I would attribute half of this to psychiatrists wanting to name something and sell some drugs to go along with that. The other half to parents, teachers, and community workers that can't see any fault in what they're doing or don't see that humans are always a violent mob, and that they want a quick something to blame for all of this.
I'd even go to say that playing violent videogames often releases stress and tension, leading to a calmer and less violent person.
hmm:
quote:But Professor Sanders said computer games affected only particular types of children and even then other [negative] factors were likely to be present.
"Generally no single thing is sufficient to explain the development of this sort of problem," he said.
obviously the writter dosnt seem to think so based on everything else that is writen there. it's all the games fault!!
I went back to this story again and noticed the opinion poll: 67% of people who read this article said "It's not the games fault if the children misbehave".
I still find a 33% minority in the opinion of "Children see, children do" to be quite frustrating on this topic; If 3.3 in 10 people actually believe that a child's aggression could be attributed mainly to playing video games, then the industry still has a serious image problem.
I'm also annoyed by the fact that this reporter fails to mention that "ultra-violent" games are not marketed towards children, and that parents should actively monitor their children's media exposure. By not mentioning this, he does what every other game-hating journo has done before him and make it seem like the game industry is just trying to corrupt the minds of innocent children, which is needless to say, really wrong.
Still thinking about forming a group like 'responsible adults against portraying violence to children? which are primarily concerned with removal of the image of Christ crucified, as it shows a violent death, being stabbed by a spear, then hung up by the wrists to the cross (fyi, nail through hand can?t hold someone?s weight, the nails where put through the wrists for crucifixions by the Romans?)
Or perhaps a group named ?society for individual responsibility??. Or just take a flamethrower to everybody?..
you know coen youve actually made one of the same points that marilyn manson made when he copped flak for the collumbine killings thing (another well established connection im sure), to give you the quote from the article he made for rolling stone: "A half-naked dead man hangs in most homes and around our necks, and we have just taken that for granted all our lives."
something else id like to raise was i was in a video store the other day and two kids who couldnt have been higher then a grade 4 or 5 came rushing in in search of grand theft auto 3 (i know this because they were telling it quite loudly to anyone who would listen). They found themselves a copy and handed it over to mum who paid for it at the cash register to the attendant who had watched the whole thing (and new mum wasnt buying that game for herself thats for sure). Yet the industry itself will get the blame (allthough for what its never certain).
Currently, the poll is at:
Do you believe exposure to such games as Counterstrike makes the average child more violent?
Currently, the results are:
1154 1154 25.79% Yes, children see ... children do.
3320 3320 74.2% No, it's not the game's fault if kids misbehave
Total votes: 4474
It seems like Counterstrike has become the new whipping boy ever since those [url="http://www.sumea.com.au/snews.asp?news=1238"]two men "dressed as Counterstrike characters" during killing[/url]..
souri: yeah i read that artical from a link on the atomic fourms. very funny. the writers at atomic made some interesting points:
> the clothing in CS is based off 'real' terrorist style clothing so the men might as well have been imitating them. you really wouldnt know.
> ironicaly there is no character in CS that is dressed like either of the two men.
> the picture is of CS Source while the crime happend several years ago.
What I find rather interesting is that every change in society needs to be blamed on something to give people a sense of relief. It can be related, in a strange way, to a workplace/road accident with certian professionals being brought in to determine how such a incident happened. As soon as a 'professional' arrives at a theory of why children are delving into this 'dark side' people are given closure, a relief, "we now know why".
Another point that I find quite interesting is how the school system uses 'behavior management' rather than 'disipline'. It seems now days we just accept that children misbehave and we just manage it, we dont teach right and wrong cause we let them get away with it. Hey, it seems so crazy, its like a woman could murder her autistic child and blame it on frustration and get away with it! I wonder how she will manage.
quote:Originally posted by MoonUnit
something else id like to raise was i was in a video store the other day and two kids who couldnt have been higher then a grade 4 or 5 came rushing in in search of grand theft auto 3 (i know this because they were telling it quite loudly to anyone who would listen). They found themselves a copy and handed it over to mum who paid for it at the cash register to the attendant who had watched the whole thing (and new mum wasnt buying that game for herself thats for sure). Yet the industry itself will get the blame (allthough for what its never certain).
I have a friend at EB and he has been giving parents lectures on what to expect in the game whenever they come in to buy it for their kids. (ie. violent and LOTS of swearing). I don't think any parents have decided to not buy it, but it's his own insurance policy so that if any parents come back complaining how the game isn't suitable for their child he can say "I told you so".
CYer, Blitz
It's pretty funny that this came up because I was reading issue #104 of PC Powerplay (October) and it had this tiny article on page 26 about a game that the Czech Republic's Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs commisioned a studio to make that involved the male figure beating and abusing his wife!
Apparently the idea behind it is that men who play the game will take their wife-beatable frustrations out on their "virtual wife" in game so as not to beat their wives in real life.
I think playing games offers a stress and reality release from the horrors and acumulating stress that children are exposed to every day. This doesn't mean give them games that are violent but to give them the apporopriate game for their age group. OBVIOUSLY if it says 18+ on the cover you wouldn't give it to a 6 year old! Would perents let thier 6 yr old child watch MA movies with sexual, violent and disturbing scenes in it? I doubt it, so why do they think that games are any different.
Another aspect that it is just ignorance on the perents part thinking all games are just games. ARH! >_<
This is interesting. At the start of the forum everybody is saying that computer games have no affect on people but by page two the forum is complaining about parents giving violent games to children and why would that matter unless it did have an affect? (I don't mean to sound aggressive or condescending. just trying to point a few things out)
I personally have a lot of mixed feelings about this. One is that as it says in that article "Public Schools Principals' Forum spokesman Brian Chudleigh said yesterday he believed violent computer games and movies had had " an accumulative impact on society". " (Don't get me wrong the article was pointless and moronic fear mongering)
Key words being "accumulative impact on society". The media in all forms seam to think that violence is acceptable from violent movies and games to the nightly news right to books. Any of you read "the chronicles of Thomas Covenant the unbeliever"? One of the first things the "hero" does is rape a 12 year old girl. And let?s not mention writers like Clive Barker.
Violence is all around us theses days. For example the movie Gladiator which has constant graphic violence but had the Caligulan orgies removed because having someone disembowelled is fine for an M rating but showing some "pink" isn't. The constant influx of violence does desensitise people which so the next thing to come out has to be even more violent to get a reaction.
At the start of this essay I said I had mixed feelings. One is the fact that despite watching/playing/reading lots of incapably violent material I myself am an incredibly NON violent person. I never actuality respond with violence. I even think twice before stepping on a cockroach. Is this because of the way I was raised? I was never allowed to watch movies until I was old enough legally ( I.e. 15yo = M15) while some of my friends were watching Predator at 10yo (which has skinless human corpses!) but most of them aren?t violent either. but on the other hand my brother is much more violent than me.
Where is the small book going? I don't know I don't have any answers; I'm just pointing about a few things and expressing a few opinions.
I think I'll finish up now saying I think we all need to be more responsible for our own actions raising our children with a decent set of morals and reducing the amount of violence in the world.
quote:Originally posted by Ponkavitch
At the start of the forum everybody is saying that computer games have no affect on people but by page two the forum is complaining about parents giving violent games to children and why would that matter unless it did have an affect? (I don't mean to sound aggressive or condescending. just trying to point a few things out)
The point here is the games were designed to be in the capable hands of a certain demographic and in those hands there is no harm. If a younger child is affected in anyway by a MA rated game then its not the games fault because the child was never supposed to have gotten a hold of it. So in sum there is no affect, provided its in the hands of its intented audience.
I think everyone agrees with me when i say f**k off! (Sorry but im sick of crap like this, i really wish the media would listen)
These days its just playing the blame game. Its the parents fault for not paying any attention to their kids so the kids go attention seeking elsewhere and causing trouble. The parents of course know this but are too embarassed to admit it so they blame what the kids love most, video games. Why admit to something when you can blame something else?
I bet you back in the old'n days the TV was considered the corrupter of children, today its video games.
LOL! that article is so full of junk, for starters this apparent recent problem they relate to a game thats been out for something around 5 years. Secondly they attribute students aggresive behaviour to games, why? how was that link established?
oh and thirdly, love how it uses the term "dark side." Star wars fever has reached further then we thought :P
(btw im looking around and cant see a email to contact the writer or editor or anything, if anyone can find one please let us know)