[Flipside]

'Kinda implied' is a very broad definition, it's sort of hard not to fit into that slot.

[Phantom Hoover]

I think it's rather interesting how people expect, when it is at its very basest cultural violence, Draw Muhammed Day to do anything helpful.  This is, on a cultural scale, picking on the kid who lives in the beat up trailer until he punches someone, and then getting pissed off that he punched you and retaliating by making fun of the kid even harder, and spreading it around to all of his friends, too.  Does that make the kid right to throw a punch?  Of course not.  But how can we consider this a positive thing when we're the ones escalating it still further?

This is a ****ing horrible analogy, it validates everything Luis and friends have been saying throughout this thread, and you should feel ashamed for making it.

[GhylTarvoke]

This is an interesting development: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11335676/Hacktivists-Anonymous-says-it-will-avenge-Charlie-Hebdo-attacks-by-shutting-down-jihadist-websites.html.

Bad guys vs. bad guys!

[Aesaar]

"We hurl abuse at Christians, and that gives us the right to hurl abuse at Muslims!'

Uuh, yeah?  Why should people not make satire about Islam when it's permissible to make satire about everything else?  That's what Charlie Hebdo does.  At what point did freedom of speech stop being the freedom to laugh at anything?

I don't give a **** about Draw Muhammad Day.  It's just typical internet trolling, and it happens because it gets a rise out of people.  The reason you don't see Draw Kim Jong-un or whatever is because those people don't give a ****.  Islam is targeted precisely because it pisses the extremists off.  But again, that shows something, doesn't it?  The Internet can mock Kim Jong-un, can mock Hitler, Obama, Jesus, the Republican Party, whatever.  Mock Islam though, and it suddenly becomes objectionable.  Why?

Again, the only reason Draw Muhammad Day is a thing is because people give a **** about this particular thing being mocked.

As an aside, one of my friends was raped, and she makes rape jokes as a way of coping.  She says it's her way of not letting that experience determine how she lives her life.  Perhaps it's not your place to dictate what jokes people should or shouldn't make.

And every now and then, the speech will aggravate a mad man or two, enough to make them blow up stuff. And *that* fact will not be helped by any amount of cartoons drawn (nothing short of planet wide lobotomy would help).
That's why, regardless of the subject, it makes sense to think about the expected outcome before exercising the freedom of speech. Otherwise it's like you're bringing a knife to a gun fight, you are free to do so, but what sense does it make?

So basically, give the terrorists what they want?  Show them that their threats work?  Like MP-Ryan said, individuals don't have a responsibility to do anything here.  But the media does.  That's the entire point of the media.  And more often than not, they're failing.

And let me be clear: neither the cartoonists or the people spreading the images bear any responsibility for the acts of terror carried out in reaction to them.  None.

I think it's rather interesting how people expect, when it is at its very basest cultural violence, Draw Muhammed Day to do anything helpful.  This is, on a cultural scale, picking on the kid who lives in the beat up trailer until he punches someone, and then getting pissed off that he punched you and retaliating by making fun of the kid even harder, and spreading it around to all of his friends, too.  Does that make the kid right to throw a punch?  Of course not.  But how can we consider this a positive thing when we're the ones escalating it still further?

This is a horrible, horrible analogy.  Drawing cartoons of Muhammad, not matter how offensive they are, is not emotional abuse or harassment.  It's not even remotely close.  It infringes on no one's rights.  This is some bull**** that paints these extremists as angry victims rather than the thin skinned ****wits they are.

[Flipside]

@Aesaar, the problem isn't about the Right to abuse people, it's about the continuation of it into a 'trend', because it becomes institutionalized, it's about the fact that whilst raised voices is a way to get attention to an important issue, if everyone is shouting, no-one is listening.

See, my problem isn't with 'Christian' or 'Muslim', it's with abuse, because it has become the primary and, in many cases, only form of communication invoked in these situations, and in doing so, it has lost its meaning.

[Scotty]

I think it's rather interesting how people expect, when it is at its very basest cultural violence, Draw Muhammed Day to do anything helpful.  This is, on a cultural scale, picking on the kid who lives in the beat up trailer until he punches someone, and then getting pissed off that he punched you and retaliating by making fun of the kid even harder, and spreading it around to all of his friends, too.  Does that make the kid right to throw a punch?  Of course not.  But how can we consider this a positive thing when we're the ones escalating it still further?

This is a ****ing horrible analogy, it validates everything Luis and friends have been saying throughout this thread, and you should feel ashamed for making it.

The analogy is meant only to relate to an organized effort to antagonize all Muslims everywhere ala Draw Muhammad Day.  Perhaps the initial clause is wrong (I'm willing to concede it's certainly not perfect), but the idea isn't along the lines of "oh no, we better not do that again or we'll get punched!"  It's along the lines of be the better ****ing party.  That isn't even to say stop making fun of Muslims, or Muhammad, or religion (or anyone else) at all!  It's to say not to escalate.  Escalation is the primary vehicle of terrorism to enact negative change, and something like that is playing right into their hands.

inb4 if you disagree with me the terrorists win

[Aesaar]

@Aesaar, the problem isn't about the Right to abuse people, it's about the continuation of it into a 'trend', because it becomes institutionalized, it's about the fact that whilst raised voices is a way to get attention to an important issue, if everyone is shouting, no-one is listening.

See, my problem isn't with 'Christian' or 'Muslim', it's with abuse, because it has become the primary and, in many cases, only form of communication invoked in these situations, and in doing so, it has lost its meaning.

I don't think that's the case.  I think the more civilized dialogue just doesn't get media attention because it's not remarkable/news-worthy.  See, I don't think the free-speech thing is actually an issue for most people, and you can look at the reactions of reasonable Muslims as a perfect example of this.  Most of them don't care if others draw Muhammad, just like most Christians don't care if others draw Jesus as a zombie.  It's the extremists that makes this an issue, and I don't think there's a possibility of or need for reasonable discourse with them.

And I strongly disagree with your notion that this is abuse in any way.  It really, really isn't.

[Scotty]

I'm pretty sure at this point we're talking in slightly diverging directions.  Namely, that one group is talking in general (you guys), and one group is talking about a specific occurrence (me and Flipside).  In general I agree with you.  In terms of that specific occurrence, yeah I'm pretty sure that qualifies as some kind of abuse.

[Aesaar]

Maybe, but the specific instances don't actually matter, because you can't do anything about them.  You can't start going around deciding what's good mockery and what isn't, simply because opinions will vary.

[Flipside]

The whole point of the thing is supposedly to enforce the belief that you can say something that is insulting to someone else, which is great, but if you make a repeating campaign out of it, then it takes on a far more worrying undertone from my perspective.

The fact it centers on a single target because 'they did it to themselves' is something I find slightly terrifying. This has moved from 'showing the world we have Free Speech' to 'showing the extremist Muslims we have Free Speech'. But, I suspect that whilst most Muslims wouldn't be up in arms about it, they wouldn't turn round and say that they are not abusive.

So, basically, a minority of Muslims have bought it on a majority of them, which isn't really fair, however you look at it.

[Aesaar]

I would agree that Draw Muhammad Day is specifically about showing the extremist Muslims we have Free Speech.  The reason for that is really simple: they're the ones who seem most hell bent on taking it away with fear and violence.  It's human nature to react strongly to that, and tbh, I have difficulty disagreeing.  I don't participate, but I don't have strong feelings against it either.

And like I said before, I don't think most Muslims give a flying **** about Draw Muhammad Day.  I've no evidence for this, it's just me thinking most Muslims are as reasonable as most Christians or Jews.  It's no that they're not up in arms about it.  I genuinely think most of them would react with "so what?".

IMO, it wouldn't become abusive until mosques and Muslim households start being pelted with drawings of Muhammad.  Which may happen, I don't know.  If it does, that I have a problem with.

[karajorma]

Did you not read anything I wrote?

It's not that only extremists care about drawing Muhammed. It's that no one ****ing cares.

Even the vast majority of extremists don't give a **** if you draw a picture of Muhammed. If they did they would be blowing up things in the Middle East that had his face on them. The extremists are responding to the perceived institutional bigotry aimed at their religion behind the people drawing Muhammed. And you know what, they're right to be ****ing upset about it. When a newspaper prints a cartoon designed to insult and alienate the Muslim minority within that country, I don't know why you are assuming the majority of Muslims wouldn't be pissed off about it. As I've already pointed out the Jyllands-Posten drew international protests even before they were fanned by the clerics tour.

Hell, you should be ****ing pissed off too!

What the extremists are wrong about is how they deal with it. So yeah, stop assuming that Draw Muhammed Day is simply about people getting angry at cartoons. They have every right to be angry at people in the West lining up to take a **** on them again.

[Flipside]

I think you'd find that if you tried to have a certain day dedicated to drawing insulting images of Christians or Jews, you'd see an outcry from interest groups, you'd probably even see the odd crazy deciding to take it as far as violence, the feeling of persecution is life-blood to extremism.

That doesn't mean that such voices should be silenced, not in the least, but this is as much about understanding how we are perceived as it is about dealing with it. After ISIS are gone, we will still have to deal with these countries, these opinions will still exist, after all, we aren't fighting Sharia Law, we are fighting Extremism, though some mistakenly conflate the two. Saudi Arabia have Sharia, they just sentenced a liberal blogger to 5000 lashes for insulting Islam, and they are our 'friends'; http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-30744693

That's the thing, this isn't a binary situation, there are so many shades of grey involved.

[IronBeer]

I'm getting some major deja vu..... I feel like we just had a thread that touched on why moderates get no attention.... hnnng trying to remember.

Oh wait it's still on the front page of GenDisc.

Color me.... either disappointed or bemused at the lack of self-awareness on display here.

(That was a seriously good analysis in the linked posting, and everybody involved here really should stop for a moment and read that. Actually, never mind "should". Do it, or I'll .....do something appropriately zany/putative. Try me.)

[Bobboau]

So, basically, a minority of Muslims have bought it on a majority of them, which isn't really fair, however you look at it.

I'll give you this.

[Mr. Vega]

Did you not read anything I wrote?

It's not that only extremists care about drawing Muhammed. It's that no one ****ing cares.

Even the vast majority of extremists don't give a **** if you draw a picture of Muhammed. If they did they would be blowing up things in the Middle East that had his face on them. The extremists are responding to the perceived institutional bigotry aimed at their religion behind the people drawing Muhammed. And you know what, they're right to be ****ing upset about it. When a newspaper prints a cartoon designed to insult and alienate the Muslim minority within that country, I don't know why you are assuming the majority of Muslims wouldn't be pissed off about it. As I've already pointed out the Jyllands-Posten drew international protests even before they were fanned by the clerics tour.

Hell, you should be ****ing pissed off too!

What the extremists are wrong about is how they deal with it. So yeah, stop assuming that Draw Muhammed Day is simply about people getting angry at cartoons. They have every right to be angry at people in the West lining up to take a **** on them again.

So the fatwa against Rushdie was only because he was the vanguard of a "perceived institutional bigotry"?

"We are from Allah and to Allah we shall return. I am informing all brave Muslims of the world that the author of The Satanic Verses, a text written, edited, and published against Islam, the Prophet of Islam, and the Qur'an, along with all the editors and publishers aware of its contents, are condemned to death. I call on all valiant Muslims wherever they may be in the world to kill them without delay, so that no one will dare insult the sacred beliefs of Muslims henceforth. And whoever is killed in this cause will be a martyr, Allah Willing. Meanwhile if someone has access to the author of the book but is incapable of carrying out the execution, he should inform the people so that [Rushdie] is punished for his actions."

That bigotry turns Muslim immigrants into recruits does not change the fact that certain Middle Eastern religious leaders are perfectly happy to call for death for something as small as drawing Mohammed, if you make a big enough splash.

[Bobboau]

I think you'd find that if you tried to have a certain day dedicated to drawing insulting images of Christians or Jews, you'd see an outcry from interest groups, you'd probably even see the odd crazy deciding to take it as far as violence, the feeling of persecution is life-blood to extremism.

First off why would we? again everyday is Make Fun of Christians Day. You want one day in particular? you have any sort of organizing principal to it? any sort of irony to it? I'm sure if I thought about it for a while I could come up with something but nothing great leaps to my mind. Just because Zombie Jesus Day isn't catching on as well doesn't mean the DMD is the Fourth Reich.

Second "drawing insulting images of" you keep doing this. you keep intentionally misrepresenting the people you are talking to and what they are saying. Draw Mohamed Day is a day to draw Mohammed. To do so because we were told we were forbidden, not a day to make fun of Muslims. Yes it's obvious many of them are going to be offensive, and yes I have been arguing in favor of the rights of the people who do that, and yes when you say something like "you can't make fun of them" I respond with something like "we have to make fun of them" but what you said is a mischarictarisation of the subject, and it's hard to always realize you've done that and call you on it rather than just simply respond to what you've said. you and a few other people keep doing this and it is like you are trying to play some sort of game of gotcha where you try and slowly corral people into the shoe-box you have for them. This feels more than a little disingenuous.

oh, wait, the whole zombie thing does happen and on Easter, the most sacred of Christian holidays none the less. and unlike DMD this actually IS an intentional mockery of the religion, that IS the idea, and Christians are offended by it. and it's more popular too. (evedence suggests that DMD's birth was twice as popular as ZJD that year, but ZJD has been consistently orders of magnitude more popular each year since)

[Aesaar]

Did you not read anything I wrote?

It's not that only extremists care about drawing Muhammed. It's that no one ****ing cares.

Even the vast majority of extremists don't give a **** if you draw a picture of Muhammed. If they did they would be blowing up things in the Middle East that had his face on them. The extremists are responding to the perceived institutional bigotry aimed at their religion behind the people drawing Muhammed. And you know what, they're right to be ****ing upset about it. When a newspaper prints a cartoon designed to insult and alienate the Muslim minority within that country, I don't know why you are assuming the majority of Muslims wouldn't be pissed off about it. As I've already pointed out the Jyllands-Posten drew international protests even before they were fanned by the clerics tour.

Hell, you should be ****ing pissed off too!

What the extremists are wrong about is how they deal with it. So yeah, stop assuming that Draw Muhammed Day is simply about people getting angry at cartoons. They have every right to be angry at people in the West lining up to take a **** on them again.

What you don't seem to understand is that the extremists aren't reacting to any specific thing.  They're against the mere existence of Western civilization.  If Western countries implemented laws banning disrespecting Islam, they'd shift their focus to something else.  These are people who view the parts of society they dislike as "institutional bigotry", as you put it.  You want to see how they think?  Just take a look at Anjem Choudary's twitter. 

No, it's not about pictures of Muhammad.  That's not what has them riled up.  It's just what they're focusing on, because it's easier to frame their outrage in a (comparatively) reasonable manner.  It lets Islamists like Choudary say "this wouldn't happen if people in the West accepted their responsibility to moderate their speech so they don't disrespect the Prophet and Islam".  It lets them frame their agenda in such a way that it isn't completely condemned.  And it lets them shift part of the blame onto their victims.  And the funniest part is that it's actually somewhat working.

Their thinking is very similar to the thinking of fundamentalist Christians in the USA who believe that Christians are persecuted because their religion isn't being indulged in every way.  That's how these extremists are, and they aren't going to stop.  The cartoons?  That's just a mutually agreed upon battleground.  For them because it lets them look more reasonable than if they attacked something like women's rights (and lets them play the angry victim), and for us because it isn't much effort and lets us make a statement too.  Draw Muhammad Day is just the Internet's petty way of showing them they're not winning.

These extremists don't do this because Muslims are marginalized and oppressed.  They do this because they want Shari'ah law in western countries, and they think that if they win the free speech fight, they'll be able to win the next ones.  They'll get no sympathy from me.

[karajorma]

I've confined my responses mostly to Draw Muhammed Day. As you keep point out, that's the agreed battleground. A battleground full of innocent civilians.

Why not choose a different battleground then? One better suited for us? Why not make it personal? I've already linked to the picture Choudary wants removed from the internet. Why not make your free speech battle there? Somewhere where it's not going to hit people who want no part in the battle but get involved cause it happens where they live.

See, when Fred Phelps acted like a wanker, I'd shut down anyone who took the piss out of Christianity on these boards. If you want to go after Phelps, go after him, but don't make HLP a place deemed anti-Christian because you're going after one bigot. Why not do the same thing here?

So the fatwa against Rushdie was only because he was the vanguard of a "perceived institutional bigotry"?

"We are from Allah and to Allah we shall return. I am informing all brave Muslims of the world that the author of The Satanic Verses, a text written, edited, and published against Islam, the Prophet of Islam, and the Qur'an, along with all the editors and publishers aware of its contents, are condemned to death. I call on all valiant Muslims wherever they may be in the world to kill them without delay, so that no one will dare insult the sacred beliefs of Muslims henceforth. And whoever is killed in this cause will be a martyr, Allah Willing. Meanwhile if someone has access to the author of the book but is incapable of carrying out the execution, he should inform the people so that [Rushdie] is punished for his actions."

That bigotry turns Muslim immigrants into recruits does not change the fact that certain Middle Eastern religious leaders are perfectly happy to call for death for something as small as drawing Mohammed, if you make a big enough splash.

You do realise that The Satanic Verses flat out took the piss out of Ayatollah Khomeini, right?

Now I'm not going to say that people weren't pissed off about the book before the fatwa was issued or that there weren't extremists causing problems before that, but the thing everyone remembers isn't quite as much about Islam as everyone thinks.

[Flipside]

Besides, the man is obviously just a Muslim version of Katie Hopkins or that sort of ilk. In fact the image of someone promoting fundamentalist views over Twitter would be almost amusing if it weren't slightly tragic that these people actually get a following.

If you based your opinion of the West on 'shock-jocks', you'll get a distorted version of the West, same goes for other cultures, the loudest voices are often not the ones that represent the majority.

Thing is, pretty much everyone on here is in agreement that we should defend our right to Freedom of Speech, and that these cartoons were an example of such. We've pretty much agreed that many are childish and immature in nature, and yes, Freedom of Speech covers childishness and immaturity, though I'll state that it isn't a requirement of it. Nobody is going to take away your Right to do that, it simply isn't going to happen, even Fundamentalists know that the harder they try, the less successful they will be. That's nothing to do with campaigns such as this, it is just basic human psychology.

Sometimes, I actually wonder who is goading who to be honest, because I don't doubt that attention seekers from all sides have noticed their ability to promote a Pavlovian response from the public by ringing certain bells.

See, if I can see a potential for discrimination in the nature of Draw Muhammed day, and I even support many of the concepts of what it claims to represent, you can bet your bottom dollar it's being pointed out as the founding principal of it elsewhere.

I get it that you don't hate Muslims, but, I wonder, if you showed these images to someone in, say, Saudi Arabia and then told them you don't hate Muslims, would they believe you?

As Kara said, if this is about Extremists and Fundamentalists, take it to them. Submit a drawing of Choudary running in terror from a pen, call it 'The courage of Extremism', something like that is using the point of the pen instead of a jumbo marker.