Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 489 posts

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#81

Post by DanBC »

jpgvm wrote: post #47
tomp wrote: post #4

> Warning: this article contains the image of the magazine cover, which some may find offensive. It's the first time I've seen something like this on Guardian; I don't even remember it on articles discussing rape, murder or such, which is usually where "trigger warning" applies. Personally, I find such trigger warnings, and especially "you might be offended" warnings, totally ridiculous. What about me? I find such wa…

Unfortunately the concept of having the right to be offended, but not the right not to be offended doesn't seem to have been explained to Muslims. Every other faith (and other large group of people) seems to have accepted it however.

> Every other faith (and other large group of people) seems to have accepted it however.

This is obviously false. In England the film "Life of Brian" faced multiple bans from local councils on being shown at cinemas. Glasgow had a 30 year ban that ended in 2009. The comedian Stewart Lee faced legal action and a vicious campaign after his opera "Jerry Springer: the musical"; Jewish groups (rightly) decry Holocaust denying cartoons or cartoons comparing treatment of Palestinians to anything that happened in Nazi Germany; Sikhs in Birmingham (UK) violently protested a play, causing it to be stopped.

Life of Brian: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/glasgow_and_west...

Stewart Lee: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=N9EUe8jNr6o

Sikh protest stops play: http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2004/dec/20/arts.religion1

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#82

Post by flexie »

chroma wrote: post #32

The Charlie Hebdo attacks show that these days, real satire of Islam can't be done without significant risk of violent reprisal. If you doubt that statement, remember The Book of Mormon. (The play, not the actual book.) Could you imagine Trey Parker and Matt Stone making an equivalent Broadway play about Islam? Could you imagine them calling it The Qur'an to Google-bomb the original? Even if they disregarded their ow…

Editors all over the western world exercise more caution when it comes to satire about islam than about christianity and in my opinion it borders a form of racism of low expectations.

Then again, who wants to be the next Salman Rushdie, Theo van Gogh, Jyllands-Posten, or Charlie Hebdo. It's not like they stand to gain much from running the risk.

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#83

Post by slackson »

tomp wrote: post #4

> Warning: this article contains the image of the magazine cover, which some may find offensive. It's the first time I've seen something like this on Guardian; I don't even remember it on articles discussing rape, murder or such, which is usually where "trigger warning" applies. Personally, I find such trigger warnings, and especially "you might be offended" warnings, totally ridiculous. What about me? I find such wa…

What are the costs of trigger warnings, compared to the benefits? It seems like a blatantly worthwhile tradeoff to me.

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#84

Post by sarciszewski »

tomp wrote: post #69
sarciszewski wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Personally, I find such trigger warnings, and especially "you might be offended" warnings, totally ridiculous. What about me? I find such warnings an insult to my intelligence and a trivialization of people's personal responsibility, where is my warning? I agree wholeheartedly. They may have decided to preface their article with this message because they feared retaliation by zealous Muslims who would not otherwise…

Why was this downvoted?!

A handful of HN users with >= 500 karma didn't like either:

- The fact that I don't embrace the concept of trigger warnings.

- The fact that I responded in agreement to another comment.

- The fact that I suggested the warning could have been placed in response to a fear of retaliation.

- Me. Just, in general.

- All of the above.

But since none of the downvoters had enough gumption to actually say what they didn't like about my comment, we'll never know. :)

My pet theory for what motivates these squads of downvoters is a mix of laziness and cowardice.

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#85

Post by nodata »

[deleted] wrote: post #76
chroma wrote: post #32

The Charlie Hebdo attacks show that these days, real satire of Islam can't be done without significant risk of violent reprisal. If you doubt that statement, remember The Book of Mormon. (The play, not the actual book.) Could you imagine Trey Parker and Matt Stone making an equivalent Broadway play about Islam? Could you imagine them calling it The Qur'an to Google-bomb the original? Even if they disregarded their ow…

[deleted]

> why can't we respect each other's religion

If your religion falls apart because of a silly cartoon written by "some guy"...

> faggots

Not the word you meant.

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#86

Post by olavk »

Kiro wrote: post #53
olavk wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Western Christianity certainly haven't left violence behind. Just take the christian terrorist Anders Brevik who killed 80 people in Norway.

I don't think one Christian terrorist is enough to say that Western Christianity "certainly" is violent. I wouldn't even say that about Islam even though I think Islam has some problems with violence that Western Christianity doesn't have.

I'm not saying western Christianity in general is violent! Certainly Breivik is a lone extremist with absolutely no support by any mainstream church. But it doesn't change the fact that he was a christian and what he considered christian values (in his own eccentric interpretation) is part of what he believed he fought for. That makes him a christian terrorist, unless you apply some kind of "no true scotscman" filter, which could just as well be used to argue that no muslim terrorists are actually muslim terrorists.

Another example would be the IRA.

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#87

Post by unclebucknasty »

lovelearning wrote: post #55
infruset wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the character is depicted similarly as in a previous cartoon by the same cartoonist: https://i.imgur.com/Lm4p71F.jpg I don't get why you're being downvoted though. Have an upvote.

Thank you for the upvote. If the downvotes were due to religious reasons, then I have to admit it is rather sad to see them on HN. On the other hand, if they were due to perceived ignorance or stupidity, then I accept them. From the link and history of the cartoons, I've reached the rather odd conclusion that anyone named "Mahomet" or "Muhammad" in a cartoon is automatically assumed to be the prophet Muhammad.

>if they were due to perceived ignorance or stupidity, then I accept them

You were just asking an earnest question. What's actually stupid is the downvote feature itself. Upvotes can help promote good content and flags can call attention to inappropriate or problematic content. Likewise, comments can be used to express disagreement.

So, what's the purpose of downvotes? Are we in preschool?

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#88

Post by jpgvm »

[deleted] wrote: post #76
chroma wrote: post #32

The Charlie Hebdo attacks show that these days, real satire of Islam can't be done without significant risk of violent reprisal. If you doubt that statement, remember The Book of Mormon. (The play, not the actual book.) Could you imagine Trey Parker and Matt Stone making an equivalent Broadway play about Islam? Could you imagine them calling it The Qur'an to Google-bomb the original? Even if they disregarded their ow…

[deleted]

>Surely those faggots need to be condemned/punished/killed/whatever

This is exactly what is wrong with people that hold your point of view. You privledge religion as something sacred and then go on to be homophobic and encourage the use of violence as a form of punishment.

This is a common theme from people the defend religion and it's pedestal.

If you want to claim that views are views you need to put everything on the same playing field, this includes opening religions up to the same discourse we levy at other things.

Re: Charlie Hebdo: first cover since terror attack depicts prophet Muhammad

#90

Post by themartorana »

davexunit wrote: post #70
tomp wrote: post #4

> Warning: this article contains the image of the magazine cover, which some may find offensive. It's the first time I've seen something like this on Guardian; I don't even remember it on articles discussing rape, murder or such, which is usually where "trigger warning" applies. Personally, I find such trigger warnings, and especially "you might be offended" warnings, totally ridiculous. What about me? I find such wa…

Everyone has to walk on eggshells around Islam, or risk being labeled racist or "Islamaphobic".

I agree. People need to understand that when almost every terrorist attack and almost every ongoing war, slaughter, massacre, etc., has "radical Islam" on one side of it, it's difficult to see that those elements represent only a tiny fraction of Muslims.

Maybe truly radical elements are in fact the tiniest sliver, but I'd appreciate some leeway for those struggling to understand how that sliver is so intimately involved in just about every major violence and armed conflict across the world.

Post reply on HN