Looks like we might have a new brand of MRA on our hands! Remember the "Stockholm: An Exploration of True Love" game that Amazon was selling which allowed users to "convince" a young woman to fall in love with them by sexually assaulting, gassing and psychologically abusing them? Well, it seems that its creator is a wee ticked about being banned from Amazon and others is conducting a college outreach program designed to enlighten college students with "types of love and relationships hidden and ignored by a culture increasingly dominated by female values."
Stanton Audemars says during his college tours, he'll disseminate the game to make sure "that every single college student of appropriate age has access to this simulation," seeming to push an anti-women and anti-feminist message cloaked in BDSM rights language:
"And young men and women have the right to recognize that true love does not necessarily involve the kind of mental castration and excessive domestication that it has become associated with . . . The point of 'Stockholm' is not that kidnapping is the path to true love. The point is that the sugar coated nonsense that TV and movies are forcing down our throat is not the only true path. It is a message that college men and women need to hear. Most don't realize that they have a choice in how they approach love and relationships, that choice in relationships does not just mean 'gay or straight'. It also can be polygamistic, dominant, submissive, relaxed, nice, cruel, possessive, etc. The types of love that women have tried to criminalize are no less valid than the types of love that seem to require that men become weak, doting, servile eunuchs."
The thing is, this game is not about choice; it's about kidnapping, sexual assault and nonconsent. What a hoot it would be if we ran into this guy while doing our college tour come fall.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Stolkholm game creator to do a "college outreach program" .
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/14467
WTF?!?! How ever does he get the idea that brainwashing and abuse are "a kind of love"?
It's also more than a little disturbing how he correctly notes that "women" (feminists) "have tried to criminalize" stalking, kidnapping, abuse, rape, and torture. Obviously, despite our efforts, such things are not really criminalized in practice as law enforcement is often all too complicit, failing to bring stalkers and the like to justice.
This young man is practicing a kind of hate speech. Love has nothing to do with his message, his game.
Amen to that. I don't know what his definition of love is, but it's pretty messed up.
Oh I so wish I could be in one of his seminars. Obviously his interpretation of "today's kind of accepted love" is all wrong, and veiled with his own misogynistic views.
**Possible trigger Warning**
So kidnapping and torture is an accepted kind of love, huh. I could just picture it now:
"Your honor, he tried to strangle me, and I passed out several times."
"Oh honey, he just loves you."
Incidentally, how many times have we heard that scenario before?
My guess is that women being "weak, doting, servile eunuchs" (except when beckoned for sex)is a-okay with this clown.
And, by the way, if this game is about true exploration, why isn't the abduction scenario open to both sexes?
If this is not about power and domination (rape fantasies) why limit the abductee to one gender?
I am getting quite sick of the "women (read: feminists) are turning men into a bunch of pussies" trope. If you are in an opposite sex relationship, working on having balance, fairness and communication as well as having amazing sex and leisure activites does not turn your partner into a dripping milquetoast; quite the reverse.
Regarding "why isn't the abduction scenario open to both sexes?", I was unfortunate enough to read the linked article and then visit this creep's website to see what other misogynistic bull he would be trying to sell. Among what I read before becoming too disgusted to continue:
Women: How often do you see a guy that is just irritating, and you just want to have sex with him to put him in his place? He’s not super attractive or anything, he’s just annoying. And because he is annoying you just want to do sexual things to him. Not violent rape or anything, just sex.
It’s not an emotion that women feel that often, but men feel it all the time.
Apparently, despite my decades of belief to the contrary, I'm no longer a man.
Ugh.
I think if women don't do this, it's less to do with biology and more to do with the cultural narrative of "sex=MANLY CONQUEST OF MANLINESS!!" Sex isn't used to degrade and shame men, so it takes a man with some sort of brain functioning to be able to recognize any variation of being on the "receiving" rather than the "HUNTING OMG" end of sexual activity--being "used" or "conquered" or "gotten" or whatever--short of being jumped by an oranguatan. Obviously there are many men out there who do have brain functioning, but those aren't the ones I primarily find annoying enough to want to degrade them.
What can be used to put a guy "in his place" is to flirt and tease, and then suddenly change one's mind and laugh at them right when they think they've got their Manly Conquest in the bag. That is why this actually does happen. But no, I don't think women often actually go and have sex with men in order to "put them in their place," for the same reason that if you're mad at someone on their birthday you don't buy them an expensive present because THAT'LL SHOW THEM JUST HOW MUCH YOU DON'T CARE!
"Women: How often do you see a guy that is just irritating, and you just want to have sex with him to put him in his place? He’s not super attractive or anything, he’s just annoying. And because he is annoying you just want to do sexual things to him. Not violent rape or anything, just sex."
I don't know what it means about me . . . but I do have fantasies like that. Or is it rape (not "just sex") if I want to put my fingers in an annoying guy's a*s sometimes to "put him in his place"?
A bit embarrassing to admit, but I just wanted to throw that out there. Maybe the problem lies with our culture- that men are EXPECTED to have these desires, and because we think no woman could possibly ever want that, not a single chick speaks up.
You are not the only female who has had these thoughts. I was on a BDSM forum a couple years ago (for the life of me, I can't find it anymore; I think it died) And the question of, I think they worded it as "reverse rape fantasies" came up. A bunch of women said that sometimes they get so angry at some men that they wished they could do everything to them from tying them down and forcing them to orgasm to violently raping, beating or even murdering them (in some pretty weird sexual ways).
Sorry, but if you have to "convince" someone to love you - its not love.
And that bull crap about love and choice? I think this guy has a syndrome of his own.
scary
"The male experience of real love is not always devotion, domestication, and doting. It is often dominance, possessiveness; it often even involves polygamist tendencies. How many women want to see their boyFriends or husbands have sex with another man? Not too many. But how many men want to see their girlFriends or wives with other women?"
This is from Stanton Audemars statement about Stockholm. This guy is aping the worst of the evo-psych crap and turning it into a justification of rape and male dominance.
Sorry for the multiple posts, but this really pisses me off.
Actually, if I had a boyfriend, I'd be totally turned at the thought of him having sex with another guy. Now, I don't go to bars and leeringly encourage two men to make out, so maybe that's why nobody seems to notice.
Sorry to keep shoving my fandom in everyone's face, but if you're an anime geek at all (or into fanfiction), you know that gay erotica (called slash [fanfiction], yaoi/shounen-ai [Japanese terms], BL [boy's love])is actually really popular among the women folk. I'm not sure how widespread this is in sci-fi and fantasy, but I know in Japan I've seen entire floors of yaoi in anime stores, and there are more and more gay erotica comics being published each year in America. It's largely a business by women for women.
Yeah -- I am always amused at how ignorant men are about the fact that a significant amount of women find guy-on-guy sexy. I know about this because of Harry Potter fan fiction. ;p
LOL! Me too! However, almost all the posts I saw were Snape on Harry. Or Harry on Snape. ;)
Oh, slash fiction has been around for at least as long as Star Trek.
I totally want to see guy on guy action. But I guess I shouldn't be too surprised this Stanton idiot has no clue about what women may or may not actually be into. I bet he even yells at his right palm to shut up and not talk.
Just wanted to add my voice here...I would love to see my boyfriend with another guy. And he couldn't care less about seeing me with another woman (possibly cause he's already seen it; before we were together, I was with a woman).
Obviously he's a eunuch...and I'm a man. Or something.
"The male experience of real love is not always devotion, domestication, and doting. It is often dominance, possessiveness; it often even involves polygamist tendencies. How many women want to see their boyFriends or husbands have sex with another man? Not too many. But how many men want to see their girlFriends or wives with other women?"
This is from Stanton Audemars statement his game. This guy is aping the worst of the evo-psych crap and turning it into a justification of rape and male dominance.
Sorry for the multiple posts, but this really pisses me off.
It also can be polygamistic, dominant, submissive, relaxed, nice, cruel, possessive, etc.
This statement is made of fail. Yes, love can take many forms and BDSM can be a part of a healthy relationship, as long as it's between two consenting adults. But by lumping dominance/submission in with such types of love as "cruel" and "possessive," it's clear that he's not advocating that kind of healthy BDSM - no, he's advocating for the misogynistic bullshit rapists and abusers have spouted for years. "Honey, I love you SO fucking much, I have to stalk you/beat you/demand you submit to me". That's not love, that's abuse, and it sickens me that he's trying to teach young people that that is okay.
Right. There is a very clear line between erotic and sexual bondage and sadism, and domestic abuse. That he conflates them is telling, since lifestylers and kink enthusiasts seem to have no problem differentiating the two.
For serious. As a feminist sub, I'm really disturbed by this dude talking in terms of dominance and submission. Dominance and submission are a-okay with mutual consent. They are not things you get to impose on an unwilling victim.
I have no words. Except this: my understanding of BDSM relationships is that both partners are consenting, have an established basis of trust, and are able to call stop if things go to a place they don't like. The victim in this game has no such agency. If I was a member of the BDSM community, I'd be just a little extra pissed at this guy.
You know, in case conflating love with kidnapping and abuse wasn't enough.
I *am* a member of the kink community and I *am* extra pissed about this guy. BDSM is about consent and make-believe, not actual kidnapping and torture. I do not believe he is actually a member of the kink community. We police ourselves to keep creeps like this out.
He's probably some asshole who hangs out on CollarMe telling women he is going to make them his "no limits slave," and would get his ass removed from an actual BDSM event for bad behavior in about twenty seconds flat.
Wow. On the website for the game there are posts from others who are supposedly against the ban. The creator writes about men who "have sex" with women because they're "irritating." Hm, yep that's known as sexual assault in the real world. There's a post comparing the game to "lethal junk food" and "environmentally destructive products." Wow. Just wow.
*Possible trigger warning*
http://rmdglobal.net/stockholm/
That absolutely terrified me. If I didn't believe most men didn't feel like that I don't think I could be near them let alone date them. This does make me think that maybe I am being overly naive. This to me is linked to a lot of concepts where men say really nasty stuff about girls they fantasise about (ie. porn stars). While I know this is less severe it still seems to see sex as something inherently degrading to women rather than something women enjoy. It seems there is at least a sub culture of getting please from viewing sex as a form of domination and punishment.
I find it odd that when men moan about the feminized definition of love (other than sexual monogamy) they tend to talk about love as abusing and harming women. While I support people's attempts to explore polyamorous relationships and BDSM I don't think this has to be to do with cruelty. It disturbs me when men get annoyed because they can't rape, kidnap women, beat them etc as this isn't considered love. While it might be how they express love it is against a woman's right to her own sexual autonomy and freedoms. To be acceptable a form of love shouldn't harm an innocent part. Men may feel unhappy having to be nice to women but they can be cruel and not have a relationship if this is what they want. This means they have an option, which women being kidnapped or raped don't. Why does someone else have to suffer in this definition of love?
I'm willing to bet his views on love and eroticism stem from lots of frustration and no real experience. He sees women as people that possess a commodity he wants (affection) and believes that their devotion to him is his "right" as an extension of either male privilege or his own narcissism. When women deny him this commodity, he feels aggrieved and decides to take by force and manipulation what isn't freely shared.
The game allows him a space to play out his fantasy; the antiwoman rhetoric is a post-hoc rationalization of his own lack of romantic relations. It's not him being creepy that drives women away -- it's his indomitable male spirit that women are afraid of!
"The point is that the sugar coated nonsense that TV and movies are forcing down our throat is not the only true path."
Uh, and kidnapping and rape is a "true path" to love? This man is mentally ill. Is there anything we can do about this?
Scarily enough, kidnapping and rape IS the sugar-coated nonsense these days. Anyone remember Twilight?
"...by a culture increasingly dominated by female values."
Bahahaha! I should live so long! I nearly spit my water all over my keyboard when I read that one.
He needn't fret his pretty little head. His much-ballyhooed patriarchy doesn't seem to be going anywhere anytime soon. I'm sure he'll get a warm welcome at many college frats that agree with his message that date rape is just another form of love.
It is scary enough when people try to pass these things off as "just games." It is absolutely frightening that this guy is openly campaigning for people to extend this infatuation with violence against women into their real lives. He is actually saying it is more than just a game, but a model for real life.
I am so angry/horrified that I don't know what to say.
It would be much more respectable if it allowed for both genders to be the abductors and the abductees. Then, and only then, could the argument be made that the game is about exploration.
Ok, this just makes me furious beyond anything:
http://rmdglobal.net/stockholm/college.html
What does this psychopath think he's doing?
I feel like he's confusing love and sex. It's true that a lot of people do enjoy dominant/submissive type stuff when it comes to sex. But I don't think sex and love are the same thing. It's one thing to be dominated in sex, it's another to be dominated/controlled/possessed overall in a relationship.
Right?
Yes, but there's also a difference between consensual dominant/submissive sex, and rape. This game isn't just dominant submissive, it's a rape game.
Also, does anyone else think it's weird that the guy is linking feministing (and jezebel) on his website?
Yeah I did.. I guess he said it was because he liked to expose people to the different views and opinions about this issue, which is great.. But it doesn't make him a better person, IMO.
I couldn't decide if it was a genuine effort to show both sides or if it was a thinly-veiled attempt to be like, "look, here's a good example of those psycho feminazis that want to castrate us all."
Neither could I.
But wouldn't they fall in love with us if we did?
Of course not! Because as the site so helpfully explains, men don't have the same emotions as women, and just lie to themselves about stuff like that!
(My apologies for the snarkiness. I just can't put into serious words how upsetting this whole thing is.)
Wow, the "freespeech" coupon for a $1 off is just soooo adorable.
I hate it when people are so quick to pull the free speech card in response to a boycott or letter writing/phone calling campaign. No one is censoring him, just people are exercising their right to free speech by telling Amazon they disapprove and might take their business elsewhere til the game is gone. Amazon then has the right to exercise it's free speech by deciding wether they will continue to sell the game. Either way, his game can still be made, sold, and bought, just not on Amazon. A right to make the game, sure. A right to sell it specifically on Amazon, hell no.
Yeah, I hate that too. When people so clearly don't understand what freedom of speech is. It's as if they're saying, everyone should be allowed to say whatever they want, as long as they're not criticizing ME.
S+M is a worse victim here than feminism, I think. Though, clearly, neither really won a victory with this stupidity.
I've practiced S+M off and on, and it is NOT about kidnapping or brainwashing anyone.
At it's best, it's a carefully controlled exercise in trust where the top is able to help the bottom emerge him or herself in their fantasies, and where closeness and growth are more important than getting off.
That's why there are safe words, that's why there are limits.
This guy is just completely off his rocker, and it disappoints me that the S+M community has not come out and said so. (Though to be fair there really isn't a feministing for kinksters, so I don't know where they'd come out and say so).
It really is a shame that there aren't really passionate spokespeople for the S&M community... some feminists paint the whole group as something it's not, and it's even easier for such misunderstandings when woman-hating cretins hide their actions behind a misrepresentation of a certain kink.
Regarding "It really is a shame that there aren't really passionate spokespeople for the S&M community..." I can think of several people who would qualify: Madison Young aka Madison Bound, Lee Harrington, Midori, Pat Califia, Laura Antoninou, Dossie Easton, Janet Hardy, Christina Abernathy, Jack Rinella, and Jay Wiseman all come to mind.
I meant there's no kind of venue like this for S+Mers.
Certainly, there could be spokespersons for it.
There are passionate bloggers for the BDSM community. lee Harrington is one and Mistress Matisse is another, just for starters.
Um, I wouldn't say BDSM is the "real victim here." Surely you haven't forgotten that stalking, rape, and domestic violence are pretty much rampant in this country - and have real human victims who are overwhelmingly women.
But it's true that the other crap thing about this is that the REAL, useful, honest discussion of BDSM is invariably going to get lost in this asshole's purposely excessive woman-hating rhetoric. We NEED more open honest discussion of BDSM, but people like this jerk just keep contributing to the mainstream fear of it, continually forcing it to the fringe. Because supposedly us BDSM weirdos do shit like "gas" each other in gas chambers.
I think this guy is just pissed he missed out on the times in history when "kidnap yourself a wife" was an accepted practice...
Do you think he really is planning on going on tour to universities and colleges?? If he is, I am contacting all the local schools and not letting this come here.
I guess I don't get the outrage over this. There's 300 million people in the United States. Obviously, some of them are gonna to be highly mentally disturbed. And anybody who wants to can make a video game nowadays and market it through a publishing non-company like RMD Global (which is so obscure it doesn't even have a article on Wikipedia, and Wikipedia has 3 million articles in English).
So some nobody makes a game, publishes it through a non-company. Their budget and skill level are so low they can't even create CGI graphics and have to resort to low-budget camera footage. Amazon sells it because they will literally sell ANYTHING, even print on demand stuff that has a market niche ceiling of 10 copies.
The only reason we even know this game exists is through the Internet. There is a Wikipedia article on the game, but the only reason this article exists is because of the controversy over the game generated at sites like this. At what point are we actually helping legitimize this game by paying ANY attention to it whatsoever? It's almost like having a bunch of threads concerning "my neighbor Bill who draws pictures of stick figures getting raped on post-its and nails them to his front door" and then giving the whole Feministing community and everyone who links to it Bill's address.
Yeah...I'd hate to imagine what would happen if Feministing really discovered 4chan.
P.S. - I've seen 4chan, I just haven't seen /b/tards touring college campuses trying to convince people that rape and abuse are just alternative expressions of love or whatever snake oil this sick fuck is selling.
Of course you don't get it Nomad, you're the same one in that other post about "forgiving rapists" who was whining about how we shouldn't "dehumanize them".
Good memory! Although I didn't use the phrase "forgiving rapists." Not to be nitpicky--I understand that's the message you took away. It just seems like when you use quote marks like you just did people might think you are quoting me directly, which you aren't.
Can this guy just go to any old college or does he need to be invited or ask or something?
Because I can't see any college asking him or seeing any presentation he puts together on what exactly he does and allowing him to come.
But this may just be wishful thinking on my part.
On a side note, someone should find out what county this guy lives in and give the authorities a heads up. It sounds like if nothing else, he should maybe be watched a bit closer in his community because frankly, I'd worry about the safety of any women in real life who have to come into contact with him.
Can anyone point me to the feministing article about the lesbian rape scene in the Vagina Monologues? I mean, that scene is pretty much a lesbian version of this stupid Stolkholm game: the victim doesn't want to do it at first but then suddenly she gets into it.
But, there is no such condemnation of that portion of the Vagina Monologues, is there? It's only morally wrong when a male thinks this way. When a woman forces another woman to have sex, that's OK somehow.
I certainly have seen discussion about that scene on feminist websites. Many people find that scene problematic; there are examples in the comments thread here:
http://www.feministing.com/archives/002752.html
You remind of the MRA's who show up and accuse feminists of not caring about female teachers who abuse their male students, despite the fact that we write about it all the damn time.
You might be surprised to find out that the construction of female sexuality as inherently passive and harmless is as much a feminist issue as the construction of male sexuality as inherently predatory.
You might be surprised to find out that the construction of female sexuality as inherently passive and harmless is as much a feminist issue as the construction of male sexuality as inherently predatory.
I hope you're right, but I haven't seen that yet. I'll keep my eyes open. I want to believe.
This is really sick.
At the same time, though, I've been noticing more and more that many of the 'romances' that seem to appeal to people these days are not healthy relationships at all. Look at things like Twilight, or the ever-popular Gone With the Wind...
This guy clearly has issues, but I wonder if Stockholm may be an element of a broader problem that many images of deep, passionate romance are really quite unhealthy. that problem may need to be dealt with in a way other than just condemning any media that displays unhealthy images of love. I'm not sure what that way would be, but i do think it would be helpful to consider why these things might appeal to people, if there maybe is something lacking in our understanding of romance today that causes some people to glorify less healthy things, and if so, how we can address that, etc.
Girls liking bad boys and guys who are not good for them ? When did that happen :p
I don't think it's just "nowadays." _Gone With the Wind_ is like a century old. These types of borderline or outright abusive relationships have been depicted in literary plotlines for eons, e.g., the coy woman who secretly wants to be dominated and ravished (i.e., raped). These are just more examples of the very *staying power* of misogyny in our culture - and a testament to how poorly we educate people on relationship boundaries and HEALTHY relationships.
I was just discussing with a coworker how amazing it would be if all high schoolers were required to take a semester-long class on healthy relationships, including romantic relationships, to teach and reinforce relationship boundaries. Such a class could probably do everything from reduce homophobia to help reduce domestic violence and rape (I can just hear the right-wing bitching and whining now - they essentially want public schools to pretend like homosexuality doesn't exist and pretend like teens don't have sexual or even romantic relationships).
Women, I think, learn that it's normal for them to put up with so much more shit from men than they ever should because "that's just the way men are - controlling and possessive and mean and rough". Women never learn what constitutes *ABUSE* - emotional and verbal abuse are still considered "lesser" on the hierarchy. Things like verbal abuse are almost normalized for men - at least two of my other female coworkers in the past month have complained to me about having their opinions called "stupid" and put down by their boyfriends, but eventually dismissed it as "not a big deal." I don't know how to convince women that it is a big deal. It's a very big deal - it's NOT how a healthy relationship works.
I wrote a community post about unhealthy/healthy relationships and how to educate others about what's healthy and unhealthy.
http://community.feministing.com/2009/06/consent-and-ignoring-no.html
I, for one, happen to love Gone With the Wind due to its portrayal of a strong, independent woman who makes her own way in the world and doesn't give into society's oppressive notions of what a woman should be like. It is not a perfect feminist story, but it shouldn't be written off as wholly negative.
The content of the game is wrong. The thing is though, many games have content that is wrong. Killing maiming, murdering. There is actually a game out there where you play a Hitman.
Is this game wrong ? Yes. But why ban this game and not other games with questionable content ?
First of all, I'm not aware of anyone trying to "ban" the game. Second of all, the difference between this and murder games is that murder games don't call murder "true love", or advertise it as something other than murder. This game calls rape and kidnap "true love", and denies that it's a rape game. The creator, and probably many of the players of the game, agree with the "true love" concept of rape and kidnap. Not only this, but the creator is trying to prey on the minds of a group of vulnerable people (young students) in order to make them believe this crap. Rapes on college campuses are already common, we don't need this creep promoting the rape culture anymore.
When someone plays "hitman" in a murder game.. Well, they know that they're the hitman. When someone plays rapist in a rape game like this, it doesn't seem as if they know that they're the rapist.
Well I must admit I did not play the game true love myself.
yeah, it's definitely okay to know full well what you're doing is wrong and still do it. are you getting my sarcasm? i'm not sure your argument of the hitman v. rapist makes any sense at all. i don't particularly want anyone playing video games where it's okay to be a rapist, a hitman, a murderer, a thief, or even just a mean person. and while we're at it, i think shows like Gossip Girl are evil. it's always nice to have a laugh/get off at someone else's expense, but when did it become right?
What an idiot. His definition of love is one of the most warped I have ever heard of.
To me, love is constantly choosing the best for your partner, even if it hurts you but you know it will benefit them.
Abuse is hurting your partner to make you feel good. That is the opposite of love.
I wonder if he's married. What a joke.
I wonder if he has some kind of police reports filed against him in his own past for stalking, abuse, harassment, etc? And now he's taking it out on the "meeeeeennnn ol' feminists (or women in general) who actually object to him treating them like shit?" I'm sure a little dirt digging into this fuckhead's past would reveal a pile of old manure.
When one sees those brilliant keywords "eunuch" and "castration" (which the male author always puts so much thought into), there's almost invariably a flaming insecure misogynist douche behind them.
This is fundamentally fucked on so many levels. How do these fuck-ups come to have such enormous egos that they think their "ideas about love" actually warrant "college outreach"? What a fucking joke.
I'm sure (I hope!) most colleges will see this bullshit for what it is. I can't imagine any women's centers or decent university administrators would allow this hate-parade to go on anywhere NEAR their campus.
I hope you do run into him on your college tour, assuming he makes good on his threat, and I hope you serve him his ass on a silver platter.
(Fact: I originally typed "I hope you do run over him on your college tour." Oops.)
Whoops, to clarify: it was a typo. (I just wanted to set that straight, juuuuust in case.)
I would be all for supporting this guy if his message was, "It's just a game; freedom of expression; it's not gonna make anyone a rapist, etc," just like I've supported games depicting violence and sexuality in the past. But, no. His message is, "I want everyone to play this game in the hope that they will adopt my twisted and violent definition of 'love'." He specifically states that the whole thing is basically a big "fuck you" to the feminist man-haters who want to take away his right to be a manly-man domineering asshole.
Good job, guy. You could have come up with a better, less controversial argument for why the game shouldn't be banned, but instead you chose to go with honesty and show us what was really in your heart. Thanks for that. Now we know who to avoid.
Reading the description of this game made my head hurt so much. Both the premise and the writing style is so nauseating, condescending, and masturbatory that I literally felt ill.
How can this compare itself to Lolita? Can anything ever be so self-indulgent? Putting it through a veil of going against the status quo when really it adheres to the time-honored theme of male domination in a heterosexist and sexist world? It's nothing new, it confirms stereotypes, and it tries to present itself as groundbreaking--that is truly barf-inducing.
That is a huge pet peeve of mine: when people set themselves as oh-so-rebellious when all they're doing is buying into the same ol' BS.
Ugh. Shit like this cannot be compared to Lolita, because the portrayal of Humbert Humbert in Lolita is critical, damn it. Lolita is not a love story. It's a story about how a man convinces himself that it's okay to ruin a girl's life because he wants her.
Audemars has deep-seated hatred of women, evident not only in this nauseating, pornographic video game, but in his hostility toward supposed "female values" that reject violence against women. This guy needs mental help. NOW.
Well, Crap.
There's a game out there called "Braid". Braid is an extremely surrealistic take on the nature of forgiveness, Mario brothers, love and time. It's...very odd.
I'd be more okay with this game if it was just very, very odd, like SCMRPG or something. When the director started in with the values things, though.
Crap.
here's this idiot's blog...
http://stantonaudemars.blogspot.com/