By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - PQube cancels Omega Labyrinth Z western release on PS due to disagreement with Sony over sexual content

Mnementh on 26 June 2018
Barkley said:
Nem said:

Also, why doesn't violence illicit the same response? We all know school shootings are a common occurrence. Have you never practiced Street fighter moves as a child? How is it different?

I'm not saying that violence in video games has no effect on the person playing, there's many studies and debates about that and people come to different conclusions, that's another discussion. But what I'm talking about is general responses to the content.

If you see something sexual on screen the general response for most people is Arousal, be it Movie, Game or Book. The response in real life to a sexual situation is also Arousal.

The response to violence in a Movie, Game or Book varies based on the person but for most they're just having fun, whereas if they are in a violent situation in real life there response is not "I'm having fun", the general response to violence is terror. This is the difference.

Sex on Screen - Aroused
Sex IRL - Aroused

Violence on screen - Fun
Violence IRL - Terror

It's instinctive that we're in danger in a real violent situation, whereas when it comes to sexual situations there is no danger (at least for the instigator) so the reaction to onscreen and real is the same with sex, but not with violence.

As Nem I really don't want to be seen as defending something I don't wanna defend (I already see posts here decrying defense of childporn). Still, I can't read this post without commenting.

First of all, you correctly state that studies are inconclusive about virtual violence causing real violence. But in no moment you even ask for studies showing that virtual sexualisation of children leads to child rape. I would say the scientific data is even sketchier on that.

But besides that you make a point about virtual violence is taken differently than virtual sex. Problem is: this is nothing natural, is something learned. If you look through movie history, violence didn't start out that explicit as it is today. Instead it slowly ramped up over decades. The viewing public was trained in watching this and the envelope of acceptable was slowly pushed outwards. Sex on screen though was always banned for religious reasons. Only these days the envelope is starting to slowly pushed about acceptable sexual content. And if you watch european movies, a lot more is possible than in american ones. So the differentiation you make between the two is really an artificial difference, created by movie history.

That said, sexualisation of children is always a special point. But you didn't talked about that, you spoke about sex on screen in general.



3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023

10 years greatest game event!

bets: [peak year] [+], [1], [2], [3], [4]

Around the Network
Shaunodon on 26 June 2018
Mnementh said:
xl-klaudkil said:
Boobs are bad, violence and mass shootings arr okr

That's the american way of life.
pokoko said:

The fuck you talking about?



Aeolus451 on 26 June 2018

Sony shouldn't try to conform to western pc culture.



Nymeria on 26 June 2018
Barkley said: 

It doesn't have to be a depiction of a child having sex to be considered child pornography or at the very least child exploitation. Depictions of violence is not illegal, sexual depictions of children is.

There's no denying that the character in the middle here is a child:

This character is one of the specific reasons the UK's rating board gave for banning the game:

"The game is explicit in its setting within a “school” environment and the majority of the characters are young girls – one child is referred to as being a “first year” student and is seen holding a teddy bear. The game clearly promotes the sexualisation of children via the sexual interaction between the game player and the female characters."

I'd say the player having to touch and fondle a clearly underage character is very reasonable grounds for a ban. Violence on the screen and for real are very separate in our minds, sex is not, hence the majority of the world getting off on porn.

In your mind there are two worlds, one in which the game is released and one in which it isn't.  What difference would it make in the world?



Aura7541 on 26 June 2018
Nymeria said:
Barkley said: 

I'd say the player having to touch and fondle a clearly underage character is very reasonable grounds for a ban. Violence on the screen and for real are very separate in our minds, sex is not, hence the majority of the world getting off on porn.

In your mind there are two worlds, one in which the game is released and one in which it isn't.  What difference would it make in the world?

Just going to jump in this convo for a bit and share this link. The references are located at the bottom of the article if anyone wants to read the actual literature.



Around the Network
JWeinCom on 26 June 2018
Kyuu said:
Hiku said:


As for the age of consent, in Japan it's 13 while in the US it's 16 at the lowest, and 18 at the highest.

I could have sworn it was 16... just shows how little i know. If that were an Islamic country you wouldn't hear the end of it.

In practice it's not really 13.  Each prefecture is able to set their own age of consent.  13 is the minimum that they are allowed to set it to.  This obviously seems low, but keep in mind this law was established in 1907.  You could argue that they could and should change it, but I don't believe any prefecture has the age set at 13, so it's kind of a moot point. 



JWeinCom on 26 June 2018
Hiku said:
JWeinCom said:

In practice it's not really 13.  Each prefecture is able to set their own age of consent.  13 is the minimum that they are allowed to set it to.  This obviously seems low, but keep in mind this law was established in 1907.  You could argue that they could and should change it, but I don't believe any prefecture has the age set at 13, so it's kind of a moot point. 

I added some more details about this to my post above. Japan's laws on this can be complicated and confusing. But from what I've read about prefectures setting the age to 16-18, there is an exception to it if "they are in a "sincere romantic relationship".


It says "usually determined by parental consent." Though it sounds like there are other ways of proving that it's a sincere romantic relationship. Especially in this day and age with pictures and videos.
I don't know what other conflicting laws there may be, as I read up a little bit about it but there was a lot to take in. But at the very least there seems to be different interpretations of the law.

The laws are kind of vague which allow them to decide on a more case by case basis.  Which can either be a good thing or a bad thing.  At any rate, the statement that Japan's age of consent is 13 needs to be followed by a huge asterisk.  Japan does tend to have among the lower teen pregnancy rates in the develop world which would suggest that young girls aren't particular sexually active (or are really prudent about birth control).



Faelco on 26 June 2018

The age of consent in Japan is 18. The national law (13) only applies on 2 inhabited islands. The rest of Japan applies regional laws, which are (almost?) everywhere 18 years old. The "romantic relationships" stuff is if the 2 people involved are below 18. It doesn't mean that the law is always enforced, but it's 18 in it.

My Japanese girlfriend is 19 so she's not technically an adult here (it's 20, mostly for marriage, alcohol and global responsibility), so I checked quite a lot to be sure that I wouldn't be in trouble.



Acevil on 27 June 2018

I always used this as guideline to understanding age of consent in Japan. Don't know how accurate it is.



 

LivingMetal on 27 June 2018
Nymeria said:
Barkley said: 

It doesn't have to be a depiction of a child having sex to be considered child pornography or at the very least child exploitation. Depictions of violence is not illegal, sexual depictions of children is.

There's no denying that the character in the middle here is a child:

This character is one of the specific reasons the UK's rating board gave for banning the game:

"The game is explicit in its setting within a “school” environment and the majority of the characters are young girls – one child is referred to as being a “first year” student and is seen holding a teddy bear. The game clearly promotes the sexualisation of children via the sexual interaction between the game player and the female characters."

I'd say the player having to touch and fondle a clearly underage character is very reasonable grounds for a ban. Violence on the screen and for real are very separate in our minds, sex is not, hence the majority of the world getting off on porn.

In your mind there are two worlds, one in which the game is released and one in which it isn't.  What difference would it make in the world?

^^^Classic.  That's all I will say on this subject.  Have a great and powerful day.