Home | Forum | Unread | Sign in | Sign in | Beta? | Wiki
The Phoenyx
your roleplaying community

discussion > gamers > main

GAMERS is about roleplaying games (including sims) and almost anything of interest to the average roleplayer.
Subscribe | Unread | Recent | Group options | Topic options | Post
WattErs10
watters.10

Wed

Aug 23
2000

18:09

[GMAST] Violent [video] game ban

On 23 Aug 2000, at 8:07, Volker_Bach@public.uni-hambur wrote:

> Steve Barr schrieb:
> 
> > http://www.cnn.com/2000/LAW/08/22/videogameban.ap/index.html
> >
> > "The law requires coin-operated games featuring
> >  graphic violence or strong sexual content to have
> >  warning labels and be kept at least 10 feet from
> >  nonviolent game machines. The machines must
> >  also be separated by a curtain or wall so minors
> >  cannot see them. The law bars people under age
> >  18 from such games unless accompanied by a
> >  parent or guardian."
> >
> > Thoughts?  How many people would get into roleplaying if they
> > couldn't legally until age 18?
> 
> I don't think this touches RPGs at all, or rather, it oughtn't
> rationally. (Of course rational is what censorship normally isn't,
> but hey). The issue here is images of violence and sex that young
> children ought not to be exposed to unwittingly. It's roughly the
> equivalent of the ruling that forbids videostores from displaying
> Cinderella next to the porn section (or rather, forbids them to
> admit children if they do). The Guardians of High Culture have
> always (and I think rightly) seen pictures as much more dangerous in
> influence than text, and in this case I can see their point.
> 
> Of course, the formulation worries me. "Graphic violence or strong
> sexual content" - does this have any fixed legal significance, or is
> it a case of "I'm the judge and I say it *is* porn"? Depending on
> current mood you could use this to forbid Pokemon (c'mon, electric
> shocks? poison gas?) How would this be handled in application? I
> wouldn't want my kids to play some of the nastier computer games (if
> I had any, that is), but neither would I want to get back to the age
> of "good, clean-minded Disney fun". Lawyers around?
> 
> As to RPGs - I'm surprised the opposition has not voiced this
> concern yet. I've heard RPGs attacked variously as escapist and
> socially stunting (which a good argument can be made against) and
> tools of Satan (that one doesn't even merit an answer IMNSHO). But
> if I was a concerned parent what would worry me most is just what my
> kid is playing there. Now, no big RPG I know makes either graphic,
> gory violence or porn a central feature (GURPS even refuses to
> discuss its notorious 'Erotic Art' Skill in print in any detail),
> but you wouldn't know from looking at the pictures. So this wave
> might yet spill over, and while I agree with Deb Atwood that
> roleplaying is easily handled in a mature and civilised way I know
> I'll have a hard time explaining that to a hostile audience.
> 
> Volker

Not to get too far off the topic or to sound too political, but back in the 
early days of rolegaming, Tipper Gore lead a crusade which included, among 
other things, a call to have rolegaming banned except for adults.  

Same thing is happening to independent / imported comics.  Next time you head 
down to pick up a little harder manga from the adult section, don't be 
suprised to find the comic shop closed, because the owner is in jail on 
obsenity charges.  Regular books are next.

Little pockets of society have always thought that they knew better than the 
parents what was and was not acceptable "for children" and think that placing 
laws makes the problem go away.

Case in point - just 20 miles south of my home the little town of Circleville 
Ohio decided that "Children" could not have facial hair, since facial hair is 
a sign of drug use among teens - this was not in the 50's or 60's, but 
happened just a few years ago.  Now they have clean-shaven children and NO 
drug problem (yeah right).

It's this type of specious logic the politicians love, they can jump on any 
bandwagon to "support" a cause, and when the ACLU steps in they can point to 
those hippie-freaks from the 60's who don't care about children.  One study 
done by a church group without proper scientific controls is all it takes.

Just another reason I think the "professional" politician should be banned.


Coyt D. Watters
"The Internet, billions of electrons with nothing better to do."
----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

Subject (required)




 
Refresh