jmw23 wrote:I believe in a free discourse, and in allowing the market to decide these matters.

plastictrees wrote:Not sure I have toooo much to add here, because I think the "Those politically correct prudes have ruined things for everyone, amirite!" nerds have staked their claim to this thread.
I'm impressed that people have somehow managed to turn finding the objectification of women and implied rape distasteful into "uptight puritanism". I must be super right wing if I think that establishing forced rape porn as a cultural touchstone has a negative impact, however small, on how women are perceived and treated in that society.

Manchu wrote:

jmw23 wrote:I believe in a free discourse, and in allowing the market to decide these matters.

The thing is, the market did decide in this case.

Free Markets ≠ Free Discourse

jmw23 wrote:

Manchu wrote:Free Markets ≠ Free Discourse

It isn't over yet!

Ian Sturrock wrote:I'm very much in agreement with Manchu here. Kickstarter is losing a lot of its credibility as a business, with this action, whether you like the idea of the game or not.
*SNIP*
All that said, if Kickstarter disliked the idea of the game, they should have said so at the start. Caving to public pressure now just makes them seem indecisive, weak, and unreliable. And yes, it makes me less likely to want to do business with them.

warboss wrote:They likely "caved" to public pressure only when someone went through the trouble of manually reporting the project leading to the likely first ever glance with live eyeballs at Kickstarter HQ.

scarletsquig wrote:

plastictrees wrote:Not sure I have toooo much to add here, because I think the "Those politically correct prudes have ruined things for everyone, amirite!" nerds have staked their claim to this thread.
I'm impressed that people have somehow managed to turn finding the objectification of women and implied rape distasteful into "uptight puritanism". I must be super right wing if I think that establishing forced rape porn as a cultural touchstone has a negative impact, however small, on how women are perceived and treated in that society.

Before you go around white-knighting on behalf of all women everywhere, you might want to learn a thing or two about the anime fandom and how many women are involved with it.

I had several female friends at university who were into it, even the crazy tentacle rape stuff which one of them played during a presentation she made on the topic. An ex girlfriend of mine liked it, and a friend of mine met his wife at an anime convention... I only really have a passing interest in some of the artwork (which is mostly extremely well done, and non-nude), but I know enough to know that something like this would probably appeal to female anime fans rather than turn them off, especially since it is cheeky rather explicit in theme and has a cute cuddley octopus as the tentacle monster. I was hoping to get the t-shirt as a freebie for the next pledge amount as a gift for a female friend of mine, but now that it probably won't reach that pledge level after being gutted, that might not happen.

It's based around dating sim-stye art, not hentai. This is nothing to do with hentai at all. In fact, if was called "octopus bento" I bet no-one would have got their panties in a bunch whatsoever because it wouldn't have the word "tentacle" in there, which means that the 95% of people who know precisely jack about anime other than the tired "hurr it's all about tentacle rape monsters" stereotype that everyone who dislikes anime clings to as their only opinion of the subject.

Dating sims have been around since the 90's and are generally story-based with a big appeal to female audiences due to them being games about emotions and dating etc.


I am sick and tired of people for whom it isn't enough to just ignore things they don't like, they just *have* to go and ruin it for everyone else as well.
It's like "I want to make every person on the entire planet only enjoy things that I enjoy, and if they don't comply I'll make it my life's mission to make them miserable!" was burned into their frontal lobes with a cattle brand at the age of 5.

For anyone who thinks this was a good thing...

Lets just say, you like Apple Pie, and I don't like Apple Pie. Maybe I think Apple Pie keeps women enslaved and baking away in the kitchen like it was back in the 50's?

Now, I could just not eat apple pie and let you eat it instead. I don't have to watch you, or your apple pie. Or your wife chained to the oven baking apple pie 24/7 according to my extremely insular and ignorant POV where Apple Pie = Domestic Violence.

Or, I could come over and smash up your apple pie and throw it into the river, so that you can't eat it either.

You cool with that, as well? No? Didn't think so.

Manchu wrote:

jmw23 wrote:

Manchu wrote:Free Markets ≠ Free Discourse

It isn't over yet!

You're right that Kickstarter is not the entirety of the space of discourse. Your initial point, however, was that Kickstarter was not allowing the market to decide. But Kickstarter is a part of the market. The hand isn't actually invisible -- it's just in a lot of places at once. In this case, the biggest and most powerful hand was Kickstarter and what it did was smack Soda Pop Miniatures down.

Kickstarter is a privately-owned company, and of course they can do as they please. I suspect they made this choice from a purely economic standpoint. Kickstarter is seen as a darling of the creative arts community, and negative publicity/boycotts would have hurt Amazon's bottom line. That's fine, but again, I'm dissapointed...

Manchu wrote:

warboss wrote:They likely "caved" to public pressure only when someone went through the trouble of manually reporting the project leading to the likely first ever glance with live eyeballs at Kickstarter HQ.

We actually know that this is NOT the case.

Kickstarter listed Tentacle Bento as one of its "Staff Picks" on its own front page shortly before suspending the project funding.

The real question is when live eyeballs started reading letters equating a card game with raping girls.

Manchu wrote:...By refusing to connect certain creators with investors, Kickstarter is exercising its right not to do business with anyone that wants to do business with them. Again, that's cool. There's no need to dream up a card game trivializing the Holocaust to make that point acceptable.

Kickstarter's right to do business with the customers it chooses is NOT at stake. What is at stake is the credibility of Kickstarter. In peddling its services, the connection of creators and investors, Kickstarter makes a lot of claims to advocating creativity. As of this post, the top banner on their homepage reads "Fund & Flow Creativity."

By exercising its right to deal with some projects and not others, Kickstarter is undermining this claim. As a customer of Kickstarter, my take away is "this business does not actually provide me with the service that it advertises."

In this case, it's not just me, Manchu, who is not being well-served as a customer. As I mentioned earlier, the message that Kickstarter has sent in this instance is that they may or may not be able to provide services to any potential customer (whether creator or investor) ... but there's really no way to know whether they will or not.

If I were a creator, I would never use Kickstarter after this because I would learn from this situation that it is not necessarily a stable connection to my potential investors. Kickstarter could step in at any time and exert the very thing that it is selling to me -- namely, freedom from third-party control of funding.

As an investor in terms of crowd sourcing, I will never use Kickstarter again because of the same reason. Kickstarter sold me the idea that they would help me establish direct contact with the content providers that I wanted to help succeed. But they have now shown that they are really a middle man, and a fickle one at that.

Just one more time for anyone who may have missed it: I don't need Kickstarter to tell me that it's okay with Tentacle Bento or that it's not okay with it. The thing that I am paying them for is for them NOT to weigh in on questions like that. So by weighing in, they have actually rendered their own service value-less to me.

plastictrees wrote:

Manchu wrote:

warboss wrote:They likely "caved" to public pressure only when someone went through the trouble of manually reporting the project leading to the likely first ever glance with live eyeballs at Kickstarter HQ.

We actually know that this is NOT the case.

Kickstarter listed Tentacle Bento as one of its "Staff Picks" on its own front page shortly before suspending the project funding.

The real question is when live eyeballs started reading letters equating a card game with raping girls.

You keep saying this. I know your shtick is "no nonesense, telling it like it is", but you're being purposefully obtuse here. It's not "a card game". It's a card game directly referencing a genre that features girls being raped. Yes they are comics and cartoons. Yes, no actual girls were actually raped in the making of those comics, those cartoons, or this card game. That's ok then right? Unless the nonesense hyperbole of "won't someone think of all those poor girls being raped by aliens" is actually true then the only objections to the portrayal of that act must be hysterical political correctness, trolling, or white knighters (white knighting? Sorry, my dismissive internet vocab is rusty).

plastictrees wrote: I do believe that the context surrounding violence in general and the context around how women are percieved and treated is very different.

plastictrees wrote: I don't think that 40k, for instance, targets a specific group of people and makes a statement about how they can be treated.

plastictrees wrote:Again, I'm not saying that SP-TB is making a strong statement, I'm not saying that the game would lead to rape (seems ridiculous that I have to head off this sort of hyperbole, but, oh look, too late).

plastictrees wrote:It's a card game directly referencing a genre that features girls being raped. Yes they are comics and cartoons. Yes, no actual girls were actually raped in the making of those comics, those cartoons, or this card game. That's ok then right?

What makes made up solders killing made up people better than made up monsters raping made up girls?

Buzzsaw wrote:

plastictrees wrote:

Manchu wrote:

warboss wrote:They likely "caved" to public pressure only when someone went through the trouble of manually reporting the project leading to the likely first ever glance with live eyeballs at Kickstarter HQ.

We actually know that this is NOT the case.

Kickstarter listed Tentacle Bento as one of its "Staff Picks" on its own front page shortly before suspending the project funding.

The real question is when live eyeballs started reading letters equating a card game with raping girls.

You keep saying this. I know your shtick is "no nonesense, telling it like it is", but you're being purposefully obtuse here. It's not "a card game". It's a card game directly referencing a genre that features girls being raped. Yes they are comics and cartoons. Yes, no actual girls were actually raped in the making of those comics, those cartoons, or this card game. That's ok then right? Unless the nonesense hyperbole of "won't someone think of all those poor girls being raped by aliens" is actually true then the only objections to the portrayal of that act must be hysterical political correctness, trolling, or white knighters (white knighting? Sorry, my dismissive internet vocab is rusty).

It's a card game, and yes, it is harmless.

Or are you of the opinion that this movie is rank bigotry? I may not respect the opinion, but at least you would be consistent.

Edit: made the point even more obvious.

Valhallan42nd wrote:Kickstarter is a company that answers to it's backing public, or not, as it sees fit. Weighing the pros of hosting this project vs the backlash from the public, who literally vote with their wallet on this site, it chose damage control over any high minded stance.

Which is exactly what I would have done, had I been in the same position. I'm not going to hurt my livelihood over a card game. As much as that sucks to be Soda Pop in this part of the equation, you do what needs to be done, and fix it from there.

plastictrees wrote:

You keep saying this. I know your shtick is "no nonesense, telling it like it is", but you're being purposefully obtuse here. It's not "a card game". It's a card game directly referencing a genre that features girls being raped. Yes they are comics and cartoons. Yes, no actual girls were actually raped in the making of those comics, those cartoons, or this card game. That's ok then right? Unless the nonesense hyperbole of "won't someone think of all those poor girls being raped by aliens" is actually true then the only objections to the portrayal of that act must be hysterical political correctness, trolling, or white knighters (white knighting? Sorry, my dismissive internet vocab is rusty).

plastictrees wrote:So your counter is to repeat that "it's a card game" and then reference a completely unrelated piece of actual parody? Yes, you have turned my world upside down.

Manchu wrote:

plastictrees wrote:It's a card game directly referencing a genre that features girls being raped. Yes they are comics and cartoons. Yes, no actual girls were actually raped in the making of those comics, those cartoons, or this card game. That's ok then right?

Yes. Without equivocation, yes. It is okay. A thing that does not hurt anyone turns out not to hurt anyone.

I already talked about the moral panic over comic books. Maybe the one about D&D will be nearer and dearer to some people here. In the 80s, there was this idea that D&D would cause kids to kill themselves or each other. (For younger people, you've no doubt heard that video games supposedly do the same thing.) D&D was portrayed as the latest manifestation of black magic/satanism.

In the 90s, the language of identity politics became popularized. People who had never gone to anthropology or sociology classes became aware of phrases like "the objectification of women" for the first time. In those days, of course, people were extremely skeptical of the concept. Sexual harassment at the workplace? "Oh, she's just making a big deal out of nothing." Well, that "nothing" ended up costing millions in the courts. And so business started taking it seriously and they demanded that their employees take it just as seriously. But a HR policy isn't the same thing as actually understanding feminism.

In 2012, our popular culture only has a "HR policy level" of understanding feminism. Saying that Tentacle Bento is yet another facet of the oppression of women is exactly like saying that D&D is "witchcraft" or "satanism" (in the pejorative sense). People thought that D&D spoke to some kind of real immorality and they were just as serious about it as we are about women's rights. And yet all that seriousness still didn't make D&D about "satanism." It all boiled down to some simplistic associations: D&D books mention spells and demons -- sounds like satanism to me, yessir! Tentacle Bento has attractive anime girls and tentacles -- of course, it must be objectification of women!

As to tentacle hentai: even explicit images of cartoon ladies being forcibly penetrated by space monsters is NOT actually hurting anyone (assuming it's out of the reach of kids). The people who say this kind of porn or any other kind is tearing down one aspect or another of our society are laboring under an uncritical and seemingly false association. It reminds me of people who say that gun ownership necessarily leads to higher crime rates. These kind of explanations are nice in that (1) they don't require much thought to understand, (2) they make very complex problems seem very manageable, and (3) they allow us to rail against things that we don't like anyway. But none of those factors make them any more accurate.

plastictrees wrote:

Buzzsaw wrote:
It's a card game, and yes, it is harmless.

Or are you of the opinion that this movie is rank bigotry? I may not respect the opinion, but at least you would be consistent.

Edit: made the point even more obvious.

So your counter is to repeat that "it's a card game" and then reference a completely unrelated piece of actual parody? Yes, you have turned my world upside down.

Brother Gyoken wrote:

plastictrees wrote:

You keep saying this. I know your shtick is "no nonesense, telling it like it is", but you're being purposefully obtuse here. It's not "a card game". It's a card game directly referencing a genre that features girls being raped. Yes they are comics and cartoons. Yes, no actual girls were actually raped in the making of those comics, those cartoons, or this card game. That's ok then right? Unless the nonesense hyperbole of "won't someone think of all those poor girls being raped by aliens" is actually true then the only objections to the portrayal of that act must be hysterical political correctness, trolling, or white knighters (white knighting? Sorry, my dismissive internet vocab is rusty).

I think the "hysterical political correctness" or whatever you're being accused of comes from the fact this is a game that has not even a shred of reality attached to it. The monsters aren't realistic, the anime girls aren't realistic, there is a 0.0% chance of anyone being tentacle raped irl ever. This, in my mind, puts it way above the aforementioned "Pimp: The Backhanding", as human sex trafficking and forced prostitution are real and scary things. There are a TON of games that involve people being killed at war, or murdered otherwise. Those things happen in real life. Why are we not railing against those? According to that logic, it doesn't matter if a magic missile doesn't exist, we shouldn't be playing a game of it, no? By the way, eagerly looking forward to a snide dismissal from someone (not neccessarily you) on this point without a logical refutation.)

Let's be real for a second: tentacle hentai is stupid. Most people mock it. I feel this game was mocking it. I don't understand where a parody of a well-mocked genre suddenly becomes an example of that genre. Parody has long served as a way of pointing out flaws and ridiculousness of stupid things. I would guess the percentage of people that wanted this for arousal purposes to be less than 5 percent, though I obviously don't have real figures. It just seems relentlessly SILLY. I didn't even see a single piece of art where tentacle touched flesh, every piece seemed framed in a humorous way.

There was a recent controversy in Magic The Gathering over a piece of card art. http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=239962 I was actually on the side of feeling this art was in poor taste. Despite having magic in the woman's hand, he's physically dominating her, hand around her throat. He's at least 3 times as big as she is, and he has his knee between her legs in a penatrative stance. This is a pose that can and has been used to abuse women in real life. That is why I was upset with it and I can understand how it could trigger victims of sexual or domestic abuse.

NO ONE will be triggered by pictures of anime girls or lurking tentacles.

It's one thing to not like something. But to claim a clear parody of a pretty gross genre is glorifying it is pretty silly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

plastictrees wrote:So your counter is to repeat that "it's a card game" and then reference a completely unrelated piece of actual parody? Yes, you have turned my world upside down.

"It's a card game" is a stupid argument to make, but he's not too far off with the Blazing Saddles reference. it's as clear a parody of racism as TB is of Tentai (is that a word? I claim it if not!) I doubt a black person will watch Blazing Saddles and be offended over the scene as it's clearly a spoof of actual racism.

AegisGrimm wrote:I just think this form of entertainment is damn creepy. Go date and/or have sex with real people, instead of simulating it.

plastictrees wrote:Your juggling of condescension and false equivalencies is impressive. My suggestion isn't that this card game is tearing down any aspect of our society, it's that this card game is contributing to a mind set that should be torn down. Your gun ownership analogy is more brilliant nonsense. Please explain to me how my stance makes a complex problem seem more manageable especially when set against your stance of "it doesn't cause any problems, you're wrong". That's a complex bit of thinking right there.

Buzzsaw wrote:

plastictrees wrote:

Buzzsaw wrote:
It's a card game, and yes, it is harmless.

Or are you of the opinion that this movie is rank bigotry? I may not respect the opinion, but at least you would be consistent.

Edit: made the point even more obvious.

So your counter is to repeat that "it's a card game" and then reference a completely unrelated piece of actual parody? Yes, you have turned my world upside down.

Because Blazing Saddles is completely free from controversy. Always has been, of course. Everyone knows that.

I do like the intellectual bankruptcy here though: if you like it, it's a parody. If you don't it's another brink in the wall of oppression going all the way back to Eve and her apple.

plastictrees wrote:My suggestion isn't that this card game is tearing down any aspect of our society, it's that this card game is contributing to a mind set that should be torn down.

plastictrees wrote:I would genuinely need someone to explain to me how TB actually constitutes a parody, other than them saying it is one and not actually showing sexual acts.

Buzzsaw wrote:

plastictrees wrote:Your juggling of condescension and false equivalencies is impressive. My suggestion isn't that this card game is tearing down any aspect of our society, it's that this card game is contributing to a mind set that should be torn down. Your gun ownership analogy is more brilliant nonsense. Please explain to me how my stance makes a complex problem seem more manageable especially when set against your stance of "it doesn't cause any problems, you're wrong". That's a complex bit of thinking right there.

Ah, the Pièce de résistance! It's not that the thing itself is evil, it's that it contributes to a miasma of darkness, a mere soupçon of devilry in the grand buffet of women hatred.

You seem proud of the complexity of your foolishness, as if that insulates it from dismissal as foolishness. Guess what? The people that think Harry Potter can be an insidious tool of the occult can actually muster some pretty intense arguments. Doesn't make them any less silly.

Buzzsaw wrote:

plastictrees wrote:I would genuinely need someone to explain to me how TB actually constitutes a parody, other than them saying it is one and not actually showing sexual acts.

I fail to see why it needs to be a "parody", or why anyone should concern themselves with the opinoin of scolds. It's a joke. One either finds it funny or not.

plastictrees wrote:

Buzzsaw wrote:

plastictrees wrote:

Buzzsaw wrote:
It's a card game, and yes, it is harmless.

Or are you of the opinion that this movie is rank bigotry? I may not respect the opinion, but at least you would be consistent.

Edit: made the point even more obvious.

So your counter is to repeat that "it's a card game" and then reference a completely unrelated piece of actual parody? Yes, you have turned my world upside down.

Because Blazing Saddles is completely free from controversy. Always has been, of course. Everyone knows that.

I do like the intellectual bankruptcy here though: if you like it, it's a parody. If you don't it's another brink in the wall of oppression going all the way back to Eve and her apple.

I have never watched Blazing Saddles. I don't care about Blazing Saddles. Well done, you've caught me in your brilliant "intellectual bankruptcy" test.

Yup, you're right. Western society has a totally healthy perception of women. Suggesting otherwise is indeed equivalent to implying that the adventures of a boy wizard will lead to the earth being rent apart by Satan. I submit to your keen insight, the fragile core of my poorly conceived notions has been shattered.

plastictrees wrote:

Buzzsaw wrote:

plastictrees wrote:I would genuinely need someone to explain to me how TB actually constitutes a parody, other than them saying it is one and not actually showing sexual acts.

I fail to see why it needs to be a "parody", or why anyone should concern themselves with the opinoin of scolds. It's a joke. One either finds it funny or not.

???
You should probably be asking all the people that keep saying that "It's totally cool guys, it's just a parody".

Bakerofish wrote:Just a comment here:

Why is it that Violence is fine but Sex isnt?

Why is it that in a forum where people play WARGAMES and play unapologetically evil armies that the mere IMPLICATION of bumping uglies elicits such a vitriolic reaction?

Dark eldar for example. Nobody here bats an eyelash at the evil that they do, the S&M aesthetic that they bandy about. Heck if memory serves they actually use the word rape repeatedly in their codexes and books.

But in Tentacle Bento where the term "rape" is no where to be found people are up in arms.

I seriously didnt expect the same closed minded reactionary bullcrap that has hounded gamers and geek culture to be so well represented in DAKKA.

AegisGrimm wrote:Especially when it's in a tabletop game, where the effects of firing upon a target are pretty damn abstract. Noone has ever screamed about the violence of chess, which wargames are simply a fancy chromed-up version of, where if a "guy' gets "shot' they just get removed from the board. Now... if you're talking movies and videogames with plenty of gratuitous and graphical/audible results from lethally attacking an opponent, that's an entirely different story.

AegisGrimm wrote:Wargames of all types generally represent two forces meeting on a battlefield, where both are carrying guns. If onlookers are surprised by what comes next, they are pretty ignorant.

Now compare that to anything representing stalking and raping women......that's right up there with material graphically simulating torture or terrorism.

AegisGrimm wrote:It's not real, and because of that its perfectly legal, too, so you are within your rights to enjoy it. But most people likely think it's damn creepy that someone gets enjoyment out of it, and if you are defending it, don't go trying to pretend to be surprised by negative reactions.

His Master's Voice wrote:And again, why do we find fantasy rape creepy and fantasy death perfectly acceptable? Kill Bill was the equivalent of hardcore porn in terms of made-up violence. It was also a high profile theatrical release. I don't recall any porn movies breaking box office records recently.

Buzzsaw wrote:

Bakerofish wrote:Just a comment here:

Why is it that Violence is fine but Sex isnt?

Why is it that in a forum where people play WARGAMES and play unapologetically evil armies that the mere IMPLICATION of bumping uglies elicits such a vitriolic reaction?

Dark eldar for example. Nobody here bats an eyelash at the evil that they do, the S&M aesthetic that they bandy about. Heck if memory serves they actually use the word rape repeatedly in their codexes and books.

But in Tentacle Bento where the term "rape" is no where to be found people are up in arms.

I seriously didnt expect the same closed minded reactionary bullcrap that has hounded gamers and geek culture to be so well represented in DAKKA.

Because;
A) Sex is evil,
B) Women are fragile and must be protected,
C) "It will give people ideas",
D) You cannot trust people to have fun,
E) "Won't someone think of the children!"

plastictrees wrote:I have heard of Blazing Saddles. My understanding was that it is considered to be shock comedy/parody. You seem pretty gleeful about whatever that proves, so enjoy.

Western society has to be doing worse than other parts of the world at something in order for it to be a problem? What's your point here? Women don't get acid thrown in their face for wearing skirts in the US so everything's cool? It could be much worse so you're being a crazy person?

It's beautiful that people have equated "dislike of portrayals of rape" with "closed minded reactionary bullcrap". I particularly enjoyed the reference to Mitt Romney terrorizing a class mate. Because if I think that maybe girl rape art isn't necessarily a positive thing then I may as well be pinning you to the ground and tearing off your ill fitting hentai t-shirt that you should probably wash more.

Buzzsaw wrote:
In fairness, I would point out that in 2001 pornography was estimated to take $14 billion, compared to the 2009 domestic box office of $10.6 billion. ...

Buzzsaw wrote:

plastictrees wrote:I have heard of Blazing Saddles. My understanding was that it is considered to be shock comedy/parody. You seem pretty gleeful about whatever that proves, so enjoy.

Western society has to be doing worse than other parts of the world at something in order for it to be a problem? What's your point here? Women don't get acid thrown in their face for wearing skirts in the US so everything's cool? It could be much worse so you're being a crazy person?

It's beautiful that people have equated "dislike of portrayals of rape" with "closed minded reactionary bullcrap". I particularly enjoyed the reference to Mitt Romney terrorizing a class mate. Because if I think that maybe girl rape art isn't necessarily a positive thing then I may as well be pinning you to the ground and tearing off your ill fitting hentai t-shirt that you should probably wash more.

Are you a farmer, because you have quite the crop of straw men standing here.

You talk about "dislike of portrayals of rape"; is it a more offensive portrayal then the hundreds of uses of the word "[see forum posting rules]" in Blazing Saddles? No offense, but if "shock comedy/parody" is fine, you need to then establish why this particular example (bento) is not in the same category as an example you think is fine (Saddles). Otherwise you're just pointing at something you don't like and stamping your feet.

As for "Western society", exactly where are we falling down on the job, and how is Bento going to be the banana peel that makes us pratfall once more?

The mention of Romney is, frankly, incoherent. Which isn't surprising, but I feel it ought to be pointed out.

plastictrees wrote:None of those things actually. Feel free to view me as Mrs. Lovejoy (or was it Maud Flanders?) though, whatever makes your strawmen easier to construct.

adhuin wrote:

Buzzsaw wrote:
In fairness, I would point out that in 2001 pornography was estimated to take $14 billion, compared to the 2009 domestic box office of $10.6 billion. ...

Good thing you've read your links. First article bunks the whole 14 billion claim and sets much more modest questimate of 3 billion or so.
And that includes all forms of delivery (marital aids, digital services, dvds, stripclubs etc) VS first step of Hollywood movie profit making.

It’s probably not unrealistic to say that porn makes up 30% of the total data transferred across the internet.

plastictrees wrote:I have heard of Blazing Saddles. My understanding was that it is considered to be shock comedy/parody. You seem pretty gleeful about whatever that proves, so enjoy.

Western society has to be doing worse than other parts of the world at something in order for it to be a problem? What's your point here? Women don't get acid thrown in their face for wearing skirts in the US so everything's cool? It could be much worse so you're being a crazy person?

It's beautiful that people have equated "dislike of portrayals of rape" with "closed minded reactionary bullcrap". I particularly enjoyed the reference to Mitt Romney terrorizing a class mate. Because if I think that maybe girl rape art isn't necessarily a positive thing then I may as well be pinning you to the ground and tearing off your ill fitting hentai t-shirt that you should probably wash more.

My problem with this getting canceled and the whole issue in general is NOT the people who say "I disagree with this project and I can't bring myself to support it, nor would would I support it if it were my call to allow it."

My problem is the people who say " I disagree with this project. I'm going to write a million letters to Kickstarter to have it canceled right away."

Really? That's akin to Mitt Romney attacking a kid with a bleach blonde emo swoop because he didn't think it belonged in his enviroment.

I partly hold Kickstarter responsible. It doesnt appear to me the game upset their own moral codes, as it was reviewed before hand and even featured. They caved to pressure and cancelled the game because some people didn't like it.

Another example of the squeaky wheel getting the grease. That people haven't complained about Leisure Suit Larry Comes Again or The Smut Peddler is curious.

I can't abandon Kickstarter completely as they do some good work and enable things to hit market that normally couldn't, but I am disillusioned with them as a neutral supporter of all projects. Like Ouze said, it's a black eye on Kickstarter in general.

Buzzsaw wrote:
Because;
A) Sex is evil,
B) Women are fragile and must be protected,
C) "It will give people ideas",
D) You cannot trust people to have fun,
E) "Won't someone think of the children!"

Pick one or more of the above.

FYI: Since I started posting about an hour ago, the Find Tentacle Bento! page has racked (zing!) up more then $2000 in pledges.

Heck, when I started posting I was merely bemused, now I've put down filthy lucre for some of that sweet, sweet sinful stuff.

I plan to smear it all over my body.

It's beautiful that people have equated "dislike of portrayals of rape" with "closed minded reactionary bullcrap". I particularly enjoyed the reference to Mitt Romney terrorizing a class mate. Because if I think that maybe girl rape art isn't necessarily a positive thing then I may as well be pinning you to the ground and tearing off your ill fitting hentai t-shirt that you should probably wash more.

plastictrees wrote:An earlier poster in the thread referenced this which he equated with what Kickstarter is doing and is what I was referring to. Which part don't you understand?

So I need to explain why I haven't started an angry thread yelling about a near 40 year old movie in order for me to hold an opinion on portrayals of sexualised teenagers and rape? I have to dislike everything that you've conflated as being in the same "crazy politically correct" wheel house in order for my opinion to be valid? Let go of Blazing Saddles. I'm not going to go watch a movie in order to continue an internet debate in the manner in which you would like it to continue.

I'm not going to educate you on the status of women in, lets say the US in particular. I think we're getting well beyond the realm of Dakka Dakka here. If you're actually interested and not just being a smug prick then you can PM me. If you're not then you can take this as a victory and celebrate by masturbating furiously to whatever you like, free of judgement and scolding.

Brother Gyoken wrote:

I'm actually on your "side" but your posting is making me reconsider that position, so good on you I guess?

It's beautiful that people have equated "dislike of portrayals of rape" with "closed minded reactionary bullcrap". I particularly enjoyed the reference to Mitt Romney terrorizing a class mate. Because if I think that maybe girl rape art isn't necessarily a positive thing then I may as well be pinning you to the ground and tearing off your ill fitting hentai t-shirt that you should probably wash more.

I'm still not seeing the portrayal of rape though? You can make an insinuation that it shares a genre with a type of animation that usually involves rape, but actually portraying it is a stretch and arguing it does your position no good.

I feel like the art shows it's clearly a spoof. There's no implication of rape in any of the pieces shown.

Buzzsaw wrote:

plastictrees wrote:An earlier poster in the thread referenced this which he equated with what Kickstarter is doing and is what I was referring to. Which part don't you understand?

So I need to explain why I haven't started an angry thread yelling about a near 40 year old movie in order for me to hold an opinion on portrayals of sexualised teenagers and rape? I have to dislike everything that you've conflated as being in the same "crazy politically correct" wheel house in order for my opinion to be valid? Let go of Blazing Saddles. I'm not going to go watch a movie in order to continue an internet debate in the manner in which you would like it to continue.

I'm not going to educate you on the status of women in, lets say the US in particular. I think we're getting well beyond the realm of Dakka Dakka here. If you're actually interested and not just being a smug prick then you can PM me. If you're not then you can take this as a victory and celebrate by masturbating furiously to whatever you like, free of judgement and scolding.

I'm honestly beginning to think this is a lark, or a laugh you're having here.

This is babbling.

Either you accept that people can enjoy things you find upsetting, or you can't. Replace Blazing Saddles with whatever parody you actually are familiar with. If you can't think of anything, then the problem may just lie in you. Juuuuuust maybe.

The status of women in the US... yes, I often wonder how women can make it through the day. The horror.

I do have to say how enjoyable it is to see you in one post firmly disclaim that you are motivated by the notion that "sex is evil", and in another advise "If you're not then you can take this as a victory and celebrate by masturbating furiously to whatever you like, free of judgement and scolding."

Because, after all, you're very sophisticated about all this. Very Sex-Positive, eh?

Buzzsaw wrote:

Brother Gyoken wrote:

I'm actually on your "side" but your posting is making me reconsider that position, so good on you I guess?

It's beautiful that people have equated "dislike of portrayals of rape" with "closed minded reactionary bullcrap". I particularly enjoyed the reference to Mitt Romney terrorizing a class mate. Because if I think that maybe girl rape art isn't necessarily a positive thing then I may as well be pinning you to the ground and tearing off your ill fitting hentai t-shirt that you should probably wash more.

I'm still not seeing the portrayal of rape though? You can make an insinuation that it shares a genre with a type of animation that usually involves rape, but actually portraying it is a stretch and arguing it does your position no good.

I feel like the art shows it's clearly a spoof. There's no implication of rape in any of the pieces shown.

Purely out of curiosity, I take from your comment that you feel I am mischaracterizing the argument of people like Plastic. To be clear, I am agreeing with Manchu's position that they represent the position of "moral panic", little different from the people that wrote letters to BioWare/EA complaining about the inclusion of SS relationships.

Do you feel I am wrongly characterizing them? How would you do so?

plastictrees wrote:To Manchu, I appreciate what you're saying. I believe that this type of forum discussion encourages people to summarize arguments in a way that can leave them very open to the black/white views that people tend to latch on to. I'm not about to put together the sort of image heavy essay necessary to better illustrate my position, and I mean that without sarcasm. I appreciate that the burden of "proof" is on me in the situation you're describing, I'm not prepared to take on that burden in this context.

Because;
A) Sex is evil,
B) Women are fragile and must be protected,
C) "It will give people ideas",
D) You cannot trust people to have fun,
E) "Won't someone think of the children!"

Formosa wrote:storm sheild relationships!!! the sick Bar stuards

Phototoxin wrote:Unless you are a) an octopus or b) Cthuhlu then I don't see how we're going to start tentacle raping lots of nubile, busty schoolgirls/

Formosa wrote:
In my less than humble opinion there is far too little octopus sex out there, i was watching the discovery channel about octopi...pees...pusseesseessesss... whatever and there was absolutely no schoolgirls... i mean what is the world coming too!

scarletsquig wrote:

Phototoxin wrote:Unless you are a) an octopus or b) Cthuhlu then I don't see how we're going to start tentacle raping lots of nubile, busty schoolgirls/

Sorry for the horrifically bad taste, but this thread was getting way too serious for its own good.

Manchu wrote:Well, the argument seems to be that tentacle rape is just an image of actual rape.

d-usa wrote:Clearly tentacles are penises.

Manchu wrote:Well, the argument seems to be that tentacle rape is just an image of actual rape.

TheSecretSquig wrote:Well I've just re pledged through Sodapop's site my $60. Don't know why they didn't go this route in the first place. Being a big fan of Anime and Manga, I can't wait to receive the game, artwork, and models. Funnily enough, it will arrive just in time for my Wife and I's holiday to Japan. Something to play on the Plane / Train which won't even raise an eyebrow over there.

To all the 'Moral Police'. I call you HYPERCRITES. The Alien Tentacle Anime theme is well established in Tokyo Pop Culture and raises no eyebrows whatsoever. This Alien Tentacle Rape is 'unacceptable' and wrong by your standards. Fine no issue, everyone is entitled to their opinion. We in the Western World have something called Freedom (or so I thought). You have a choice. If you don't like it, don't buy, look at it. What gets my back up is 'because I think it’s wrong, then it shouldn't be allowed'. As long as its legal, what’s the issue? Clearly there are no laws being broken by Sodapop, but people insist that their views are best ‘so let’s get the Project shut down’....

scarletsquig wrote:This doesn't surprise me, Kickstarter is an American website, and America, in general (not individuals, obviously, and not everyone in the entire country, obviously), has a giant-centipede-sized bug up its ass when it comes to anything sexual, explicit or implied.

Fountains of gore, casual cold-blooded murder, butchery, torture and mutilation though?

Totally A-OK U-S-A, come bring the children and enjoy the show!

Of course, it's their site, they have the right to ban anything they want. Should have done this at the review stage though, instead of being jerks about it.

Manchu wrote:

warboss wrote:They likely "caved" to public pressure only when someone went through the trouble of manually reporting the project leading to the likely first ever glance with live eyeballs at Kickstarter HQ.

We actually know that this is NOT the case.

Kickstarter listed Tentacle Bento as one of its "Staff Picks" on its own front page shortly before suspending the project funding.

The real question is when live eyeballs started reading letters equating a card game with raping girls.

MagickalMemories wrote:I get that Kickstarter's lost favor with you, Manchu, but I think you're too colored by your own opinions and not giving the facts enough weight. Kickstarter made a decision then, as is their right, changed their mind when, as a corporate entity, they changed their minds.

Cyporiean wrote:Got this from Kotaku btw, who didn't have a single problem with it.

Bakerofish wrote:Just a comment here:

Why is it that Violence is fine but Sex isnt?

lord_blackfang wrote:Because extremists can fight sex with violence, but not the other way around.

Yup, I went there. I compared the rage over Tentacle Bento with bombing abortion clinics. It's the same mindset.

Agamemnon2 wrote:You, sir, are a nincompoop.

Agamemnon2 wrote:You sure did. Wow. And I thought these forums had already spawned the worst argument imaginable. I had no inkling they had more still left in the tank.

brettz123 wrote:

TheSecretSquig wrote:Well I've just re pledged through Sodapop's site my $60. Don't know why they didn't go this route in the first place. Being a big fan of Anime and Manga, I can't wait to receive the game, artwork, and models. Funnily enough, it will arrive just in time for my Wife and I's holiday to Japan. Something to play on the Plane / Train which won't even raise an eyebrow over there.

To all the 'Moral Police'. I call you HYPERCRITES. The Alien Tentacle Anime theme is well established in Tokyo Pop Culture and raises no eyebrows whatsoever. This Alien Tentacle Rape is 'unacceptable' and wrong by your standards. Fine no issue, everyone is entitled to their opinion. We in the Western World have something called Freedom (or so I thought). You have a choice. If you don't like it, don't buy, look at it. What gets my back up is 'because I think it’s wrong, then it shouldn't be allowed'. As long as its legal, what’s the issue? Clearly there are no laws being broken by Sodapop, but people insist that their views are best ‘so let’s get the Project shut down’....

2. People have the freedom to support this project if they want and people also have the freedom to not support it. You sir are the one acting like a hypocrite. Kickstarter is a private institution run by private citizens who also have the right in a free society to allow or disallow any project they want to. That is what freedom is all about.

TheSecretSquig wrote:
If as you so put above, people have the freedom to support something or not, then please explain why the people not supporting have applied pressure to have Kickstarter close the project down?

TheSecretSquig wrote:
So by your definition above, you are free to support something, but not free to support something you find offensive (but legal). If you don't want to support it, you apply pressure to make sure no one else can support it. By definition that Sir, that is Hypocritical.

TheSecretSquig wrote:
The point is, Kickstarter allowed the Project, supported it, and even highlighted it as a staff choice. A couple of people find it offensive. So instead of just walking by, they then write biased articles, applying pressure on Kickstarter, who then cave in for fear of bad PR, and cancel it. You either support it or you don't. You don't change your mind half way through.

AgentProvacateur wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=dL1n1mEBWvc

Agamemnon2 wrote:Even then, equating people protesting against a game, a GAME, with acts of arson, murder and terrorism is beyond the pale, even on the Internet.

Manchu wrote:Even so: Anyone and any company can be charged with hypocrisy but that's not really much of a charge. People (and companies) make mistakes -- it doesn't mean that they have to keep making mistakes in order to be consistent and thus legitimate. If Kickstarter looked back on "Kittens In A Blender" with regret, then canceling Tentacle Bento is at least consistent with that regret.

The real problems are:

(1) a company that we pay to NOT exert third-party control over funding is doing exactly that

and, much more disappointing really,

(2) some people think Tentacle Bento is advocacy of violence against women.

Alfndrate wrote:
I have found, since reading the kotaku article's comments, there is a game that was made called "Kittens in a Blender" yes it is exactly what you think it is about. Kittens in blenders, and it was funded via kickstarter. So the death of fake representations of real animals in fake representations of real blenders in card game form is okay, but fake tentacles grabbing fake girls at a fake school in card game form is not.

lord_blackfang wrote:... until they grow a pair and stop giving in to fundie nonsense.

Michelle Zhang wrote:The game in itself, from what I gathered from the information posted on the Kickstarter and the website itself, is a tongue-in-cheek card game about tentacle monsters and girls. You play as a monster with tentacles disguised as a girl whose goal is to capture girls in a high school. The object is to capture girls before your opponent (also a monster disguised as a girl) does.

That’s it.

So where’s the controversy? The controversy comes from our own minds. Our own already twisted minds projecting our thoughts on to the game. And in a way I feel like this game is suppose to get us to have that reaction. It’s a sort of commentary on how we see certain things. A commentary on how this genre has been so pervasive that we automatically associate “tentacle” with something more sinister.

Allison Jones wrote:tbh as someone who rather likes the tentacle rape kink it sort of made me chuckle. but if you don’t like it then it’s not a game for you and you don’t have to support it.

and that’s fine. but being angry that the game exists, or is about to exist, isn’t about stopping rape culture, it’s about shaming people for liking a kink and having fun with it. and i think that’s absurd.

Alfndrate wrote:Possibly, Kittens in a Blender was funded 4 days ago, Tentacle Bento was canned 2 days ago.

Alfndrate wrote:

...

I could post the mind achingly numbing conversation I had with my friend who heard about this yesterday and is insanely angry over the fact that this game even possibly existed.

Thunderfrog wrote:

Alfndrate wrote:Possibly, Kittens in a Blender was funded 4 days ago, Tentacle Bento was canned 2 days ago.

If someone funded Kittens in a Blender 4 days ago, then someone's commiting fraud. I've purchased/owned that game for my kids since last Christmas.

In the interests of staying on-topic:

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1187581581/kittens-in-a-blender-the-card-game/posts

Thanks ~ Manchu

Kilkrazy wrote:

Alfndrate wrote:

...

I could post the mind achingly numbing conversation I had with my friend who heard about this yesterday and is insanely angry over the fact that this game even possibly existed.

Only a terrible troll would buy him a copy of this...

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/13210/hentacle

What this really boils down to is whether a game such as Tentacle Bento is actually harming anybody.

If cancelling the production of Tentacle Bento would prevent even a single person from being subjected to an act of violence, I would gladly put a torch to every copy of the game. However, I’m not an expert on women’s issues, and would never claim to be, so I cannot speak to the effect of such a game on society. I also can’t speak for the other journalists covering this topic, but unless they have some expertise in this field, they are taking a stance rooted in personal taste and opinion.

Whether the company's products are in good taste or bad, the folks behind Soda Pop Miniatures are real people with real jobs. Regardless of how I actually feel about Tentacle Bento, advocating harm to a company based on what amounts to a judgment call is an action I could never take.

If cancelling the production of Tentacle Bento would prevent even a single person from being subjected to an act of violence, I would gladly put a torch to every copy of the game.

Brandon Sheffield wrote: The company [Kickstarter] should not help to facilitate the idea that rape is no big deal.

Manchu wrote:What I said is that it was "more reasonable" than this:

Brandon Sheffield wrote: The company [Kickstarter] should not help to facilitate the idea that rape is no big deal.

Matt Morgan's piece is a direct criticism of Sheffield's call to arms.

biccat wrote:They're just saying it is in poor taste.

Kovnik Obama wrote:I'd like to note the fact that 'tentacle rape' in this context seems to means 'tentacle groping'. Is groping rape now? Anyone at Kickstarter ever seen an octopus trying to grab a hold of something? Because it's pretty much all groping all the time. Try to hug that girl? Grope. Been asked to help figure out you GF's bra size? Grope. Shake that guy's hand? Grope the frak of those fingers.

Poor little octopus is now a serial rapist...

Manchu wrote:

MagickalMemories wrote:I get that Kickstarter's lost favor with you, Manchu, but I think you're too colored by your own opinions and not giving the facts enough weight. Kickstarter made a decision then, as is their right, changed their mind when, as a corporate entity, they changed their minds.

I don't think I've ever said Kickstarter should not have the right not to do business with Soda Pop. What I have said is that Kickstarter's business is providing a contact between creators and investors where there is little to no third-party control of funding. So yes they have the right to exercise that third-party control by, for example, canceling certain projects mid-funding but exercising that right obviously undermines them as a business.

Also, Eric, in the post you quoted I was actually reciting the facts in response to speculation. I'm pretty surprised that you chose to quote that post as an example of me "not giving the facts enough weight."

Kovnik Obama wrote:I'd like to note the fact that 'tentacle rape' in this context seems to means 'tentacle groping'. Is groping rape now?

Manchu wrote:Even so: Anyone and any company can be charged with hypocrisy but that's not really much of a charge. People (and companies) make mistakes -- it doesn't mean that they have to keep making mistakes in order to be consistent and thus legitimate. If Kickstarter looked back on "Kittens In A Blender" with regret, then canceling Tentacle Bento is at least consistent with that regret.

The real problems are:

(1) a company that we pay to NOT exert third-party control over funding is doing exactly that

and, much more disappointing really,

(2) some people think Tentacle Bento is advocacy of violence against women.

Manchu wrote:@Eric:

That's a good point. There is an indirect relationship between the investor and Kickstarter. But let's face it:

- No Creators = No Kickstarter; AND
- No Investors = No Kickstarter

I am really curious as to what you think Kickstarter sells if not the direct connection between creator and investor? And I'm also curious to hear what you think Kickstarter did by canceling this project if not sever that very connection?

John Cadice of Kickstarter emailed Brandon Sheffield and Sheffield intervied him. IMO, Cadice comes off as truly professional here and I'm glad Sheffield allowed and published this dialog:

http://insertcredit.com/2012/05/17/the-boundaries-of-humor-an-interview-with-john-cadice-creator-of-tentacle-bento/

insert credit wrote:BS: You also said: “Yes, the art is suggestive, but there is no nudity, no running screaming fearful faces dripping with tears and horror, there is plenty of innuendo, as it is geared to get a naughty giggle out of a table of adult gamers.. but anime fans know about this genre, the taboos around it, etc.” – in my article, I asserted that treating the subject of rape or molestation lightly is part of the problem. How do you respond? It calls to mind these old ads. Some might call it harmless fun, others might say it perpetuates a mindset of casual treatment of violence toward women.

JC: It’s a valid point, there is nothing casual about violence, rape, molestation. Working in marketing, social norms shift and change depending on the audience you want to reach. I don’t ask everyone to love this game, anime in general is quite a rub to lots of people. I do not believe it perpetuates a casual mindset toward rape, because, as its designer, that was not the intent, and mostly because there is not rape in our game.

We can run down a million rabbit holes just as bad by cross examining why women wear high heeled shoes, the appropriateness of camouflage as a textile pattern for children… etc etc etc. Show me ponies being ridden by children under a rainbow, and I will find someone to shout about the subjugation of intelligent animals for our petty amusement with as much intensity as this argument.

wyomingfox wrote:Because (alledged or otherwise) subjugation or abuse of animals is on par with (alledged or otherwise) subjugation or abuse of human minors... o_O. That would run counter to US law.

"Groping" is pretty much by definition, without consent and considered a form of sexual assault. Sure it's not as serious as rape, but that's like saying "I shot your child in the foot, but at least I didn't shoot him in the head!"

Off-topic but if a person 18 or older "groped" a person under 18 in the U.S, I believe it would be clasified as "sexual assault of a minor" regardless of whether the minor consented or not...though there are exceptions (Parental Consent to be maried to a minor 16 years or older). The guilty party would be facing jail time.

AegisGrimm wrote:Here's my two definitive statements on this whole thing:

1. Kickstarter can do whatever the hell they want with their site. It totally sucks if you don't like what they do, but there it is.

AegisGrimm wrote:2. On the state of the game and it's image of imagines rape: It's not real, and because of that its perfectly legal, too, so you are within your rights to enjoy it. But most people are likely to think it's damn creepy that someone gets enjoyment out of it, and if you are defending it, don't go trying to pretend to be surprised by the negative reactions. You aren't fooling anyone.

Manchu wrote:The facts, as near as they can be deciphered thanks to Kickstarter's policy of not explaining its actions to all of its customers, have been established.

- Kickstarter approved the Tentacle Bento Project.
- The Tentacle Bento Project made good headway.
- Kickstarter put the Tentacle Bento Project on its own front page as a "Staff Pick."
- Brandon Sheffield urged his readers to demand that Kickstarter cancel the project.
- Sheffield's article was praised by and distributed through Kotaku.
- Kickstarter canceled the Tentacle Bento Project.
- The Tentacle Bento Project had been funded as of that point in the amount of $30,701.
- Soda Pop Miniatures moved the project to its own site as a pre-order offer.
- As of right now, Soda Pop has received pre-orders in the amount of $22,138.
- We will never know how much investors would have sunk into the Tentacle Bento Project if Kickstarter had allowed it to continue.

So which of these facts am I not giving enough weight, Eric?

wyomingfox wrote:

Kovnik Obama wrote:I'd like to note the fact that 'tentacle rape' in this context seems to means 'tentacle groping'. Is groping rape now?

Off-topic but if a person 18 or older "groped" a person under 18 in the U.S, I believe it would be clasified as "sexual assault of a minor" regardless of whether the minor consented or not...though there are exceptions (Parental Consent to be maried to a minor 16 years or older). The guilty party would be facing jail time.

wyomingfox wrote:Because (alledged or otherwise) subjugation or abuse of animals is on par with (alledged or otherwise) subjugation or abuse of human minors... o_O. That would run counter to US law.

Mr. Sheffield,

Your central point seems to be that Tentacle Bento trivializes violence against women. I would suggest that your argument begs the question.

I really don't have any interest in defending the hentai sub-genre of tentacle rape but I do want to point out that you have offered no credentials to support the idea that you have an accurate understanding of Japanese niche cultures or how they are patronized in the West. Your argument that this brand of hentai trivializes or advocates for violence against women therefore boils down to "come on, it's obvious." That is astoundingly presumptive given the seriousness of the charge. Indeed, it reminds me of the post-rape scenario where the victim is told "come on, that short skirt (etc) makes it obvious that you wanted it."

But fine, for the purposes of this comment, I will assume (despite having no actual knowledge derived from research or any other special insight myself) that the tentacle rape sub-genre does in fact trivialize violence against women. We can come to your next assumption: that any depiction suggestive of that sub-genre also trivializes violence against women. In your analysis of your interview with Mr. Cadice, you mention that Mr. Cadice did not satisfactorily explain how Tentacle Bento is a satire of the tentacle rape sub-genre. Your conclusion seems to me to be based on the idea that a proper satire would explicitly denounce the genre.

Earlier today, I cam across the comments on tumblr by a person named Michelle Zhang. She had this to say:

"So where’s the controversy? The controversy comes from our own minds. Our own already twisted minds projecting our thoughts on to the game. And in a way I feel like this game is suppose to get us to have that reaction. It’s a sort of commentary on how we see certain things. A commentary on how this genre has been so pervasive that we automatically associate “tentacle” with something more sinister."

I thought that was exceptionally poignant. The satirical possibilities of this game are directly the result of what it leaves to your imagination rather than any narrative that it forces on you. And it is you who creates the satire by engaging. Tentacle Bento makes of aware of our need to rationalize things that we don't actually understand. It doesn't provide us with the tools to undertake that rationalization, either, which I find to be its most fascinating feature. Frankly, this is the bizarre and uncomfortable experience of exposure to the Japanese niche-culture of hentai tentacle rape. That hentai makes us judge. Not passing judgment doesn't seem to be an option. Even people who try to avoid xenophobia cannot help but wonder "what is wrong with Japan?"

Of course, that judgment/rationalization is not a hard one because the actual tentacle rape anime is so obviously disgusting to most Western people. (Contrast the questions "is murder wrong?" and "is a soldier killing an enemy soldier during wartime wrong?" for example.) Tentacle Bento does indeed clean that image up a bit and so the judgment call becomes harder. The ambiguity that you complain of, in other words, is absolutely essential to the satire. And the satire, as I indicated earlier, is not really of tentacle rape hentai but of our reaction to it.

If you look at Mr. Cadice's responses, right from the beginning he is eager to apologize for anyone being hurt or upset. You can cynically dismiss that as PR but I believe it indicates the actual quality of satire that was intended -- basically, to make the target audience uncomfortable enough to blush and feel confused about how they "should" (especially within the rather puritanical bounds of public sexual discourse in America) react. Mr. Cadice acknowledges that this experience of ambiguity may indeed upset some people outside of the target audience and I find that sincere.

One objection to my argument above is that the target audience would not be made uncomfortable or undergo any cognitive dissonance by engaging with Tentacle Bento. I think that point reveals a basic lack of familiarity with the target audience. The best way to illustrate my point is: if the target audience were people who approved of or lusted after violence against women, why would this game so studiously avoid that very thing? It seems to me that not being explicit, not hammering anyone over the head with the sheerly bizarre imagery of hentai tentacle rape is itself the point. If the target audience was people who get off to girls being raped by monsters ... well, I'd say that Soda Pop did a very poor job targeting them with Tentacle Bento.

I think the point of this game is to ask yourself why you're blushing; to ask yourself why you have the assumptions that you do. Like everything, a lot of people won't get past the very superficial experience of the mechanics and the pictures. But just as you seem to assume that a tacit approval of and participation in the subjugation of women is the obvious content of this game, I think the obvious content is a Western experience of something that is basically not Western.

Regardless of our disagreement, I appreciate the space you have provided for dialog and hope that it will remain unclouded by preconceived notions about what people who enjoy different things than you, who are in some (perhaps otherwise insignificant) way not like you, MUST be like or MUST advocate in order to be different from you in that manner.

MagickalMemories wrote:

Manchu wrote:So which of these facts am I not giving enough weight, Eric?

-We have no proof that Kickstarter actually caved to to ASSUMED demands from readers who may or may not have contacted Kickstarter.

Manchu wrote:*snip*

Absolutionis wrote:

wyomingfox wrote:Because (alledged or otherwise) subjugation or abuse of animals is on par with (alledged or otherwise) subjugation or abuse of human minors... o_O. That would run counter to US law.

You must have missed my more legitimate comment.

"Grouping" is, by legal definition, Sexual Assault. Simple as that.

There is no legal technicality that you can squeeze your strawman now.

Sexual Assault is never acceptable even if you call it "groping".

Dear Mr. Hamilton,

I have been following the story of Tentacle Bento pretty closely but I
am not associated with Soda Pop Miniatures in any way other than
having recently pledged money to the Tentacle Bento project. I just
read your recent piece "Creator of 'Satirical' Tentacle-Rape Game
Apologizes" and I wanted to bring to your attention a different
perspective on this matter. I have attempted to post the following
comments to Brandon Sheffield's article containing his interview with
John Cadice. I hope you will take the time to read them even if they
are quite lengthy.

[snip]

Thank you for reading all of that, if you did. Whether or not you can
agree with me or even conceive of my point of view in this matter I
think it is important that we at least try to share different views.
In that light, I am sorry to say that I found you article to be
conclusory and judgmental. I don't know whether Kotaku aspires to
neutrality in coverage as a matter of professionalism or not but
statements like "And satirical intentions or no, this game is… well
come on, guys, it's pretty creepy." don't seem to forward that goal.
Also, the lack of any mention of Kotaku's earlier article in
solidarity with Mr. Sheffield much less Kotaku's approval of the
Tentacle Grape soda product seems inappropriately misleading.

I would ask that you reconsider your coverage of this issue as a
matter of conscience.

Thank you again for your consideration,