backtop


Print 47 comment(s) - last by Mint.. on Dec 8 at 12:42 PM

"Would someone please think of the children?" --Helen Lovejoy

Critics of sex and violence in video games have long been rallying to outlaw explicit titles.  But science has provided them with little evidence that adult content in video games is harmful.  In fact some studies have shown gaming provides some health benefits, such as improved reflexes and stress relief.

But critics finally have some of the red meat they have long waited for, thanks to a new study by Yang Wang, M.D., an assistant research professor at Indiana University's School of Medicine.  The study reveals that violent games create changes in the brain activity of adult males, notably appearing to desensitize the brain to violent concepts.  While stopping short of definitively tying these neurological changes to behavorial ones, the study does seemingly imply that gamers who play violent videogames may react to violence differently.

The study used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), a specialized brain scan that looks at changes in blood flow within the brain.  FMRI has received a great deal of interest of late, due to its ability to "read peoples' minds", to some extent.

The study compared a control group of 14 males age 18 to 29 to a study group of 14 males in the same age range.  The study group was ordered to play 10 hours of a violent first person shooter game for one week and then refrain from playing for the next week.  The control group was ordered to play no games on either week.

Yang Wang
Dr. Yang Wang, Indiana University Med. School Professor led the study. 
[Image Source: IU School of Medicine]

After the two week period was up, both groups took a test where they were shown words in different colors and were expected to press buttons corresponding to the color of the word.  fMRI scans showed their brains' reactions to the words.  Violent words were interspersed with nonoffensive terms.  

The procedure, known as emotional interference, showed that the gaming group -- despite having played no games in a week -- consistently showed less activity in the left frontal lobe when exposed to words with violent connotations.  The left frontal lobe is the part of the brain responsible for considering the consequences of actions and overruling socially unacceptable actions.

The gamers also showed decreased activity in their anterior cingulate cortex.  This part of the brain controls decision-making, empathy, and emotion.  Dr. Wang comments [press release], "For the first time, we have found that a sample of randomly assigned young adults showed less activation in certain frontal brain regions following a week of playing violent video games at home.  The affected brain regions are important for controlling emotion and aggressive behavior."

fMRI Images
Normal Brains (top) showed more activity when reacting to violent words than the gamers' brains (bottom). [Image Source: IU School of Medicine]

After a second week without playing any games the gaming group's brain activity increased back to similar levels to the control group.

Dr. Wang says the study shows long term affects of gaming, stating, "These findings indicate that violent video game play has a long-term effect on brain functioning.  These effects may translate into behavioral changes over longer periods of game play."

The researcher suggested that it is important for studies examining the affects of gaming to study gamers in their "natural environment" (at home).  He suggests that past studies where the gaming was performed in a lab may have been inaccuarate due to the artificial atmosphere.  For his study he let the gamers play at home, using an assigned gaming device (a university laptop).

The work was published [abstract] in the journal Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging.  

Dr. Wang had four faculty coauthors -- Tom Hummer, Ph.D., IU assistant research professor of psychiatry; William Kronenberger, Ph.D., associate professor of clinical psychology in the IU Department of Psychiatry; Kristine Mosier, D.M.D., Ph.D., IU associate professor of radiology; and Vincent P. Mathews, M.D., IU professor of neuroradiology.  

As with many medical studies, one criticism that could be farely levelled against this work was how applicable the extreme levels of exposure to a certain environmental factor that the study examined were to more typical level of exposure (e.g. Most gamers don't play 10 hours of first person shooter action per day, so does 2 hours really have the same effect?).  This is similar to questions raised regarding studies that examine the "cancer causing" properties of certain substances, but exceed the common dose by orders of magnitude in lab animal tests.

More serious questions are raised by the study's funding, which comes from the Center for Successful Parenting.  The group's mission is stated as:

Our culture used to protect the innocence of our children.  Today our children are constantly exposed to sex and violence.  Our vision is to move parents, leaders in health, government, business, education, public safety, and other vocations to action by changing our culture to protect children from unhealthy media in all formats.

That mission could well have biased what the researchers were looking to find.  Indeed the center is already using the research in a series of brochures [PDF] decrying the evils of gaming.  It writes:

You probably think that the video game your child is playing every afternoon isn’t affecting their behavior. Think again.  Researchers at the Indiana University School of Medicine recently conducted a study that demonstrated otherwise.

Anti-gaming brochure
The Center for Successful Parenting is already using the study in its brochures. [Image Source: Center for Successful Parenting]

In that regard this study is unlikely to convince gaming fans that gaming is medically harmful, much as past studies have failed to convince the critics that it's safe.  But the researchers may be fighting a losing battle.  A recent study showed a whopping 97 percent of children regularly played videogames.

Sources: Eurekalert [press release], Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging [abstract]



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Link? what, where?
By darkpuppet on 12/5/2011 11:57:59 AM , Rating: 4
I'm not sure how this is study shows a link between behaviour and videogames.

Problem number one: the experiment was done in an uncontrolled (read 'home') environment. What else was going on that may have affected the brains of the individuals who were tasked with playing 10 hours of videogames (fatigue, stress, etc)

And problem 2: those who played the games had less activity in areas of the brain in control of behaviour and decision making -- but how does that actually affect behaviour and decision making?

For example, if you do a task enough times, your brain will program itself to do said task while using less brain power...

could it be that the players of said games just became more efficient at the task, rather than desensitized? And is desensitized really a bad thing?

There's so many ways that the actual research could be read, but seems as though the paper takes it's own editorial approach -- which seems a bit unscientific to me.




RE: Link? what, where?
By locowolf on 12/5/2011 12:05:51 PM , Rating: 2
The test task was not video games, it was a Stroop task. It was performed in an experimental, not home environment. However, my understanding is that the video games were performed at home.

That said, I agree with your conclusion: gamers may well have performed the task more efficiently and thus required less neural resources.


RE: Link? what, where?
By The Raven on 12/5/2011 1:18:01 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
However, my understanding is that the video games were performed at home.
At home? So how do we know that this aggression is not due to the games themselves and instead caused by the gamers' kids constantly walking infront of them when they have the game winning headshot lined up on their red dot.


RE: Link? what, where?
By Adonlude on 12/5/2011 2:29:35 PM , Rating: 4
Sounds to me like any kid wanting to be a doctor, police man, EMT, or soldier needs to be playing LOTS of violent video games.


RE: Link? what, where?
By The Raven on 12/5/2011 3:18:09 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah desensitizing is not always bad lol.


RE: Link? what, where?
By JPForums on 12/6/2011 9:24:55 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
... gamers may well have performed the task more efficiently and thus required less neural resources.


Let's start with this premise and formulate an alternate theory.

quote:
The gamers also showed decreased activity in their anterior cingulate cortex. This part of the brain controls decision-making, empathy, and emotion.


The test involves taking an action based on the color of the word. First, the decision making aspect is related to the color of the word not comprehension. Second, it is hard to be empathetic to a written word. If we assume the two groups are random and thus on average equally efficient at decision making (as they should be), then the activity differences measured in their anterior cingulate cortex would most likely be the result of a difference in emotional response. It could be said that the gamers were simply less emotional allowing the decision making activity to occur more quickly.

A theory based on this and previous research, that suggests games can help relieve stress, is that gamers are less stressed and thus less prone to emotional outbursts and aggressive behavior. As a result, we would expect decision making to take less time as well.

quote:
The procedure, known as emotional interference, showed that the gaming group -- despite having played no games in a week -- consistently showed less activity in the left frontal lobe when exposed to words with violent connotations. The left frontal lobe is the part of the brain responsible for considering the consequences of actions and overruling socially unacceptable actions.


Again, the actions of the test were unrelated to the words. There is little consequence to consider in the required action of associating a color to a button press. If we assume less emotional response from the gaming group, then less time would be spent on considering the consequences of actions they have no intention of taking.

quote:
"These findings indicate that violent video game play has a long-term effect on brain functioning. These effects may translate into behavioral changes over longer periods of game play."


It seems to me that it will make them less emotionally charged and less prone to emotional outburst allowing rational thinking to take over. This, of course, assumes the individual isn't predisposed to emotional outbursts, irrationality, and destructive behavior prior to gaming.

quote:
After a second week without playing any games the gaming group's brain activity increased back to similar levels to the control group.

Dr. Wang says the study shows long term affects of gaming, stating, "These findings indicate that violent video game play has a long-term effect on brain functioning. These effects may translate into behavioral changes over longer periods of game play."


An alternate hypothesis is that enough stress had built up over the next week as to negate any stress relief gained from gaming two weeks prior. This could easily have been tested by having two more groups game for two weeks and a month respectively. Then monitor how long it takes for their neural activities to return to normal.

There is simply not enough data to support such over reaching conclusions. There are some hypotheses that can be formulated from the data and tested in follow on research. However, when multiple logical theories can be derived from a set of data, it is most often the case that the theories that are supported by previous research data are closer to correct (assuming the data is valid and unaltered). In conclusion, we need to get more data on the subject before passing out the brochures.


RE: Link? what, where?
By kattanna on 12/5/2011 12:06:20 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
which seems a bit unscientific to me


try not scientific at all


RE: Link? what, where?
By AnnihilatorX on 12/5/2011 12:09:23 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
After a second week without playing any games the gaming group's brain activity increased back to similar levels to the control group.

Dr. Wang says the study shows long term affects of gaming, stating, "These findings indicate that violent video game play has a long-term effect on brain functioning.


So 2 weeks is long term now?


RE: Link? what, where?
By kattanna on 12/5/2011 12:51:40 PM , Rating: 2
in an medical anthropology class i had, the teacher wanted us to read this "study" about cultural responses to those with STD's

they questioned 9 people with STD's and 4 without.. and used those answers to write a paper on how american culture treats those with STD's

a whole 13 people picked from the authors local city to represent the entire country

i told the teacher that that study was a crock making such sweeping generalizations from such a small and local group, yet the class was forced to use that as a reference for material on a test.


RE: Link? what, where?
By JasonMick (blog) on 12/5/2011 1:13:23 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'm not sure how this is study shows a link between behaviour and videogames.

Agreed, I didn't say that and the study didn't say that. That's why I wrote:
quote:
While stopping short of definitively tying these neurological changes to behavorial ones, the study does seemingly imply that gamers who play violent videogames may react to violence differently

The study solely tries to establish a link between violent video games and brain activity via the emotional dissonance/Stroop test. A link that is still pretty questionable given the test structure and results.
quote:
Problem number one: the experiment was done in an uncontrolled (read 'home') environment. What else was going on that may have affected the brains of the individuals who were tasked with playing 10 hours of videogames (fatigue, stress, etc)

And problem 2: those who played the games had less activity in areas of the brain in control of behaviour and decision making -- but how does that actually affect behaviour and decision making?

For example, if you do a task enough times, your brain will program itself to do said task while using less brain power...

could it be that the players of said games just became more efficient at the task, rather than desensitized? And is desensitized really a bad thing?

Good points. Other flaws I didn't note in the piece, are that the study failed to compare non-violent games response to violent ones or fully quantify overall changes in brain activity in other regions.
quote:
There's so many ways that the actual research could be read, but seems as though the paper takes it's own editorial approach -- which seems a bit unscientific to me.

Not surprising... look at the source of funding. Can we say bias?


RE: Link? what, where?
By TSS on 12/5/2011 8:55:57 PM , Rating: 2
The main flaw of the study is gaming 10 hours on a laptop. If they did that on a PC i'd take it a little more seriously.


RE: Link? what, where?
By someguy123 on 12/5/2011 10:28:47 PM , Rating: 2
They're grasping at straws at this point.

I don't even understand how desensitization is meant to fuel actions. Wouldn't this more likely correlate with reduction in violence? I mean, if you're spending your days slaughtering aliens or elves to save the world, is it really that appealing to punch regular people? The mind wants bigger and better things, not to revert to humble reality.


RE: Link? what, where?
By StinkyWhizzleTeeth on 12/6/2011 9:59:40 PM , Rating: 2
The gaming industry should fund that study.


RE: Link? what, where?
By StinkyWhizzleTeeth on 12/6/2011 10:09:52 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
could it be that the players of said games just became more efficient at the task, rather than desensitized? And is desensitized really a bad thing?


I thought improved efficiency WAS desensitization? It's just an emotionally negative word, that people generally assume to be negative. In any case, I'm pretty sure I know what you meant.

It makes a lot of sense that repetition would lead to reduced neural activity. It's why habits are so much easier, even when they are self destructive. In order to change a habit, I really have to struggle and I would think that would lead to increased neural activity in the scans.


Poverty
By The Raven on 12/5/2011 1:09:31 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
A recent study showed a whopping 97 percent of children regularly played videogames.

Hmm... the 2010 census shows that ~20% of kids under 18 are living in poverty. Someone please tell me how 17% of kids are regularly playing video games...in poverty.




RE: Poverty
By cjohnson2136 on 12/5/2011 1:56:52 PM , Rating: 3
Cause parents would rather by them these games then food.


RE: Poverty
By FITCamaro on 12/5/2011 2:58:03 PM , Rating: 2
Because "poverty" in America means you only have a 40" HDTV instead of a 60", only have basic HD cable instead of that + all the movie channels, and the basic high speed internet instead of the fastest connection. Oh you also have an iPhone and designer clothes.

But damn the person who tries to make you buy health insurance.


RE: Poverty
By FITCamaro on 12/5/2011 2:58:26 PM , Rating: 2
I should say "thinks you should pay for your own health insurance".


RE: Poverty
By The Raven on 12/5/2011 3:16:02 PM , Rating: 2
lol I was about to say!


RE: Poverty
By Mint on 12/8/2011 12:42:48 PM , Rating: 1
Yeah, that's logical. How dare a poor family spend $400 every few years on a 40" HDTV and $50/mo on TV+internet. They could easily give up those luxuries to pay $13k/yr for average health insurance...

I know that it's not hard to find dicks on the internet that like to shit on the poor, but when your posts get rec'd then it's a sad world we live in.


What happened to parenting?
By rebound11 on 12/5/2011 11:58:45 AM , Rating: 2
Why does anyone have to ban anything for anybody? What happened to parents teaching children what's right and what's wrong? What's reality and what's fiction? I was playing Wolfenstein 3D (yes the first one which was not even remotely close to 3D) when I was a in kindergarten, played all the FPS I wanted since... I've even been watching all the horror movies and thrillers since I learned how to read the subtitles (I learned to read when I was 4 BTW) and I don't go around killing or raping people. Why? because I had good parents that explained to me what's good and bad, what's real and what's not. Hell they even explained stuff about sex when they caught me watching porn (TVs or magazines) at a pretty young age.

It's not good to shield children from the world of violence (which is the real world) because they will be hit hard when they enter it. It's way better to teach them how to defend against those who want to hurt them and to put it simple what's good and what's bad. Bad parents blame anyone except themselves and expect the world to change to their expected wants and needs for their children. Good parents will raise good children regardless of the games they play, the music they listen or the movies they watch.




RE: What happened to parenting?
By ShaolinSoccer on 12/5/2011 12:38:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
What happened to parents teaching children what's right and what's wrong?


The parents are too busy working.


RE: What happened to parenting?
By The Raven on 12/5/2011 1:11:51 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
The parents are too busy working.

...on their COD k/d ratio.


RE: What happened to parenting?
By rebound11 on 12/6/2011 3:24:05 AM , Rating: 2
If they're so busy working they shouldn't have kids that they can't raise.

I have 2 working parents and they have been employed ever since before I was born. This hypothesis is BS.


As a PC gamer of many years...
By callmeroy on 12/5/2011 11:33:56 AM , Rating: 5
This study just makes me want to punch the crap out of these little....

oh....wait.

NVM....:)




RE: As a PC gamer of many years...
By MZperX on 12/5/2011 12:41:47 PM , Rating: 2
Well played, sir... :-)


By The Raven on 12/5/2011 1:10:52 PM , Rating: 2
Especially since your tag is " Callm E. Roy"


Long-term... what?
By MrBlastman on 12/5/2011 12:26:51 PM , Rating: 2
After only TWO WEEKS these "doctors" and "scientists" are saying that video gaming can produce long-term negative effects?

All in two-weeks?

Really?

What a joke. After two-weeks of peeing off my porch outside, I can proclaim with absolute certainty that it produces long-term benefits to the plant life below, also!




RE: Long-term... what?
By tng on 12/5/2011 12:39:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
...we have found that a sample of randomly assigned young adults showed less activation in certain frontal brain regions following a week of playing violent video games at home. The affected brain regions are important for controlling emotion and aggressive behavior.
Which of course is a LONG way from actually saying that FPS games cause kids to make bad decisions in real life.

This is one of just several studies that try to tie violent behavior to video games and fails. There is no real evidence that any of the kids in this or the previous studies would have actually been more inclined to be more violent towards others in real life. All this shows is that some parts of the brain responded differently after playing.

There is a new group out there every year with an agenda who is always about the children and want desperately for this to be true for some reason. Bunch of Nanny government people IMO.


Some crappy college
By valkator on 12/5/2011 4:05:15 PM , Rating: 2
People, it is not like this study was done by a very reputable college. I mean indiana.. pfft, this is just a moron at a crappy college not knowing what the hell he is doing. When Hopkins does a study of their own, I would be more inclined to believe it. (not that i would though) :)




RE: Some crappy college
By FaceMaster on 12/7/2011 1:24:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I would be more inclined to believe it. (not that i would though) :)


Sigh. People only hear what they want to hear. It's why there will never be a truce between videogame lovers and videogame haters. Or religions. Or any area where there are debates to be had.

I, on the other hand, am also biased since I play computer games. I only see what I want to see. Dead people.


Confound...
By locowolf on 12/5/2011 11:55:50 AM , Rating: 3
Increased activation in those brain regions in that same task is often taken as a measure of poor control over attention. So, the pattern demonstrated by gamers could be a result of de-sensitization of violent words, or instead, better control over attention as a result of playing video games. Since the latter has been demonstrated previously, I would probably favor the improved control interpretation.




Dear anti-video game people's
By FITCamaro on 12/5/2011 2:56:11 PM , Rating: 3
Shut the f*ck up and just don't play games or let your children play them if you don't like them.

A favorite quote of mine is "If gun's kill people, spoons cause obesity".




Ooops...
By MrWho on 12/5/2011 11:42:24 AM , Rating: 2
... I just got my 4yo addicted to Mortal Kombat on the Wii.




mmm
By Paj on 12/5/2011 12:35:44 PM , Rating: 2
14 people over two weeks != everyone at all times ever




Just what we needed...
By MZperX on 12/5/2011 12:55:57 PM , Rating: 2
...more junk "science" from people who are too smart for their own good.

One would think that a pre-requisite to attaining a PhD and conducting research in any field would be a demonstrated ability to distiquish between "cause and effect" and "correlation". I guess that's not the case at IU School of Medicine. There is way too much fail in this to go through one-by-one. The most disappointing part is the highly speculative conclusion which is not supported by any factual evidence.

In fact, based on their findings, I've concluded that working as a university researcher causes irreparable harm to brain activity. Clearly the research paper written by the victims shows severe damage to their ability to form logical, coherent thoughts. This outrage must be stopped!




Now do the same thing with...
By Motoman on 12/5/2011 12:57:38 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, whatever. Do the same test after:

1. Watching movies.
2. Watching TV.
3. Reading comic books.
4. Reading non-comic books.
5. Listening to dramatic radio programming.

...so on and so forth. The same idiots have complained about "the children" at all points in our history, over whatever the current hot thing was. They always have been, and always will be, idiots.




By Schrag4 on 12/5/2011 1:30:31 PM , Rating: 2
Back in the late 90s, I got hooked on violent games like Doom, Duke Nukem 3D, Quake, etc. They definitely changed my behavior - they made me want to play more FPS's because they're fun . Was I desensitized to fake, violent images? Of course. Does that mean I would have been desensitized to real violence unfolding right in front of me? I really doubt it. They're just not the same in any way.

Oh, and by the way, by desensitized, I mean it was really really cool (or gross, depending on whether or not you carry a man card) the first times I played these games and eventually that wore off. Most of my friends played the same types of games, and the word to describe our behavior related to these activities wasn't "voilent." It was "nerds."




Poor control group
By Suntan on 12/5/2011 2:42:59 PM , Rating: 2
I would be more interested in his findings if he had his control group play 10 hours of *non* violent video games. As it is he had them do no gaming at all.

How then can he conclude that *violent* games are the cause of desensitization? Perhaps anyone playing 10 hours of games, even non-violent, would respond similarly.

-Suntan




Dr Yang Wang
By EricMartello on 12/5/2011 5:32:38 PM , Rating: 2
Hey man, don't yang my wang! Almost as good as Dr. Crapper from the history channel.




What a load of Crap
By m3t4lh34d on 12/5/2011 10:05:01 PM , Rating: 2
That study is clearly biased, and with the lack of knowledge of the human brain, 'increased activity' in a certain region of the brain does not indicate increased violent tendencies 'without a shadow of a doubt'. Did they ever think that possibly the increased brain activity in that region is due to the fact that their brain was recently exposed to the visual stimuli matching those parameters and their short term memories were still active with said stimuli? Of course they would show increased activity as they still have the data stored in their short term memories. The other group 'control' obviously would show a lesser amount of activity in said region due to the fact that they were not exposed to stimuli matching the parameters that were being searched for in the study. Thus this is completely biased, and is yet another study where the scientists aren't looking to prove violent video games AREN'T a bad influence, but they are in fact trying to prove that they ARE. When you're trying to PROVE something is violent, of course you are going to only look for things that can make your case. Would you submit evidence that would implicate your client in a crime when you are trying to prove his innocence? These studies were clearly funded and/or influenced by this 'Parenting' group, and were looking to please their client.




By shin0bi272 on 12/6/2011 12:20:54 AM , Rating: 2
The second or "control" group should have played a game like tetris or some other type of game thats non violent but still a game.

Plus your sample size... out of the entire gamer nation mind you... is under 30 people and all of them are under 30 themselves. Ive been playing all types of games since I was about 8 or 9 and I know gamers in their 50's... so Im pretty sure they could have found a wider range of people and maybe more people in total to test. maybe make 2 groups out of 3 different age groups.

Then you have the test. It doesnt test images it tests the color of words. That's not a valid test of whether or not the violence affected their brains. Show them images and see if their brain responds more favorably to them when they are of violence after playing. Otherwise youre testing whether or not that person can recognize colored words... which video games can enhance through better eye hand coordination btw.

Lastly if the "effects" return to normal after a week of non play the study should have been extended to see if after say 4 weeks of play does the brain return after a week? 2? 4? do you need the same amount of time to come down as you had playing? What would be the effects on the brain of 1 hour a day? 2? 4? Does the brain need the same or less time to come down with less play per day? You cant just grab a few of your buddies and give them laptops (probably with federal grant money) and tell them to go crazy playing games for a week and then throw them in the school's FMRI and claim the games changed their brain and call it a day. That's not scientific!




By VinnyRandy on 12/6/2011 4:04:13 AM , Rating: 2
The study may be true. I remember a lot of my classmates would imitate Street Fighters characters and fighting each other. Good time.
I am sure movies, TV and internet have similar effects. There is no more innocent kids unless you lock them up.




reduced brain activity
By PaFromFL on 12/6/2011 9:16:01 AM , Rating: 2
Perhaps the reduced brain activity indicates reduced anxiety and increased confidence gained by the gamers. This might lead behaviorally to a reduced tendency to panic in tough situations. A better way study the correlation of gaming with violent behavior would be to survey violent prison inmates. I doubt that the majority of violent offenders spent a whole lot of time gaming.




By letmepicyou on 12/6/2011 9:51:14 AM , Rating: 2
If you create a line graph covering the last 100 years, and on this graph, you chart 2 data points, 1 being the percentage of American women in the workplace, and 2 being incidences of violent crime, you will see 2 lines that show a remarkable similarity to one another. The more women that work, the less of a motherly female influence you have in the home, and the more kids (both males AND females) are brought up by television, movies, music, and video games. Why kids are growing up as imbeciles nowadays is painfully obvious, but anyone that calls it out gets drug through the mud as a supposed "misogynist".

Trouble is, ladies, you've been sold a load of HOOEY by people who, for decades, have been lying to you telling you they want to EMPOWER women by getting them into the workplace in equal proportions to men. You haven't been empowered by this because the one place your power COUNTS, in the family, has been replaced by XBOX.

Your power and identity has, in fact, been eviscerated. No longer in control of the family, all you are now is another corporate wage slave generating income for the elite class while the same class steps in to fill the gap you've left in your family in public education. Want to take the power back?

Quit that stupid job and go back home so mothers can once again lead families.




Influence.
By ipay on 12/6/2011 11:14:07 AM , Rating: 2
This research Scientist is said to have been influenced by Justin Bieber.




Modern-Day Cowboys and Indians
By clarityinla on 12/6/2011 8:50:55 PM , Rating: 2
Back when kids were actually allowed to play outside, we played War, Cowboys and Indians, and Dracula vs. Frankenstein. We would get shot, jailed, bitten in the neck and sometimes buried on a daily basis.

Since they didn't have MRI's back then, how do we know that playing those games didn't have a similar effect on our brain as he dreaded "violent video games"?

Role playing is an important part of growing up, only now it's done on an x-box rather than IRL. Of course it isn't politically correct to role play anymore, lest you be accused of racism, sexism, or some other social crime.

This is just another example of the nanny-statists looking for a way to stop kids and grown-ups from having fun!




"We basically took a look at this situation and said, this is bullshit." -- Newegg Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng's take on patent troll Soverain














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki