Friday, February 24, 2006
I'm starting to blame the victim
Have you heard of the kerfuffle at the University of Prince Edward Island? The president caught wind of a university newspaper's plan to publish those cartoons - you know, the super-deadly evil ones from Denmark - and halted its distribution after only a few hundred copies escaped into the public.
One part of the story that grabbed me was the reaction of a PEI resident to the cartoons (in today's National Post): "I feel like I was raped in the street while people watched."
I have no access to this woman's mind. I cannot assess whether she is just spewing hyperbole or she is, under the guiding grace of Dr. Phil, truly broadcasting her inner feelings to the world. I do know this, however: do not hire her to man a hot-line of any sort; social services are likely a poor fit for her, career-wise.
"You think that's bad," she responds to the shattered, needing person,"did you see those cartoons? I felt raped in the street while people watched! By comparison, a rough husband is a mere inconvenience!"
From Chuckercanuck's perspective, if given a choice between a public raping or having blasphemous cartoons published in journals I don't have to look at, I lean towards option number 2. Right now, I'm recollecting the "Christ Piss", a photograph of a Crucifix in a glass of the artists piss. I saw it in a documentary about censorship many years ago, but its the kind of image you remember. Even with the memory of Christ Piss pressed to the front of my brain, I choose someone else's blasphemy over my own public raping. Call me crazy.
A necessary ingredient to peace and personal security is a tolerance for blasphemy. Smart folks have told Chuckercanuck so, many times. That woman should forever have the freedom to liken the limited publication of blasphemy to a public raping. But only because Chuckercanuck has the right and duty to denounce that sentiment as false and infantalizing.
If a resident from PEI felt raped by those Danish Cartoons, then here is an unprecendented case where the only appropriate thing to do is blame the victim.
One part of the story that grabbed me was the reaction of a PEI resident to the cartoons (in today's National Post): "I feel like I was raped in the street while people watched."
I have no access to this woman's mind. I cannot assess whether she is just spewing hyperbole or she is, under the guiding grace of Dr. Phil, truly broadcasting her inner feelings to the world. I do know this, however: do not hire her to man a hot-line of any sort; social services are likely a poor fit for her, career-wise.
"You think that's bad," she responds to the shattered, needing person,"did you see those cartoons? I felt raped in the street while people watched! By comparison, a rough husband is a mere inconvenience!"
From Chuckercanuck's perspective, if given a choice between a public raping or having blasphemous cartoons published in journals I don't have to look at, I lean towards option number 2. Right now, I'm recollecting the "Christ Piss", a photograph of a Crucifix in a glass of the artists piss. I saw it in a documentary about censorship many years ago, but its the kind of image you remember. Even with the memory of Christ Piss pressed to the front of my brain, I choose someone else's blasphemy over my own public raping. Call me crazy.
A necessary ingredient to peace and personal security is a tolerance for blasphemy. Smart folks have told Chuckercanuck so, many times. That woman should forever have the freedom to liken the limited publication of blasphemy to a public raping. But only because Chuckercanuck has the right and duty to denounce that sentiment as false and infantalizing.
If a resident from PEI felt raped by those Danish Cartoons, then here is an unprecendented case where the only appropriate thing to do is blame the victim.
Comments:
<< Home
I'm with you. However, I've been told I'm clueless, repeatedly, so I'm not sure I'd consider this a ringing endorsement of your post.
"But only because Chuckercanuck has the right and duty to denounce that sentiment as false and infantalizing."
Well stated, old chap! I take note of the word "duty". Maybe my memory is getting foggy, but did people talk this stupid ten or twenty years ago? It seems to me that we hold certain segments of society to a much, much lower standard of conduct here in Canada; by failing in our duty to denounce stupid talk, we enable it and encourage further stupidity.
Actually it's probably inaccurate to call it stupid talk; dishonest would be closer to the mark.
It reminds me of an interview I saw with Linda Tripp in which she tried to spin Clinton's tryst with a twenty one year old college graduate who worked at the freaking White House as "child abuse".
Well stated, old chap! I take note of the word "duty". Maybe my memory is getting foggy, but did people talk this stupid ten or twenty years ago? It seems to me that we hold certain segments of society to a much, much lower standard of conduct here in Canada; by failing in our duty to denounce stupid talk, we enable it and encourage further stupidity.
Actually it's probably inaccurate to call it stupid talk; dishonest would be closer to the mark.
It reminds me of an interview I saw with Linda Tripp in which she tried to spin Clinton's tryst with a twenty one year old college graduate who worked at the freaking White House as "child abuse".
Chuckercanuck, loved the last line! Did you read Flemming Rose's responce? Very interesting. Personally, I am getting quite tired of the hypocracy. Isn't there a little something going on in Irag right now? Aren't mosques being blown up by fellow muslims? Aren't Mohammad's own relatives said to be buried in one of the detstoyed mosques? Wouldn't all that be worth getting a little more upset about? Heck, if you're going to rant, rave and kill people, I think sacred ground holds a little more water than a cartoon.
The crucifix in "piss"? The artist would be beheaded before you could say "high art" if that were a Quran.
Again, I wish the peaceful, moderate Muslim world would speak up. Can't they fight the fanatics who have hijacked their religion, turning it into excuse for primitive bloodshed? Otherwise, we are left with this bad taste in our mouths. What is it? Oh yeah, terror.
The crucifix in "piss"? The artist would be beheaded before you could say "high art" if that were a Quran.
Again, I wish the peaceful, moderate Muslim world would speak up. Can't they fight the fanatics who have hijacked their religion, turning it into excuse for primitive bloodshed? Otherwise, we are left with this bad taste in our mouths. What is it? Oh yeah, terror.
# posted by 
: Saturday, February 25, 2006 9:25:00 AM
: Saturday, February 25, 2006 9:25:00 AM
"Again, I wish the peaceful, moderate Muslim world would speak up"
They do. All the time. Constantly. No one is listening.
Conflict sells newspapers.
They do. All the time. Constantly. No one is listening.
Conflict sells newspapers.
chuckercanuck,
What else could you expect from a province that spawned Bud The Spud and Lester The Lobster?
What else could you expect from a province that spawned Bud The Spud and Lester The Lobster?
# posted by : Saturday, February 25, 2006 4:55:00 PM
: Saturday, February 25, 2006 4:55:00 PM
"Conflict sells newspapers"
True, but maybe reporters have been too busy running for cover to photograph the Ghandi-esque demonstrations in Nigeria. I bet its hard to hear "all we are saying, is give peace a chance," through the burning debris, too.
Post a Comment
True, but maybe reporters have been too busy running for cover to photograph the Ghandi-esque demonstrations in Nigeria. I bet its hard to hear "all we are saying, is give peace a chance," through the burning debris, too.
# posted by : Sunday, February 26, 2006 9:48:00 AM
: Sunday, February 26, 2006 9:48:00 AM << Home
