5 ms·

Doing things that are offensive to Muslims to make the point that we should have the right to do things they find offensive is... something I'm not sure about.

Doing things that are offensive to Muslims to make the point that we should have the right to do things they find offensive is... something I'm not sure about. It's utterly ridiculous that people would riot over a cartoon, and the South Park debacle is upsetting (especially given that the show has always used kid gloves with Mohammed and Islam). I don't think it's possible to feel anything other than contempt for the conduct of Revolution Islam. That said, making fun of Islam for the point of making fun of Islam just seems like something that (although it's not intended this way) would be interpreted by many as very mean-spirited. Of course, there are legitimate and severe problems with "the Muslim world" with respect to human rights, and nothing should stand in the way of criticizing this, just as we aren't afraid to criticize the governments of China or the US for their human rights violations.

fierarul 16y ago
>Of course, there are legitimate and severe problems with "the Muslim world" with respect to human rights, and nothing should stand in the way of criticizing this, just as we aren't afraid to criticize the governments of China or the US for their human rights violations. Doing a drawing sounds like something a human shouldn't be afraid, wouldn't you say ? >I don't think it's possible to feel anything other than contempt[...] >Doing things that are offensive to Muslims to make the point that we should have the right to do things they find offensives is... something I'm not sure about. I think that would be a sign of fear, not contempt.
Retric 16y ago
I accept that a picture of Mohammed such as :-) would offend people. I can accept someone refraining from such to avoiding offending people. However, the idea that people need to avoid drawing a smiley face or risk death is unacceptable to me. PS: My smiley face was some other Mohammed and not anyone’s prophet.
- billybob 16y ago
  :-) My smiley face is a depiction of the Muslim prophet Mohammed. Whom I, as a non-Muslim, do not consider a true prophet. Whose writings I consider to be partly plagarized from Jewish scripture. Disagree? Write your own comment.
forinti 16y ago
If you take into consideration that the British and the US have been involved in the middle east for decades, you'll see that being offensive will compound on quite a bit of resentment.
vegashacker 16y ago
In your first paragraph you claim that this is about "the right to do things they find offensive". (I agree.) But then you change it to "making fun of Islam for the point of making fun of Islam." But I think this is a very different from your original characterization--and I don't think you are accurate here.
milkshakes 16y ago
I think you're missing the point. The contempt and criticism is not aimed at the Muslim world (though I will admit, intentionally offending Muslims tastes bad to me too), but at Comedy Central and any other media outlet that caves to these threats. She's mocking Mohammed, but only doing so in order to mock the taboo against mocking Mohammed.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
  - culled 16y ago
    She's encouraging people to parody the Comedy Central executive's actions. A picture of them wouldn't do that.
    - deleted 16y ago
      [deleted]
- jerf 16y ago
  "(though I will admit, intentionally offending Muslims tastes bad to me too)" Such delicate and tender social sensibilities we all suddenly have. As a Christian, people deliberately trying to offend me is merely part of the background noise of my life. Can't say I see it every day, but every week is probably fair. Does "intentionally offending Christians" taste just as bad to you? I address this to everyone who would agree with that statement, not you personally, because I'm sure the answer is "yes" for some people. I mean it more an a question for introspection, because it's been a long time since I've actually been offended by anything. And if the answer is no, my followup question would be "What's the difference?" and "Are you sure that's a social incentive structure you want to set up?" Allowing people to cow you with threats like this goes beyond even religion; "give me my handouts or I'll commit violence" is a threat that has been used in the real world, after all, it's not even theoretical. It's better not to encourage that.
  - milkshakes 16y ago
sophacles 16y ago
There is also the absurd death threat/possible murder-as-retribution aspect. I will gladly mock people who think killing is a viable response to an image, even if it is offensive.
- johnyzee 16y ago
  Except this is offensive to even the Muslims who are perfectly reasonable.
  - Kadin 16y ago
    I don't see how that's possible. It's not reasonable to get offended because of a harmless cartoon; anyone who does is by definition unreasonable.
    - JabavuAdams 16y ago
      Suppose we're talking in person. In the middle of the conversation, I fart. Then I pick my nose and eat it. Finally I reach into my pants and scratch my crotch. All of these things are harmless to you, but I would not be surprised if you were offended by some of them. Disgust is cultural. It's important to recognize that large numbers of people can as a result of their culture be disgusted by things we consider normal. It's unreasonable to say "you shouldn't be disgusted". The best we can say is that the value of free speech outweighs the value of pandering to various groups' definitions of good taste.
      - Kadin 16y ago
        Disgust and offense are very different things. There are many things that I find disgusting, yet I am not offended by them since they don't affect me. I can think of a lot of sexual practices that strike me as really disgusting. Eating shit, for instance. Yet the fact that people out there do it doesn't offend me; being forced (or tricked) into watching it would be, but the act itself is merely disgusting. It becomes offensive when it's forced. To be offended, particularly to the point of violent action, over something that doesn't affect you (or any other person, or even an animal) strikes me as unreasonable. Of course, since you've opened up the rabbit hole of cultural constructs I'll admit that "reasonableness" is cultural as well -- but I think the Western, Enlightenment-inspired idea of "reason" and "reasonableness" is worth fighting for. If that makes me a cultural imperialist, so be it.
lmkg 16y ago
It's not making fun of Islam just to make fun of Islam. Making fun of Islam is not the main purpose. That's just a means to an end. The purpose is to stand in solidarity with those who offended, and rebuke those who use violence and threats of violence to impose their views on others. The fact that Islam is being made fun of is incidental, coming about only because that was the action that incited the threat in the first place. The main message that is trying to be conveyed is not "Islam is silly," but rather "We will not be cowed by death threats." I wish there were ways of communicating the latter without conflating it with the former so we didn't have to wade into that mire of offending innocent Muslims. Unfortuantely, the death threats being rejected in the latter are issued for making the former statement, so the two statements are inherently entangled. If there were a better and less contentious way of making the point, I would support it, but I haven't seen one and can't come up with one myself. The one thing I don't like about the whole thing is that taking action is taking sides in a conflict, and that implicitly accepts the conflict as valid. I don't like dichotomous reasoning in general, and I disagree with the whole Islam vs Western Secularism conflict in specific because I think they're less incompatible than partisans of either side want to realize. In this particular incident though, I think I disagree with radical Islam more than I disagree with the conflict as a whole, so I'm tempted to take a side for once.
ErrantX 16y ago
The problem is that the issue is Comedy Central censored this material, not necessairily that there were death threats. I don't think it's either smart or intelligent to deliberately provoke the people who are trying to promote fear through death threats - it just gives them more media coverage. The South Park episode was clearly a fine piece of "offensive comedy" - not deliberately targeting Muslims (because of the context of the episode). However this is saying "hey you want to send us death threats, fine. Here's some more content designed to be offensive to you". It's a problem because then it begins to escalate (perhaps someone gets beaten up - so everyone prints T-Shirts with the cartoons, then a bomb goes off.... etc etc.) Does this show us as not being scared? I think it actually shows fear - and crucially is the kind of reaction the extremists are looking for! It increases the media coverage; I'm sure there will be more threats appearing if this makes it "mainstream" and they will all be reported. And it is the response they want in a "war" where making us do offensive things wins them support in the Islamic world. Not being scared would be to continue as usual, make our comedy as normal, including Muhammed when required - and ignore the death threats and extremism. Don't give them the platform. That seems the least fearful thing to do! :) Not showing the scene was bad on the part of Comedy Central - and I feel it is censors like that whom we should be taking to task over this. Not the extremists - because if you do that they will delight in fighting back :) Historically ostentatious shows of "no fear" never end well. No, I can't support this. :( EDIT: rereading there seems a slight emphasis on the idea of using all kinds of religious iconography. That's something I could get more behind - simply because it's no longer about the extremists, but about Comedy Central being censors. That is a good cause. So long as this doesn't promote targetting religion or the idea of entering into a fight against extremists (rather than the censors) then perhaps it has merit.

fierarul 16y ago

>Of course, there are legitimate and severe problems with "the Muslim world" with respect to human rights, and nothing should stand in the way of criticizing this, just as we aren't afraid to criticize the governments of China or the US for their human rights violations. Doing a drawing sounds like something a human shouldn't be afraid, wouldn't you say ? >I don't think it's possible to feel anything other than contempt[...] >Doing things that are offensive to Muslims to make the point that we should have the right to do things they find offensives is... something I'm not sure about. I think that would be a sign of fear, not contempt.

Retric 16y ago

I accept that a picture of Mohammed such as :-) would offend people. I can accept someone refraining from such to avoiding offending people. However, the idea that people need to avoid drawing a smiley face or risk death is unacceptable to me. PS: My smiley face was some other Mohammed and not anyone’s prophet.

billybob 16y ago
:-) My smiley face is a depiction of the Muslim prophet Mohammed. Whom I, as a non-Muslim, do not consider a true prophet. Whose writings I consider to be partly plagarized from Jewish scripture. Disagree? Write your own comment.

forinti 16y ago

If you take into consideration that the British and the US have been involved in the middle east for decades, you'll see that being offensive will compound on quite a bit of resentment.

vegashacker 16y ago

In your first paragraph you claim that this is about "the right to do things they find offensive". (I agree.) But then you change it to "making fun of Islam for the point of making fun of Islam." But I think this is a very different from your original characterization--and I don't think you are accurate here.

milkshakes 16y ago

I think you're missing the point. The contempt and criticism is not aimed at the Muslim world (though I will admit, intentionally offending Muslims tastes bad to me too), but at Comedy Central and any other media outlet that caves to these threats. She's mocking Mohammed, but only doing so in order to mock the taboo against mocking Mohammed.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
- culled 16y ago
  She's encouraging people to parody the Comedy Central executive's actions. A picture of them wouldn't do that.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
jerf 16y ago
"(though I will admit, intentionally offending Muslims tastes bad to me too)" Such delicate and tender social sensibilities we all suddenly have. As a Christian, people deliberately trying to offend me is merely part of the background noise of my life. Can't say I see it every day, but every week is probably fair. Does "intentionally offending Christians" taste just as bad to you? I address this to everyone who would agree with that statement, not you personally, because I'm sure the answer is "yes" for some people. I mean it more an a question for introspection, because it's been a long time since I've actually been offended by anything. And if the answer is no, my followup question would be "What's the difference?" and "Are you sure that's a social incentive structure you want to set up?" Allowing people to cow you with threats like this goes beyond even religion; "give me my handouts or I'll commit violence" is a threat that has been used in the real world, after all, it's not even theoretical. It's better not to encourage that.
- milkshakes 16y ago

sophacles 16y ago

There is also the absurd death threat/possible murder-as-retribution aspect. I will gladly mock people who think killing is a viable response to an image, even if it is offensive.

johnyzee 16y ago
Except this is offensive to even the Muslims who are perfectly reasonable.
- Kadin 16y ago
  I don't see how that's possible. It's not reasonable to get offended because of a harmless cartoon; anyone who does is by definition unreasonable.
  - JabavuAdams 16y ago
    Suppose we're talking in person. In the middle of the conversation, I fart. Then I pick my nose and eat it. Finally I reach into my pants and scratch my crotch. All of these things are harmless to you, but I would not be surprised if you were offended by some of them. Disgust is cultural. It's important to recognize that large numbers of people can as a result of their culture be disgusted by things we consider normal. It's unreasonable to say "you shouldn't be disgusted". The best we can say is that the value of free speech outweighs the value of pandering to various groups' definitions of good taste.
    - Kadin 16y ago
      Disgust and offense are very different things. There are many things that I find disgusting, yet I am not offended by them since they don't affect me. I can think of a lot of sexual practices that strike me as really disgusting. Eating shit, for instance. Yet the fact that people out there do it doesn't offend me; being forced (or tricked) into watching it would be, but the act itself is merely disgusting. It becomes offensive when it's forced. To be offended, particularly to the point of violent action, over something that doesn't affect you (or any other person, or even an animal) strikes me as unreasonable. Of course, since you've opened up the rabbit hole of cultural constructs I'll admit that "reasonableness" is cultural as well -- but I think the Western, Enlightenment-inspired idea of "reason" and "reasonableness" is worth fighting for. If that makes me a cultural imperialist, so be it.

lmkg 16y ago

It's not making fun of Islam just to make fun of Islam. Making fun of Islam is not the main purpose. That's just a means to an end. The purpose is to stand in solidarity with those who offended, and rebuke those who use violence and threats of violence to impose their views on others. The fact that Islam is being made fun of is incidental, coming about only because that was the action that incited the threat in the first place. The main message that is trying to be conveyed is not "Islam is silly," but rather "We will not be cowed by death threats." I wish there were ways of communicating the latter without conflating it with the former so we didn't have to wade into that mire of offending innocent Muslims. Unfortuantely, the death threats being rejected in the latter are issued for making the former statement, so the two statements are inherently entangled. If there were a better and less contentious way of making the point, I would support it, but I haven't seen one and can't come up with one myself. The one thing I don't like about the whole thing is that taking action is taking sides in a conflict, and that implicitly accepts the conflict as valid. I don't like dichotomous reasoning in general, and I disagree with the whole Islam vs Western Secularism conflict in specific because I think they're less incompatible than partisans of either side want to realize. In this particular incident though, I think I disagree with radical Islam more than I disagree with the conflict as a whole, so I'm tempted to take a side for once.

ErrantX 16y ago

The problem is that the issue is Comedy Central censored this material, not necessairily that there were death threats. I don't think it's either smart or intelligent to deliberately provoke the people who are trying to promote fear through death threats - it just gives them more media coverage. The South Park episode was clearly a fine piece of "offensive comedy" - not deliberately targeting Muslims (because of the context of the episode). However this is saying "hey you want to send us death threats, fine. Here's some more content designed to be offensive to you". It's a problem because then it begins to escalate (perhaps someone gets beaten up - so everyone prints T-Shirts with the cartoons, then a bomb goes off.... etc etc.) Does this show us as not being scared? I think it actually shows fear - and crucially is the kind of reaction the extremists are looking for! It increases the media coverage; I'm sure there will be more threats appearing if this makes it "mainstream" and they will all be reported. And it is the response they want in a "war" where making us do offensive things wins them support in the Islamic world. Not being scared would be to continue as usual, make our comedy as normal, including Muhammed when required - and ignore the death threats and extremism. Don't give them the platform. That seems the least fearful thing to do! :) Not showing the scene was bad on the part of Comedy Central - and I feel it is censors like that whom we should be taking to task over this. Not the extremists - because if you do that they will delight in fighting back :) Historically ostentatious shows of "no fear" never end well. No, I can't support this. :( EDIT: rereading there seems a slight emphasis on the idea of using all kinds of religious iconography. That's something I could get more behind - simply because it's no longer about the extremists, but about Comedy Central being censors. That is a good cause. So long as this doesn't promote targetting religion or the idea of entering into a fight against extremists (rather than the censors) then perhaps it has merit.