Dynast Brass said:
I suspect that like most people around the world, what I don't know about Australian politics could fill endless volumes. That is to say, I've never really paid much attention to it as a country. I've been near it, but never actually to it, so that may play a part. I actually know very little about Australia, not just the politics, now that I stop and consider it. Whatever I haven't learned from 'In A Sunburned Country' or relating to something in my field, I probably don't know. So, I know about immigration and relocation efforts, some issues with policing and jails, but that's about it.
In short, I appreciate the lesson, because it filled some gaps.
It was more about whether or not you were serious. Your post could be reasonably inferred as being a "shame on you" to a certain ethics group that is involved in perpetual and selective outrage, as our mutual friend Jux has recently pointed out. The use of the term "moral panic," which has basically been a dog whistle term for them, further conflates issues.
I know about this because the Australian R17 rating has been contested for years. Games which would make it through otherwise as an M game were refused certification. The current system, when enacted, improved things greatly, but didn't automatically make games free to do as they please. And there have been some bumps, but most AUS gamers seem to view this as an improvement because prior to this point, no such games would be released without being heavily butchered.
Which is why it's weird to see comments like:
valium said:
oh no, no no. they arent trying to take away your video games, no no. whatever gave that impression?
Since this is literally the opposite of that situation.
Of course, the funny thing is I'm still hearing about how GTA V is "banned" in Australia. Because apparently, the reality just isn't that interesting. And it's not. A couple of shops which do not cater to gamers voluntarily opted to not stock a game that was already a year old.
darthxaos said:
It could still happen now that Jack Thompson has put on hoop earrings and is now being taken seriously by the press that used to denounce him.
You know, that's not going to happen and all, but if it did, it'd be exactly what gamers deserve for having such a massive temper tantrum over Anita Sarkeesian in the first place. Gamers built the podium, and have no right to complain people are paying attention to her now.
If she really wanted to restrict video games, gamers would have given her all the ammunition necessary by now. All she'd need to do is say "look at how angry and childish it has made gamers, let's ban them."
That won't happen, because "she's going to take away out games" is nonsense told to justify anger that some woman DARES criticise things I like, but the reality is, gamers gave censors everything they'd need, from motive to a mascot.
Seriously, and I can't emphasise this enough, if people are seriously concerned about gaes being restricted, then they should be looking the other way and going after the gamers who have made this all possible. But they won't, because this is just the gamer version of "two minute hate."
