To be sick to death of being told to not confuse terrorists with Muslims on every social media/discussion site

[Elsmom]

Erm yes... I'm not thick, I do know this. It's condescending, patronising and presumptuous. I actually think based on the lives of my Muslim neighbours and friends that there hasn't been this presumed outpouring of islamophobia and Muslims are not suffering due to the attacks in Paris at all? We, most of society can be trusted to make the distinction between terrorists and Muslims. Just sick of being lectured everytime I log onto anything!

Or that it is a "religion of nutters".

Or that no Muslims should be allowed to immigrate to Britain at all.

All things I have read recently on MN.

Yet in objecting to those i have called a lefty bleeding heart activist with no life who calls everything I don't agree with racist and Islamophobic.

Depressing.

The examples I spoke of are Islamophobic. And that's just on MN. There are far worse comments out there I'm sure.

As a geek, I find the Evolutionary Psychology theories about prejudice quite plausible:

Researchers in the field have hypothesised that we may be pre-disposed to crudely classify people, animals and plants into simplified groups - e.g. dangerous / friendly / delicious with onions - as a survival measure.
However, what helped primitive hunter gatherers on the Savannah Plain 200,000 years ago can be disastrous in our highly complex society, if applied without thinking properly.

Presumably, any inherent tendencies would be reinforced or reduced by the environment of the surrounding society, plus individual life experiences.

Importantly, survival instincts kick in hard when we feel ourselves, or especially our families, are in danger and these can override the reasoned opinions we would normally have.

So, we need to keep reminding ourselves not to lump together a diverse group of people as “the other”, whether on ground of religion, race, politics, body shape.
It’s not being patronising: we are all susceptible to this tendency and noone should feel either smugly superior or unfairly picked on.
We must consciously train ourselves - not just others - and be watchful to avoid unfair / superficial classifications.

Yes the same old bores preaching (to the converted) via their Facebook statuses.

It's usually more about them than actually really caring about the issues.

There are a lot of people here that need reminding. I think Its because I
live in an area with no diversity.

Did Charlie hebbo publish that backinkybriefly? The article seems to suggest it was a random cartoon posted online?

CH might've published some offensive Jesus cartoons, you're right that I don't know- I'm not a avid reader and it's more than possible that only their numerous offensive Mohammed cartoons have been publicised. My point was if they haven't, they did seem to be focusing on offending Islam rather a lot

I don't know if that was from there. It was just handy as I'd just seen it linked to on another thread, but loads about all religions. I can't really appreciate them as I don't speak French, but it seem they were fairly balanced in their targets.

bigChocFrenzy that's the best argument I've seen in favour of preaching against Islamophobia I've seen so far.

I would counter it slightly by saying that it estimates human intelligence and too low in the modern day and age, and doesn't really take into account the effect of socialisation, that most of us in jobs and with social lives undergo, where we meet on a daily basis those from a far greater variety of backgrounds and experiences 200,000 years ago.

Or in practical terms, a bit like the terrorists, I've noticed that only one or two extreme examples of my FB friends spouted off Islamophobia following the Paris attacks. I'm impressed at the amount of common sense shown by most people, who seem able to easily distinguish between a rogue terrorist and a follower of Islam. Most of us know people who do follow Islam, and who may well be our friends and neighbours, which probably makes a huge difference.

I don't think treating people as if they are thick or dumn is a very promising strategy - most would surely tend to ignore it or laugh it off, and stick to their own views, if you get the approach that wrong. But I tend to assume people are at least as intelligent as myself (unless the contrary is proven).

This is not very flattering!

almond your remarks are so fucking ridiculous regarding my post I can't bother to bite.

As usual agree with chandler excellent post ^^.

I'm not surprised by that theboody. I am used to people using their supposed 'tolerance' as a vehicle to spread hatred on the Internet and then treating the distress it causes others as some kind of game you may or may not 'bite' at.

This thread has been Catholic bashing from the start, despite the OP never even mentioning them in the OP.

The lack of people criticising this while claiming to be offended over hatred against Muslims illustrates the OP's point. It is all posturing and social positioning. It has nothing to do with religious tolerance at all.

Sughra Ahmed, president of the Islamic Society of Britain, said freedom needs to be defended "at all costs".

"We need to de-escalate the tension around all this. Those Muslims who feel offended may have a right, but in the scheme of things we should be far more offended by injustice, economic exploitation, anti-Semitism, homophobia, murder, etc," she said.

A wonderful contrast to shithead Anjem Choudary's call for war.

"But I tend to assume people are at least as intelligent as myself (unless the contrary is proven)."

Would this be people you know? People in your work/social circle? Or everyone? Because, if the last option, you'd be wrong. As I said before, it's worth remembering that the AVERAGE IQ is 100. That means there are plenty of people around with an IQ below 100. Unless your IQ is the lowest it can be on the scale, then there are going to be a LOT of people less intelligent than you out there, so your assumption is wrong.

I mostly see tolerance actually on mumsnet and where I live (amongst lots of muslims). I am very pleased by the united reaction.

However the bottom line is I live in and want to continue to live in a culture where we can mock anyone and if I find women who cover their heads very offensive (as I do) then |I just have to put up with that and lump it as do people who might be offended by my saying there is no God, gays are fine, men and women are equal and Thetans did not fly out of the sky.

If muslims are upset by cartoons or Christians then they cannot have a very strong God or faith if a drawing causes such problems. I bet if there is a God she weeps at the mess man (usually men not women) have made of a few basic rules like love people and don't kill. Not in her name.

In fact, 100 is the median IQ score, not the average, but the point is still valid - there are plenty of people with an IQ below 100 out there.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient#mediaviewer/File:IQ_distribution.svg

Thumbwitch Would this be people you know? People in your work/social circle? Or everyone?

Everyone. I'm an optimist! I assume people are intelligent, unless the contrary is proven. Sometimes I'm wrong.

I find mumsnet far, far less tolerant than real life. This thread isn't bad, in fact its very intolerant of racism in general, but in terms of getting things wrong, making sweeping and rather idiotic comments, particularly accusing people of things - far, far less tolerant.

BOB, it's true that no one has been bombed for that awful image. But, christians once murdered each other in large numbers for all kinds of nonsense. The Cathars of Southern France were wiped out for believing that good and evil were dual aspects of mankind. It wasn't even heresy. It was just a different way of looking at human nature. I don't know what your link is a different way of looking at. But, I reckon, if you'd have shown it to the earl, Simon de Montfort, you'd have been in some pretty painful trouble.

DoraGora, you''re right to remind people now and then that Christians did that too. I've upset a few Christians myself by saying that very thing.

Oh and don't forget Jews too. They have their atrocities recorded in the old testament for all to see.

But no Christians or Jews have killed over a picture this week and probably not for a couple of centuries - perhaps never.

When it comes to resisting prejudice, particularly when society is seriously strained by terrorism, I believe Emotional IQ and empathy are more relevant than standard IQ.
Some brilliant scientists, including Nobel prizewinners, have made astonishingly crass and backward statements about controversial issues outside their area of expertise.

EQ of course varies too across the population.
IQ does have relevance to some degree though, wrt the ability to understand and assess information from different sources.

The Reformation and Enlightenment transformed Christianity and enabled the development of our current "Western" values.

The equivalent modernisation of Islam is likely to be more difficult, because the Koran is claimed to be the direct word of God, rather than being transmitted via prophets in the Bible.

Yasmin Brown has a very interesting Article in the Guardian about Muslims and their religious constraints, ranging from the savage punishment of Muslim reformers in countries like Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, to the criticism she received from UK Muslims for publishing her book "refusing the Veil".
I was astonished by the very harsh criticism she received from her educated acquaintances.

Oh I'm not saying that high IQ people can't be astonishingly crass and backward, of course they can! I was responding to the point about "most people being at least as intelligent as me" - when in reality, it's unlikely to be the case. And yes, low IQ is going to reduce people's ability to think around what they're being told.

The equivalent modernisation of Islam is likely to be more difficult, because the Koran is claimed to be the direct word of God, rather than being transmitted via prophets in the Bible.

I'm not stalking you, honestly (paranoid after Fanjo's comments). Sharia Law also is generally said by international lawyers to have massive problems, because inflexibility is built into it as a doctrine. That results in administrative inflexibility (it tends to produce legislatures which protect against change, rather than facilitating it), and it simply does not, and cannot recognise simple mercantile (trading and business) principles which have been around in Western legal systems since the Romans and even the Danes invented them 3000-2500 years ago.

I find preachy types annoying, because they assume people are more stupid than they actually are and self-assume a role of teacher which they are hardly guaranteed to be good at or even get things right.

Sometimes people simply need to let off steam by saying things, but would never ever dream of being actively racist. But policing people's word, like thoughtspeak can be dangerous. Even ancient communities recognise the need to let off steam - US Indians, probably one of the most recent equivalents of your archaic hunter gatherer societies 200,000 years ago, used to practice something called "counting coup" when engaging with immigrants - basically threatening attack but instead simply lightly touching on the shoulder. This is a basis from which friendly relations with respect on both sides can form, but unfortunately white settlers tended to respond with an over-reaction and shoot them. Some things never change.