5 ms·

Except this is offensive to even the Muslims who are perfectly reasonable.

Kadin 17y 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 17y 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 17y 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.
  - sigzero 17y ago
    I am 100% sure that I would not threaten to kill you for any of those things.
    - ErrantX 17y ago
      No and neither would the vast majority of Muslims. (bearing in mind that this was a discussion about why Muslims take offence at the cartoons and their response. I may have misread but the above poster seems to suggest that Muslims generally give death threats over this offence - which is untrue. The extremist is giving the threats not the Muslim :-))
sophacles 17y ago
Too bad for them? Being offended is not the end of the world. I'm offended every time some tea-party person claims that * is tantamount to nazi-ism, but I don't threaten death as a response, and I would probably mock anyone who did.
MartinCron 17y ago
As Philip Pullman so beautifully said (about Christianity, in his case) nobody has the right to never be offended. Video here: http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmarchive/2010/04/philip_pullman.html http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmarchive/2010/04/philip_pullman...
- pw0ncakes 17y ago
  I agree. Obviously, people have the right to depict Mohammed however they wish. Whether they necessarily should is another matter. Offensiveness for its own sake is the province of the Manhattan "high art" world, but (being outside of that world) I don't buy into it as a good thing. I thought South Park was harmless and funny in its 200th and 201st episodes, because the poignancy-to-offensiveness ratio was high (they were pretty inoffensive in their treatment of Islam). What's odd and somewhat inconsistent here is that Islam doesn't forbid only the depiction of Mohammed, but of any of God's creations (defined as the animals including humans). This aversion to depiction isn't rare in human cultures; Renaissance-era Christians considered theatre morally impure and actors were refused Catholic burials at one time. Yet, as far as I know, few Muslims are offended when non-Muslims create cartoons in general, even though strict Muslims aren't allowed to do so. Yet when Mohammed is involved, it's considered to be on a different level.
  - MartinCron 17y ago
    Interesting trivia from the good micro-history book "The Immortal Game" is that the classic stylized chess piece shapes that are still used today were adapted from more representative figures specifically to be less offensive to Muslim leaders who didn't approve of the realistic depictions.
- foldr 17y ago
  Nobody's suggesting that Muslims have a right not to be offended. The point is just that deliberately offending a large group of people is usually a dick move.
  - MartinCron 17y ago

Kadin 17y 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 17y 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 17y 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.
- sigzero 17y ago
  I am 100% sure that I would not threaten to kill you for any of those things.
  - ErrantX 17y ago
    No and neither would the vast majority of Muslims. (bearing in mind that this was a discussion about why Muslims take offence at the cartoons and their response. I may have misread but the above poster seems to suggest that Muslims generally give death threats over this offence - which is untrue. The extremist is giving the threats not the Muslim :-))

sophacles 17y ago

Too bad for them? Being offended is not the end of the world. I'm offended every time some tea-party person claims that * is tantamount to nazi-ism, but I don't threaten death as a response, and I would probably mock anyone who did.

MartinCron 17y ago

As Philip Pullman so beautifully said (about Christianity, in his case) nobody has the right to never be offended. Video here: http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmarchive/2010/04/philip_pullman.html http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmarchive/2010/04/philip_pullman...

pw0ncakes 17y ago
I agree. Obviously, people have the right to depict Mohammed however they wish. Whether they necessarily should is another matter. Offensiveness for its own sake is the province of the Manhattan "high art" world, but (being outside of that world) I don't buy into it as a good thing. I thought South Park was harmless and funny in its 200th and 201st episodes, because the poignancy-to-offensiveness ratio was high (they were pretty inoffensive in their treatment of Islam). What's odd and somewhat inconsistent here is that Islam doesn't forbid only the depiction of Mohammed, but of any of God's creations (defined as the animals including humans). This aversion to depiction isn't rare in human cultures; Renaissance-era Christians considered theatre morally impure and actors were refused Catholic burials at one time. Yet, as far as I know, few Muslims are offended when non-Muslims create cartoons in general, even though strict Muslims aren't allowed to do so. Yet when Mohammed is involved, it's considered to be on a different level.
- MartinCron 17y ago
  Interesting trivia from the good micro-history book "The Immortal Game" is that the classic stylized chess piece shapes that are still used today were adapted from more representative figures specifically to be less offensive to Muslim leaders who didn't approve of the realistic depictions.
foldr 17y ago
Nobody's suggesting that Muslims have a right not to be offended. The point is just that deliberately offending a large group of people is usually a dick move.
- MartinCron 17y ago