Stephen Fry hits back at accusations of Islamophobia

[cosmicalstorm]

I've been following the Dawkins-Twitter debate for a while. It's really weird to see how somebody who digs into Islam gets called an Islamphobic.

Stephen Fry has spoken of his frustration at being labelled an "Islamophobe" for criticising the violent acts committed by some Islamists.

In a strongly worded blog post, the actor and comedian lamented that the "squeezed liberal finds himself in the position that he cannot criticise Islamofascism because it's somehow 'racist'".

He continued: "It is a topsy-turvy smothering of debate and an Orwellian denial of free speech to declare that speaking out against violence will cause violence."

Fry decided to write the piece after attracting criticism for giving his support for the prominent atheist and evolutionary biologist Professor Richard Dawkins, a noted critic of Islam.

In on online exchange last week, Fry said Prof Dawkins was justified in singling out Islam for more criticism than other religions, tweeting: "Wonder why. Oh, have a look around the world and see them slaughtering each other, let alone others. So charming to women too …"

Clarifying his views in a blog post titled "Am I an Islamophobe?", Fry wrote: "Do I hate Muslims? Absolutely not. Any more than I hate Christians. Or Jews, or Hindus, or anyone on account of their beliefs, or lack of them. I am simply not interested in laying into one religion or another. To me they are all as untrue as the next, which is the point and the only point of being an atheist."

Fry, 56, continued: "I am afraid of anyone who hates me and everything I stand for and wants me and the civilisation I grew up in destroyed."

However, he added: "Do I believe that all Muslims want to see my civilisation destroyed? That they are all bombers in the making? Of course I don't."

Fry also expressed his frustration at having to go through "this absurd liberal court of inquisition" of defending himself against the charge of Islamophobia, saying: "[It] really grinds my gears."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/peopl ... rnalSearch

[Dr. Trainwreck]

It really is a weird situation. I mean, we don't have reservations with bashing Christianity in this forum, why should we have reservations with bashing Islam? Or is it considered an internal affair when people from Christian-majority countries bash Christianity, as opposed to bashing Islam that's largely an outside thing in the West?

Although Fry is an ass for his comment that Muslims slaughter each other. I mean, Charles Taylor ain't that far back, and he was such a good Christian he was praised by Pat Robertson. Poverty and ethnic division are just as good for violence as any religion.

[Tanasinn]

Muslims do slaughter each other in the name of their god, though. I mean, it's not like he made that up or exaggerated it, or was saying Christians DON'T murder one another or non-Christians. The inability of American politicians and military minds to recognize that Muslims have some serious beefs with each other caused a lot of trouble in our latest military misadventures.

I think people have reservations vis a vis criticizing Islam because the practice is so closely associated with actual racists rather than maltheists. That, I think, is only natural. Now, the folks that say we shouldn't be 'inflammatory' because it incites violence? Fuck them with a dragon dildo.

[Admiral Valdemar]

There's a joke in the Alan Partridge film about this. You can make fun of Christians and occasionally the Jews, but NEVER the Muslims.

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

Maybe it has something to do with Christianity being the religion of most of the world hegemons while Islam at most has regional powers that are still suffering current effects of colonialism (from the Christian powers). That Islam is largely a religion of people of colour while most white people are Christian. How much of the reaction against Islam comes in the form of either malicious military imperialism or else patronising White Man's Burden issues.

The playing field might not exactly be level, you know?

[Grumman]

Maybe it has something to do with Christianity being the religion of most of the world hegemons while Islam at most has regional powers that are still suffering current effects of colonialism (from the Christian powers). That Islam is largely a religion of people of colour while most white people are Christian. How much of the reaction against Islam comes in the form of either malicious military imperialism or else patronising White Man's Burden issues.

The playing field might not exactly be level, you know?

...you do know that Stephen Fry is a gay atheist, right? If anyone gets to play the "less privileged than you" card, it's the guy who would be fucking executed if the Sauds or Iranians were in charge.

[Metahive]

He's also a white first-worlder and white first-worlders are currently busy murdering brown third-worlders at their leisure and fucking up their countries.

Look up "power-differential"", or are you one of those shmucks who thinks there shouldn't be any mosques in WhiteLandia unless Saudi-Arabia allows churches in Mekka?

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

...you do know that Stephen Fry is a gay atheist, right? If anyone gets to play the "less privileged than you" card, it's the guy who would be fucking executed if the Sauds or Iranians were in charge.

Less privileged than whom? Stephen Fry has literally zero to worry about from the evil Iran and Saudi Arabia, being a well-off white westerner. Even were he not well-off, those countries could have nothing to do with him. The typical person in Saudi Arabia or Iran, though, not only has to deal with the effects of American power now and through the decades (poverty and death, all that fun stuff), but the only way they could do anything to try to get away from it would be to be from a ridiculously well-off segment of their own society.

[Admiral Valdemar]

I don't know how Fry being white and from the UK has any relevance at all to his argument. He also suffers from mental health problems, which are every bit as misunderstood as the gay atheist angle. We can't call out abuses because there's abuse in our history?

It's quite simple. The "brown third-worlders" are quite capable of fucking up their countries by themselves. They're doing it. And the "white first-worlders" can sit by and watch them do this, as we are doing in Syria right now because, let's face it, we're not winning any fans by actually taking any action over there.

None of that has any bearing on the fact that there is a taboo against Islam being called out for things to the extent that Christianity has been. I frankly don't care if they're in run down nations because of my forefather's embracing imperialism in the past to an abhorrent level. I'm still going to call Islam out on despicable acts and should be allowed to without threat of violence which would, ironically, prove my point.

[Ralin]

Less privileged than whom? Stephen Fry has literally zero to worry about from the evil Iran and Saudi Arabia, being a well-off white westerner.

Indeed, because Muslims totally are not known for having a significant minority of their community that kills people who publicly insult their idiot religion, and a much larger segment that isn't willing to go that far but tacitly condones the extremists.

You know, just like Christians. Whom Fry has also criticized.

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

None of that has any bearing on the fact that there is a taboo against Islam being called out for things to the extent that Christianity has been. I frankly don't care if they're in run down nations because of my forefather's embracing imperialism in the past to an abhorrent level. I'm still going to call Islam out on despicable acts and should be allowed to without threat of violence which would, ironically, prove my point.

It's funny how people always talk about how their forefathers were the ones who did all that bad imperalism stuff and now this generation should just get over it. Did the UK and the US and others stop using espionage and coups and economic strongarming and bombing and invasion in much of the Muslim world for their own benefits in the 1940s and it's all been good and clean since then? And even if that were the case, how would that excuse the huge disparity that would last for generations just from lasting consequences? It's just like racism and white people saying "yes our grandfathers oppressed your grandfathers but now it's all in the past so shut up".

The point is, criticism of two comparable things needs to have some sort of understanding of the power differential between them. Just as someone who benefits from white privilege but tries to be "fair and balanced" with criticism of white people and black people in America should rightly be called out for racism, so too is someone like Fry who benefits from the privilege of being part of the core establishment West putting issues in Islam and Christianity on the same scrutiny while ignoring any and all context should be called out for islamophobia.

You're also talking to a queer atheist with mental health issues over here, just to try to preempt that card being thrown.

[Dominus Atheos]

So under what circumstances are white first-worlders allowed to criticize brown third-worlders?

Edit, hit submit instead of preview: Not to straw-man you, but it sounds suspiciously like you are saying first-worlders just can't criticize third-worlders ever.

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

Considering the history of what happens every time Europe and America have found something to criticise about the third world, considering how much scrutiny they get to the point of deception compared to the real sins of the world powers, yes, I do think there should be extra leeway given there. Has Western criticism of the third world ever lead to any sort of improvement without causing mass murder and economic devastation along the way? And if it has, does the balance pan out compared to all the bad that's come from it?

[Korto]

My feeling is the problem is different groups are so used to being attacked by various -phobes, that they become over-sensitive. This is reasonable on their part, if your always under attack, you're better getting your counter-attack in early. And the people attacking will open by sounding quite reasonable, and using reasonable areas of criticism, using that as a foot in the door to progress to the hate-speak.
This means that anyone raising a valid criticism or point of discussion will, quite unintentionally, sound like the last pack of bigots the group had to deal with, and may be dealt with accordingly.
And the person wanting to raise the criticism is also aware of what the bigots say, and this has a chilling effect because they don't want to sound like those arseholes, and they don't know how to get across that they don't secretly think all gays should be sterilised or Moslems are in the service of Satan, they just want to discuss that maybe this interpretation of Holy Law a country has isn't the best, and the country next door has a different interpretation that seems better and can we talk about that?

[hongi]

It really is a weird situation. I mean, we don't have reservations with bashing Christianity in this forum, why should we have reservations with bashing Islam? Or is it considered an internal affair when people from Christian-majority countries bash Christianity, as opposed to bashing Islam that's largely an outside thing in the West?

Why don't you have reservations bashing Christianity? You do know that Christianity is massive in the Third and Second World right?

[Korto]

Because most people here are Christian, or have a Christian background? I have a Christian background, so I would feel quite comfortable criticising Christianity, but uncomfortable criticising Islam, as I don't want to sound like the other arseholes. Similarly, I'm white, so I would have no concern about being called racist if I criticised whites, but leery of criticising blacks.
Mind you, blacks probably don't feel as cautious criticising whites, but that's probably because they'd be fucking hard-pressed finding a criticism we don't deserve. (As an example of something, as white, I can say about whites.)

[General Mung Beans]

...you do know that Stephen Fry is a gay atheist, right? If anyone gets to play the "less privileged than you" card, it's the guy who would be fucking executed if the Sauds or Iranians were in charge.

Less privileged than whom? Stephen Fry has literally zero to worry about from the evil Iran and Saudi Arabia, being a well-off white westerner. Even were he not well-off, those countries could have nothing to do with him. The typical person in Saudi Arabia or Iran, though, not only has to deal with the effects of American power now and through the decades (poverty and death, all that fun stuff), but the only way they could do anything to try to get away from it would be to be from a ridiculously well-off segment of their own society.

In purely economic terms, your average Saudi citizen (not so much if you're a guest worker from Pakistan or Indonesia) is pretty well off along with residents of most of the other "oil emirates. And if we're going to use this logic, should we refrain from criticizing white working-class people with prejudices of various sorts in the United States and elsewhere in the Western world considering they'be been significantly affected by deindustrialization, outsourcing, and so forth along with having a significant power disparity with someone like Stephen Fry?

[mr friendly guy]

I would consider someone an Islamophobe if they
a) utilise gross generalisations about Muslims eg all or most Muslims are terrorists

b) wants to deny them rights which other religious people would have (ie ban the Burkha type campaigns but allowing other groups to keep their religious paraphenalia) or deny them freedom of religion, eg Ann Coulter retarded speech about forcibly converting them.

Such a situation doesn't apply to Stephen Fry.

[Serafina]

It really is a weird situation. I mean, we don't have reservations with bashing Christianity in this forum, why should we have reservations with bashing Islam? Or is it considered an internal affair when people from Christian-majority countries bash Christianity, as opposed to bashing Islam that's largely an outside thing in the West?

Why don't you have reservations bashing Christianity? You do know that Christianity is massive in the Third and Second World right?

Because those are usually not the target of the criticism - when a first-worlder criticizes Christianity, he usually targets the Christians of his own experience - other first-worlders.

[Metahive]

You're allowed to criticise the islamic world as much as you want. And other people are allowed to call you privileged, imperialist douchecanoes for it as well if they think it fits. Can't deal with that? Tough titties, that's Free Speech for you.

[Elfdart]

Ever the drama queen, Stephen Fry is scared shitless:

Sadly we live in more worrying times. Phobos is the Greek for fear. Am I afraid of certain fanatical Christians, Muslims, Lord’s Resistance Army fighters or any other group like that? You bet your cute keister I’m afraid. I am afraid of anyone who hates me and everything I stand for and wants me and the civilisation I grew up in destroyed. I am afraid of any state or religious endorsed brute squad that suddenly smashes my door down at three in the morning and drags me to the wall to be shot. I am afraid of any group of people wherever they’re from and whomever they do or don’t worship who see justification for explosions that cause human blood to run like rivers down the streets.

Because being in the UK means he has so much to fear from fanatical Third Worlders and their primitive religions. This reminds me of the claim made by his whiskey-drenched, holocaust-denying buddy, Christopher Hitchens, who claimed he was on the front lines of the war against "Islamofascism" because he lived in a D.C. suburb and the Pentagon wasn't too far away and...

I don't know where Fry finds the courage to go on living.

You're allowed to criticise the islamic world as much as you want. And other people are allowed to call you privileged, imperialist douchecanoes for it as well if they think it fits. Can't deal with that? Tough titties, that's Free Speech for you.

That's not fair! How dare those superstitious primitives respond in kind when they get insulted!

[Elfdart]

It's quite simple. The "brown third-worlders" are quite capable of fucking up their countries by themselves. They're doing it. And the "white first-worlders" can sit by and watch them do this, as we are doing in Syria right now because, let's face it, we're not winning any fans by actually taking any action over there.

The US and its lackeys haven't been sitting by and watching, they've been pumping weapons and other support to the insurrection in Syria, and will probably start bombing the country sometime this week. All to "maintain credibility" (i.e. to smack down anyone who doubts the sheer awesomeness that is the Empire of America-Fuck Yeah!). Suddenly the death threats against cartoonists and a shitty novelist, the stabbing of a filmmaker and the occasional do-it-yourself bombing seem like small potatoes. The only difference is one of scale. The National Security State feels insulted, so thousands of people will now be slaughtered with bombs and drones. When fanatical Muslims take offense the death toll is much lower.

[Guardsman Bass]

You're allowed to criticise the islamic world as much as you want. And other people are allowed to call you privileged, imperialist douchecanoes for it as well if they think it fits. Can't deal with that? Tough titties, that's Free Speech for you.

Depends on the country. The "poor oppressed muslims" thing doesn't really apply in the case of the Saudis, who were never under anyone's imperial boot after the Ottoman Empire's fall and have been rich as hell for decades (and are busy sponsoring sides in all the regional conflicts around them too).

But that's the problem with Fry's condemnation. Muslims are close to 2 billion of the world's population, and heavily concentrated among a ton of unstable, poor countries. There's pretty much always going to be conflict going on among some of them as long as that's the case, so condemning muslims in general over it is stupid.

[Formless]

My feeling is the problem is different groups are so used to being attacked by various -phobes, that they become over-sensitive. This is reasonable on their part, if your always under attack, you're better getting your counter-attack in early. And the people attacking will open by sounding quite reasonable, and using reasonable areas of criticism, using that as a foot in the door to progress to the hate-speak.
This means that anyone raising a valid criticism or point of discussion will, quite unintentionally, sound like the last pack of bigots the group had to deal with, and may be dealt with accordingly.
And the person wanting to raise the criticism is also aware of what the bigots say, and this has a chilling effect because they don't want to sound like those arseholes, and they don't know how to get across that they don't secretly think all gays should be sterilised or Moslems are in the service of Satan, they just want to discuss that maybe this interpretation of Holy Law a country has isn't the best, and the country next door has a different interpretation that seems better and can we talk about that?

Besides this, just being an atheist today doesn't make you immune to the effects of a christian or jewish upbringing. Bias is learned young, and Muslims aren't idiots who don't know this. And that is without getting into the effects of propaganda, whether its nationalistic, imperialistic, or simply "terrorists are everywhere, fear them!" bullshit.

[Grumman]

You're allowed to criticise the islamic world as much as you want. And other people are allowed to call you privileged, imperialist douchecanoes for it as well if they think it fits. Can't deal with that? Tough titties, that's Free Speech for you.

Just because you are not legally forbidden from making your racist accusations does not mean they are valid.

And yes, you are a racist. You accuse Stephen Fry of being an "imperialist" just because he is white and was born in the UK, which to your diseased mind means he has a moral obligation to not criticise people like Mohammed Bouyeri (a murderer who does not share your purported belief that you're allowed to criticise the Islamic world as much as you want).