It is very weird.
In fairness, i think it mostly is a (over?)reaction to cancel culture and the likes. But its a really weird stance.
Prophet Muhammad cartoon sparks Batley Grammar School protest
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
In fairness, i think it mostly is a (over?)reaction to cancel culture and the likes. But its a really weird stance.
I think the point about "insulting" the prophet is that it's not just about cartoons. It's also about articles, book and films. The point being that any public figure who might express critism or "insult" Muhammed will quite often need police protection for most of their life if not all of it. Islam is 2nd largest religion in the world and fasting growing, and there will be people who will express their opinon on Muhammed just like we do with any other religous figure that muslims will find offensive and it's not tolerable if expressing that view comes with a geniune threat to your life.
Not at all, sorry I was just trying to explain why something that seems incidental to some may offend others deeply. Overall as I've said elsewhere in this thread, I think there's a strong argument for the Charlie Hebdo publication of the images, but I don't think showing them in classroom adds anything to a basphemy discussion which could easily be had without showing them. It just seems a provocative thing to do that didn't need to happen.
Or even your job.
I like to offend people I know, the look on their faces entertains me but it is indeed weird to want to offend people you don't interact with.
Well also that.
This is valid. And how do stunts like this help reduce this fanaticism?
Ah good old tolerance. Yes let's respect archaic nonsense when the same people who are getting angry about it are probably the same ones who would advocate a good old fashioned stoning. Primitive backwards shit.
Your logic sounds a lot like the Talions law.
Plenty of depictions of Muhammad in Islamic art over the centuries, particularly in places touched by Persian culture. If you’re ever in Dublin in normal times you can view some at the Chester Beatty library in Dublin Castle.
The fanatism is the problem in the first place.
Whatever your view on it, what does someone achieve by using a cartoon that they know will cause controversy like this? You are putting it for explicitly the reason of getting a negative reaction from large % of people. You aren't using "freedom of speech", you're using freedom of speech as an excuse to incite a lot of people with literally no other benefit.
That doesn't answer the question, it's like answering the fire is the problem when asked about how to extinguish a fire.
But let’s stay grounded in reality regarding current culture, say culture for the past 120 years. Are you discounting the medium of cartoons / animation as important or impactful in society? In my opinion, it’s rather sad that they have assumed so much import, but I can’t discount how impactful they are in society. Why should this medium not be allowed to continue as such, because some people get upset over it?
I used ‘adult’ purposefully in regards to what those who are being formed into adults are shown via media mediums. An impressionable youth shouldn’t be limited regarding what they see & if it makes them feel uncomfortable. It’s through this process I feel that an adult becomes mature, being able to realize their own self through being challenged, being made to feel passionate about something. Why would we want simple replicants of current culture by limiting what they learn, see, discuss, argue about, or feel passionate about? It’s not a zero sum game, it can’t be. There will always those who take umbrage against something uncomfortable, yet there will always be those who benefit from the same uncomfortability. I think it is ludicrous & revisionist to comport behavior to just acquiesce to one side of this equation. Thankfully we don’t adhere to such zero sum silliness in the real world & long may that continue, via cartoons or otherwise.
When was there ever not fanatiscm in Islam? You could argue there is fanatiscm in all major religions or perhaps all religons, but they don't all have similar doctrines, histories or similar founders who are upheld as the best of men.
Just regarding percentage terms, these cartoons will not cause & have not caused outrage in far more people than it will cause outrage. This can’t be a metric we use to define what is acceptable.
Not sure what years he was teaching. But literally any point between primary/high school, showing a picture like that would likely just fuel bullying and not help in any way. Helping would be showing positive images and positive interactions between different culture. Not saying "this one guy drew a provocative image once and then there was a terrible backlash because he dared do it even though he only did it for the backlash" and making everyone look like an ass hole. I just don't see how insulting images to any culture can help. Saw someone mention anti-fascism teaching, or teaching about nazi history etc. You wouldn't give out Mein Kampf as reading material would you? You explain the negatives how they exist and why it's bad, you don't literally give the negative material to kids.
Yes you can. There is no need to infantilize teenagers in education.
What is the point of it? A teacher should be guiding his class of kids. If the school has any percentage of Muslim population, then he is basically making them feel like bigger outsiders by showing images that are offensive to them. They don't have to react badly to it. But kids are impressionable and if there's already a bullying problem for those people, then this does nothing but fuel the fire. There is literally no benefit in showing the actual images. You aren't doing some sort of positive, progressive discussion. Would any of these schools show an image of Jesus getting fecked in the ass or being a terrorist or whatever the insulting images are, and then say "freedom of speech people can't stop you from doing this even if it'll cause some people to freak out disproportionately". No. They would say don't be an idiot as there is no benefit in using an image that insults a large population and does nothing else.
Mein Kampf also has a lot of reasons to be offensive, especially to Jewish people who were within living memory victims of a huge genocide by the fecking author.
They’re just cartoons. If you’re upset because somebody drew a cartoon, give your head a wobble.
They’re just cartoons. If you’re upset because somebody drew a cartoon, give your head a wobble.
Giving kids the manifesto of why Hitler wanted to eradicate the Jewish population is literally one of the dumbest possible things any school could ever do. Yes a large percentage wouldn't be fine. But large groups are also very impressionable, like imitating movies, games, books, whatever else. Why do you think the USA has so many shooting? They all read each other's manifestos and feed off it and get ideas. It's a terrible educational idea.
Nah, not for me. I was at sixth form college when the Danish cartoons row had kicked off in 2004/5 and we had a discussion about it in our law class about it on the basis of Human Rights (freedom of expression, etc). We had a mature discussion without the lecturer needing to resort to showing the cartoons. This person could easily have done the same.
He/she could easily have discussed those exact issues without actually showing the pictures. If someone can't disregard their personal opinions (by sharing or distributing material that they would know for a fact would cause offence, let alone that his audience would be fricking children) then that's a massive red flag for me in terms of their professionalism and lack thereof. The fact that it then enflamed tensions within the pupils themselves and made the atmosphere within the class increasingly tense, with the white pupils making several disparaging and Islamophobic remarks it is understandable why the parents acted the way they did. These are children we're talking about, ffs. The freedom to express and offend (and damn the consequences) talk rings a little hollow when you put it in that context.
Also, it wasn't a mob, it was a peaceful protest, and no harm came to staff or students alike. I personally wouldn't have done so during Covid times, but last I checked freedom of assembly is fundamental human right.
I dont know which cartoons they are. Assuming they are the Charlie hebdo ones. Ones that depict him as a terrorist or getting fecked in the ass or whatever it is. What benefit is there? You're a teacher. We aren't talking about if a comedian is allowed to do this who's entire job is to laugh at people's expenses. We're talking about educational material for kids. It serves no benefit.
If mein kampf is the sole reading material possibly. But if it's part of a wider reading list on WW2 and the holocaust, I don't believe it is. The reasons there are so many shootings in the US is because they have so many guns and social problems.
I think if you spent less time obsessed over Islam you'd realize there are countless forums, discussions boards, groups and political parties that are centered around criticism of Islam.
There are actual classes in universities all across America that are centered around the criticism of religions and middle easter religions such as Islam. Anyone that "insults" does not often need political protection. There is always a time and place.
Also, why on earth would you "criticize" a belief of someone who is practicing it? What are you trying to achieve? Criticize it on your own all you want just like you've been doing it for years on this forum.
Anyone else feeling this right about now?
Right and black is just a color so I should be free to smear black paint on me.
Is this the current protest? Because there is reports of death threats. However these might come from people who are not attached to the school itself. I read this in the daily mail, so as a source it might be wrong. Another is Euronews which I'm not really familar with.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...threats-rugby-loving-burly-Yorkshire-lad.html
https://www.euronews.com/2021/03/26...acher-who-showed-prophet-muhammad-cartoons-to
Surely then mein kampf is 'just a book'? We can employ a reductionist approach to everything and say that nothing short of actual physical actions should cause upset.
Oh yeah I’m not saying go mental, you’re still bound by the realms of taste and decency, and what is acceptable in a school. You wouldn’t show kids anything inappropriate for sure, but if it’s relevant and will further their understanding to show them the Hebdo cartoons, go for it. If he was showing a terrorist cartoon, then that’s provocative for different reasons and the guy deserves to be sacked.
You just used the rationalization of a large number of people shouldn’t be made to feel uncomfortable, yet you won’t use the same logic when discussing an even larger group of people. Why the different prisms?
Of course there’s benefit to the wider world than Islam to showing the cartoons. It creates debate, debate that potentially illuminates for those not of the islamic fairy to reassess how they view that faith. Is there not validity in this?
The zero sum argument of ‘never showing or creating the cartoons because a minority is uncomfortable’ is just mad, no matter what the subject is. Why shield people from reality, especially when they are forming their opinions of the world?
The answer to your first question is in both of my last post to you, I explicitely stated it. As for the second paragraph, simply read what I wrote don't imagine what you want to read. I'll be honest with you, you are frustrating me to a point that you can't imagine.
To make it simple, in this context cartoons are like a book in a foreign language. In order to understand the book, you need to know how to read and you also need to understand that foreign language, which means that that book in a foreign language isn't appropriate for all audiences. That's the issue with cartoons, they very often refers to things that you need to know and understand beforehand, they hammer a point home but aren't the point itself, you need to build a base of knowledge in order to appreciate their content, otherwise they are just drawings that you may associate with feelings instead of knowledge, some steps can't be forgone.
So my point is that more often than not the immature audience needs to avoid that kind of content, they need to be taught the fundamentals, they need to be given a solid base that will allow them to understand later.
It is just a book, but it’s offensive for reasons other than just ‘My religion says so’.
I highly doubt that is the case. The incident occurred on Monday and the protest only happened yesterday. That tells me that they were trying to resolve the issue amicably in that intervening two day period.
Even if it is true and there are fringe elements who are saying and doing such things then that isn't coming from the parents, IMO. The kids will still have to go in to school in the next days, months, and years after all. And those fringe elements need to be punished to the full extent of the law, but that's down to them being idiots than any inherent failing on the religion itself or of the community around the school.
Blackface isn’t the same is it
Again that's not an answer to the question asked. Do you think that putting petrol on a fire extinguish said fire?
It's not but the idea that an action is simply the action and not loaded with a meaning is silly.
Ok so would you show a picture of Jesus/moses/whoever getting fecked in the ass or being depicted as a terrorist to prove a point about freedom of speech? Showing that picture and then saying you're using it to say you should be able to show or say whatever you want because of freedom of speech is an idiotic thing to do. Everyone knows there are extremists in every group who react poorly to things. Any reasonable person would be upset at using that, just like there would be if you replaced Muhammed with any or the other religious figures, just targeting a different group. Then the extremists always take it to the next level unfortunately, but again, doesn't matter on religion. At a certain point, common sense and "don't be an idiot" should come into play. If you're a teacher, it's part of your job to not be disrespectful to cultures/beliefs, whether on religion or politics. You can explain the history, but don't outright disrespect other groups.
Yeah many people are offended that someone else is offended by the fact that they are offended by something that was made to offend.Anyone else feeling this right about now?