Skip to comments.The genius of the ‘Islam is right about women’ stunt
Posted on 12/10/2019 1:09:14 PM PST by grundle
Posters bearing that message have appeared in a town in Massachusetts. No one knows how to react.
Trolling the woke left has become a popular pastime. It can be clever and funny, but it can just as often be a crude attempt to elicit outrage for its own sake. Rarely, however, does something show up that is easily dismissed as trolling, but which is so remarkably incisive and apt that it rises not only to the level of satire, but borders on civil disobedience.
Think of Posie Parkers billboards quoting the dictionary definition of the word woman. The power of such acts comes from two things. First, they acknowledge usually with irreducible simplicity that something that went without saying a moment ago has suddenly become unsayable. Secondly, the outrage they provoke does not come from any epithet, caricature or insult, but rather from having the nerve to draw the viewers attention to an act of cognitive dissonance that we are all engaging in, but would rather not acknowledge.
The result is that those who attempt to explain why the act is offensive end up simply tying themselves in knots, while revealing that they have never given a moments thought to the position they find themselves defending. This seems to generate even more anger, with the inevitable online mob quickly joined by politicians, journalists and other public figures, eager to see that the heretic is made an example of.
At their best, these acts of public disobedience are examples of real-life Winston Smiths pointing out to the rest of us that Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. Their persecutors, like his, are those who know and fear the truth of Smiths next sentence: If that is granted, all else follows.
The example of perfectly crafted dissent that Id like to submit here appears in this video from Massachusetts local TV news, showing some reactions to the fly-posting of white sheets of paper bearing the statement Islam is right about women. The reactions are deeply revealing. Nobody can clearly point out why they object to the statement indeed, nobody seems to object to the statement at all on its face. Yet most seem to express offence at it if a little unconvincingly.
The reason for their dilemma is obvious enough to anyone who has been paying attention. Western society has managed to convince itself (at least in public) that any statement criticising any aspect of Islam is, by definition, bigotry. As a result, Western societies have effectively decided to enforce Islamic restrictions on blasphemy, and called it tolerance.
The strain of conforming to this lie is evident in the fumbling attempts by the interviewees to explain their objections. Do they believe that Islam is right about women? If so, why the objection? Do they believe that Islam is wrong about women? If so, in what sense is the statement an attack on Islam or Muslims? Do they believe that the author of the poster is saying that Islam is right about women, but doing so ironically? In which case, the objection can only be that the author is guilty of a thoughtcrime by stating that two and two make five with insufficient sincerity. Or do they worry that they are guilty of thoughtcrime for noticing the irony?
I think the source of the objection is as follows: I thought we had all agreed to pretend not to have any negative opinions about Islam. But this statement forces me either to agree with it, which I dont, or disagree with it, which Im not allowed to.
The result is utter confusion on the part of the interviewees about how to signal their obedience to the unspoken lie. One woman, who struggles to explain why she found the posters upsetting, nevertheless, ripped them down, took them to the police, and alerted social media.
The situation is a beautiful inversion of the analogy set out in the iconic essay The Power of the Powerless by Václav Havel, in which a greengrocer puts up a sign in his window that says Workers of the world, unite!. Rather than being the result of any deeply held ideological conviction, the sole purpose of the sign is to signal his obedience to authority, which he hopes will afford him the right to be left in peace.
In Czechoslovakia in 1978, it was a sign placed in a shop window. In the suburbs of Boston in 2019, it is confused expressions of offence that cant quite be pinned down or explained, but which must nevertheless be expressed in public, and reported to the police. The confused rambling is unsurprising since, as Havel explains, subjugating oneself to ideological conformity in return for a quiet life can only be achieved by abdicating ones reason.
Such abdication grinds down the ideologically obedient citizen, because it reduces life to a purely material existence, in which moral integrity and human dignity must be sacrificed in order to keep the state off ones back and oneself in a job. This is a fate which Havel suggested might one day befall the West if it were ever to succumb to the profane trivialisation of humanity required to live within a lie rather than challenge it. With police now calling on citizens to check their thinking, and people regularly losing jobs over social-media posts, who can say that we have not reached it?
Every time a see a female defend Islam, I want to ask her about her clitorectomy.
How old was she when they came at her with razor blades? Does she remember screaming in pain and agony? Has she had this slice and dice done to her own daughters?
You know.... basic muzzie fundamental values.
Yes, it was brilliant. A multi-dimensional pool shot.
Should work as well with “Islam is right about homosexuals”.
A similar poster,
Twenty years Old!
No citizenship; the Japanese have this right.
I love it! This simple statement forces the reader to acknowledge an impossible choice: If you say that *slam is wrong about women, you are an evil islamophobe and you hate brown people and you’re a bigot. If you say that *slam is right about women, you agree that women are to be beaten, or killed if they talk to a man, that they have no rights, and are lower than cattle.
So no one knows how to react to the statement. Beautiful!
So, a biytch ripped them down and took them to the police. An obvious thoughtcrime.
I purchased a shirt off of Amazon and every time I wear it, I get massive reactions.
Already have prepared lines to use and can act stupid to let them expose themselves.
Have several saved Quran verses on my iPhone notes.
People dont know what to think and I dont give a Fu$&
Democrats are evil scum.
Brings to mind the old “This statement is false.”
In the hands of wordsmiths, it produces an entertaining infinite loop.
In the hands of Kurt Godel who managed to place it in math form, it resulted in the “incompleteness theorem”.
Name three things Islam is correct about... LOL
You said it all, and much more concisely than the author.
What happens to a transgendered male to female convert when they go to get a cliterectomy?
“Name three things Islam is correct about.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.