Advocate Relates Grand Theft Auto to Violence Against Prostitutes
Advocate Relates Grand Theft Auto to Violence Against Prostitutes
December 17, 2007
Today marks the fifth annual International Day to End Violence Against Sex Workers.The Toronto Sun reports that an advocate for sex workers believes that pop culture influences, including the popular Grand Theft Auto series, help legitimize violence against prostitutes. Anastasia Kuzyk of the Sex Workers' Alliance of Toronto told the newspaper:
Sex work is a job, and violence isn't in the job description... There's a video game out there where you can run down prostitutes and kill them and beat them up and take their money. It feeds into the whole subculture of allowing the violence to continue. Violence against sex workers should not be normalized, but it is.
Kuzyk noted that between 1991 and 2004, 171 female sex workers were murdered in Canada. Street-level sex workers, she said, are 60 to 112 times more likely to be victims of fatal violence than the general population.
Comments
Lets face it, most late teen and early 20s gamers probably aren't the most forward when it comes to women, whether having to get their interest legitimately, or having to pluck up the courage to go kerb crawling for it!!
So how can these people run prostitutes down in the street, as street soliciting is illegal in Canada.
What has it come to when people who take part in illegal activities complain about legal ones?
While paid sex might be undesirable for some, it is still an industry that makes money and instead of trying to kill them to stop the prostitution industry, why not just say no and say that you would not want to have their services???
killing someone because they don't have a moral life does NOT make it ok...just please everyone just use a bit of respect for those who might have a job that you might not like.
Freedom of Choice made for a great Pro-Abortion slogan, but the FACT is that Choice is a very broad term that should be considered for a great many issues, no matter what the gender or race or sexuality or whatever.
Many jobs are looked down on, and employees of such jobs are made fun of, disrespected, even treated with bigotry and hate.
What should be looked upon as an individual choosing a JOB, even one that many in society would place on the bottom rung of worthy jobs, rather than living off of other individuals or the government. Some of these jobs aren't glamorous. Some are down right demeaning to the individual, but they still choose those jobs. The fact is that individuals in the "adult business", no matter what the field, have made choices for themselves, whether others like it or not, and so long as they have the Freedom to Choose when to leave and not be forced to perform some act they do not wish to, they have a Right to do so without the verbal and mental abuse of the rest of society.
Pointing the finger of blame at fictional storylines for what happens in the real world is being ignorant, no matter how close you are to the situation, of what is going on in general society in the real world.
Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
Their job involves picking up strange men and taking them someplace where they won't be seen. Both parties have an interest in avoiding scrutiny.
It sucks, but it's got nothing to do with video games.
And course this has nothing to do with the fact that they are walking around the streets in the wee hours of the morning, are often alone during those hours, and are known to be carrying significant amounts of cash at any given time. No, it has everything to do with video games.
and also the fact that many of them are carrying (or looking for) illegal narcotics of some kind.
Yep. It's all the fault of them vidja games!
Is this guy seriously trying to claim that GTA 'legitimized' violence against Sex Workers (Which is a PC way to say HOOKER) SIX YEARS before the very first game was even made? (1997/1998 was when the original GTA was released, according to Wiki, which has a pretty good track record when it comes to actual public record facts.)
no one made an out-cry about being able to kill muggers in GTA 1.
I'm not really sure what the last 2 parts of your post have to do with the subject.
Let me rephrase that, I don't think most prostitutes are killed by someone because they don't like prostitution. I think they are killed because they are easy targets.
Its a snadbox game, it doesn't encourage anything, it lets you do what you want.
That said, violence against sex workers is deplorable, and shouldn't be tolerated in any form (in real life).
She goes to the cops - she goes to jail for being a hooker.
If you are going to make prostitution illegal, then fine, enforce the laws. And punish people who solicit them to the same or worse degree. But since most law enforcement agencies view prostitution as a soft crime, or recognize that prositutes are more likely to be a victim of a 'worse' crime, ie theft, murder, assault, they simply don't go after them. Legalized prostitution is better, so a legal sex worker has legal recompense to go after someone who commits a crime against her. But, it still legalization isn't going to solve the issue. Personally, I think prostitution laws should be repealed. This would allow them to prosecute, and allow for the dissolution of the drug-laden heirarchy that keeps many, many prostitutes in thrall.
Then cops can go after drugs, rapists, assaults, etc. instead of wasting time on a trade that has always, and will always exist.
Why limit it to prostitutes though. Why don't we blame GTA for Dr. Harold Shipman becoming the world's most prolific murderer killing all those elderly people... or maybe the number 2 killer, Elizabeth Bathory... We could blame GTA for her, even though this phenomenon happened long before she turned up too!
Ah political correctness how I love you.......
not.... a playstation game...
... >_
"I’m pretty sure Prostitution is not a job.. its a crime."
Depends on who you talk to and where.
We all know the answer as to whether GTA promotes violence against women..
But then, if you've never done it, you're at a disadvantage in Best Man Speeches.
I do believe that the person speaking is canadian where prostitution is legal, so its not a crime. So the statement is actually correct. Grant it though, many of the same problems with prostitution remain... It being legalized does help in that they are able to go to the police for help, but the questions are, are they willing to? is their much the police can do after the violence took place? And do the police care enough about them to take them seriously? if the answer to these are "no", especially the last one, then prostitutes got a lot more serious problems they need to deal with then some videogame.
I can get behind stopping violence against sex workers and I would even go so far as to say that in most games there's really no reason to have violence against sex workers in much the same way that in most movies there's no reason for the main character to beat a prostitute.
The thing is that in some media violence against anybody isn't exploitive. In some - hell, in many - cases it is but in some cases it's intrinsic to the media experience. In GTA III the connection is even slimmer - violence against prostitutes in GTA III is circumstantial. You can kill prostitutes and take their money because you can do the same to anybody in the game world. You could argue that it's exploitive because all of the violence in GTA is exploitive but it's not targeted at sex workers.
It's just frustrating that this woman is misinformed. And to those saying that sex workers are committing a crime I would like you to consider that the underground sex trade forces a huge number of young women into violent prostitution and they have almost no recourse. If you consider a 16 year old girl who's been lured out of her Eastern European village with dreams of making a modest living working at a restaurant in the US but is then beaten, raped and forced into prostitution a criminal rather then a victim then you have serious problems.
I would also like to point out that prostitution is quite probably the "world's oldest profession" - it has been with us since the beginning of recorded history and in many cultures, for a very long time, was considered quite respectable - even desirable. It is western Judeo/Christian values that have demonized it and made it immoral.
Well the article was from the Toronto Sun. I'd be referring to Canadian law.
No one in Thailand cares about violent video games.. so its fairly irrelevant who you talk to or where on this topic.
Isn't that what you're doing?
That said, none of these people deserves to be assaulted. I believe the speaker is saying that although it is a job risk - there tends to be some glamorization or at least acceptance of violence towards prostitutes. It could be that the mention of GTA was an example of this acceptance.
Judging from some of the comments above, I think she is right. This is a bit of a hot topic in Canada as there is an ongoing trial for a criminal who is accused of killing some 25 prostitutes and feeding them to his pigs. Pretty gruesome stuff. He has been handed 5 or 6 life sentences so far and the trial is continuing.
However, that case alone indicates that violence against sex workers [i]is[/i] a problem, even if video games are not to blame. I'm not sure what the solution is, but it would probably help if the government would stop treating them like criminals and/or ignoring them in the hopes that they'll go away. As I understand it, prostitutes are unlikely to report a lot of the violence done to them, and the police are unlikely to care, so... that creates a very bad situation that violent folks like Pickton are well aware of.
So.. any suggestions that'll never work?
I don't know. I won't pretend to be an expert on these things... but if I was in charge, I'd probably just look at other countries, see where prostitutes suffer the least violence, and try to copy whatever they're doing (assuming that human rights don't need to be violated in the process).
That'd be.. Shit, I don't know..
Yes prostitution is legal in Canada... but as I've already stated, its not legal to work the streets in Canada, nor live off the profit of prostitution... so while the law allows people to sell sex in the country, you have to essentially be a non-profit private escort, which isn't whats being suggested here.
The problem with people who are lost, aimless or unhappy is that they have a lot of frustration, at the world, at their job, at their wives etc, and unfortunately, sometimes they take that frustration out on the only available target.
Jack The Ripper did not play GTA.
What about the Yorkshire Ripper? That guy they arrested about 6 months ago?
Let's give a hand to Ken for putting up the grand excuse of "Provocatively dressed females are just askin' to get raped."
@Ken - Since we are talking paradoxes, there's a good chance that if you run head first into a brick wall about 20 times, you might come out a little smarter...At least I know I'd be a bit happier.
(sorry for the flame, but that kind of comment pisses me off to no end. Do what you must Zachary)
On topic with the article, %60 - %112 higher mortality rate for their profession? Good lord, drug dealers have a higher survival rate than that!!!
Cuz yeah, it's a pretty lousy paper.
I have to totally agree with you there. Perhaps he should hit his head on a wall a few time.
In Canada the difference between 2nd and 1st dregree murder is very subtle in terms of sentencing. Basically he will receive a life sentence for each of his 6 victims. There is a 'possibility' of parole but the liklihood of that is practically nil.
I believe the difference in the evidentiary burden and length of trial for a 2nd degree conviction and a 1st degree is very large. Considering the age of the defendant and the minimum sentences he will be receiving and that he will not get parole (if he lives that long), I would say there was no reason to pursue the 1st degree charges.
Then again, the river flows two ways on that one...
Ok, based on your logic, a house with no dogs, no security systems, nothing, and has just an old lady living there is just as likely to be robbed as a house with several dogs, a man or 2 that is clearly a hunter, with marked security systems and cameras?
Frankly, Prostitutes ARE more likely to be assualted. Ken wasn't saying that rape is ok, only that ones that advertise their bodies are more likely to have their bodies taken by force. I don't know of any analogies or ways to make common sense any clearer, you two are just going to have to figure it out yourselves.
If by chance I decided I wanted to rape someone, who would I do it against? A fully-clothed woman (or man, whatever), or one dressing like a total skank?
Who's the ones that need headxwall? Quit attacking someone for making a pretty clear point
Also, even in places where prostitution is legal, it is illegal to be a street walker because there are standards in place to help with the safety of the "sex worker" and their client which go out of the window when put on the street.
As for the "less clothes, easier to be raped" issue. It is actually a fact that most rapist will look for someone wearing baggy clothes or long hair so that it is easier to grab and prevent the person from escaping. Where I'm from, this is well known and most of the street walking prostitutes actually will cut their hair to prevent it being an issue.
I also want to point out that it is only recently that law enforcement has been able to do anything about rape and prior to that many people had been turned away with no help (regardless of what their profession was) and sometimes even laughter.
Seriously, GTA is to real world violence as broccoli is to flying cars - completly unrelated.
"If by chance I decided I wanted to rape someone, who would I do it against? A fully-clothed woman (or man, whatever), or one dressing like a total skank?"
So what you're saying is that you feel that a "total skank" is more deserving of being raped then a respectable member of society? Wait - actually, what you're saying is that someone who presents themselves as a "total skank" is more deserving of rape then someone who presents themselves as a respectable member of society. Why is this?
Is this because you feel that by dressing provocatively they're enticing those rapists to commit crime? Or is it because you feel that by being "total skank[s]" they're less worthy members of society and shouldn't complain about being raped? So are you suggesting that by acting a certain way and dressing a certain way they are "asking for it," so to speak?
As to your analogy: it is completely flawed. The amount of obvious protection offered by a house (kudos to comparing a crime that destroys someone physically and emotionally to having some crap taken, by the way) will directly effect the act of robbing it in the most pragmatic way possible, but the style of dress of a woman, unless she's wearing a suit of fucking armor that's padlocked shut, isn't going to make much of a difference to a potential rapist.
Actually, the more I think about what you said the more uninformed and bigoted you become. First, just the act of comparing rape to burglary is absurd. Second, you don't understand your own analogy. Finally, you clearly have no understanding of the topic because you don't know anything about why most rapes occur.
There certainly was a time when rapes weren't considered "real" crimes and attitudes like yours were why that was the case.
Thank you - that cleared the issue a bit (and prompted a little more research). Will he be required to at least serve the 25 years for each conviction in succession before parole becomes a possibility.
@ the "rape debaters"
Rape is not a sexual act; is it an act of violence. Little girls are raped, elderly women are raped, overweight women are raped, unattractive women are raped. Clothing and appearance has very little, if anything, to do with it.
GTA3 didn't come out until, what, 2001? So that shrinks down their data pool by a HUGE amount. The GTA series didn't become a part of pop culture until the third installment (2001) and I don't believe either of the earlier installments had prostitutes in them.
When I first read this I thought "Gary Ridgway, the Green River Killer". Being from Washington this was a BIG deal when he was caught. He was a serial killer who purely targeted prostitutes. He started his killings in the early 80's and went on for the next two decades until he was caught in 2003. Along with the murders in Washington, he's also believed to be connected to several murders (all prostitutes) in Oregon and Canada. He was quoted, saying "I killed so many women I have a hard time keeping them straight". The number of murders in Canada he is believed to be connected with seems to vary from source to source. Some have gone as far as suggesting around 40. Let's also not forget Robert "Willie" Pickton who is believed to have killed 46 people, all drug addicts and prostitutes. Both these men probably never touched a video game in their lives (both over 50) or probably even heard of Grand Theft Auto.
And yet in that same game you can run down, kill, beat up, and rob regular pedestrians and even cops.
He's not saying that they're more desrving rather that it will be easier to do it against a skank. In other words which is either to tear off (by force) 2+ layers of clothing or clothing that barely covers anything.
It's like saying that playing Assassin's Creed will make one proficent at Parkour and teach you that it's ok to go around and randomly kill any Templar you see.
I swear that these people who say this stuff about games are more deluded than they think we are.
"Sex work is a job, and violence isn’t in the job description…"
Maybe it isn't in the job description, but violence IS an acceptable risk for this sort of job. No it isn't desirable, and these prostitutes don't deserve to be maimed or killed, but it comes with the job.
The biggest difference is they are putting themselves in circumstances that raise the probability of such things happening to the.
Also they are at risk from religious fanatics and people who think they are evil unclean or just a sore on society... also considering that they street walkers are breaking the law they are less likely to report it and police have been much less interested in rapes or attacks on prostitutes than others...
This has been a fact of life for thousands of years(minus the cars that is...) unless ofcourse jack the rippers was also influenced by video games...
GTA lets you kill hookers and EVERYONE ELSE... so you would think that IF it incouraged violence (witch I doubt since violence has been steadily decreasing since violent games came around) than it would incourage it against all people equally not just against prostitutes so you argument is both idiotic and uninformed...
here is proof:)
http://img140.imageshack.us/my.php?image=4548aa4a2b64e21892c524bhm3.jpg
@rape debate
rape is not about who looks hot...
it is about control and often about violence really ugly women are almost as likely to get raped as really hot women... sex workers are at more risk due to the fact that it is easier to get to them and get away with it...and the fact the society views them as immoral...
and if any games make rape more likely then I would look japanese hentai games, oh wait Japan has one of the lost crime rates in the world so that isn't it either...
Prostitution vs. Video games??? Is there really a question here of which might have more damaging consequences for those involved?
What a joke ...
I think the really beutifull suggestion is that pixelated prostitutes in games due more harm to society than actual prostitutes....
The ignorance expessed in these messages is kind of surprising, especially when the whole article is read.
Nowhere in the article are they saying that in 1991, GTA caused X number of violence cases against prostitutes. The statistic was brought up to indicate the general amount of violence attributed to this occupation.
In addition, they implicate ALL pop culture, and though it is unfortunate that video games are used as an example, it doesn't necessarily mean their message is wrong.
And it seems that the messages here just underscore their point about the negative portrayal of prostitutes. When other occupation ask for protection, this isn't a big deal. I mean, it is all right when a construction worker demands OSHA standards or we demand our bank accounts are backed by the FDIC (in the US), but when sex workers ask for some protection, they somehow seem to deserve it!
"Also they are at risk from religious fanatics"
Okay Im sorry, but thats a pretty outlandish statement. I can imagine that happening occasionally but can you even find a case where that was the motive?
Not to mention that you can kill anyone in the game. Yet another example of misinformation. "The player can kill prostitutes [and everyone else in the game]!"
http://baramos.bravehost.com/breakingnews.html Here, I wrote an article making fun of this like a year ago. I thought it was out of date, but here it is, back in the news!
LOOK:
"Kuzyk noted that between 1991 and 2004, 171 female sex workers were murdered in Canada. Street-level sex workers, she said, are 60 to 112 times more likely to be victims of fatal violence than the general population. "
Add 112 and 60 and you get 172, then subtract the 171 murders from 172 and U GET:
1
1 game, GTA OMG!!!! I lolz
But seriously you cannot pick that profession without being discriminated against.
I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
I was going to say that, dang. Hookers do have a role in GTA that regular citizen characters don't but placing the blame of violence against the world's oldest profession on the world's newest media doesn't work out mathmatically.
Hookers were not a part of Grand Theft Auto till GTA 3 in 2001, so 130 murders occured without the games influence whatsoever...
I'm sorry, but it IS NOT A VALID POINT. I have been teaching women's self defense and rape prevention for nearly 6 years. Both my father and my grandfather were police officers. I was instructed by and trained with police officers. I have met with several organizers from battered women's shelters and sexual trauma therapists, in varying cities mind you.
A female is in much more danger of not being able to defend herself, and is a more likely target, if they are wearing clothes that are used against them: baggy clothes, jackets, etc. A scantily clad woman actually has a better chance of defending herself, making her less likely to be directly attacked. Now, that does not completely cover all cases, but it is a statistic commonly found and supported by everyone I've met with.
Also, do not call someone's logic into question when you fail to read their comments properly. E. Zachary Knight and myself did not claim Ken was approving of rape. We were pointing out an ignorant, though commonly believed, statement.
Now, before come back with some personal knowledge of knowing a guy who knew a girl who was raped, I'll go ahead and be the pompous ass you are expecting: I guarantee my knowledge and connections in this topic far exceed your's, not to mention my ability to read into someone's statement and accept what is correct or ignorant.
your analogy is off. What you described would be the difference between an average sized girl vs a woman who is obviously an ex-marine/ultimate fighter getting raped.
If you want to stick with your analogy of a house. It'd be the difference between a house with newer paint and it's blinds open, which might increase the chances of the house being robbed, but by an extremely negligible amount.
I mean, in Roller Coaster Tycoon, I can purposefully drown the entire population of my park. I CAN. I have the CHOICE, it doesn't mean the goal of the game for me is to do it, it doesn't mean that I am encouraged to do it, it means I have the option. (Note to anyone that has drowned someone, try using this excuse in court... it might just work, with the law the way it is right now. Heck, if Hillary get in, I'm almost sure it will!)
BUT, if I did see a skanky girl on the street and a fully-clothed one, and really wanted to rape one, just rape, not steal from, I would choose the less-clothed one. I'm not saying it's ok, just that I would choose the one thats "easier access." I don't see why statistics would differ from whats basically common sense. Less clothes = easier
didn't know whores had a union. learn something new every day.
However, in this particular situation, I don't believe there is any common sense used during a sexual assault. Attackers use predatory skills, not common sense. However, if that is the term you wish to use, let me present a counter argument:
A female wearing a winter coat, scarf, boots, and jeans is less agile than a scantily clad female (skank, I believe is the term you are using negatively). She is wearing items that can be used against her: a coat which can be used to yank her in any direction, a scarf that can choke her or control her head movement, boots which do not allow for quick escape, etc. Having "quick access" to a females body does not matter in the initial attack. If you see a potential victim walking down a street, you are more than likely not going to rape her right there on the sidewalk. You need to get her into a car, into a room, and generally out of sight from the public.
Sorry to poke holes in your theory, but I do value what you have to say. I like to receive any feedback people have on this topic, especially since I am teaching more classes lately. I also like to deflate misinformation so that others will be better educated and pass that info along to their friends and family. I just happen to believe the experts I've spoken to over the past few years.
Facts:
Perseption is influenced by stimuli.
There is 'mental momentum' in socialogical norms. Thus, if we already hate 'the darkies' it is easier for our opinion of them to go more negative compared to groups we like as well as much easier to vilify them.
Take these two factors together and anyone with a brain can summise that the notion that particular marginalized groups could be damaged by popular portrayal is not unreasonable. (check out one of dem bukes one dees days mahshanizzile)
Fight the fight. There is a fight here. Claiming "everyone beats 'em some hoes now and then, even Madden fans!!!" does nothing for your cause or message. Well, nothing positive that is.
I do humbly ask that you not completely generalize everyone here, as not everyone has come to the same conclusion after reading this article.
My opinion is that frequent readers of GP, such as myself, tend to have knee-jerk reactions when a group claims video games play an influential role in the actions of violent offenders. There were some rather tasteless remarks : yeah I'm looking at you BILLY.
However, I believe the general consensus here is that the blame the industry receives more or less lacks proper reasoning without evidence.
However, that is regardless of the fact that anyone who puts themselves into a position of getting into a stranger's vehicle, going home with a stranger, regardless of how they are dressed, is taking a risk. So even if prostitutes wore ski clothing they would be at higher risk than a woman not taking the risk of hooking complete strangers, which is the reason that most serial killers' victims have been prostitutes--they're easy to persuade into private places and probably not missed as easily as most people.
As Teh Mommy pointed out earlier, targets are often those who are perceived as being easy prey. A large percentage of victims are usually assaulted by someone they know, and not so much by seedy unknowns creeping down a road in their car scanning for scantily clad women.
I guess my overall point, which I heavily impress upon my students, is that you should always be considered a target regardless of where you are, what you are wearing, and what you are doing.
Misinformation leads to unpreparedness, in any situation in life. Baramos made an excellent point that those who place themselves in vulnerable positions are more susceptible to harm. The victims DO NOT deserve what they endure, but what they are more vulnerable because of what they do.
Well, while I'm here, I might as well use the overplayed card: violent assault on prostitutes has been occurring long before video games were invented. To claim a recent invention is a cause or influence on violence is absurd.