Richard Dawkins -- Islamophobia?

[Trevor from Toronto]

This interview in SLATE just came to my attention.

Particularly interesting are his comments on Islam and the bizarre dysfunctional relationship which has evolved among otherwise intelligent Liberals and Islam.

"RH: You have turned your attention to Islam recently. Why is that?
RD: I think my love of truth and honesty forces me to notice that the liberal intelligentsia of Western countries is betraying itself where Islam is concerned. It's stymied by the conflict between being against misogyny and discrimination against women on the one hand, and on the other by the terror of being thought racist—driven by misunderstanding Islam as though it were a race. So people who would normally speak out against the maltreatment of women don't do it. I do fret about what I see as a betrayal by my own people, the nice liberals."


What do you think?

Why do people call somebody a racist when they ridicule or are even just critical of Islam? Particularly self-identifying liberals or leftists?

Why is being called Islamophobic supposedly a bad thing?

I think it's interesting that Dawkins has now taken over the mantle left by the late Hitchens as a critic of Islam and the left's strange defence of it -- a cognitive dissonance that I can't figure out for the life of me!

 

[Brainache]

I think the main thing is fear.

Even mild criticism of Islam or Muhammad can get you death threats and riots, if certain sections of the Islamic media find out about it.

Why risk it?

 

[Trevor from Toronto]

Michael Palin said that recently, too! http://dailym.ai/1cg5UPP

Although I think it's ridiculous to silence one's self and give into bullying by a religious cult, I think there is a difference between simply not talking about it and defending it against those who do criticise it and the despicable practices of its adherents. Don't those people leaping to the defence of some of the worst people on the planet -- simply because they think it's politically correct to do so without thinking it through at all -- have a lot to answer for?

 

[Frank Newgent]

Can't think of a single time I ever saw him host an episode of Family Feud with a woman in hijab now that you mention it.

 

[Akri]

Why do people call somebody a racist when they ridicule or are even just critical of Islam? Particularly self-identifying liberals or leftists?

Because people misuse the term "racism" when really they mean "bigot".

Why is being called Islamophobic supposedly a bad thing?

Should it be a good thing to say that someone is a bigot? That's what "Islamaphobic" amounts to (though the term does get misused a lot).

I think it's interesting that Dawkins has now taken over the mantle left by the late Hitchens as a critic of Islam and the left's strange defence of it -- a cognitive dissonance that I can't figure out for the life of me!

Are you sure it's cognitive dissonance, and not simply them disagreeing with you?

 

[tsig]

I think the main thing is fear.

Even mild criticism of Islam or Muhammad can get you death threats and riots, if certain sections of the Islamic media find out about it.

Why risk it?

Freedom.

 

[A'isha]

Muslims themselves have done far more to combat misogyny and discrimination against women in Islam than Hazrat Dawkins has ever done or ever will do.

 

[Polaris]

Muslims themselves have done far more to combat misogyny and discrimination against women in Islam than Hazrat Dawkins has ever done or ever will do.

Within an Islamic framework, that is. They're treating the symptoms and not the disease.

 

[angrysoba]

I think the main thing is fear.

Even mild criticism of Islam or Muhammad can get you death threats and riots, if certain sections of the Islamic media find out about it.

Why risk it?

I don't really think that is true. I know that if I say lots of nasty things about Muslims I am almost certainly not going to receive death threats or spark riots, but I may be considered a bit too bigoted to be invited back to the next cocktail party.

So if it is fear, it is probably fear of social opprobrium.

 

[A'isha]

Within an Islamic framework, that is. They're treating the symptoms and not the disease.

It, unlike all of Hazrat Dawkins' ill-informed jerkishness and slobberingly stupid twitter comments, gets results.

 

[Polaris]

It, unlike all of Hazrat Dawkins' ill-informed jerkishness and slobberingly stupid twitter comments, gets results.

That's all well and good, but it's stuff like this that still rankles me:

So Mr. Diawara, 77, visited the 10 intermarrying villages of his extended family. He won over the village chiefs and convinced imams that there was no religious requirement for cutting, which predates Islam by centuries. He was tactful, never using the term “female genital mutilation,” but he explained its consequences. At his family’s annual council, the villages agreed to give up the tradition and in 1998 held what is believed to have been Africa’s first collective abandonment.

So if someone else convinces them that there is an Islamic requirement for it they'll return to the practice? How about "don't do it because it's a horrible thing to do"? It should be of note that Islam certainly had no exhortations to stop doing it.

 

[Darat]

Who are these people who don't criticise the barbarism practised by some Muslims?

The nearest I can come to someone who could even be slightly described in this way would be say a feminist who supports a woman's right to wear what she wants and therefore fully support women wanting to wear the Hijab and the like. But even then the ones that I have heard or read only recognise it is a choice issue when women are not being coerced (for whatever reason) by men.

 

[Darat]

That's all well and good, but it's stuff like this that still rankles me:



So if someone else convinces them that there is an Islamic requirement for it they'll return to the practice? How about "don't do it because it's a horrible thing to do"? It should be of note that Islam certainly had no exhortations to stop doing it.

How do you know that was not part of his campaign? (ETA: The article you quote from seems to say that he did.)

That aside if someone says to me "I do X because my religion tells me I should" then removing that reason is a very sensible way to start and change someone's mind.

 

[Polaris]

Who are these people who don't criticise the barbarism practised by some Muslims?

The nearest I can come to someone who could even be slightly described in this way would be say a feminist who supports a woman's right to wear what she wants and therefore fully support women wanting to wear the Hijab and the like. But even then the ones that I have heard or read only recognise it is a choice issue when women are not being coerced (for whatever reason) by men.

They'd be the ones who handwave it away by saying trying to refocus the issue into a chance to bash Christianity's horrible past.

 

[A'isha]

So if someone else convinces them that there is an Islamic requirement for it they'll return to the practice?

No, because that was only one part of the campaign.

How about "don't do it because it's a horrible thing to do"?

That's pretty much what Imam Demba told them, actually:

So how exactly did Demba approach his work on such a sensitive issue? Well, first, he identified the groups most necessary to his cause. He deliberately went first to his father's lineage, then to his mother's. He spent four months walking, joined by two of his peers, going from village to village. He focused on providing good information from reliable, verifiable sources like local health agents and religious authorities, and then let people draw their own conclusions. He framed things in relation to shared values, as well as human rights and responsibilities.

This built upon the education he had received as part of Tostan's nonformal education programme. It certainly helped that he was a respected religious leader and could speak to the fact that "the tradition" was not mandated by Islam; however this did not guarantee his success, and in the years since Demba first shared his theory with us, we have found that many others can play this role. Passionate grandmothers and mothers, former cutters, and enthusiastic youth groups have used Demba's approach with great success.

What is central to the work of all of these individuals and groups is a passionate defence of human rights and a clear sharing of the consequences of the practice of FGM/C. This is framed within the traditional values that hold these families and communities together rather than in language that attacks or shames from an outside point of view. As Maimouna Traoré, a woman who early on joined Demba's efforts to see the end of this practice among the Bambara people, put it: "In giving up this tradition we are not less Bambara. We are now more Bambara than ever."

 

[Dissolution]

It's not bigoted to criticise Islam any more than it is to criticise Christianity.
What has Dawkins said that's actually bigoted towards that particular faith, as I've probably missed it?

 

[Polaris]

How do you know that was not part of his campaign? (ETA: The article you quote from seems to say that he did.)

That aside if someone says to me "I do X because my religion tells me I should" then removing that reason is a very sensible way to start and change someone's mind.

I agree it may be the only practical way to do it in a lot of cases, but what about when you run into something that is justified by the religion, like a man beating his wife or considering a woman's court testimony inferior. The only way to remove the reason is to remove the religion - trying to reform it from within is like saying "don't throw out the baby with the bathwater" when there is no baby.

 

[A'isha]

They'd be the ones who handwave it away by saying trying to refocus the issue into a chance to bash Christianity's horrible past.

Who's trying to handwave it away?

 

[A'isha]

I agree it may be the only practical way to do it in a lot of cases, but what about when you run into something that is justified by the religion, like a man beating his wife or considering a woman's court testimony inferior.

This, for starters.

 

[Darat]

They'd be the ones who handwave it away by saying trying to refocus the issue into a chance to bash Christianity's horrible past.

That is not the definition of the group given by the quote in the opening post.