What is violence, and what is not
November 29, 2006Oh the pointless and age-old debate about violence in computer games…
If kids go violent there are only two people to blame: the parents. They are responsible for their kids, not violent games or films. It is the parents’ responsibility to teach kids right and wrong, not that of the entertainment industry. If you, as a parent, blame violent games and films for the actions of your child, it is you who failed in properly raising your child (excl. children with mental disorders, of course). I remember that great line from the Southpark film song “Blame Canada”:
We must blame them and make a fuss
Before someone thinks of blaming us!
And that’s all there is to it.
Other than that, what is more dangerous to a child, telling it going to war, killing people is okay, and having guns is okay too (Iraq, death penalty, no gun control), or a violent game, of which you can explain it is all fake?
And even other than that, what is violence, and what is not?
I am sorry, but this is not the point at all. This is not only about kids, but for adults too. And without KNOWLEDGE that violent games can make a person less sensitive to a violent theme in real life, you can’t decide to change your ways or not.
Back in the ’50s there were people who were claiming that smoking is actually good for you. Until new studies came out and proved otherwise. What you do from THAT point on is what matters. Your parenting example is out of place here, because it’s not the point of the discussion. Knowledge is, and what you do with that knowledge.
>And even other than that, what is violence, and what is not?
Playing violent games does not necessarily make you violent. You are playing the same stupid devil’s advocate game as some people who replied in my blog. According to the studies, they make you insensitive, not necessarily violent. And this is almost as bad.
Comment by Eugenia — November 29, 2006 @ 9:00 pm
I am sorry, but this is not the point at all. This is not only about kids, but for adults too. And without KNOWLEDGE that violent games can make a person less sensitive to a violent theme in real life, you can’t decide to change your ways or not.
Irrelevant without comparison studies. I’m sure as hell teaching your kids it is okay to kill people (death penalty) makes them a whole lot less sensitive, same as telling your kids it’s okay to shoot people in wars. But since you have no study to show that that too desensitises people, this whole study regarding games is pointless.
A study might reveal that product a is ten times better than product b, but if you conduct no studies to how much better or worse products c and d are, than how can you make a choice?
A study like this, by itself, is useless.
Comment by Administrator — November 29, 2006 @ 9:08 pm
>Irrelevant without comparison studies.
I disagree. They DID find that violent games do change parts of the brain negatively. You don’t have to make a comparison study about everything in life. This is almost impossible. Besides, let’s say that guns or violent TV DOES have a negative affect too, but choosing not to play violent games will only make it better for you, not worse. So, why not cut down ONE of the TWENTY bad things in life? It’s 5% better you know.
Comment by Eugenia — November 29, 2006 @ 9:16 pm