Sunday Soapbox: On assuming negative intent

Last December, I launched an occasional series called Sunday Soapbox, in which I share my thoughts on some of the most persistent issues plaguing the model horse hobby. Today's post was not written by me, but I agree with every word. Thank you, anonymous friend, for offering this well-written take on something that happens all the time to all of our detriment.

On Assuming Negative Intent

by anonymous

We’ve all seen the posts. Somebody goes to a show, their models don’t do well, and immediately they jump to one of the following:

• The judge does not like me personally
• The judge was just giving ribbons to their friends
• Old people are mean and don’t like change or innovation (rude)
• The judge has beef with the sculptor of the molds I collect
• The show hostess and the judge are conspiring to ruin my day specifically

And on, and on, and on.

We have ALL had bad show days. Some of us more than others! Sometimes the judging really does not make sense, especially when you’re newer to showing and trying to make sense of the way ribbons are hitting the table. But my question is, how many people making these posts would expect others to give them the benefit of the doubt if the tables were turned? We all expect others to assume positive intent in our own actions, but are a lot slower to give it the other way when we perceive another person’s actions as having harmed us.

These posts are hurtful. They make people less likely to judge and a LOT less likely to hold a show. For reference, every show host spends money from their own pockets to make these things happen. Even if some expenses are covered by a regional show organization or sponsor, the hosts are putting hours and hours into making these events happen. When you put your whole life on hold for the days/weeks leading up to a show and then come home to a social media shitstorm, it makes it a whole lot harder to keep your enthusiasm for next time. .

As a reminder, we have no uniform judging standards in this hobby. Zero. There’s no handbook. Some judges focus on Anatomy, Biomechanics, Color Accuracy. Some judges focus on breed type and conformation, and still others weigh collectability more heavily, even in breed classes. Some show holders specify in the packet what they would like the judging criteria to be, but since there’s no certification process, there’s still a ton of wiggle room for how placings shake out. Even if the show holder does their best to select judges who can and will judge based on the stated criteria.

There’s no one right way to be a judge. As we become more familiar with the hobby, each shower should determine what their collecting philosophy is, and then learn which judges have a similar perspective and show under them. This is the way to have a better time at shows and for the results to make more sense. 

This path is a lot of work, and not for the casual exhibitor. It’s perfectly okay to keep it chill, and show locally no matter who the judges are, just remember that you are paying for that person’s opinion that day. Just because you disagree with it does not mean they’re wrong and you’re right. 

Should we take accusations of wrongdoing seriously, and look into them? Absolutely. Is social media vagueposting the way to address concerns? No. Unless your goal is to have a lot fewer shows, judged by the same fifteen people who have developed a thick enough skin to take the blowback, we as a hobby have got to be more mindful about the stages we take to for complaining. 

Reach out to the show holder from a place of curiosity about what you observed, not accusation. Have a conversation, you might learn something. Cheating and favoritism certainly happen, but not nearly on the scale some folks seem to be convinced of. 

If you truly care about the future of the hobby, of live showing, and about fostering growth, please start with giving others some grace and benefit of the doubt before you take to social media.