Michael Atkinson Once Again Dismisses Gamers

[CD-R]

"I AM MICHAEL ATKINSON. NONE OF YOU CAN TAKE CARE OF YOURSELVES, SO I MUST DO IT FOR YOU, YOU PANTS-CRAPPING IDIOTS. VOTE FOR ME!" I think he's a shoe-in.

The problem is he isn't saying that. He's a politician, so while he is certainly implying it, he's saying it in a way that is laced with faux-concern for children that, assuming anywhere near the majority of his local voters even are aware of this debate, looks for all the world like he is "doing the right thing."

Reading his responses I have to admit, his argument will be strong to some people. I don't belive he is ignorant about how things are or even missing the point, rather, I think he is deliberately making his argument to consolidate his position in the glorious state of Southern Australia to appeal to his local communities. It's all too well thought out and written, which is a few pegs up on Jack Thompson. And this is before you consider how his locality think of him about his other views, of which I am afraid I am unable to speak of - I frankly was barely aware of his existence living up here in QLD until this brouhaha got cooked up.

TLDR: He won't be going anywhere. Now we play the waiting game until he retires - as long as it isn't over R18+ mind you...

He won't be going anywhere with that kind of attitude. There has to be something that can be done. Elections are coming up who is running against him? I may not live in Australia but I'm more than willing to help spread the word about whoever runs against him around the Net.

 

[can't-think]

There is a gaming party running against him, but he's held the seat for years and a lot of the community probably believe him and all of the anti-gaming news stories that are around at the moment. Also a lot of older people won't see the issue as a big deal.

 

[Radelaide]

Okay, now I'm fairly sure the reply I'm getting from him is just going to be written in red crayon and it'll only say "NO U".

God damn it, why won't this man see reason?

Edit: After reading that letter, I swear if I get the same letter, I'm going to Adelaide (lol) and I'm going to shove it back down his throat.

 

[CD-R]

There is a gaming party running against him, but he's held the seat for years and a lot of the community probably believe him and all of the anti-gaming news stories that are around at the moment. Also a lot of older people won't see the issue as a big deal.

Ok there ya go. What's there website, who is the candidate that's running against him? Can we get any photos of Atkinson with a prostitute to start a big ass smear campaign against him? Can we photoshop some and do it anyway? These are questions people need to ask.

 

[The Great JT]

Arm the noob pwners and ready the BFG-9000 salvos, we're-a goin' to war with Michael Atkinson.

 

[silentsentinel]

Well, Australians, looks like you're just going to have to wait for him to grow old and die.

 

[LeonLethality]

he needs to be shot with a crossbow man I wish I could say what I was thinking while reading this article but I would be banned before I could hit the post button, this guy really needs to understand that violence is one of the entertainment points in games now imagine how fun a fighting game would be without fighting? (don't VG cats reference me on that I read the minor conflict comic too) I feel sorry for my gaming brethren in Australia for having to put up with him

 

[Sibbo]

"I AM MICHAEL ATKINSON. NONE OF YOU CAN TAKE CARE OF YOURSELVES, SO I MUST DO IT FOR YOU, YOU PANTS-CRAPPING IDIOTS. VOTE FOR ME!" I think he's a shoe-in.

The problem is he isn't saying that. He's a politician, so while he is certainly implying it, he's saying it in a way that is laced with faux-concern for children that, assuming anywhere near the majority of his local voters even are aware of this debate, looks for all the world like he is "doing the right thing."

Reading his responses I have to admit, his argument will be strong to some people. I don't belive he is ignorant about how things are or even missing the point, rather, I think he is deliberately making his argument to consolidate his position in the glorious state of Southern Australia to appeal to his local communities. It's all too well thought out and written, which is a few pegs up on Jack Thompson. And this is before you consider how his locality think of him about his other views, of which I am afraid I am unable to speak of - I frankly was barely aware of his existence living up here in QLD until this brouhaha got cooked up.

TLDR: He won't be going anywhere. Now we play the waiting game until he retires - as long as it isn't over R18+ mind you...

He won't be going anywhere with that kind of attitude. There has to be something that can be done. Elections are coming up who is running against him? I may not live in Australia but I'm more than willing to help spread the word about whoever runs against him around the Net.

Our electoral system doesn't work like that. We have three levels of government local (council), state and federal. Atkinson is a state mp and as such only people in his electorate in South Australia can vote him in or out. Thats about 20000 people, so unless we have a federal referendum to change the laws or those 20000 people get sick of his BS the other 22 million of us are going to have to put up with his shit.

 

[TheMadDoctorsCat]

So basically his argument boils down to "Parents can't take care of children. Only I can". Why exactly is this man in a position of power?

While I hold no love for this man, it's a little more complex than that.

His "two thirds of households" statistic is unfortunately, in all likelihood, pretty close to the mark. We've all heard the stories of grannies buying 18+ games for their kids and then suing the distributors for it.

Atkinson's argument seems to be that since most parents won't take responsibility for what their kids play, obviously someone else has to. And since a lot of parents I know seem to regard games consoles in the same way as the generation before that regarded TV - and would happily sit their kids in front of an XBox so they could go down the pub, yet be outraged if it was suggested to them that they let their kids couch-potato out in front of the telly - he would seem to have a point.

Where his argument falls down is in the idea that the kids are somehow harmed by this. For example, my friends and I grew up playing DeathMatch Doom in cybercafes, and yet none of us has ever attacked a shaven pink gorilla with a chainsaw. (This is how awesome retro gaming can be, kids.)

The way I see it, you have three options here:

1) Regulate the games companies, banning the games. (The populist move.)

2) Regulate the parents, prosecuting them for corrupting a minor every time they let their babies play "Kill Frenzy 2: The Bloodbath." Which, while it would doubtless be satisfying to put some of the aforementioned ignorant granny brigade behind bars, would probably lose him a few votors too many for comfort. (Don't forget, the man is a politician.)

3) Grow a sense of perspective, have a decent rating system for games that allows for mature or adult content without the threat of bans, take steps to educate the general public on what those ratings mean, educate instead of legislate, and generally leave the industry to run in the most competitive and healthy environment that it can.

The last option would be a victory for common sense. Of course, this being the Australian gaming industry, I don't see an overabundance of that particular quality right now.

 

[Pendragon9]

He's wrong. No argument about it.

If kids can watch "Porno Valley" on Latenight television in Australia, he's wrong.

 

[Furioso]

Instead of complaining just vote him out, the people put him into power, the people can take him out.... or perhaps we can just throw things at him each day until he gains some form of common sense.

 

[DalekJaas]

saying that it's quite possible for adults to find games that will challenge them without having to resort to "depraved sex, gore and cruelty."

- That statement is completely true, do you want an R18+ rating out of principle or because your a bunch of sick, twisted NERDS.

I only buy games that interest me, this year I have bought 2 games. The Beatles Rockband and Modern Warfare 2. Both very enjoyable, and I am over 18 years old.

I can see both sides of this debate, and if i had to choose one I would support the gamers because Atkinson is so blatantly biased.

 

[SyphonX]

I bet this prick is a colossal warmonger too. He probably doesn't mind if the evening news shows middle-eastern brown people burning to death, and their charred corpses in the rubble, etc.

When it comes to real violence, these colossal mother-fuckers just love to shove it in your face and make you want it.. and we're talking Real violence here folks. People burning to death, people slowly dying from massive trauma.. Oh, they want you to be on their side at all costs and love it.

When it comes to games... and "fake violence", well that's just a damn destructive scourge on the Earth, ban artistic representations of violence.

 

[SyphonX]

People in Australia need to bite the bullet on this, somehow. Some small businesses will have to challenge the government and try to stock up on as many banned games as possible and really shove it in their face too. So when the government comes knocking on their door and reveals just how fascist and boot-jacked corrupt they are when they "shut them down", people will then see just how f-ing ridiculous the government really is. Then Michael Atkinson can then promptly suck his own ass in response.

 

[SyphonX]

This man is nothing but your typical useless political thug. He's been involved in a multi-million dollar "controversy" where he was involved in the "hiding" of over 6 million. So, obviously this man is a better parent of your child than yourself, so step aside and let him spank your children for you.

 

[J-Alfred]

Wow... akward... I mean, you can't fault the guy for believing in something, especially if that "something" might (MIGHT) indirectly reduce child's violence, but for this guy to be in a position of such power... I'm reminded of my own parents, who considered the old animated TV show "Beetlejuice" to be too scary, and so they forbid me from watching them. That's fine; that's their privilege as parents to protect their children from what they deem harmful. But after a point, the child grows up and can decide for himself what's harmful and what's not. Michael Atkinson really should learn that.

Edit: And yet, he is constantly elected, so someone likes what he's doing... I guess the problem is that most of the people opposed to his views are too young to vote in opposition, and those old enough to vote are of the old-school crowd that probably thinks Doom is too violent too. Clearly the only thing to do is start a social revolution.

COME ON!!! SING IT WITH ME!!!

"We're not gonna take it...
No, we ain't gonna take it..."

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

Someone please tell this idiot to step down from office and jump off a cliff before someone goes over there and beats him to death with a trout. Seriously, dude, get a life. Everyone wants an r18+ rating in Australia and democracy is supposed to be what the people want. You are not a fucking dictator, now get off your high horse. [/end rant]

Sorry about that, but I meant every word.

don't apologize, you're totally correct.

The man is not just hurting the gamers, he is singlehandedly eliminating free-speech from a nation, and promoting fascism

 

[SyphonX]

No, you can absolutely fault this guy for his beliefs. He is a scumbag.

I directly relate it to banning/burning books, just because "he doesn't believe in it" doesn't give him the right to Literally do what he wants. You know very well if he tried to do this with books, he would have eaten a smelly shit sandwich already and would not be in a position of power.

I thought we've already crossed that bridge? Why are we still banning forms of media.. ?

Countries around the world used to ban Fahrenheit 451, 1984, Catcher in the Rye, Clockwork Orange.. etc, because they absolutely, positively assured us that our children would be transformed into ruffians, vandals and Godless creatures of the Earth. All those books have an occurring theme of the government failing society and causing the downfall of said society.

Why is it then, that most of the games banned in Australia have this reoccurring theme of a government failure? Whether it's Left 4 Dead's theme of the government unable to police itself in a massive infection. Fallout 3's graphic depiction of world government failure, denouncing warmongering institutions and having a general, "See, this is what happens with war." theme. Even Call of Duty: MW2 is receiving sparks, and what do you know.. there is a huge theme of ultimate government failure to police itself in the event of terrorism.

Any game, and I mean any game that is A. Popular and B. Depicts a Weak Government will C. Be Banned. Almost no exceptions... Whenever a symbolic "violent plot" is portrayed in a game, they will use the 'violence' to ban it.

There is an organization in the UK that wants to ban (or change), actually I think already have.. the nursery rhyme Humpty Dumpty. Specifically the part about, "All the king's men couldn't put him back together again.". No, I'm not joking.

This is all a part of something much greater than superficial violence.

 

[TechNoFear]

As South Australia is famous for both churches and serial killers, there is still hope....