Alarikf writes:
>> If we are engendering, even in the slightest, a generation of boys who treat women like "objects" then don't you think that we are doing at least some damage to "the objects we call women"?
Note that what I wrote before is still unquestionably true: in the game itself no actual women come to any actual harm. Alarikf's concern is that some hypothetical "boys" playing the game may suffer a hypothetical attitude adjustment that may someday hypothetically result in some hypothetical harm to some hypothetical women. Hypothetically speaking.
Now I'm not up on the latest research, but my guess is that if there was a proven link between childhood fantasy and adult criminal behavior, games like "Grand Theft Auto" would have been legislated off the shelves long ago. No?
>> I mean, shoot man, women are already treated like objects...
Yadda yadda yadda. The question is whether it can be demonstrated (i.e. proven) that this "Pimp" game will cause significant additional criminal behavior. If so, ban it. If not, let it die its inevitable commercial death in the marketplace.
>> Who's to say what I would be like if, instead of D&D I got this "Pimp out women" game when I was fifteen?
My guess is that Alarikf might have played it a couple times, had some laughs, put it away, and gotten "D&D" at his next opportunity. I doubt that "Pimp" has the immersion value of "D&D".
>> But I am not willing to say that such influences make NO difference to a person's attitudes in life and towards women.
In other words, the "Pimp" game (and by implication all similarly "frivolous" products) should be presumed "guilty" until proven "innocent"? If we use that standard, then SEIV should also be banned, because it simply can't be proven that NOBODY is harmed in the slightest by the game (as I suspect numerous SOs can testify).
Re: Fantasy vs Reality
Threaded Mode