Bigotry is intersectional. You know damn well what people are trying to say, and what hateful bullshit they’re responding to.
When some redcap uses “Muslim” as a synecdoche for spitting out middle-eastern stereotypes, they’re not engaging in comparative religious criticism, or making some grand philosophical argument. They’re being a racist asshole. Even if the label they use is not a race. If you haven’t noticed - racist assholes love tiny excuses to say ‘what’s so racist about–?!’ whatever dehumanizing caricature they just attributed to some associated label. Like “thugs.” Or “bankers.”
Bankers aren’t an ethnicity… but people screaming about “bankers controlling the media” are definitely talking about an ethnicity.
When some redcap uses “Muslim” as a synecdoche for spitting out middle-eastern stereotypes, they’re not engaging in comparative religious criticism, or making some grand philosophical argument.
This is true, but when I’m having a discussion about religion and I feel like I’m done criticizing christianity and move on to islam for a bit, people shouldn’t say “woah, that sounds a bit racist”, and some people still do. I’m very left leaning but I have to say it’s mostly people who consider themselves progressive or left leaning, who have trouble separating these things.
I’ve never met a Zoroastrian and I’d bet you haven’t either.
Buddhism in the experience of any Anglophone is likely to be pleasant metaphysical nothings.
Judaism is more often the target of hatred than its source, and while that balance swings precipitously for Orthodox communities, they’re few and far between.
The simple fact of the matter is - Christianity is overwhelmingly what fucks with English-speaking nations 24/7, and Islam only sticks out for some extremely specific events. Do I need an on-record opinion of Mongol animistic faith and Bantu shamanic ritual before I’m allowed to talk shit about apostasy and Leviticus?
Do you ever find yourself in discussions about religion where the topics of discussion include Zoroaster?
I have actually met a Zoroastrian and had some fascinating conversations about their religion. I would never practice their religion, nor do I particularly care for organized religion, but I’m glad I got to meet and talk to them because it helped me understand a personal experience I would never untake.
Judaism is often the target of hatred, these days, because of anti-semites. Not because of debates about the merits of the religion. Those debates are primarily held internally - you know, amongst people who actually know and care about the religion.
Yes, of fucking course I have. Not that it would have any bearing on my ability to talk shit about enshrined dogma or free-range woo-woo nonsense. Nor would it absolve me, if I started labeling those engineers according to the beliefs of AK-wielding maniacs.
Congratulations on identifying antisemitism as bigotry. Apply that to Islam and you’ll find the topic of this discussion. ‘Islam is often the target of hatred, not on the merits of the religion, but because of bigoted assholes.’
People who are criticizing the religion itself have to distinguish themselves from those assholes. It takes additional effort. Audiences expecting it’s all insincere cover for bigotry is not ideal, but it’s better than letting racists make flimsy excuses.
People whose only contribution is religious criticism are doing nothing wrong.
For the Muslims I have known, I respect their right to practice whatever nonsense they like. But. I respect them. Their religion is nonsense, as all religions are nonsense. Any positive experience exists in spite of their holy text saying, in black and white, that the AK-wielding maniacs have the right idea. I have endless vitriol for morons who insist all Muslims must believe blah blah blah, because, plainly not. But the most defanged version of any Abrahamic faith is still really fucked up. And that wide base of wishy-washy support is a constant shield and breeding-ground for the diehard violent loons.
‘This is the unquestionable word of the creator of the universe, but ehhh don’t take it too seriously’ is a hard sell.
Well I have met and talked to several Muslims in my life.
Religion only really came up for a couple of them, because you know, they’re just people going through their lives like anyone else and religion doesn’t often come up in polite company unless you’re a part of their religion. But there are a few I’ve gotten to know well enough to feel comfortable about asking.
Anyway, after some expected hesitancy, and some convincing that I’m just curious about their experiences, everyone I’ve talked to explained that their experience of islam is very peaceful and compassionate and gives them a sense of belonging and community. One asked about my own experiences with religion, which made them feel lucky to have found a good community. I said I had found other communities and was fine. And after that day, I felt like we understood eacj other a little better than before.
I knew a Sikh woman once, so wore the whole garb even though she lived in America. I asked her how she felt about the garb, and expected something something sacred religious whatever. But she surprised me by saying she felt the garb was a form of expression for her, an identity, and also made her felt safer - this was before 9/11. She said it was her choice to wear it and wore it proudly. And that really gave me the context I needed to break out of my biases about Islam and accept that we all do wierd shit, religious or otherwise, and that’s not only okay, it makes us unique and interesting.
When I look at the replies on this post, I see a lot of confusion, a lot of anger, a lot of hatred, and a lot of circlejerking. And rightly so, because there’s no context to this post. No, criticizing Islam isn’t always racist but it really depends on the context and the individuals receiving it.
OP is repeating the same dangerous rhetoric that I see across all sides of disagreement - but is always connected to bigotry: “I should be allowed to criticize without being criticized.” I can’t deny the appeal of such a request but it’s unreasonable. OP is absolutely allowed to say whatever he wants. But his audience is also free to respond and interpret.
The thing is, when you send negativity out into the world, you get it back. And if OP isn’t ready for that, maybe he should find more positive messages to send.
Edit: whoops I called someone both a muslim and sikh. She converted so my mind for some reason conflated the two.
I totally agree with a lot of what you’ve said, but I do have a quick question cos I think maybe I’m confused. You met a Muslim woman who was Sikh? I thought they were two different religions!
You can criticize one bad thing without criticizing every other example of that bad thing. I don’t need to go through the list of every Republican president just to talk about how bad Trump was. I don’t need to go through the list of every serial killer to talk about how evil John Wayne Gacy was.
Christianity and Islam are the world’s two biggest religions. Obviously, discussions about them will come up more than discussions about other religions in many parts of the world. “Yeah, but what about the Zoroastrians?” doesn’t really make much headway in such discussions and isn’t really relevant to them.
I don’t know you at all, just asking probing questions that people sometimes forget to think about while spending their so much of their brief moments of human connection spouting anger and hatred. That’s all.
These “discussions on religion” that everyone is having that “migrate to islam” are still very much theoretical. Nobody here is asking for permission to publish a treatise that criticizes Islam.
No, OP and everyone involved is asking for the right to criticize without being criticized back. Which absolutely is loaded rhetoric that is typically associated with hate and bigotry. Yes, everyone is allowed to say whatever they want on the internet, but everyone else is allowed to interpet and criticize back however they want.
And in this case, bigots absolutely do criticize Islam, often with sweeping and inaccurate generalizations, in order to be racist without sounding racist. Negative atheism is often a shield for racism. So yes, I’m asking probing questions because it’s really hard to tell sometimes whether criticism of Islam is actually just diguised racism or just an atheist who wants to shit talk on religion and picks one he heard about in the news. And 9 times out of 10, the latter is an arguement from a position of ignorance and lacks any awareness of the complex sociopolitical factors that have shaped middle eastern/balkan nations as well as the religion of Islam.
Do you often find yourself in “discussions about religion” where your primary contribution is to complain about Christianity and Islam?
I live in Denmark where Christianity is the biggest religion, so it’s the one I have had shoved down my throat the most, which makes it the most obvious to criticize (because it’s the one I know the most about). As many people know Denmark has been on the news a lot lately because of people burning books. This has been a major topic in the Danish media even before the story spread across the world, so it’s been something I’ve debated on the regular the last couple of years as well. Those debates have mostly focused on the book burners though, and my criticism would be limited to something like “it’s just a book”.
This is why I mentioned those two religions in my original post.
I don’t know much about Zoroastrianism or Buddhism, so I wouldn’t know what to criticize. The same pretty much goes for Judaism, though I guess I know a bit more about that religion, seeing as Christianity is mostly built upon the Jewish scriptures.
Those debates have mostly focused on the book burners though, and my criticism would be limited to something like “it’s just a book”.
That’s not really a criticism of the religion though. Actually, it’s a criticism of people of that religion being angry about people from another religion slighting their own, which is more an opinion on book burning (which I vehemently disagree with mostly for reasons related to historical preservation) than anything to do with religion.
The reason I ask is that this post seems to imply that you are having conversations with friends when suddenly, " you know what grinds my gears? Christianity! Oh and by the way, fuck those Muslims too!" And negative Atheism is often an excuse for bigotry.
Covering the big three: Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism generally gets majority of the current worst offenders. But notes about the extremists version of Judaism, Buddhism, and other should be made too.
Covering the big three: Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism generally gets majority of the current worst offenders.
Yes, and I’m sure your point-by-point take downs of each of these are all the rage in college campuses everywhere. I’m sure nobody rolls their eyes at all when you launch into another diatribe about how Hinduism is destroying the world.
I personally criticise all religions in which the deity is purported to be omnipotent and omnibenevolent. Because those two things are directly opposed to each other for a deity in our world.
In your discussions about Islam, do you confine your criticism to Islam as a religion, or do you branch off into the political and social roles that Islam plays and their negative contributions towards human development (sorry if I am making assumptions)?
If it is the latter, it is an incomplete picture unless you talk about how what we now consider the Muslim world was pushed into being such through the systemic disassembly of moderate Islam and secular third world movements because they were seen as less disruptive to the international order than the potentially Soviet-aligned movements? The Islamic Republic in Iran didn’t come out of nowhere, after all. You’re not talking about Islam per se at that point, but a forced move of political radicalization that was looking for any carrier it could use.
In your discussions about Islam, do you confine your criticism to Islam as a religion, or do you branch off into the political and social roles that Islam plays and their negative contributions towards human development (sorry if I am making assumptions)?
This depends on who I’m talking to. I don’t usually steer the debate towards politics my self because I don’t feel like I’m well enough informed about foreign politics to start that particular debate. However one of my friends with whom I often have deep discussions is from Iran, and he loves debating the political side of what is going on there lately, so when I’m talking to him, the political and social roles of Islam is regularly touched upon. If I’m talking to someone who doesn’t have a greater knowledge of the political side than I do, I try to keep it about the religion. If I’m going to debate something I know little or nothing about, I prefer if the other person does know something about it, so they can correct me if I make dumb assumptions because of my ignorance, and so I can learn a bit more and hopefully become less ignorant with time.
I think that the media is controlled by people that are extremely wealthy, not just bankers and that some of them being Jewish has nothing to do with it.
Bigotry is intersectional. You know damn well what people are trying to say, and what hateful bullshit they’re responding to.
When some redcap uses “Muslim” as a synecdoche for spitting out middle-eastern stereotypes, they’re not engaging in comparative religious criticism, or making some grand philosophical argument. They’re being a racist asshole. Even if the label they use is not a race. If you haven’t noticed - racist assholes love tiny excuses to say ‘what’s so racist about–?!’ whatever dehumanizing caricature they just attributed to some associated label. Like “thugs.” Or “bankers.”
Bankers aren’t an ethnicity… but people screaming about “bankers controlling the media” are definitely talking about an ethnicity.
This is true, but when I’m having a discussion about religion and I feel like I’m done criticizing christianity and move on to islam for a bit, people shouldn’t say “woah, that sounds a bit racist”, and some people still do. I’m very left leaning but I have to say it’s mostly people who consider themselves progressive or left leaning, who have trouble separating these things.
Do you often find yourself in “discussions about religion” where your primary contribution is to complain about Christianity and Islam?
Do you also criticize Judaism? Zoroastrianism? Buddhism?
Or is it just those two?
I’ve never met a Zoroastrian and I’d bet you haven’t either.
Buddhism in the experience of any Anglophone is likely to be pleasant metaphysical nothings.
Judaism is more often the target of hatred than its source, and while that balance swings precipitously for Orthodox communities, they’re few and far between.
The simple fact of the matter is - Christianity is overwhelmingly what fucks with English-speaking nations 24/7, and Islam only sticks out for some extremely specific events. Do I need an on-record opinion of Mongol animistic faith and Bantu shamanic ritual before I’m allowed to talk shit about apostasy and Leviticus?
Do you ever find yourself in discussions about religion where the topics of discussion include Zoroaster?
I have actually met a Zoroastrian and had some fascinating conversations about their religion. I would never practice their religion, nor do I particularly care for organized religion, but I’m glad I got to meet and talk to them because it helped me understand a personal experience I would never untake.
Judaism is often the target of hatred, these days, because of anti-semites. Not because of debates about the merits of the religion. Those debates are primarily held internally - you know, amongst people who actually know and care about the religion.
Have you ever met a Muslim?
Yes, of fucking course I have. Not that it would have any bearing on my ability to talk shit about enshrined dogma or free-range woo-woo nonsense. Nor would it absolve me, if I started labeling those engineers according to the beliefs of AK-wielding maniacs.
Congratulations on identifying antisemitism as bigotry. Apply that to Islam and you’ll find the topic of this discussion. ‘Islam is often the target of hatred, not on the merits of the religion, but because of bigoted assholes.’
People who are criticizing the religion itself have to distinguish themselves from those assholes. It takes additional effort. Audiences expecting it’s all insincere cover for bigotry is not ideal, but it’s better than letting racists make flimsy excuses.
People whose only contribution is religious criticism are doing nothing wrong.
For the Muslims I have known, I respect their right to practice whatever nonsense they like. But. I respect them. Their religion is nonsense, as all religions are nonsense. Any positive experience exists in spite of their holy text saying, in black and white, that the AK-wielding maniacs have the right idea. I have endless vitriol for morons who insist all Muslims must believe blah blah blah, because, plainly not. But the most defanged version of any Abrahamic faith is still really fucked up. And that wide base of wishy-washy support is a constant shield and breeding-ground for the diehard violent loons.
‘This is the unquestionable word of the creator of the universe, but ehhh don’t take it too seriously’ is a hard sell.
Uh huh.
Well I have met and talked to several Muslims in my life. Religion only really came up for a couple of them, because you know, they’re just people going through their lives like anyone else and religion doesn’t often come up in polite company unless you’re a part of their religion. But there are a few I’ve gotten to know well enough to feel comfortable about asking.
Anyway, after some expected hesitancy, and some convincing that I’m just curious about their experiences, everyone I’ve talked to explained that their experience of islam is very peaceful and compassionate and gives them a sense of belonging and community. One asked about my own experiences with religion, which made them feel lucky to have found a good community. I said I had found other communities and was fine. And after that day, I felt like we understood eacj other a little better than before.
I knew a Sikh woman once, so wore the whole garb even though she lived in America. I asked her how she felt about the garb, and expected something something sacred religious whatever. But she surprised me by saying she felt the garb was a form of expression for her, an identity, and also made her felt safer - this was before 9/11. She said it was her choice to wear it and wore it proudly. And that really gave me the context I needed to break out of my biases about Islam and accept that we all do wierd shit, religious or otherwise, and that’s not only okay, it makes us unique and interesting.
When I look at the replies on this post, I see a lot of confusion, a lot of anger, a lot of hatred, and a lot of circlejerking. And rightly so, because there’s no context to this post. No, criticizing Islam isn’t always racist but it really depends on the context and the individuals receiving it.
OP is repeating the same dangerous rhetoric that I see across all sides of disagreement - but is always connected to bigotry: “I should be allowed to criticize without being criticized.” I can’t deny the appeal of such a request but it’s unreasonable. OP is absolutely allowed to say whatever he wants. But his audience is also free to respond and interpret.
The thing is, when you send negativity out into the world, you get it back. And if OP isn’t ready for that, maybe he should find more positive messages to send.
Edit: whoops I called someone both a muslim and sikh. She converted so my mind for some reason conflated the two.
I totally agree with a lot of what you’ve said, but I do have a quick question cos I think maybe I’m confused. You met a Muslim woman who was Sikh? I thought they were two different religions!
Yes, you are right. She was a former muslim who converted to Sikhism and I apparently confused myself and typed it out wrong.
You can criticize one bad thing without criticizing every other example of that bad thing. I don’t need to go through the list of every Republican president just to talk about how bad Trump was. I don’t need to go through the list of every serial killer to talk about how evil John Wayne Gacy was.
Christianity and Islam are the world’s two biggest religions. Obviously, discussions about them will come up more than discussions about other religions in many parts of the world. “Yeah, but what about the Zoroastrians?” doesn’t really make much headway in such discussions and isn’t really relevant to them.
I mean, how often are discussions about Islam “coming up” in your daily life?
Is your only contribution to those “discussions” to criticize the religion?
Not often but sometimes and no not always. Maybe you don’t know me as well as you think you do.
I don’t know you at all, just asking probing questions that people sometimes forget to think about while spending their so much of their brief moments of human connection spouting anger and hatred. That’s all.
You asked loaded questions which, just based on context, clearly had answers you thought you already knew.
These “discussions on religion” that everyone is having that “migrate to islam” are still very much theoretical. Nobody here is asking for permission to publish a treatise that criticizes Islam.
No, OP and everyone involved is asking for the right to criticize without being criticized back. Which absolutely is loaded rhetoric that is typically associated with hate and bigotry. Yes, everyone is allowed to say whatever they want on the internet, but everyone else is allowed to interpet and criticize back however they want.
And in this case, bigots absolutely do criticize Islam, often with sweeping and inaccurate generalizations, in order to be racist without sounding racist. Negative atheism is often a shield for racism. So yes, I’m asking probing questions because it’s really hard to tell sometimes whether criticism of Islam is actually just diguised racism or just an atheist who wants to shit talk on religion and picks one he heard about in the news. And 9 times out of 10, the latter is an arguement from a position of ignorance and lacks any awareness of the complex sociopolitical factors that have shaped middle eastern/balkan nations as well as the religion of Islam.
I live in Denmark where Christianity is the biggest religion, so it’s the one I have had shoved down my throat the most, which makes it the most obvious to criticize (because it’s the one I know the most about). As many people know Denmark has been on the news a lot lately because of people burning books. This has been a major topic in the Danish media even before the story spread across the world, so it’s been something I’ve debated on the regular the last couple of years as well. Those debates have mostly focused on the book burners though, and my criticism would be limited to something like “it’s just a book”. This is why I mentioned those two religions in my original post.
I don’t know much about Zoroastrianism or Buddhism, so I wouldn’t know what to criticize. The same pretty much goes for Judaism, though I guess I know a bit more about that religion, seeing as Christianity is mostly built upon the Jewish scriptures.
That’s not really a criticism of the religion though. Actually, it’s a criticism of people of that religion being angry about people from another religion slighting their own, which is more an opinion on book burning (which I vehemently disagree with mostly for reasons related to historical preservation) than anything to do with religion.
The reason I ask is that this post seems to imply that you are having conversations with friends when suddenly, " you know what grinds my gears? Christianity! Oh and by the way, fuck those Muslims too!" And negative Atheism is often an excuse for bigotry.
Covering the big three: Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism generally gets majority of the current worst offenders. But notes about the extremists version of Judaism, Buddhism, and other should be made too.
Um excuse me?
Yes, and I’m sure your point-by-point take downs of each of these are all the rage in college campuses everywhere. I’m sure nobody rolls their eyes at all when you launch into another diatribe about how Hinduism is destroying the world.
I personally criticise all religions in which the deity is purported to be omnipotent and omnibenevolent. Because those two things are directly opposed to each other for a deity in our world.
Cool beans
In your discussions about Islam, do you confine your criticism to Islam as a religion, or do you branch off into the political and social roles that Islam plays and their negative contributions towards human development (sorry if I am making assumptions)?
If it is the latter, it is an incomplete picture unless you talk about how what we now consider the Muslim world was pushed into being such through the systemic disassembly of moderate Islam and secular third world movements because they were seen as less disruptive to the international order than the potentially Soviet-aligned movements? The Islamic Republic in Iran didn’t come out of nowhere, after all. You’re not talking about Islam per se at that point, but a forced move of political radicalization that was looking for any carrier it could use.
This depends on who I’m talking to. I don’t usually steer the debate towards politics my self because I don’t feel like I’m well enough informed about foreign politics to start that particular debate. However one of my friends with whom I often have deep discussions is from Iran, and he loves debating the political side of what is going on there lately, so when I’m talking to him, the political and social roles of Islam is regularly touched upon. If I’m talking to someone who doesn’t have a greater knowledge of the political side than I do, I try to keep it about the religion. If I’m going to debate something I know little or nothing about, I prefer if the other person does know something about it, so they can correct me if I make dumb assumptions because of my ignorance, and so I can learn a bit more and hopefully become less ignorant with time.
Edit: a word
I think that the media is controlled by people that are extremely wealthy, not just bankers and that some of them being Jewish has nothing to do with it.