Fully Baked Left Wing Vegan Cookies

The Black Oil

robindch wrote: »

On Monday, Islamic apostate Maryam Namazie spoke at Golsdmith University to the university's Atheist, Secularist and Humanist Society. Unfortunately, she ran into predictable bother with Goldsmiths Islamic Society (ISOC) involving allegations of intimidation and violence, a violently disrupted talk, while in fact suggesting that the university should be a "safe space":

http://freethoughtblogs.com/maryamnamazie/2015/12/01/goldsmith-isoc/
http://www.londonstudent.coop/death-threats-goldsmiths-speaker-maryam-namazie/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/12029884/Human-rights-campaigner-heckled-at-blasphemy-lecture.html
https://www.facebook.com/shabnam.assadollahi/posts/10207931965036007

https://twitter.com/goldfemsoc/status/672054097164509185

Goldsmiths Feminist Society stands in solidarity with Goldsmiths Islamic Society. We support them in condemning the actions of the Atheist, Secularist and Humanist Society and agree that hosting known islamophobes at our university creates a climate of hatred.

We showed our support on our Facebook page by sharing ISOC’s post with a message of solidarity. Our Facebook page is designed as a space for us to communicate with our members, and their safety is our first priority, under the policies set out by our Student Union. We reserve the right to remove comments and posts that violate these terms or contribute to the marginalisation of students.

Let's only debate ideas covered in intellectual bubble wrap.

silverharp

here is the video , its comedy when you think about it ,it looks like there are about 40 or 50 people there in total but because of these clowns hundreds or thousands of people can see it on line

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1ZiZdz5nao

orubiru

The Black Oil wrote: »

https://twitter.com/goldfemsoc/status/672054097164509185

Goldsmiths Feminist Society stands in solidarity with Goldsmiths Islamic Society. We support them in condemning the actions of the Atheist, Secularist and Humanist Society and agree that hosting known islamophobes at our university creates a climate of hatred.

We showed our support on our Facebook page by sharing ISOC’s post with a message of solidarity. Our Facebook page is designed as a space for us to communicate with our members, and their safety is our first priority, under the policies set out by our Student Union. We reserve the right to remove comments and posts that violate these terms or contribute to the marginalisation of students

Let's only debate ideas covered in intellectual bubble wrap.

I'm not even sure what Maryam Namazie is supposed to have done here that is beyond what a lot of outspoken Atheists would do?

So she was raised as a Muslim but has since denounced her religion. She challenges the mixing of politics and religion.

I honestly don't feel like anyone would bat an eyelid if she was opposed to Christianity.

We have a Feminist Society opposing the hosting of a woman who has said that “from the very fact that you are a second-class citizen, even your testimony legally is worth half that of a man's, you get half what a boy does in inheritance if you are a girl. You have to be veiled if you're a girl or a woman, and there are certain fields of education or work that are closed to you because you're considered emotional.”.

If she was saying these words regarding "The White Supremacist Male Patriarchy" then she'd be getting a standing ovation. If she says it about Islam then she's accused of creating a climate of hatred?

Someone would have to explain that to me. What has this lady done wrong?

orubiru

silverharp wrote: »

here is the video , its comedy when you think about it ,it looks like there are about 40 or 50 people there in total but because of these clowns hundreds or thousands of people can see it on line

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1ZiZdz5nao

Well, I think we can all agree that there's nothing safe about that space!

So those particular members of the Goldsmiths Islamic Society plan to prevent a "climate of hatred" through intimidation, shouting and general disruption? Interesting.

Pretty much an example of why the concept of the "safe space" is wide open to abuse. These lads are making a complete mockery of it to be honest and you can see them laughing away while accusing the speaker and organizers of "intimidation" and shouting out "safe space, safe space".

When I hear from a Christian angrily, blindly, declaring that "abortion is murder" I usually try to employ some kind of logical reasoning backed up by medical science and legal definitions. That's my counter argument. I never realized I could just say "your different point of view is making me feel unsafe" and they would be obligated to stop. Must try it some time.

A Safe Space should exist ONLY for the protection and/or recovery of vulnerable individuals. It should not be used as a way to hide from "harmful" opinions and it should certainly not be used as a mechanism for silencing other people.

There's really something hilarious about the words "safe space" being relevant somehow in political and religious debate.

130Kph

A curious aspect of this, is Maryam’s blog is hosted on PZ Myers site - & he would be completely aligned to goldsmiths feminists society stance
“that hosting known islamophobes at our university creates a climate of hatred. “ -goldfemsoc

Anyway, isoc said

Just a few examples of her Islamophobic statements, she labelled the niqab- a religious symbol for Muslim women, “a flag for far-right Islamism”. Also, she went onto tweet, they are ”body bags” for women. That is just 2 examples of how mindless she is, and presents her lack of understanding and knowledge about Islam. I could go on for a while if you would like further examples.
….
…She also regularly shares platforms with right wing fascists such as Douglas Murray…

Usually people give their best reasons first for calling someone an Islamophobe.

This is her opinion of a niqab- but to call this anti-Muslim bigotry is not even slightly credible. Does anyone know if there’s anything else she has said in the past that could lead goldfemsoc to making this accusation?

Is sharing a platform with D Murray (if that’s true) enough to label her Islamophobic?

I read her blog all the time and I can’t recall anything that could be described as such.

Gbear

orubiru wrote: »

A Safe Space should exist ONLY for the protection and/or recovery of vulnerable individuals. It should not be used as a way to hide from "harmful" opinions and it should certainly not be used as a mechanism for silencing other people.

More specifically, it should be something you create in your own narrow setting and not something you impose on everyone.

jackofalltrades

Goldsmiths Feminist Society stands in solidarity with Goldsmiths Islamic Society.
We support them in condemning the actions of the Atheist, Secularist and Humanist Society and agree that hosting known islamophobes at our university creates a climate of hatred.

Turkeys voting for Christmas comes to mind.
That's a simply mind boggling level of cognitive dissonance.

orubiru wrote: »

I honestly don't feel like anyone would bat an eyelid if she was opposed to Christianity.

They sure wouldn't.
You can even see this in action on this website.
A lot of people are more than happy to have a go at Christianity and Catholicism.
But as soon as anything to do with Islam is mentioned they're fully on the defensive.

130Kph wrote: »

Is sharing a platform with D Murray (if that’s true) enough to label her Islamophobic?

Any criticism of Islam, no matter how well founded, is enough to have you labelled an Islamophobe.
It's a joke of a word, used to silence people that you disagree with.
People who use the word need to be challenged on it and asked to come up with a better argument.

Hotblack Desiato

robindch wrote: »

Have a read of the burka thread - a significant portion of the population believe that wearing the burka is, in fact, a symbol of freedom.

Proof if ever it were needed that if you can convince yourself to believe in a theistic god, you can convince yourself to believe in anything.

MrPudding

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Proof if ever it were needed that if you can convince yourself to believe in a theistic god, you can convince yourself to believe in anything.

There are quite a few atheist posting on that thread arguing for the "right" to wear a burka.

It is actually a good example of what we frequently say, being a atheist simply means we don't believe in gods, nothing more.

MrP

Hotblack Desiato

MrPudding wrote: »

There are quite a few atheist posting on that thread arguing for the "right" to wear a burka.

Apples/oranges.

You could argue that anyone who feels compelled to wear or do something on the grounds of religion is oppressing themselves, but it's their right to do so. Those two arguments are not in conflict.

I think the world would be a better place without religion, but I don't have the right to stop anyone from practising their religion.

MrPudding

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Apples/oranges.

You could argue that anyone who feels compelled to wear or do something on the grounds of religion is oppressing themselves, but it's their right to do so. Those two arguments are not in conflict.

I think the world would be a better place without religion, but I don't have the right to stop anyone from practising their religion.

I was simply referring to the fact that it isn't just believers that support freedom to wear the burka, something which you have just confirmed. I guess you could argue that you don't see it as a symbol of freedom, but still support them wearing it, but I think the more common position is more like a refusal to comment on the legitimacy of the garment at all (basically the whole who are we to judge) and merely focus on a person's right to do whatever they want, even though if they had an actually genuine choice they might not do that thing.

If one refuses to comment on the legitimacy of an opinion, for example if the burka is a symbol of freedom or not, and believe only those that think it is a symbol of freedom can have a view on it, is that not, then, saying it is a symbol of freedom because the only people that can judge it think it is? I guess this is similar to the argument that a failure to condemn an act is a sign you condoned it.

MrP

silverharp

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Apples/oranges.

You could argue that anyone who feels compelled to wear or do something on the grounds of religion is oppressing themselves, but it's their right to do so. Those two arguments are not in conflict.

I think the world would be a better place without religion, but I don't have the right to stop anyone from practising their religion.

I wouldnt support a ban but society shouldnt bend either, if the bank clerk needs to see that your face ties to your ID or passport there shouldn't be any exemptions on religious grounds. Or if someone is doing something to preclude themselves from employment there should not be access to welfare, so be it a burqa or having plastic surgery so that you look like a lion. :pac:

JPNelsforearm

When people are bombing mosques and attacking anyone perceived as muslim in the streets, then we can start to talk about "Islamophobia", until then, its just another buzz word used to shut down debate and enforce the consensus.

Links234

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

When people are bombing mosques and attacking anyone perceived as muslim in the streets, then we can start to talk about "Islamophobia", until then, its just another buzz word used to shut down debate and enforce the consensus.

You mean like when this uber driver in the states who got attacked by a passenger who thought he was Muslim? Or closer to home, this Saudi woman who was attacked on a Dublin bus? Or you know, the Sikh temple in Wisconsin where a right-wing terrorist killed 6 and injured 4 others in a shooting, before killing himself? Or, how about this?

Twenty-six mosques around France have been subject to attack by firebombs, gunfire, pig heads, and grenades as Muslims are targeted with violence in the wake of the Paris attacks.

This stuff is happening now, and has been happening for years.

silverharp

Im almost willing to believe in Karma , Maryam got an email form the college asking her to take down the video because some of the students are upset that they can be seen on the video.....lol!


http://freethoughtblogs.com/maryamnamazie/2015/12/04/goldsmiths-student-union-request-and-more/

Goldsmiths Student Union request and more

I have received the following email from the Chief Executive of Goldsmiths Students’ Union today (one of three since yesterday) asking to remove the video of my talk for the Atheists Society on Monday 30 November on Apostasy, Blasphemy and Free Expression in the age of ISIS. You can see my reply refusing to do so below.

I’m disappointed and concerned to see that the video you have posted of you speaking at the event at Goldsmiths hosted by Atheist, Secularist and Humanist Society and entitled: Apostasy, blasphemy and free expression in the age of ISIS’ has still not been removed.

A number of students have complained about the video as their consent to be filmed was not asked at the start of the meeting by your camera-operator and this is now viewable on a public website. This is very distressing for these students and we therefore ask that this video is removed from your site as a matter of urgency.

Again, I would appreciate a response asap so I can reassure students that action is being taken. Thank you.

I wrote back:

Thank you for your email.

We won’t be removing the video of my talk at Goldsmiths and the attempts at intimidation carried out by a number of the Islamic Society’s “brothers”. The video has now gone viral and been posted on numerous media outlets and other websites.

I am sorry for any distress caused, particularly as a result of the intimidation tactics of the Islamic Society prior, during and after my talk, and in particular that caused by some of the ISOC “brothers” who attempted to disrupt the event. Nonetheless, this was a public meeting; all those attending saw it being videotaped and made no requests for anonymity. There was implied consent. Moreover, given that some ISOC members have made their own selective clips of the meeting and publicised it on social media, a video of the entire meeting is needed to clarify any misinformation and provide the full facts. This is particularly crucial given that the Goldsmiths Atheist Society is calling for an investigation into the debacle.

I look forward to Goldsmiths investigation and hope that it helps to put an end to its ISOC’s unrestrained attempts at creating fear and intimidation at the expense of free expression and dissent.

If you haven’t also heard, both the Feminist Society and LGBTQ+ Society of Goldsmiths have come out with solidarity messages – for the Islamic Society – and of course not for me. The irony…

Goldsmiths Student Union request and more

The Black Oil

Oh, for goodness sake.

jackofalltrades

If you haven’t also heard, both the Feminist Society and LGBTQ+ Society of Goldsmiths have come out with solidarity messages – for the Islamic Society – and of course not for me

Turkeys are really loving Christmas this year :rolleyes:.

From Goldsmiths LGBTQ+ Society's facebook page.

Following recent events on- and offline, we would like to state and show our solidarity with the sisters and brothers of our Goldsmiths ISOC
We condemn AHS and online supporters for their islamophobic remarks, attitudes, and harassment.
If they feel intimidated, we urge them to look at the underpinnings of their ideology.
We find that personal and social harm enacted in the name of ‘free speech’ is foul, and detrimental to the wellbeing of students and staff on campus.
In our experiences, members of ISOC have been nothing but charming, patient, kind, and peaceful as individuals and as an organization.
We hope this series of events prompts reflection in all parties involved, but also onlookers.
Allyship consists of apologies, bearing with and deconstructing discomfort, respecting the necessary privacy of safer spaces, and opening our hearts to humans unlike ourselves.
We can all stand to improve in this area- which ideally is a daily, humbling practice and not a label.

Could you imagine if an Atheist/Humanist/Secular society came out and said, that if gay people feel intimated they should reconsider their sexuality.
They're basically condoning violence and people who laugh at the idea of an atheist blogger being hacked to death.

Shrap

silverharp wrote: »

Im almost willing to believe in Karma , Maryam got an email form the college asking her to take down the video because some of the students are upset that they can be seen on the video.....lol!


http://freethoughtblogs.com/maryamnamazie/2015/12/04/goldsmiths-student-union-request-and-more/

Wow. I was fairly blown away by Maryam in that video yesterday, have to admit. Some woman for one woman! I guess she's had some serious practice to stand there and deal with that. With communication skills like that I reckon she'll make/take some converts back down off their headfcuk standards of behaviour. Hopefully.

silverharp

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Turkeys are really loving Christmas this year :rolleyes:.

From Goldsmiths LGBTQ+ Society's facebook page.


Could you imagine if an Atheist/Humanist/Secular society came out and said, that if gay people feel intimated they should reconsider their sexuality.
They're basically condoning violence and people who laugh at the idea of an atheist blogger being hacked to death.

up is down, down is up , I despair a little. Maybe there is a Jews for Hitler group ther just to complete the axis of stupid

robindch

Shrap wrote: »

I was fairly blown away by Maryam in that video yesterday, have to admit. Some woman for one woman!

Maryam was at that conference in Dublin some years back and - unlike some other people who subsequently became quite famous for events which were alleged to have occurred - didn't hesitate for one second to draw a rather lovely crayon picture in my kid's "people I have met" crayon picture book.

Maryam's one of the good people.

looksee

I have just watched that entire video, and as Shrap said, she is some woman.

The Black Oil

The Yale story continues...it'd be interesting to know where Halloween costumes were at 10 years ago.

https://twitter.com/crampell/status/672808850718879745

JPNelsforearm

The Black Oil wrote: »

The Yale story continues...it'd be interesting to know where Halloween costumes were at 10 years ago.

https://twitter.com/crampell/status/672808850718879745

Just make soft science and useless arts subjects like the mentioned "ethnic studies" into diploma courses, free up more funding for real students and get rid of the headbangers who have no place in a university.

Hotblack Desiato

The Black Oil wrote: »

The Yale story continues...it'd be interesting to know where Halloween costumes were at 10 years ago.

https://twitter.com/crampell/status/672808850718879745

I'm sorry for my ignorance, in which human language if any does the above make sense?

Hotblack Desiato

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

Just make soft science and useless arts subjects like the mentioned "ethnic studies" into diploma courses, free up more funding for real students and get rid of the headbangers who have no place in a university.

Golgafrincham B-Ark material.

JPNelsforearm

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Golgafrincham B-Ark material.

Universities aren't daycare centers, nor should the courses on offer be padded out with made up subjects, so morons can pick up a degree in nose picking/ethnic studies and feel warm inside.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAAeVU5jnHo

Hotblack Desiato

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

Universities aren't daycare centers, nor should the courses on offer be padded out with made up subjects, so morons can pick up a degree in nose picking/ethnic studies and feel warm inside.

Oh yeah. It's ridiculous that (at least in some areas) everyone is expected to get into a degree course. It's not the best option for many people. There are as many potential plumbers born in Foxrock as Finglas. 'Working with your hands' is very much looked down upon in this country for some reason.

silverharp

Article in the Indo about Maryam

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/carol-hunt/multiculturalism-and-the-culture-of-offence-34262492.html

It's considered elitist to compare one set of cultural values with another, and God forbid that you suggest one culture is in any way superior to another. You might offend someone's cultural sensitivities, and that wouldn't do at all, would it? Recently, human rights activist - and ex-Muslim - Maryam Namazie spoke to Trinity College's Philosophical Society on what she calls our "culture of offence".
(She was lucky to get the chance. Last March, Trinity's Society of International Affairs cancelled a talk by her, because of last-minute restrictions on what she could say.)
She said: "The days when unconditional freedom of expression was seen as a cornerstone of all rights are long gone. Instead, self- censorship and censorship are promoted as intrinsically good. It's no longer a defence of unconditional free expression that is progressive but a defence of censorship".
Google Namazie and you'll read comments about what a danger she is to society. She is regularly described as being "inflammatory" and a person who "incites hatred". You'd be forgiven for thinking that Namazie was a supporter of the death penalty for adulterers and apostates, like the Islamist speaker TCD allowed to speak earlier this year, but no, as far as right-thinking pluralists are concerned, she's even worse.
Namazie, you see, is a feminist who opposes Islamic fundamentalism, Sharia law and gender segregation. She is particularly vocal about women's rights. She thinks stuff like stoning rape victims to death, murdering apostates, mutilating young girls' genitals and putting LGBT people in jail, are all bad things. Consequently, she needs to be heavily censored because her opinions offend people who believe that if your culture requires little girls to be mutilated, then, in the name of multiculturalism, you cannot be criticised for it.
Earlier this week, Namazie gave a talk at London's Goldsmith College. You can look it up on YouTube. In it she doesn't say anything about the impact of religion on the lives of women that I haven't said over the years about the Catholic Church and Irish women. She talks about blasphemy and free expression. She's polite, factual and extremely well informed. The talk is a disaster. She is whistled at, shouted at, intimidated, harassed and heckled by male students. At one stage a student stands up and turns off her PowerPoint. Afterwards, she received death threats and abuse. Just imagine if an academic giving a lecture in Ireland received that sort of treatment. We would, rightly, be horrified. Women's groups all over the country would be up in arms, supporting the right of Irish women to speak freely in public. But what did Goldsmith's Feminist Society do? They gave out a statement on their Facebook page saying that they were standing in solidarity with the men who silenced and threatened Namazie. Why? Because her speech was entitled 'Apostasy, blasphemy and free expression in the age of Isis'. The men who protested against her and made death threats were allegedly members of the college's Isoc (Islamic) society. (Namazie is very clear in her distinction between Islam, the religion and Islamism, the far-right political movement).
The aforementioned Kenan Malik tweeted about their Facebook post: "Oh, the irony. "I believe in free speech… but not when criticising ideas hostile to my rights". But, as Malik, himself a Pakistani Muslim, has often pointed out, this is the reality of multiculturalism. In his book, From Fatwa to Jihad, he asserts that "multicultural policy creates the segmented society and fixed identities to which it is supposedly a response". Namazie argues that "is a profoundly racist phenomenon, which values and respects all cultural and religious practices, irrespective of their consequences for women."
I've often argued that the support some feminists and members of the Left have for regimes and cultures that discriminate against women and LGBT people, is contradictory, West-centred and, yes, racist.
Seemingly if you're Christian, white, Western and from the settled community you're entitled to universal concepts like civil rights and equality. But if you are, for instance, a Muslim woman from Saudi Arabia who wants to drive a car, or a Traveller woman who wants a career instead of marriage, no one is going to fight your case for you. Instead, the cultures which perpetuate inequalities will be defended, in the name of tolerance and pluralism. But what about human rights? When did we decide that they weren't universal after all? When did feminists, like those in Goldsmith, decide that intolerance and sexism should be championed above the right of a woman to speak about injustice? Namazie argues that even in the heart of the secular West "different laws and customs apply to women who have fled Islam- stricken societies. As a result of this racism, the veiling of girls becomes acceptable in the heart of Europe and men who kill women in the name of honour are given reduced sentences."
In a letter to Minister for Justice Frances Fitzgerald about the relatively benign topic of Saudi girls and veiling, Ebbas Ali added that students from Gulf states were "voting with their feet and choosing countries who are more sensitive to their culture".
That's all very well, but perhaps we should be more assertive in protecting ours? Or is that racist?

Nodin

silverharp wrote: »

Article in the Indo about Maryam

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/carol-hunt/multiculturalism-and-the-culture-of-offence-34262492.html

Support from the likes of Carol Hunt she could do without.

silverharp

Nodin wrote: »

Support from the likes of Carol Hunt she could do without.

I dont know who she is as i dont read irish papers so much but that sounds like an argument based on impugning the source. From listening to Maryam I doubt she would be so closed minded. On a quick search I can see that they both wrote complimentary articles on Hitchens for example so Im not sure what your point is?