Aaron Sylvester said:
I abused a 14 year old once.
My army of marines absolutely destroyed his base thanks to my strategic genius.
Problem?
No problem, because you immediatly clarified what you meant and you're not a person of public interest. "Stephano" didn't and he is, so there's a difference.
Deshara said:
Eh. Some people say shit. Who cares?
You should, if you think of yourself as a respectable member of the gaming community, you should stand for it, whenever there's a situation this community might make a spectacular land in the dirt in the public eye, which it is currently creating more and more opportunities for.
ElPatron said:
And i think you are twisting the point to your likelihood, which doesn't make it right. If, as a pro, he shouldn't be different than any other gamer, then why is he earning huge money for playing games? Why are his games/matches promoted and streamed all around the world? Why does that not account to any other gamer? Because there is a difference. He became a representative of gaming and now he has to act like one, which means applying to the social rules of public behaviour. If you don't like those rules, that's another thing, you can work to change those, but until then, people of public interest can't say everything without getting the corresponding feedback. Also, wanna tell me the probable reason child abuse isn't mentioned in the video you're referencing? Well, i'll do it myself: It's because child abuse is another matter than eating meat, expressing homosexuality in public, or even consuming goods from unfair, or even inhuman production. It is so because vegetarians, homosexuals, fair trade and human right supporters as well as (most) oppressed social groups are somewhat capable of defending themselfs. There are exceptions, but those are just as delicate as child abuse. Imagine a journalist, or even politician making a statement supporting the state-as-is in north Korea - say hallo to another person being condemned by the public, for good reasons.
AzrealMaximillion said:
So when do we start banning online console gamers for saying racial epithets and claiming to rape their opponents?
Very likely won't be long. Look at the other matter from Street Fighter x Tekken, shows where this is going.
Elect G-Max said:
Ok, then elaborate me pls. It's just that, statistically speaking, most victims of child abuse aren't able to properly expres their victimization and/ or aren't heard by their respective legal guardian. That's why many cases of child abuse aren't recognized until the victims grow to their middle age and build the strength to resolve the issue. That's also the case with many victims of "adult" sexual abuse. I know, that for young people most laws appear like major resctriction and discrimination, been there just some years ago, but in fact, young people in their maturing process are vulnurable to being exploited (abused) in many, many ways and should be protected from that. Sure, the first person to protect them are their parrents and other close, familiar guardians, but in reality, unfortunately, that isn't working all the time, up to not very often. That's why there has to be other means, for example laws, to protect the maturing process, until the individual is capable of expressing and defending itself. Sure, some aren't even capable when they are "mature", some never are and sure it could be done in many better ways, some ways are definetly shit, but you have to draw a line at some point and those are the current perimeters. I think, Cox would approve.
In his home country, it definetly is illegal. I think he knows that and the consequences for violating thoses rules/laws, even if he never violated them himself.
madster11 said:
First, i don't find him guilty of rape by any means until now, but he's innocent until proven guilty in that matter. That doesn't affect how i think about his management treating the matter until now.
Another thing is, you are right, one doesn't just like sex on their xy birthday. Some biologosists and sociologists even state, that the disposition is already set in infantility, for example including a "sexual oral phase" before the age of 2, which is then dropped and later reoccurs. Does that mean, you can have oral sex with an infantile? Fuck no (gah, can't resist bad word-play anymore)! The thing is, if you know how, which is rather easy as an "adult", it is just to easy to exploit the occuring sex-drive of an adolescent. In this state, you can hardly say if the adolescent is mature enough or not,or if or when it is actually affection or love and when it is exploitation, that's why you have to draw a hard line, which is definetly set above 12 and in most cases above 15 or even 18, to encourage that first sexual experiences are made within same-age groups.
Slightly OT: Just had a discussion a short while ago about the age of political participation, which is, in the last decades, constantly lowering in europe. I very much support higher political awareness at younger ages, though i am very glad i didn't have to realy bother about this, but could bother about other things when i was 15. And, when i look at adolescents presenting political symbols they don't understand yet, i'm certain it is good they aren't entitled to alrady participate in this matter, but still have time to further learn about it. And again, sure there are many, many adults who have no real idea what they are doing in a political context, too. And again, there has to be a line somewhere and best thing to better the general situation is to first increase political awareness "everywhere".
