Penn Jillette Speaks Out on RapeLay

[Sledgimus]

Try playing one of the Japanese "dating" sims. Look at all the details you go into.
Now play a Western "murder" game. Look how casually you can murder someone.

Now imagine a game solely based on the planning of a murder, stalking someone and getting your jollies off as they die at which point they thank you.

If you can't understand why that's a bad thing, then I don't know how else to explain it.

So what you're saying is you think it's morally wrong, therefore should be banned. This makes you different from every pillock demanding Doom be banned... how?

Out of curiosity, how many people have played the game? I downloaded it last night (yes, boo/hooray piracy) and played it today. I really don't see this being a threat to the nation's children. I'd far rather they were pissing their time away on this tedious animated twaddle than downloading Max Hardcore videos.

 

[meisnewbie]

I'm sorry, I still don't really see what you're getting at. Rape simulators are just "press the button," I don't see how there's a closer connection between player and character in RapeLay than there is in a first person shooter.

Try playing one of the Japanese "dating" sims. Look at all the details you go into.
Now play a Western "murder" game. Look how casually you can murder someone.

Now imagine a game solely based on the planning of a murder, stalking someone and getting your jollies off as they die at which point they thank you.

If you can't understand why that's a bad thing, then I don't know how else to explain it.

Except that NO SUCH GAME EXISTS-at least in any quantity or measure-and it's entirely stupid to say so due to the nature of dating sims. The point of dating sims SELF IMPROVEMENT in order to impress the fictional female you want. Essentially it revolves around performing task X in order to improve yourself in Y fashion to impress Z female. Of course, you can readily apply this to improving yourself in sexual slave making fashions but again, it contradicts the fundamental tenant of SELF IMPROVEMENT to please someone.

There actually IS a game out there that involves enslavement, but that's a crappy flash game on newgrounds or something.


You either meant eroge/ in general (which doesn't necessitate planning or involvement of any sort) or the type of simulation game that Rapelay is. Eroge generally has minimal involvement from the player, limiting any interaction to "PICK THIS CHOICE" and then throwing text walls at you. (which isn't your point) And then simulation games such as Rapelay, which is itself obviously low budget crappy and not non-niche. From what I understand, the only company that makes such game is illusion and even then some of the games they make involve creating a female (not sure if the option for rape exists).


Stop attacking imaginary games which do not exist.

 

[Denmarkian]

I'm quite impressed at how many people can completely miss the point of the people they are attempting to argue with.

Sisterpants or whatever has been brainwashed by the psychotic femnazi wing of the feminist movement to live in constant fear of every single man because all of us have a penis, and therefore COULD rape and abuse a woman. Which unfortunately has mutated into this baseless hatred of every single man BECAUSE we have a penis and therefore WILL rape and abuse EVERY SINGLE WOMAN WE SEE given the chance.

She believes that games like RapeLay and other forms of media that illustrate (though not necessarliy condone) rape embody a metaphorical sledgehammer that would send our fragile male psyches careening into the depths of being a deranged mad serial murderer/rapist were we ever exposed to it.

The thought/fear that men will revert to slathering lustful goons if we see anything remotely sexually explicit is most likely one of the driving forces behind our puritanical "hush-hush"ing of sex.

The normal knee-jerk reaction from people like Sisterpants who want to dictate their morality onto everyone else is to attempt to suppress these things to keep the "impressionable" members of society from being exposed to them and thus may deviate from the morality the knee-jerk reactionaries like to espouse. God forbid someone has a different opinion or worldview. It's amazing that we've actually accomplished legal gay marriages in several states considering the percentage of our population that are convinced they agree with the moralists.

They want to keep things from changing because they fear they will no longer be able to control things in the same way they do now. Everyone in power wants to keep it, no one has ever freely abdicated a position of power, and no one ever will.

The arguments of "is rape a worse crime than murder?" are irrelevant. Both are horrible, horrible things that one human can do to another, end of story.

The real argument that I can see is: how detailed of a virtual experience can one craft before it is inappropriately gratuitous?

Like the point the_root_of_all_evil was trying to make in his theoretical "murder simulation" game, where you actually have to PLAN to murder someone, you have to STALK them, you have to get your victim in a VULNERABLE situation, and THEN you attack them, and have to watch as the life drains out of their eyes. That involves you as the player in the murder MUCH more than "point gun, press left mouse button to fire"

the_root_of_all_evil's theoretical game impacts you psychologically as a person.

If RapeLay has THAT level of involvement in the actions of your character, then there is something wrong with the people who get enjoyment out of playing it.

Pre-meditated violence is one of the most traumatic acts for the perpetrator.

Is RapeLay a pre-meditated violence simulator? From what I have heard, I don't feel that it is.

Now, onto the argument that banning things because they may incite someone to perform the simulated act in public gives people the excuse that they were influenced by the banned material.

OF COURSE IT DOES.

If you are in favor of banning Hostel because it depicts acts of heinous violence perpetrated on another human being, you are giving the next sadistic violent murderer the ABILITY to claim that seeing the movie Hostel made them do it.

You are allowing violent people to blame violent media for their violence, because OBVIOUSLY the abusive alcoholic husband would have NEVER thought to beat his wife and children if he hadn't read "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf" in High School, or watched any of the films produced in the last SIXTY YEARS that depict abusive alcoholic husbands.

The minute you ban something because it MIGHT influence someone's behavior in real life you are giving them the EXCUSE that it does.


Okay, that was a bit longer than I expected to write, but I think it covers at least most of the points people have brought up over the past 5 pages.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

So what you're saying is you think it's morally wrong, therefore should be banned. This makes you different from every pillock demanding Doom be banned... how?

Because that's not my words or thoughts.
I said that I believe it's morally wrong and should be kept off sale due to there not being an equivalent positive sexual choice.
I didn't say banned.

Stop attacking imaginary games which do not exist.

It's a metaphor. It shows you why there's a difference.

The minute you ban something because it MIGHT influence someone's behavior in real life you are giving them the EXCUSE that it does.

Given the stuff that is banned (cannabis, racism, full frontal nudity, prayer in schools) versus the things that haven't been (cheap alcohol, rat poison, political benefit fraud, slander from alleged rape), you do have to think that our system really needs to sort out it's priorities before it lets open the floodgates to the avant garde crowd.

Is RapeLay a pre-meditated violence simulator? From what I have heard, I don't feel that it is.

Is it a pre-meditated sexual assault simulator though? And I know there are ones available in this part of the world already.

 

[Sledgimus]

That still doesn't make sense. Doom didn't give me the option to sit down and negotiate with demons over tea and crumpets. Should that also be banned? I have to murder and run drugs in GTA games, shall we outlaw them?

Basically, I can't see that you're presenting an argument that doesn't equally apply to a lot of other controversial games. What's the difference? Or are you in favour of massive censorship of videogames?

 

[scotth266]

Guh. There's been too many Rapelay threads in too short a time. I already posted my opinions twice, and I don't feel like typing them again, so COPYPASTA!

Spoiler: On the news thread where the Governor of NY went crazy about this:

Our politicos are ignorant fools. I already made a post on my thoughts on this game/banning of it in the previous thread, but here's a rehash:
1)Game got made in Japan.
2)Game was sold ONLY in Japan.
3)Some dude put up two copies on Amazon.
4)Politicians do what they do: act batshit bonkers over something that doesn't matter/apply in an attempt to win the votes of the common man.
Nice to know everyone sees how dumb this guy is for saying this crap. Just saying: our politicians are the most ignorant/stupid group of Americans. The rest of us are vastly superior to them (for the most part).

Spoiler: On the thread about the ban:

I despise censorship in all its forms, but this almost makes me want to justify it. And then I remember that this was caused by interference from outside powers. You see, I don't think that a ban on the stuff would even be that seriously enforced, unless the Japanese decided to make it of their own volition.

To be honest, I can't see them actually banning it... perhaps they should just ban the EXPORT of these games. Then they can't risk us getting offended, and they can keep their 10-20% of the market up and running.

The only problem with banning 'rape' games is that there's a pesky thing called "The Internet"... people will still be able to download these rape games.

True enough: banning the industry only drives it underground, and encourages fan developed games. Then again, such games would be quite lower in quality.

Of course, people could just skip across the border somewhere and make these games where they would be legal to produce as well.

So in the end, even if the ban on making the games is enforced, it only drives away the producers, and the customers get their games on the Internet.

I suppose I should try to add something new to the discussion, eh? A summary of my thoughts would be:

1) Censorship is bad, regardless of what the material being censored is. If you're going to censor or restrict something, you must apply a unifying standard, you can't be picky about what you will and won't accept. If they ban this, they'll need to ban all the mature games as well, or they're just hypocrites.

2) They need to do this by themselves, not because we're staring at them and growling. It's their culture. Since no one is being harmed, we have no right to interfere. For reference, see the Prime Directive from Star Trek.

I say that this ban idea is silly. We foreigners have no right to judge them anyway. In a society where a cross in a jar of a man's urine is regarded as art, we have no right to question another society's standards.

 

[Sledgimus]

It's blatantly hypocritical. There are websites devoted to providing images and videos of women pretending to be raped. How is that better than a videogame of cartoon characters being badly raped?

Btw, the clipping issues are hilarious when someone is being "raped" by a penis that's clearly waving around about six inches in front of their vagina.

 

[meisnewbie]

"It's a metaphor. It shows you why there's a difference."

Sure there's a difference, but you now need to prove that that difference is SUBSTANTIAL.

 

[Jumplion]

It's blatantly hypocritical. There are websites devoted to providing images and videos of women pretending to be raped. How is that better than a videogame of cartoon characters being badly raped?

There's a difference between watching rape and participating in the rape. That's a major gripe with people who criticize games, they are much more interactive and personal than any movie, book, song, or TV show ever could.

 

[Pellucid]

Murder is a worse crime than rape, after all.

I'd rather be murdered, myself. Not that I have a problem with fake cartoons of fake people being fake raped.

 

[Arisato-kun]

Note: I do not condone rape and would never play RapeLay.

Now that that is out of the way I find trying to ban this a little far. If you don't like it then ignore it. There has been no proof that this game leads people to rape. Therefore, the logical conclusion is that this game is not harmful. Also, any mentally stable person would be able to separate reality from fantasy. If this game DID in fact lead someone to rape I'm sure we could all agree that that person was pretty screwed up in the head to begin with. Crazy people don't need anything to push them over the edge. They can do that just fine on their own.

If you don't like RapeLay then by all means ignore it. Hell, let us know that you don't like it. I know I don't. But it's not harmful to anyone. Nobody is forcing you to play this game. Don't think that just because you don't like it means that you can deny someone else their right to play it. Especially considering that this game was both released and only intended for sale in a country that finds FICTIONAL depictions of these acts acceptable.

 

[Booze Zombie]

Playing a rape game makes not a rapist. Raping makes a rapist.

A solid statement, no? Saying otherwise is like saying "playing Cooking Mama makes you a good chef"!

 

[Jumplion]

There's a difference between watching rape and participating in the rape. That's a major gripe with people who criticize games, they are much more interactive and personal than any movie, book, song, or TV show ever could.

If you're going to argue that watching an act and participating in an act are the real difference, then I would counter with the fact that playing a video game in which you "rape" a character is NOT actually participating in rape. What happens on screen is not rape, it's video. No human was forcibly penetrated, pixels don't cut it.

You're right on that account, but you cannot deny that video games are much more interactive with the player than movies or books. You can't meet the same interaction with movies. Shooting someone in a video game is right next to shooting someone in real life to be quite frank, it's the fact that the player can tell the difference that's essential. Most of us have common sense, but sometimes it takes something for a guy to go over the edge and it could very well be a video game.

Video games have as much potential to be negative as any other media and it's silly to say otherwise because everything has the potential to set someone off to a murderous rampage. Playing a video game about shooting people is about as damaging as watching a movie about shooting people and both have their own influences. Just like how alcohol has some effect to people who drank one to many whiskey and got into a car crash, video games have as much potential to be a negative influence as anything.

Even if it is just a bunch of pixels.

 

[Booze Zombie]

You're right on that account, but you cannot deny that video games are much more interactive with the player than movies or books. You can't meet the same interaction with movies. Shooting someone in a video game is right next to shooting someone in real life to be quite frank, it's the fact that the player can tell the difference that's essential. Most of us have common sense, but sometimes it takes something for a guy to go over the edge and it could very well be a video game.

Video games have as much potential to be negative as any other media and it's silly to say otherwise because everything has the potential to set someone off to a murderous rampage. Playing a video game about shooting people is about as damaging as watching a movie about shooting people and both have their own influences. Just like how alcohol has some effect to people who drank one to many whiskey and got into a car crash, video games have as much potential to be a negative influence as anything.

Even if it is just a bunch of pixels.

So, everything should be banned in the eyes of most "mothers" ("speaking as a-")?

Sigh...

 

[Jumplion]

So, everything should be banned in the eyes of most "mothers" ("speaking as a-")?

Sigh...

What? I never said that at all. Do not put words in my mouth.

I'm saying that video games have as much potential to be a bad influence as cheap movie gore fests can. If some guy went on a murder rampage, and it was found that he played Counter-Strike 24/7 then it's silly to assume that the video game didn't have at least a hint of effect on the person.

Obviously, the video game wasn't the sole cause of the murderous rampage, but it had some effect on the person. Maybe the game tipped him over the edge, who knows.

 

[puppydogvaan]

I would like to post an opinion from the other side: someone who would play this game, if it didn't involve going to shady download sites. I'd probably get a kick out of it.

That said, I'm a female New Testament-style Catholic who believes in love and hugs for everyone and who recently had a public breakdown and burst into tears because I was afraid that I'd hurt someone's feelings.

I don't want to play the game because I want to rape people, I want to play the game because I'm fascinated by human depravity. I'm a voyeur, pure and simple. This game isn't going to push me over the edge into violence and the thought that someone would use it as an excuse to do so is disgusting and offensive. It's simply not a valid argument and never has been.

Also, what effect do you think banning this game would have?? People like me, who would play for voyeuristic tendencies, would just go watch a documentary on Jeffrey Dahmer instead. People who would play because they were interested in raping people would, well, go rape people. It's just a game. It doesn't affect how people act IRL.

 

[Booze Zombie]

What? I never said that at all. Do not put words in my mouth.

I'm saying that video games have as much potential to be a bad influence as cheap movie gore fests can. If some guy went on a murder rampage, and it was found that he played Counter-Strike 24/7 then it's silly to assume that the video game didn't have at least a hint of effect on the person.

Obviously, the video game wasn't the sole cause of the murderous rampage, but it had some effect on the person. Maybe the game tipped him over the edge, who knows.

Never said you said it, but the "speaking as a mother" type of people will.
It'll be very annoying.

 

[okama]

I would like to post an opinion from the other side: someone who would play this game, if it didn't involve going to shady download sites. I'd probably get a kick out of it.

That said, I'm a female New Testament-style Catholic who believes in love and hugs for everyone and who recently had a public breakdown and burst into tears because I was afraid that I'd hurt someone's feelings.

I don't want to play the game because I want to rape people, I want to play the game because I'm fascinated by human depravity. I'm a voyeur, pure and simple. This game isn't going to push me over the edge into violence and the thought that someone would use it as an excuse to do so is disgusting and offensive. It's simply not a valid argument and never has been.

Also, what effect do you think banning this game would have?? People like me, who would play for voyeuristic tendencies, would just go watch a documentary on Jeffrey Dahmer instead. People who would play because they were interested in raping people would, well, go rape people. It's just a game. It doesn't affect how people act IRL.

your point on voyeurism made me think of something else - people all have their kinks. voyeurism, exhibition, leather etc. There are people who have a thing for rape situations, of course. Personally, I find those who want to be the perpetrator a little funny... but what do we think about those who have the kink of being in a rape situation themself? they'll get their partner to act rough and bursque, and ignore their pleads to stop (but of course having a safeword, just in case). the idea of being overpowered by someone is quite appealing to a surprising number of people (just take a look at any Mills&Boon book, for instance) - and the rape fanatasy is just an extension of that. If it was possibly to create a similar game where you were in the place of the victim, what would the general public's reaction be?



And to anyone who has actually seen the game, I'm curious - just how much do you actually see? I know the laws in Japan can be very heavy handed on that sort thing, and mosaic patterns over the actual 'bits' is common in many types of porn. There can be all sorts of humilating acts happening, but when actual genetalia or penetration is shown, there's a bar covering part of it. I guess the idea is if you can't see the whole thing, it isn' as bad. More often than not, said bar is so small and thin it might as well not be there.