"Rape simulator" Game Goes Viral Amid Calls For Censorship

"Rape simulator" Game Goes Viral Amid Calls For Censorship

www.smh.com.au

Attempts to ban a deplorable "rape simulator" video game have only caused it to spread virally across the internet, leading to calls for sites hosting the game to be blocked by internet censors.

(visit the link for the full news article)

G'day

Well here we go again.....

Another day, another call by the appalling Rudd government to have their appalling internet censorship legislation pushed through parliament.

They're using this as further ammunition.....

Of course the game is distasteful in the extreme.....

However it now appears we will be told "if you don't support the censorship it means you support this game".

That is to say, they will use this to polarise the argument, just as they are doing with their child pornography & bestiality arguments.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

www.smh.com.au
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 31-3-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]

I wish it was just the Rudd government, but they are all the same in this country. They don't answer to us, the people.

Seriously, common sense is that most people will turn away from this. There will be sickos regardless of whether they find this stuff on the internet, or go practice in real life.

So the government can "protect" us from "deemed harmfull" information??
I don't need your protection thanks Mr. Leave me alone.

I agree, I think the game is pretty ridiculous.

But...

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy...believes that filters are necessary to block content such as RapeLay for all Australians, but a poll on this website yesterday found 96 per cent of the 45,000 respondents did not support Senator Conroy's policy.

That is a pretty significant amount of people polled and seriously high percentage against the filtering.

Why does this minister think he speaks for what the people want, when clearly, his draconian filtering is not what they want?

Yeh, the game isn't nice. But the internet and media are filled with things we don't like.

However its YOUR CHOICE not to view them.

Originally posted by realist00
So the government can "protect" us from "deemed harmfull" information??
I don't need your protection thanks Mr. Leave me alone.

G'day realist00

Exactly!

Very well said

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by noonebutme


G'day noonebutme

One can only hope this poll will discourage them by getting them thinking about the potential loss of votes.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

lol. Technically its not rape since its programmed to do that.

I mean dont get me started, on the psychology of reward conditioning correlate to people losing inhibitions in things that they desire... they could want to do this in real life and not know how to go about doing it, or feel ashamed, and then play the game and get positive reinforcement for doing it... I dont need to say what that does...

The people rallying against it have obviously never been to Japan... theres stuff a million times worse... Japans so messed up probably because everyones repressed because theres so many cultural 'taboos' everyone has to keep their paraphilias in secret... Japans probably got the highest amount of frotteurism in the world... and they even sold used panties at stores...

Sexual assault victims' rights advocate Nina Funnell is against online censorship but said: "These games are quite vile and for victims out there it's quite distressing to come across these games or even just be aware that they exist and there's a culture of rape tolerance and acceptance."

Haha, because PTSD only happens to rape victims right? Then we should ban shooting games because of soldiers and Nintendogs because a little girl recently lost her puppy... against censorship, pro-favouratism yeah right

Originally posted by noonebutme

Why does this minister think he speaks for what the people want, when clearly, his draconian filtering is not what they want?

That's what government does. That's the only thing its ever done. Even if the majority of people do support the censorship and shrinking of liberty it still wouldnt be right for the majority to use force of law (read: gun to head) to subject the minority to their will. Welcome to our world. You get one life to live under government doing only what somebody else whom youve probably never met and who has certainly never met you or even knows your name is okay with you doing then you die.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


Yeh, it still really gets to me.

The idea that a govt is voted in by people but then said govt decides on rules and regulations that *it* believes are in the peoples' best interest, when clearly it is not.

I'm old enough now to know that sadly, this is how all govts work, so I shouldn't be surprised.

I'm still an idealist and rebel at heart and hate seeing informed people being told what they can/cannot do by the body *they* elected.

but hey, I suppose I just reiterated the same sentiment shared by the majority of ATSers so, nothing new

I do NOT support this game, or any actions this game simulates.

However, I do not believe it is something that should censored.

Penn Jillette made a few pretty good points about this on a video:



Rape is a horrible, horrible, crime. However, so is murder. Yet there are thousands of video games that simulate murder. There are thousands of movies and books the depict murder, etc...

So, to start censoring this game would start a chain reaction of censorship of many other games. Where do you draw the line?

Once again, I do not support this game or any actions it simulates.


[edit on 31-3-2010 by ALLis0NE]

What if the entire purpose of this game is to add momentum to the internet censorship agenda?

Look at all the press this is getting: since the story first appeared on my news feeds it has gone from 1 story at 3pm yesterday to 5 at 7:30am today. All the MSM outlets are going to cover it with the eventual/enevitable companion stories about violence in games and the evils of the 'net.

If this was just another game about killing people there wouldn't be a word about it, but rape? There was no chance that this game would slip under the radar; the word rape alone is enough to have women look into the story when it wouldn't have registered with them if it was about anything else.

Know your enemy.

How many people here have read stories because the title contained a specific word or words? This is the right story at the right time: the push against internet conspiracies didn't gain any momentum (but it is still floating around) but the fallout over this might. Getting women's groups involved is a brilliant move, not only does half the population become interested, but if the husbands/boyfriends want to maintain tranquility in the home they damn well better get involved as well.

Two for the price of one.

We've all been expecting a false flag leading to even tighter controls, does it have to be a real world event?

In the case of the internet, the war TPTB are looking for is against freedom of speech and the free exchange of knowledge/information. These two aspects of the internet hamper their control attempts as increasingly more people are receiving news items from everywhere but the MSM and the state propaganda machine.

A day after release and there are governments already citing it as an example to justify censorship online?

That's a pretty quick response.


EDIT: Spelling & Form

[edit on 31-3-2010 by [davinci]]

Originally posted by [davinci]
Look at all the press this is getting: since the story first appeared on my news feeds it has gone from 1 story at 3pm yesterday to 5 at 7:30am today. All the MSM outlets are going to cover it with the eventual/enevitable companion stories about violence in games and the evils of the 'net.

I've been scratching my head over this story since CNN covered it yesterday.

The western media coverage of this game died out OVER A YEAR AGO.

Suddenly it's news again. Hmmm.

Edit: apparently the game has been out since 2006.



[edit on 31-3-2010 by vox2442]

G'day

I was thinking myself how the timing of this is all extremely convenient.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

An overview from the following website; Giantbomb.

Nature of the Sex in RapeLay

Although the sex depicted in RapeLay is non-consensual, the actual rapes involve neither violence nor torture. The victims only resist for a brief period before giving in and enjoying it. In RapeLay, despite being a sex-themed adult-only game, the characters have their private parts hidden by a pixel filter. This is because in Japan, it is illegal for genitalia to be shown uncensored.

So there is already censorship in the game - why add more?

In all seriousness though where do you draw the line in censorship and when do you take accountability for promoting that which you are trying to censor. I'd never heard of this game and have now opened my eyes to the disturbing (to me at least) world of sexual...I'm not even sure how to put it.

On the flip side though the character that the player plays as can't 'complete' the game on a happy note as the following happens.

Endings

There are only two different endings in Rapelay, both of which involve the player character dying. If you have sex with Aoi in the cowgirl position before her will is broken, you will get an ending where she takes advantage of the position to stab you to death with a pair of scissors. The other ending occurs if you let a pregnant girl carry her baby to term. Unwilling to let the child be raised by you, the mother pushes you in front of a train the next time you're at the subway station. There is no "happy" or "good" ending in RapeLay; if you avoid these two endings, the game lets you go on raping the women forever.

Weird chit and no mistake but not a need for the Aussie government to try and pull the wool (pun intended) over the eyes of its populous.

-m0r

I don't think Australia should take it upon itself to rid the world of rape simulation games. We're already trying take whales away from the Japanese if we keep this up we'll end up in a war.

reply to post by m0r1arty


G'day m0r1arty

I'll think I'll just wait for Starcraft 2 & Diablo 3.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

I thought I had heard this story before.

There is always an egenda. Clearly for the Rudd government it is internet censorship, and control laws under the guise of "protection".

I found it interesting that the Port Arthur Massacre was in the news recently, with a Tassie cop being accused of setting the killer up in order to get gun legislation through (Howard government). I know that line of thought has been going on since the attack, but it was interesting that it was released again.

I couldn't believe it was on MSM.

Thing is, most of the time the agenda of government is out for all to see, like dirty laundry. The average person does not connect the dots. The idea of "freedom" and "liberty" has been lost in translation.

reply to post by ALLis0NE


i agree with everything that penn said.

However . . .

i do believe STRONGLY in cultural relativism; which is NOT the same as moral relativism. Penn seems to put them in the same boat.

i do not believe that this game or anything else should be censored.

kinda absurd that they just target one form of insanity , what about murder simulators or other "unapropriate context" simulators ?

i mean they could just as well target "racing" games where the inviroment is a city and speed limits are not to be kept ,

it is just as illigal as raping and as simulated.

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


If you hold out for Guild Wars 2 (It's not a play to pay MMO) I'll team up with you.

Nothing wrong with wiping out an entire species of sentient life that appears to be at odds with your way of living in a virtual environment whatsoever.

However I doubt you'll get nekkit dancing ele's and warriors if the Oz government gets it's way Maybe, maybe not.

-m0r #Dismantle