Political Correctness in Modeling

As for me, when doing a model, I really don't look at the PC aspect of the model.  If it interests me or hits a nerve just right, I'll bring it home and work on it.

What does agrivate me though, are the model companies or stores bowing and scraping to be PC when ever a wave is created and pulling kits from the market.  ie. wally pulling the General Lee kits. 

I can understand it if there is a law in a country that prohibits certain aspects of a model or kit on the market, and that is another issue altogether, and not one for here, but for residents of that country to work out.

goldhammer

What does agrivate me though, are the model companies or stores bowing and scraping to be PC when ever a wave is created and pulling kits from the market.  ie. wally pulling the General Lee kits. 

That, was all about not offending customers, not being PC IMO. Those kits came back, which I think is even funnier.

$$$

stikpusher

Bish, aside from Iceland, I really can't think of any nation that does not have some blood on their hands from the past. 

 

Being from Viking stock, their hands aren't pristine either.  It's interesting how these dicsussions evolve.

I've never experienced what the OP asked.  The idea of "PC" is that we don't offend anyone.  But it's interesting how offended people are by the concept of "PC"; people who expect others to be more thick skinned about offenses are very thin skinned about challenges to their right to offend.

Maybe we can all agree that the OP tossed the Mars bar in the swimming pool?

I'm also one who doesn't get much positive out of German WW2 subjects, but to each his own. I decided at one point to really get it out of my system and build something unequivocably Nazi.

Cdn Colin

 

stikpusher

Bish, aside from Iceland, I really can't think of any nation that does not have some blood on their hands from the past. 

 

 

 

 

 

Being from Viking stock, their hands aren't pristine either.  It's interesting how these dicsussions evolve.

I've never experienced what the OP asked.  The idea of "PC" is that we don't offend anyone.  But it's interesting how offended people are by the concept of "PC"; people who expect others to be more thick skinned about offenses are very thin skinned about challenges to their right to offend.

 

Offende, no. Simply infuriated by those who may try and tell me what i can and can't say and which views i can and can't express.

CC, we are all well aware of the Vikings and their deeds. My point regarding Iceland was that it is one of the few areas in the world colonized and settled by folks that did not already have a native population that would become subjugated or worse. Their own history as a nation does not have the sort of past that most other nations of the world do. All the countries today in the Western Hemisphere had native populations that would see their own societies turned upside down with the arrival of European colonization over the 16th 17th 18th and 19th Centuries.

GM, if you look at the profile of the original poster for this thread, if it is truthful, he is a youngster, and this may have been a legit posting. Ot it could indeed be somebody stirring the pot. 

But to me, this is an intersting discussion topic, the way it can meander around and raise all sorts of points.

Great points, well taken.  I think it's important to be able to say or express something controversial, but be open to explanations of why you're wrong.

As to Iceland, I recall reading a book by Farley Mowat about evidence of a preexisting population in Iceland.  They originated in the Shetlands, and were pushed accross the Atlantic my Viking expansion.  I read this almost 20 years ago.  It was The Farfarers.

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/74168.The_Farfarers

Fascinating. I had never read or heard of such before. But then again I am not well versed on Icelandic history. I was under the impression that the island was uninhabited when it was settled by the Vikings. And another tidbit of information being that Iceland and Greenland naming as islands were a bit of disinformation by the Vikings. Anybody seeking Greenland off of Viking information would find only a frozen island wasteland and that Iceland would not sound tempting to those some folks.

I happened upon the book on a rainy weekend at my in-law's cottage.  It was a pretty good read.  He wrote it as half narrative and half historical; the narrative sections were followed by his evidence.

What i meant for this tread was to discuss any cases of modellers or non modellers being offended by the creations of the community. Sadly this thread quickly became a little more heated than the average thread of the site. History should be told truthfully and honestly and creators should not feel boundaries based on the nature of the content. If you deny history the proper exposer it will slowly be forgotten. I apologize for lighting this powder keg but what is this site for than to discuss and share perspectives and ideas.  

gjw

What i meant for this tread was to discuss any cases of modellers or non modellers being offended by the creations of the community. Sadly this thread quickly became a little more heated than the average thread of the site. History should be told truthfully and honestly and creators should not feel boundaries based on the nature of the content. If you deny history the proper exposer it will slowly be forgotten. I apologize for lighting this powder keg but what is this site for than to discuss and share perspectives and ideas.  

 

I would not say this thread has become heated at all. I think in general most of the posters agree that we don't like PC, so would agree with your comments. But what is a bit of an issue is the suggestion that a certain thread shows examples of PC, but i certainly don't see it.

Maybe you could point out which posts you think are being PC.

Now the accusation is denying history???

No, I get you. Keep scratching those matches and you'll blow yourself up.

Are we really talking about political correctness, or is this really a social correctness issue?  By this I mean that no government seems to be worried about it right now, no votes pending, few laws up in the air.  Really, I see it more as a sensitivity to those who suffered harm by a group/movement. Some of those folks are still around, and I think we should be sensitive to them, both the folks directly affected and by their children.

That's a good point, Don.  Food for thought.  I don't set out to offend anyone; but I know that there are some people who derive great pleasure from others' discomfort.

Don Stauffer

Are we really talking about political correctness, or is this really a social correctness issue?  By this I mean that no government seems to be worried about it right now, no votes pending, few laws up in the air.  Really, I see it more as a sensitivity to those who suffered harm by a group/movement. Some of those folks are still around, and I think we should be sensitive to them, both the folks directly affected and by their children.

 

 

 

 

Problem there is Don, the list of people who mght take offense is never ending. I know here we are talking mainly about the Germans. But they were not the only nation to attempt genoicde and commt some pretty vile crimes.

Listen, we are being trolled.

But lets assume a happy moment where this guy exits stage left.

Ok- now the complaint was a response to a negative observation about the 13 SS, never mind that there was no evidence provided regarding either PC behavior or ridicule. Obviously this guy wanted to start a flame war defending the SS.

These guys were NOT Germans but Croatians, were NOT an organized unit in the sense that they were like an SS Panzer Division. In Himmlers words Muslim men would make perfect SS soldiers as Islam "promises them Heaven if they fight and are killed in action." Whether or not he was right, it was an entirely cynical move to terrorize anyone sympathetic to Tito or the movement to overthrow the invaders, in this case the Bosnian Christians and Jews.

And, Model Maniac did not model them, as we know so therefore was not somehow entering into research of a subject in which he had any interest, for sure. They were a kit on the shelf, he hired "Jo" to build them so that they could be added to his website and museum, both commercial enterprises.

Having questioned whether that was so insensitive a subject that it didn't belong here, I endured a fair amount of pummeling about these being little plastic toys and don't be so thin skinned etc., but I have no problem speaking out against things I find so abhorent as to make me sick.

Denying history?

Look, there's a too common playbook here being read by the troll. I'd like to see him come out and show why any criticism of the 13th SS is in turn worthy of condemnation.

Actually the 13th SS were what would today be known as Bosniaks- the Muslim population of that particular province. Croations are primarily Catholic, and during WWII were very much in league with The Germans in WWII. They had their own units equivalant to the  Handschar troops, known as Ustaše. The Germans exploited the ethnic divisions of Yugoslavia and some of that exploitation and its' living memories were contributing factors in the Yugoslav wars of the 1990s once Tito died.

I suspect that our original poster has little to no knowledge of the history of either group, or WWII in Yugoslavia in general.

Bish

 Problem there is Don, the list of people who mght take offense is never ending. I know here we are talking mainly about the Germans. But they were not the only nation to attempt genoicde and commt some pretty vile crimes.

 

Bish is correct. Would a dio depicting the savage and inhumane deeds of the IJA draw the same negative reaction? I'm not giving Germany a free pass on this but Japan's atrocities are overlooked or just forgotten.

Right Stik, got confused working from memory. They were Bosnians, whgich at the time was subsumed into the Croatian Republic. My relatives are Croat Catholics and they live in Italy, on account of persecution by the Ottomans back in the 16th.

It goes on and on.

Your presumption is a little rash considering I never defended any action of any branch or divison of the SS. I was simply stating that the upload of Model Maniac had a user belittling the work of the modeller due to the subject (aka lumps of plastic and paint).

The *** also make me sick ( especially certain foreign units and turn coats such as the French and english) not only the huge number of war crimes but also the dogma that still is perpetuated to this day. My point was to simply say that though we are disgusted by history, we shouldn't shy away from it due to its offensive nature while also taking into account peoples sensitivities to the material

I put swastikas on german a/c for historical reasons not to glorify *** in any way.

gjw

My point was to simply say that though we are disgusted by history, we shouldn't shy away from it due to its offensive nature while also taking into account peoples sensitivities to the material

 

This "PC" thing is an excuse for bad behavior. Along the lines of "don't crit it if you can't do better" and "don't look if you don't like it".

Would I jump on it again? Probably not, I too have learned something from this. Was my reaction "PC". Nonsense.

Also re read the original thread. The whole crit of giant holes and blobs of paint was directed at the other model in the same post, an 88. I'll give you credit there, that was ridicule. But, again, not "PC" just fairly rude comments about lousy modeling.

Hello!

I think we would all agree that there's no downside to a good model or dio of even the most vicious war criminals, if it's well researched and built well. Some info about who they were and what they did would probably also be most welcome.

But I have to defend the "If you don't like it, don't look" rule. Or maybe I should put it more precisely - I'm very interested in your moral judgment of the subject and I'd love to hear your opinion about what I modeled, just don't tell me what I can model and what not. Building models doesn't harm anyone, so it should be free. Showing pictures also doesn't harm anyone, neither. But I'm for warnings in the thread title (for example) to let the people decide before viewing, if they might not like something. This is how I understand freedom and it is important to me.

Thanks for reading and have a nice day

Paweł

Sprue-ce Goose

Regarding "Wiki" articles. I would advise being very, very cautious of the content of Wiki articles.

The warning against believing everything posted on the internet also applies to Wiki articles.

Per Wiki policy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_policies_and_guidelines

 Wikipedia is free content that anyone can use, edit, and distribute.

 

 

 

gjw

Your presumption is a little rash considering I never defended any action of any branch or divison of the SS. I was simply stating that the upload of Model Maniac had a user belittling the work of the modeller due to the subject (aka lumps of plastic and paint).

The *** also make me sick ( especially certain foreign units and turn coats such as the French and english) not only the huge number of war crimes but also the dogma that still is perpetuated to this day. My point was to simply say that though we are disgusted by history, we shouldn't shy away from it due to its offensive nature while also taking into account peoples sensitivities to the material

 

Maybe there is more here than you realise. I know you have been a member for a few yeras, but i wounder if you really undertsand the relantionship between MM and many otehrs on the forum. I would suggest that the comments you are concerned about are not based on just the build in question but on MM's posts in general.

As i mentioned before, i have never come across what you are claiming either on this site or any other. This is one of 2 SS diorama's i did last year.

If any SS unit was going to draw condemnation from a largely American audiance, it would be this one. But i recieved nothing of what you are suggesting. So you might wnat to look a little further into the comments of MM's post rather than make the assumption its about a PC brigade.

Bish

 

 

gjw

Your presumption is a little rash considering I never defended any action of any branch or divison of the SS. I was simply stating that the upload of Model Maniac had a user belittling the work of the modeller due to the subject (aka lumps of plastic and paint).

The *** also make me sick ( especially certain foreign units and turn coats such as the French and english) not only the huge number of war crimes but also the dogma that still is perpetuated to this day. My point was to simply say that though we are disgusted by history, we shouldn't shy away from it due to its offensive nature while also taking into account peoples sensitivities to the material

 

 

 

 

Maybe there is more here than you realise. I know you have been a member for a few yeras, but i wounder if you really undertsand the relantionship between MM and many otehrs on the forum. I would suggest that the comments you are concerned about are not based on just the build in question but on MM's posts in general.

As i mentioned before, i have never come across what you are claiming either on this site or any other. This is one of 2 SS diorama's i did last year.

If any SS unit was going to draw condemnation from a largely American audiance, it would be this one. But i recieved nothing of what you are suggesting. So you might wnat to look a little further into the comments of MM's post rather than make the assumption its about a PC brigade.

 

Beautiful dio

the doog

 

 

Sprue-ce Goose

Regarding "Wiki" articles. I would advise being very, very cautious of the content of Wiki articles.

The warning against believing everything posted on the internet also applies to Wiki articles.

Per Wiki policy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_policies_and_guidelines

 Wikipedia is free content that anyone can use, edit, and distribute.

  

Actually, Wikipedia is considered by many to be one of the most accurate sites on the internet. It is constantly revised to contain the most current information and the information is peer-reviewed and corrected. You can't just anonymously edit the text to alter facts; you must cite your sources, and attribute your email/identity to your additions and your information can be challenged and removed if found to be errant or propaganda.

Doog:

Thanks for the vote of confidence in Wikipedia.

In that case, Wikipedia standards must have changed considerably since I first viewed a Wikipedia webpage perhaps ten years ago.

The historical accuracy of the page I viewed at the time was so obviously wrong that I shunned the website.

As for Wikipedia today:

I do note that comments are now being added to web pages such as the text at the top of this webpage:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Tootoosis

However, it would be helpful if whoever posted the notation:" This article needs additional citations for verification" had also noted those sections or statements which have not been verified. I do not see any obvious mention of what requires verification within such an article- or did I miss something in the references section? 

Perhaps clicking on each hyperlink and sifting through every related web page is necessary in order to discover the reason why additional citations are needed? 

.

In view of this thread's title, I hope my post is suitably PC ...............

Certainly a nice dio.

Pawel thank you for the thoughtful reply.

I should have added one more: "I'm sorry if this offended you".

1) You probably aren't, really.

2) Why should you be?

Good old Amazon is now bombarding me with offers for books about the SS.

Noooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!! says Mr. Bill

I guess I must be the lucky one.

So far, no pop-ups about Oujé-Bougoumo or the Wapos Falcon.