• thelasthoxhaist [he/him]
    hexagon
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    4 years ago

    its a traditions you dense idiot, stop being such a western chauvinist and accept not everyone country is a parasitic imperialist country based in western supremacy

    • Amorphous [any]
      arrow-down
      31
      ·
      4 years ago

      literally what the fuck are you talking about you fucking fool

      "take off your shoes or stay out of my house" completely valid. the reason is cleanliness. theres nothing wrong with that. similarly, "dont draw muhammad in my house or go away" thats fine too

      "dont draw muhammad in your own house" is fucking absurd and it's disgusting that you support it. its like a christian telling you not to have gay sex in your house because it's offensive to their religion

      fuck all the way off, your religion does not have power over my fucking life

      • hogposting [he/him,comrade/them]
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        4 years ago

        Why would you ever draw Muhammad? About the only reason anyone ever does is in an attempt to deeply insult an enormous number of people. That kind of "fuck you I do what I want" mentality doesn't garner much sympathy from me. Having a reasonable amount of respect for your fellow human beings (i.e., not doing something you would never otherwise do specifically to piss them off) is something we need more of.

        Yeah, you're free to yell the N-word at the top of your lungs in public. Yeah, if a black person decides to beat you to death for it they're in the wrong, too. But my sympathy for you in that situation is limited because maybe you shouldn't be an absolute piece of shit just because you technically can.

        • Amorphous [any]
          arrow-down
          24
          ·
          4 years ago

          Why would you ever draw Muhammad?

          i have never had any desire to do so and i probably never will, but it is not immoral to do so and i have every right if i did want to

          • hogposting [he/him,comrade/them]
            arrow-down
            12
            ·
            4 years ago

            i have every right if i did want to

            Yes, that's exactly the "fuck you I do what I want" mentality I was criticizing. That makes you a massive piece of shit, even if you're technically free to do it.

            You shouldn't be a massive piece of shit, and you certainly aren't accomplishing anything if you choose to be one. You should be a decent human being.

            • Amorphous [any]
              arrow-down
              17
              ·
              4 years ago

              ok, imagine for a second that i tell you that, according to my religion, it is wrong to wear red on tuesdays. wearing red on tuesdays is a completely benign act im sure we can both agree, there is nothing wrong with doing so. but ill be offended if you do it.

              are you an asshole for deciding to wear red on tuesday? no. of fucking course not. you're also not racist, or a lib, or a chud, or a reactionary, or any of the shit im being called in these comments.

              • hogposting [he/him,comrade/them]
                arrow-down
                9
                ·
                4 years ago

                How common is wearing red? How common is drawing a picture of Muhammad?

                The reasonableness of the request is in large part determined by how burdensome it is to fulfill.

                • oralcumshot [hy/hym]
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 years ago

                  The teacher who was beheaded did not draw the prophet. The elderly woman and man who were beheaded in the church in Nice did not draw the prophet.

                  • hogposting [he/him,comrade/them]
                    ·
                    4 years ago

                    Note that a few comments up I've already said killing someone over this is wrong. No one is arguing that people should get the death penalty for drawing Muhammad. The argument is that you're a huge asshole if you do, because there's no reason to do it besides pissing people off.

                • Amorphous [any]
                  arrow-down
                  13
                  ·
                  4 years ago

                  its not about whether the request is reasonable, its about whether you're an asshole or racist or whatever for refusing. and it is very very easy for you to never wear red again in your life, so surely just not wearing red for one day of the week is not that unreasonable?

                  if not wearing red on tuesdays were a muslim tradition, you absolutely would be calling me out the exact same way for saying i dont intend to follow that tradition

                  • hogposting [he/him,comrade/them]
                    arrow-down
                    8
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    4 years ago

                    But I wear red plenty now, so it would at least be somewhat of a burden to remember not to wear red on Tuesdays. It's not a burden at all to not draw Muhammed because I never draw him anyway.

                    It's the going out of one's way to be as offensive as possible that makes this asshole behavior. No one's ordinary routine is being disrupted, no one's being even slightly inconvenienced.

                    • Amorphous [any]
                      arrow-down
                      11
                      ·
                      4 years ago

                      What if you never wear red but, upon being told you're racist if you wear red on tuesdays, you decide to start wearing red on tuesdays? Does this circularly make you racist?

                      People don't like being told not to do harmless things because of other people's religious or personal beliefs and will often do those things as a result of being told not to do them because, again, they are harmless things that should not be stigmatized. Drawing pictures of any human who has ever lived or will ever live is a harmless activity which should not get you called racist or an asshole. It doesn't matter if this is just one guy and you could draw any of the other guys who have ever lived, there is no reason not to draw him.

                      • hogposting [he/him,comrade/them]
                        arrow-down
                        5
                        ·
                        edit-2
                        4 years ago

                        What if you never wear red but, upon being told you’re racist if you wear red on tuesdays, you decide to start wearing red on tuesdays? Does this circularly make you racist?

                        If I never did something -- let's call it drawing a picture of Muhammad -- but I started doing it specifically to piss off a group of people my country has demonized and killed by the millions, yes, I would be an enormous piece of shit.

                        • Rev [none/use name]
                          arrow-down
                          3
                          ·
                          4 years ago

                          How have Chechens been demonized and killed by France? A country explicitly supporting them and their most reactionary elements in their struggles against Russia.

                        • Amorphous [any]
                          arrow-down
                          10
                          ·
                          4 years ago

                          ok, so say someone wears red on a tuesday and i fucking brutally murder them for it

                          its their fault, right?

                          • hogposting [he/him,comrade/them]
                            arrow-down
                            6
                            ·
                            4 years ago

                            No, and I already gave you this scenario and this answer in this same thread. You're just being argumentative at this point.

                            Log the fuck off for a bit

                    • Rev [none/use name]
                      arrow-down
                      5
                      ·
                      4 years ago

                      The going out of your way argument is good in principle but we're not talking here about a dude just drawing pictures of Muhammad and running around shoving it into random people's faces, are we? It was a teacher, showing the cartoons (that he himself didn't draw) from a well known (even if in very bad taste) magazine in his ethics class as part of a discourse on religious tolerance, censorship, personal freedom. We don't even fucking know his personal stance on the caricatures. On top of that, he got beheaded by a guy from Chechnya, a republic that has never in its history been subject to French colonialism. A republic that has social mores and is ruled in pretty much the same way as Salafist Saudi Arabia. So no, this here is not the hill leftists should die defending because it has zero relevance to the attitudes of the overwhelming majority of Muslims.

                      • hogposting [he/him,comrade/them]
                        arrow-down
                        3
                        ·
                        4 years ago

                        No one is arguing that killing someone over this is OK.

                        The "it's for class" reasoning doesn't hold much water either. We learn about all sorts of things we shouldn't do without needing to see an example of them, and it's not as if a picture of a person is such a difficult concept to grasp that it requires examples.

                        • Rev [none/use name]
                          arrow-down
                          3
                          ·
                          4 years ago

                          It holds all the water because context matters. I also don't know what to tell you if you think the purpose of such a class is "to show what a historical figure looks like". Tell me though, would you also ban showing historical photos of banners with the swastika in a history lesson about Nazis because displaying it would hurt the sensibilities of Jewish pupils present and one could describe a swastika by saying it's a black cross with perpendicular lines at each end? Would you ban the virulently racist attitudes, expletives and slave beatings in a film about slavery? This shit comes too close for comfort to lib performative idpol with its deliberate dismissal of context.

      • Saif [he/him]
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 years ago

        no one has ever said "don't draw Muhammad in your own house"??? where the hell are you getting this from. nobody is asking you to not draw Muhammad in private, that's absurd and irrelevant to the question. this whole discourse is about western reactionaries intentionally enflaming the situation by drawing Muhammad outwardly, usually in racist big-nosed depictions i might add.

          • hogposting [he/him,comrade/them]
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            4 years ago

            There are plenty of people who eventually found their way to leftism, but took a detour through mid-2000s atheism. Mid-2000s atheism did rip on other religions occasionally, but of course Islam was the main target as the War on Terror was still relatively popular.

          • GravenImage [none/use name]
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            4 years ago

            FORCING THEIR RULES down people’s throats

            *Bourgeois rules, *the proletariat's throat (uwu)

            hardly ever see such takes in threads even about far-right Christian people

            the evangelical death cult is old news, not much to talk about

          • Rev [none/use name]
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            4 years ago

            I don't know under what rock you've been living if you are new to the massive leftist vitriol against fundamentalist Christians, against fundamentalist Hindus, against the Buddhist monstrous slave state in Tibet pre PRC, against Zionism. Just because it's not ok to just denigrate and pick vicious fights with religious folks who keep their religion to themselves does not in any way justify lionising religious bigots who would kill you first thing for being an "apostate".

            • hogposting [he/him,comrade/them]
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 years ago

              lionising religious bigots who would kill you first thing for being an “apostate”.

              Zero people in this thread are doing that.

          • Amorphous [any]
            arrow-down
            20
            ·
            4 years ago

            (but not JUST this certain religion ofc!!! even tho its the only one i’m constantly criticizing!!!)

            i literally criticized christians for the same shit 2 comments up you dumbfuck piece of shit

            i live in alabama, i have a seething hatred for christians and have never knowingly interacted with a muslim. why the fuck are you accusing me of this bullshit?

              • Amorphous [any]
                arrow-down
                15
                ·
                4 years ago

                funny how im "islamophobic" for rejecting religious rule of literally the entire world's population, but not "christophobic" for the same thing

                  • Rev [none/use name]
                    arrow-down
                    8
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    4 years ago

                    Outright Nazis are also a minority, should the left also protect their honour and their sacred screeds from the dominant imperialist neo-liberals?

                    • nullinvert [she/her]
                      arrow-down
                      2
                      ·
                      4 years ago

                      are you seriously unironically equating persecuted religious minorities and nazis, jesus fucking christ

                      • Rev [none/use name]
                        ·
                        4 years ago

                        jesus fucking christ

                        Don't use the lord's name in vain, we might have Christians from countries with persecuted Christian minorities browsing this site.

                      • Rev [none/use name]
                        arrow-down
                        6
                        ·
                        4 years ago

                        I equate standing up for minorities explicitly pushing a violently reactionary agenda with idiotism. Wahabists are such a minority.

                    • rozako [she/her]
                      arrow-down
                      2
                      ·
                      4 years ago

                      “standing up against islamophobia is the same thing as defending nazis” is a super smart leftist thing to say.

                      • Rev [none/use name]
                        arrow-down
                        1
                        ·
                        4 years ago

                        So anti-wahabism is anti-islamophobia now? You know the sect that would gladly massacre all other Muslims if given the chance. Reactionary minorities are reactionary. No passaran.

                  • Amorphous [any]
                    arrow-down
                    22
                    ·
                    4 years ago

                    fuck off dude, thats a ridiculous way of looking at things

        • Amorphous [any]
          arrow-down
          19
          ·
          4 years ago

          this whole discourse is about western reactionaries intentionally enflaming the situation by drawing Muhammad outwardly

          a muslim's right to tell a person what they can and can not draw based on religious rules end at their own doorstep. i dont care if they're drawing muhammad and then printing it on flags and flying those flags on every street corner in the entire world, it literally does not matter and anyone who gets upset at them for it is responsible for their own feelings, because no one has any obligation to respect rules specific to their religion

          • Saif [he/him]
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            4 years ago

            so once again, "drawing Muhammad in your own home" is not the question at hand here, you accept this. now you need to accept that nobody gives a shit about questioning the "morality" of drawing Muhammad in a vacuum just as no leftist with half a brain thinks the literal letter structure of the n-word is morally evil on its own. we're talking about cultural contexts. and just as it's morally wrong to go out of your way to be racist towards black people, it's morally wrong to go out of your way to be racist towards Muslims. and it takes a bizarre amount of effort in this context as well, i mean you are arguing for the right for people to make elaborate art just to be racist.

            • Amorphous [any]
              arrow-down
              16
              ·
              4 years ago

              there is literally nothing racist about drawing muhammad as a statement that you dont respect religious guidelines, just in the same way there's nothing racist about waving a pride flag in a christian's face. when people try to impose their religious rules on you and you decide to go out of your way to disrespect those rules, that isnt fucking racist.

              these people the OP is talking about are almost certainly racist, yes, but it is not racist to draw muhammad

              • Saif [he/him]
                arrow-down
                11
                ·
                edit-2
                4 years ago

                muslims are a race, and its racist to draw muhammad now, read the room my friend. this is the way of things. stop trying to conflate everything under the western conception of "religion" as if you can approach them all in the exact same way, you imperialist fuck. come to each one humbly with your head bowed, and attempt to learn something new about a different culture, for once in your fucking life.

                • Amorphous [any]
                  arrow-down
                  16
                  ·
                  4 years ago

                  muslims are a race, and its racist to draw muhammad now

                  what the fuck is wrong with you lmao this is absurd

                  • Saif [he/him]
                    arrow-down
                    6
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    4 years ago

                    race is a social construct and not a biological one, and if you spend 5 seconds looking at the Western discourse you will see that Muslims have undergone racialization. how have you missed this?

                    • Amorphous [any]
                      arrow-down
                      14
                      ·
                      4 years ago

                      ok, if they're a race then they don't have religious rules i need to respect because races are something you are born into and not sets of beliefs that you follow and impose on others

                      • Saif [he/him]
                        arrow-down
                        5
                        ·
                        4 years ago

                        sure, if that's the tack you want to go on. now that we've established islam has been racialized, and that it's extremely obvious that plastering drawings of Muhammad on the walls has been weaponized as form of racial oppression (again take 5 seconds to look at the discourse), can we agree it's fucking racist to do it? and there's precedence of course - culture is a fickle thing and anything can be turned into a slur with enough effort by racists, and we're not even talking about a word, we're talking about elaborately drawing something lmao.

                        • Amorphous [any]
                          arrow-down
                          12
                          ·
                          4 years ago

                          sure, if that’s the tack you want to go on. now that we’ve established islam has been racialized, and that it’s extremely obvious that plastering drawings of Muhammad on the walls has been weaponized as form of racial oppression

                          why is it racial oppression to draw pictures of some guy? it's against muslims religious beliefs, but we're not talking about a religion here, we're talking about a race.

                          • Saif [he/him]
                            arrow-down
                            5
                            ·
                            4 years ago

                            because racists have turned it into racial oppression? i just said culture is a fickle thing and this is how racial slurs and racial oppression develops, just look at blackface.

                            • GravenImage [none/use name]
                              arrow-down
                              2
                              ·
                              4 years ago

                              this is how racial slurs and racial oppression develops, just look at blackface.

                              Liberals literally have history backwards. It was the historic material conditions of black exploitation which generated the superstructure of anti-black culture in order to rationalize the existing state of affairs.

                            • Amorphous [any]
                              arrow-down
                              14
                              ·
                              4 years ago

                              blackface is mockery of a specific race's features. drawing muhammad is mockery of a specific religion's rules. how is there any similarity?

                              • Saif [he/him]
                                arrow-down
                                8
                                ·
                                4 years ago

                                i don't know how many times i have to keep saying this - racial oppression develops culturally, meaning there could be no logic to it but it becomes racist anyway due to the usage by racists for that purpose. for example, a lot of slurs have literally no etymological meaning, such as the "G" word used against Asians. you are trying to make racism seem logical, when it isn't and never has been.

                                • GravenImage [none/use name]
                                  arrow-down
                                  5
                                  ·
                                  4 years ago

                                  i don’t know how many times i have to keep saying this

                                  maybe because it's totally wrong?

                                  racial oppression develops culturally,

                                  please read Marx

                                  there could be no logic to it but it becomes racist anyway due to the usage by racists for that purpose

                                  *bourgeois racists use this 100% logical ideology for the purpose of maintaining exploitative worker relations.

                                • Amorphous [any]
                                  arrow-down
                                  10
                                  ·
                                  4 years ago

                                  so when and how am i allowed to criticize those who wish to impose their religious rules on me?

                                  • Saif [he/him]
                                    arrow-down
                                    7
                                    ·
                                    4 years ago

                                    it's just a word guys stop imposing your rules on me i can say it whenever i want

                                      • Saif [he/him]
                                        arrow-down
                                        4
                                        ·
                                        4 years ago

                                        no, but being black could be described as a "din" interestingly enough, which Islam describes itself as, as the English word "religion" and its connotations did not exist in classical Arabic. Would you like to learn things from an Islamic perspective, considering you "have never knowingly interacted with a muslim"?

                                        • Amorphous [any]
                                          arrow-down
                                          9
                                          ·
                                          4 years ago

                                          ok so how do i state my disinterest in following their religious rules without being racist?

                                          • DerEwigeAtheist [she/her, comrade/them]
                                            arrow-down
                                            3
                                            ·
                                            4 years ago

                                            No one asks that you follow ramadan don't work on fridays or quit eating pork. You can even draw mohammed in your own home. But drawing muhammad in our society with it's context has been made into a racist attack on Muslims. I don't know if dogwhistle is the right term, but it is similar, i think.

                                • oralcumshot [hy/hym]
                                  arrow-down
                                  12
                                  ·
                                  edit-2
                                  4 years ago

                                  It's baffling how stupid liberals like you don't realize that by being so afraid of even talking about or being associated with some, basically neutral thing, be it a meme, a subculture, scene or social space online that the right has even so much as vaguely tried to associate itself with, they are literally ceding ground and surrendering said thing to the right. The right barely has to do any effort to take over something it seems, just make the vaguest gesture that said thing is their turf and culture war obsessed lefties immediately hand it over to them because they are obsessed with appearing pure and free of anything even vaguely "problematic".

                                  You are a fucking idiot and in a perfect world you would be born without hands so that no one would ever have to read your shitty posts. Inshallah that happens to you one day

                                  • GravenImage [none/use name]
                                    arrow-down
                                    1
                                    ·
                                    edit-2
                                    4 years ago

                                    make the vaguest gesture that said thing is their turf and culture war obsessed lefties immediately hand it over to them because they are obsessed

                                    This is what happens when you're an idealistic liberal. Marxists know that historical material conditions are the base from which all these superstructure ideologies are formed. If an idea is racist, it's because the material world you live in is racist, like it's the symptom of a deeper disease.

                  • disco [any]
                    arrow-down
                    5
                    ·
                    4 years ago

                    That comment is so absurdly idiotic that I assumed he was trolling at first. But no, somehow he actually believes it.

      • mao [he/him]
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        4 years ago

        deleted by creator

        • Saif [he/him]
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          4 years ago

          the statement "religion is reactionary" as if you could conflate everything under the western conception of “religion” is unmaterial and unmarxist, go to bed.

          Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. it is the VAPORWAVE of the masses.

          • oralcumshot [hy/hym]
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            4 years ago

            It's interesting how civilians murdering each other on the basis of race gets them branded as reactionaries but using the same label on those who murder on the basis of religion is a bit too far-fetched.

            It's also interesting how you selectively invoke that quote from Marx while conveniently omitting the wider point, that religion is the "illusory Sun" that "revolves around man as long as he does not revolve around himself". Which is to say, religion in practice is an organ of bourgeois reaction, used for the exploitation and estupefaction of the working class.

            You are an opportunist and a revisionist and wallahi you will one day be punished for your treachery.

              • oralcumshot [hy/hym]
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                4 years ago

                The majority of racists don't act out on any violent fantasies they might hold, it still makes them reactionaries. You fucking dolt.

                  • oralcumshot [hy/hym]
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    4 years ago

                    The point is that it doesn't matter whether you say or do anything racist to be a reactionary, you just need to hold racist views. The same applies to religious zealotry.

          • mao [he/him]
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 years ago

            deleted by creator

            • Saif [he/him]
              ·
              4 years ago

              imagine accusing a middle easterner of orientalism, just take the L and go home

              • mao [he/him]
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                4 years ago

                deleted by creator