Author
|
Topic: RapeLay (Read 9273 times) |
|
MoEnzyme
Acolyte
Gender: 
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 4.54
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
 
|
 |
RapeLay
« on: 2010-04-02 09:28:30 » |
 |
It was only a matter of time. After Grand Theft Auto, its almost anticlimactic.
'RapeLay' video game goes viral amid outrage
By Kyung Lah, CNN
March 31, 2010 -- Updated 0708 GMT (1508 HKT)
Intro:
Quote:Tokyo, Japan (CNN) -- The game begins with a teenage girl on a subway platform. She notices you are looking at her and asks, "Can I help you with something?"
That is when you, the player, can choose your method of assault.
With the click of your mouse, you can grope her and lift her skirt. Then you can follow her aboard the train, assaulting her sister and her mother.
As you continue to play, "friends" join in and in a series of graphic, interactive scenes, you can corner the women, rape them again and again. |
Full article and video
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/03/30/japan.video.game.rape/index.html?hpt=P1
excerpt:
Quote:| It is little wonder that the game, titled RapeLay, sparked international outrage from women's groups. Taina Bien-Aime helped yank the game off store shelves worldwide. "This was a game that had absolutely no place on the market," said Taina Bien-Aime of women's rights organization Equality Now which has campaigned for the game to be taken off the shelves. But the controversy that led to stopping sales of the game instead took it viral. |
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 4.54
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:RapeLay
« Reply #1 on: 2010-04-02 16:26:03 » |
|
Excerpt from the video (not in text) "no one should play a game where they only way to win is to rape." This is truly thought policing. We aren't even talking about real porn here, just cartoons. We already have numerous games where mass murder is the only way to win, so WTF? -Mo
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
Blunderov
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.91
Rate Blunderov
"We think in generalities, we live in details"
|
|
Re:RapeLay
« Reply #2 on: 2010-04-03 04:05:49 » |
|
[Blunderov] I think Plato would have felt that neither games in which mass murder, or rape, are the only way to win are desirable. In The Republic he speaks out, for instance, against musical cadences likely to inflame the passions. I'm reminded of the story of an East German teacher complaing about how harmful and undermining it was for children, whom they had been doing their best to educate in the virtues of peace and social cooperation, to watch violent cowboy movies transmitted over the wall by Western TV stations.
Is this thought policing? Is it thought policing to forbid, as the famous example goes, someone from from shouting "fire" in a crowded cinema? Free speech, freedom of expression, are concepts which are qualified all the time. It is for instance illegal, some would say also immoral, to slander someone. Likewise to conspire to commit a crime. Likewise to bear false witness. Examples of qualifications of the right to free speech abound.
Bottom line. It is possible to imagine circumstances where violence is ethical and to this extent violent video games may have, it could be argued, some legitimacy. But I have not yet been able to think of a credible situation in which rape could be regarded as having any legitimate purpose. Is the game harmful? Yes. Does it have any redeeming features? Not that I can think of.
|
|
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 4.54
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:RapeLay
« Reply #3 on: 2010-04-03 14:42:16 » |
|
Quote from: Blunderov on 2010-04-03 04:05:49
[Blunderov] I think Plato would have felt that neither games in which mass murder, or rape, are the only way to win are desirable. In The Republic he speaks out, for instance, against musical cadences likely to inflame the passions. I'm reminded of the story of an East German teacher complaing about how harmful and undermining it was for children, whom they had been doing their best to educate in the virtues of peace and social cooperation, to watch violent cowboy movies transmitted over the wall by Western TV stations.
Is this thought policing? Is it thought policing to forbid, as the famous example goes, someone from from shouting "fire" in a crowded cinema? Free speech, freedom of expression, are concepts which are qualified all the time. It is for instance illegal, some would say also immoral, to slander someone. Likewise to conspire to commit a crime. Likewise to bear false witness. Examples of qualifications of the right to free speech abound. |
All of these examples deal with some sort of actual harm or an attempt to cause an actual harm, to a real person's body, reputation, wallet, etc. RapeLay does not.
Quote:Bottom line. It is possible to imagine circumstances where violence is ethical and to this extent violent video games may have, it could be argued, some legitimacy. But I have not yet been able to think of a credible situation in which rape could be regarded as having any legitimate purpose. Is the game harmful? Yes. Does it have any redeeming features? Not that I can think of.
|
If I play RapeLay, who am I harming and how?
-Mo
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
Blunderov
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.91
Rate Blunderov
"We think in generalities, we live in details"
|
|
Re:RapeLay
« Reply #4 on: 2010-04-03 18:34:58 » |
|
[Blunderov] This question from a memeticist? By playing the game you feed the troll. Do you want to be that guy?
|
|
|
|
|
Fritz
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1746
Reputation: 8.85
Rate Fritz
|
|
Re:RapeLay
« Reply #5 on: 2010-04-03 20:10:14 » |
|
Quote:Posted by: Blunderov Posted on: Today at 18:34:58
[Blunderov] This question from a memeticist? By playing the game you feed the troll. Do you want to be that guy? |
My little voice tells me that your right Blunderov; but the statistics in the US don't seem to demonstrate this. In the end I feel a game with a goal to harm a segment of our society promotes an idea that can only case harm in the end, even thought I can't find proof of this.
And your right MO. I could see this coming; drawing a straight line back to Grand Thief Auto.
Cheers
Fritz
Source: CDC
Source: National Youth Violence Prevention
Media Violence Facts and Statistics(Printable Version)
Prevalence of Media Violence
The Television Violence Monitoring Project examined the amount of violence on American television for three consecutive years, as well as contextual variables that may make it more likely for aggression and violence to be accepted, learned, and imitated. They found:
61 percent of television programs contain some violence, and only 4 percent of television programs with violent content feature an "antiviolence" theme.
44 percent of the violent interactions on television involve perpetrators who have some attractive qualities worthy of emulation.
43 percent of violent scenes involve humor either directed at the violence or used by characters involved with violence.
Nearly 75 percent of violent scenes on television feature no immediate punishment for or condemnation of violence.
40 percent of programs feature "bad" characters who are never or rarely punished for their aggressive actions.
The report notes that many television programs fail to depict the harmful consequences of violence. Specifically, it finds that of all violent behavioral interactions on television, 58 percent depict no pain, 47 percent depict no harm, and 40 percent depict harm unrealistically. Of all violent scenes on television, 86 percent feature no blood or gore. Only 16 percent of violent programs feature the long-term, realistic consequences of violence.[1]
A recent study by the Center for Media and Public Affairs found that from 1999 to 2001, the amount of serious violence on television decreased by 17 percent. On the broadcast networks, the amount of violence decreased by 11 percent. On premium cable, the amount of violence decreased by 65 percent, while on basic cable, violence increased by 20 percent. The amount of violence in top grossing feature films remained essentially the same.
The Link Between Violent Television and Movies and Aggressive Behavior
There is now solid evidence to suggest a relationship between exposure to violent television and movies and aggressive behavior. Researchers have found that children are more physically and verbally aggressive immediately after watching violent television and movies. It is also clear that aggressive children and teens watch more violent television than their less aggressive peers. A few studies have found that exposure to television and movie violence in childhood is related to increased aggression years later, but further research is needed in this area.
Violent Music Videos and Aggressive Behavior
A relatively small amount of research has focused on the impact of music videos with violent or antisocial themes. Researchers have found that exposure to violent or antisocial rap videos can increase aggressive thinking, but no research has yet tested how such exposure directly affects physical aggression.
Violence in Video Games
Children's use of video games has become widespread. A recent survey of families with school-age children found that 74% of families with school-age children own video game equipment, and school-age children play video games an average of 53 minutes per day. Parents are less likely to supervise their children's use of video games than they are to supervise their use of television. While most parents (88%) report regularly supervising their children's use of television, only about half report regularly supervising their children's use of video games (48%).[2]
A 2001 review of the 70 top-selling video games found 89% contained some kind of violence. Almost half of all games (49%) contained serious violence, while 40% contained comic violence. In 41% of the games, violence was necessary for the protagonists to achieve their goals. In 17% of the games, violence was the primary focus of the game itself.[3]
The impact of the widespread use of violent video games is a cause of concern for researchers, because they fear that the interactive nature of video games may increase the likelihood of children learning aggressive behavior and that the increasing realism might encourage greater identification with characters and more imitation of the behaviors of video game models.
To date, violent video games have not been studied as extensively as violent television or movies. The number of studies investigating the impact of such games on youth aggression is small, there have been none on serious violence, and none has been longitudinal. A recent meta-analysis of these studies found that the exposure to violent video games has a relatively small effect on physical aggression and a moderate effect on aggressive thinking. The impact of video games on violent behavior remains to be determined.[4]
Source: CDC
Violent injury and death disproportionately affect adolescents and young adults in the United States. It is the second leading cause of death for young people between the ages of 10 and 24.
In 2005, there were 5,686 homicides among young people age 10 to 24 —an average of 16 each day.
In 2006, over 720,000 violence-related injuries in young people age 10 to 24 were treated in U.S. emergency rooms.
CDC monitors and tracks trends in youth violence across the United States. Data help program planners make informed decisions about where to best allocate limited resources.
Youth violence is a serious problem that can have lasting harmful effects on victims and their family, friends, and communities. The goal for youth violence prevention is simple-to stop youth violence from happening in the first place. Prevention strategies should focus on promoting pro-social behavior, strengthening families, and creating
|
Where there is the necessary technical skill to move mountains, there is no need for the faith that moves mountains -anon-
|
|
|
|
|
Sat
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 50
Reputation: 4.53
Rate Sat
Freelance Pedestrian
|
|
Re:RapeLay
« Reply #7 on: 2010-04-04 16:05:48 » |
|
To this thread I'd also add the obvious - the map is not the territory. If I say rape you think rape. Neither of us has actually been raped. Even if we consensually play rape one another with great attention to detail and realism in real life, it's still a map and not the territory. No one has been raped.
Really, I fail to see how a video game representation of a thing is the thing it represents and how it is any different than a movie, comic book or story. They're all maps, and not the territory of rape.
|
Ascend Through Modification
Church of Virus Web Hosting Donations
|
|
|
Fritz
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1746
Reputation: 8.85
Rate Fritz
|
|
Re:RapeLay
« Reply #8 on: 2010-04-04 23:24:39 » |
|
Quote from: Sat on 2010-04-04 16:05:48
To this thread I'd also add the obvious - the map is not the territory. If I say rape you think rape. Neither of us has actually been raped. Even if we consensually play rape one another with great attention to detail and realism in real life, it's still a map and not the territory. No one has been raped.
Really, I fail to see how a video game representation of a thing is the thing it represents and how it is any different than a movie, comic book or story. They're all maps, and not the territory of rape. |
Seems to me "The Eastern Bunny", "Crucifixion", "Rising from the Dead", are all just mapped ideas, yet they have had a real world territorial impact that has screwed us up for the last two thousand years not to mention the occasional alter boy or two.
As Lenin said "A lie told often enough becomes the Truth"
Cheers
Fritz
|
Where there is the necessary technical skill to move mountains, there is no need for the faith that moves mountains -anon-
|
|
|
Blunderov
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.91
Rate Blunderov
"We think in generalities, we live in details"
|
|
Re:RapeLay
« Reply #9 on: 2010-04-05 01:45:58 » |
|
Quote from: David Lucifer on 2010-04-04 11:32:03
[Blunderov] I meant a metaphorical "rape troll". If there is anything that is evil, then I think rape is evil and I think the game is evil.
http://www.3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2010/04/of-men-and-monsters-terry-eagleton-on-evil.html
Of Men and Monsters: Terry Eagleton on Evil
04 April 2010, 06:40:08 PM | Robin Varghese
In the New Statesman:
A police officer involved in the case of the murdered toddler declared that the moment he clapped eyes on one of the [teenage] culprits, he knew that he was evil. This is the kind of thing that gives evil a bad name. The point of demonising the boy in this way was to wrong-foot the soft-hearted liberals. It was a pre-emptive strike against those who might appeal to social conditions in seeking to understand why they did what they did. And such under standing can always bring forgiveness in its wake. Calling the action evil meant that it was beyond comprehension. Evil is unintelligible. It is just a thing in itself, like boarding a crowded commuter train wearing only a giant boa constrictor. There is no context which would make it explicable.
Evil is often supposed to be without rhyme or reason. An English Evangelical bishop wrote in 1991 that clear signs of Satanic possession included inappropriate laughter, inexplicable knowledge, a false smile, Scottish ancestry, relatives who have been coal miners, and the habitual choice of black for dress or car colour. None of this makes sense, but then that is how it is with evil. The less sense it makes, the more evil it is. Evil has no relations to anything beyond itself, such as a cause.
In fact, the word has come to mean, among other things, "without a cause". If the child killers did what they did because of boredom or bad housing or parental neglect, then - so the police officer may have feared - what they did was forced upon them by their circumstances; and it followed that they could not be punished for it as severely as he might have wished. This mistakenly implies that an action that has a cause cannot be freely undertaken. Causes in this view are forms of coercion. If our actions have causes, we are not responsible for them. Evil, on the other hand, is thought to be uncaused, or to be its own cause. This is one of its several points of resemblance with good. Apart from evil, only God is said to be the cause of himself.
There is a kind of tautology or circular argument implicit in the policeman's view. People do evil things because they are evil. Some people are evil in the way that some things are coloured indigo. They commit their evil deeds not to achieve some goal, but just because of the sort of people they are. But might this not mean that they can't help doing what they do? For the policeman, the idea of evil is an alternative to such determinism. But it seems that we have thrown out a determinism of environment only to replace it with one of character. It is now your character, not your social conditions, which drives you to unspeakable deeds.
[Bl.] As I said before, do you want to be that guy? I don't.
|
|
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 4.54
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:RapeLay
« Reply #10 on: 2010-04-05 12:28:54 » |
|
Sat makes my point as well; a representation of rape is not an actual rape. I'm still not quite understanding Blunderov's point - I'll just start with what I think I understand of it. It seems that Blunderov is saying there can be no justification for rape. Since I can't readily think of any justification I'll agree. Plain vanilla violence *might* be justifiable as self defense or defense of others depending on the context, whereas no such justification seems applicable to rape. Actual rape is never justifiable. I wouldn't go so far as to call it inexplicable, however. Generally I think it serves to give the perpetrator a sense of control, power, and dominance which can temporarily satisfy some evolutionary drives related to aggression and reproduction. We probably all have a rapist somewhere in our genetic heritage.
The possibility that there is no ethical justification for rape doesn't necessarily make it more evil than other things. Given the choice of being raped or being killed or maimed, I think many people would rather not be killed or maimed. And of course in the video game example, some games are designed to encourage the player to engage in violent simulations which would be specifically unjustified in real life. Grand Theft Auto (GTA) presents such an example. So in terms of of which is more evil, GTA makes a stronger case than RapeLay. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RapeLay#Controversy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Theft_Auto#Controversy
Up this point, this all remains mostly relevant to Blunderov's question, "Do you want to be that guy?" That's certainly a fair question for an individual playing or contemplating playing these games. However that's a different consideration from authorities engaging in thought policing, aka censorship. Lacking any consistent causation between the representation of these acts (rape, aggravated assault, murder, etc.) and the actual commission of these acts or actual harm, such censorship is the unwarranted tactic of a tyrant, and metaphorical trolls serve only as bogeymen.
-Mo
Quote from: Blunderov on 2010-04-05 01:45:58
Quote from: David Lucifer on 2010-04-04 11:32:03
[Blunderov] I meant a metaphorical "rape troll". If there is anything that is evil, then I think rape is evil and I think the game is evil.
http://www.3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2010/04/of-men-and-monsters-terry-eagleton-on-evil.html
Of Men and Monsters: Terry Eagleton on Evil
04 April 2010, 06:40:08 PM | Robin Varghese
In the New Statesman:
A police officer involved in the case of the murdered toddler declared that the moment he clapped eyes on one of the [teenage] culprits, he knew that he was evil. This is the kind of thing that gives evil a bad name. The point of demonising the boy in this way was to wrong-foot the soft-hearted liberals. It was a pre-emptive strike against those who might appeal to social conditions in seeking to understand why they did what they did. And such under standing can always bring forgiveness in its wake. Calling the action evil meant that it was beyond comprehension. Evil is unintelligible. It is just a thing in itself, like boarding a crowded commuter train wearing only a giant boa constrictor. There is no context which would make it explicable.
Evil is often supposed to be without rhyme or reason. An English Evangelical bishop wrote in 1991 that clear signs of Satanic possession included inappropriate laughter, inexplicable knowledge, a false smile, Scottish ancestry, relatives who have been coal miners, and the habitual choice of black for dress or car colour. None of this makes sense, but then that is how it is with evil. The less sense it makes, the more evil it is. Evil has no relations to anything beyond itself, such as a cause.
In fact, the word has come to mean, among other things, "without a cause". If the child killers did what they did because of boredom or bad housing or parental neglect, then - so the police officer may have feared - what they did was forced upon them by their circumstances; and it followed that they could not be punished for it as severely as he might have wished. This mistakenly implies that an action that has a cause cannot be freely undertaken. Causes in this view are forms of coercion. If our actions have causes, we are not responsible for them. Evil, on the other hand, is thought to be uncaused, or to be its own cause. This is one of its several points of resemblance with good. Apart from evil, only God is said to be the cause of himself.
There is a kind of tautology or circular argument implicit in the policeman's view. People do evil things because they are evil. Some people are evil in the way that some things are coloured indigo. They commit their evil deeds not to achieve some goal, but just because of the sort of people they are. But might this not mean that they can't help doing what they do? For the policeman, the idea of evil is an alternative to such determinism. But it seems that we have thrown out a determinism of environment only to replace it with one of character. It is now your character, not your social conditions, which drives you to unspeakable deeds.
[Bl.] As I said before, do you want to be that guy? I don't.
|
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
Sat
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 50
Reputation: 4.53
Rate Sat
Freelance Pedestrian
|
|
Re:RapeLay
« Reply #11 on: 2010-04-05 13:31:18 » |
|
Regarding maps and territory:
1) We can say that mistaking a representation of something for the thing itself is a type of insanity. After all none of us would eat the menu and say, "That was a damn fine hamburger." Except some crazy people. The fries were good too.
2) To a degree we are all crazy, because we act as if our models, maps are real instead of being neurolinguistic constructs. Even your concept of the color blue is not the thing it represents.
2.5) Many of our maps are heavily infected by the maps used goat herders from 3000 years ago.
3) Because we are all insane to a degree, who will decide which maps aren't allowed?
4) If we ban violent video games... why not ban violent movies, violent music, comics, art in general? Care to shit can Moby Dick or Pulp fiction?
4.5) 2 girls one cup. goatse m( 0 )m
5) What exactly is violent? Isn't it a matter of degree?
6) Lastly, It is important to separate what consenting adults do and are exposed to and what children are exposed to.
Myself, I've made a point of actively participating in the unfolding development and programming of my kid's brain. As such he gets to play Grand Theft Auto and all sorts of violent games. At the same time he's instructed in martial arts and since he could talk he's been getting Sat's Parental Crash course in Ontology:
We actively discuss the difference between pretend things, games, movies (including porn) and consensus reality.
I hate to consider the anti-libertarian implications of what seems to be being advocated by some here.
Freedom is not only applied to, but also works as freedom from - in this case freedom from the morality of others in cases where no harm is being done by the activities between consenting adults.
|
Ascend Through Modification
Church of Virus Web Hosting Donations
|
|
|
Blunderov
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.91
Rate Blunderov
"We think in generalities, we live in details"
|
|
Re:RapeLay
« Reply #12 on: 2010-04-06 07:39:15 » |
|
[Blunderov] Mo has laid out a fair exposition of my position and it's shortcomings. I'll return to this thread when time and inspiration permit....
|
|
|
|
|
David Lucifer
Archon
Posts: 2642
Reputation: 8.94
Rate David Lucifer
Enlighten me.
|
|
Re:RapeLay
« Reply #13 on: 2010-04-07 11:26:38 » |
|
[Lucifer] I tend to agree with Sat and Mo. If Blunderov takes a consistent position then all fictional representations of evil acts should be banned including all depictions of rape, torture and murder in all games, movies and books. I don't think anyone that cares about a free society would take that position.
|
|
|
|
|
Blunderov
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.91
Rate Blunderov
"We think in generalities, we live in details"
|
|
Re:RapeLay
« Reply #14 on: 2010-04-08 02:43:45 » |
|
[Blunderov] I don't recall having suggested that the game should be banned. What I have said is that I think the game is evil. And that anyone who plays the game is going to have to come to terms with the fact that they are the sort of person who plays that sort of game. And, furthermore, that others will be fully entitled to draw their own conclusions about the moral character of those men (!) who do. TMM, RapeLay crosses the same sort of line that child pornography transgresses. There is no 'proper' discussion of these subjects that does not seek to to discourage them. To cast them in any other light is to connive with them.
I don't want to be that guy. Neither should anybody. But I never said anything about banning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
