So why do we still hear that narrative? For RoR especially, I believe it is because video games are not seen as a valid art form. And time and time again, studies have shown that video games simply do not incite their players to commit violence. or suggest this is a normal behaviour.” Obviously, if parents are buying violent games for their kids, that is on them. In his letter, he writes "these types of "recreational games" are dreadful examples for our children and may provoke or encourage violence or bully(ing) behaviour. Shocked by Rule of Rose in particular, he wrote a letter to EU’s officials on “ violent video games and their availability to minors.” Despite the game being rated as 18+, his main concern is the same old “ think of the children,” argument. He was Europe's justice and security commissioner at the time. The main player who pushed for RoR’s banning is Franco Frattini. So, why does the banning of a game in 2006 matter? Well, censorship within games continues to go strong. If the mere mention of it is too adult, RoR having gay kids would be seen as eroticsm. People today still think that the mention of homosexuality is too "adult," for children, to the point where there is legislation in Florida to ban it from schools. While it would be too severe of an allegation to make that the people behind RoR’s banning are all homophobes, these biases against queer people are still worthy of a mention. Unless, of course, your view is that homosexuality is peverse. While it obviously seeks to convey that Diana is a sadistic child, and Meg is in love with her, nothing erotic is being displayed here. It intentionally cuts away to Meg’s face. This may appear inappropriate- if you could actually see what is going on. As she pricks Meg’s finger on the rose, she chuckles and puts the wounded finger in her mouth. They are impoverished children and the toilet is often referred to in the UK as a "throne." Diana has power, as much power as an orphan can have, over Meg. While it taking place in a toilet cubicle feels skeevy, it is to set up an obvious metaphor. Tackling this scene from the trailer is easily disprovable. I believe this allegation comes from this scene in the trailer and worryingly, the inclusion of canonical queer characters. While the governing bodies behind the banning of this game did not state exactly what they are referring to, one can make assumptions. While rape itself is not actually present, it is certainly a theme that is quietly explored within the game.The previous claims of underage eroticsm are just as concerning. While it is an uncomfortable scene, it is needed to understand that Diana is unsafe and is a victim too. He comments on her appearance with "no new mummy or daddy will want you if you look like that," as well as "I won’t be mad," statements. Notably, his language is that of an abuser. While there is no outrightly inappropriate touching, the way his touch lingers upon her says it all. She is crying because of this and we watch as he tries to coerce an answer out of her if she is to blame or not. There is a mess created in his room and she is blamed for it. There is an incredibly hard to watch scene (that you can watch here, but I do not recommend it if you are in a bad headspace), in which she is caressed by the orphanage’s headmaster, Hoffman. Diana is a heavily implied to be a victim of sexual abuse. An example of this is within Diana’s chapter.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |