The line about violent imagery in fairy tales is bullshit. Just because a child reads something doesn't mean he understands it.
This brought back memories:
the evil queen in Snow White is forced to wear red hot slippers and dance until she is dead
I remember putting that together as, "Magical red slippers that make her dance."
The innocent lack the frame of reference to grasp horrors, so you can't compare a book which allows them to misinterpret with a game that
teaches them the meaning.
This ruling seems to lack context. They don't have a problem with minors being prohibited from voting. They don't have a problem with adults moderating minors. Yet when those adult voters decide to moderate en masse, suddenly the child has civil rights?
And I'd say we certainly have a history of protecting children from witnessing real gore. Teens wouldn't be fascinated with breaking the prohibition if it wasn't prohibited.
I do believe access to
real gore should be protected from a certain age (14, maybe?) as it has value in learning about how the world really works. Faces of Death will teach you that guns really do kill people; 4chan will gleefully show you that speeding can turn you into a yellow and pink smear on the pavement, and watching a rider get run over by a dump truck teaches you about bike safety... but engaging in fake acts of graphic violence as pure entertainment doesn't teach you anything good. Triggering the sick glee at breaking society's prohibitions and letting out your inner sadist is not "speech."
I've played
The Torture Game, but I can't say that I think it would be appropriate for my 4 year old cousin.