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

[Vexx]

In news of "imaginary fiction witch hunters", the Boston Herald is pumping a story about "child pornography" (or rather, imaginary fictional rape-sim games sold in Japan).

http://www.bostonherald.com/business...72572&srvc=rss

And once again, rather than hunt the Real Thing, they focus on fantasy targets. Yes, this stuff is trash.... but its *imaginary* trash (so why aren't they trying to stop serial killer slasher films?)

[Sazelyt]

I guess Japanese people show a lot of understanding towards such themes. Or they have already gone beyond a certain level where no return is possible. Or that just means they have accepted living in a fantasy world with no boundaries, where anything can happen.

[Vexx]

I just think the whole idea of going after imaginary *fiction* on any topic is a bad road to tread down. Thought police yadayada and no scientific basis for it. Irrationalism at its most unpleasant. The "D&D Satan-connection" moonbats of the 1980s in another guise....

Probably over half the western world has the same understanding as Japan of what is fantasy and what isn't (the article points out that Japan's "Equality Now" group is also raising a furor... but if you examine its basis, you find a bit of moonbattiness rather like PETA). But these "30%ers" for lack of a better term don't have a rational basis for their faux-righteous fury -- in fact the science leans against them. But power and importance comes with being the leader of crucifying imaginary devils. And Britain seems to be leading the way in wackjob laws lately trying to take the title from the US.

There's real crime going on out there -- and this nonsense is totally firing in the wrong direction wasting valuable energy.

[yezhanquan]

Originally Posted by Vexx

I just think the whole idea of going after imaginary *fiction* on any topic is a bad road to tread down. Thought police yadayada and no scientific basis for it. Irrationalism at its most unpleasant. The "D&D Satan-connection" moonbats of the 1980s in another guise....

And probably over half the western world has the same understanding of what is fantasy and what isn't (the article points out that Japan's "Equality Now" group is also raising a furor... but if you examine its basis, you find a bit of moonbattiness rather like PETA). But these "30%ers" for lack of a better term don't have a rational basis for their faux-righteous fury -- in fact the science leans against them. But power and importance comes with being the leader of crucifying imaginary devils. And Britain seems to be leading the way in wackjob laws lately trying to take the title from the US.

There's real crime going on out there -- and this nonsense is totally firing in the wrong direction wasting valuable energy.

Probably, they think that it's easier to chase after imaginery stuff than to focus on dealing with real foes.

[mg1942]

I also read somewhere in some (undisclosed) blog site that the US-based feminist group EQUALITY NOW has succeeded in forcing the publisher of RapeLay into withdrawing the game from sale and the pages of most retailers.

[james0246]

^Equality Now campaigning against the game (and like minded games) doesn't really surprise me, but there is nothing they can do about the game considering that it was illegally released in America, and the original publisher broke no laws in Japan (they do seem to be petitioning the government, but since nothing conclusive has ever been established in regards to connecting violent games to real world events, I find it hard to believe that the government would attempt to outlaw the genre).

That being said, Public molestation (for women) is still a large problem in Japan, so I would hope that Equality Now, which is a good organization that has done many positive and meaningful activities across the world, would focus on the actual problem, rather than a silly game (or genre of games) that really doesn't normalize or promote the real world violence (the meer fact that the majority of the games/other fictional materials actually have the women like being raped just shows you how out of touch the games are with reality).

[Narona]

Originally Posted by james0246

^Equality Now campaigning against the game (and like minded games) doesn't really surprise me, but there is nothing they can do about the game considering that it was illegally released in America, and the original publisher broke no laws in Japan (they do seem to be petitioning the government, but since nothing conclusive has ever been established in regards to connecting violent games to real world events, I find it hard to believe that the government would attempt to outlaw the genre).

That being said, Public molestation (for women) is still a large problem in Japan, so I would hope that Equality Now, which is a good organization that has done many positive and meaningful activities across the world, would focus on the actual problem, rather than a silly game (or genre of games) that really doesn't normalize or promote the real world violence (the meer fact that the majority of the games/other fictional materials actually have the women like being raped just shows you how out of touch the games are with reality).

Have many men ever thought about what a lot of women feel to know that there are games like rape-sim on sale?

I will not argue a lot on this topic (mainly because it will get on my nerves), but most girls I know (including myself), when they are aware of it, care about the fact that such games exist, and are annoyed by it.

Something in which "you play the hero" is different from reading a book or watching a movie.

Saying that people should not care about that and focus on other RL problems is imo, not pertinent. You can focus on different things at the same time. Giving up on something doesn't mean that you will obviously get more results in the rest.

[Vexx]

I'll just repeat that outlawing drawn pictures, comics, games, or even theatre that may portray unpleasant situations (especially from the point of view of the villain who may glorify such things) is a nasty little trip to the land of thoughtcrime and censorship of any "wrongthinking" by people you may not see eye-to-eye on regarding morality (recent real examples of what thoughtcrime land can be like: flogging a girl for thinking about a guy... stoning a girl to death for the insult of being raped... )

If the protesters were more consistent (being against slasher/horror movies or going after the crime shows like CSI, Criminal Minds, and such that seem to relish portraying hideous violence against women and children) -- I might at least find them more credible even if I still disagreed with the notion of prosecuting ideas or storytelling.

(having a Minority Report moment here....)

[james0246]

(I'm sure this will be deleted or placed in another thread, but...)

The ultimate form of any prevention technique is to teach children what is right and what is wrong. So, instead of banning a specific type of video game, or a genre of negative erotic entertainment, it would be better served to have a strong sex education course for younger students, so as to limit misconceptions and to hopefully (in a non Big Brother sense) filter out negative ideas (i.e. rape, molestation, and pedophilia) before they are fully formed.

If you are really interested in the connection between video games a physical violence, I suggest you check out:

Grand Theft Childhood: The Surprising Truth About Violent Video Games, Lawrence Kutner and Cheryl K. Olson.
"Video Games and Real Life Aggression", Lillian Bensely and Juliet Van Eenwyk, Journal of Adolescent Health, vol. 29, 2001.
"Video Games and Health", Mark Griffiths, British Medical Journal vol. 331, 2005.

Edit: looking briefly on Google, I found this page (as well as the sources I was already referring to ), and this quote:

Other studies, however, reach the conclusion that violence in video games is not causally linked with aggressive tendencies. This was the conclusion of a 1999 study by the U.S. government, prompting Surgeon General David Satcher to say, "We clearly associate media violence to aggressive behavior. But the impact was very small compared to other things. Some may not be happy with that, but that’s where the science is."[19] A meta-analysis by psychologist Jonathan Freedman, who reviewed over 200 published studies and found that the "vast and overwhelming majority" did not find a causal link, also reached this conclusion.[20]. A US Secret Service study found that only 12 percent of those involved in school shootings were attracted to violent video games, while 24 percent read violent books and 27 percent were attracted to violent films.[21] An Australian study found that only children already predisposed to violence were affected by violent games.

[Narona]

Should I repost what I erased? I thought you wanted to stop the debate.

Originally Posted by james0246

^The problem with the games, though, is that the actual molesters and rapists are not really the audience for such games. So, spending the time and resources combating such vile and disgusting games really doesn't solve the actual problem (especially considering that there is very little proof that paying such games actually encourage any socially negative behavior (i.e. there is no proof that you become a killer simply because you play a game (or read a novel) that has you kill someone, etc)), it is just time and resources that could be spent on truly meaningful activities (such as providing better security on trains, or enlarging the police force, etc). And, if you are going to split your resources, say 20/80 (or some other number that places actual cases far above imaginary cases (some may be potential, but it is unknown just how many or how few)), then the 20% spent on combating these stupid games (and other such niche negative erotic "entertainment") is really not an effective amount of time or money to try and combat anything. And, if you put more money and effort into attempting to fight the imaginary cases, then you run the risk of letting actual cases fall through the cracks. It is really a no-win situation, so, as I already stated, it is better to try and combat the real cases rather stupid games made by and for sick individuals.

To put it another way, Prohibition in America did not stop the criminal activity associated with alcohol consumption (the moral decay, etc) rather it did nothing, or at worst, encouraged criminal behavior/activity. So, attempting to outlaw such material in Japan would end up accomplishing very little, and could conceivably, in a worst case scenario, actually "force" some deviants into attempting to molest their desired targets (obviously this is an extreme scenario based on the idea that an "addicted" person would attempt to facilitate their addiction using any means necessary). (I am not trying to actually connect Prohibition and a possible ban on negative erotic materials, rather I am attempting to briefly draw a comparison between the attempt to outlaw certain deviant activities practices, and what really results from such a ban (if you would prefer, I could bring up US Sodomy laws instead).)

If many people, including people who work in the law department (at least in France. And I personally am a law student and interested in the debate), also wonder what shall be the limits in what we show to the people through fictions is because we consider that a state shall not only care about actual crimes, but also to take preventive actions to try to prevent new crimes if we can. Some people say that some preventive actions are useless, but a good amount of people think that it is better to so something rather than doing no preventive actions at all.

(Actually, in a general way about preventive actions, some of them actually do work here, like what we do to prevent car accidents. so we can't say it is, in that case, useless. So the ones in France who claim that every preventive actions are useless are wrong.)

The debate goes really far here in France, because a state has to be coherent, but currently aren't in the eyes of some people. For example, here in France, child pornography is illegal, but yet, we tolerate some other things like showing rapes in movies. You know you can find people who wants to be able to do porn movies with child, since they would do "only a fiction with no real penetration".

What most people are ok with is that there has to be a limit in what we find acceptable and unacceptable. Even in fiction. Because a democracy is not an anarchy with complete freedom. So yet, many questions are still debated.

As I see it, about that "games thing", I guess some people mistake what those who are against it are trying to do. It's not about saying that those games are bad, etc. It's about wondering if it can lead some people to become criminals. So, I guess they see it as a preventive actions. Saying that it is an useless preventive action can't be proven since games are still around in Japan. You can't say that something is useless if you haven't tried.

Now what "I" think about it is (i'm sorry if there are some fans of rapes-sim who will read me here but I won't hold back) that to produce or enjoy a rape-sim means that you are already nuts (I am a law student so I try to speak with laws and rights in mind, but sometimes I feel like saying what I deeply think: those people are completely nuts in my eyes and are worthless than dogs), and have more chance to become a criminal than the other people. A psychiatrist once explained on the french TV that many people who for example enjoy pornography someday reach a state when Pornography is not enough anymore, and so that they want more and more to try their fantasies for real. I would personally tend to think that it also could apply to somebody who enjoys rape-sims.

Originally Posted by james0246

(I'm sure this will be deleted or placed in another thread, but...)

The ultimate form of any prevention technique is to teach children what is right and what is wrong. So, instead of banning a specific type of video game, or a genre of negative erotic entertainment, it would be better served to have a strong sex education course for younger students, so as to limit misconceptions and to hopefully (in a non Big Brother sense) filter out negative ideas (i.e. rape, molestation, and pedophilia) before they are fully formed.

We do both and most people think it's good that way. We try to improve both of course. About sex education it's more complicated though because of many factors. Example : taking in account what parents think too.

About education in general, a lot of people also think that the parents has to educate their childrens properly. There are preventive actions that exist to warn the parents that they have a role to play in the education, because some of them seems to think that it's only the role of people at school (stupid isn't it?)

If you are really interested in the connection between video games a physical violence, I suggest you check out:

Grand Theft Childhood: The Surprising Truth About Violent Video Games, Lawrence Kutner and Cheryl K. Olson.
"Video Games and Real Life Aggression", Lillian Bensely and Juliet Van Eenwyk, Journal of Adolescent Health, vol. 29, 2001.
"Video Games and Health", Mark Griffiths, British Medical Journal vol. 331, 2005.

Edit: looking briefly on Google, I found this page (as well as the sources I was already referring to ), and this quote:

I already heard of it, but as I said to somebody else, I saw a difference in every type of games. You can't classify all of them easily without looking at a content. A game like Call of Duty can't be compared to, for example, a game in which you just simulate a rape.

So I consider that it can't be applied to compare a game like COD, to for example, a rape-sim.

[danin8r44]

I see most any form of censorship or of punishment for the possession of fictitious images as a form of thoughtcrime. The purpose of a legal system is to stop crime from happening by punishing people who commit crimes, not people who might commit crimes. We have all thought of punching someone in the face, but we only go to jail for actually punching someone in the face. The same rule applies to all information material.

How do we know that these materials even promote rape, violence, or any other crime for that matter. There have been so many studies with so many varied results that it is near impossible to come to any firm conclusion as to whether these materials actually promote the crimes carried out in them. It is just as likely that these materials provide a relief for people with such desires so that they do not act them out in reality. There are also people who use these materials without any real world basis at all, instead realizing the material as pure fantasy and treating it as such with no real repercussions in their normal lives.

The only sure fire and free way to stop these crimes from occurring is to punish actual criminals and to educate children and adults on the evils and the consequences of committing the crime. Anything else is just potentially useless censorship. Hardly something that we should expect from any free society.

[0utf0xZer0]

My advice: don't let your government regulate what kind of porn you can get.

I'm sure that Canadian politicians had nothing but good intentions with including fictional stuff under our child porn law in 1993, but a definition of kiddy porn that technically includes the adult versions of Key's games is just ridiculous.

Nobody in their right mind would take whether someone owns a copy of Air as a good indication of whether they're a child molester.

(And yes, I know we're talking about porn that's a bit more sinister in nature than Key stuff here, but I can see the same sort of thing happening.)

[Kusa-San]

Well firstly about rape game, I think we must ban them. I don't understand how we can tolerate such kind of game which make the promotion of rape and sexual violence.

Originally Posted by Narona

A psychiatrist once explained on the french TV that many people who for example enjoy pornography someday reach a state when Pornography is not enough anymore, and so that they want more and more to try their fantasies for real.

Exatly. When something is becoming to common for you then you will take a new step which will be more extrem. And that's why we need, no we must stop this kind of game.


Now about violent game, I think the main problem is not that this kind of game exist but that this kind of game is reachable by young children. I find that really scndalous that a 10 years old children can play with a game such as GTA. It's not for nothing that there is an age restriction ! But the salesman and parent don't do their work. I mean how a mother can tolerate that her children play to a game like GTA ?

Some people said that's it was the same 15years ago. But no it was not the same. The graphics was less really less realistic and so the impact was not the same at all. Now with the fast evolution of graphics the difference between reality and virtuality is really small. And that's why we need to prevent children to play such game. Because you need to be fully grown, to have good base to play such game.

[Vexx]

Exatly. When something is becoming to common for you then you will take a new step which will be more extrem. And that's why we need, no we must stop this kind of game.

Got any scientific basis for that?

A psychiatrist once explained on the french TV ...

Would you be interested to know how *little* research supports his "explanation"? Or whether the single "psychiatrist" mentioned even had the background or data to make those assertions?

A few more facts, some research, and a lot less arm-waving please.

[Ichihara Asako]

Lolicon is already illegal here. Or rather "sexualised depictions of a minor" (including cosplay porn; legal adults dressing up to look like kids, if they can pull off the young look) which is pretty absurd, honestly.

There's been a few cases of people being tried for "cartoon porn" with the Simpsons one fairly recently being one of the most prominent. But this is also the only western country that is trying to filter the internet, so what do you expect, really.

[Throne Invader]

Ok, my reaction .................child porn= morbid. Let's leave it at that. I hardly fine any reason to start a debate concerning this.

Releasing rape games isn't gonna do any good for anyone.

[Kusa-San]

Originally Posted by Vexx

Got any scientific basis for that?

Our society is the proof of this kind of behaviour.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Kusa-San

Exatly. When something is becoming to common for you then you will take a new step which will be more extrem. And that's why we need, no we must stop this kind of game.

It is like going along with the typical "Once a retard, always a retard". We evolve to accept the harshest things in life doesn't mean that we do not evolve to accept the better things too.

One more thing is that the politicians are doing all these to garner their votes from the general masses by acting to be "morally correct". Given how morals are often self-contradictory, stereotypical and absolutist, it is only right that we apply them in our daily lives with a pinch of salt.

Originally Posted by Kusa-San

Our society is the proof of this kind of behaviour.

There is no such thing as societal/double standard as long as humans are able to experience emotion, able to think and are not connected to a centralised hive mind. Each person views and acts on experience and discretion, and being able to accept others for who they are and what they do brings about greater understanding than making them conform to a "societal norm".

So why not be different and say, "Too bad for the society." rather than having the society saying "Too bad for you."? Conforming to a stupidified greater power doesn't make you, or anyone else cleverer.

Originally Posted by AmoreDoll

Ok, my reaction .................child porn= morbid. Let's leave it at that. I hardly fine any reason to start a debate concerning this.

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.

[MakubeX2]

Rapelay is overrated here. I can think of more explict stuffs that dates back prior to the year 2000 and before. (A goddamn decade before this fiasco !) Tell me if you need examples.

Really, this is just a lame attempt to draw our attention away from what really matters at hand such as the bad economy and a global virus outbreak.

[Narona]

Originally Posted by danin8r44

I see most any form of censorship or of punishment for the possession of fictitious images as a form of thoughtcrime. The purpose of a legal system is to stop crime from happening by punishing people who commit crimes, not people who might commit crimes. We have all thought of punching someone in the face, but we only go to jail for actually punching someone in the face. The same rule applies to all information material.

How do we know that these materials even promote rape, violence, or any other crime for that matter. There have been so many studies with so many varied results that it is near impossible to come to any firm conclusion as to whether these materials actually promote the crimes carried out in them. It is just as likely that these materials provide a relief for people with such desires so that they do not act them out in reality. There are also people who use these materials without any real world basis at all, instead realizing the material as pure fantasy and treating it as such with no real repercussions in their normal lives.

The only sure fire and free way to stop these crimes from occurring is to punish actual criminals and to educate children and adults on the evils and the consequences of committing the crime. Anything else is just potentially useless censorship. Hardly something that we should expect from any free society.

As i said, a state has to be coherent. What you say was a basis of many debates in France, 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 are those things 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 is 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.