![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
mad posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
scans_daily(Cross-posted to NoScans_Daily.)
We'd like to thank all our members for bearing with us while we worked out a response to the comments and queries raised inparusmajor's post on anti-oppression, the community ethos and the mod stance on it. We're cross-posting this both to the thread and both comms and have attempted to make our stance as clear as possible to avoid further confusion.
We need to be very clear that the moderation team will clamp down on discriminatory behaviour where we see it and we will continue to apply anti-oppression methods of moderation, many of which can be read up on in our Resources post, which has been up and linked from the main page for several months. The reason we raised this issue now was not because it was comics related, but because it was community related. What better place to discuss discrimination than one where it has, unfortunately, recently been at work?
We also need to be very clear that we're concerned most with those who are being denigrated - we do not believe that our priority is protecting those members who are called out for, or demonstrate, discriminatory behaviour or bigotry. This is not about making the community safe for those members. We do realize that sometimes comments can be made that are unintentionally discriminatory. In those cases, we hope that any member who gets called out would be able to apologize and learn from the experience and, if doing so, we will strive to ensure they are not harassed over what may well have been a mistake or misunderstanding. In most cases, a heartfelt apology is enough to defuse a misunderstanding. If it isn't, we will endeavour to step in and mediate to protect all out members. We are confident that the majority of members are able to handle these situations well, and can recover from mistakes. But at all times our priority will be those members who are discriminated against over those who are called out.
We'd point members again to the community ethos that talks about trying to make Scans_Daily and NoScans_Daily a safer space for those who are discriminated against. That has always been a part of Scans_Daily's ethos ever since the community was founded as part of the slash community and the only change is that the moderators have tried to be more active about anti-oppression. We fully intend to continue to do so and to help make Scans_Daily and NoScans_Daily places where bigotry and discrimination are not tolerated, but where everyone, minorities and non-minorities alike, can feel safer.
What does that mean for the average member? Very little. We genuinely believe that the large majority of our members are open-minded and aware of oppression issues and have no intent to harm. The vast majority of posts on the community members do not need any moderator intervention. The policy of encouraging the calling out of other members or creators for discriminatory or oppressive behaviour is one that has been written in as part of the community's ethos for nearly a year, and the vast majority of members have continued to post and discuss comics without any concern. One only need look at the 60+ posts to Scans_Daily since the last mod post to see that, for the most part, it's business as usual.
We would say that for anyone who does not feel comfortable with these anti-oppression policies, there are a large number of forums and communities online which do not follow such policies, where they may feel more at ease. However, we will state that there's no big change here and that if you've been comfortable being part of these communities for some time, there's no reason for that to change.
We have seen some concern that policy has changed and we're now allowing personal attacks. We're not and we need to be clear on this. The subject of tone has been brought up many times in the comments of the mod post and we'd particularly encourage people towards reading The privilege of politeness, an essay not written by us but which we believe clarifies our stance on this issue. As part of our stance on anti-oppression moderating, prompted in part by events on this community last year, we recognize that those who are confronting discrimination, and may well be on a daily basis, shouldn't be expected to react to bigotry and discrimination with calmness and politeness. Bigotry is not polite, it is an attack and insulting. Thus, we will give more leeway to those members who are being discriminated against if they have an understandable emotional response. If someone is being horribly discriminated against, even unintentionally, we are likely to be more understanding if they snap back, once or twice. However, we encourage anyone being discriminated against to disengage and ask for modly intervention in such cases.
Rest assured, the rules on personal insults and attacks are not changing and repeated harassment, personal attacks, or insults will also not be tolerated.
We would like to thank those members who have commented on the previous post and have been supportive of those who have been discriminated against. We'd also like to thank those who made positive contributions to or constructive criticism of the moderators' approach. We have taken these comments on board and in any future posts we will strive to be clearer with our intent, and provide resources so members can further educate themselves if they choose to do so. However, there is no compunction to comment on such discussion: if you feel that an issue doesn't directly affect you, we'd ask you simply skip past it. Intentional or not, derailing from what may be a deeply personal issue for some members can drown out their voices. This is not acceptable.
As always, we welcome comments and criticism, but be aware that the ethos of the community is not up for debate - we have every intention of continuing to strive towards making this a safer space for everyone, and that won't be changing.
We'd like to thank our members for supporting us on this.
- The Scans_Daily and NoScans_Daily Mod Team
Profile | FAQ | Tags | Suggestions | Requests | Volunteers | Contact Mods
We'd like to thank all our members for bearing with us while we worked out a response to the comments and queries raised in
parusmajor's post on anti-oppression, the community ethos and the mod stance on it. We're cross-posting this both to the thread and both comms and have attempted to make our stance as clear as possible to avoid further confusion.We need to be very clear that the moderation team will clamp down on discriminatory behaviour where we see it and we will continue to apply anti-oppression methods of moderation, many of which can be read up on in our Resources post, which has been up and linked from the main page for several months. The reason we raised this issue now was not because it was comics related, but because it was community related. What better place to discuss discrimination than one where it has, unfortunately, recently been at work?
We also need to be very clear that we're concerned most with those who are being denigrated - we do not believe that our priority is protecting those members who are called out for, or demonstrate, discriminatory behaviour or bigotry. This is not about making the community safe for those members. We do realize that sometimes comments can be made that are unintentionally discriminatory. In those cases, we hope that any member who gets called out would be able to apologize and learn from the experience and, if doing so, we will strive to ensure they are not harassed over what may well have been a mistake or misunderstanding. In most cases, a heartfelt apology is enough to defuse a misunderstanding. If it isn't, we will endeavour to step in and mediate to protect all out members. We are confident that the majority of members are able to handle these situations well, and can recover from mistakes. But at all times our priority will be those members who are discriminated against over those who are called out.
We'd point members again to the community ethos that talks about trying to make Scans_Daily and NoScans_Daily a safer space for those who are discriminated against. That has always been a part of Scans_Daily's ethos ever since the community was founded as part of the slash community and the only change is that the moderators have tried to be more active about anti-oppression. We fully intend to continue to do so and to help make Scans_Daily and NoScans_Daily places where bigotry and discrimination are not tolerated, but where everyone, minorities and non-minorities alike, can feel safer.
What does that mean for the average member? Very little. We genuinely believe that the large majority of our members are open-minded and aware of oppression issues and have no intent to harm. The vast majority of posts on the community members do not need any moderator intervention. The policy of encouraging the calling out of other members or creators for discriminatory or oppressive behaviour is one that has been written in as part of the community's ethos for nearly a year, and the vast majority of members have continued to post and discuss comics without any concern. One only need look at the 60+ posts to Scans_Daily since the last mod post to see that, for the most part, it's business as usual.
We would say that for anyone who does not feel comfortable with these anti-oppression policies, there are a large number of forums and communities online which do not follow such policies, where they may feel more at ease. However, we will state that there's no big change here and that if you've been comfortable being part of these communities for some time, there's no reason for that to change.
We have seen some concern that policy has changed and we're now allowing personal attacks. We're not and we need to be clear on this. The subject of tone has been brought up many times in the comments of the mod post and we'd particularly encourage people towards reading The privilege of politeness, an essay not written by us but which we believe clarifies our stance on this issue. As part of our stance on anti-oppression moderating, prompted in part by events on this community last year, we recognize that those who are confronting discrimination, and may well be on a daily basis, shouldn't be expected to react to bigotry and discrimination with calmness and politeness. Bigotry is not polite, it is an attack and insulting. Thus, we will give more leeway to those members who are being discriminated against if they have an understandable emotional response. If someone is being horribly discriminated against, even unintentionally, we are likely to be more understanding if they snap back, once or twice. However, we encourage anyone being discriminated against to disengage and ask for modly intervention in such cases.
Rest assured, the rules on personal insults and attacks are not changing and repeated harassment, personal attacks, or insults will also not be tolerated.
We would like to thank those members who have commented on the previous post and have been supportive of those who have been discriminated against. We'd also like to thank those who made positive contributions to or constructive criticism of the moderators' approach. We have taken these comments on board and in any future posts we will strive to be clearer with our intent, and provide resources so members can further educate themselves if they choose to do so. However, there is no compunction to comment on such discussion: if you feel that an issue doesn't directly affect you, we'd ask you simply skip past it. Intentional or not, derailing from what may be a deeply personal issue for some members can drown out their voices. This is not acceptable.
As always, we welcome comments and criticism, but be aware that the ethos of the community is not up for debate - we have every intention of continuing to strive towards making this a safer space for everyone, and that won't be changing.
We'd like to thank our members for supporting us on this.
- The Scans_Daily and NoScans_Daily Mod Team
Profile | FAQ | Tags | Suggestions | Requests | Volunteers | Contact Mods
no subject
Date: 2010-02-14 06:37 am (UTC)You know what, I'd rather be in a community where the mods take sides against transphobia, homophobia, biphobia, sexism, rape apologists, and racism then in a community where the mods never do anything because they want to be seen as neutral.
Mods are not neutral, there is no community or forum that can claim neutral mods on all things. This is the internet, not a organized debate. Comic book scans are not a right. Scans_daily is not a right.
The mods shouldn't have to say in a community founded by female LGBTQA comic fans that certain language will not be tolerated. It is not 4chan. It is not newsgroup. It is not superdickery.
When someone says or does offensive hurtful things they need to be called on it, especially if they didn't mean it in a hurtful way. Because it's the only way we're going to have change. If a person doesn't know their behavior is hurtful and offensive, they aren't going to change it. No one likes being called on these things. And saying "I didn't realize how hurtful what I said or did was, I'm sorry" or "I'm sorry I did or said this hurtful thing", does not mean you are saying you are a horrible person.
I was called on something I'd done that was offensive and unconsciously fetishizing. I did not mean to be, but the fact was I'd hurt someone. I reacted badly. Hell I used the stupid "I'm sorry you found this offensive." I was more worried about my own feelings than the person I'd hurt. I wish I could go back and handle the situation better. And I wish it didn't take someone saying to me "I'm sorry you were offended" in a conversion about bisexuality before I got it.
Our words and actions do not exist in a vacuum.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-14 08:31 am (UTC)Is the real intent to inform, or to return the hurt and shame inflicted?
no subject
Date: 2010-02-14 08:51 am (UTC)And you know what? I got over it. I learned. I realized that my outrage, my hurt feelings were nothing in comparison. I made someone feel unwelcome in a community about something they enjoyed. It didn't matter that I didn't do it on purpose. I still hurt someone.
If someone says something hurtful, hateful, and offensive whether they intended it or not, and is refusing to understand or at the very least acknowledge the offended party's feelings, then I say dogpile away.
Because maybe just ONE person commenting will get through to that person. I've seen it happen a number of times.
Everyone wants to come hear to read fun scans, to talk about comics, it does not take much for those of us in a privileged position to be respectful. It does not take hardly any effort at all on our part not not call Supergirl a cunt or to say Iron Man is a fucking retard. It does not take much for us to realize that our words can hurt. The language I use around my group of personal friends when we're not in public is not always the language I would use in a public forum.
I have not experienced even a fraction of what many others hear have, but I have been made to feel very unwelcome in slash communities where bisexuality is treated like a nonentity or something only to be applies to promiscuous characters (the phrase "promiscuous enough to be bi" was used). I was made to feel like something on display to be questioned and prodded, and that I shouldn't at all take offensive to anything that was being said because no one meant to be offensive. No mod stepped in. I no longer take part in discussions on that community because of this.
And if some people feel unwelcome then, sorry to say, welcome to what so many others feel every day of their lives. Not just online but at school, on the train, at their jobs.
On a completely OT note is your icon from Jedi Knights? Because if so that is a awesome glitch and a awesome screen shot.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-14 09:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-14 09:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-15 12:01 am (UTC)+10
no subject
Date: 2010-02-15 03:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-14 03:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-14 04:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-14 08:17 pm (UTC)I said this in the other post in reply and I'll say it again here, too.
Date: 2010-02-14 04:14 pm (UTC)That's one thing that's odd to me about this whole deal, and that's somehow criticizing something like the presentation of the post or some of the mod's choices--in some people's minds--equals being okay with transphobia.
Whenever, actually, as a community, we were and are all united in being horrified by the hateful crime shown on the video and no one was in favor of transphobia.
Re: I said this in the other post in reply and I'll say it again here, too.
Date: 2010-02-14 10:39 pm (UTC)Maybe someday, you'll understand that the way you speak to others who are not like you is also important. Cruelty, even unthinking cruelty, is part of what makes life hard for those who aren't like you. When they're here, reading and participating, the dangers they have to live with in the outside world are still part of their lives. Reality doesn't cease to be just because we're all indulging in a little escapism here.
There's a continuum of privilege and power-over relationships that doesn't start and end with extreme acts of violence. It's made up of many, many things: some of them small on the face of it. But they add up, and they take a toll that isn't always as blatantly obvious as bloodshed and broken bones.
Re: I said this in the other post in reply and I'll say it again here, too.
Date: 2010-02-15 02:05 pm (UTC)What?
Of course words matter. That's exactly what I'm saying. We share that idea.
And then I have to say another 'what?' for going ahead and lumping me in some group in your mind. You don't know me.
Re: I said this in the other post in reply and I'll say it again here, too.
Date: 2010-02-15 03:16 pm (UTC)Re: I said this in the other post in reply and I'll say it again here, too.
Date: 2010-02-15 08:18 pm (UTC)But that post was never meant to be only about whether or not we can all join together and be foursquare against hate crimes. It was meant to help people see that our own small corner of the 'net is affected by events in the outside world. It was meant to ask us what, if anything, we can do about that.
Intervening in a hate crime would be a scary and dangerous thing to do, no matter how much I might want to. This isn't a comic book and I could get badly hurt running into a fight with my fists out. But nobody's asking me to do that here. They're only asking me to think before I shoot off my mouth. I don't think that's an unreasonable request. It's something I can do in safety, and so I will.
That's what I got from the whole business, anyway.
Meantime, it looks like the board is pretty much going on as it has for quite sometime. So hopefully your frequently-expressed fears about some kind of campaign of "one side" against "the other side" are proven to be unfounded.
offtopic
Date: 2010-02-16 08:47 am (UTC)I agree with that stuff completely, except there's a "but" for me. The next thing I'm about to explain is something I've mentioned a couple of times in these 500+ comment entries, and in case you've noticed it before, sorry for repetition.
Anyways, I'm politically very active in free speech issues, that's the big issue that I'm into. Hate crimes are _not_ free speech. Inciting to violence against a group of people is illegal, period.
Also, if someone has something to say that's not-very-nice-but-still-not-a-hate-crime, it's not illegal, but it's nicer if they're able to just not say it.
But there's a really big clash with islam. I've researched the religion a lot, read the Qur'an, I look up muslim POVs, and follow news of the ummah. And frankly, the more I learn about islam, the more I'm convinced about islam's similarities to scientology.
Some people have chosen to pick their fight with Christianity; they point out all the wrongs in the religion's history and oppose the fundamentalists' attempts to influence legislation process. My fight is very similar to that, except with islam.
In European countries with large muslim immigrant populations, if you attempt to be nice and avoid saying/doing things that offend muslims, life becomes like walking on a minefield. There are just too many things that islam finds insulting of forbidden. If you voice out your frustration over this, you are labeled as an "islamophobe" and deemed to be racist (which is just silly). What's worse, there have been a lot of attempts to introduce islamophobia into legislation as one form of discrimination. This would make islam unique among religions and illegal to criticize.
I'll give you just a few links to highlight the culture clash here:
What to do if your brother was gay?
Making jihad beloved to our children
A cool Egyptian blogger summarizes the 2007 teddy bear crisis
A survey says "only" 7% of muslims condone 9/11 attacks (7% of muslims = 91 million people)
Another survey says 55% of Arabs feel that "offensive words" justify violence
Newsstory about how to beat your wife (Qur'an 4:34 allows wife-beating btw)
A snippet from the excellent movie "Obsession"
Murder attempt against the guy who drew a Mohammed cartoon
You don't have to read all that, and these links are just the tip of the iceberg, but my point is: I feel I'm justified to criticize islam the way that many others criticize christianity or scientology. But there are people who find my words offensive, and I'm dubbed an "islamophobe" for that; I'm told that I should just be nice and not say hurtful things.
This is why I've come to these conclusions:
-labeling a person racist/sexist/homophobe/etc is a lazy way to deal with any conflict, and people shouldn't throw such loaded words around too casually.
-saying hurtful, offensive things shouldn't be illegal even if it's not nice.
-offensive words should be debunked with rational, polite counter-arguments that prove the other guy is full of sh*t.
Kinda off-topic and a long post, but I hope this might help in understanding why I've come to feel the way I do.
Re: offtopic
Date: 2010-02-16 09:24 am (UTC)Er, I'm pretty sure that there is still a great deal of Islamophobia in Europe. Didn't France ban Muslim women from covering their hair?
There's certainly justification for criticizing Islam, the same way there is for Christianity. But I do think it is also important to note that in a lot of places, Muslims frequently belong to ethnic minorities who are subject to discrimination, oppression and bigotry. And I think it's shortsighted to entirely dismiss that, or consider how it may intersect with real Islamophobia.
(I also feel like one should make a distinction between the Church of Scientology, and Scientology as it may be practised by those who've managed to break away from the Church but who still consider themselves Scientologists.)
-labeling a person racist/sexist/homophobe/etc is a lazy way to deal with any conflict, and people shouldn't throw such loaded words around too casually.
You can call it lazy, but for some people who deal directly with racism/sexism/homophobia/transphobia/ableism on a regular basis, you may only have the energy (physical, mental, emotional) to just say "that's racist" or "fuck you" and leave. And what makes things worse for a person in that position, is that someone will often respond to that with If You Cared About These Matters You'd Be Willing To Educate Me or You're Being Hostile, and that is unacceptable.
To tell the person who said "that's racist" that they're "lazy" for not explaining, or that they shouldn't get mad is in effect policing their emotions and/or attempting to silence them. We don't want to do that here.
-saying hurtful, offensive things shouldn't be illegal even if it's not nice.
But they're not acceptable here, noting that calling out discriminatory language/behaviour is not considered a personal attack.
-offensive words should be debunked with rational, polite counter-arguments that prove the other guy is full of sh*t.
While sometimes being calm can be effective, it isn't always, and telling the people who are directly affected by the offensive words/attitudes/actions in question that they have to be polite is often in effect a method of silencing those people. (Of course, it doesn't always follow that the person doing the calling out is a member of the group being denigrated.)
Re: offtopic
Date: 2010-02-16 10:12 am (UTC)The French law that denies face-covering veils in schools is because French schools forbid wearing _any_ kinds of religious symbols. It's a separation of church and state thing, and the purpose is to make differences between students unnoticeable in order to promote tolerance. If veils were allowed, it would mean that muslims would have one set of rules while other students would have another. Students wouldn't have equal rules, and there would be a double standard.
Last year president Sarkozy was in the news for saying that burkas are "not welcome" in France because "in our country, we cannot accept that women be prisoners behind a screen, cut off from all social life, deprived of all identity". He was defending muslim women's right to dress the way they want, rather than their culture's right to decide how they have to dress.
In January, France got a law that people can't use burqas in public services. People can still wear them in streets, but not in hospitals, schools, or public transport. It makes sense; at least in my country, there's always been a law against masquerading in public events. And there are instances of burqa being used by criminals as a means of masking themselves, too.
(Btw: burqa and niqab = the clothes that cover everything except eyes; hijab = the veil that only covers the hair. Only burqas are denied from public services, and you can still wear them in the street. I understand hijabs are still totally okay because they don't conceal your facial features.)
in a lot of places, Muslims frequently belong to ethnic minorities who are subject to discrimination, oppression and bigotry. And I think it's shortsighted to entirely dismiss that, or consider how it may intersect with real Islamophobia.
To be clear on this, how do you define islamophobia? I understand that phobia = irrational fear of something, and I don't see that in most critical islam research. There are some trollish idiots who paint horror pictures about muslims as subhumans, but for the most part, the islam criticism I see is civil, educated and reasonable, without the "irrational fear" thing.
But they're not acceptable here, noting that calling out discriminatory language/behaviour is not considered a personal attack.
I agree with that; laws are a different thing than website rules, and each website can set any kinds of rules it wants to. One message board completely denied all political/mature discussions, another forbids people from posting "gallup" questions, and on a Half-Life forum I frequent people get pissed off if you post a "G-man is Gordon in the future" thread. Websites are allowed to set up any kinds of rules they want to.
Just trying to say that I've seen a lot of people debunk islam critics' opinions by simply saying that they're "islamophobes", it was rude to hurt muslims' personal feelings, and that's why the islam criticism is not valid. And I saw some kind of parallels with the recent controversy around here, which is why I felt so troubled by it.
Re: offtopic
Date: 2010-02-16 10:44 am (UTC)I'd define it as fear or hatred of people different than you, and in this case those people are Muslims. Look at the way fundamentalist/far right-wing Americans criticize Islam. As you say, fundamentalist Islam and Christianity have a lot in common. Ever watch the documentary Jesus Camp? The camp leader practically acknowledged all their similarities, but still wanted to wage war on Muslims, simply because they're not Christian (i.e. they're "different"), and by her definition they are therefore evil and should be obliterated.
A Muslim classmate of mine, a girl, who kept her hair covered in public, was harassed multiple times in the weeks after 9/11. How on Earth was that "justified criticism" of Islam? That was racism, plain and simple. It was someone associating and lumping her in with murderers, simply because of her religion and/or the way she looked. And this was in a big, multicultural city that prides itself on tolerance, so I find it very hard to believe that didn't and hasn't happened to Muslims all over in various places.
I think another aspect to explore, in addition to the intersection of discrimination against ethnic minorities (which Muslims frequently are), is political aspects. Just like many Christians selectively choose what they want to follow in the Bible, in order to adapt their faith to modern and/or liberal mindsets, so do Muslims, even when some of those Muslims living in theocratic countries. It's hard to criticize a religion as a whole when groups and individuals practice it differently.
This doesn't mean that one can't or shouldn't criticize Islam, but I think there is more one should take into account.
Re: offtopic
Date: 2010-02-16 12:24 pm (UTC)I only said that some people choose to fight against fundie christians; I didn't actually say my opinion about similarities between islam and christianity. And my opinion is that while fundies of any religion are not fun, I feel there are HUGE differences between fundie islam and christianity.
I've heard about Jesus Camp but never saw it. I haven't done too much research on American fundies because around here, christianity is pretty emasculated, secular and causes no problems. It's the islamic immigration that creates a question mark in Europe. How to best integrate these immigrants into the country and avoid culture clashes? I'm interested in that question.
A Muslim classmate of mine, a girl, who kept her hair covered in public, was harassed multiple times in the weeks after 9/11. How on Earth was that "justified criticism" of Islam? That was racism, plain and simple.
It wasn't islam criticism, it was just plain old intolerance and wrong. And it's even kind of insulting to imply that islam critics condone harassing/harming individual muslims :/
Btw, islam is not a race. If they harassed her because of her religion, it was religious intolerance, but it wasn't actually racism. Muslims come in all ethnicities and nationalities. I don't know your friend, but since you decided to use the word "racism", she probably comes from another ethnicity than the folks who harassed her. If they used racial slurs in such case, then it was racism.
This doesn't make the insults she heard any more acceptable, but it's just good to understand that islam's not a race, and criticising islam doesn't mean that you're criticising some particular race.
It's hard to criticize a religion as a whole when groups and individuals practice it differently.
I'm gonna link you to Ali Sina's faq. Sina used to be a muslim, but he grew disillusioned with the religion after researching it, and he founded a great website that criticizes islam.
"All Muslims are not terrorists. I am a Muslim and I am not fanatic and violent."
"You talk about the bad parts of Islam. How about the good parts?"
Sina is of the opinion that islam should be banned as a death cult. There are some muslims who feel that islam can still be redeemed; there's for example reformislam.org (also known as Muslims Against Sharia). Then there are some awesome secular muslim bloggers like The Big Pharaoh, Sandmonkey and muttawa.blogspot.com, who show that muslims can have a sense of humor. And of course, there are a lot of muslims who are not very active in these kinds of debates; they just live their own lives without thinking about religion too much.
I know that there are a lot of different branches here, but the branch of islam that I'm against is the one that Mohammed practiced. The guy who founded the religion. I don't like him, at all. I think he was a horrible person, and I'm sad that islam's core teachings regard him as a perfect rolemodel for people. His branch of religion is the one that demands women to cover themselves, ex-muslims to be put to death, and gays dropped off a cliff.
I'm okay with an islam that takes away jihad and sharia aspects, but I don't know how long it will take until someone is able to sanitize islam and make it mainstream :/ I don't know if it's even possible.
Some additional points I want to make:
-I'm taking the guess that you haven't really read much about these issues. You are using arguments that I've heard a million times before, and they have been thoroughly debunked elsewhere on the 'net. Still, I feel that if I lashed out in frustration "omg you're so clueless", it would be counter-productive and wrong. That's why I chose to educate you about the French deal, for example (which is just one tiny issue in a huge, huge ball of problems).
-However, I can't educate you about everything that I've learned during the last four years, because the whole thing is _huge_. And this is off-topic, after all. If you're interested in this issue, I recommend checking out this online book. The author keeps shoving his christianity at the reader and it's kinda annoying, but otherwise it's a very eye-opening book. After reading it, decide for yourself if the author was biased and islamophobic, or if he had some points.
-I'm frightened when otherwise tolerant and well-meaning people can be so eager to defend a totalitarian "religion" and the oppression it practices (even if they haven't educated themselves about it). Not referring to you though, it's a common phenomenon today and it scares me.
I'm trying to drop off of this debate now. You say you believe that it's the ignorant person's responsibility to educate themselves. Well, I'm calling islam out on discriminatory behaviour, practices and words. If you're offering me stock answers that I've heard debunked before, isn't it kinda... derailing? :p
But yeah. Offtopic and long post. Will try to shut up now :)
Re: offtopic
From:Re: offtopic
Date: 2010-02-16 04:53 pm (UTC)It doesn't make a hell of a lot of sense to me to draw the parallel you do here.
Re: offtopic
Date: 2010-02-16 06:24 pm (UTC)I take islamic oppression pretty personally because I'm an atheist female artist. Women don't have much rights according to sharia, atheists even less, and artists, well, just look at Mohammed cartoon controversy. I'm unhappy that just recently, there was a fricking political murder attempt in the formerly-so-safe Scandinavia. A murder attempt, over a picture that was drawn in 2005. It pisses me off. So, attempts to claim that it had nothing to do with islamic regulations about art, depictions of Mohammed, or blasphemy being punishable by death? *shakes head in disbelief*
The connections I saw with the s_d controversy are about offensive words, hurt feelings, correct responding to ignorant arguments, and double standards employed to protect minorities. I wanted to point out that these things are much more complicated than a lot of people think, and that's why the ethos has felt kinda troubling to me.
Also, it appears to me that if someone were to claim here that islam doesn't step on my rights as a person, then comm ethos would justify me to reply "fuck you"; after all, they'd be trying to marginalize all those issues. I wanted to show that IMO that approach is wrong, and people should take the attempt to educate, or at least point the other person in the right direction and hope they're willing to do research independently.
But yeah, I'm being preachy and I'm still offtopic, so I'll stop :)
Re: offtopic
Date: 2010-02-16 06:32 pm (UTC)Does that mean I should start waging some kind of "culture war" against the entire Christian faith?
Sorry. I don't condone violence and repression in the name of religion, but I'm finding this whole idea of yours very hard to swallow. Especially since I know religious secularists of many faiths who do not in any way endorse or condone violent acts against their idealogical opponents.
Re: offtopic
From:Re: offtopic
From:Re: offtopic
Date: 2010-02-16 10:26 pm (UTC)And last I checked, Fundamentalist Christians like the abortion clinic bombers, the Lord's Resistance Army, and the Northern Ireland war have shown no more scruples than their Muslim counterpart.
Charedim throw acid in the face of women to no criticism at all from the West.
Hinduvta organize pogroms of Muslims also to no opprobrium from the West.
Re: offtopic
From:Re: offtopic
From:Re: offtopic
Date: 2010-02-16 10:23 pm (UTC)