Japanese crossword «Special Forces»
| Size: 25x30 | Picture: | Difficulty: | Added: | 08.11.18 | Author: paweenze |
COMMENTS
show: 1 🗨
A very simple silhouette, but a quick puzzle. Subject material isn't great.
replyspoiler
Horse*** to being offensive. Some people get offended just so they can appear to be righteous. Good one to do today, Veteran's Day.
show: 7 🗨
spoiler
Actually, many soldiers would find this image quite offensive, if they thought it was meant to represent veterans or Veterans Day. You might notice that you will almost never see a statue that represents modern veterans where the gun is actually being pointed. There are statues with soldiers holding guns at the ready as they move, but not actively pointing at something - as this image appears to do. Not even memorials for Special Forces units are depicted that way.
That's because, while it's obviously going to be part of the job in an active combat situation, even when depicting an actual known battle - it's not considered paying honor to a veteran's service to depict them pointing a gun in the same stance they'd use to actually kill a combatant. And those who were forced to take lives in battle are even less keen to have an image honoring them, that appears to be in the process of aiming and shooting.
As you might expect, they prefer to be depicted defending people over attacking them.
That's because, while it's obviously going to be part of the job in an active combat situation, even when depicting an actual known battle - it's not considered paying honor to a veteran's service to depict them pointing a gun in the same stance they'd use to actually kill a combatant. And those who were forced to take lives in battle are even less keen to have an image honoring them, that appears to be in the process of aiming and shooting.
As you might expect, they prefer to be depicted defending people over attacking them.
show: 6 🗨
Thank you for that comment Femme_Appeal. You are quite right.
I just wonder how many of the offended people are offended because they are military or have military family or friends. Or are they just saying they are offended because there is a gun? There is too much offense being taken these days over things that should just be passed by.
And what was the intent of this picture? Was it to upset people or pay tribute? Why assume the worst?
replyI just wonder how many of the offended people are offended because they are military or have military family or friends. Or are they just saying they are offended because there is a gun? There is too much offense being taken these days over things that should just be passed by.
And what was the intent of this picture? Was it to upset people or pay tribute? Why assume the worst?
show: 2 🗨
I wouldn't be surprised if some people are just offended to be offended. It happens.
However, I also don't agree with the popular sentiment that we should assume someone's intentions are good unless we have reasons to think otherwise - or that intention is what matters. People used to think that blackface wasn't offensive unless it was used in hugely racist depictions, but as we've learned in recent years, it was offensive long before black people felt free to voice their offense. Just as sexual harassment was offensive to women, even back when they worried that complaining about it would get them labeled as "too sensitive."
To this example specifically, I wouldn't make any image "honoring" military veterans without having some idea how they'd feel about it. That's the responsibility in depicting another population of people - you cannot properly show someone respect without first learning what they find respectful and disrespectful. Conscientiousness and courtesy are at least as important as intention.
replyHowever, I also don't agree with the popular sentiment that we should assume someone's intentions are good unless we have reasons to think otherwise - or that intention is what matters. People used to think that blackface wasn't offensive unless it was used in hugely racist depictions, but as we've learned in recent years, it was offensive long before black people felt free to voice their offense. Just as sexual harassment was offensive to women, even back when they worried that complaining about it would get them labeled as "too sensitive."
To this example specifically, I wouldn't make any image "honoring" military veterans without having some idea how they'd feel about it. That's the responsibility in depicting another population of people - you cannot properly show someone respect without first learning what they find respectful and disrespectful. Conscientiousness and courtesy are at least as important as intention.
show: 1 🗨
I do agree with some of what you're saying @Femme_Appeal. But in any segment of people ("they'd feel about it"), there is not likely to be 100% consensus. I have a son & sons-in-law in the military so I'm not "unbiased" with this. We don't know that the author wasn't military and chose this as a depiction that meant something to him.
I think if we wait to see if something (a nonogram, a painting, a statue, a book, a speech) offends someone else, we wouldn't have any of those. Sometimes something is for shock value, or to awaken an interest or some understanding and it is offensive for a segment of the population.
I do understand what you are getting at, but 5 people can look at a painting and there can be 5 interpretations of it, some positive and some negative. I guess what I'm saying is that I don't think there are any easy answers and every answer does not fit everybody. All we can do is try to be aware in our interactions with others.
replyI think if we wait to see if something (a nonogram, a painting, a statue, a book, a speech) offends someone else, we wouldn't have any of those. Sometimes something is for shock value, or to awaken an interest or some understanding and it is offensive for a segment of the population.
I do understand what you are getting at, but 5 people can look at a painting and there can be 5 interpretations of it, some positive and some negative. I guess what I'm saying is that I don't think there are any easy answers and every answer does not fit everybody. All we can do is try to be aware in our interactions with others.
As someone who spent most of my career in special operations (though not a special forces, "green beret" myself), I find this image to be not in the least offensive.
While an image of a soldier (or anyone) pointing there weapon can be found offensive, it is more the intent than and context that would be offensive, rather than the image itself.
If the image is of artistic intent, e.g., a picture of a soldier with a weapon pointed could be used in an artistic way to convey a specific message or emotion, where the focus is on the art rather than the weapon itself, then that is not at all offensive.
If, on the other hand, the image was intended to glorify violence, military aggression, or even if it was just intended to piss off the "gun nuts" of the world, that would be offensive.
replyWhile an image of a soldier (or anyone) pointing there weapon can be found offensive, it is more the intent than and context that would be offensive, rather than the image itself.
If the image is of artistic intent, e.g., a picture of a soldier with a weapon pointed could be used in an artistic way to convey a specific message or emotion, where the focus is on the art rather than the weapon itself, then that is not at all offensive.
If, on the other hand, the image was intended to glorify violence, military aggression, or even if it was just intended to piss off the "gun nuts" of the world, that would be offensive.
show: 1 🗨
show: 1 🗨