Allegro.cc - Online Community

Allegro.cc Forums » Off-Topic Ordeals » RapeLay

This thread is locked; no one can reply to it. rss feed Print
RapeLay
Onewing
Member #6,152
August 2005
avatar

axilmar said:

It depends on the killing. Killing for defense = acceptable, killing for offense = not acceptable. As I have said before, being on the offensive is what is immoral.

In your opinion. For some people, killing isn't immoral at all and to some killing in defense is immoral. Given, these groups of people are very small, it still makes my list true.

------------
Solo-Games.org | My Tech Blog: The Digital Helm

Karadoc ~~
Member #2,749
September 2002
avatar

Karadoc said:

And when the person fantasizing about these things comes and rapes your daughter, what would you say?

Karadoc didn't say that.

axilmar said:

And when the person fantasizing about these things comes and rapes your daughter, what would you say?

Raping my daughter would be a problem. Fantasising about rape is not.

Look, I can't say I've fantasised about raping someone, but I have fantasised about killing people - and I bet most other people here have as well. It isn't a problem. I can fantasise as much as I like and it doesn't do any harm to anyone. The reason I'm bringing this up is that it is probably something that people here can relate to.

-----------

axilmar
Member #1,204
April 2001

Onewing said:

In your opinion. For some people, killing isn't immoral at all and to some killing in defense is immoral. Given, these groups of people are very small, it still makes my list true.

Yes, absolutely in my opinion. We are discussing our views here, aren't we?

Fantasising about rape is not.

How can you know that?

Quote:

but I have fantasised about killing people - and I bet most other people here have as well.

I am in the minority then...

Is it healthy to fantasize about killing people?

Quote:

I can fantasise as much as I like and it doesn't do any harm to anyone. The reason I'm bringing this up is that it is probably something that people here can relate to

Until, one day, reality and fantasy blur into one thing and you end up doing this.

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

I can't seem to find an official age for the younger daughter anywhere... Probably doesn't help that I don't speak Japanese. And judging that sort of thing is never easy. :-X I can see an argument being made that she could be a teenager[1], which is at least a gray area, although that is easily open to interpretation. :-/

References

  1. Wikipedia says the story begins with you following her into the subway. I don't live anywhere near subways, but I can't see it being normal for children to ride them alone...
Karadoc ~~
Member #2,749
September 2002
avatar

Right, axilmar, it's a constant battle to keep our fantasies out of reality... It's an accident waiting to happen. A slippery slope. A liability. Lets solve the problem by putting restrictions on what people are allowed to fantasise about, so that we can all live in peace.

-----------

axilmar
Member #1,204
April 2001

Right, axilmar, it's a constant battle to keep our fantasies out of reality... It's an accident waiting to happen. A slippery slope. A liability. Lets solve the problem by putting restrictions on what people are allowed to fantasise about, so that we can all live in peace.

Why do you feel it is a restriction? unless you enjoy it, you wouldn't feel it's restrictive.

EDIT:

I do not support any restrictions on thought. That's fascism. You can think whatever you wish. But allowing such a game to go in public...it's like society accepting rape, even if society says it's immoral to do so.

alethiophile
Member #9,349
December 2007
avatar

axilmar said:

But allowing such a game to go in public...it's like society accepting rape, even if society says it's immoral to do so.

So what would you advise? Are you calling for the game to be banned? Or is it simply a moral argument you're making? If the latter, then many would agree with you that it is, at the best, morally questionable to make a game like RapeLay. If the former...well, bans aren't really practicable, especially once you get people's back up about it--there would simply be a black market for illegal hentai games, much as there is now for child porn.

--
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
C++: An octopus made by nailing extra legs onto a dog.
I am the Lightning-Struck Penguin of Doom.

Karadoc ~~
Member #2,749
September 2002
avatar

axilmar said:

I do not support any restrictions on thought. That's fascism. You can think whatever you wish. But allowing such a game to go in public...it's like society accepting rape, even if society says it's immoral to do so.

I don't think allowing a game like this one suggests that society is accepting rape any more than games with theft say that society accepts theft or games with murder say that society accepts murder or games with war say that society accepts war.

-----------

axilmar
Member #1,204
April 2001

So what would you advise? Are you calling for the game to be banned? Or is it simply a moral argument you're making? If the latter, then many would agree with you that it is, at the best, morally questionable to make a game like RapeLay. If the former...well, bans aren't really practicable, especially once you get people's back up about it--there would simply be a black market for illegal hentai games, much as there is now for child porn.

One thing that works but has been largely neglected is exposure. Prohibition does not really work, unless we talk about fascism. So, what is needed here is exposure to the media. Let the media talk about it, analyze it, display it, and let the people know that this game exists. Then if public opinion is largely against it, the company that made the game will be largely stigmatized and driven out of business in the most natural manner.

I don't think allowing a game like this one suggests that society is accepting rape any more than games with theft say that society accepts theft or games with murder say that society accepts murder or games with war say that society accepts war.

You can't stick everything in the same bag. There is a reason why you are stealing and from who you are stealing or who you are killing. As I said above, defense = good, offense = bad. So, if the poverty is so great and few people are ultra rich and you steal from them in order to feed your children, that's defense. It can be accepted. If you kill an oppressive dictator, that's defense, and it is acceptable. If you steal a kid's launch money, that's offense, and it's not acceptable. If you murder someone because you wanted to steal his watch, then that's offense, and it's not acceptable.

Rape, by it's very definition, is a violation of the other people's rights. It's offensive, and therefore not acceptable. By allowing this game to exist, society winks to people that "hey, it may be officially wrong, but in reality it is not that wrong".

Another viewpoint is the victim's viewpoint. If you would have been raped, how would you feel that your pain has become the object of entertainment for some people, and most importantly, how would you feel that society largely ignores your pain and instead tries to profit from it? if not betrayed, then you would feel raped again, at least psychologically.

Is it really worthwhile for a society to ignore victims in favor of entertainment? isn't it a moral downhill that one person's pain becomes the entertainment of another person, and that is accepted by the rest of the people? isn't that a violation of human rights?

Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
avatar

axilmar said:

Doesn't the game put you in someone's shoes that commit rapes?

You don't take your shoes off before raping someone? How uncivilized is that?

The only way Trump is going to be involved in a landslide is if the land surrounding the White House collapses into the Earth's core. -- bamccaig

Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
avatar

I ripped some fur off of a cat in KQ III.

Bob
Free Market Evangelist
September 2000
avatar

axilmar said:

So, if the poverty is so great and few people are ultra rich and you steal from them in order to feed your children, that's defense. It can be accepted.

You have a very strange definition of "defense".

Anyway, if you start banning anything that seems objectionable to someone, you will rather quickly end up banning everything.

Voltaire said:

Not only is it extremely cruel to persecute in this brief life those who do not think the way we do, but I do not know if it might be too presumptuous to declare their eternal damnation.

--
- Bob
[ -- All my signature links are 404 -- ]

axilmar
Member #1,204
April 2001

Bob said:

You have a very strange definition of "defense".

Since when stealing from the ultra rich and giving to the ultra poor (when the population is 99% ultra poor) is not fair? in such a case, it's obvious that wealth is not redistributed properly.

Quote:

Anyway, if you start banning anything that seems objectionable to someone, you will rather quickly end up banning everything.

It's not banning anything that seems objectionable to someone. It's banning something based on the widely acceptable principle that the freedom of one person ends where the freedom of another person begins.

Do you object to that principle?

Epsi
Member #5,731
April 2005
avatar

axilmar said:

It's banning something based on the widely acceptable principle that the freedom of one person ends where the freedom of another person begins.

{"name":"2652587063_b43c764eea.jpg","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/9\/9\/99353adfd38f9e1938db369d63eebf1f.jpg","w":500,"h":500,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/9\/9\/99353adfd38f9e1938db369d63eebf1f"}2652587063_b43c764eea.jpg

___________________________________

piccolo: "soon all new 2d alegro games will be better. after i finsh my MMRPG. my game will serve as a code reference. so you can understand and grab code from."
piccolo: "just wait until my invetion comes out its going to take the wii to the next leave of game play. it will run sony and microsoft out of busness if i dont let them use it aswell."

Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
avatar

axilmar said:

Since when stealing from the ultra rich and giving to the ultra poor (when the population is 99% ultra poor) is not fair? in such a case, it's obvious that wealth is not redistributed properly.

It depends on if the ultra rich got to be rich by stealing from the rest of the population. Otherwise, it's just that the poor are stealing from the rich (by voting for government that works via the politics of envy).

If you say the rich got that way by paying "sweatshop wages", the poor obviously thought that was better than their alternatives, so the "sweatshop" was a good thing. Otherwise the poor wouldn't have worked in the "sweatshop".

Otherwise, I'll go on the dole right now...

[EDIT]
If you think taking peoples money and giving it to poorer people is good, let's see you send a few hundred euros or whatever to ReyBrujo right now, no excuses.
(I assume he's not starving, but in a low income country)

The only way Trump is going to be involved in a landslide is if the land surrounding the White House collapses into the Earth's core. -- bamccaig

alethiophile
Member #9,349
December 2007
avatar

axilmar said:

It's banning something based on the widely acceptable principle that the freedom of one person ends where the freedom of another person begins.

So how does RapeLay impinge on anyone's freedom? At all? It's a video game. No actual rape was ever involved.

--
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
C++: An octopus made by nailing extra legs onto a dog.
I am the Lightning-Struck Penguin of Doom.

anonymous
Member #8025
November 2006

What about school-shootings which seem to be getting rather common-place. Internet videos probably are a factor (lots of imitators) but where do people get an idea that they should take lots others with them? Could waving guns all day in video games be a factor?

Perhaps they've got an idea that punishing their teasers (and some random bystanders) is OK as you are going to punish yourself in the end? Anyway, the reasoning seems a bit similarly faulty as the opinion that "killing is OK in defense". No, it isn't in a large number of cases - when you are attacked with a knife, you'd aim for the foot, not for the head. It also seems that in movies people are killed in defense rather liberately.

Onewing
Member #6,152
August 2005
avatar

anonymous said:

where do people get an idea that they should take lots others with them?

I imagine there's several different routes to this outcome.

  • Chemical imbalance causing them to be angry/depressed when they should be happy.

  • Giving up on life all together, feeling their's means nothing so why should anyone else's life mean anything

  • Feeling of death is greater than life, therefore they wrongfully justify killing as saving

  • A flip of a quarter

------------
Solo-Games.org | My Tech Blog: The Digital Helm

anonymous
Member #8025
November 2006

Except has any of this lead to frequent school shootings before? There seems to be a cultural shift in the notions about dying and suicide among young people, and it sort of coincides with the age of violent movies, video games and internet. Doesn't all that seem to make at least some people numb when it comes to these issues, a sort of black-and-white world-view (killing in defense - OK, killing in offense - bad)?

alethiophile
Member #9,349
December 2007
avatar

anonymous said:

Except has any of this lead to frequent school shootings before? There seems to be a cultural shift in the notions about dying and suicide among young people, and it sort of coincides with the age of violent movies, video games and internet. Doesn't all that seem to make at least some people numb when it comes to these issues, a sort of black-and-white world-view (killing in defense - OK, killing in offense - bad)?

While school shootings and mass killings are high-profile, frightening events, the truth is that they are very rare compared to anything else. To paraphrase Bruce Schneier, don't worry about things you read about in the news. Worry about the things that are so common they don't even make the news anymore. More people die in drunk driving accidents every day than in even the worst of mass killings--so let's ban alcohol, shall we? It worked so well during Prohibition.

--
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
C++: An octopus made by nailing extra legs onto a dog.
I am the Lightning-Struck Penguin of Doom.

Onewing
Member #6,152
August 2005
avatar

The increased frequency has a lot to do with momentum (imho). Once these shootings got media attention and the full impact was realized, others followed.

------------
Solo-Games.org | My Tech Blog: The Digital Helm

anonymous
Member #8025
November 2006

Absolutely. But makes people sheep to the point that they are willing to follow?

axilmar
Member #1,204
April 2001

It depends on if the ultra rich got to be rich by stealing from the rest of the population. Otherwise, it's just that the poor are stealing from the rich (by voting for government that works via the politics of envy).

The rich always steal from the rest of the population. That's a huge topic, but it is very rare for rich people to be absolutely honest in their job.

Quote:

If you say the rich got that way by paying "sweatshop wages", the poor obviously thought that was better than their alternatives, so the "sweatshop" was a good thing. Otherwise the poor wouldn't have worked in the "sweatshop".

It does not work like that. The poor have no alternative because the rich decided so.

So how does RapeLay impinge on anyone's freedom? At all? It's a video game. No actual rape was ever involved.

Rape does. Rapelay just opens the way.

Personally I don't see a need for such types of games to exist, unless the majority of men fantasize about raping some girl. I wonder if this is true.

LennyLen
Member #5,313
December 2004
avatar

anonymous said:

Except has any of this lead to frequent school shootings before? There seems to be a cultural shift in the notions about dying and suicide among young people, and it sort of coincides with the age of violent movies, video games and internet.

Sorry, but we have violent movies, video games and the internet here, but we've never had a school shooting (At least never by a student. There was an incident where some nutter shot up a primary school, but that was in 1923, so the internet can't be blamed for that.) It's more than just that.

alethiophile
Member #9,349
December 2007
avatar

axilmar said:

Rape does. Rapelay just opens the way.

How? Why would it?

I'm still not sure what, exactly, you're suggesting--when I asked you said something about exposure, which I don't think would work, but just recently you also said something about banning it. If you're talking about the former, then go ahead, say what you want. This has already gone through the controversy mill (see OP) and Illusion still exists. If you're talking about the latter--by what precedent do you ban a computer game? And why would you?

--
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
C++: An octopus made by nailing extra legs onto a dog.
I am the Lightning-Struck Penguin of Doom.



Go to: