Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To wish our press made a stand for enlightenment values....

162 replies

Babycham1979 · 07/01/2015 16:12

....and all published the cartoons of Mohammed on their front covers tomorrow.

The right to freedom of expression and to cause offence are fundamental principles that underpin European values and liberal western democracy; surely the only response to the Charlie Hebdo shootings is for our society to make a stand against this kind of fascist terrorism and show that we can't be cowed by bullying.

Some people may be offended, but that's the price you pay for reaping the benefits of living in a modern, liberal, secular society. If our media bows down to this kind of violence, surely the nut-jobs have won? Self-imposed censorship is still censorship.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
Ubik1 · 08/01/2015 20:29

The common good is standing up for our democratic values - values that we appear to take for granted.

You are blaming those journalists for their own deaths. And for the deaths of others.

I've not said anything about 'appeasers.'

I'm taking issue with your suggestion that these people were in some way responsible for their deaths. That is a frightening position to take - we live in a democracy, we have the right to ridicule God, Allah and whoever else we want to. It might not be clever, it may be offensive but we should be able to do it without fear.

Sadly this is no longer the case.

Babycham1979 · 08/01/2015 21:39

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

wanttosqueezeyou · 08/01/2015 22:02

YANBU.

Time to stand up and be counted.

wanttosqueezeyou · 08/01/2015 22:08

Thin end of the wedge sugar.

There are many things these people find offensive. Gays, women, educating girls - off the top of my head.

Do we need to start watching our step? Being careful what we wear? Where will it end.

MuttersDarkly · 08/01/2015 22:09

i'm just enough of realist to know that we have to act in a responsible manner

To wish our press made a stand for enlightenment values....
SugarOnTop · 08/01/2015 22:36

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

SugarOnTop · 08/01/2015 22:39

Gays, women, educating girls are not promising to kill innocent people - there's the difference.

terrorists ARE threatening peoples lives so you have to take a different approach to make your point.

LemonySnug · 08/01/2015 22:43

Sugar on Top you may find the cartoons offensive, but that is your problem. It doesn't mean that they are offensive. Others may actually find them funny.

Islam should be subject to criticism like everything else. Muslims should stop thinking that the are so bloody special and that there should always be different rules for them

Makes me puke.

Nancy66 · 08/01/2015 22:44

what vile stuff? Nothing vile was published.

simontowers2 · 08/01/2015 23:30

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

SugarOnTop · 08/01/2015 23:43

I am not offended by them in the least. i don't subscribe to any organised religion - its a load of bollocks as far as i'm concerned.

ahhh, Simplesimon........you are soooooo mature Grin i'm absolutely sure i've read the same said about you here on MN over the past couple of years Grin

i am amused to see how some of you cannot debate or discuss opposing opinions without resorting to name calling and childish behaviour Grin

think i'll leave you to your playpen whilst i go join adult company Grin

CaffeLatteIceCream · 08/01/2015 23:59

Sorry...but every last one of you who is taking the "Well, we don't condone what the murderers did, but there's no need to offend Islam" is missing the point to an embarrassingly MASSIVE degree.

And ....not only are you adding to the problem, you are part of the reason we have a problem in the first place.

Trying not to offend the sensibilities of an archaic religion lends credence to the idea that they have some right not to be offended. That they have some right to expect us to curb our own freedom of speech and expression because it will upset them. This then adds to their sense of indignation when someone DOES "offend" them and they feel justified in going on their ignorant rampages.

Remember the cuddly toy named Mohammed? Remember the riots when the Danish cartoons were first published? Remember Salman Rusdie and the Fatwa which continues to this day?

And I bet you were there saying...."Well, of course Salman Rushdie shouldn't have a price on his head, but he knew his book would offend and Muslims shouldn't be made to feel insulted like that". Right?

Who gives a flying fuck if Muslims are offended? That's their tough shit. Nobody has the right, or should be tacitly given the right, not to be offended.

Freedom of speech does not exist to support your right to say popular things. It exists to support your right to say unpopular things. And it is, without question, the most important right any of us have. It is one of the cornerstones of democracy and it must, must not only be supported...but LOUDLY and VOCALLY supported.

And the whole "no need to be an intolerant dick" attitude?

Yes, there is a need to be an intolerant dick about Islam. It is an horrific ideology that is holding an enormous amount of people - women and children in particular - hostage all over the world everyday.

Every right minded person should be being a dick about Islam.

And those moderate Muslims we're all mates with, who are horrified just like us? Then they should be being a dick about Islam too.

TempsPerdu · 09/01/2015 00:01

YANBU at all, OP. It's been quite startling over the past couple of days to note the sizeable minority of people who just don't seem to grasp the principle of free speech. Lots of lip service being paid to freedom of expression, then qualified with statements like '...as long is it isn't offensive'. Sad really that publishing the Mohammed cartoons should even be considered a brave act. As I see it, nothing should be above criticism and satire, and that includes Islam.

MistressMia · 09/01/2015 00:49

Yes, there is a need to be an intolerant dick about Islam. It is an horrific ideology that is holding an enormous amount of people - women and children in particular - hostage all over the world everyday.

Every right minded person should be being a dick about Islam

And those moderate Muslims we're all mates with, who are horrified just like us? Then they should be being a dick about Islam too.

this a million times over

MistressMia · 09/01/2015 01:18

To anyone still up please can you all text and share this appeal for Saudi blogger ASAP.

Its just been announced he will start being flogged tomorrow

Names are being submitted at 8.30am tomorrow

www.facebook.com/AmnestyUK/photos/a.398583814394.172651.7624294394/10152995151439395/?type=1&theater

www.amnesty.org.uk/write-rights-raif-badawi-saudi-arabia?utm_source=FBPAGE&utm_medium=Social&utm_content=20150108182800&utm_campaign=Freedom_of_expression&linkId=11626740#.VK8qWkvSzVs

To wish our press made a stand for enlightenment values....
kawliga · 09/01/2015 03:32

sugar is not a fool, she is just afraid of the terrorists. It is a natural human reaction to be afraid of angry people with guns who will come and shoot you if you tell jokes about them. It is natural (or common sense as Sugar says) to decide to stay quiet and try not to antagonize them and hopefully they will go away and not hurt you and your loved ones.

Most of us are afraid of terrorists. Most of us are not heroes.

We should just be grateful that there are those amongst us with the courage to lay their lives on the line for the freedom of everybody else. Charlie Hebdo had the courage to stand for freedom, and we all benefit from that. To me journalists are just like those who serve in the armed forces: they expose themselves to danger when most of us really wouldn't have the fortitude to do that. We'd be too frightened, to be honest. Like Sugar here, running scared.

So, a few brave folks fight for our freedom and they get no gratitude. What they get is 'how could they be so stupid to put themselves in danger'! But I think they don't do it for the gratitude. They do it for freedom, so we can all live in freedom (including the freedom to be scared and ungrateful).

CheerfulYank · 09/01/2015 03:38

I despise those cartoons but I stand unequivocally behind the right to draw them.

kawliga · 09/01/2015 03:45

Before Charlie Hebdo I too despised those cartoons. Now I love those cartoons. Charlie Hebdo has completely changed my views about offensive writing/drawing/jokes. I feel like those 12 should not have died in vain.

Before Charlie Hebdo I hated racist jokes, which are not even remotely funny but just offensive and stupid. Now when I hear a racist joke I will just think of Charlie Hebdo and think '12 people died for your right to tell that racist joke'. Racism is a scourge, but better racism than journalists shot dead at their desks.

UptheChimney · 09/01/2015 08:13

OP you are definitely utterly REASONABLE.

Problem is, not all the world had an Enlightenment, and there are cultures & religions that are still invested in misogyny, patriarchy, and ignorance.

Babycham1979 · 09/01/2015 08:33

I've said this on another thread, but I'll say it again. It feels to me as if Britain has finally realised that some of our. Alums ARE superior and that we shouldn't be guiltily apologising for them constantly. Also that, if people are going to come to this country, they will have to accept and abide by our values unconditionally. The pre-modern nut jobs have gone too far now, and I suspect (and hope) this will give Europe a renewed sense of confidence in enforcing our values in our own societies. Tolerance, freedom, equality are not dirty words.

OP posts:
MuttersDarkly · 09/01/2015 09:36

Sugar

At least the price of my cartoon was just a harmless fuck off from an internet random.

But do you know what another difference between you and murdering bastard fanatics is ?

If I had self censored, you would have been less twisted knickers in response.

Murdering bastard fanatics won't. You can self censor yourself right into a burkah, and they are not going to stop killing.

Because whatever the reason of the day is, the real motivation is power, control and permission to maim and murder.

In the same way there is nothing black people can say or do to appease the KKK and get them to leave them alone, nothing gay people can do to appease the WB church out of behaving like utter dicks, nothing any Albanian can do to appease Lega Nord-ites into non bastard-ness.

The people grooming, influencing and funding individual lost/damaged souls, impressionable teenagers, warped types who like maiming and killing... are not going to down arms on the basis of our self censorship.

Even if we gave them everything they wanted,right down to wholesale mass conversion to the "right" sort of Islam (and try doing that given that there isn't an agreed one true way) , they'd still find reasons to commit barbaric acts. If you don't believe me, go take a peek at where the vast overwhelming bulk of the victims of Islamic terrorism is. Those people sure as hell aren't making so much a mild eyebrow raise at Muhammad. They are still dying in their thousands.

What you want is a solution. To make it stop.

There isn't one. This is how it is for now. And none of us know for how long, or what will take its place in the future. Life is insecure, unpredictable and for as long as we've had life, murdering bastard fanatics have been around to make everybody else as miserable and/or as dead as they can.

So perhaps it makes more sense to hold on to the things that helped make our society better for us overall, rather than jettison them for the sake of a thing that given half a chance would make our society so very much worse ? Which does include deeply irreverent satire, particularly the variety with the greater potential for penetration, which includes cartoons, spitting image style commentary and crude/rude stand up.

Personally I am not prepared to give the above up so you can have a wholly erroneous sensation that you can control murdering bastard fanatics by limiting what you (and we) say/draw.

As for "vile stuff". There seems to a concerted effort to label cartoons that many haven't even seen, as racist.

A racist looking at them will enjoy them for racist reasons. Just like they will enjoy all and any cartoon satire of Obama for the same reason.

But when I look at them I see the same thing I see when the Pope, the Madonna, God or Jesus are satirized. A very sharp pencil poking fun at and making a mockery of the all too easily reachable weak spots in a powerful, control freaky institution. Which is not small potatoes. Smashing sacred golden calves rarely is.

Thank the god I don't believe in that such irreverence is practiced. Because it plays a significant role in maintaining the boundaries around said powerful institutions which helps us avoid them returning to a point where they censored, with bloodshed if needs be. It plays a role in keeping them out of the state, out of the bedroom, out of the courtroom. And that is a very good thing.

Unless you read history wistfully thinking "oh for the good old days".

writtenguarantee · 09/01/2015 10:02

Gays, women, educating girls are not promising to kill innocent people - there's the difference.

agreed. So I guess they are fair game? Perhaps gays, women and children should grab some masks, guns and bombs so that people stop saying vile stuff about them too. They too get offended.

Is that the answer? Threats and violence?

stubbornstains · 09/01/2015 10:34

what vile stuff? Nothing vile was published.

Personally, I think the Charlie Hebdo cover illustration of the pregnant Boko Haram sex slaves screaming "Don't touch our benefits (alloc)". counts as vile. By anyone's measure.

I also think the images of the prophet Mohammed, naked, as a porn star are pretty vile.

I wouldn't want to see stuff like this published in any British paper, and, were it published out of context in this country, I'm sure there would be a huge public backlash- and not just from Muslims.

Problem is, free speech is freer for some sections of society than others. Unless the people you are vilifying also have access to the front pages of the mainstream media to make their point, then it's hardly a level playing field, is it?

The tragedy is that they finally have found a way to get their front page Sad.

I would forever condemn these attacks, but if images like this were published in this country, I would definitely be supporting peaceful protest against them.

writtenguarantee · 09/01/2015 10:56

I also think the images of the prophet Mohammed, naked, as a porn star are pretty vile.

that may are may not be a reference to mohammed having child brides.

I wouldn't want to see stuff like this published in any British paper, and, were it published out of context in this country, I'm sure there would be a huge public backlash- and not just from Muslims.

there's a solution to that. don't buy the newspaper!

Unless the people you are vilifying also have access to the front pages of the mainstream media to make their point, then it's hardly a level playing field, is it?

if we are talking about muslims, they have plenty of means to respond appropriately. the muslim council of britain has publications through which it can respond. it isn't an even playing field, but they are hardly helpless.

StainlessSteelBegonia · 09/01/2015 11:11

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Swipe left for the next trending thread