Draw Mohammad Day

[Nordic Einar]

I think that if you're going to be an asshole, even if you're being an asshole for noble reasons, you should be honest enough with yourself to admit that you're being an asshole.

I reiterate, since people continue to strawman this - I do not believe Islam is exempt from criticism, or that you shouldn't have the right to draw Muhammad. I just think you're a dick for doing it, and I'd appreciate the honesty of admitting you're a dick.

We are being dicks. We honestly don't care that we are being dicks, since we are fighting for our right to be dicks.

Happy now?

No, because I still think you're being a huge dick to non-extremist Muslims, but at least you've got the self-respect to admit it to yourself.

Islam is reprehensible, and I have no qualms about 'offending' or 'othering' people who subscribe to a vile and oppressive ideology which they wish to impose upon others; they can get over it. Any dickishness which might be contained within an innocent drawing of Mohammad is far outweighed by their dickishness towards women, gays and non-Muslims (or indeed other Muslims!). I salute this initiative and support making every day Draw Mohammad Day (with prizes for most creative insulting depictions) until they shape up or shut up.

This shit? Right here? This is the kind of person DMD is giving a platform to. This is the kind of person who, because they're emboldened by the thousands who're participating too, are harassing non-extremist Muslims. You cannot separate DMD and shit like this, because this shit is often a core constituent. And the thing is? I know plenty of many liberal, high-minded XKCD-esque peers who participated under the guise of protecting free speech. The truth of the matter? Most of them did it because they finally had a day when being Islamophobic and offensive to Muslims was okay.

I doubt you'll find many participants that would agree with those anti-Muslim sentiments. And even if that were the case, I'm more concerned with the merit of their actions than the purity of their motives.

Many participants in this thread? Maybe. Many participants out in the wide open internet? I'd strongly argue to the contrary.
But it's cool - you don't mind if they're racist, bigotted fucks, as long as it pushes your desired agenda, right?

[Robstickle]

This shit? Right here? This is the kind of person DMD is giving a platform to. This is the kind of person who, because they're emboldened by the thousands who're participating too, are harassing non-extremist Muslims. You cannot separate DMD and shit like this, because this shit is often a core constituent. And the thing is? I know plenty of many liberal, high-minded XKCD-esque peers who participated under the guise of protecting free speech. The truth of the matter? Most of them did it because they finally had a day when being Islamophobic and offensive to Muslims was okay.

Or perhaps they really were just participating to give a big "fuck you" to the people who think it's okay to send death threats (and in at least one case carry them out) over pictures of Mohammad.

[Rakysh]

Looking at the pictures uploaded to the facebook page, the majority are from people like Atlasdrugged than people like Smw.

[smw543]

You cannot separate DMD and shit like this, because this shit is often a core constituent.

Citation needed.

But it's cool - you don't mind if they're racist, bigotted fucks, as long as it pushes your desired agenda, right?

Are you getting enough oxygen up there on your high horse?

Either DMD is a worthwhile effort or it isn't. The calculation is the value of the message weighed (which is certainly open to debate) against the harm done (which is also open to debate). If it turned out that a large contingent of women suffragists only got involved so they could vote for pro-segregation candidates, would that make their efforts any less important?

"Intent doesn't matter" goes both ways.

[Rakysh]

Citation here: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Everybody-Draw-Mohammed-Day/121369914543425#!/pages/Everybody-Draw-Mohammed-Day/121369914543425?v=photos

The majority of the photos actually featuring Mohammed show him as a terrorist or a paedophile. All kinds of other racist shit is posted.

[Gelsamel]

This shit? Right here? This is the kind of person DMD is giving a platform to.

Oh noes, the internet gives a platform to the most depraved and abhorrent speech ever! So what? "I don't like what some people are saying" is not a very powerful argument for anything other than your own opinion here.



To use an argument from the other side... I don't like how some here are maligning the whole group based off the extremists. Guess that means we should rally against this here thread. Or is this okay solely you (generic) don't disagree with it?

[smw543]

I can't really be bothered to go through 13,000 pictures (though I'm assuming you didn't either). But I've looked at the last 100 or so, and skimmed quite a few more, and there are plenty of innocuous ones; nearly every serious cartoon (as in, a serious submission, not something put together in MS Paint in five minutes) was appropriate IMO. As for the pedophilia and pig jokes, the vast majority are silly memes or otherwise obviously of the "this is a joke" variety. And depicting him alongside terrorism is a legitimate form of criticism.

And of course, you have Muslims "fighting back" by, for example, posting a picture of someone wiping his ass with an Israeli flag.

[Rakysh]

I think Mohammed pictured having sex with a pig has gone beyond just making a point, but whatever.

[scikidus]

Now that I look back on it, Draw Mohammad Day was a mistake, for the simple reason that its objective was not clearly defined.

The point here is not to offend the millions of peace-loving Muslims out there, but to show the non-peace-loving Muslims that violence is not a deterrent. Draw Mohammad Day lost sight of that, especially one the /b/tards of the internet caught wind of it. That Facebook group feels oddly familiar to the result the last time 4chan took on a crazy religion....

The problem is that once the fucktardary of the internet got on board with the event, the aim shifted from making a point to offending the high hell out of people. We shouldn't be trying to outright offend these people, we should make the very fact that they are offended at all look completely ridiculous.

A picture of Mohammad fucking a goat is offensive. Heck, if someone did that with Obama or really any other person, it would be just as offensive.

However, if I drew something like this:

Spoiler:

Then you've successfully made whomever is offended by that look completely ridiculous. What is there to be offended by in that picture? Once you've removed actually offensive material from the event, then you can actually make a point.

I'd propose that if this ever happens again, only peaceful images be accepted. A simple smiling stick figure, an arrow and a word like that shouldn't be offensive.

[felltir]

That Facebook group feels oddly familiar to the result the last time 4chan took on a crazy religion...

Islam != Scientology. Islam is a widely respected religion, Scientology is a cult. Please respect others' beliefs, and do NOT refer to them as crazy.

[Greyarcher]

My point is that nobody has recommended censorship. Your post is non-sequitur.

No, the mention of censorship was a reference to Pakistan's reaction (i.e. blocking the sites that depicted Mohammad).

[TheGrammarBolshevik]

So you weren't responding to the person whom you were quoting?

[Greyarcher]

So you weren't responding to the person whom you were quoting?

I was remarking that your mention of /b/ was an interesting analogy, and used that as a stepping point to speak generally in the rest of my post.
Edit: Or rather, I found the analogy to /b/ interesting, and what it prompted was the rest of my post.

[Aetius]

Islam != Scientology. Islam is a widely respected religion, Scientology is a cult. Please respect others' beliefs, and do NOT refer to them as crazy.

Why should I respect anyone's stupid beliefs? Islam != Scientology only because Muhammed was a better writer.

[jestingrabbit]

Here's the Council on American-Islamic Relations response to DMD (spoilered for length).

Spoiler:

A Muslim Response to 'Draw Muhammad Day'

I will be the first to defend anyone's right to express their opinion, no matter how offensive it may be to me. Our nation has prospered because Americans value and respect diversity.

But freedom of expression does not create an obligation to offend or to show disrespect to the religious beliefs or revered figures of others.

In reaction to the recent controversy over a depiction of Islam's Prophet Muhammad in an episode of Comedy Central's "South Park," a Seattle cartoonist apparently declared May 20th to be "Everybody Draw Muhammad Day."

I say "apparently," because cartoonist Molly Norris -- the creator of the cartoon showing many objects claiming to be a likeness of the prophet -- now says she never intended to launch "Draw Muhammad Day."

On her web site, she has since posted a statement that reads in part: "I did NOT 'declare' May 20 to be 'Everybody Draw Mohammed Day'...The cartoon-poster, with a fake 'group' behind it, went viral and was taken seriously...The vitriol this 'day' has brought out, of people who only want to draw obscene images, is offensive to the Muslims who did nothing to endanger our right to expression in the first place...I apologize to people of Muslim faith and ask that this 'day' be called off."

Norris even visited a mosque at the invitation of the local Muslim community.

The creator of a Facebook page dedicated to the day also repudiated the "inflammatory posts" it inspired. He said, "I am aghast that so many people are posting deeply offensive pictures of the Prophet...Y'all go ahead if that's your bag, but count me out."

Despite the cartoonist's and the Facebook page creator's seemingly sincere attempts to distance themselves from the fake event, Muslim-bashers and Islamophobes made sure the call to "draw Muhammad" went viral on the Internet. They are hoping to offend Muslims, who are generally sensitive to created images of the Prophet Muhammad or any prophet.

[The majority of Muslims believe visual representations of all prophets are inappropriate in that they distract from God's message and could lead to a kind of idol worship, something forbidden in Islam.]

So how should Muslims and other Americans react to this latest attempt by hate-mongers to exploit the precious right of free speech and turn May 20 into a celebration of degradation and xenophobia?

Before I answer that question, it must first be made clear that American Muslims value freedom of speech and have no desire to inhibit the creative instincts of cartoonists, comedians or anyone else.

The mainstream American Muslim community, including my own organization, has also strongly repudiated the few members of an extremist fringe group who appeared to threaten the creators of "South Park." That group, the origins and makeup of which has been questioned by many Muslims, has absolutely no credibility within the American Muslim community.

I, like many Muslims, was astonished to see media outlets broadcasting the views of a few marginal individuals, while ignoring the hundreds of mosques and Muslim institutions that have representatives who could have offered a mainstream perspective.

Next, one must examine how the Prophet Muhammad himself reacted to personal insults.

Islamic traditions include a number of instances in which the Prophet had the opportunity to retaliate against those who abused him, but refrained from doing so. He said, "You do not do evil to those who do evil to you, but you deal with them with forgiveness and kindness."

Even when the prophet was in a position of power, he chose the path of kindness and mercy. When he returned to Mecca after years of exile and personal attacks, he did not take revenge on the people who had reviled him and abused and tortured his followers, but instead offered a general amnesty.

In the Quran, Islam's revealed text, God states: "Invite (all) to the way of your Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching, and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: for your Lord knows best who have strayed from His Path and who receive guidance." (16:125)

Another verse tells the prophet to "show forgiveness, speak for justice and avoid the ignorant." (7:199)

This is the guidance Muslims should follow as they express concern about an insulting depiction of the Prophet Muhammad, or of any other prophet of God.

Instead of reacting negatively to the bigoted call to support "Draw Muhammad Day," American Muslims -- and Muslims worldwide -- should use that and every other day as an opportunity to reach out to people of other faiths and beliefs to build bridges of understanding and respect.

The best and most productive response to bigoted campaigns like "Draw Muhammad Day" is more communication, not less communication -- including not restricting the free flow of ideas with measures like banning Facebook.

Research has shown that anti-Islam prejudice goes down when people interact with ordinary Muslims and have greater knowledge of Islam.

Therefore, the best reaction to those who would mock the Prophet Muhammad (or the religious symbols of any faith) might be a mosque open house for the local interfaith community, a community service activity organized by Muslims and involving people of other faiths, or a newspaper commentary describing the life, legacy and personal character of the Prophet Muhammad, which is the opposite of the calumny some people fabricate about him. This should be of concern to all decent and objective people.

We will all benefit if each of us -- whether Muslim, Jew, Christian, Buddhist, or Hindu -- exhibits the common human decency required by our respective faiths.

[Aikanaro]

I motion we send that person an Internet.

[Kulantan]

I second that motion.

[felltir]

Islam != Scientology. Islam is a widely respected religion, Scientology is a cult. Please respect others' beliefs, and do NOT refer to them as crazy.

Why should I respect anyone's stupid beliefs? Islam != Scientology only because Muhammed was a better writer.

Well, I was assuming you had a better point than "I am right". Oh, and that you weren't just an enormous douche truck.

I will discount anything you say, as [sarcasm]I clearly don't have to respect any of your beliefs.[/sarcasm]

[Aetius]

Well, I was assuming you had a better point than "I am right". Oh, and that you weren't just an enormous douche truck.

I will discount anything you say, as [sarcasm]I clearly don't have to respect any of your beliefs.[/sarcasm]

What reason do I have to respect your beliefs? You have no evidence for them, you have no arguments as to why they're at all valid, all you have is a whiney attitude if I don't pretend your obvious delusions have some magical merit.

[Xeio]

Islam != Scientology. Islam is a widely respected religion, Scientology is a cult. Please respect others' beliefs, and do NOT refer to them as crazy.

Christianity started out as a cult too, you know. Give it 2000 years and we'll see where Scientology ends up.

[Nordic Einar]

Well, I was assuming you had a better point than "I am right". Oh, and that you weren't just an enormous douche truck.

I will discount anything you say, as [sarcasm]I clearly don't have to respect any of your beliefs.[/sarcasm]

What reason do I have to respect your beliefs? You have no evidence for them, you have no arguments as to why they're at all valid, all you have is a whiney attitude if I don't pretend your obvious delusions have some magical merit.

Human decency and not being a huge cunt? That's a start. Being inclusive and accepting of cultures that aren't similar to your own?

[Aetius]

Human decency and not being a huge cunt? That's a start. Being inclusive and accepting of cultures that aren't similar to your own?

Weird how that logic doesn't apply to the "obviously crazy" religions like Scientology.

[Nordic Einar]

Human decency and not being a huge cunt? That's a start. Being inclusive and accepting of cultures that aren't similar to your own?

Weird how that logic doesn't apply to the "obviously crazy" religions like Scientology.

Respond to the person who claimed that of Scientology, not me. Though, again, Islam and Scientology are vastly different simply by existing on vastly different scales, and to judge them differently because of this isn't necessarily a dishonest thing to do, but I digress.

tl;dr you're a dick.

[Aetius]

Respond to the person who claimed that of Scientology, not me. Though, again, Islam and Scientology are vastly different simply by existing on vastly different scales, and to judge them differently because of this isn't necessarily a dishonest thing to do, but I digress.

tl;dr you're a dick.

I was responding to them. You're the one who interjected.

[Nordic Einar]

Respond to the person who claimed that of Scientology, not me. Though, again, Islam and Scientology are vastly different simply by existing on vastly different scales, and to judge them differently because of this isn't necessarily a dishonest thing to do, but I digress.

tl;dr you're a dick.

I was responding to them. You're the one who interjected.

I interjected about why you should respect other people's beliefs. That response about Scientology? You quoted me in it. Are you being obtuse on purpose?

[scikidus]

That Facebook group feels oddly familiar to the result the last time 4chan took on a crazy religion...

Islam != Scientology. Islam is a widely respected religion, Scientology is a cult. Please respect others' beliefs, and do NOT refer to them as crazy.

Wow, way to completely miss the point of my post. "Crazy" was in reference to Scientology, although now that I look at it I see how you could have inferred from the grammar that I was referring to Islam. Anyway, I don't even know what your point was by pointing out that Islam != Scientology. I was talking about how 4chan treats religion, not how the situations are identical.

[Gelsamel]

Islam != Scientology. Islam is a widely respected religion, Scientology is a cult. Please respect others' beliefs, and do NOT refer to them as crazy.

And yet you denigrate Scientology in that very sentence...

Now that I look back on it, Draw Mohammad Day was a mistake, for the simple reason that its objective was not clearly defined.

Did you even read the facebook page?

Hopefully this page will spark serious debates in international forums.

We are not trying to slander the average muslim , it's not a muslim/islam hatepage. We simply want to show the extremists that threaten to harm people because of their Mohammed depictions, that we're not afraid of them. That they can't take away our right to freedom of speech by trying to scare us to silence.

We encourage you to report all hateful things that get expressed through words & images on this page.

[aleflamedyud]

And of course, you have Muslims "fighting back" by, for example, posting a picture of someone wiping his ass with an Israeli flag.

Because obviously everyone who has a problem with Islamofascism/Islamism is either a Jew, or under the Jews' influence.

I put a Muhammad cartoon into my Facebook profile page, and then took it down when "Draw Muhammad Day" was over. Feh. To everyone who has such a huge problem with the day, I've got a question: when did disrespect for a religion or ethnicity, including offensive disrespect for a religion or ethnicity, stop being free speech? What's the actual difference, in free-speech terms, between posting a "Muhammad == terrorist" cartoon (I don't remember or care if mine was along that variety, I just ripped one from the Internet at random) and "posting a picture of someone wiping his ass with an Israeli flag"? If you haven't actually libeled someone, don't you have a right to your opinions?

[Nordic Einar]

And of course, you have Muslims "fighting back" by, for example, posting a picture of someone wiping his ass with an Israeli flag.

Because obviously everyone who has a problem with Islamofascism/Islamism is either a Jew, or under the Jews' influence.

I put a Muhammad cartoon into my Facebook profile page, and then took it down when "Draw Muhammad Day" was over. Feh. To everyone who has such a huge problem with the day, I've got a question: when did disrespect for a religion or ethnicity, including offensive disrespect for a religion or ethnicity, stop being free speech? What's the actual difference, in free-speech terms, between posting a "Muhammad == terrorist" cartoon (I don't remember or care if mine was along that variety, I just ripped one from the Internet at random) and "posting a picture of someone wiping his ass with an Israeli flag"? If you haven't actually libeled someone, don't you have a right to your opinions?

Nice strawman. No on here has suggested you don't have a right to make that comparison, any more than someone lacks the right to wipe their ass with an Israeli flag. But doing both of those things makes you an asshole, and are probably counter-productive to propagating any kind of cultural inclusiveness or mutual understanding.

[Gelsamel]

Aaaaand now we get back to people making arguements about how certain inputs affect the emergent properties of a chaotic system... great.

[Xeio]

Aaaaand now we get back to people making arguements about how certain inputs affect the emergent properties of a chaotic system... great.

Oooooo, and name calling. I loooooooooove name calling.

[TheGrammarBolshevik]

Are you suggesting that I don't have the right to call people who disagree with me "dungsmokers"?

[aleflamedyud]

And of course, you have Muslims "fighting back" by, for example, posting a picture of someone wiping his ass with an Israeli flag.

Because obviously everyone who has a problem with Islamofascism/Islamism is either a Jew, or under the Jews' influence.

I put a Muhammad cartoon into my Facebook profile page, and then took it down when "Draw Muhammad Day" was over. Feh. To everyone who has such a huge problem with the day, I've got a question: when did disrespect for a religion or ethnicity, including offensive disrespect for a religion or ethnicity, stop being free speech? What's the actual difference, in free-speech terms, between posting a "Muhammad == terrorist" cartoon (I don't remember or care if mine was along that variety, I just ripped one from the Internet at random) and "posting a picture of someone wiping his ass with an Israeli flag"? If you haven't actually libeled someone, don't you have a right to your opinions?

Nice strawman. No on here has suggested you don't have a right to make that comparison, any more than someone lacks the right to wipe their ass with an Israeli flag. But doing both of those things makes you an asshole, and are probably counter-productive to propagating any kind of cultural inclusiveness or mutual understanding.

Tell me then, why is there a 4-page thread about people drawing Muhammad and no thread at all about people posting pictures of someone wiping his ass with the Shield of David? Why is being an asshole to Muslims controversial while being an asshole to other groups, in this case another minority group, receives a blase attitude, especially when Muslims do it?

There are nasty levels of special pleading at work here.

[Xeio]

Are you suggesting that I don't have the right to call people who disagree with me "dungsmokers"?

Hey, call them whatever you want, if they're offended by name calling on a forum, they're probably overly sensitive. On the other hand it's not very effective to use as the crux of an argument though...

(In before that's what she said?)

[Isaac Hill]

Those saying the DMD pictures should be benign drawings of Mohammed to avoid discrimination against Muslims have it backwards. If I draw a simple, neutral picture of Mohammed, the message becomes, "Muslims are offended by this innocuous image. Aren't they strange?" If the image is something genuinely offensive, something that would offend a Jew if Moses were the subject, then the message is, "Offensive speech must be protected." In short, Muhammed and Jesus should not be holding hands, they should be 69ing. That would support equality.

The people who drew Muhammed as a terrorist have it wrong, too. Their message of, "Mohammed supports violence" is not only bigoted, but distracts from the point of free speech for its own sake. The best DMD pics I've seen have been the silly ones, like the LOLMohammed from this forum, or the Xzibit one from the facebook site. Maybe next time some radical Mislim group threatens violence against images, the response should be Mohammeme, editing Mohammed into random internet memes.

[Griffin]

So, lets get something straight - how many of you would oppose a "draw a friendly and respectable picture of mohammed day"?

[LuNatic]

Based on the likelihood of hijacking by /b/tards, I object, and propose a better alternative:get a scan of a proper historical painting of him from before the whole no pictures rule was brought in to place, and then get people to use it as forum avatars/facebook profile pics for a day. And only in direct response to an extremist threat, not as an annual thing. The reasons given by the people who initiated DMD were to send a message that they wouldn't be cowed by threats, not to be arseholes, and I think this would be a better and less offensive way of accomplishing that.

[Xeio]

Based on the likelihood of hijacking by /b/tards, I object, and propose a better alternative ... The reasons given by the people who initiated DMD were to send a message that they wouldn't be cowed by threats, not to be arseholes, and I think this would be a better and less offensive way of accomplishing that.

Um, anything can be hijacked by /b/tards. You might as well say we should stop doing anything, because after all, what if some asshole comes along and tries to ruin it? If you think someone is an asshole for standing up against terrorists... well, whatever, I disagree.

get a scan of a proper historical painting of him from before the whole no pictures rule was brought in to place

Why does the picture have to be from before depicting Muhammad was "banned"? That seems like an odd request. Does that mean the Danish cartoons that started the controversy would be banned? The 200th South Park episode (where he wasn't even shown)? The super-best-friends episode?

And only in direct response to an extremist threat, not as an annual thing.

I doubt the day will continue being celebrated after the extremists have stopped sending threats (I'll just mark down "extinction of human race" on my calendar to make sure I don't forget...). In fact, is that really when we should even stop? Shouldn't it be after they realize that they can't thought depiction police everyone who doesn't follow their beliefs?

Also, what is the practicality of organizing an event every time there is a threat? I'm not sure how often this actually comes up...

[Ixtellor]

Islam != Scientology. Islam is a widely respected religion, Scientology is a cult. Please respect others' beliefs, and do NOT refer to them as crazy.

They both the the same definition of religion.

The fact you say one is respected and the other is a cult, is just a matter of cultural bias.

They are equally bizarre and cultish.

I would write more but I have to go beat my wife for leaving the house without her burka again -- to prove I am honoring her.... um virtue.

[Rakysh]

That's a cultural thing, not a religious thing. Honestly...