Feminists Outraged by Interactive DVD Available on Amazon

Is this the next RapeLay controversy?

Although interactive DVDs aren’t traditionally thought of as video games, they would appear to fall into something of a gray area between movies and games.

That may be an academic argument, but, in lodging a new protest against online retailer Amazon.com, woman-centric website Feministing treats Stockholm: An Exploration of True Love as a video game:

it looks like another game involving violence against women seems to have"slipped" past [Amazon’s] radar. "Stockholm: An Exploration of True Love" is a game that allows the user to experience,

    "…a terrifyingly vivid exploration of Stockholm Syndrome, a psychological condition in which a captive falls in love with her kidnapper. And you play the part of the kidnapper. With a limited number of options, you must figure out how to make her fall in love with you."

This includes using poison gas on the victim, sexually assaulting her and using psychological abuse against her in efforts to make her "love" you. Unbelievable.

While RapeLay was offered by a third-party reseller on Amazon, Stockholm appears to shipping direct from the online retailer’s inventory.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone

165 comments

  1. 0
    Adamas Draconis says:

    UMMMM crying pancakes. Delicious when covered in weeping maple syrup and agonized butter.

    Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.

  2. 0
    krotoslol says:

    OHNOES, A VIDEO GAME ABOUT SEX. I MUST GO AGAINST IT INSTEAD OF DOING THINGS THAT ACTUALLY MATTER!

     

    Jeez, it’s a game for crying pancakes sakes.

     

     

    I also want to play this game.

     

    =========================================================================== Jack Thompson is vanquished!!!

  3. 0
    quantum_mechanik says:

    Max

    — Do you believe that "emotional" reactions are invalid? Or less valid? Is there something wrong with responding emotionally to something? Is emotional neccesarily irrational, and if not, how did you make the distinction that those who do not believe your game should be promoted and sold by another company are acting irrationally?

  4. 0
    rmdglobal says:

     Hi All – this is Max Shearson, outreach coordinator at RMD Global. I’ll keep this short: the response and outrage to "Stockholm: An Exploration of True Love" is understandable. After all, it does challenge core ideas of modern American society. But I think that some of the reactions have been quick and emotional, rather than careful and considered.

    At our site, authors, filmmakers, and even the CEO of RMD Global have shared their views on the recent Banning of "Stockholm." The site is http://rmdglobal.net/stockholm/ I know that anyone as dedicated to a cause as many of you are will want to consider all rational perspectives.

    All we’re asking is that you consider a few other points of view, and, if you agree, to sign the online petition, or even leave any helpful comments.

    -Max

  5. 0
    Karsten Aaen says:

    Unbelievable it is.

    That the feminist can’t see this is a DVD, a fantasy.

    And no feminist seem to protest over 9½ weeks (bad movie, btw) or that film were Ewan McGregor ties a young women up, holding her captive against her will, in order for her to fall in love with him.

    And I know that many women long for to be overtaken by man, to be taken (in fantasy at least) by a man overpowering them. And if people are into this, there are bondage movies and submissive movies on this thing called the internet…

  6. 0
    Chaplain99 says:

    The point here is not "is it okay?"  The point here is "do you want it to be okay?"  The what-if stance might be safe, but you sacrifice alot in the way of civil liberties to keep your morality healthy.  That being said, a healthy distinction between reality and fantasy is JUST as important as the distinction between what HAS happened and what MIGHT happen.

    "HEY! LISTEN!"

  7. 0
    Father Time says:

    To be honest I’m surprised Amazon even sells porn in the first place.

    —————————————————-

    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  8. 0
    Tammej says:

     It’s okay to dream about it, make a game about, make a movie about it, write stories about it. Basically anything about those fantasies except the real thing should be fine.

  9. 0
    quantum_mechanik says:

    Wait, are you saying that since people do rape, it’s okay to make a game about it? Because people do rape, it’s okay to treat it like a normal thing?

  10. 0
    quantum_mechanik says:

    Absolutely no one, no feminist group, says those things. There is such thing as a "rape" culture, but no one, absolutely no one, believes that men a) aren’t affected, and b) deserve it.

  11. 0
    MechaTama31 says:

    But with something as trivial and obscure as this (how many people do you suppose had ever even heard of Rapelay or Stockholm before a couple weeks ago?), it mostly just "raises awareness" that you are touchy and overreact to things, and undermines your position for more important issues.  The boy who cried wolf, yadda yadda…

  12. 0
    Firebird says:

    Deamian: Animals don’t rape, humans do.

    I have seen enough Youtube (Why the hell I am still watching FUCKING YOUTUBE!?) clips that beg otherwise….

    Deamian: A question that is completly out of topic but.. if this is an interactive DVD we are talking about, why is it on "gamepolitics?"

    GP: Although interactive DVDs aren’t traditionally thought of as video games, they would appear to fall into something of a gray area between movies and games.

    Now we could go into a discussion on that concept. But……. *Yawn*

  13. 0
    Deamian says:

    The percieved outrage around this is the attempt to normalize sexual abuse and violence toward women, which as a whole is utterly deviant if you compare every living being on earth together.

    Animals don’t rape, humans do.

    But animal and people commit violence, for different reasons, both for survival at times.

    As such, it will always be generally more accepted to play a game which involve someone with a chainsaw slicing thru hordes of baddies, than a guy raping and poisoning a woman into love…

    Both normal and horrible human behavior, but one is actually deviant. Letting you guess which…

    At the limit, this DVD could also depict the fact that the protagonist is sending a cry for help ; to sexual violate a woman and seek gratification from it is a sign of crisis, conflicts and intense personnal pain within one’s life.

    Another limit could be that the publishers want people to know what Stockholm syndrome is, and choosing an interactive media, making it much more controversed up, is a sure way to whip people’s attention into it.

    All in all, feminists are as right as they are wrong to bash on this dvd/game.

     

     

    A question that is completly out of topic but.. if this is an interactive DVD we are talking about, why is it on "gamepolitics?" This ain’t "DVDpolitics." One now needs to figure out what seperates an interactive DVD from a video-game… Apparently, not a lot of things does.

  14. 0
    Firebird says:

    Not saying that its not abused but look at the dating game and wide spread cheating I am merely pointing out the grass is not greener on the other side.

    I am thinking of that OnlineBootyCall.com commercial, and now I am weeping for society.

  15. 0
    ZippyDSMlee says:


    Yupp they nuked it, it seems anything that involves sex and controversy they nuke it…… oy vay….

     


    I am a criminal because I purchase media,I am a criminal because I use media, I am a criminal because I chose to own media..We shall remain criminals until Corporate stay’s outside our bedrooms..


    http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com

  16. 0
    ZippyDSMlee says:


    This makes me ponder the concept of love as a illusion, it’s such a needed thing in the mind it can warp ones view of the world.  Makes me wonder how far off arranged marriage is because people can be so silly how wrong can it be to shape things from a more wise point of view.

     

    Not saying that its not abused but look at the dating game and wide spread cheating I am merely pointing out the grass is not greener on the other side.


    I am a criminal because I purchase media,I am a criminal because I use media, I am a criminal because I chose to own media..We shall remain criminals until Corporate stay’s outside our bedrooms..


    http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com

  17. 0
    Arell says:

    The point is that if they are opposed to something, something that really goes against their mission statement, then they at least have to try.  If you see something and find it truly heinous, and it’s sort of your job to speak out against things you find heinous, then what does it say about you if you just let it pass?  "Eh, whatever, why bother raising awareness if we can’t win that battle easily?"

  18. 0
    PeterWDAwson says:

    I hate product protests. As long as the stuff they sell isn’t a public health risk I don’t see the point, it just makes a mess of the legal system and leaves more people pissed off. Focus on creating jobs, people.

  19. 0
    GRIZZAM PRIME says:

    Yes, but how is attacking some obscure title going to accomlish social change to begin with? Did social change occur via the attacks on the Rapelay game? It’s not like either is or was being held as some sort of social standard for how to treat people of the opposite sex.

  20. 0
    GRIZZAM PRIME says:

    I can understand why they would be offended by this game, but what do they hope to accomplish by attacking this interactive DVD?

  21. 0
    LegendaryGamer00 says:

    Because then they would have to attept the unthinkable.

     

    They would… HAVE TO SHUT DOWN TEH INTERNETZ!!!

     

    Which is just as rediculous(and impossible) as it sounds.

    ——————–

    Making the world a better place… one Headshot at a time…

  22. 0
    Shahab says:

    You know, Amazon opened themselves up to this kind of thing once they backed down and removed Rapelay. Now every crackpot group is going to be looking for some controverial product listed on Amazon that they can campaing to have removed. These groups love to have victories, since they generally do nothing but pontificate, so now Amazon and its product suppliers have a big bullseye on their backs.

  23. 0
    nightwng2000 says:

    Heck, would they be complaining if the game was about players being "Women’s group" members trolling high schoolk grounds as teachers looking for their next "boy toy"?

    After all "women don’t rape men", "it’s cool for boys to be with older women", "it doesn’t happen as often so it’s not that big of a deal", "males deserve to be raped because females have always been the victims of males", "it’s the fault of media because they sell sex" (to paraphrase LaFave), and so on.

    Nightwng2000

    NW2K Software

    Nightwng2000 has also updated his MySpace page: http://www.myspace.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

  24. 0
    TK n Happy Ness says:

    Sounds like the feminists are either PMSing or upset that they have never gotten laid. Maybe even a bit of both.

    When Jack Thompson runs his mouth, does anyone really care what he has to say anymore?

  25. 0
    nightwng2000 says:

    Here’s a question:

    If individuals and organizations are so against the TOTALLY fictional video games that depict violent sex, including rape, why aren’t they equally loudly demanding ends to:

    "Erotic" books, especially ones written by women, that depict rape victims falling in love with their assailants

    Fantasy RolePlayers who enjoy playing rape scenes (no matter what the genders roles are for assailant and victim).

    People who actually DO have violent sex consentually.

    And so on.

    Why aren’t they demanding that authors of the books bee arrested if it’s so truly evil and disgusting and empowering to real rapists as they claim?

    Why aren’t they demanding that authority figures go on the porn sites and track down those who post images of their fantasy and role play and arrest them for encouraging rapists to commit real acts of rape.

    Why aren’t they demanding the police storm the homes of people they believe are even consentually having violent sex?

    If video games that depict fictional violent sexual acts are as truly horrid as they claim, why aren’t they following up against ALL violent sexual fiction and ALL consentual violent sexual acts?

    Nightwng2000

    NW2K Software

    Nightwng2000 has also updated his MySpace page: http://www.myspace.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

  26. 0
    Tammej says:

    Seriously – would anyone complain like this if the captive was male, and the criminal a girl?

     

    ‘Sides. It’s a tasteless ‘game’-thing. People have a right to be tasteless. And enjoy that, too. =]

  27. 0
    Avalongod says:

    To a copyeditor to begin with!  Just kidding…just note that Stockholm is spelled wrong in the first sentence.  I’d tone down some of your language too.  "Bunch of feminists" is vague and sounds hostile.  I’d name the organization directly (i.e. "the national organization of…") or keep the language a bit more professional (i.e. "some individuals who self-identify as feminists…").

    Just my $.02.

  28. 0
    Arell says:

    Unless you put "cure" in quotations, in which case you’re probably not literally implying it’s a cure.

    Fine.  For the literal minded, I was trying to say we should kill rapists, in a joking manner.

  29. 0
    Mukake says:

    This item is now unavailable on Amazon as of about 1:30 pm mountain time. Luckily I was able to order the game before then at the low price of 9.99 (and only 9.99 with my amazon prime account). The irony is I wouldn’t have even known about this product if it wasn’t for the complainers, at least not this soon after its release.

    Thank you to Feministing on giving me the heads up on this one.

  30. 0
    Arell says:

    That’s still about forcing a person to have sex against their will.  If a husband raped his wife, it’s still encroaching on her rights to do with her own body as she pleases.  And that doesn’t even have anything to do with a "mental issue."  I mean, if someone with a psychological disorder rapes someone, then you might have an arguement that they deserve treatment over punishment.  But your example is just about someone having an opinion.

    To be honest, your example doesn’t even make sense as a counterarguement.  I would cry "strawman," but I usually use the term wrong.  Please take a few minutes to think about your responses before hitting "Post Comment."

  31. 0
    Father Time says:

    I’m not comparing the two I’m just saying that if execution can be considered a cure for the common rapist than it can considered a cure for anything.

    —————————————————-

    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  32. 0
    Valentia X says:

    Except that the propensity to rape is not, in and of itself, indicative of any mental deficency (rather than disease, per say). There may be underlying issues, but being a rapist does not exclude you from punishment on the grounds that you are unable to discern right and wrong, much as a schizophrenic might. And I doubt being bi-polar is much of a defence either.

  33. 0
    Valentia X says:

    Unless they believe the rapist to have other mental issues that contributed to their proclitivities. Which is a distinict possibility- an extremely abberant childhood could be the answer as well; there are people who believe it’s a woman job’s to sleep with her husband, however she feels, and if she doesn’t, she’s ‘wrong’.

  34. 0
    ZippyDSMlee says:


    I see raping escaped goats is still in style….

     


    I am a criminal because I purchase media,I am a criminal because I use media, I am a criminal because I chose to own media..We shall remain criminals until Corporate stay’s outside our bedrooms..


    http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com

  35. 0
    Father Time says:

    Here’s the type of letter we should be mailing to Amazon which I psoted on their feminist site.

    Dear Amazon,
    A bunch of feminists have recently sent you a letter demanding you pull Sotckholm from your store.
    While from the looks of it the game would disgust me I ask that you please not pull the game as doing so would just give it free publicity (moreso than the feminists have all ready given it) and thus more sales, and possibly a sequel. Something similar happened with rapeplay as it garnered a large amount of attention after you decided to pull it. I do not wish for Stockholm to be the news topic for the next several weeks and would rather have it fall into relative obscurity quickly. So if you would kindly not pull it I would very much appreciate it.
    Signed
    A loyal customer.

    Now where might I go to send the letter?

    —————————————————-

    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  36. 0
    Father Time says:

    They’re not I’m just saying execution is a cure for rapist just as much as it is a cure for any other disease or state of mind or whatever.

    —————————————————-

    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  37. 0
    JustChris says:

    Usually, gameplay revolving around romantic or sexual activies comes off as very clumsy. But this is more of an interactive movie than a pixel-and-polygon video game. The presentation is probably more graphic and obviously an attempt to cash in on some shock value.

    I don’t know about anyone else, but watching a sex movie is more depraving than interacting in it.

    Just read this column from a game developer:

    http://www.igda.org/columns/clash/clash_Nov07.php

    A passive viewer of torture, murder or violence – who chooses to watch it as a form of entertainment – is not just tacitly condoning it. The observation of such activities is gratifying, to the point that he seeks it out. That kind of voyeurism is much more depraved [than controlling the action], sitting there eating popcorn while characters beg and scream.

    I guess by definition, Stockholm falls more into the area of exploiting the subject of violence and rape, than the exploitation of gameplay, you know, the thing that keeps people interested in progressing through the game. 

    Manhunt and BMX XXX both exploited their subject matter far more than the gameplay, that is why they ended up being mediocre games. And why the number of media watchdogs outnumbered the number of gamers that actually cared about them.

  38. 0
    nighstalker160 says:

    I would place this thing at the same point as RapeLay on the "disgusting" spectrum. Maybe Dennis took to heart some of the criticism he got about his personal opinions bleeding into the RapeLay topics.

    Alternatively, it could be that the goal of this interactive DVD is to make the woman fall in love with you as opposed to just havnig her be a sexual object that you forced over and over. It’s splitting hairs but I guess I see that distinction.

    What I do take issue with is the misrepresentation of "Stockholm’s Syndrome."

    Stockholm’s Syndrome is NOT a condition in which a captive "falls in love with her captor." It is a condition in which a captive IDENTIFIES with his or her captor and becomes a willing participant in the captor’s actions.

    What is happening in this interactive DVD (which is more a ‘choose your own adventure’ movie than a game) is just ONE way in which Stockholm’s Syndrome can manifest but it is NOT the definition of "Stockholm’s Syndrome."

  39. 0
    Father Time says:

    Only if you consider execution a cure for bi-polar disorder

    —————————————————-

    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  40. 0
    Alyric says:

    Apples and oranges: A rapist chose to commit an atrocious act against another human being. Warped, yes – but perfectly rational. Just evil.

    A schizophrenic isn’t in full control of his or her mental faculties. Schizophrenics can and do commit crimes, but often they are driven to it by delusions and hallucinations. They can’t help it, and in fact, it’s an illness that can be treated.

    There’s no cure for being an evil raping bastard.

  41. 0
    nightwng2000 says:

    Just saying that media in general needs to be responsible for it’s actions is misleading.

    Certainly, when it comes to media that is "non-fiction", such as real news media, educational media, and media whose intent is educational peripherally (such as religion and behavioral education (versus facts and figures)) needs to act responsibly under a similar concept of "The Truth, The Whole Truth, And Nothing But The Truth".

    But when it comes to "fiction", there should be NO boundaries or limitations.  Simply because it IS fiction.

    Fiction is fiction.

    Reality is reality.

    Reality comes set in boundaries and consequencies for actions of an individual.

    Fiction has no limitations and should have no consequences.

    Some say that they would like to make their fantasies (a form of fiction) come true.  But in so doing, that fantasy becomes reality and bound by the limitations of reality and the consequences of reality.

    But fiction should not be forced to be limited.  Everyone has their own tastes when it comes to the myriad of genres within the fictional setting.  Many have different views of what is "good", "bad", "ugly" or beyond in either direction as to what any one genre or any one product’s value is.  Not everyone shares those views.

    The claims that liking any one genre or product of the fictional style must mean that you agree and intend to make that fiction a reality is not based on any factual, realistic claim. 

    An individual who has an interest in certain beliefs or acts in reality may be drawn to the fictional version of those beliefs or acts.  But the same is not necessarily true of the reverse.

    Indeed, an individual who has a propensity for a particular belief or act in the real world may very well find ANY excuse to follow through that reality, whether exposed to the fictional version or not.

    There has never been evidence that exposure to the fictional version of of anything automatically makes the person wxposed to that fiction actually do it in reality, especially if they don’t have a propesity for doing them in reality already.

    Nightwng2000

    NW2K Software

    Nightwng2000 has also updated his MySpace page: http://www.myspace.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

  42. 0
    Valentia X says:

    The closest I have ever heard to that (and this was in passing, so don’t bet the ranch on it) was that the treatment be augumented with time in a psychatric facility instead of a prison. Or let off early with counseling and chemical castration.

     

    I believe the mind of a rapist is very warped, but I don’t exactly put it on par with, say, schizophrenia.

  43. 0
    Avalongod says:

    I think you probably put it better (to some degree I was needling the other poster on his wording, which was a bit straw-man-ish).  Nonetheless, post Mike-Dukakis, I’d be surprised to find politicians on either side of the aisle who are mainstream, successful politicians who would argue against hard time for rapists.  Then again, perhaps I’m wrong, and certainly willing to examine any examples provided.  I think some might argue that treatment program could be a useful addition, but are any actually suggesting that rapists be set free with treatment only and NO jail time?

  44. 0
    Valentia X says:

    I think he might be speaking about politicians who prefer ‘rehabilitation’ over hard time. And they’re probably a bit fuzzy on the death penalty as well.

     

    Personally I think some crimes are better suited for rehab (usually drug-use related) but a rapist should be shackled to a pipe for ten minutes, in a room with four angry dads with baseball bats. That seems reasonable.

  45. 0
    Avalongod says:

    Actually I’ll amend my comment above by saying that is "sounds like" it’s in poor taste.  I’m aware that advocacy group descriptions of media don’t always match the actual content.

  46. 0
    Avalongod says:

    I agree with many of the posts above.  This DVD…whatever it is, is obviously in poor taste.  But the reaction is quite silly, and seems likely to drive up sales at least somewhat if only for morbid curiosity.

    Honestly I think that the intent of advocacy groups such as this has little to do with decreasing sales of the "offending" media product, and more to do with increasing their own visibility and influence.  If they become more visible and powerful AND media sales increase…so be it.

  47. 0
    Avalongod says:

    I’d be curious where you can find a mainstream politician…MAINSTREAM, mind you…who has ever said anything remotely along the lines of "rapists don’t deserve to go to prison".

  48. 0
    jedidethfreak says:

    I find it funny that, in America, feminists usually vote for politicians who believe that rapists don’t deserve to go to prison.

     

    Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone’s feelings.

  49. 0
    Father Time says:

    Except these are invalid criticisms. There’s ZERO proof that these will cause people to commit violence or wrap their perception of true love (and that idea that they will is pure idiocy). This is also an obscure game aimed at people with a certain fetish so any claim that this will lead our culture to treating women like crap is also very flimsy.

    What this is, is stumbling upon to a sick game meant for people who like sick stuff and whining and bitching about it, pretending it’s mainstream and demanding it be censored simply because you don’t like it.

    It’s disgusting therefore Amazon should remove it to protect our delicate sensibilities is not a valid argument, period.

    And you keep calling me privlidged (with no fucking proof) and are implying that this somehow diminishes my argument. That’s the very defintion of ad hominem.

    When a mainstream game comes out aimed at everyone that has stockholm then complaints would be valid.

    Until then you’re complaining about a game that was designed for a specific audience, giving it more attention than it deserves and demanding it be censored because you’re offended by it (even though it’s not meant for you).

    It’s not valid criticism no matter how much you want to pretend it is. It’s bitching at nothing and if you keep doing it you’ll be ignored by the masses (not just by me although I love how you crafted a straw man of me saying I would be the only one to stop listening to you).

    —————————————————-

    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  50. 0
    lumi says:

    You keep telling yourself that, and the majority of society will continue to follow the path I just predicted.  It IS a loaded term.  I’m not making this up; I mostly came to this realization AFTER talking with a friend who IS a "self-identified feminist".

    And once again, since you seem to be willfully ignoring it, I have never once said that I’m going to "dismiss everything you have to say", I said that anything you claim under the banner of feminism is going to be initially viewed with a healthy dose of skepticism because of the history of (sometimes!) frivolous attacks associated with it.

    "And no, they’re not the loud ones. They’re the ones people like to pretend are loud to deflect valid critique."

    That’s pretty sad denial right there.  Maybe for someone who surrounds herself in the "good" kind of feminism, it’s hard to see.  For most of us on the outside…

    No.  Just no.

  51. 0
    lumi says:

    I never claimed to be the "final arbiter" on what is and is not a valid criticism.  I let history do that job.  Or are you claiming that there has never been a frivolous accusation against games?

    The thing is, like any lobby, the groups that target games with these frivolous accusations usually know it’s frivolous.  They’re doing it to garner PR for themselves, or try to cast negative PR at their target, or because they’re trying to curry favor with some other political affiliate. 

    Sometimes, they really do have such a warped sense of reality that they do believe it.  Like the idiots claiming that playing GTA will cause more school shootings.

  52. 0
    yllamana says:

     "They’re the loud ones.  The squeaky wheels.  So you combine a small but very vocal group that espouses these ideas, combine it with a myriad of attacks on gaming (some of which are blatantly invalid), and you have a recipe for severe distrust and antagonism whenever someone waving the same banner as that group comes by with an attack of their own, legitimate or not."

    No. Just no.

    Feminism is and has always been about equality. If you didn’t know that before, you do now. IMO, the correct response to finding that out is, "Oh. I didn’t realise that; sorry for the confusion."

    Frankly, if someone is going to dismiss everything I have to say because they think their idea of "feminist" meaning "misandrist" is more important than actually engaging with the topic then I don’t want to talk to them in the first place.

    And no, they’re not the loud ones. They’re the ones people like to pretend are loud to deflect valid critique.

  53. 0
    yllamana says:

     "… it’s about not bringing up invalid criticisms of video games…"

    Then I’m having a really hard time seeing:

    a) who made you the final arbiter on what is and is not a valid criticism;

    b) how that is relevant in any way to this case.

  54. 0
    lumi says:

    I should just have this saved somewhere so I can C&P it whenever a "feminist" issue comes up on this site and we inevitably get to this point.

    "I see a bunch of people screaming about how people who think women should be equal to men (feminists) are wrong and horrible"

    Something that all modern "feminists" need to recognize is that whatever the term may have meant at the time of its inception, it has grown and evolved (much like the movement itself).  There are multiple schools of thought and multiple groups that currently identify themselves as "feminists", and they do NOT all agree with each other.  Some are all about perfect equality between the genders.  And you know the funny thing?  Most guys out there agree with this.  Do you know why they get so uncomfortable or aggressive when faced with the word "feminism"?

    It’s because there are other groups out there claiming the same title, who are, quite honestly, full of shit when they claim to want equality.  Like most stereotypes, the "man-hating militant feminazi" was born from a seed of truth.  And you know what’s worse?

    They’re the loud ones.  The squeaky wheels.  So you combine a small but very vocal group that espouses these ideas, combine it with a myriad of attacks on gaming (some of which are blatantly invalid), and you have a recipe for severe distrust and antagonism whenever someone waving the same banner as that group comes by with an attack of their own, legitimate or not.

    tl;dr version: the word "feminist" is so overloaded at this point in time that it can be a harmful way to self-identify when entering into a potentially volatile debate.

  55. 0
    lumi says:

    "Your entire post is, "I don’t want you to bring up valid criticisms of video games because if you bring up too many then the one you like most magically won’t count somehow because I don’t want it to." That isn’t productive in any way. It’s a silencing tactic."

    For the umpteenth time, no, that is not my argument.  I have specifically said this is not about "not bringing up valid criticisms of video games"; it’s about not bringing up invalid criticisms of video games.  Bring up lots of invalid criticisms in the hope of getting some of the spaghetti to stick to the wall, and you’re going to become recognized as just that: a boy who cries wolf.  And then, when you actually do have a wolf to cry about, no one’s going to take you seriously.

    "You’re talking to people who are actually affected by this stuff."

    This affects me directly.  I know you weren’t speaking to everyone, but keep in mind that most of us (well, at least some of us) aren’t doing this as an intellectual exercise, even if we’re on the opposite side of the fence from you.

  56. 0
    yllamana says:

    Your entire post is, "I don’t want you to bring up valid criticisms of video games because if you bring up too many then the one you like most magically won’t count somehow because I don’t want it to." That isn’t productive in any way. It’s a silencing tactic.

    It’s also worth noting that I have never made any ad hominem arguments here.

    I see that quantum_mechanik has said some pretty good stuff up the page, so I suggest you go and read that.

    Also, as a last thing: please don’t do this "I’m just playing the devil’s advocate!!" garbage. You’re talking to people who are actually affected by this stuff. It might all be an abstract discussion for fun for you, but it’s not for us. Quit it. It’s privilege at work that you act that way.

  57. 0
    yllamana says:

     I’m not sure who you think is blowing what out of proportion, here. I see some commentary on one website and then on this website I see a bunch of people screaming about how people who think women should be equal to men (feminists) are wrong and horrible and should shut up because they said something you don’t like about a game/interactive DVD/whatever.

    If anyone is blowing anything out of proportion, it would seem to be you and some other commenters.

    It is true that some people on feministing react pretty strongly to this game’s existence. I’d suggest trying to see where they’re coming from; as far as I know, nobody has appointed you as the arbiter of what people can and cannot care about, and I’m very curious as to why you think their opinion of the game is invalid but your opinion that they should shut up and stop stating their opinion is not invalid.

  58. 0
    yllamana says:

     I’m really unclear on what you think Jack Thompson agrees with me about. I haven’t seen him critique much, but admittedly I haven’t been paying all that much attention to him. :)

  59. 0
    quantum_mechanik says:

    Yeah, I’m sort of beyond the dickery at this point. I think there are real problems, real differences of opinion, and that’s fine and dandy and we can all learn, discuss, and think about things without aformentioned dickery.

    It’s really easy to try and strategize causes we agree with, but aren’t affected by. And it’s not a bad thing to think. It’s not a bad instinct. The problem with it that I see, though, is that, like I said before, we can’t know what really is or isn’t important. We can imagine, we can think we know, but until we actually have the experience, we’re just guessing.

    There are a lot of tactics to achieving equality, and some work better than others. I think that, from the current state of, say, race and gender relations in the US, that equal rights don’t neccesarily lead to equal treatment, under the law or under the culture. One idea is, yeah, that creating legal equality leads to societal equality. And, in it’s way, that’s sort of the easiest, because it relates to things written down, things easily measured and confirmed, etc. What’s much harder, much more pervasive, is the societal changes that require achieving before real equality occurs. Changes like the destruction of stereotypes, oppressive gender roles, language issues, etc.

    Moving back to this, after reading the comments around this game and the protests following it, there’s a lot of essentialist pronouncements on feminists, women, etc. The truth is, feminism is an incredibly diverse umbrella of political philosophy and sociological ideas. Some, certainly, have spoken of or even believe in things that, to people who believe in pure equality, are worrying. These statements usually require some framework to make them palatable, but shouldn’t result in the dismissal of the movement.

    There are two political philosophers that can illustrate this point. Plato and Machiavelli. Plato was an idealist, who described how things should work, in a perfect, happy world. Machiavelli was a realist, who was responding to corruption, to difficulty, and to the takeover of his state by a fairly entrenched family. So when we read both, Plato makes us happy, while Machiavelli sort of scares us because he uses some terrifying language. But as a response to the (then) current situation, his statements make a lot of sense.

    Feminism is like that, in some ways. A lot of it is quite high-minded, imagining what a perfect world, devoid of oppression, looks like. And some of it is responsive to the current situation. Those responses can be angry. They can be mean. They can be incredibly scary. Like every other group on the planet.

    Anyways, feminism has diversity, but the one issue they all sort of unify around, the one statement that is universally agreed upon, is that Rape is Bad. This is actually a more profound thing than it sounds like, because the definition of rape, and the motivations behind it, get to be explored. There is, or was, an idea that men were simply biologically hard-wired to rape and that society was a curbing mechanism on that. This has been debunked pretty thoroughly, and now it looks a bit like the other way around, where in most cases of sexual assault, the perpetrator was acting out of what he or she felt was some sort of societal right.

    it seems to me that sexual assalters come in two forms. There’s the crazy ones, the honest-to-G-d poorly wired people that expose themselves on busses, stalk and tie up women, etc. The crazies. But that’s not what most sexual assault looks like. MOST sexual assault looks like a guy going too far with a woman who said no, because he thought that she meant yes, or didn’t particularly care about the no. And that, the theory goes, is caused by this pervading idea that women are worth less than men, are there to be used by men, and do not, cannot or should not be in control of their own sexual choices. And this sort of game worries people because it creates a fiction that normalizes and confirms that idea.

  60. 0
    Ratros says:

    Multiple critiques aren’t "diluted" – on the contrary, they let us see common themes and problems that appear over and over, giving us more insight into how to avoid them. :)

    Jack Thompson agrees.  That sez it all.

    I once had a dream about God. In it, he was looking down upon the planet and the havoc we recked and he said unto us, "Damn Kids get off my lawn!"

  61. 0
    Chaplain99 says:

    I know/I gathered as much.  However, to the casual observer, one might assume that you’re taking potshots at an offensive post.  Be that as it may, I just enjoy conflict, that’s all.  ^^

    "HEY! LISTEN!"

  62. 0
    GRIZZAM PRIME says:

    Good point. I really can’t know for sure what is important to a group that I don’t belong to (now you’ve got me wondering how different I am from gays in terms of the things in life I value. It’s been interesting so far…).

    Now, in case you were wondering, the reason I figured that gay rights groups were less concerned about slur terms than rights battles is (aside from the fact that I never hear them show the same concern for words as for rights and equal protection) because I reasoned that changing or banning a word doesn’t change a situation much. People can still insult you using other slurs and you still don’t have rights gained. If you focus most of your vigor on gaining rights and equal protection and succeed in doing so, the situation changes; you have more rights and protection.

    And you are very right in saying that people may not understand the feelings of other groups. That’s why it seems strategically benificial to save most of your vigor for matters that most people outside of a group can understand to some extent, or even relate to. It might make all the sense in the world to the group itself, but it’s hard to gain victory in a civil rights struggle if other groups don’t understand your concern.

    (I’d also like to appologize for my initial thought that your were just being an asshole when you asked me that question. I’m used to internet dickery…)

  63. 0
    quantum_mechanik says:

    No, that wasn’t what I was trying to do. I was just pointing out that, while it’s easy for members of a certain group to critique the social advancement of that group, criticize their priorities, etc. We really have no idea what’s more important or not. We can guess, but we can’t really know for sure

  64. 0
    quantum_mechanik says:

    What I don’t get is, if you’re not gay, how can you tell what’s important to gay people and what isn’t? Banning gay marriage, that’s a result of homophobia. Calling someone a fag in the street because they’re holding hands with another guy, that’s homophobia. It stems from the same place, and the amount of flak people get from being gay on the street, in the workplace, at school, etc. affects a lot more people than those who are interested in becoming married.

  65. 0
    MechaTama31 says:

    I suppose you are not familiar with the story of the boy who cried wolf…

    The problem is not that feminists (or whoever) are criticizing the games, it’s that they blow it so far out of proportion, acting like it’s the end of the world if these pixels over here make naughty with those pixels over there.  By getting so hysterical over such trivial, unimportant, silly things, it will tend to make people dismiss your hysterics even when they happen to be about something genuinely bad.

    I’m not saying you should be "silenced", or that you can’t criticize things, I’m just saying you should keep it reasonable, stop with the hyperbole, quit making mountains out of molehills.  Games like this and Rapelay are not the end of civilization.  They do not deserve to be taken so seriously.  Treat them like the trash they are, make your critique if you must, and let them be swept into the rubbish bin of history.  By launching such a tirade against the game, all you do is give the game the support of people who react strongly to what they perceive as attempts at censorship.

  66. 0
    Chaplain99 says:

    -gasp-  Oh, snap, quantum_mechanik.  You totally just pulled a two-fer there: nullifying the validity of his comment AND questioning his sexuality?  IMPRESSIVE.

    "HEY! LISTEN!"

  67. 0
    GRIZZAM PRIME says:

    Nope. I do pay attention to the gay rights struggles going on in the country though. The ones that get taken seriously and get media attention are usually the ones who go after big targets like gay marriage rights and coverage of homosexuals under hate crime laws. Media attention is of course useful in any sort of political struggle, since it helps spread the message.

    Maybe I’m looking too much at the victory of the struggle as a whole, and not giving proper credit to the signifigance of the detail matters like this. That being said, yeah, the game is pretty fucked up, and I completely understand why they’d be pissed about it.

  68. 0
    LujanD says:

    I’m absolutely dying to know what’s so damnably horrible about being "privileged" to yllamana.

    I mean, seriously, no matter how I interchange her words, it still sounds funny to me. xD

    It’s like going around yelling, "Curse you well-off people, CURSE YOU ALL!"

  69. 0
    GRIZZAM PRIME says:

    It depends on one question: do you want to win?

    If you genuinly want to win, it’s usually helpful to pick your battles and stick to the "big fish".

    For example, look at animal rights groups like PETA. They rant about trivial matters and as such people tend to dismiss them as nothing more than whiners.

    Another example is how gay rights activists (the ones that people take seriously, anyway) focus on equal rights as opposed to doing things like trying to have the word "fag" banned, because that’s trivial in comparison to actual equal rights struggles.

  70. 0
    Father Time says:

    Oh no you better not disagree with hger again or else she’ll call us priviledged.

    Can you pelase stop with the ad hominem crap. You have no proof we’re even ‘priviledged’ in the first place.

    Anyway look at Peta, they protest and whine about so much crap and say so many stupid things that I’ve never seen anyone (that’s not a member of PETA) who takes them seriously.

    If you continue to complain and bitch about insignifcant shit too often you’ll be mocked, trivialized and generally ignored. This is not unique to feminists and it’s not something only ‘priviliged people’ (whatever the hell that is) do.

    —————————————————-

    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  71. 0
    yllamana says:

    Your whole argument boils down to a silencing tactic. "If you bring up something that privileged people don’t like, privileged people might not listen to you about a hypothetical something that’s more important to you!" I’m sure you can see why I’m not going to let that affect my actions, and why I won’t suggest people hold off on valid critique because of it.

    It’s misdirection, nothing more.

     

     

  72. 0
    lumi says:

    "Multiple critiques aren’t "diluted" – on the contrary, they let us see common themes and problems that appear over and over, giving us more insight into how to avoid them. :)"

    When a non-trivial number of your protests are about easily debunked or downright ridiculous topics, yes, it absolutely does dilute the remaining legitimate arguments.  While it’s not an absolute, the odds of "picking a losing fight" go up as you protest an increasing number of topics.  Again, I’m not saying it’s a guarantee, but a statistical probability if you’re not very careful.

    Also, there have been a number of demonstrably poor arguments that feminists groups (and other "activist" groups, for that matter) have made against video games and other topics of offense.  I don’t dismiss something just because I hear it from, say, the PTC, but I will certainly take it with a good bit of skepticism while I look into the matter, because the PTC has a proven track record of hollow propaganda and supporting its own arguments with false or misleading information.  If they didn’t have such a history, it’d give more weight to their current arguments.

    This becomes especially true when dealing with subjects that are inherently subjective.

  73. 0
    yllamana says:

    To address the easy part,

     "… where you assume everyone "screaming" and "getting defensive" about this a member of a privileged class."

    Quoting from my post:

    "… getting screamed at by huge numbers of defensive privileged people…"

    As you can see, nowhere did I say that only privileged people can scream and get defensive. If your protest is that I didn’t mention other people, then okay, I can accept that. I absolutely agree that people who aren’t in the privileged class can disagree with a critique, and can do so in the same defensive ways as a lot of privileged people do.

    Back to the idea that it "dilutes" anything, I have to emphatically disagree with you. The point of critique is to expose problems in the work. This means that authors/artists/(preferred noun here) can avoid those problems in future.

    Multiple critiques aren’t "diluted" – on the contrary, they let us see common themes and problems that appear over and over, giving us more insight into how to avoid them. :)

  74. 0
    lumi says:

    At the same time, complaining frequently and about trivial matters dilutes the strength of your protests when something truly deserving of protest comes along.  Also, you undermine your own position when you make assumptions, such as the one at the end of your post where you assume everyone "screaming" and "getting defensive" about this a member of a privileged class.

  75. 0
    Timbo says:

    Well put.

    Although, I do feel that the methods of this particulr feminist group are counter productive.  Raising attention to these type of products through protest has, in the past, generally increased their sales by raising awareness of the game.

  76. 0
    quantum_mechanik says:

    It’s more an issue of normalization, I think. I don’t believe anyone, outside of nutbars, believe that someone who plays a violent or sexually violent video game will be turned into a sociopath or what have you. But the normalization effect is something that’s tangible, measurable, and confirmable.

    A person is sort of a reaction to a mass of influences, and their opinions are informed by those influences. There are ways to make an idea more influential, through all sorts of psychological tricks and forces–Sort of like salesman do. Normalization and stereotyping are a few of those ways, and this has been confirmed–expose a person to some racist, sexist, homophobic material, even on a small scale, and over time, they’ll start to think less of the group targeted. Showing them with similar traits will build up ideas in people’s minds that are quite sticky and entrenched. Think of the opinion center as a sort of pliable membrane, and repeated, low-level prodding will build up a resistance.

    A culture as a whole also has this membrane. That’s where we get our cultural values from. And the values change over time in reaction from certain pressures on that membrane, and all of those pressures stem from ideas. A few people thought poorly of women, designed a system that reinforced and reflected that belief, and after a while of everyone living in that system, that idea gets spread around to everyone. Everyone’s opinions are, in many ways, reflections based off of the culture they live in. This is not to say that everyone in a specific culture has the same opinions–indeed, people have quite different outlooks on certain things, because of the way they specifically were brought to frame those ideas. But the cultural construct of, say, gender, is there.

    Normalization is a repeated buffetting on the cultural membrane to build up a resistance to it. Low-level communications that forced sex, or unconsensual sex, or date rape, or that men deserve sex even if the woman doesn’t want to, that stuff adds up. Look at films and books and comics in the 40’s to the…gosh, right to the 80’s. The bad guys were communists, or veiled representations of communists. Now, in the 21st century, we think of communism as just a political philosophy, but it was a MORAL thing back then. People were scared of that philosophy–not just the bomb, but the idea that one day the US would wake up and be a communist state. Anyways, as that stereotype in media went away, so did the fear.

  77. 0
    lumi says:

    Well, in that case the counter is "why is profiting off of murder and terrorism (two EXTREMELY popular subjects in movies, books, and television) totally acceptable?"

    For that matter, where do they draw the line?  What kind of conflict is okay to profit off of?

  78. 0
    lumi says:

    "It was an easy business decision for them to remove it."

    Thank you for sinking your own boat.  It was a business decision.  If any action that ever results in something becoming less accessible to the masses is "censorship"…well, then, you need to get the fuck over it.  By that definition, there are plenty of legitimate reasons for censorship.

    Which is why such a definition is useless bullshit.

  79. 0
    Adrian Lopez says:

    No. Amazon removed the game because of its content, or rather because of the silly whining from potential customers about such content. The game was likely not a big seller, and in any case was not being sold by Amazon directly. It was an easy business decision for them to remove it.

  80. 0
    ShadowDragon28 says:

    Amazon did not censor it. The company behind the game made it clear they do not sell their products outside of Japan. Amazon respected their policy and withdrew the product from their listings.

  81. 0
    Adrian Lopez says:

    Of course it’s censorship. The fact that it’s legal and private doesn’t make it any less so. That you call this position "bullshit", "drivel" and "weak" doesn’t make it any of that.

  82. 0
    lumi says:

    Which is also his opinion, and is not censoring it.  Amazon didn’t say "you’re not allowed to make this game" or "nobody is allowed to sell this game".  They said "it’s not worth it for us to sell this game".  That is NOT censorship.

    Please, let’s skip over the self-censorship bullshit here, too.  Amazon is a business; making the business-savvy decision is NOT automatically censorship, so please STFU before trying to apply that drivel (not directing that at you, per se, Novablack, I just know there are some posters around here who are all over that weak argument).

  83. 0
    Adrian Lopez says:

    I’m not saying he isn’t entitled to have an opinion, or that he isn’t free to express it at every possible opportunity. I just find it an annoying tendency in his writeups about RapeLay.

    He doesn’t like it. I get it… just like I got it the first time he called it disgusting.

  84. 0
    lumi says:

    Why?  Dennis is as entitled to an opinion as anyone.  I think it’s a testament to his integrity as a journalist that, despite the fact that he quite clearly feels it’s disgusting, he’s not in favor of censoring it.

  85. 0
    yllamana says:

    The main angle I can see criticism of Fat Princess coming from is fatphobia – it seems like it’s essentially using a harmful stereotype of fat people as helpless to sell their game. I can see how that would upset some people, and I’m not sure how the game being constructed differently to avoid that would harm anyone.

    IIRC, there was also some feminist criticism about force-feeding at the time. There was discussion going on about torture in the media and one of the stupider things I remember being said by a public figure was something about being "force-fed chocolate cake." I think someone criticised it from that angle, that force-feeding someone anything is pretty repulsive and horrible (and it is – read about it) and that the game is portraying it as something silly and fun instead.

    Anyway, tangent aside, it’s possible to make really cool and fun games without actively alienating or perpetuating harmful stereotypes, and that’s where the criticism of Fat Princess was probably coming from.

  86. 0
    Father Time says:

    I think it was meant to be a jab at the helpless princess stereotype.

    —————————————————-

    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  87. 0
    Father Time says:

    I don’t think it was feministing I think it was another site but irregardless, not everything is geared towards one group so it would seem strange to demand removal of entertainment which relies partly on shock value because it sickens them.

    —————————————————-

    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  88. 0
    yllamana says:

     I’ve been reading Feministing for a while now, so I have a pretty good idea of the things that get posted on there.

    You thinking something is trivial does not make it immune to criticism. Institutional *isms are perpetuated by an enormous number of small things working in concert. I don’t specifically recall any criticism of Fat Princess, so I can’t respond to how much I agreed or disagreed with it. I’ve never played the game, either, so I can’t critique it myself. :)

    Sometimes there are posts on there about games that I don’t agree with, but that’s okay too. I can post on there and try to clear up confusion about them, and hopefully everyone walks away with a better understanding of what’s going on at the end.

     

  89. 0
    Father Time says:

    You haven’t seen the feminists too much have you. They complain about the most useless trivial shit. Fat Princess comes to mind.

    —————————————————-

    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  90. 0
    Father Time says:

    No it could very well lead to games being altered to appease the feminists if they manage to get this game pulled.

    Also if you don’t see the difference between critizing someone’s argument and demanding it not be made you’re a fool (and that’s putting it lightly).

    —————————————————-

    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  91. 0
    Zerodash says:

    My first 2 expository writing courses in undergrad were taught at the women’s campus by women’s studies profs.  Ever topic and required reading in both covered ideas like how men are naturally predisposed to act violently- especially toward women- as a normal sexual predisposition.  Other subjects covered how western society is breeding a "rape culture", which resulted in the famous "one in four men are rapists" idea.

    As for some of the sexual hangups- one ex GF in particular refused to be on the bottom because "true" feminists would never let a man be on top.  She also would get super-pissed at herself every time we had sex because she would feel like she was taken advantage of- even if she was the one who asked first!  And that is nothing to say of how pissed she would get if she caught me checking her out- she claimed it "objectified" her. 

    Between that and my misadventures as an employee of the univeristy I attended, I got to see a very, very ugly side of feminism. 

    Humanism > Feminism.  Because equality is about everyone- not elevating one group to sainthood and demonizing another. 

  92. 0
    quantum_mechanik says:

    I think it’s relevant to find out, since he brought it up, what exactly "sexual hangups" he feels that feminism instilled in his girlfriend, why they’re hangups and not valid choices, and what he thinks about the idea that one person should judge the sexuality of another.

  93. 0
    Nekowolf says:

    But feminism is NOT a hate group. It’s not even a "group" but rather an umbrella term, under which is several organizations. It’s its sub-divisions that are hate groups. Where as the KKK is not an umbrella term, but an actual orgazation.

    Third Wave Feminism still has some rationale with in it, but those who actually speak intelligently within it are often criticized and struck down by the rest who want female superiority or whatever asinine goal.

    To simply disregard the whole thing because it is overflowing of idiots is foolish in itself, because you are also  being rid of the intelligent arguments, by people who are reasonable and thoughtful. And yes, they are there.

  94. 0
    Chaplain99 says:

    …I don’t want it to seem like I’m trolling you or anything, quantum, but I think the use of "Out of curiousity" is a misnomer when applied to the questions you follow up with.  Maybe a phrase like, "Hey, I really don’t care about the answer to the question I’m about to ask, I just want to have some clout to prove you wrong, so…"  That seems a bit more reasonable, no?  ^^

    "HEY! LISTEN!"

  95. 0
    Zerodash says:

    See my links above.  Also try dating a feminist/women’s studies major.  I did it in college, and she gave me a window into the hate that the movement professes.  She (and her peers) were utterly preoccupied with hating men, so much so that the very notion of having a boyfriend was a source of intense personal debate (and don’t even get me started on her bizarre sexual hangups).  It has become so bad that many women won’t even call themselves "feminists" because of how much the radical elements have come to dominate it. 

  96. 0
    jccalhoun says:

    Fine, then what about using Jacko’s comments to say you won’t listen to any Christians?

    The point I’m trying to make is that you can find isolated examples of extremism everywhere. Pick a group and you can find some people that are full of hate. To say then that the entire group is full of hate is an absurd oversimplification.

     

     

     

    http://www.popularculturegaming.com

  97. 0
    Wolvenmoon says:

    If you find gun violence offensive, it’s all over legitimate sites in flash ads. When a boundary is crossed, make your voice known.

    These people have the same right to dislike this game that you do to voice your opinion about their opinion. In fact, the five minutes you spent on this article, and the five minutes all the other commentors have spent writing their stuff, is the same amount of time this group is likely spending. They’ll get off of their computers after writing their opinions, eat their dinners, watch some TV, and go on with their lives even while protesting this game.

     

    Quite effing bluntly, amazon.com does not have adequate age verification for this kind of stuff, either. Teenagers are always just cruising for stuff that’ll screw them up later in life.

    I will not buy securom games. http://www.wolvenmoon.com/sharedfiles/message1.jpg and http://www.wolvenmoon.com/sharedfiles/message2.jpg

  98. 0
    quantum_mechanik says:

    Out of curiousity, do you think there’s anything at all, any concievable situation, that SHOULDN’T be allowed in a game or movie?

  99. 0
    jccalhoun says:

    You could also use the same logic about your post:

    You don’t like that they don’t like it umm… well don’t read about it and spend time posting a comment about it. How about you just get on with the rest of your life, which i would hope is more important than obsessing over a niche blog post over a niche game that doesnt affect you directly in ANY way and would have no impact on your life except for your voluntary self involvement.

    Quite frankly Since it doesnt infact affect anyone other than those people who voluntarily read it, there isnt anything more to discuss. You dont like it? Well then take the steps ive just laid out for you. For some reason you seem to think that drawing attention to this blog post, delaying its inevitable fall into utter obscurity,  and drawing attention to it better serves your aims. It doesnt.

    Wow problem solved.

     

    http://www.popularculturegaming.com

  100. 0
    lumi says:

    The argument they’re standing by, I’m sure, is that exposure to the game normalizes the depicted behavior and increases the likelihood of a user/viewer imitating such behavior.

    Which, of course, is a different invalid argument.  But I’m sure the stance they’re taking is not the one refuted by "don’t like it?  don’t buy it", but by "there is NO actual evidence that exposure to this material increases the likelihood of actual rape/abuse".

  101. 0
    Father Time says:

    I don’t think anything more needs to be said but unfortunately they’ll never learn.

    They think they’re helping to stand for decency by calling attention to some real indecent stuff that they can find.

    —————————————————-

    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  102. 0
    NovaBlack says:

    ” "…a terrifyingly vivid exploration of Stockholm Syndrome, a psychological condition in which a captive falls in love with her kidnapper. And you play the part of the kidnapper. With a limited number of options, you must figure out how to make her fall in love with you."

    This includes using poison gas on the victim, sexually assaulting her and using psychological abuse against her in efforts to make her "love" you. Unbelievable.”

     

    whats that? You dont like it?

    umm… well dont buy or play it then. Um and dont go to amazon and spend time researching and  reading about the game. How about you just get on with the rest of your life, which i would hope is more important than obsessing over a niche game that doesnt affect you directly in ANY way and would have no impact on your life except for your voluntary self involvement.

    Quite frankly Since it doesnt infact affect anyone other than those people who voluntarily buy it, there isnt anything more to discuss. You dont like it? Well then take the steps ive just laid out for you. For some reason you seem to think that drawing attention to this product, delaying its inevitable fall into utter obscurity,  and drawing attention to it better serves your aims. It doesnt.

    Wow problem solved.

  103. 0
    Zerodash says:

    No compromises.  If a humanist group that is concerned with the well-being of all people (regardless of race, gender, etc) came out with the same concern, then I would care to listen.  Not so from a hate group- they reap what they sow.

  104. 0
    Arell says:

    No, that’s too rational.  Zerodash has it right, listen to no one!

    If the Westburo Baptists protest soldier funerals and praise the deaths of distaster victims, then refuse to listen to any Christian whatsoever.  If a terrorist claims jihad, condemn the rest of the 1 billion+ Islamists.  If that Andrew guy wants to eat fried rat on his tv show, then don’t watch ANY Travel Channel shows.

  105. 0
    Chaplain99 says:

    No, do the opposite.  Don’t ignore the reasonable complaints, but treat them with scrutiny because such vocal extremists exist in the first place.

    "HEY! LISTEN!"

  106. 0
    yllamana says:

    Hey, I thought I’d comment on a couple of things I found problematic about your post.

    "*headdesk* Seriously, are people just digging for things to be offended about?"

    Firstly, it’s not necessary to "dig" for things that have really messed up sexist undertones (or overtones, for that matter). They sort of come to us.

    Secondly, "be offended"? Please. The undertone of *your* post is that "being offended" is something people just do because they get something out of "being offended." Personally, it would cause me no end of joy if people stopped doing messed up sexist, racist and any other -ist you care to name things.

    I’m not sure what you think people get out of speaking up about *isms, but I can tell you the main thing people *do* get out of it: the hope that in future people will be able to produce work that has fewer messed up *ist issues in them. Critiques of things can help make a better thing the next time around. Speaking up about something and getting screamed at by huge numbers of defensive privileged people is not something that people just do for fun.

  107. 0
    hellfire7885 says:

    *headdesk* Seriously, are people just digging for things to be offended about?

    I remember I think over a year ago, 25 to Life came out. As crappy as it was, it would have died a quick death on shelves, but no. Some thin skinnedm orla crusader discovered it, made a huge stink, and gave the game moderate success.

    These peopel are just repeating the process.

    Rapelay would have remained under the radar, 25 to Life would have remaiend udner the radar, this would have remained under the radar, but no, some thing skinned person had to mkae a stink over it and giveit more publicity.


  108. 0
    yllamana says:

     It sounds like the only option available is to write more feminist critiques of things. Then any extra publicity will be so diluted that it won’t matter, and we can get some more great discussion on representation of women in media going!

  109. 0
    PHOENIXZERO says:

    Even when it was a full blown, Live Journal blog he use to generally keep his opinions to himself or at least not have them directly in the story.

  110. 0
    Arell says:

    "STOCKHOLM" – A guide for creeps, stalkers, and pedophiles on how to psychologically torture a person into loving you.  Brought to you by the makers of "Boom!" a step by step tuturorial for developing pipe bombs, and "Hush," a how-to guide for making infantcide look like an accident!

    Because free speech doesn’t need to be used responsibly.

  111. 0
    Arell says:

    Yes.  Ignore even the reasonable complaints just because you’re tired of listening to a few vocal extremists on on the fringes of the movement.

  112. 0
    Zerodash says:

    I’ve said it before, but this info needs to get out there- the feminist movement has devolved into little more than a gender oriented hate group. I refuse to listen to anything they have to say as much as I would listen to the KKK complain.

    http://www.deltabravo.net/custody/quotes.php

    http://eve.enviroweb.org/perspectives/issues/bodies.html

    http://womensspace.wordpress.com/2008/01/27/carnival-of-radical-feminist-anti-pornography/#comment-83129

    http://womensspace.wordpress.com/2006/05/19/why-feminists-should-boycott-mothers-day/

  113. 0
    Ratros says:

    I’ll admit it, I laughed.

    I once had a dream about God. In it, he was looking down upon the planet and the havoc we recked and he said unto us, "Damn Kids get off my lawn!"

  114. 0
    tibuka says:

    As long as it is clear what is comment and what is actual news, i don’t care. I also think this dvd is much worse than the more surreal Rapelay, but everyone is free to choose what to like or dislike and make public comments about it. And also, everyone is free to buy and enjoy something that creeps other people out.

  115. 0
    Chaplain99 says:

    Don’t make Dennis choke a b****. He might actually get his own game then.

    Tasteless humor aside, I kinda agree.  Then again, GamePolitics is more of a semi-official blog than anything else (at least, in my opinion).

    "HEY! LISTEN!"

  116. 0
    Charax says:

    so…hold on.

    GP calls RapeLay "disgusting" because you grope not even remotely realistic-looking women and rape them, and at the end of it here’s a high chance you suffer the karmic repercussions and die.

    This lets you torture, psychologically abuse and poison your targets as well as rape them, and you "do" all this to a real woman, who is acting out the effects of your actions, which result in a "happy" ending of her falling in love with you – which is essentially positive reinforcement of your actions – and not a single hyperbolic adjective is included in the commentary?

    So where’s the line where GP will go from simply reporting something (like here) and commenting on their subject as being "disgusting" (as with Rapelay)?

    Can we have an iota of consistency here?

Leave a Reply