Last week we talked about morality and violent fantasies expressed in art forms, such as video games. In the end I claimed that, although not everyone might agree, violent depictions in video games are generally accepted as long as they are not forms of sexual violence. Naturally, this raises the question why we treat sexual violence so differently. Just to be clear, what I don’t want to talk about here is youth protection with regard to sexual content and violent content in video games, movies or other works of art. Some might think it is strange that a 14 year old can watch movies with fully automatic rifles being fired into crowds of people while they cannot watch a movie with exposed female breasts (in most western countries). But that is a different topic. Let’s leave children out of the picture here and assume we’re only talking about content that can only be accessed by adults. So in a hypothetical version of “Grand Theft Auto” that is only accessible to adults, would it be fine to add a “rape button” that allows you to commit acts of sexual violence against NPCs? Although I don’t have any data, I suspect most people would say “no”.
But why? To try and answer that, we first have to look at what distinguishes a sexual act from an act of sexual violence: confusingly, it’s not violence but consent. Activities that we might consider to be very violent, like suffocating someone or beating them up, can be normal sexual acts as long as all parties involved agree to it out of their own free will. But as soon as any of the people involved is not consenting, even the act touching another’s body can be acts of sexual violence. Another thing that can become sexual violence without consent is exposure to sexual thoughts, for example in a work of art. If a work of art depicts explicit sexual content, it needs to be ensured that anyone engaging with it is aware of this and willing to do so. That’s why pornographic movies need to be clearly labeled, even on an all-adult platform.
You might think that is already the problem with our “rape button”. But let’s say the game is made in a way where you are never incentivised to press it and it even pops up a warning message saying “this will display graphic depictions of sexual violence, do you want to continue?”. People who press “yes” can be assumed to have consented. And assuming the player is alone, they’re the only party involved, so all parties have consented. Unless, that is, you count the NPCs. But do you need consent from non-living simulated entities without feeling? Most people would probably say no. But if you need another argument, some people use vegetables to pleasure themselves. If they are fresh, they contain living tissue that in some cases could grow into a full plant. These vegetables are much more alive than our NPCs, yet we don’t think it’s necessary to acquire consent from them.
So, we can deduce that the act of committing sexual violence in video games does not constitute sexual violence itself. But naturally that doesn’t mean it can’t be immoral, it's just not immoral for that reason. If asked, many people would probably suggest that it’s more about what it says about you (or does to you) as a person, but that’s the exact discussion we had last week and we can use the same line of reasoning. Except, there is one big difference we should address. It’s not just fun we are talking about, it’s sexual pleasure. That is a much stronger form of reward system activation in the human brain, meaning it is much better at reinforcing behavior. But that doesn’t matter if the behavior it is reinforcing is just playing the video game. If you think that reinforcing a certain behavior in video games also reinforces this behavior in real life, that should probably also apply to non-sexual violence.
Now that we’re essentially back to square one, here’s my take on why people seem to think that violence against NPCs is ok except sexual violence isn’t. It’s because sexual violence scares us more than non-sexual violence does. It’s the same reason most people don’t like the works of Marquis De Sade very much. It points a spotlight at a part of our soul that most people don’t understand and thus fear, often more than anything else. Nearly everyone will agree that acts of violence, both sexual and non-sexual, should be avoided whenever possible. It’s just things we do not want to happen to us and most cultures have established a rule that you should not do to others what you don’t want to happen to yourself. I’m pretty sure that the vast majority of people couldn’t even imagine purposefully committing an act of violence against another human being. Yet, there is a part of us, probably an evolutionary remnant, that makes us feel pleasure from the thought of it. A monster within us. I can’t know if it exists in everyone, I don’t even know if it exists in most people, but I know it exists in some and I’m almost certain it exists in more people than you’d think.
But this is not just a lack of knowledge on my part, it’s the main reason this monster is so scary. It’s inside you and you’re all alone with it. You’re afraid to tell anyone about it, because you think that they’ll assume you are that monster. But that means you can’t deal with this threat in the way you’d deal with any other threat, which is by relying on other people’s experiences. Making a fire is dangerous, but you’ve seen other people do it and you can ask them about what to do to make it safe. But this monster, you know nothing about. It tries to lure you in with pleasure, but if you submit to it, will it take control? If it demands you to betray your own morals, will you be able to say no? In the news we only hear about people who didn’t. Now imagine how scary fire would be if the only time you ever heard about it was people’s houses burning down.
Fortunately, there is a way out. It’s precisely because people seem to be so opposed to indulgent sexual violence in art that I’ve come to think that the monster isn’t as dangerous as you might expect. Because the most likely explanation for it is that the monster is really common. And if it’s that common, people losing control over it is a lot less common. I think the monster is nothing to be afraid of. In fact, it’s not a monster at all. It’s a part of you. Being afraid of a part of yourself is a tension that is really unhealthy to your psyche. You don’t have to give in to it to keep it in check. Just treat it with respect, then it will also respect you and your moral standards. If you read my blog, you’ll know how important I think it is to love yourself. And that mean all parts of yourself.
Needless to say, if you’re one of those people struggling with this and you find it difficult to stay in control, seek help. But I trust you to be a responsible human being. Don’t hurt the ones you love and love everyone, including you!
