German psychotherapists want to ban violent video games !

[Soldat_Louis]

I've just learnt that the GWG, the most important federation of psychoterapists in Europe, called for a ban on so-called "killergames", that they compared to "anti-personnel mine for soul". I found only one link in English about the subject :

http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/99732

Poor Germans (though we might have the same thing in France, in Italy or elsewhere...).

[Grahamr]

I saw no facts in that report...only hyperbole.

Are the German courts armed with any form of the first amendment? If so, this could end fast.

[Soldat_Louis]

Anyway, here is the GWG's official press release (http://www.gwg-ev.org/cms/cms.php?textid=1213) (taken from their website). It's in German, but a Google translation allows you to understand the essential. However, if someone can translate it, I'd be grateful.

[IanCharles@gmail.com]

This doenst surprise me, Germany is already very harsh on video games.

[kurisu7885]

This doenst surprise me, Germany is already very harsh on video games.

If SWAT teams raiding Crytek are no indication

[Soldat_Louis]

By the way, there is a translation of the GWG's press release available in English. But as it was made by LaRouchites, read it with caution. (http://www.gamepoliticsforums.com/showpost.php?p=56972&postcount=135)

[kurisu7885]

By the way, there is a translation of the GWG's press release available in English. But as it was made by LaRouchites, read it with caution. (http://www.gamepoliticsforums.com/showpost.php?p=56972&postcount=135)

If it was translated by them, then it's not worht reading as it wouldn't be the original report.

[DarrelBT]

If SWAT teams raiding Crytek are no indication

That one doesn't count actually. THe raid is was related to software piracy, not game violence.

[Pelor]

I saw no facts in that report...only hyperbole.

Are the German courts armed with any form of the first amendment? If so, this could end fast.

Yes, Germany's Basic Law guarantees free speech, but it doesn't have the same kind of strength as in the United States. The worst that can happen is that the game is put on the infamous Index (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundespr%C3%BCfstelle_f%C3%BCr_jugendgef%C3%A4hrde nde_Medien). It would be illegal to sell, display, advertise, or even give the game to a minor.

[Grahamr]

In other words, g2 Austria. :D

[Twin-Skies]

"Landmines for the soul"?

I find this statement hypocritical...coming from a country that happens to be the home hq for H&K, Mauser, Rhinemetall, (formerly) Daimler-Benz, Krupps, and the like.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Then again, until they can come up with real figure to back up their statements, they'll have no less credibility than the LaRouche group.

[Pelor]

"Landmines for the soul"?

Sounds like the name for an awesome rock ballad.

[Twin-Skies]

Sounds like the name for an awesome rock ballad.

I'm not rock fan, but yeah, that'd make a good title.

Even better if its message is something in the lines of "Rage against ignorance!"

[Soldat_Louis]

The GWG's initial press release on the ban of "killergames" sparked so many reactions that they published another one (http://www.gwg-ev.org/cms/cms.php?textid=1216), in which they justify their call for a ban, and refute the arguments of their detractors.

A Google translation allows to understand the essential, though I'd like to have a real translation.

[Kranki]

The GWG's initial press release on the ban of "killergames" sparked so many reactions that they published another one (http://www.gwg-ev.org/cms/cms.php?textid=1216), in which they justify their call for a ban, and refute the arguments of their detractors.

A Google translation allows to understand the essential, though I'd like to have a real translation.

Well, you want a real translation, here is one up until the end of section 2. If no other source crops up until tomorrow evening, I'll add the other half when I get home. (It's almost 1 am now, I really should get to bed.) I also added some comments of my own at the end of this post that I thought to be interesting for anyone actually reading the whole text.

-----------BEGINNING-OF-TRANSLATION----------
Response of the GWG to the reactions to our press release of November 28, 2007:
"Violent games destroy compassion - no killergames for Christmas" [title of the original press release]

The GWG appreciates the lively discussion of the topic "violent computer games" caused by our press release.
We are happy about the numerous affirmative reactions of parents, educators, scientists and by our colleagues. Regarding the critically-dismissive comments, we choose, because their number makes individual replies unfeasible, this way, to answer them thematically grouped and to give our opinion.

1. The existing possibilities for a ban of violent games are sufficient.
The existing legal measures (§ 131 StGB) are obviously insufficent. The current implementation of the law about the "display of violence"are not effective. That's why the Secetaries of the Interior of Bayern, Sachsen, Niedersachsen demand a furtherreaching ban. Current youth protection of minors is insufficient. The "Selbstkontrolle durch die Unterhaltungssoftware Selbstkontrolle (USK)" and the possibilities of the "Bundesprüfstelle für jugendgefährdende Medien" (BPjM) don't make certain, that violence-promoting games like e.g. "Doom3" can't be bought and played by minors.
See also the ZDF-report: http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=zOD4Is0lGVo&feature=related

2. Research reports, that show a relation of media and real violence don't exist.

We refer to these three scientific works of the large number we have available:

* The study of the psychologist Rita Steckel und Clemens Trudewind from Bochum arrives at the result, that gaming directly reduces emotional sensibilty. Literal quote: "In the long run, this reduction of empathic reactions can lead to emotional desensitizing, thereby weakening an important mechanism for aggression prevention." [Translator's note: Of course the quote isn't exactly literal any more.]
* The study of Tillmann/Holler-Nowitzki/Holtappels/Meiner und Popp (Schülergewalt als Schulproblem, München 1999) at schools in Hessen documents, that violent media became the most influential condition ahead of "Peergroup", school and family for the frequency of acts of physical violence.
3540 students of 167 classes were questioned with a standardized questionnaire.
* The study of Weiß regarding the effect of the consumption of violent media in Baden-Württemberg and Sachsen had the following result: The legetimation and disposition towards violence has for students aged 12 to 16 a substantially superior connection with the amount and frequency of use of violent media. (Gewalt, Medien und Aggressivität bei Schülern, Göttingen 2000)

This was also the subject of two dissertations at the Freie Universität Berlin at the faculty of educational science and psychology, that also addressed the effect of violent computer games.
In the work of Astrid Kirsten titled "Aggressive Jungen und gewalthaltige Computerspiele" [aggressive boys and violent computer games] elementary school students were questioned. Even though they belonged to an age group, where violent games are seldomly played, ego shooters were among the favorite games of 20% of the 142 students. (p.106) Though the study could not prove "significant connections between violent acts directed at others and playing of violent games", but "kids, that played action games more often, tendet to use physically confronting strategies in arguments with their friends". (p.132)

The so far unpublished current two-year-study about the subject "media violence, youth violence and performance in schools" by Hopf/Huber/Weiß also found transitions between virtual violence and reality. The authors write: "Video-/Computergames and horror-/violencemovies are therefore also principal risk factors for the development of aggression and violence in youths, not only social or personal factors." (p.28) Another significant result of the study is: "The more horror and violent films are watched during middle childhood and the more violent games are played at the beginning of adolescence, the greater the violence among students and delinquency at age 14."
quoted after http://frontal21.zdf.de/ZDF/download/0,5587,7000133,00.pdf

If you are interested, we'd be glad to provide further research upon request.

--------------END-OF-TRANSLATION-------------


Translator's notes in brackets, notice how "scientists" and "our colleagues" seem to be two distinct groups.

Regarding section 1 of their 'rebuttal':
Current German laws, which are already in effect, make it illegal, to sell games to kids that don't meet the age requirements as set by the USK. This also applies to Doom3, which was rated "Keine Jugendfreigabe", "No clearance for minors", which signifies an age requirement of 18 and above.

Also, the ZDF, which is frequently referenced as a source, is a public TV station in Germany, that isn't exactly well known for good research and fair reports, at least in the area of videogames. They're more sensationalist than any number of private stations combined could possibly be. In case you didn't know, World of Warcraft plays like Battlefield 2 and the goal of GTA is to rape as many women as possible. Dismembering people with chain saws is worth extra points. You heard it first on ZDF. (I have yet to see a single politician getting interviewed about video games, that didn't blindly repeat the part with the raping and the chain saw.)

[Soldat_Louis]

Thanks a lot Kranki ! (and sleep well ;) )

[Soldat_Louis]

Oh, and if you have enough time, could you also translate GWG's original press release (http://www.gwg-ev.org/cms/cms.php?textid=1213) ? I know that the LaRouchites' translation is quite correct, but it's a matter of pride : I don't want to owe them anything, and I don't want to trust them for anything. Thanks in advance.

[Kranki]

Oh, and if you have enough time, could you also translate GWG's original press release (http://www.gwg-ev.org/cms/cms.php?textid=1213) ? I know that the LaRouchites' translation is quite correct, but it's a matter of pride : I don't want to owe them anything, and I don't want to trust them for anything. Thanks in advance.

It'll have to wait at least until Monday, I have some important work to wrap up this weekend. I'll see, if I can spare some time next week.

----------TRANSLATION PART 2---------------
3. Connections between video games and the US armed forces can't be proven
The currently most renowned book about the subject "the virtual war" [Der virtuelle Krieg] by CT-editor Hartmut Gieselmann (Hannover 2002) says:
["Der virtuelle Krieg", this is actually the title of the book, this isn't obvious in the German version either. I have translated this sentence exactly as it's done in the German version, that's why it sounds that strange.]

"But the military uses computer games for traning, normal games as well as versions, that are specially adapted for the military. The "Training and Education Command" (TECOM) of the US-Marines maintains a special department for pc-training for this purpose." (p.92f)

"The list of games used by the military contains the games "Half-Life" and "an adapted version of Doom called Marine Doom" (Gieselmann, p.93)

Gieselmann adds: "The military uses these games as preliminary training for their recruits and at the same time as advertisement. They should not be different in appearance than the traing versions for the US military, safe that the explosions should be somewhat bigger, because the dry depiction of the military simulations may well be not spectacular enough for the living room." (Gieselmann, p.95)

The documentation ""Die Welt der Spiele: Wunschwelten aus dem Computer" (Paderborn, o. J.) [The world of games: worlds of desire out of the computer] documents military use of violent computer games:"Marine Doom: a Doom-variant, that was developed by the US army for the training of marines. This game shows, that violent games like Doom aren't just harmless games, but can also be used as preparation for acts of killing. They are also used in a military context for the preparation of real combat missions. The minotaur-like Doom-Monsters became terrorists in the army-simulations, the scenarios built to resemble real locations, to allow for example training storming occupied embassies." (p.19)
Quoted after: http://frontal21.zdf.de/ZDFde/download/0,6753,7001626,00.pdf

4. Violence has many causes, the true causes of violence often aren't mentioned
Psychotherapists and couselors of the GwG are confronted daily with aggression and parenting problems on various levels. Of course aggression and violence cannot be attributed to violent computer games as a single cause. We never claimed that anywhere. Violent games lead neither automatically nor monocausally to violence and disposition towards violence. But they contribute a portion, that can't be ignored.

5. The responsibility should lie with the parents and vendors

Parents bear this responsibility. It is our goal, to assist parents by educating them about the psychological connections and the person-centric educational principles in a democratic parenting style with humanistic principles and develop their parenting competence. This is the focus of our educational events. This was specifically mentioned in our press release, along with pedagogical/psychological tips for parents. Delegating the responsibility to the sellers isn't enough.

6. Demanding a ban patronizes mature citizens
Whether a ban of such games (beyond that of §131 StGB) is an adequate measure - that can be argued. Like every ban in pedagogics.

What we won't argue is this: These games are not only dispensable, but we recognize in them a negative contribution to our culture. "Strategical abilities" - games are frequently defended using this argument - can also be taught by other/non-violent games.

Violence-promoting games have no positive use for our society whatsoever. Even if they are classified as objects of "cultural value", they aren't an enrichment. It is undeniable, that "killer games" are able to damage the capacity for empathy and hinder its development.

-----------END OF TRANSLATION--------------

The last paragraph uses the word "killer games" (Killerspiele). This is basically the German equivalent to "murder simulator".

Also in this paragraph is a reference to §131 StGB. This is a law going beyond usual regulations, that completely bans distribution of media depicting cruel or inhuman violence against humans or humanoid beings in a way, that glorifies or plays down these acts of violence, or that depicts the cruelty or inhumanity of these acts in a way that violates human dignity. The law bans (1) distribution of these media, (2) making the media publicly available in any way, (3) offering them or making them available to minors in any way or (4) producing/importing/exporting/offering/stocking these media with intent to do anything of (1)-(3).
Games banned under this law are actually seized by the police and subsequently destroyed.
This law doesn't apply to any games mentioned in either of the GWG press releases, nor any other mainstream games. The original Manhunt was banned under this law, and that's the only game I can think of. Every other popular or semi-popular game is either freely available or on the Index, for the more violent titles. (The Index is governed by an entirely different law with far lighter consequences.) Mentioning this law in relation to any game, that is currently publicly available, is nothing more than a sign of ignorance.

Also, if anyone can tell me something specific about the nature of "person-centric educational principles in a democratic parenting style with humanistic principles", I'd really like to hear it.

[Soldat_Louis]

Here is an English translation of GWG's original press release (http://www.currentconcerns.ch/index.php?id=577) (which curiously disappeared from their website). It is provided by Swiss left-wing magazine Current Concerns. Beware : as this magazine is not only English-speaking, but also French-speaking, German-speaking and even Spanish-speaking, they translate a lot of articles and press release, but the quality of this translation is sometimes as bad as Google-trad.


Brutal Computer Games Destroy Compassion
Advice for parents how to recognize brutal computer games and protect their children from them
Press release by the German Society for Scientific Psychotherapy (GwG)

Psychotherapists demand that computer games in which adolescents are rewarded for killing or torturing humans be outlawed. This kind of games is increasingly marketed as shooting games, which plays down the issue. The notion of ‘media competence’ often serves as a cover. What children and adolescents need today is ‘media education’!
From the point of view of developmental psychology, games supporting violence are a disaster for the mainly juvenile users. This is the experience of many experts of the Society for scientific psychotherapy (Gesellschaft für wissenschaftliche Gesprächspsychotherapie, GwG), uniting specialists from psychotherapeutic counselling and school psychology services. The GwG is the largest European professional society for psychotherapy and counselling. It now demands to outlaw games that glorify violence, in order to preserve the fundamental consensus of a society built on human values.
“Killer games are like landmines for the soul”, says Elke Ostbomk-Fischer, university teacher and member of the GwG. “The media depravity of adolescents has reached such appalling levels during the latest years that politicians must react immediately to prevent an entire generation of children and adolescents from being drowned in a flood of violence.” With this statement, Elke Ostbomk-Fischer is in agreement with leading crime experts and with scientists that are watchful of media issues. “Some of these games are contempt uous of human dignity and therefore violate the German constitution. For this reason, their production and marketing should be a punishable offence.”
An increasing number of ever younger children are losing their natural compassion when they dive into worlds of brutal action for hours and days, worlds in which destruction and killing is experienced as fun and fascination. Boys are particularly affected by this. They begin to act in an increasingly aggressive manner and can hardly be won over for any pro-social behaviour and rules of human cooperation.
There is an increasing number of adolescents that spend more time on addictive computer games than at school. “Many parents feel helpless, and they despair in view of the overwhelming power of media. They are often contemptibly depicted as backward by their own children when they react with scepticism as their kids put violent video games on their wishing lists, says psychotherapist Karl-Otto Hentze, who is CEO of the GwG. Children that are well-trained in internet usage will talk their parents into acceptance, based on arguments by “scientists” that are close to the computer industry.

What are killer games?

In file number 2007-0001-0100/76-07 by the German Bundesrat, they are defined as “game programs that display cruel or otherwise inhuman violence against humans or beings that resemble humans and let the player participate in such displayed acts of violence.”
Originally, these games were developed for the US armed forces as war simulations. They served the purpose to decrease the soldiers’ inhibitions to kill, to increase their ‘killing efficiency’. The US military psychologist David Grossman warns emphatically that this method of violence conditioning works in exactly the same way in children and adolescents when they play such violenceoriented programs intensively.

“Media Education” instead of “Media Competence”

The game producers have long taken control of the term “media competence”. The companies finance research and training projects aimed at increasing “media competence”. Of course they have an interest to prevent the outlawing of killer games. Some experts support them with arguments like “prohibitions make them even more attractive…” (If this were true it should also apply to traffic redlights, theft, and murder.) Another strategy is to upgrade computer games as “part of our culture.” In this view, “media competence” encourages a precise knowledge of game types, tools and technical details. Killing and violence can be accepted as an “aesthetic convention”.

“Media Education” includes “Education of the Heart

In contrast, “media education” includes the education of the heart. Its basis is an unequivocal orientation towards ethical conventions of human rights. The constitution is the standard. “Media education” supports a humane and cooperative culture of communication. Without a training in discernment, it is difficult to distinguish pedagogically useful advice from sales pitches.

Form your own opinion

The following questions help you to form your own opinion of a computer game.

1. Does the game feature persons or beings
– that treat others degradingly?
– that violate the rights of others or expel them from their home?
– that rob the belongings of others or destroy their abode?
2. In the game, are persons or beings
– intimidated or put in a state of great fear?
– purposefully hurt?
– tortured or threatened with torture?
– dismembered?
– strangulated, or are their necks broken?
– injured by weapons?
– killed with a shot aimed at the head or torn apart by bombs?
3. Does the game feature other examples of inhumane and cruel actions?
Are such actions
– considered a success?
– displayed as fun?
– rewarded with recognition?
4. Is the game lacking clear and realistic indications
– that the cruel activities are not right?
– that the persons affected by cruelty suffer?
– that there are consequences and that the perpetrator will be held responsible?
5. Does the game lack models of non-violent conflict resolution?
– Does it fail to suggest being helpful, considerate, and socially responsible?
– Is there a lack of examples in which avoiding violence is recognized as an achievement?
6. In this game, would your child be the person that is evil and cruel towards others and is successful with these actions?

If you answer ‘yes’ to some of these questions, think carefully what your child is going to learn in this game.

How can parents and personnel in pedagogical professions protect their children?

– Try to be a good role model in areas which you consider as important for your child.
– Question arguments that speak in favor of media endorsing violence. Rely on your own feeling and common sense. Do not trust in age recommendations on the game package. The legal protection of minors is not sufficient.
– Computer games cost a lot of time anmoney. They often make the purchase of hardware and accessories necessary. Don’t be pressed into spending more than you can afford.
– Watch how your children handle media. This is easier if a shared PC is used in a central room. The same applies to the TV.
– Show interest in what your child learns, experiences and feels.
– Accompany and support your child in getting trained on modern media. This way you also notice in time when your child accesses websites or games that you consider as inappropriate or even dangerous.
– Talk openly with your child about possible problems. Don’t blame your child. He or she has not invented these contents.
– A ‘good conversation’ means: every participant makes a bona fide effort to understand the other’s viewpoint. This includes
– listening to each other
– not interrupting each other
– not ridiculing or debasing what the other has said.
These rules should apply also to a situation in which you can by no means permit a game, because it is in gross violation of human dignity and counteracts your education.

Source: Press release by GwG, Nov 28, 2007;