So I wonder if this conversation would play out the same way if a Fundamental Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/KMart due to themes of demons/witchcraft?
It'd be worse reasoning if only because misogyny in video games is actually a thing whereas the satanic panic was the paranoid delusions of the fundamentalist right wing.
Satanic and witchcraft-related themes in video games also exist.
But here's the kicker, they don't exist enmass outside of videogames. Misogyny does, as does the violent abuse of sex workers.
So I wonder if this conversation would play out the same way if a Fundamental Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/KMart due to themes of demons/witchcraft?
It'd be worse reasoning if only because misogyny in video games is actually a thing whereas the satanic panic was the paranoid delusions of the fundamentalist right wing.
Satanic and witchcraft-related themes in video games also exist.
But here's the kicker, they don't exist enmass outside of videogames. Misogyny does, as does the violent abuse of sex workers.
Murder also exists en masse outside of video games. As does drug use. So I pose a similar question, if a Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/Kmart for these reasons, would the conversation go the same way?
So I wonder if this conversation would play out the same way if a Fundamental Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/KMart due to themes of demons/witchcraft?
It'd be worse reasoning if only because misogyny in video games is actually a thing whereas the satanic panic was the paranoid delusions of the fundamentalist right wing.
Satanic and witchcraft-related themes in video games also exist.
But here's the kicker, they don't exist enmass outside of videogames. Misogyny does, as does the violent abuse of sex workers.
Murder also exists en masse outside of video games. As does drug use. So I pose a similar question, if a Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/Kmart for these reasons, would the conversation go the same way?
Would I be calling it censorship? No. Would I be equating it to book burning? No. Would I agree they have a point? Maybe.
So yes, it would. After seeing how easily gamers jump to threatening people, I really do think the games industry has a violence issue.
Now ask yourself the same question... If a gamer group started writing advertisers of game publications who criticize games from a feminist perspective, would you support them? Would you support people saying it's censorship? I wouldn't support either, but I'd be more than willing to be vocal about my beliefs without being dishonest about the opposing position.
So I wonder if this conversation would play out the same way if a Fundamental Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/KMart due to themes of demons/witchcraft?
It'd be worse reasoning if only because misogyny in video games is actually a thing whereas the satanic panic was the paranoid delusions of the fundamentalist right wing.
Satanic and witchcraft-related themes in video games also exist.
But here's the kicker, they don't exist enmass outside of videogames. Misogyny does, as does the violent abuse of sex workers.
Murder also exists en masse outside of video games. As does drug use. So I pose a similar question, if a Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/Kmart for these reasons, would the conversation go the same way?
Would I be calling it censorship? No. Would I be equating it to book burning? No. Would I agree they have a point? Maybe.
So yes, it would.
Now ask yourself the same question... If a gamer group started writing advertisers of game publications who criticize games from a feminist perspective, would you support them? Would you support people saying it's censorship? I wouldn't support either, but I'd be more than willing to be vocal about my beliefs without being dishonest about the opposing position.
I would definitely consider this an attempt at censorship on that group's part. People have a right to right about games through whatever lens they want to. The answer to criticism you don't agree with is more criticism, not an attempt to silence them.
Now ask yourself the same question... If a gamer group started writing advertisers of game publications who criticize games from a feminist perspective, would you support them
So I wonder if this conversation would play out the same way if a Fundamental Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/KMart due to themes of demons/witchcraft?
If you take a list of three groups:
Feminists
Nazis
Fundamentalist Christians
And you group them all together just based on the idea that they all have issues with people consuming some kinds of media, I think you're missing something. The same goes even if you don't include Nazis.
I'm not sure what your point is.
Think of it this way. If someone told you they were a feminist, a Nazi, or a fundamentalist Christian, and that, because of this, they had a problem with some kind of media, would you see no distinction between the three people? You'd say to yourself "well, this feminist doesn't like X, and this Nazi doesn't like Y, and I guess that's all we can really say about that!" Or are there some relevant differences between feminism and Nazism such that the fact that a feminist dislikes something might mean something different than the fact that a Nazi dislikes something?
So I wonder if this conversation would play out the same way if a Fundamental Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/KMart due to themes of demons/witchcraft?
It'd be worse reasoning if only because misogyny in video games is actually a thing whereas the satanic panic was the paranoid delusions of the fundamentalist right wing.
Satanic and witchcraft-related themes in video games also exist.
But here's the kicker, they don't exist enmass outside of videogames. Misogyny does, as does the violent abuse of sex workers.
Murder also exists en masse outside of video games. As does drug use. So I pose a similar question, if a Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/Kmart for these reasons, would the conversation go the same way?
Would I be calling it censorship? No. Would I be equating it to book burning? No. Would I agree they have a point? Maybe.
So yes, it would.
Now ask yourself the same question... If a gamer group started writing advertisers of game publications who criticize games from a feminist perspective, would you support them? Would you support people saying it's censorship? I wouldn't support either, but I'd be more than willing to be vocal about my beliefs without being dishonest about the opposing position.
I would definitely consider this an attempt at censorship on that group's part. People have a right to right about games through whatever lens they want to. The answer to criticism you don't agree with is more criticism, not an attempt to silence them.
Well at least you're consistent on that point. But when it comes right down to it consumers having a voice and using that voice to influence decisions by corporations is a good thing. Without that the only people who can't speak are the consumers.
So I wonder if this conversation would play out the same way if a Fundamental Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/KMart due to themes of demons/witchcraft?
If you take a list of three groups:
Feminists
Nazis
Fundamentalist Christians
And you group them all together just based on the idea that they all have issues with people consuming some kinds of media, I think you're missing something. The same goes even if you don't include Nazis.
I'm not sure what your point is.
Think of it this way. If someone told you they were a feminist, a Nazi, or a fundamentalist Christian, and that, because of this, they had a problem with some kind of media, would you see no distinction between the three people? You'd say to yourself "well, this feminist doesn't like X, and this Nazi doesn't like Y, and I guess that's all we can really say about that!" Or are there some relevant differences between feminism and Nazism such that the fact that a feminist dislikes something might mean something different than the fact that a Nazi dislikes something?
I'm personally confused as to why you're comparing Christians and feminists to Nazis.
So I wonder if this conversation would play out the same way if a Fundamental Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/KMart due to themes of demons/witchcraft?
I would think Target/Kmart were dumb but well within their rights for doing it like I think they are currently?
Like I've said before?
Why are you wondering a thing I've made abundantly clear?
So I wonder if this conversation would play out the same way if a Fundamental Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/KMart due to themes of demons/witchcraft?
If you take a list of three groups:
Feminists
Nazis
Fundamentalist Christians
And you group them all together just based on the idea that they all have issues with people consuming some kinds of media, I think you're missing something. The same goes even if you don't include Nazis.
I'm not sure what your point is.
Think of it this way. If someone told you they were a feminist, a Nazi, or a fundamentalist Christian, and that, because of this, they had a problem with some kind of media, would you see no distinction between the three people? You'd say to yourself "well, this feminist doesn't like X, and this Nazi doesn't like Y, and I guess that's all we can really say about that!" Or are there some relevant differences between feminism and Nazism such that the fact that a feminist dislikes something might mean something different than the fact that a Nazi dislikes something?
I'm trying to focus on the reasons why a group is calling for a retailer to not carry a product. Asking Target to remove GTA because it has "misogynistic themes" is apparently a-okay to some people in the thread. I'm wondering if a similar group asking Target to remove "Diablo 4" due to it's satanic/witchcraft themes or GTA because it has "violence and drug use" would be viewed as a-okay as well?
So I wonder if this conversation would play out the same way if a Fundamental Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/KMart due to themes of demons/witchcraft?
If you take a list of three groups:
Feminists
Nazis
Fundamentalist Christians
And you group them all together just based on the idea that they all have issues with people consuming some kinds of media, I think you're missing something. The same goes even if you don't include Nazis.
I'm not sure what your point is.
Think of it this way. If someone told you they were a feminist, a Nazi, or a fundamentalist Christian, and that, because of this, they had a problem with some kind of media, would you see no distinction between the three people? You'd say to yourself "well, this feminist doesn't like X, and this Nazi doesn't like Y, and I guess that's all we can really say about that!" Or are there some relevant differences between feminism and Nazism such that the fact that a feminist dislikes something might mean something different than the fact that a Nazi dislikes something?
I'm personally confused as to why you're comparing Christians and feminists to Nazis.
He's not. He's saying these things are different but people are using them in comparisons as if they're interchangeable.
So I wonder if this conversation would play out the same way if a Fundamental Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/KMart due to themes of demons/witchcraft?
I would think Target/Kmart were dumb but well within their rights for doing it like I think they are currently?
Like I've said before?
Why are you wondering a thing I've made abundantly clear?
Well, that was a general question to the thread, not to you specifically.
So I wonder if this conversation would play out the same way if a Fundamental Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/KMart due to themes of demons/witchcraft?
If you take a list of three groups:
Feminists
Nazis
Fundamentalist Christians
And you group them all together just based on the idea that they all have issues with people consuming some kinds of media, I think you're missing something. The same goes even if you don't include Nazis.
I'm not sure what your point is.
Think of it this way. If someone told you they were a feminist, a Nazi, or a fundamentalist Christian, and that, because of this, they had a problem with some kind of media, would you see no distinction between the three people? You'd say to yourself "well, this feminist doesn't like X, and this Nazi doesn't like Y, and I guess that's all we can really say about that!" Or are there some relevant differences between feminism and Nazism such that the fact that a feminist dislikes something might mean something different than the fact that a Nazi dislikes something?
I'm trying to focus on the reasons why a group is calling for a retailer to not carry a product. Asking Target to remove GTA because it has "misogynistic themes" is apparently a-okay to some people in the thread. I'm wondering if a similar group asking Target to remove "Diablo 4" due to it's satanic/witchcraft themes or GTA because it has "violence and drug use" would be viewed as a-okay as well?
Well the difference would be the difference between misogyny and witchcraft for one.
Second it would depend on the content itself.
Though incidentally I very much doubt the 40k signatures were specifically about misogyny so much as GTA is just a popular thing to be angry at by old people.
So I wonder if this conversation would play out the same way if a Fundamental Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/KMart due to themes of demons/witchcraft?
I would think Target/Kmart were dumb but well within their rights for doing it like I think they are currently?
Like I've said before?
Why are you wondering a thing I've made abundantly clear?
Well, that was a general question to the thread, not to you specifically.
Though incidentally I very much doubt the 40k signatures were specifically about misogyny so much as GTA is just a popular thing to be angry at by old people.
That does a lot to solve my confusion. You're probably right.
So I wonder if this conversation would play out the same way if a Fundamental Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/KMart due to themes of demons/witchcraft?
If you take a list of three groups:
Feminists
Nazis
Fundamentalist Christians
And you group them all together just based on the idea that they all have issues with people consuming some kinds of media, I think you're missing something. The same goes even if you don't include Nazis.
I'm not sure what your point is.
Think of it this way. If someone told you they were a feminist, a Nazi, or a fundamentalist Christian, and that, because of this, they had a problem with some kind of media, would you see no distinction between the three people? You'd say to yourself "well, this feminist doesn't like X, and this Nazi doesn't like Y, and I guess that's all we can really say about that!" Or are there some relevant differences between feminism and Nazism such that the fact that a feminist dislikes something might mean something different than the fact that a Nazi dislikes something?
I'm trying to focus on the reasons why a group is calling for a retailer to not carry a product. Asking Target to remove GTA because it has "misogynistic themes" is apparently a-okay to some people in the thread. I'm wondering if a similar group asking Target to remove "Diablo 4" due to it's satanic/witchcraft themes or GTA because it has "violence and drug use" would be viewed as a-okay as well?
In this instance? It's because this group is directly effected by the very real violence towards sex workers and the very real mysoginy of modern day society. And GTA shows and allows for that violence without any form of thought put into the portrayal of said violence, treating it as a big joke.
Which, some would argue, is further perpetuating the normalization of violence towards women and mysoginistic attitudes. Which is a very real and widespread problem that is entrenched in every aspect of modern day society.
In other words it's because of a problem that directly effects their lives.
I'll add that I don't think this is a good way to deal with this problem in the game industry. That the problem isn't GTA but the even more subtle displays of sexism in games and the culture, and that by targeting GTA specifically in this fashion this particular group has been lumped in with every reactionary critic of the game, lessening the actual chances of spreading their concerns with those who generally consume games. Basically this is something that needs to change industry wide, not just one of the most standout examples.
So I wonder if this conversation would play out the same way if a Fundamental Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/KMart due to themes of demons/witchcraft?
If you take a list of three groups:
Feminists
Nazis
Fundamentalist Christians
And you group them all together just based on the idea that they all have issues with people consuming some kinds of media, I think you're missing something. The same goes even if you don't include Nazis.
I'm not sure what your point is.
Think of it this way. If someone told you they were a feminist, a Nazi, or a fundamentalist Christian, and that, because of this, they had a problem with some kind of media, would you see no distinction between the three people? You'd say to yourself "well, this feminist doesn't like X, and this Nazi doesn't like Y, and I guess that's all we can really say about that!" Or are there some relevant differences between feminism and Nazism such that the fact that a feminist dislikes something might mean something different than the fact that a Nazi dislikes something?
I'm trying to focus on the reasons why a group is calling for a retailer to not carry a product. Asking Target to remove GTA because it has "misogynistic themes" is apparently a-okay to some people in the thread. I'm wondering if a similar group asking Target to remove "Diablo 4" due to it's satanic/witchcraft themes or GTA because it has "violence and drug use" would be viewed as a-okay as well?
In this instance? It's because this group is directly effected by the very real violence towards sex workers and the very real mysoginy of modern day society. And GTA shows and allows for that violence without any form of thought put into the portrayal of said violence, treating it as a big joke.
Which, some would argue, is further perpetuating the normalization of violence towards women and mysoginistic attitudes. Which is a very real and widespread problem that is entrenched in every aspect of modern day society.
In other words it's because of a problem that directly effects their lives.
Unless I'm wrong, no form of media has been shown to be able to cause violence or misogyny or both. Show me a real study with that conclusion and I might have to stop playing games or watching movies or even reading, because I definitely don't want to turn into a murderer.
So I wonder if this conversation would play out the same way if a Fundamental Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/KMart due to themes of demons/witchcraft?
If you take a list of three groups:
Feminists
Nazis
Fundamentalist Christians
And you group them all together just based on the idea that they all have issues with people consuming some kinds of media, I think you're missing something. The same goes even if you don't include Nazis.
I'm not sure what your point is.
Think of it this way. If someone told you they were a feminist, a Nazi, or a fundamentalist Christian, and that, because of this, they had a problem with some kind of media, would you see no distinction between the three people? You'd say to yourself "well, this feminist doesn't like X, and this Nazi doesn't like Y, and I guess that's all we can really say about that!" Or are there some relevant differences between feminism and Nazism such that the fact that a feminist dislikes something might mean something different than the fact that a Nazi dislikes something?
I'm trying to focus on the reasons why a group is calling for a retailer to not carry a product. Asking Target to remove GTA because it has "misogynistic themes" is apparently a-okay to some people in the thread. I'm wondering if a similar group asking Target to remove "Diablo 4" due to it's satanic/witchcraft themes or GTA because it has "violence and drug use" would be viewed as a-okay as well?
In this instance? It's because this group is directly effected by the very real violence towards sex workers and the very real mysoginy of modern day society. And GTA shows and allows for that violence without any form of thought put into the portrayal of said violence, treating it as a big joke.
Which, some would argue, is further perpetuating the normalization of violence towards women and mysoginistic attitudes. Which is a very real and widespread problem that is entrenched in every aspect of modern day society.
In other words it's because of a problem that directly effects their lives.
I'm at a bit of a loss as to how to avoid this scenario in a game like GTA where it's an open world concept. I haven't played GTA5 yet, but I'm assuming it's much of the same of it's predecessors: Basically you're a dick to everyone, you steal cars and other vehicles and just cause mayhem in general.
So, do we not include women in games like this because it is possible to cause harm to them? Do we expand that to prevent people from being dicks to everyone? Do we just prevent the game from getting developed at all?
This isn't about silly geese who think people are utterly unaffected by culture.
This is about silly geese who think not selling something they like is automatically suppressing that thing, the people who like it, and the people who create it.
So I wonder if this conversation would play out the same way if a Fundamental Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/KMart due to themes of demons/witchcraft?
If you take a list of three groups:
Feminists
Nazis
Fundamentalist Christians
And you group them all together just based on the idea that they all have issues with people consuming some kinds of media, I think you're missing something. The same goes even if you don't include Nazis.
I'm not sure what your point is.
Think of it this way. If someone told you they were a feminist, a Nazi, or a fundamentalist Christian, and that, because of this, they had a problem with some kind of media, would you see no distinction between the three people? You'd say to yourself "well, this feminist doesn't like X, and this Nazi doesn't like Y, and I guess that's all we can really say about that!" Or are there some relevant differences between feminism and Nazism such that the fact that a feminist dislikes something might mean something different than the fact that a Nazi dislikes something?
I'm trying to focus on the reasons why a group is calling for a retailer to not carry a product. Asking Target to remove GTA because it has "misogynistic themes" is apparently a-okay to some people in the thread. I'm wondering if a similar group asking Target to remove "Diablo 4" due to it's satanic/witchcraft themes or GTA because it has "violence and drug use" would be viewed as a-okay as well?
In this instance? It's because this group is directly effected by the very real violence towards sex workers and the very real mysoginy of modern day society. And GTA shows and allows for that violence without any form of thought put into the portrayal of said violence, treating it as a big joke.
Which, some would argue, is further perpetuating the normalization of violence towards women and mysoginistic attitudes. Which is a very real and widespread problem that is entrenched in every aspect of modern day society.
In other words it's because of a problem that directly effects their lives.
Unless I'm wrong, no form of media has been shown to be able to cause violence or misogyny or both. Show me a real study with that conclusion and I might have to stop playing games or watching movies or even reading, because I definitely don't want to turn into a murderer.
The problem isn't one of causation, its one of further normalization and reinforcing beliefs and views already entrenched in modern day culture. It's why I'm not as vocal about violence in videogames. Violent people aren't normalized in our society, we don't have casual violence in our everyday lives.
So I wonder if this conversation would play out the same way if a Fundamental Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/KMart due to themes of demons/witchcraft?
If you take a list of three groups:
Feminists
Nazis
Fundamentalist Christians
And you group them all together just based on the idea that they all have issues with people consuming some kinds of media, I think you're missing something. The same goes even if you don't include Nazis.
I'm not sure what your point is.
Think of it this way. If someone told you they were a feminist, a Nazi, or a fundamentalist Christian, and that, because of this, they had a problem with some kind of media, would you see no distinction between the three people? You'd say to yourself "well, this feminist doesn't like X, and this Nazi doesn't like Y, and I guess that's all we can really say about that!" Or are there some relevant differences between feminism and Nazism such that the fact that a feminist dislikes something might mean something different than the fact that a Nazi dislikes something?
I'm trying to focus on the reasons why a group is calling for a retailer to not carry a product. Asking Target to remove GTA because it has "misogynistic themes" is apparently a-okay to some people in the thread. I'm wondering if a similar group asking Target to remove "Diablo 4" due to it's satanic/witchcraft themes or GTA because it has "violence and drug use" would be viewed as a-okay as well?
In this instance? It's because this group is directly effected by the very real violence towards sex workers and the very real mysoginy of modern day society. And GTA shows and allows for that violence without any form of thought put into the portrayal of said violence, treating it as a big joke.
Which, some would argue, is further perpetuating the normalization of violence towards women and mysoginistic attitudes. Which is a very real and widespread problem that is entrenched in every aspect of modern day society.
In other words it's because of a problem that directly effects their lives.
I'll add that I don't think this is a good way to deal with this problem in the game industry. That the problem isn't GTA but the even more subtle displays of sexism in games and the culture, and that by targeting GTA specifically in this fashion this particular group has been lumped in with every reactionary critic of the game, lessening the actual chances of spreading their concerns with those who generally consume games. Basically this is something that needs to change industry wide, not just one of the most standout examples.
Violence is a widespread problem that directly affects people's lives.
Drug abuse is a widespread problem that directly affects people's lives.
Overeating is a widespread problem that directly affects people's lives. We should only show people eating healthy vegetables or else people will continue under the wrong headed assumption that eating fatty foods is ok and they'll die sooner and cost the health care system billions.
Why not fight depictions of that stuff too?
Also, as another reply points out, whats the fix here? Because the game allows violence against every inhabitant. And I've heard (though I've not played the game) that no mission in the game specifically incentivizes violence against a sex worker (at no point is there a greater reward for beating or killing a sex worker than there is any other random individual in the game and very few instances for women in the game in general compared to men (there are obviously lots of instances where the game promotes missions that involve killing men.) You either have to remove women from the game, make them invincible or just not make a game that allows violence against random people.
So I wonder if this conversation would play out the same way if a Fundamental Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/KMart due to themes of demons/witchcraft?
If you take a list of three groups:
Feminists
Nazis
Fundamentalist Christians
And you group them all together just based on the idea that they all have issues with people consuming some kinds of media, I think you're missing something. The same goes even if you don't include Nazis.
I'm not sure what your point is.
Think of it this way. If someone told you they were a feminist, a Nazi, or a fundamentalist Christian, and that, because of this, they had a problem with some kind of media, would you see no distinction between the three people? You'd say to yourself "well, this feminist doesn't like X, and this Nazi doesn't like Y, and I guess that's all we can really say about that!" Or are there some relevant differences between feminism and Nazism such that the fact that a feminist dislikes something might mean something different than the fact that a Nazi dislikes something?
I'm trying to focus on the reasons why a group is calling for a retailer to not carry a product. Asking Target to remove GTA because it has "misogynistic themes" is apparently a-okay to some people in the thread. I'm wondering if a similar group asking Target to remove "Diablo 4" due to it's satanic/witchcraft themes or GTA because it has "violence and drug use" would be viewed as a-okay as well?
In this instance? It's because this group is directly effected by the very real violence towards sex workers and the very real mysoginy of modern day society. And GTA shows and allows for that violence without any form of thought put into the portrayal of said violence, treating it as a big joke.
Which, some would argue, is further perpetuating the normalization of violence towards women and mysoginistic attitudes. Which is a very real and widespread problem that is entrenched in every aspect of modern day society.
In other words it's because of a problem that directly effects their lives.
I'll add that I don't think this is a good way to deal with this problem in the game industry. That the problem isn't GTA but the even more subtle displays of sexism in games and the culture, and that by targeting GTA specifically in this fashion this particular group has been lumped in with every reactionary critic of the game, lessening the actual chances of spreading their concerns with those who generally consume games. Basically this is something that needs to change industry wide, not just one of the most standout examples.
Violence is a widespread problem that directly affects people's lives.
Drug abuse is a widespread problem that directly affects people's lives.
Overeating is a widespread problem that directly affects people's lives. We should only show people eating healthy vegetables or else people will continue under the wrong headed assumption that eating fatty foods is ok and they'll die sooner and cost the health care system billions.
Why not fight depictions of that stuff too?
Also, as another reply points out, whats the fix here? Because the game allows violence against every inhabitant. And I've heard (though I've not played the game) that no mission in the game specifically incentivizes violence against a sex worker (at no point is there a greater reward for beating or killing a sex worker than there is any other random individual in the game and very few instances for women in the game in general compared to men (there are obviously lots of instances where the game promotes missions that involve killing men.) You either have to remove women from the game, make them invincible or just not make a game that allows violence against random people.
Well, even besides the allowal of violence being enacted upon, you could remove the wife beating "satire" on the radio along with all the other mysoginistic crap that Laszlo and the secondary writers produced, have some important women in the plot, or go all the way and have a female playable character instead of 3 guys.
The problem isn't just the violence, it's the overall attitude and tone of the game regarding women.
As far as sexism in games having an influence on real life? Just look at how any propaganda material from WWII influenced people's perception towards Japanese and German folks. How racist portrayals of black people further spread racist stereotypes. The media you consume can and will influence the way you see others. It's been something that had been used for thousands of years, and I don't need a damned study to show that considering the history.
And there is middle ground between "Literally no effect." and "Turns you into Ted Bundy."
Nobody is saying GTA V is going to turn you into the other dude named Bundy and starting rocking a No Ma'am shirt, but it does make certain misogynistic ideas seem more normal and acceptable.
And there is middle ground between "Literally no effect." and "Turns you into Ted Bundy."
Nobody is saying GTA V is going to turn you into the other dude named Bundy and starting rocking a No Ma'am shirt, but it does make certain misogynistic ideas seem more normal and acceptable.
To expand on this, remember how gamers being portrayed as antisocial pocket protector losers made people treat being a gamer as weird? Well, that's media influencing behavior towards people it represents.
To argue that media doesn't perpetuate sexism is the same as saying media didn't help make that stereotype a common one.
I mean saying media doesn't influence people is...weird. There's literally a whole career path people have made just using media to influence people. It's why video games have multi-million dollar advertising budgets and why businesses are hiring behavioral experts.
So I wonder if this conversation would play out the same way if a Fundamental Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/KMart due to themes of demons/witchcraft?
If you take a list of three groups:
Feminists
Nazis
Fundamentalist Christians
And you group them all together just based on the idea that they all have issues with people consuming some kinds of media, I think you're missing something. The same goes even if you don't include Nazis.
I'm not sure what your point is.
Think of it this way. If someone told you they were a feminist, a Nazi, or a fundamentalist Christian, and that, because of this, they had a problem with some kind of media, would you see no distinction between the three people? You'd say to yourself "well, this feminist doesn't like X, and this Nazi doesn't like Y, and I guess that's all we can really say about that!" Or are there some relevant differences between feminism and Nazism such that the fact that a feminist dislikes something might mean something different than the fact that a Nazi dislikes something?
I'm trying to focus on the reasons why a group is calling for a retailer to not carry a product. Asking Target to remove GTA because it has "misogynistic themes" is apparently a-okay to some people in the thread. I'm wondering if a similar group asking Target to remove "Diablo 4" due to it's satanic/witchcraft themes or GTA because it has "violence and drug use" would be viewed as a-okay as well?
In this instance? It's because this group is directly effected by the very real violence towards sex workers and the very real mysoginy of modern day society. And GTA shows and allows for that violence without any form of thought put into the portrayal of said violence, treating it as a big joke.
Which, some would argue, is further perpetuating the normalization of violence towards women and mysoginistic attitudes. Which is a very real and widespread problem that is entrenched in every aspect of modern day society.
In other words it's because of a problem that directly effects their lives.
I'll add that I don't think this is a good way to deal with this problem in the game industry. That the problem isn't GTA but the even more subtle displays of sexism in games and the culture, and that by targeting GTA specifically in this fashion this particular group has been lumped in with every reactionary critic of the game, lessening the actual chances of spreading their concerns with those who generally consume games. Basically this is something that needs to change industry wide, not just one of the most standout examples.
Violence is a widespread problem that directly affects people's lives.
Drug abuse is a widespread problem that directly affects people's lives.
Overeating is a widespread problem that directly affects people's lives. We should only show people eating healthy vegetables or else people will continue under the wrong headed assumption that eating fatty foods is ok and they'll die sooner and cost the health care system billions.
Why not fight depictions of that stuff too?
Also, as another reply points out, whats the fix here? Because the game allows violence against every inhabitant. And I've heard (though I've not played the game) that no mission in the game specifically incentivizes violence against a sex worker (at no point is there a greater reward for beating or killing a sex worker than there is any other random individual in the game and very few instances for women in the game in general compared to men (there are obviously lots of instances where the game promotes missions that involve killing men.) You either have to remove women from the game, make them invincible or just not make a game that allows violence against random people.
Well, even besides the allowal of violence being enacted upon, you could remove the wife beating "satire" on the radio along with all the other mysoginistic crap that Laszlo and the secondary writers produced, have some important women in the plot, or go all the way and have a female playable character instead of 3 guys.
The problem isn't just the violence, it's the overall attitude and tone of the game regarding women.
As far as sexism in games having an influence on real life? Just look at how any propaganda material from WWII influenced people's perception towards Japanese and German folks. How racist portrayals of black people further spread racist stereotypes. The media you consume can and will influence the way you see others. It's been something that had been used for thousands of years, and I don't need a damned study to show that considering the history.
Now female protagonists, thats a different discussion and one where I support that addition. But again, that is different. Let women engage in the wrongness alongside everyone else.
Haven't played the game nor was I planning so some of this I'm going to have to let drop. Any of the specific scenes.
But the petition was driven by violence against women in a game that allows violence against everybody. Even if you changed the stuff you mentioned, the game would still allow players to commit violent acts on women unless you were to put women into a special exempt category or remove them.
Propaganda is not at all equivalent. The messages in propaganda are overt and the people you're talking about were our enemies in an actual war. Racist attitudes were supported by specious arguments. The progress that has been made there has been through overt arguments, not through censoring the subtle effects of media. As opinions changed, media changed naturally. If you're going to put a game in that category when it allows violence against both genders and mostly promotes violence against men (as pretty much all games with violence do and I only say pretty much to allow for scant possibilities I'm not aware of.) I give up. Probably 99.9 percent of violence in games is against men (and don't tell me "violence against women is more real" because tons of real men die in ways similar to what is shown in war games and shooters.)
Myopia enjoys a victory this day.
But of course you're going to have a response to this and you'll claim victory if I don't respond and we'll be here for hours and all because you think its right to suppress fiction. Well have your victory. Be proud of having denied gamers the chance to play a game that harms no one.
And there is middle ground between "Literally no effect." and "Turns you into Ted Bundy."
Nobody is saying GTA V is going to turn you into the other dude named Bundy and starting rocking a No Ma'am shirt, but it does make certain misogynistic ideas seem more normal and acceptable.
It makes theft, murder, reckless endangerment, drug abuse, and any number of other crimes seem more normal.
The point of a game like this is to get mischief making urges out of your system. We're doing this stuff in a game so that we can have fun with it without ever doing it in real life (or rather they are, I've never been a fan of the series). The humor of these games comes from the dissonance of how wrong this stuff would be if we were really doing it vs how fake and thus harmless it is. A person can't enjoy what they're doing in Grand Theft Auto without consciously acknowledging that what the game makes them do would be wrong if they did it for real.
And this is why arguments about subtle media tropes aren't relevant. You're meeting the wrongness head on.
So I wonder if this conversation would play out the same way if a Fundamental Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/KMart due to themes of demons/witchcraft?
If you take a list of three groups:
Feminists
Nazis
Fundamentalist Christians
And you group them all together just based on the idea that they all have issues with people consuming some kinds of media, I think you're missing something. The same goes even if you don't include Nazis.
I'm not sure what your point is.
Think of it this way. If someone told you they were a feminist, a Nazi, or a fundamentalist Christian, and that, because of this, they had a problem with some kind of media, would you see no distinction between the three people? You'd say to yourself "well, this feminist doesn't like X, and this Nazi doesn't like Y, and I guess that's all we can really say about that!" Or are there some relevant differences between feminism and Nazism such that the fact that a feminist dislikes something might mean something different than the fact that a Nazi dislikes something?
I'm trying to focus on the reasons why a group is calling for a retailer to not carry a product. Asking Target to remove GTA because it has "misogynistic themes" is apparently a-okay to some people in the thread. I'm wondering if a similar group asking Target to remove "Diablo 4" due to it's satanic/witchcraft themes or GTA because it has "violence and drug use" would be viewed as a-okay as well?
In this instance? It's because this group is directly effected by the very real violence towards sex workers and the very real mysoginy of modern day society. And GTA shows and allows for that violence without any form of thought put into the portrayal of said violence, treating it as a big joke.
Which, some would argue, is further perpetuating the normalization of violence towards women and mysoginistic attitudes. Which is a very real and widespread problem that is entrenched in every aspect of modern day society.
In other words it's because of a problem that directly effects their lives.
I'll add that I don't think this is a good way to deal with this problem in the game industry. That the problem isn't GTA but the even more subtle displays of sexism in games and the culture, and that by targeting GTA specifically in this fashion this particular group has been lumped in with every reactionary critic of the game, lessening the actual chances of spreading their concerns with those who generally consume games. Basically this is something that needs to change industry wide, not just one of the most standout examples.
Violence is a widespread problem that directly affects people's lives.
Drug abuse is a widespread problem that directly affects people's lives.
Overeating is a widespread problem that directly affects people's lives. We should only show people eating healthy vegetables or else people will continue under the wrong headed assumption that eating fatty foods is ok and they'll die sooner and cost the health care system billions.
Why not fight depictions of that stuff too?
Also, as another reply points out, whats the fix here? Because the game allows violence against every inhabitant. And I've heard (though I've not played the game) that no mission in the game specifically incentivizes violence against a sex worker (at no point is there a greater reward for beating or killing a sex worker than there is any other random individual in the game and very few instances for women in the game in general compared to men (there are obviously lots of instances where the game promotes missions that involve killing men.) You either have to remove women from the game, make them invincible or just not make a game that allows violence against random people.
Well, even besides the allowal of violence being enacted upon, you could remove the wife beating "satire" on the radio along with all the other mysoginistic crap that Laszlo and the secondary writers produced, have some important women in the plot, or go all the way and have a female playable character instead of 3 guys.
The problem isn't just the violence, it's the overall attitude and tone of the game regarding women.
As far as sexism in games having an influence on real life? Just look at how any propaganda material from WWII influenced people's perception towards Japanese and German folks. How racist portrayals of black people further spread racist stereotypes. The media you consume can and will influence the way you see others. It's been something that had been used for thousands of years, and I don't need a damned study to show that considering the history.
Now female protagonists, thats a different discussion and one where I support that addition. But again, that is different. Let women engage in the wrongness alongside everyone else.
Haven't played the game nor was I planning so some of this I'm going to have to let drop. Any of the specific scenes.
But the petition was driven by violence against women in a game that allows violence against everybody. Even if you changed the stuff you mentioned, the game would still allow players to commit violent acts on women unless you were to put women into a special exempt category or remove them.
Propaganda is not at all equivalent. The messages in propaganda are overt and the people you're talking about were our enemies in an actual war. Racist attitudes were supported by specious arguments. The progress that has been made there has been through overt arguments, not through censoring the subtle effects of media. As opinions changed, media changed naturally. If you're going to put a game in that category when it allows violence against both genders and mostly promotes violence against men (as pretty much all games with violence do and I only say pretty much to allow for scant possibilities I'm not aware of.) I give up. Probably 99.9 percent of violence in games is against men (and don't tell me "violence against women is more real" because tons of real men die in ways similar to what is shown in war games and shooters.)
Myopia enjoys a victory this day.
But of course you're going to have a response to this and you'll claim victory if I don't respond and we'll be here for hours and all because you think its right to suppress fiction. Well have your victory. Be proud of having denied gamers the chance to play a game that harms no one.
I've done what now? When did GTA V get pulled off the market all of the sudden?
I'm asking asking this seriously because I'm sitting here playing the damn game in between replies.
And there is middle ground between "Literally no effect." and "Turns you into Ted Bundy."
Nobody is saying GTA V is going to turn you into the other dude named Bundy and starting rocking a No Ma'am shirt, but it does make certain misogynistic ideas seem more normal and acceptable.
It makes theft, murder, reckless endangerment, drug abuse, and any number of other crimes seem more normal.
The point of a game like this is to get mischief making urges out of your system. We're doing this stuff in a game so that we can have fun with it without ever doing it in real life (or rather they are, I've never been a fan of the series). The humor of these games comes from the dissonance of how wrong this stuff would be if we were really doing it vs how fake and thus harmless it is. A person can't enjoy what they're doing in Grand Theft Auto without consciously acknowledging that what the game makes them do would be wrong if they did it for real.
And this is why arguments about subtle media tropes aren't relevant. You're meeting the wrongness head on.
Maybe you could spare talking about what the game is and isn't when talking to people who've actually played it.
"No, you don't understand, it's not censorship, we're just trying to stop people from viewing or purchasing art that we don't want them to see. Totally different thing."
I found the news post really disappointing. Tycho's relationship with words is a big part of the appeal of Penny Arcade to me. I get that he doesn't like how games are dealt with in Australia. It's still jarring to read a news post where he conflates two entirely different concepts, then accuses people who might correct him of being awful censors themselves.
It's been said already, but censorship is a narrow concept. It only the appropriate term when it's a restriction on speech enforced by the state. Speech in the technical sense, not just verbal communication.
Target aren't censors because they aren't a state. You can deplore what they're doing without throwing literally impossible accusations around.
Tycho projects an image of being a person who cares about words. I would have hoped that he could do better than throwing the nearest handy pejorative at Target, and following up with "I'm right because I say I'm right."
"No, you don't understand, it's not censorship, we're just trying to stop people from viewing or purchasing art that we don't want them to see. Totally different thing."
Actually they're just letting businesses know that they won't support them if they carry the game, which is a personal choice.
There might be an argument that this is censorship if significant government resources were allocated to support the people trying to get Target to stop stocking GTA V. Or if Target stopped stocking GTA V after receiving threats of greater regulation or fines from the government. That's what happened to American comics in the mid-20th century.
The impetus for an action matters a lot. It isn't just what people do, it is why they do it.
Removing GTA V from shelves as a response to a consumer petition is about as far from censorship as you can get.
If target is so pervasive as retail outlet that it's decision not to stock GTA V is de-facto censorship, meaning that it would be near-impossible for Australians to legally obtain GTA V, then Australia needs to look at its anti-trust law, not its censorship policies. I don't think that's the case here though.
The Target ban of GTA 5 takes us back to early 2000 with the likes of Jack Thompson. His issue was that he claimed that violence in video games rubbed off on to the people that played it. To that end, he attempted to censor the games. Of course, we all know that violence in video games does not make someone more violent. There's been countless studies on that topic. This is the same thing in that baseless accusations are being made against a game, with no data to back it up. Just feels.
Has anyone actually read the reasoning behind the pull? A group petitioned Target to remove the game because GTA5 depicts violence against women. The group is lying by omission. GTA5 depicts violence against everyone. It's also a game that is intended for 18+ audience and is only sold to an 18+ audience in Aus. Seriously. It is illegal in Aus to sell an 18+ game to a minor. So what this group is telling Target is that GTA 5, BAD, and adults shouldn't make their own choice on how to purchase media. But, Game of Thrones, GOOD. 50 Shades of Gray, GOOD. Notice the double standard?
Also, if GTA5 DID depict violence against women, it would not have even been allowed on the shelves to begin with because their consumer board doesn't allow that in games period.
This boils down to an attempt at censorship because people got their feels hurt. Sorry. Don't play the game if you don't like it. Let adults make their own choices about what they should and should not purchase. I don't need your shitty moral compass to tell me how to live my life.
The Target ban of GTA 5 takes us back to early 2000 with the likes of Jack Thompson. His issue was that he claimed that violence in video games rubbed off on to the people that played it. To that end, he attempted to censor the games. Of course, we all know that violence in video games does not make someone more violent. There's been countless studies on that topic. This is the same thing in that baseless accusations are being made against a game, with no data to back it up. Just feels.
Has anyone actually read the reasoning behind the pull? A group petitioned Target to remove the game because GTA5 depicts violence against women. The group is lying by omission. GTA5 depicts violence against everyone. It's also a game that is intended for 18+ audience and is only sold to an 18+ audience in Aus. Seriously. It is illegal in Aus to sell an 18+ game to a minor. So what this group is telling Target is that GTA 5, BAD, and adults shouldn't make their own choice on how to purchase media. But, Game of Thrones, GOOD. 50 Shades of Gray, GOOD. Notice the double standard?
Also, if GTA5 DID depict violence against women, it would not have even been allowed on the shelves to begin with because their consumer board doesn't allow that in games period.
This boils down to an attempt at censorship because people got their feels hurt. Sorry. Don't play the game if you don't like it. Let adults make their own choices about what they should and should not purchase. I don't need your shitty moral compass to tell me how to live my life.
And companies don't have to stock games they don't want to. And consumers have a right and duty to tell companies what they want. We're not.missing the point at all. We just don't exactly agree with the normal overly defensive, persecuted gamer outlook on this shit. The sky isn't falling, and no one is making it so GTA V is unavailable to people who want it.
No I don't.
+3
J. D. MilknutLord of ChipmunksPortland, ORRegistered Userregular
I don't know why I decided to glance at the comments today. No fucking thanks.
Yeah I usually find most PA comics to be pretty funny, or at least accurate jabs at silly industry things.
But this one just makes me a good deal disappointed. Mostly because I know they can do better than this, and because they're just giving the folks that already hate them more fuel for their fire.
Posts
But here's the kicker, they don't exist enmass outside of videogames. Misogyny does, as does the violent abuse of sex workers.
Murder also exists en masse outside of video games. As does drug use. So I pose a similar question, if a Christian group managed to raise enough of a stink to get a game pulled from Target/Kmart for these reasons, would the conversation go the same way?
Would I be calling it censorship? No. Would I be equating it to book burning? No. Would I agree they have a point? Maybe.
So yes, it would. After seeing how easily gamers jump to threatening people, I really do think the games industry has a violence issue.
Now ask yourself the same question... If a gamer group started writing advertisers of game publications who criticize games from a feminist perspective, would you support them? Would you support people saying it's censorship? I wouldn't support either, but I'd be more than willing to be vocal about my beliefs without being dishonest about the opposing position.
I would definitely consider this an attempt at censorship on that group's part. People have a right to right about games through whatever lens they want to. The answer to criticism you don't agree with is more criticism, not an attempt to silence them.
God no. It's a good thing that's not happening.
Well at least you're consistent on that point. But when it comes right down to it consumers having a voice and using that voice to influence decisions by corporations is a good thing. Without that the only people who can't speak are the consumers.
I'm personally confused as to why you're comparing Christians and feminists to Nazis.
I would think Target/Kmart were dumb but well within their rights for doing it like I think they are currently?
Like I've said before?
Why are you wondering a thing I've made abundantly clear?
I'm trying to focus on the reasons why a group is calling for a retailer to not carry a product. Asking Target to remove GTA because it has "misogynistic themes" is apparently a-okay to some people in the thread. I'm wondering if a similar group asking Target to remove "Diablo 4" due to it's satanic/witchcraft themes or GTA because it has "violence and drug use" would be viewed as a-okay as well?
He's not. He's saying these things are different but people are using them in comparisons as if they're interchangeable.
Well, that was a general question to the thread, not to you specifically.
Well the difference would be the difference between misogyny and witchcraft for one.
Second it would depend on the content itself.
Though incidentally I very much doubt the 40k signatures were specifically about misogyny so much as GTA is just a popular thing to be angry at by old people.
Multiple people have made similar statements.
That does a lot to solve my confusion. You're probably right.
In this instance? It's because this group is directly effected by the very real violence towards sex workers and the very real mysoginy of modern day society. And GTA shows and allows for that violence without any form of thought put into the portrayal of said violence, treating it as a big joke.
Which, some would argue, is further perpetuating the normalization of violence towards women and mysoginistic attitudes. Which is a very real and widespread problem that is entrenched in every aspect of modern day society.
In other words it's because of a problem that directly effects their lives.
I'll add that I don't think this is a good way to deal with this problem in the game industry. That the problem isn't GTA but the even more subtle displays of sexism in games and the culture, and that by targeting GTA specifically in this fashion this particular group has been lumped in with every reactionary critic of the game, lessening the actual chances of spreading their concerns with those who generally consume games. Basically this is something that needs to change industry wide, not just one of the most standout examples.
Unless I'm wrong, no form of media has been shown to be able to cause violence or misogyny or both. Show me a real study with that conclusion and I might have to stop playing games or watching movies or even reading, because I definitely don't want to turn into a murderer.
I'm at a bit of a loss as to how to avoid this scenario in a game like GTA where it's an open world concept. I haven't played GTA5 yet, but I'm assuming it's much of the same of it's predecessors: Basically you're a dick to everyone, you steal cars and other vehicles and just cause mayhem in general.
So, do we not include women in games like this because it is possible to cause harm to them? Do we expand that to prevent people from being dicks to everyone? Do we just prevent the game from getting developed at all?
This is about silly geese who think not selling something they like is automatically suppressing that thing, the people who like it, and the people who create it.
The problem isn't one of causation, its one of further normalization and reinforcing beliefs and views already entrenched in modern day culture. It's why I'm not as vocal about violence in videogames. Violent people aren't normalized in our society, we don't have casual violence in our everyday lives.
Violence is a widespread problem that directly affects people's lives.
Drug abuse is a widespread problem that directly affects people's lives.
Overeating is a widespread problem that directly affects people's lives. We should only show people eating healthy vegetables or else people will continue under the wrong headed assumption that eating fatty foods is ok and they'll die sooner and cost the health care system billions.
Why not fight depictions of that stuff too?
Also, as another reply points out, whats the fix here? Because the game allows violence against every inhabitant. And I've heard (though I've not played the game) that no mission in the game specifically incentivizes violence against a sex worker (at no point is there a greater reward for beating or killing a sex worker than there is any other random individual in the game and very few instances for women in the game in general compared to men (there are obviously lots of instances where the game promotes missions that involve killing men.) You either have to remove women from the game, make them invincible or just not make a game that allows violence against random people.
Well, even besides the allowal of violence being enacted upon, you could remove the wife beating "satire" on the radio along with all the other mysoginistic crap that Laszlo and the secondary writers produced, have some important women in the plot, or go all the way and have a female playable character instead of 3 guys.
The problem isn't just the violence, it's the overall attitude and tone of the game regarding women.
As far as sexism in games having an influence on real life? Just look at how any propaganda material from WWII influenced people's perception towards Japanese and German folks. How racist portrayals of black people further spread racist stereotypes. The media you consume can and will influence the way you see others. It's been something that had been used for thousands of years, and I don't need a damned study to show that considering the history.
Nobody is saying GTA V is going to turn you into the other dude named Bundy and starting rocking a No Ma'am shirt, but it does make certain misogynistic ideas seem more normal and acceptable.
To expand on this, remember how gamers being portrayed as antisocial pocket protector losers made people treat being a gamer as weird? Well, that's media influencing behavior towards people it represents.
To argue that media doesn't perpetuate sexism is the same as saying media didn't help make that stereotype a common one.
Now female protagonists, thats a different discussion and one where I support that addition. But again, that is different. Let women engage in the wrongness alongside everyone else.
Haven't played the game nor was I planning so some of this I'm going to have to let drop. Any of the specific scenes.
But the petition was driven by violence against women in a game that allows violence against everybody. Even if you changed the stuff you mentioned, the game would still allow players to commit violent acts on women unless you were to put women into a special exempt category or remove them.
Propaganda is not at all equivalent. The messages in propaganda are overt and the people you're talking about were our enemies in an actual war. Racist attitudes were supported by specious arguments. The progress that has been made there has been through overt arguments, not through censoring the subtle effects of media. As opinions changed, media changed naturally. If you're going to put a game in that category when it allows violence against both genders and mostly promotes violence against men (as pretty much all games with violence do and I only say pretty much to allow for scant possibilities I'm not aware of.) I give up. Probably 99.9 percent of violence in games is against men (and don't tell me "violence against women is more real" because tons of real men die in ways similar to what is shown in war games and shooters.)
Myopia enjoys a victory this day.
But of course you're going to have a response to this and you'll claim victory if I don't respond and we'll be here for hours and all because you think its right to suppress fiction. Well have your victory. Be proud of having denied gamers the chance to play a game that harms no one.
It makes theft, murder, reckless endangerment, drug abuse, and any number of other crimes seem more normal.
The point of a game like this is to get mischief making urges out of your system. We're doing this stuff in a game so that we can have fun with it without ever doing it in real life (or rather they are, I've never been a fan of the series). The humor of these games comes from the dissonance of how wrong this stuff would be if we were really doing it vs how fake and thus harmless it is. A person can't enjoy what they're doing in Grand Theft Auto without consciously acknowledging that what the game makes them do would be wrong if they did it for real.
And this is why arguments about subtle media tropes aren't relevant. You're meeting the wrongness head on.
I've done what now? When did GTA V get pulled off the market all of the sudden?
I'm asking asking this seriously because I'm sitting here playing the damn game in between replies.
Maybe you could spare talking about what the game is and isn't when talking to people who've actually played it.
It's been said already, but censorship is a narrow concept. It only the appropriate term when it's a restriction on speech enforced by the state. Speech in the technical sense, not just verbal communication.
Target aren't censors because they aren't a state. You can deplore what they're doing without throwing literally impossible accusations around.
Tycho projects an image of being a person who cares about words. I would have hoped that he could do better than throwing the nearest handy pejorative at Target, and following up with "I'm right because I say I'm right."
Actually they're just letting businesses know that they won't support them if they carry the game, which is a personal choice.
The impetus for an action matters a lot. It isn't just what people do, it is why they do it.
Removing GTA V from shelves as a response to a consumer petition is about as far from censorship as you can get.
If target is so pervasive as retail outlet that it's decision not to stock GTA V is de-facto censorship, meaning that it would be near-impossible for Australians to legally obtain GTA V, then Australia needs to look at its anti-trust law, not its censorship policies. I don't think that's the case here though.
The Target ban of GTA 5 takes us back to early 2000 with the likes of Jack Thompson. His issue was that he claimed that violence in video games rubbed off on to the people that played it. To that end, he attempted to censor the games. Of course, we all know that violence in video games does not make someone more violent. There's been countless studies on that topic. This is the same thing in that baseless accusations are being made against a game, with no data to back it up. Just feels.
Has anyone actually read the reasoning behind the pull? A group petitioned Target to remove the game because GTA5 depicts violence against women. The group is lying by omission. GTA5 depicts violence against everyone. It's also a game that is intended for 18+ audience and is only sold to an 18+ audience in Aus. Seriously. It is illegal in Aus to sell an 18+ game to a minor. So what this group is telling Target is that GTA 5, BAD, and adults shouldn't make their own choice on how to purchase media. But, Game of Thrones, GOOD. 50 Shades of Gray, GOOD. Notice the double standard?
Also, if GTA5 DID depict violence against women, it would not have even been allowed on the shelves to begin with because their consumer board doesn't allow that in games period.
This boils down to an attempt at censorship because people got their feels hurt. Sorry. Don't play the game if you don't like it. Let adults make their own choices about what they should and should not purchase. I don't need your shitty moral compass to tell me how to live my life.
And companies don't have to stock games they don't want to. And consumers have a right and duty to tell companies what they want. We're not.missing the point at all. We just don't exactly agree with the normal overly defensive, persecuted gamer outlook on this shit. The sky isn't falling, and no one is making it so GTA V is unavailable to people who want it.
But this one just makes me a good deal disappointed. Mostly because I know they can do better than this, and because they're just giving the folks that already hate them more fuel for their fire.