So, why do politicians hate video games.

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

Lufia Erim:

CaitSeith:

Lufia Erim:
If videogames can have positives effects on certain people, why couldn't they also have negative effects?

Gamers obviously have a bias, which is why their cries are ignored.

Here's an easy example.

If Sad music can make you sad and that sadness can make you cry, and happy music can make you happy and that happiness makes you smile/laugh, then why can't angry music make you angry and that anger have you act out?

If sadness only makes you cry and happiness only makes you laugh, why would anger make you do anything but shout out loud in anger?

https://v1.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.831624-RAGE-QUIT-to-the-point-of-smashing-your-controller-monitor-keyboard-TV-etc

Well here's a thread on these very forums about people acting out due to rage. You tell me.

No, you tell me then why sadness only makes you cry and happiness only makes you laugh.

Lufia Erim:

stroopwafel:

Lufia Erim:
If videogames can have positives effects on certain people, why couldn't they also have negative effects?

Gamers obviously have a bias, which is why their cries are ignored.

Here's an easy example.

If Sad music can make you sad and that sadness can make you cry, and happy music can make you happy and that happiness makes you smile/laugh, then why can't angry music make you angry and that anger have you act out?

That last one is a stretch.

That doesn't make any sane person want to 'act out'. That is just ridiculous. It exists on a completely different plane from crazy people who commit (gun) violence. It's not like crazy needs an excuse. Crazy needs access to mental health programs or psychiatric care in an early stage and no access to guns.

Is it? Anger is an emotion is it not? Just like Sadness and Happiness. From what i can tell, normal, healthy individuals, experience anger. From what i gathered also, normal healthy individuals make poor decision while Sad, Happy or Angry. Excluding Anger seems disingenuous at best.

The problem is, people are looking at Videogames as something that WILL make you violent rather than Can make you violent.

There's a difference. And different people react in different ways to media. Some people will watch a sad movie and cry. Others will watch a sad movie, and feel comfort ( happiness) and again other will watch the same movie and feel angry.

And yet, as soon as videogames are discussed, gamers, ignore the "angry". It's hypocritical.

Videogames do not make you go out and kill people. Those who do are already predisposed to violent behavior and suggesting videogames might have some contribution to their mental illness because it made them 'angry' is both ignorant and short-sighted. Scientific studies have also proven there is zero correlation.

Maybe you have some kind of blind faith in 'authority' that you parrot antiquated politicians but stating videogames do not lead to violent behavor is not 'hypocritical' but common sense that is both logical and scientifically proven. Unlike the conservative beliefs of the elite that puts big business and their own elective interests before the safety of the public.

stroopwafel:

Lufia Erim:

stroopwafel:

That last one is a stretch.

That doesn't make any sane person want to 'act out'. That is just ridiculous. It exists on a completely different plane from crazy people who commit (gun) violence. It's not like crazy needs an excuse. Crazy needs access to mental health programs or psychiatric care in an early stage and no access to guns.

Is it? Anger is an emotion is it not? Just like Sadness and Happiness. From what i can tell, normal, healthy individuals, experience anger. From what i gathered also, normal healthy individuals make poor decision while Sad, Happy or Angry. Excluding Anger seems disingenuous at best.

The problem is, people are looking at Videogames as something that WILL make you violent rather than Can make you violent.

There's a difference. And different people react in different ways to media. Some people will watch a sad movie and cry. Others will watch a sad movie, and feel comfort ( happiness) and again other will watch the same movie and feel angry.

And yet, as soon as videogames are discussed, gamers, ignore the "angry". It's hypocritical.

Videogames do not make you go out and kill people. Those who do are already predisposed to violent behavior and suggesting videogames might have some contribution to their mental illness because it made them 'angry' is both ignorant and short-sighted. Scientific studies have also proven there is zero correlation.

Maybe you have some kind of blind faith in 'authority' that you parrot antiquated politicians but stating videogames do not lead to violent behavor is not 'hypocritical' but common sense that is both logical and scientifically proven. Unlike the conservative beliefs of the elite that puts big business and their own elective interests before the safety of the public.

I never said videogames make you go out and kill. Anywhere in any of my posts. If You're going to jump to that conclusion, and not actually discuss what i did say, we are done here.

CaitSeith:

Lufia Erim:

CaitSeith:

If sadness only makes you cry and happiness only makes you laugh, why would anger make you do anything but shout out loud in anger?

https://v1.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.831624-RAGE-QUIT-to-the-point-of-smashing-your-controller-monitor-keyboard-TV-etc

Well here's a thread on these very forums about people acting out due to rage. You tell me.

No, you tell me then why sadness only makes you cry and happiness only makes you laugh.

Only? I never said only. I said sadness can make you cry, it's literally there in the quote. Implying that emotions influence actions. Sadness is an emotion that influence your actions. So is happiness and anger.

To suggest otherwise is foolishness. Especially when i posted a thread, from the holier-than-thou escapists showing how rage and anger affects people's actions.

Lufia Erim:

CaitSeith:

Lufia Erim:

https://v1.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.831624-RAGE-QUIT-to-the-point-of-smashing-your-controller-monitor-keyboard-TV-etc

Well here's a thread on these very forums about people acting out due to rage. You tell me.

No, you tell me then why sadness only makes you cry and happiness only makes you laugh.

Only? I never said only. I said sadness can make you cry, it's literally there in the quote. Implying that emotions influence actions. Sadness is an emotion that influence your actions. So is happiness and anger.

To suggest otherwise is foolishness. Especially when i posted a thread, from the holier-than-thou escapists showing how rage and anger affects people's actions.

Yeah, and your examples of actions for sadness and happiness are pretty restrained and positive (to suggest that all acts coming from them are good is foolishness), while implying that acts of anger are always negative (specially when in games you can focus your anger back to the game by its gameplay).

Because they played Man Enough for MS-DOS when they were young adults.

CaitSeith:

Lufia Erim:

CaitSeith:

No, you tell me then why sadness only makes you cry and happiness only makes you laugh.

Only? I never said only. I said sadness can make you cry, it's literally there in the quote. Implying that emotions influence actions. Sadness is an emotion that influence your actions. So is happiness and anger.

To suggest otherwise is foolishness. Especially when i posted a thread, from the holier-than-thou escapists showing how rage and anger affects people's actions.

Yeah, and your examples of actions for sadness and happiness are pretty restrained and positive (to suggest that all acts coming from them are good is foolishness), while implying that acts of anger are always negative (specially when in games you can focus your anger back to the game by its gameplay).

That's why they are only examples. Ever heard of tears of happiness, Or tears of rage? What about a sad smile? Are you a robot? Do you not know what emotions are? Do you need me to spell out every example for you?

You are clearly not mature enough to have this conversation.

There are a couple of reasons...

One reason is the characteristics required to become an elected representative. The type of people to become politicians (with a mixture of confidence and drive to change things or fight against something, as well as being outgoing and highly social) are generally not the type of people who are gamers. That's not to say gamers can't have these qualities, but if you look at it purely from a numbers perspective the likelihood is much smaller for a large percentage of the gaming world to have those qualities who also go into politics. Therefore, politicians can't connect to the gaming world as much because it's often so far outside their reality.

The other reason, in my opinion, is a generational thing. Most (not all) politicians at the moment are either baby boomers, Gen X or Millenials.

- Boomers at large weren't really exposed to gaming so don't understand it and see it as for children.
- People in Gen X played games but it was not in mainstream society, especially among adults - they might play them with their kids if they had them late in life.
- Early to mid Millenials play games more but there's still some social conditioning where there's some guilt associated with gaming (i.e. they don't want to be viewed as overgrown children, even if they secretly enjoy it).
- Late Millenials and Gen Z (or zoomers if you want) are more likely to embrace gaming as an adult as it's become more part of the culture.

I suspect as the older generation changes politicians will tend to be more accepting of their peers who still like video games since it's essentially their jobs to represent their areas.

I don't think it's so much that politicians hate videogames, it's more that they're trying to score points with the part of the electorate that hate videogames. Ultimately, when push comes to shove, most politicians will points-score with potential voters rather than declare (or stick to) a moral viewpoint.

Lufia Erim:

You are clearly not mature enough to have this conversation.

Neither you are. I'm not the one trying to end the conversation after your false equivalences got called out.

I'd say politicians that are against gaming fall into one of three categories:
1. Boomers - People don't understand gaming and think its the devil.
2. Crooks - Politicians that have taken donations (aka bribes) from the TV and film industries (gaming's main competitors) to damage their rival.
3. Opportunists - Politicians that don't really give a shit about videogames one way or the other, but find it a convenient scapegoat to distract from whatever the issue really is.

Bilious Green:

2. Crooks - Politicians that have taken donations (aka bribes) from the TV and film industries (gaming's main competitors) to damage their rival.

First time I have heard of it. Whom are you specifically referring to?

I know Trump flung some BS about games more or less recently, as he does, but for the most part I think the "videogame scare" has died out since the Columbine/GTA days. Besides they hardly have the monopoly on violence in media.

Johnny Novgorod:
Besides they hardly have the monopoly on violence in media.

They ever hardly had the monopoly on violence in media. That's why the Supreme Court ruled in videogames favor when they got compared with Grimm's Fairy Tales.

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here