Pope calls Video Games and Cartoons "Perverse"

[Jetsetlemming]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/01/24/pope.media.reut/index.html

"Any trend to produce programs and products -- including animated films and video games -- which in the name of entertainment exalt violence and portray anti-social behavior or the trivialization of human sexuality is a perversion," he said.

Oh Noez! Exalted violence! Anti-social behavior! THE TRIVILIZATION OF HUMAN SEXUALITY!
All things the Catholic church normally endorses.
Hm, how odd.

[Soli]

My beloved Tetris... I never knew. :blank:

[haterllnation]

Oh Noez! Exalted violence! Anti-social behavior! THE TRIVILIZATION OF HUMAN SEXUALITY!
All things the Catholic church normally endorses.
Hm, how odd.

QFT. Exactly what I would have mentioned.

[Baroness]

The Pope needs to stop talking about things he really doesn't know anything about.

[Noata]

Tetris is really perverted. Stick long blocks in holes?! Come on!

[anver]

The Pope needs to stop talking about things he really doesn't know anything about.
Everybody does.

[TygressVirgo]

Yeah . . . the GTA series is not marketed to teenagers and younger children . . . nor is it extremely violent. By all means the Pope has no idea what he is talking about.

[Fred]

I heard that popes are required to undergo an examination proving they are male, whereby their genitals are exposed to a procession of bishops. I certainly might be mistaken about this requirement, but it could explain the Pope’s fixation with the trivialization of human sexuality.

[Cherub Rock]

I'm not Catholic so I don't really care what the Pope thinks.

As far as I'm concerned he has a point, however saying that video games and cartoons that exalt violence and portray anti-social behavior or the trivialization of human sexuality (in other words promote non-conformative forms of behavior) are perverse is no great statement. A lot of people believe that anyway, and all the Pope is doing is saying that he agrees.

[ZaichikArky]

... AHAHAHAHAHAHA.

this is HILARIOUS. especially coming from the roman catholic church :3. Aren't Catholic PRIESTS more perverse than video games? I'd love to see some hardcore gaming response... like Penny Arcade's response to that stupid politician. It was quite amusing.

[Jiant Flying Panda]

Aw fuck this shit.

Im Catholic... Ish. But even I'm gonna call this bullshit.

I'm gonna go play Gears of War later. Anyone wanna trade gamertags?

[Kwiz]

My beloved Tetris... I never knew. :blank:

You must repent for this sin. Un-install Tetris now and never look back upon your perverted ways.

[Stephy]

I dunno, some games I do think... are questionable.

[Saitou Hajime]

The Bible's more violent than most video games, so whatever.

[Saitou Hajime]

...K? I was replying to the thread in general, not your post. The Pope's being a hypocrite.

[Jetsetlemming]

Yeah . . . the GTA series is not marketed to teenagers and younger children . . . nor is it extremely violent. By all means the Pope has no idea what he is talking about.
They aren't marketed towards younger children. O_o If they were, The commercials for GTA: San Andreas would have used a song slightly more hip than "Welcome to the Jungle," but rather one of the many rap songs on it's soundtrack. G&R doesn't have too many fans among today's youth. :blank:
And anyway, GTA is hardly a fair representation of the entire media of videogames, just like Dragon Ball Z and Drawn Together are hardly representative of most cartoons. Over half of all videogames released are rated "T" by the ESRB, and only around 17% of them are rated "M", having adult content.

[RandomPasserby]

Heh, funny how the pope copies american christian groups.

[Beowulf]

Thus further proof emerges that the pope is an idiot...

[Jetsetlemming]

I wonder if the Pope likes Castlevania? :D

[Mastiker]

Sheesh. I could be pope.

http://www.brightlightsfilm.com/49/49_images/1sbcheery.jpg
^ targeting children

http://mix-cozzy.blogzine.jp/musicmixmag/images/jackass.jpg
^ targeting teenagers

http://www.businessweek.com/careers/workingparents/blog/archives/sex%20and%20the%20city.jpg
^ targeting lonely middle-aged women

[Kass]

They aren't marketed towards younger children. O_o If they were, The commercials for GTA: San Andreas would have used a song slightly more hip than "Welcome to the Jungle," but rather one of the many rap songs on it's soundtrack. G&R doesn't have too many fans among today's youth. :blank:
And anyway, GTA is hardly a fair representation of the entire media of videogames, just like Dragon Ball Z and Drawn Together are hardly representative of most cartoons. Over half of all videogames released are rated "T" by the ESRB, and only around 17% of them are rated "M", having adult content.


Keep telling yourself that. Those games are marketed to kids. Start strolling through the more popular titles, then look honestly at when the commercials air. Medal of Honor, GTA, Call of Duty, even the Marvel Comics-based games are extremely violent and all of them are advertised during the Saturday morning and after-school kids programming. The song played doesn't change anything.

The ratings are irrelevant because there is no enforcement behind them. there's no real penalty for retailers who ignore them and I've watched 10-year-olds buy rated T and M games at Wal-Mart without so much as a raised eyebrow from the clerk.

My daughter owns all of those titles save GTA, which I absolutely refuse to allow. I dislike them intensely and I have told my daughter why, but my daughter is smart enough to tell the difference between game violence and real violence. Not all kids are. I've met them--in court.

I don't object to the games being published or purchased, but be realistic. The games are excessively violent and some are sexually graphic if you know the right cheat code. They are marketed to kids. That's just reality. Whether or not you think that is okay is morality and the Pope is as entitled to his opinion as you are. It certainly isn't invalid.

As for the cartoons, again, same thing, just a different medium.

Mastiker, you market to kids by portraying teenagers. The target audience for any show or game is typically younger than whomever is portrayed in the advertisements and the shows/games. Shows starring teens are marketed to the pre-teen demographic. Teens tend toward shows/games about adults. With the exception of your Stupid in the City example (I loathed that show), you need to drop back each of your examples an age group.

[Mastiker]

Mastiker, you market to kids by portraying teenagers. The target audience for any show or game is typically younger than whomever is portrayed in the advertisements and the shows/games. Shows starring teens are marketed to the pre-teen demographic. Teens tend toward shows/games about adults. With the exception of your Stupid in the City example (I loathed that show), you need to drop back each of your examples an age group.

Ah, I was just trying to make a joke :gloomy:

I dunno who any of those target, but I watch 'em all. 'Cept for the last one. Gaw, why would anyone think that's a good show? And since it's been on basic cable it pisses me off more, because it's no longer "Sex in the City" it's just "Four Chicks who talk about getting some but never do in the City" and... well, that just completely kills the point of calling it that D:

[Jetsetlemming]

Kass, when has Grand Theft Auto EVER been advertised on a children's network or during saturday morning cartoons? The only times I ever saw a commercial for the latest game is in the evening on channels that typically target adults. In case you weren't aware, there are activist groups that watch every second of TV, especially children's TV and broadcast (ABC, NBC, FOX) TV. If a GTA commercial EVER aired during a children's show, heads would roll at the network and Congress would definitely get involved. A user-made modification for the PC version of Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas introduced sexual content into the game, and for this the ESRB recalled the game (all versions) and rerated it AO (Adults only), and Hillary Clinton got the FTC to investigate Take Two Interactive.
And there IS plenty of enforcement of the ratings standards in most places. Walmart, Gamestop, most of the other big retailers of videogames are ordered from the head offices to refuse to sell M rated games to children without a parent. I CAN NOT buy an M rated videogame from the Gamestop near my house anymore unless I luck out and get a new employee at the register. Otherwise they decide I look underage and ask for ID which I don't have. I bought an M rated game at Walmart last week, and the guy at the electronics register called over two of his co-workers and they eyeballed me for a minute before deciding I look over 17 and letting me buy the game.
You made a right decision in not letting your daughter not have Grand Theft Auto. You certainly don't need the Pope parrotting lines from Christian fundamentalist groups about subjects he most likely knows NOTHING about. Even if you've never heard of Grand Theft Auto, on the back of the box it clearly describes the game is suitable only for those 17 and over, and contains Animated Violence, Animated Blood and Gore, Strong Language, and Mature Sexual Content.
The point isn't that the Pope isn't allowed his opinion. It's that he made an offense generalization of entire forms of art. Nowhere near all videogames are violent and sexual. 99% of cartoons are perfectly safe for children's viewing (at least American cartoons >_> Not gonna mention Japanese stuff). He clearly laid out that he views ALL cartoons, and ALL video games, as forms of perversion. They have no worse content than your average live-action Hollywood blockbuster or television drama (24? CSI?), and most of them are lightyears tamer, but NO, "real" television is established as normal. People LIKE television shows. It's those goddamn cartoons and videogames that they don't like! They'll like to hear us slander those!

[Fermented Yeast Paste]

The point isn't that the Pope isn't allowed his opinion. It's that he made an offense generalization of entire forms of art. Nowhere near all videogames are violent and sexual. 99% of cartoons are perfectly safe for children's viewing (at least American cartoons >_> Not gonna mention Japanese stuff). He clearly laid out that he views ALL cartoons, and ALL video games, as forms of perversion. They have no worse content than your average live-action Hollywood blockbuster or television drama (24? CSI?), and most of them are lightyears tamer, but NO, "real" television is established as normal. People LIKE television shows. It's those goddamn cartoons and videogames that they don't like! They'll like to hear us slander those!
No he didn't, read it again. He clearly was speaking out against any form of media, including (but not limited to) cartoons and video games, that "exalt" violence, etc. This does not include every cartoon, nor every video game. To "exalt" doesn't just mean to have violence in it (say, Sonic), but rather have it at excessive levels (GTA).

[Kass]

The GTA:SA "Hot Coffee" mod was not a user mod, but a Take Two mod that had to be unlocked. It was a mod installed on the factory disks for both the PC and the PS2. The FTC nailed them because it was in the factory-released game and not disclosed. Take Two got hammered because they lied about it, not because it was there. They only lied about it to slip in a lower rating. Initially, it did NOT warn of the graphic sexual content. They eventually admitted they lied about the mod and that is why the got off with a warning for a promise to "never, ever do it again, cross my heart, hope to die." They weren't fined or punished in any way, shape or form.

You might get lucky and have the only Wal-Mart in the country who actually checks ages for video games. Dateline has tested the big chains and kids routinely walked out with age-inappropriate games. I have never, ever seen an employee at a chain store check an ID for a video game. They certainly never check my daughter's when she buys her games. (She has to save and purchase them herself because I refuse to pay for them.)

You are assuming the Pope has never seen or has no knowledge of these things. I'm sure he's seen enough to render his opinion. contrary to popular belief, he doesn't live in a bubble. I doubt seriously the Pope holds a higher opinion of nearly all TV programming, but most popular video games are violent and unnecessary, as are most cartoons shown on TV in America. Making the violence cartoonish or humorous doesn't make them non-violent. It makes them violent and irreverent. There's a difference and depending on your viewpoint of acceptable violence levels, some or none are acceptable for children. I can assure you that 99% safe is grossly exaggerated.

Have you ever tried to find non-violent video games for anyone over the age of five? It's an exercise in exasperation and futility. I've tried and I gave up. Your choices are sports games or Zelda, and even that has some violence. It just isn't as pervasive and at least has a clear good vs. evil context. It still isn't exactly much of a selection. My daughter has the games she does because I finally decided her game console was a glorified, very expensive paperweight if I limited her to games I found acceptable, so I backed off...some. My daughter has those games absolutely NOT with my blessing, but with my grudging acknowledgement that at least I know my kid is smart enough to handle it. I'd just as soon snap the disks of a few of them.

The generalization the Pope made isn't far off reality. The only disparity is what level of violence is acceptable or not.

The Christian groups you lambaste for only hating on cartoons and video games actually routinely hammer almost all television, especially the CSIs, 24 and the like for being gratuitously violent and gory. They don't let off more realistic TV shows. The comments about cartoons and video games get more press because animated ventures appeal to children and are aimed at children and the media and politicians know that "think of the children" is a sure-fire way to get ratings/attention. (Why do you think one of Dateline's highest rated shows is on busting pedophiles?) Go read the websites. About the only programming that gets acceptable ratings is the nauseating Lifetime channel programming.

Mastiker, sorry. Didn't get the joke. :(

[Mastiker]

Mastiker, sorry. Didn't get the joke. :(

That's what you get for being a mod I suppose. You either don't get the jokes, or you make bad ones. :watson:

I agree with everything you say, to a point. I like video games a lot, but I know how hard it is to find something non-violent. If you're really looking for things that aren't violent, I would suggest a lot of Nintendo games. Stuff like Animal Crossing and Mario Party are fairly non-violent. They tend to have a lot of games that are targeted to a younger audience, but still enjoyable by everyone.

With the exception of Sonic Heroes and some techno games (that basically no ones ever heard of) there are barely any games that I can think of that don't have much graphic violence.

[Digital Masta]

Now if only I gave a damn about what the pope thought...hmmmm

[c-rex]

You might get lucky and have the only Wal-Mart in the country who actually checks ages for video games. Dateline has tested the big chains and kids routinely walked out with age-inappropriate games. I have never, ever seen an employee at a chain store check an ID for a video game. They certainly never check my daughter's when she buys her games. (She has to save and purchase them herself because I refuse to pay for them.)


Don't give your daughter install privileges on your computer if you are so worried about her purchasing and playing games you feel would harm her. Then it doesn't matter if Walmart or where ever fails to ID. At best she'll get a box with a lewd picture on it. She won't be able to install the game until you log onto the computer with an admin account and install the game for her. I'm sure you do realize that the best way to make your kid want video games is to cast them in an ill light. If you want to her off gaming and don't mind a few days of night terrors I'd suggest you pick up a copy of FEAR, just make sure your computer can run it. In either the second or third chapter of the game when the Delta force team is burned to death by the crazy little girl that should put her off games and be good for a few nightmares. Although such advice comes with the disclaimer that I babysit a ten year old who beat my time in that game and she constantly destroys me in multiplayer mode. Pesky children with their better reflexes.

As for the Pope, well hey if you are going to let some old dude a bunch of other old dudes elected and declared to be the voice of an invisible man in the sky control your life, well its a free country.

[Mastiker]

Don't give your daughter install privileges on your computer if you are so worried about her purchasing and playing games you feel would harm her. Then it doesn't matter if Walmart or where ever fails to ID. At best she'll get a box with a lewd picture on it. She won't be able to install the game until you log onto the computer with an admin account and install the game for her. I'm sure you do realize that the best way to make your kid want video games is to cast them in an ill light. If you want to her off gaming and don't mind a few days of night terrors I'd suggest you pick up a copy of FEAR, just make sure your computer can run it. In either the second or third chapter of the game when the Delta force team is burned to death by the crazy little girl that should put her off games and be good for a few nightmares. Although such advice comes with the disclaimer that I babysit a ten year old who beat my time in that game and she constantly destroys me in multiplayer mode.

That's horrible advice.

"Let's mentally scar, and possibly psychologically damage our child into having nightmares on something. That'll make sure she'll never do it. Oh, she might be screwed up later on, but at least she's safe now, cause we all know that that's the most important thing. Talk to her about it, or let her use her own judgement on it? Psh. That's the old method of parenting. Who wants that, when we can just scar our kids and pass the blame?"

DIAF.

Pesky children with their better reflexes.

I agree with that. Simple solution if your little brother is better than you: disconnect the controller. They'll never know the difference.

edit: brother, babysittee, whatever same thing XD

As for the Pope, well hey if you are going to let some old dude a bunch of other old dudes elected and declared to be the voice of an invisible man in the sky control your life, well its a free country.

*ahem* Politics anyone? Only difference is that instead of the voice of an invisible man, it's the voice of an ignorant mass of people. Just because that's how people want to live their life doesn't mean you should knock it down. I'm sure they look at your lifestyle as pretty stupid as well (or maybe, just maybe, they recognize the differences in both lifestyles and instead of ranting mindless dribble, they respect what you do so long as you respect what they do. Just a thought)

Olives make me uppity. :innocent:

[c-rex]

That's horrible advice.

"Let's mentally scar, and possibly psychologically damage our child into having nightmares on something. That'll make sure she'll never do it. Oh, she might be screwed up later on, but at least she's safe now, cause we all know that that's the most important thing. Talk to her about it, or let her use her own judgement on it? Psh. That's the old method of parenting. Who wants that, when we can just scar our kids and pass the blame?"

DIAF.

I love the DIAF comment. Excellent maturity. But I'll be polite and respond in a mature fashion rather than four letters. Maybe you should stick to playing RWPW where DIAF is an accepted retort.

Humans want that which is forbidden. I wanted beer, a fast car and hockey pads because my parents forbid them. I have two out of the three and have a line on the third one. If you give the daughter a FPS she might decide on her own she doesn't like them. FEAR is the worst of bunch, but you can always go with Counterstrike Source which is realistic but not so gory. CS:S is a good game too since if you toss in her a good server the game will be no fun to her since she'll like last thirty seconds. Thhat also might convince her the game isn't fun since she'll be losing constantly. A used copy of Halo might also work for parents who prefer their to children to shoot at things that don't look like people and have blue and purple blood. I highly doubt that Kass is going to plug her daughter into FEAR no matter what I say, I was more pointing out that giving the daughter a taste of the fruit she wants and making sure that the taste is a bad one is one option. Personally I like Kass's method of "If you want it, buy it". The only issue with that method is sooner or later the daughter might buy something Kass does not like.

As for a video game messing up a kid for life I highly doubt it. My point was the sheer amount of blood in FEAR is overwhelming to many people. The simple disgusting factor in the game is likely to make a novice FPS player blanch. As a consquence the daughter might have a bad dream about it, it happens in human nature now and than. Half the schools in America pull the same trick in Driver's Ed and Sex Ed. Ever seen "Agony on the Highways"? Although studies have shown most of the shock value is gone in under two weeks, for most people within three days, leaving only a lingering distate for the entire deal. For that matter my parents gaze me a beer when I was twelve. I swear my dad bought the worst beer in the store and let it get heat and cool a half dozen times before he gave it to me. They figured the horrible taste would put me off drinking. It did buy them four years.

Oh and I babysit a girl. Go back and reread my post where I talk about how she destroys in multiplayer.

[Stephy]

I pretty much agree on everything Kass has said thus far. And just to be silly:

Video games and cartoons that depict violence have made Mastiker use acronyms to tell people to die in a fire! *Shock.

DIAF.

[Mastiker]

snip

I added the DIAF to show how serious I was about what I said :clap: Good job on catching that and overreacting to it.

As for the rest of it, no duh humans want what they desire the most, but she ain't exactly holding her kid off from all games. If she was, perhaps your advice would be smart, but not in the manner that you said it. Giving kids nightmares isn't always sensible. Just because humans want something doesn't mean they should get it.

Personally, I wouldn't give my (theoretical) child a game like that to play right away. Instead I would start them off of games with little violence. Then, by the time they got to the point where they were playing FEAR they'd be able to recognize that violence is fictional, and only okay in a virtual playground where no one actually gets hurt. Who knows.

Besides, if it really worked, the kid you babysit wouldn't play the game ever, much less better than you. :rolleyes: therefore, bad advice.

h and I babysit a girl. Go back and reread my post where I talk about how she destroys in multiplayer. Uh-huh, I read that. I wasn't takling straight to you with my comment :D

That's why, directly underneath it, it says "brother, babysitee, whatever same thing" Sorry that wasn't clear enough, mostly that was my fault.

edit: Stephy! You're right! I must repent D:

[Kass]

c-rex, if you had read, I do draw the line and have made at least one game a complete no-go in my house--anything GTA for starters. I always reserve veto power on anything she purchases and as I also said before, I actually talk to her and tell her exactly why I don't like them. I'm more than happy to occasionally pick up a video game I approve of (I actually really like playing the Zelda games), but I'll not waste my money on most of the crap that is out there. If she wants to waste hers, I just point out that when something she REALLY wants like an mp3 player comes along, she'll not have any money for it because I won't make up for money she wastes. *THAT* works best.

I am the mom and what I say goes. Period. I am also fair and know perfectly well that making things taboo makes them more intriguing. I also know that intriguing or not, somethings are just NOT appropriate for children and you just say "no" and that's the end of discussion.

Oh, and no one but I have install privileges on my PC. I'm very OCD about how my PC is organized.
it's the voice of an ignorant mass of people.

Now who's painting with a wrong broad brush? They don't agree with you so they are ignorant? Nice.

[c-rex]

Besides, if it really worked, the kid you babysit wouldn't play the game ever, much less better than you. :rolleyes: therefore, bad advice.


She started on Halo and CS 1.6 and worked her way up.

As for the girl, you used a masculine pronoun and then corrected it from brother to kid I babysit. I never noticed a correction of the masculine pronoun.

You should really keep your fat dumb ass in RWPW where the hardest thing you have to do is link to cat macros.

So can you tell the above is sarcasm or not? Who knows, text doesn't convey context. Next time a nice icon to show emotion would help. As in:

You should really keep your dumb ass in RWPW where the hardest thing you have to do is link to cat macros. :P

Edit:
If that ignorant mass of people comment is directed at me, perhaps I could have phrased it better but like sad it is a free country and everyone here has the right to decide if they want to listen to the Pope. He chose to a view a form of media and expression as a perversion. I reserve the right to refer back to his words as ignorant. My personal bet is that he's shooting for another hot button issue to rile up the faithful to cover up the movement of the pedo priests. As it turns out the pedo priest from Norwalk, Ohio where my maternal family was raised is now in the Vatican following a number of sexual abuse charges, so I have a personal chip on my shoulder against the church. I'm sure the catholic church has caused ten times the number of incidences of men raping little boys as every "perverted" video game out there.

[Mastiker]

So can you tell the above is sarcasm or not? Who knows, text doesn't convey context. Next time a nice icon to show emotion would help.

*sigh* remind me never to mix jokes with serious comments in General Discussion ever. Plus, I use emoticons more than anybody else in GD. It's usually why I'm ignored. XD

I had something serious to say, but you took the wind out of my comments, plus Kass already said it (and probably better)

Now who's painting with a wrong broad brush? They don't agree with you so they are ignorant? Nice.

Aw Kass, you and I were getting along for a change :gloomy: Again, jokes + serious = bad in GD.

[Jetsetlemming]

Sim City.
Tetris.
Guitar Heroes.
Sonic.
Mario.
Crash bandicoot.
Spyro.
Jazz Jackrabbit (old school :P)
Pokemon.
Final Fantasy (unless you consider swinging a sword in the general direction of an enemy and having them disappear in a flash to be violent. It's less violent than Zelda, anyway)
Anything by Disney. (Just ask steph about Kingdom Hearts!)
Zelda (you already mentioned this)
Megaman. All the characters are robots!
Pretty much anything released on Gameboy, nintendo, super nintendo.
There are plenty of non-violent, or low-violent games appropriate for children that aren't directly aimed at 5 year olds.
For the rest of the games content, you have to remember that the average videogame player is 24, and the average age of a video game purchaser is about 10 years higher than that (can't remember the exact figure :(). Even counting the violent games, the Grand Theft Autos, the Resident Evils, The FEARs, there are games with violence that are anything but "perverse". That have as much relavence to the story and gameplay as any major movie's violence. Half-Life, Silent Hill, Parasite Eve, Call of Duty, etc. Videogames, in content, are no different than movies. And yet they're singled out because they're viewed as for kids, even though the average player is in their twenties, and you end up with the Pope calling an entire art form a perversion. Are you really willing to stand behind a statement that the videogames as a whole are a perversion because some games have adult content? Because some games dare to be as adult as your average hollywood movie? He certiainly didn't specify only the adult games are perverse. He said any media which produces violent, antisocial, trivial sexual games is perverse. Thats pretty much every single media you can think of, isn't it?
The pope just said that all forms of entertainment, especially videogames and cartoons, are perserse wholesale. That's something that's ok?

[RandomPasserby]

Final Fantasy 7 and 8 are quite violent and scary imo for a lil kiddo (like 14-16 years or younger). Both are heavily in the destruction of the world, doom, death and evil mutants-category.

Oh Kass, you didn't get your lil girl a playstation did you? It was Sony's consoles that turned video games into violence fest similar to tv/movie violence.

[Daishikaze]

Someone forgot about Mortal Kombat, which wasn't a sony exclusive title

[Mastiker]

Final Fantasy 7 and 8 are quite violent and scary imo for a lil kiddo (like 14-16 years or younger). Both are heavily in the destruction of the world, doom, death and evil mutants-category.
Meh, I wouldn't get 'em for a kid for different reasons. 7 because of the scene with Aeris (put me to tears as a kid) and 8 because it's too... deep/boring for little kids.

Oh Kass, you didn't get your lil girl a playstation did you? It was Sony's consoles that turned video games into violence fest similar to tv/movie violence.

You're... joking?

Sega definitely had the most violent games on the market for years, but that's because they were goin up against Nintendo... but ever played the Sega Dreamcast? Some of the games on there involved raising the dead and brutally murdering people. Hell, my favorite game Dragon Force you played as one of seven monarchs and constantly attacked opposing forces. There was suicide, assinations, war, and an incarnation of a demon. Personally, I think that's a little bit more graphic than Sony's stuff XD

edit:
Someone forgot about Mortal Kombat, which wasn't a sony exclusive title

Oh god, yeah, that was on Genesis and SNES looong before the Playstation was even created.

[Beowulf]

The whole point of this discussion should be that the fault of videogame violence on children is 100% the parents fault.

"Oh but my child buys games on their own from unscrupulous retailers!"
Bullshit. For one thing where is your preteen child getting the $40-$50 necessary to purchase new games. Of course the logical thing to do is simply take the game back and not to give the child any more money for awhile. This excuse is so overused that it makes my brain hurt. It's called child supervision.

"The ratings system isn't strict enough!"
Also bullshit. The ratings system works fine just as it is. It's just that most parent's are simply too stupid to figure this out. I have a friend who works at a GameStop and he has dozens of stories of mothers/fathers bringing a game like GTA or Manhunt to the counter. This was the conversation he related to me:
Him: Are you sure you want your child to be playing this (she had brought up a copy of The Suffering)?
Retarded Lady (RL): Why what's wrong with it?
Him: It's full of extremely dark and violent imagery for one...
RL: I'm sure it's fine.
Him: The rating here says that it's for mature audiences only (her kid was about 10).
RL: (kid starts fussing at this point) IT'S FINE, just let me make my purchase!
Him: Okay...
3 Days Later
RL: (she comes storming back in screaming at the top of her lungs) I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU SOLD THIS GAME TO MY CHILD!! WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE MAKING AND SELLING A GAME LIKE THIS!? I WANT MY MONEY BACK!!
Him: (I am Jack's complete lack of surprise) Welcome back...

People like her are the reason the ratings system doesn't work. Not because of retailers, not because of game makers, because of ignorant dumbshit parents like her. They use videogames/movies/television as babysitters and don't pay any attention to what their child does or watches, then when they finally do look they flip the fuck out on everyone else instead of putting the blame on their own shoulders.

[Mastiker]

snip

It's been a while since I agreed 100% with what you said.

I like the way Kass lets her child buy her own games though. (It is entirely possible for pre-teens to gain money, via chores or allowances or something like that. I know I earned money by mowing neighbors lawns or shoveling their driveways) At least Kass has enough responsibility to recognize that some games are bad for kids.

[Jetsetlemming]

Hell, there was even a Friday the 13th videogame on the NES. :P Not that it had any gore or anything in it. Just scary themes. It's kinda hard to recreate Jason's... work, on an 8-bit, 16 color system.

[Campion]

Jetset, usually I'm pretty quick to agree with you, but I'm afraid on this occasion I just can't. To me personally (and I mean no offense) your initial post read how I would expect a journalist to report on this subject (Pope condemns all media violence, mass media passes buck on to video games and cartoons, thanks to a single sentence in the transcript). Whilst your quote is literally correct it is still only a single sentence taken from a much broader attack on media industry values.

I would be unsurprised if those in the traditional media (Print/Radio/TV) did not take such a stand in effort to protect their own product (by passing the buck), they understand the commercial reality of existing as a cultural commodity and in the interests of ratings or circulation will often posit such arguments against computer games themselves. The PS2 game Rule of Rose for instance was denied a release in the UK after a Murdoch owned newspaper repeated ridiculous claims made in the Italian press ('Panorama' owned by Berlusconi). The interesting point here is that neither Murdoch or Berlusconi own any games companies, if they had owned the rights to the game or the distribution, do you think that any of the journalists working on their papers would take the chance of attacking the game? I don't think so myself.

I don't have an opinion on whether the Pope was right or wrong in denouncing media violence, but I do have an opinion on free speech, and I stand behind his right to it as much as I stand behind yours or anyone elses.

I could argue that the vast majority of studies that have been taken on the subject of media violence tend to be a little trite in the analysis of their findings and this is because the money behind the research is usually political or religious and that means that research is skewed to an agenda making it worthless as an indicator of a social reality.

Kass, can I say, your method of parenting when it comes to such things sounds exemplary, explaining to your daughter why you think she should have a different product over another is an important piece of communication in the family, far better than the 'because I say so' approach in my opinion.



Campion.

[Ceirnian]

As it has been said before, there are plenty of non-violent / low violent games out there. I really don't understand why people who are against 'mature' games make it seem like you have to bend over backwards to get some of those titles.

[RandomPasserby]

Mastiker, I mean playstation had lots of titles designed to lure in young adults and teenagers and quite a few of them are similar to horror movies and movies like Commando. Of course if Sony hadn't done it, someone else would have, but ps1 was the console for gta, legacy of kain series, resident evil etc.

And Sega's 2 latest consoles flopped. So they didn't help much in making pope h8 gaems.

[Mastiker]

Mastiker, I mean playstation had lots of titles designed to lure in young adults and teenagers and quite a few of them are similar to horror movies and movies like Commando. Of course if Sony hadn't done it, someone else would have, but ps1 was the console for gta, legacy of kain series, resident evil etc.

And Sega's 2 latest consoles flopped. So they didn't help much in making pope h8 gaems.

Still, violence has been huge in video games since post-Atari :D

[Digital Masta]

Actually, I'm more adverse to foul language, sex and all that than violence when it comes to kids. Partly because of how I grew up. Growing up my parents never really restricted anything that my brothers and I watched or played. Hell, they bought us Mortal Kombat for Christmas (I was probably no more than 8 years old). As far as what we watched, it was pretty much anything goes (within reason). Most rated R movies we watched with our parents and we did the typical "cover our eyes" thing when we saw something that we felt uncomfortable with (our parents never told us to do it, we just did)

I probably wouldn't buy a violent game for my child until they were old enough to comprehend the concept of violence, in which I would then teach the difference between what's on tv (and it games) when compared to real life. But then again in truth I'd probably end up buying games that aren't specifically for a small child and buy games that I could enjoy too regaring consoles. Computer games on the other hand I'd buy the ones aimed at young kids

If I was watching other people's kids they obviously their parents set the rules for them and I'd follow them.

With my kids, I'd probably play the violent game with them or watch them play.

I believe that when video games "cause" violence, they are usually isolated incidents that result from either shitty parenting OR loose screws in the child's brain (for lack of a better term).

[Y.T.]

What's worse ? GTA where the player is a petty criminal, or a strategy game involving genocide, thermonuclear war or the use of biological weapons...
Germans had it right .. they banned Wolfenstein for shooting nazis, but allowed Panzer General in which there were no swastikas, but in which you were conquering the world ..

I wonder every time I press "drop all fusion bombs" while playing Master of Orion (a space strategy game) ..

And that crap with sexual stuff. I think it's far more appropriate to show nudity, than graphical violence to kids. For fuck's sake, what's wrong with nudity ? It's not like (non-obese) people have to be ashamed of anything while being nude..

[RandomPasserby]

Still, violence has been huge in video games since post-Atari :D
Yeah, but tended to be on the level of fireballs in street fighter 2 and Mario stomping on turtles. I just mean ps transformed (of course, before that there wasn't powerful enoguh consoles for it) mainstream videogame violence from Tom&Jerry and power rangers kind of shit to closer to stuff like Commando and Battle Royale if we use other medias as examples.

[Digital Masta]

And that crap with sexual stuff. I think it's far more appropriate to show nudity, than graphical violence to kids. For fuck's sake, what's wrong with nudity ? It's not like (non-obese) people have to be ashamed of anything while being nude..

IMO it's more along of what context it's used in rather than nudity itself.

[Jetsetlemming]

Campion, I'm afraid your fancy british talk confused me. :( I'm not sure how you're disagreeing with me. >_>
A couple points:
Rule of Rose has underage female cast members, some of whom have love interests amongst themselves. That in it's own would make any publisher a bit wary. Combine that with a violent survival horror game that's rated for adults, and I can see how the game can be seen in a negative light. Not saying it should be prejudged this way, but I can see how it is.
Ruport Murdoch actually DOES own a game company, called Fox Interactive (http://games.ign.com/objects/025/025027.html). I have a couple games made by Fox Interactive, including Alien Vs. Predator, which is as violent as your average Predator or Alien movie.
Oh, and nobody's denying the Pope's right to make inaccurate claims condemning all forms of media wholesale. We're just disagreeing with his opinion. :P

[RandomPasserby]

Alien Vs. Predator, which is as violent as your average Predator or Alien movie.
Man, It was fun nailing people's ahnds, heads and legs to walls and roofs with the harpoon!

[Josh]

I am ashamed that the Pope apparently hates Kermit the Frog.

I once and for all agree that it truely isn't easy being green.

[Jiant Flying Panda]

GTA ain't shit over games such as my beloved Fallout series.

This game had pretty much every vice you can think of. Drug use, Prostitution, Blackmail (extorsion), Gang violence, Racism (to a degree), Murder (Including children).

The only reason why this game didn't catch any flack was because of 3 reasons. One: it wasn't as popular. Let's be hounest here, if GTA wasn't as popular as it is soccer moms wouldn't even know enough about it to start bitchin'. Two: The game was outdated by the release of GTA:3. Graphically the violence wasn't as realistic but in the Fallout series the violence was over the top. Seriously. And Three: The game was on the PC, and we all know parents don't buy their kids PC games.... Can you recall a game on the PC that caught as much flak as GTA or even Bully?

[O-Matic]

Hu Ha. My opinion:

Scientists found out, that monkeys and other animals understand the difference between a game and reality. Like when young lions are brawling with each other, they know when it's a game and when a fight is real.

Now, some humans think that our children are more stupid than monkeys, because somehow they think that our children do NOT get the difference between a game and reality.

So I did an experiment myself: I let my 5 year old brother play GTA: SA...
And I told him not to harm any people in the game. And it works. He's just driving around (and he's damn good for a kid!) and whenever he accidentely hurts a guy he sayz "oops, I'm sorry!"
I don't see a bad influence on him. Except that he runs away from police cars as if he was a criminal ^^;;

Okay, and the Hot Coffee mod riot was a nice proove how dumb humans can be. If you let your child play a game where it beats up old grannys and shoot at hookers, why should you mind a sex scene? I mean, if you had to choose between showing kids a hardcore porno or a real gunfight from iraq, which would you chose? What do you think is more evil for your kids to see, sex or violence? Love or War? The blood, right?
So why are parents complaining that their childen, who are allowed to virtually kill other people, can see some sex if they wish? (by unlocking that mod)

I tell you, guns are perverted. Violence can terrify a child to a point where it need serious help. Sex however can't hurt children at all, that's just church propaganda. Show you kid a splatter/horror movie, and they won't say a word for a month. Show them a porn, and they'll giggle and stuff...of course I don't know because I never tried this stuff ^^ but, I'm sure I'm right. Becaus I roque! Rock I mean. :)

[Stephy]

So I did an experiment myself: I let my 5 year old brother play GTA:


....

You... let a 5 year old play GTA?... Seriously? >_<; gawh. I don't even know what to say to that. I'm sure at 5 he can kind of comprehend what he is doing. Hm...

Don't think that was very wise of you, honestly in my opinion.

[Campion]

Campion, I'm afraid your fancy british talk confused me. :( I'm not sure how you're disagreeing with me. >_>

Damn fancy British Talk.. Sorry. I'll try and talk a bit more clearly from here on in.

I was a little confused by the fact that the original post contained only the reference made by the Pope against videogames and comics, where the largest amount of the Popes argument actually lay against the traditional media. However, I respect your right to make the distinction you have, I just wanted to point out that the Pope has attacked the whole media and not just new media.


A couple points:
Rule of Rose has underage female cast members, some of whom have love interests amongst themselves. That in it's own would make any publisher a bit wary. Combine that with a violent survival horror game that's rated for adults, and I can see how the game can be seen in a negative light. Not saying it should be prejudged this way, but I can see how it is.

I agree that the content of the game can be seen as being in poor taste, (It was one of the games in a cultural study on violence that I worked on) but the media misrepresented it badly, including (in the European media at least) claims of sadomasochism and the burial of children. These claims were taken from a politician, who had viewed the trailer but had not played the game itself. According to both gamers who had Rule of Rose and the professional body charged with ensuring videogame standards in Europe, the claims were completely nonsensical. It proved to be an excellent example of a moral panic.


Ruport Murdoch actually DOES own a game company, called Fox Interactive (http://games.ign.com/objects/025/025027.html). I have a couple games made by Fox Interactive, including Alien Vs. Predator, which is as violent as your average Predator or Alien movie.


Well, that's a confusion created by me being a bit stupid in my original missive, my bad. What I should have said is that had the game been distributed in the UK by a company owned by Murdoch, none of the traditional Murdoch media companies would have spoken out against it. Same goes for Berlusconi and his media empire in Italy.

My argument is that it would be typical of the traditional media (TV/Radio/Print) to condemn violence in the new media (Internet/Videogames), while trying to ignore their own. Violence and Sex make money in this business and when you are atacked by a leading world figure such as the Pope the first act of the traditional media is to push the blame somewhere else, usually to a place where they don't have a commercial interest. This is how I read your initial post, it sounded a bit 'traditional media'.

Sorry for the confusion.


Campion.

[Ceirnian]

No offense intended, but have you played GTA?

From what he says, all the kid did was drive around and if he hurt anyone on accident he apologized. You can play GTA without doing anything bad at all, just by driving / running around and exploring the different areas. Most people don't do this, but it's entirely possible. Which is why he posted "And I told him not to harm any people in the game", as part of the experiment.

Now with that said, GTA isn't a very fun game to me so I'm not trying to defend the game. I'm just pointing out his 'experiment' assuming it is true isn't so bad.

[Masa the Masta]

I used to play Resident Evil 2 when I was a kid.

Aside from paranoia from hearing zombie-like sounds at night and recurring nightmares for a month straight, I came out rather civilized, and intact.

4chan however, completely ruined all of that.

[Radiance]

You might get lucky and have the only Wal-Mart in the country who actually checks ages for video games. Dateline has tested the big chains and kids routinely walked out with age-inappropriate games. I have never, ever seen an employee at a chain store check an ID for a video game. They certainly never check my daughter's when she buys her games.

Come to my Target. :D I'm an asshole to kids because the rich spoiled kids in my area act like shit and make my day horrible so I return it to them. I don't sell T games to kids without their parents holding their hands, I check ID for all M games. When kids argue to their parents "BUT ITS ONLY T!" "There isn't a lot of blood and violence." I turn and smile to the parent "Oh no, there is plenty of blood and violence.... perhaps you would be more comfortable with this educational line of games."

Anyhow... I couldn't care less about who the games are marketed to. I fully believe it is a parental responsibility to not only guide what they allow their children to play but also to limit the amount of time they are allowed to play. Parents are treating video games like the modern babysitter just like the early TV families did. They seriously need a better excuse if they want to blame video games, because as it stands now they are shitty parents and the ESRB is doing far more than the legal requirements for regulating games. Hell they recently released a bunch of new commercials that play during prime time hours about how to stay informed on the ratings system and where to find information on the games.

[O-Matic]

I remember an interview with Peter Molyneux about his game Fable.
They send the game to these ESRB people who decide the age rating. Some weeks later they got a reply, where the game was rated 0+ or something. Because the playtesters, did not see any violence. In this game, you can kill children (Omg! >_>) but it really depends on how YOU play it. So they had to send the game back again, to make sure that the ESRB gets checked again, and then it got an 17+ age rating.

So, that's what I'm saying. It depends on the player. I played GTA and never killed somebody, because to me that's no fun.
Could it be, that when people to these violence/sex stuff in some games, it's not the game that makes you do so, it's youself.
I know, the game gives you the option to do as you wish, and some games are clearly only made for violence.

But if you have no fun killing people, why do you play games designed for it?

[Jetsetlemming]

You can kill children in Fable? >_>; I know you can punch them, but the only town they exist in takes away all your weapons and disables your spells while you're in it.
BTW, sniping off a bandit's head and having all his friends freak out cause they realize the mighty hero JSL is coming to slaughter their asses is great fun. :D

[Beowulf]

BTW, sniping off a bandit's head and having all his friends freak out cause they realize the mighty hero JSL is coming to slaughter their asses is great fun.
I expect to read your name in the paper in conjunction with a massive massacre of human life any day now...

Speaking of JSL this thread reminds me of another... (http://www.outpostnine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7569)

[Jetsetlemming]

As long as a group of leather-bound british bandits weilding swords and hammers and pickaxes don't show up in my neighborhood anytime soon, you'll be left waiting for quite a while. O_o
I can easily tell the difference between real life and a videogame. :bored: I'm not at all violent in real life, either.
Furthermore, you're an idiot for thinking otherwise just because I said I like a character AI reaction of an ally's death in a videogame. I like playing Hitman too, and so do you. Does that mean either one of us is planning on becoming a professional assassin?

[Kass]

The whole point of this discussion should be that the fault of videogame violence on children is 100% the parents fault.

"Oh but my child buys games on their own from unscrupulous retailers!"
Bullshit. For one thing where is your preteen child getting the $40-$50 necessary to purchase new games. Of course the logical thing to do is simply take the game back and not to give the child any more money for awhile. This excuse is so overused that it makes my brain hurt. It's called child supervision.

"The ratings system isn't strict enough!"
Also bullshit. The ratings system works fine just as it is. It's just that most parent's are simply too stupid to figure this out. I have a friend who works at a GameStop and he has dozens of stories of mothers/fathers bringing a game like GTA or Manhunt to the counter. This was the conversation he related to me:
Him: Are you sure you want your child to be playing this (she had brought up a copy of The Suffering)?
Retarded Lady (RL): Why what's wrong with it?
Him: It's full of extremely dark and violent imagery for one...
RL: I'm sure it's fine.
Him: The rating here says that it's for mature audiences only (her kid was about 10).
RL: (kid starts fussing at this point) IT'S FINE, just let me make my purchase!
Him: Okay...
3 Days Later
RL: (she comes storming back in screaming at the top of her lungs) I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU SOLD THIS GAME TO MY CHILD!! WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE MAKING AND SELLING A GAME LIKE THIS!? I WANT MY MONEY BACK!!
Him: (I am Jack's complete lack of surprise) Welcome back...

People like her are the reason the ratings system doesn't work. Not because of retailers, not because of game makers, because of ignorant dumbshit parents like her. They use videogames/movies/television as babysitters and don't pay any attention to what their child does or watches, then when they finally do look they flip the fuck out on everyone else instead of putting the blame on their own shoulders.

Did you even read what I wrote? Seriously. If a store fails to card a child, YES it is THEIR problem. They are in violation of the law. My daughter can purchase some games I don't like because I realize that despite my objections, they do her no real harm, but like I said several times, she is NOT allowed to purchase whatever she wants. I always am there with her and you had better believe I kick up a fuss if the store doesn't ID or ask questions of her when she purchases T-rated games, even with my approval. It's their damned job to do so, just like it is my job to tell her, "sorry, that game is off-limits" (and I do often).

By the way, when you were 14 or 15, did your parents supervise every single purchase you ever made or did they trust you?

I loathed Sailor Moon (primarily because it was insanely stupid and insipid) but I let my daughter watch it because it was essentially harmless. You can't deny the sexual overtones in the show though. To do so would be willfully stupid. That doesn't mean I'm not being a good parent because I let her watch. It means I'm being a good, realistic and fair parent. I'd rather my daughter see/experience something I find mildly objectionable under my supervision where we can discuss it than unsupervised at someone else's house.

A pre-teen/teen can make all sorts of money outside the home if they are willing to work. My daughter babysits, helps people carry in groceries, does household chores, etc. for others to earn extra money. She earns quite a bit that way actually. She can earn money by working around my house that way too. I don't just give her an allowance. She gets a wage in exchange for work. An allowance without responsiblity are an indulgent, lousy idea.

Oh, and for the record, my daughter is allowed one hour of television of her choice a day and an hour of video games/computer games a day IF her chores and homework are done. It used to be far less. She wasn't allowed video games AT ALL until she was 11. Often at her age now, homework doesn't allow.

[Arcadia]

http://www.atlus.com/smt/main.html

The Pope should play this game.

[Stephy]

Kass I think that is a very good way to go about raising your daughter! You seem like a very responsible parent. :) *I don't see that as much as of lately.

*around here anyway

[Beowulf]

As long as a group of leather-bound british bandits weilding swords and hammers and pickaxes don't show up in my neighborhood anytime soon, you'll be left waiting for quite a while. O_o
I can easily tell the difference between real life and a videogame. I'm not at all violent in real life, either.
Furthermore, you're an idiot for thinking otherwise just because I said I like a character AI reaction of an ally's death in a videogame. I like playing Hitman too, and so do you. Does that mean either one of us is planning on becoming a professional assassin?
So you and sarcasm aren't on speaking terms then? How could possibly have thought I was being serious?

Did you even read what I wrote? Seriously. If a store fails to card a child, YES it is THEIR problem. They are in violation of the law. My daughter can purchase some games I don't like because I realize that despite my objections, they do her no real harm, but like I said several times, she is NOT allowed to purchase whatever she wants. I always am there with her and you had better believe I kick up a fuss if the store doesn't ID or ask questions of her when she purchases T-rated games, even with my approval. It's their damned job to do so, just like it is my job to tell her, "sorry, that game is off-limits" (and I do often).
Did you read what I wrote? Yes it is against the law for stores not to card children. But it is your responsibility as a parent to observe what your child is playing and take action accordingly. Make sure your child knows the rules and follows them. If your child does buy a game you don't approve of then have them take it back and keep the refunded money as punishment. Don't just sit back on your heels and go "well nothing to be done about it now..."

By the way, when you were 14 or 15, did your parents supervise every single purchase you ever made or did they trust you?
By the time I was fifteen I had a part time job. Also by the time I was fifteen my parents trusted me to make responsible choices concerning the media I involved myself in. My mother would keep tabs on what games I was buying myself and if she didn't approve then I wasn't allowed it.

[Jetsetlemming]

The only evidence that your statement was anything but a serious idiotic statement was that you've talked about violent videogames before, and without any sign of sarcasm or a lack of serious intent, you just come off as being an ass intentionally. Playing the devil's advocate is a popular thing to do round these parts. This is the internet, where no man can here your tone of voice. K? :D
Plus I had just woken up when I read that. >_>; Early morning thought process ftw.
On the current topic....
My mom never payed a lick of attention to what type of videogames I played, though she did put a lot of restriction on TV and movies. Her impression of videogames was mostly based on the Atari 2600. :P So I played Doom, and I played Duke Nukem, and I played Shadowrun, and I played Resident Evil, and I played Mortal Kombat.
Amazingly, playing none of those violent videogames as a little kid had a single effect on me, however, when I first watched the Mortal Kombat movie over a friend's house when I was 8, we were instantly jumping all over the furniture in their rec room in the basement, trying to drop kick and wrestle each other. Watching WWF on TV had the same effect, however violent cartoons did not. I was never inspired to hit my brother with a frying pan thanks to Tom & Jerry, though I was sure quick to attempt a Piledrive.
Watching real people do stuff is a million times different than playing it with digital characters on TV, for myself and every kid I grew up with.

[Arctic_Slicer]

Remember awhile back when the Pope quoted a previous point about Islam and the Muslims took it out of context and got all pissed off about it? Many people on this forum complained about and yet we have many of the same people here taking the pope's quotes out of context and adding a thier own personal bias to it. Instead of taking specific quotes from his speach and use it as a backdrop to spew your own mis-informed opinions why don't you read the full speech and try to understand what he is really trying to say.

Link (http://212.77.1.245/news_services/bulletin/news/19598.php?index=19598&lang=it#TESTO%20ORIGINALE%20IN%20LINGUA%20INGLESE)

This is the 41st annual World Communication Day Speech. The catholic church does this every year because they realize the importance of the media. He also spends a good deal talking about the education of the media. While most people are quoting just what the original poster quoted they are missing equally important parts of the speech such as this one:

2. The relationship of children, media, and education can be considered from two perspectives: the formation of children by the media; and the formation of children to respond appropriately to the media. A kind of reciprocity emerges which points to the responsibilities of the media as an industry and to the need for active and critical participation of readers, viewers and listeners. Within this framework, training in the proper use of the media is essential for the cultural, moral and spiritual development of children.

How is this common good to be protected and promoted? Educating children to be discriminating in their use of the media is a responsibility of parents, Church, and school. The role of parents is of primary importance. They have a right and duty to ensure the prudent use of the media by training the conscience of their children to express sound and objective judgments which will then guide them in choosing or rejecting programmes available (cf. Pope John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris consortio, 76). In doing so, parents should have the encouragement and assistance of schools and parishes in ensuring that this difficult, though satisfying, aspect of parenting is supported by the wider community.

Before some of you continue on with your pope bashing I recommend you read the full context of what he was trying to say so that you will be better informed on in statements in respone to his speech.

[Jetsetlemming]

How the hell does that make
"Any trend to produce programs and products -- including animated films and video games -- which in the name of entertainment exalt violence and portray anti-social behavior or the trivialization of human sexuality is a perversion," he said.
Ok? There's no vaguery to that statement. Media forms which produce any violent, antisocial, or trivially sexual content are perverse. Saying that children should be taught to be responsible in how much TV they watch and how much they play games is an entirely different subject from condemning all forms of media as perverse, which is what he did, as all forms of media have some violent, antisocial, or sexual content- video games, TV, movies, books, art, poems, songs, everything has SOMETHING that can fit under the Pope's classification of "perverse". Just because in the same speech he said that kids should be responsible in using this "perverse" media in no way makes it so we can't condemn and disagree with his statement.

Look, here's the full Reuters article from the link in the first post:
VATICAN CITY (Reuters) -- Pope Benedict said on Wednesday that the media were "perverse" and harmed children when they exalted violence and trivialized human sexuality in the name of entertainment.

The Pope made his comments in a message for the Roman Catholic Church's World Day of Communications, whose theme this year is "Children and the Media: A Challenge for Education".

While recognizing that many people involved in social communications wanted to do what is right, commercial competitiveness often meant lower standards, he said.

"Any trend to produce programs and products -- including animated films and video games -- which in the name of entertainment exalt violence and portray anti-social behavior or the trivialization of human sexuality is a perversion," he said.

He said this was "all the more repulsive" when programs were directed at children and adolescents.

"How could one explain this 'entertainment' to the countless innocent young people who actually suffer violence, exploitation and abuse?" he said.

Globalization had led to an even more pervasive effect of the media over children and their influence was rivaling those of school, church and home, the Pope said.

"I appeal to the leaders of the media industry to educate and encourage producers to safeguard the common good, to uphold the truth, to protect individual human dignity and promote respect for the needs of the family," he said.

[Plekto]

Yeah, you just wait... One day all of those Quake and Counterstrike skills will come in handy when The Rapture happens and the world is thrown into chaos. I'll know exactly how many shots it takes to take out a radiation-scarred freak and exactly what works against a demon spawn, thank you very much...

(goes off to his bunker to wait for the end of the world)

P.S. Always shoot for the head.

[Kass]

Jetsetlemming, you're missing the point. He didn't condemn all cartoons or games or TV shows. He only condemned those that "exalt violence." There is nothing good to be learned from anything that praises, glorifies or extols violence. You should look up "exalt" so you know what he is really saying. That is exactly the problem. You're ignoring a key modifer just so you can rant against the pope.

He didn't say "all violent cartoons and games." He was very specific in his criticisim. He limited it to media that exalts violence. Basically, media that make violence look like something that is good, fun and acceptable.

The Pope made his comments in a message for the Roman Catholic Church's World Day of Communications, whose theme this year is "Children and the Media: A Challenge for Education".

While recognizing that many people involved in social communications wanted to do what is right, commercial competitiveness often meant lower standards, he said.

Have you checked the quality of TV programming lately? it isn't that good. Doing what is right or responsible doesn't draw the ratings that a cheap, stupid film with lots of explosions does.

"Any trend to produce programs and products -- including animated films and video games -- which in the name of entertainment exalt violence and portray anti-social behavior or the trivialization of human sexuality is a perversion," he said.

There you go. That is a very specific segment of all the cartoons, games, and programming that is out for public consumption. Only those that make violence, anti-social behavior and trivialized sexuality look like acceptable behavior.

He said this was "all the more repulsive" when programs were directed at children and adolescents.

Even more specific than the previous statement because he further narrows it to a subset of an already narrow group of products.

"How could one explain this 'entertainment' to the countless innocent young people who actually suffer violence, exploitation and abuse?" he said.

That's a very good question. How would you explain away the inherent contradiction that make-believe violence is acceptable and fun and real violence is not? Remember, you have to put this into terms that a child can understand. Why is it okay to pretend to kill people and not okay to kill people?

Now, explain how showing that it is okay to smack people around on TV or in a game to a child who has been smacked around and beaten daily? Now do it without sounding like a hypocrite. Explain to him how images of people getting beaten is fun and amusing when him getting beaten is anything but amusing. You know what that kid is going to think? "If he thinks that is funny, he'd probably think me getting hit is funny too."

Explain how making a rape scene humorous is acceptable to a rape victim. Again, without sounding hypocritical. I can assure you, they find very little amusing about rape and even less amusing in trivializing the trauma of rape.

Globalization had led to an even more pervasive effect of the media over children and their influence was rivaling those of school, church and home, the Pope said.

It has. Globilization is a phenomenon of the media (all media, not just news organizations). It is a phenomenon of the ability to communicate ideas to a lot of people instantly around the world. The only way to do that on a mass scale is through the media. TV, movies, games and such have more of an impact on a person's life now than at any other time in modern history.

By and large, children spend more time involved with forms of media than they do with people. Someone earlier criticized the use of TV and games as babysitters and he was right that that is a significant problem (even though he was talking about me and was about as wrong as anyone could be on that). People do do that.

It used to be that kids were more influenced by their friends than television. Now it is the other way around.

"I appeal to the leaders of the media industry to educate and encourage producers to safeguard the common good, to uphold the truth, to protect individual human dignity and promote respect for the needs of the family," he said.

Yeah, because promoting dignity and respect for the needs of the family is such a bad thing... How dare he ask leaders with tremendous influence to actually think and act responsibly? He knows they aren't likely to change, but if no one asks them to do so, they never will.

But notice, NOWHERE did he condemn all violent media as perverse. He only condemned media that exalts and glorifies violence.

[King Kong]

The pope is a shithead.

[Kass]

Thanks for the thoughtful insight.

[Fermented Yeast Paste]

But notice, NOWHERE did he condemn all violent media as perverse. He only condemned media that exalts and glorifies violence.
I posted this as well back on page 1, but nobody seemed to take notice. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v218/Ph4t3/Emot/emot-smith.gif


Ah well. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v218/Ph4t3/Emot/what.gif

[Beowulf]

That's a very good question. How would you explain away the inherent contradiction that make-believe violence is acceptable and fun and real violence is not? Remember, you have to put this into terms that a child can understand. Why is it okay to pretend to kill people and not okay to kill people?

Now, explain how showing that it is okay to smack people around on TV or in a game to a child who has been smacked around and beaten daily? Now do it without sounding like a hypocrite. Explain to him how images of people getting beaten is fun and amusing when him getting beaten is anything but amusing. You know what that kid is going to think? "If he thinks that is funny, he'd probably think me getting hit is funny too."

Explain how making a rape scene humorous is acceptable to a rape victim. Again, without sounding hypocritical. I can assure you, they find very little amusing about rape and even less amusing in trivializing the trauma of rape.
Why is it okay for children to have played "cops and robbers" for as long as anyone can remember? And Kass what the heck are you talking about with the whole "humorizing violence/rape" thing? What in gods name tries to make a rape scene humorous? And the whole "how to explain to a child" is easy, if the child is of the appropriate age/maturity level then he should know the difference between pretend and reality.

[Kass]

any number of Japanese animation movies (sorry, I don't know the differences between the types) I've watched with my guy and more than a few movies have made light of exactly that. Watch any movie where the bad guy is held up as the hero then try to explainit to a child.

And in cops and robbers, no one died. The bad guys went to jail. In cops and robbers, no one's head exploded and no kids got beaten and no women got smacked around for amusement.

[Jetsetlemming]

>_>; Can we really not bring japanese cartoon porn into this discussion? That's like bringing up german scat porn in a discussion of modern motion pictures.

[4letterwords]

The pope has a point.

But I say the pope is just a product of the hitler youth.
I also have a point.

[Fermented Yeast Paste]

The pope has a point.

But I say the pope is just a product of the hitler youth.
I also have a point.
Yeah, because he really had a choice and all that.

[Beowulf]

any number of Japanese animation movies (sorry, I don't know the differences between the types) I've watched with my guy and more than a few movies have made light of exactly that. Watch any movie where the bad guy is held up as the hero then try to explainit to a child.
Kass why would I be explaining this stuff to a child in the first place? As has been stated numerous times if the child is of the appropriate age level then there is no reason to explain the differences between make believe violence and real violence. If your child can't understand that by ages 10-12 then you have bigger problems then letting your child play/watch violent media.

And in cops and robbers, no one died. The bad guys went to jail. In cops and robbers, no one's head exploded and no kids got beaten and no women got smacked around for amusement.
So apparently you've never seen young boys play such games before? Kids "died" all the time, that's the job of the "robbers"...

[Kaji]

Beo: How are they to learn if nobody teaches them?

[Jetsetlemming]

Nobody ever needed to "teach" me the difference between fantasy violence and real life violence. I saw plenty examples of both growing up, and they were distinctly different categories. :|

[Beowulf]

Thank JetSet for beating me to the punch...

[Buckwheat]

Well, one more reason I'm going to that hell.