How should we react to visual gameplays' featuring disturbing themes?

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Narona

As i said, a state has to be coherent. What you say was a basis of many debates, and a lot of people think it isn't.

On the right side you want to educate the people by saying to them that a rape or child porn is bad, but on the right side you give free access to rape-sims and child porn imagery products.

It causes many problems:

- Social problems. To educate properly a kid, parents need to do their job, but the state too. If your parents say that one thing is bad but once outside of your parents radius you see that products are promoting such "bad things", then there is a chance that your kid will wonder "but if it is so bad, why do those things are on sale" and other questioning. A kid or young adult is not a robot and can see when something seems not coherent. I personally think that parents has to have the state as a back-up.

- Justice problem. The people who don't care about laws or those who don't know can't understand that the justice is not 0 or 1 (at least here in France), and that even in the case of a rape or a murder, you don't just put a person in jail, just like that. Actually, if what the state does in contradiction with a law, a good lawyer can try to use that breach to explain, for example, how the state is also GUILTY of promoting something that is supposed to be bad, causing eventually the culprit to not be punished as he should be. Some people avoid normal punishments by using such breaches. A common case, accusing a company or the state to have caused a subject to have an unstable mind because he/she was influenced by something. It's not as easy as people think to judge a case like that.

I am a bit tired to listen to people who seem to don't give a fuck about things like that, and eventually complain that the state/justice doesn't do its job well.

Won't it be easier if we just teach the kids how to think? With so many DHA fortified milk formulas claiming to imbue children with "high IQ", the modern child's mental capability would certainly be better than the past. Of course, unless they are all fake.

IMO, it is the parents that teach the child how to act, and how to have a fair instinct while not curtailing the freedom of thought. The school should only assess the academic quality of the child. The media is neutral. If some kids who come from broken families, or played Duke Nukem at the age of 6 are able to find their way in life out of drugs and hardcore casual sex, why are kids with complete families not able to do the same? Is it due to reliance, or material substitution to the real care and concern the child actually needs?

[Throne Invader]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

Does a beyond legal age young adult looking like a child acting sultry considered child porn? IMO, loli is by looks, not by age. A physical display of innocence being sexually attractive doesn't equate to illegal penetration if the subject :

1. Consents
2. Is beyond the age limit
3. REALLY has that natural loli look

Trust me on that. I got a female friend who is 21 this year and looks like a 14 year old due to a genetic fault. And she is ridiculously cute. No guy initially wanted to befriend or date her due to the fear of being branded as a paedophile, so being the thick-skinned and impulsive idiot I decided to make friends with her. It is much better for her now since she is out in the workforce and there are more open-minded people willing to accept her for who she is.

You are right about one thing although it's kind of off topic. This world does need more open minded people who accept other people despite their physical dilemmas. But then you called yourself an idiot for being friends with her uhhh...you're a nice person, really.

I believe that this thread is more about age than looks considering it does concern "child" porn/rape whatever.

[Narona]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

Won't it be easier if we just teach the kids how to think? With so many DHA fortified milk formulas claiming to imbue children with "high IQ", the modern child's mental capability would certainly be better than the past. Of course, unless they are all fake.

IMO, it is the parents that teach the child how to act, and how to have a fair instinct while not curtailing the freedom of thought. The school should only assess the academic quality of the child. The media is neutral. If some kids who come from broken families, or played Duke Nukem at the age of 6 are able to find their way in life out of drugs and hardcore casual sex, why are kids with complete families not able to do the same? Is it due to reliance, or material substitution to the real care and concern the child actually needs?

If you don't understand my point, I can't do anything other than writing it again and again. The parents have to educate their kids, but the state and laws have to be "coherent" with what the kids learn from their parents. You also just don't seem interested in the other part of my post while you really should. And in this thread, we don't only talk about the "kids".

[danin8r44]

I do see the potential benefits in banning this stuff. My concern is the question of whether any form of censorship that potentially stops deranged people, who potentially would have committed the crime without the material, from committing a crime that they haven't committed yet. For me, any form of censorship isn't a light law like a small tax. It is a big issue with potentially dire consequences of the state that the law is being passed in. So how can you justify such a big movement against something that is only potentially and unprovenly harmful and has not had a negative effect yet?

I am very against real child pornography. Not only is it disgusting, but it actually has a harmful effect. The justifiable reason for banning real child pornography is because of the child pornography trade going on. These children are hurt abused and raped for money that they almost never receive. It is as of yet impossible to prove that viewing child pornography makes you anymore inclined to have sex with a minor so that has no value in law, but child pornography does have an immediate and provable real world negative effect. I fail to see this real negative effect anywhere in drawn material outside of giving a few perverted otaku some more food for a while.

Also, how does this influence children in any way? Not only do children have no access to this material, but they likely have no knowledge of it. Children do not learn how to punch a child from a video game. They learn how to punch a child and then play a video game in which that occurs. Sex and perversions as well are natural human occurrences that all people are exposed to before they reach adulthood. Children will see a bad act as no more wrong or right based simply on whether there is a fictitious animated game of the act being sold that they have likely never been exposed to. If they begin to see an act as right or wrong it is infinitely more likely that this will be due to real world experience. Even children, when sane, are able to distinguish between cartoons and reality. It is only the crazy among us who could possibly be motivated by any of this stuff. Crazy people can't be predicted anyway so what is the use?

This game sounds disgusting, but it is fictitious and so I think that any needless and likely useless censorship is far more disgusting.

Edit: god all of the posts in this thread are long it is like the claymore forums

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Narona

If you don't understand my point, I can't do anything other than writing it again and again. The parents have to educate their kids, but the state and laws have to be "coherent" with what the kids learn from their parents. You also just don't seem interested in the other part of my post while you really should. And in this thread, we don't only talk about the "kids".

That is what you are talking about. I thought you saying that parents should be more responsible rather than blaming the state all the time and vice versa.

So what about the media? To you, are they neutral or have an active part to play in this?

Originally Posted by danin8r44

This game sounds disgusting, but it is fictitious and so I think that any needless and likely useless censorship is far more disgusting.

When I played that game, I told myself, "Thank goodness the game is so lifelike and real so that it replaces the actual event in real life." "Morally questionable" entertainment aren't as bad as it seems. We should be glad that it exists so it can substitute the evil desires we want to enact out in real life.

[Narona]

Originally Posted by danin8r44

I do see the potential benefits in banning this stuff. My concern is the question of whether any form of censorship that potentially stops deranged people, who potentially would have committed the crime without the material, from committing a crime that they haven't committed yet. For me, any form of censorship isn't a light law like a small tax. It is a big issue with potentially dire consequences of the state that the law is being passed in. So how can you justify such a big movement against something that is only potentially and unproven harmful and has not had a negative effect yet?

I explained one case above in which it can cause a big problem in a court of law. I understand that most people don't seem to understand how it works, but I don't how to explain it better than my second point above.

I am very against real child pornography. Not only is it disgusting, but it actually has a harmful effect. The justifiable reason for banning real child pornography is because of the child pornography trade going on. These children are hurt abused and raped for money that they almost never receive. It is as of yet impossible to prove that viewing child pornography makes you anymore inclined to have sex with a minor so that has no value in law, but child pornography does have an immediate and provable real world negative effect. I fail to see this real negative effect anywhere in drawn material outside of giving a few perverted otaku some more food for a while.

False, it has a value. That why the justice work with psychiatrists, because for example, during a trial we ask them to check if the person was for example really influenced by something (example in the case of a rape, by a rape-sim game), or if he is lying. But it's not so easy to do so. I don't know in your country, but here it has a value on a court of law.

Also, how does this influence children in any way? Not only do children have no access to this material, but they likely have no knowledge of it. Children do not learn how to punch a child from a video game. They learn how to punch a child and then play a video game in which that occurs. Sex and perversions as well are natural human occurrences that all people are exposed to before they reach adulthood. Children will see a bad act as no more wrong or right based simply on whether there is a fictitious animated game of the act being sold that they have likely never been exposed to. If they begin to see an act as right or wrong it is infinitely more likely that this will be due to real world experience. Even children, when sane, are able to distinguish between cartoons and reality. It is only the crazy among us who could possibly be motivated by any of this stuff. Crazy people can't be predicted anyway so what is the use?

Children are "supposed" to have no access. Parents are not always behind them, especially when the person is a teenager. You say it's not possible (from your pov) to see if something that a kid or teen see will influence his mind, but so there is a "?", meaning that it could, so at least we should care about that. If the state doesn't care about that, then it would be terrible.

(I don't even talk about a few cases when the parents accuse on a court of law the state to not have done its job well)

This game sounds disgusting, but it is fictitious and so I think that any needless and likely useless censorship is far more disgusting.

... It's not about censoring things for the lulz. Sometimes i feel like writing for nothing.

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

That is what you are talking about. I thought you saying that parents should be more responsible rather than blaming the state all the time and vice versa.

So what about the media? To you, are they neutral or have an active part to play in this?

I meant that the state has to be coherent with the laws and the education that the parents are supposed to give to their children.

The medias play a part in it. The "CSA" is supposed to record the contents that are shown on TV, to see if the companies stay on the right track. Silly example: Like not braodcasting a porn movie at 3pm.

There are also preventive actions in some paper. But the press in France is more free than people maybe think. You can find a lot of different opinions, and sometimes a paper can go against a state preventive actions. (example: stating that it will not work)

Anyway, I don't really know what details you want.? So if you want some other details, be more precise and I will try to reply

[danin8r44]

Originally Posted by Narona

I explained one case above in which it can cause a big problem in a court of law. I understand that most people don't seem to understand how it works, but I don't how to explain it better than my second point above.

I read it and it sounded like pleeding insanity honestly, though I am no legal expert. It sounds more like a problem with the legal system. Should we censor material because the legal system has a hole or should we patch the hole?(I'm American btw)

Originally Posted by Narona

False, it has a value. That why the justice work with psychiatrists, because for example, during a trial we ask them to check if the person was for example really influenced by something (example in the case of a rape, by a rape-sim game), or if he is lying. But it's not so easy to do so. I don't know in your country, but here it has a value on a court of law.

It has a possible but unprovable value. I have yet to see a study that positively identifies the viewing of materials relating to the crime as a cause for the crime rather than the perpetrator having the idea or the mental perversion to commit the crime before exposure to the material. (if anyone has one please post)

Originally Posted by Narona

Children are "supposed" to have no access. Parents are not always behind them, especially when the person is a teenager. You say it's not possible (from your pov) to see if something that a kid or teen see will influence his mind, but so there is a "?", meaning that it could, so at least we should care about that. If the state doesn't care about that, then it would be terrible.

(I don't even talk about a few cases when the parents accuse on a court of law the state to not have done its job well)

I meant that the state has to be coherent with the laws and the education that the parents are supposed to give to their children.

I never claimed it was impossible for what children see to influence them. I actually believe that it likely will influence them. My points were that children do not have easy access to this stuff they would have to search for it (it isn't spread on billboards everywhere) and that it is unlikely in my view that a child will be inclined to commit a crime simply because they saw a fake game about the crime when they are taught that the crime is wrong not only by their parents but by their peers teachers etc... This is especially true for a game that is not easily available to children. So who would this law most likely prevent from committing crimes, assuming that it does? Crazy people. The extreme outliers in our society that will very likely end up doing wrong irregardless of what they are exposed to.

[Nightbat®]

I never heard of "Serial killers", "Happy Slapping", "GHB Rape Drug" or "Violent game based - School shootings", even "Loituma" (or whatever it's called)
untill they were on the news

So if any potential lunatic wants inspiration, no need to look furhter than the daily news

[Jazzrat]

In the minds of many, rape is a fantasy (especially in Japan) fueled by our desire to dominate and control another (and note, it's not limited to men only).

A good portion of the pornography in japan revolves around some form of rape but the problem at hand here is not pornography but the depiction of rape in media. You can argue that it's fictional and people should discern reality and fiction but yet, we often model ourselves after fictional materials. Repeated exposure to them may numb the society towards such behaviour or even impose fictional ideals onto some people.


While socially unacceptable in most culture, there's already an underlying levels of apathy to such cases especially in male dominated society. Makes me wonder if a greater exposure to such would further aggravate this problem.

Influence of pornography on Teenagers

Pornography and rape crime in Japan

[Amray]

I personally think that governments should spend the majority of their time trying to rid of real child abuse and exploitation, as opposed to these numerous parties trying to ban fictional sources such as Lolicon and various manga series'.

One can make anything they want out of a drawing. Characters in games and Doujins have no 'Birth Certificate' thus they do not have an age, nor do they have feelings or a nervous system to be able to feel pain and shame. Then of course there are the real incidents where feelings are hurt and lives are lost after hours and hours of brutal and sickening sessions. But no, instead they continue to stress over cute little blushing fictional girls that sit with their legs open...because they were drawn that way. I do understand that some governments detest the existence of such things as they state that it can "Promote" obvious results, but making speeches over animated girls with big eyes, wearing tight swimsuits, is just silly; especially when there are clearly much more monstous and horrible things going on in the real world. Things a lot more hideous. Nevertheless I do somewhat understand the governments' pledges to rid of such things as such demented drawings and games should not rightfully exist in the first place.

In the future I assume that I will be arrested for having a Lucky Star artbook in my possession, knowing the silly direction of which the government is currently approaching. Nevermind the man down the road that has a camera full of "spying" content of the next door neighbours daughter...just pay your attention to my Lucky Star artbook.

[yezhanquan]

Well, as I see it, it all boils down to the enforcement. How would the local police react? As it is now, they're probably already over-worked and under-paid. They don't need to enforce another law which just doesn't seem to be well-thought out.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by Kusa-San

Our society is the proof of this kind of behaviour.

"our society" is probably more civil and contains less violence than in the last several hundred years and definitely less than in the last thousand years -- methinks you're watching too much nightly "news" that overfocuses on the lurid rather than actually looking at statistics, maybe?

Originally Posted by Amray

In the future I assume that I will be arrested for having a Lucky Star artbook in my possession, knowing the silly direction of which the government is currently approaching. Nevermind the man down the road that has a camera full of "spying" content of the next door neighbours daughter...just pay your attention to my Lucky Star artbook.

Quoted for truth ... enforcement has finite resources. Chase imaginary ghosts and demons with poorly written law ... or catch and punish people who actually commit crimes against other human beings?

[Jazzrat]

It's not possible to go for the consumer, but to control it from the producer side itself. Should we really allow these people to keep on making rape simulators? Should rape porn be loped into the same category as child porn?

There's a lot of factors to be considered when such restriction are to put in place and may have unintended consequence as well. But making rape into a game which reinforce such acts is probably mostly negative for society's mental health.

[Vexx]

I'll point out I think such games are prurient trash... but you attack the "problem" by reducing demand (i.e. education and values). Prohibiting material leads down unpleasant directions -- and again, people are suggesting banning artwork, writing, and drawn things -- today's deciders could be easily replaced the sorts of people who *love* those positions of authority and use them to aggregate power and domination - banning things *you* might think acceptable. There is very little evidence that such materials contribute to abuse and crime -- what little studies there are that support the idea are almost entirely based on small children being exposed to violence and then being more violent temporarily. Such correlation has not been demonstrated in teens or adults who can tell fantasy from reality.

[Jazzrat]

Originally Posted by Vexx

There is very little evidence that such materials contribute to abuse and crime -- what little studies there are that support the idea are almost entirely based on small children being exposed to violence and then being more violent temporarily. Such correlation has not been demonstrated in teens or adults who can tell fantasy from reality.

There's little conclusive evidence since there's so many factors involved in rape cases vs pornography. However, I think it's easier to ask ourself if sexualizing rape is a good practice? Would a person's libido be inhibit by such material or would it further degrade their perception of rape?

Banning often cause such activities to go underground however, demonizing them can have a positive net effect at times for example child pornography. While it's a prevalent problem everywhere but majority of the people abhor it and this helps discourage most people from indulging in such fantasy due to the negative image.

[0utf0xZer0]

Originally Posted by Jazzrat

It's not possible to go for the consumer, but to control it from the producer side itself. Should we really allow these people to keep on making rape simulators? Should rape porn be loped into the same category as child porn?

The products in question are produced in another country with that country's market in mind, and most westerners who play the game will have gotten it through bittorrent or similar means.

So to actually have any sort of impact, yes, you do need to go after the consumer. And I will not support any law that proscribes legal punishments for people based on what kind of fictional porn they like.

Originally Posted by Vexx

I'll point out I think such games are prurient trash... but you attack the "problem" by reducing demand (i.e. education and values). Prohibiting material leads down unpleasant directions -- and again, people are suggesting banning artwork, writing, and drawn things -- today's deciders could be easily replaced the sorts of people who *love* those positions of authority and use them to aggregate power and domination - banning things *you* might think acceptable.

Having seen how Canadian child porn law has played out, I want to see those advocating for a law demonstrate exactly what material they plan to target and how they intend to target that material specifically. Does the material need to include violence to be considered rape porn, or does a couple of lines of protest in the middle of an otherwise consensual looking scene qualify? Can a character consent if she's drunk? Or hell, are we just talking "rape sims" or do hentai RPGs where you can get you life energy drained by female monsters in sex like acts qualify? I think it's important for these sorts of things to be considered, particularly as it takes me literally seconds to think of erogames that have similar scenarios in them.

[Irkalla]

While at it, they should also ban all mmorpg games too, because they also encourage rape. How they encourage it? It's really simple. My bf spends the whole day playing online games totally neglecting me and after a while I get totally sexually frustrated...In the end I end up raping him and a few other guys as a result!..Ouch bummer.

Bottom line, it's wrong to ban something that is potentially threating, and that MAY lead into an actual act outside of their little virtual world no matter what kinda disturbing theme it is.

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by Vexx

"our society" is probably more civil and contains less violence than in the last several hundred years and definitely less than in the last thousand years -- methinks you're watching too much nightly "news" that overfocuses on the lurid rather than actually looking at statistics, maybe?

Indeed. And seeing the past with rose-tinted glasses to boot.

Originally Posted by Jazzrat

There's little conclusive evidence since there's so many factors involved in rape cases vs pornography. However, I think it's easier to ask ourself if sexualizing rape is a good practice? Would a person's libido be inhibit by such material or would it further degrade their perception of rape?

Those are, indeed, good questions, and I don't believe it's wise to make laws until we've got actual answers. There's a pretty good chance laws would make things worse, after all.

[-KarumA-]

Must add that it doesn't matter if video games are or are not the cause of violence, frankly I don't care
This video game is disrespectful towards women and I as one who has been through such a situation am glad they are doing something about it when it comes to this game because as a victim the last thing you want is hear about people who actually play this game
If I were to even see someone play this game or hear one word that they play this I would be the one to have more violent tendencies towards them because they do not know what it is like to be in a situation like that and are having a good time doing in a game which ultimate goal is rape

[Daniel E.]

Originally Posted by Amray

In the future I assume that I will be arrested for having a Lucky Star artbook in my possession, knowing the silly direction of which the government is currently approaching. Nevermind the man down the road that has a camera full of "spying" content of the next door neighbours daughter...just pay your attention to my Lucky Star artbook.

QFT.... again. >_<

Allow them to ban one thing today and the people behind it will probably want to ban something else tomorrow.

If a person (any person) can be influenced in a bad way by a game, then there's a chance that person can be influenced in a bad way by pretty much anything around him/her.