PETITION: Target AU, Kmart: Restore GTA V to Australian store shelves

[TeamCZRRacing]

Hi,

So as some of you may be aware, recently Target Australia and Kmart removed GTA V from Australian store shelves as the result of a factually inaccurate and plainly biased petition (you can watch TotalBiscuit's video on the issue here; he'll give you a little more context than I can). I'll save you the long-winded speech about how idiotic this entire petition is (there's already one my petition's page), but I have created a petition to restore GTA V to Australian store shelves, and I would be infinitely grateful if you would look over it and perhaps sign it. The fact that not one but two major international retailers have removed the game from their stores as the result of a petition filled to the brim with conjecture and bias is wrong.

If you sign, don't forget to share with friends. With any luck, we'll be able to at least get them to think twice about their stance.

Thanks!

 

[prisonermonkeys]

The fact that not one but two major international retailers have removed the game from their stores as the result of a petition filled to the brim with conjecture and bias is wrong.

Your petition is based solely on the content of the game and poking holes in the argument put forward by the original petitioners, and displays no understanding of the underlying social issue of domestic violence. So long as the game contains depictions of violence directed towards women in any context, your argument is moot and retailers are well within their rights to pull the game from shelves, even if you collect ten times the number of signatures as the original petition.

Furthermore, attempting to portray the revocation of the game as "wrong" is in itself a misnomer. However misguided the original petition, it is not morally wrong; morality is the word we use for the concept of right and wrong on the absence of the rule of law. We cannot reasonably call the decision to pull the game from shelves to be morally wrong as the intention is to counteract domestic violence, which is only a good thing given how systemic it is. Furthermore, there is an increasing demand for businesses to adopt policies of corporate social responsibility, which in many cases businesses will forgo short-term profits to act in a responsible way, earning that profit back over the long term through galvanising a reputation as socially responsible. Even if you successfully refute every argument put forward by the original petition, you cannot change the fact that the game permits violence against women.

In short, this entire argument is fundamentally flawed. You do nothing to address the underlying issue of the relationship between domestic violence and new media, and make no attempt to understand the position of the original petitioners. Instead, you choose to go on the offensive, portraying those petitioners as unreasonable, ill-informed wowsers. You do not provide any viable alternative to the demands of corporate social responsibility, or acknowledge that the game has been available for over a year and that the retailers are unlikely to get any financial benefit from ignoring social demands and restocking the game.

The entire petition comes across as ignorant, cynical and aggressive, intent on marginalising social activists with legitimate concerns. All you do is reinforce the idea that gamers are passively sexist, and no CEO is going to act on this petition. And I cannot say that they would be wrong to.

 

[Northstar]

I see nothing wrong with their decision since it's ultimately their choice when it comes to what they carry.

The fact that not one but two major international retailers have removed the game from their stores as the result of a petition filled to the brim with conjecture and bias is wrong.

I just have to correct you here. While both KMart and Target are "Global" brands, they are both separate from their U.S. equivalents and are under the same corporate umbrella (Wesfarmers).

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I'm just surprised K Mart still exist at any capacity whatsoever.

 

[TeamCZRRacing]

I see nothing wrong with their decision since it's ultimately their choice when it comes to what they carry.

You are correct. It is their choice, and the point of the petition is to get the mot at least reconsider. Really that's all that can be hoped for.

Your petition is based solely on the content of the game and poking holes in the argument put forward by the original petitioners, and displays no understanding of the underlying social issue of domestic violence. So long as the game contains depictions of violence directed towards women in any context, your argument is moot and retailers are well within their rights to pull the game from shelves, even if you collect ten times the number of signatures as the original petition.

Furthermore, attempting to portray the revocation of the game as "wrong" is in itself a misnomer. However misguided the original petition, it is not morally wrong; morality is the word we use for the concept of right and wrong on the absence of the rule of law. We cannot reasonably call the decision to pull the game from shelves to be morally wrong as the intention is to counteract domestic violence, which is only a good thing given how systemic it is. Furthermore, there is an increasing demand for businesses to adopt policies of corporate social responsibility, which in many cases businesses will forgo short-term profits to act in a responsible way, earning that profit back over the long term through galvanising a reputation as socially responsible. Even if you successfully refute every argument put forward by the original petition, you cannot change the fact that the game permits violence against women.

In short, this entire argument is fundamentally flawed. You do nothing to address the underlying issue of the relationship between domestic violence and new media, and make no attempt to understand the position of the original petitioners. Instead, you choose to go on the offensive, portraying those petitioners as unreasonable, ill-informed wowsers. You do not provide any viable alternative to the demands of corporate social responsibility, or acknowledge that the game has been available for over a year and that the retailers are unlikely to get any financial benefit from ignoring social demands and restocking the game.

The entire petition comes across as ignorant, cynical and aggressive, intent on marginalising social activists with legitimate concerns. All you do is reinforce the idea that gamers are passively sexist, and no CEO is going to act on this petition. And I cannot say that they would be wrong to.

To that I say, look at TotalBiscuit's video on the matter. He explains my views on your arguments getter than I can.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

To that I say, look at TotalBiscuit's video on the matter. He explains my views on your arguments getter than I can.

He's still unconvincing. Until such time as you can demonstrate that a) the decision to pull the game has been detrimental to the cause of ending domestic violence, b) put forward a meaningful and sustainable alternative to remedying domestic violence, or c) both, you still come across as aggressive, cynical and ignorant, reinforcing the perception that the gaming community is inherently - however passively - sexist. In the end, no matter how well-intentioned your motives, you have gone about it in such a way that you do more damage to your own demographic. Which is somewhat ironic, given that that's how you feel about the original petitioners.

Also, in terms of developing an actual sustained, logical and coherent argument, you have completely failed. I teach a unit called "Digital Worlds", which is about the literary value of new media such as video games, and gender representations within these digital worlds is one of the issues we look at. If a student submitted that petition as an essay on gender representation, it would probably get about 15% if I was feeling generous.

 

[TeamCZRRacing]

He's still unconvincing. Until such time as you can demonstrate that a) the decision to pull the game has been detrimental to the cause of ending domestic violence, b) put forward a meaningful and sustainable alternative to remedying domestic violence, or c) both, you still come across as aggressive, cynical and ignorant, reinforcing the perception that the gaming community is inherently - however passively - sexist. In the end, no matter how well-intentioned your motives, you have gone about it in such a way that you do more damage to your own demographic. Which is somewhat ironic, given that that's how you feel about the original petitioners.

Also, in terms of developing an actual sustained, logical and coherent argument, you have completely failed. I teach a unit called "Digital Worlds", which is about the literary value of new media such as video games, and gender representations within these digital worlds is one of the issues we look at. If a student submitted that petition as an essay on gender representation, it would probably get about 15% if I was feeling generous.

Fair enough. I've taken your suggestions onboard and closed the petition, perhaps until I can rewrite it and make it a bit more convincing.