They are talking about underage girls being depicted in sexual ways.

I'm all for this.

"What? You mean they are going to be more conscious about how 50% of the population is depicted in their games now?"

Plenty hunks of muscle running around taking hundreds of bullets in video games.

I don't look anything like those masses of muscle and I'm pretty sure I'd have a very hard time with taking even one bullet.

I'm not complaining though.

"But what about me? Why didn't they think about how I would feel about how the opposite sex is depicted?"

Well there are plenty consumers with varying tastes but if there's policy that curtails certain tastes, those tastes will go elsewhere to find it. This should be taken into consideration before enacting such policy.

There is truth in what you say, but (a very big BUT) there is a reason why people are asking companies like Sony to apply such rules: it is so much easier.

Look, Sony can just implement internal rules, don't tell anyone (as they did until someone asked) and don't release a firm list of criterias. Fuck, there even is no need for a list criterias, Sony can just decide on a whim which game passes and which not, for which game they ask the dev for changes. A law must have clear rules and it must be released to the public so everyone can see these rules.

Sony also don't need to be transparent about the enforcement. So, we only know if this happened, if a dev leaks it or something goes wrong. For the most part we will not know that Sony asked for changes. In difference with a law, you know where it applies. For instance, in germany a public body 'indexes' some media for unfit for public distribution or even completely forbidden to distribute. The rules on these cases are set clear, but more importantly we know how many works are hit by that, for the most part we also know the list and for every media the organization can be asked if that media is on the index. We never will know such a thing for Sony.

To put such restrictions into law a public discussion has to take place and enough legislators have to agree. Even if they do, after the election new lawmakers can change it or take it back entirely. For Sony some manager can just decide on a whim to implement such rules (as it happened). No public discussion, no election.

That is why more and more people are asking or pressuring companies with big marketplaces into such rules. Because they know this doesn't stand a chance to become actual law.

Do a large percentage of the female population consider prostitutes in GTA as negative depictions of women? Why is that ok?

1. Don't know. I've never polled anyone on that question.

2. That damned internet sarcasm.

Why is that bad? 

A few women playing beach sports and posing in bikinis: BAD and should be censored!

Topless strippers and hookers rubbing their tits in your face: No problem.

Its all about money anyways. If DOA Xtreme sold 40M copies, we would not be having this conversation.

I guess its not about those this time. It keeps happening, so I just used previous ones as an example.

I'm not one to guess on polls: I don't base my beliefs on polls. Masses of bullet-proof muscle or exaggerated breasts are products of fantasy. They're not real, they're make-believe and a way for one to enjoy free time.

Neither muscles nor breasts bother me.

In Sony's POV they think this is the future of gaming. 4 the players. 

This has never been a problem so it should not be a problem now.