Maybe my Japanese isn't what it used to be, but could you please point me/us to the specific paragraph where they say this? The page you linked to appears to be an all-purpose "Letter from the CEO"-type splashpage which introduces visitors to the roles which the EOCS has served both in past and in present. Also, the use of 変化 to refer to the current pressures the EOCS is facing seems to suggest resentment/ridicule of the attacks rather than polite agreement or neutral acceptance.
End of r*** in ero anime and games?
- Thread starter reingiolt
- Start date
-
Akiba-Online is sponsored by FileJoker.
FileJoker is a required filehost for all new posts and content replies in the Direct Downloads subforums.
Failure to include FileJoker links for Direct Download posts will result in deletion of your posts or worse.
For more information see this thread.
The EOCS site says nothing about the ban at this point. The only news source at this point is the TBS report, which is short on details. (And it's not clear what the "10% to 20%" figure refers to. Units sold? Titles? Gross revenue?)
Everything else is just reactions to the TBS report.
By the way, 変化 simply means "changes", and the splash page refers to constant and dramatic changes in society and social values in the 16 years since the EOCS was founded.
I hope Ben can sleep well again now. :sleeping: Please don´t worry, you are neither the first nor the last to whom this happened.
Viewing the discussion in both threads and seing that both had completely the same topic I decided to merge both threads into a single thread and replaced it into the hentai discussion section.
I hope it´s o.k. this way...
I slightly renamed the thread too.
Viewing the discussion in both threads and seing that both had completely the same topic I decided to merge both threads into a single thread and replaced it into the hentai discussion section.
I hope it´s o.k. this way...
I slightly renamed the thread too.
Doh! I completely missed HENTAIBEN's post.
Now I don't know what to believe. Time will tell.
As for Sakunyuusha's conspiracy theory, I think you overestimate the cleverness of both TBS and the EOCS. :dunno:
Now I don't know what to believe. Time will tell.
As for Sakunyuusha's conspiracy theory, I think you overestimate the cleverness of both TBS and the EOCS. :dunno:
Confusion is the mother of all fu**ups...
Their counting on it when starting debates about these things based on nothing.
(hmm perhaps just another conspiracy theory but still)
What is frightening is the statement above...
"What if EOCS approached TBS..."
It's like saying "EOCS is working against it's members" rather than keeping an eye out on the organization as whole, using media against it's own members if I understood this right.
Nevertheless... the step is short to also convert the whole H scene into Kid-s Only Manga...
We'll revert back to the days of Sazuki chasing bad guys and that is it.
Once again along the lines "Violence is fine, but intimacy is not, in any form"
EDIT:---
When will policy makers understand that the games a) exist b) sells really well c) continue to expand on markets ...
Because "Community Standards" define there is a demand for them.
It does not mean the number of r***s, violent crime and other negative facts do occur.
It simply means, the notion of so called "community standard" values are different than what the government, legal scene and media tries to instill in the larger public in my opinion.
Like ostrages, with their heads in the sand, they deny the facts and make policies based on wishful thinking of a perfect world.
I guess we can all agree humans are far from perfect, and as long as that is the case, we can't expect to live in utopia.
Their counting on it when starting debates about these things based on nothing.
(hmm perhaps just another conspiracy theory but still)
What is frightening is the statement above...
"What if EOCS approached TBS..."
It's like saying "EOCS is working against it's members" rather than keeping an eye out on the organization as whole, using media against it's own members if I understood this right.
Nevertheless... the step is short to also convert the whole H scene into Kid-s Only Manga...
We'll revert back to the days of Sazuki chasing bad guys and that is it.
Once again along the lines "Violence is fine, but intimacy is not, in any form"
EDIT:---
When will policy makers understand that the games a) exist b) sells really well c) continue to expand on markets ...
Because "Community Standards" define there is a demand for them.
It does not mean the number of r***s, violent crime and other negative facts do occur.
It simply means, the notion of so called "community standard" values are different than what the government, legal scene and media tries to instill in the larger public in my opinion.
Like ostrages, with their heads in the sand, they deny the facts and make policies based on wishful thinking of a perfect world.
I guess we can all agree humans are far from perfect, and as long as that is the case, we can't expect to live in utopia.
I just obtained a copy of Mitsuya's newest tankoubon, Paikore. In it, I read a very erotic and adorable ^_________^ story about a mangaka and an assistant who fall in love. Unrealistic, yes. Cliche, admittedly so. But Mitsuya's adorable "loli-faced adult women with big boobs" moe style of drawing, coupled to an already adorable story, made this the sugar cube of the morning's hentai gems.
And why am I posting about it in this thread? Because it's a fantastic example of why I fear this sort of legislation is going to utterly neuter hentai.
Why? Because: in this story, the man technically attempts to r*** the woman. Things to consider!
Admittedly, with this particular story the fix would be easy in the world of tomorrow: simply don't have him push her over. Simply have him mumble about not being able to tell what it's like when a penis enters a vagina and have her mumble that she's okay with him testing it out for the sake of the manga, and have the passionate sex evolve from this. But the thing is, you don't get to retcon what's already been printed. If Japanese law is going to illegalize any hentai game (and, I fear, hentai anime and hentai manga would not be too far behind) which depicts r***, then it follows that attempted r*** is r*** for the purposes of this law, and therefore a story like this -- in which a character arguably "attempts to r***" another character in one scene -- would have to be blacklisted.
This is why the proposed change to the law, as it stands, is waaaaaaaaaay too broad. Mind you, I'm of the opinion like a lot of you that no fictional r*** hentai should be banned, but I'm also trying to plea with our ideological adversaries and beg them to come to reason! They have to understand that there is a difference between Amano Ameno (see attached picture) and Mitsuya (see attached rar). Both authors use r*** in their stories, but it's like saying two guys use Samuel L. Jackson in their films and one guy's films are CGI clones of Samuel L. fulfilling every role of the movie while the other guy's films are nothing to do with Samuel L. Jackson and he's just one of the passersby on the sidewalk in one of the film's least important scenes as an Easter egg of sorts.
I've attached a third file (the 2nd image attachment). It's one of the pages from this story, as a courtesy for people who either don't know who Mitsuya is by name or who do and who want to know if they already have this story or not. To be perfectly clear, the first image attachment is NOT what's in the rar! The second image is! If you want the story to the first image, do an /rs/ search for "Swan Pink" and you should get it pretty easily.
And why am I posting about it in this thread? Because it's a fantastic example of why I fear this sort of legislation is going to utterly neuter hentai.
Why? Because: in this story, the man technically attempts to r*** the woman. Things to consider!
- "Attempted r***" is a pretty strict interpretation of what played out. Takuya had already been given a number of signs that Yumeko was not sexually sheltered around him. She hadn't really protested when he stuck his fingers up her vagina. If anything, one could argue in his defense that what he did was "catch her off guard." But that's just it.
"Catching a woman offguard" can still be construed as attempted r***. And that alone would get this story blacklisted in the future if Equality Now and other groups pushing to outlaw fictional r*** in hentai get their way. - He doesn't succeed in his attempted r*** anyway. She stops him before he can penetrate and the two have a chat.
- He wins her over to his cause. And he does so in an undeniably uncoercive manner. All he does is get on his soapbox and talk about the importance of eromanga being erotic and how it's not possible to draw an erotic comic if you can't even arouse a single woman. She has complete free will to reject or accept his stance and she is won over by it (fictional as that may be).
- She very clearly enjoys the sex.
- Last page: it's an undeniably happy ending. I mean, this shit doesn't get any happier than this. A good-bye kiss! A new couple is born! She's fucking adorable, too! And she's so happy! Check out that smile! Check out that heart after the また来ます ! She's his girlfriend now and she's happy to be!
Admittedly, with this particular story the fix would be easy in the world of tomorrow: simply don't have him push her over. Simply have him mumble about not being able to tell what it's like when a penis enters a vagina and have her mumble that she's okay with him testing it out for the sake of the manga, and have the passionate sex evolve from this. But the thing is, you don't get to retcon what's already been printed. If Japanese law is going to illegalize any hentai game (and, I fear, hentai anime and hentai manga would not be too far behind) which depicts r***, then it follows that attempted r*** is r*** for the purposes of this law, and therefore a story like this -- in which a character arguably "attempts to r***" another character in one scene -- would have to be blacklisted.
This is why the proposed change to the law, as it stands, is waaaaaaaaaay too broad. Mind you, I'm of the opinion like a lot of you that no fictional r*** hentai should be banned, but I'm also trying to plea with our ideological adversaries and beg them to come to reason! They have to understand that there is a difference between Amano Ameno (see attached picture) and Mitsuya (see attached rar). Both authors use r*** in their stories, but it's like saying two guys use Samuel L. Jackson in their films and one guy's films are CGI clones of Samuel L. fulfilling every role of the movie while the other guy's films are nothing to do with Samuel L. Jackson and he's just one of the passersby on the sidewalk in one of the film's least important scenes as an Easter egg of sorts.
I've attached a third file (the 2nd image attachment). It's one of the pages from this story, as a courtesy for people who either don't know who Mitsuya is by name or who do and who want to know if they already have this story or not. To be perfectly clear, the first image attachment is NOT what's in the rar! The second image is! If you want the story to the first image, do an /rs/ search for "Swan Pink" and you should get it pretty easily.
One thing that hasn't been directly discussed:
I understand the rationale certain activist groups hold against computer games that simulate r***; that is, out of a belief (whether founded or not) that it is at least indirectly correlated to incidents of actual r***. So what, if anything, are those groups doing to prohibit the production of pornography that simulates r***? Because in particular, the Japanese pornography industry does indeed produce significantly more r***-themed adult videos compared to other pornography industries.
It seems to me if anything, going after r***-themed pornography is a much more sure-fire target as there could be a more palpable translation from the simulation of r*** of real women to the actual r*** of real women.
I'm of the camp that believes there is no credible evidence that directly links violent games to violent behavior (eg: GTA et al) in a causal relationship -- that is, playing violent video games does not always and necessarily mean a person will become more violent. They may become desensitized to certain kinds of content, but that does not necessarily mean they are more inclined to actually carry violent behavior.
What video game makers are responding to is simply a market demand (for such video games). Eg: they're not in the business of creating violent people, but are simply responding to an existing demand for that sort of content. There may in fact be a few exceptions here and there where would-be criminals formulate ideas for their crimes from video games (though the same can be said of tv shows and movies), but I believe most of an inclination towards violence stems from other factors (eg: environment, some sort of traumatic experience, etc).
I hold essentially the same viewpoint when it comes to games that simulate r*** (in the way that r*** is a specific form of violence). Though no one is denying that incidents of r*** do indeed occur in Japan, there just isn't much evidence (or research, even) that directly links such games to occurrences of actual r***.
To speak briefly about the UN statistics on occurrences of r*** (per 100,000), I agree that Japan's figures are highly under-represented. But two points: 1) even other countries are subject to under-representation, namely that the phenomenon of women who don't report their own r*** is not uniquely Japanese. And 2) despite inaccuracy, that does not mean the figures should be thrown out completely. For an incidence rate of 1.78 and 32.05 for Japan and US respectively, that means Japan must have an under-representation rate of 1:20 (that is, only 1 out of every 20 r***s is actually reported) in order to match incidence rates of the US -- and that's still before the US's figure is adjusted for the same kind of under-representation. It is possible to then put that against anecdotal evidence to see if women do indeed choose not to report r*** at a rate of 95% -- or if it's more, or less, than the UN's figures. So it's not an accurate figure, but it's a basic measuring stick for the order of magnitude for the incidence rate of r***.
While it is indeed true that a lot of incidents of r*** in Japan are either disregarded by the police or brushed under the rug by the victims, I still have a hard time visualizing Japan as a country where women are r***ing right and left, or that every single female is bound to experience r*** at some point in her life. In fact, I would be surprised if the incidence rate was significantly higher than in other major economic powers, especially when weighing it against anecdotal evidence of Japan being a notably more safe country compared to said countries.
To return to OP, there's one interesting side-point. I don't have the reference at-hand, but I had previously seen a study that charted a small decrease in sexual violence incidents in Japan during the 1970-1990 period when pornography availability began to increase dramatically (due to emergence of at-home video viewing technology). The decrease could be merely a statistical error, but what's important is that there wasn'ta significant increase proportional to the availability of pornography. So while prohibition of "extreme" materials may indeed put a few exceptional incidents at bay, I think it will ultimately prove counter-productive in the long run for activist groups' agendas, since there really isn't a solid causal relationship between pornographic material and sexual violence.
I'm not against the ban because I have something at stake (actually I don't play H-games as it is), but because I think many people are jumping onto the bandwagon out of a "do good" feeling without really understanding what it is they are doing -- in the same way that America has been notorious for domestic terrorist attacks in the name of animal activism and eco-awareness. I am with those that call for self-regulation from within the industry. If r***-simulation game producers ever come to the point where their games do in fact promote real-life sexual violence, they have as much incentive to regulate themselves as anyone else, out of the possibility of being shut down completely.
:...:
I understand the rationale certain activist groups hold against computer games that simulate r***; that is, out of a belief (whether founded or not) that it is at least indirectly correlated to incidents of actual r***. So what, if anything, are those groups doing to prohibit the production of pornography that simulates r***? Because in particular, the Japanese pornography industry does indeed produce significantly more r***-themed adult videos compared to other pornography industries.
It seems to me if anything, going after r***-themed pornography is a much more sure-fire target as there could be a more palpable translation from the simulation of r*** of real women to the actual r*** of real women.
I'm of the camp that believes there is no credible evidence that directly links violent games to violent behavior (eg: GTA et al) in a causal relationship -- that is, playing violent video games does not always and necessarily mean a person will become more violent. They may become desensitized to certain kinds of content, but that does not necessarily mean they are more inclined to actually carry violent behavior.
What video game makers are responding to is simply a market demand (for such video games). Eg: they're not in the business of creating violent people, but are simply responding to an existing demand for that sort of content. There may in fact be a few exceptions here and there where would-be criminals formulate ideas for their crimes from video games (though the same can be said of tv shows and movies), but I believe most of an inclination towards violence stems from other factors (eg: environment, some sort of traumatic experience, etc).
I hold essentially the same viewpoint when it comes to games that simulate r*** (in the way that r*** is a specific form of violence). Though no one is denying that incidents of r*** do indeed occur in Japan, there just isn't much evidence (or research, even) that directly links such games to occurrences of actual r***.
To speak briefly about the UN statistics on occurrences of r*** (per 100,000), I agree that Japan's figures are highly under-represented. But two points: 1) even other countries are subject to under-representation, namely that the phenomenon of women who don't report their own r*** is not uniquely Japanese. And 2) despite inaccuracy, that does not mean the figures should be thrown out completely. For an incidence rate of 1.78 and 32.05 for Japan and US respectively, that means Japan must have an under-representation rate of 1:20 (that is, only 1 out of every 20 r***s is actually reported) in order to match incidence rates of the US -- and that's still before the US's figure is adjusted for the same kind of under-representation. It is possible to then put that against anecdotal evidence to see if women do indeed choose not to report r*** at a rate of 95% -- or if it's more, or less, than the UN's figures. So it's not an accurate figure, but it's a basic measuring stick for the order of magnitude for the incidence rate of r***.
While it is indeed true that a lot of incidents of r*** in Japan are either disregarded by the police or brushed under the rug by the victims, I still have a hard time visualizing Japan as a country where women are r***ing right and left, or that every single female is bound to experience r*** at some point in her life. In fact, I would be surprised if the incidence rate was significantly higher than in other major economic powers, especially when weighing it against anecdotal evidence of Japan being a notably more safe country compared to said countries.
To return to OP, there's one interesting side-point. I don't have the reference at-hand, but I had previously seen a study that charted a small decrease in sexual violence incidents in Japan during the 1970-1990 period when pornography availability began to increase dramatically (due to emergence of at-home video viewing technology). The decrease could be merely a statistical error, but what's important is that there wasn'ta significant increase proportional to the availability of pornography. So while prohibition of "extreme" materials may indeed put a few exceptional incidents at bay, I think it will ultimately prove counter-productive in the long run for activist groups' agendas, since there really isn't a solid causal relationship between pornographic material and sexual violence.
I'm not against the ban because I have something at stake (actually I don't play H-games as it is), but because I think many people are jumping onto the bandwagon out of a "do good" feeling without really understanding what it is they are doing -- in the same way that America has been notorious for domestic terrorist attacks in the name of animal activism and eco-awareness. I am with those that call for self-regulation from within the industry. If r***-simulation game producers ever come to the point where their games do in fact promote real-life sexual violence, they have as much incentive to regulate themselves as anyone else, out of the possibility of being shut down completely.
:...:
Good points, guy. One of the great dilemmas of sociological studies on the "influence" of media on individuals is precisely the inability to prove--or disprove--a clear cause-and-effect relationship. Anecdotal evidence is all but meaningless.
Does the r**ist with the large collection of r*** porn or r*** games r*** because of the porn, or is he attracted to the porn because he has an inclination to r***? Does the teen who loves playing Grand Theft Auto go on a shooting spree because he was affected by the game, or was he attracted to the game because of a violent inclination? There's just no way to know.
The popular theory (that has been voiced in this thread) that porn or violent video games can serve as some sort of "pressure release valve" and can actually prevent real-life violence is similarly unsupported by any hard scientific data, because, again, cause and effect simply can't be determined.
But can anyone deny that we are all in some way affected by the media that saturates our lives? Can anyone really state unequivocally that a child raised in an environment where images of extreme violence and portrayals of women as nothing more than objects of sexual desire are rampant and unavoidable is not going to become less sensitive to real violence or r*** than a child who isn't?
Just some food for thought.
Does the r**ist with the large collection of r*** porn or r*** games r*** because of the porn, or is he attracted to the porn because he has an inclination to r***? Does the teen who loves playing Grand Theft Auto go on a shooting spree because he was affected by the game, or was he attracted to the game because of a violent inclination? There's just no way to know.
The popular theory (that has been voiced in this thread) that porn or violent video games can serve as some sort of "pressure release valve" and can actually prevent real-life violence is similarly unsupported by any hard scientific data, because, again, cause and effect simply can't be determined.
But can anyone deny that we are all in some way affected by the media that saturates our lives? Can anyone really state unequivocally that a child raised in an environment where images of extreme violence and portrayals of women as nothing more than objects of sexual desire are rampant and unavoidable is not going to become less sensitive to real violence or r*** than a child who isn't?
Just some food for thought.
Well as I had mentioned briefly, I personally would never be so audacious as to consider porn or violent video games a kind of "pressure release valve". Just as much as there may or may not be any definitive correlation between availability of porn and incidence of r*** (even before we begin talking about causation), there also may or may not be any definitive correlation between an individual's private thoughts and an inclination for actually carrying out violent behavior (which would be necessary in order to say that simulated violence helps control actual violence).
I think that separation carries over into the question of desensitization. We are certainly desensitized when it comes to the perception of violence. But the imagery of violence most of us see almost always contained within our TV, either stylized by Hollywood or edited for "decency" (eg: on the news, we see yellow tape and bodybags, but never any severed limbs or mangled bodies). Most of us rarely actually see such violence in real life, let alone experience it personally, and I think most of us would also have a difficult time equating the two with each other.
Particularly for victims of violent crimes, I doubt the experience is any less traumatic for them despite having seen and heard about similar crimes on the news every night. And conversely, I still think that for most people, they have an understanding (a "moral threshold", if you will) that there is a distinct difference between the virtual(ized) world and the real world. That is, their willingness to play violent games comes from an understanding that they aren't actually killing people. For them to actually kill a person in real life, or commit some other violent crime, requires them to overcome that threshold, and video games (or other "virtualized" desensitization material) is seldom the predominant factor in overcoming that threshold.
What we can say is that an affinitive interest in violent content may be an indicator for a willingness (conscious or unconscious) to commit violent crimes, but even if that were the case, that's an incredibly unreliable indicator, as there are countless cases left and right of people who are absolute fans of video games (and r***-simulation anime/manga/pornography) who simply have never committed any crimes.
I think that separation carries over into the question of desensitization. We are certainly desensitized when it comes to the perception of violence. But the imagery of violence most of us see almost always contained within our TV, either stylized by Hollywood or edited for "decency" (eg: on the news, we see yellow tape and bodybags, but never any severed limbs or mangled bodies). Most of us rarely actually see such violence in real life, let alone experience it personally, and I think most of us would also have a difficult time equating the two with each other.
Particularly for victims of violent crimes, I doubt the experience is any less traumatic for them despite having seen and heard about similar crimes on the news every night. And conversely, I still think that for most people, they have an understanding (a "moral threshold", if you will) that there is a distinct difference between the virtual(ized) world and the real world. That is, their willingness to play violent games comes from an understanding that they aren't actually killing people. For them to actually kill a person in real life, or commit some other violent crime, requires them to overcome that threshold, and video games (or other "virtualized" desensitization material) is seldom the predominant factor in overcoming that threshold.
What we can say is that an affinitive interest in violent content may be an indicator for a willingness (conscious or unconscious) to commit violent crimes, but even if that were the case, that's an incredibly unreliable indicator, as there are countless cases left and right of people who are absolute fans of video games (and r***-simulation anime/manga/pornography) who simply have never committed any crimes.
One thing which bothers me about Mr. Thorn's most recent (5/31) blog update to which daredemonai linked us is, he claims that most people in Japan didn't know these sorts of games existed and that the only ones who did were the ones plugged into Akiba culture. For me to believe that, the following observations and points of conjecture would need to sum up to an incorrect conclusion:
[hide]I am a young American male adult. I do not read fantasy books. I know that fantasy books exist. I know that fantasy books sometimes contain dwarves, hobbits, elves, trolls, gnomes, goblins, orcs, werewolves, vampires, dragons, beasts from Greek mythology, " " Roman mythology, " " Norse mythology, " " Medieval superstitions and legends, etc. I could not name you any fantasy books save for the ones which have penetrated into the public consciousness like Lord of the Rings or Eragon. I definitely couldn't name for you the specific heroes of any random fantasy book you might happen to select.
But here's the thing: if you were to ask me, "Sir, do you believe that there are some fantasy books on the market in which the hero is an elf?", I would answer, "Probably, yes" despite having read very little fantasy. "A dwarf, maybe?" "Yes, I could see that." "How about a goblin, sir." "Sure, I suppose." "A goblin, sir? Even though they're wicked creatures?" "Well, maybe this is a good goblin!" "Uh-huh. And how about a dragon." "Yeah, sure. I mean, Draco stared in that movie DragonHeart, right?" Without having read much fantasy, common sense informs me that the books' heroes could come from any of the mythical races which fans associate with the genre. Indeed, even completely made-up races could be what the main characters of many fantasy books belong to.
So, departing from this analogy, we return to the matter at hand: r*** in video games.
Question 1. Were I to ask you "how common do you believe r*** to be in sexual fiction?", how would you answer? How do you think the common man/woman would answer? ("sexual fiction" referring to imaginings, films, books, drawings, music, etc)
Question 2. Were I to ask you, "do you know what video games are?", how would you answer? As a follow-up to that obvious answer, were I to then ask you, "do you know of any reason to not believe in the existence of erotic video games?", how would you respond?
Question 3. Were I to ask you, "how likely is it that for any given sexual fetish there is probably a video game out there which lets the player partake in it?", how would you answer?
This is why I think Mr. Thorn is either being obtuse or is being genuine with his audience but is one exceptionally socially-deaf fellow. Because if he expects us to believe that most Japanese people "never knew such games existed" because they're not plugged into Akiba life, are not sexually deviant, do not play video games of any kind, etc., he's kidding himself.
I've never played nor seen a single eroge in which the main character transforms into an alien monster, tentacle fucks women, and transforms them into alien monster females by so doing, but it doesn't take much imagination on my part to figure that such a game probably exists. And so it goes for the members of Parliament, for the party leaders, and for Joe and Jane Average -- if they know video games exist, if they know sex exists, then they figure there're probably sex games. And if they know r*** fetish exists, then they figure there're probably r*** fetish sex games.
Had Mr. Thorn written that "most Japanese people never know these games were legal," then I wouldn't need to suspend my disbelief for a second. I'd agree with him in a heartbeat, with still as little evidence then as he or I have right now. But the thing is, Mr. Thorn has neither evidence to support his claim nor basic logic, while I (hope that I) at least have the latter. His self-reference ("I live in Japan") hardly constitutes material evidence to support his claim that most Japanese never knew such games existed.
Japanese guy : Rapelay :: me : The Wizards of Elzynob . He's never heard of the game, I've never heard of the book.
Japanese guy : sex :: me : fantasy. We both know the genre exists.
Japanese guy : video games :: me : books. We both know the medium exists.
Japanese guy : sex games (eroge) :: me : fantasy books. Even if neither of us has ever seen one before, we have no reason to doubt their existence.
----------->
Japanese guy : r*** games :: me : a fantasy book in which wizards are the title characters. I know wizards exists in fantasy, so it's not hard to imagine an author writing a fantasy book where wizards are the stars of the show. DITTO, DITTO, DITTO for the average Japanese citizen and a r*** game. He may not know Rapelay, but like fuck he doesn't know about eroges in general.[/hide]
I used Hide because it's a lot of conjecture and I'd appreciate being corrected if one or more of you also live in Japan and strongly agree with Mr. Thorn despite your -- our -- strong awareness of r*** games' existence.
[hide]I am a young American male adult. I do not read fantasy books. I know that fantasy books exist. I know that fantasy books sometimes contain dwarves, hobbits, elves, trolls, gnomes, goblins, orcs, werewolves, vampires, dragons, beasts from Greek mythology, " " Roman mythology, " " Norse mythology, " " Medieval superstitions and legends, etc. I could not name you any fantasy books save for the ones which have penetrated into the public consciousness like Lord of the Rings or Eragon. I definitely couldn't name for you the specific heroes of any random fantasy book you might happen to select.
But here's the thing: if you were to ask me, "Sir, do you believe that there are some fantasy books on the market in which the hero is an elf?", I would answer, "Probably, yes" despite having read very little fantasy. "A dwarf, maybe?" "Yes, I could see that." "How about a goblin, sir." "Sure, I suppose." "A goblin, sir? Even though they're wicked creatures?" "Well, maybe this is a good goblin!" "Uh-huh. And how about a dragon." "Yeah, sure. I mean, Draco stared in that movie DragonHeart, right?" Without having read much fantasy, common sense informs me that the books' heroes could come from any of the mythical races which fans associate with the genre. Indeed, even completely made-up races could be what the main characters of many fantasy books belong to.
So, departing from this analogy, we return to the matter at hand: r*** in video games.
Question 1. Were I to ask you "how common do you believe r*** to be in sexual fiction?", how would you answer? How do you think the common man/woman would answer? ("sexual fiction" referring to imaginings, films, books, drawings, music, etc)
Question 2. Were I to ask you, "do you know what video games are?", how would you answer? As a follow-up to that obvious answer, were I to then ask you, "do you know of any reason to not believe in the existence of erotic video games?", how would you respond?
Question 3. Were I to ask you, "how likely is it that for any given sexual fetish there is probably a video game out there which lets the player partake in it?", how would you answer?
This is why I think Mr. Thorn is either being obtuse or is being genuine with his audience but is one exceptionally socially-deaf fellow. Because if he expects us to believe that most Japanese people "never knew such games existed" because they're not plugged into Akiba life, are not sexually deviant, do not play video games of any kind, etc., he's kidding himself.
I've never played nor seen a single eroge in which the main character transforms into an alien monster, tentacle fucks women, and transforms them into alien monster females by so doing, but it doesn't take much imagination on my part to figure that such a game probably exists. And so it goes for the members of Parliament, for the party leaders, and for Joe and Jane Average -- if they know video games exist, if they know sex exists, then they figure there're probably sex games. And if they know r*** fetish exists, then they figure there're probably r*** fetish sex games.
Had Mr. Thorn written that "most Japanese people never know these games were legal," then I wouldn't need to suspend my disbelief for a second. I'd agree with him in a heartbeat, with still as little evidence then as he or I have right now. But the thing is, Mr. Thorn has neither evidence to support his claim nor basic logic, while I (hope that I) at least have the latter. His self-reference ("I live in Japan") hardly constitutes material evidence to support his claim that most Japanese never knew such games existed.
Japanese guy : Rapelay :: me : The Wizards of Elzynob . He's never heard of the game, I've never heard of the book.
Japanese guy : sex :: me : fantasy. We both know the genre exists.
Japanese guy : video games :: me : books. We both know the medium exists.
Japanese guy : sex games (eroge) :: me : fantasy books. Even if neither of us has ever seen one before, we have no reason to doubt their existence.
----------->
Japanese guy : r*** games :: me : a fantasy book in which wizards are the title characters. I know wizards exists in fantasy, so it's not hard to imagine an author writing a fantasy book where wizards are the stars of the show. DITTO, DITTO, DITTO for the average Japanese citizen and a r*** game. He may not know Rapelay, but like fuck he doesn't know about eroges in general.[/hide]
I used Hide because it's a lot of conjecture and I'd appreciate being corrected if one or more of you also live in Japan and strongly agree with Mr. Thorn despite your -- our -- strong awareness of r*** games' existence.
The legal (and, more broadly, the philosophical) problem with these discussions is that they always come back to causation vs. correlation and yet the human mind can never, ever be said to "know" causation! It operates wholly on correlation! To know the cause of an event is to not only know affirmatively (i.e. to know that that cause is the cause) but is to also know negatively (i.e. to know that every other possible cause is not the cause). In other words, the only beings capable of knowing causes are omniscient beings.
(long explanation/defense of my claim follows)
[hide]Who are examples of omniscient beings?
1. Most narrators and, to a "lesser degree of omniscience" (lol), readers. For example, if the writer tells us that John killed Mary for revenge, then we know that to be the truth. The characters within the book are humanly incapable of knowing it. No matter what evidence they find, no matter what testimonies they hear, they can only make assumptions and draw conclusions from these. They can be 99.99% certain John killed Mary for revenge, but never can they be 100% certain. Only we, the readers, can be.
2. Professors and students in morality courses. When you're reading a book on philosophy and the author tells you that Boat A has 100 criminals who are each incapable of redeeming themselves while Boat B has 1 good man and you're asked to pick between which boat to detonate, you know those pieces of evidence to be true. But in real life, if a man told you this, how would you know? You're not there on the boats! And even if you were, how would you know who was truly good and who wasn't?
3. A real-life omniscient being.
That's it. In other words, when you're not reading a work of fiction, and when you're not considering a hypothetical ethical dilemma inside of your brain, you can never and do never know for certain what's real and what isn't. And because of this limited knowledge base of ours, we humans are restricted to existing as creatures who correlate. What we humans label "causes" are merely "correlations so strong that it would be absurd to not assume that they're in fact causes." But that's still an assumption we make when we take that jump from Correlation to Cause. We're assuming that if the relationship between A and B is 99.9999% that it's more likely we're looking at 100% linkage (i.e. a cause) than at 99.9999% linkage not indicative of cause (i.e. a very strong correlation). "If 99%, then 100%." "If 92%, then 100%." "If 58%, then 58%." We are simple computers with a round-up function turned on. We round up to 100% correlation (i.e. a cause) when the real value for the correlation is greater than or equal to our arbitrarily-decided-upon cutoff and we do not round up or down when it's below that cutoff. A 58 is a 58, a 23 is a 23, but a 94 or a 99 are always 100s as far as we're concerned.[/hide]
We are rational creatures which desperately seek to know and understand cause and effect, and yet we are not omniscient creatures and are therefore incapable of ever truly obtaining that which we seek. Tragic ... and yet romantic in its own way.
(long explanation/defense of my claim follows)
[hide]Who are examples of omniscient beings?
1. Most narrators and, to a "lesser degree of omniscience" (lol), readers. For example, if the writer tells us that John killed Mary for revenge, then we know that to be the truth. The characters within the book are humanly incapable of knowing it. No matter what evidence they find, no matter what testimonies they hear, they can only make assumptions and draw conclusions from these. They can be 99.99% certain John killed Mary for revenge, but never can they be 100% certain. Only we, the readers, can be.
2. Professors and students in morality courses. When you're reading a book on philosophy and the author tells you that Boat A has 100 criminals who are each incapable of redeeming themselves while Boat B has 1 good man and you're asked to pick between which boat to detonate, you know those pieces of evidence to be true. But in real life, if a man told you this, how would you know? You're not there on the boats! And even if you were, how would you know who was truly good and who wasn't?
3. A real-life omniscient being.
That's it. In other words, when you're not reading a work of fiction, and when you're not considering a hypothetical ethical dilemma inside of your brain, you can never and do never know for certain what's real and what isn't. And because of this limited knowledge base of ours, we humans are restricted to existing as creatures who correlate. What we humans label "causes" are merely "correlations so strong that it would be absurd to not assume that they're in fact causes." But that's still an assumption we make when we take that jump from Correlation to Cause. We're assuming that if the relationship between A and B is 99.9999% that it's more likely we're looking at 100% linkage (i.e. a cause) than at 99.9999% linkage not indicative of cause (i.e. a very strong correlation). "If 99%, then 100%." "If 92%, then 100%." "If 58%, then 58%." We are simple computers with a round-up function turned on. We round up to 100% correlation (i.e. a cause) when the real value for the correlation is greater than or equal to our arbitrarily-decided-upon cutoff and we do not round up or down when it's below that cutoff. A 58 is a 58, a 23 is a 23, but a 94 or a 99 are always 100s as far as we're concerned.[/hide]
We are rational creatures which desperately seek to know and understand cause and effect, and yet we are not omniscient creatures and are therefore incapable of ever truly obtaining that which we seek. Tragic ... and yet romantic in its own way.
Hmm. For what it's worth, I also live in Japan, and had never heard of r*** games until I stumbled on this thread. I had known of sex simulation games, I suppose (you can see them on the shelves of just about any software store in Japan), but I don't think it ever occurred to me that there might be such things as r*** games. Then again, I never really looked carefully at the shelves of sex software, since I'm not interested. Like all fine, upstanding citizens, I get my porn from the Internet. :snicker:
Are there r*** games in the U.S. or elsewhere? I'm an American, but I have no idea. Again, it never occurred to me. (Then again, I haven't lived in the U.S. for ages.) I think that's the flaw in your reasoning, Sakunyuusha. Of course I know that there is explicit erotic fiction (though I've never read it), and I suppose I wouldn't be surprised to learn that some of it contained r*** scenes that are supposed to be arousing. I also know about video games and computer games, and have played quite a few, though I'm basically only interested in RPG/adventure games, not first-person shooters or things like Street Fighter. But in fact it never occurred to me that r*** games might exist. Maybe I'm also an "exceptionally socially-deaf fellow." :exhausted: Being aware of two genres or phenomenon does not necessarily mean you have assumed that there must be an intersection of the two somewhere. I know about shoplifting, and I know about jigsaw puzzles, but I would never assume the existence of "shoplifting jigsaw puzzles."
Surely there was a time (not so long ago?) when you didn't know of and never imagined the existence of r*** games?uzzled:
But you're right that Thorn does say, "Most residents of Japan (including me) never even knew about the existence of this genre until the current controversy brought it to light" without backing the statement up with any evidence. I'll ask my own Japanese friends if they've ever heard of r*** games. Then again, most of my Japanese friends are women.... :evillaugh:
Are there r*** games in the U.S. or elsewhere? I'm an American, but I have no idea. Again, it never occurred to me. (Then again, I haven't lived in the U.S. for ages.) I think that's the flaw in your reasoning, Sakunyuusha. Of course I know that there is explicit erotic fiction (though I've never read it), and I suppose I wouldn't be surprised to learn that some of it contained r*** scenes that are supposed to be arousing. I also know about video games and computer games, and have played quite a few, though I'm basically only interested in RPG/adventure games, not first-person shooters or things like Street Fighter. But in fact it never occurred to me that r*** games might exist. Maybe I'm also an "exceptionally socially-deaf fellow." :exhausted: Being aware of two genres or phenomenon does not necessarily mean you have assumed that there must be an intersection of the two somewhere. I know about shoplifting, and I know about jigsaw puzzles, but I would never assume the existence of "shoplifting jigsaw puzzles."
Surely there was a time (not so long ago?) when you didn't know of and never imagined the existence of r*** games?
uzzled: But you're right that Thorn does say, "Most residents of Japan (including me) never even knew about the existence of this genre until the current controversy brought it to light" without backing the statement up with any evidence. I'll ask my own Japanese friends if they've ever heard of r*** games. Then again, most of my Japanese friends are women.... :evillaugh:
Hmmm okiotskuete kudasai... we don't want to read about the "crazy American" next in the AO headlines... :dunno:
Perhaps "Rule 34" is not commonly known...
"If it exists, there is porn made of it..."
Very interesting conversation folks...
I must say I agree with the fact it seems unreasonable, at least among the generation 40 and below, to assume a stand of absolute no knowledge.
It is safe to assume if the human mind can perceive it, someone else already tried taking it to the next step. At least that is how I reason on a daily basis even in work, and rather than figuring out how to do my own latest mathematical invention, I would assume someone else already derived a perfectly good formula without me being involved.
The same reasoning is perhaps behind the thinking that when a significant client basis for certain games exist, there is an equally large group "informed but not interested" so the absolute ignorance on the issue can hardly "hold up in court"...
uhmmm I've known r*** games and animes since 12 years ago yet I'm not japanese or even live in there hahaha
How come they only banning r*** in ero anime and games ???? while they can start in JAV ??? ironically JAV depicted far more realistic scene than ero anime and games. Usually people copy things that resembles more to their situation (r*** themed JAV) rather than illustrated pictures....
they're making such a big fuss for things that have existed far too long and does they have proof that these games increases the rate of r*** ???
How come they only banning r*** in ero anime and games ???? while they can start in JAV ??? ironically JAV depicted far more realistic scene than ero anime and games. Usually people copy things that resembles more to their situation (r*** themed JAV) rather than illustrated pictures....
they're making such a big fuss for things that have existed far too long and does they have proof that these games increases the rate of r*** ???
American-made, no. American-sold, I can't say for certain but I have seen boxed-up eroges for the PC sold at Fry's Electronics before in the Adult Hentai section of the store, so I wouldn't be surprised.
A, I would in fact assume so. ^^; I'd also assume puzzles of houses on fire exist, puzzles of orb weaver spiders exist, puzzles of the Hubble telescope exist, and puzzles of cheeseburgers and fries exist. "If you can dream it, you can do it" ... except morphed in my mind, I suppose, from its original quote and into "if you can think of it, it's probably been done." Pizza-flavored ice cream? Dimetapp-smelling deodorant? A car body made out of see-through plastic? I can imagine all of these and more. The human imagination's a powerful thing. It's hardly a challenge to say, "If r*** manga exists, and if fighter video games exist, then I bet a fighter in which the winner r***s the loser exists" any more than it is to say "if [as before], then I bet a hentai manga exists which stars the main female characters from a popular fighter". Nobody acts surprised by DOA, Guilty Gear, or Soul Caliber hentai, so why does everybody act so surprised when a beat-'em up r*** game for the PC comes out?
B, it is the responsibility of the lawmakers to consider such things. When they say, "Fictional r*** is legal," and when they say, "Video games are works of fiction," then they are saying "video game r*** is legal." For the common Japanese person to be surprised that 1 + 1 = 2 like this is, imo, concerning. It's even more concerning to me if the Japanese legislators aren't just feigning ignorance but were genuinely clueless that such a thing could or did exist.
Know of their existence, yes. Be surprised by their existence, no. I either didn't know they existed (and so had yet to be surprised), or upon learning they existed was not surprised to learn they existed. I guess that's my frustration here: that people are acting indignant about this and I think it's largely faked/exaggerated. "I CAN'T BELIEVE THIS WAS HAPPENING UNDER OUR NOSES!" some of them are suggesting. I want to ask them, "Can't you? I mean, seriously: are you that unimaginative that it surprises you to the point of disbelief to learn that, given video games and given r*** pornography -- or even more specifically than that, given hentai video games and given r*** hentai in other media -- that somebody put the two together to make a r*** hentai game?"Surely there was a time (not so long ago?) when you didn't know of and never imagined the existence of r*** games?
But to be honest, we're beginning to talk about two different things. Here's why:
his article made reference to the act of a gamer actually raping characters in the game. That such games do exist I am not denying. However, what Equality Now is pushing for is not the removal of gamers in control of rapists but of depictions of r***, period from eroges. What this means is that a game like Infection 3 (see attached picture) where all the player does is click between different story paths and all he sees are static drawings depicting many of the female characters being r***ing under different circumstances ... a game like this is up for being banned.
If Equality Now was saying, "Look, we want to take the 'R' out of 'FPR', or 'First Person Raper'," then I wouldn't have as much of a problem. I'd still be concerned. I'd still want to know why it's unacceptable for a guy to vicariously r*** a hardly-mistakable-for-real woman in a video game but it's acceptable for him to vicariously mutilate quite-real-looking men in BioShock or to assasinate quite-real-looking men in Hitman II. But in the end I'd say, "I can see why they're attacking FPR games. At least they're not touching all of the eroges that have r*** depicted in the plot."
But they are. Because they haven't declared war against first-person or third-person r*** scenes which are player-controlled. They've declared war against r*** scenes in pornographic video games period. That is what upsets me: is that, for all of Mr. Thorn's talk that "video games and comics are two totally different things," he really has very little idea what he's talking about. Either he or I, unfortunately.
Because the majority of r*** eroges are basically "comics with audio and colored-in pictures" and would hardly classify as "games" by Western standards. Again, see the pictures below. These are what I think of when they say "r*** eroge," and not the first-or-third-person "I'mma mashin' da buttons anda rapin' da woman" games like Rapelay. And I fear these are also what Parliament and Equality Now are also gunning for. Rapelay may be the first in line at the guillotine, sure, but it's going to be a looooooooooooooooooooooooong line with plenty of blood spilled from plenty of titles. This sequence shows a news reporter getting r***ing by a bunch of infected men (infected with the zombie virus, that is) and being turned into an infected sex-crazed zombie slut herself. The player has zero control over this scene. The only clicking he does is a single mouse click to advance the plot one screen at a time.
Excuse me for a moment. I don't want to derail the topic too much, but I did want to talk about this for a moment. Plus I honestly can't keep up with the conversation as a whole at the moment. Just know that I mostly agree with Sakun, and I'm against censorship in any form. Hoohaw.
Moving on...
I know I've played some English ergoes that contain r*** scenes in them. So, yes they are sold here. However, think about that for a moment. Do you think that many Americans know about these games? I kinda think they don't. Look at the huge stink Fox News made over Mass Effect a couple years ago with there "Sex Box" article. Or the controversy over Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas Hot Coffee. Think of the field day that shining bastion of news Fox would have if they discovered something like Virgin Roster?
Or maybe I'm mistaken. The difference between those three examples is that while Mass Effect and GTA:SA are both marketed as Mature content, but they are still video games that America feels are being marketed towards childredn - for whatever ignorant reason. Where as something like Virgin Roster is clearly marketed as pornography. Maybe they wouldn't take issue with it then. I don't know
I'm not entirely sure where I'm going with this, as is usually the case with most of my rants. Even if America took offense to r*** games, America and Japan are both very different cultures. I'm not going to pretend I fully understand Japanese culture, but I'd like to think they're more open to sex than we are here in America. But if it's possible for Americans to be so ignorant about such things as mature gaming, and for news reporters and parents to constantly be shocked by the content found in some video games. What's to say Japan wouldn't feel the same way?
Sorry if my ramblings are incoherent. I'm really not as intelligent as you guys are and I just took some vicodin so I'm a little high. Hopefully I got some sort of point across though. Maybe?
Just one thing real quick: remember that the real world is seldom anything like the internet world. This applies to perceptions of the openness of sexuality in Japan vs America et al, whether or not H-games that simulate r*** are well known, rule 34, etc.
On the internet, the perception of Japan as a culture filled with sexual fetishization is widespread, no thanks in part to all kinds of atypical pornography. In some respect it's true, but no more than the fact that people outside of Japan also practice BDSM, join swingers circles, etc. But in the real world, Japanese are actually more conservative when it comes to talking about sex. So while you could say Japanese and American cultures aren't the same, it's hard to say that they're different, in the sense that one is open to sex and the other isn't.
Same goes towards H-games. Among people who can use a computer and frequent sites like AO, knowledge of H-games is inevitable, if not guaranteed. But there are a lot of "normal" people who simply aren't tuned into the intarwebs, and while they might know in the back of their minds that adult games exist (just as they do pornography), they generally don't know anything about specific genres, etc.
I can sympathize with the people whose very first reaction to the image of the otaku world is that of repulsion. Not that I agree with censorship, but that it's got a bit of shock value that is hard to ignore -- shock value that many of us are used to.
On the internet, the perception of Japan as a culture filled with sexual fetishization is widespread, no thanks in part to all kinds of atypical pornography. In some respect it's true, but no more than the fact that people outside of Japan also practice BDSM, join swingers circles, etc. But in the real world, Japanese are actually more conservative when it comes to talking about sex. So while you could say Japanese and American cultures aren't the same, it's hard to say that they're different, in the sense that one is open to sex and the other isn't.
Same goes towards H-games. Among people who can use a computer and frequent sites like AO, knowledge of H-games is inevitable, if not guaranteed. But there are a lot of "normal" people who simply aren't tuned into the intarwebs, and while they might know in the back of their minds that adult games exist (just as they do pornography), they generally don't know anything about specific genres, etc.
I can sympathize with the people whose very first reaction to the image of the otaku world is that of repulsion. Not that I agree with censorship, but that it's got a bit of shock value that is hard to ignore -- shock value that many of us are used to.
True, the net is not real life or close to it but let us not forget that Japan is a culture that started adding women only cars to their subways because the groper (Chikan) problem was so bad, and apparently beyond the ability of the police to control.
That said, I can only speak for myself. I have played RapeLay, the Biko series from Illusion, also the Des Blood, Artificial Girl 2 & 3, Schoolmate, and Hako. I was also raised on Speed Racer and the Warner Brothers cartoons and yet I still manage to NOT run off cliffs thinking I will somehow stay up in the air, nor do I think trying to plug a gun barrel with my finger will lead to anything except a hell of a lot of pain an my finger getting blown off.
Leave us also not forget that while there was low level consternation over the Grand Theft Auto series level of violence, when it was a matter of killing the hooker to get your money back ( up to Gran Theft Auto San Andreas) Serious media wide freaking out and congressional inquiries didn't happen until GTA San Andreas when someone figured out how to turn off a censor on the original disc and access scenes of CONSENSUAL sex that Rockstar themselves had put there.
Yet for all this, the vast majority of people who play these games don't seem to go off on bloody, violent rampages, raping and pillaging, or anything else like that. Just a thought: MAYBE the scumbags who ARE sitting there on trial for their own actions are looking for someone or something to blame either due to massive denial or just plain trying to get lesser sentences.
Regardless of other considerations, I myself have a basic understanding of Physics, and I know what the term "Consent" means. You DO NOT do things to anyone who has not consented, you do NOT TOUCH anyone who cannot properly GIVE that consent.
Some groups are always looking for ways to force their morality and values on others, and ban anything they find offensive rather than simply NOT LOOKING. If we're all fine with that, then just let them. If you'd like to NOT see Illusion and the other Adult game companies driven out of business, then object, and maybe for once the people saying "Mind your own damn business" will win.
Just my two cents, your mileage may vary.