- 0 Posts
- 40 Comments
Oh… I guess you don’t know the game.
Those are the characters.
Another commenter pointed out that a selling feature of this game is the jiggle physics.
This is getting old though.
Just so you know what the scientists studying this have to say:
Should we be worried about escalation? The consumption of VCSAM does not prevent pedophilic individuals from future offending and can instead act as a progressive addiction (Maras & Shapiro 2017). Some CSAM offenders who engage in contact offending have suggested the contact offending was an extension of their online offending (Quayle & Taylor 2003). For example, in a recent study that applied Ward and Siegert’s (2002) pathways model to sexual offending of penetrative child sexual offenders, several offenders engaged in CSAM before resorting to contact offending. 12 One female offender, “commenced to use the internet…(time) to chat with other people… who gained sexual gratification from child pornography which led to the commission of the subject offences” (Osbourne & Christensen 2020, p. 13). The material has been argued to potentially serve as a gateway to contact offending (Maras & Shapiro 2017), as the offender may become desensitized to passive viewing, finding it to be insufficient over time (Schell et al. 2007). In line with the material being considered as a gateway, an offender might commence with masturbating to VCSAM material, then escalate to CSAM material (after becoming desensitized to VCSAM), before progressing on to act out impulses on children – in an attempt to experience the original level of gratification when first viewing VCSAM. Sullivan and Sheehan (2002) refer to the desensitization of images as the ‘fantasy escalation effect’ with the trajectory to engage in increasingly explicit videos and images (Sheehan & Sullivan 2010).
Given that much of VCSAM material is computer generated, it allows for unlimited creativity in how child characters are abused compared with CSAM (e.g., movements and depictions that are not humanly possible in real life). In turn, offenders who escalate through the types of VCSAM, viewing unimaginable forms of bestiality and penetrative activity, might find themselves skipping the nudist, erotic, or posing forms of CSAM during their escalation, instead being drawn to the gross assault and sadistic CSAM. It is not, therefore, illogical to suggest that those who commence CSAM offending from VCSAM offending may be more desensitized and follow different offending trajectories compared with those who commence with CSAM offending, which could be explored in future research.
While engaging with abusive material does not inevitably result in contact offending (Henshaw, Ogloff & Clough 2015), there are effects to the exposure of such. In their laboratory study, Paul and Linz (2008) found that participants exposed to ‘barely legal’ pornography (females depicted as under the age of consent), were quicker to recognize words with sexual connotations (after being primed with neutral images of female children) compared with participants who had been exposed to adult pornography (after being primed with neutral images of older-looking models). The authors concluded that the relationship between cognitions and the likelihood of acting on such, is complex (Paul & Linz 2008). While they argued the mere endorsement of sex-youth cognitive schema does not guarantee deviant action, the potential effects of deviant behavior from being exposed to such material cannot be outright rejected (Paul & Linz 2008). Paul and Linz (2008) suggest that extensive exposure can desensitize individuals to related behaviors and content. Given VCSAM is related in content to CSAM, the ongoing effects of exposure to VCSAM is an important avenue for future research
He did actually make this argument when he said pornographic material depicting minors being available would lower cases of sexual assault…
Just because the argument was implicit and not explicit does not mean it wasn’t made. That was not a straw man.
The other commenter was actually strawmanning my position incredibly heavily in another comment, but I noticed you didn’t call that one out.
Lemmy is rife with this pedophile apologia, especially concerning threads about child pornography material made with AI and about comic style child pornography material, and I have no problem with saying that that is absolutely disgusting.
Are pedophiles mentally ill humans that need help? Yes. Should they be pushed towards active pedophilia in any way, shape, or form? No. They should not. As psychologists studying sexual abuse prevention agree, even in the case of VCSAM.
A direct excerpt from the paper:
Should we be worried about escalation? The consumption of VCSAM does not prevent pedophilic individuals from future offending and can instead act as a progressive addiction (Maras & Shapiro 2017). Some CSAM offenders who engage in contact offending have suggested the contact offending was an extension of their online offending (Quayle & Taylor 2003). For example, in a recent study that applied Ward and Siegert’s (2002) pathways model to sexual offending of penetrative child sexual offenders, several offenders engaged in CSAM before resorting to contact offending. 12 One female offender, “commenced to use the internet…(time) to chat with other people… who gained sexual gratification from child pornography which led to the commission of the subject offences” (Osbourne & Christensen 2020, p. 13). The material has been argued to potentially serve as a gateway to contact offending (Maras & Shapiro 2017), as the offender may become desensitized to passive viewing, finding it to be insufficient over time (Schell et al. 2007). In line with the material being considered as a gateway, an offender might commence with masturbating to VCSAM material, then escalate to CSAM material (after becoming desensitized to VCSAM), before progressing on to act out impulses on children – in an attempt to experience the original level of gratification when first viewing VCSAM. Sullivan and Sheehan (2002) refer to the desensitization of images as the ‘fantasy escalation effect’ with the trajectory to engage in increasingly explicit videos and images (Sheehan & Sullivan 2010). Given that much of VCSAM material is computer generated, it allows for unlimited creativity in how child characters are abused compared with CSAM (e.g., movements and depictions that are not humanly possible in real life). In turn, offenders who escalate through the types of VCSAM, viewing unimaginable forms of bestiality and penetrative activity, might find themselves skipping the nudist, erotic, or posing forms of CSAM during their escalation, instead being drawn to the gross assault and sadistic CSAM. It is not, therefore, illogical to suggest that those who commence CSAM offending from VCSAM offending may be more desensitized and follow different offending trajectories compared with those who commence with CSAM offending, which could be explored in future research. While engaging with abusive material does not inevitably result in contact offending (Henshaw, Ogloff & Clough 2015), there are effects to the exposure of such. In their laboratory study, Paul and Linz (2008) found that participants exposed to ‘barely legal’ pornography (females depicted as under the age of consent), were quicker to recognize words with sexual connotations (after being primed with neutral images of female children) compared with participants who had been exposed to adult pornography (after being primed with neutral images of older-looking models). The authors concluded that the relationship between cognitions and the likelihood of acting on such, is complex (Paul & Linz 2008). While they argued the mere endorsement of sex-youth cognitive schema does not guarantee deviant action, the potential effects of deviant behavior from being exposed to such material cannot be outright rejected (Paul & Linz 2008). Paul and Linz (2008) suggest that extensive exposure can desensitize individuals to related behaviors and content. Given VCSAM is related in content to CSAM, the ongoing effects of exposure to VCSAM is an important avenue for future research
Oh great, somebody that doesn’t understand stats.
You know what else having access to violent video games correlates with that might be a bit more important than the video games themselves? Material wealth and higher standard of living. What happens to correlate with material wealth and higher standard of living? Less crimes of every single type.
Also I don’t agree with the way the body is being sexualized in the comment above mine, but there is a serious problem, still, with sexualization of characters that explicitly look like children but are “totally a 200 year old vampire bro”. This is especially true of anime and video games with anime-inspired artwork. I’m not saying that all video games or animes are like this. Nor am I saying that all gamers and anime fans are closet pedos. What I am saying is that there’s serious problems in these communities that must be addressed. The pushback in spite of my non-condemnation of the whole is kinda hilarious. I do understand how my first comment could be misinterpreted.
Never thought I’d get into an argument where somebody thought sexualization of minors was a good thing though, so I guess that’s a new experience at least.
Steam honestly has it really bad. You don’t see blatant hate speech in play store reviews but you certainly do on steam. The same goes for their forums, which are almost totally unmoderated. Totally agree tho that this is a symptom of a larger problem and am always wary of the government seeking to impede free speech, even if it’s speech I despise. If there are calls to violence and stuff I’m totally cool with that being prosecuted ofc.
Right now we have music festivals and large ren faires where people go for a week to enjoy something together. Imagine if some time in the future we could slow our brains perception and achieve am SAO-like experience for people in a week at a festival-like environment!!! What an interesting experience that would be
I think you may be misinformed as to what a non-compete agreement is. For example, when I worked for leaf filter, I had to sign a non-compete agreement that stated I couldn’t/wouldn’t work in the gutter protection industry for 6-12 months after leaving their company. Was it too broad to enforce and just their to keep anybody with a working brain from taking their service and providing it for cheaper? Yes. Did it work, effectively driving down competition and allowing them to effectively pigeonhole the US market? Also yes.
It really depends on who you’re talking about. Indie game devs? Don’t pirate. EA? The programmers/designers/writer/etc are getting paid the same amount either way, but there is still an argument to be made that if enough people were to pirate that it could cause layoffs in the future. higher amounts of piracy and higher sales are positively correlated tho so it’s really tough to say.
In no way should someone be upset with you for you not wanting to pirate tho. That’s just ridonk
No but I can see that they’re a member of the US education system based on their wording, content, and context.
Can you?
I didn’t just make fun of somebody because their English sucks. My French sucks lmao. I mentioned that his comment doesn’t paint him as very intelligent because he was talking shit on an education system (in a vast majority English speaking country, referring to the country as “here” implying both residence in the US and inside knowledge of the US education system (as he knows what happens within), virtually guaranteeing english grammar instruction at some point) while using the grammar of an inebriated 4 year old. Like fuck me dude
It’s actually two people that are “familiar with the move” and whose names aren’t printed. I’m not super convinced by that tbh.
Secondly, if this company was actually close to this technology, why would they not be talking about it? This would be a huge boon for Chinese tech, and that’s not the type of thing that normally comes from two randos to an international organization and is usually like a press release or something.
Couldn’t stop thinking about what you said about Huawei’s 7nm chips so I decided to investigate and would you look at that it only took me 10 seconds to find out you’re wrong: https://consumer.huawei.com/en/press/news/2018/huawei-launches-kirin-980-the-first-commercial-7nm-soc/
They also need to keep those users though. Like if people just come for Alan wake 2 they have no incentive to stay currently because the epic games store and app are kinda dogwater compared to steam.
Like I have launchers for a couple services on my computer and the only one that gets used except for the purpose of playing one specific game is steam.
I mean every other game in the series seemed to have been going for realism idk why this one would be different. It may have many technical improvements but imo that doesn’t excuse things like skin that looks smooth as butter on almost every NPC lol
Not that I’m not excited, just a bit disappointed.
You’re correct that nobody has quite said the quiet part out loud yet except for myself and the initial comment I was replying to.
And again, nobody is interested in arguing about the points to do with sexualization of minors in video games and anime, despite that being the comment thread they replied to.
Yes I’ve made mistakes and committed fallacies in this argument. No, I am not arguing in bad faith. Nor do I intend to.
Nobody has replied to the salient points, nor the research I’ve raised, and that saddens me, as it means people are more interested in keeping their lolicon games than reducing issues affecting real people, and as a survivor of childhood sexual assault myself, I find that pretty fucked up. I would hope that even somebody who hasn’t gone through what I have would have the same proclivity to protect living, breathing children over having unfettered access to lolicon games that sexualize minors but this thread has shown me that this is not the case.
Goodbye