Sex scenes in software

Anglosphere

As a libertarian, I'm in a difficult position. I disagree with conversatives and liberals more often than I agree with either, it seems.

Take the row over sex scenes in GTA: San Andreas for example:

US politicians have stepped into the storm over secret sex scenes in the best-selling Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas game.

The House of Representatives has overwhelmingly called for investigation into the companies behind the game.

The uproar is over explicit sexual scenes in the game that can be unlocked with software created by a fan.

There were sex scenes in Larry (now I feel old) when I was a kid and in various other software as well, no "unlocking" required. I had explicit pornographic playing cards hidden from my mom at a fairly young age. But I didn't turn into a rapist or freak, in fact I try to treat women with the uttermost respect. And although I can't deny being crazy about a younger girl, the law's the limit for serious stuff. I might be kinky, but I'm not traumatised.

The point being? Let law makers and enforcers focus on actual violence and murder or rape crimes. With some bit-altering user software I could easily turn the background of Windows into a pornographic picture.. does that mean the government should question Microsoft? Please.

It's impossible to ban sex from the life of teenagers and we shouldn't try. In fact, it's irresponsible to have them deal with their hormones without being well-informed.

Responsible parents should give accurate information and education at home, starting no later than age 10-12, which is when girls (and later boys) start significant biological sexual development. They may promote abstinence, but should prepare for non-abstinence.

And if they're not capable or willing, then (and only then) government may step in, possibly by mandatory sexual education in school. But certainly not by going nuts over hidden scenes in software rated 17+. In a world where the majority of adolescents have their first actual sexual experiences before 17 anyway.

Priorities, government. Priorities.

Comments

Neil Stevens (#3) on Jul 27, 2005 01:01 CEST (Post reply)

The creator of that game lied to the public, claiming that it had a certain level of content in it, when in fact it had way more than was claimed.

That's arguably fraud, and is a time when government can have a role.

I'd rather that they just got sued, though, rather than having a new law passed.

If government can't intervene to keep people honest in the marketplace, what can it do?

Rob (#1) on Jul 27, 2005 04:06 CEST (Post reply)

To me the scenes are more likely to be a programmer's easter egg that happened to be unlocked by software instead of a number of cool moves, in which case it's credible the publisher denied the claims at first.

If it is not an easter egg and software modications are necessary: wouldn't the unlocking process then waive the publisher's liability? There is after all not a single retail version of the software able to display the scenes out of the box. Note that the answer to this question could hold severe consequences for the free software movement.

Neil Stevens (#3) on Jul 27, 2005 07:07 CEST (Post reply)

The discs contained the data. The publisher has admitted that every copy of the game they've sold, on all platforms, contained the data.

It really doesn't matter whether it's easy or hard to get to the data. The data's there, but the publisher claimed it wasn't when it got that deceptive rating.

Publishers really ought to audit more carefully what they're putting on discs.

Rob (#1) on Jul 27, 2005 10:33 CEST (Post reply)

Perhaps, but a crappy audit is not as severe as intent.

So I think we should just agree that civil action would have been sufficient: America is at war, so its government has better things to do.

Neil Stevens (#3) on Jul 28, 2005 07:37 CEST (Post reply)

/news.ars/post/20050727-5143.html [arstechnica.com]

And there's the lawsuit.

Post comment