Frustration Factor: The Resolution

by Boomerang 

Mistress Nightshadow, Geoff Paulson, and the rest of you: You guys got it all wrong, and for very obvious reasons that will be stated in this editorial.  While you guys will whine and complain, none of you focus on the core issues.

First of all, I believe we are all opposed to the general concept of censorship of video games, so I will work from there.  Now, I will make a startling statement:  No matter what we do, there will always be someone who believes that games should be extensively censored.  Here's another shocker for you: Some people honestly believe that games are the source of all the violence and filth that pervades our society.  Now, pretend you are like these people.  If you could find a single cause of all the problems in our society, you would try to destroy it, wouldn't you?  Many of the few church leaders (and trust me, the greater religious community is more open-minded) who believe that games are evil feel the same way.

Now take note, nothing of what I am saying is meant to offend anyone, I speak with simple frankness.  The problem that most of the other authors who have written on this subject have is that they are unwilling to see another side, or talk about it rationally, just like the religious leaders and people like Senator Joe Lieberman will not listen to us.

Now, people have complained about videogame violence since that ancient Atari game that an older friend showed me in which you run over stick figures with a car to get points.  That was back when us teenagers were born in the '80s.  Point is, this whole debate is nothing new.

However, the problem with people like Mistress Nightshadow and Geoff Paulson is that they are too hot headed and angry to resolve the conflict.  They can only see things in an extremist mindset and therefore cannot compromise.  The result of this is that the war over censorship will be waged indefinitely because no one will give in.

Let me give a few examples.  In the original Frustration Factor, M. Nightshadow gives a fictitious example of a kid trying to catch fellow students with a grenade, Pokemon style.  This is a COMPLETELY ridiculous example, and she knows it.  In fact, the entire article has this sarcastic and ridiculous flavor to it.  I've got news for you: NONE OF THE PEOPLE WHO CONDEMN VIDEOGAMES ARE GOING TO LISTEN TO AN ANGRY ARTICLE POPULATED WITH SILLY EXAMPLES.  How on earth do you plan to convince the religious extremists and other videogame haters that they are wrong if all you do is rag on them and their ideas?  We have to COMPROMISE.  No one will listen to you if you write articles like that.

M. Nightshadow goes on to talk about how no one will respect our opinions because we are all a group of teenagers, and no one takes us seriously.  Well, if you give them something to respect, such as a fair article, they will have to take us seriously, so get over that stereotype.

This brings me to Geoff Paulson's rebuttal.  First of all, proud player of the Pokemon TCG, the TCG has actually caused violence.  Note that I am not talking about the videogame, just the card game.  I read a story about how a child was stabbed by one of his peers because of a dispute over a trade.  If anyone wants a copy of this article, it's easy to find.  I know it sounds like making an excuse, but look at the logic: remove the cards, there is no reason to fight.

Paulson accuses Nightshadow of becoming a "bigot."  This is the ignorant, foolish behavior that I am talking about, the behavior that may someday cause more and more censorship.  Instead of attempting to look at the facts in Nightshadow's article, Paulson ironically becomes what he accuses Nightshadow of becoming: ignorant and a bigot. 

Instead of thinking, "Hey, maybe if I communicate my point to Nightshadow in a calm way, complete with legitimate facts and forethought, she may see my point,"  Paulson lashes out viciously with a tirade of childish and petty name calling.  This ties back to my thesis:  Do you think an intelligent man like Senator Lieberman will really take Geoff Paulson seriously?  No, he will simply ignore him because of the unreasonable tone that he has presented himself in.  And because of that, powerful men like Lieberman will be less willing to listen to OTHER defenders of videogames.

So in the end, closed-minded people like Paulson actually HURT our cause.  Basically, I am trying to say several things:  Express yourselves intelligently and fairly to the opponents of videogames, and we may win enough over, enough to stop the spread of videogame censorship.  Behave angrily and unreasonably like Geoff Paulson and our efforts are doomed to eventual failure.

Original Editorial : Frustration Factor!