JerrytheBullfrog said:
I realize that quite well, thank you very much. I'm beginning to think that you don't, considering that you're mistaking the criticism of one with the criticism of another.
Ask yourself this: Why is she criticizing Kanye's video instead of criticizing, say, Lady Gaga's videos, wherein she wears plenty of skimpy clothing? A crucial difference here is that of "agency." That is, who decides what the women are to be wearing? In one, it's the women - Lady Gaga wears what Lady Gaga decides she wants to wear. Maybe this IS for the titillation of a male viewer, but it's still the woman's choice to do so, much like it's her choice to do so IRL. In the other, it's the men - the women wear what the men want them to wear to titillate the male viewer. They have no agency.
I'm actually kind of stunned that you don't see the objectification here. Most of the women in this video are portrayed as dead. They're lifeless and immobile, only around for their physical appearance in lingerie. Hell, in one scene Kanye is physically rearranging them! They are literally being portrayed as objects, not people. The message here is that the artists in the video choose to surround themselves with women in lingerie for no reason other than that they look sexy in lingerie. It is ABSOLUTELY exploitation and objectification of the highest order, and that you insist that she's just criticizing "Women in lingerie = bad" just kind of makes me think that you... honestly don't understand what she's getting at.
A woman may have designed Bayonetta, but it was men who decided how to portray her in game. Is the character designer responsible for the lascivious shots panning over her crotch and ass? Probably not.
SO because a man told the women to dress that way(regardless of purpose) it is objectification. Bull shit. As said before, the women in the Kanye video serve as background dressing. Extras functioning as props for symbolism. They wore clothing normally regarded as sexy but were not sexualized. Yes, they wore less than modest clothing but the point was not 'check these bitches being half naked'. There is a reason most of the girl is obscured by lighting. Point is her criticisms are a glancing blow. It scrapes the top but doesn't bite deep into the meaning or purpose of the song. She see female extras playing dead while wearing lingerie & cries misogyny without exploring any possible meanings, she sees the difference between white & black women's portrayal here & cries foul in the same manner. She watched the video, saw something that pissed her off, & opened fire. She did not decide to think maybe that wacky kanye is trying to say something that's not 'i hate women'. But both of you jump straight to crying misogyny, no analysis of the lyrics or exploration of possible purposes, straight to the misogyny.. My favorite analysis of the song is multifaceted, that its a commentary on white/black politics, the music industries 'meat grinder' business practices, a look at what fame can do to you, & a glance into the past. But im sure its all misogyny & demonetization of women because that's what the patriarchy do. The video is not the ramblings of a misogynistic madman, its got purpose. At any rate, titillation is not the word i would use to describe any of the girls in the video, the idea of a dead girl is not sexy to most people. necrophilia is still a very small niche.
She designed the characters appearance & behavior. But regardless of gender of the person executing this, a man making the character does not automatically invalidate their sexuality, or that they were made to harm/spite women.
Before this goes forward you will define, misogyny, sexual objectification, exploitation, sexualization. Particularly how YOU define them. Otherwise this will be unable to progress any further.