this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2024
119 points (89.9% liked)
Games
16948 readers
631 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Hey so two things:
not all women have giant breasts and huge asses. Other body types exist. Most healthy women have smaller breasts than any you see on tv or in games or anime.
The availability of violent video games and media correlates with lower violent crime.
The availability of pornography correlates with lower rates of sexual crimes.
Therefore it stands to reason, though it is unpleasant if not impossible to objectively test your conjecture is likely the opposite of reality.
Oh great, somebody that doesn't understand stats.
You know what else having access to violent video games correlates with that might be a bit more important than the video games themselves? Material wealth and higher standard of living. What happens to correlate with material wealth and higher standard of living? Less crimes of every single type.
Also I don't agree with the way the body is being sexualized in the comment above mine, but there is a serious problem, still, with sexualization of characters that explicitly look like children but are "totally a 200 year old vampire bro". This is especially true of anime and video games with anime-inspired artwork. I'm not saying that all video games or animes are like this. Nor am I saying that all gamers and anime fans are closet pedos. What I am saying is that there's serious problems in these communities that must be addressed. The pushback in spite of my non-condemnation of the whole is kinda hilarious. I do understand how my first comment could be misinterpreted.
Never thought I'd get into an argument where somebody thought sexualization of minors was a good thing though, so I guess that's a new experience at least.
We had you people try this shit in the 1990s.
Violent media does not cause violence.
Pornographic media does not cause sex crimes.
Get the fuck back to your southern Baptist Church and leave the nonreligious alone. Stop pretending you give a shit about kids, you just want to push your weird little religion on everyone.
Just so you know what the scientists studying this have to say:
Should we be worried about escalation? The consumption of VCSAM does not prevent pedophilic individuals from future offending and can instead act as a progressive addiction (Maras & Shapiro 2017). Some CSAM offenders who engage in contact offending have suggested the contact offending was an extension of their online offending (Quayle & Taylor 2003). For example, in a recent study that applied Ward and Siegert’s (2002) pathways model to sexual offending of penetrative child sexual offenders, several offenders engaged in CSAM before resorting to contact offending. 12 One female offender, “commenced to use the internet…(time) to chat with other people… who gained sexual gratification from child pornography which led to the commission of the subject offences” (Osbourne & Christensen 2020, p. 13). The material has been argued to potentially serve as a gateway to contact offending (Maras & Shapiro 2017), as the offender may become desensitized to passive viewing, finding it to be insufficient over time (Schell et al. 2007). In line with the material being considered as a gateway, an offender might commence with masturbating to VCSAM material, then escalate to CSAM material (after becoming desensitized to VCSAM), before progressing on to act out impulses on children – in an attempt to experience the original level of gratification when first viewing VCSAM. Sullivan and Sheehan (2002) refer to the desensitization of images as the ‘fantasy escalation effect’ with the trajectory to engage in increasingly explicit videos and images (Sheehan & Sullivan 2010).
Given that much of VCSAM material is computer generated, it allows for unlimited creativity in how child characters are abused compared with CSAM (e.g., movements and depictions that are not humanly possible in real life). In turn, offenders who escalate through the types of VCSAM, viewing unimaginable forms of bestiality and penetrative activity, might find themselves skipping the nudist, erotic, or posing forms of CSAM during their escalation, instead being drawn to the gross assault and sadistic CSAM. It is not, therefore, illogical to suggest that those who commence CSAM offending from VCSAM offending may be more desensitized and follow different offending trajectories compared with those who commence with CSAM offending, which could be explored in future research.
While engaging with abusive material does not inevitably result in contact offending (Henshaw, Ogloff & Clough 2015), there are effects to the exposure of such. In their laboratory study, Paul and Linz (2008) found that participants exposed to ‘barely legal’ pornography (females depicted as under the age of consent), were quicker to recognize words with sexual connotations (after being primed with neutral images of female children) compared with participants who had been exposed to adult pornography (after being primed with neutral images of older-looking models). The authors concluded that the relationship between cognitions and the likelihood of acting on such, is complex (Paul & Linz 2008). While they argued the mere endorsement of sex-youth cognitive schema does not guarantee deviant action, the potential effects of deviant behavior from being exposed to such material cannot be outright rejected (Paul & Linz 2008). Paul and Linz (2008) suggest that extensive exposure can desensitize individuals to related behaviors and content. Given VCSAM is related in content to CSAM, the ongoing effects of exposure to VCSAM is an important avenue for future research
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_url?url=https%3A%2F%2Fresearch.usc.edu.au%2Fview%2FpdfCoverPage%3FinstCode%3D61USC_INST%26filePid%3D13161500130002621%26download%3Dtrue&hl=en&scisig=AFWwaeZERt0h_qC0HOcMzLh1ghdF&oi=scholarr
Your paeudoscience isnt fucking science
I am not religious...
You, on the other hand, are very good at making up arguments to put in my mouth.
Bye bye now
Byebye religious nut, hope you get better soon. The world is better when you stick to Facebook.
Bye bye closet pedo!
Nobody was making this argument, that's a straw man you made up.
He did actually make this argument when he said pornographic material depicting minors being available would lower cases of sexual assault...
Just because the argument was implicit and not explicit does not mean it wasn't made. That was not a straw man.
The other commenter was actually strawmanning my position incredibly heavily in another comment, but I noticed you didn't call that one out.
Lemmy is rife with this pedophile apologia, especially concerning threads about child pornography material made with AI and about comic style child pornography material, and I have no problem with saying that that is absolutely disgusting.
Are pedophiles mentally ill humans that need help? Yes. Should they be pushed towards active pedophilia in any way, shape, or form? No. They should not. As psychologists studying sexual abuse prevention agree, even in the case of VCSAM.
A direct excerpt from the paper:
Should we be worried about escalation? The consumption of VCSAM does not prevent pedophilic individuals from future offending and can instead act as a progressive addiction (Maras & Shapiro 2017). Some CSAM offenders who engage in contact offending have suggested the contact offending was an extension of their online offending (Quayle & Taylor 2003). For example, in a recent study that applied Ward and Siegert’s (2002) pathways model to sexual offending of penetrative child sexual offenders, several offenders engaged in CSAM before resorting to contact offending. 12 One female offender, “commenced to use the internet…(time) to chat with other people… who gained sexual gratification from child pornography which led to the commission of the subject offences” (Osbourne & Christensen 2020, p. 13). The material has been argued to potentially serve as a gateway to contact offending (Maras & Shapiro 2017), as the offender may become desensitized to passive viewing, finding it to be insufficient over time (Schell et al. 2007). In line with the material being considered as a gateway, an offender might commence with masturbating to VCSAM material, then escalate to CSAM material (after becoming desensitized to VCSAM), before progressing on to act out impulses on children – in an attempt to experience the original level of gratification when first viewing VCSAM. Sullivan and Sheehan (2002) refer to the desensitization of images as the ‘fantasy escalation effect’ with the trajectory to engage in increasingly explicit videos and images (Sheehan & Sullivan 2010). Given that much of VCSAM material is computer generated, it allows for unlimited creativity in how child characters are abused compared with CSAM (e.g., movements and depictions that are not humanly possible in real life). In turn, offenders who escalate through the types of VCSAM, viewing unimaginable forms of bestiality and penetrative activity, might find themselves skipping the nudist, erotic, or posing forms of CSAM during their escalation, instead being drawn to the gross assault and sadistic CSAM. It is not, therefore, illogical to suggest that those who commence CSAM offending from VCSAM offending may be more desensitized and follow different offending trajectories compared with those who commence with CSAM offending, which could be explored in future research. While engaging with abusive material does not inevitably result in contact offending (Henshaw, Ogloff & Clough 2015), there are effects to the exposure of such. In their laboratory study, Paul and Linz (2008) found that participants exposed to ‘barely legal’ pornography (females depicted as under the age of consent), were quicker to recognize words with sexual connotations (after being primed with neutral images of female children) compared with participants who had been exposed to adult pornography (after being primed with neutral images of older-looking models). The authors concluded that the relationship between cognitions and the likelihood of acting on such, is complex (Paul & Linz 2008). While they argued the mere endorsement of sex-youth cognitive schema does not guarantee deviant action, the potential effects of deviant behavior from being exposed to such material cannot be outright rejected (Paul & Linz 2008). Paul and Linz (2008) suggest that extensive exposure can desensitize individuals to related behaviors and content. Given VCSAM is related in content to CSAM, the ongoing effects of exposure to VCSAM is an important avenue for future research
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_url?url=https%3A%2F%2Fresearch.usc.edu.au%2Fview%2FpdfCoverPage%3FinstCode%3D61USC_INST%26filePid%3D13161500130002621%26download%3Dtrue&hl=en&scisig=AFWwaeZERt0h_qC0HOcMzLh1ghdF&oi=scholarr
YOU added the "minors" part. The person you replied to isn't talking about minors. They used the word "women" specifically. Ironic that you said this earlier:
Ahh yes I forgot to disregard all context of the argument. That's my favorite tool in discourse, personally! Have anything to say to the rest of my comment? The actual important part?
Of course not...
What context? This isn't about children at all and never was.
Oh... I guess you don't know the game.
https://dguljqwnrjejm.cloudfront.net/images/Genshin_Impact_thumbn.width-1000.bgcolor-000.format-jpeg.jpg
https://assets.xboxservices.com/assets/cd/d0/cdd0d11b-dd3f-40f3-8720-41463983fd45.jpg?n=222910044_GLP-Page-Hero-1084_1920x1080.jpg
Those are the characters.
Another commenter pointed out that a selling feature of this game is the jiggle physics.
This is getting old though.
Oh no, I know the game very well. In fact, I know the game well enough to know that the images you posted are not from this game. Genshin Impact is a completely separate franchise from Zenless Zone Zero. This is the character from the article, who is most assuredly not a child.
I'm not sure if you're being an idiot on purpose, or if it's an accident.
Oh that's totally my b. I got confused. I think the article may have mentioned genshin impact somewhere.
Anyway, I took a look and you're right only half the cast is child-coded! Great! Now let's get the other half too!
It didn't. Just like nobody ever argued for sexualizing minors.
This isn't the first thing you've just made up in this thread. I'm beginning to think that you're acting in bad faith here.
You're correct that nobody has quite said the quiet part out loud yet except for myself and the initial comment I was replying to.
And again, nobody is interested in arguing about the points to do with sexualization of minors in video games and anime, despite that being the comment thread they replied to.
Yes I've made mistakes and committed fallacies in this argument. No, I am not arguing in bad faith. Nor do I intend to.
Nobody has replied to the salient points, nor the research I've raised, and that saddens me, as it means people are more interested in keeping their lolicon games than reducing issues affecting real people, and as a survivor of childhood sexual assault myself, I find that pretty fucked up. I would hope that even somebody who hasn't gone through what I have would have the same proclivity to protect living, breathing children over having unfettered access to lolicon games that sexualize minors but this thread has shown me that this is not the case.
Goodbye
Again, you're the only person talking about minors in this thread, my guy. Nobody's replying to your straw men because we all see them for what they are.
You're just upset that the game you know nothing about doesn't line up with the talking points you had prepared, so you're trying to force them into the conversation and twist it into something it isn't. Nobody's going to humor that obvious attempt at derailing the conversation, because you're arguing against points that nobody is making in the first place.
You already made it apparent that you don't know what the game is about, let alone which game the article is even referring to since you clearly didn't read it. Why are you even here? Just to say "Look at me, I care about children"? Congrats, you're such an amazing person.
Your ego is out of control, you need serious deep therapy and introspection, you made yourself look not only insane but really fucking ignorant and vile.
For like the 20th time, nobody was doing this. That was an argument that existed entirely in your imagination. Do you seriously still not understand this, or are you just pretending to not get it?