Pandora’s Lunchbox: Deregulating Decency With Dorks’ Dollars

Editor’s Note: The Following Article contains images that, while not genuinely pornographic, would not be a great thing for your boss to see over your shoulder. Please read responsibly.

by Adam Maresca

Thanks to the likes of open-source funding services like Kickstarter, the “marketplace of ideas” has never been more literal, or more troubling. Though their record is far from perfect , the service recently has come under fire again. This time the cause is the cancellation of the card game Tentacle Bento  for, presumably, flagrantly violating the company’s obscenity guidelines. The fact the game tripled its initial goal and ran on the site for quite some time is not the major source of the outcry, though. It’s that the game was pulled from Kickstarter at all.

That Which Must Be Preserved At All Costs.

Insert Credit’s initial coverage  by Brandon Sheffield is one of the main sources of the complaints that got the project pulled, and his  correspondence with John Cadice , the game’s designer, is telling. Sheffield found Cadice’s stance during their conversation to be duplicitous in the face of his demeanor from gameplay demonstration footage. But maybe the video in question was an informal setting, and the innuendo was being laid on thicker in the private company of friends. That could be mildly more understandable… but it’s not the case by a long shot. One need only look to Soda Pop Miniatures’ own promotional materials to realize Cadice is a weasel trying to escape the henhouse. Consider the following pairs of quotes; first halves are all statements by Cadice from the Sheffield interview, latter halves are either text or spoken audio found directly on the defunct Kickstarter page linked above.

1. “We do not in any way condone or illustrate violence in any way against any of the ladies in our game.” / “Your mission: get your slimy tentacles on as many of the student body as you can before time runs out.”

2. “We are not trying to be edgy, and very few of our backers find our product out of any kind of norm as it relates to their interests.” / “Sweet and adorable anime schoolgirls frolic through the brightly-lit halls of Takoashi, while the creeping tentacles of the offending aliens lie just out of sight, waiting to snatch their next victim.”

3. “We can run down a million rabbit holes just as bad by cross examining why women wear high heeled shoes, the appropriateness of camouflage as a textile pattern for children… etc etc etc. Show me ponies being ridden by children under a rainbow, and I will find someone to shout about the subjugation of intelligent animals for our petty amusement with as much intensity as this argument.” / “Tentacle Bento is a mature themed product not intended for sale to children under the age of 17.”

4. “The constant battery of sexual terminology (where there is not one instance in our product) and lines like ‘The style is a cute, lighthearted, pastel-colored look at the wonderful world of forcing your way inside a female against her will,’ is your assertion and not fact, and colored the whole conversation.” / “[$25 Donation Level] GRABBY HANDS: Early copy of the game, + exclusive promo card set!” 

5. “I am providing a narrative about aliens grabbing up school girls. Notice the large sucker covered tentacles for ‘grabbing things.’ I do have a card with a girl being tickled, and another baking a cake… the perceived notion became the narrative here, and that is the problem. We do not address or imply what happens when you are capturing the students.” / “I can’t wait to get my hands on this new class of girls to see what kind of… ‘talent’ they might have.”

 That the final line of the final pair is spoken by Marie-Claude Bourbonnais, a erotic nude / fetish model hired as both spokesperson and audience hook, should more or less complete the scene. Even if in spite of all this someone were to insist that Tentacle Bento is “not about rape” because it never names or depicts it explicitly, the game’s every decoration is predicated on the tropes of pornographic Japanese comic books that even PR Disaster Mode Cadice says the game is meant to “mock”. It’s the equivalent of a child waving his hands over you while chanting “I’m not touching you”, or using the word “ niggardly ” when discussing the current President’s economic policy.

“We’ve paid her to endorse the game! That means we’re equal opportunity, right?”

Cadice is ably hoisting himself by his own petard, but this is not ultimately his story. The problems with a card game that makes abduction and heavily implied rape its main scoring mechanic should be fairly self-evident to the sane and sexually undisturbed, to say nothing of the erotic anime depictions of high school students. (And commissioned facsimiles of real people.) But even with the $30,000 in Kickstarter contributions nullified, the project has migrated to Soda Pop’s website… and is already four grand ahead of its previous high water mark.

So, in summary, we have a crass, insensitive trivialization of rape and an attempt to rebuke the offenders publicly. Word of the incident is starting to get around and an unrepentant “resistance” is reveling in its own callousness/indifference. What does Mike Krahulik of Penny Arcade think?

Par for the course! 

The Internet, for all its boons and benefits, has opened a new chapter in social history, where those who would be shunned and shamed by local peers have been able to coalesce into geographically dislocated communities. When those fringe groups claim the “oppression” of animated TV program fans as equal to that of LGBT rights activists, most of us cringe or laugh derisively. When those communities are founded on principles liked mass-marketed rape pedophilia in a faux-Japanese cartoon candy coating, most of us coil in revulsion. But those who don’t see a problem seem to have plenty of money to burn, and cash knows no moral qualms. Perfectly free trade helps bring together war chests for good ideas as well as it does for reproachable ones.

“Free speech” is a powerful and volatile right, and one of the few that most Americans claim to both cherish and exercise regularly. We accept that the cost of abiding by the First Amendment are blind spots where reprehensible and harmful material can seep through. Nuanced caveats have to be added for things like hate speech, threatening elected officials, and yelling “fire” in a movie theater, but nevertheless there are plenty of vile creations that can pass for legal. That doesn’t mean, however, that we have to like it, or that we cannot attempt to curb the influence and reach works like Tentacle Bento have. It’s the difference between trying to burn every print copy of  The Turner Diaries  and, say, protesting the book getting a deluxe reprint and distribution by Penguin Classics.

In an unexpected satirical marriage of
those two less-than-appetizing ideas…

The fuss is minimal when award-winning Pakistani student filmmakers are denied visas for depicting the bloody truths of “drone warfare”. But get in Tentacle Bento’s way, and you have one of the figureheads of “gamer culture” taking up the sword because of that one time he read that falsely attributed Voltaire quote  and got it in his brain that all ideas are of equal value. These developments should seem antithetical to the spirit of “free speech protection” to anyone who stops and thinks for five minutes, but there is a grain of terrible truth at the core of both events.

The new version of the “marketplace of ideas” is simply that: just another marketplace. Every dollar spent is an equal vote in favor of what economic theory defines as a product, be it a good, service, or idea . Each dollar might be equal to each other dollar, but clearly the way they’re spent and how many votes any given person can make varies wildly. The internet’s power of anonymity makes it easier for the depraved and deplorable to gain traction, while the imbalance of spending power that dictates our lives offline similarly drives the popularity contests of the Internet. And as imbalanced as this “playing field” already is, no realistic amount of money can be spent in opposition to prevent the next Tentacle Bento from coming to fruition. There’s no real vote at all, only a quota to meet.

We actually pay to attend our  “voter
registration drives”… who runs PAX again?

The final ingredient is the reason anyone has bothered to publicly champion a ridiculously simple, boring-looking card game and its pandering, perverted titillation: the delusion of legitimacy that having a community grants. Fans and customers become interchangeable, and checking against common sense is steadily going out of fashion. Ethics become purely relative; money changes hands and inevitably pools with the most immediately attractive ideas, which generally are not the “best” from a sociological viewpoint. Beyond a certain threshold, some can even buy their way to a rarified kind of success that is both self-fulfilling and self-reproducing. All we can do is spend wisely and hope against hope that everyone else won’t chip in to help build and sustain abominations. Or, you know, at least have enough shame to do it in the dark and not scream about being persecuted.

(Haha, I’m just kidding, we’re locked in a cultural death spiral until the game industry suffers a catastrophic collapse without any guarantee of recovery.)

Adam Maresca also writes for Gamer’s Obstinacy & Kosternian Understanding.

This entry was posted in Critical Conversation , Features and tagged Adam Maresca , Brandon Sheffield , Debug Chamber , First Amendment , , Insert Credit , John Cadice , Marie-Claude Bourbonnais , , , Penny Arcade , , , Turner Diaries . Bookmark the permalink .
  • Markovian_Process

    Honestly I dont have a problem with this game… maybe I should, but I don’t. Pornography no mater how taudry is ultimately just a form of sexual expression and so long as no one was actually victimized I could care less. I wouldn’t throw my money at it, but more power to those who would.

    What I do have a problem with is the creators trying to present the game as anything other then what it is. If you’re going to make a tenticle rape card game, fine, what ever, at least have the conviction to stand behind it instead of being a dishonest scoundrel and pretending your not.

    And as a service provider, kickstarter has every right to determine what they do and dont allow. Just like a movie theater has every right not to screen pornography Kickstarter has every right not to allow fun raising for pornography. It’s there service and there call. To remove that right is actually to infringe on there freedom of speech.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=22600732 Arthur Koch

      Well, qualifying harm as a direct or indirect result of pornography can be a complex issue of its own. I think it would ultimately take a depth of examination that I’m not interested in of the mechanics, art, and consumption of this game to even hazard a guess at how much it contributes to culturally normalizing rape versus how much it is just a symptom of such a culture. While I suspect this game isn’t sophisticated enough to produce more rape culture than it consumes, I don’t think such a possibility is beyond the realm of pornographic arts.

      At the same time, I can’t imagine suppressing these sorts of expressions would actually function to reduce the deeper problems. Obviously the attendant conversations direct us to where the legitimate problems with rape normalization overtly evidence themselves. Mr. Maresca puts forward what seems to be a cynical evaluation of the “marketplace of ideas,” but I think there’s a compelling dimension to it, which you touch on with Kickstarter’s agency as a venue for ideas. I’m sure Kickstarter makes a financial evaluation of potential controversy, but I feel like Tentacle Bento has also failed metrics of logical and sociological merit in larger segments of the internet and gamer discourses. I suspect it’s increasingly difficult to disregard ideological veracity in favor of profit when your marketplace is fundamentally ideas.

      Tentacle Bento may have made its fundraising goal even without Kickstarter support and found a vocal defender in Krahulik and his associates, but these aren’t accomplishments. These aren’t even the bare minimum effects of inertia in a rape-normalizing culture. I know my reply very quickly moved beyond the scope of your comment, but you started my mental gears turning, so yeah.

    • http://www.mediumdifficulty.com/ Kyle Carpenter

      What I think Adam argues, though, is that this equation of free market to free speech is sort of false. You suggest that it’s not for you, but that if people want to buy it, fine. I’d like to point out you’re speaking specifically about the rights of Kickstarter and the rights of Soda Pop Miniatures to govern their business as they see fit: the implication I see in what you’re arguing here is that the market will regulate what is acceptable to produce and distribute based on whether or not people buy it.

      I think the point of this article – and one I agree with – is that “what people will buy” is sort of insane metric for what is appropriate and what is not, given the rather insulting success of Tentacle Bento. The defining feature of this ideological slant is that rights are in the eyes of the consumer. That’s incredibly weird, especially when you think of how prevalent the attitude is.

      Sorry, I think I’ve done this to you before (totally didn’t mean to repeat!) but I wanted to help unpack something in both your response and Maresca’s article.

      • Markovian_Process

        No one is saying the system is perfect (Well alright maybe Libertarians are, but they are by large crazy.) But I’ve never been a fan of regulating morality, other then the fact that it doesnt work. What you and I find offensive some one else may not, and there are lots of things I am not offended by that lots of people are. Generally I lean towards freedom and right to express ones self. The general logic is, that if you don’t allow people to express themselves, all you are doing is forcing a black market and driving it underground. This is not health and leads to the creation of sub cultures that tend to fester. So long as no one is actually hurt, well people are free to do as they want. Now that doesn’t mean you can’t criticize. You can say any negative thing you like against it. But beyond criticism what do you do? Shut them down? Arrest them? What exactly is the solution?

        • http://www.mediumdifficulty.com/ Kyle Carpenter

          The solution, I suppose, would be for people to be willing to change their mind about their endeavours rather than using “free speech” as a teflon coating – which is what I think HAS been happening at large. “It’s my opinion, and you can’t change that” is very different from “this is my idea as I see it, but I am willing to be persuaded that perhaps I am in the wrong.” Conversation, and being persuaded not to do something because you recognize what it will do to another person/group is not censorship – but bulldozing injured parties with the power of the market may very well be, in my eyes.

          I suppose the idea that I want to raise is that censorship can work more insidiously than through simple governmental interference – it can also work through a willingness to turn a blind eye to the testimony of certain groups who let us know that they are being hurt. I feel genuine free speech means being willing to listen to the voices that aren’t able to yell. This is what I feel the equation of free speech to free market does.

          I have an article coming out today that elaborates on my thoughts regarding the polemics of the situation. I’d love to see what you think!

          • Markovian_Process

            I would be very interested to see what woman have to say about this. Are they being hurt? So far every commentator has been a dude.

            And yes, listening is important, but that doesn’t mean I have to agree with you.

            I think my problem with this article, is the actual stance of the author is a bit unclear. Why yes he is against the game, but to what end? What does being against it mean and what does he feel we should do about it? I really don’t quite understand what exactly he is getting at, other then this game is insensitive. (It is, but I have never felt insensitivity reason to censor something.)

            When I wrote my previous comments I was under slept and not entirely thinking straight, I think I may have come off a tad bit unclear myself. So just to make sure all the cards are laid down on the table my position is thus.

            While I find the guy making a disengenuis sleez bag I have no feelings pro or con on this game, but think the people who are bitching and moaning about Kickstarter dropping the title need to learn what Free Speech means. Is the game covered under Freedom of Speech? Yes. But that doesn’t mean Kickstarter needs to facilitate it. In fact that would literally be taking away Kickstarters freedom of speech by forcing them to be privy in the creation of something they may not agree with. I think every commentator here understands what Freedom of Speech means, but as a concept it is one of the most abused and miss used terms in contemporary culture.

            Though I am no doubt coming off very Libertarian in many of my posts on this magazine, I am not… or at least I don’t associate with the bulk of Libertarian culture.

            It may seem like a digression to about my politics, but I bring it up for a reason. The Right Wing media, has trained people to automatically associate criticism with censorship, but only when it relates to them. I’m reminded when The University of Ottawa cancelled a speech by Ann Coulter, because she made some racist comments towards an Arab student at a previous lecture. Naturally she went on the attack saying UofO was censoring her by not providing her with a pulpit. But by that logic was she not censoring that poor Arab girl? Let it be said, I think Miss Coulter had every right to make those racist comments, (she’s an idiot, but she has right to be an idiot) but there is no obligation of any one to provide her with a venue for her. We are not taking away her right to say what she wants to say bu not providing her with microphone. Life has concupiscence, sometimes people are going to not like what you have to say or do, that’s there right.

            Where you see so Sexism in the game, I see Classism in the response to it being pulled. This reaction is the result of a privileged class who has been trained that there Freedom of Speech is the only Freedom of Speech that matters, and fuck you if your poor, a minority, or a woman. I would bet dimes to dollars that 99% of the people complaining about Kickstarter pulling Tentacle Bento are white men who pay attention to Right Wing pendents in the media.

            I may defend this games right to exist on grounds of expression, but I will just as fervently defend any and every person who criticizes it, and the right of any one not to facilitate it. Because every ones Freedom of Speech maters, not just people who are incensed that there opinion is more righteous then any one else’.

            —-

            Wow, that went on waaaaaay longer then I intended. Anyways I saw the article you posted on the topic is up, so I am off to read that.

          • http://www.mediumdifficulty.com/ Kyle Carpenter

            I could direct you to some female critics who do feel very much aggrieved on the subject: Lana Polansky of Kill Screen, Mattie Brice of The Borderhouse, Jenn Frank, Patricia Hernandez of Kotaku, Julian Williams of Zam.com, and all of these are for instance.

            Brendan Keogh has even suggested that he’s disappointed that his recent article on rape culture has been picked up so widely, as he feels there are female critics who have written on the subject better and more persuasively who are being ignored.

            I would absolutely agree that there is a class issue at play here too, though!

      • Markovian_Process

        If you wish to convince me that this game should be censored, you would need to show me definitively that it normalizes rape. Because right now, the research shows that places that have better access to pornography actually have less rape.

        http://www.toddkendall.net/internetcrime.pdf

        Now the theory is not with out it’s detractors, and I am certainly open to any evidence to the contrary, but despite what cynic bloggers on the internet have to say I really havn’t seen anything convincing.

    • Why yes hello!

      My major grievance against the game itself isn’t against people’s private sexual fetishes. Whatever consenting adults do behind closed doors and pulled curtains is up to them. It’s that the cutesy presentation is then tailored for a mass market palate. Like Arthur said, it’s a very difficult topic to navigate, but the cheeky joking around the idea of rape contributes to people not taking it as seriously as they should. (Not using the phrase “rape culture” was a very intentional omission.)

      As for the “marketplace of ideas” and placing moral authority on spending habits, that’s a side effect (or symptom) of how services like Kickstarter work. It’s a tool that can, in theory, be used for good or evil to give any project on it visibility and legitimacy; that’s why their use of discretion as a private company is so crucial. If they hadn’t established a foothold on Kickstarter first, would they have been so well-funded? Would they have even reached their goal?

      Glad people enjoyed the article!

  • Ryan Morning

    In Mike Krahulik’s case he saw an opportunity to champion freedom of speech, and apparently divorced it entirely from what he was tacitly supporting. And even now I have no idea what his intentions actually were— does he approve of the game? Or did he simply feel the need to be the saviour that the project so obviously didn’t need, feeling that they’d suffered unjustly after Kickstarter decided they didn’t want to host it and exercised their right to desist in doing so?

    Instead of offering up an explanation he repeatedly accused challengers of demanding censorship. And then blocked them from talking to him. Not that I’m saying that the very act of muting his critics counted as censorship in and of itself; that’s a worrying path to take, considering the pervasiveness of harassment. I’m just nonplussed because it seems close-minded and puerile. If you use your influence and that influence results in exposure for something, the least you could do is elaborate on your intentions.

    A friend of mine, once, was disgusted that some indie game involved gunning down schoolchildren. And it always seems to be the really lowbrow, try-hard edgy projects that we end up defending, simply because they’re the chafe that prompts the conversation on whether people “should be allowed to do that”. And to that outraged friend I had to stress that while I thought it was disgusting and sensationalist (and probably a lousy game, too, looking at the footage) I’d defend the developer’s right to circulate their art. Well, I may have actually said “art”. Using inverted commas as some kind of radiation barrier so I could chicken out and avoid deciding on whether it was a serious creative undertaking.

    I guess what I’m saying is; by all means, remember that freedom of speech applies to everything equally, beyond particularly harmful instances outlined in law. But at least be honest about your reasons for parroting that phrase. And remember that defending someone’s right to a voice does not have to extend to indirectly (or directly? Such mysterious intent) supporting their endeavour in front of a million fans who take your word as gospel.

  • JosephHilgard

    I find it hard to believe that this thing is actually intended to sell on its merits as a game (although some think it does: Krahulik defends himself, saying that Soda Pop Miniatures “makes good games”).

    If the product is intended as a trick-taking game in the tradition of Spades or Wizard, then an apology and a re-theme would be the easiest thing in the world. Instead of a rape game involving places, girls, and abductions, make it a cooking contest where players must combine pots, ingredients, and broths. Simple!

    Of course, Tentacle Bento ISN’T meant to sell on its merits as a game – can you imagine trying to play this with 2-3 other people? It’s a sabot. It’s a way to justify buying a pack of ecchi playing cards, and oh, put me down for an extra few hundred dollars for the body pillow, since it’s all for a good cause.

    This isn’t game design. It is a new marketing opportunity to sell knickknacks and pandering fanservice materials to otaku. By smudging the lines like this, Soda Pop gets to claim that they’re making a game & get coverage and exposure from gaming outlets – coverage that they wouldn’t get otherwise just selling ecchi drawings directly.

    Real game developers make games without all this nerd-baiting and sexual exploitation. You’re not going to see Hans Im Gluck or Rio Grande Games with a line item for softcore porn actress endorsements or body pillows on their budget anytime soon.

  • FatherTime

    “The problems with a card game that makes abduction and heavily implied
    rape its main scoring mechanic should be fairly self-evident to the sane
    and sexually undisturbed,”

    I say the problem begins and ends with “it’s disgusting and I don’t like it”

    You say it trivializes real rape and to me that sounds like the people saying GTA trivializes murder.

    “. Nuanced caveats have to be added for things like hate speech,
    threatening elected officials, and yelling “fire” in a movie theater,”

    Generic hate speech laws/anti-slur laws violate the first amendment. Also fire in a crowded theater was a supreme court precedent that got overturned decades ago.

    “The fuss is minimal when award-winning Pakistani student filmmakers are denied visas”

    Nice use of a red herring. This isn’t about Pakistani students and it never was. The fact that they might not have heard this doesn’t make their points any less valid.