Sex in games is bad, age of consent and what?

Remove all ads!

Sex in games in any form is so bad that minors should never get to see it. Age of consent is so important that people should go to prison for having consensual sex with the underaged. But what about real children who are not a lump of pixels and are in no consensual situation?

or

or:

http://www.cpa.org.au/garchve04/1193iraq.html

Hurrah for good, law-abiding heroes and defenders of freedom and morality, led by truly Christian values.

Of course, if you do a search on threads and posts by me (chevalier), for keywords like "children + torture + rape", you're going to find more. Much, much more. And not only in the time of war, not only outside the US territory.

Don't take this as an attack on the nation or the country, but something's obviously wrong with politicians and administration. Are values relative, detainees subhuman and automatically guilty of everything, devoid of any right to privacy of respect? Is lewdness and even non-consensual one and even with children involved, a dire necessity of war or justice? But a couple of pixels in GTA (which was wrong, of course) is a crime and some youngsters sleeping with a bit younger youngsters deserve to rot in prison. Eh...

 

I've been saying that since early '01. This is just one of the many symptoms, though arguably the worst. Personally, I would not have minded at all if someone had blown up Abu Ghraib with everyone inside. The blemishes that the Bush administration has inflicted on us will probably still persist by the time I grow old and die, but somehow I don't see him (or anyone) being punished for this, and that's just too much.

 

I'm actually surprised that you said some of the things you said since it's something I could have very well said myself. So what else can I say except that I 100% agree with what you just said. And now when that's done I think I need a strong drink.

 

Sorry, what is this thread actually about? I can't make any sense of it. What have those quotes got to do with sex in games being bad?

 

I'm with HB in part. chev, what does sex/sexual situtations in games have to do with children being abused in RL? Are you trying (in a convoluted method, imo if that's what you're doing) to connect sexual content in games with RL abuse of children? If so, you are leaving out a few links in the chain of thought.

 

I think that sex in ganes is not necessarily bad or wrong but a question of context and content. If in the course of a game there was sex that involved a minor that would be wrong; or if the sex was rape that would be wrong. If it involved any form of non-consensuality that would be wrong .

However really what would be the need for actual sex in a game ? It would be voyeurism in the extreme for it to happen in a game unless you were in control and even then the need would be dubious.

We all know from the games we play that there are courtesans etc and whilst we could go through a transaction/offer with them we have no need to see the act carried through. And in the romance threads of BG2 we don't see the acts where Aerie becomes pregnant etc.

I'm unsure of your tenuous links to RL child abuse to sex in games which as far as I can see is minmalistic and innuendo at best.

 

I take that the quotes paraghaphs are all instances of abuse by american soldiers in Iraq.

Compare the brutality of that with the shrill crys over the GTA:SAs modded nudity by the next President Clinton wannabe or efforts to restrict sales of games by the next President movie-star wannabe.
Or the 50 year sentence given to a minor who had sex with another minor and later married her.

Obviously something is horribly wrong with the USA.

Surprise, surprise! I too agree with Chev

 

Before the war started, I knew this sort of thing would happen, but I never imagined it would involve children. I wonder if certain members of this board will say its all propaghanda

There are thousands of members of the Royal Irish Rangers stationed in Iraq, but its funny how we don't hear of them raping and beating up civillians. Lets face it, we all know that most of Abu Ghraib are innocents that are rounded up to impress the US public. Whey they hear that Marines have thousands of 'bad guys' in prison, of course they will not care, as 1 they are 'terrorists' and 2 they are not US citizens.

The above quotes are from here

Is it wrong to rape children? Of course not, as "war is not meant to be nice"

A CNN report claims that sex abuse in middle class US is epidemic so if a person can do that to their own child, why would they control themselves when they have power over foreign children?

@ kuemper, I think that Chev is just talking about they hypocrisy of the US public going mad over GTA's hidden sex scenes, but not of the horrors of Abu Ghraib.

Edit : fixed link

[ November 13, 2005, 12:10: Message edited by: Cúchulainn ]

 

@HB, kuemper: Cuchulainn is right. The title is sarcastic, ironic. I actually think restricting the sale of violent or sexually intense games to minors is a very good idea, but what I am trying to convey is that people complain a lot about sex in games, 20 year old eople having consensual sex with a 14 year old etc, but look what happens on the holy war!

Leaving politicians aside, wonder if those soldiers or contractors who undress young girls during interrogations aren't perhaps good Christians and law abiding citizens in their communities, frowning on such scenes as the one in GTA and believing people should go to prison for years for sleeping with someone a couple of years younger. Heck, they probably believe gay people should be prosecuted but somehow sodomising young Muslims in interrogation isn't bad.

Oh, and we have relatively quite a damn lot of Polish soldiers in Iraq and still no such stories about them (apart from some politicians from other countries trying to blame Abu Ghraib etc on them but without success). And they aren't hand-picked saints. They are people like everyone.

@Cuchulainn: Yesterday or a couple of days ago, I saw statistics according to which one in four women in the States has faced a rape attempt and one in five has in fact been raped. It seems unusually high and probably higher than elsewhere, but I can't be sure. Perhaps there is a connection, but I can't be sure.

It looks like Maj Gen Walter Wodjakowski is a plain criminal but I doubt he's ever going to see a prison cell from inside. Unless he goes to one to "interrogate" someone.

From the article:

"The majority of these children trade sex for money or for more expensive clothes or other consumer goods," Estes said. "Most of the 'customers' of these children are members of their own junior and senior high school peer groups."

Survival sex is one thing, but "more expensive" is totally different. Actually, some people apparently think that they have found a way to cheat the system, get money without work, gaining much and losing nothing. Heck, some have partners and still sell sex for money, keeping it in secret. Some actually collect money for a better start in life, hurrying to make use of their young bodies while they are still juvenile. I've even heard about "earning" money for wedding parties that way. Heck, in my own law department at uni there are people who do that. But yes, someone must have failed to make sure that certain values are ingrained in said children and young adults. There is a lot of hypocrisy in bitching about sex in the media, while failing to bring up children so they wouldn't sell their bodies for trendy clothes and cosmetics.

[ November 12, 2005, 22:02: Message edited by: chevalier ]

 

Well, I am not usually one to defend the actions of this administration. And I think their condoning the use of torture is a disgrace (for them, and the american people as well).

However, regarding the actual incidents discussed in this thread, I am not sure. If that happened, that's horrific. But the article linked by chev (in the first post) is more than a year old. And it says that evidence related to these cases is in the hands of the New Yorker and Washington Post among others. I would think that if the evidence was strong enough, we would have heard about this in the media before now.

There is plenty of well-documented stuff to be angry about, though. And I think the abuse of human rights of prisoniers is as big a stain on the reputation of the Bush administration as their bungling of the Iraq war (or rather even worse)

Cúchulainn, could you fix the links in your post? The claim that "sex abuse in middle class US is epidemic" seems a little overboard, too.

 

Photos of sexual abuse of female detainees have been censored out and the whole matter has been silenced down swiftly, but yes, they did come out in their own time and were proven authentic. "Having sex with a detainee" was the kind of phrasing used by the administration. Have you done search on my previous threads about women and children abuse in the war on terror? Or even on American soil by the police, prison guards and others (several strip search threads, for instance)? Courts in the States have ruled that guards' "equal employment rights" are more important than inmates' concerns of privacy and modesty, including things such as watching inmates taking shower. So if you want to be a male guard in a female prison, it's more important than the fact a female inmate doesn't want you to look on her taking shower. Note that this doesn't refer to people with a verdict but all inmates, including detainees waiting for trial or even for any charge whatsoever.

 

Chev's initial post hits the nail on the head.

Granted, the source linked isn't the most credible, but, really, that's irrelevant; we know there has been torture. We know torture continues. Whether adolescents are being tortured or not doesn't really matter. Even if the "only" people being tortured are males between the ages of 25 and 35, it's absolutely unacceptable.

 

The link has been fixed. Please note that I am not saying it is 'epidemic', the CNN story says this, and I am also aware that child abuse goes on in every country.

I agree with AMaster that its unacceptable to torture any prisoner, even if they are guilty, but why is it acceptable to "carpetbomb the entire middle east and take all their oil" as you state in another thread?

Donald Rumsfeld has even admitted that child abuse at the hands of US guards has went on in Abu Ghraib and other prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan. If anyone wants the link, just ask.

 

And what exactly charges can an eight year old be waiting for? A 16 year old could technically fire a gun and even wound someone, but come on...

And while I understand what drives people to violence in interrogation, sex is totally unnecessary in it. Just why the hell undress 16 year old girls?

 

So, if sexual humilation and rape will break prisoners quicker than outright torture, according to the US doctrine this is the way to go.



Wasnt there much condemning of Hussein's regime for just that? Torturing? Raping children in their parents plain sight to crush their spirits? Kind of hard to tell who is the bad guy nowadays, no?

 

Nah, I would still tell them to get bent. Things that are done to me against my will are no fault of my own.

Next, it's absolutely unexcusable to use such methods and undress 16 year old girls (and generally women) in interrogation to soften them up, anyway. Don't you agree?

Yeah, but raping children and making their allegedly (read: imaginatedly) Saddam-supporting parents watch is apparently not the same.

I repeat once again: there is no lawful use of sexual humiliation or sexual violence and nothing whatsoever can justify that. I would gladly rather die than have a 16 year old girl undressed so I could be saved because perhaps she knows something.

It's time to put criminals on trial, guys. It's getting more and more difficult for me to see the difference between Saddam's troops and American troops. I wonder how many Iraqis would rather still have Saddam in power instead. I believe soldiers who have done such things should be handed over to the Iraqi authorities, albeit without wives and daughters. Deprived of all military or civil ranks and medals etc.

Besides, it's utterly ridiculous when a soldier calling himself a defender of Christian values doesn't have a problem with sexual coercion on prisoners, thereby committing an act which, according to his own religion, sends him to hell if he doesn't repent -- and he has to regret it to repent, so "I'm going to do this now and ask God's forgiveness later" doesn't work.

In my view, anyone who sees sexual humiliation and violence against prisoners as acceptable under any circumstances is unworthy of the uniform or the public office he's holding. Those animals need to be banned from any position of authority or power over anything that lives.

I wonder if public opinion in the States sees those crimes the same as if the animals in uniforms did it on WASP Americans. I wonder how a 16 year old American girl feels when she's about to say "daddy" to a guy who undressed 16 year old Iraqi girls in interrogation. Or how an American woman feels about sleeping with a guy who "had sex with female detainees". Wonder how conservative anti-gay environments feel about soldiers who sodomise Iraqis or make them emulate (read: perform fully, just without the heart and mind) homosexual intercourse. Or pro-life organisations about those who keep eight year olds in prisons.

Plus, I wonder what American authorities and organisations and prominent citizens have had to say so far about American prisoners being sexually humiliated and/or violated. Don't people radiate holy wrath when reading about Irani investigations in which American captives are raped but then suddenly think it's not such a big deal when it's done to Iraqis? I would like to believe they don't and I cling to that belief. But those people don't grow up in the army and/or administration, damn it. What gives?

I perfectly realise not every soldier does that, but for each one that does, how many see it? How many people don't react? Or superior officers, don't they really know? What about intelligence agents? Those aren't exactly private soldier equivalents on the ladder.

[ November 13, 2005, 21:13: Message edited by: chevalier ]

 

I agree with everthing you said, chev, with only two exceptions.

So would I, but you can't deny that humiliating violation has at least some effect, no matter how much you ignore it. At the very least it turns into anger.

I'm not familiar with that acronym, but those of us in the US who are sane (a number growing with every day and new bungle of the war) recognize that these people should not be doing these things even if ordered, as such actions or even orders are unlawful. People who do these sorts of things should be turned over to their victims for punishment.

 

Yes I did get mixed up there... Apologies to both TGS and AMaster for this.

 

Felinoid, WASP basically means white. White Anglo-Sax Person or something along those lines.

I'm too selfish to make "I'd rather die" type of exclamations, but on the actual point I agree.

The kind of stuff going on is insane. It's absurd that people supposedly fighting dictatorships, terrorism etc. sink to the level of the enemy they demonize.