Three feminists are arrested for pasting naked images of Mohammed on city centre walls in Toulouse

submitted by alttrawl from self.GenderCritical

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]BEB 1 insightful - 4 fun1 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 4 fun -  (9 children)

What do these women think that drawings of the Islamic prophet Mohammed have to do with feminism?

I know a lot about the Charlie Hebdo controversy, as well as the Fleming Rose controversy - I am an agnostic myself and very much a fierce defender of free speech, but both of those were provocative acts designed to incite the Muslim world.

But, again, why did these feminists protest? I have racked my poor brain and have not found any links between pictures of the Islamic prophet Mohammed and feminism.

This is about the third or forth time in the past few days that I've seen attempts by GC feminists to link drawings of Mohammed (and the beheading of that poor man) with feminism and I'm baffled.

[–]CastleHoward 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Maybe in solidarity with all the women harmed by islam? Would that be feminist enough? You're baffled? Really?

[–]BEB 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (3 children)

But, for instance, my country, the US, with the "help" of other countries, including sometimes France, has launched a number of unprovoked wars and military actions against primarily Islamic countries, which have resulted in well over a million, probably several million, deaths of innocent civilians, and millions of civilians lives ruined.

I would prefer to be alive under Islam, especially the moderate Islam of pre-Ayatollah Iran, Indonesia, India, etc., then dead under US & its allies bombs or forced into prostitution by war, as so many Iraqi women were, especially Iraqi Christians.

Not only that, but the US supports covert and semi-covert actions, for instance in Afghanistan, which end up replacing governments that gave women some rights with fundamentalist regimes.

I have been around long enough to hear the lies my country has told to get us into a number of wars and military actions. One of the things that usually precedes a US attack, or to keep the US population rallied in support of an attack already underway, is the demonization of some aspect of the victim country.

For instance, US soldiers going into Iraq were trained to think of Iraqis as Hajis (Muslims who have completed the pilgrimage to Mecca) and something hateful. Ironic given that Saddam Hussein was a secularist, who actually allowed Iraqis, if they chose, to live a secular life for the most part. And also that Iraq had a sizable Christian population as well as other religions like Jews, who were historically treated very well.

Fleming Rose, who first created a controversy similar to Charlie Hebdo, was allied with US neo-Conservatives, the same neo-Conservatives who had lied us into Iraq II. His publishing of the Mohammed cartoons were designed to inflame the Muslim world and keep Americans, who were/would soon wake up to the lies told to get us into Iraq for the second time, onboard the war effort by showing us how crazy those "sand n-word" (as US troops called Iraqis), were.

So, now, the US, Israel, Saudi Arabia have Iran in our sights. Time to ramp up the demonization of Islam yet again.

If feminists fall for it, well, they are falling for one of the oldest tricks in the book, convincing a peaceful population that they are either under attack, or that there is a moral imperative to go to war (the lie about premature Kuwaiti babies being thrown out of incubators told by US government propagandists in the run up to Iraq War I) but the deaths and/or destruction of the lives millions of Iranian women and children, will be on their heads too.

BTW: WoLF (who I normally love) is retweeting an Iranian woman "activist" who is also tied to the neo-Conservatives who want the US to attack Iran. WoLF, like these French feminists, is being played. I hope they wake up, before they too will see what happens when we demonize an entire population, religion, etc., - war is not female-friendly at all.

[–]tea4two 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I understand you have a strong opinion, but with all due respect, stop USplaining and learn about the legacy of satire and the Enlightenment in Europe and particularly in France. Have you ever read Charlie Hebdo before the attacks? I have. Charlie Hebdo was not trying to incite the Muslim world specifically, Charlie Hebdo was treating islam like every other religion and every other ideology in the world: equal irreverence. Have you seen their drawings of Jesus? The pope? About Judaism? Charlie Hedbo's publishing of the caricatures was a resounding no to censorship and sacred cows.

They did not demonize a population, they laughed at extremists and died for it. How can you be on a feminist sub and not see the chilling parallel: "Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them." This is what happened here. Laughter was met with murder.

[–]BEB 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

Women's laughter is met with murder all over the world; why have some GC feminists, especially in the UK, but in this case, France, allied themselves with this particular cause of demonizing Islam and claiming it only has to do with free speech?

My concern, as I've said, is that some GC feminists stand to become unwitting (or witting) tools in the softening up of the public to support yet another war against an Islamic country.

An attack on Iran would be catastrophic, and it would be pretty fucking hypocritical if women who call themselves feminists were even a tiny bit responsible for the deaths of millions of women. And not just in Iran, because a conflict with Iran could lead to a much wider war.

But in terms of these GC feminists support of free speech (well, when it's used against Islam) France recently jailed a man, Hervé Ryssen, for posts on Facebook and Twitter, and a YouTube video, that were deemed "anti-semitic." Why should France treat someone who makes anti-Islamic statements, or media, differently? And where is the GC free speech brigade's outrage?

I am a free speech absolutist: I would not have punished Herve Ryssen nor Charlie Hebdo, but that's not what's happening in France. Some groups are protected and some are not.

And Charlie Hebdo is hypocritical - This is from the link in my other response. While I don't agree with the author in other parts of his commentary, he makes valid points about Charlie Hebdo's and others hypocrisy towards Islam and free speech in general.

Also, as I mentioned, the earlier Mohammed cartoon controversy (2005) was by a Danish paper called Jyllands-Posten, under the direction of a man named Fleming Rose, and was designed to inflame the Islamic world. Fleming Rose was tied to Neo-Conservatives.

I am not a Muslim BTW: I am not a fan of religion, except the good parts like "Love Thy Neighbor" - I just love facts, no matter where they lead me. And I hate war.

"...Charlie Hebdo sacked the veteran French cartoonist Maurice Sinet in 2008 for making an allegedly anti-Semitic remark? Were you not aware that Jyllands-Posten, the Danish newspaper that published caricatures of the Prophet in 2005, reportedly rejected cartoons mocking Christ because they would "provoke an outcry" and proudly declared it would "in no circumstances... publish Holocaust cartoons"?

Muslims, I guess, are expected to have thicker skins than their Christian and Jewish brethren. Context matters, too. You ask us to laugh at a cartoon of the Prophet while ignoring the vilification of Islam across the continent (have you visited Germany lately?) and the widespread discrimination against Muslims in education, employment and public life - especially in France. You ask Muslims to denounce a handful of extremists as an existential threat to free speech while turning a blind eye to the much bigger threat to it posed by our elected leaders.

Does it not bother you to see Barack Obama - who demanded that Yemen keep the anti-drone journalist Abdulelah Haider Shaye behind bars, after he was convicted on "terrorism-related charges" in a kangaroo court - jump on the free speech ban wagon? Weren't you sickened to see Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of a country that was responsible for the killing of seven journalists in Gaza in 2014, attend the "unity rally" in Paris? Bibi was joined by Angela Merkel, chancellor of a country where Holocaust denial is punishable by up to five years in prison, and David Cameron, who wants to ban non-violent "extremists" committed to the "overthrow of democracy" from appearing on television."

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/mehdi-hasan/charlie-hebdo-free-speech_b_6462584.html

[–]MezozoicGay 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

As far as I see main reasons when feminists (and people in general) are not supporting muslims and fine with attacking them is either because Islam is very-very anti-woman and homophobic religion or because liberal choise feminists are calling everything islamophobic and pushing it everywhere, so people protest against it.

[–]alttrawl[S] 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I don't follow French feminism news, so don't quote me, but the fly-posting sounds like the same group of GC feminists active in France. One of them had her art exhibit about domestic violence hijacked by TRAs. It's probably not about the drawings specifically, but criticism of the religion in general. There's a video on youtube of French feminists confronting Muslim men about why there were only men hanging out in public spaces. All the women seen passing by wore the full niqab, and the men were saying that this was their culture. Many people are using the term parallel societies when they describe this.

[–]BEB 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

Thank you! I was just wondering because I've seen at least three non-French GC feminist twitter accounts bring up free speech, the beheading in France and /or drawings of Mohammed and I couldn't figure out the connection.

[–]tea4two 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You act baffled and yet you have the answer in your post: free speech.

Look at all the feminists silenced online, don't you think they need free speech too? We need to speak up for everyone's right to speak freely, for everyone's right to parody anything they want, for everyone's right to offend anyone they want. You can't only defend free speech when it comes to your pet cause, every erosion to free speech -on any topic- ultimately hurts us all.

And, yes, there is also a total overlap between people who will kill because of an image of Mohammed, and people who want to strip women of their rights.

[–]BEB 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

I don't even know where to start to answer you, but here goes:

One of my points would be that there are different strains of Islam, as there are of Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.

In some, or in some Muslim-minority countries - women are doctors, lawyers, politicians, etc. It is quite unfair to judge all Muslims based on the religion's extremes.

Second point: many religions oppress women. The Buddhists of Tibet ostracize widows. The Hindus forced widows to burn on the funeral pyres of their husbands. In some Jewish sects women also have to cover their hair, their arms and wear long skirts. In Buddhist Thailand, girls are sold into sexual slavery.

Where are the feminist protests? Why are we focused on Islam, when other religions do similarly horrible things to women?

So all these GC feminists are outraged that an innocent man was beheaded because of a drawing of the Islamic prophet Mohammed. So am I.

But the US and its war allies, which often include the UK and France, have been on a daily Muslim killing spree since... I am having a hard time remembering when it started, but let's start with Iraq War I - so for almost 30 years, on and off, the US has been killing Muslims and, at the very least a million Muslims, have died with tens of millions more maimed and displaced ...where is the outrage?

Why are so many GC feminists LIVID about one murder, when around the world religions are killing and sexually exploiting women, and our very own countries are murdering Muslim women with aplomb, using our tax dollars?

And if you want to talk free speech in France, and specifically at Charlie Hebdo - it is quite the hypocritical media outlet:

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/mehdi-hasan/charlie-hebdo-free-speech_b_6462584.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9kdWNrZHVja2dvLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAANxcQc6PlyFuIKW2h8HoCevp3iwnndof_59Tbu24kf7o4I82IRZ76pCx5cmDCRGdmwvxCh82O3cBrh_zCpnto2m33p9Avic-hL53DFj46ObvwKCsXB_WCGi13Bhog75_u0WjtydsmcHZFBHuYmvPFg7BHfJIIyVYNnW_JbP1twYx

And if you want to talk free speech in the US, well, we are supposed to have a First Amendment right to free speech, but...:

https://theintercept.com/2019/01/05/u-s-senates-first-bill-in-midst-of-shutdown-is-a-bipartisan-defense-of-the-israeli-government-from-boycotts/

I actually know a lot about this topic. It was part of my job for years. It bothers me that, for whatever reason, GC feminists seem to be getting sucked into the Neo-Conservative, endless "War on Terror AKA War on Islamic Countries" vortex, which will have no good outcomes for any good person, but will be absolutely devastating for tens of millions of women.