I've always though the best thing about Diablo is that you can play it using only 1 hand...
Are video games and pornography ruining you?
@sins_of_mosin said:
Society should be more worried about how celebs are treated like gods and how much money is given to them and sports people.
"Given"? People pay money to see athletes and "celebrities" perform, whether it be on a screen or in real life. They (entertainers) make money relative to the amount of revenue they generate through performing. This is not wrong, and in fact makes absolutely perfect sense. You think Rihanna is terrible? Fine. But when millions of people pay for her songs, she deserves all the money that she gets.
If you're objecting to the amount of money that average people spend on entertainment in general then that's fine, and if you're concerned about the extent to which some people treat entertainers as heroes than that's legitimate as well. Objecting to the amount of money that entertainers make by itself is an illogical perspective. If you feel that entertainers make too much money you're actuallyconcerned with much wider issues.
@kmdrkul said:
I think it's totally plausible.
I do not. Its kind of silly idea. Yes, people go through phases that involve various degrees of celibacy, but on average we produce more than two children per person, and that requires social interaction. So it happens.
This is like mixing up the concepts of weather and climate. A cold July doesn't mean we are in an ice age.
@Korwin said:
I've always though the best thing about Diablo is that you can play it using only 1 hand...
GG
[/thread]
@AlexanderSheen said:
@BraveToaster said:
A news outlet not knowing what they're talking about? Astounding!
Those guys are holding N64 controllers...
Clearly an article that knows what the fuck it's going on about.
Things affect you as much as you want them to.
This is some slippery slope bull shit if I've ever seen it.
The consequences could be dramatic: The excessive use of video games and online porn in pursuit of the next thing is creating a generation of risk-averse guys who are unable (and unwilling) to navigate the complexities and risks inherent to real-life relationships, school and employment.
That's a bold fucking claim substantiated by no evidence. There is no way you could possible prove a correlation between the use of video games/porn and being a "risk-averse" (one could argue shy) guy. It seems that they think the only way to develop real social skills is to do it in person. And by using video games and porn there is an inherent deterioration to said skills. Nonsense.
Ruining me? THEY COMPLETE ME!
@sashimi_biscut:
I've read a couple of your posts, and I looked at the links you've provided, and I'm left a bit baffled.
Perhaps I'm a decade too old, as I'm 30, but I don't know a single guy who would expect their sex lives to be like pornography. In fact, the only time I could could see someone thinking that their sex would be like their porn, is someone who's never actually had sex before. I assure you, anyone who's had sex knows pulling out to finish isn't nearly as pleasurable as leaving it in (sorry for the graphic language!), in fact, I'd say it's hard to get yourself to pull out for that very reason.
That only leads me to this assumption: the TED talk that you linked and that woman's speech, is all anecdotal. We're hearing something that someone thinks could be possibly true but there's no real way to prove that it is. I guess you could put out a questionnaire about "Does your boyfriend try to bust on your face all the time?" but I don't know if you're going to get a whole lot of honest responses.
Besides, if you're having sex with that person, I'd like to believe that you're on personal enough terms to ask him to not do something during sex. If you aren't, you need to be more discerning with your sexual partners.
As far as your other points go, about having video games and porn be a little more gender neutral, I can see your point. The problem is, you're relying on a male point of view to fix it for you, and this won't be possible until there are more women making both porn and video games.
I'll be honest, I know what I like, most men like something very similar. We're pretty straightforward and visually-oriented. I haven't a goddamn clue what women find sexy or erotic in men, so, to rely on someone like me to cater to your point of view, is unrealistic. Hell, Bioware had to bring on a whole bunch of women writers to get Mass Effect in some sort of semblance of a balanced approach at story telling. Simply, there needs to be more female creators in both of these genres.
That being said, there's an awful lot of media going around about how there's been a decline in men, or they're not based in reality, or they're not growing up mature and I think that's a whole lotta bull honkey. I figure there are just less men interested in doing the traditional male role, which, I can understand. The traditional female role is being broken more and more every year, and men are just supposed to deal with it, but when the social dynamic for men changes, all of a sudden we're no-good lowlifes?
Perhaps it's a two-way street? Females are slowing rising in power to finally be able to share in the control of the world, but that means there will be displaced men. Don't be surprised when they don't want to play to societies expectations when a lot of those expectations are holdovers from a dwindling social dynamic.
I, for one, think it's the bee's knees that women now have to pursue men with the same fervor men had to in the past. Now a women can put themselves on the line for rejection, just like men used to. It's laissez faire when it comes to dating, and I wouldn't have it any other way!
I think some people get so caught up in video games, the internet, pornography, etc., that their life does end up devolving to the lowest possible state of existence, unfortunately.
I don't think these factors necessarily "ruin" a life, however, when they're balanced out with other aspects of life.
''Norwegian mass murder suspect Anders Behring Breivik reported during his trial that he prepared his mind and body for his marksman-focused shooting of 77 people by playing "World of Warcraft" for a year and then "Call of Duty" for 16 hours a day.''
How does playing WoW train one to kill people? o.o
''Video game and porn addictions are different. They are "arousal addictions," where the attraction is in the novelty, the variety or the surprise factor of the content. Sameness is soon habituated; newness heightens excitement. In traditional drug arousal, conversely, addicts want more of the same cocaine or heroin or favorite food.''
huh, one would think that Kinect and Move would be more popular with core gamers (and games like CoD and WoW extinct by now), seeing as gamers like 'newness' rather than 'more of the same'.
edit: In hindsight, it seems this 'newness' point, this distinction between drug addition and game addiction, isn't really relevant to the rest of the article. So whatevs. Beats me why the article brought it up.
@BigChickenDinner said:
This is some slippery slope bull shit if I've ever seen it.
The consequences could be dramatic: The excessive use of video games and online porn in pursuit of the next thing is creating a generation of risk-averse guys who are unable (and unwilling) to navigate the complexities and risks inherent to real-life relationships, school and employment.
That's a bold fucking claim substantiated by no evidence. There is no way you could possible prove a correlation between the use of video games/porn and being a "risk-averse" (one could argue shy) guy. It seems that they think the only way to develop real social skills is to do it in person. And by using video games and porn there is an inherent deterioration to said skills. Nonsense.
So what if there are no numbers to go along with what they are saying? So just because there hasn't been some official study on this very specific hypothetical, you are going to close your mind completely to the mere possibility?
You better believe I can see some correlation to the usage of video games and social life. If you're playing World of Warcraft 50 hours a week you are not going to have a conventional social life. You'll probably be a recluse. And yeah, the effects of recluse could possibly be forming real-life relationships, doing well in school, and finding employment. If somebody is scared of everybody but their own mommy bringing them their dinner every night, they probably are going to have a hard time extending themselves in the real world for job opportunities. Obviously for every one of these people, there are probably a hundred average joes that have a firm grasp on balancing their life.
This is the exact kind of closemindedness that scares me. No, I don't think we should just consume everything that is spoon fed to us by the media. I don't think the article was meant to throw video game usage under the bus by presenting cold hard facts about how it could literally destroy men. Too many people in this thread think that and automatically dismiss the bigger picture.
When you have seen as much freaky porn as I have it's impossible to find anything that gets you off any more. So for me porn as gone down to almost nothing for me. Games are just my choice of how to waste my free time. Nothing sinister about it. This is just another stupid and uninformed "vidja games are the devil" headlines.
@kmdrkul:
Well, the problem with that outlook is that it's purely speculation. Any scientist worth listening to will throw out some actual numbers or actual science. What this piece is is an opinion piece, like the editorial section of the paper. That's why it's such a joke, it's like your grandpa writing in about how much he doesn't like foreigners.
My personal take on it? The social dynamic has swung, the traditional definition of what it is to be "a man" is out the window. There is no longer this push to get married, have a stable job and kids and more men look at that life and decide it's not for them. Why is that a problem? When the social dynamic for women started to change and they share more power with men, there is obviously going to be displaced men, especially in those "traditional" roles. Men had to get used to the dynamic for women changing, so let the opposite be true. People just have to accept, to the new man, relationships and climbing up the corporate ladder is optional for their own definition of success.
What a terrible article. I was genuinely ready to go in there and read something that did provide research-backed evidence of a properly observed problem, but it almost all seems to be fear-mongering, claims made without evidence, and false conclusions. I can see the following problems with the article:
- The article opens by telling us researchers support the view that pornography and video games are ruining males, but whether that is the case or who the researchers are remains unknown. The article is able to pull out two or three examples but we never get much deeper data than that.
- The article then launches into talking about porn addictions and gambling addictions. These are very different from talking about frequent use of these things by young males. "Addiction" doesn't mean you look at porn every day or you just can't wait to dig into the new Diablo, it means you participate in these activities to the point where it's a diagnosable mental illness. Unless you want to claim that this entire generation of males all have that mental disorder, something which no evidence is provided for, then addictions are largely irrelevant to this discussion of the generation as a whole.
- Whenever someone claims a study says X and X is an even somewhat bold claim, we should be skeptical. Studies can be flawed and there's a lot of bad research out there. The article provides little means by which to glean if their data is properly sourced from reliable studies.
- Using Anders Breivik or the S. Korean Starcraft player who died of a heart attack as support for this view is ridiculous. These are people who are notable exactly because they are outlier cases. They do not begin to represent the average young male, and even if they did you can't prove that the video games themselves were a cause of their conditions, let alone the only cause.
- Talking about the 1950s experiment by Milner and Olds as research into the effects of porn/video game addiction in young males is really stretching it. That experiment can tell us some interesting things about vague ways in which the brain reacts to stimuli, but an experiment about electric shocks being given to rats does not directly scale up to tell us things about how young male humans lives are altered by porn and games.
- "Regular porn users are more likely to report depression and poor physical health than nonusers". To it's credit this is one of the more concrete assertions the article makes which is apparently backed up by evidence, but even if the research here is solid, it still only demonstrates correlation, not causation, and the ideas that people use porn as a replacement for face-to-face interactions and that it isolates people are bold claims that are never explicitly backed up.
- I'm very skeptical of the idea that people have been proven to be more aggressive after playing video games. All the cases of people committing actual violent acts who've played games happen in uncontrolled conditions where there are many different variables acting on them, while all the research that happens under test conditions does not proper emulate real-world scenarios and never contains people actually committing violet acts beyond attacking inanimate objects or playing loud noises into peoples' ears.
- Throughout the article, claims are also made about people being digitally rewired or being desensitized to reality which just never get backed up and justified.
- If we're taking Zimbardo's TED talk as part of the article or part of the evidence for the article then it's not all that great. He seems to present some strong figures for boys failing in education, but I don't think education should be a straight measure of success, and when he announces he will present evidence for boys being unable to interact with women properly he actually doesn't present any evidence at all, he just makes claims about what he thinks is happening, based on nothing we can see. When it comes to providing evidence that these perceived problems are caused by games and porn all he does is present broad and vague figures about the increasing popularity of video games and pornography among males, he doesn't even demonstrate proper correlation, let alone causation. In the majority of cases he also does not cite his sources.
This idea that men aren't what they used to be and video games and porn are to blame is an easy idea to believe because we've seen people who seem like they don't deal well with the world and consume this kind of entertainment, and video games and porn are still entertainment which certain sections of society consider somewhat scary and seedy. But following these kinds of vague hunches is not how science works, and has been proven to repeatedly lead to false conclusions. Until you can demonstrate properly, through valid evidence, that this is indeed what is happening then there's no reason for the world to just start taking this position. The really annoying thing is people look at these articles and go "A researcher said it, so I guess it's true". If you think it is true then fine, but you've got to go on something more than blind conjecture and vague observations, and this article seems to use a whole lot of both.
@sins_of_mosin said:
Society should be more worried about how celebs are treated like gods and how much money is given to them and sports people.
Fucking this. This is what we should all be worried about, in all honesty. Anyways...
Everyone else has stated this, but if you don't have any self control, then you're in trouble. Moderation, etc etc.
@OppressiveStink: Uhhhhhggg you wrote something long and now I have to use my brain.
Even now none of you are empathizing with anyone other than yourselves. "Well I have not seen any of the things you are saying, female, so i can't be true. No science for that!" even though you just watched a ted talks, and read an article from a top psychologist, and had me a young woman who talks with many other young women about this who all share the same experience. You just don't want to believe it because you are blind to it. Just like how so many men are blind to women's experience of constant sexual assault as a teen, and constant sexual harassment as an adult. "I have never seen this, you must be exaggerating or making it up". Of course you have not seen it, you are not a woman. You would be amazed that extreme amount of denial so many men are in. Look at this thread about the experience of how women are treaded. And then look at the extreme amount of unawareness there was when men realized this was happening. Some even went so far as to say it DOESN'T REALLY HAPPEN.
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/tzm98/to_the_guys_when_you_wolfwhistle_at_ladies_do_you/c4r7tbf
"I just have to ask, where and when was this growing-up experience? I'm a 27 year old dude, and it's just incomprehensible to me that every woman I know really went through something like that. And honestly, this is the first I've heard about it from a female too. Like I've heard about an incident once in a while, but it's always portrayed as a fairly isolated incident. Not as something that happens all the time.
Why didn't the women I know and love tell me about this? Did they just assume I knew and didn't care? Or that I wouldn't believe them? Or was it just uncomfortable?
preemptive thanks for putting up with my befuddlement"
He had never even noticed it.
Most men never believe us on claims of oppression because they never even look for it. You don't see it because you are not a woman. You don't see men being complete weirdos because you are NOT the one having sex with them and having relationships with them. You don't know what it is like, and when someone tries to present you with what it is like you completely refuse to look beyond your experience as a man.
You tell me that I'm asking men to do it for me, I'm not. I'm asking men to do with WITH me. WIth all the fighting and struggling and yelling women do, we can't do much if men don't also try and help. All throughout history the minorities have always had to convince the people in power that their claims were legitimate. I know this seems really extreme to you, but you have everything in terms of a lot of things. I only get the things that you allow me to have.
Most of the comments are "i'm happy leave me alone" but you don't even stop to think how your lifestyle makes you treat others. I'm going to have to tell you all this, most of you treat women like they are not people. This kind of treatment happens a lot more when i interact with men who watch tons of brazzers and play way too many video games. Did you know that there are a lot of women who are afraid to go to comiccon because the sexual assault is so bad that security cannot even protect women? That doesn't happen nearly as much as other events with the same amount of people like sporting events and most concerts.
But I guess it is all anecdotal because YOU never saw it. You ever think that YOUR experience is anecdotal?
Porn totally sucks. It's a total waste of time and when you're done, to quote Chrono Trigger, "but you're still hungry". Taking a break from it I realized that real women become much more attractive. At least video games much teach you something or give you some sort of feeling of accomplishment.
@sashimi_biscut:
Well, I was kind of hoping to keep this discussion relevant to the content that was already posted, but I guess we can speak to the larger question at hand. Numbers, feelings, and the honesty of empathy in a debate of this kind.
Before I go forward with this discussion, I want to let you know, do not think men and women sit equal at the table yet. We've made some pretty good strides as a society but we have quite a bit of ground to cover (especially in the math and science fields) in regard to women's equality. Alright, now to my argument.
It's hard to have an honest discussion about gender equality because of the main reason you cite, empathy. As a purely logical man, when someone comes to me with an argument, and for the sake of an example, let's say it's the statement is:"cats are better than dogs".
I'm going to say "okay, prove it". So the cat-lovers find a cat expert and that expert comes out and states "Hey, these are the reasons that cats are better than dogs.". Well, of course that cat expert is going to have one hell of an argument, they're an expert on cats.
But the dog people will want their say, so they'll bring an expert on dogs who will give, similarly, a very convincing argument on why dogs are the better pet. So, you have two sides of an argument, both giving anecdotal evidence, but ultimately colored by their own perceptions. This, you cite in your own argument against me.
That's why when I say "prove it" I need more than conjecture on both sides, I need solid numbers. This is why empathy has no place in a discussion like this and why the TED talk you posted is can be discounted so easily.
Now, I'd like to focus on a point you had. I believe you stated "most of you treat women like they are not people." I can understand there being bad apples, there are always some in a bunch, but this is downright offending. To color your thoughts on an entire gender from of the acts of a handful of jerks is shameful and at the very least narrow minded.
Furthermore, you bring even more anecdotal evidence in the form of stories that your friends told you, so I guess the way this works is the one with the most stories wins? I could tell you some first hand anecdotes where I've been cat-called, groped and sexually harassed by women(I know how shocking that women can be just as vulgar!). I also know some second hand ones about how women have been manipulative, physically abusive and generally terrible! Yet I still manage not to make broadly-sweeping negative remarks about women, which, it seems you cannot in regard to men.
So this goes to say, which is going to win? My dog opinion or your cat opinion?
It pisses me off that people think someone calling for some actual proof is an attempt brush aside an argument when it's the ONLY FUCKING REAL WAY TO MOVE ALONG AN HONEST FUCKING DISCUSSION.
Edited for oxford commas and bad grammar.
@kmdrkul: Women who read erotic novels are becoming sex addicts in new and dangerous sex acts. They are becoming socially inept and unable to function in school, work, and family environments. This new generation of women are going to be unable to function in a normal way because of their addiction to erotic literature.
I think I made my point. Its not that I was being closed minded, its that they gave no evidence. Just because " You could totally see that happening " does not make it true.
@rebgav said:
I don't understand. Are games and porn making us risk averse, or making us crazy psycho killers? IT CAN'T BE BOTH, MEDIA! PICK A SIDE!
Of course, people are ignoring the fact that while both videogames and pornography are working harder than ever to impress, women aren't.
Go tell the women we are leaving.
I got a hearty chuckle.
KNOW YOUR DOPE FIEND. YOUR LIFE MAY DEPEND ON IT! You will not be able to see his eyes because of the Tea-Shades, but his knuckles will be white from inner tension and his pants will be crusted with semen from constantly jacking off when he can't find a rape victim. He will stagger and babble when questioned. He will not respect your badge. The Dope Fiend fears nothing. He will attack, for no reason, with every weapon at his command-including yours. BEWARE. Any officer apprehending a suspected marijuana addict should use all necessary force immediately. One stitch in time (on him) will usually save nine on you. Good luck.
The basic concept would be true if not for one simple fact: Isolating oneself is only a symptom/reaction to risk averseness. It can't be the cause at the same time. I.E., while isolation will quickly make you more risk averse, avoiding risk must put you into isolation in the first place. Video-games/pornography are simply tools we use to isolate ourselves. It's not their fault that society can fuck people up so bad that some find that they can no longer be part of it. For some, games can seem a better alternative. It's understandable that the association is made, but it's false in my opinion.
At most, games have simply lowered the bar a bit. I suppose it would be harder to keep to yourself if there was nothing else to occupy you except the company of others.
I already commented but I just wanted to add one bit; I like how only males are apparently being ruined by video games and porn. So apparently a) women are immune to the supposed negative effects of video games and porn or b) people still believe women don't play video games or watch porn. Uh-huh.
@kmdrkul said:
@BigChickenDinner said:
This is some slippery slope bull shit if I've ever seen it.
The consequences could be dramatic: The excessive use of video games and online porn in pursuit of the next thing is creating a generation of risk-averse guys who are unable (and unwilling) to navigate the complexities and risks inherent to real-life relationships, school and employment.
That's a bold fucking claim substantiated by no evidence. There is no way you could possible prove a correlation between the use of video games/porn and being a "risk-averse" (one could argue shy) guy. It seems that they think the only way to develop real social skills is to do it in person. And by using video games and porn there is an inherent deterioration to said skills. Nonsense.
So what if there are no numbers to go along with what they are saying? So just because there hasn't been some official study on this very specific hypothetical, you are going to close your mind completely to the mere possibility?
You better believe I can see some correlation to the usage of video games and social life. If you're playing World of Warcraft 50 hours a week you are not going to have a conventional social life. You'll probably be a recluse. And yeah, the effects of recluse could possibly be forming real-life relationships, doing well in school, and finding employment. If somebody is scared of everybody but their own mommy bringing them their dinner every night, they probably are going to have a hard time extending themselves in the real world for job opportunities. Obviously for every one of these people, there are probably a hundred average joes that have a firm grasp on balancing their life.
This is the exact kind of closemindedness that scares me. No, I don't think we should just consume everything that is spoon fed to us by the media. I don't think the article was meant to throw video game usage under the bus by presenting cold hard facts about how it could literally destroy men. Too many people in this thread think that and automatically dismiss the bigger picture.
The problem is you have no idea what the actual causality is. I consider it just as likely (more likely in truth) that the reclusiveness causes the 50 hours of WoW play as the other way around. The way I see it, there have been social recluses for a lot longer than there have been computer games, it's just that the people exhibiting these behavioral patterns have found something new to do.
@Vodun said:
@kmdrkul said:
@BigChickenDinner said:
This is some slippery slope bull shit if I've ever seen it.
The consequences could be dramatic: The excessive use of video games and online porn in pursuit of the next thing is creating a generation of risk-averse guys who are unable (and unwilling) to navigate the complexities and risks inherent to real-life relationships, school and employment.
That's a bold fucking claim substantiated by no evidence. There is no way you could possible prove a correlation between the use of video games/porn and being a "risk-averse" (one could argue shy) guy. It seems that they think the only way to develop real social skills is to do it in person. And by using video games and porn there is an inherent deterioration to said skills. Nonsense.
So what if there are no numbers to go along with what they are saying? So just because there hasn't been some official study on this very specific hypothetical, you are going to close your mind completely to the mere possibility?
You better believe I can see some correlation to the usage of video games and social life. If you're playing World of Warcraft 50 hours a week you are not going to have a conventional social life. You'll probably be a recluse. And yeah, the effects of recluse could possibly be forming real-life relationships, doing well in school, and finding employment. If somebody is scared of everybody but their own mommy bringing them their dinner every night, they probably are going to have a hard time extending themselves in the real world for job opportunities. Obviously for every one of these people, there are probably a hundred average joes that have a firm grasp on balancing their life.
This is the exact kind of closemindedness that scares me. No, I don't think we should just consume everything that is spoon fed to us by the media. I don't think the article was meant to throw video game usage under the bus by presenting cold hard facts about how it could literally destroy men. Too many people in this thread think that and automatically dismiss the bigger picture.
The problem is you have no idea what the actual causality is. I consider it just as likely (more likely in truth) that the reclusiveness causes the 50 hours of WoW play as the other way around. The way I see it, there have been social recluses for a lot longer than there have been computer games, it's just that the people exhibiting these behavioral patterns have found something new to do.
This is true. I still do think that certain games are tailored to enable (encourage?) reclusive behavior. "Something new to do" could easily be other activities like competitive eating, underwater basket weaving, or diaper changing - but none of those activities were purposely manufactured to be done for days on end (grinding levels in WoW, prestige in CoD, etc).
This article discovered there are lazy people. Bravo. Before video games and online porn, there was TV and dirty magazines. There will always be people that just dont want to do anything.
nah they probably just got a computer and are enjoying the novelty of it...
since is 1996 and they are holding N64 controllers ¬¬"
@kmdrkul said:
This is true. I still do think that certain games are tailored to enable (encourage?) reclusive behavior. "Something new to do" could easily be other activities like competitive eating, underwater basket weaving, or diaper changing - but none of those activities were purposely manufactured to be done for days on end (grinding levels in WoW, prestige in CoD, etc).
Well, the issue Zimbardo and Duncan talk about is the addiction to arousal. The constant need to get something new and exciting. Doesn't grinding in WoW or any other game speak against that? Or maybe the strive for the "new" thing is satiated within one game...new gear, new level, new skills.
I still have to say I feel that "descending" in to gaming is a symptom of something else. It may exasperate it by its availability and addictive design, but there is something else at play which causes you to go there in the first place.
I work and maintain healthy relationships, although I am somewhat adverse to taking risks. I don't got it, right?
if there wasnt porn and video games. they would find something else. some people have addictive personalities. and some people are lazy. and some people are perverts. and some people smell bad. and some people like doritos. and some people have a dog. and some people eat poop. and some people drink runny poop. and some people bang horses. and some people lick frogs. and some people climb trees. and some people spank babies. and some people are afraid of flying. and some people like rap. and some people sing country. and some people cry after watching old yeller. and some people laugh after watching old yeller. and some people commit suicide. and some people sleep all day. and some people are smart. and some people pick thier nose. and some people pick thier friends nose. and some people go onto video game forums and post pointless comments.
@Slag said:
This concept should not just be dismissed out of hand (which is basically a rehash of 2011 Ted talk). For one Dr. Zimbardo of Stanford university has an excellent track record and what they are saying certainly is very plausible in many respects.
I think it's very possible, heck even probable, that games and pron and what have you make it easier for shy people to isolate themselves. With the internet today you can earna living and provide yourself with basic necessities without ever leaving the house.
However the article provides zero empirical support for its' claims and most critically takes the concept to a very exaggerated extreme
It's one thing to say a portion of the population is being negatively impacted like this by games, quite another to claim it's ruining "an entire generation of men".
Pretty much this. What he's saying is plausible and probably has happened in certain cases, but the few studies he cites seem to have correlation/causation problems (e.g. it sounds like the CDC study on porn is way overreaching with its conclusion). So basically he concocted a grand-sounding theory about the demise of guys, backed it up with no sound scientific evidence connecting either porn or video games to what he's claiming, ignores any other possible social factors/explanations, and gave a BS Ted talk that is now being turned into a book. It's really sad for me to see professionally lazy stuff like this getting into the Ted talks.
@deathstriker666 said:
Risk-averse men? Nevermind other important factors like the ridiculously high price of tuition or not being able to find employment in a uncertain and unstable economy. Nope men these days are pussies. Blame the video games and porn
The problem with arguing that is those are tough issues to fix and it is easier to scapegoat things everyday people have direct control over.
@Citizengamer said:
@Slag said:
This concept should not just be dismissed out of hand (which is basically a rehash of 2011 Ted talk). For one Dr. Zimbardo of Stanford university has an excellent track record and what they are saying certainly is very plausible in many respects.
I think it's very possible, heck even probable, that games and pron and what have you make it easier for shy people to isolate themselves. With the internet today you can earna living and provide yourself with basic necessities without ever leaving the house.
However the article provides zero empirical support for its' claims and most critically takes the concept to a very exaggerated extreme
It's one thing to say a portion of the population is being negatively impacted like this by games, quite another to claim it's ruining "an entire generation of men".
Pretty much this. What he's saying is plausible and probably has happened in certain cases, but the few studies he cites seem to have correlation/causation problems (e.g. it sounds like the CDC study on porn is way overreaching with its conclusion). So basically he concocted a grand-sounding theory about the demise of guys, backed it up with no sound scientific evidence connecting either porn or video games to what he's claiming, ignores any other possible social factors/explanations, and gave a BS Ted talk that is now being turned into a book. It's really sad for me to see professionally lazy stuff like this getting into the Ted talks.
For the record, there are plenty of very recent studies on video game addiction by itself. And then there are plenty of recent studies on pornography addiction... again by itself. Thus it's easy to reach a conclusion that POSSIBLE video game addiction + POSSIBLE pornography addiction MAY = some new image of a modern male. I agree that the article is biased and definitely didn't dig deep enough with any sort of empirical statistics.
I could think of a rather harsh and hamfisted connection between video games and pornography, however - people who play video games for hours on end are usually alone, isolated, with an internet connection... hmmm... what to do in between rounds/matches/quests? Heh. Just a thought - again, to me, this is all more hypothetical then factual.
I'm sure some people have problems, but I don't. I can stop playing for a month if I have something else more important going on. Gaming is something I like, but it's not the only thing there is. Also, porn just isn't the same after you have found a real woman, at least in my experience.
@rebgav said:
@kmdrkul said:
none of those activities were purposely manufactured to be done for days on end (grinding levels in WoW, prestige in CoD, etc).
Progression in WoW and CoD are designed to keep you coming back for months and years, not to encourage scumbags to hit lvl85/10th Prestige in a week. The people who make either game their sole recreational activity are breaking the system, they will be done with the treadmill or the pvp content long before the opportunity arrives to pay for an expansion or map pack. That those same people will stick around and keep on playing long after they've hit the limits of the game's ability to reward them should clearly speak to the fact that it is not the carrot-on-a-stick progression mechanics which influence those players choices.
That is an interesting point, hadn't thought of that. Who is to say that the progression mechanics didn't get them hooked enough to keep wanting to come back regardless of the "reward?" I see your point that the phenomenon is possibly a person abusing a system rather than a system enabling an abuser. I think a big takeaway from the article is that addiction is more than just substance abuse - why video games and pornography were singled out is really only the author's guess. Television can have addictive properties, too - Requiem for a Dream, anyone?
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment