Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Moar Brains, Plz
So the Zombie March March is approaching. Atkinson stepped down. And as I'm sure you guys are, I'm reading more and more articles about the R18+ issue and I just don't care.
So many gamers are perpetuating the myth that gamers are immature jerks - I don't even bother reading the comments to the articles I read - if I finish reading the article at all.
I know that there's doubt that the replacement for Atkinson will present a different attitude among most gamers out there - when Craig first told me about the stepping-down, as though it were good news, the first thing I thought was 'How does this actually change things?' I then expressed a similar sentiment out loud when I couldn't think of an answer.
I assume that folks that I interact with on a daily basis, if not the general Australian gaming demographic, are well aware that scapegoating Atkinson was a dangerous thing - a few arguments aimed towards him as a person did not address the issue of R18+ gaming at all, but people still invested energy into mocking him. This means that energy is wasted discussing/insulting/attacking his religious standing (although not all who agree with Atkinson are of the religious right standing, nor are all of the religious right in agreement with Atkinson), his perception that gamers are dangerous people (I can actually see his point - some gamers were taking the issue quite personally. If I were in his position, I'd feel threatened after what some gamers allegedly did), that he's abusing his power (which he might well be doing, but this isn't an example of abuse of power - he's expressing an opinion that many disagree with).
Regardless, it still happens. His character is being attacked more than the issue at hand. I can still see why he takes the stance he does - it's all about protection. I'm just making a few assumptions here, but I think he believes that protection of what kids do and don't see is the responsibility of the government because many parents are not taking on this responsibility themselves. The way many adolescent gamers - and a few too many 'mature-aged' gamers - express themselves kinda doesn't help bust this particular myth.
I still personally think that any information that assists parents in raising their kids is a good thing, so I'm ultimately for the rating system, but I won't waste time by preaching to the converted.
I'm dubious about attending the Zombie March March. A bunch of people who have mostly just entered adulthood, parading around in costumes that themselves despict things that the rating system would protect minors from seeing. Minors are in public places.
Now, it's arguable that the costumes would be graphically violent enough for a rating of, say, M15+, should they appear in a video game or movie, but that's kinda the point. If it's arguable (either way), then I'd say it's probably better to drop the cosplay altogether if you want to be taken seriously while participating in a public protest.
Unless you didn't care about the opinions of those who you haven't completely swayed in your favour.
Then there's the other issue - there are many issues that I feel, quite strongly, that need to be changed - animal rights, environmental concerns towards industrial and commercial regulation, equal workers' rights, gay marriage, drug decriminalisation...the list could go on.
I'd say, unflinchingly, that all of those that came off the top of my head just then - all of them - are more important things to be concerned with than not receiving a few games each year - some of which I might still miss a year after they've been released. That's stretching the reality of it for the sake of argument.
Sure, I'm a white male, aged 18-60, living in Australia and considered straight by the commonly accepted definition of the word. Everyone listens to me and I don't have to listen to anyone else, so the only one of those issues that affects me, really, is the Game one.
Doesn't for a minute imply that it's the only one I should care about.
It's been a long time since I've attended protests for anything that I believe is worth protesting for. If I go to this thing, I'll just be reminding myself of all the energy I could be spending on more important issues, but aren't. The same goes for everyone else there, as I find it hard to believe that a single one of them could seriously consider that R18 ratings for games is the single most important thing in their lives, because that would imply that they are the single most important thing in their lives, which is a scary indication of the direction that society is headed in.
Yes, this means that I'm assuming that the Zombie March March is the only cause that the majority of the attendees have invested their energy in, at least in the past year.
...an assumption, sure, but hardly one of the more risky assumptions I've made.
Anyway, it's something that I'm still thinking about increasingly, as I've implied that it whatever it says about those kids out there it says about me. Quite rightly, too - It'd be silly to point my finger at them and ignore the similarities in our mindsets, lifestyles and values.
I can only change how I live my life, though, but I can change it.
So many gamers are perpetuating the myth that gamers are immature jerks - I don't even bother reading the comments to the articles I read - if I finish reading the article at all.
I know that there's doubt that the replacement for Atkinson will present a different attitude among most gamers out there - when Craig first told me about the stepping-down, as though it were good news, the first thing I thought was 'How does this actually change things?' I then expressed a similar sentiment out loud when I couldn't think of an answer.
I assume that folks that I interact with on a daily basis, if not the general Australian gaming demographic, are well aware that scapegoating Atkinson was a dangerous thing - a few arguments aimed towards him as a person did not address the issue of R18+ gaming at all, but people still invested energy into mocking him. This means that energy is wasted discussing/insulting/attacking his religious standing (although not all who agree with Atkinson are of the religious right standing, nor are all of the religious right in agreement with Atkinson), his perception that gamers are dangerous people (I can actually see his point - some gamers were taking the issue quite personally. If I were in his position, I'd feel threatened after what some gamers allegedly did), that he's abusing his power (which he might well be doing, but this isn't an example of abuse of power - he's expressing an opinion that many disagree with).
Regardless, it still happens. His character is being attacked more than the issue at hand. I can still see why he takes the stance he does - it's all about protection. I'm just making a few assumptions here, but I think he believes that protection of what kids do and don't see is the responsibility of the government because many parents are not taking on this responsibility themselves. The way many adolescent gamers - and a few too many 'mature-aged' gamers - express themselves kinda doesn't help bust this particular myth.
I still personally think that any information that assists parents in raising their kids is a good thing, so I'm ultimately for the rating system, but I won't waste time by preaching to the converted.
I'm dubious about attending the Zombie March March. A bunch of people who have mostly just entered adulthood, parading around in costumes that themselves despict things that the rating system would protect minors from seeing. Minors are in public places.
Now, it's arguable that the costumes would be graphically violent enough for a rating of, say, M15+, should they appear in a video game or movie, but that's kinda the point. If it's arguable (either way), then I'd say it's probably better to drop the cosplay altogether if you want to be taken seriously while participating in a public protest.
Unless you didn't care about the opinions of those who you haven't completely swayed in your favour.
Then there's the other issue - there are many issues that I feel, quite strongly, that need to be changed - animal rights, environmental concerns towards industrial and commercial regulation, equal workers' rights, gay marriage, drug decriminalisation...the list could go on.
I'd say, unflinchingly, that all of those that came off the top of my head just then - all of them - are more important things to be concerned with than not receiving a few games each year - some of which I might still miss a year after they've been released. That's stretching the reality of it for the sake of argument.
Sure, I'm a white male, aged 18-60, living in Australia and considered straight by the commonly accepted definition of the word. Everyone listens to me and I don't have to listen to anyone else, so the only one of those issues that affects me, really, is the Game one.
Doesn't for a minute imply that it's the only one I should care about.
It's been a long time since I've attended protests for anything that I believe is worth protesting for. If I go to this thing, I'll just be reminding myself of all the energy I could be spending on more important issues, but aren't. The same goes for everyone else there, as I find it hard to believe that a single one of them could seriously consider that R18 ratings for games is the single most important thing in their lives, because that would imply that they are the single most important thing in their lives, which is a scary indication of the direction that society is headed in.
Yes, this means that I'm assuming that the Zombie March March is the only cause that the majority of the attendees have invested their energy in, at least in the past year.
...an assumption, sure, but hardly one of the more risky assumptions I've made.
Anyway, it's something that I'm still thinking about increasingly, as I've implied that it whatever it says about those kids out there it says about me. Quite rightly, too - It'd be silly to point my finger at them and ignore the similarities in our mindsets, lifestyles and values.
I can only change how I live my life, though, but I can change it.
Comments:
Waitwaitwait.
Weren't you the one telling me something to the effect of 'at least he's doing something' when I questioned the effectiveness of the first zombie march?
Also Atkinson stepping down changes the following:
1. Most vocal opponent is out of the way. This also means that the biggest obstacle to getting the rating is out of the way. It'd be like Paul assaulting the Sardaukar in Arakeen but all of a sudden all the Sardaukar only had knives instead of projectile weapons.
2. The one (publically) guy holding it back is no longer also the one (partially) funding one of the loudest lobbyist groups against it
3. Regardless of WHO replaces him, it's a show of a weakening position (if you'd been following that election you'd know that Atkinsons party lost 12.5% or something to other parties after holding somethign like 75% at the last election) when the guy who has held the seat for the last 20 years starts the process of giving it up.
4. The new guy is pro R18+.
I can actually see very clearly the cosplay side of the march. How often to you pay attention to where the large crowds that come out of stations go when they wander about after exiting?
Now, how much more attention would you pay if it were say even 50 clowns? Wouldn't you ask yourself (if not them) 'What up with that?' (If I remember right, you used the same argument on me for the last one)
"If I were in his position, I'd feel threatened after what some gamers allegedly did)"
That was ONE gamer who left an alledgedly threatening note (Seeing as nobody has actually seen it, we can only take his word for it. Given he's had several defamation lawsuits pointed at him, I find it very hard to do so) under his door at 2:30am (Which in itself is odd, if these are as crazy hours as he's making them out to be, how does he happen to know the exact time it was put under his door?)
A year ago.
Yep, not a peep about it a year ago when it happened, but now that he needs something to defend himself with, he's milking that for all it's worth.
"A bunch of people who have mostly just entered adulthood, parading around in costumes that themselves despict things that the rating system would protect minors from seeing. Minors are in public places."
Actually.. No. L4D was classified MA+15. It's actually fine for minors to play these games - they just need to be accompanied by an adult and an adult needs to buy it.
"Unless you didn't care about the opinions of those who you haven't completely swayed in your favour."
As above. Attention grabbing/interest piquing point.
"Then there's the other issue - there are many issues that I feel, quite strongly, that need to be changed - animal rights, environmental concerns towards industrial and commercial regulation, equal workers' rights, gay marriage, drug decriminalisation...the list could go on"
Out of curiosity, how much political work have you done in order to push any of these agendas? How many petitions have you assisted with getting out there? How many protests attended? How many MP's harrassed over their stances?
I'm not saying you shouldn't care about whatever cause you happen to like at the time, I'm saying there's nothing wrong with going to the march as long as you also devote energy to pushing the other agendas as well. Whatever works for the cause in question.
"Anyway, it's something that I'm still thinking about increasingly, as I've implied that it whatever it says about those kids out there it says about me"
Actually.. the whole post came off a bit 'They all suck because they only care about games. I'm great because I care about other things.' Never really seemed you were saying any of it applied to yourself (And not that the other points weren't valid).
Just sayin'.
Weren't you the one telling me something to the effect of 'at least he's doing something' when I questioned the effectiveness of the first zombie march?
Also Atkinson stepping down changes the following:
1. Most vocal opponent is out of the way. This also means that the biggest obstacle to getting the rating is out of the way. It'd be like Paul assaulting the Sardaukar in Arakeen but all of a sudden all the Sardaukar only had knives instead of projectile weapons.
2. The one (publically) guy holding it back is no longer also the one (partially) funding one of the loudest lobbyist groups against it
3. Regardless of WHO replaces him, it's a show of a weakening position (if you'd been following that election you'd know that Atkinsons party lost 12.5% or something to other parties after holding somethign like 75% at the last election) when the guy who has held the seat for the last 20 years starts the process of giving it up.
4. The new guy is pro R18+.
I can actually see very clearly the cosplay side of the march. How often to you pay attention to where the large crowds that come out of stations go when they wander about after exiting?
Now, how much more attention would you pay if it were say even 50 clowns? Wouldn't you ask yourself (if not them) 'What up with that?' (If I remember right, you used the same argument on me for the last one)
"If I were in his position, I'd feel threatened after what some gamers allegedly did)"
That was ONE gamer who left an alledgedly threatening note (Seeing as nobody has actually seen it, we can only take his word for it. Given he's had several defamation lawsuits pointed at him, I find it very hard to do so) under his door at 2:30am (Which in itself is odd, if these are as crazy hours as he's making them out to be, how does he happen to know the exact time it was put under his door?)
A year ago.
Yep, not a peep about it a year ago when it happened, but now that he needs something to defend himself with, he's milking that for all it's worth.
"A bunch of people who have mostly just entered adulthood, parading around in costumes that themselves despict things that the rating system would protect minors from seeing. Minors are in public places."
Actually.. No. L4D was classified MA+15. It's actually fine for minors to play these games - they just need to be accompanied by an adult and an adult needs to buy it.
"Unless you didn't care about the opinions of those who you haven't completely swayed in your favour."
As above. Attention grabbing/interest piquing point.
"Then there's the other issue - there are many issues that I feel, quite strongly, that need to be changed - animal rights, environmental concerns towards industrial and commercial regulation, equal workers' rights, gay marriage, drug decriminalisation...the list could go on"
Out of curiosity, how much political work have you done in order to push any of these agendas? How many petitions have you assisted with getting out there? How many protests attended? How many MP's harrassed over their stances?
I'm not saying you shouldn't care about whatever cause you happen to like at the time, I'm saying there's nothing wrong with going to the march as long as you also devote energy to pushing the other agendas as well. Whatever works for the cause in question.
"Anyway, it's something that I'm still thinking about increasingly, as I've implied that it whatever it says about those kids out there it says about me"
Actually.. the whole post came off a bit 'They all suck because they only care about games. I'm great because I care about other things.' Never really seemed you were saying any of it applied to yourself (And not that the other points weren't valid).
Just sayin'.
Anyway, another thing you may have missed about part of this argument (Basing that on the fact it wasn't bought up in the post) is that this is also a censorship thing.
It's the idea that you can't do something because it's not suitable for a 15 year old.
That's a scary thought when it's the attitude of a censorship minister. Especially when the current system allows one minister to veto ALL the others.
Sound familiar? No?
Apply it to Conroys' net filter plan. It's pretty much the same argument but applied to the entire net instead of games.
Sure, today they may say it's child porn, but say they decide that oh, say the discussion and display of BDSM suddenly 'offends the moral practices of society as a whole'
And yes - The laws they're trying to pass for this ARE that vague.
Infinite power corrupts infinitly(ely? both ways look wrong) and with such vague laws on something that would need very, VERY specific laws, they're effectively leaving a massive back door open for them to go back later and say 'Ok, we don't like websites that promote gay marriage anymore, add them to the censor list'
You can kiss your ability to discuss the other agendas that ARE important to you on that day..
Again - Not saying I agree with everything that goes onto the net, but I'll fight tooth and nail for peoples right to say it (To a certian extent of course, Conroy seems to think if you're anti-net censorship, your pro-child porn).
Stupid blogger made me cut the reply in half..
It's the idea that you can't do something because it's not suitable for a 15 year old.
That's a scary thought when it's the attitude of a censorship minister. Especially when the current system allows one minister to veto ALL the others.
Sound familiar? No?
Apply it to Conroys' net filter plan. It's pretty much the same argument but applied to the entire net instead of games.
Sure, today they may say it's child porn, but say they decide that oh, say the discussion and display of BDSM suddenly 'offends the moral practices of society as a whole'
And yes - The laws they're trying to pass for this ARE that vague.
Infinite power corrupts infinitly(ely? both ways look wrong) and with such vague laws on something that would need very, VERY specific laws, they're effectively leaving a massive back door open for them to go back later and say 'Ok, we don't like websites that promote gay marriage anymore, add them to the censor list'
You can kiss your ability to discuss the other agendas that ARE important to you on that day..
Again - Not saying I agree with everything that goes onto the net, but I'll fight tooth and nail for peoples right to say it (To a certian extent of course, Conroy seems to think if you're anti-net censorship, your pro-child porn).
Stupid blogger made me cut the reply in half..
I guess you had me wrong on a few counts.
First, I was impressed that Rhys did something with his life, even if it's this. It involves a level of work and dedication that he's never shown in the time I've known him. My attitude towards the censorship issue was a little different back then. I've since had a long, hard think about it and it is now represented by the words in this post. I'd hate to think that I'm not allowed to change my mind about something when exposed to new data.
I didn't realise that the new guy is pro R18+. If he is, then that's great news.
For the record, I was commenting on people's attitudes that the 'war' had been won when Atkinson stepped down. I still think it was doubtful - my understanding of the demographic that backed him implied that another person, just as vocal, would replace him.
I have no idea what the deal is with the clowns. I will ask you what you're on about when you get into work.
Regarding Atkinson feeling threatened: Remember, it's conjecture - I'm not the only one who's working off it.
How do we know that he didn't say anything about it a year ago? How do we know that it was a single gamer? How do we know that he said that it was 'exactly at 2:30am'?
By the same token:
How do we know that bikers haven't threatened him? How do we know that Atkinson has a family that he feels he needs to protect? How do we know that the reported incident happened at all?
I did mention that this was ultimately attacking his character, which is pointless - and I still see it that way, irrespective of what we actually know about the situation.
Re: L4D
My point still stands, it seems.
And, despite my disclaimer, you still point out hypocrisy. Guess you had to.
"If I go to this thing, I'll just be reminding myself of all the energy I could be spending on more important issues, but aren't."
Said exactly this multiple times long before I've made this post.
Also, Internet censorship is another matter entirely.
First, I was impressed that Rhys did something with his life, even if it's this. It involves a level of work and dedication that he's never shown in the time I've known him. My attitude towards the censorship issue was a little different back then. I've since had a long, hard think about it and it is now represented by the words in this post. I'd hate to think that I'm not allowed to change my mind about something when exposed to new data.
I didn't realise that the new guy is pro R18+. If he is, then that's great news.
For the record, I was commenting on people's attitudes that the 'war' had been won when Atkinson stepped down. I still think it was doubtful - my understanding of the demographic that backed him implied that another person, just as vocal, would replace him.
I have no idea what the deal is with the clowns. I will ask you what you're on about when you get into work.
Regarding Atkinson feeling threatened: Remember, it's conjecture - I'm not the only one who's working off it.
How do we know that he didn't say anything about it a year ago? How do we know that it was a single gamer? How do we know that he said that it was 'exactly at 2:30am'?
By the same token:
How do we know that bikers haven't threatened him? How do we know that Atkinson has a family that he feels he needs to protect? How do we know that the reported incident happened at all?
I did mention that this was ultimately attacking his character, which is pointless - and I still see it that way, irrespective of what we actually know about the situation.
Re: L4D
My point still stands, it seems.
And, despite my disclaimer, you still point out hypocrisy. Guess you had to.
"If I go to this thing, I'll just be reminding myself of all the energy I could be spending on more important issues, but aren't."
Said exactly this multiple times long before I've made this post.
Also, Internet censorship is another matter entirely.
I just didn't want to give up my Saturday by spending it tramping around in the heat covered in fake blood (we Browns are a clean people).
Post a Comment
