#This was in regards to a post about how puritanism is bad and how banning kink shit does not in fact stop people from being freaks

[takashi0]

[rgr-pop]

don't reblog. this is a post where i will be asking for support strategizing how to work with a zoomer comrade who might be easily steered into t*rf stuff. there is a woman in our org who is very young and i want to support her. she is [alma mater] old friends with [trans roommate] who cares about her a lot. [kids from that school are like a whole hive in this org, it's cute actually.] she has a labor organizer job. she got elected to leadership in our org (after being a leader at the college org) but stopped coming to things, rightfully i think, after the behavior of men in this organization. to summarize without letting my own experience of the shit bleed into her experience: she was one of a handful of women who complained on slack that men were blowing up at them over nothing. in response to her saying that, some men in the organization said something essentially doubling down on it and our chair (bad behavior idiot boy) made a public statement supporting the men. anyway the point being, she has had bad experiences around gender in this org, but doesn't have the long experience that i have, and she knows i supported her but we haven't really talked much since that.

[trans roommate] and i have been talking about having her over and chilling more. she sometimes posts things that i would call slightly femcel, but also which kind of is wrapped up in the "puritanical zoomer" stuff. roommate had said she sided with the "ban sex scenes" kids lol and i was like, that's just zoomer solidarity lol. as an example. she's also engaged in the anti hookup culture stuff. this is really classic femcel sex wars so as you can see i regard myself as the best expert to handle it. i had screenshotted something where she was like, leftist men are misogynist degenerates who call women on the left puritans for having morals in their sexual politics. i know those words are red flags but i think she's really like 22 at the oldest so it wasn't a huge alarm for me, i just sent it to roommate and said "i support her femcelery sometimes but how do we loop her back around to 'men are misogynist degenerates who don't fuck'" lol. because i mean --you know i agree that they are misogynists, but they are misogynist to me because i'm the pervert honestly 90% of the time. neither here nor there...

so roommate said to me this is my dear friend but she's my only friend who i worry about becoming a t*rf. and i was like that's real, you know i've seen some shit in my time, we will strategize making sure that doesn't happen. i guess it had been on their mind for a while, and they talked to their other [alma mater hive], another young woman who also has perspective on some of that zoomer sexual politics stuff but she's really anti t*rf (and an icon, i stan). and she said she had the same worries and one time saw this girl interracting with a t*rf account or some such. so anyway

i'm worried and i want to figure out how to do this the right way this time. i do actually think this is the perfect example of her own social isolation making her vulnerable to this and i think that having her over to hang out with us just being us (good role models) will really help. she probably also needs to dump her boyfriend whoever he is (i'm not sure if she's straight but i know she has a boyfriend)

[themidnightguardian]

just to be safe, here’s some tw: discussion of religion, mentions of authority figures trying to coerce a child, discussion of purity culture, brief and non-graphic mentions of alcoholism (family history) and sexual assault and abuse (in regards to fanfic) and genocide (the bible)

---

In light of how puritanical people are getting with trying to censor fanfic, I am thinking once again about how when I was young, I grew up in the catholic church. We went every sunday, my mom was a sunday school teacher, I have an uncle who’s a priest, all that jazz. but every sunday on the drive back home, my mom would draw us into a discussion about what we thought of the sermon, ask us to dissect our opinions on what we had learned. it wasn’t meant as a way to check if we had paid attention; she wanted us to think critically about what we were being taught and decide for ourselves if we agreed with it.

so when my other sunday school teachers said that my dad and grandmother were going to hell for being non-religious, or when our priest tried to tell me god would love me less if I didn’t drink the holy wine despite the fact that I was concerned since alcoholism ran in my family, or when the youth group leader tried to get me to sign a contract to ‘sign over’ my free will to god’s plan as if it was a tradable good, I didn’t have to take these authority figures at their word. I could decide for myself that it was bullshit and say no.

I am not religious anymore and neither is my mom, but that’s not actually the point of this post. The point is that engaging with toxic/problematic content does not inherently make you believe it.

Right now there is a rise in this purity culture, protect the children, get rid of any content (but especially literature) that conveys allegedly immoral ideals, etc. A lot of the arguments surrounding the regulation of these things suggest that people who write “problematic” content are obviously in agreement with it, or that people who read/view “problematic” content are at a high risk of normalizing it and then partaking in such things in real life.

The key to making sure the media & messages you are consuming don’t impact your real-life actions, however, is not to simply get rid of anything that is potentially “dangerous.” It is critical thought.

Without critical thinking, I would probably still be Catholic, and as a nonbinary queer, I would probably be so deep in the closet and full of self-loathing and denial that I wouldn’t even know that about myself. And yet if I had never been exposed to Catholicism at all, I don’t actually think that would be better. Because during the bible readings and the sermons and the sunday school classes, I decided that I loathe self-sacrifice to the extent of martyrdom. I decided that authority figures do not always have my best interests at heart. I decided that there is no good reason, ever, for genocide, not even in god’s name, not even if you are god.

When I apply that same critical thinking to some of the things I’ve read in literature and fanfiction, especially the things that people want banned because it’s “not safe to read” and “people will start to act like this” and “it’s glorifying these horrible things and everyone who reads it is sick”, what I’ve actually taken away from that kind of fic is this:

Sometimes people have a good reason to do horrible things, and yet that doesn’t make their actions okay. If you don’t want sex and your partner makes you, it’s still sexual assault. Abuse can take on a thousand different appearances, and many, many, many of them are not physical. People are rarely all good or all bad, and everyone is shaped by their experiences to some extent.

The idea that reading about things that are uncomfortable or dangerous or illegal is enough on it’s own to make someone repeat those behaviors is frankly ludicrous. I’d bet that most people are actually coming away more aware of the toxic/problematic things to avoid in real life rather than perpetuating them. And if you are becoming desensitized to the horrors in the world like one post I saw suggested, that’s either because you weren’t a super empathetic person in the first place or it’s a coping mechanism to deal with the fact that you cannot personally fix most of it.

[creativitycache]

ngl asking for people who self-identify as "antis" is already biasing your results because the term originated from fans being defensive over getting called out (eg the types who sincerely think fandom culture is ""puritan""). fair number of people started to use the term ironically and it might be evening out but overall the post calling for responses on the survey still comes off as something written in bad faith?

I wrote a rather long and involved response and then tumblr ate it. Goshdarn.

Fair warning, this is a hyperfixation and I’m coming off of a migraine so this may not be very cogent. Please read this in the over excited tones of someone infodumping about emulsifiers, with no animosity intended.

So, tl;dr and with a lot fewer links, I’m incredibly interested by your perspective that “anti” originated as a derogatory term.

As far as I am aware, the etymological history of the word “anti” being used pejoratively is coming from some very new debates.

I’m also noting that you had no feedback regarding the content of the questions themselves, which I would be interested in hearing as I am genuinely coming from a place without censure.

The term “anti” actually is a self-descriptor that arose in the Livejournal days, where you’d tag something as “Anti ___” for other like minded people to find. (For example, my cursory google search pulled up 10 Anti Amy Lee communities on LJ).

I’m a self-confessed old. I was back in fandom before Livejournal, aaaall the way back in the Angelfire days. Webrings children! We had webrings! And guest books for you to sign!

I’m going to take a swing for the fences here Anon, so if I’m wrong please let me know, but I’m going to guess you became active as a fan in the past 5-8 years based of your use of the term puritan.

There’s actually a HUGELY new debate in fandom spaces! Previously, it was assumed that:

a) All fandom spaces are created and used by adults only.

b) If you were seeing something, it’s because you dug for it.

These assumptions were predicated upon what spaces fandoms grew in. First you had Star Trek TOS fandom, which grew in 1970s housewives kitchens. They were all friends irl, and everyone was an adult, and you actively had to reach out to other adults to talk about things. (By the way- a woman lost custody of her children in the divorce when her ex husband brought up to the judge she kept a Kirk/Spock zine under her bed. The judge ruled this as obvious signs of moral deficiency. That was in the 80s! Everyone is still alive and the parents are younger than my coworkers!)

Time: 1967-1980s. Is Anti a term? No. Who is the term used by? N/A Is fandom space considered Puritanical? No.

Then, when the internet came about, it was almost exclusively used by adults until The Eternal September. 1993 was the year that changed the internet for good, but even years after that the internet was a majority adult space. Most kids and teens didn’t have unlimited access if their parents even had a home computer in the 90s.

This is the rise of Angelfire, which were fansites all connected to each other in “rings”. You had to hunt for content. If you found something you didn’t like, well, you clicked out and went on with your day because you’d never see it again unless you really dug. This was truly the wild west, tagging did not exist and you could go from fluff to vore in the blink of an eye with nothing warning you before hand. All fannish spaces were marked “here be dragons” and attempts were made to at least adopt the “R/NC-17″ ratings on works to some limited success, depending on webmaster.

Time: 1990-1999. Is Anti a term? No. Who is the term used by? N/A Is fandom space considered Puritanical? No.

In 1999 LiveJournal arose like a leviathan, and here is where the term Anti emerges as a self descriptor. Larger communities began to form, and with them, divisions. Now, you could reach so many fans you could reach a critical mass of them for enough of them to dislike a ship. The phrase “Anti” became a self-used tag, as people tagged their works, communities, and blogs with “anti” (NB: this is at far, far smaller rates than today). Anti was first and foremost a tagging tool used and created by the people who were vehemently against something.

You could find content more easily than in the past, but you still had to put some serious elbow grease into it.

In 2007, Livejournal bans users for art "depicting minors in explicit sexual situations”. The Livejournal community explodes in anger- towards Livejournal staff. The account holders/fans view this as corporate puritanical meddling. The outrage continues as it is revealed these bans were part of a pre-sale operation to SUP Services. SUP Services, upon taking over Livejournal in 2008, proceeds to filter the topics “bisexuality, depression, faeries, girls, boys, and fanfiction”.

The Great LiveJournal Migration begins, as fans leave the site in droves.

Time: 1999-2009. Is Anti a term? Yes. Who is the term used by? People self describing, seeking to create communities based off a dislike of something. Is fandom space considered Puritanical? No.

Where do fans go? Well, in the last decade, they migrated to Tumblr and Twitter (sorry Pillowfort- you gave it a good try!)

What’s different about all of these sites? Individuals are able to create and access content streams. These are hugely impactful in how communities are formed! Because now:

a) finding content is easier

b) finding content you dislike by accident is easier

c) content you dislike requires active curation to avoid

d) truly anonymous outreach is possible and easy (for example, you anon! Isn’t it much easier to go on anon to bring up awkward or sensitive topics? I’m happy you did by the way, and that’s why I keep my anons open. It’s an important contextual tool in the online communications world!)

Now the term Anti gets sprightly. Previously, if you didn’t like content, there was nothing you could really do about it. For example, I, at the tender age of way-too-young, opened up a page of my favorite Star Trek Deep Space 9 fansite and pixel by pixel with all the loading speed of a stoned turtle a very anatomically incorrect orgy appeared.

I backed out.

1. Who could I contact? There was no “message me here” button, no way to summon any mods on Angelfire sites.

2. If I did manage to find a contact button, I would have had to admit I went onto a site that wasn’t designed to keep me safe. I knew this was a site for adults, I knew there wasn’t a way to stop it from showing something. There was no such thing as tags. I knew all of this before going in. So the assumption was, it was on me for looking. (Some may have argued it was on my parents for not supervising me- all I can say is thank GOD no one else was in the living room and my mom was around the corner in the kitchen.)

But now? On Tumblr? On Twitter? In a decade in which tagging is so easy and ubiquitous it’s expected?

Now people who describe themselves as antis start to have actual tools and social conventions to utilize.

Which leads to immediate backlash! Content creators are confused and upset- fandom spaces have been the wild west for decades, and there’s still no sherriff in town. So the immediate go-to argument is that these people who are messaging them are “puritans”.

And that’s actually an interesting argument! A huge factor in shaping the internet’s social mores in the latest decades is cleanliness for stockbrokers. Websites can become toxic to investors and to sales if they contain sexual content. Over time, corporations perfected a mechanism for “cleaning” a site for sale.

Please note there is no personal opinion or judgement in this next list, it is simply a description of corporate strategies you can read during the minute meetings of shareholders for Tumblr, Twitter, Paypal, Venmo, Facebook, Myspace, Yahoo Answers, and Livejournal.

1. Remove sex workers. Ban any sex work of any kind, deplatform, keep any money you may have been holding.

2. Remove pedophilia. This is where the jump begins between content depicting real people vs content depicting fictional characters begins.

3. Remove all sexual image content, including artwork of fictional characters.

4. Remove all sexual content, including written works. If needed, loop back to step 2 as a justification, and claim you do not have the moderators to prevent written works depicting children.

I would like to reiterate these are actual gameplans, so much so that they’ve made their way into business textbooks. (Or at least they did for my Modern Marketing & App Design classes back in the early 2010s. Venmo, of course, wasn’t mentioned, but I did read the shareholder’s speeches when they banned sex workers from the platform so I added them in the list above because it seems they’re following the same pattern.)

So you have two groups who are actively seeking to remove NSFW content from the site.

A) Corporate shareholders

B) People are upset they’re seeing NSFW content they didn’t seek out and squicks them

Now, why does this matter for the debates using the term “puritan” as an insult? 

Because the reasons corporate shareholders hate NSFW material is founded in American puritanism. It’s a really interesting conflation of private sector values! And if Wall Street were in another cultural context, it would be a completely different discussion which I find fascinating!

But here’s the rub- that second group? They're not doing this for money. If there are any puritanical drives, it’s personal, not a widespread cohesive ideology driving them. HOWEVER! The section of that group that spent the early 2010s on tumblr did pick up some of the same rhetoric as puritanical talking points (which is an entirely separate discussion involving radfems, 4chan raids, fourth wave feminism, and a huge very nuanced set of influences I would love to talk about at a later time!)

These are largely fans who have “grown up” in the modern sites- no matter how old they actually are, their fandom habits and expectations have been shaped by the algorithms of these modern sites.

Now HERE‘s the fascinating bit that’s new to me! This is the interpretation of the data I’m getting, and so I’m out on a limb but I think this is a valid premise!

The major conflict in fandom at this time is a struggle over personal space online.

Content creators are getting messages telling them to stop, degrading them, following them from platform to platform.

They say “Hey! What gives- we were here first. The cardinal rule of fandom is don’t like, don’t read. Fandom space has always been understood to be adult- it’s been this way for decades! To find our content, you had to come to us! This is our space! This is my space, this is my blog! If you don’t like it, you’re not obligated to look!”

Meanwhile, at the exact same time, antis are saying “Hey! What gives- this content is appearing on my screen! That’s my space!  I didn’t agree to this, I don’t like this! I want it to be as far away from me as possible! I will actively drive it away.”

This is a major cultural shift! This is a huge change and a huge source of friction! And I directly credit it to the concept of “content stream” and algorithms driving similar-content to users despite them not wanting it!

Curating your online space used to be much simpler, because there wasn’t much of it! Now with millions of users spread out over a wide age range, all feeding in to the same 4-5 websites, we are seeing people be cramped in a technically limitless space!

Now people feel that they have to go on the offense to defend themselves against content they don’t like, which is predicated upon not only the algorithms of modern websites but ALSO talking points fed from the top down of what is and what is not acceptable on various platforms.

Time: 2010-2020. Is Anti a term? Yes. Who is the term used by? People self describing,and people using it to describe others. Is fandom space considered Puritanical? Depends!

So I, a fandom ancient, a creaky thing of old HTML codes and broken tags, am watching this transformation and am wildly curious for data.

Also...I uh....I can’t believe this is the short version. My ADHD is how you say “buckwild” tonight.

Anyways...um...if anyone has read to the bottom, give me data?

[camaro-and-smokes]

I'm not trying to start any issues, but I have some thoughts about what you shared regarding gay sex in fanfic. To begin, I'm familiar with the article, I've read it a lot, I try to employ some of the ideas in it in my own writing.

On the other hand...isn't inaccurate and exciting/non-dangerous sex some of the draw of fanfiction/fiction in general?

If we take romance books, for instance, one of the major draws is that STDs or pregnancy just aren't concerns unless the author explicitly wants them to be. No one should be getting their sex education from romance books, that would be irresponsible. It's why readers *know* they're fiction.

I think the same goes for anal sex that relates to the mouth. Yes, someone should use a dental dam or a condom unrolled to be a flat piece to perform analingus in real life, but there's no concern about the potential impacts in fiction because it's fiction. It's not real.

One of the arguments that has been used to suppress homosexual expression in media is that sex does not belong somewhere. That's unfair, the same standard is not held to heterosexual sexual depictions in media. In this regard, I think asking people to keep it out when it's already been tagged appropriately and equating this to bad story telling is disheartening.

I hope you know I mean no ill will or to cause any issues or call you out. I only want to express some concerns I have because I see these talking points a lot from a puritanical viewpoint. It worries me that this is how queer relationships may be viewed in real life.

Hi nonny!

Listen, first of all, I fully agree with you about fan fiction and fiction in general!

They should be free way to express any fantasies anyone has. There shouldn't be any limitations to it, nor should anyone feel, that what someone else says is right or correct, should be that for them.

There's the beauty of fiction - it isn't real and doesn't have real implications, so you're free to do whatever you want with it.

Maybe I should've once again emphasized that if the writer wants it to be as accurate as possible, then maybe consider what the referenced article says, as I did with my Camaro post. Because that's what I meant.

Sorry if I wasn't clearer on that.

What I didn't definitely mean and in my opinion didn't say either, was that homosexual expression should be denied or banned from any form of media when heterosexual expression is used perhaps even too much.

It definitely shouldn't.

The whole piece was just about how to depict it realistically, not banning it from anywhere.

Even if it makes me queezy. It was simply meant as a something saying please don't, but not to keep someone from doing it despite what I think about it.

I'm just a somebody on the Internet. I'm not nor I should be taken as an authority in anything.

Like I said in it, I use sex in my stories too. I think that sex belongs to story about a mature relationship, no matter what genders it includes. And especially between Harrington and Hargrove I use it always. I want them to be happy that way.

It was also a piece of my personal views on what I think is good storytelling and what I personally like reading. I enjoy correctly depicted sex in fiction, no matter the genders. But that's just my preference.

If you saw my opinions as puritanical, that's absolutely fine. They simply reflected my views on the accuracy of depicting sex in fiction the way I enjoy it - as accurate as possible.

In real life I try not to define any relationships between any genders by genders. I don't see relationships or people like that, and personally I think it's rude to define people or their relationships by their gender alone - which is what I see a lot nowadays. I see relationships simply between people, because that's what my personal experience is as someone who's had relationships with both opposite and same sex. I just see people as people and I fall in love with people, not their genders.

If I see a piece of fiction I don't enjoy or find it too inaccurate for me, then I move on. I don't think the writer of that piece meant the story for me, they meant it for them, and for some other audience. Simple as that.

But thank you for pointing these things out. I can correct the post to reflect more what I meant. Unfortunately, online, when communicating just by text alone, one can't always be as detailed as maybe in real life when talking with someone in person. Then it's good that someone takes a moment to point these things out.

[addcrazy-blog]

New Post has been published on Add Crazy

New Post has been published on https://addcrazy.com/tariq-ramadan-muslims-need-to-reform-their-minds/

Tariq Ramadan: ‘Muslims need to reform their minds’

Tariq Ramadan is aware of all approximate travel bans. In spite of everything, he changed into never supposed to come to be right here, in a pebbledash semi in northwest London. In 2004, he became on his way to America, having been presented the position of professor of Islamic studies at the University of Notre Dame, in Indiana. All of sudden, nine days before his flight, a house already rented, youngsters enrolled in faculty, his visa became revoked.

The reasons given were indistinct in the beginning, however finally got here right down to the reality he supported a charity the Bush administration labeled a fundraiser for Hamas. They argued Ramadan ought to have regarded about the links. How could he, he said when the donations have been made before the blacklisting – in different phrases, earlier than us government itself knew? He believes, instead, that he become singled out for his competition to the conflict in Iraq.

In 2010, Hillary Clinton, as secretary of the kingdom, revoked the revocation, however with the aid of that time, Ramadan had been embraced by using St Antony’s University, Oxford. Ramadan has no regrets. “I’m very glad that they prevented me from going. I’m tons better off right here,” he says, in gently accented English (he grew up in Geneva, speak French and Arabic). Commuting to Oxford, he has made Metroland his home. In the States, he says, “I don’t assume it’s political surroundings where you are unfastened to talk. Humans are scared.”

It’s likely just as well he feels that manner: the Trump administration won’t be rolling out the welcome mat. As well as its plans for a new government order designed to save you tens of millions of Muslims from coming into us of a, it’s considering designating the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist enterprise. That poses a hassle for Ramadan because it becomes his grandfather, Hassan al-Banna, who based the movement.

This own family connection has given upward thrust to a lot of innuendoes over time. A number of his detractors consider that Ramadan himself is a taking walks Brotherhood front: clean-speak, but with a forked tongue. His calls for peace and communicate seemingly masks a secret timetable to Islamise Europe. I’m able to locate any cause to disbelieve Ramadan whilst he says he’s no longer a member of the corporation. He has been open in books and talks approximately his approach – to remain trustworthy to the tenets of Islam, however resolutely to take part in western society – and it seems pointless to invoke a shadowy puppet-master. “I’m the grandson of Hassan al-Banna and this is the truth,” he says. “I’ve been pretty important to the business enterprise. With the final e-book that I wrote about the Arab awakening, or even after 2011, I was very essential. Now to be important … Is [one thing]. To lessen them to something which is violent extremism, and to renowned and to accept the rhetoric of [Egyptian president] Sisi and earlier than him Mubarak: that’s not going to help any u. S . A .. Due to the fact these Human beings, you undertaking them with democracy and with arguments, not with repression and torture.”

Ramadan believes that terrorist designation might set a terrible precedent. “Listening now … To dictators listing who’re the terrorists … that’s going to be very, very horrific for the future of the Center East.”

Is that this the maximum troubling moment for the Muslim global given that 9/11? no longer handiest will we have Donald Trump, but in France, wherein Ramadan has a workplace and spends tons of his time, a couple of in 4 citizens returned Marine Le Pen. How worried is he?

“You know, the final election … when Hollande won, I stated he physically gained the election, however politically, some distance-proper birthday party, the front Countrywide, won. Because its rhetoric became anywhere. They’re prevailing the game.” If it’s Le Pen, he explains, “it’s going to be worse, but it’s already very bad. Of route, we need to resist her birthday party, but the most critical component is the normalization of her rhetoric Within the Socialist birthday party and [among] the Republicans.”

Ramadan is positive, however, Because he says Countrywide politics matter less than what goes on in communities. There, he has written, Muslims can “upward push to the event”, assembly the demanding situations posed by means of a weather of fear by taking an unflinching have a look at themselves, even as attractive to make society, as a whole, juster.

Is that this the “Muslim reformation” that everyone from Invoice Maher to the likes of the now ex-Country wide safety adviser Michael Flynn believes is important? “We shouldn’t export terminology. Islam doesn’t need a reformation, however Muslims want to reform their minds, their interpretations of Islam, which isn’t always precisely the same as what you [went] thru Due to the fact we don’t have a church.”

Ramadan’s cutting-edge ebook, known as Islam: The Necessities, is an try and set out just how this modification of mind desires to come back approximately. It’s billed as “a Pelican introduction” to the religion, however, the ones in search of a For Dummies-style guide might be disappointed. It’s written in Ramadan’s trademark stately prose (he is both extra energizing and greater succinct as a speaker), and receives deep into the weeds of what it method to be a Muslim In the age of globalization. That said, an appendix, Ten Belongings you Concept You Knew approximately Islam, gives a punchy recap of his mind on key problems, including sharia, jihad and get dressed codes. Ramadan explains that Sharia is a manual to ethics, no longer truly a legal code. Corporal and capital punishments are the end result of a “brutal and literalist” software of it and must be suspended. His approach to homosexual Human beings appears to love the sinner, hate the sin – a conservative one Within the context of very current progress Within the west, however infrequently incompatible with lifestyles here, as tens of millions of conventional Christians display. Islam considers modest dress for ladies and men and duty, despite the fact that no longer a critical one.

Ramadan needs Muslims, especially western ones, to think about themselves as really part of contemporary society, and to push it Within the course of human rights and equality of possibility. he is truly pissed off by using the reduction of his religion into questions of hijab or homosexuality through non-Muslims. (He points out that Islam’s position as the puritan foil to a permissive west is noticeably new. Till properly after the Enlightenment, Muslim cultures were seen as threatening due to their libertinism and sensuality.)

Ramadan boils his prescription for western Muslims – and he is obvious that Islam is now a western religion, too – right down to four Ls: “Expertise of us of as language, admire for its legal guidelines, loyalty to its society and liberty for the residents.” Out of context, the ones are phrases that many parties of the right in Europe would love to get off their election manifestos, and many at the left would possibly need to but wouldn’t dare. And but Ramadan still has credibility among Muslim grassroots: he is in excessive demand as a speaker, specifically to younger Human beings, and now not just on the liberal fringe. How does he do it?

What the initiatives are the feel of being no person’s stooge. He speaks truth to power, whether that’s Within the corrupt, conservative Center East, or the belligerent west. It wasn’t just the USA, and at one point, France, that refused him access – he has also been banned from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and several different Muslim-majority nations. He says he became named, these days, in two Islamic state motion pictures, as being “extra risky towards Islam than the non-Muslims”. The hazard was considered big enough for him to be provided protection by using the British authorities, but he became it down, questioning it might be too disruptive.

So why does he continue to be attacked as a threat to liberal values, even our safety? There’s no shortage of unflattering fabric accessible approximately him. One of the more outlandish examples is a front web page tale that regarded Inside the Sun on 12 July 2005, much less than every week after the bombings that killed 52 People in London. It branded him an Islamic militant, who had come to preach (he is not a cleric). A pacesetter Within the equal paper called him an extremist who “backs suicide bombings”. It went on to describe him as an “a smooth-spoken professor whose moderate tones present an acceptable, ‘reasonable’ face of terror to impressionable young Muslims.” A smelly Richard Littlejohn column turned into thrown in for properly measure.

Advertisement

The Sun articles read as although completely divorced from truth, and the febrile publish-7/7 atmosphere offers no excuse. Ramadan is sad after I carry them up – I don’t blame him – but they form a part of a sample of response to him that seems vital.

In a 2003 Tv conflict with Nicolas Sarkozy, then France’s indoors minister, Ramadan’s name for a moratorium on corporal and capital punishment throughout the Muslim international was wilfully misconstrued as a guide for the stoning of women. Rotterdam metropolis council, which hired Ramadan as a network adviser, had 54 tapes of talks he had given in Arabic translated after allegations of homophobia and misogyny surfaced. They declared the reports to be erroneous but later fired him anyway for the web hosting a display on Iran’s regime-funded Press Television. In her ebook Frère Tariq – Brother Tariq – French journalist Caroline Fourest laid out a charge sheet in opposition to him that protected a visceral loyalty to the Muslim Brotherhood and use of double discourse to idiot non-Muslim audiences. final year, the mayor of Bordeaux, Alain Juppé, said Ramadan changed into no longer welcome In the city, claiming his position on troubles consisting of secularism, women and men and equality become ambiguous.

It’s hard to get away the realization that this form of controversy is the fate of any Muslim public highbrow who tries to grapple with the arena as it’s far, rather than as we would like it to be. Ramadan offers as exact as he receives, although. He took the united states to courtroom over his visa and did the same with Rotterdam. He gave an interview to the Sun to “rectify” their account of him and sued some other journalist who accused him of doublespeak.

This intuition to strike returned doesn’t continually help his case. Notwithstanding his very clear and repeated denunciations of antisemitism as un-Islamic, it’s a price that has nonetheless been leveled at him. The reason? An editorial he wrote in 2003 accusing positive Jewish public figures (and non-Jewish ones, he says now, admitting that this point turned into now not made clean In the authentic) of “communitarianism” for failing to denounce Israeli human rights abuses.

In it, he wrote that if Muslim intellectuals are expected to condemn the acts of the Saudi regime and terrorism or violence in Pakistan, Jewish ones have to do the identical when it comes to Israel. He tells me he doesn’t regret writing the piece, even after all of the problem it has induced (Sarkozy introduced it up throughout their row). I placed it to him that it’s unfair to expect anybody to bear responsibility for the guidelines of a government they didn’t select, starting with Muslims, and that wrongs don’t make a right. “I disagree with you,” he says. “Due to the fact I suppose there’s a moral duty. I simply think that as a Muslim, once I see things that are achieved in my call, as in Saudi Arabia, I have to talk out. I’m not accountable, but I’ve to talk out. And that I suppose that … Some of the Jewish Human beings in France are speaking out and saying: not in my call. And I think that is a moral duty.”

  Ramadan’s tries to find an area for Islamic orthodoxy In the secular west has visible him “continuously doing the splits”, in keeping with one reviewer. He’s short to respond: “It’s in your thoughts, it’s not my reality.” but I’m wondering whether or not, as for plenty ordinary Muslims, that sense of a fault line is most acute in which the generations meet. He has 4 youngsters between the while of 15 and 30, girls and boys. Are they critical approximately their religion, like him? “To my Knowledge, sure,” he laughs. “sure, I think that They’re training Muslims.” would they inform him if they weren’t?

https://addcrazy.com/