Educator Advocates California's Law Against Violent Games
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
If only my T-90 MBT Russian tank wasn't in for repairs I would be driving over to her house and give her a piece of my mind.
Replace "cannot" with "will not". If you've worked in retail you would know how ignorant parents are. I've seen parents buy CoD: Black OPs for kids that could not have been over 8. While I definitely don't agree with this woman, parents need to be educated or something; either that or they just don' care.John Stalvern said:
Heh, well, I'm kinda pleased I'm living over here in the UK where, when Stewart Lee was taken to court for blasphemy over his involvement in the Jerry Springer Opera, the case was eventually dropped, 'due to it not being 1508'.
I really need some kind of 'dummies guide to the US', I hear something about 'the seperation of church and state. Sounds like the seperation of buttocks to me, something that might look like it when there's a close examination, but most of the time they're pressed pretty damn tightly together.
It's a far cry from the UK, where Tony Blair admits to hiding his faith in Christianity because he feared the british public wouldn't take him seriously if they found out.
Anyway, I don't mean to derail the thread, I was just curious as to why they couldn't pass a law, and now I know, thanks for the information
I really need some kind of 'dummies guide to the US', I hear something about 'the seperation of church and state. Sounds like the seperation of buttocks to me, something that might look like it when there's a close examination, but most of the time they're pressed pretty damn tightly together.
It's a far cry from the UK, where Tony Blair admits to hiding his faith in Christianity because he feared the british public wouldn't take him seriously if they found out.
Anyway, I don't mean to derail the thread, I was just curious as to why they couldn't pass a law, and now I know, thanks for the information
I tried to respond to her points individually, but screw it, it isn't worth it. This has to be one of the worst arguements I've seen for this case yet.
1. She infers causation in a psychology/sociology research, the biggest no-no in the fields, as the mind is still too complex to completely understand and it ignores the fact that the correlation might mean the opposite direction, or ignore countless other factors that might be the cause that lie outside the studied group.
2. She infers that parents are helpless to get an opinion first. Try WhatTheyPlay.com, which actually goes in depth at the content (including just how mature a game is), done by actual gamers. This is just one of MANY sites out there. Chances are that if you're able to afford games for your kids, you probably have internet access.
3. She has never been around real kids. This is oh too apparent.
4. MANY Escapist users will notice just how vague her wording is, in addition that OFTEN she seems to be making up things without real examples (and the whole "brutality comes later in games" Really? I don't know of games that do that unless they decide to a have shocking scene such as torturing the main character or such, which is done in a way so that it intentionally isn't desensitizing, but rather traumatizing), as well as her 30 years of research is more than likely bullshit.
5. She seems to know nothing about the topic, assuming all games rated M are just mindless gore fests, or what the little descriptions in the ESRB rating are (I first thought she knew the premise, but not the specifics of the phrases, but given how she treats this as something that has never come up before *cough* MPAA *cough* I'm doubtful she even has a clue about them).
1. She infers causation in a psychology/sociology research, the biggest no-no in the fields, as the mind is still too complex to completely understand and it ignores the fact that the correlation might mean the opposite direction, or ignore countless other factors that might be the cause that lie outside the studied group.
2. She infers that parents are helpless to get an opinion first. Try WhatTheyPlay.com, which actually goes in depth at the content (including just how mature a game is), done by actual gamers. This is just one of MANY sites out there. Chances are that if you're able to afford games for your kids, you probably have internet access.
3. She has never been around real kids. This is oh too apparent.
4. MANY Escapist users will notice just how vague her wording is, in addition that OFTEN she seems to be making up things without real examples (and the whole "brutality comes later in games" Really? I don't know of games that do that unless they decide to a have shocking scene such as torturing the main character or such, which is done in a way so that it intentionally isn't desensitizing, but rather traumatizing), as well as her 30 years of research is more than likely bullshit.
5. She seems to know nothing about the topic, assuming all games rated M are just mindless gore fests, or what the little descriptions in the ESRB rating are (I first thought she knew the premise, but not the specifics of the phrases, but given how she treats this as something that has never come up before *cough* MPAA *cough* I'm doubtful she even has a clue about them).
There are already laws against selling M rated games to minors. I still get carded from time to time myself. Parents that do get games for their children don't do what you're describing at all... They look at the shelf, see the game that matches that strange name that their child was barely able to pronounce and then are happy with just that and rest assured that game is making its way home to the child.C14N said:
To take the time to actually read all the descriptions and little warnings on the back of the box is an inconveniance to parents, because it's an inconveniance to have to make a side trip to the electronics section to begin with.
A game shop for them is like a tractor supply shop for me. I can walk into a game store and look at a game and be awed while my father would look lost and confused, afraid to touch anything. Those roles are reversed if we were to walk into a tractor supply, he would look at something with a content look on his face while I would feel uncomfortable and anxious to leave.
It's easy to say "Parents should take the time to research these things and all that jazz." But in reality, they want nothing to do with it, because even if they did research it, they wouldn't understand what it is they're looking at. Which is why it's so easy for news companies to bash games because all they have to do is present some people that appear to share the same mind set as the parents and then commense talking poorly of the medium.
I cannot hold a grudge against the majority of people that speak out against games because I honestly feel sorry for them. They are being misled, and those lies that are being fed turns them away from games even further because they feed off their misunderstanding to create fear.
It's a mere matter of a generation gap if anything. Everyone in office right now was raised in a time where none of this technology bull crap existed, and we all know how awkward it is to see mother and father, grandma and grandpa trying to use a cell phone or get a dvd to work. Bring games into the picture with their fast paced graphics and explosions and controllers that have buttons all around them. Whoa, that's some scary shit!
They don't understand it, and they're afraid of it. There's no doubt they would try to shun it, especially after hearing "Omg there's sex and blood in these things?!"
In due time this will all blow over... In due time.
Hoo boy. Here we go... again...
I've advocated such laws around here before, and I am still curious as to the merits of having THIS discussion HERE. This community consists ENTIRELY of gamers, many of whom are presumably underage and thus potentially affected by this law. This makes the prevailing responses to these threads ridiculously predictable. When AZ upped the gambling age to 21 years ago, the most noise made was by those who were soon to be denied the ability to gamble. So this is all essentially a giant circle-jerk.
Now for the REALLY unpopular part. There's a kid in my son's 2nd grade class with severe emotional disorders- he's violent, curses, discusses inappropriate subjects with the other students, and throws desk-tossing tantrums when asked to do anything. The child is actually segregated from the rest of the class because of his behavior. (My son goes to school in an economically depressed region, meaning it's not fully equipped to handle a kid like this.) This student, who again is growing up so wonderfully antisocial, is allowed to play Grand Theft Auto if he's "good" (and God only knows what that means.) Before you cry out that there should be some parental intervention (WHICH THERE SHOULD, NO QUESTIONS ABOUT IT), take the time to acknowledge that, for whatever reason, there is none. Shit parents put out a shit kid
Net result? Society suffers as yet another animal is released into its midst, and my son ends up in actual physical danger from assault by this brat.
Is the video game the cause? No, hell no, there's obviously quite a bit going on there, the kid has serious issues. BUT IT'S NOT HELPING. The parents are failing, but the problem isn't limited to this kid, as he's tossed into the public school where he interacts with other kids. He's a part of society. He affects us all.
When we, as a community, as a society, pass laws, it's ALWAYS a slippery slope. There is ALWAYS the chance for abuse when you give some fellows arms and tell them to police the rest of us. We CANNOT pass ANYTHING without running that risk. We pass laws to make sure that those of us who aren't responsible don't get to do too much damage to the rest of us. Adults can get the games they want, and minors end up ONLY being able to get them with SOME SORT of parental involvement, even if it's as little as looking at the box when they buy it. Might suck for some with particularly reactionary parents, but jaywalking laws suck for people who aren't near intersections. Shit happens, deal with it.
Are video games the devil's spawn? HELL NO. This 'educator' would be better off trying to fix the broken system she works in, but she'd rather meddle in the affairs of others with her hyperbolic speech. Her viewpoint is skewed, but what she's advocating won't be the end of the industry. Hyperbole countered with hyperbole is just stupid.
tl:dr I'm a jerk who is wrong, wrong, wrong.
I've advocated such laws around here before, and I am still curious as to the merits of having THIS discussion HERE. This community consists ENTIRELY of gamers, many of whom are presumably underage and thus potentially affected by this law. This makes the prevailing responses to these threads ridiculously predictable. When AZ upped the gambling age to 21 years ago, the most noise made was by those who were soon to be denied the ability to gamble. So this is all essentially a giant circle-jerk.
Now for the REALLY unpopular part. There's a kid in my son's 2nd grade class with severe emotional disorders- he's violent, curses, discusses inappropriate subjects with the other students, and throws desk-tossing tantrums when asked to do anything. The child is actually segregated from the rest of the class because of his behavior. (My son goes to school in an economically depressed region, meaning it's not fully equipped to handle a kid like this.) This student, who again is growing up so wonderfully antisocial, is allowed to play Grand Theft Auto if he's "good" (and God only knows what that means.) Before you cry out that there should be some parental intervention (WHICH THERE SHOULD, NO QUESTIONS ABOUT IT), take the time to acknowledge that, for whatever reason, there is none. Shit parents put out a shit kid
Net result? Society suffers as yet another animal is released into its midst, and my son ends up in actual physical danger from assault by this brat.
Is the video game the cause? No, hell no, there's obviously quite a bit going on there, the kid has serious issues. BUT IT'S NOT HELPING. The parents are failing, but the problem isn't limited to this kid, as he's tossed into the public school where he interacts with other kids. He's a part of society. He affects us all.
When we, as a community, as a society, pass laws, it's ALWAYS a slippery slope. There is ALWAYS the chance for abuse when you give some fellows arms and tell them to police the rest of us. We CANNOT pass ANYTHING without running that risk. We pass laws to make sure that those of us who aren't responsible don't get to do too much damage to the rest of us. Adults can get the games they want, and minors end up ONLY being able to get them with SOME SORT of parental involvement, even if it's as little as looking at the box when they buy it. Might suck for some with particularly reactionary parents, but jaywalking laws suck for people who aren't near intersections. Shit happens, deal with it.
Are video games the devil's spawn? HELL NO. This 'educator' would be better off trying to fix the broken system she works in, but she'd rather meddle in the affairs of others with her hyperbolic speech. Her viewpoint is skewed, but what she's advocating won't be the end of the industry. Hyperbole countered with hyperbole is just stupid.
tl:dr I'm a jerk who is wrong, wrong, wrong.
I know, if you could use the most over the top disturbing/horrifying using a cat as a silencer, got bored and uninstalled it,Fronzel said:Oh, Postal 2, of course. That game from years ago that deliberately went way over the top for the sake of it and wasn't critically or commercially successful. These people just adore that game, don't they? It makes their confirmation bias tingle so good.moretimethansense said:Postal 2 but even then you aren't forced to do that, at least not in that orderFronzel said:
Frankly I think the only people that didn't were the sensationalists.
Right 'cause a school teacher is the leading expert on games, I forgot.
Yes, my reaction is pretty instinctual and I'll admit I'm biased towards games.
But, all of these problems need to be placed on the parents, not the games and not the kids.
Yes, my reaction is pretty instinctual and I'll admit I'm biased towards games.
But, all of these problems need to be placed on the parents, not the games and not the kids.
1982 getting colder, besides there wasn't that much violence in that game I mean look the arrows never even touch him what could anyone find objectional about that game?[/joke]spectrenihlus said:
So incredibly true. Good post.dastardly said:
Can you imagine if a basketbal coach campaigned against growing wheat? Because the wheat would lead to violent behavior? That's about as ludicrous as these people are. She's an absolute ... haha, basketcase XD
"Josel goes on to cite various statistics that don't necessarily prove her point. "A survey of 4,028 Connecticut high schoolers found that 6% of boys and 3% of girls reported signs of 'problem' gaming, including 'an irresistible urge to play, trying and failing to cut down on gaming, and feelings of tension that could only be relieved by playing.' Plus, 4% of the girls said they'd gotten into a serious fight, and 8% said they'd carried a weapon," she wrote. I'm not sure how she correlates the 4% of girls who get into fights with videogame play; there is no indication that they are the same 3% who are "problem" gamers."
I don't know if this has been said yet but [HEADING=1]Correlation does not imply causation![/HEADING] thank you.
I don't know if this has been said yet but [HEADING=1]Correlation does not imply causation![/HEADING] thank you.
You know, I see this argument a lot, but I rarely hear any backlash about it. This is odd because it's so blatantly false and asinine. Firstly, you don't have to play a game to know what's in it. If this were the case, then how would we, as gamers, ever decide which games to play and which to not? There are tons of ways to find out about a games content, and most of them can be done standing right there at the cashier in Gamestop, all of them if you've got an internet-enabled phone. More importantly, all of these methods have been used, in various forms, for centuries as ways of discovering the content of books, and more recently for movies or whatever entertainment medium you can think of. ESERB: the most descriptive rating system used in popular media. It should be sufficient all by itself to tell you what the important parts of a game are. The web site even has more elaborate descriptions for the descriptor snippets on the box, if you are inclined to look. Furthermore, the box art and advertising blurbs do a decent job on their own of describing the type of gameplay that will be going on. If that's not good enough, you might ask someone about it, either a store clerk, or someone who's played it. Those people not available? Whip out your smart-phone and Google up some video reviews for it. Gameplay videos and screenshots can tell you all you need to know about it before it's even released. And game companies are not hiding the core gameplay mechanics from anyone -- if they did, what would they sell the game on? Saying that the violent parts of a game are hidden from parents is a blatant, ignorant lie.Greg Tito said:
Besides, this assertion is based on the absurd assumption that the amount of viscera and depravity usually grows as the game progresses. That's difficulty. There is no basis for the assertion that games -- any games -- only become violent after hours of hard work, nor is it so that most games become progressively more violent as time goes on.
id love to see the statistics on how many Connecticut high schoolers smoke cigarettes and drink alcohol. there are two substances that can literally lead to ones own death, with the latter also causing other peoples deaths as well.Greg Tito said:
personally, i have never smoked, never drank alcohol, and have never been in a fight or carried a weapon to school, etc. and just about everyone around me has done at least 3 out of 4 of those things. i play video games a HELL of a lot more than those people, but i am apparently the one with the problem, according to this ignorant woman.
and its a FANTASTIC thing that their feelings of tension can be relieved through gaming. games are fun and they make people feel better.
also, i almost literally face-palmed myself when i read that she said that parents cannot play the games (or at least watch gameplay of them) and make a decision for themselves whether or not the games are too violent for their children. parents really need to start using YouTube when it comes to video games. its as simple as typing in "Dante's Inferno gameplay" in the searchbar to learn that your 10 year old kid shouldnt be playing it
Y'know, I would rant, complain, and ramble about how this woman's opinion doesn't mean a thing on top of her facts not being %100 true, but I feel that would be too normal and cliche for someone on the internet to do, so I leave all the readers of this comment with one thing:
Ok. Lets take a look at two game cases I just pulled off random (were just sitting on a pile of crap in my room). Red Dead Redemption and Indigo Prophecy. Both M rated games. Lets take a look. On the front of both is a pretty easy to spot label of "MATURE 17+" and an ever bigger M. Lets look at the back. Again "MATURE 17+" and an even bigger M but this time it also lists the reasons: blood, intense violence, nudity, strong language, strong sexual content, use of drugs (that's RDR now for Indigo Prophecy) blood, partial nudity, sexual themes, strong language, use of drugs and alcohol, violence. How is that hard to understand? Even if you assume going on google and looking the game up and understanding reviews/videos is too hard for them how is the ESRB content hard to understand or notice? Even if looking up and understanding reviews/videos of the game is hard for them, shouldn't they put in the effort? I have to disagree with you. I think it's simply parents either not caring what their kid plays (in which case they don't fall into the group of this woman) or not taking the time to check. I'll grant you there may be some ignorance in the form of not understanding games aren't just for kids but I would think seeing those ESRB content ratings would make it obvious there are games for adults that aren't intended for children.snowfox said:
Edit: Oh yeah, not to mention the cover of Indigo Prophecy has a person looking at their blood stained hands while dropping a blood stained knife and RDR has a guy pointing a double barrel shotgun.