Shellshock
New member
That's what I thought they we're referencing too, he clearly IS taking part, they all are theres no moral dilema/thought involved, it's just a rape scene lol.
Alien Contact: Controversial Subject matter.
- Thread starter supervike
- Start date
i would love to have a discussion with the artist about this work. but something like the intent of the fifth guardsman, which is clearly vague, is vague for a reason and if I were the artist I would not feel the need to explain the fifth guardsman's intent.
i think the reason the fifth guardsman is not a big part of the main story is obvious: rape happens, and in reality there's very little we can do to stop others from doing it, and all we really can do is not perform the act ourselves. It's like if you know someone who was raped. You're clearly are not a part of that main story, no matter how much you wish you could have stopped it.
Shellshock
New member
He's ranking officer and quite clearly turning off the comms system, hes a big part perhaps the biggest in a way, he's ranking and condoning, covering and probly keeping an eye out from the line of sight he's drawing. If he wanted to stop it he's got a boltgun against a busy guy with a lasgun and several unarmed others, he's part alright.
is that what he's doing with his left hand finger? I couldnt really tell. If that is true, that changes the story quite a bit, makes it much harsher.
Shellshock
New member
That's how I read into it yeah, I thought a few times maybe he's turning it on so as to report back whats going on without drawing attention, but then the notion of why would a comm system be off if your on patrol, and why would a ranking officer need to do that instead of putting his men in line is stronger than he's trying to do good. I also read his face as very cold and hard, no emotion, which gives rise again to he's letting his men have their fun and doesn't give a toss.
JesterzUSMC
Recovering Megalomaniac
My take is that they are the lower denominator of guardsmen. The ones that were either pressganged into the guard, or needed to get offworld, or had no future at home. The grungy, dirty look to them gives that impression, to me at least. But continuing with my "fluff" impressions, this "rape" is by no means a foregone conclusion. This isn't some random human woman against 5 trained military men. This is an Eldar guardian. The fact that it's a female is the only reason these idiot guardsmen would attempt such a base act in the first place. But far from being a back alley "woman of the nught" from the underhive that takes being the victim of such things as rape and abuse as par for the course of life, this femme fatale is a member of a xeno species known for their grace, agility and inhuman speed. The one guys preparing to "make contact" is way too far ahead of the situation.
To me it speaks more of the mistakes that come back to haunt you. These guardsmen seem like they have experience doing this to their own species, but have underestimated their opponent.
This is a shot of Karma, their debased actions coming back to finish their tales in an ironic justice sort of way.
I showed my girlfriend, (who was sexually assaulted in her youth) and she came to the same conclusion. With no coaching from me. (Other than the fact that I fill her brain with fluff and try to include her in the 40k universe whenever the opportunity arises).
She at first thought is was a Sister of battle, and said she didn't like the SoB convent's color scheme, and that the "renegades" weren't the right color, they "look too much like regular army guys, not chaos-y enough", but then I told her they were guardsmen, and that she was an Eldar, and she looked closer and scrolled through the images, and said, "she's one of those 'Space Elf people, right?" I said yes, and she said, "Those guys are dead...".
So there you go, my household likes this piece.
!
To me it speaks more of the mistakes that come back to haunt you. These guardsmen seem like they have experience doing this to their own species, but have underestimated their opponent.
This is a shot of Karma, their debased actions coming back to finish their tales in an ironic justice sort of way.
I showed my girlfriend, (who was sexually assaulted in her youth) and she came to the same conclusion. With no coaching from me. (Other than the fact that I fill her brain with fluff and try to include her in the 40k universe whenever the opportunity arises).
She at first thought is was a Sister of battle, and said she didn't like the SoB convent's color scheme, and that the "renegades" weren't the right color, they "look too much like regular army guys, not chaos-y enough", but then I told her they were guardsmen, and that she was an Eldar, and she looked closer and scrolled through the images, and said, "she's one of those 'Space Elf people, right?" I said yes, and she said, "Those guys are dead...".
So there you go, my household likes this piece.
!ScottRadom
Shogun of Saskatchewan
Bah.
You know what else is a pretty harsh image? A man being cruicified with blood running from his wrists. Also a bleeding wound on his side and blood running from his temples from the crown of thorns pressed into his skull. Yet I had to endure that harsh image from the time before I could even walk or speak every Sunday. Even had some of those crucifixes laying around the house in highly visible locations (Like over my friggin' bed man). And that was at the same time that Bugs Bunny was being edited on TV to make sure nobody saw Elmer Fudd getting shot at by his own gun. That Elmer Fudd is a clumsy bastard BTW.
Rape is bad, everyone gets that even/especially the creator of this diorama. I don't see why this dio has turned into such a big deal. I just simply don't agree with all the points made against this exhibit or it's place amongst the rest of our toy soldiers. I say big ups to Nakatan for making this dio. I think it's well done.
You know what else is a pretty harsh image? A man being cruicified with blood running from his wrists. Also a bleeding wound on his side and blood running from his temples from the crown of thorns pressed into his skull. Yet I had to endure that harsh image from the time before I could even walk or speak every Sunday. Even had some of those crucifixes laying around the house in highly visible locations (Like over my friggin' bed man). And that was at the same time that Bugs Bunny was being edited on TV to make sure nobody saw Elmer Fudd getting shot at by his own gun. That Elmer Fudd is a clumsy bastard BTW.
Rape is bad, everyone gets that even/especially the creator of this diorama. I don't see why this dio has turned into such a big deal. I just simply don't agree with all the points made against this exhibit or it's place amongst the rest of our toy soldiers. I say big ups to Nakatan for making this dio. I think it's well done.
JesterzUSMC
Recovering Megalomaniac
I second that!
Elly3438
Member
OOH! Where can I find that? Sounds interesting. I hate it when someone references something publicly but doesn't post a link. Private jokes are rude..
Sorry about that! Didn't mean to be rude... here's the link:
http://wyrd-games.net/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=3219
JesterzUSMC
Recovering Megalomaniac
I'm sure it wasn't intentional! Thanks!
JesterzUSMC
Recovering Megalomaniac
WHOA! Now that is just sick, sad, and wrong! But beautifully rendered!
Disturbing...the clown just makes it festive...but the details really bring it to life!
Disturbing...the clown just makes it festive...but the details really bring it to life!
I`m surely had a line for each character, when i converted the figures and thought of the composition, i even know how that knife managed to get so dangerously (for guardsmen) close to the girl - it not just `lies there`, but now it`s really does not matter - every viewer will create his own story. It`s really more interesting, don`t you think so?
JesterzUSMC
Recovering Megalomaniac
YEs! Very good work sir!
Torn blue sky
New member
I'm actually really interested to see what your personal take is, your "story" , having seen so many other peoples interpretations.
JesterzUSMC
Recovering Megalomaniac
Me too! So come on! Out with it!
cannon_fodder
New member
Just jumping in here late, but I (as always) reside along the fence. . .
To the artist: well done piece of work, brings out emotion in everyone (which is brilliant), and I love that you leave it open to interpretation.
To those who think like I do: yeah, it is kind of offensive, I'd rather it not be here, but we can change the channel and look for 'eldar schemes' rather than this material. Defend your point, don't yell at others for finding it OK.
To Chern Ann: Thank you for making a site like this, but really, do you need to feed the trolls? Your posts are just as inflammatory as anything and offensive at times ("Do we really need to accommodate the handicapped?" or however you put it, is just as wrong as some people claim this dio to be)
To those who tell those of us against this to get over it: The OP wanted a discussion, we're giving it to them. Don't flame us for being against it and wanting it censored (rightly or wrongly). Flame us because some of the arguments are weak and not thought out.
To clarify my views: Wargames and such, and the violence involved are inherent because they revolve around the act of war and the roles of the individuals within the conflict. It is a microchasm of a universe not all of it, not an all encompassing playbill. The fluff does bridge this gap somewhat, but personally, if I'm offended I avoid that aspect of the given game, or the game itself; example: I hate the Agonizer mini from the 'hordes' skorne army (http://privateerpress.com/hordes/gallery/skorne/solos/agonizer). The fluff basically breaks the agonizer down as a baby elephantine creature that has been abused and neglected so badly that it is released on the battle field and the enemy will feel extremely depressed by it's sheer presence. I'm against it completely, but it's yours if you want to own it. In a case such as this, I'm against it being posted (at least openly) on the grounds of the rights involved, which annoy me in 'real life' as well. This dio illustrates the lack respect for POWs as a whole and the rights of women. In both cases, the implied acts (by my views admittedly) are being tried (yes the IG are basically dead regardless) simply because they can. In addition, these events are taking place outside of the acts found on the battle field (the intent of the game in my opinion, as stated earlier) and are therefore unnecessary.
In addition, I don't really agree with ANY nudity in miniatures, let alone pictures of them. Most of the time (which this dio may diverge from), these minis are sophomorish, immature, and glorified. It doesn't need to be made, so why? I include GW Daemonettes here for 2 reasons: 1. I just don't think these minis are in good taste and 2. They are the objectification of women (ever seen a naked male figure from GW?)
As far as sexual violence being different than physical violence, it comes down to the nature of the beast, in my opinion. The basic role of war (and wargames as played on the tabletop) is to kill (remove) the enemy from the field of battle (tabletop) before they do the same to you. The reason: the two sides are at war. It's inherent. Throughout time, the tools of war have been brutal and aggressive (one could argue the gun is meant to be humane in that it can give the enemy a quick, painless death). But it's about remaining standing for one cause over another, and then continuing on. Sexual violence is objectifying, removing one's own will and/or control, and is a temporarily vulgar answer to a disturbingly permanent (psychological) issue. In war, death, blood and gore are inherent, rape and molestation are not, and thus unnecessary.
Lastly, should this site be censored....no more than a stripped barbie doll. However, I do agree there should be something that ID's this site, or at least some of the items within, as NSFW or adult oriented. To be honest, until it was brought up in this thread, I had not realized this was meant to be an adult (not sexual, adult) site. It very well be in the users agreement, but I glaze over those as they are intended to protect the initially party (CMON.com) and not the users, and not reading it is on me. Having said that, this agreement is the only true place, I can find anyway (outside of Chern Anns comments here), that list the adult rating. I do not think it would be out of line, or too hard, for someone to tag questionable photos/minis as only being viewed by a CMON registered user, as the agreement identifies the sites intent.
But that's just my take on things, continue the flame wars, please....my hotdogs are almost done, and the s'mores'll be ready soon...
(Hey Cassar, are the burgers done yet?)
To the artist: well done piece of work, brings out emotion in everyone (which is brilliant), and I love that you leave it open to interpretation.
To those who think like I do: yeah, it is kind of offensive, I'd rather it not be here, but we can change the channel and look for 'eldar schemes' rather than this material. Defend your point, don't yell at others for finding it OK.
To Chern Ann: Thank you for making a site like this, but really, do you need to feed the trolls? Your posts are just as inflammatory as anything and offensive at times ("Do we really need to accommodate the handicapped?" or however you put it, is just as wrong as some people claim this dio to be)
To those who tell those of us against this to get over it: The OP wanted a discussion, we're giving it to them. Don't flame us for being against it and wanting it censored (rightly or wrongly). Flame us because some of the arguments are weak and not thought out.
To clarify my views: Wargames and such, and the violence involved are inherent because they revolve around the act of war and the roles of the individuals within the conflict. It is a microchasm of a universe not all of it, not an all encompassing playbill. The fluff does bridge this gap somewhat, but personally, if I'm offended I avoid that aspect of the given game, or the game itself; example: I hate the Agonizer mini from the 'hordes' skorne army (http://privateerpress.com/hordes/gallery/skorne/solos/agonizer). The fluff basically breaks the agonizer down as a baby elephantine creature that has been abused and neglected so badly that it is released on the battle field and the enemy will feel extremely depressed by it's sheer presence. I'm against it completely, but it's yours if you want to own it. In a case such as this, I'm against it being posted (at least openly) on the grounds of the rights involved, which annoy me in 'real life' as well. This dio illustrates the lack respect for POWs as a whole and the rights of women. In both cases, the implied acts (by my views admittedly) are being tried (yes the IG are basically dead regardless) simply because they can. In addition, these events are taking place outside of the acts found on the battle field (the intent of the game in my opinion, as stated earlier) and are therefore unnecessary.
In addition, I don't really agree with ANY nudity in miniatures, let alone pictures of them. Most of the time (which this dio may diverge from), these minis are sophomorish, immature, and glorified. It doesn't need to be made, so why? I include GW Daemonettes here for 2 reasons: 1. I just don't think these minis are in good taste and 2. They are the objectification of women (ever seen a naked male figure from GW?)
As far as sexual violence being different than physical violence, it comes down to the nature of the beast, in my opinion. The basic role of war (and wargames as played on the tabletop) is to kill (remove) the enemy from the field of battle (tabletop) before they do the same to you. The reason: the two sides are at war. It's inherent. Throughout time, the tools of war have been brutal and aggressive (one could argue the gun is meant to be humane in that it can give the enemy a quick, painless death). But it's about remaining standing for one cause over another, and then continuing on. Sexual violence is objectifying, removing one's own will and/or control, and is a temporarily vulgar answer to a disturbingly permanent (psychological) issue. In war, death, blood and gore are inherent, rape and molestation are not, and thus unnecessary.
Lastly, should this site be censored....no more than a stripped barbie doll. However, I do agree there should be something that ID's this site, or at least some of the items within, as NSFW or adult oriented. To be honest, until it was brought up in this thread, I had not realized this was meant to be an adult (not sexual, adult) site. It very well be in the users agreement, but I glaze over those as they are intended to protect the initially party (CMON.com) and not the users, and not reading it is on me. Having said that, this agreement is the only true place, I can find anyway (outside of Chern Anns comments here), that list the adult rating. I do not think it would be out of line, or too hard, for someone to tag questionable photos/minis as only being viewed by a CMON registered user, as the agreement identifies the sites intent.
But that's just my take on things, continue the flame wars, please....my hotdogs are almost done, and the s'mores'll be ready soon...
(Hey Cassar, are the burgers done yet?)
Last edited:
Tercha
Member
I have been following this thread as have many others judging by the number of views, great work by the moderators to start a thread on something so controversial at what I would expect to be the quietest time for any forum.
A few points on the (perceived) subject matter
1) Is interspecies sex actually possible?
2) Can human morals be transferred to other species (sure IG look sort of human - but their physique certainly isn't - perhaps a humanoid sub species if "1" is possible?)
3) Is there an equivalent of the Geneva convention in force in 38,000 years time...and who signed it?
A few points on the (perceived) subject matter
1) Is interspecies sex actually possible?
2) Can human morals be transferred to other species (sure IG look sort of human - but their physique certainly isn't - perhaps a humanoid sub species if "1" is possible?)
3) Is there an equivalent of the Geneva convention in force in 38,000 years time...and who signed it?
JesterzUSMC
Recovering Megalomaniac
Just wanted to be clear that I was responding to you:
That was a very well thought out, and excellently expressed post.
Kudos to you Sir!
JesterzUSMC
Recovering Megalomaniac
So yeah, I guess the answers are:
1) Anything with a hole?
2) Yes, same as human emotional and motives can be projected onto inanimate objects (Animism)
3) Maybe? Probably? Code of Conduct for IG?
Imperial Infantrymans Primer on aliens - Smash the xenos, wipe them up, and shove them off the face of the earth. Mash that dirty xenos scum, kick 'em in the teeth where it hurts. Kill! Kill! Kill! The filthy bastard xenos, I hate 'em! I hate 'em! Aaargh! Aaargh!
I have also had a thought about wargaming not being for kids. Call of Duty 4 has a huge 18 rated logo on the front and back of the box due to the scenes of violence and war. Manhunt has a Warning Parental Advisory logo on the front of it due to the torture/murder porn. Assault on Black Reach has a 3+ logo on it due to small parts.
I have also had a thought about wargaming not being for kids. Call of Duty 4 has a huge 18 rated logo on the front and back of the box due to the scenes of violence and war. Manhunt has a Warning Parental Advisory logo on the front of it due to the torture/murder porn. Assault on Black Reach has a 3+ logo on it due to small parts.
