Behaviorism

Martin Robbins penned this article for the left-wing British newspaper/site the Guardian, in which he (rather angrily) examines the case of an "anger management company" citing video games as reasons for bad behavior in children, specifically violent and irrational behavior. He argues that it's the parent's fault, not the games. On the whole, I agree with him -- and regular readers know how rare it is for me to agree with anything published in the Guardian.

The video games available today are not Space Invaders and Pac-Man. They are ultra-realistic in appearance (if not in physics) and many are actively violent and warlike. I know, because I play several of them. But I am an adult of middle age, with a lifetime of experience with which to filter fantasy from reality. Children by definition do not possess that filter; to them, what's on that screen is, from an emotional perspective, a part of reality. Children soak up experiences like a sponge and mix it all together in their immature minds. Expecting children to rationalize and make moral judgements with no moral training is like blaming a dog for peeing on the carpet when you've never bothered to housebreak him.

As Mr Robbins points out, the problem here is not violent video games, but incompetent and lazy parenting. Games are reviewed and labeled just as movies have been for years. They are clearly marked if they are inappropriate for children. So if your Little Johnny is becoming uncooperative, waspish and snotty while playing his game about running over civilians at high speed and recruiting street whores, or he shouts obscenities at the screen while blowing up virtual tanks, who is at fault here?

Unfortunately, the nanny-state mentality with which many of today's young parents grew up is starting to bear its rotten fruit. They can't comprehend that it is their job to slap Johnny on the back of the head, wash his mouth out with soap and send him to bed with no dinner when he throws a temper tantrum. They've been saturated for over two decades with the leftist mantra: "It's not your fault."

Which brings us full circle: a leftist rag like the Guardian complaining about a situation which they helped to bring about is really burying the needle on the ol' Irony Meter.

Raise your kids. Nobody else is going to do it for you. If they end up in gladiator academy when they're 16 because you let Grand Theft Auto IV babysit when they were eight, don't go accusing game makers of irresponsibility -- because that's a really fragile glass house you're occupying.

Finally, I agree with this comment whole-heartedly:

Anger management is a dubious field to begin with, treating a 'disorder' which doesn't seem to exist in any meaningful sense. Even the expansive lists of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (the DSM), the diagnostic bible for mental health, don't include anger disorders, and anger management techniques seem to have little reliable, systematic evidence supporting their use.

Indeed. That's the been the trend for years now: confusing behavioral issues with physical disorders. It wasn't long ago that nearly half the children in the United States were on some form of psychotropic to control "attention deficit disorder" and other lame excuses for lack applying a belt to the hindquarters. I realize that sounds old fashioned and out of vogue, but it doesn't change the truth. Humans are animals (as liberals are so quick to remind everyone) and the only way to train an animal is with reward and punishment. Don't believe me? Try talking reasonably to that puppy you're trying to housebreak. Get back to me on how that works out for you.

__
Hat-tip to Vizigoth