Now, whether or not you agree with controlling what video games minors can by through legislation isn't really the point here. I think parents are ultimately responsible for what their children buy. I'm more bothered by the obvious double standard sexual content is subjected to by the courts.
Justice Stephen Breyer, one of the two dissenters, actually commented on this himself:
"What sense does it make," he asked, "to forbid selling to a 13-year-old boy a magazine with an image of a nude woman, while protecting a sale to that 13-year-old of an interactive video game in which he actively, but virtually, binds and gags the woman, then tortures and kills her?"It does make you wonder.
What kind of First Amendment would permit the government to protect children by restricting sales of that extremely violent video game only when the woman — bound, gagged, tortured, and killed — is also topless?"