Archive for the ‘Politics’ tag
More ‘G,’ less gore
Photo credit: lmb920
When an 8-year-old boy handed me “Gears of War,” I hesitated. I looked at his grandma and held up the rental display box for her to see.
“You know that this game is extremely violent, right?” I said to her. “The guy has a chainsaw on top of a machine gun, so you shoot until you get close enough to saw them in half. It’s one of the bloodiest, most gory games out right now.” I pointed to the “M” rating, which is reserved for games with intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content, explicit drug references or strong language and usually only for players 17 or older.
The little boy nodded vigorously and his grandma smiled. “Oh yes, he just loves violence, don’t you son?” she said benevolently. “The more violence the better.”
“Violence is awesome!” he chimed, before handing me “BioShock” and “Halo 3,” both rated “M.” His grandma happily rented all three.
This was the creepiest interaction I have experienced in my short-lived Hollywood Video career. Until then, I thought the argument that minors could easily convince adults to rent and buy “Mature” and “Adults Only” video games for them was a joke. But this boy’s grandmother rented games I worry about my 22-year-old boyfriend playing.
A recent ruling in Minnesota makes this even more disturbing. The state cannot restrict minors from renting or buying games rated “Mature” or “Adults Only” - the latter reserved for 18-year-olds because of the “prolonged scenes of intense violence, graphic sexual content and nudity,” according to the Entertainment Software Rating Board. This means the little boy could rent those games himself, if he goes to the right place.
Most people don’t realize that the rating system’s impact on rentals and purchases is entirely voluntary - retailers are not required by law to enforce the age restrictions; they opt to do so. If a store doesn’t care to enforce the system, they can rent or sell any game to any minor without facing legal consequences. The state of Minnesota tried to make it mandatory, but it was struck down as a “violation of freedom of speech.” I might buy that argument if the state aimed to ban the games entirely, but since when does “freedom of speech” allow minors unrestricted access to explicit content?
Part of the strike down was probably because of a $25 fine to minors caught buying or renting such games. Such a fine would do nothing to stop minors from trying because their parents would be the ones paying. A better solution would be to punish retailers caught renting or selling the games, much like how we punish retailers who sell cigarettes and alcohol to minors. Fining minors isn’t the answer, but it makes sense to enact laws restricting minors from buying or renting extremely violent and sexual video games, just as we restrict them from access to pornography and other “adults only” material.
While the exact effects of video game violence are subject to debate - especially when it comes to the difference between a child and an adult playing the same game - most research suggests it has an impact on levels of aggression, desensitization to violence and a predisposition to act aggressively when confronted with real-life conflicts. Just because we don’t know the exact effects, doesn’t mean we should have a free-for-all consumer system of explicit games.
One of the best things about the rating systems for movies, music and games is that it allows parents the freedom to control the content accessible to their child. Properly enacted, such laws would prohibit minors from having unrestricted access to content reserved for adults; however, parents or guardians have always had the ability to override that for their own child. We can’t arrest minors for smoking or drinking if their parents bought them the cigarettes and beer; we can only arrest them if they’re trying to get the substances themselves. But we owe it to caring parents to provide a decent public environment.
As a society, we are responsible for creating an atmosphere where parents do not have to police their children in order to prevent their exposure to blatantly violent or inappropriate sexual content. We need to create a “rated-G” world in the public sphere and any parents who feel comfortable with exposing their kids to more, can do so if they choose. Enforcing game ratings is the first step.
So many words have been wasted about how exposure to violent video games plays out in real life. Ultimately, we cannot and should not try to restrict what adults choose to expose themselves to. But if we are going to criticize people on their ability to be good moderating parents, we need to give them the tools and space to do their job.
Read the original column online here.
