Russian Ambassador Slams Wartime Rape Sculpture

[Thanas]

I just really dislike it when people think that qualms about everything under the umbrella of "offensive" is the same as people who push to punish those who say "fuck" or to cover up statues with bared breasts or things like that. That bogs down any real discussion about the consequences of actions and just lends towards lazy "free speech" statements that end the discussion.

I think you are massively misunderstanding the comments made in this thread, which is nobody's fault but your own. You are imagining when people compare the qualms of people viewing this with loud children that they are belittling rape victims. They are not. They are talking about modes of avoidance without making any judgement on the underlying moral premise. What they are saying is that one can avoid statues by not looking at them but not avoid other intrusions, ergo the method of intrusion of one is worse than the other (you are forced to listen to noisy sounds, you are not forced to look at things). Without making any judgements on rape victims.

It would be one thing if someone had said "I hate noisy kids, they bother me far more than some stature about rape, which is less of an issue for society than noisy kids." But nobody did and I think you are looking for things where none exist.

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

If it's unclear, I'm not talking about anything like contributions to rape culture, but in how the effects on an individual are incomparable (with a few possible rare exceptions). I don't think anyone's going to be triggered into an actual flashback or panic attack or anything from a loud kid or anything like that (though I guess it's possible) but such a stark depiction of rape is something that will have that effect if stumbled upon by some people who've suffered from it or the direct threat of it before. I find such easy equivocations between annoyance and strong psyco- or physiological effects on a person to be, well, misleading at best.

[Thanas]

Lots of things can trigger panic attack. I have seen a panic attack being triggered by a car horn (person in question got hit by a car once). Likewise, someone who has been bullied in school might conceivably get triggered by loud kids. What makes you the expert on deciding that case A triggers this and case B triggers that? Do you have a degree in psychology or why do you feel confident in saying that this will trigger that?

Also, nobody is equivocating anything. They are saying that one thing can be escaped, another cannot. What of this is so hard to grasp?

[K. A. Pital]

True, but the problem so far seems to be the Russians throwing a snit whenever their glorious soldiers are depicted negatively.

I remember the U.S. media hysteria after PSY's Gangnam Style got popular and they suddenly discovered that he rapped "Kill those Yankees who tortured Iraqi captives". Throwing a snit is universal.

I mean, just in this thread you got the Russian ambassador blasting propaganda that would make Mao proud.

He's speaking generic propaganda about a past war, but I can point you to America's constant claims that its soldiers died for "freedom" in places like Iraq. There's a sculpture commemorating American dead in Afghanistan in front of WTC One, although it is clear that they were not fighting for the independence of Afghanistan. For Russia it is a matter of prestige (especially among the elder generation), so I am not surprised at the reaction.

[SMJB]

I remember the U.S. media hysteria after PSY's Gangnam Style got popular and they suddenly discovered that he rapped "Kill those Yankees who tortured Iraqi captives". Throwing a snit is universal.

Wasn't that just Fox News?

He's speaking generic propaganda about a past war, but I can point you to America's constant claims that its soldiers died for "freedom" in places like Iraq. There's a sculpture commemorating American dead in Afghanistan in front of WTC One, although it is clear that they were not fighting for the independence of Afghanistan. For Russia it is a matter of prestige (especially among the elder generation), so I am not surprised at the reaction.

Look, I'm not going to pretend that Bush's reasons for going to war in Iraq were anything but fantasy or that it wasn't handled disastrously, but...well, it's a democracy now, isn't it? The Kurds aren't going to be genocided any more, are they? As for Afghanistan, where the Taliban kill and mutilate little girls for trying to go to school...I'm reminded of a statement by one of my characters that they'd "still be the 'bad guys' if [they] were fighting Nazis," which might be hyperbole...but only might be.

[K. A. Pital]

Look, I'm not going to pretend that Bush's reasons for going to war in Iraq were anything but fantasy or that it wasn't handled disastrously, but...well, it's a democracy now, isn't it? The Kurds aren't going to be genocided any more, are they? As for Afghanistan, where the Taliban kill and mutilate little girls for trying to go to school...I'm reminded of a statement by one of my characters that they'd "still be the 'bad guys' if [they] were fighting Nazis," which might be hyperbole...but only might be.

Nah, I'm not really saying Taliban are good guys, no. But neither are the Nazis: however, Russia beat the Nazis on Polish land to make Poland a satellite state. Of course, one can bring up the good argument that being a sovereign, but dependent state is still much better than getting wiped out and deported to Siberia to make room for 50 million Germans of the Greater Reich and not even having your own state any more. But still.

The question is not whether your enemies were bad (in case of the Nazis or the Taliban that's like 2x2=4), question is whether what you said about the goals of the war is true. And more often than not it is not just untrue, but blatantly untrue. I guess that's what makes most people angry - that the Allied powers fought for their own goals and not 100% selflessly sacrificed themselves. But that's the truth.

[Thanas]

True, but the problem so far seems to be the Russians throwing a snit whenever their glorious soldiers are depicted negatively.

I remember the U.S. media hysteria after PSY's Gangnam Style got popular and they suddenly discovered that he rapped "Kill those Yankees who tortured Iraqi captives". Throwing a snit is universal.

But you didn't have the US ambassador to South Korea protest in the media.

I mean, just in this thread you got the Russian ambassador blasting propaganda that would make Mao proud.

He's speaking generic propaganda about a past war, but I can point you to America's constant claims that its soldiers died for "freedom" in places like Iraq. There's a sculpture commemorating American dead in Afghanistan in front of WTC One, although it is clear that they were not fighting for the independence of Afghanistan. For Russia it is a matter of prestige (especially among the elder generation), so I am not surprised at the reaction.

That is a bit of tu quoque, isn't it?

[K. A. Pital]

Nah, I already said that I don't object to people bringing up these crimes. However, it is clear that the nationalist crowd will react accordingly, and the government will pander to it.

[Thanas]

Oh, ok. Yeah, I agree with that.