The Tanoubliette: Pussy Hurt and Delusions or TTPHAD for short.

Seb: "They are not being assholes. They are drawing cartoons. People getting upset to the point of violence over other people drawing cartoons is the problem. Acquiescing to their threats of violence does not solve anything. Drawing the cartoons that upset them does. It makes the act mundane, helping them to recognize how irrelevant the act actually is in their daily lives, and it delegitimizes the threat of violence as a viable political tactic.

Drawing Muhammad goes from dick move to obligation the instant people threaten violence over it. We cannot abide this kind of behavior."






Oh! They were just drawing cartoons, not being assholes at all, how silly of me! How could I have misinterpreted that?

Keep telling yourself that, bub. Keep re-writing reality in your brain so it conforms to your personal belief system. Ignorance is bliss, after all.

Oh, I was wondering when were going to see the "Acquiescing to their threats of violence" straw man again. Welcome back! But to clarify, I never suggested acquiescing to anything. All I suggested was not going out of your way to piss someone off. If you can't see the difference between the two (and you clearly can't) then I see very little point in discussing this with you.

As for your last line, what about my shit sandwich example? If somebody says "Don't eat this shit sandwich or I'll KILL YOU", are you going to eat it just to demonstrate that you will not allow yourself to be threatened with violence? Are you OBLIGED to eat the shit sandwich just because someone threatened you? Because that's exactly what you're saying, and it's fucking stupid. A dick move is still a dick move when the people being antagonized are bad guys.

Seb: "You can be flippant and sarcastic, but they are literally just drawing cartoons. One side has arbitrarily decided that this is not okay for no good reason. There are perfectly good reasons to draw Muhammad. Not so much for eating shit sandwiches.

It's curious that in a situation like this, you've decided it's the non-Muslims antagonizing the Muslims and not the other way around. Somehow their perpetual condemnation and actual oppression of women, gays, atheists, and non-Muslims in general can be handwaved away with half a sentence of disapproval while drawing their dude is apparently a dick move worthy of pages and pages of argument. WEIRD."



You're powerful ignorant, Seb.

There are good reasons for pointing your finger, too, but if you point your finger an inch away from someone's nose and hold it there, that person's going to get pissed off. You can consider this an "arbitrary" decision to be annoyed at a perfectly harmless gesture, but you know damn well that pointing your finger at someone's face WILL piss them off. That's what changes it from "harmless gesture" to "being an asshole".

You're right, though, there ARE perfectly good reasons to draw Mohammed. I would encourage anyone who is faced with one of these reasons to not hesitate for even a second. Making a cartoon about religious icons teaming up like superheroes? Mohammed is a logical inclusion. Making a graphic novel about the stories behind significant religious figures? Draw away. Do NOT let threats deter you from doing something you have legitimate reasons to do.

Saying "Ha ha! You can't stand this shit but I'm doing it anyway because FUCK YOU!" is not a perfectly good reason to do something. That's the whole fucking point. Most of us will never draw Mohammed because we'll simply never have any reason to. Deciding to do it just to piss people off is not defending free speech. It's not taking a stand against threats of violence. It's not normalizing behavior in an attempt to de-stigmatize it. It's juvenile and pointless antagonism, it's gleefully acting like a prick without having to take responsibility for it because BAD GUYS, and it only makes the problem worse.

Also, who the fuck are you to dictate my views on Muslims? Have I ever once defended the actions of extremists? Have I ever once even implied that Muslim extremists don't antagonize us or that their actions aren't abhorrent? Why are you trying to contradict arguments I've never made? WE KNOW Muslim extremists are terrible. Like I said, that's not even up for debate. I'm not "hand-waving" anything, you moron. I'm not discussing how terrible Muslim extremists are because there's nothing to discuss. We are ALL in agreement about that already, whereas there appears to be some debate as to whether or not the "Draw Mohammed Contest" was a stupid idea (it was). X is worse than Y doesn't mean we're not allowed to talk about Y, and it CERTAINLY doesn't mean talking about Y means we're OK with X. How fucking simple are you? Have you never participated in an online discussion before? Jesus.

Doc: "In Tanoomba's world, one of these is a valid political protest by an oppressed minority and the other is the dominant elite just being assholes."

Wrong again, doc. Guess you don't know shit about "my world".

Quaid: "The solution to the problem is not to avoid drawing Muhammad. It is to draw him thousands of times. So many times that it would be absurd to fight it.

Hopefully this brave event, and those like it, are just sparks that ignite a wildfire of Terrorist Tentacock Muhammad Hentai."



No, the solution is to draw Mohammed exactly as often and under the exact circumstances you would have drawn him if there were no threats at all. That's how you show that you will not allow threats to dictate how you live your life: By living your life as though there were no threats.

Going out of your way to draw Mohammed because FUCK YOU, THAT'S WHY gives the extremists more credit than they deserve. It shows that you ARE allowing the extremists to dictate how you live your life, even if it's by doing the opposite of what they want. It legitimizes their threats as worthy of attention and ensures that they will continue. It encourages conflict and increases hatred when hatred is the entire problem. If, on the other hand, nobody gave a shit about drawing Mohammed, the Muslims would have no choice but to just let that shit slide when it inevitably happens. They would realize that no matter how much something might offend them, not everybody sees it that way and they can't take it personally. Instead, you've turned "drawing Mohammed" into a political statement (for no other reason than "threats"), and what do you know? If making this political statement also means you get to piss off people you don't like, well isn't that just a pleasant coincidence? It's REALLY about free speech, tho. For realz.

Quaid: "What if I'm an artist in Toronto who wishes to draw Muhammad, Jesus, and other religious icons in homoerotic poses to make a political statement about religion's relationship with LGBTQ rights? Is that a good enough reason for extremists to just ignore me? After all, I'm not just 'being an asshole' then, am I? According to you, they'll just let it slide! After all, nobody else is offended! Right?"

That actually does sound like a pretty good reason to me. I honestly don't know if you'd be "ignored" or not. But, at the very least, if the other religions have to also be offended at this and demonstrate that they can be pissed and never consider acting out violently, that shows Muslims what they are expected live up to if they want their religion to get even a modicum of respect from non-Muslims.

It's provocative, but it's almost promoting group skills (not killing each other) through the provocation. I don't know if it still technically counts as being an asshole when that's what you're parodying, but I would say that's a legitimate reason, at least. Not sure about the whole nickel-and-dime approach to "let's find a reason to draw Mohammed that doesn't involve being an asshole". I've already said there would be perfectly good reasons for people to draw Mohammed and nobody's going to apologize for that because sometimes you just gotta deal with being offended, like everyone else. But it's a lot harder to justify when it's done for the express purpose of pissing off a specific group, even if that's an objectively terrible group. And I know we don't agree on how much authority we have in inferring a third person's "express purpose", but you gotta go by what you see, right?

I thought you would like that part.