Jimquisition: Rape vs. Murder

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 . . . 17 NEXT
 

Jimothy Sterling:
Please bear in mind that my video's intent is not to discuss the right/lack of right of any of these games to exist, at least outside of the throwaway comment near the end. I'm talking about *why* the two subjects are handled differently, not the right/wrong in *how* they are handled. While I may discuss that subject in a future video, it would be too much to discuss it in the same video as this one.

Have to admit, when I read the video's title I was sorta hoping it'd address the subject of people getting upset about rape, the word, being used as trash-talk/description of performance in playing of games i.e. "I just raped that guy so hard." I find those arguments about whether it's worse to say you raped someone than to describe what you literally just did to them (involving, say, a shotgun at close range followed by some napalm) interesting and amusing at times.

When it comes to game content, though, eh...it really depends on how you're handling it. I mean, I'm looking at context, as was mentioned in the video. There's a load of possible scenarios involving killing people: military action, self-defense, survival needs, assassination, etc. compared to far fewer plausible contexts for rape. If rape's the central focus of the game, that means the game's context is going to be screwed up pretty much regardless. If this Hypothetical Rape Game is based on the idea that your character is going out in search of women (or men?) to beat down and rape, I'd have to think it would be pretty much just as bad if he (or she?) were hunting down people to murder, not because rape = murder, but because of the stalking and motivation and so on. It's not so much the rape itself that's the rotten core of this concept; it's more the fetid cherry on top of a game that's completely structured to play a monster/serial killer/what have you.

From the other side of the same idea, I'm trying to think of games wherein adding a rape element probably wouldn't change much about how bad the people involved are and/or how "inappropriate" the game is. Saints Row 2 comes to mind. Not because of the wanton murder and nakedness and general wtf behavior throughout the bulk of the game, though that helps. No, I'm thinking of a particular scene in which your character abducts the girlfriend (non-combatant, victim) of one of the bad bosses, stuffs her in the trunk of a car and tricks the baddie into crushing her to death with a monster truck.

Think about that for a minute.

There's no self-defense justification. There's no monetary or military gain from her death. It doesn't do anything to benefit you or your goals at all, really. All it accomplishes is ruining the girl's life (via messily ending it in a rather terrifying and probably painful manner) and pissing off the boss. That's it. Your character just does it because he (or she) is a colossal bastard.

Now, if instead in this event the girlfriend is raped and sent home to her beau to tell him about how she was traumatized, it would accomplish pretty much the same thing. Would it make the game better/worse? I dunno, I don't think it would really change much of anything - you're a monster either way.

Of course, given it probably wouldn't change much of anything, there's no reason to include rape there. It wouldn't add anything to the story any more than it would detract from it. It'd just be something thrown in for the sake of having rape in a game, and that's not a good thing either.

tl;dr - There are probably contexts wherein rape could be included in a game without completely corrupting the game with it, but it'd be pretty hard to do without making it some kind of exploitative fanservice for creeps. Or, to put it another way, it's very hard to justify including rape in a game, even in cases where it might "make sense."

I thought this episode was really good.
I wouldn't have known quite how to phrase it myself, but I'm glad someone is able to put it a bit more coherantly than I would.

I think that at the moment we have enough trouble with real-life rape being trivialised and dismissed, and I really think the best thing video games can do is just stay out of it.
Not to mention, as a female gamer - that's really the last thing I want in games.
Now, I'm going to try and get out of this thread before I get flamed for this opinion.

I have to simply disagree with the premise because of one omitted factor

Culture

That really is one of the huge issues that cause very different mentalities when it comes to what we consider allowed to be created in a video game and what isn't allowed. You have a country like Japan where our current roots of the video game industry came from after the video game crash that actually demonstrates that they can offer various kinds of games(some more based on gameplay while others based on story/pick your path) that deal with sex and sexuality. Yet at the same time they do actually have a problem with a certain level of violence that compared to the United States is quite easy to find.

The other part of the problem here that was missing is that while the video focused on say the victim there is one major statement still missing. Murder and rape are both crimes in a civilized society. There are victims that still exist even in the act of murder such as relatives, loved ones and friends that also share a gigantic impact based on economic income and mental health.

So the bias I see in this video is more of a cultural stigma that comes with living in a civilized society that is more or less uncomfortable with dealing with the issues of sex. Be it from religion, or a secular argument dealing with sex and sexuality in the west is a lot harder to actually think about using as an tool or element when having a discussion or using sex or sexuality as an element in a movie, book or video game.

So while Jim thinks that the video game industry in the west is not prepared for sex and sexuality I personally disagree. The only way the video game industry is going to be able to really learn how to actually deliver a stronger story or game is to actually utilizing the elements of sex and sexuality in their games. It may not always have to be rape as it is going from zero to sixty but we certainly have elements in our video games that while small actually demonstrate that on some level the west is capable of appreciating games that deal with sex and sexuality just as much as violence.

There are certainly more elements but suffice to say that I still do find a hypocrisy between the extremes of murder and rape and how it is more of the society(often people who aren't consumers of said product) that will do anything to prevent such growth. The major difference is that most video game companies are more like hollywood and not the book industry which don't actively promote their products using the new media we are so used to. Only reason Rapelay actually got such big in the west in terms of controversy was cause some idiot actually brought a couple copies BACK from japan and then sold it on e-bay for money.

EDIT: I should also add one problem I had with a video. Never use a comedian as proof of validation of the argument. The core of their work often comes from actually talking about subjects that much like what you play in video games, watch in movies, and read in books is to challenge their viewers and shock them by breaking our cultural expectations. In their line of work either it is all okay, or none of it is. I personally will side with the liberty that allows people to create the content they desire and use the tools that exist in order to achieve the emotional response they wish to get out of the intended demographic.

AxelxGabriel:

Cecilthedarkknight_234:

AxelxGabriel:

Again, Dentistry can be justified. You dont NEED to go to a dentist.

Rape is not. There is no justification for Rape, period.

it's called the cycle of abuse not that it justifies rape but if child is raped over x amount years by a predator then turns around and does the same because he or she never got help for the abuse then it goes in cycle that needs to addressed. No there is never a just cause for rape however given a person's weak state of mind and enduring amount of abuse he or she might of took it's understandable why the person would repeat the cycle, to make some-one hurt or feel bad as they do.

So I'm supposed to feel sorry for a guy who rapes today because he was raped 20 years ago? That is a piss poor excuse and it gets no sympathy from me.

there are kids that rape younger kids or are you unaware of that?? Kids that where molested for 5 years from ages 6-7 to 11-12 feel frustrated in pain and don't know what the hell to do. They look for some younger than them and take it out on that person because the person's psyche was already broken at a young age. You really need to read up and study case laws on this stuff it's actually sad how this damn cycle of abuse goes with out as much glance or care to talk about. No if person was raped 20 years ago as a kid then goes out and rapes it's not legit reason or even a damn excuse however you have to take into factor did that person get help over those twenty years or did he or she little it bottle up and explode because of the shame/guilt of what happened.

There is nothing as cut or dry that some it just twisted evil sh** with no morals unless they are "sociopaths". Mental health issues play alot into this so don't excuse it as b.s. You're talking to a victim of molest ion to begin with that would rather kill him-self than commit such a horrible act of rape or sex abuse.

Rape really is a touchy subject to approach, so I can kind of understand why mainstream games tend to avoid it. I mean, the gaming industry gets enough flak for violence, and rape is another beast altogether.

http://youtu.be/ymNdfdQvdVc

This is the quote from Dave Chappelle that Jim used, note that everyone is laughing and applauding...

:P

image

While I rarely watch your videos, Im glad I decided to watch this one. I agree with everything said.

Belated:
Honestly, I'm still not sure you've sold me on rape being worse than murder. If you examine the crimes objectively, murder is still worse because it ends a person's life. Rape leaves them intact to live another day.

But you're arguing this from the permanence of the result. And yeah, murder is forever, which makes it definitely more permanent... but that's not always what people mean by "worse." (And let's also remember that rape can't be "undone," so it's not exactly transitory.)

It's not really about the victim or the act, but about the perpetrator. Any of us, if pressed hard enough, can think of a situation in which someone could make us so angry we would want to kill them. We can put ourselves in "the killer's shoes" in some way. Not every killer, not every circumstance, but some.

What's more, we see situations in the world in which killing is justified (thus meaning it's, you know, not "murder," per se). The act is occasionally excusable, and most games put is in that sort of situation. But even when we're not in that situation (like running around in GTA gunning down civvies for no reason), the ground has already been broken on the act itself, so we can turn a blind eye since it's just fantasy.

(I'm not saying we feel sorry for a serial killer, or anything like that, but the fact that we can in some distant way understand killing... well, that takes some of the sting out of what the guy did. He's a guy that misused killing, but we retain the knowledge that sometimes it's necessary, or at least understandable. We know that killing occasionally has a "correct" us, and that it can even happen accidentally, so some of the taboo surrounding the at itself is mitigated -- we look at the circumstances and the perpetrator to determine right/wrong.)

Bur rape? There is no situation in which it is justified. I don't think anyone out there can think of a situation in which someone could make them so angry they would want to rape them. We are not able to put ourselves in the killer's shoes, so there is absolutely not even the slightest seed of sympathy or understanding. There is no "correct" way to use rape, so that marks anyone who would use it with a particular brand of intentional evil.

There are no mitigating circumstances. The act is completely evil, so the person who chose to do it is also completely evil.

And that's why they're viewed so differently, in the broad sense. Now, the family of a murder victim will feel differently, because they are personally tied to the crime and its consequences, so let's be very sure: We're talking about the general public feeling on the perpetrators.

(This idea also explains why we all -- even murderers and rapists -- hold a special hatred for child molestors, by the way.)

Jimothy Sterling:
snip

(To include for relevant above argument re: How we can relate to murder/killing vs. how we cannot relate to rapists)

I prefer the term surprise sex personally. Rape is to good a word to be associated with such an ugly act.

Perhaps its worth noting, culturally the japanese have different cultural attitudes towards rape than western society, i'm not saying its right or wrong but the difference does exist.

Here's the thing about rape.

It's not about the sex involved. It's about the loss of power the individual feels, the complete helplessness that overcomes them as they realize they're completely powerless and have to either bend to the will of this menacing individual, and only hope to get away in one piece (read: not also murdered). It's about taking the walls an individual has built up in today's society, everything they know about how to function in a civil world, and tearing them down. Suddenly, the world's a much more brutish place, people can't be trusted, especially if they happen to have a penis, and, thanks to our culture's complete and utterly sickening fear of all things sexual, the victims feel as if they cannot convey their feelings, their experiences regarding the event, to anyone.

That's rape.

I could argue that torture's worse, in essence, it's about the same thing, but with less sex and more injury. I could, but I won't, because of one logical fallacy that everyone always forgets.

Sex is still a taboo subject.
Being cut open, and as sickening as this is, is something to brag about for some groups of people.

And as long as sex is a taboo subject, Rape will always be more difficult to go through (not to mention more of a taboo subject taboo subject taboo subject) than torture. The reason being, that rape will be much harder to recover from mentally so long as victims feel that they have nowhere to turn for help with the trauma they experienced.

That's all I have to say on the subject. We don't need more rape games. We need a game with a rape victim as the lead, and the story, nomatter what it is, told through their perspective. Games are a powerful tool of conveyance. Developers should utilize this.

esperandote:

WouldYouKindly:
It's quite simple to me. We've all had a desire to hurt someone at some point, maybe not kill, but hurt is immensely common. Now, very few people have a desire to rape people, fortunately.

But most people have the desire to have sex, while the person object of the desire migh not want to have sex with said person.

There are hundreds of girls that post dozens of seminaked and/or sexy pictures of them on facebook, and they have public accounts or private but accept all requests, in that case, I'm not saying is right if someone rape them but if someone does i wouldn't say it wasn't 100% inevitable. I know i wish i had sex with them when i see them.

But sex, in spite of what some religions will tell you, is a completely natural and completely necessary biological function which there shouldn't be shame attached to. It doesn't serve the survival of the species if I smash the face in of the guy who just cut me off. Furthermore, you don't want to rape them, you'd like to have consensual sex with them.

Rape is extremely common in places like Saudi Arabia even though there are laws forcing what they see as modest dress. The issue is not how women dress, it's the dehumanization of women. Places where women are given full rights and there's less social stigma on their sexual activity tend to have less incidences of rape.

jmarquiso:

Aureliano:
Slippery slopes and censorship. If there's a topic that cannot be written about for fear of the very real possibility of an author being accused of committing or desiring to commit the action under discussion, does that set a dangerous precedent for free speech?

The common sense argument says no, but since when have you seen common people act sensibly when it comes to censorship?

To be fair, he never advocates censorship. He even says quite explicitly he is not saying they shouldn't be made. What he's saying is it's inappropriate, in bad taste, etc. Basically he'd defend the right for someone to make a game about rape, but he wouldn't invite them home.

Think about this - the ACLU threw its weight behind the KKK and NAMBLA, not because they believe in their causes, but they believe in the right for them to speak.

To invoke an old adage: love the sinner, hate the sin. The fact that somebody has made fiction about a difficult topic does not make them a bad person. Presumably meeting them and seeing how much you like them is how you can tell whether or not you'd want to hang out with them.

Rabidkitten:
Seems correct.

Given the circumstances, if it's you or them. You're probably going to choose to kill.

I'll stand up for the complexity of murder here and propose this question: If you're in the 'kill or be killed' scenario, who provokes it beforehand?

AWESOME VIDEO! Just one correction, the biblical quote is "Thou shalt not murder" not thou shalt not kill... And even in that, murder is placed on the same level as adultery, as defined contextually would be sex of any kind outside of marriage, which is much less offensive as rape. The result of murder and adultery were both the death penalty by stoning at the time.

Killing injustly is murder, killing with justice, ie death penalty, war, self defense, etc, is a completely different statement. Just wanted to clarify that. And for those idiots that will argue they are the same, LOOK IT UP IN A DICTIONARY!

The reference to gregor Clegane MADE this for me.

Slow clap jim!

This is all true, but to be frank I consider rapelay a game the same way I consider everything on redtube movies, yea they fit in the medium technically but they're porn first, the medium second. I doubt of the people who enjoy rapelay, that many of them are doing it because they consider it a good game, they enjoy it because it's about their fetish, and you don't choose your fetish, which would definitely be better than looking for real world rape porn (as in with porn actors) if only because the possibility is existent (even if infinitesimal) that it's real rape, and easily better than them looking for real ,not acted out rape porn. There's lots of videos I could find that are rape porn but no one is insulting the movie industry for it

I would definitely find it distasteful if the next GTA had a section where you rape someone though. That actually makes rape blend in with what's supposed to be the fun in a way, and obviously you don't know what you're getting into. If you played rapelay and had no idea what you were getting into than I envy your purity.

If I want to make a new villain that is worse that is worse than all other villains combined, what what could be worse than rape?

See Jim you can be thoughtful when you try lol.

But seriously rape is even worse then being an animal. From everything I know about Zoology in every species it is the female that makes the ultimate choice of who to mate with and when. I am sure there are a few exceptions like for invertebrates where mating doesn't involve sex.

Twinmill5000:
And as long as sex is a taboo subject, Rape will always be more difficult to go through (not to mention more of a taboo subject taboo subject taboo subject) than torture. The reason being, that rape will be much harder to recover from mentally so long as victims feel that they have nowhere to turn for help with the trauma they experienced.

Sex has not been taboo for a long time, at least not in my family or many many families around me. Also, people have all kinds of places to turn to and are almost forced to utilize them, and I know 4 women in my family alone that will always struggle with the fact that they were raped by some old pervert.

It is a scar that will never go away on anyone it is done to and it changes their perspective forever. When you are in the bedroom you can't do certain positions because of the insuing flashbacks, you can't use certain phrases as they will cause blackouts. Murder of any kind will never give a person that as they are dead. The person committing the murder will forever have to deal with it whereas the rapist just wants more.

And you know what, while I am ranting on the subject, it does not have to do with the fact that men and women are different because rape usually occurs on underage children, both boys and girls alike. And usually rapists have to rape at least 30 children before they get caught............ So, they are definitely on different levels and will/should always stay that way.

Hhhmmm I'm a little confused here.
Isn't murder the act of killing a human with malice afterthought?
The way I see it Jim does not really showcase nor argue in favour of murder... he argues in favour of homicide or killing in general.

I agree though. A game where there player rapes is a horribly bad idea however I certainly also think that a game may include rape in order to develop a character or story.

SonOfVoorhees:
My captcha says Kiss me.

RPGxMadness:
http://youtu.be/ymNdfdQvdVc

This is the quote from Dave Chappelle that Jim used, note that everyone is laughing and applauding...

:P

This joke is still funny even though Jim Sterling tried to shoehorn it into a rape video... Ye I said it, you shoehorned the shit out of that joke.

Jimothy Sterling:

Alterego-X:
The first point is kinda invalid by there being lots of games that allow murdering a bunch of unarmed civilians in unnecessarily cruel ways.

But otherwise I agree.

That subject is brought up a little later in the video, though.

My point wasn't to say that in-game killing is ALWAYS justified, more to say that, unlike rape, it at least CAN be justified within the fiction. I was simply drawing a distinction between the two concepts rather than presenting that first point as an absolute.

The one salient issue here is basically a legal one, but one that makes ALL the difference.

"Killing" IS NOT THE SAME as "murder".

In the vast majority of games, the act of killing is, as you have said, put in a context wherein it is socially justified, and for which the protagonist would not be punished in a civilised legal system: soldiers on the battlefield, secret operatives trying to stop some shady group from killing millions, a guerrilla fighter opposing a tyranny, cops going after hardened criminals, or people acting in self defence. So here, the whole concept of "murder" already goes out the window. Many games go even further than that by making the antagonists not human at all, at which point civilised morality doesn't even enter into the discussion, since we have no norms or precedents for dealing with monsters, dragons, zombies, robots or aliens, which get killed/destroyed every bit as often as human beings in the world of video games.

Then you have the "outlaw" type of games - Assassin's Creed, Hitman etc - in which your murderous ways are indeed censured and prosecuted by society (you know, GUARDS!), but it is understood by the protagonist and the player that the illegal acts are done in the service of some greater good, that the victims are driven by an evil agenda. So again, while the society of the protagonist sees their acts as murder, the audience is aware that there are other factors which render certain criminal acts acceptable - and the AC games, among others, do punish you for killing civilians.

So basically, in 90% of games, the act of killing isn't, in fact, murder; the very Bible that tells you not to kill your fellow man sings the praises of David and Joshua, and their heroic deeds in battle - which is just another way of saying "killing people".

We are then left with a rather small number of games in which you can actually commit murder or manslaughter - these tend to be open-world games, and in most of them, murder and manslaughter are either purely optional or again, put in a certain context. In the GTA games, you usually play a criminal. So it is understood that the actions of our drug-dealing, pimping, car-jacking, murdering protagonists are committed by people whose moral fibre isn't exactly what you would call "exemplary". Then there are games such as Fallout, in which it is understood that society has broken down, and that our morals and laws aren't applicable any more - not to mention the fact that many of these titles have a "karma meter" of some kind that does at least a token job of telling you that blowing up Megaton isn't a particularly nice thing to do.

However, none of this is applicable to rape - in no civilised society is there any context in which rape is acceptable (*looks at Japan* - right, guys?). Yes, soldiers raping women still happens in war, but it is considered an even more heinous act than the killing of civilians. There is no context in which raping somebody is necessary to thwart a great evil or serve the common good. Killing CAN be a crime; rape CANNOT be ANYTHING BUT.

Therein lies the difference, I should think. While many games glorify the act of killing, very few even portray the crime of murder, and when they do, it is either put in context, or the game catches similar amounts of flak as the rape games do - Manhunt, Postal etc - whereas it is impossible to put rape in a context that is anything other than vile, base, sleazy and criminal.

While I think this video has some great points, there is one part where the argument falls apart. If this is about irrevocable damage done to people, victimization and the like, then there are forms of murder that should be looked down upon as well.

For example: If you play a game like Grand Theft Auto, and you run over a group of civilians for fun, or shoot a random bystander in the head for giggles, aren't you doing just the same? You're irrevocably ending an innocent person's life who has no hope of fighting back. You're putting a gun to the head of someone who has no hope of stopping you, killing then, driving off with their car just because you can. Don't get me wrong, I despise rape. But we're talking about something worse, in my opinion; taking away someone's right to LIVE entirely just because you CAN.

Personally, I believe both are just as bad. I see no problem with the "getting the bad guy" aspect of video games, be it with guns, martial arts, etc. On the same token, however, I believe that the "victim" aspect of rape is just as prevalent in games like Grand Theft Auto where you are mowing over civilians in a car just because you could.

Errr, well the problem with "rape" being such a hot button issue is simply that it's definition has been broadened so much by society nowadays. When most people hear the term "rape" the imagine that comes to mind is someone just running up and overpowering a victim and forcing themselves on them. That's really, really bad. It's become a gray area today because that isn't what rape means in terminology anymore, today you could be accused of raping someone just by getting them drunk or whatever. It's also an ambigious crime in many cases because of a general lack of evidence in most cases. In a situation where you have a victim covered with injuries and damage to their genitals from being forced upon and all that it's pretty black and white, in many other cases however that's hardly the issue. Rape oftentimes becoming a way for women (in paticular) to change their mind about sex after the fact, or simply to abuse men. After all today it's not unheard of for some girl to pick up a guy, sleep with him, and then claim rape after the fact to get them in trouble, or to launch a civil suit. This is one of the big reasons why the so called "victim" is examined under a microscope.

Rape became a gray area due to the human factor, and the seriousness of the accusation and relative lack of a need for evidence leading to abuse. One variation on the so called "honey trap" nowadays is for some girl to pick up a guy she knows has money for some kinky sex, perform a submissive role for a camera, and then turn around weeks or months later and engage in blackmail, or accuse the guy of an actual crime with an attached civil suit.

None of that has to do with the issue of rape in video games, but mostly in response to the "issue" of how people are increasingly trying to turn it into a gray area. It's not because people are saying there is nothing wrong with rape, it's because all of the proactive prosecution of accused rapists have open the system up to abuse, and we're gradually seeing a shift towards protecting people from the accusation. Due to the trauma involved in real cases Rape is one of the few crimes you can get someone convicted of, or win a civil suit based on, with little more than circumstantial evidence. A girl could for example claim Jim Sterling raped her weeks/months/years ago at a convention or something, and provide evidence they bumped into each other briefly, and pretty much drag him through the mud (and perhaps even win). Given the passage of time due to "trauma" the accused is pretty much put into a position of having to prove a negative for all intents and purposes, when generally speaking it's supposed to be up to the accuser (the rape victim and prosecution) to prove he did it beyond a reasonable doubt. Rape has been derailing the justice system in one way or another for long enough where it's shouldn't be surprising that we're seeing some backlash.

Now, as far as rape in video games goes... well here is where I'm going to say something really contreversial, above and beyond the above, and hopefully some people will read it, and even if they disagree will think about it:

There is nothing wrong with rape FANTASY. Both genders have fantasies about being forcibly taken/seduced by attractive members of the opposite gender (or their own if that is what they are into). Indeed being taken by some Fabio-like pirate or whatever is a stereo type in women's romance novels, where the term "Ravished" tends to be used in place of rape. In such fantasy the big thing is the victim starts out resisting, but eventually likes what happens, and things progress from there. Pretty much your typical submissive stuff that goes through the minds of most people while half asleep and giving themselves a good wank to send themselves off.

The reason why such stuff is adult material, is because the consumer of the media has to be able to clearly divide fantasy from reality, something kids aren't nessicarly going to be able to do. What works in fantasy, doesn't work in reality. You need to be able to understand that if you go out and rape some lady she's not going to get into it over time and fall madly in love with you, because it's "what she really wants when she tells you how repulsive you are". Things like that do not end well in real life.

When it comes to me, the basic determining factor on if something is going too far, is the simple question of whether the victim winds up enjoying it within the fantasy. If the rapist and victim could both pass as ceterfolds (male or female) and it's part of a story that generally has a happy ending, then I really don't have much of an issue. If you have someone being used for amusement in the private chambers of a drow dominatrix, or held prisoner in the private quarters of Dread Pirate Fabio, chances are it's not an issue.

On the other hand if it's done in a fashion based entirely off of sadism (and not the enjoyable kind) and the victims are simply discarded, having obtained no form of enjoyment from the experience, then yeah... that's a little creepy, as it generally comes across as misogynist/miandrist.

As odd as this will sound, I will say that I've occasionally run into some thought provoking stuff that falls between the two extremes. Jim's point about how death ends, and a rape victims have to live on with the knowlege of the crime is a pretty accurate one. Over the years I've read some things about how the only fair way to really punish a rapist would be for them to themselves be raped as you can't even acheive parity with the crime no matter enter the punitive without that given that it's such a grotesque occurance. There is also the point that in some cases with certain kinds of crimes it might be also be seen as kind of valid as a punishment. I was reading a wierd story years ago dealing with what Snow White and Prince Charming did to the evil queen (Mallificent) after she was brought down. It was a bit sick to put it mildly, but it did raise a valid point that justice is blind for a reason, and simply killing her wouldn't have come anywhere near balancing the scales for the things she had done over a period of years. Of course while thought provoking on some levels, and working as a story in of itself, I saw it as more of an object lesson as to why we don't allow torture (and that's pretty much what this was, rape and torture occupying the same basic cosm of forced suffering).

That said, I have no problem with this kind of stuff in fantasy, and within games, either in terms of exploring the ideas, or just playing them out for entertainment. That's what the "M"/"X"/"R"/"AO" label is for depending on intensity. You really need an adult point of view before you should go there.

Also do not get the impression I'm some wierdo who wanders around reading tons of bizzare adult stuff non-stop (even if I admit I do read some). I'm speaking entirely within the subject.

I agree with Jim on some points, but not on others, and really I don't think he thought it out very well.

I'm... rather surprised at this one. I was expecting something a lot more controversial but you rather bluntly put forward a truth that I totally agree with, and you made sense of it all. Nice one there.

As a *male* Law Enforcement officer, and one in the military at that, I wholeheartedly agree with all points Jim. Rape is something in the world we live in that has two different identities. It is hate and frowned on (when caught and put in the pen with the general population, a rapist is in for a lovely time) yet prior to a conviction an almost, air of compassion is extended to the accused, almost as if they are a victim unto themselves.

Having dealt with a a few rape cases over the years my own theory on why this dichotomy exists (and is heightened in the military 10 fold) is that there is a certain shame in allowing oneself (that is to say, the victim) BE a victim. I think it relates to the seemingly natural prudishness of humans in most cultures that views sex as something that requires REAL effort to attain and that if a rape victim "allowed" that to happen, then they are somehow at fault for not protecting themselves as well as they should have. That's my theory at least. It certainty seems evident when interviewing accused rapists in the Army.

Also to anyone interested; yes men can be raped, yes women CAN be rapists (not all rapes are, lets say, mechanical, for example if a women held you (assuming male reader) down and forced a broomstick up your *** you'd probable consider yourself raped).

I think its just my philosophical view here that disturbs my view, but personally I think killing is far worse than rape. It is a definitive end. Unless you are religious and actually believe in afterlife, I understand not holding death as bad as I do, but any atheist who thinks its better to die than be raped really has not pondered exactly how final death is.

Any wound can heal, death cant. If you'd rather take bullet than be tortured that is your call, but unless all hope for better future is lost, I would fight tooth and claw for my last breath.

For the record when I play them games, I usually kill, murder and torture without remorse in abundance, regardless of my view on value of life. (or because of it? Who knows.)

Given the choice between rape game with force-feedback codpiece and a realistic kill simulator where every single enemy organ and artery can be my target, I'd say hold the clean boxers and bring me my best murder music. Unless the Killsim is an FPS with the option of peering to your opponents eyes as the life ebbs away. In that case, I'll probably need to change afterwards.

The Cheshire:
Um... yes, I agree with your points Jim, but you are missing a part: what about a game that features rape story wise but is not about that? Should that be taboo too? For example, the first quest in Game of Thrones involves chasing a rapist (he raped another dude) and killing him. No problem there, in my book. A rape attempt happens in Heavy Rain too, I don't think it's crossing the line either (well, I didn't fail that QTE).

Of course, a game about raping women is something different to all of that.

I'm fairly certain his conclusion was "Make whatever rape game you want, but don't be surprised when I judge you for it," I took that to mean that nothing was actually "taboo" in his eyes, or rather he would use his mighty monkey brain to help him decide whether to dislike it or not. He went on at length how Rape can be used in a narrative structure to define a badguy as being Purely Bad, and it sounds like those games you mentioned clearly fall into that category.

In short, I don't think he missed those parts at all.

Very good points. Something to think about. I'll be passing this video on to friends.

Thanks for trying.

portal_cat:
I think you brought up some good points. Where killing a bad guys most people pay more attention to being a hero then how many people they kill. Where rape is you are the bad guy. Murder can be justified, rape cannot.

What about games like Grand Theft Auto, where you murder scores of innocent people and are still ostensibly the "good guy"?

Amazing video, I think sometimes the shortest discussions are the best as you have to sum up your point in the clearest possible way, Jim did that with remarkable accuracy and clarity.

Rape can be worse than murder as it leaves a lasting stain, then again I would probably prefer my daughter (I don't really have one) to be raped rather than murdered, because she would still be alive. It depends on how mentally tough the rape victim is and if they recover or not. This is not an issue that can be just casually decided.

A strong person will recover from rape no one recovers from death.

The point about the defenceless victim idea made me think of the "No Russian" level of Modern Warfare 2. There was controversy about that scene, and even when I played it I felt uncomfortable, though never once did I feel it during any other part of the game. On the other hand, killing innocents in Red Dead Redemption didn't effect me so much. I guess in one you're playing as the "good guy" and in RDR your morality can be kinda shrouded.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 . . . 17 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here