Interest in and Comment on Islam- Islamphobic?
One interesting thing I have observed since 9/11 (it seems al things Islamic revolve around 9/11-a crucial date similar in importance to the Hijra 622 The journey of Islam from Humanity to Itself; 9/11 the start of Islam’s journey from Itself back to Humanity.?? ( A thesis I will pursue in latter essays) is the absolute voyeuristic fascination general westerns (I don’t know about peoples of other civilizations if they have a similar fascination with all that is Islam. I haven’t read that they do) have towards Islam and Moslems.
It must be very annoying to Moslems and religious people in general to explain the ins and outs of your faith and god to strangers especially within a secular society that has the likes of Dawkin’s “God Delusion” around. How do you talk to a stranger about virgin births of gods and hearing voices from god without the other nodding their head and stepping back with strange looks in their eyes.
Is this intense interest justified. Usually its not. Usually, though there may be economic/social/cultural differences in individuals of different religious backgrounds (e.g. Moslems in European countries), the consensus is that it’s their business what their faith is and I don’t real care. I may be concerned about their welfare and standing in the community and this might erupt (eg IRA ) in an effort to correct it but “…..if they want to believe in stupid irrational things then live and let live I say. Just as long as they push their thing down my throat”. They are part of the community.
What then is different. What did 9/11 bring to the picture? The interest I believe is due to the following
1 The suicidal nature of Islam/Moslems (It’s an acceptable activity in Islam under certain circumstances) A Moslem can usually identify a situation where this slaughter of incident individuals is permissible though that person may not do it. Very few Islamic organizations, if any, will unequivocally condemn martyrdom operations (the Islamic term for suicide bombings) in all situations. Israel is an example where even moderate Islamist will allow suicide bombings to occur.
2 Islam has and Moslem practices an antiquated and quaint visual culture eg
*Many wives (less so now).
*Veiled woman ruled by men.
*Macho unshaven men in raucous crowds that lack any females.
*A public prohibition of alcohol or gambling. (Privately ??).
*Confusion of the ancient enslavement riba with the welfare benefiting use of interest rates.
*Confusion with the secular. It allows them to practice their faith not take it away from them.
*Inward looking and low integration characteristics.
*Moralistic attitude (particular with the political Islamists) to non Muslims coupled with an inferiority complex and a disposition to conspiratory theories to explain problems which manifests itself in a condemnation of anyone leaving the faith or mixing with the other non family sex and associated with a cultural dislike of Jews.
*No sex outside of marriage and little practice of demonstrative affection in public for one’s spouse (sad).
*Very little public interaction between the sexes (very sad)
There is a range of these expressions of these cultural characteristic that range non observant to intense. Both can be regarded good pious Muslims.
There are a range of other religious activities that tend not to attract attention or interest. These would include
*Mosques on Fridays
*Prays 5 times a day
*Ramadan
*Going on a holiday to Mecca
These are treated as par for the course and not thought of as being strange.
All these characteristics especially number 1 ( 2 makes it more intriguing) make Western’s interested in Islam to find out what makes it tick. I believe they justify Western interest in Islam and make any discussion and interest in Islam and Muslims politically correct. (This Blog is an example of this individual interest) Do you have to be a Muslim before you have the right to discuss and criticize and comment on Islam and Muslims like Edward Said demanded and accused Orientalism of? Obviously no!. Do you have to speak the language and be a qualified scholar before you do these things. Obviously no!! Do you have to read a wide range of books, think before you put your foot in you mouth and be prepared to accept truth from others to allow you to extricate that foot out before you let Islam and Muslims have it with both verbal barrels. Obviously yes.
This interest must be frustrating for Muslims. “Ever since the Mongols and the European enlightenment you did care a shit about us and now you want to know how we go to the toilet, what we eat and how we have sex. Even when you colonise us and took our resources and tried to change our ways you weren’t interested in our religion. And now you are . Everyone is an expert. What shits you are”
But number 1 coupled with number 2 makes you interesting especially if both are carried out to the extreme even if it just allows us to protect ourselves and even yourselves (if we die you in a way die also) from your and your faith. This protection can involve either active political confrontation with Islam or joining and becoming a Muslim (you tend not to hurt your kind). If it wasn’t for number 1 I don’t think number 2 would be enough to create the interest in the population. If your woman can put up with it and your deprivation of your public sensuality only effect you then what do I care. It might be interesting for professional sociologist and physiologists but not to Joe Blow down the street.
How is this interest in all that is Islam and Moslem’s personal and public habits manifested? Currently many ways and it would be interesting for some media undergraduate to select it as his or her end of undergraduate thesis topic. To help some up coming PR person I provide the following help and suggest they include an increase in the following I suspect:
*Number of articles in the popular press i.e. the MSM.
*Number of Blogs fully devoted to Islamic items (e.g. Dhimmi Watch and MereIslam) including the obvious Islamists anti or watch blogs (e.g. Watching Jihad Watch)
Number of ordinary Blogs reporting on Islamic matters (e.g. LGF) and of course the obligatory *Islamist watch Blogs (e.g. lgfWatch).
*More popular books on Islam and all its facets by both journalist (of varying quality as emphasized by Edward Said) and professional scholars.
*More scholarly books on Islam and Middle East subjects.
*More local articles with a negative attitude to Islam and Muslims
*More scholarly articles in the various professional journals on Islam and the Middle East. I am not too sure if a new professional journal has arisen due to the increased interest but I would be surprised that more articles are not being produced.
*More films/TV items on Muslims/Islam interacting with westerns and western culture.
*More interest of Governments towards Islam and Moslems in terms of
· Intelligence and police,
· increased welfare to these groups.
· More attempts at integration,
· accommodation of Islam and Moslem interests (though this has been controversial use of Habib in hospitals, Moslems cemeteries, Moslem driving taxis not carrying alcohol, not using alcohol antiseptics in hospitals by visiting ill patients of Moslem relations)
The next question to ask (and which I will go into details in a later article titled “What Islamists say when they mean fuck off”) is “Can this interest and subsequent robust discussion be considered as being that political incorrect symptom of “Islam-o-phobia” or heaven forbid “racial”. Racial in the way normal people define it, is out as Moslems come in all colours. Islamphobia? Is Islamphobia (if it does exist) like that Homophobia game that all religious groups play? Of course its not. Gays get killed for what they are by these religious bigots. Islamist Terrorists kill others for what they are. Big difference! Muslims tend not to get killed because they are Muslims and if they do its murder and if it goes further than robust criticism then its harassment or even a hate crime just like any other minority group. Robust criticism of a religion irrespective of how much the religious are offended is not a phobia and I would suggest reading Dawkin’s book if you think otherwise (not that I agree with his thesis).
Vilification laws tend to be a fine line. Should only be used/considered in the extreme of encouraging actual harm to another. It should allow for intense criticism of different faiths and policies. Freedom of speech should be the objective. Any question of “responsibility” in free speech is just a tactic by religious people to stop criticism of their beliefs. Responsibility in free speech is only to be limited to libel laws and things like holocaust denial. I think I would allow any one to say 1 plus 1 is really 3 but to deny such things as the holocaust / genocide when there is tremendous amount of evidence is legally wrong. In relation to Islam, the response of Moslems to
*Cartoons
*Rushdie
*Pope
(everyone know what you mean when to just mention one word.) were all wrong and western sensitivity to it was wrong. Especially as all the Islamic reaction to these items had more to do with politics than any religious offence. The excuse that we don’t want our people hurt by Islamist reaction just delays the day of ultimate confrontation or Clash of Civilizations.
All the above 1 to 3 were fair comment in the society of humans (another future essay). My motto is “sticks and stone will break my bones but name will not make me give up my religion even if it’s stupid from the point of view Dawkins”
So in summary we conclude “yes” it is legitimate to vigorously investigate Islam and yes it must annoy Moslems and I would to if I was a Moslem and yes it is not Islamphobic and never will it be in our secular society.
Dave the Brave
It must be very annoying to Moslems and religious people in general to explain the ins and outs of your faith and god to strangers especially within a secular society that has the likes of Dawkin’s “God Delusion” around. How do you talk to a stranger about virgin births of gods and hearing voices from god without the other nodding their head and stepping back with strange looks in their eyes.
Is this intense interest justified. Usually its not. Usually, though there may be economic/social/cultural differences in individuals of different religious backgrounds (e.g. Moslems in European countries), the consensus is that it’s their business what their faith is and I don’t real care. I may be concerned about their welfare and standing in the community and this might erupt (eg IRA ) in an effort to correct it but “…..if they want to believe in stupid irrational things then live and let live I say. Just as long as they push their thing down my throat”. They are part of the community.
What then is different. What did 9/11 bring to the picture? The interest I believe is due to the following
1 The suicidal nature of Islam/Moslems (It’s an acceptable activity in Islam under certain circumstances) A Moslem can usually identify a situation where this slaughter of incident individuals is permissible though that person may not do it. Very few Islamic organizations, if any, will unequivocally condemn martyrdom operations (the Islamic term for suicide bombings) in all situations. Israel is an example where even moderate Islamist will allow suicide bombings to occur.
2 Islam has and Moslem practices an antiquated and quaint visual culture eg
*Many wives (less so now).
*Veiled woman ruled by men.
*Macho unshaven men in raucous crowds that lack any females.
*A public prohibition of alcohol or gambling. (Privately ??).
*Confusion of the ancient enslavement riba with the welfare benefiting use of interest rates.
*Confusion with the secular. It allows them to practice their faith not take it away from them.
*Inward looking and low integration characteristics.
*Moralistic attitude (particular with the political Islamists) to non Muslims coupled with an inferiority complex and a disposition to conspiratory theories to explain problems which manifests itself in a condemnation of anyone leaving the faith or mixing with the other non family sex and associated with a cultural dislike of Jews.
*No sex outside of marriage and little practice of demonstrative affection in public for one’s spouse (sad).
*Very little public interaction between the sexes (very sad)
There is a range of these expressions of these cultural characteristic that range non observant to intense. Both can be regarded good pious Muslims.
There are a range of other religious activities that tend not to attract attention or interest. These would include
*Mosques on Fridays
*Prays 5 times a day
*Ramadan
*Going on a holiday to Mecca
These are treated as par for the course and not thought of as being strange.
All these characteristics especially number 1 ( 2 makes it more intriguing) make Western’s interested in Islam to find out what makes it tick. I believe they justify Western interest in Islam and make any discussion and interest in Islam and Muslims politically correct. (This Blog is an example of this individual interest) Do you have to be a Muslim before you have the right to discuss and criticize and comment on Islam and Muslims like Edward Said demanded and accused Orientalism of? Obviously no!. Do you have to speak the language and be a qualified scholar before you do these things. Obviously no!! Do you have to read a wide range of books, think before you put your foot in you mouth and be prepared to accept truth from others to allow you to extricate that foot out before you let Islam and Muslims have it with both verbal barrels. Obviously yes.
This interest must be frustrating for Muslims. “Ever since the Mongols and the European enlightenment you did care a shit about us and now you want to know how we go to the toilet, what we eat and how we have sex. Even when you colonise us and took our resources and tried to change our ways you weren’t interested in our religion. And now you are . Everyone is an expert. What shits you are”
But number 1 coupled with number 2 makes you interesting especially if both are carried out to the extreme even if it just allows us to protect ourselves and even yourselves (if we die you in a way die also) from your and your faith. This protection can involve either active political confrontation with Islam or joining and becoming a Muslim (you tend not to hurt your kind). If it wasn’t for number 1 I don’t think number 2 would be enough to create the interest in the population. If your woman can put up with it and your deprivation of your public sensuality only effect you then what do I care. It might be interesting for professional sociologist and physiologists but not to Joe Blow down the street.
How is this interest in all that is Islam and Moslem’s personal and public habits manifested? Currently many ways and it would be interesting for some media undergraduate to select it as his or her end of undergraduate thesis topic. To help some up coming PR person I provide the following help and suggest they include an increase in the following I suspect:
*Number of articles in the popular press i.e. the MSM.
*Number of Blogs fully devoted to Islamic items (e.g. Dhimmi Watch and MereIslam) including the obvious Islamists anti or watch blogs (e.g. Watching Jihad Watch)
Number of ordinary Blogs reporting on Islamic matters (e.g. LGF) and of course the obligatory *Islamist watch Blogs (e.g. lgfWatch).
*More popular books on Islam and all its facets by both journalist (of varying quality as emphasized by Edward Said) and professional scholars.
*More scholarly books on Islam and Middle East subjects.
*More local articles with a negative attitude to Islam and Muslims
*More scholarly articles in the various professional journals on Islam and the Middle East. I am not too sure if a new professional journal has arisen due to the increased interest but I would be surprised that more articles are not being produced.
*More films/TV items on Muslims/Islam interacting with westerns and western culture.
*More interest of Governments towards Islam and Moslems in terms of
· Intelligence and police,
· increased welfare to these groups.
· More attempts at integration,
· accommodation of Islam and Moslem interests (though this has been controversial use of Habib in hospitals, Moslems cemeteries, Moslem driving taxis not carrying alcohol, not using alcohol antiseptics in hospitals by visiting ill patients of Moslem relations)
The next question to ask (and which I will go into details in a later article titled “What Islamists say when they mean fuck off”) is “Can this interest and subsequent robust discussion be considered as being that political incorrect symptom of “Islam-o-phobia” or heaven forbid “racial”. Racial in the way normal people define it, is out as Moslems come in all colours. Islamphobia? Is Islamphobia (if it does exist) like that Homophobia game that all religious groups play? Of course its not. Gays get killed for what they are by these religious bigots. Islamist Terrorists kill others for what they are. Big difference! Muslims tend not to get killed because they are Muslims and if they do its murder and if it goes further than robust criticism then its harassment or even a hate crime just like any other minority group. Robust criticism of a religion irrespective of how much the religious are offended is not a phobia and I would suggest reading Dawkin’s book if you think otherwise (not that I agree with his thesis).
Vilification laws tend to be a fine line. Should only be used/considered in the extreme of encouraging actual harm to another. It should allow for intense criticism of different faiths and policies. Freedom of speech should be the objective. Any question of “responsibility” in free speech is just a tactic by religious people to stop criticism of their beliefs. Responsibility in free speech is only to be limited to libel laws and things like holocaust denial. I think I would allow any one to say 1 plus 1 is really 3 but to deny such things as the holocaust / genocide when there is tremendous amount of evidence is legally wrong. In relation to Islam, the response of Moslems to
*Cartoons
*Rushdie
*Pope
(everyone know what you mean when to just mention one word.) were all wrong and western sensitivity to it was wrong. Especially as all the Islamic reaction to these items had more to do with politics than any religious offence. The excuse that we don’t want our people hurt by Islamist reaction just delays the day of ultimate confrontation or Clash of Civilizations.
All the above 1 to 3 were fair comment in the society of humans (another future essay). My motto is “sticks and stone will break my bones but name will not make me give up my religion even if it’s stupid from the point of view Dawkins”
So in summary we conclude “yes” it is legitimate to vigorously investigate Islam and yes it must annoy Moslems and I would to if I was a Moslem and yes it is not Islamphobic and never will it be in our secular society.
Dave the Brave
posted by Dave at 2:23 AM
0 comments
