Google bans Doki Doki Literature Club from their store due to "sensitive themes"

[Norion]

Chrkeller said:

Norion said:

Do you have a problem with art depicting high schoolers going through stuff like mental health issues? Cause the reason it got banned from the Play Store is its depiction of "sensitive themes" and DDLC's most acclaimed aspect is its handling of mental health issues and as someone who dealt with major depression issues for a lot of my teen years and was going through a depressive episode when I played it back in 2017 its handling of that is a huge reason why it was so impactful for me. It's a similar situation for a lot of the other people who have played it.

You still haven't explained why it's nonsense and a weak argument in the way I used it. As I said slippery slope arguments are completely valid in certain situations. It's only a fallacy when used poorly for example by implying that doing something will lead to something unrelated and not providing evidence or a logical basis for why that'll happen.

I think games that feature sexual activities (implied or shown) for under aged kids is sick, gross, disgusting and unacceptable.  

Because it always end up with a gross exaggeration.  Democrats want to limit mag capacity and slippery slope means they are going to ban butter knives!!

Heck, you can see it in this thread.  Google is banning a game that has adult themes involving kids and people are already "omg M rated is next!"

Slippery slope is an assumption based system not grounded in logic and reality.

No idea what high school means to other countries, but here it means under aged kids...  i do not and will not view sexual themes with kids as acceptable.  I just will not. 

That doesn't happen in DDLC but you realize that art depicting something isn't an endorsement of said thing right? It can depict the outright evilest acts imaginable like torture and genocide, including underage people getting killed, tortured and so on.

The key difference is that the US has the 2nd amendment so the ability to own and use guns largely unrestricted is under no threat at all from minor gun regulation. Getting two thirds of the government to implement a new amendment that nullifies that one is not happening when one of the parties is all in on gun rights. In comparison people in certain other countries would've been right to point out that gun regulation decades ago would lead to more down the line so the slippery slope argument would've been correct for that so it absolutely can be grounded in logic and reality.