CosmoKramer
Newcomer
Rubbish. Liberals are afraid that widesperad violence in media numbs people and lowers their threshholds to violence. In a country of cowboy gun laws I understand their concern.
Germany Restricts Command and Conquer Generals for Idealogy!
- Thread starter DemoCoder
- Start date
Rubbish. Liberals are afraid that widesperad violence in media numbs people and lowers their threshholds to violence. In a country of cowboy gun laws I understand their concern.
Well, that's just as stupid as conservatives that who think that widespread sexuality makes people into rapists, pedophiles, and homosexuals.
Amazing how liberals who profess to defend our right to free speech against so-called moral majority conservatives are just as willing to take our rights away to "protect us"
Stay the f*ck out of my bedroom and get your f*cking hands off my hardrive.
I am sick of both types.
Liberals are just as willing to supress people's rights when it goes against their attempts to reengineer society in a sort of "new soviet man" mentality.
Amazing how liberals who profess to defend our right to free speech against so-called moral majority conservatives are just as willing to take our rights away to "protect us"
Stay the f*ck out of my bedroom and get your f*cking hands off my hardrive.
I am sick of both types.
Liberals are just as willing to supress people's rights when it goes against their attempts to reengineer society in a sort of "new soviet man" mentality.
MrsSkywalker
Newcomer
Oh so true! What these women need to realize is that no one forces the half naked girl in the motorcycle ad to sit there...she chose to do it of her own free will. The money's good, why not? Yet you always have this group of women who crowd around her trying to make her feel like a "victim". We call those women "feminazis" around here, and while the term is perhaps more than mildly offensive, it's a pretty apt term. They hate men, they think all men are enemies. These women give us normal ones a bad name, and are perhaps the largest and loudest censorship group in the country. They claim to want liberation for women, yet what they really mean is domination of all males. They fight true "equal rights" legislation, instead pushing for special rights for women. When I see a demonstration of these radicals I am often tempted just to veer my car...just a little bit that way....
Aye, the feminists. With all my support for women and their fight for equal pay for the same job and all sympathy for those trying to break traditional patriarchical systems, but those who call themself "feminists" are not the best representatives in that fight. The typical feminist is not feministic, rather they are women who had picked up the worst of the traditional "male attributes" such as arrogance, egoism, narrow-mindedness and so on. These are actually fighting against women since the louder they get the less people will listen, and those who have reasonable ideas will be lost in the noise.
DemoCoder said:
To suggest that it will not have a negative impact at all is silly. It is silly to pretend that these creatures are not impacted by their environment. While I understand that nature is destiny, freedom of choice is not bound by it nessesarily. Nature/Nurture I would suggest humans are shaped by both in some way. Simply put it is stupid to imply that environmental factors do not count. What is not so stupid to ask is how much environmental matters factor in. I disagree with your stupid assumption.
DemoCoder said:
I couldn't agree more. Funny though while you don't want anyone in your bedroom, which is great BTW, I am rather against people putting their bedrooms on our streets. You can't have it both ways you see. I don't want to be in your bedroom and I don't want people parading their f*cking bedrooms down our streets.... I don't want my kids to be taught that "anything goes" with regards to sex without my consent, fare enough?
LOL, man ... I got to say something here guys. I thought you were more up to date then this. The modern feminists have but all given up the cause of feminist of the past. The modern feminist is less interested in proving that to be female is better. *cough* What the newer philosophy is directed at is making males more female and females more male. Gone are the woman who are simply proud to be female. What they are interested in is a hermaphadite(argh I can never spell that one.)like model for human sexuality.
Their major assumption is that all human activities are a result of socializations. Now I could explain this rather simple theory yet again but would rather not. This is their new focus, the modern feminist are not so worried about the objectification of women bodies, I think that they finally figured out that they can never make men stop objectifying them. But now the modern feminist is very interested in exploiting the objectification of women as a source of power over men. Which really is effective.
They no longer bitch about porn or prostitution and even come equipped with condoms to give out to out children in Junior High Schools. They are interested in the break down of the patriarchal nuclear family and the creation of the welfare state and egalitarianism so that women whom choose to have children with any given man may leave him or them. Meanwhile taxpayers are looking after the children via child welfare programs that support her ill responsibility or for that matter his.
While they have lost their zeal to be seen as equal they are insisting on equal outcomes regardless of choices they make in life. This runs contrary to the idea that one ought to be responsible for their own well being and passes that responsibility on to the state, which in turn increases spending to attempt to create an equal outcome result which in turn requires the state to increase taxation and social engineering policies via public education etc.
What the newer philosophy is directed at is making males more female and females more male. Gone are the woman who are simply proud to be female. What they are interested in is a hermaphadite(argh I can never spell that one.)like model for human sexuality. Their major assumption is that all human activities are a result of socializations. Now I could explain this rather simple theory yet again
but would rather not. This is their new focus, the modern feminist are not so worried about the objectification of women bodies, I think that they finally figured out that they can never make men stop objectifying them. But now the modern feminist is very interested in exploiting the objectification of women as a source of power over men. Which really is effective. They no longer bitch about porn or prostitution and even come equipped with condoms to give out to out children in Junior High Schools. They are interested in the break down of the patriarchal nuclear family and the creation of the welfare state and egalitarianism so that women whom choose to have children with any given man may leave him or them. Meanwhile taxpayers are looking after the children via child welfare programs that support her ill responsibility or for that matter his.
While they have lost their zeal to be seen as equal they are insisting on equal outcomes regardless of choices they make in life. This runs contrary to the idea that one ought to be responsible for their own well being and passes that responsibility on to the state, which in turn increases spending to attempt to create an equal outcome result which in turn requires the state to increase taxation and social engineering policies via public education etc.
InsanePoet
Newcomer
Views of conservatives vary.
Some conservatives are authoritarian and won't allow anything at all. Others however are much looser and would be fine with things such as C&C Generals. Most conservatives are pro-war, because in the mind of a conservative, war is not evil. In the case with Iraq, war is necessary, however undesireable, but necessary regardless.
Sodomy, adultery, and general fornication, however is considers immoral, unlawful and show be shunned, in the mind of a conservative, it should not be allowed in the media as it is.
Some conservatives are authoritarian and won't allow anything at all. Others however are much looser and would be fine with things such as C&C Generals. Most conservatives are pro-war, because in the mind of a conservative, war is not evil. In the case with Iraq, war is necessary, however undesireable, but necessary regardless.
Sodomy, adultery, and general fornication, however is considers immoral, unlawful and show be shunned, in the mind of a conservative, it should not be allowed in the media as it is.
ya i am not into the authoritarian thing by any means, when i said it was acceptable i merely meant in the sense that i belive it fits the logic that they have been applying to their restrictions on the entertainment industry. however i do think it would be more reasonable to make it an optional think with incentives to promote compliance, like less taxation on such items when sold in stores that meet an agreed upon set of guidelines.
While I believe that censorship of gore as well as sex is ultimately futile, it should be pointed out that restricting advertisement to minors of games containing it has been common practice in Germany for quite some time now. (some companies circumvent this by green blood etc. - that's the reason why many german gamers buy their games here in Austria) I don't think that this case hase much to do with the current political conflict.
On the topic of left wing/right wing vs censorship: Both types of government would rather keep such a law in place than deal with the millions of "concerned" parents that are too busy to both control and educate their own children.
On the topic of left wing/right wing vs censorship: Both types of government would rather keep such a law in place than deal with the millions of "concerned" parents that are too busy to both control and educate their own children.
Sometimes it is, depending on how unneccessary and indecent its contents are. The reason that isn't being done here, is because C&C Generals isn't something that most of us view as a product that has no reason to exist.
Selling something doesn't force people to buy it, the consumer still can choose whether or not to buy it. Government intervention takes that choice away from the consumer. For some things, drugs for instance, it can be justified, since the consumer can easily fall into a situation where their addiction takes over and begins making the choice for them. For other things, such as video games, it seems like the government is patronizing the average individual's ability to use common sense.
I'm a bit disappointed, the sensationalized subject of this thread alone sounds more like something I'd expect of the Inquirer, not DemoCoder.
I think I already explained in a thread in the Game Talk Forum how the BPjS (the institution resonsible for indexing C&C:G) works. First of all, an indexed product is not fully censored like some people here seem to think, it primarily means access is restricted to adults and no advertising is allowed. Stores are allowed to keep these produts on stock and sell them to everybody over the age of 18 though. To summarize my other post, the 4 main criteria for a "script" to get indexed are pornography, excessive violence/gore, Nazi ideology/symbolism and belittlement/glorification of war. Considering Germany's recent history I think the last 2 points are understandable.
The (unfortunate) reason the BPjS is so actively involved in indexing games compared to their in comparison minimal engagement in other contemporary media is, that the independent age rating institution for entertainment software (USK, which rated C&C:G as 16+), unlike its counterpart for movies (FSK), is not legally binding. This basically means there is no fully working or binding age rating system in Germany for entertainment software. To counter this the BPjS is sometimes taking things too far, which is why I hope the USK (which IMHO has a much more competent board of advisors and experts when it comes to games) will in a not too distant day in the future be similarly responsible for rating games, as the FKS is for movies (which is basically 100% the same as the US Voluntary Movie Rating System except for different rating criteria that are often due to small cultural differences, e.g. more sex but less violence is in general tolerated here). This would take almost all of the influence over games out off the hands of the sometimes over-sensitive BPjS (e.g. according to law the BPjS can only consider indexing a movie if it has either not been rated at all or rated 18+ by the FSK).
It might interest some here that a pretty large group of people is currently fighting this and other BPjS indexing decisions in court and things look good AFAIK.
I think I already explained in a thread in the Game Talk Forum how the BPjS (the institution resonsible for indexing C&C:G) works. First of all, an indexed product is not fully censored like some people here seem to think, it primarily means access is restricted to adults and no advertising is allowed. Stores are allowed to keep these produts on stock and sell them to everybody over the age of 18 though. To summarize my other post, the 4 main criteria for a "script" to get indexed are pornography, excessive violence/gore, Nazi ideology/symbolism and belittlement/glorification of war. Considering Germany's recent history I think the last 2 points are understandable.
The (unfortunate) reason the BPjS is so actively involved in indexing games compared to their in comparison minimal engagement in other contemporary media is, that the independent age rating institution for entertainment software (USK, which rated C&C:G as 16+), unlike its counterpart for movies (FSK), is not legally binding. This basically means there is no fully working or binding age rating system in Germany for entertainment software. To counter this the BPjS is sometimes taking things too far, which is why I hope the USK (which IMHO has a much more competent board of advisors and experts when it comes to games) will in a not too distant day in the future be similarly responsible for rating games, as the FKS is for movies (which is basically 100% the same as the US Voluntary Movie Rating System except for different rating criteria that are often due to small cultural differences, e.g. more sex but less violence is in general tolerated here). This would take almost all of the influence over games out off the hands of the sometimes over-sensitive BPjS (e.g. according to law the BPjS can only consider indexing a movie if it has either not been rated at all or rated 18+ by the FSK).
It might interest some here that a pretty large group of people is currently fighting this and other BPjS indexing decisions in court and things look good AFAIK.