iOS game lets you beat your boyfriend

[Cheesepower5]

Well, i think that all that needs to be said has been, but yeah, this is pretty appalling.

Getting a little tired of the double standards screamers who seem to be ignoring that yes, this is causing a lot of outcry and anger so they can try and score points in their little gender war.

As a gay man i am almost glad that if me and my partner get in a fist fight we are both going to be weight equally in a court of law as apposed to a straight couple where the lady has the advantage. but then again she didn't have the advantage in the fistfight. I don't know how to feel about this; it all honestly seems like a mean spirited joke. Hear it from someone who enjoyed super princess peach I know that sexist jokes can be funny and even fun in a video-game.

well, female on male domestic abuse is a very real thing, and a very real problem. The only people not taking seriously are other men who like to try and belittle the victims.

A lot of women (not necessarily feminists) promote stereotypes like that as well. There's no need to point fingers at either gender for them, these standards emerged from our culture.

 

[Wdbisl]

All I have to say is that it's tasteless and I'm surprised very little media coverage has been shown on it. I guess that says a sad thing about our society and there concern for men.

 

[Slayer_2]

I am going to sidestep the sexism issue and condemn this purely because it depicts an abusive relationship in a positive light for no artistic reason. I am not saying it should be banned or that it shouldn't have been made, I'm merely saying I do not enjoy positive depictions of abuse.

By that argument, where do commonly accepted games like Call of Duty stand? You could argue they depict war and killing in a rather positive light with no real artistic reasons. The above reason is one of the reasons I can't argue against this game, as stupid and boring as it looks, we shouldn't censor it.

 

[Jayemsal]

Very often when someone looks disapprovingly at the way a specific gender (usually their own) is being depicted, there may be somewhat of a knee-jerk reaction to defend that gender, against the better judgement.

The fact of the matter is, this iOS game is indeed sexist, both towards men and women.

Yes, if it were gender flipped it would get more attention, because western society doesn't react as quickly to female on male domestic violence.

These are pretty objective facts.

NOW...

The WRONG way to discuss this, is to get into finger pointing.

One should not see this game and instantly react with "See? Feminism is about hating men! We suffer so much more!"

STOP RIGHT THERE!

Feminism - Noun

1: the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes



This is about EQUALITY, not whoever is suffering more.

The problem isn't who is suffering more, the problem is that people are suffering at all.

 

[Darken12]

By that argument, where do commonly accepted games like Call of Duty stand? You could argue they depict war and killing in a rather positive light with no real artistic reasons. The above reason is one of the reasons I can't argue against this game, as stupid and boring as it looks, we shouldn't censor it.

What? I don't consume CoD-like games because I am anti-war, yes. However, I was never in favour of censorship or banning. I even say so in the post you quoted. Public condemnation does not equal censorship.

 

[Slayer_2]

By that argument, where do commonly accepted games like Call of Duty stand? You could argue they depict war and killing in a rather positive light with no real artistic reasons. The above reason is one of the reasons I can't argue against this game, as stupid and boring as it looks, we shouldn't censor it.

What? I don't consume CoD-like games because I am anti-war, yes. However, I was never in favour of censorship or banning. I even say so in the post you quoted. Public condemnation does not equal censorship.

So you don't play any games with violence in them? If violence warrants condemnation, your library of games must be rather small.

 

[Darken12]

By that argument, where do commonly accepted games like Call of Duty stand? You could argue they depict war and killing in a rather positive light with no real artistic reasons. The above reason is one of the reasons I can't argue against this game, as stupid and boring as it looks, we shouldn't censor it.

What? I don't consume CoD-like games because I am anti-war, yes. However, I was never in favour of censorship or banning. I even say so in the post you quoted. Public condemnation does not equal censorship.

So you don't play any games with violence in them? If violence warrants condemnation, your library of games must be rather small.

I don't think all violence warrants condemnation, only violence depicted without narrative/artistic justification and glorified. I'm fine with violence within a narrative context or as a part of an artistic statement. Horror games, for example (save a few that have veered straight into the "violence is cool" territory) use violence as a way to enhance the horror experience. Violence is depicted as a very bad thing that you should avoid and only engage in when there's no other choice, using violence as a way to convey tension and terror. I do dislike RPGs that force me to beat the crap out of countless "enemies" for loot and gold, though that's a problem I have with the genre itself and not with any particular game (If the story dwarfs the grinding and the game doesn't idolise violence, I'll give it a try).

My problem with most CoD-like games is that they exist only to sell violence not only as a spectacle in and of itself, but also as feeling of empowerment through the interactivity of the medium. To be honest, that's what scares me the most, the idea that I'm supposed to feel powerful by pumping something full of bullets, and that the sight of it should be awesome.

But none of this means, for the record, that I would support any motion against violent games. Just because I personally dislike them doesn't mean I have a right to impose that on others.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

My problem with most CoD-like games is that they exist only to sell violence not only as a spectacle in and of itself, but also as feeling of empowerment through the interactivity of the medium. To be honest, that's what scares me the most, the idea that I'm supposed to feel powerful by pumping something full of bullets, and that the sight of it should be awesome.

Do you not feel there is potential for harmless catharsis in such a pursuit? Does it differ significantly from playing Paintball, or Cops and Robbers as kids? Heck, even sport has adopted overtones of martial violence, a kind of "safe" simulated conflicts with teams standing in for nations.

Or do you have a specific issue with CoD games because you feel like they transcend "video game violence" and offer up some kind of reprehensible social commentary?

I've yet to play any of the CoD's so I honestly have no idea.

 

[Darken12]

Do you not feel there is potential for harmless catharsis in such a pursuit? Does it differ significantly from playing Paintball, or Cops and Robbers as kids? Heck, even sport has adopted overtones of martial violence, a kind of "safe" simulated conflicts with teams standing in for nations.

Or do you have a specific issue with CoD games because you feel like they transcend "video game violence" and offer up some kind of reprehensible social commentary?

I've yet to play any of the CoD's so I honestly have no idea.

For other people? Sure. For me? I might be genetically or psychologically incapable of catharsis through violence or competition, simulated or otherwise. Whenever I've played anything that's geared towards giving players an adrenaline high (simulated violence, simulated competitions, action, etc), I've felt only tense and strung out, not relaxed or euphoric in any way. I end up frazzled, anxious and irrationally aggressive (hence why I prefer practising solitary, non-competitive sports like archery). So yeah, maybe it's easy for me to take that stance when I don't get what everyone else gets from the experience, I have a biochemical reason for avoiding excessively violent games while others have a biochemical reason to seek them out. Why are my experiences any more important than anyone else's?

I don't have a problem with people enjoying violent games and I would defend the right of such games to exist, but my take on violent games isn't black and white. I think that the more "unrealistic" the violence, the more I can personally enjoy them (hence why I often give a pass to RPGs), while I would never touch something like Manhunt. However, I ultimately side with Jim Sterling on the issue of violence on videogames (even the most realistic depiction of violence doesn't match the actual rawness of real-life violence, and the idea that gamers are desensitised to violence is absolutely ridiculous).

I do have a political problem with warshooters (or spunkgargleweewees or military shooters or however you want to call them), and Yahtzee has pretty much summed up my opinions on them already in his various reviews and talks on the subject. In short, I see them as Americans making up villains so that they have a reason to feel like victims/heroes and have an outlet for their massive military/armament idolatry. Though I am not really angry about this or anything, I'm sure most people play the game for the gameplay and AAA quality. I would shake my head in stern disappointment at the creators for pandering to the right-wing paranoia, but since I'm foreign leftist scum, my words don't really have a lot of weight.