[aldo_14]

I actually noticed this in a new story about Muslims feeling attacked by the media in Australia, but I think it stands as true most places.  The essential point made was that no other group in the world is identified readily with religion rather than race, ethnicity, nationality (or ancenstral nationality); whereas we'll ('we' being western society in general) usually group people into 'British', or 'American', or 'Chinese', the generic term for any Arab bloke seems to be Muslim, particularly when described in the media.

I find this interesting, and curious as to whether it is the cause or the symptom of what appears to be a growing prejudice.

[MarkN]

Two points:
1) Jews have been identified by religion for far longer than Muslims.
2)Most Mulsims in many countries are not of Arab origin, but Pakistani origin. Muslims, while they tend to keep to themselves (different holy days from other religions, plus their restrictions on food, make it very difficult to be otherwise), are not a racial group, but a religious group.

As for Muslims feeling attacked by the media, the media tends to attack everyone. After all, remember the problems over the cartoon in a Danish newspaper, that not only made fun of Mohammed, but also of Jesus and The Buddha, yet Buddhists aren't the ones one the street.

[IPAndrews]

The muslim stereotype is quite a strong one. I'm not going to debate if that is fair or not. I have my own view, others have theirs. Either way because it is a strong stereotype it is naturally the first one we think of and the one our brains use commonly when it comes to abstracting the world.

[aldo_14]

Two points:
1) Jews have been identified by religion for far longer than Muslims.
2)Most Mulsims in many countries are not of Arab origin, but Pakistani origin. Muslims, while they tend to keep to themselves (different holy days from other religions, plus their restrictions on food, make it very difficult to be otherwise), are not a racial group, but a religious group.

1) I've rarely seen them done so in the media, though. I can't remember a single instance where there's been a link made between the aims of the state of Israel and Judaism as a religion, but such a link seems commonly made in - if not actual stories - opinion pieces in newspapers (for example).
2) That was my point (the grouping of disparate nationalities under a religious banner when it's not done for any other religion); however, I'm not sure about the 'of Pakistani origin' part and I'd like you to provide a source & meaning for that statement.  For example, I believe the majority of Muslims in Austria & Germany are Turkish immigrants.  The majority in Belgium are Moroccan or Turkish (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4385768.stm).

As for Muslims feeling attacked by the media, the media tends to attack everyone. After all, remember the problems over the cartoon in a Danish newspaper, that not only made fun of Mohammed, but also of Jesus and The Buddha, yet Buddhists aren't the ones one the street.

Well, it's firstly worth noting that the Danish newspaper is a singular incident.  The feeling of persecution is not really related to that (it's seen as symptomatic perhaps), but the general linkage between Islam and violence in the media.  It's also worth noting a bit more about the circumstances of the cartoons; namely that the protests came as the result of circulation (by radical Imams) of the cartoons with the addition of 3 far more offensive cartoons (including pictures which were twisted in meaning to depict Islam when not actually referring to it atall) for the obvious purpose of sparking a reaction.  Had those 3 more offensive cartoons (with the twisted context they were presented in) been actually published in said paper, the outcry - if not the extremity of the protests - would have been justifiable as they would have been clearly racist.  (on the converse, I'd just like to emphasise that the cartoons had every right to be published under freedom of speech, and that Muslims equally had every right to peacefully protest)

[Flipside]

It's partly a lose-lose situation though, let's face it, there are highly publicised areas of Muslim society that represent themselves as Muslim first and their country of origin comes second, and willingly pass on an image of a massive united Muslim nation to further their cause.

Now, that may or may not be a misrepresentation, it more than likely is, some sects of Islam, for example, in Turkey, are nothing like the sects in, say, Iran.

I suppose if you pick up a big hammer and wave it around, you'll be known as 'The man with the Big Hammer.', it's just human nature to label things like that, it's not exactly fair, but it is a natural way to think, and you always remember the most outspoken person or event (which is why a lot of peoples' perception of Muslims is based on incorrect information).

[IPAndrews]

I suppose if you pick up a big hammer and wave it around, you'll be known as 'The man with the Big Hammer.'

The point I was trying to make, only made in a far more amusing manner. Nice quote. Consider it stolen.

[Rictor]

Whil we're at it, how come no one uses the term "Mohammadens". anymore

[aldo_14]

Whil we're at it, how come no one uses the term "Mohammadens". anymore

Too many letters for them?

[Flipside]

Keyboards cost

[IPAndrews]

It doesn't fit on a Jihad video label.

[Taristin]

1) I've rarely seen them done so in the media, though. I can't remember a single instance where there's been a link made between the aims of the state of Israel and Judaism as a religion, but such a link seems commonly made in - if not actual stories - opinion pieces in newspapers (for example).

Im thinking that that is only the case because of WW2. Had there been no great attack and attempted extermination of jewish peoples, the media today probably would refer to them all as jews. But because of the holocaust, it's a lot easier, now for a jewish person to feel "harassed" by such a labelling (in certain contexts) and in retaliation, label someone an anti-semite. And as soon as you're labelled an anti semite... well... look at Mel Gibson

[aldo_14]

1) I've rarely seen them done so in the media, though. I can't remember a single instance where there's been a link made between the aims of the state of Israel and Judaism as a religion, but such a link seems commonly made in - if not actual stories - opinion pieces in newspapers (for example).

Im thinking that that is only the case because of WW2. Had there been no great attack and attempted extermination of jewish peoples, the media today probably would refer to them all as jews. But because of the holocaust, it's a lot easier, now for a jewish person to feel "harassed" by such a labelling (in certain contexts) and in retaliation, label someone an anti-semite. And as soon as you're labelled an anti semite... well... look at Mel Gibson

Didn't hurt apocalypto......

Yeah, the label 'Jew' did occur to me as the only other example.  But if the reason it isn't used is because of the Holocaust then... well, doesn't that indicate something about 'Muslim' as a label too?

[Taristin]

Mm, it's more a case of humanity not learning more than anything. People will claim that we've learned from the mistakes of the past, but in actuality, we only learn from individual instances, and when the scenario changes slightly, it's brand new again.
IMO, of course.

[NGTM-1R]

Perhaps, but then again, here in the US a vast majority of blacks, particularly those who get stuck with the nasty stereotypes (i.e. inner city) are Muslim. But nobody identifies them as Muslim. They're identified as black.

It might have to do with ease of use, too. The Middle East has precious few unifying factors save its religion. Iran for example is ancient Persia, and Persians and Arabs don't play nice. Even the term Arab incorporates a great number of ethnic subgroups that have long memories and bad relations with each other. The Bedouin proverb "Me against my brother, my brother and I against my family, my family against my tribe, and my tribe against the world." has a lot of truth to it.

There's a parallel with Africa and its own intercine conflicts in such places as Rwanda that rings more true as time goes by and Islam fractures further.

[Kosh]

I actually noticed this in a new story about Muslims feeling attacked by the media in Australia, but I think it stands as true most places.  The essential point made was that no other group in the world is identified readily with religion rather than race, ethnicity, nationality (or ancenstral nationality); whereas we'll ('we' being western society in general) usually group people into 'British', or 'American', or 'Chinese', the generic term for any Arab bloke seems to be Muslim, particularly when described in the media.

I find this interesting, and curious as to whether it is the cause or the symptom of what appears to be a growing prejudice.

Lets put some of this into context:

Over the last few years you have gangs of muslim men who rape girls, then get away with it. Then you also have them going to countries like Australia and they critize non-islamic girls for not wearing a veil on the beach, and then you also have that idiot cleric who said that women who did not wear a veil were "uncovered meat".

Australians are getting tired of this BS. The biggest problem is that muslim society is horrifically backwards and instead of trying to come out of its hell hole, it tries to drag everyone else down with them.

[Descenterace]

Mm, it's more a case of humanity not learning more than anything. People will claim that we've learned from the mistakes of the past, but in actuality, we only learn from individual instances, and when the scenario changes slightly, it's brand new again.
IMO, of course.

I agree. Last time I expressed that opinion though (on a different forum), it got a less-than-favourable reaction.

In a similar vein:

A *huge* proportion of people cannot make *correct and accurate* generalisations of principles. They have to learn everything as if it's an unrelated piece of crap, BECAUSE THEY ARE STUPID! PEOPLE ARE STUPID! YES, THAT'S RIGHT, I'M SHOUTING NOW! AIEEEE!! PEOPLE ARE STUPID!

[Blaise Russel]

Lets put some of this into context:

Over the last few years you have gangs of muslim men who rape girls, then get away with it. Then you also have them going to countries like Australia and they critize non-islamic girls for not wearing a veil on the beach, and then you also have that idiot cleric who said that women who did not wear a veil were "uncovered meat".

Australians are getting tired of this BS. The biggest problem is that muslim society is horrifically backwards and instead of trying to come out of its hell hole, it tries to drag everyone else down with them.

haha yes because all muslims are the same

get out

[aldo_14]

I actually noticed this in a new story about Muslims feeling attacked by the media in Australia, but I think it stands as true most places.  The essential point made was that no other group in the world is identified readily with religion rather than race, ethnicity, nationality (or ancenstral nationality); whereas we'll ('we' being western society in general) usually group people into 'British', or 'American', or 'Chinese', the generic term for any Arab bloke seems to be Muslim, particularly when described in the media.

I find this interesting, and curious as to whether it is the cause or the symptom of what appears to be a growing prejudice.

Lets put some of this into context:

Over the last few years you have gangs of muslim men who rape girls, then get away with it. Then you also have them going to countries like Australia and they critize non-islamic girls for not wearing a veil on the beach, and then you also have that idiot cleric who said that women who did not wear a veil were "uncovered meat".

Australians are getting tired of this BS. The biggest problem is that muslim society is horrifically backwards and instead of trying to come out of its hell hole, it tries to drag everyone else down with them.

That's the absolute illustration of my point; you are grouping all Muslims with this group of idiots.  Yet we do not have 'christian gangs', or claim the likes of Billy Graham (the homophobes, the racists, etc) as representative of Christianity.  We don't look at creationists and go 'ah well, it's because christianity is so backwards'.  When the Vatican makes a statement of tolerance, people accept it - when a Muslim cleric does the same, they are ignored or treated as a minority.  Even the use of 'them' is in it's own way a dehumanising statement.

[Bobboau]

those people are however used as representitives of Americans, it's because there are enough of us who listen to the grahms ect to make it a problem, same with islam, even if it's 10% of the population thats still 100,000,000 people.

[aldo_14]

those people are however used as representitives of Americans, it's because there are enough of us who listen to the grahms ect to make it a problem, same with islam, even if it's 10% of the population thats still 100,000,000 people.

I've never heard nor seen the likes of Billy Graham as representatives of either Americans or Christians.