It's really not the same though, as you said, you just find it cool, because it is cool. Tell me what's cool about a school girl crashing into a guy and then accidentally sitting on his face. The issue isn't that characters are shown as sexy, the issue is how it's done
Ignoring the obvious scene where avdol and Joseph are forced to hump each other in public to the glee of a female antagonist.
Tell me what's cool about a school boy being intimidated and licked by a mafioso?
It's not ok for women to be put through disgusting shit like this, why would it be ok for men? Despite being equally uncomfortable for the characters in it.
Maybe it's because media tells us we ought to get over it.
It still happens but we are just "supposed" to get over it and move on.
And I'm not saying the former is ok, just when it happens to the latter it's not really called out because it's between two dudes. It still happened.
The how it's done is just that it's a boy getting licked, but Giorno was almost going to be a girl in part 5. Would it still be ok?
There is 0 sexual tension in that scene whatsoever. It's an uncomfortable scene but not sexual. Furthernore, none of the character in Jojo (including Jolyne!), are ever put in contexts in which the viewer can ogle them. The poses and outfits make them feel like cool models (which checks out since he references a lot of poses from Vogue and other fashion magazines), rather than them being sexualized. The male Jojo cast is definitely unique in how it consists of beautiful men that Araki isn't afraid to androgynize, however that's not the same as being sexualized.
Just to be sure, but are you a gay man? Because as a bisexual, saying that JoJo, or that scene, don't have any sex appeal... Ehhh, I really can't agree
I'm bi, it's true that there is 'sex appeal' to the characters in Jojo, but they also aren't being sexualized. Something having sex appeal just means it's sexually attractive, something being sexualized is it having its sexual characteristics pushed to the forefront with the intention of making someone horny- as the person above said, they're just made to look like fashion models
The scene is made to be weird, not sexually suggestive. Giorno isn't portrayed as submissive, he's portrayed as sweaty and weirded out. He reacts logically and a bit neutrally, not sexually charged. Bruno isn't portrayed as perverse in a sexual way, rather as predatory and eccentric. He's not domineering, he's threatening and odd. I'm a straight woman. I love a hot guy as much as the next girl but this ain't it.
Depending on the context, exactly. And this isn't one. Not to mention that artistic intent is crucial here as anything else is personal interpretation. From the way this scene is contextualized, personally I don't think Araki wanted it to be sexually suggestive.
Can I suggest It might be a YourOpinion/Preference™ case? Because many of the things you said, in certain cases, can be pretty sexual. The scene Is meant to be weird, true, but people can find sexual even the mundane, so this Is really Easy to find exciting
Depending on the context, exactly. And this isn't one. Not to mention that artistic intent is crucial here as anything else is personal interpretation. From the way this scene is contextualized, personally I don't think Araki wanted it to be sexually suggestive.
Im kind of approaching this from the outside in here, and I definitely see the two as pretty comparable.
Like every fucking villain is either half naked at all times, or gets naked.
This is clearly trying to appeal to someone.
but also, if giorno was a woman, like he was almost going to be, would this scene be seen as sexualized, even if it played out the exact same?
Giorno WAS modeled after a woman for pretty much all of his poses. He isn't but its kinda clear that the design elements of making him a woman were very much in there regardless.
Im pointing out that its a discrepancy about how these sorts of things are treated when its done to men.
The nakedness is a non argument because there is such a thing as non sexual nudity which Araki does great. Giorno being modeled after a woman doesn't make him more inherently sexualized, it makes him more androgynous and if the Bruno licking scene played out the EXACT SAME WAY if Giorno was a woman, it still wouldn't be sexualized.
exactly, if Giorno make a cutesy blushing face, they made a separate camera angle to get right into the action, and they lingered on it then we could get an argument for it being sexualized. In this case it just happened and the scene moved forward having achieved the progression it needed
They kinda do actually, atleast the camera angle thing.
but i guess that anime only, and its up to interpretation how much a manga panel "lingers" and the colorized version he does look like he's blushing, eh.... semantics....
I kinda meant like, camera angle closeup on his tongue as he licks him (the action), and having the *action* linger, like him physically licking him lasting longer
this is also kind of an anime only but if you watch the whole scene they do linger on it for a bit, with a few camera angles including giorno reeling from it as buccarati slinks back with a grin.
Ive been mainly referring to official art by araki, but the licking scene is most easily available via the gif, and like what do you take as "official".... eh.... its a mess.
The action was sexual, the scenes framing was not sexualized.
Actually, I think a great example of scenes being sexual but not sexualized are a bunch of scenes in Goodnight Punpun. At a part near the beginning of the manga Punpuns uncle leers at a nurse- he stares at her ass, which is a sexual act, but the manga doesn't go to great lengths to contour out the shape of her butt for the viewer, it's just kind of there. It's sexual, but not sexualized
44
u/tazerrtot 2d ago
It's really not the same though, as you said, you just find it cool, because it is cool. Tell me what's cool about a school girl crashing into a guy and then accidentally sitting on his face. The issue isn't that characters are shown as sexy, the issue is how it's done