Amazon sells another video game where you “play” sexual abuser

*Possible trigger warning*

While we haven’t been the biggest fans of Amazon as of late and their history of selling a rape simulation game (which they did end up banning), it looks like another game involving violence against women seems to have”slipped” past their radar. “Stockholm: An Exploration of True Love” is a game that allows the user to experience,

“…a terrifyingly vivid exploration of Stockholm Syndrome, a psychological condition in which a captive falls in love with her kidnapper. And you play the part of the kidnapper. With a limited number of options, you must figure out how to make her fall in love with you.”

This includes using poison gas on the victim, sexually assaulting her and using psychological abuse against her in efforts to make her “love” you. Unbelievable.
Contact Amazon and let them know that profiting off of sexual and psychological abuse is completely unacceptable.
h/t to Jennifer for the heads up.

and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

112 Comments

  1. wrshamilton
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 12:12 pm | Permalink

    I guess I’d want someone to play the game before this kind of post happens. I’ve never been the victim of abuse, and I don’t think my voice should count too loudly here, but this doesn’t seem like it’s being presented as pornography. Which doesn’t necessarily make it ok, but I guess I could envision a situation in which this game was trying to make an impact on the player with the intense unacceptability of the actions s/he is forced to take.
    I think maybe that that still wouldn’t be ok, but it’d be worth a discussion rather than an unadorned, fuck-you kind of post. Maybe.

  2. whizz for atoms
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 12:21 pm | Permalink

    I just read the (only) review of the game on Amazon – the customer describes it as “erotic” so it’s certainly being used in that context. Incidentally, the writer seems to have a lot of other erotic material on sale through Amazon – difficult to tell whether it’s in a similar vein but it does indicate the kind of market the game is going for.
    The saddest thing is that I don’t find this kind of thing unusual anymore. Beyond wrong.

  3. laurylen
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 12:27 pm | Permalink

    Just sent this:
    As an Amazon customer, I am deeply disappointed at your decision to market and distribute the video game “Stockholm: An Exploration of True Love.” This game encourages people to “play” the part of an abusive kidnapper, and its “strategies” for winning include sexual assault. The description also seems to limit the game play options to victimizer=male and victim=female, a message we hear enough in our culture. Please rethink this decision and refuse to distribute a game that essentially trains people to be abusive. Thank you.

  4. pleco
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 12:27 pm | Permalink

    Considering the recent discussion about the manga porn case, I guess it’s worthwhile pointing out something you didn’t explicitly state: this is a simulation, it’s not real. The woman is an actress. I’m not saying it isn’t disturbing, despicable, or otherwise. This is not a product I would purchase myself.
    Yet this is the sort of work that hovers on the borders of free speech, hate speech, and pornography all at once (I’m sure some people think at least 2 of these categories overlap).
    The author has this to say, though, which I don’t think really helps his case:
    “Before feminists attack ‘Stockholm’, I’d suggest that they take a look at the romance novels that are popular with women today. You don’t see a lot of ‘Ross and Rachel’ type romances. You see kidnapping, captivity, force. Great erotic writers recognize that ‘Stockholm Syndrome’ is a much more legitimate form of love than what Hollywood wants to shove down our throats. This simulation helps people explore that.” –Stanton Audemars
    Yuck? Irregardless of Audemars’ interesting perspective on erotic writing (noteworthy: he sees this as art if his quote counts for anything), I am cautious about knee-jerk reactions to these unpleasant works of fiction.
    The demo is here (WARNING: it’s disturbing): http://rmdglobal.net/stockholm/
    I think the main arguments against that other Amazon rape game revolved around the fact that you were empowered to commit crimes under the guise of fantasy, and that the fictional women were being forced into any kind of sexual act at all. This looks to be more of the same.

  5. Ori
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 12:40 pm | Permalink

    Disgusting! I’ve offen wondered about what motivates men to create and play misogynist material like this.
    I’ve complained to Amazon.com, and I hope this game is removed from their website.

  6. Jeanette
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 12:44 pm | Permalink

    I see what you’re getting at, but I’m not sure I agree. I think it’s pretty likely that the type of person who would order this game is someone who would already get off on raping or otherwise hurting women.
    As for those who would be benefit from sensitivity training about rape, I don’t believe that acting as virtual rapist is the best way to teach it. I think that the player would become desensitized by the act than sympathetic to the victim.
    On a side note, I emailed a complaint to Amazon. If I get a non-automated response, I’ll post it.

  7. Alexandr
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 12:49 pm | Permalink

    “Which doesn’t necessarily make it ok, but I guess I could envision a situation in which this game was trying to make an impact on the player with the intense unacceptability of the actions s/he is forced to take.”
    According to the quote from the creator that pleco posted below, the game’s message is more along the lines of “rape is love”.
    No dice, I’m afraid.

  8. Pantheon
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 12:50 pm | Permalink

    I’m not sure where I come down on something like this, but I just wanted to point out that in the Manga porn case they were putting a man in prison. There’s a big difference between the government using the criminal justice system to imprison someone over offensive porn, and a private company like Amazon choosing not to distribute offensive porn. As far as I know no one is filing criminal charges against the makers of this DVD or anyone who bought it, so it isn’t really at all the same as that Manga case. Amazon would be completely within their rights to refuse to sell something like this, and the makers could still set up their own website to distribute it.
    Either way, I think Amazon needs to create a separate adult section of their site, or some safesearch options.

  9. cassie
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 12:52 pm | Permalink

    i’m usually not the type of person who believes that children and adults will go out and do what they do in video games. however, with this game, i believe that people would.
    the only people who would find enjoyment in this type of game and would buy it would be people who have fantasies about doing this type of thing (i don’t believe that people who just like to be kinky would buy this). i honestly believe that the people would see how much they enjoy it, and then would go out and try it in real life. i’m not saying that this game would make everyone who plays it rapists, but there’s a lot of people that would.

  10. Jeanette
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 12:54 pm | Permalink

    I didn’t read the author’s comments before I emailed Amazon, but now that I have, I find this even more disturbing than even the RapeLay game. As despicable as that was, at least it presented rape as what it is: violence. Audemars seems to think that abuse is a legitimate way to make a woman fall in love with a man. He is clearly in need of a psychiatrist.

  11. paulina
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 12:59 pm | Permalink

    This seems to come up as #5 in “True Love” search of Amazon “Movies & TV”. I can just imagine some 11 year old kid looking for ‘true love’ and coming across this: sick.

  12. bluish
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 1:05 pm | Permalink

    Y’know, there’s a difference between infringing upon free speech and asking a retailer to consider what it sells. I do not advocate making something like this illegal, but I will (and have) asked Amazon to consider removing it from it’s virtual shelves. Deciding not to sell something is very different from passing government regulation banning it.
    Rape scenarios are nothing new in pornography, but Amazon does not have to sell them – leave the hardcore, hateful and misogynist porn to the “adult” retailers who chose to make money on that stuff.

  13. brianna
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 1:06 pm | Permalink

    I’d like to think that there could be a video game written about the Stockholm syndrome or about rape or about abuse that was an honest exploration of the subject, much in the same way that it is possible to write a book or make a film about it. I wouldn’t find it hard to believe that the author of this game thinks he is doing just that. But as long as the ‘goal’ of the game is to ‘make her fall in love with you’ it’s nothing more than exploitation, pure and simple. (It’s also an interactive DVD, not really a game – I would imagine that puts it closer to rape porn than anything else). It should be removed from Amazon immediately, no question about it.

  14. Ariel
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 1:12 pm | Permalink

    This is disgusting. I can’t believe they make games like this. This is equivocating rape with love. It’s not. And I’m sorry, this is not a healthy outlet for anything. This just reinforces the rape culture we live in. Don’t even get me started on the “it’s a fantasy” argument. blah!

  15. saintcatherine
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 1:15 pm | Permalink

    I thought of that case, too, but mostly because I figured SOMEbody might try to say that this kind of thing is a good way for people to “act out” their violence in a “safe” way, similar to the suggestion that looking at kiddie porn is a great way to keep your molesting tendencies under wraps.
    …And looking at porn helps you to not be so misogynistic, too.
    Right?

  16. Pantheon
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 1:30 pm | Permalink

    Its also worth noting that this one, unlike the last one, is actually being sold by Amazon (not a third party marketplace seller).

  17. Laila
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 1:34 pm | Permalink

    I’m utterly amazed that this hasn’t caused a huge wave of disgust and horror. I find the game deeply sickening – thought it had been banned?? We seem to be living in a culture which decrees that ‘anything goes’ so long as it’s simulated. Where are we going to draw the line? Free speech – as someone commented – is value-laden. Some controls have to exist in order to protect individuals.
    We need to accept that not all matters – simulated or not – qualify as entertainment, and we need to be asking serious questions about the type of person that would enjoy viewing – never mind participating (as that’s what games allow) in such horrific behaviour. I certainly sent an email to Amazon and will not be using them in future.

  18. dream
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 1:44 pm | Permalink

    This looks disgusting. I am writing amazon a letter about it as well. As for free speech, as long as amazon isn’t the sole market-place for all gaming, there isn’t really a free speech problem with asking a business to not display a product you dislike. I say this as a libertarian who believes all sorts of freedom are of the utmost importance.
    Sexual violence may well be different, but I want to remind people that most evidence on violent video games find little correlation with real life violence. There is a great book (titled Grand Theft Childhood) that discusses this in depth, along with a bit more subtlety on the different subtopics and effects. I don’t know if the same is true for sexual violence in games, but I have some hope that it may be the case, with comparison to people with sexual fetishes that include pain, control or submission, many of whom would never want to force or hurt someone (or actually be forced by someone) not interested in the same consensual activity. Enjoying an imitation of violence does not, hopefully, mean most people that like this game would also enjoy the violence itself.

  19. Laila
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 1:46 pm | Permalink

    Completely disagree, I’m afraid. I think anyone willing to stand on the fence on this game might ask themselves if they would play it; and if not, why not. I certainly couldn’t. Something to think about.

  20. a.k.a.wandergrrl
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 1:48 pm | Permalink

    You make some good points here. It’s a similar situation with art – an artist who wants to explore a difficult subject like rape or sexual violence has a tricky challenge of figuring out how to raise questions and make statements without propagating the exploitation. As a gamer, I would be very interested in games that examine societal issues.

  21. ladylicious
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 2:10 pm | Permalink

    I think this is worse than porn or violent movies because it is interactive. It can’t be effectively compared to movies or other media, because it allows an individual to role-play and it crosses the line from fiction into virtual reality.
    However, I’m not sure if it should or shouldn’t be covered under free speech. One man’s erotica is another’s porn, because different people have different ideas about what is erotic and what is offensive. For me, this game is clearly offensive and I would be happy to see it banned. On the other hand, there are a lot of people who consider the erotica that I watch to be disgusting and worthy of banning.
    My issue is that there are people who would be more than willing to ban all erotica, soft-core porn included. I am a sex-positive feminist and occassionally watch porn made by women for women. Many people think that my porn is offensive and should be taken off of shelves. These people might also say that my vibrator should also be illegal. (In response, I would argue that I’m a much nicer person with my vibrator than without, haha.)
    I think the premise of the game is disgusting and I would never date anyone who owned a copy of it. I also think that only a truly disturbed person would be interested in playing this game. However, I’m wondering if I’m being a hypocrite by wanting my porn to be legal and wanting to outlaw someone elses porn?
    I might write a letter anyway, because it seems that free speech goes both ways. If free speech is the loophole that allows some loser to make this game, then I am just as free to write a few letters opposing it as well. And in this case, since no one is lobbying for legislation, there’s really nothing wrong with pushing for a boycott. Boycotting doesn’t infringe on free speech.

  22. dormouse
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 2:16 pm | Permalink

    I am even more disturbed by the “Customers who bought this also bought….” Tears welled up in my eyes looking at the pages. Seeing things like this make me feel very unsafe. People buy and make these things, and you can never know who they are. That is the most disturbing thing.

  23. Posted May 29, 2009 at 2:48 pm | Permalink

    And yet feministing continues to link to Amazon when promoting Jessica’s (and others’) books. Why??? Seriously. Why are you supporting a business that promotes this kind of demeaning trash? Why aren’t you supporting your independent women’s bookstores that are going out of business because people are shopping at Amazon? Does Amazon host author events for you? Do radical feminist employees at Amazon handsell your book for you? (Full disclosure, I work at an independent bookstore, but even so). I love feministing but everytime you link to Amazon it’s like a slap in the face.
    Do you get a kickback from Amazon? I don’t mean to be rude by asking this but I think it’s a valid question, because independent bookstores will do that for you too. And you know they’re not promoting this sort of tripe. If you’re not going to link to women’s bookstores at least link to Powell’s or another independent bookstore….

  24. marissafromboston
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 3:00 pm | Permalink

    the good news is all the reviews for it on amazon talked about how horrific this “game” is and how amazon should be ashamed of itself for selling it.

  25. Lumix
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 3:06 pm | Permalink

    I think these are excellent questions. This isn’t something I’d even considered. I think this would be a great way for Feministing to support independent and especially feminist bookstores by linking to them on this site rather than Amazon.
    I can see how selling and promoting books about feminism in a feminist bookstore can be considered preaching to the choir. It makes sense to promote books like that to a wider audience. But to link to Amazon on this WebSite does seem unnecessary and sends a mixed message about Feministing’s relationship with Amazon, which as stated in the OP, has been pretty rocky lately.

  26. Lumix
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 3:07 pm | Permalink

    And another thing:
    How long are we going to have these weight loss ads up on Feministing? Talk about sending mixed messages…

  27. Father_Time
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 3:22 pm | Permalink

    “We seem to be living in a culture which decrees that ‘anything goes’ so long as it’s simulated. Where are we going to draw the line?”
    How about nowhere, if it’s simulated it doesn’t cause anyone harm which is why there’s an anything goes attitude.
    “Free speech – as someone commented – is value-laden. Some controls have to exist in order to protect individuals.”
    No individuals (who didn’t consent) were hurt in the making this movie or similar ones like that. Also the evidence that this causes other people to harm people is pitifully bad.
    “We need to accept that not all matters – simulated or not – qualify as entertainment, and we need to be asking serious questions about the type of person that would enjoy viewing – never mind participating (as that’s what games allow) in such horrific behaviour.”
    Because obviously those people are lesser beings therefore it’s Ok for us to take away their entertainment simply because we find it objectionable.

  28. Father_Time
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 3:29 pm | Permalink

    Dear Amazon,
    A bunch of feminists have recently sent you letter demanding you pull Sotckholm from your store.
    While from the looks of it the game would disgust me I ask that you please not pull the game as doing it would just give it free publicity (moreso than the feminists have all ready given it) and thus more sales, and possibly a sequel. Something similar happened with rapeplay as it garnered a large amount of attention after you decided to pull it. I do not wish for Stockholm to be the news topic for the next several weeks and would rather have it fall into relative obscurity quickly. So if you would kindly not pull it I would very much appreciate it.
    Signed
    A loyal customer.

  29. taalibba
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 3:30 pm | Permalink

    Not sure how I feel about this, although my original reaction was “so amazons marketing specifically to criminals now?”
    I’m really okay with fictional mind games. I generally enjoy pyschological thrillers. But i’m really creeped out that the player can plan and control this kind of abuse.But I’ve always maintained that there is a huge difference between playing a game that includes violence and committing actual real life violence.
    So yeah, I’m on the fence.

  30. EGhead
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 3:37 pm | Permalink

    I agree with your critique– I think this kind of thing is awful– but I’m wondering why you call out this game in particular. There is a lot of porn out there in the same vein, and a lot of BDSM rape roleplay. This seems to be between the two in terms of interpersonal relations: the viewer of pornography does not participate at all, the player of this video game does participate but the ‘victim’ does not, and in BDSM all parties are participating. Is it something about that middle category that makes it particularly harmful or offensive?

  31. Father_Time
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 3:44 pm | Permalink

    Damn you privacy laws.

  32. Father_Time
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 3:46 pm | Permalink

    Someone tried doing that with Columbine and he got a shitstorm was controversy and blamed for a murder.
    Mostly by people who didn’t even play the game.

  33. Father_Time
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 3:47 pm | Permalink

    Someone tried doing that with Columbine and he got a shitstorm of controversy and it was blamed for a murder.
    Mostly by people who didn’t even play the game.

  34. Ori
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 4:34 pm | Permalink

    Troll.

  35. Ori
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 4:37 pm | Permalink

    I also hadn’t considered this. Perhaps it’s time for feminist authors to shift away from Amazon.com if they continue to market materials like “Stockholm”?

  36. Father_Time
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 4:40 pm | Permalink

    So instead of debating that you’re not giving the game free publicity you just prefer to attack me?

  37. JetGirl70
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 4:41 pm | Permalink

    Actually, I am quite comfortable calling someone who gets off on psychologically and physically tormenting another NON-CONSENTING person (yes, I am aware of BDSM) a lesser being. Empathy is what makes us decent human beings. Those who lack it, aka sociopaths, are severely damaged human beings, and dangerous on top of that.
    I actually feel sorry for people who cannot feel empathy. However, I am also happy to protect others from them, and that includes taking away their triggering “entertainment.”

  38. Father_Time
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 4:46 pm | Permalink

    And precisely what evidence is there that the entertainment triggers them?
    Also getting off on fantasy is not comparable to people who lack empathy. That would be like saying anyone who enjoys murder or violence in their entertainment (and dear Christ there’s a lot of it) doesn’t see any value in life.
    People can enjoy crime in their entertainment and not be criminals.

  39. Laila
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 4:46 pm | Permalink

    Gratification from any person’s suffering – simulated or not – for the sake of entertainment is uncomfortable. This isn’t erotica displaying two consenting adults; it’s more than a fetish.
    The fact that many people simply couldn’t play a game like this shows that the content is disturbing on some level. The fact that it’s a woman, and so much violence is still legitimised against women is hurtful. As for drawing the line: free speech is very important, but so is the protection of marginalised groups – women, children etc… Could we produce games showing violence against children? No. The line has to be drawn somewhere.
    Whilst ‘dream’ is correct to point to minimal evidence linking violent acts and observed material, studies have yet to disprove that it doesn’t contribute to an increasing desensitization to violence, to which Western increases in violent crime are perhaps testament.

  40. Laila
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 4:49 pm | Permalink

    Brilliant….my response was far too tame!

  41. Father_Time
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 5:02 pm | Permalink

    “Gratification from any person’s suffering – simulated or not – for the sake of entertainment is uncomfortable. This isn’t erotica displaying two consenting adults; it’s more than a fetish.”
    No it’s just a fetish.
    “The fact that many people simply couldn’t play a game like this shows that the content is disturbing on some level. The fact that it’s a woman, and so much violence is still legitimised against women is hurtful.”
    Anyone who attempts to use this game to justify abuse on women was all ready dangerous before they started playing. The game says you’re a kidnapper and it shows the girl in pain quite clearly.
    “As for drawing the line: free speech is very important, but so is the protection of marginalised groups – women, children etc…”
    Yes it’s important to protect them but these are fictional characters played by paid actresses the characters don’t need protection.
    Also the right to expressed the most sickening thoughts is far more than the protection of the ‘victims’ from being featured in well fiction.
    “Could we produce games showing violence against children? No. The line has to be drawn somewhere.”
    Assuming your talking about virtual children, it’s been done (and in a mainstream game) and I see no reason why it should be frowned on.
    “Whilst ‘dream’ is correct to point to minimal evidence linking violent acts and observed material, studies have yet to disprove that it doesn’t contribute to an increasing desensitization to violence, to which Western increases in violent crime are perhaps testament. ”
    Crime is on a low right now actually
    http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/viort.htm
    Oh and shouldn’t you first prove that these things are harmful to people before you can claim that what you’re doing is necessary for people’s safety?

  42. Father_Time
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 5:03 pm | Permalink

    sorry when I said frowned upon I meant banned.

  43. Father_Time
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 5:05 pm | Permalink

    also I meant to say “the right to express sickening thoughts is far more important than …”
    I wish this site had an edit feature.

  44. Destra
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 5:27 pm | Permalink

    *yawn* Yet another overreaction to media without any thought behind it.
    Playing this game or any other game where you rape and harm women does not make it more likely that that person will hurt women in RL. Just the same as playing a game where you kill someone doesn’t make it more likely that they’ll actually murder someone.
    Calling for the censorship of a game, book, or movie because it has violence in it does not solve any problem. What does solve the problem is having balanced families, communities, and support systems. We also need an abundance of media out there depicting healthy relationships and interactions with women. The debate needs to be about these things, not about one violent game.
    This all holds true if the game is intended to be erotic too, but even more so. One can’t help what one is turned on by, but we can control how we act in real life.
    Also, shame on every single one of you who went to Amazon and left a negative review of a game that you have never played. Speaking about something of which you have no knowledge is only being foolish.

  45. prtsimmons
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 5:30 pm | Permalink

    I have an honest question: What differentiates this game from BDSM? Both involve simulated non-consensuality and simulated violence. I have heard that all the players in a BDSM fantasy are consensual, but so are the actors in this game. I can’t imagine enjoying this game, in the same way I can’t imagine enjoying pretending to inflict pain on someone.
    I don’t disagree that we have a culture that condones rape in many situations, and that this must be changed, but I’m not sure that getting upset about a niche product like this is productive. I would love it if Amazon voluntarily stopped carrying this product, but I would love it even more if they stopped carrying Glenn Beck’s books – but on the whole, I think they have a right to sell those products, even though they disgust me. And if Amazon does stop carrying things whenever they get a certain number of e-mails, what will prevent religious conservatives (for example) from writing a million e-mails and getting sex-positive and feminist books from being dropped?

  46. Destra
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 5:33 pm | Permalink

    Dude, how is that person a troll? Just because she/he does not agree with what some readers on feministig have done in the past does not make her/him a troll. Trolls are people who launch personal attacks against others. Isn’t that what you’ve done when you called someone a name?

  47. Laila
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 5:34 pm | Permalink

    We’re going to have to agree to disagree and I do completely disagree with you.
    Firstly, official stats are by no means reliable sources of evidence. Violent crime in many areas is increasing. I’m from the UK and I know that gun and knife crime is increasing both here and America.
    Should we value every ‘fetish’ as you so like to call it?? What about paedophilia? Is that a ‘fetish’? Remember ‘the line’? Of course we have to draw it. With regard to the game to which you refer; just because something has been produced doesn’t make it ok. Whilst I appreciate it’s a massive grey area, surely we can balance entertainment with respect, safety and decency?
    Another thing….Truth existed before research came along. Perhaps the appropriate research simply hasn’t been done yet.

  48. Ace
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 5:44 pm | Permalink

    I’m all for Amazon banning it, but I don’t think the game itself should be banned from the government.
    As soon as you start putting limits on Free Speech you are pretty much banning it.

  49. Jadelyn
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 5:47 pm | Permalink

    I think the thing that bothers me most about it is that it’s billed as “An exploration of true love.” Stockholm Syndrome is a mental illness that results from the trauma of kidnap and mistreatment. So…true love is defined as deliberately attempting to induce mental illness in a kidnapped woman? What the fuck kind of screwed-up vision of “love” is this trying to perpetuate?
    Like a raped woman marrying her rapist…

  50. curtis
    Posted May 29, 2009 at 6:12 pm | Permalink

    Hey everybody let’s play “Alter Boy Syndrome”. Maybe that will teach the prospective priests amongst us how bad sexual abuse is. And if people protest, well they should shut up otherwise a bunch of losers are going to make a run on the game. Sorry to be disrespectful to these notions but what nonsense. Of course the game “Stockholm Syndrome” is targeted at sexually frustrated losers who want to get off. Must we be so analytical of the obvious? And who cares if protesting the game draws the short attention span of sexual parasites; the standard of our collective market place should not be constantly lowered to that which is acceptable only to them. Besides not rocking the boat to keep the men folk comfy is so Vatican. Really now, agendas aside, we all know that keeping quiet only makes things worse.
    (A similar, yet more polite version, has been sent to Amazon)

Feministing In Your Inbox

Sign up for our Newsletter to stay in touch with Feministing
and receive regular updates and exclusive content.

241 queries. 1.943 seconds