Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

the cartoon controvery

Posted by aquaponics 
Translucent
Re: the cartoon controvery
February 17, 2006 08:04PM
Papa, give thanks. Crucial post. No, I was not reffering to your attitude towards religious fanatics, as I fully agree with it and every-thing else that you wrote. Please note that my comment was in regards with your agreement that Islam subjugates women. Respect.

Guidance
Maconha
Re: the cartoon controvery
February 17, 2006 08:49PM
Does Islam subjagate women any more than anythhing else. Who is the slave the woman who is told to cover her face with a cloth or the woman who is taught to cover her face with make up? The woman who fills a crucial role in the lives of her family or the woman who hates the way she looks? Is it all relative? Not stating my opinion, just putting out some questions.
Translucent
Re: the cartoon controvery
February 17, 2006 08:54PM
"...Who is the slave the woman who is told to cover her face with a cloth or the woman who is taught to cover her face with make up?"

Boom again Ninja! We ought to look how we subjugate women in our own society.
Re: the cartoon controvery
February 17, 2006 09:24PM
Papa Ray, respect, but maybe you can name the women you know of who were beaten for not wearing enough rouge or mascara. I personally do not know any women who were thrown in jail or jeered at and had stones thrown at them in the street for not dressing 'attractively' enough.
The worst part of political or social discourse in this country is from those who preach blanket moral equivalency for everything. I'm not saying you're guilty of that Papa Ray, I can tell you're a man who looks at (and rejects fukkery from) all sides of an issue.
Re: the cartoon controvery
February 17, 2006 09:30PM
My mother spent 2 nights in jail in Belize for wearing shorts.... I know it's not a beating, but does that count?
Translucent
Re: the cartoon controvery
February 17, 2006 09:45PM
Stamina, the rhetoric about the subjugation of women through the concept of beauty came from Ninja and I, not papa ray. So I'll tag ya question. We all know of the devastating psychological effect that the concept of beauty have in women in our society, and if you dont, you're out of touch with ya culture. Women suffer in many ways, from felling depressed, undesirable, unworthy, unfulfilled, etc... . So some eat, some take pills, some inflict injuries pon themselves, and millions spend an unrealistic amount of time striving to live up to an unrealistic and chauvinistic concept, and all in order to fit into a box where they can be marketed to a sexual/sensual driven society. Women (and obviously sensuality) is the number one selling advertizing tool, pushed down our throats in every arena and everywhere we go. They are, in other words, a product. If you don't call that subjugating...

Consciousness cover the earth...
Maconha
Re: the cartoon controvery
February 17, 2006 09:55PM
Right on Translucent!!!! Just like how it is said that "dem take the shackles off mi foot and put dem pon mi brain", so too, women in our society have become subjegated to the whims of Madison Avenue's vision of what a 'perfect' woman looks like. Is it any wonder that Madison Avenue is run by a bunch of white men???
Re: the cartoon controvery
February 17, 2006 10:05PM
So, in your book women being stoned to death for adultery or killed for honor by their own male family members because they had the temerity to get raped is on exactly the same level as that of those women who worry terribly that they might not be pretty enough. That's rather execrable moral equivalency you're trying to "push down our throats"
What you see in this country (and feel so free to instruct me about) is a result of peer pressure and corporate advertising. It is not mandated by any law, religious or governmental. It only gets "pushed down your throat" if you open your mouth and swallow it. The women in the middle east and Africa, on the other hand, have no choice in the matter whatsoever; it's hardwired into their religion and culture.
Re: the cartoon controvery
February 17, 2006 10:45PM
When was this Daniel? I had a great experience in Belize 10 yrs ago and I'm surprised to hear this. Although, I was laughed at for wearing shorts as a teenager as they are thought of as being only for little kids. Reasoned with some women there who seemed to be as free as anyone else or at least didn't complain.
Re: the cartoon controvery
February 17, 2006 11:06PM
1975. But now I am remembering that it was in Guatamala and not Belize. It was a 'local' form of extortion as they offered to let her go for 20.00, but she said she needed a place to stay anyway. They let her out a day later once they realized that they weren't getting no $$$ out of her and still had to feed her.
papa ray
Re: the cartoon controvery
February 18, 2006 12:57AM
Yes, this thread has evolved from a discussion of the Danish cartoons to
weighing the pros/cons of Islam and 'The West' . My My...

No, I don't think all cultures chime in as sweetly.morally, spiritually,or musically
the next, not at all. And yes, whatever your critique or rejection of Western Culture, don't be pretending a woman being influenced to wear make-up has the same oppression as a woman living under full-fledged hard-shell-sharia-law-male-dominated society.

I no more assume Islam is about the kind of hateful treatment given to women under Taliban rule than I do Christianity is nothing more than the mouthings of Jerry Falwell. But each religion suffers from the pious utterances of the
respective viewpoints I cited...

(To all you gentlemen:Honestly, all things considered, given what women put up w/ from men--and SOME religions and cultures more than others-- I'm AMAZED more men aren't simply murdered. By women. )

That's what you might call a serious joke: if not by a gun or knife, than by the spoon, if you know what I mean. Amazing, that more bad men are not poisoned by the women they abuse, if you think about it.
jjlab3
Re: the cartoon controvery
February 18, 2006 01:08AM
TRIPOLI, Libya - The publication of cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad continued to send shock waves around the world Friday as protesters set fire to the Italian consulate in Benghazi, Libya, and clashed with police hours after an Islamic cleric in Pakistan offered a $1 million reward for killing one of the cartoonists.



Over a cartoon?
Translucent
Re: the cartoon controvery
February 18, 2006 09:59AM
"...(and feel so free to instruct me about)..."

:0) only as free as you feel to instruct idrens here on Reggae Music. I would rather call it reasoning, but suit yourself...

"...That's rather execrable moral equivalency you're trying to "push down our throats"..."

I Love your light trod...everytime...

If my words are being fully read, it should be clear that I ain't talking about "...women who worry terribly that they might not be pretty enough"...or..."a woman being influenced to wear make-up...". I am talking about human misery. Or is it human misery to be considered only the lack of food and/or physical violence?! These two certainly have enormous potential to bring misery to one's life, but so does one's mind. In fact, nothing is as powerful as the mind when it comes to inflicting misery. Consider this: What brings more misery to a women victim of rape; her body or her mind?

The idea that "...It only gets "pushed down your throat" if you open your mouth and swallow it..." is about as short-sighted as it gets. We are all born with wide "open mouths", and WILL "swallow" our culture's values, unless if, by unusual circumstances, these values become screened. Its called enculturation; beliefs "...hardwired into... [our]...culture..." will become hardwired in our brains. Hence, this is the formula used by the rulers of our time and society. Physical slavery became obsolete, as it lends itself to revolt; much more efficient is to control the masses through mental slavery. To quote Noam:"The media is to "democracy" what the use of force is to dictatorship".

"...The worst part of political or social discourse in this country is from those who preach blanket moral equivalency for everything..."

But that's precisely the premises from which you're departing, isn't?! Based on your morals, you're commenting on the morals of another culture. It's a comment on "...moral equivalency..."!! And the truth is, there IS moral equivalency among cultures, and no culture is superior to another, just different, though they may feel superior, because, once again, their judgment is guided by their own morals.

Give thanks for the reasoning. Blessed be.

Consciousness cover the earth...
Maconha
Re: the cartoon controvery
February 18, 2006 02:25PM
I would like to see all these people who are making excuses for these Muslim countries to try and live there for a month...especially the women. Then come back here and see how good they actually have it.

Re: the cartoon controvery
February 18, 2006 05:06PM
Transparent did you come from your country just to instruct me, who's lived and struggled in this land for so many years, who protested the Vietnam war, who's worked with VISTA and Habitat for Humanity, on its evils? Who gave you the credentials to do that? If it's such an evil place, why are you here and not there? you can equivocate all you like but the shared ideals of the religions of the world, as well as critical thinking, (which is a trait hopefully not limited to any culture or religion), will surely show you that all cultures are NOT equivalent, that the treatment and opportunities afforded to their women, their poor, their minority religions and ethnicities are far from equal. No place is utopian in these regards, certainly not the USA, but it has been and remains in demand as a refuge for those fleeing from global persecution and downpression.
By your claims that the media and corporate advertising are creating a mental dictatorship, you create a equivalency between that and real dictatorship that imho is despicable. None of us (with maybe the exception of zoki) have lived under a REAL tyranny, save the mental one some of us create for ourselves. Again, when one reaches the age of reason and lives in a culture that includes a modicum of freedom of choice, nobody should be mentally enslaved save those who really WANT to be.
btw, Chomsky's a great linguist; he'd be well advised to remain within his chosen field, however. I know I'll piss some of his worshippers off, but compared to Marcuse or Sartre, Noam's an ideological lightweight.
The original point of my post was that people who riot, burn and kill in protest of some cartoon depicting their hero as violent are showing their collective hypocrisy to the world as well as shaming the universal tenets of their own religion. Nothing equivocal about that. But then again, I feel that if Mohammed returned to this world, he'd issue a fatwa for the execution of Bin Laden, Zarqawi and the other religious zealots bringing shame and hatred to his religion and his God.
papa ray
Re: the cartoon controvery
February 18, 2006 06:39PM
One final word on this controversy. Some goverments in Islamic nations are not above forging cartoons that are attributed to the Danish series, forgeries calculated
to further inflame the man in the streets to violence. Some religious leaders in
Islamic countries are not above forging images attributed to this Danish newspaper,
to madden the hearts of their followers. Translucent, whatever your take is
regarding the malfeasences of this nation(and whatever else you may think
of those on this board, there is no scent of jingoism regarding the U.S.),
let's recognize the cynical manipulation of those who now riot by their
leaders.

By the way,if I may be so fortunate, my next planned visit to a foreign nation(music-related) will be to one that is Islamic in its faith.
Re: the cartoon controvery
February 18, 2006 07:45PM
Apologies Maconha, I meant 'Translucent'...still early in the morning for me...
What country is that papa ray?
BG
Re: the cartoon controvery
February 20, 2006 03:04AM
" And yes, whatever your critique or rejection of Western Culture, don't be pretending a woman being influenced to wear make-up has the same oppression as a woman living under full-fledged hard-shell-sharia-law-male-dominated society.""

!!!!!!!!!
eXaCtLy, Papa Ray, exactly.
!!!!!!!!!

I beat my woman in public if i want, but under islamic law, i am allowed.
I MAKE my women wear full body burqa's, she has no choice.
I murder my daughter, victim of rape, because she shames me.
I practice female circumcision, cutting off my daughters clitoris at age 12, lest she feel pleasure.
I do not allow my woman to drive a car, or vote, or own property for business, or EVER EVER EVER EVER have an affair without doling out punishments ranging Civilized version:
I beat my woman but was arrested and charged with domestic violence.
I TRY to ASK my wife to wear something sexy but she CHOOSES to wear what she PLEASES.
The man who raped my daughter is serving 15 yrs in a super-max prison, and she has been thru counseling and has a great support group.
female circumcision????? wtf is that????
My girlfriend bought her OWN car, with her OWN money, took off work this morning and went to vote, all while on her way to closing a deal on her 1st property, where i think she will continue to have an affair with a police officer.

is something right because it's "CULTURAL"?
Re: the cartoon controvery
February 20, 2006 05:25AM
Muhammad's wife was a brilliant business women, who owned land, etc. Muhammad never taught this crap that many Islamic countries practice today. The ehad covering is only mentioned TWICE in the Koran, and it had to do with the sun, and not women.

But then, in the Bible Paul makes it mandatory for women to keep their head covered...and Peter taught that women should not wear jewlery nor make-up.

Re: the cartoon controvery
February 20, 2006 05:29AM
Interesting bit there - nobody ever answered my question: when did representations of the prophet become sacreledge? (Serious question) Is this in the Quoran?
Re: the cartoon controvery
February 20, 2006 11:30AM
I've always thought the "story of Muhammed" would make a bank for an Oliver Stone,or like, there in Cali. I been waiting for the release since 9/12/01. Perhaps there is fear of backlash from dem fundamentalists for showing this story. About that time I was given an Arabic version of the "story of Muhammed", a movie. That's when I learned of no representations of the prophet. The movie never once showed his image. Sometimes views coming from the eyes of Muhammed, but never his image.

I'm not sure when and under what rule this became sacreledge, I'll leave that for a more learned scholar.

ic

and this one!!! Sounds like the same ransoms Bush is offering around....

"TRIPOLI, Libya - The publication of cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad continued to send shock waves around the world Friday as protesters set fire to the Italian consulate in Benghazi, Libya, and clashed with police hours after an Islamic cleric in Pakistan offered a $1 million reward for killing one of the cartoonists."
Re: the cartoon controvery
February 20, 2006 04:48PM
Dubguy

There is a couple of prohibitions in the Quran of entering a house with pictures in it or drawing pictures, etc. Taken in its historical context, Muhammad might have done that to keep iconagraphy out of the new found religion, given that the Eastern Christians he knew probably had icons in their house. It is in line with the "no graven images" commandment of the Old Testament.

Re: the cartoon controvery
February 20, 2006 05:04PM
[www.zombietime.com]

I found that website with early paintings by muslim artists depicting mohammad. Was intresting to take a look at.



Dr. Suess (aka Ras James)
Irie Sounds International
Re: the cartoon controvery
February 20, 2006 05:50PM
The site you provided Ras James appears to be anti-Islamic, or at the very least biased and non-objective, as the author of the blog created his own image of Muhammad on the ass of a camel. His information is also historically misleading for a couple of reasons:

1. The paintings he provides are dated from the 1400's up, 800 years after Muhammad was alive. A lot changes in 800 years, theological and culturally, which leads to the following point...

2. Most of the paintings are Iranian or from Afghanistan, both traditionally non-Arabic coutnries. Afghanistan is also credited with making the first images of the Buddha, when such images were prohibited by the Buddha himself and his first disciples. So culturally one would expect images to be made in these countries. Also, Afghanistan, before the Taliban (non-Afghanistanians), has traditonally been very moderate in their Islamic beliefs, many times at odds with the more traditional Arabic Muslims.

papa ray
Re: the cartoon controvery
February 20, 2006 06:45PM
Hey Stamina, thought I posted this but it didn't go thru---I'm hoping to visit
Mali next January.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login