Yesterday I posted on a hideous video game. RapeLay has no business being sold anywhere…period..simple as that.
No sooner did I stumble the post on Stumbleupon, and someone objected. He said,
Seriously, stumble? Do we need this garbage? I understand the game is tasteless and sick, but who cares? It’s not like you were forced to play it. Let people be the sick disgusting heathens they want to be, it’s none of your business.
This guy needs to seriously rethink some things. First, he foists himself on his own moral petard. If it’s none of my business to critize a game in which players gang rape and force women to have abortions, then it’s none of his business to criticize my critique. He should, paraphrasing his words, “let me be the moralistic fundie that I want to be. It’s none of his business.”
He himself does the very same thing he chides me for, the only difference is that I chide the selling of a video game that advocates rape and forced abortion, and he chides me for merely objecting to something!
Secondly, I can only hope he’s inconsistent in actually living out his moral principles. What if I were to say, “…who cares? If I want to be a racist, it’s not like he’s being forced to be a racist. It’s none of his business”? or “…who cares? If I want to be a fundamentalist preacher and take little old ladies for everything they own, it’s not like he’s being forced to participate. Let me be the sick screwball I want to be. It’s none of his business”?
You see, he might think that morality is a personal taste, pick and choose thing, but it’s not. Our beliefs and actions have repercussions that far outreach our own little lives. You know the saying: “no man is an island.” Our desires, feelings, beliefs, and actions are laced up with other human beings.
One day, my kid is going to have to grow up in this world. I don’t want her going to college and living next door in a dormroom next to some loser who plays RapeLay.
By objecting to something that’s wicked, I’m trying to make this world a better place. Saying “it’s none of your business” sounds enlightened and open minded, but it’s really just cowardice, plain and simple.
_____________________________________________
If you like what you read, please consider subscribing to my RSS feed (RSS button at the top right in the sidebar).
This is absolutely disgusting…but, given the absolute lack of moral scruples many in our relativistic culture possess, I’m not surprised.
eBay and, until yesterday, Amazon.com, sold perversion and wickedness, calling it entertainment and “fun.”
Amazon.com’s description of the game RapeLay said:
RapeLay is an offshoot of the Illusion series, Interact Play. You, like in previous installments, play as a public nuisance that gets away from captivity and starts scouting for new targets. This time around you find a family of a single mother and her two daughters. You quickly begin your hunt and capture each woman one by one. The gameplay involves an amusing training/disposition system with which to break each respective target to your liking. Watch where you b–w your l–d, or you might get them pregnant!
From Worldnet Daily:
According to descriptions, gamers may invite other male characters to join a gang-rape scenario. Pregnancy and abortion are “key features,” and characters are punished if they decide to keep a baby.
“If she does become pregnant you’re supposed to force her to get an abortion, otherwise she gets more and more visibly pregnant each time you have sex,” one reviewer revealed. “If you allow the child to be born then the woman will throw you in front of a train.”
The person continued, “Take that pro-life movement!”
Ohhh, time to fill out another bulletin about me. Aren’t these things stupid? Whatever, I’m incredibly bored so I’ll give it a go. Siiggghh….Who knows why I fill these things out.
Answer each question honestly, with the first thing that comes to mind.
Last thing you drank: Tree Top Apple Juice (yum)
Last Person you hugged: Girlfriend
What you want to do now: sleep
Last time you cried: IDK, can’t remember
________________________________________________
Ever read something like that in a Myspace bulletin? Have you ever been the person to send those ubiquitous “about me survey” bulletins? Chances are you’ve seen and/or sent many of them. The “25 random things about me” meme on Facebook is the current reincarnation of this “about me” spirit.
We may say we are annoyed by them (Notice the feigned disinterest in the beginning. We have an irresistible urge to manage the appearance of vanity, so we act like we don’t care), but really, we like them. After all, our favorite thing to talk about is “me.”
On the one hand, this all reflects a good human desire: the desire to be known. Authenticity is all the rage these days. We want to be real, up front, and honest with people. If I cried yesterday watching The Batchelor, then it’s ok (and even desirable) for people to know that.
Life is messy. I’m messy. That’s ok.
On the other hand, what we don’t realize is that the “New Media” has changed the way we define authenticity. Now, you can pass for being authentic by managing a sly substitute.
Outside of cyberspace, a tremendous amount of communication is conveyed by the “non-verbals.” A look in the eye; An odd facial expression; a tone of voice. Even where someone’s feet point can communicate a ton. Though some people can pull it off partially, it is hard to truly hide in face-to-face community. Authenticity in this embodied context is thus very robust.
In the world forged by “New Media,” by contrast, this nuance in community is lost, and hence it becomes very easy to manage what others see. You only provide the facts you want others to know. Matthew Lee Anderson states,
It is crucial in communication–whether in person or online–to be as authentic as possible. As new media are communally oriented, authenticity and honesty take on added importance. But online communication places us in charge of our own self-presentation. Even when we act ‘authentically’ online, we act at our own discretion. In interpersonal communication, however, controlling our self-presentation is much more difficult, if not impossible. The astute and familiar observer can hear the subtle differences in tone that indicate contentment or anxiety, peace or frustration, just as the astute observer can see subtle differences in the face that betray the truth about a person’s real state of mind…In interpersonal communication, we communicate more than we consciously intend…very few of us have the ability to hide ourselves as well as we think….(this) doesn’t prevent us from trying to control when and how we disclose ourselves to the world…
This idea, though, that we can selectively self-disclose and control our own ‘authenticity’ is the sort of problematic value that the new media reinforce. (The New Media Frontier, Ed. by Roger Overton and John Mark Reynolds)
I see this faux authenticity played out in the “about me/25 things” bulletins and notes. We say it’s real; we say it’s 25 “random” things. But it’s not…each is carefully selected to project a certain persona to the world. Even the show of disinterest in the beginning is carefully selected…we take pride in our shows of humility.
Also notice the trivial nature of many of the disclosures (example: what I last drank). This has snuck into our definition of “being real” too.
This shallow authenticity is not impossible in the embodied community, but it’s very, very difficult. It’s much easier online. As Anderson points out, online communities reinforce our valuing of this thin self-presentation.
Even though Facebook and Myspace have brought good changes, we should pause to think about this and other ideas and values inherent in the medium.
If you liked what you read, please consider subscribing to my RSS feed (RSS button found at the top right in the sidebar) and/or stumble this post (Stumbleupon button below).
Even though I am keen on the downside of electronic media, I am a big fan of it as well. I am especially a big fan of blogging…duh.
One of the biggest reasons why is because it is an incredible avenue for proclamation of the Gospel and contending for the Christian worldview.
It’s no secret that most of what we call the “old media” is secular in orientation. This goes even for those outlets that are conservative leaning, such as the Orange County Register (*some* argue that its right leaning, at least. It’s debatable on whether or not its right leaning socially.). A wide swath of it is very much left wing as well: NBC, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, New York Times, Los Angeles Times…these guys are off the charts in their love for all things Lefty.
Blogging undercuts that. It levels the playing field. Time and time again, bloggers have called the old media out on their bias and have kept them honest…well, at least more honest than they would be without the blogosphere.
You’d better watch what you publish, because bloggers will fact check your a**.
George Whitfield was known for his innovative methods at spreading the Gospel message. He made great use of newspapers, which many preachers of the time didn’t. He preached open air outside of churches. This was something the pastors of older, established churches weren’t willing to do very much. As a result, he was a key instigator in the Great Awakening in both Britain and the American colonies. He displayed innovation at a time when it was sorely needed.
pic courtesy of wikipedia
Christians and conservatives need to do the same today. For all its downfalls, the internet and the blogosphere specifically offer us an unprecedented opportunity. Through blogs, we can reach countless numbers who would never walk through the doors of a church. Will we embrace the opportunity and be on the cutting edge, or will we stay with the dinosaurs?
Click on parts one through three (links above) of this series to see how we can *wisely* embrace such opportunities.
Like this article? Here are some other related articles:
Read parts one and two of this series here: I and II.
Albert Mohler and John Mark Reynolds both have excellent suggestions on how to get our electronic media habits under control. Mohler’s piece is especially pertinent to parents. I recommend you read and devour both in their entirety. Read them here and here, respectively.
Like I mentioned a few days ago, this isn’t the beginning of the end of civilization. All we need is a little wisdom and moderation. We just have to start thinking about what our minds and souls imbibe, that’s all.
But though this issue doesn’t mean the end of the world, it is very important. Afterall, the ones who are most negatively affected by the plugged in life–teenagers–are tomorrow’s leaders, teachers, and church pastors. We can’t afford continued neglect.
I will say that I struggle with this, especially since starting this blog. It has become quite a demanding mistress. I will need to develop more discipline if I am to avoid some of the pitfalls I noted in my last post. I struggle particularly with implementing Reynolds’ third suggestion. I’m constantly checking my blog, email, and stumbleupon page.
Like this article? Here are some other related articles:
Today I want to comment on ways that over exposure to media has hurt us and, more importantly, children and teenagers.
Immediately, when I suggest there could be negative effects of media, many think, “every time teachers, parents, and pundits get worried about something, nothing comes of it.”
Well, sometimes there’s a bit of truth to that, but in this case, as John Mark Reynolds suggests, a “tipping point” has been reached where we do have cause for concern.
Perhaps the biggest negative effect that electronic media has had on teenagers specifically is evident when you ask, “if teens are spending an average of 45 hours a week plugged in, what are they *not* spending time doing?” Answer: they are not spending time with their parents. This puts the TV, the internet, or the peer group “in loco parentis”.
Secondly, they aren’t reading, spending solitude time, or developing a devotional life. Its sad to see a myspace profile that has mounds and mounds of titles listed under the “movies” section, but the books section says something like, “ya, I don’t do books.” You can see this on teens’ and adults’ profiles, on Christians’ and non-Christians’ profiles.
Electronic media has had many other effects too.
Have you ever tried to have a worthwhile conversation with someone while he’s playing a video game or while he’s listening to his IPOD? If you have, then I’m willing to bet you have one word (at least) to describe that experience: frustrating.
I know what my students say: “but I can listen to my IPOD and interact with people just fine! Seriously, it helps me study.” Then why do people typically turn down the radio in their cars when they are trying to follow carefully crafted directions or when they want to concentrate on something?
I work with teenagers all the time, and I see the way such things affect them. When they are texting, or have their IPODS on, or whatever, they are in the classroom, but they aren’t really there. You catch my drift?
One could argue that they aren’t there no matter what, but I see evidence that this tendency to cognitively float around is only exacerbated by being plugged in. No matter what such IPOD junkies suggest, I see the proof, and I will die on that hill before I believe them.
Really, how could someone even suggest that, when they are on myspace, listening to their IPOD, watching TV, and instant messaging a friend (often at the same time!), that they can write a quality essay, just as quality as it would be if they were writing it undistracted? Such a thought is laughable. Sure, having soft music in the background might help out, but we’re talking about a whole different level of multitasking, folks.
There’s evidence that suggests that such multi-tasking changes the way the brian functions. One’s ability to follow a logical argument deteriorates, and it is easier to be manipulated by images and emotions. I’m telling you, even when they aren’t plugged in, folks, especially teens, who are immersed in media have a hard time settling. It comes with the age, of course, but again, electronic media exacerbates the phenomenon. When I start a lecture, I have about 30 seconds to get their attention. If I fail at that, they become bored and distracted, and they tune out.
It is very, very difficult to tune them into the deep things. Entertainment is their bottom line.
Dealing with silence is yet another hard task for the media saturated. I’ve talked with countless people who frequently use IPODS, and almost all of them state uncategorically that thinking in silence is difficult for them. Its almost like IPODS are an addictive drug.
A steady diet of electronic media changes how you relate to people too: ever take a gander at the comments section on blogs? Online communication doesn’t bode too well for civility. Its not a stretch to see that if someone socializes mostly online, that will affect how they relate to others in the real world too…and online is how many teenagers socialize these days.
Such coarse social relations online has even given rise to a new word: cyberbullying.
Also, there is a downside to blogging specifically. If a person’s main reading consumption is through blogs online, how will that affect their ability to read longer pieces, especially if that longer piece weaves a complicated logical argument?
Reynolds asks:
“Mental development takes time and practice. What if nobody takes the time? Could it be that we are marketing habits to young adults that are not helpful?”
Then he adds:
“Mental acuity and attention are skills that can degrade. If you don’t read a long book for a while, then it is harder to read a long book when you finally pick one up.”
I think he’s spot on. Blogs and other online media specialize in the quickie genre, where skimming is the norm. Readers tend to shy away from longer, more thoughtful pieces. Before I started Pugnacious, I blogged on myspace. In reaction to my blogs, I regularly received the comment, “I usually don’t read your stuff. It’s too long, and I just can’t do it.” This was in response to pieces that were no longer than this post.
If they say that about my posts, what are they to do when they encounter the Bible, or Homer, or Socrates? I weep for them.
What’s the solution to these negative effects? Obviously it isn’t to go Amish. Moderation is the key. This is the subject of tomorrow’s post!
Like this article? Here are some other related articles:
The average work week? No. The average hours of sleep per week? No. The average time teenage boys spend thinking about girls per week? No. That number is much, much higher. Trust me. I was a teenage boy once. I still act like one from time to time.
Because I teach of teenagers, even if I didn’t examine the studies, I’d believe it. That number, by the way, dwarfs the number of hours on average that children spend with parents (around 15).
Technological media, from IPODS to cell phones, from the internet to video games, is everywhere. The current young generation has grown up being immersed in this stuff to the point that they often consider media consumption as an assumed right, rather than a moderated privilege.
Sometimes we uncritically assume the technical imperative (or at least something close to it): all technological advances are good and we must have them. Even if we don’t explicitly state this, far too often we implicitly think it and/or feel it.
The CommonSense Media analysis should give us pause, however. Actually, we should have paused to think about all this long ago.
Often, technological advances and inventions have advantages to them, but we often don’t realize that they come with a downside as well. This is true with even the most innocuous inventions. The light bulb and the harnessing of electricity, for example, both obviously had the advantage of, uh, light in the house, but the unforseen disadvantage was that families no longer had to congregate in a single room. Everyone now had ample opportunity to do their own thing in other rooms of the house. Now, this didn’t bring on the apocalypse, but it did make for less and less family time.
Another example is the invention of air conditioning. This drove folks inside into their houses, rather than out on the porch at night. Again, this is no reason to proclaim the sky is falling, but the effect it had was that it eroded neighbor time. Folks didn’t get to know their neighbors as well.
We often miss these unintended consequences of technology.
Just in case you are wondering, I’m no hypocritical luddite. I’m writing this on a blog, after all, and I first was alerted to the media study by Albert Mohler via his Podcast (read his recent blog entry on the subject here). The internet is wonderful. I’m very thankful also that I can get quality teaching and thinking on deep things through ITunes. I could go on and on about the benefits of technological advances in Media. I hope you will see by reading some of the related articles below that I’m a fan of social media and blogging.
We need to pause, though, to ask ourselves what media saturation is doing to us and, more importantly, to our kids.
Tomorrow I will post on the downsides of the most recent technological advances. On Wednesday, I will post on how we can manage our exposure to media such that we can maximize the benefits while minimizing the damaging effects. Thursday I will conclude with a note on how the blogging revolution has and can be positive.
Like this article? Here are some other related articles:
