But one of the stinging rules of rhetorical debate is that “silence is consent”. DesIn short, the gaming community conceded the argument that violent video games have been proven harmful to minors…
But there was a second loss in our silence. We accepted the framing that there is something dangerous here, and the only debate to be had is whether the industry is doing enough or if the government should do more. There was no discussion of social, cultural , or educational concerns with limiting access to games. By conceding that that studies have spoken, we ignored a discussion about why the results of all these conflicting studies might be more complicated than either side makes them out to be, and what role education, cultural and family discussion and media literacy play in how children participate in the world around them.
– Josh Diaz
I lost you there.
When did the gaming community concede that violent games are harmful? I would ask if making boxing a televised sporting event has made society a more harmful place (or wrestling for that matter). In both cases, REAL WORLD fighting takes place and neither activity has lead to increase in violence…
anyway… silence is consent 🙂
Been proven to be harmful? Where? When? This is just speculation. Bring children up as decent people and there’s nothing wrong with a bit of fantasy, no one is saying violent games are reality.
[thanks for your crap comment, spammer]