Anonymous asked: If today's attack on cartoonists in Paris does not show the danger that Islam and Muslims present to the world, I do not know what else would. Marvel should be denounced, and not supported as a company, for promoting characters and hiring creators that practice this religion of hate, terror and destruction.
The greatest and most harmful lie of the 21st century is that to combat terrorists, we must become terrorists, to combat hate we must hate.
Bigotry in all its forms must be opposed and overthrown.
If yesterday’s attack on the NAACP in Colorado Springs does not show the danger that whiteness and white people present to the world, I do not know what else would. Marvel should be denounced, and not supported as a company, for promoting characters and hiring creators that belong to this culture of hate, terror and destruction.
That broad brush feels a lot different when it’s pointed at you, huh?
Now I’m not saying we shouldn’t denounce Marvel. But wouldn’t a more laser focuses critique be Christians or Baptists rather than “White People”? What you’re doing is (even subconsciously or unintentionally) saying all Muslims are a single race.
I mean, I’m happy to take the piss from organized religion. But I feel like we can workshop this comment into something truly biting.
Well, yes, that’s why I changed “religion” to “culture” in my version. Believe me, I’m aware of the diversity of Islam.
I considered going with “Christian,” both for the reasons you give and for symmetry. The problem is that there are roughly equal odds that the anon asking this, or anybody reading and nodding in quiet agreement with the anon, is Christian or an atheist, but they’re almost certainly white.
I had to think very hard in how to parse this. While I see the value in using “white” in this sort of (Critique? Comment? Castigation?) I feel like it’s almost working at cross purpose. Because what it does when we use broad, sweeping criticism is we allow people to blanket themselves much easier in denial.When you make a specific, accurate argument you may not reach every set of ears, but what you say has more impact.
I had a professor who was very good at this sort of thing. Every paper had to be peer edited and she would go over student’s editing job and mark how well you edited, making up a component of your mark. The first paper was brutal on the entire class. She spent two lectures on how to properly edit and critique people’s arguments. At the time I was a little too inexperienced to see the use of it, but as time goes on I think she had a point.
As I said, I considered that and decided that in this case it was more important to reach more ears, because if I went with “Christian” it would allow atheists that denial, and because the NAACP attack was racially rather than religiously motivated.
You’re not my professor, I’m not your student, and acting like our disagreement on this point is an opportunity for you to educate me—implying that the fact that I did differently from what you would have done is a sign that I am ignorant or not thinking and need you to “elevate” me to your “superior” level—is tremendously condescending and unpleasant behavior on your part.
I am sorry I came across as condescending. It was not my intention to :educate” you, merely present an alternative point of view and my reasoning.
Thank you for apologizing.
