So...

Phew! I tell ya what... Apparently, last night the manager of the building finally decided to turn the heat on (okay, that's somewhat of an exaggeration, the heat's been on, but he's kept it pretty low), and now it's like 80 degrees in my apartment.

Amaster42 wrote:my violence phobic parents won't let me have No More Heroes or Metroid 3

Ok, no more heroes, I can understand. but Metroid Corruption isn't all that bad. As long as you're like...14, it should be no problem.Sure you blast the crap out of stuff with missiles and beam weapons, but it's not really that violent IMO.

[EDIT]OH! BTW, if you enjoyed the first Tales of Symphonia, the second game in the series (dawn of the new world) looks to be pretty friggen good. I just need to find it in a store somewhere...

Well, my parents just don't like Metroid because it's a shooter, and the fact that it's aliens and stuff just "desensitizes us to the use of a weapon" and stuff.

What does that even mean? Your parents are worried that, should the day ever come where you find yourself in a suit of power armor with a blaster on your arm, you'll just start killing aliens indiscriminately without regard to whether or not they deserve to die?

Amaster, I know how you feel. My parents have banned a few games and movies from me before.

Although I find it ironic that my neighbor got Metroid for his tenth birthday, and he had Prime 2 since he was eight or nine. 😊

I used to live with my aunt and uncle, and they wouldn't let me buy any CDs with a Parental Advisory sticker. That led to me skipping school and walking to Best Buy so I could get CDs without them knowing.

Amaster, your parents are fools. Violence is a very positive part of the male psyche. Males are attracted to violent stories because its how they process and develop the mindset that allows them to become protectors and hunters. Your parents want to mold you into a sexless wimp. Telling a male child that violence is evil is like telling them that they should never become interested in girls. It won't work.

I encourage you to watch violent movies, play violent video games, and be a happy, vigorous male. As long as that violent energy is contained within the bounds of an acceptably non-sociopathic morality you will be much better off than following your parents' pin headed rules.

Sure, Beldaran, that's gonna win an argument - "But some guy on the Internet told me that not being allowed to play violent video games will emasculate me."

On a more serious note, your pop psychology mumbo-jumbo is about as scientific as the "violent video games will desensitize teenagers to violence" mumbo-jumbo.

rock_nog wrote:
On a more serious note, your pop psychology mumbo-jumbo

If you think the male attraction to aggressive behavior and hunter/warrior behavior is "mumbo jumbo", then you don't know anything about human beings and should put that fact on your resume.

I'm not particullary atracted to violence.

Beldaran wrote:If you think the male attraction to aggressive behavior and hunter/warrior behavior is "mumbo jumbo", then you don't know anything about human beings and should put that fact on your resume.

*sigh*

Well, I wouldn't put it the way Beldaran did, but...

Look, I have a pretty good idea why your parents are violence-phobic when buying you games/movies/books. It's because they've heard all the horror stories and Jack thompson BS about kids playing Grand Theft auto and then turning out to be psychos who try to hijack a car and shoot cops and end up dead.

Well, here's the thing. As long as the viewer/player isn't a weakminded ape (:googly😊 and can tell the difference between fantasy and reality, then by all means, they're not bad at all. I never really sought out violence as a kid (outside of Power Rangers and the like, I guess.). But as much as I wanted to be a badass super hero kicking monter ass, I knew it wasn't real.

Now that I'm considerably older, I enjoy the occaisional violent game (metal slug, FPS games, and I'd probably like no more heroes too), but I never for a seconf think it's real. Hell, to this day, if I'm in a really bad mood and just want to rip something apart, I pop in Shadow the hedgehog. After a good playthrough of blasting through at record speed, I feel a whole lot better. When used right, Violent media can be used to VENT violent frustrations. And personally, I'd rather headshot a bunch of pixels than hurt an acutal person.

TL;DR: While ACTUAL violence is bad, fantasy violence isn't. It's neutral ground. It can be good, and help you vent frustration, and not undermine your grip on reality at all. Or (if you are weak minded) it CAN serve as an example that you might end up acting out. But in the second case, you're already a nutbag to begin with, and if violent media doesn't set you off, then something else will.

the only thing that could have turned me into a "sexless wimp" was my high school experience, where I was at the bottom of the social food chain for 5 years (although I DO admit that the wimp part is still true). ....in faaaact...That may explain some things about me that I've been wondering about for a while...

russadwan wrote:I'm not particullary atracted to violence.

Me as well. I'm a pacifist unless provoked beyond all reason. (You give me a gun and tell me to fight a war, I will flat out refuse, unless they are banging on our front door, planning to butcher all the innocent woman and children).

And yet despite that, I can still enjoy headshotting a Combine soldier in half-life 2, before grav-gunning an oil drum into another.

Oh, and I'd consider Metroid 3 to be in the same category as Power Rangers. MILD violence. Unles syou have the mental strength of an amoeba, there is NO WAY IN HELL that you would be affected by it.

rock_nog wrote:but I bet you're not gonna bother citing anything

No, I'm going to do hours of research to convince someone who has apparently never left their apartment that men enjoy being tough. I suppose you think football, video games, action movies, comic books, boxing, hockey, and mixed martial arts are just some weird anomaly that has nothing to do with human psychology.

As far as being necessary to development, men that are incapable of violence are useless and incapable of defending themselves. If American men were afraid of violence, we'd all be speaking Japanese and German, saluting the Fuhrer or bowing to the Emperor. Our capacity for male aggression helps us be competitive, inventive, hard working, and strong in the face of adversity. I love women, but we can't all be women, despite what Amaster's parents want.

Also, good luck attracting women by being an emotional pacifist with no desire or ability to defend your mate, posses her sexually, or demonstrate traditional male secondary sexual characteristics.

Oh, but don't listen to me. I don't have a degree in Bullshit from a university full of dickless communists so nothing I say can possibly be relevant.

russadwan wrote:I'm not particullary atracted to violence.

Are you in favor of fighting terrorism? Do you enjoy the Zelda games? Are you glad the Revolutionary War was fought? Would you shoot a criminal who was raping your mother?

Congratulations, you're a violent ass hole, just like me.

Beldaran wrote:I suppose you think football, video games, action movies, comic books, boxing, hockey, and mixed martial arts are just some weird anomaly that has nothing to do with human psychology.

Many men have no interest in any of those things. You would probably label them effeminate. But that would be based on the assumption that gender roles are inherent and effeminacy is not a social construction. Which may be totally incorrect.

Beldaran wrote:Are you in favor of fighting terrorism? Do you enjoy the Zelda games? Are you glad the Revolutionary War was fought? Would you shoot a criminal who was raping your mother?

Congratulations, you're a violent ass hole, just like me.

mighty_darknut wrote:the assumption that gender roles are inherent

If by "assumption" you mean genetic and bio-chemical fact, then yes, they are inherent.

russadwan wrote:Let me re-phrase that. I am not particularly atractted to unneeded violence. Yes, I am in favor of fighting terrorism and shooting rapists. However, I'm not the kind of guy who goes up to somebody and starts a fight.

ok, so you have a preference in your flavor of violence. You don't like random violence. Neither do I. But I don't see you objecting to the rough treatment we gave the Nazis.

Violence is bad ass.

Beldaran wrote:If by "assumption" you mean genetic and bio-chemical fact, then yes, they are inherent.

As far as I know, that "fact" is still very disputed.

Football, violent video games, and action movies are entertainment. Nothing more. I seriously doubt that anyone's psychological growth will be stunted by exposure to these. Also, I see nothing inherently masculine about any of these - plenty of women enjoy them, too. Aggression is an inherently human trait, and contrary to the views of some crazy feminists, violence would not magically disappear if there were suddenly no more men.

Anyway, I agree that prohibiting a video game because it has violent content is absurd, but I just don't think that as a result, Amaster will be end up being an effeminate wimp for life.

I think that a person always has an inclination for violence that rises as another mistreats them.

That inclination is either to be violent in real life, or to be violent in fantasy life.

If a victim is stronger than the person doing the oppressing, the victim will be more inclined to real-life violence.

If a victim is weaker than the oppressor, he's more likely to fantasize about violence and have no interest in bringing it to reality.

It's basically the self-preservation factor. I'm not sure anyone would be excited to go to war. On the other hand, if you could go to war with the guarantee that you wouldn't get hurt.. that changes things.

Now besides that, it sounds to me like both Amaster and Russ have the stereotypical "helicopter parents". The only difference is that Russ will become one himself, while Amaster will probably be fine.

rock_nog wrote:I see nothing inherently masculine about any of these - plenty of women enjoy them, too.

Perhaps ignoring history, culture, biology, statistics, and reason will help you reach other magical conclusions as well.

There's a long history of overt sexism in our culture, as well. Women were trained to act a certain way and prohibited from participating in certain activities - but I'm sure you have some magical formula that can tell you exactly how much of behavioral differences are due to indoctrination and how much are do to biology.

Beldaran wrote:Also, good luck attracting women by being an emotional pacifist with no desire or ability to defend your mate, posses her sexually, or demonstrate traditional male secondary sexual characteristics.

Excuse me, but I happen to be a pacifist, and sex is not at the forefront of my mind, and yet I've hit it off very well with women. The only think that has stopped me from having a girlfriend is that fact that every girl I've EVER had ANY interest in has already been taken. Also while sex IS something I'd like to have someday, I'm more interested in the companionship aspect. Call me effeminate if you want, I really don't give two shits. It'd rather that my brain be in my head rather than between my legs anyway.

Oh, and if someone was harassing my girl, I WOULD defend her. I wouldn't clock the guy unless I really had to, but I'd stop the guy from messing with her one way or another.

Beldaran wrote:Would you shoot a criminal who was raping your mother?

Yes. I'd shoot the guy in the leg, point the gun at his crotch and say "Next one hits somewhere more painful. If I were you, I wouldn't move until the cops show up". I'm not in favor of the death penalty in any case short of Genocide, or unless the guy drastically harms/kills everyone I care about, in which case I can plead insanity BECAUSE I WILL HAVE GONE INSANE.

Beldaran wrote:Congratulations, you're a violent ass hole, just like me.

Correction: We are not violent ass-holes. We are people who avoid violence wherever possible, but will resort to it if it's the only solution.

Glenn Mark II wrote:
It's basically the self-preservation factor. I'm not sure anyone would be excited to go to war. On the other hand, if you could go to war with the guarantee that you wouldn't get hurt.. that changes things.

Even then I'd still refuse. The main reason I'm a pacifist is because I really don't want to hurt people, since I know what it feels like to be hurt. It's not pleasant. Why should I WANT to make others feel pain unless It's totally necessary?

Again, unless the opposing army is on our doorstep, gearing themselves up to murder everyone, innocent kids and all, I am not picking up a gun.

There's a time and place when actual violence is needed. Other than those times, it's not a good thing.

Pacifists are the morally useless chaff floating around in a society that offers them security they don't deserve.

Whoah, I missed a lot.
Well, my parents have absolutely no problem with violent movies. And I wouldn't say it's the whole Jack Thomson thing either, although that's getting closer...

Hmmm, I know:

Rock Nog wrote:
Your parents are worried that, should the day ever come where you find yourself in a suit of power armor with a blaster on your arm, you'll just start killing aliens indiscriminately without regard to whether or not they deserve to die?

Amaster42 wrote:
My parents are worried that if for any reason I should ever find myself in the military, I will be so used to shooting anythng that moves that the atrocities I commit won't bother me.

So basically your parents think you are stupid and easily influenced. That must be nice to know.

Heh, I'm not the one they're worried about. They oppose it out of principle, but they know I'd be alright, seeing as I'm 17 and have been raised in a relatively non-violent environment. But my 13 year old brother, who already has some issues...

I see. So they're more protecting your brother, but extending their concern to you. That's what's happening with me.

When I was a teenager, I did anything I wanted, even if I wasn't allowed to. My parents were strict christians, but I disobeyed all their rules. The only rules I followed were ones that matched with my existing behavior. In other words, I never smoked or drank etc because those are self-destructive habits.

I watched all the rated-R, NC-17, and XXX movies I wanted (at friend's houses, using the internet, hiding them in my room, whatever). I listened to all the music I wasn't allowed to listen to. I never once accepted the idea that information was illegal. I acquired whatever information I wanted because no one is in control of my intellectual activities.

I find it baffling that people would actually obey their parents restrictions on information just out of respect. They are not respecting you, they are trying to control your thoughts.

Beldaran wrote:When I was a teenager, I did anything I wanted, even if I wasn't allowed to. My parents were strict christians, but I disobeyed all their rules. The only rules I followed were ones that matched with my existing behavior. In other words, I never smoked or drank etc because those are self-destructive habits.

I watched all the rated-R, NC-17, and XXX movies I wanted (at friend's houses, using the internet, hiding them in my room, whatever). I listened to all the music I wasn't allowed to listen to. I never once accepted the idea that information was illegal. I acquired whatever information I wanted because no one is in control of my intellectual activities.

I find it baffling that people would actually obey their parents restrictions on information just out of respect. They are not respecting you, they are trying to control your thoughts.

Quoted for awesomeness.

Beldaran wrote:I find it baffling that people would actually obey their parents restrictions on information just out of respect. They are not respecting you, they are trying to control your thoughts.