Alien Contact: Controversial Subject matter.

[Avelorn]

You know a couple of years ago I had some dioramas in mind that I never got to make. They were all about this really, trying to force the viewer to look at our hobby (admittedly mine circled around GW and LOTR) not from the perspective of entertainment but from the underlying "reality" it depicts. I am in no doubt that we are heading in a good direction when we get work that actually has a point to make in contrast to the very pointless and routine depictions of violence we not rarely get here.

This is not the first controversial piece and it will not be the last and I can't think of any future submission that I would personally ban unless it constituted a personal attack (or if it's illegal - to save the site). If it's miniatures it is related content.

However I might have made a mistake when rating this submission on the merits if it was cool or not. I don't think it's cool at all but important non the less.

 

[noneedforaname]

*looks around the door* hmmm *puts away fifty foot pole*

 

[wejee]

I don't think it's cool at all but important non the less.

I think what you mean to say is you don't think "rape is cool." I don't think anyone here does, at least not publicly.

You think the work is important, meaning it is stimulating, at least in a conversational way. So long as the work is not stimulating conversation because "it's just so bad and poorly made," I think important/stimulating = cool, but here I am getting wrapped up in stupid semantics.

I think the diorama is amazing, by the way. I do not find it to promote rape or cast a tawdry light on rape. The artist is holding a mirror on which we see a reflection of society, which in turn it is a reflection of ourselves, not the artist. Do not blame the artist for bringing this to our attention, blame the rapists for making it exist in the first place. If anything the artist's work is a plea AGAINST rape. In the piece, we are obviously made to root for the woman; the men are depicted sleazy, clumsily smoking cigars with nonchalant expressions, etc., while the woman holds a strong and determined expression while going for a weapon to defend herself with. A brutal and emotional scene, yes, but that's what makes it so powerful, and this powerful message translates as a warning that rape DOES exist in the real world, and we HAVE to be aware of it, and that it is wrong.

 

[Avelorn]

@wejee: Though not entirely clear I realise re-reading, the last point was a bit of a sarcasm related to the countless of debates we've had on how to properly vote on submissions. The site have outgrown its name now I think.

 

[wejee]

ah. It will take me a while to catch on to those things I'm sure. Either way, I apologize but I "used" what you said more of a catalyst for a point I wanted to make, regardless of your particular opinion. Again, my humble apologies

 

[Master of fact]

I must admit when i first looked at it i was not shocked. Im a big fan of GW lore ect. The thing is this DOES happen. Am i a fan no. Its is just a model after all and can be read several ways. I instantly thought the elf was going to get smacked with belt then went ohhhhhhhh.

On a brighter and funnier note is it just me or would you try and pull an elf if you could!

 

[Gearhead]

I'll say one thing: If I'd read the FAQ recently (hadn't since I joined, so it long ago faded from memory,) then I'd have found this (unless it was a very recent update, which I doubt) :

Any picture of any painted or converted miniature is accepted. You must own the rights to the picture to post it.

...and had a lot less to say in this thread, especially as to whether or not any given submission should be here. I can certainly debate its merits, but THAT particular argument is pointless.

What this whole thing boils down to is differences of values and opinions. We each spend a lifetime developing them, and I doubt very much that we'd be able to outline and define them as clearly as Chern has defied us to do. I'm not going to pick up that particular glove because it would probably be the biggest TL : DR on the 'net. All I can really do is look at each instance and examine what my thoughts and feelings are about it; I could not, and it would be unrealistic to expect anyone to, outline a complete and comprehensive flowchart to handle each little thing ahead of time. I say again: we all have our limits. I think that for every person, there's going to be something that is beyond their limit of acceptability, even if they haven't found it yet. Those limits are going to defy clear mapping, and they're ever-changing. Yet again, the source of debate here is simply that some people have those limits closer in than others.

 

[JesterzUSMC]

And so you are not allowed to have an opinion of what should and should not be allowed on anything? You are are simply being to broad in your views. What about seatbelts in cars or restricting alcohol use to minors. It is an asinine argument which is designed to dismiss a point of view without any active thought on your part.

I think that seatbelts are a tool, and intelligent, safety conscious people use them. I don't think their use should be a law. If you're too stupid or careless to use them, you deserve your fate. And alcohol use [IMO] should not be restricted, it only adds to the prestige and desire to rebel in youth. I broke the law drinking underage, but when I could do so legally, all of the "taboo" excitement was gone, and I have settled to a more reasonable beer or two, usually socially, every now and then.

I am well aware of the free and easily accessed adult content of the internet. However it is still a weak point for a site not to make the effort. CMON ISNT a porn site and it wouldnt require very much effort on their part to have a section that at least gives you the option to make a decision as to if you want to view certain content on it or not.

That actually is a valid point of view. Valid insofaras I can't see a reason NOT to agree. but again {my opinion}. It also opens abuse. If the poster was in charge of rating it themselves, there is opportunity for abuse. If it's up to the mods, well, then they'd have the added responsibility of rating posts, and also have clear guidelines for what constitutes a rating level.
An "R" rating filter wouldn't be a bad addition to the site, or even a "NSFW" filter on your account itself.

Sorry again a weak argument. Chern is perfectly capable of expressing subtle and well thought out points and has done so many times in the past. I have no problem with him defending this site, I have defended it myself on a number of occassions, I do have a problem when someone is getting attacked personally for expressing a viewpoint.

When the argument degenerates into "morality" and ceases to be about fact, it is no longer an argument but an opinion. Opinions that are out in plain view are going to be attacked and defended. But there is no real point, since there is no fact to base them on, they are by their very nature, subjective. I think Chern has made a beautiful site, and it's very community nature is why I come here almost exclusively, and the reason why this is the ONLY site I pay to belong to.

Again a REALLY weak argument. As I said earlier this is CMON, it is a discussion about an internet site it ISNT about the internet as a whole.

And yet, it is. In a microcosm sort of way, it IS a representation of the internet societal phenomenon.

 

[JesterzUSMC]

CoolMiniOrNot will always be for adults. We might make convenience features for adults. Do not let your kids loose on this site unsupervised. We will try to keep the PC bullshit to a minimum.

I love you sir!

 

[Swordwind]

I just find it odd that being stabbed/shot to death is considered somehow better than being raped (and alive to talk about it).

Alive to talk about it but suffering torturous mental anguish for the rest of their existance.

The logical continuation of this diorama takes place several years later with one of the guardsmen, minus a arm, leg or both, beating the crap out of his wife because she burnt the toast and he has PTSD. I mean, if we're talking unpleasant aspects not covered in the cartoon version of war known as warhammer...

 

[Torn blue sky]

Bloody hell, this thread didn't just light the blue touch paper did it, just incinerated it with a flamethrower!

 

[supervike]

I mean, if we're talking unpleasant aspects not covered in the cartoon version of war known as warhammer...

I think this is the crux of the matter right there. The idea that because they are 'toys' and kids like them doesn't necessarily make them designed for children.

People often pigeon hole comic books and animation as something 'for kids', and then are doubly shocked when they deal with a tough subject matter.

Miniatures, comics, animation and video games (at least in my opinion) are very viable mediums to discuss topics such as these. Novels, movies, news programs etc. seem not to ever get lambasted for delving into controversial topics, most likely because they are percieved to be 'kid free'.

I think it's a mistake to assume any of the things I mentioned are automatically dismissed from dealing with heavy subjects just because of their nature.

For instance....Were any of you 'offended' about the subject manner of the Jodie Foster movie 'The Accused'?

 

[Chern Ann]

That actually is a valid point of view. Valid insofaras I can't see a reason NOT to agree. but again {my opinion}. It also opens abuse. If the poster was in charge of rating it themselves, there is opportunity for abuse. If it's up to the mods, well, then they'd have the added responsibility of rating posts, and also have clear guidelines for what constitutes a rating level.
An "R" rating filter wouldn't be a bad addition to the site, or even a "NSFW" filter on your account itself.

Ignoring the principle of the matter for the moment, here are my practical thoughts on NSFW. Implementing this feature does not cost "nothing".

In my estimation, less than 1 in 1000 people who surf the site would actually face disciplinary action by their companies for visiting CoolMiniOrNot because of its adult nature. More likely they'd get fired because CoolMiniOrNot would be viewed as a gaming site and a frivolous waste of company time. Remember, this is an international site used by a majority of non-US/UK visitors, who are unlikely to have a similar view of what is considered pornography or even R.

Further, an even fewer number are "sensitive souls" who are actually uncomfortable about looking at controversial material, such that they would have preferred never to have seen it. Case in point, Gearhead and DrEvilMonki are apparently taking up arms about the fact that the content was created in the first place and that it is exhibited here, and are outraged on behalf of countless voiceless others who apparently cannot muster up a free email to register their protest. This is a completely separate argument about whether a subject is taboo (in which case it is verboten and should be deleted), and whether or not it should be filtered (it is acceptable, but not for everyone). Note, the number of people that have come out of the woodwork on the two images in question lending their support, this rarely happens when people merely approve of something.

So for the sake of these few with special demands on the site, should we:
1. Spend resources adding a filter? (let's assume my time is worth $0), so no matter
and
2. Have volunteer moderators making judgment calls on what is and what isn't safe for work? Do you know how many images are added a day?
and
3. the worst - inconvenience the many for the special needs of the few? (This image is NSFW, please click here to continue) This isn't a situation where we need to accomodate handicapped folk is it?

Until such time I can train a computer to decide what is a good booby, and what is a bad booby, maintaining a NSFW filter will take work on our part, and it will take work on your part as a user who would not otherwise be affected by this. While you may not mind, there are thousands more who would find it annoying. It is not as easy a decision as you think.

[edit]
In any event, the mods have decided they don't want the additional work and responsibility of deciding what actually is NSFW (too much cleavage? Underboob? Areola? Tentacle looks too much like a dick? Commisaar looking at Sister of Battle in a funny way?), and I'm certainly not going to hand it to the concerned citizens committee over here, so it's tabled for now.

 

[wejee]

totally agree.

movies teach lessons, "evil" characters are ultimately punished. Look at "Henry Portrait of a Serial Killer." in that move, the "evil" character is NOT punished, and the movie is considered highly offensive.

In warhammer, when all you have is minis in a diorama, its not so easy to "teach a lesson." there's only a snapshot of a single scene. Its much tougher to summarize everything you may want to say in such a short amount of time, a single image.

 

[wejee]

i wish i made this diorama and had so many people having such a heated debate over my work.... congrats to the artist

 

[JesterzUSMC]

Ignoring the principle of the matter for the moment, here are my practical thoughts on NSFW. Implementing this feature does not cost "nothing".

In my estimation, less than 1 in 1000 people who surf the site would actually face disciplinary action by their companies for visiting CoolMiniOrNot because of its adult nature. More likely they'd get fired because CoolMiniOrNot would be viewed as a gaming site and a frivolous waste of company time. Remember, this is an international site used by a majority of non-US/UK visitors, who are unlikely to have a similar view of what is considered pornography or even R.

Further, an even fewer number are "sensitive souls" who are actually uncomfortable about looking at controversial material, such that they would have preferred never to have seen it. Case in point, Gearhead and DrEvilMonki are apparently taking up arms about the fact that the content was created in the first place and that it is exhibited here, and are outraged on behalf of countless voiceless others who apparently cannot muster up a free email to register their protest. This is a completely separate argument about whether a subject is taboo (in which case it is verboten and should be deleted), and whether or not it should be filtered (it is acceptable, but not for everyone). Note, the number of people that have come out of the woodwork on the two images in question lending their support, this rarely happens when people merely approve of something.

So for the sake of these few with special demands on the site, should we:
1. Spend resources adding a filter? (let's assume my time is worth $0), so no matter
and
2. Have volunteer moderators making judgment calls on what is and what isn't safe for work? Do you know how many images are added a day?
and
3. the worst - inconvenience the many for the special needs of the few? (This image is NSFW, please click here to continue) This isn't a situation where we need to accomodate handicapped folk is it?

Until such time I can train a computer to decide what is a good booby, and what is a bad booby, maintaining a NSFW filter will take work on our part, and it will take work on your part as a user who would not otherwise be affected by this. While you may not mind, there are thousands more who would find it annoying. It is not as easy a decision as you think.

[edit]
In any event, the mods have decided they don't want the additional work and responsibility of deciding what actually is NSFW (too much cleavage? Underboob? Areola? Tentacle looks too much like a dick? Commisaar looking at Sister of Battle in a funny way?), and I'm certainly not going to hand it to the concerned citizens committee over here, so it's tabled for now.

Pardon me sir, but I was not one in favor of any of these things.
I absolutely love this site AS IS!
I was pointing out the extra work that would be involved. Maybe I thought faster than I typed and skipped over some thoughts (it happens) but I am in no way in favor of censorship.
I am of the opinion that if I don't like it, I won't look, if I hate it, I um...won't look.
But if I hate the site...I wouldn't be here, and I damn sure wouldn't give you my hard earned money for a star next to my name...LOL.
Just really want that to be clear...

 

[cassar]

just a by the way, whats the first thing thing you do when someone says "no dont look", ya look! dont say ya dont cause ya do. my way of thinking is if youre going to go through life being offended by human nature then your gonna be upset...a lot! take a deep breath count to ten then go and shoot something preferably with a large calibre machine gun. oh and let the cinders finally go out on this one, theres already a man down, i think the casualty quota's already been filled. no duff, end ex. HAPPY CHRISTMAS ya bunch o wabs .

 

[Chern Ann]

Pardon me sir, but I was not one in favor of any of these things.
I absolutely love this site AS IS!
I was pointing out the extra work that would be involved. Maybe I thought faster than I typed and skipped over some thoughts (it happens) but I am in no way in favor of censorship.
I am of the opinion that if I don't like it, I won't look, if I hate it, I um...won't look.
But if I hate the site...I wouldn't be here, and I damn sure wouldn't give you my hard earned money for a star next to my name...LOL.
Just really want that to be clear...

I didn't mean to imply you do not like the site; but I thought I'd share the reasons why we don't make changes in the way things are done here without careful consideration.

 

[Chern Ann]

I think this is the crux of the matter right there. The idea that because they are 'toys' and kids like them doesn't necessarily make them designed for children.

People often pigeon hole comic books and animation as something 'for kids', and then are doubly shocked when they deal with a tough subject matter.

Miniatures, comics, animation and video games (at least in my opinion) are very viable mediums to discuss topics such as these. Novels, movies, news programs etc. seem not to ever get lambasted for delving into controversial topics, most likely because they are percieved to be 'kid free'.

I think it's a mistake to assume any of the things I mentioned are automatically dismissed from dealing with heavy subjects just because of their nature.

For instance....Were any of you 'offended' about the subject manner of the Jodie Foster movie 'The Accused'?

This reminds me of the ridiculous CCA - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comics_Code_Authority rules of the 50s regarding comic books.

The CCA prohibited the presentation of "policemen, judges, government officials, and respected institutions ... in such a way as to create disrespect for established authority." But it added the requirements that "in every instance good shall triumph over evil" and discouraged "instances of law enforcement officers dying as a result of a criminal's activities." Specific restrictions were placed on the portrayal of kidnapping and concealed weapons.
Depictions of "excessive violence" were forbidden, as were "lurid, unsavory, gruesome illustrations." Vampires, werewolves, ghouls and zombies could not be portrayed. In addition, comics could not use the words "horror" or "terror" in their titles. The use of the word "crime" was subject to numerous restrictions.
Where the previous code had condemned the publication of "sexy, wanton comics," the CCA was much more precise: depictions of "sex perversion", "sexual abnormalities", and "illicit sex relations" as well as seduction, rape, sadism, and masochism were specifically forbidden. In words echoing the Hollywood Production Code, love stories were enjoined to emphasize the "sanctity of marriage" and those portraying scenes of passion were advised to avoid stimulating "lower and baser emotions."

If these guys had their way over miniature games in the UK in the 80s 40k would never even have existed. Presumably good guys would be American good guys when dealing with international conflicts.

 

[Elly3438]

I have some advice for the people who are SO upset by this diorama... GET OVER IT! Seriously, you are an adult protesting something like this on an artistic website? You thought the mini was uncool, so get over it and move on. It's not like you just saw a Chechnyan beheading video or something of the sort. I'm starting to think people just want to complain for the sake of it, just to add a little element of excitement into their otherwise dreary lives, by protesting something so trivial.

@Vikey - As I remember, Tom's IP7 Nightmare entry called "Daddy's Home" had some disturbing themes ( A LOT more so than this diorama), but again, it was a great piece that made you think about some nasty things. Good stuff!