We make no pretension of being unbiased here at the CWR. We have our particular axes to grind and banners to wave. Evan, you’ll notice, often covers the place of Asians in culture- in no small part because Evan is a combo of a few Asian peoples himself, and more directly affected by that issue. I, alternatively, grew up in the Middle East, and after having spent pretty much the entirety of my life with Arabs and Muslims (not the same thing, shouldn’t have to explain that), I’m more sensitive to Middle Eastern issues- Islamophobia in particular.
I could spend all day railing on the treatment of the Middle East/Arabs/Occupied Palestine/Muslims/etc. The way Arabs/Muslims are singled out for scrutiny and criticism. Casting Indian actors to play Arabs, since Arabs don’t match their own stereotype. The lack of appreciation for the key role the Middle East played in preserving and advancing science and philosophy.
You get the idea.
So rather than trying to tackle a single issue that could be (should be, and has been) covered by an entire academic book, I’m going to hit up super-specific issue.
Today, I’d like to do something I’ve been wanting to for a while. We’re going to go through a list of recent quotes on Arabs and Islam and replace them with the words “Jew,” “Jews,” and “Jewish.”
Most quickly springing to mind is the latest line of tripe from Anne Coulter. While you are (unfortunately) probably already familiar with some of Coulter’s statements (see: “It would be a much better country if women did not vote. That is simply a fact.” or “[Canada] better hope the United States doesn’t roll over one night and crush them. They are lucky we allow them to exist on the same continent.”), you may not have heard Coulter’s recent assertion that the wife of one of the Boston Bombers should ““Be jailed for wearing a hijab” (right after saying “I don’t care if she knew about this [bombing]”- just so you know it’s about religion, not justice).
Yesterday, I saw a picture of Kabul, taken in what must have been the late 70s or early 80s. It was either in or near a university- I recall there being a stone courtyard with tall, shady trees and an ornate water fountain. There were also a couple of young women, wearing short sleeves and pants, carrying their books. The comment section for this picture was awash with sighs about “how beautiful Afghanistan had been” once upon a time and “what a shame it was that religion had come along and messed it all up!”
I was, needless to say, a little ticked off by the responses to the picture. While there were a few people who managed to point out that Islam didn’t one day appear in Afghanistan and wipe out every last vestige of modernism (and that a major Soviet invasion may have played a part as well), for the most part it was all comments on the terrible threat to civilization religion plays. Continue reading →
GORDON: Dearly beloved, we are gathered here today before these witnesses to discuss the role of religion in our comparatively secular world.
Not too long ago, Evan and I discussed the subject of separating art from its artist, which brought up controversial science fiction writer Orson Scott Card, selected by DC to author a series of Superman comics.
Public outcry ensued as a result of OSC’s viciously homophobic views- including a statement advocating the overthrow of the American government should gay marriage ever be legalized.
EVAN: I am going to be honest and admit that I am counting down the second until this is over, when I get to finally play my copy of StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm.
That being said, this relates back to our talk because OSC’s views are deeply founded in his religion, Mormonism.
GORDON: Now back in that post, Evan asserted that OSC’s views were “reprehensible, regardless of where you stand.” Could you expound on that a bit for us?
EVAN: Well, the general consensus of the internet [from what I could tell] is that OSC is free to believe whatever he wants. If a man believed his cat created the universe he would, by anyone’s standards, certainly be wrong, but would not necessarily be chided for it.
People drew the line at Card’s support of organizations that were actively boycotting the legalization of gay marriage in America, as well as, like you said, advocating the overthrow of the government.
Homosexuality as a sin is something I think on almost every day, due to my belief that the Bible is without errancy and my observation that there is, from what I can see, absolutely nothing negative about a healthy homosexual relationship with another person. That being said, I am not about to cry that we burn down Parliament [or the White House, whatever] simply because the government allows two men to wed.
GORDON: So ultimately, your issue with OSC is that he shouldn’t let his personal views lead to him commit drastic acts?
EVAN: My personal issue, I suppose, is that he takes a stance that I’m already extremely uncomfortable with having and pushes it to its most extreme. That’s my honest answer.
On the surface, and certainly where I was last week or whenever it was, yes. Essentially that was where I was coming from, that his cry to overthrown the powers that be was an overreaction.
GORDON: And that’s certainly something that’s fair.
I often hear the argument that “You can’t force your religious views on others,” usually using a homophobic, sexist, or totalitarian agenda as an example. My issue with that has always been that you never hear the same people making that argument when something positive is on the table.
I’d probably reference John Brown, MLK Jr., Bonhoeffer, or Malcolm X as examples.
EVAN: I definitely agree with what you’re saying. Just regarding basic good behavior you never really hear people saying, “How dare you tell people to tell the truth and not murder and steal! Stop pushing your antiquated morals on the rest of us!”
GORDON: Exactly. That brings me to the core of the issue I wanted to hash out a bit: is militancy really a bad thing? Earlier today, I came across this image:
And I was kinda bugged by it. The implication seemed to be that Jimmy’s only two courses of action are silence or rage. I mean- if a friend posted something on Facebook I thought was incorrect, I don’t think I’d just ignore it.
EVAN: I rarely do when it comes to misspellings, grammatical issues, and anything regarding comic books.
GORDON: Exactly. If something is important to you, you should speak up about it, right? Heck, you shouldn’t you take direct action on it?
EVAN: I’m going to bring up an experience of mine that essentially no one knows about:
When I was much, much, much younger I thought it would be a good idea to evangelize to a classmate [this was in 8th Grade, I think]. It didn’t pan out the way I’d hoped, because they were quite satisfied with their own religious beliefs, and reasonably so.
The thing is, I was coming from a place where I thought I was doing the right thing. After all, if Christians really do believe that Jesus is “the way the truth and the life” and that no one gets to heaven except through him, isn’t there some sort of responsibility to tell others? And if there isn’t an onus, wouldn’t you want the people you care about to get in?
So yes, it was important to me, and no, I don’t think I went about it the right way. But I did take action, for better or for worse.
GORDON: Let me throw you an extreme scenario:
The government has decided to start indiscriminately throwing minorities into internment camps, dragging ’em out of their homes in the middle of the night because, I don’t know, if you don’t, the terrorists win. Do you take militant action?
EVAN: Would I directly oppose the government, you mean?
GORDON: Yes.
EVAN: Do I count as a minority?
GORDON: For the purposes of this example, yes.
EVAN: If I was not a minority I would probably act in the same capacity as those who hid Jews in Nazi-occupied Europe.
As a minority, I’m honestly not sure. I’m not particularly disposed to act violently, so I suppose I have to ask what you would deem as being “militant action.”
GORDON: But one way or another, your actions would be rooted in your understanding of your religious/moral code, right?
EVAN: Correct.
GORDON: So it’s not so much an issue of extremism, even in regards to religion- it’s just a question of the issue itself
In this case, OSC is a jerk not because he advocates the overthrow of the government, but because he makes that threat over something so benign as Adam and Steve getting a sheet of paper.
EVAN: I suppose it is contextual, yes. Though I’m sure there are people out there [myself not included] who would equate gay marriage with throwing babies into the Nile.
GORDON: This is indeed true. with that in mind, How do we address the question of the separation of church and state?
EVAN: That’s a really great question. I guess we have to ask how well of a job we’re doing with that at the moment.
GORDON: Not knowing the ins and outs of Canadian politics, I’m afraid I won’t be able to make so much of a universal statement. Speaking for myself, I prefer a pretty staunch elimination of the cosmetics of religion in my government.
Get “In God We Trust” off my money, take “Under God” out of the Pledge of Allegiance. Though in total honesty, that’s more from a distrust of government in my religion than vice versa.
EVAN: The whole issue that “money is the root of all evil,” so why do we have religious institutions that have a net worth that goes into the billions? Yeah, I can be pretty into that sentiment.
GORDON: A very interesting topic, considering the elections currently going on in the Vatican.
EVAN: Well, the question we were presented today is what role does religion have to play in our increasingly secular world. In terms of Christianity, my hope is that its role is a positive one.
That Christians [myself included] can be seen as loving and not hateful [see: The Westboro Baptist Church], as giving and not selfish [see: most people in general], as willing to consciously process what we believe to be the truth instead of sticking to them blindly because they’re what we were told.
Christianity has changed a lot over the centuries without straying from what it is at its core. We can keep changing, we should keep thinking.
GORDON: So at the end of the day, religion becomes a social movement, rather than a distinct community or culture?
EVAN: I think that as a culture Christianity is, ideally, a social movement.
GORDON: So how do you reconcile other religions with this?
EVAN: Honestly it depends on the religion. I think Buddhism, when done right, more or less works along the same lines.
Are we counting Scientology as a religion and not a cult?
GORDON: Oooh. Them’s fighting words. Let’s call it a religion, for now.
EVAN: I suppose I would like every religion, Scientology included, to stick to my format of what I would like Christianity to be. If you hash out logically that alien soul debris is the cause of every human’s problems, more power to you; I have done the same thing in believing that a man who was also God died on a cross and was resurrected.
What’s really important is that we act on the positive aspects of our religious beliefs [taking care of the poor, not being dicks to one another] and really thinking upon our beliefs. Like I said, homosexuality as a sin does not at this point in my life make a lick of sense to me, and I continue to struggle with reconciling that with the rest of my faith. Make sure what you believe makes sense to you.
So as a TL;DR, do good things and think.
GORDON: Fair enough- but what about when it doesn’t work? There are plenty of vile groups out there whose diseased, twisted “logic” has led them to some pretty nasty conclusions. They’re obligated to act on those beliefs, right? How do you deal with conflicting agendas?
EVAN: How are they acting on these beliefs?
GORDON: Let’s say they’re banning the Hijab for Muslim Women; passing legislation on it.
EVAN: I’d say that infringes on basic human rights, and that people should stick to the words of public awareness campaign “If You See Something, Say Something.” People should protest.
GORDON:Certainly something we don’t get enough of. And with that, dearly beloved, we are out of time.
EVAN: It’s creeping me out that you’re calling our readers that. Or me. That’s even more troubling.
GORDON: Imagine if I actually did have a cult following. How awesome would that be?
EVAN: Extremely troubling.
GORDON: I for one believe our readers have learned their lesson- I’d like to leave them the option of offering an “other” topic in the comment section.
EVAN: Guys and girls, this week we talked as much as we could upon the topic for the week, and were only able to get so far. So in addition to us possibly discussing what you want us to, next week you can possible look forward to us discussing:
GORDON: Violence in media: How much is not enough?
EVAN: Thank you for wading through our back and forths, and we sincerely hope you join us again next week [and every weekday, really]. I am now off to go play some Heart of the Swarm.
First and foremost, apologies about the state of the blog next week. E> was postponed ’till tomorrow due me forgetting about it completely and watching a movie/drinking with my cousins last night. This morning’s replacement was delayed due to my being sick all day today.
The following contains spoilers to films you should’ve seen by now.
The first and third films in the franchise concerned the Ark of the Convenant and the Holy Grail, respectively. Both are Judeo-Christian relics, and both are shown to have a great deal of power in the series; the former melts the face off of a bunch of Nazis and the latter brings Henry Jones Sr. [Sean Connery] back to full health from grievous wounds. Which is great.
Then take into account the second film, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. The Hindu goddess Kali is introduced, who is pretty into human sacrifice. This movie’s relic is actually five relics, sacred Sankara stones that do . . . something. All I’m really sure of is that Indy says things and they get super hot and burn the guy who says “kali ma shakti de” and pulls out another dude’s heart.
The first three movies of the franchise make a lot of sense in context with the protagonist’s profession, that of archaeologist. The main issue here is that the Holy Grail and Ark of the Covenant are shown to draw their powers from the Judeo-Christian God, father of Jesus Christ, et cetera. High priest Mola Ram [Mr. Kali Ma] finds his supernatural abilities in Kali, I assume. This can be explained away with the following-
“Kali” and the source of her powers originate in the demonic. This resolves the idea of an actual healing Holy Grail existing in the same universe as magical burning stones. God and Kali are essentially just opposite sides of the same coin, the divine and the diabolic. Which is great. We’ve reconciled the two, fantastic.
Enter Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. The relic: the skull of a genuineextraterrestrial. The source of its powers: genuine extraterrestrials. Which leaves us- where?
As an audience we’re left to believe that a divine Jesus Christ, death goddess Kali, and aliens all co-exist on some level. The addition of that last source of otherworldly power really throws a wrench into the works.
Sure, I guess we could say that the source of both the divine [for both Judeo-Christian and Hindu faiths] is in the extraterrestrial, that these aliens seeded the world with their technology or power or however else you want to say it, but really? There’s a definite stretch to suspend disbelief on the part of the audience. I mean, sure, we can accept face-melting Arks, but aliens?
And that’s the problem that, I personally, have with the fourth Indiana Jones movie.
If it isn’t, then you probably aren’t familiar with the series (and should count yourself truly fortunate), so for you blissfully innocent, here’s the basic run-down.
The Left Behind series is based on the book of Revelation in the Bible, as well as certain (delectably) apocalyptic verses in Old Testament books. I say “based on”, but that’s more to demonstrate the authors’ intentions. Left Behind is “based on” the book of Revelation in the same way that Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles is based on Vasari’s biographies of Italian Renaissance artists.
In the sixteen-novel series, all true (cough, Protestant, cough) Christians have been “raptured” (removed from the world and taken directly to the after life), leaving behind the unsaved protagonists of the story who find themselves contending with the oncoming “tribulations” (the host of hardships and catastrophes marking the end times) and the rise of the antichrist, who walks the earth in the form of a Romanian politician who takes control of the UN (because, you know, there’s no one more powerful than the UN).
Things more powerful than the UN: The Student Government of MLK Jr. Middle School, A Junior Sales Rep from Prescott Pharmaceuticals, Paris Hilton’s Chihuahua
Needless to say, I don’t think very highly of the series. But hey, if we’re looking for badly written fan-fiction, why not haul Twilight to the guillotine?
It’s because of the fan part. That’s what really gets me. We’re not talking about someone fawning over the idea of stalker-veggie-sparkle-vampires, we’re talking about someone fawning over the idea of millions- billions– of human beings undergoing agonizing deaths. Think I’m reading into things? Take a look at this passage from the series:
The riders not thrown leaped from their horses and tried to control them with the reins, but even as they struggled, their own flesh dissolved, their eyes melted, and their tongues disintegrated. As Rayford watched, the soldiers stood briefly as skeletons in now-baggy uniforms, then dropped in heaps of bones as the blinded horses continued to fume and rant and rave.
Seconds later the same plague afflicted the horses, their flesh and eyes and tongues melting away, leaving grotesque skeletons standing, before they too rattled to the pavement.
You might say “Sure, that’s violent, but that isn’t exactly glorifying it, is it?”. Let me continue on.
…Jesus nudged His magnificent white charger and descended to the top of the Mount of Olives.
As He dismounted, Carpathia shrieked out his final command, “Attack!” The hundred thousand troops followed orders, horsemen at full gallop firing, foot soldiers running and firing, rolling stock rolling and firing.
And Jesus said, in that voice like a trumpet and the sound of rushing waters, “I AM WHO I AM.”
At that instant the Mount of Olives split in two from east to west, the place Jesus stood moving to the north and the place where the Unity Army stood moving to the south, leaving a large valley.
All the firing and the running and the galloping and the rolling stopped. The soldiers screamed and fell, their bodies bursting open from head to toe…
So much for turning the other cheek, eh?
And here’s what gets me about the series. It’s not the generally bad writing or the twisted theology- it’s just how freakishly popular the series is. Popular enough not to spawn just one movie attempt, but two. It’s hard enough for good stories to get a second chance at something like that, let alone this junk. And it’s the implication of that popularity which gnaws at me. There are people out there- a lot of people- who genuinely look forward to this supposed apocalyptic scenario, or an apocalyptic scenario, anyhow. People who fully expect the end of the world to be a plague and hellfire ridden Armageddon, complete with WWIII and genocide of unheard of proportions. People who look forward to this- and not in a “in the sweet by and by” way, I’m talking about a “I love the smell of napalm in the morning” kind of way.
You can’t deny that this blood-thirsty anticipation does exist. If you’re even only vaguely familiar with the Christian (American-Christian, more on that in a second) subculture, you’ll almost have certainly run into this. There’s plenty of other lousy Armageddon fantasies out there.
And what makes it all the worse is just how utterly undeserved all this hidden vitriol is. This vengeful glee isn’t coming from people who have been mercilessly persecuted for their faith. This isn’t coming from the families of martyrs or the congregations of assassinated priests and pastors in the third world. The churches of Africa, Asia, and South America have enough problems combating war, poverty, and disease to be drooling over prophesied war, poverty, and disease. No, this is the bitter vindictiveness that only comfort and safety can breed. All this body-bursting leering isn’t a result of imprisonment (not that it would be justified there either), it’s a result of being snubbed by Bill Maher or portrayed as yokels on some sitcom.
That’s just messed up.
Now this isn’t Shame Day, but that doesn’t mean we can’t all gather ’round and ruthlessly mock something that so richly deserves it, and if this drivel doesn’t deserve it, I don’t know what does.
The first and third films in the franchise concerned the Ark of the Convenant and the Holy Grail, respectively. Both are Judeo-Christian relics, and both are shown to have a great deal of power in the series; the former melts the face off of a bunch of Nazis and the latter brings Henry Jones Sr. [Sean Connery] back to full health from grievous wounds. Which is great.
Culture War Reporters 
Let’s Talk About The Hijab
I could spend all day railing on the treatment of the Middle East/Arabs/Occupied Palestine/Muslims/etc. The way Arabs/Muslims are singled out for scrutiny and criticism. Casting Indian actors to play Arabs, since Arabs don’t match their own stereotype. The lack of appreciation for the key role the Middle East played in preserving and advancing science and philosophy.
You get the idea.
So rather than trying to tackle a single issue that could be (should be, and has been) covered by an entire academic book, I’m going to hit up super-specific issue.
The hijab. Continue reading →
Rate this:
3 Comments
Posted in America, Europe, feminism, Islam, media, race, religion
Tagged Aceh, afghanistan, Africa, America, Arab, Asia, bigotry, Christopher Titus, comments, congressman todd akin, Culture, Egypt, Europe, expression, feminism, Feminist, freedom of speech, Hijab, human-rights, indian actors, Indonesia, Iran, Islam, Islamophobia, Jordan, Kevin Hart, Lebanon, Malala Yousafzai, mennonite, Middle Eastern, middle-east, misogyny, missouri congressman, modesty, no shirt no shoes no service, north america, patriarchal, patriarchy., politics, racism, racist, rape, religion, saudi arabia, secular, social standards, stubbenville, Syria, Todd Akin, trial, western, westerner, women's issues, women's rights