Blogger Hates Violence, Yet is Against California Law

November 11, 2010 -

A discussion between two writers on the Perpetual Post website caught our eye because one of the scribes, even while expressing an aversion to violent videogames, doesn’t think the government should be in the business of limiting a child’s access to them.

In her part of the article, Molly Schoemann says that she “can’t really stomach violence of any kind—even videogame violence,” and recounted a previous experience playing Army of Two in which she was reduced to being “huddled in a pile of rubble,” where she “refused to shoot anyone.”

Schoemann also believes that violent games do have some sort of impact on youngsters, writing, “Can you really tell me that the experience of playing a videogame in which you rampage around shooting other people happens in a vacuum and has absolutely no influence over the way in which a child thinks of violent behavior and its consequences?”

But even with those two feelings in the back of her head, she is not looking for government intervention. As she wrote:

Granted, I am not sure that I am particularly in favor of laws restricting these games from being sold to minors either. For one thing, I don’t think this would really do much in the way of keeping them out of the hands of children. For another, a child who is otherwise well-rounded and grows up in a loving and supportive home is ideally receiving enough positive influences in his or her life to combat any tendencies toward violence that might be awakened through videogames or other media sources.

Ultimately, it is the children who do not grow up in loving and supportive homes whose potential for violence we need to worry about – and their access to violent videogames is among the least of our concerns in that case.


Comments

Re: Blogger Hates Violence, Yet is Against California Law

She comes across as a strong pacifist, but yet doesn't support unnecessary censorship on violence? Good on her.

 

---------

James Fletcher, member of ECA Canada

Re: Blogger Hates Violence, Yet is Against California Law

Sounds like she just does not like conflict in any form.  Will not take a firm stand on any point that is clearly against someone else else she might be forced to defend herself.  ie Wishy washy

Re: Blogger Hates Violence, Yet is Against California Law

I'd also remind Ms. Schoemann that video game violence is not violence. No one is getting hurt. It's important to make the distinction because there is enough real violence to go around. When we fight against pretend violence we are in effect wasting our effort on a non-issue. As a Quaker and a devout pacifist (who has, incidentally, brutally murdered thousands of zombies, cowboys, cops and generic Russian/Arabs in games like Left 4 Dead, Red Dead Redemption, GTA IV and CoD MW), I think it's important to keep our eyes on the ball. Hint, the 'ball' is not inside any video game. It's out here in the real world where REAL PEOPLE get hurt and killed. Ms Schoemann comes to that conclusion despite the fact that she seems to confuse violent game content with actual violence. I guess that's good, but the journey from 'video games are horribly violent' to 'let's concentrate on real violence' seems a little disjointed.

Re: Blogger Hates Violence, Yet is Against California Law

“Can you really tell me that the experience of playing a videogame in which you rampage around shooting other people happens in a vacuum and has absolutely no influence over the way in which a child thinks of violent behavior and its consequences?”

If Molly Schoemann means to suggest that video game violence makes my kid more accepting of violence, then I can say without a shadow of a doubt that it has absolutely no influence in that way. On the contrary, it illustrates why real life violence is bad - because in real life, real people are the ones in pain, spurting blood and dying in agony. In a game, the blood is just coloured pixels - no one gets hurt. My daughter understands this and it gives her a point of reference that she wouldn't have if she was kept protected from images of violence.

Does seeing violent content influence how my child thinks of violent behaviour, sure, but not in the way Molly Schoemann thinks it does.

Re: Blogger Hates Violence, Yet is Against California Law

It sounds like she's talking to a strawman there. I don't think anyone (at least from what I've seen on sites such as this one) who is opposed to the law is indifferent about kids playing violent games. Many kids are mature and settled enough for it not to affect their behaviour, and it's up to their parents to decide if they are.

What we take issue with is the suggestion that violent games are inevitably harmful to kids (they aren't), that studies prove this (they don't) and that parents and the industry can't protect kids without government intervention (they can).

Re: Blogger Hates Violence, Yet is Against California Law

I'm indifferent to kids playing violent games.  So, that's one.

 

Andrew Eisen

Re: Blogger Hates Violence, Yet is Against California Law

If it did happen in a vacuum, it likely would have some unfavorable influences.  But it doesn't exist in a vacuum.  That's why it's not dangerous.

 

Andrew Eisen

Re: Blogger Hates Violence, Yet is Against California Law

My cool book.  You are now in it.

 

Andrew Eisen

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Should 'Hatred' have been removed from Steam Greenlight?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
E. Zachary KnightIf you are downloading a copy in order to bypass the DRM, then you are legally in the wrong. Ethically, if you bought the game, it doesn't matter where you download it in the future.12/19/2014 - 12:06pm
InfophileEZK: Certainly better that way, though not foolproof. Makes me think though: does it count as piracy if you download a game you already paid for, just not from the place you paid for it at? Ethically, I'd say no, but legally, probably yes.12/19/2014 - 11:20am
ZippyDSMleeAnd I still spent 200$ in the last month on steam/GOG stuff sales get me nearly every time ><12/19/2014 - 10:55am
ZippyDSMleeMaskedPixelante:And this is why I'm a one legged bandit.12/19/2014 - 10:51am
ZippyDSMleeE. Zachary Knight: I buy what I can as long as I can get cracks for it...then again it I could have gotton Lords of the Fallen for 30 with DLC I would have ><12/19/2014 - 10:50am
MaskedPixelantehttp://www.joystiq.com/2014/12/19/marvel-vs-capcom-origins-leaving-online-storefronts-soon/ Speaking of "last chance to buy", Marvel vs. Capcom Origins is getting delisted from all major storefronts. Behold the wonders of the all digital future.12/19/2014 - 9:59am
MaskedPixelanteSeriously, the so-called "Last Chance" sale was up to 80% off, while this one time only return sale goes for a flat 85% off with a 90% off upgrade if you buy the whole catalogue.12/19/2014 - 9:37am
E. Zachary KnightInfophile, Tha is why I buy only DRM-free games.12/19/2014 - 9:37am
MaskedPixelanteNordic is back on GOG for one weekend only. And at 85% off no less, which is kind of a slap in the face to people who paid more during the "NORDIC IS LEAVING FOREVER BUY NOW OR FOREVER HOLD YOUR PEACE" sale, but whatever...12/19/2014 - 9:28am
InfophileRe PHX's link: This is one of the reasons the digital revolution isn't all it's cracked up to be. There's also the flip side where Sony can block access to games you've bought if they ban your account for unrelated reasons. All power is theirs.12/19/2014 - 8:52am
MaskedPixelantehttp://uplay.ubi.com/#!/en-US/events/uplay-15-days You can win FREE GAMES FOR A YEAR! Unfortunately, they're Ubisoft games.12/18/2014 - 6:29pm
Papa MidnightAh, so it was downtime. I've been seeing post appear in my RSS feed, but I was unable to access GamePolitics today across several ISPs.12/18/2014 - 6:06pm
james_fudgeSorry for the downtime today, folks.12/18/2014 - 5:54pm
PHX Corphttp://www.craveonline.com/gaming/articles/801575-sony-refuses-offer-refund-playstation-game-fraudulently-purchased-hacker Sony Refuses to Offer Refund for PlayStation Game Fraudulently Purchased by Hacker12/18/2014 - 1:43pm
NeenekoMakes sense to me, and sounds kinda cool. One cool thing about Minecraft is the meta game, you can implement other game types within its mechanics. There are servers out there with plots, an episodic single player one sound kinda cool12/18/2014 - 11:07am
MaskedPixelantehttps://mojang.com/announcing-minecraft-story-mode/ Umm... what?12/18/2014 - 10:24am
NeenekoThat would make sense. Theaters probably can not afford the liability worry or a drop in ticket sales from worried people. Sony on the other hand can take a massive writeoff, and might even be able to bypass distribution contracts for greater profit.12/18/2014 - 10:03am
ConsterNeeneko: I thought they cancelled it because the major cinema franchises were too scared of terrorist attacks to show the film?12/18/2014 - 9:55am
Neeneko@Wonderkarp - there is still a lot of debate regarding if the movie was a motive or not. Unnamed officials say yes, the timeline says no.12/18/2014 - 9:10am
NeenekoSomething does not smell right though, Sony is no stranger to being hacked, so why cancel this film? For that matter, they are still not giving in to hacker's original demands as far as I know.12/18/2014 - 9:06am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician