As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options
Here's my problem with the videogame legislation...
Alchemist449
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
I have a feeling it won't stop there. Sure it's just video games being limited at first, but whats to stop politicians from spreading this type of censorship to other media? Why can't 50 years from now a politician look at American Psycho and realize that it too might be too harsh for minors to read, there by making it illegal to sell it to a minor. Whats to stop a government advisory committee on literature to start up and make the latest Stephen King novel X rated because of violence and sexual content?
Maybe I'm just being paranoid but I believe that once you start restricting one form of media you open all forms of media to censorship. And it scares me.
Maybe I'm just being paranoid but I believe that once you start restricting one form of media you open all forms of media to censorship. And it scares me.
Alchemist449 on
0
Posts
Things don't work like that.
Now, of course, GTA is being banned for the most retarded of reasons in this scenario, but still.
Why exactly would that be a problem? Are you just pissed because you're a minor and it affects you? If a parent thinks that their child is mature enough to deal with the book then they can buy it and give it to their child.
It's illegal to give an 18-rated film to a minor so why not videogames as well. In some ways this legislation may help the videogame industry by getting the public to understand that some games just weren't meant for kids. One of the reasons that so much hype gets whipped up around something like GTA is that a great deal of people think that computer games are something for kids so, when a game comes along with adult content, the immediate response is "Look what they're giving to your kids!"
My mother is like this. Also with anime. She was staying with me and I was watching the last episode of Evangelion - not the movies, the series.
She was really upset that this was the kind of thing shown to kids - and I was like "Mum, this show is for adults" and should couldnt understand - cartoon = kids.
Same with games.
There will always be some controversy over something or other and certain things are always going to be restricted. And yes, games are probably going to open up a whole new can of worms now that they're becoming more photo-realistic and immersive. But it in no way is going to lead to everything else suddenly being restricted or banned.
I don't think this is true. If you're referring to R-rated movies, first of all under-18s aren't banned from those movies, they simply need a parent or guardian (or SOME adult) in attendance to get them in; secondly, the movie ratings are a voluntary system engaged in by the Motion Picture Association of America precisely to prevent actual legislation on the issue.
It's true in the UK, where Gorak is from
If a movie is 15-rated, under 15s are banned.
If a movie is 18-rated, under 18s are banned.
There used to be a 12 rating, meaning under 12s were banned, but with Harry Potter and a few children's films growing darker, they changed this to 12A, meaning that now under 12s are allowed in if accompanied by an adult.
You are required by law to show ID, and right of entry in the cinema or right of sale in a shop can be refused if you cannot prove your age.
He's not an America. His point was that in Britain it is illegal to allow minors into X rated films but we haven't gone down the slippery slope the original poster was so afraid of.
Politicians need to look like they are doing something for their constituents. If they can accomplish that without actually doing anything or pissing off their colleagues, then all the better.
So here comes this GTA thing. Everyone knows that video games are toys for children. And how dare this new and scary company called Take-Two/Rockstar market this to children. BAM! Instant "safe" issue for an election campaign.
Kids don't vote (neither do many of the 18 - 34 year olds that most commonly play games), so no one on Capitol Hill cares what they think. And by pushing through meaningless legislation that will never be strongly enforced or will get struck down in the courts, they look good to Mom and Dad. Because they care about The Children.
That's the whole issue in a nutshell.
And the US has NC-17, which means no one under 17 may enter the movie, and that is just for theaters. If you are under 18 and try to stroll into best buy and try to buy one of the playboy videos, it is not going to work. I have never seen the issue with laying out a law that would put fines on retailers for selling M rated games to people under 17, and AO games to anyone under 18.
NC-17 is a MPAA rating. The MPAA is a film industry organization starte by the stuios specifically to avoid legislation restricting movies. It is NOT LAW. The MPAA works because places that want to show MPAA rated films(basically everyone) can get thier distribution rights pulled if they don't adhere to the MPAA's guidelines.
The ESRB is a simialr idea but has never really ben enforced to the degree movie ratings are
Please stop equating movie ratings with pornogprhy they are two totally seperate things.
Porno falls under obscenity laws(which is still bullshit). Banning games for any age range based on content has been ruled time and time again as a violation of the first amendment. I have more, but I have to work now. In short it's a bad idea that would horribly cripple the industry.
Like the porn industry is crippled, right?
And since you bring it up, aside from philosophical objections, who is really unhappy with the way porn is handled in our society? It's free on the internet. It's available in convenience stores - does anyone have a problem with it being in dark plastic wrap or behind the counter? I don't. You can get it on pay per view. There are stores that specialize in nothing but porn. You can order it in the mail.
I mean, what is the disatisfaction here?
I fail to see the brass tacks pragmatic problem.
The pragmatic problem isn't with "how porn is handled", but rather, it is only a problem when some one is arrested should they accidentally distribute pron to a minor.
Additionally, you could make the argument that the way that pron is handled actually DOES cause a problem, as it contributes to the misconception that porn is "wrong", and something to be ashamed of. That opens a larger debate, of course, but it is worth noting that the argument can be made that more than a few rapes have at the least been contributed to by the fact that the rapist was made to feel, for one reason or another, that sexual urges were a bad thing. The close association by our society of sex and violence being in the same catagory, that of mature behavior, and often mentioned in the same breath, serves, in part, to help break down mental barriers between the two, which is indeed unhealthy.
I think it is actually just a fine.
And a fine is all that is proposed for video game vendors as I understand it also.
I find this argument unimpressive.
Will we soon find rapists puffing on cigars while in the act because smoking indoors is also prohibited? Violence, sex and smoking - the trifecta of evil.
How many adults really take the time to plow through Evangelion? I mean, like, actual adults and not drooling man-children.
Well, there are a few different levels of penalty that can be enacted here, but technically it is only SUPPOSED to be a fine.
But even that is potentially debateable in the sense that we are putting responsibility on some one who ultimately is not the party responsible for how a child percieves the pornography.
I will be the first to admit that, as a minor, I obtained pornographic images, both from the internet, and while travelling abroad, where they were easier to obtain. No harm came of this, as my parents, whether or not they were even aware of my exposure to these images, had raised me with certain understandings and reasonings, so that seeing airbrushed images of nude women and couples engaged in intimateacts did not somehow pervert me from the path of normal sexual developement.
Placing responsibility for exposure on the distributor of the material, rather than reponsibility for perception on the parents of the individual, systematically misrepresents wherein the actual dangers lie.
This is, of course, different from limiting substances from distribution, because substances have a much more specific effect. I am not neccesarily in favor of our current methods of substance limitations, but I do see a clear difference between the catagories of legal limitations.
Do you honestly think that the close association in our society between sex and violence has had ZERO effect on developing minds?
Like, when I lived in England and was exposed to nudity in their after-8 pm programming it kind of blew my ears back.
It doesn't really seem to me that the new availability of porn has really materially warped the current generation, though I'm in general a proponent of empowering parents to practically restrict what their kids are exposed to when it comes to potentially objectionable themes/ images. I don't think it's unreasonable to limit sales of "M rated" video games to adults.
I think the connection could be oversold. So I'm skeptical of how far reaching it is.
But then you take it even further out and suggest a root cause is social attitudes that both sex and violence are taboo and thus they become intertwined. A lot of things are taboo but not intertwined though, and this is unexplained.
And then you go even further out and suggest that because our regulation of pornography arises from these attitudes, deregulating it will have a causative relationship in separating sex from violence.
To many rickety assumptions piled on top of each other for me. Last I heard, rape was about power, not sex.
I'm curious - what are some taboos that aren't tied up in sex?
no one thing is purely another thing.
yes, rape is power, but there are reasons why that power struggle manifests in the form of rape as opposed to some other act.
I'm going to walk away from this discussion, because honestly, I don't feel all that strongly about it, and was making the point more that it COULD be discussed, rather than actually trying to discuss it in and of itself.
But the argument that I was crafting, which I was saying could be properly argued (in response to your argument that you did not feel this was a topic that could be argued) is that among our various societal taboos, sex and violence are often specifically listed together, whereas other taboos are left seperate. There is a stronger association created between these two taboos in particular than among other taboos.
DO I neccesarily believe this argument? No, although I'd be open to it, but my point is merely that it could possibly be made, and as such, the way that our society handles pornography ISN'T universally accepted as being pragmaticlly okay.
I think, in the context of his argument, the power of rape wouldn't be "man over woman", but "man over taboo". I'm probably not the best person to put the theroy in words, but I imagine there has to be some seriously fucked up psychological shit going on when your taught that sex is icky and a sin and you better never do it or your weeman will rot off. In that context I assume some rapes wouldn't be about "me man me want take power from woman" rather.... you get my point. (Ever feel like you're using a sledge hammer when all you needed was your thumb)
Edit: Not that this has much to do with the original argument of course.
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo
There's the thing about not calling people who were assholes assholes right after they die.
There seem to be just as many about the dead as there about sex tho. (Insert necrophilia joke)
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo
I don't think that this is really a taboo as much as a bit of social ettiquitte.
I mean, we don't refer to the invasion of another's personal space as a taboo, or the eating of meat with a salad fork as a taboo.
I don't know man, using the wrong fork and speaking ill of the dead fall into two different categories, at least in my book. One involves me looking like an uneducated ass (whooo). The other means I have to deal with the ghost of some asshole I apparently didn't like to begin with haunting me for God knows how long, possibly ending with him tying a noose around my neck and shoving me down the stairs.
Those two lead to two very different places man.
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo
Don't forget about eating dogs and cats! Oh, horses!! That's taboo in America. Mmmm, cannibalism.
Wii Code: 1040-1320-0724-3613 :!!:
I think that there is a tendency to tie taboos into sex. I'm not sure if it's America-specific or just a human trait, though I tend towards the latter.
speaking ill of the dead, in general societal circles, has NOTHING to do with being haunted by ghosts.
Ithink you're now confusing taboos with superstitions.
Don't chew with your mouth full.
No, wait.
no one is at all interested in creating fines related to speaking ill of the dead, or chewing with your mouthful, etc.
It's pretty easy to tie anything to sex, some of us here are masters of it. Freud made a career of it.
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo
Taboo:
1 : forbidden to profane use or contact because of what are held to be dangerous supernatural powers
2 a : banned on grounds of morality or taste <the subject is taboo> b : banned as constituting a risk <the area beyond is taboo, still alive with explosives -- Robert Leckie>
I'm taking that shit literally dude; I don't care to fuck with the supernatural.
edited for clarity.
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo