"MERCY FOR TANGO" Topic

I am pleading for mercy for tango. A reduced sentence at least.

I am sure that Tangos offense was an oversight and he did not mean to endorse or advocate what the scene showed. his own words at the start expressed the liminality of the subject.

Certainly he ought not to have posted it.

Certainly it was unsettling.

If it is in the nature of "art" to be unsettling and people to defend crucifixes in beakers of Urine, or crime scene photos as statements of art, then one cannot have it both ways.

As I said it was a wincing scene. Rules are rules and I am just asking for a reduction of sentence.

I recall a powerful painting , "The Trial of Constance DeBeverly" from the San-Fransisco University of art. quite powerful. But that's another matter.

The point as been made.

Otto

I agree. I didn't even notice the "scene" until I started reading the comments!

I was too busy looking at the details of the painting and terrain… :)

I did wonder where her "top" went to…

What the heck happened? HE'S in the DH?

No way, it's gotta be some sort of fluke. Tango doesn't have an evil bone in his body. He's a good person through and through.

Let him out or shorten the sentence. Please.

Dan
PS. But if someone must pay the full number of days, I'll willingly take his place in the DH. Seriously.

Certainly he ought not to have posted it.

Certainly it was unsettling.

And that's enough in my book to get him DH'd. It was in gross taste. He needs to think some before hitting 'send'… (But that's asking waaaaaay too much…)

To say nothing that HE BROKE THE RULES. BILL'S RULES. End of story…

I think CC's eloquent defence of Tango speaks volumes about both of them.

PS. But if someone must pay the full number of days, I'll willingly take his place in the DH. Seriously.

What a generous offer. And there is legal precedent. The 'Whipping Boy'.

For those of you who don't know, the whipping boy needs some introduction. He was the child, brought up with a prince or with a young king, and punished on his behalf, when the prince or king was naughty: crucially the royal and his proxy were friends so any pain was vicariously felt.

Reluctantly, I will endorse Dan's noble offer & ask Bill to replace Tango's stay in chokey with CC, "TMP's Whipping Boy".

I admit to being totally baffled. Not only does this sound completely out of character for Tango, but I don't see anything in any of his recent threads that would even vaguely qualify as being about rape.

…but I don't see anything in any of his recent threads that would even vaguely qualify as being about rape.

The topic he posted, which involved photos of a diorama depicting a female soldier about to be raped, has been removed.

There have been other times that Tango has posted stuff without reading what he posted and he's been DH. This is no different, except it's more visual rather than printed.

Maybe I have been playing "This War of Mine" a bit too much, but I felt more disturbed by the artistry of the composition than by the scene it pretended to depict. It was too clean, too neat. The scene should have been dirty, shocking, with blood, gore and terror. That was what War means for defenceless victims that are at the mercy of beasts in uniform, and not the soft lines, the pastel palette of colors, the neatness of the composition… Bah!

As for the punishment for Tango? Well, we are hypocrites so why not? It eases our consciences.

I just found the diorama. He can do his time like anyone else.

I was less disturbed by the tacky diorama than by the people that admire it. But they are allowed to disagree.

Hopefully Tango will learn from his mistakes.

I did not like the diorama, I thought it was in poor taste.

The female did not appear human, IIRC it had elf ears.

I don't think it deserves 8 days in the dawghouse, maybe three tops.

Mike Bunkermeister Creek
bunkermeister.blogspot.com

Now I recall seeing the diorama of a lone enemy warrior about to be captured by a group.

Wow, so THAT's what you call a scene of rape???

What a bunch of prudes and (after the click) hypocrites. There was nothing in that scene that implied a sexual violation.

And if you say that it is her revealing costume or the simple gender composition of the figures on the diorama (female for one side, male on the other) that automatically makes the scene one of sexual violence … wow, you guys are really a bunch of twisted hypocrites.

Dan
PS. Lots of wringing of hands here, I see.

Considering the fact that 40 years ago in one of the hobby magazines there was an article on a new series of figures called "Pirates if the Caribbean.'

The series of 25s (as I recall) featured pirates doing what pirates do and featured photos of the figures in diorama type settings of a raid in progress.

And in fact one of the figures was a classic pose of a pirate in the act of raping a victim.

At the time I was rather shocked that a hobby magazine would print such a picture and even more taken aback that someone would sculpt and offer for sale such a figure.

On the other hand, that is what pirates did and the sanitized versions we see in the media and on gaming tables certainly present a distorted picture of that reality. Actually reading the history of the boucaneers has made certainly removed any luster from their image.

Of course that goes for many of the forces that make it onto gaming tables, so where to draw the line.

Frankly that diorama is far less shocking/offensive than that rape figure I saw 40 years ago. And frankly it actually serves as a reminder of one of the probable results of placing women in combat roles.

I recall reading that in 'Cross of Iron' one of the soldiers in the unit was captured by a female Russian mortar unit and subsequently raped. Now there would be an idea for a diorama.

On a final note, rape is a much more sensitive topic now that it was in the past – censoring the diorama won't make it go away.

P.S. I agree Basileus on the stark cleanliness, but as with movies, etc. the dirt and grime of reality seem to get lost in translation.

Goragrad: "I recall reading that in 'Cross of Iron' one of the soldiers in the unit was captured by a female Russian mortar unit and subsequently raped. Now there would be an idea for a diorama."

So there are times when you think rape (or a diorama of rape) is somehow really justified?

Are you guys even hearing yourselves when you say these things?

Dan

Perhaps you should go back over some of your own posts CC? Pot/kettle?

The diorama in question can be found by Googling images of "Eldar rape".
It is a very well done diorama, in fact one of the finest I've ever seen using wargaming figures. That's admiration for the hours of work and skill that went into it, not the subject.
It depicts a partially nude Eldar woman, breasts exposed. One of the 40K IG is holding the breastplate he has just ripped from her. She is cowering in the dirt.
One has his bolter trained on her. Two others have weapons ready.
One IG is starting to take his pants off, "Me first". The others will just have to wait their turns.
It's perverted, and has no place being shown on a "family friendly" site.
8 days is just about right. It's obviously more severe than a 3 day slap on the wrist. It's just a time out. That's all. He can do the time standing on his head.

By the way, I think all those glorious paintings of The Rape of the Sabine Women are pretty perverted too.
Btw, I refuse to answer any "Hey OFM, what do you think of….." nonsense. It's garbage, and Tango01 should have known better.

Considering we have a Boobies Board, maybe we shouldn't be that surprised. I'd vote to nuke the whole board if another poll to do it came up.

I'm also glad the reason for the sentence is just plain common sense. No need to invent a new DH category with a poll, like we had during the Holocaust Denial debacle.

"Hypocrisy is a tribute vice pays to virtue."
~ François de La Rochefoucauld

So there.

DeepPHorse: "Perhaps you should go back over some of your own posts CC? Pot/kettle?"

Please provide a single example where I say that rape is justifiable under any circumstance. Any, any at all. I dare you. If you can't then retract your statement.

Dan
PS. Winston (OFM) that's a ton of detail that I frankly never even noticed when I glanced at the picture. I didn't even know that the diorama was called Eldar Rape. It's clear that the picture alone didn't tell the whole story. Wow.

Well having not seen the original post or googled the image, I'll have to go off the description of the scene given and Tango's quote "It's not going to be easy for her…"

So I see no reason to support a call for his early release.

Edit: Okay I googled the image and yes its pretty obvious what is being depicted, not as graphic as I imagined thankfully but still blatantly obvious of what it is trying to depict.

So no, for once let Tango do the time for the crime.

I didn't know what the big deal was until I went back and looked at it. NOW I get it. Yep DH him.

DeepPHorse: "Perhaps you should go back over some of your own posts CC? Pot/kettle?"

Please provide a single example where I say that rape is justifiable under any circumstance. Any, any at all. I dare you. If you can't then retract your statement.

Dan, I *think* DH is referring to your hypocrisy rather than your defence of rape. Calling some of the posters here "twisted hypocrites" probably explains the heated responses. Your call, but maybe you'd like to apologise to them?

No reduced sentence for him. He knew exactly what he was doing, and exactly what he was posting. Please read his caption. Please do not make excuses for him.
We all knew what it was and what was going on here. After all Otto does says, in the original posting, "Ah a gang rape….Diversity." So what does Diversity mean here?

I swear I've seen that dio on here before…Anyway, Armand is a big boy, and he knows the warden, so things will work out okay.

Not one iota of mercy. Tango is prolific in his posting, sometimes to his detriment. He doesn't seem to think before he posts anything, especially if someone has posted it before, virtually minutes before him. He's a big boy. and, in this case, he doesn't need his legion of "insert your own word here" standing up for him.

Otto,

Wow, I've gotta say that this has been one of the "best" threads so far. I'm saving this one for posterity.

Dan
PS. Email sent.

Dear Dan

Yes. ]

I believe the image was pulled from the "cmon" site which tends to have an abundance of female figures with a great deal of nudity. And I think that while this appeals to a certain number of people, it is not everyones cup of tea as many times it pushes the limits of "good taste". After all, TMP is about miniature gaming. So, yes, I think Tango(whose posts I enjoy) could have exercised a little more discretion in his choice of subject matter to post to this site which includes a number of female readers.

Now, on another matter. A number of the posts are coming close to personal attacks on certain posters which is totally uncalled for, so I would suggest certain folks "back off" before they join Tango. Nuff said.

As to the sentence, as in all matters on TMP "Bill's house, Bill's rules". So fair or not, it is what it is.

Dave

I LOVE Tango/Armand, but this time he made a mistake…

Perhaps an honorable mistake, but as even he questioned it upon posting…he should not have gone through with it.

And YES, the Neanderthals are starting to come out of the woodwork (and I do not include Tango in this statement).

Let him serve his sentence, as he will be all the better for it.

And AGAIN…odd that there isn't enough going on in TX right now to keep others busy, FLA too (including me).

By the way, what was what unsettled so many, because I didn't see any condonation of the act of rape. I did disagree with how the author choose to represent it -as I explained before I believe it should have been something dirty, disgusting, not "artistic"- but not that the author decided to represent with figures one of the most common acts of war known to mankind: the rape, the humiliation, of the defeated. So, was that it reminded us what war actually means? Or was that it offended our burgeoises sensibilities? (rape is not mentioned in polite company, by Jove!) Or, perhaps, that Tango didn't show the proper amount of horror expected in a gentleman? Just curious.

FREE TANGO !!!!

He knows the rules as well as anyone, don't see why he should be released early.

I'd like him to be canned for longer

This isn't even about humans. It's about some kind of creatures called elder whatever they are. So it's OK to show humans killing each other, but not some kind of sci-fi creatures about to kill each other.

I think there should be no pictures of killing whatsoever, that's the pornographic aspect that should be avoided.

No basileus. It was not because it offended our "bourgeois" sensibilities. If that picture "offended our bourgeois sensibilities, then most of the images that come to us through the nightly news. or on network television (watch a few episodes of Law order SVU) would have the bourgeois in our sensibilities flat on their backs in hyperventilating seizures.

It was because the ankle-biters, sharks, and kids who sit on the cool table at the cafeteria here and look to tear down anyone not sitting at said cool table, were given an opening to draw blood. These people never slam a noun against a verb except to tear someone or something down. Tango does a lot here and most of the stuff he posts I don't read. But that's ones choice. But he posts far more useful stuff than the whole lot of his detractors who mostly post nothing except to tear apart the work of others.

Of course people not liking rape diorama's is simply due to it being a personality contest then thats a pretty far stretch of the imagination. If people like that sort of stuff for a "good time" but its everyone else who has the problem then that says a lot.

A lot of Tango's posts\feed in certain threads are click\dawghouse bait (mentioned above this has been posted before), he knows it and pushes the limits all the time so his DH by the Editor is a good decision.

No Otto, it was because Tango posted something inherently offensive. If you don't see rape or the depiction of rape as a suitable subject for modelling, then I really can't help you. And before you draw any false parallels, no, the fact is that rape may be a common event in war, but it is not what I want in my hobby, or to be an accepted part of the environment I game in.

Killing, maiming and destroying the enemy is a necessary part of war, it has to be modelled in a wargame, in real life, we award medals, promotions and celebrity to those who do it well, we prosecute those who commit rape. Occasinally brutal depictions of combat are borderline but integral. This is gratuitous.

Tango broke the rules – he's doing the time, and I find any defence of this as a part of our hobby to be repugnant and demeaning to those trying to defend the indefensible.

Is it possible to commit a crime against a fantasy alien?
Calm down the perpetually offended, it was an example of excellent painting and modelling

Oh. Give. Me. A. Break.
It's rape.
If a black woman or a "Jewess" are considered sub human, does it count?
The female in the diorama has pointy ears.

"But he posts far more useful stuff than the whole lot of his detractors who mostly post nothing except to tear apart the work of others"

Otto, you do this in everyone of your critiques…Your A+, F-
grading system of others work…

And rape is a vile disgusting act of power and rage…it's not sexy, tender or loving. Don't make excuses and act as if there's any excuse for it what so ever….

After re-reading these comments it's clear that many here have posted out of genuine concern over content of material.

But it's also clear that, for a few of you, the outrage is about much more than just the damn photo. Some references have been made to past "mistakes", in the plural, which points to a reason besides a photo that depicts the vile act of rape.*

Like I said earlier, this has been a very revealing thread.

Dan
* And when you read their numerous misogynistic comments and vile sexist language outside of TMP it's clear what this outrage is really about for them … the monster of many posts must be destroyed and this is their opportunity to make that happen, if they can somehow get everyone else's help to do it.

The depiction of sexual violence is vile. No excuse.

Perhaps, just perhaps, there are some fellow gamers on this site who think a diorama depicting imminent rape has crossed the line. You know, family-friendly site, common decency and all that.

Not residents of another site, not "perpetually offended", not "ankle-biters", no ulterior motive whatsoever. Just taking umbrage at a single posting and the lack of forethought to post it. Clearly our editor did. Is that too difficult to understand? Must we resort to blanket generalizations?

My comment isn't a generalization. I'm speaking about a few who want to drive this further.

Dan

You two are not in disagreement. You can both be correct.

Ya know, that dio was on here a few years ago. As ah disremember there were lamentations but no dawghousings ? Just sayin' :/

Was that around 2011 ?

Dan

It's not judgmental or oversensitive to register discomfort about something; it's healthy, helpful, and necessary.

I absolutely agree.

Dan