Milo Yiannopoulous screws up
Business Insider's James Cook has an admirably even-handed report this morning with the details of the latest hoo-hah: you can now have first-person sex with prostitutes in Grand Theft Auto V, before—you guessed it—killing them to get your money back. In the past, your modesty was protected by a car door and the camera angle, but now players have full control over how they see the sex. And the murder afterwards.As I said before, T&A imagery itself is okay; in fact, it's peanuts. But murder?
I know what you're thinking. Isn't this all a bit sick? Isn't there something a bit... wrong with men and women who sit at home acting out violent fantasies? As I say, I used to think so too. But the research says there's absolutely no evidence that violence in games, or depictions of sexy women, make players any more violent, or misogynistic, in real life.
In fact, at least one university professor, Matthew Grizzard at the University at Buffalo, believes that video games make players more ethical, by increasing their sensitivity to, and awareness of, moral issues. "Violent video-game play may actually lead to increased moral sensitivity," says Grizzard. "This may, as it does in real life, provoke players to engage in voluntary behavior that benefits others."
What, exactly, makes the notion of committing murder perfectly okay? I suppose Yiannopoulos is going to say that, because these are prostitutes getting obliterated, that justifies everything? Prostitution may be morally bankrupt, even unhealthy. But felonious though it may be, it's still far from the worst offense anyone could pull, and putting hookers into positions where they're tissue paper - to be used before getting tossed aside like yesterday's stale bread - is disgusting, and not my idea of a computer game worth playing.
And this is where I want to make a serious point: what if a video game came down the pike where players were given the option of murdering Jews, Blacks, Latinos, Asians, and on the religious side, even Christians? What if a game were made where an option was given for murdering gays and lesbians? In fact, what a game came along where players were invited to get their protagonists to utter nasty racial slurs? Point: even if it didn't inspire violent attitudes towards minority groups in real life, that's still very repulsive to design games that would appeal to bigots. And I think even Yiannopoulos knows that, if he came within even miles of apologizing for games like those, even pro-Gamergate supporters would eat him alive.
So what the hell's gotten into this dummy, acting as an apologist for a crude game that's otherwise alarmingly nasty to women? Why does he think he can get away with condoning a game like GTA that's offensive in the sense it offers the option to murder women and presume not a single person will be taken aback? Why is it wrong to legitimize racism but okay when the same is done with the female sex? What he's done is incredibly stupid, and could provide detractors with the perfect ammo to use against him. In fact, as if further proof were needed that video games can be made for all the wrong reasons, just a few months ago, Jihad Watch got hold of news that ISIS designed a video game for training jihadists to violence. And that can refute any argument Grizzard makes too. Didn't Yiannopoulos ever ponder that kind of filth's influence?
So I'm sorry to say, but Yiannopoulos has screwed up big time, and I believe he should apologize. Any Gamergate supporters who don't want people to think they harbor perversions should shun the GTA series and distance themselves from Yiannopoulos' lunkheaded defense of such a crappy game.