Week 10 Reflection on Blog Discussion
Hi everyone,
For my reflection I would like to bring up a blog discussion on a virtual rape case. In April 2007, “Belgian newspapers De Morgen and Het Laatste Nieuws reported that the Federal Computer Crime Unit in Brussels sent out detectives to investigate a virtual rape case that occurred in Second Life”. A commentary on this issue was written in Virtually Blind, a research resource that covers legal news, issues, and events that impact virtual worlds, video games, and the 3D internet.
The commentary garnered 40 replies and sparked a flurry of debates from the validity of the crime to whether the authorities were right to take action to what constitutes rape.
Some found the entire concept of virtual rape ridiculous and their comments were a clear indication of their views. “Virtual Rape? Throw this character into virtual prison.”
Some believed the police were right to take action. “Even if the act is not a crime, the visual and textual basis of it could be considered obscene and illegal.”
In my opinion, if the psychological impact of a virtual rape can be proven to have the same impact as that of a real-life encounter, ethically and legally, I would say that it is right for the offender to be prosecuted. The main issue is being able to prove the depth of the psychological impact. I feel that it would be a waste of time and resources to find an offender over such an issue if the victim made the report because she was annoyed and feeling spiteful. The punishment should fit the impact of the crime.
What I found interesting about the discussion is a comment raised by one of the respondents. “Things like these happened before as stated in this article about a similar event that took place in an older text based mmorpg. It was discussed at the time but no real action was taken. Well this time police was involved as you can find on the second citizen forum and in all the others articles covering the story”
This begets the question what accounts for the change in perspective?
If you look at the textbook's example of the LamdaMOO virtuak rape incident in 1993, no mention of legal action was made. The incident itself then was a shock to the system and people did not have any idea how to react to it. No police report was made and the victim only confessed that she was emotionally traumatized much later.
Fast-forward to 2007, when a similar crime occurred, the matter was reported to the police and the public prosecutor gave the green light for detectives to investigate. This shows an overall change in the importance society gives to a virtual rape. The victim herself felt it was bad enough to make a police report and the public prosecutor felt the damage was significant enough to warrant an investigation.
How is it a “virtual rape” case in 1993 did not call for police intervention but a similar situation in 2007 warrants the attention of the police?
Furthermore, everyone was either for or against legal action.
I believe it is the increased integration of virtual worlds in our everyday lives that accounts for the difference in perspective. As the internet increasingly became a part of everyday life, the number of people interested in games requiring avatars have increased. The importance attached to one's virtual friends, virtual actions and virtual well-being increases and it has a greater impact on a person's psychological well-being.
A clear example of the impact of one’s virtual life on one’s real life would be the account of a former victim of virtual rape. She responded to the discussion and states that she is “still traumatized and upset by the whole incident and it has had terrible ripple effects” on her real life as well as her virtual life.
Her personal experience validates my stand that the importance one attaches to one’s virtual life is high. The differences in police reaction as well as the reaction of the victim between the virtual rape case in LamdaMOO to the more recent Second Life case, led me to conclude that the priority placed on one's virtual well-being is now higher that it was in the past. Therefore, I believe it is the main factor for the different reactions to the 1993 case and the 2007 case.
I loved some of the comments posted after the article.
ReplyDelete"4 Norman
This is completely rediculous. So I guess players who kill other players in MMOG’s are guilty of murder and should be charged? How idiotic is this? I fear for our society when I see how many peopel think this is a real issue. Turn off the computer and reaquaint yourself with reality."
I think what this comment comes down to is that consent is involved. In a PVP game we wouldn't expect people who killed other people to be charged with murder, because these people all consented when signing up for the game that this could be an inevitable result. If I was playing Second Life and out of no where my avatar was suddenly killed I'm sure I view it very differently.
"12 Robbie
I’ve noticed a few responses here about the fact that the user could merely have turned off the computer, and due to this ability to escape, it means that the “sex” was optional and thus that no rape occurred. Firstly, date rape is an example of sex that is technically avoidable, yet due to socially constructed psychological issues, the victim is often unable to escape the situation. The victim may be too emotionally destablised by the inital attack to be able to respond appropriately, or, prior to attempting escape, the victim tries a number of escape methods which fail to work. Inability to effect an appropriate escape hardly neutralises the term of “rape” in this instance. Secondly, other criticism has noted that the victims of online rape cannot consider it rape because the characters are virtual, and have no bearing on the real world. Rape differs from sex beyond the basics of the physical struggle: it is also a mental issue which is primarily marked by a masculine domination through force, and subjectation of the victim. It is the psychological effects that are the most brutal. Understanding this, the post-human issue of embodied consciousness is important. Embodied consciousness is where a human consciousness becomes so naturalised in an environment - whether it is performing repetitive tasks, operating an online character, typing on a keyboard, or any other technological interaction with an environment - that they have extended their consciousness to the point where the technology acts as a mental extention of their body. As such, a person can become incredibly involved with their online equivalents, to the point where they suffer real emotional damage from an unfair exploitation of their character. All this, however, circumvents the fact that there is a person out there who will have - regardless of the victim’s reaction - considered themselves as having successfully raped someone online and congratulated themselves for it. This is an idea I, and hopefully many others, find incredibly disgusting."
This one sums up for me the whole idea of the debate. In these days of higher intergration of technology with the every day it's difficult to spend any amount of time in a virtual environment with an avatar and not become in some way emotionally attached to it. Especially if it has a resemblence in look or attitude with the person who created it.