Sex Sells, and So Does Ignorance
Thanks to Google News for reminding me just how bad local stories on video games can be.
This editorial from Dixie State College of Utah’s Dixie Sun commits a lot of sins, most notably calling three-and-a-half year old BMX XXX a “new” game and saying that the point of the Grand Theft Auto games is “really just to see naked women, or to get naked women to do whatever you want them to do.”
Then there’s the assumption that game retailers are “following the laws” about selling Mature-rated titles to minors (laws?) and the seeming implication in the lede that the phrase “sex sells” has only been around for the last ten years.
But the best part is the wishy-washy conclusion that pretty much says “women aren’t anything special, but still, games shouldn’t show them with their clothes off.”
I am not what most would call a feminist; I don’t fight for equal rights and I truly do believe there are some things men can do that (most) women can’t do and I’m OK with that. But I don’t know how we, as a society, can sit back and let video games teach our children how the world should be.
I’m not usually one to pile on like this (OK, I am) but I think it’s important that we’re all aware just how misguided and ignorant some writers are about our hobby.
on April 21st, 2006 at 7:19 am
Well, actually… very few games have much if anything in the way of sex, despite the prevalence of scantily clad babes in game advertising. The “jiggling glass” in God of War is about as close as they get, and games like Monte Cristo’s 7 Sins (which actually does have some softcore sex) don’t get US distribution because nobody here will carry AO-rated games.
on April 21st, 2006 at 10:08 am
You’re also forgetting Lula 3D - recently “released” by CDV.
I tried to read that linked article, but couldn’t. The ignorance was overwhelming. Unfortunately because it’s in print a majority of people will take that as TRUTH.
on April 21st, 2006 at 11:01 am
Actually, Daniel, it’s a college newspaper. Does anyone take those seriously?
on April 21st, 2006 at 11:36 am
“Does anyone take those seriously?”
It depends on the reader, the writer, and the paper’s rep, I’d say. A college paper doesn’t have as wide a reach as a major daily, but it does usually have a loyal audience among that college. These are impressionable young minds here! WON’T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!
on April 21st, 2006 at 12:34 pm
You weren’t tempted to title this post, “Some Editorials Portray Their Authors As Dumb, Ill-Informed”?
on April 21st, 2006 at 12:57 pm
“You weren’t tempted to title this post, “Some Editorials Portray Their Authors As Dumb, Ill-Informed”?”
No… but I am now.
on April 21st, 2006 at 4:18 pm
My response:
http://www.topofcool.com/?p=160
on April 21st, 2006 at 9:17 pm
…First I’ll say I feel GTA: San Andreas (and the series, at least recently) is morally “bad” enough that I’m probably at the least never going to play SA, if I ever play any GTA title. That said, lumping GTA in with those other titles is still idiotic.
By the way, so is equating every other game on the planet with Leisure Suit Larry.
I think there was about one line in this editorial that I agreed with. I’m not even sure what the point of the article was; it seems to lack some unity.
on April 24th, 2006 at 8:52 am
There’s almost more immoral content in the controversy over video game content then the content itself. What is the world coming to?
The simplest pleasures must be ruined by the ignorant few with large mouths.