Banned Rape Game Gets Consensual Send-Up
Just when you thought that the controversy surrounding Japanese eroge title RapeLay had finally dissipated, Japanese developer Softhouse has lampooned the fracas in its new erotic game, Shinobiryuu. How? Japanese warriors having deliberately consensual sex with members of the opposite sex.
RapeLay drew such strong criticism that the United Nations asked Japan to ban games "involving rape and sexual violence against women." Japan's Ethics Organization of Computer Software did just that.
And while Shinobiryuu is an erotic game, and the eroge market is indeed a separate and distinct entity from the larger game market, the notion that simulated rape ought to be defended is certain to distress many. Not helping the matter is Shinobiryuu's "declaration," which appears before the game even begins and doesn't do a terribly wonderful job of explaining its pro-RapeLay position:
DeclarationThis is a declaration made with the consensus of all the characters that appear in this story.
All the characters appearing in this game have gone through special training and all actions carried out are done on the basis of mutual agreement.
Even if you're a inhuman person who believes that fictional characters in creative works do not have human rights, please do not ignore this.
We also thank all the kind people who see a character in the story saying phrases such as "help me" and take it as a real call for help.
However, even though you are worrying for the characters in the story, these are all lines spoken from a script.
They are not saying all this from the bottom of their hearts. We are sorry that they have put in so much effort into their acting that some people will confuse it as something that is really happening.
This game is a fictional story.
Game = fiction, got it. Follow-up question: cultural differences aside, out of all the troubles in this world, what does it say that your studio picked rape to defend?
Sure, there's a big difference between simulated rape and actual rape, but does anything with the word "rape" really mandate immediate political support? More than, say, human rights abuses, climate change, war (pick one), AIDS, cancer, poverty, starvation and education in the developing world? Ok, sure, you make erotic games so erotic issues are your bag - still, why not take a more intelligent route and reference Jodie Foster in The Accused, or make a comparison to much of the world's tacit acceptance of other types of simulated violence? There are at least half a dozen more serviceable ways to defend rape games, if one is determined to do so.
In addition to crystallizing the otherwise-unfounded claims of anti-game nuts, this is one stance defending freedom of speech that much of the world will find hard to get behind - consensually, at least.
Eroge Characters Comment On Hentai Game Restrictions [GameSetWatch]
[via GamePolitics]
tiny dancer
Posted to Miscellany on 23 December 2009
· Comments (26)
Other stuff like this: consensual sex, eroge, erotic games, japan, political statement, rape, rapelay, sex, shinobiryuu, softhouse
Why should they provide 'immediate political support' to human rights abuses, climate change, war (pick one), AIDS, cancer, poverty, starvation and education in the developing world?
Non of that is directly related to them.
They made a game that features rape. It's their product and they're defending it.
Whatsmore, I don't think it's supposed to be some huge high profile protest to it. More of a passive aggresive retort.
It's not even like these kinds of games are aimed at mainstream audiances. They're aimed at a small group of dedicated pervs. I can only speculate at how something like this came to the attention of the UN. ¬_¬
Talk about having better things to be worrying about then unconcensual sex in a fictional videogame.
I don't really understand why people are so upset by make-believe things engaged in make-believe rape. It's no different than a porn video with make-believe rape. Actually, I suppose it's even less offensive than that.
It's interactive porn featuring rape-fantasy, not my thing but who am I to judge what people want to get off on as long as it is not actually harming anyone else.
All forms of media feed into wider views of what is and isn't acceptable. The more something is seen the more it's normalised in people's minds; a lack of lgbt representation in games for instance enforces heteronormativity, so I can see why there is a push to suppress the notion of rape as acceptible in games as in some people's minds it will make it a more legitimate action.
That's why some PETA activists opposed Cooking Mama, and why we won't anytime soon be seeing Majestico releasing Raping Mama......though PETA producing Trauma Laboratory: Vivisect Mama, yeah, I could see that happening.
@Nexus
"Why should they provide 'immediate political support' to human rights abuses, climate change, war (pick one), AIDS, cancer, poverty, starvation and education in the developing world?
Non of that is directly related to them."
Right, but rape IS directly related to them.
And that disturbs some people.
Are you actually surprised by that?
The game is symptomatic of some effed up things in Japan's culture, I suppose.
But the UN or feminist activists or whoever should really be targeting the source, sexism and repressed sexuality in Japan, and not a symptom.
"Even if you're a inhuman person who believes that fictional characters in creative works do not have human rights, please do not ignore this."
I had to chuckle a bit here.
I certainly do think human rights are restricted to, you know, actual living human beings. But then, my issues with these sorts of games have very little to do with the characters and more to do with the players, more specifically the player mindset throughout. It's about normalization (as mentioned above), and protecting actual women, not defending poor bits of code.
As for the comment above mine: sometimes you can have some effect on the problem by tracking back from its symptoms, as it were. Personally, I wouldn't ignore sexism/racism/homophobia in games altogether in favor of clinging to the hope that everyone in the world will eventually stop being sexist/racist/homophobic...
Just my two cents.
Maybe it is a double standard, but women have so much shit with which to put up, and I know of no videogames that focus solely on men getting raped as a means of progress.
@ Gamescook
Oh, there's rape games with men too. I don't care for them, but I know they exist.
Mind you, the only one I can think of right now is Enzai.
These rape-games (or ero-games) as a whole have been around for decades and you have them for your regular straight audiance or even in a yaoi form (the latter technically even being intended for women).
Really, they've been around so long that I don't get why it's become an issue now.
@Gamescook
What Nexus said. Trust me, I've been into yaoi for more than a decade now, among my collection of bara games (yaoi is mostly effeminate pretty boys, bara is more muscular/average/chubby guys) there's even one that includes an alternate kinky path, one of those paths involving noncensual acts.
As for the people saying 'it'll lead to normalization!' ...No. Just no. I'm going to come out and admit I've done some freaky and disturbing things on the internet, and they don't make me any more inclined to turn into a sexual psychopath IRL. To buy into this you have to buy into the idea that violent video games lead to an increase in violent tendencies like Jack Thompson says. This is false, it is my sincere belief that only those who would otherwise be prone to such tendencies suffer that kind of effective and would be at risk to commit such acts even if all abhorrent acts were removed from videos (which would include, I'd like to note, every game that features violence as violence is generally a criminal act as well, which would include pretty much the vast majority of games. No Bioshock 2, No Modern Warfare 2, No Mass Effect 2.)
It may seem like it's just a matter of something most people find abhorrent, and rightly so, but the question then becomes 'where do we draw the line on what's acceptable and what's not?' And I'm sure everyone on this site realizes that there are a number of people out there that would advocate that that should include all LGBT content.
Well, we can at least agree that rape games are fucking creepy and the people that play them are less tempting to hang out with than others, I hope. I mean, I know people can legally be racist, but enough people shouting them down and displaying enough scorn, would be enough to make them at least be a little more quiet about it, right? You have the freedom to speak your mind and put your foot in your mouth. Am I way in the wrong here?
What do you mean, quiet them down?
It's not like they were promoting rape on the streets.
Again, these games have a very specific target-audiance. They're not intended to be mainstream games. No one is forcing you to buy it either.
And frankly, people who think fiction leads to real life behavior should not be gamers.
As for them being creepy. People have all kinds of kinks and fetishes. One person's creepy is another person's... not so creepy. ^_^;;
Diferent tastes and all that.
This has been an interesting discussion. I'm not going to defend "rape," fictional or otherwise, but I echo the comments of the others who feel that getting on the ban bandwagon is a dangerous thing. There's a lot of stuff I find personally abhorrent, whether we're talking about sexual interests or putting ketchup on scrambled eggs, but I would not like my personal barometer to dictate what other adults can or can't do.
As gross as I find this game and as unsettled as I would feel knowing someone was into this sort of thing, I don't think it's appropriate to ban something depicting fictional characters when it has no basis in reality. The normalizing argument really doesn't work; provided it's kept to adults, by that point any characteristics or interests have already formalized. Nobody not already pre-disposed towards violence plays a FPS and then becomes a serial killer.
So even though I think something like this should be legal, I do understand the opinions of others who disagree. Unfortunately, I believe we have to veer on the side of caution and support the right of stuff like this to exist even if we don't like it, lest we accidentally shoot ourselves in the foot on something we do.
@ Nexus
I was using an analogy. I guess I did not do it right.
It's a shame I don't have permission to share with you the full text of the emails I've received from survivors of rape. In response to this article in particular, I don't want to cheapen the fight against violence toward women by contributing to a discussion that lends credence to the notion that rape in any form, game simulation or not, can EVER be acceptable, but I will share the following two sentences with you:
"I'm sending this to you via private email because I don't dare post it to your board. the comments have shone it is not a safe space for rape victims. Maybe its because I've been a victim of sexual violence and have been exposed to many other people who have, but yes, this game is normalizing rape and that is bad."
Please consider the fact that RAPE VICTIMS consider our site, of all the safe spaces, an un-safe space to have a discussion about real-life rape and its relation to rape games. I don't know about you, but hearing that makes me feel ashamed.
The anonymity of the internet protects those who would defend "rape aficionados" but not the women whose lives are destroyed by rape? Here, of all places? At Christmastime, no less? Yes, I think shame is the appropriate reaction.
Please, enjoy your opinions and discussions, and remember why this site exists in the first place when you're talking about a *different* vulnerable demographic. If that doesn't work, imagine your sister, your daughter, your mother, your girlfriend, your galpal - any woman you love reading the comments here that, in some small way, make the world a safer place for rape and a less safe place for rape survivors.
Let's have a less morally reprehensible 2010.
First of all, real life rape is not excusable in any way or shape. This seems quite obvious.
I don't know where that person got that anyone here would be negative to a real life victim of rape.
The fact remains though that if we make special considerations for victims of rape (no matter how reprehensible the crime is) in lieu of freedom of speech, the same argument can be made for the victims of any crime. And just think where videogames (or any media) would be without portrayels of violance or the like.
As for the site being safe for discussion. Everybody agreeing is not a discussion. Then again, this is a discussion about rape games. Not actual RL rape. On which I hope everybody agrees that it is wrong.
Also, I'm slightly disappointed by how much you focus on women in your defence of rape victims. Men are victims of rape too, you know.
I'm sorry if this offends, but it's just the way I feel about it.
I think that it's unfortunate that anyone would feel like they can't talk here, so I will share something about myself. I was the victim of sexual assault as a child, and I still disagree that this game should be banned. What I said about not applying my barometer towards things that squick me out absolutely applies here as well; if not moreso, because I think that people who are the victim of something as heinous as actual rape are understandably too close to the situation to look at it objectively. I would certainly not feel appropriate using my experiences to emotionally manipulate people into getting rid of something that I, personally, dislike.
The studies do not support this "normalizing" concept. Again, I think it's a shame that anyone would feel uncomfortable discussing their experiences here when I don't see any comments glorifying actual rape, and pretty much everyone is in agreement that this game is "bad." But just because something is "bad" doesn't mean it should be banned and eviscerated from existing, and the unfortunate reality is that once you begin arbitrating what bad stuff can and can't exist, it becomes too easy for the ball to roll uncontrollably.
Again, actual rape is abhorrent, and I can speak personally when I say that it's an experience that absolutely haunts and shatters you in ways you wouldn't even know about. It's an experience that sticks a knife in your side and wrenches it around your gut. It's a sickening feeling that still stays with me today, and it's something no video game with artificial characters will ever come close to emulating.
Just because I don't support banning this game, however, doesn't mean I'm downplaying its subject matter, and I think that the positive effect of this appearing in the news again is that it's another opportunity to discuss this subject-- hopefully as adults and without reactionary rhetoric.
Nexus - you're right, I should extend my defense of rape survivors to ALL people - men, women, girls, boys, babies.
Agreement isn't at issue - just the awareness that for some people, particularly rape survivors, the distinction between RL rape and rape games is fuzzy. No matter how crystal clear the issue may be to you, or to those who aren't bothered by them. Those who *are* bothered are likely to be bothered on a devastatingly personal level. Surely that merits a moment or two of consideration?
As for this:
"I don't know where that person got that anyone here would be negative to a real life victim of rape."
I think the answer to that question begins and ends with one concept, or rather its absence: sensitivity.
Rape. What a lovely thing for anyone to defend on any level ever. What a great way to spend your time. This is really an important issue and we need to stop these horrible people trying to hurt those poor defenseless rape games.
Those games can't speak up for themselves or defend themselves so I'm glad to see people taking time out of their day to do it for them.
Stop crime against rape games today!
Mixvio: Thank you enormously for sharing your personal story. Your courage and openness are appreciated more than you know.
I don't have a simple opinion on banning these games. The purist in me agrees that, on principle, the notion of banning what we find to be offensive is not a very good solution. The pragmatist in me realizes that sometimes society has to draw a line. The cynic in me realizes that drawing that line is itself a dangerous idea. On the other hand, the white knight in me wants to draft the ban himself.
My angle all along has been how absurd it is to spend much time defending rape games, which I certainly stick by. So for now I'm with Layla.
I don't really see this so much as defending "rape games" as much as the concept of defending things from individuals' personal sensitivities.
This "for the children" mentality is pervasive in our culture, and is the basis for a lot of reactionary laws that do nothing to actually protect children (or in this case, rape victims) but instead paves the way for more egregious violations of free speech.
And this isn't just hypothetical. This is why violent video games, which already are not marketed to children, aren't rated for children, and shouldn't be played by children (and wouldn't be, if parents actually parented instead of relying on the government to do the job for them) are increasingly under fire for "normalizing" violence. It's why such games are usually banned or require extensive editing to get passed in Germany; it's why Germany put through a ridiculous law over pornography and adult material that required a USB stick to be inserted in your computer in order to verify that you were an adult, for each and every "adult-only" classified website you wanted to be a member with.
Some people look at this and only see "defending rape games." That's a pretty disingenuous and narrow certification of the issue I'm actually concerned over. Society may need to draw a line at some stuff, but who determines where that line falls? Common consensus in the US right now would put us as the LGBT community on the opposite end of a lot of things.
Mixvio: I respect the issue *you're* concerned about, but that doesn't make it "disingenuous and narrow" for those who *are* concerned about the more specific issue of "defending rape games."
I see where you're coming from, but I think there's plenty of room in the cultural dialog for a mindset that says: while censorship is bad, taking a personal stance against "rape games" isn't bad.
It certainly isn't disingenuous, by any means or definition, to feel that "defending rape game" isn't the most admirable use of one's time. If that's so, consider me narrow.
Layla, that tone of argument that belittles the other side in a discussion is out of order.
So far this has been a relatively civil discussion. So let's try and continue showing eachother some respect please.
As mentioned, this isn't a discussion about the rapegames themselves so much as it is about freedom of expression and censorship. Well it has been for me anyway.
I don't care for this game either, but we can't just be anti-censorship on things we like.
As for the sensitivity plea, I reiterate that victims of other crimes could make the same plea.
Do you want to see all games with violance in them banned?
No more war-games or anything like that?
No games like Manhunt or GTA?
Also, as for the use of one's time. Does that mean all of us at this very moment should be out protesting against the true evils in society?
Why are all of you on the internet then?
I'm not sitting here spending all my time focused on this issue. I come back to it from time to time check on responses as I do with virtually any topic on any site where I've responded to.
That doesn't mean it's a big crusade for me. It just means I have an interest in the discussion. Which I'm assuming is the same for the rest of you that make more than one post on this topic.
Admirable use of time? Should I go out looking for homeless people to be give shelter to? I'm no saint. I'm just a regular person on the internet. Like most of the people who visit this site thank you very much.
tiny dancer: But, as I said, my defense of this has nothing to do with the "rape games" part as much as it is the overarching issue. You can't divorce the two, and I don't see anyone really defending this because they're saying "Oh hey, rape games are kickass."
I don't know if anyone here has ever been involved in a MMOG/virtual world called Second Life, but it's an open ended platform that's completely user-generated. One of the issues that had constant resurgence in the time that I was a part of that community was "ageplayers," or subscribers who fashioned their digital avatar into a representation of a child. A lot of people were extremely uncomfortable with this, even when it was as demure as people just roleplaying being a nine year old. The environment was for adults only, and while the platform itself wasn't specifically sexually explicit, like the internet itself a lot of the user-generated content veered in the sexytime direction. Similarly, while some people only wanted to roleplay being a nine year old, some people wanted to roleplay having sex with nine year olds.
In an environment that was ostensibly only for adults 18+, some people felt that this was encouraging pedophilia and routinely pressured the developers to ban it or create arbitrary restrictions on how short you could make your avatar or other stuff. I don't think I need to express how distasteful I find the concept of having sex with a kid, virtual or otherwise, and how much that makes me, personally, uncomfortable. But similarly, I was more uncomfortable with the idea of banning something simply because someone didn't like it.
So, while I absolutely identify that this is a sensitive issue for some people, the comment about being disingenuous is distilling the people who are saying "I have a problem with rape games, but I have more of a problem with restricting what adults can do consensually with fictional characters" into "hell yeah let's go play us some rape RPG!" I'm not seeing any of the latter, and I'm certainly not defending the concept. But I do think that this is dangerous ground to tread, and historically society hasn't been very good at navigating these issues to any degree that isn't ham-fisted and out of control.
Mix: I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this count.
Fair enough!
But to anyone reading this who feels like they can't say anything, I would hope that you reconsider; I'll certainly be front in line to punt anyone who makes any inappropriate or threatening comments towards a rape victim. But at the same time, please don't mistake potential freedom-of-speech concerns with saying this stuff is okay. I do find this game exceptionally crass and abhorrent and it is disturbing to me that anyone would seek this out and enjoy it. But I don't think the things that disturb me, when we're talking about stuff adults do on their own time in their own homes of their own will, should necessarily be codified into law.