LET'S (NOT) RESPECT EACH OTHER?S TASTES (OR: "THIS GAME ISN'T FOR YOU, AND THAT'S (NOT) OKAY")

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4
 

Dreiko:

altnameJag:

Dreiko:

So, while I agree that these things ought to be illegal, they still aren't actually rape either. You have two extremes here. You have Sweden and the like treating everything under the sun as rape, such as to in fact remove the gravity of rape by equating brutal assault that lives actual physical scars to people drunkenly bumping uglies and then waking up perfectly healthy and regretting it (the one who reports it first being a victim of rape) and then you have Japan where it's seen as a no big deal to grab someone's ass since "heru mon ja nai" or "you won't lose anything by it" XD.

So yeah, I agree that these things should be treated as crimes, but I don't agree that they should go towards the nation's actual rape statistics. They're more akin to public nuisance crimes or maybe assault at best if someone's being overly physical.

Okay, 1) whether or not you think they *should* count as rape, sexual assault, or other crimes is largely irrelevant to the fact that Japan wasn't counting them and the UK was, which explains a lot about the discrepancy about the two numbers which was the point, and
2) WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK.

The implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Japan should adopt the UK standard or that UK is accurate and Japan inaccurate. Otherwise, why bring this up as a counterpoint to Japan's low statistics to imply that they're not really low or that they ought to be higher. You wouldn't do so if you didn't think that UK's approach was more correct, hence my addressing that notion.

YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

altnameJag:

Dreiko:

altnameJag:
Okay, 1) whether or not you think they *should* count as rape, sexual assault, or other crimes is largely irrelevant to the fact that Japan wasn't counting them and the UK was, which explains a lot about the discrepancy about the two numbers which was the point, and
2) WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK.

The implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Japan should adopt the UK standard or that UK is accurate and Japan inaccurate. Otherwise, why bring this up as a counterpoint to Japan's low statistics to imply that they're not really low or that they ought to be higher. You wouldn't do so if you didn't think that UK's approach was more correct, hence my addressing that notion.

YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?

You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

Dreiko:

altnameJag:

Dreiko:

The implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Japan should adopt the UK standard or that UK is accurate and Japan inaccurate. Otherwise, why bring this up as a counterpoint to Japan's low statistics to imply that they're not really low or that they ought to be higher. You wouldn't do so if you didn't think that UK's approach was more correct, hence my addressing that notion.

YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?

You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

Uh, when one definition is more narrow than the other? Yes. These statistics don't exist in a vacuum and jag was pointing it out. Acting like it doesn't matter is just missing the point. You can't pretend a lower rate of crime is anything to be proud of when it directly results from a more narrow definition of said crime.

Honestly, you're just blatantly debating in bad faith here. "The UK calls something rape, it is rape" is a presumption, hm? You wanna be coy? Ok. I'll play ball. Incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc.

Which of those do you object to being classified as rape?

Dreiko:

altnameJag:

Dreiko:

The implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Japan should adopt the UK standard or that UK is accurate and Japan inaccurate. Otherwise, why bring this up as a counterpoint to Japan's low statistics to imply that they're not really low or that they ought to be higher. You wouldn't do so if you didn't think that UK's approach was more correct, hence my addressing that notion.

YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?

You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

When it comes to statistics, it absolutely matters. You have to compare like-to-like.
You can't say Freedonia has half the murder rate of Examplestan so it's safer when Freedonia only counts killings that happen on the weekend as murder.

erttheking:

Dreiko:

altnameJag:
YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?

You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

Uh, when one definition is more narrow than the other? Yes. These statistics don't exist in a vacuum and jag was pointing it out. Acting like it doesn't matter is just missing the point. You can't pretend a lower rate of crime is anything to be proud of when it directly results from a more narrow definition of said crime.

Honestly, you're just blatantly debating in bad faith here. "The UK calls something rape, it is rape" is a presumption, hm? You wanna be coy? Ok. I'll play ball. Incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc.

Which of those do you object to being classified as rape?

That really makes sense only if you have some sort of third world country where people don't have human rights. Japan is a prosperous first world country so they are just as entitled to define rape in their own legal standard as any other nation. The standard isn't necessarily stricter just because it defines more thing as rape, it can also just be mistakenly overbroad. You're not "strict" when you behead jaywalkers and you are not taking a "bigger stand" against jaywalking when you do that, you're just being tyrannical. Do you think Saudi Arabia takes a stand against theft by cutting people's arms off? Aren't they just being insane?

Blackmail and extortion are...blackmail and extortion. What you blackmail and extort someone for, be it money or sex or to quit their job or to refuse a promotion, isn't (and shouldn't be) relevant. Or what, should we call extortion for a monetary sum theft now? See, that makes no sense.

And sure drugging someone in order to take advantage of them is rape but just having drunkenness organically lead to sex without anybody's intention to have that happen definitely shouldn't be.

altnameJag:

Dreiko:

altnameJag:
YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?

You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

When it comes to statistics, it absolutely matters. You have to compare like-to-like.
You can't say Freedonia has half the murder rate of Examplestan so it's safer when Freedonia only counts killings that happen on the weekend as murder.

It is like to like, each society gets to define whatever type of conduct as rape, and the societies that are more advanced and prosperous achieve this prosperity through in some part the accuracy of this definition (among a myriad of other things) so Japan being a very prosperous nation indicates some measure of accuracy to their criteria. Nobody forced the UK to choose a definition which will brand more of its citizens as rapists.

Also, rape is just one of the crimes and generally crimes all have a pattern to them. Japan has similarly low stats for all those other crimes too, not just rape, so a scenario where you get like 30 shootings total a year in the whole nation but there's this plague of rape is not really realistic. Rape happens the most in places where all the other types of crime also happen often, and Japan has the least of those other types of crimes.

So even with the UK standard you'd still end up with way fewer of them because the society is just safer and more law abiding overall.

Dreiko:

altnameJag:

Dreiko:

The implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Japan should adopt the UK standard or that UK is accurate and Japan inaccurate. Otherwise, why bring this up as a counterpoint to Japan's low statistics to imply that they're not really low or that they ought to be higher. You wouldn't do so if you didn't think that UK's approach was more correct, hence my addressing that notion.

YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?

You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

It doesn't matter whether the UK or Japan is in the right. What matters is that the statistics are not directly comparable due to their different methodologies. They only become comparable once the figures are adjusted so that they track the same phenomena. Either the UK zeroes out from its figure all instances attributable to incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc until it only tracks the same things that Japan's figure does, or Japan adds to its figure all instances attributable to incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc until it tracks the everything that the UK's figure accounts for. Which figure is adjusted is largely irrelevant. All that matters is that the acts tracked in the adjusted data become consistent between the data sets.

It's like adding fractions. You can't do it until you convert the fractions into a form where they share a denominator. In order to add 3/5 and 2/3, you have to first turn them into 9/15 and 10/15, respectively, giving you a result of 1 4/15. If a pair of similarly named statistics are defined differently, they lack that common denominator and have to be adjusted before they can be directly compared.

Asita:

Dreiko:

altnameJag:
YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?

You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

It doesn't matter whether the UK or Japan is in the right. What matters is that the statistics are not directly comparable due to their different methodologies. They only become comparable once the figures are adjusted so that they track the same phenomena. Either the UK zeroes out from its figure all instances attributable to incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc until it only tracks the same things that Japan's figure does, or Japan adds to its figure all instances attributable to incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc until it tracks the everything that the UK's figure accounts for. Which figure is adjusted is largely irrelevant. All that matters is that the acts tracked in the adjusted data become consistent between the data sets.

It's like adding fractions. You can't do it until you convert the fractions into a form where they share a denominator. In order to add 3/5 and 2/3, you have to first turn them into 9/15 and 10/15, respectively, giving you a result of 1 4/15. If a pair of similarly named statistics are defined differently, they lack that common denominator and have to be adjusted before they can be directly compared.

Yes I understand the mathematics, I just don't see them philosophically applying when the subject at hand is something that wasn't generated by nature and we just calculate it and express that through math but rather it is something we arbitrarily define. In that situation, who is in the right would make the other one using bad information in their statistics, poisoning the result one way or another. It's like trying to calculate the length of the earth on the assumption it's flat. The math may be correct for a hypothetical flat earth but it is not indicative of reality which is what I'm talking about here. You can still calculate the length of the earth, you just have to do so differently than you would if it was flat, and you'd be actually correct despite the other equation using the right math, because it's based on a faulty hypothesis.

Rape stats aren't supposed to be a disembodied thing, they actually supposed to reflect some aspect of reality, not just math.

Dreiko:

erttheking:

Dreiko:

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?

You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

Uh, when one definition is more narrow than the other? Yes. These statistics don't exist in a vacuum and jag was pointing it out. Acting like it doesn't matter is just missing the point. You can't pretend a lower rate of crime is anything to be proud of when it directly results from a more narrow definition of said crime.

Honestly, you're just blatantly debating in bad faith here. "The UK calls something rape, it is rape" is a presumption, hm? You wanna be coy? Ok. I'll play ball. Incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc.

Which of those do you object to being classified as rape?

That really makes sense only if you have some sort of third world country where people don't have human rights. Japan is a prosperous first world country so they are just as entitled to define rape in their own legal standard as any other nation. The standard isn't necessarily stricter just because it defines more thing as rape, it can also just be mistakenly overbroad. You're not "strict" when you behead jaywalkers and you are not taking a "bigger stand" against jaywalking when you do that, you're just being tyrannical. Do you think Saudi Arabia takes a stand against theft by cutting people's arms off? Aren't they just being insane?

Blackmail and extortion are...blackmail and extortion. What you blackmail and extort someone for, be it money or sex or to quit their job or to refuse a promotion, isn't (and shouldn't be) relevant. Or what, should we call extortion for a monetary sum theft now? See, that makes no sense.

And sure drugging someone in order to take advantage of them is rape but just having drunkenness organically lead to sex without anybody's intention to have that happen definitely shouldn't be.

altnameJag:

Dreiko:

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?

You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

When it comes to statistics, it absolutely matters. You have to compare like-to-like.
You can't say Freedonia has half the murder rate of Examplestan so it's safer when Freedonia only counts killings that happen on the weekend as murder.

It is like to like, each society gets to define whatever type of conduct as rape, and the societies that are more advanced and prosperous achieve this prosperity through in some part the accuracy of this definition (among a myriad of other things) so Japan being a very prosperous nation indicates some measure of accuracy to their criteria. Nobody forced the UK to choose a definition which will brand more of its citizens as rapists.

Also, rape is just one of the crimes and generally crimes all have a pattern to them. Japan has similarly low stats for all those other crimes too, not just rape, so a scenario where you get like 30 shootings total a year in the whole nation but there's this plague of rape is not really realistic. Rape happens the most in places where all the other types of crime also happen often, and Japan has the least of those other types of crimes.

So even with the UK standard you'd still end up with way fewer of them because the society is just safer and more law abiding overall.

A first world country that is fucking awful at handling sexual assault. Don't whitewash the shit that goes on over there just because it makes games you like. You think defining blackmail, underage incest, and drugged sex is comparable to beheading jaywalkers and cutting the hands off of pickpockets. Can you kindly not insult my intelligence with baseless hyperbole?

Define blackmail for theft as theft? I mean, yeah. We do that. This might blow your mind Dreiko but people can commit more than one crime at a time. You can commit blackmail and use that blackmail to commit another crime. Don't be so simplistic in how you view the world.

Drunk people are not capable of giving consent, there is no "organic" way for drunkness to lead to sex unless both people are black out drunk. Don't act like drunk women aren't taken advantage of, I've seen enough victim blaming to know that they are.

erttheking:

Dreiko:

erttheking:

Uh, when one definition is more narrow than the other? Yes. These statistics don't exist in a vacuum and jag was pointing it out. Acting like it doesn't matter is just missing the point. You can't pretend a lower rate of crime is anything to be proud of when it directly results from a more narrow definition of said crime.

Honestly, you're just blatantly debating in bad faith here. "The UK calls something rape, it is rape" is a presumption, hm? You wanna be coy? Ok. I'll play ball. Incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc.

Which of those do you object to being classified as rape?

That really makes sense only if you have some sort of third world country where people don't have human rights. Japan is a prosperous first world country so they are just as entitled to define rape in their own legal standard as any other nation. The standard isn't necessarily stricter just because it defines more thing as rape, it can also just be mistakenly overbroad. You're not "strict" when you behead jaywalkers and you are not taking a "bigger stand" against jaywalking when you do that, you're just being tyrannical. Do you think Saudi Arabia takes a stand against theft by cutting people's arms off? Aren't they just being insane?

Blackmail and extortion are...blackmail and extortion. What you blackmail and extort someone for, be it money or sex or to quit their job or to refuse a promotion, isn't (and shouldn't be) relevant. Or what, should we call extortion for a monetary sum theft now? See, that makes no sense.

And sure drugging someone in order to take advantage of them is rape but just having drunkenness organically lead to sex without anybody's intention to have that happen definitely shouldn't be.

altnameJag:
When it comes to statistics, it absolutely matters. You have to compare like-to-like.
You can't say Freedonia has half the murder rate of Examplestan so it's safer when Freedonia only counts killings that happen on the weekend as murder.

It is like to like, each society gets to define whatever type of conduct as rape, and the societies that are more advanced and prosperous achieve this prosperity through in some part the accuracy of this definition (among a myriad of other things) so Japan being a very prosperous nation indicates some measure of accuracy to their criteria. Nobody forced the UK to choose a definition which will brand more of its citizens as rapists.

Also, rape is just one of the crimes and generally crimes all have a pattern to them. Japan has similarly low stats for all those other crimes too, not just rape, so a scenario where you get like 30 shootings total a year in the whole nation but there's this plague of rape is not really realistic. Rape happens the most in places where all the other types of crime also happen often, and Japan has the least of those other types of crimes.

So even with the UK standard you'd still end up with way fewer of them because the society is just safer and more law abiding overall.

A first world country that is fucking awful at handling sexual assault. Don?t whitewash the shit that goes on over there just because it makes games you like. You think defining blackmail, underage incest, and drugged sex is comparable to beheading jaywalkers and cutting the hands off of pickpockets. Can you kindly not insult my intelligence with baseless hyperbole?

Define blackmail for theft as theft? I mean, yeah. We do that. This might blow your mind Dreiko but people can commit more than one crime at a time. You can commit blackmail and use that blackmail to commit another crime. Don?t be so simplistic in how you view the world.

Drunk people are not capable of giving consent, there is no ?organic? way for drunkness to lead to sex unless both people are black out drunk. Don?t act like drunk women aren?t taken advantage of, I?ve seen enough victim blaming to know that they are.

Now you're being obviously disingenuous lol. I only likened blackmail to beheadings, incest and whatnot being treated as crimes are fine which is why I didn't give you a counter argument.

And blackmail for theft would be like, blackmailing someone to make them steal something, not blackmailing someone for their own property that they can legally give to anyone without commiting theft. You're really stretching what I'm actually talking about here. Simply put, blackmail and extortion are already crimes. Having sex isn't a crime, giving things isn't a crime, etc. etc. so when someone blackmails you to do these legal acts that you just don't want to do, they are, yes, ONLY committing blackmail during that event, not rape or theft or anything else.

Having sex with someone who is unable to give consent without realizing they can't because you're drunk is just as organic as allowing sex to happen because you're too drunk to refuse. Neither party is more to blame when neither party purposefully got the other party drunk to take advantage. Just because some people do indeed do that doesn't mean every such case is one where malice was involved.

Dreiko:

erttheking:

Dreiko:

That really makes sense only if you have some sort of third world country where people don't have human rights. Japan is a prosperous first world country so they are just as entitled to define rape in their own legal standard as any other nation. The standard isn't necessarily stricter just because it defines more thing as rape, it can also just be mistakenly overbroad. You're not "strict" when you behead jaywalkers and you are not taking a "bigger stand" against jaywalking when you do that, you're just being tyrannical. Do you think Saudi Arabia takes a stand against theft by cutting people's arms off? Aren't they just being insane?

Blackmail and extortion are...blackmail and extortion. What you blackmail and extort someone for, be it money or sex or to quit their job or to refuse a promotion, isn't (and shouldn't be) relevant. Or what, should we call extortion for a monetary sum theft now? See, that makes no sense.

And sure drugging someone in order to take advantage of them is rape but just having drunkenness organically lead to sex without anybody's intention to have that happen definitely shouldn't be.

It is like to like, each society gets to define whatever type of conduct as rape, and the societies that are more advanced and prosperous achieve this prosperity through in some part the accuracy of this definition (among a myriad of other things) so Japan being a very prosperous nation indicates some measure of accuracy to their criteria. Nobody forced the UK to choose a definition which will brand more of its citizens as rapists.

Also, rape is just one of the crimes and generally crimes all have a pattern to them. Japan has similarly low stats for all those other crimes too, not just rape, so a scenario where you get like 30 shootings total a year in the whole nation but there's this plague of rape is not really realistic. Rape happens the most in places where all the other types of crime also happen often, and Japan has the least of those other types of crimes.

So even with the UK standard you'd still end up with way fewer of them because the society is just safer and more law abiding overall.

A first world country that is fucking awful at handling sexual assault. Don?t whitewash the shit that goes on over there just because it makes games you like. You think defining blackmail, underage incest, and drugged sex is comparable to beheading jaywalkers and cutting the hands off of pickpockets. Can you kindly not insult my intelligence with baseless hyperbole?

Define blackmail for theft as theft? I mean, yeah. We do that. This might blow your mind Dreiko but people can commit more than one crime at a time. You can commit blackmail and use that blackmail to commit another crime. Don?t be so simplistic in how you view the world.

Drunk people are not capable of giving consent, there is no ?organic? way for drunkness to lead to sex unless both people are black out drunk. Don?t act like drunk women aren?t taken advantage of, I?ve seen enough victim blaming to know that they are.

Now you're being obviously disingenuous lol. I only likened blackmail to beheadings, incest and whatnot being treated as crimes are fine which is why I didn't give you a counter argument.

And blackmail for theft would be like, blackmailing someone to make them steal something, not blackmailing someone for their own property that they can legally give to anyone without commiting theft. You're really stretching what I'm actually talking about here. Simply put, blackmail and extortion are already crimes. Having sex isn't a crime, giving things isn't a crime, etc. etc. so when someone blackmails you to do these legal acts that you just don't want to do, they are, yes, ONLY committing blackmail during that event, not rape or theft or anything else.

Having sex with someone who is unable to give consent without realizing they can't because you're drunk is just as organic as allowing sex to happen because you're too drunk to refuse. Neither party is more to blame when neither party purposefully got the other party drunk to take advantage. Just because some people do indeed do that doesn't mean every such case is one where malice was involved.

You compared classifying someone who blackmailed a person into having sex against their will as rapists to beheading jaywalkers. A hyperbolic statement. No offense Dreiko, you're starting to sound like those people who say it's not rape if it wasn't violent. And you agree with criminalizing underage incest? So do you agree that Japan's definition of rape is too narrow? Because they don't do that.

I know. That's theft. If you blackmail someone into commit a crime, you are responsible for that crime. Kind of like how blackmailing someone into having sex is rape considering someone is being forced to have sex against their will. The signs of being drunk are very obvious. It's very simple Dreiko. If they're drunk and you're not, keep it in your pants. Otherwise you are taking advantage of someone who is under the influence.

If someone can't give consent and you have sex with them, you have raped them. "I didn't mean to" is not a valid defense.

erttheking:

Dreiko:

erttheking:

A first world country that is fucking awful at handling sexual assault. Don?t whitewash the shit that goes on over there just because it makes games you like. You think defining blackmail, underage incest, and drugged sex is comparable to beheading jaywalkers and cutting the hands off of pickpockets. Can you kindly not insult my intelligence with baseless hyperbole?

Define blackmail for theft as theft? I mean, yeah. We do that. This might blow your mind Dreiko but people can commit more than one crime at a time. You can commit blackmail and use that blackmail to commit another crime. Don?t be so simplistic in how you view the world.

Drunk people are not capable of giving consent, there is no ?organic? way for drunkness to lead to sex unless both people are black out drunk. Don?t act like drunk women aren?t taken advantage of, I?ve seen enough victim blaming to know that they are.

Now you're being obviously disingenuous lol. I only likened blackmail to beheadings, incest and whatnot being treated as crimes are fine which is why I didn't give you a counter argument.

And blackmail for theft would be like, blackmailing someone to make them steal something, not blackmailing someone for their own property that they can legally give to anyone without commiting theft. You're really stretching what I'm actually talking about here. Simply put, blackmail and extortion are already crimes. Having sex isn't a crime, giving things isn't a crime, etc. etc. so when someone blackmails you to do these legal acts that you just don't want to do, they are, yes, ONLY committing blackmail during that event, not rape or theft or anything else.

Having sex with someone who is unable to give consent without realizing they can't because you're drunk is just as organic as allowing sex to happen because you're too drunk to refuse. Neither party is more to blame when neither party purposefully got the other party drunk to take advantage. Just because some people do indeed do that doesn't mean every such case is one where malice was involved.

You compared classifying someone who blackmailed a person into having sex against their will as rapists to beheading jaywalkers. A hyperbolic statement. No offense Dreiko, you?re starting to sound like those people who say it?s not rape if it wasn?t violent. And you agree with criminalizing underage incest? So do you agree that Japan?s definition of rape is too narrow? Because they don?t do that.

I know. That?s theft. If you blackmail someone into commit a crime, you are responsible for that crime. Kind of like how blackmailing someone into having sex is rape considering someone is being forced to have sex against their will. The signs of being drunk are very obvious. It?s very simple Dreiko. If they?re drunk and you?re not, keep it in your pants. Otherwise you are taking advantage of someone who is under the influence.

If someone can?t give consent and you have sex with them, you have raped them. ?I didn?t mean to? is not a valid defense.

Yes, didn't I say that there's two extremes here and that I think there's an actual middle ground? Incest should be criminalized, but not as rape, but as it's own type of crime. Not sure what you'd call it, endangering a minor or corrupting a minor? Something like that, not rape.

Blackmailing someone into having sex isn't the same as raping them. Basically, it's either rape and not blackmail or it's blackmail. Blackmail is making someone will themselves to do something over a threat. It's different from actually forcing them to do something irrespective of their will because the person has the option of suffering the consequences and refusing, whereas in a rape situation you take that option from them through force and they literally can't do anything to avoid the sex. It's basically severely worse to actively rob someone of the ability to make the choice than to simply present it.

And yes I said if BOTH people are drunk neither is being malicious, I don't know where you saw me say that if only one person is drunk it's the same as it is with both people. Yet in a lot of these tyrannical systems whoever reports the drunk sex first is a victim of rape.

Dreiko:

Yes, didn't I say that there's two extremes here and that I think there's an actual middle ground? Incest should be criminalized, but not as rape, but as it's own type of crime. Not sure what you'd call it, endangering a minor or corrupting a minor? Something like that, not rape.

Blackmailing someone into having sex isn't the same as raping them. Basically, it's either rape and not blackmail or it's blackmail. Blackmail is making someone will themselves to do something over a threat. It's different from actually forcing them to do something irrespective of their will because the person has the option of suffering the consequences and refusing, whereas in a rape situation you take that option from them through force and they literally can't do anything to avoid the sex. It's basically severely worse to actively rob someone of the ability to make the choice than to simply present it.

And yes I said if BOTH people are drunk neither is being malicious, I don't know where you saw me say that if only one person is drunk it's the same as it is with both people. Yet in a lot of these tyrannical systems whoever reports the drunk sex first is a victim of rape.

You do know that jag mentioned incestious pedophilia right? As in sex with someone who is underage? As in statitory rape? You are you going to tell me that sex with someone who is too young to get consent shouldn't be considered rape either?

Say that to someone who was blackmailed into having sex, see what happens. Also, what the fuck are you even talking about? It's not rape because they have the choice to accept the damages? That's like saying it's not rape if you hold a gun to someone's head because they can accept the damages. And even ignoring that, it's not a choice, it's an ultimatum. When you are threatened to do something you are not being threatened with a choice, your choices are being taken away.

Well I clarified I wasn't talking about two people being drunk at the same time, so I don't know why you brought it up. Also, even then, you kinda do say the two are the same. Look.

Dreiko:

Having sex with someone who is unable to give consent without realizing they can't because you're drunk is just as organic as allowing sex to happen because you're too drunk to refuse. Neither party is more to blame when neither party purposefully got the other party drunk to take advantage. Just because some people do indeed do that doesn't mean every such case is one where malice was involved.

Both people having sex because they're too drunk is just as organic as allowing sex to happen because you're too drunk to refuse. Emphasis mine.

Dreiko? You fucking scare me man. You seem to be readily opposed to all but the most narrow definition of rape. If it's pedohilia, it isn't rape. If someone was blackmailed into having sex, it wasn't rape. If you're too drunk to refuse sex it's "organic."

Remember when people used to talk about rape culture Dreiko? This is it. Making excuses for everything but the most narrow definition of rape.

More importantly this whole topic has degraded to a circular argument as you and altnamejag debate about the context of the sexual material vs the original topic of me arguing that not everybody's tastes deserves respect and trying to seek approval for it.

I means, it kinda fits the idea.

This spiraled out of "niche ecchi games with passable controls and writing probably aren't going to score very well, doubly so when most of them feature kids"

But we've gotta justify, at any length, how they're Good, Actually.

Or at least, if somebody was calling Dragalia Lost gambling/gacha trash in a shiny-but-depressing wrapper, I wouldn't end up trying to argue that pachinko machines aren't gambling for culture reasons.

altnameJag:
I means, it kinda fits the idea.

This spiraled out of "niche ecchi games with passable controls and writing probably aren't going to score very well, doubly so when most of them feature kids"

But we've gotta justify, at any length, how they're Good, Actually.

Or at least, if somebody was calling Dragalia Lost gambling/gacha trash in a shiny-but-depressing wrapper, I wouldn't end up trying to argue that pachinko machines aren't gambling for culture reasons.

Still we could have did more damage breaking down Pete's article vs debating circularly with Dreiko

erttheking:

Remember when people used to talk about rape culture? This is it. Making excuses for everything but the most narrow definition of rape.

Eh, y'know. Here in the civilized Northern Europe -- Finland, in fact -- rape requires violence, threat of violence, or the victim's helplessness (usually means a blackout drunk or otherwise unconscious/immobile person), and statutory rape isn't even written down (such might be a case of sexual abuse or unlawful sex with a minor, or abuse of a position of power like if a teacher sleeps with a student).

Broadening the term is in vogue now, so the parliament is on it one way or another, but it's a mistake in my opinion. Rapists already get off with a year of conditional discharge and paying between 5 and 7 thousand euros to the victim. "Yes means yes" -law brings about extremely difficult cases to prove, and the "new" rapists would get off even easier. People for it bring up that it's sending a message, because most obviously think rape is a big deal, but I think that a narrower definition like we have now is what keeps the heavy connotations of rape and rapists in there. Consent laws are for sexual abuse and rape laws for rape.

Also bestiality is still legal here, lol. Though the thought behind that is solid: anyone engaging in bestiality is most likely unwell themselves.

erttheking:

Dreiko:

Yes, didn't I say that there's two extremes here and that I think there's an actual middle ground? Incest should be criminalized, but not as rape, but as it's own type of crime. Not sure what you'd call it, endangering a minor or corrupting a minor? Something like that, not rape.

Blackmailing someone into having sex isn't the same as raping them. Basically, it's either rape and not blackmail or it's blackmail. Blackmail is making someone will themselves to do something over a threat. It's different from actually forcing them to do something irrespective of their will because the person has the option of suffering the consequences and refusing, whereas in a rape situation you take that option from them through force and they literally can't do anything to avoid the sex. It's basically severely worse to actively rob someone of the ability to make the choice than to simply present it.

And yes I said if BOTH people are drunk neither is being malicious, I don't know where you saw me say that if only one person is drunk it's the same as it is with both people. Yet in a lot of these tyrannical systems whoever reports the drunk sex first is a victim of rape.

You do know that jag mentioned incestious pedophilia right? As in sex with someone who is underage? As in statitory rape? You are you going to tell me that sex with someone who is too young to get consent shouldn't be considered rape either?

Say that to someone who was blackmailed into having sex, see what happens. Also, what the fuck are you even talking about? It's not rape because they have the choice to accept the damages? That's like saying it's not rape if you hold a gun to someone's head because they can accept the damages. And even ignoring that, it's not a choice, it's an ultimatum. When you are threatened to do something you are not being threatened with a choice, your choices are being taken away.

Well I clarified I wasn't talking about two people being drunk at the same time, so I don't know why you brought it up. Also, even then, you kinda do say the two are the same. Look.

Dreiko:

Having sex with someone who is unable to give consent without realizing they can't because you're drunk is just as organic as allowing sex to happen because you're too drunk to refuse. Neither party is more to blame when neither party purposefully got the other party drunk to take advantage. Just because some people do indeed do that doesn't mean every such case is one where malice was involved.

Both people having sex because they're too drunk is just as organic as allowing sex to happen because you're too drunk to refuse. Emphasis mine.

Dreiko? You fucking scare me man. You seem to be readily opposed to all but the most narrow definition of rape. If it's pedohilia, it isn't rape. If someone was blackmailed into having sex, it wasn't rape. If you're too drunk to refuse sex it's "organic."

Remember when people used to talk about rape culture Dreiko? This is it. Making excuses for everything but the most narrow definition of rape.

I think people call hebophellia something-rape because it's so frowned upon that they wish to use the sort of crime label in order to get the people who commit it the maximum amount of hate but no, I definitely don't think it's rape when something can be a loving marriage in one country (first hand experience on that front since my parents hit it off at ages 13 and 19 and they were married for over 25 years lol) and the same exact act is considered rape in another. If you think of it, when you qualify rape as statutory that is one way of admitting it to be a different type of thing than regular rape in the first place, so I'm fine with even considering it rape but different from normal usual rape, which is the type of rape we're discussing here.

And I don't think rape culture is anything to do with how you define rape, that's just a legal and logical argument. Rape culture is having positive feelings about these acts, not having negative feelings supportive of their criminalization but just wanting to classify them accurately.

I mean, if this is rape culture, you kinda neuter the term because you liken it to actual roaming rape gangs in the Congo which is who actually has a rape culture and sees women as tools for their enjoyment. And I'm supposedly the one who likes being over-dramatic apparently lol.

McElroy:

erttheking:

Remember when people used to talk about rape culture? This is it. Making excuses for everything but the most narrow definition of rape.

Eh, y'know. Here in the civilized Northern Europe -- Finland, in fact -- rape requires violence, threat of violence, or the victim's helplessness (usually means a blackout drunk or otherwise unconscious/immobile person), and statutory rape isn't even written down (such might be a case of sexual abuse or unlawful sex with a minor, or abuse of a position of power like if a teacher sleeps with a student).

Broadening the term is in vogue now, so the parliament is on it one way or another, but it's a mistake in my opinion. Rapists already get off with a year of conditional discharge and paying between 5 and 7 thousand euros to the victim. "Yes means yes" -law brings about extremely difficult cases to prove, and the "new" rapists would get off even easier. People for it bring up that it's sending a message, because most obviously think rape is a big deal, but I think that a narrower definition like we have now is what keeps the heavy connotations of rape and rapists in there. Consent laws are for sexual abuse and rape laws for rape.

Also bestiality is still legal here, lol. Though the thought behind that is solid: anyone engaging in bestiality is most likely unwell themselves.

...Man, if a year of probation and a few thousand euro fine is all straight up violent rapists in Finland get as punishment, y'all don't need to worry about anybody taking rape *less* seriously by expanding its definition. Like, that kind of sentencing is a straight up scandal most other places.

Dreiko:

I think people call hebophellia something-rape because it's so frowned upon that they wish to use the sort of crime label in order to get the people who commit it the maximum amount of hate but no, I definitely don't think it's rape when something can be a loving marriage in one country (first hand experience on that front since my parents hit it off at ages 13 and 19 and they were married for over 25 years lol) and the same exact act is considered rape in another. If you think of it, when you qualify rape as statutory that is one way of admitting it to be a different type of thing than regular rape in the first place, so I'm fine with even considering it rape but different from normal usual rape, which is the type of rape we're discussing here.

Buddy, I don't care how loving your relationship is, but a child cannot love their uncle or father enough to marry them. This "Japan is safer" myth you're trying to prop up because somebody dared criticize a high-school tiddy game is just fucking bonkers.
It's easy to have a low rape rate when parents having sex with their children isn't illegal and forcing a gal to drink alcohol to incapacity and then having your 6 person club gang-rape them doesn't count as rape. https://japantoday.com/category/crime/prosecutors-drop-rape-case-against-6-keio-university-students
So don't try to say "but Japan has lower rape stats" when the government's figuring that the number of people who report even pre-change violent rape to police is in its low single digits. You're comparing murders in a country that only happen on Sunday evening to murders in a country that happen all week.

For fuck's sake, every few months they're busting a rape club in a university for molesting other students, they've got special women only train cars, and they aren't letting this go: https://www.thedailybeast.com/in-japan-rape-cases-no-still-means-no-conviction-and-protests-are-growing

And you're spinning this because, what, random people on a web forum want more fanservice games to not have children in them? That it's super important that these characters remain under 18 (for fans) but that it shouldn't be important that these characters are under 18 (if you don't like it)? Man, just let people not like the thing. I don't need to know that your dad looked at a barely pubescent girl and said "I want to hit that" and it supposedly worked out. That factoid isn't going to stop me from making fun of bizarrely written ecchi games where loans don't exist because nobody is old enough to sign a contract.

Dreiko:

I think people call hebophellia something-rape because it's so frowned upon that they wish to use the sort of crime label in order to get the people who commit it the maximum amount of hate but no, I definitely don't think it's rape when something can be a loving marriage in one country (first hand experience on that front since my parents hit it off at ages 13 and 19 and they were married for over 25 years lol) and the same exact act is considered rape in another. If you think of it, when you qualify rape as statutory that is one way of admitting it to be a different type of thing than regular rape in the first place, so I'm fine with even considering it rape but different from normal usual rape, which is the type of rape we're discussing here.

And I don't think rape culture is anything to do with how you define rape, that's just a legal and logical argument. Rape culture is having positive feelings about these acts, not having negative feelings supportive of their criminalization but just wanting to classify them accurately.

I mean, if this is rape culture, you kinda neuter the term because you liken it to actual roaming rape gangs in the Congo which is who actually has a rape culture and sees women as tools for their enjoyment. And I'm supposedly the one who likes being over-dramatic apparently lol.

Oh my god, I am seeing honest to god pedophilia apologism. And your parents were like that? That...explains a lot. think it can be loving? I...wait, why did you bring this up when we were quite specifically talking about incest? ...Is there something you want to tell us? Sorry, but such a relationship is inherently unbalanced. The concept of age of consent exists for a reason, because we as a collective society decided that there are points where we needed to decidie when a person was too young to consent to having sex. Guess which countries think 13 is ok? Burkina Faso, Comoros, Niger, Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, and Japan (except not really for Japan. Federally prefectures are ALLOWED to make the age of consent 13, but none of them actually did so and there's not a place in Japan where a preceture went for an age lower than 16) so if your parents were sexually active during the first year of their relationship, it would've been considered statutory rape in every country in the world except 4 3rd world ones. Gives things perspective, don't it? And no, statutory rape exists for a damn good reason, because people below the age of consent cannot adequately give consent. Also because we as a society decided that people who run around having sex with people who are pre-pubescent are most likely sexual predators, because they'd be having sex with adults if they weren't. So hopefully your parents weren't sexually active for the first three years of their relationship, otherwise, your dad was one hell of a creep.

Once we have reached the realm of "hebophellia, aka, sex with 11-14 year olds isn't rape" then no, we are very firmly in the realm of rape culture as there is not a single country on Earth who thinks fucking an eleven-year-old should be legal. And I'll remind you again, we were talking about incest.

Earlier in the thread I said you struck me as the type of person who didn't consider it rape unless it was violent (something that really adds to rape culture here in the states). Your comment on the Congo only further solidifies that point for me. Widen your perspectives a bit, will you? Any situation where a person is forced into sex against their will or where they cannot reliably give consent And do you think there aren't people in the first world who don't view women as tools for their enjoyment? Do you look at the links Jag posts and think that's a phenomenon that only exists in third world countries? It's a mindset that's alive and well in the land of the rising sun, and it'd be nice if you stopped sweeping it under the rug.

altnameJag:
...Man, if a year of probation and a few thousand euro fine is all straight up violent rapists in Finland get as punishment, y'all don't need to worry about anybody taking rape *less* seriously by expanding its definition. Like, that kind of sentencing is a straight up scandal most other places.

I got inspired and looked it up to jot my memory. Non-violent (and no helplessness or lack of consciousness) rape was added in 2014... The minimum sentence is four months. I guess my little worries are five years late.

If you don't mind me saying it, this thread has become rather ghastly. Even for me, the radical centrist firmly in between erttheking and Dreiko.

McElroy:

altnameJag:
...Man, if a year of probation and a few thousand euro fine is all straight up violent rapists in Finland get as punishment, y'all don't need to worry about anybody taking rape *less* seriously by expanding its definition. Like, that kind of sentencing is a straight up scandal most other places.

I got inspired and looked it up to jot my memory. Non-violent (and no helplessness or lack of consciousness) rape was added in 2014... The minimum sentence is four months. I guess my little worries are five years late.

If you don't mind me saying it, this thread has become rather ghastly. Even for me, the radical centrist firmly in between erttheking and Dreiko.

Personally I knew the thread became a shitstorm because there are no other arguments we turn to beyond the age one. Dreiko directing at the heat Pete Davison was going to get him and relying on circular logic to tire out the other and errtheking being unable to break the circle.

gyrobot:

McElroy:

altnameJag:
...Man, if a year of probation and a few thousand euro fine is all straight up violent rapists in Finland get as punishment, y'all don't need to worry about anybody taking rape *less* seriously by expanding its definition. Like, that kind of sentencing is a straight up scandal most other places.

I got inspired and looked it up to jot my memory. Non-violent (and no helplessness or lack of consciousness) rape was added in 2014... The minimum sentence is four months. I guess my little worries are five years late.

If you don't mind me saying it, this thread has become rather ghastly. Even for me, the radical centrist firmly in between erttheking and Dreiko.

Personally I knew the thread became a shitstorm because there are no other arguments we turn to beyond the age one. Dreiko directing at the heat Pete Davison was going to get him and relying on circular logic to tire out the other and errtheking being unable to break the circle.

I can't believe how derailed this thread has gotten. Sorry gyrobot. My only suggestion is if you do a topic similar to this to lay down some ground rules, and bring in the moderators if no ones listening.

erttheking, as much like you and respect you, you're never gonna win with Dreiko. From what I've seen, he will do anything to defend behavior this is knowingly wrong. He's not worth arguing with or getting in to essay long debates. I've seen y'all do this multiple times.

Dreiko.......there are plenty of stuff I wish I had not read, because now I want nothing to do with you. If you are ever on a topic I created, please be on point or don't bother responding. I prefer if you didn't. What you typed up can't be ignored.

CoCage:

gyrobot:

McElroy:
I got inspired and looked it up to jot my memory. Non-violent (and no helplessness or lack of consciousness) rape was added in 2014... The minimum sentence is four months. I guess my little worries are five years late.

If you don't mind me saying it, this thread has become rather ghastly. Even for me, the radical centrist firmly in between erttheking and Dreiko.

Personally I knew the thread became a shitstorm because there are no other arguments we turn to beyond the age one. Dreiko directing at the heat Pete Davison was going to get him and relying on circular logic to tire out the other and errtheking being unable to break the circle.

I can't believe how derailed this thread has gotten. Sorry gyrobot. My only suggestion is if you do a topic similar to this to lay down some ground rules, and bring in the moderators if no ones listening.

erttheking, as much like you and respect you, you're never gonna win with Dreiko. From what I've seen, he will do anything to defend behavior this is knowingly wrong. He's not worth arguing with or getting in to essay long debates. I've seen y'all do this multiple times.

Dreiko.......there are plenty of stuff I wish I had not read, because now I want nothing to do with you. If you are ever on a topic I created, please be on point or don't bother responding. I prefer if you didn't. What you typed up can't be ignored.

Thanks for the input cocage. I can sympathize with Dreiko but I feel any debate involving extremely niche Japanese games will bring out an extremely defensive users no matter where you who would harass and ratio you to oblivion if you. I will keep this in mind when I make another topic to keep it from being derailed. No wonder sites like resetera simply shut debates like this down and ban the creepy posters.

As for Errtheking, I do side with you on this argument but stayed out of it because of my past sympathies for niche stuff from Japan that these days can no longer stomach because of the toxic fanbase that defends the worst points about the game. Still would have liked to see you stayed on the topic if O'Reilly from Nintendo Life was right for insulting Dreiko and Davison's tastes.

And Dreiko, from here on out I want you stay on topic in this debate or stay out of it if you cannot. We have given you an opportunity to debate here that most sites will simply give you the boot for. I get Pete Davison has his fans and probably includes you. But if you cannot be a good representative as seen here, I would rather not have further articles from Moegamer or similar subjects like this being posted. I used to believe how personals opinion was shaped by the opinions of others as funny but now I see their point and fully agree on it. So stay on topic or stay out.

New article from Pete Davison who goes on his usual tired spiel that got him blacklisted from journalism.

https://moegamer.net/2019/11/14/bullet-girls-phantasia-the-art-of-erotica/

Wow, a 3000 word essay on a budget Japan only game with Asian English options. If you need an essay to argue for erotica in gaming instead of realizing how limp wristed Japanese is with sexual content that they have to use flowerly language to hide it.

The west is not afraid of sex, they are tired of an audience who has a teenager's mentality of what sex and erotic content is supposed to be with an myopic view of sexual content where only girls are featured instead of a pansexual approach towards it like Cockworks did.

gyrobot:
New article from Pete Davison who goes on his usual tired spiel that got him blacklisted from journalism.

https://moegamer.net/2019/11/14/bullet-girls-phantasia-the-art-of-erotica/

Wow, a 3000 word essay on a budget Japan only game with Asian English options. If you need an essay to argue for erotica in gaming instead of realizing how limp wristed Japanese is with sexual content that they have to use flowerly language to hide it.

The west is not afraid of sex, they are tired of an audience who has a teenager's mentality of what sex and erotic content is supposed to be with an myopic view of sexual content where only girls are featured instead of a pansexual approach towards it like Cockworks did.


But this Pete dude, his arguments are rationalizations that leave you with nothing else to say but YIKES!

I agree, rationalization for bad games is a common trait found among weebs who support compile heart and low quality Japanese. Like they still believe Japanese Games are being persecuted purely for sexual content.

Ok I have read some interesting points here. Dreiko just wow uhm yeah so the hell and cut to the chase that was a lot of fucked up shit you defended and swept under the rug. Errtheking got to know when to just dip it aint worth it, its just not.

But I want to know about the Compile Hearts situation. Is it true that Sony did not just told him no sexy flexy but even offered a compromise to make the sexy high schoolers sexy college students and buddy was like no "my artistic vision won't allow it". Cause if that is the case certain sections of the internet omitted that party really hard to go off on SJWs and people ironically not looking at all the facts.

Jarrito3001:

But I want to know about the Compile Hearts situation. Is it true that Sony did not just told him no sexy flexy but even offered a compromise to make the sexy high schoolers sexy college students and buddy was like no "my artistic vision won't allow it". Cause if that is the case certain sections of the internet omitted that party really hard to go off on SJWs and people ironically not looking at all the facts.

The "just use a time skip" bit is honestly just me spitballing an idea I had, not an actual Sony-approved compromise plan. I'd be able to make a better argument if I could point to a straight up Gal Gun/Senran Kagura/Gun Gun Pixies style ecchi game that had exclusively adult characters, but far as I know there just *aren't* any. And considering what unacceptable censorship (imagine the world's largest air quotes) looks like, how much more horny did this batch of 14 to 18 year olds need to be? http://kjganime.com/character.html

But like, look at some of the stuff western games with older characters can get up to. Look at horny Dark Souls Code Vein.

altnameJag:

Jarrito3001:

But I want to know about the Compile Hearts situation. Is it true that Sony did not just told him no sexy flexy but even offered a compromise to make the sexy high schoolers sexy college students and buddy was like no "my artistic vision won't allow it". Cause if that is the case certain sections of the internet omitted that party really hard to go off on SJWs and people ironically not looking at all the facts.

The "just use a time skip" bit is honestly just me spitballing an idea I had, not an actual Sony-approved compromise plan. I'd be able to make a better argument if I could point to a straight up Gal Gun/Senran Kagura/Gun Gun Pixies style ecchi game that had exclusively adult characters, but far as I know there just *aren't* any. And considering what unacceptable censorship (imagine the world's largest air quotes) looks like, how much more horny did this batch of 14 to 18 year olds need to be? http://kjganime.com/character.html

But like, look at some of the stuff western games with older characters can get up to. Look at horny Dark Souls Code Vein.

Its crazy its used to not bother cause I used to be in high school so did not think much of it. Then I looked around and was like damn that is really all there is. Like you may get the occassional milf and mom by accident but its like lewding college age and above just does not work I guess.

Like I pointed out one time that how the Pokemon series has more hot actual milfs than say Dead or Alive where outside the 1000 year old Tengu which is doesn't count everyone knows it the 26 year old is pretty much treated as a grandma.

Question how is Code Vein its decisive but animu Dark Souls might be up my ally. Does it lewd grown ups or does it just continue the high schooling.

Jarrito3001:

Its crazy its used to not bother cause I used to be in high school so did not think much of it. Then I looked around and was like damn that is really all there is. Like you may get the occassional milf and mom by accident but its like lewding college age and above just does not work I guess.

Like I pointed out one time that how the Pokemon series has more hot actual milfs than say Dead or Alive where outside the 1000 year old Tengu which is doesn't count everyone knows it the 26 year old is pretty much treated as a grandma.

Question how is Code Vein its decisive but animu Dark Souls might be up my ally. Does it lewd grown ups or does it just continue the high schooling.

Code Vein is all vampires, but far as I know only like, 1 dude and 1 gal got vamped before adulthood, and they aren't particularly sexed up. Past that, it's all adults. Which makes sense, what with it involving a war.
Mechanics wise it's a little more dodge focused than Bloodborne, and enemies have excellent tracking and hit like a truck, so everything's a bit more of a glass cannon. It's almost an action game like DMC but with a stamina meter.

And because Pete made a sore point about it. Nintendo Life decided to let him do a freelance review for a budget fanservice escape game and view it as some great victory over Pat and his negative reviews of niche Japanese titles

https://www.nintendolife.com/reviews/switch-eshop/prison_princess

Cue his fanbase of of weebs calling it a victory over a father of children who views reviewing games as work. I am more agitated at his fanbase than him right now. It shows that if you put your mind behind ranting about the current stable of of press for not giving a fanservice laden title a fair shake you can hold them hostage.

gyrobot:
And because Pete made a sore point about it. Nintendo Life decided to let him do a freelance review for a budget fanservice escape game and view it as some great victory over Pat and his negative reviews of niche Japanese titles

https://www.nintendolife.com/reviews/switch-eshop/prison_princess

Cue his fanbase of of weebs calling it a victory over a father of children who views reviewing games as work. I am more agitated at his fanbase than him right now. It shows that if you put your mind behind ranting about the current stable of of press for not giving a fanservice laden title a fair shake you can hold them hostage.

Meh! Maybe this way he'll get over his persecution complex.

If I could encourage my rabid fanbase who got into a hissy fit in return for a good review. I would gladly become a freelancer writing about obscure japanese games. This encourages a toxic response from the audie ce instead of realizing their bad tastes and getting better ones

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4

Reply to Thread

Posting on this forum is disabled.