iOS game lets you beat your boyfriend

[AngloDoom]

Tasteless. That's all that can be said about it, really.

I fail to see the funny side of it due to my close friend being the victim of domestic abuse but if someone finds it funny than I guess there's a market and it's clearly not me. I just hope the people playing the game aren't using it as a 'getting even' sim.

 

[Kirov Reporting]

This reminds me of a show a few years ago. I think it was called "What Would you do?" or something like that. They had a scenario where a man was hitting his spouse in public to see how people reacted. The public almost immediately took notice and put a stop to it. Then they reversed the roles where the woman was beating the man and not only was it tolerated, one woman was actually enjoying it. It took quite a while for a random woman to stop the beating.

I remember that, didn't most of the crowd comment along the lines of 'he's obviously done something to deserve that', or 'good on her showing him what for!' when of course there's no excuse for violence like that, and obviously no one would have dared say such callous things in the first situation. It's very interesting just how far people are willing to run with this reverse discrimination.

Sorry, what I meant to say is all men are brutes and can't be the victims of physical abuse. Yes.

 

[Vegosiux]

....seriously?

Who's actually going to pay for such a thing? One, there are so many free "beat this guy up mercilessly" apps out there, and two, slapping the person's picture on a dartboard and going FOR THE EYES, BOO!!! is a lot more therapeutic.

 

[Palademon]

I understand how this is stupid, and considered quite sexist.

But it does occur to me that it may not have any menaing unless we put something on it. I'm sure it was affected by "lol woman hurting man" way of thinking, but it's just a piece of entertainment. Some men will enjoy it for that very reason. We may be paying too much attention to the genders, or projecting our own feelings.
As long as we realise that this is a game and shouldn't be used as an incentive for reality it's fine. It's not like we get all up in arms when a game comes out about killing people, so why should domestic abuse be seen as that great a deal if we can calmly remember it's a game.
I can beat up my spouse in Skyrim or Fable, and often will as I'm going around on an evil rampage. Is this game worse because the objective is that?
I mean that objective alone is quite boring, but y'know...murder

 

[Hagi]

I understand how this is stupid, and considered quite sexist.

But it does occur to me that it may not have any menaing unless we put something on it. I'm sure it was affected by "lol woman hurting man" way of thinking, but it's just a piece of entertainment. Some men will enjoy it for that very reason. We may be paying too much attention to the genders, or projecting our own feelings.
As long as we realise that this is a game and shouldn't be used as an incentive for reality it's fine. It's not like we get all up in arms when a game comes out about killing people, so why should domestic abuse be seen as that great a deal if we can calmly remember it's a game.
I can beat up my spouse in Skyrim or Fable, and often will as I'm going around on an evil rampage. Is this game worse because the objective is that?
I mean that objective alone is quite boring, but y'know...murder

I think what makes the game worse is that, unlike all those games with murder, it sets up a very disturbing causal relationship.

Games which feature tons of killing usually come with some sort of save the world plot. Killing tons of people part of some evil organisation intent on destroying the world as we know it will save the world, there'll most certainly be better ways of achieving that but it's a valid means. Murdering the bad guys will stop the bad guys.

Even in games where you can just randomly murder innocents there's no causal connection being implied that this is somehow an admirable thing. I can take a hooker in my car in GTA, do the nasty and then proceed to murder her but at no point will there be a radio broadcast lauding me as citizen of the year for my upstanding treatment of prostitutes.

This game is setting up a causal relationship that beating up your boyfriend will turn him into mr. perfect. That's the messed up part and how it differs from Skyrim or Fable. Beating up your spouse in those games has absolutely no implication by the game that this'll somehow give you a better spouse.

It certainly shouldn't be forbidden or anything, but the implication this game is putting forward that beating up your boyfriend will improve him deserves all the criticism it's getting.

 

[Kirov Reporting]

I understand how this is stupid, and considered quite sexist.

...

I mean that objective alone is quite boring, but y'know...murder

Optional murder. There is nothing in Skyrim (AFAIK) that compels you to murder a spouse, and any decision to do so is on your shoulders (and I would hope to know in advance, so I can keep my distance from you). It's not 'Skyrim: 50 ways to kill your lover'.

I haven't played this game, but from the looks of it, it is being sold as 'use casual violence to shore up that partner!'

Which, if true, is in very poor taste. Now, I'm going to get back to making my App, it's called 'How To Raise Your Kids: Sassback Gets Smacks'

 

[WendelI]

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.

 

[Auron]

where the lady has the advantage. but then again she didn't have the advantage in the fistfight.

I know a bunch of women who can break their partners in half, this classic assumption can be very incorrect.

anyway back on topic. i just want to see the "train your girlfriend" app released to even things out. as long as wife beater simulator v 2.0 gets the same level of response we can all agree all is right in the world but i'm sure we all know if they ever do release it it will be front page news and feminists will be burning whole cities to the ground

Yeah I think that's an important step towards equality. There's really no reason for us to go all activist about it as stupid as it is these developers have the right to make their retarded game and it shouldn't be censored, wish more people would realize it.

 

[bartholen_v1legacy]

Just another "prrrt" disappearing into the great desert of gaming, but it's somewhat cathartic to see that sexism and tasteless seem to apply to both genders equally nowadays.

 

[ThisGuyLikesNoTacos]

It's not like anything bad follows fro- Oh wait!

There's not much else to say. I add another vote for tasteless.

 

[Zhukov]

I just find this funny.

I know, I know, if it was a woman on the receiving end this game would be hurled into the fiery pits of hell, good for the goose, good for the gander, equality, blah-de-blah... I get it.

So you've not noticed that aside from a couple of people, that it's been universally by both men and women called a sexist POS and said it never should have seen the light of day?

Uh... what?

No, I'd say that was pretty obvious, even from just reading this thread.

My point is that even though I get why people don't like this game I personally just find it amusing.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I've got this one covered guys. This deserves the same incisive gender commentary this forum is famous for.

1. This is just typical whiny MRA nonsense! If it was a woman being abused no one would care! (insert conspiracies, random statistics, a link to a gender swapped version of "amazing atheist" and "a voice for men")

2. It's not offensive. You're choosing to be offended. Its right to be offensive is more important than your right not to be offended. (insert Ricky Gervais, Stephen Fry quotes, false sense of moral superiority)

3. I think this is hilarious because trolling (insert "u mad" picture, trollface)

4. Again? Guys, this is obviously NOT misandry. (insert confusing, circular reasoning)

5. Something something Freedom of Speech.

6. It was done for shock value and they fooled you! You are the victim of brilliant advertising.

7. Arguments about the definition of sexism.

8. Arguments about the definition of misandry.

9. Random name calling.

10. Thread derailed with pictures of goats.

 

[Kirov Reporting]

The text was great, but the goat picture was the icing on the cake.

Okay, I loved your response, and I think it's fairly on-the-nose. Pretty much every response does seem to fit in there somehow, I'm as guilty as any other. So much circular conversation that basically still adds up to zero.

 

[x EvilErmine x]

Wow that's a bit fucked up. I mean how long would it stay available if it was 'The girlfriend trainer' instead? Not very long at all I bet. Double standards for all! xD

Seriously though +1 to the tasteless vote for me.

 

[Cheesepower5]

I've got this one covered guys. This deserves the same incisive gender commentary this forum is famous for.

1. This is just typical whiny MRA nonsense! If it was a woman being abused no one would care! (insert conspiracies, random statistics, a link to a gender swapped version of "amazing atheist" and "a voice for men")

The Amazing Atheist is hardly champion of the MRA movement or an anti-feminist speaker. Hell, his wife is one of those super feminists. Whad'they call'em? Militant Feminists? Hardcore Feminists? I honestly forget, and I still don't get how it works, but yeah. He's done like 4 anti-feminist videos (The Failure of Feminism, Tumblr Feminists, etc.) Most of them are older and just calling out extremist groups, like when he makes a Glenn Beck video or what have you. He's also made one called "It's Only Sexist When Men Do It" where he's pissed of at The Talk for getting away with laughing at a guy who got his dick cut off. Mostly pretty reasonable stuff.

 

[phylline]

Double standards and glorification of domestic abuse (as has been said), not something that's acceptable.

I do wonder, however, how many people are using this to come to the conclusion that society is anti-male, hm.

 

[Hagi]

Mostly pretty reasonable stuff.

With a few exceptions here and there.

 

[Farseer Lolotea]

The premise alone skeeves me right out, TBQH. As others have pointed out, it reads as portraying domestic violence as somehow "cute." And that's gross and fucked-up.

But that said?

The Amazing Atheist is hardly champion of the MRA movement or an anti-feminist speaker. Hell, his wife is one of those super feminists. Whad'they call'em? Militant Feminists? Hardcore Feminists? I honestly forget, and I still don't get how it works, but yeah.

That's odd; I could have sworn he was openly gay.

He's done like 4 anti-feminist videos (The Failure of Feminism, Tumblr Feminists, etc.) Most of them are older and just calling out extremist groups, like when he makes a Glenn Beck video or what have you. He's also made one called "It's Only Sexist When Men Do It" where he's pissed of at The Talk for getting away with laughing at a guy who got his dick cut off. Mostly pretty reasonable stuff.

Not going to delve much deeper into this, but his having done more than one such video kind of contradicts your previous claim. Unless, of course, he's focusing on actual failures within mainstream feminism (the excessive focus on middle-class white businesswomen, for example). But going after the convenient scapegoat that is Tumblr, or trotting out an extreme example, kind of suggests otherwise.

 

[Sparrow]

Abusive relationships, regardless of who's doing the abuse, should never be trivialized. I'm a stout believer in the "nothing is sacred" rule when it comes to jokes, but this... seems like a joke without a punchline. "Haha, abuse" is pretty much all I'm getting from this.

 

[briankoontz]

It's getting to be worrisome the degree to which gamers want to censor the medium.

If boyfriend abuse is acceptable in film, tv, and books, then why not in video games?

What happens when a serious game developer wants to include boyfriend abuse in a social game in order to explore issues related to that, but can't because gamers have already decided that abuse is not allowable in a game?

The hypocrisy of complaining about abuse in a game while gamers have no problem killing hundreds or thousands of digital representations of living things (often people) in a game is rather stunning.

"It's ok if you shoot and kill me, sweetie, just don't pull on my tie too hard!"

Obviously digital murder isn't real murder, but digital abuse isn't real abuse, either.

Why do gamers pick and choose what's "real" in a game, while no other artistic medium is treated as such?