Defending virtual rape: Not the same as condoning it

Manhunt2 was banned in the UK because:

"Manhunt 2 is distinguishable from recent high-end video games by its unremitting bleakness and callousness of tone in an overall game context which constantly encourages visceral killing with exceptionally little alleviation or distancing. There is sustained and cumulative casual sadism in the way in which these killings are committed, and encouraged, in the game."

Therefore I think this disgusting game should be banned as it encourages rape, seeing as thats the whole point of the game.

We play games for entertainment.
We watch movies with rape, murder, torture, sex, drugs, lies just plain crazy,scary,and sometimes sick stuff - all for entertainment!

We don't ban those movies do we? No.
We set an age restriction on them. That's how it is.

There are age restriction on the games as well.
So what's the problem?
We may not agree that it's right but just look at from that point of view.

We ban and censor things all the time in this country... a "rape game" can be banned the same as anything else... and while we do have the first amendment right that guarantee free speech you also have to be aware that not all speech is in fact free.

Just like you can't shout fire in a crowded theater or insight acts of violence on your behalf (Charlie Manson ask him about it), as well as it being illegal in most states (technically) to use profanity in front of a minor (corrupting one)

While I support free speech I find these games deeply disturbed.

I am against the death penalty, but I shed no tear when they execute a moral monster.

By the same token, I have no sympathy for the moral monsters who would play such a game.

Would a game about shoving Jews into the ovens be OK?

Would a game about lynching African Americans be OK?

What about child molesting?

Some things are simply not healthy, mentally or morally, no matter how you try to justify it.

Anyone with some knowledge of psychology knows that rape is not some spontaneous act, it is usually the result of many hours of fantasy. These games simply facilitate that fantasy.

If nothing else, a rather hefty sin tax should be attached to these games, in order to fund education that might combat the corrosive effects of such blatant and ugly objectification.

As long as it remains virtual reality it is freedom of speech. Once it uses real human images I'm not sure if having them available online(free)is freedom of speech.
I will say the female in these picture on the sites I read look hauntingly like an actress that has been seen on a HULU available, recent TV show. The eyes, face, hair, body type... that's kind of creepy! = [

Thought and action are certainly two distinct entities. Most of the time people are able to restrain themselves and respect the boundary between desire and indecent social behavior. Still there are those who are unable to manage these boundaries. Fortunately or unfortunately for many of us, we live in societies in which the state is responsible for safeguarding its citizens. The state will of course react unfavorably any time its citizens are harmed, no matter in what numbers. So debates like these, along with debates over violence in the media, will continue until we are able to accept that a certain amount of people who engage in these kinds of games will act out their desires and a certain amount of people will fall victim to such action. It's not a matter of whether or not these games influence people to rape or kill, but how many individuals are raped or killed by the few players who ARE pushed over the edge. So let's just determine an acceptable number and be comfortable with it. The same way we've accepted the fact that there will be a certain number of poor people in a good year, a certain number of traffic accidents, and so on and so forth. Since we are unwilling and unable to ban harmful activities (racism and homophobia in private, rape video games) for fear of impinging upon freedom of speech, we must be willing to tolerate the consequences of occasional hate crimes, and sexual abuses.

Virtual and fantasy rape should not share the stigma of actual rape.

The distinct difference is the fantasy element and the role-playing element vs. the act of forcing unwanted advances on another person.

What you act out between two willing participants(or one human and another virtual one) is private and acceptable as long as no one's personal comfort zones are breached.

It becomes a problem when a person is forced against their will to have sex and is assaulted in real life with no approval given prior to sexual contact.

Fantasy rape is consensual; Real rape is not. Big difference. Please, stop being oversensitive, lay back the morality and let the virtual rape happen.

Wow, I've never heard of a "rape" game before reading that article....I feel sort of sick to my stomach that people would actually create a game in which you...well, rape. Let alone would I think people would buy it! Wow...that was an eye opener.

And to think people would defend rape games...haha

I'm not a gamer, but i must agree with the original author of the article. These games, no matter how disgusting they are, should not be banned (1st amendment rights and all).

In addition, the notion that people who play/defend these games are automatically inclined to rape someone is absurd. Not everyone who plays a first person shooter wants to shoot another person.

I find these games morally repugnant, but to ban them based off of a gut reaction, would be, well, irrational.

Oh ya, you should see the other fights I ve ............

"Though I may not agree with what you say, I will defend to the Death your right to say it"-

They do this because real girls would kick them it the balls, game over.