Talk:Strappado/Archive 1

Archive 1

Picture

Is it me, or does the BDSM picture of "strappado" look nothing like the description given of it? Are we sure that's a good picture to put there? --Jacquelyn Marie 02:52, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Image is an accurate depiction of a strappado as used in BDSM activity. A dedicated entry and expanded description is now on strappado bondage. The original entry should remain here for reference purposes should a user looking for the BDSM related subject can be re-directed. Taxwomen, I've used your picture from here on the new page, I hope that's OK with you. --jbc01 07:52, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

I think I understand what part is meant to be the strappado now, but at first I thought it was the strap that was between the legs. That's why I was so confused. Thanks for clarification. --Jacquelyn Marie 21:13, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Image

This had the name of a Wikipedia editor on the image page, not the one who uploaded it, unless they're the same person. (And the face could certainly be the first editor, who also had an image on her user page.) I therefore feel it's inappropriate to use it until we establish who owns the copyright and/or whether the person in the photograph has given permission for it to be used on Wikipedia. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:56, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, Slim, I can't understand your explanation. The image page says it was uploaded by Taxwoman, who has asserted that it's PD. Taxwoman added the photo to the page.

Are you suggesting that this is a copyright image? Have you found it on the web somewhere? Why do you think that the person who uploaded it doesn't have the right to release it into the public domain? Would you be happier if they tagged it GFDL?

I'm asking these questions because I'm concerned that you could be seen to be being nothing more than vindictive towards the editor in question. I know this is not the case, so I am asking for clarification. I ask the other editors concerned not to put the image back on the page in respect of the need to consider that you must have respectable reasons, but please do answer in short order and we can sort this out. -- Grace Note. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.87.165 (talk) 06:59, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

I have to note though that the woman does bear a passing resemblance to one featured on this site, which provides the picture for strappado bondage. -- GN — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.87.165 (talk) 07:04, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

No, it said it was Rachel Brown, another editor who Taxwoman says is a friend of hers, and who others say is the same person. If it's the same person and it's definitely an image of herself, she's welcome to add it. But if it's someone else, we need to know that that person agrees to its use. Why on earth would I be vindictive? I know nothing about these editors. Indeed, the vindictive thing would be to leave it on the page. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 07:28, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

I haven't looked at the site you linked to, but if you think it's someone on that site, that makes it not so bad, though we'd have to claim fair use, and I don't know if we can do that for images like this. But I wouldn't care one way or the other if you wanted to do this. My only concern is that a woman whose name is on the image page (a prior version of the image page) is being depicted and may not have given her consent. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 07:31, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

I wrote to the editor the photograph was identified as, and although the response wasn't clear, she didn't say it was her or that she objected to its use, so I have no further concerns. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:58, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

This was nonsense. The photo was not of Rachel Brown and looked nothing like her. The caption was altered from "a friend" to "Rachel Brown" by an anonymous vandal. - Taxwoman 14:36, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

BDSM inline stuff replaced with link

I have replaced the BDSM stuff with a link to the relevant article. As I wrote in my edit summary, having it here totally trivializes the main topic of this page. Here we are writing about a severe form of torture, so let's be serious and not draw shallow comparisons with something that some people choose to subject themselves to for fun. Thanks. Arbitrary username 15:45, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

On a related issue, I am now also removing two of the categories:

• Category:Human body positions
• Category:Physical restraint

Although the article still appears to fit these categories to some extent according to their names, it is reasonably clear from the other articles in these categories that they relate largely to BDSM issues. As such, I think they are not useful for this article as it now stands, adding nothing beyond the categorization under Category:Torture which I am of course retaining. Arbitrary username 22:03, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Iran

Does anyone have a citation for its usage in Iran, or is it just an edit made by the Bush administration? 69.238.20.35 (talk) 07:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I've reviewed the last few days of page history, and it looks like Iran was last added by 66.251.26.61 at 07:06, 1 December 2007. The edit is described as "clarity throughout". ;-) Since there's no citation and the "clarity" editing introduced facts not in the previous version of the page, I added a citation needed tag to the Iran link. I dislike propaganda and warmongering more than I dislike the Iranian government. 69.238.20.35 (talk) 07:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Hanoi Hilton

I am pretty sure that this particular torture was done to US servicemen captured by the Vietnamese and that John McCain specifically mentions it.--No Sig

I've added North Vietnamese use of this technique on US POWs to the article. 68.166.235.8 (talk) 02:36, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Strappado bondage

Strappado bondage was put up for deletion. The result was to merge into this article. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strappado bondage. Because no notice of this proposed merge was given to editors of this article, I have requested a deletion review. See Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 October 8. Editors who have an opinion on the matter, pro or con, are invited to comment. TJRC (talk) 04:19, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Undo of merge from Strappado bondage

Strappado bondage was recently merged into this article based on an AfD on that article. In a deletion review, wp:Deletion review/Log/2008 October 8, it was clarified that the merge disposition is not binding. For example:

• "If the editors at Strappado don't want the merged content (and I can't blame them) they have the option to merge it someplace else instead, or to remove it entirely."

• "there is no reason why editors can't later move the content elsewhere."

• " If the consensus is still to merge it [to the Strappado article], that's fine, but it should be done so under a correct understanding of the term."

• "Merge AfD closures are suggestions, not set-in-stone things. Feel free to reject, retarget, or otherwise change around the way the merge actually does or doesn't happen (using talkpage consensus)."

There is no consensus between the editors of Strappado bondage and Strappado to merge into Strappado. If you wish to merge Strappado bondage into Strappado, please open the appropriate discussion. I also suggest considering other appropriate article for the target merge. See the deletion review for some suggestions. TJRC (talk) 20:29, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree with not merging (for the reasons I gave in the deletion review). Mdwh (talk) 00:55, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and in case it's not clear from my comments above, I too oppose the merge, for the reasons stated in the deletion review. TJRC (talk) 01:24, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Image

While there's an obvious difference in intention between the use of strappado in torture and in bondage, what opinion do people hold on using one of the images from Strappado bondage in this article for illustrative purposes – it may be difficult for some to visualise the position. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 20:40, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

The revealing clothing (and other "gear") the models are wearing in the available pictures would distract from illustrating the position. We do already have a picture on this page that, while fuzzy, demonstrates it adequately.--Father Goose (talk) 20:09, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

-- I also have a big problem with the witness account and accusations against the United States. The witness, a Mr. Irqbal, says that he knew that his torturers were Americans because they wore green uniforms with gold stars. However, there is no American military uniform to my knowledge that is green with gold stars. Generals wear silver stars, and general's stars on green (presumably camo) uniforms are black, not gold. In light of this I am removing the accusation against the United States. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tpkatsa (talk • contribs) 19:35, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

United States

I removed the first paragraph references to the United States and Bush. The article stated that: "has since been used by the governments of Turkey, Nazi Germany and the United States of America under President George W. Bush", using Al-Jamadi as an example. Problem is, since the article also says that the military (presumably the US military) ruled his death a homocide, and that the people involved in his detention have been charged and/or convicted of abuse, you have conflicting statements, as well as quite a stretch to claim the "US government" used it. In Nazi Germany, such treatment was explicitly allowed by the state, and in Turkey, it is often implicitly allowed, or officially covered up. Barring some counter-evidence, the United States has done neither, and its disingenuous to imply that this is official US policy. I suppose you could say military members of the United States used it, or some such work-around, but this form of torture has been used for centuries; does every wiki article have to focus so heavily on recent events in the United States? And to tack on George Bush's name is pure politics, as well as being incredibly ethnocentric. Why didn't it also state "Turkey under President Süleyman Demirel", or "Nazi Germany under chancellor Adolf Hitler"? Wiki isn't about creating a personal sounding board for your own politics. Give these nations equal treatment, or not at all.BuboTitan (talk) 12:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

You reckon the sentence would be more lenient on Bush if we phrased it as: "has since been used by the governments of Turkey under President Süleyman Demirel, Nazi Germany under chancellor Adolf Hitler and the United States of America under President George W. Bush"? Malatinszky (talk) 13:14, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't matter. Strappado was not used at Abu Ghraib.

Look at the picture, then read the description, and then read what happened. The Jane Mayer piece says, "The accounts concur that, while Jamadi was able to stand without discomfort, he couldn’t kneel or sit without hanging painfully from his arms."

The only people calling it "strappado" are the ones who wail about human rights when they think they can blame the U.S., and then hide under their beds when America's enemies really torture people.

-- Randy2063 (talk) 15:44, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

MSNBC reported it as "Palestinian hanging", which redirects here. So I added it under modern instances (and made it clear it was what was described as "Palestinian hanging"). So it's verifiable as being described that way. Also note that the Manadel al-Jamadi article also describes it as "Palestinian Hanging" which links back here, so at least now it's consistent. Wokstation (talk) 23:50, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

It's still not strappado. A wikilink doesn't make it verifiable. We may need to send that redirect elsewhere.

If we can find a source that says it's a "light" form of strappado, like strappado bondage recreational bondage, then we should create a new section explaining that it's different from what we have pictured and described. Otherwise some of the readers will see this as false advertising.

-- Randy2063 (talk) 01:49, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Where-else would you redirect "Palestinian hanging" to? Even this article says that it's another name for it, and MSNBC referred to it by it's "alternative name". Note that I was careful to include the context in which is was called that, so I disagree that it shouldn't be here (obviously, else I'd not have placed it). If you can find a verifiable definition for "Palestinian hanging" that doesn't closely resemble strappado, I'd agree with you. Wokstation (talk) 01:01, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Not having a good place to redirect it doesn't mean it's okay here. I'm not saying it has to go elsewhere, although it could go to stress positions. That's really where it would belong if not for the fact that it's a pretty bare article.

If we really want to say it's a form of strappado then we need to revise the definition. Right now the definition says they're suspended in the air "which most likely dislocates both arms." A Palestinian hanging doesn't do that, and isn't even necessarily painful.

The easiest thing to do would be to expand this article by adding a separate section on Palestinian hanging with a clear description so that the readers aren't fooled into thinking they're the same thing. The only problem with that is I don't see a good source using the name strappado for this. I can't verify the one we have because it's offline.

-- Randy2063 (talk) 21:51, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

According To...

Someone asked who alleges that strappados were used during the Salem Witch Trials of 1690’s: Here you go. http://home.comcast.net/~burokerl/torture_and_death_for_accused_witches.htm174.25.142.178 (talk) 00:49, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Usage in Israel

Originally this article noted that this torture technique was named "Palestinian hanging" because of its alleged use in Israel. But someone has changed that sentence to literally its opposite, claiming that it is a misnomer since it is not used in Israel. This is not cited and seems to be original research. There are many sources which directly contradict that claim. See:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,147957,00.html http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=e-liAAAAIBAJ&sjid=lzEMAAAAIBAJ&pg=4373,574536&dq=palestinian-hanging+israel&hl=en http://baltimorechronicle.com/2005/121305Hussain.shtml http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=Mo8xAAAAIBAJ&sjid=F_4DAAAAIBAJ&pg=1311,5564883&dq=palestinian-hanging+israel&hl=en http://www.harpers.org/archive/2006/02/0080932

All of these sources (and more) state without any proof that it is called a "Palestininian Hanging" due to widespread usage by Israel. Poyani (talk) 12:12, 1 June 2012 (UTC)