Just one month away from 2012's "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day"?

[Gaith]

May 20, 2010, as we all know, was the worldwide e-event occasion of "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day". It drew global media attention, but, according to a quick perusal of its Wikipedia article, not much else, and certainly nothing of note for the same date in 2011.

Now, I always felt that the concept was half, or maybe three-quarters, of a great idea. Who doesn't love a good-natured poke at religion, provided that the pokes themselves aren't themselves hateful or otherwise inspired by bigotry? (Is not "Life of Brian" one of the funniest movies of all time?)

Where I thought that the idea fell somewhat short, however, was in singling out Mohammed, and thus Islam, for fun. Why not have an "Everybody Draw Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed Day"? That way, not only would all three of the big Judeo-Christian prophets get their moments in the spotlight, the fact that they'd be featured together would symbolize how closely related they've always been, and their implicitly equal footing would thus rankle theological extremists of all three stripes, rather than just the one.

Thoughts, all?

Muhammad leads Abraham, Moses and Jesus in prayer.

Super Best Friends
​

 

[BillJ]

Never heard of it...

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Yeah, good luck with all that.

The cartoonist whose gag inspired others to create this "holiday," Molly Norris, legally changed her name and went into hiding in 2010.

More relevant to many of our lives, today is the Great American Smoke-in.

 

[Tora Ziyal]

I never heard of it either, but I kind of like your version.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

The original idea seems like a big risk just because Islam forbids Muhammad from being depicted at all. So how could that be anything but an insult or dare to Muslims?

 

[Sky]

Naaaah, this is old news. The Mohammed cartoon controversy was.. in 2005. Why not come up with something a bit more original, and interesting?

(Also, I don't really get trying to rankle religious people on purpose. What's the point?)

 

[Gaith]

The original idea seems like a big risk just because Islam forbids Muhammad from being depicted at all. So how could that be anything but an insult or dare to Muslims?

Actually, the Qu'ran contains no such prohibition, and there is disagreement amongst sects of Islam regarding the matter.

And humor inevitably risks insulting people. Life of Brian pissed a bunch of people off. But it also enriched our collective culture, and to this day permits lots of people to get a hearty laugh at religion's expense. Sometimes the possible insult is worth the payoff.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I like some of those pics in the Wiki article. My favorite is the one with all darkness (no actual depiction appears) with the phrase "Muhammad At Night."

Edit: here it is.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

(Also, I don't really get trying to rankle religious people on purpose. What's the point?)

You're exactly right. This whole idea has nothing to do with humor, and never did.

It grew out of humor - first, mocking the censorship of South Park and secondly Norris's joke based upon that. But "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" doesn't have a point other than to offend Muslims.

That's made even clearer by the proposal to broaden it to include Christ, Moses, etc. What's inherently funny or satirical about drawing either of those religious figures, worthy of a holiday to celebrate it?

Answer: not a thing. Nada. Zip. Therefore, what makes drawing Mohammed remarkable enough to have sustained this proposal for even one year?

Only one thing: the prohibition throughout the Islamic world on doing so.

That's not humor. It's offense for the sake of giving offense.

Here's what the two people who originated this idea said about it after it took hold:

Norris said the campaign had grown much bigger than she initially intended, and that her cartoon was being used in ways she couldn't control. "I just want to go back to my quiet life", she told the writer of a blog about comics at The Washington Post. Wellington announced on April 26 that he, too, was dropping out of the movement. "I am aghast that so many people are posting deeply offensive pictures of the Prophet," he wrote."Y'all go ahead if that's your bag, but count me out."[ Norris acknowledged, "I said that I wanted to counter fear and then I got afraid." On April 29, Norris suggested that "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" be called off: "Let's call off 'Everybody Draw Mohammed Day' by changing it to 'Everybody Draw Al Gore Day' instead. Enough Mohammed drawings have already been made to get the point across. At this juncture, such drawings are only hurtful to more liberal and moderate Muslims who have not done anything to endanger our first amendment rights."On May 1, Norris posted a marked up version of her original cartoon, apologizing to Muslims

Hey, that's it - what about a "Draw Al Gore Day?"

Nah. What's funny about that?

Exactly as much as is funny about the Mohammed thing, which was probably Norris's point in making the suggestion. What's different about drawing Gore versus drawing the Prophet?

The giving of offense, and that's all.

And humor inevitably risks insulting people.

A red herring, since there's no humor inherent in the simple act of drawing Mohammed - just the opportunity to offend.

This was a dumb idea to begin with and it had no legs, so there's no point in trying to bring it back up under cover of "broadening" it.

I mean, if someone wants to start a topic declaring "let's back Everybody Draw Mohammed Day because threats against freedom of expression should be met with defiance and it makes us brave to taunt the threateners" then they at least have a tenable position with which one can agree or disagree. "Let's do this because it's funny" is either foolishness or dissembling.

 

[stj]

There are some interesting issues here.

First, insulting people is quite commonly considered amusing to those who are not insulted. This is particularly true when Christians insult Muslims, the defense of which right was the purpose of the original proposal. The claim that it was about standing up to fear is absurd. South Park is very much about insulting people for humor. Any proposal to continue to make fun of Islam alone is very much

Second, "What's inherently funny or satirical about drawing either of those religious figures, [Moses and Christ] worthy of a holiday to celebrate it?" Drawing Moses, Christ and Muhammad together satirizes the bigoted assumption that only Muhammad is worthy of disrespect. This answer is simple and obvious.

Third, though there are many purposes achieved by making fun of others, one can be to encourage the uncommitted to back away from the social outcasts. That's why the OP's proposal will never be taken up. Just making it has given us as much satire as we're going to get.

Last, since the US government is engaged in so many assaults on Muslim peoples it seems entirely undesirable to encourage Christian bigotry by treating the original proposal as in any way legitimate. Sorry, I'm against the idea.

 

[cooleddie74]

I'm as politically incorrect a bastard as they come on a whole lot of issues, but just poking a stick in the eyes of over a billion people for the sake of poking a stick in their eyes isn't brave...it isn't worth anybody's time...it isn't funny. There are many legitimate issues I have with Islam as well as a whole lot of organized religion, but I wouldn't encourage open attacks on and mocking ridicule of anybody's religious icons just because you can do so. Sometimes these kind of drawings can be extremely funny in the proper context, as in the "Allahsaurus" Muslim dinosaur art that's been put on display here in the BBS more than a few times. But that drawing wasn't done and then aimed at the Muslim world for the sake of one big "fuck you" to the entire community...it was done within the context of BBS/TNZ discussion about the crimes and bigotry of Islamic militants and extremists. It wasn't advertised to the entire world with a bullhorn.

In short...just don't bother with this stupid "day." Trust me, there are valid reasons to make fun of a lot of religion in this world but this event serves no great constructive purpose and will just get millions of uneducated, fundamentalist Muslim fucktards in Third World countries whipped into a glassy-eyed frenzy and might even lead to a lot of innocent people getting killed. Society hasn't yet evolved to the point where a lot of people can tolerate what non-believers say and think about their religion. Sometimes...every once in a while...when you're in the woods and happen to walk by a bear? It's a good idea not to taunt the bear.

 

[OdoWanKenobi]

Jews don't worship Moses.

 

[Ethros]

Jews don't worship Moses.

Ahem

 

[Gaith]

"Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" doesn't have a point other than to offend Muslims.

That's made even clearer by the proposal to broaden it to include Christ, Moses, etc. What's inherently funny or satirical about drawing either of those religious figures, worthy of a holiday to celebrate it?

Answer:

To defy, through mockery, the absurd and dangerous notion that any one human is or was so special that making an illustration of him is worth being upset about. I thought that that was implicit...

Here's what the two people who originated this idea said about it after it took hold

I think being confronted with death threats might have a dampening effect on one's willingness to laugh in front of the world. But the fact that there were death threats at all is excellent proof of the need to combat extremist theology through peaceful means such as mockery.

And humor inevitably risks insulting people.

A red herring, since there's no humor inherent in the simple act of drawing Mohammed - just the opportunity to offend.

Giving offense to violent and tyrannical people via critique of violent and tyrannical ideologies is one of humor's finest attributes. Or have we already forgotten about Candide, to name only one example?

And, as Mr. Laser Beam pointed out, some of the "depictions" were quite funny in their own right.

I mean, if someone wants to start a topic declaring "let's back Everybody Draw Mohammed Day because threats against freedom of expression should be met with defiance and it makes us brave to taunt the threateners" then they at least have a tenable position with which one can agree or disagree. "Let's do this because it's funny" is either foolishness or dissembling.

Why can't it be both?

Jews don't worship Moses.

No, they have the good sense not to worship any human figure (at least until the Messiah arrives) - which is a valuable reminder in of itself.

 

[Mark de Vries]

Giving offense to violent and tyrannical people via critique of violent and tyrannical ideologies is one of humor's finest attributes. Or have we already forgotten about Candide, to name only one example?

But this isn't being critical. This is just insulting millions of people just for the sake of insulting them. Not to mention calling all those same people 'violent and tyrannical', which is, quite plainly, bigotted and extremely narrowminded.

There is no apparent theory, no criticism behind it. It is merely saying, "Haha, you're so stupid, look how stupid you are, you stupid stupid-heads". Schoolboy bullying.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Giving offense to violent and tyrannical people via critique of violent and tyrannical ideologies is one of humor's finest attributes.

There are 1.5 billion Muslims in the world. How many react violently to the Mohammed drawings? A few thousand? The rest --at least the ones who care about such things-- you're (general you) just being a dick to for no reason except to feel self-righteous and superior. I fail to see how that is something to be celebrated.

 

[Sector 7]

First, I am a Christian of Jewish descent.

Second, I believe it is wrong to purposely insult another person's faith.

During my lifetime, I have worked beside people who are Muslim, Jewish, Christian and more. Most are 'normal, average' people living their lives in ordinary ways, working to provide for their families. Why would I want to deliberately insult them?

While you, and your friends, may think it is funny, I find it bigoted and insulting to people of faith: Muslim or otherwise. When you get all your laughs from insulting Muslims, which faith or group of people will you, and your friends, turn on next?

 

[horatio83]

Giving offense to violent and tyrannical people via critique of violent and tyrannical ideologies is one of humor's finest attributes. Or have we already forgotten about Candide, to name only one example?

Calling a monotheistic religion with plenty of versions and incarnations a "violent and tyrannical ideology" is bigotted and plain stupid.

 

[Gaith]

Not to mention calling all those same people 'violent and tyrannical', which is, quite plainly, bigotted and extremely narrowminded.

Calling a monotheistic religion with plenty of versions and incarnations a "violent and tyrannical ideology" is bigotted and plain stupid.

Good grief, I in no way meant that all Muslims or their theology are "violent and tyrannical", only those who make death threats over cartoons.

This is just insulting millions of people just for the sake of insulting them.

Saying "Muslims are stupid" is an insult to Muslims. But a visual depiction of Mohammed, such as this one:

Is not. If some Muslims choose to take offense at it, that's their own choice, and their resulting feelings of offense their own responsibility. But by saying that any depiction of this one particular human is necessarily an insult to millions, Mark de Vries, I find that you seem to be making that choice for them - and I'd call that sort of behavior "bullying".
​

Calling a monotheistic religion with plenty of versions and incarnations a "violent and tyrannical ideology" is bigotted and plain stupid.

Merriam-Webster defines "bigot" as "one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance". Critiquing an ideology (and again, I was not saying that all Muslims adhere to the more dangerous strains of Islam) is not bigotry, any more than anti-tobacco activists are bigotted towards tobacco users. And Python's "Life of Brian" was not an expression of hatred or bigotry against Christians, even if some Christians decided to take offense to it.

Human beings are more than the ideologies they choose to adopt. Critiquing a certain strain of Islamic thought is not in of itself hatred towards people.

 

[horatio83]

I smell bullshit. In what way is a depiction of Mohammed an "offense to violent and tyrannical people"?
I am sure that there are plenty of ordinary and peaceful Muslims who did not like these depictions just as I am sure that there are plenty of ordinary and peaceful Christians who did not like this Monty Python movie.

If you wanna offend violent and tyrannical religious people you target Christians, Muslim or Jewish reactionaries and fundamentalists and not Jesus, Moses or Mohammed. I am a hardcore atheist but I totally fail to see why I should make fun of any of these three fictional guys. It's not like they are some kind of nasty assholes that deserve it. Now if you wanna attack Ratzinger, Pat Robertson, Nasrallah or Chomeini I am all for it ... but insulting religious characters just for the sake of it? Nah, plain dickery isn't what secularism is meant to be about.