This is an interesting point you raise. Not for the sake of the topic mind you, but more from a humanity pov. It feels a bit like saying 'your emotions are not you'. A way to differentiate between what you feeling and who you are. Your feelings, these sometimes raging waters wanting to pull the uneducated down into that dark hole that should not be looked upon, and sometimes the educated too, don't get me wrong here, usually have grounds for expressing themselves the way they do.
Sorting through them is another point. Most humans will find coping mechanisms of sorts. Some actually manage to deal with them. It is sometimes hard to understand why people choose for extreme coping mechanisms. Certainly, if the observer is of the mild department, experiencing live as a breeze passing by. But at the moment that someone softly whispers ' he/she has gone through 'stuff'. Most people manage to find some forgiving sense in their hearts.

Of course you may have had something else in mind all together. I do remember quite fondly how at a certain point in my life i walked about with a shaven head uniformed in a certain branded trainings outfit to let the whole world know that i was a fond of a musical genre. I wish we had those body pillows back then ;)

Which is coincidentally exactly what the "new Puritans" (want to) do.

They want to decide what everyone can see, hear, play, teach and learn, etc.

And if they deem something "inappropriate", "impure", "obscene" and/or simply (and in broad strokes) "bad", then they are of the opinion that everybody else should be barred from having access to that something.

That's also why they don't like having options and choices available for everyone.
They think, them making the choice for everyone, should suffice

They love taking over the role of "moral guardians" for society.

Whether society as a whole wants them to take over that role or not, is of no concern for them (aka: "mommy knows best what's good for you, dear!").

If you had the power to change the law, how far would you take it? Would you, for instance, censor a film like The Italian Job because it glorifies robbery and dangerous driving? The latter is a serious problem, with well over a million people killed every year on the roads globally, and it's only logical that the media's portrayal of driving contributes to it.

Is there any objective evidence for this claim? And does it work with other types of games as well? How many of those who often play GTA then do the same things in reality? How many people who played CS for terrorists subsequently joined ISIS? How often do MK fans start violent fights that end in serious injury or even death? In general, Is there a statistic on how often infatuation with something that is bad in real life but fun in games leads to corresponding bad deeds in real life?

I'm sure that any mentally healthy person understands that media and reality are not the same thing. And if murders, rapes, robberies, and whatever else are appropriate and fun in games or films, this does not mean that they are also appropriate in real life. And mentally ill people anyway will do terrible things with or without games/movies.

For example, I'm just one of those who played Vice City for hours, not going through the missions, but just wreaking havoc - blowing up cars, shooting the crowd and the police, etc. And I enjoyed it immensely. But it's more likely that the sky will fall to Earth than I will even take a gun in my hands in real life, let alone use it against someone. And I'm far from alone in this. Therefore, statements in the style of "games/films normalize something bad in the minds of society" do not cause me anything but skepticism and doubt.

After all, if now you personally will be forced to play all the games in this series several times, after that, you still won’t go to rape minors, right? Right?..

Every instance of derived pleasure and joy is an endorsement regardless of the source being "filthy" or wholesome, regardless of the denouement of its expression being an orgasm or a smile.

It's no greater or smaller an endorsement than me laughing my ass off like a maniac when the fictional human being i shot for no reason blew up funny into pieces after i tossed a grenade at the quasi corpse because the damn thing was agonizing to death precisely on the spot where i intended to build my fictional log cabin. It's no greater or smaller an endorsement than me doing it at resume after hitting pause to watch the news reports on tv about real live human beings in Ukraine being blown to pieces by the crap flung at them by that other man-child loony toon.

There are only two honest sides to this table, either both instances are acceptable on the grounds that it's pleasure and joy derived from horrors inflicted upon fictional characters or neither of them is acceptable on the grounds that we shouldn't be allowed to derive pleasure and joy from fictional depictions of the very real horrors human beings inflict upon each other.

Beyond that there's nothing but an endless sea of hypocrisy, like the respectability of " intellectual distance and irony" from fictional depictions of some types of atrocities but not others, a mere biased construct shaped by a mix of culture, political motivation, religious belief, prejudice and personal baggage.

Cruelty is part of of us, it's our penchant for cruelty that makes us laugh when we see a senior fall flat on their ass. One second later we rush to help them back up and make sure they're ok but in that very first second back there, we chuckled and derived joy from someone else's misfortune, pain, suffering, before that part of us is pushed aside by other parts of our humanity, namely, decency, empathy, kindness.

As long as folks keep the cruelty that resides within each of us, and our pre disposition to revel in it, confined to fictional screening borders and, after a split second chuckle, keep rushing to pick our seniors back up from the floor, then they have nothing to be ashamed of - so by all means, inquisitor, keep pointing that finger at will until it falls off from wear and tear.

---

Folks, please be sure to put on your " intellectual distance and irony" hats before watching this.

---

That's us, human beings. Live with that.

I Mean, yes, psychopaths do exist. But the majority of people (even if there are significant numbers of psychopaths) aren't going to derive such pleasure from a fictional character's suffering at all, even if they despise that character.