Jimquisition: Rape vs. Murder
- Thread starter Jimothy Sterling
- Start date
The one thing I don't like about this is how he speaks about death as though he knows what it entails. I'm not ascribing to any one religion right now but even if you don't you still have no fucking CLUE just how it is to die!
Furthermore, what we DO know of death is that it's an END. You lose ALL your potential when you die, you can do things no more. People can recover from rape, they can move on to lead wonderful productive and HAPPY lives. If you die, you die, you don't ever have a CHANCE of recovering from death.
By saying that rape victims are more worse off than murder victims you promote their euthanasia so as to put them out of their misery, which I am sure was not the intent of the video but is still flat out retarded.
Furthermore, what we DO know of death is that it's an END. You lose ALL your potential when you die, you can do things no more. People can recover from rape, they can move on to lead wonderful productive and HAPPY lives. If you die, you die, you don't ever have a CHANCE of recovering from death.
By saying that rape victims are more worse off than murder victims you promote their euthanasia so as to put them out of their misery, which I am sure was not the intent of the video but is still flat out retarded.
Great until he brought up examples of rape for characterization of a bad character. Take that, put it in game and give the rapist whether it be player or not their just deserts. If its 100% not ok in games ever then video games limit themselves to not exploring taboo subjects that movies and books do quite often but with justification towards the one doing the action. Having Clockwork Orange that's all I need to say even though Jim already had it in here.
So, don't rape and don't be immature or completely retarded about the subject of rape and its fine in any media.
So, don't rape and don't be immature or completely retarded about the subject of rape and its fine in any media.
Thank god Jim got this right- when I read the little bit at the bottom of the video asking if condemnig rape while condoning murder wasn't a bit hypocritical I was a bit worried, before I watched the video and he bluntly said no it wasn't.
Ironically though, Battle Raper 2 was actually ludicrously mislabeled- the game has NO rape in it, none at all. OK, maybe a bit of skeevyness where you massage girls' unconscious and half-naked bodies to heal them after they lose a fight, but ALL the actual sex in the game is consensual. Seriously! The Something Awful review of the game actually complained that the name was inaccurate! It was the ORIGINAL game that actually had rape in it.
Ironically though, Battle Raper 2 was actually ludicrously mislabeled- the game has NO rape in it, none at all. OK, maybe a bit of skeevyness where you massage girls' unconscious and half-naked bodies to heal them after they lose a fight, but ALL the actual sex in the game is consensual. Seriously! The Something Awful review of the game actually complained that the name was inaccurate! It was the ORIGINAL game that actually had rape in it.
I by no means assume the rape in question would have to be done by the playable character, i just spoke about that part in particular because it seems like that is more controversial (having the rape done by not the playable character is no different then having any character do it in a book or movie or show so i don't even see it as the issue we are discussing as much). I think it's the controlling the character and making them rape someone that's more the issue that upsets people. Kratos getting raped? yup, got no problem with it at all,Treblaine said:
The thing is him getting raped would not have worked plot wise very well in any convincing way. However him raping someone would totally make sense and would have made for another interesting boss battle. But, yah, if it was presented in a logical way and worked i'd have no problem with the character i am playing getting raped. Was kinda hoping they'd do it with Lara Croft in the new game. Would have made for a more interesting story in my opinion.
Thank god he got it right? So, you totally fail to mention why it is not hypocritical. You just say that it is so. OOOk then.Arcane Azmadi said:
I am disappointed Jim got this wrong, condemning rape while condoning murder is completely hypocritical and is total bullshit which panders to those too swept up in the currently fashionable taboo to use logic and common sense.
Aaaaaaaaaaand here's another thing. Because, frankly i am getting real annoyed that this even needs to be discussed. As someone stated previously, people generally think consensual acting out of rape fantasy (like in bdsm communities) is ok. People think literature (both sleazy, dramatic, serious, fantasy, exc) with rape in it is ok. People generally think movies with rape in it is ok. BUT holy crap video games with rape... NO, THAT'S JUST WRONG! Seriously guys? WHY is it wrong. Why is it wrong for video games (another entertainment type) to feature rape when basically every single other entertainment media can do so freely. I mean do you people even realize how completely stupid it is that this even needs to be discussed. That a trailer from the new Tomb Raider which features an attempted rape scene (which from what i can tell is far from skeezy in nature) gets so much criticism.
"And oh no, you can't have rape because someone may get off on it blah blah" Hay, guess what? Rape is not nice, neither is murder or torture... but guess what else; people (and yes, PLENTY of women, as well as men) have rape fantasies and that's ok. And it's ok for there to be some video games to pander to that just as there are TONS of books and movies that pander to it. Put a damn disclaimer on the damn product and those who don't like it can bloody well not part take.
"And oh no, you can't have rape because someone may get off on it blah blah" Hay, guess what? Rape is not nice, neither is murder or torture... but guess what else; people (and yes, PLENTY of women, as well as men) have rape fantasies and that's ok. And it's ok for there to be some video games to pander to that just as there are TONS of books and movies that pander to it. Put a damn disclaimer on the damn product and those who don't like it can bloody well not part take.
And here's another thing. I feel like there's this thing in the minds of the masses where the gaming public feels like they have some right to "control" games. Like the video games comming out better be pandering to everyone. This is def not the case with movies and books where there are plenty of indi, and not so indi movies/books/music, that pander to taboo or questionable subjects or do things that most people would not like. Now perhaps this is because video games were at the same place as movies were in the 50s where technology was such that you basically needed a lot of money and mass support to make anything remotely descent looking (remember how movies went threw this same bull back in the day? If not watch Movie Bob's history of movies mini episodes in the Big Picture). But guess what? Games are now getting to the point where, yes, smaller indi studios can make graphically decent quality games, and so it is more likely that theyd be more willing to appeal to knitch groups (like say people who want to play out rape fantasies in a video game). AND THIS IS A GOOD THING GUYS! It means video games are progressing to a wider more rounded media where not every game has to be a guaranteed sell out blockbuster hit. YOU don't own all games. YOU don't have to like all games. YOU do not have to want to play all games. It's OK if there are games which would make you sick. Your games probably make your grandma sick. And in condemning rape in games you are no different from those people in government you don't like and laugh at who say "oooh nooo. can't have violence or shooting in a video game, it is twisted and evil... exc"
and on a related note: People have been getting so wound up about the whole "oh no, Lara Croft almost gets raped" nonsense that i think the potential symbolism here is totally missed. Think of it this way. Lara Croft is getting (supposedly) a reboot here, her proportions as being adjusted as well as the premise and gameplay. So look upon the sexual assault in the actual game as symbolic of the "sexual assault" Lara has been getting from fan boys in their minds since she first came out and put women with big tits into video games. She fights back in the game as the producers of the game are fighting back to bring the franchise back to the dignity of a good game with good gameplay (or so we hope). See how that's clever? GOOD.
That's silly... Not that I agree with raping someone in a video game. But that killing someone in a game is always fast. You can spend 5 minutes killing someone in a game in eve if your trying to kill a mothership or Titan you can spend 30 minutes killing it if not longer, and you going to be fighting every step of the way.
Its not impersonal and its a BIG f***ing deal. that titan could be the average players entire income over a 20 year period. obv its not usually individual player who buy build titan's / super carriers its an alliances of 100's or 1000's of people. but its no throw away thing.
But there is an intent if you have even built the Super Carrier, Titan or any other combat ship to kill people. so there is a sort of justification there.
But I think if its not the player doing the rape and its a nemesis and you want to do it as part of the story to create hatred for the evil guy then yeah go on right ahead. But the story line better be f***ing awesome to use such a touchy subject for your story.
PS: some stupid idiot got so mad when some people blew up hit titan that he said he was going to sue them for the isk to plex value of the loss... obv that never happens because as with all games they say in the agreement that all items purchased though the eve store are property of CCP. Not only to stop nuts suing other people but nuts suing them for there losses if they want to ban them or W.E. btw the price was $10,000 USD. EPIC TEARS!!!
Its not impersonal and its a BIG f***ing deal. that titan could be the average players entire income over a 20 year period. obv its not usually individual player who buy build titan's / super carriers its an alliances of 100's or 1000's of people. but its no throw away thing.
But there is an intent if you have even built the Super Carrier, Titan or any other combat ship to kill people. so there is a sort of justification there.
But I think if its not the player doing the rape and its a nemesis and you want to do it as part of the story to create hatred for the evil guy then yeah go on right ahead. But the story line better be f***ing awesome to use such a touchy subject for your story.
PS: some stupid idiot got so mad when some people blew up hit titan that he said he was going to sue them for the isk to plex value of the loss... obv that never happens because as with all games they say in the agreement that all items purchased though the eve store are property of CCP. Not only to stop nuts suing other people but nuts suing them for there losses if they want to ban them or W.E. btw the price was $10,000 USD. EPIC TEARS!!!
Wait, so fake children getting fake raped is taboo but you defend the depiction of rape in general within games on the basis that it's fantasy? Why does the "it's fantasy" argument suddenly fall flat when it's an act you deem too personally offensive? It's either all fantasy and thus has no overall effect, or it's not and should be regulated. You're making an argument exactly like those who say that murder is okay but rape is not, or that killing is okay but murder is not, etc. You either recognize the right of society to arbitrarily ban people's fantasies or you don't. You can't recognize the right of society to ban only fantasies held by other people.JoaoJatoba said:
Fair enough. Freedom of speech finds its limitation only on the harming of others. I give you child rape game in exchange of a limitation of display for sale.Comrade_Beric said:
And, this is not about people's fantasies, but the expression of these fantasies. You may express yourself as you like, but I am not oblige to listen. So you can make whatever game rape you like, as long it is virtual, but you may not display it wherever you like.
How about that then?
In my revision post, I did say that the solution has to be clear markings and warnings on things that may be offensive to people rather than banning them. It only makes sense that the product cannot, therefore, have an outward appearance or advertisement that may offend before someone has a chance to notice the warning and look away. So, fair enough. The product has to be clearly marked so people know what it is, but it can't go so far as to visually depict such acts on its displays or anything since that would effectively negate the work of trying to put a warning label on it.JoaoJatoba said:
captcha: love me
Dear Jim. As your primary justification for rape being worse than murder would appear to be that the victim has to continue living with the emotional pain of the rape, would you consider a rape-murder more socially acceptable than straight rape?
Not sure where I stand. I mean, on the one hand, rape is obviously very bad, but on the other, I am opposed to censorship (and firmly believe that video games should be able to cover any topic movies and literature can). Thus, this presents the interesting and somewhat difficult problem of defend the right of "rape games" and games that feature rape as a story device to exist without defending the game itself.
Andy Chalk did an article here a while back that's a good start, but I think it needs more substance. Not quite sure what to add though.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/the-needles/7388-Lets-Not-Ban-RapeLay
He brings up some good points, but again, it's a very fine line between defending something's right to exist and defending the thing itself.
Andy Chalk did an article here a while back that's a good start, but I think it needs more substance. Not quite sure what to add though.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/the-needles/7388-Lets-Not-Ban-RapeLay
He brings up some good points, but again, it's a very fine line between defending something's right to exist and defending the thing itself.
Whether or not he would consider it more socially acceptable, the issue is whether his own reasoning, followed to its logical end, would reach that conclusion, and the answer seems a pretty clear "yes" to me; Just one of many proofs along the "more rape victims recover than murder victims" motif, although I confess I like your form the best.unFunkiest said: