nenena | Whoops, Part Two

Entry tags:

Whoops, Part Two

Follow-up to this:

The Foreign Ministry of Japan has formally apologized (Japanese link).

Anime News Network does an English write-up that includes the phrase "Muslims' feelings that were hurt by images deemed inappropriate."

Muslim's feelings that were hurt. Wow. Just wow. Could that phrasing be any more dismissive and juvenile?

Meanwhile, the previously quite progressive and open-minded denizens of the ANN forums smear xenophobic, anti-Muslim, and outright bigoted fecal matter all over the board and call it a "discussion." I read the thread, my jaw dropped, and I am never going to look at certain posters the same way again.

Nothing like Islam to bring all of the closeted bigots out in all of their arm-flailing, mouth-frothing glory. Farewell, ANN discussion boards. I hardly knew ye.

Edited to add: And this just showed up in my blog reader. How timely.

Edit the second: In the interest of fairness, a link to Jeffkun's post.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Wow. -_-;;

expressed regret for Muslims' feelings that were hurt

That phrasing is very "I'm sorry that your foot is broken b/c of my car" instead of "I'm sorry I ran over your foot" >:\

And omg some of the stuff in that forum is so UGH >:(

I'm not even going to look. I don't think my blood pressure could take it.

Ugh... My head hurts now. ~_~;;

I'll be flat out honest, I find it troubling that there was an apology. It smacks of censorship to me- and appeasement. I also see a double standard being applied which makes me sick.

I know you see it differently, but we probably have considerable cultural differences.

What, exactly, is the double standard that you see?

That it's ok to offend other sources, but that we can't expect Muslims to be mature enough to handle things that might even be remotely insulting to their religion.

It's like we don't expect "any better" from them.

That it's ok to offend other sources

What other sources? Has anybody else - particularly any other religion - complained about something like this in an anime?

Also keep in mind that we're not talking about a legitimate artistic choice on the part of the animators, here. What they did was an accident. They never intended to use the Qur'an, they just did so by accident. I'm thinking that's definitely something worth apologizing for. Maybe the situation would be different if the animators had made a deliberate choice to appropriate the Qur'an in their work... But they didn't. So they have nothing to defend, and no reason not to apologize.

we can't expect Muslims to be mature enough to handle things that might even be remotely insulting to their religion.

Nice of you to declare the many intelligent, reasonable, and thoughtful protests against this flub "immature."

"Even remotely insulting"? Again, nice of you to decide what crosses the threshold of "a little insulting" versus "a lot insulting." Especially since you're not a Muslim. But that's okay, I bet you understand Islam a lot better than those pesky old protesting Muslims do!

Yes, I understand why the Jojo's creators did what they did- it was not intentional. The Jojo's creators apologizing should end this. They weren't trying to offend Muslims. I just get the distinct impression that this will not be enough to satisfy this particular group of "Muslims". If it is, then quite simply, I'll be pleasantly surprised.

I'll say this, if it was a bunch of Christians complaining, or any other religion complaining- would anything have been done other then people laughing at them? That's the double standard I'm complaining about. It's like it's ok to offend some groups, but not others.

If you're wondering where the "we can't expect Muslims to be mature enough" comment comes from- it's from other conversations I've had about this- where someone else made the comment that all the Islamophobia is due to an expectation that Muslims can't control themselves like a "civilized" culture, and how in the name of preventing discrimination, they are in fact perpetuating it with that assumption. I remember hearing these arguments during the French riots last year.

I just get the distinct impression that this will not be enough to satisfy this particular group of "Muslims". If it is, then quite simply, I'll be pleasantly surprised.

Well, that's not an argument. That's a projection based on an assumption based on a stereotype.

Also, who is "this particular group" of which you speak? The people who spoke out against JoJo ran the gamut from fans on the internet to secularized university professors to actual clergymen, some radical, some not. It was (is) a pretty diverse slice of Islam.

I'll say this, if it was a bunch of Christians complaining, or any other religion complaining- would anything have been done other then people laughing at them?

So the "double standard" only exists as a hypothetical, imaginary situation. Okay.

Look, there is no double standard except in your imagination. If you can show me an actual instance of a real double standard, then we'll talk. Until then, I would advise against complaining about a double standard that doesn't actually exist.

And here's a final question - even if a hypothetical group of imaginary Christian protesters got laughed at, would that change anything about how right or how wrong the Muslim protesters are regarding this issue?

I'll answer: No, it wouldn't. Even if Japan treated one group like crap, it wouldn't excuse treating another group like crap, too. So the "double standard" argument is doubly irrelevant here.

Islamophobia is due to an expectation that Muslims can't control themselves like a "civilized" culture, and how in the name of preventing discrimination, they are in fact perpetuating it with that assumption.

Japan apologizing for accidentally shitting on the Qur'an is NOT because of "Islamaphobia." Why are you assuming that it is?

Jeff, no offense, but I think you're seriously projecting here.

There is projection here, I won't deny it. I think it's a legitimate projection- you do not. I think there is a legitimate historical projection that can be made. I get the impression you do not, which is a legitimate argument that I don't agree with.

As for the final question. I thought about saying that, but threw it out for the very same reason you did. Two wrongs don't make a right. And you're absolutely right- however, the fact that they would be laughed at is evidence of a "double standard" to me, and that the reason for this double standard is fear based- which gives moral hazard issues. (Using moral hazard in the economic sense)

As for Japan apologizing- the question is are they doing it because they legitimately believe that they were in the wrong, or that they are doing it out of fear of attack? I hope it's the former.

however, the fact that they would be laughed at is evidence of a "double standard" to me

And again, imagination =/= fact.

Ok, I'll give a concrete example. We laugh at some of the things out of Pat Robertson's mouth. What makes him any less legitimate then the Sheikh from Cairo? He likely has just as many followers. If you can provide sources for your argument, I'll accept those.

Another concrete example, what about all the Christian complaints about Harry Potter that get laughed at?

I did a little quickie research on this- and he seems to be the biggest source of this complaint- he does seem to be a radical- so calling him an Islamic Pat Robertson may have some merit.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/008557.php
http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2008/01/20/44471.html

The first story is his opposition to the US government, and the second story is his call for "grave penalties" to apostates.

I also have one other philsophical problem. Why are the actions of an individual corporation (the makers of Jojo's) being viewed as representative of the Japanese government? I don't think it was the Japanese government's place to apologize here.

If you can provide links to where other Muslims not influenced by this guy were complaining, I'll listen. I didn't see any, but I was mostly looking what this guy's other views were. (Yes, this is something that should have been done earlier, I was ignorant and impatient to have not done so)

Ok, I'll give a concrete example. We laugh at some of the things out of Pat Robertson's mouth.

Who the fuck is this "we" of whom you speak?

What makes him any less legitimate then the Sheikh from Cairo? He likely has just as many followers.

I have no idea how this comparison makes any sense, and I'm starting to suspect that you have no idea what you're talking about.

Another concrete example, what about all the Christian complaints about Harry Potter that get laughed at?

Because the complaint was that Harry Potter taught witchcraft, and that's a stupid complaint, because the spells in Harry Potter aren't real.

Not comparable. This IS a real complaint - the Qu'ran WAS shown in the anime as being read by a mass murderer - there's nothing make-believe about that.

and he seems to be the biggest source of this complaint

Not according to the Japan Times (http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20080523a1.html) he's not. He's not even the person who brought the scene to international attention. Some anonymous internet anime fan deserves that credit.

And so what if some kook got behind the protest? I fail to see how that makes it any less legitimate. I also fail to see how this proves or disproves your ridiculous imaginary double standard.

I also have one other philsophical problem. Why are the actions of an individual corporation (the makers of Jojo's) being viewed as representative of the Japanese government? I don't think it was the Japanese government's place to apologize here.

Because the Japanese government declared this giant international "manga and anime ambassador" program, remember?

If you can provide links to where other Muslims not influenced by this guy were complaining, I'll listen. I didn't see any.

Again, check the Japan Times coverage. But other than that I can't help you because I don't speak Arabic.

But WTF, the burden of proof isn't on me here. You're the one projecting all of these fucktastic stereotypes on anybody who happened to protest JoJo. Even if you find a kook or two, it still doesn't give weight to your generalizations. Find me a dozen. Find me a hundred. Maybe then I'll be inclined to always automatically assume the worst about Muslims, the way that you are in this thread.

Ok, time to quote from the Japan times article.

Sheikh Abdul Hamid Attrash, chairman of the Fatwa (religious edict) Committee at Al-Azhar, the highest Sunni authority, based in Cairo, called the cartoon an insult to Islam.

"This scene depicts Muslims as terrorists, which is not true at all," he said. "This is an insult to the religion, and the producers would be considered to be enemies of Islam."

Given this guys comments listed in my last post, (links provided above), that's rather chilling. And this guy is a high authority in Islam.

Despite the apology from the publisher, some are not willing to accept the error.

Aly Yassin, owner of a Cairo Internet cafe, said he believes the object of the Japanese producers was to say: "This evil character derives its subversive ideas from this book, the Holy Quran. . . . This indicates the deep-rooted rancor against Islam and the misconceptions about Quran meanings. This is unjustifiable."

Still others, including Gamal Qutb, ex-head of the Fatwa Committee at Al-Azhar, were even tougher, suggesting Muslims should boycott Japanese products unless Japan takes action against the video.

What do they mean by action? Given the fact he has called for the death of another person, I think it's fair to draw a conclusion that they're looking for control, not an apology.

To me, that article just reinforces my opinion on the matter, which is this. Yes, an apology was the right thing to do, but it won't be enough for the radicals behind this, who are going to try spinning this for their own ends.

You're repeating yourself here. And still ignoring some parts of the protest in favor of the parts that most agree with your pre-conceived stereotypes. Not to mention that you still haven't come close to explaining what you mean by this "double standard" business other than a bunch of bigoted projection. (Your only examples so far involve different reactions from different groups of people to different types of protests. Hint: For a "double standard" to be true you've got to only have one actor, say that Japanese government, making the decisions. Other people's reactions to Harry Potter/Pat Robertson/whatever do NOT a "double standard" make.)

Jeff, I'm going to freeze this thread now, since you've shown yourself incapable of making any substantially new arguments, and are clearly unwilling to confront your own prejudices here. In short, we're going in circles. And my LJ layout is breaking. If you want to continue this discussion, take it to your journal or whatever. But no more here. Good night.

Which brings me to the part of my day where I click on links clearly marked as Japanese and then click away, surprised I had been to a Japanese link. *shakes head*

People are special in a bad way. (so am I clearly.)

Yeah that is a very unfortunate, not to mention lazy, way to phrase the apology. The whole situation could have been avoided if they had just crosschecked the text before they put it up there. Directly associating the text of the Quran with an evil murderer is breathtakingly stupid and wrong as well as infuriating.

I will admit though, that there is a little part of me that is a bit annoyed that anime and manga can use other religions in completely "SUCH-AND-SUCH DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY" and "wow, that's kind of offensive" ways without any comparable shitstorm being thrown up. Most of it is either relatively harmless or just so bizarrely out there like Evangelion with Christianity, but I will admit that Hellsing, despite my kind of liking it, sticks in my craw sometimes showing Protestants and Catholics as insane wild slaughter machines (and in the case of Catholics, evil).

That's very true. I think an important difference, however, is that in the case of Christian depictions in anime, the Japanese target audience generally understands that what they're seeing is inaccurate and has little relation to reality. There is a large and growing percentage of Christians in Japan, and at least one denomination of a Christian church even in the smallest rural villages (like mine). I'm not basing this observation on actual scientific surveys or anything, but I will say that based on my own interactions with my students and Japanese otaku, they usually "get it" when it comes to the split between real Christianity versus pop culture depictions of Christianity. Shinto and Buddhism are often treated the same way in anime, too. So they "get it." They get that it's not real.

The problem with Islam, however, is that it's massively stereotyped and villified all over the world right now, and especially in Japan. Believe it or not, there is an Arab immigrant underclass in major cities in Japan, most of whom are Muslim. You can find mosques in many Japanese cities. You can also find monthly incidences of mosques being vandalized, angry anti-Muslim screeds published in local and national papers, police accounts of Arabs and Muslims being arrested and deported on suspicion of being terrorists. So to have something like the JoJo incident in this context makes it much, much worse than comparably clueless depictions of Christianity in anime. Because in this case, the tasteless appropriation mirrors and reinforces very real stereotypes about Muslims that are having a very real impact in Muslim populations all over the world. Of course this was all unintentional - and I'm certain that probably none of the Japanese target audience watching this show even knew that the Qu'ran was on the screen in front of them - but that doesn't make it any less inappropriate. It's all about context.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Whoops, Part Two

no subject

no subject

no subject

(frozen comment) no subject

(frozen comment) no subject

(frozen comment) no subject

(frozen comment) no subject

(frozen comment) no subject

(frozen comment) no subject

(frozen comment) no subject

(frozen comment) no subject

(frozen comment) no subject

(frozen comment) no subject

(frozen comment) no subject

(frozen comment) no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject