"you'v ebeen in the u.s., the mecca for high fructose corn syrup, it's the worst there"

context doesn't matter here, just an example of how the word mecca is used as an expresion, I'm sure most of you have seen it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by al-Qa'bong:
I don't know if using "Mecca" is offensive, but suggesting that high fructose corn syrup can make a pilgrimage to any holy place is just plain dumb.

---

People don't usually think of etymology when they use expressions. Why do so many babblers always need to be self-righteous and condescending?

here's a few more examples with a definiton from dictionary.com:

American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source - Share This
mec·ca Audio Help (měk'ə Pronunciation Key
n.

1.
1. A place that is regarded as the center of an activity or interest.
2. A goal to which adherents of a religious faith or practice fervently aspire.
2. A place visited by many people: a mecca for tourists.

[After Mecca (from its being a place of pilgrimage).]

“Hollywood is a mecca for would-be actors and actresses.”

-SLd

[ 24 June 2008: Message edited by: SLd ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by oldgoat:
I guess a problem with the original question is the assumption that Muslims will think and respond as a block.

I can ask over the next few days. I'm pretty sure I will mostly get shrugs.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sven:
Not to be too dismissive, but who cares?

I don't see anyone wringing their hands wondering if saying "Jesus Fucking Christ" is offensive to Xians.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SLd:
Are you being facetious?

-SLd

[ 24 June 2008: Message edited by: SLd ]

---

The idea that a normal person of any (or no) faith would be "offended" by a harmless expression is a bit condescending to that person - isn't it? Doesn't it imply that their religion is so overpowering that they feel bad even when no offence is intended?

"Mecca" isn't a racist or sexist or xenophobic term. If I say "God almighty", do I have to worry about whether someone in the room will have a heart attack?

In fact, why would you ask a question like this about "Muslims" in the first place? Do you think they take their religion more to heart than others in our society?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sven:
I don't see anyone wringing their hands wondering if saying "Jesus Fucking Christ" is offensive to Xians.

---

As a (former) Christian, I think I'm well within my rights to bastardize religious phrases from my own background.

And the question wasn't whether you CARE if it's insensitive. The question is, IS it an insensitive thing to say, and is it something that might offend observant (or even non-observant) Muslims.

Is it "insensitive" to say that we're sick and tired of the MSM crucifying the NDP every chance they get? Which precise sects of Christianity would it be insensitive to?

Do I need to do a faith audit before suggesting that if the mountain won't come to Mohammed, maybe Mohammed should come to the mountain?

Is it insensitive to say to a biologist, when visiting an art gallery: "I believe this is one of the most intelligent designs I've seen in a long time"?

quote:

---

Why do so many babblers always need to be self-righteous and condescending?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
Hey 500_Apples, what does "offensive" mean?

The idea that a normal person of any (or no) faith would be "offended" by a harmless expression is a bit condescending to that person - isn't it? Doesn't it imply that their religion is so overpowering that they feel bad even when no offence is intended?

"Mecca" isn't a racist or sexist or xenophobic term. If I say "God almighty", do I have to worry about whether someone in the room will have a heart attack?

In fact, why would you ask a question like this about "Muslims" in the first place? Do you think they take their religion more to heart than others in our society?

Your opening posts raises lots of questions for me, quite apart from the one you asked.

---

Perhaps what could very well be an earnest inquiry, is also represenative of the effects of the growing Islamaphobia now entrenched in this country.

It could also stem from the idea that is perpetuated by the ruling class and racists alike; that there are "Good Muslims" and "Bad Muslims?"
Taking the stereotypes and ignorance even further

- the bad Muslims would be the kind that would become or are, suicide bombers, women beaters, "fundementalists" who live and die by a dogmatic and tyranical and obtuse faith. The bad Muslim would be mortally offended upon hearing his motherland used in infidel dialog, further cementing his image as a monster and relic from less freedom loving societies than that of Canada.

- the "Good Muslims" on the other hand have become well assimilated in Canadian multicultural (capitalist) society, are of lighter skin, speak fluent English, are University educated, laugh at their own tarnished faith and think that Little Mosque on the Prairie is a delightfully funny and intelligent show.

Whether it's on screen or in person, it never amazes me how easy it is to decipher genuine interest from the bullshit.

quote:

---

feel free to exercise your right not to participate or read any of the responses.

---

Quoted for Irony

-SLd

[ 24 June 2008: Message edited by: SLd ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
Hey 500_Apples, what does "offensive" mean?
"Mecca" isn't a racist or sexist or xenophobic term. If I say "God almighty", do I have to worry about whether someone in the room will have a heart attack?

---

I'm not worried about any muslims getting a "heart attack".

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
In fact, why would you ask a question like this about "Muslims" in the first place? Do you think they take their religion more to heart than others in our society?

---

[ 24 June 2008: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by SLd:

Perhaps what could very well be an earnest inquiry, is also represenative of the effects of the growing Islamaphobia now entrenched in this country.

It could also stem from the idea that is perpetuated by the ruling class and racists alike; that there are "Good Muslims" and "Bad Muslims?"
Taking the stereotypes and ignorance even further

- the bad Muslims would be the kind that would become or are, suicide bombers, women beaters, "fundementalists" who live and die by a dogmatic and tyranical and obtuse faith. The bad Muslim would be mortally offended upon hearing his motherland used in infidel dialog, further cementing his image as a monster and relic from less freedom loving societies than that of Canada.

- the "Good Muslims" on the other hand have become well assimilated in Canadian multicultural (capitalist) society, are of lighter skin, speak fluent English, are University educated, laugh at their own tarnished faith and think that Little Mosque on the Prairie is a delightfully funny and intelligent show.

Whether it's on screen or in person, it never amazes me how easy it is to decipher genuine interest from the bullshit.

-SLd

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by 500_Apples:

Severe overanalyzing.

---

Not really, just taking your logic as far as I could. I've been taught by people I look up to, that it's a more efficient manner of exposing peoples defective thinking, than simply calling them a dumbass.

That, and coming from both a Hindu and Muslim background/upbringing, I've heard my fair share of ridiculous comments, questions and concerns related to the faiths. Yours wasn't too bad actaully, but i'm sure it still fed the "full of ignorant whiteys" stereotype that's attached to this board. Although I'm sure it's just a minority opinion.

Maybe you should take your question to Irshad Manji?

quote:

---

Originally posted by SLd:

Not really, just taking your logic as far as I could. I've been taught by people I look up to, that it's a more efficient manner of exposing peoples defective thinking, than simply calling them a dumbass.

That, and coming from both a Hindu and Muslim background/upbringing, I've heard my fair share of ridiculous comments, questions and concerns related to the faiths. Yours wasn't too bad actaully, but i'm sure it still fed the "full of ignorant whiteys" stereotype that's attached to this board. Although I'm sure it's just a minority opinion.

Maybe you should take your question to Irshad Manji?

-SLd

---

Intellectual masturbation doesn't necessarily constitute "taking logic as far as one can". As a critic of Freud once said, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, Though there will always be people such as yourself who argue it's always s phallic figure. There's a place for analyzing, but too often people overanalyze, and as with rorschach tests it reveals more about them than about what they're analyzing.

quote:

---

Originally posted by 500_Apples:

Intellectual masturbation doesn't necessarily constitute "taking logic as far as one can". As a critic of Freud once said, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, Though there will always be people such as yourself who argue it's always s phallic figure. There's a place for analyzing, but too often people overanalyze, and as with rorschach tests it reveals more about them than about what they're analyzing.

FYI I'm not white. That's another example of you making ignorant assumptions, probably from the application of false stereotypes.

---

Hahahaha, this coming from an astro-physicist!

Perhaps my Zionist-radar is just on at too sensitive a level. Perhaps you really were just asking a simple question, despite how overtly simplistic and condescending it sounded.

But then again, perhaps it was a false stereotype that convinced YOU to ask the question in the first place? Maybe you've just been alienated out in Ohio for too long?

Whatever the case, rest assured that one doesn't need to be "white" to be ignorant, it's something that like love, doesn't see color.

ps: What exactly constitutes a "political pundit?" Is this a title you bestowed upon yourself, or had granted to you?

-SLd

[ 25 June 2008: Message edited by: SLd ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by SLd: Hahahaha, this coming from an astro-physicist!

---

Yeah.

[ 25 June 2008: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
Is it "insensitive" to say that you don't think a certain strategy is "kosher" when there are Jews in the room, observant or not?

---

I don't know. Is it? That's a good question. I would wonder that too.

It's simply a question about politeness and figuring out whether a phrase is offensive. Different religions have different things that are offensive and things that aren't.

For observant Christians, using God's name in vain is offensive. Does that mean you are REQUIRED never to do it in front of a Christian? No, of course not. I'm free to offend anyone I want with my speech, and I sometimes do. But that doesn't change the fact that, to Christians, saying "Jesus Christ!" or, for more observant Christians, "Oh my God!" is an offensive or insensitive thing to say, and something that they would likely refrain from saying themselves.

On the other hand, saying, "That's my cross to bear" is a religious allusion that, from my experience, does not offend even religious Christians, and is something that they would feel free saying.

So the question 500_Apples is asking is whether or not using "Mecca" in the manner he does above is culturally or religiously insensitive or offensive to Muslims. It's a reasonable question. I don't see why people feel the need to attack him about it. If you don't want to know the answer, or don't have an answer to give him, then why are you here? Aren't there a thousand other threads for you to read?

Also: personal attacks are not allowed on this site. Something for you to keep in mind, SLd.

[ 25 June 2008: Message edited by: Michelle ]

quote:

---

Not to be too dismissive, but who cares?

I don't see anyone wringing their hands wondering if saying "Jesus Fucking Christ" is offensive to Xians.

---

quote:

---

Is it "insensitive" to say that you don't think a certain strategy is "kosher" when there are Jews in the room, observant or not?

Is it "insensitive" to say that we're sick and tired of the MSM crucifying the NDP every chance they get? Which precise sects of Christianity would it be insensitive to?

Do I need to do a faith audit before suggesting that if the mountain won't come to Mohammed, maybe Mohammed should come to the mountain?

Is it insensitive to say to a biologist, when visiting an art gallery: "I believe this is one of the most intelligent designs I've seen in a long time"?

---

I agree with both these statements. You know, that is what multiculturalism is. We learn from other people, they learn from other people. We all appropriate other's words, or catch phrases. This is life. If we were to police every single thing that came out of out mouths that might offend someone somewhere we are no better than fascists.

I am a lefty but I do not want to be the thought police.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
I don't get why people are attacking 500_Apples here. No one is assuming that Muslims are more sensitive than other people. No one is suggesting that if you offend a Muslim, he's going to strap on a suicide bomb - in fact, it's pretty offensive of you to imply that this was where 500_Apples was coming from, SLd.

It's simply a question about politeness and figuring out whether a phrase is offensive. Different religions have different things that are offensive and things that aren't.

For observant Christians, using God's name in vain is offensive. Does that mean you are REQUIRED never to do it in front of a Christian? No, of course not. I'm free to offend anyone I want with my speech, and I sometimes do. But that doesn't change the fact that, to Christians, saying "Jesus Christ!" or, for more observant Christians, "Oh my God!" is an offensive or insensitive thing to say, and something that they would likely refrain from saying themselves.

On the other hand, saying, "That's my cross to bear" is a religious allusion that, from my experience, does not offend even religious Christians, and is something that they would feel free saying.

So the question 500_Apples is asking is whether or not using "Mecca" in the manner he does above is culturally or religiously insensitive or offensive to Muslims. It's a reasonable question. I don't see why people feel the need to attack him about it. If you don't want to know the answer, or don't have an answer to give him, then why are you here? Aren't there a thousand other threads for you to read?

Also: personal attacks are not allowed on this site. Something for you to keep in mind, SLd.

[ 25 June 2008: Message edited by: Michelle ]

---

RE: Michelle -

Nobody is being "attacked" and everyone has the equal right to either challenge ideas or not. From my perspective, it's you that needs to step back (mod or not)and let the thread takes it's course.

The tone of your intervention in this thread, is not a new thing and you have been challenged on it before by others. While I must respect the time and effort you (along with other mods) put into maintaining this website, please do not confuse healthy polemicizing with all out "ad-hominem rhetoric" 'Apples is doing just fine on his own, and I for one am actaully starting to appreciate where he was actaully coming from. His remark on critics of Freud and rorschach tests made me laugh out loud (very smart retort!) and I'm not such a big shit that I can't laugh at myself.

However, while I'm not a practicing Muslim, nor have I been for a long long time, I'm well aware of the fact, that the the question posed by 500_Apples, comes in a time and environment of exceptional scrutiny / misunderstanding / sensitivity and full-blow Islamaphobia (not to mention a counter-productive, or reactionary over compensative handling of Muslim related topics is all prevalent). I believe what he tagged as "severe over-analyzing" I look at, as putting things into context, or the specific objective conditions of the times.

RE:Stargazer

I believe that your comments about "Policing," are equally if not more, off base, then the so-called PC/oversensitivity/personal attack that is apparently going on here. This is a chat-board, not a bar room laden with broken bottles and guns hidden under waistbands, so I suggesting to check your finger pointing and melodrama.

Your idea of "multiculturalism" is far different than mine. I see it as nothing more than PR that was developed under colonization of this country, to further shroud systemic racism of Indigenous peoples so rest assured, that my own comments have nothing to do with "multiculturalism"

With both of your recent comments, I am beginning to get a better idea of the degeneration that occurred in the Anti-Racist thread, where "holier-than-though" type retorts were slung, every time someone put our a direct or aggressive challenge to someone else. TO ME, the tone of this thread, suggests that opinions expressed, ARE IN FACT, very relevant. Once again 'Apples is doing fine, and isn't crying bloody murder.

I believe heads need to:

1.) Be more careful of throwing "policing" around on this on this board. Despite it being a haven for social-democrats, there are a lot of political organizers and activists alike, and the terminology could very well spook a lot people unnecessarily, and is dangerously close to another kind of attack - "bad jacketing"

2.) Be more understanding that confrontation on the web, is not a bad thing.

3.) Be aware that in-light of how REAL slander that goes on in other threads and are directly focussed on individuals and organizations by name, go unchecked, moderator intervention in issues of this insignificance, is more than a little inconsistent.

4.) Understand that if you are going to throw around political terminology, then use it correctly. "Fascist" is less about pure censorship and more in keeping with a specific set of economic conditions. People throw this word around so much, it's become as empty as "democracy."

On a personal note, having lots of experience with progressive-type people who I know for a fact, are condescending to the point of petty-attack, when it comes to issues pertaining to Islam, I am well aware of the climate in this country. The Muslim community at large in Canada has a target on it's back as a result of blow-back from the legitimately inhumane actions of some proclaiming adherence to Islam, AS WELL (and far more so), as the programmatic / systemic attacks on those who practice Islam. The intervention of of Michelle and Stargazer seems far more in keeping with inappropriateness, than any quips on mine or anyone else's part. I would finally, suggest again, to visit the comments put forward by Makwa as I think the content of this thread would fall under the category of "anti-racist" topics.

With that, I'm giving 'Apples a intraweb hug, kiss and apology...and I'm out.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Caissa:
Sometimes a question is a question. I'm more interested in answers to this question than people's attempts to deconstruct the question.

---

While I'm happy that you are in touch with what your interests are, and are not. People have the right to deconstruct, reconstruct, buro destrukt - questions all they want! Not your thing? Scroll down!

Jeebus, I'm really beginning to feel the frustration that Makwa felt. This board can really f*ck with your head!

Anyway, they both said that the use of the word Mecca in that sense would at least internally raise an eyebrow, though neither of them would make an issue of it. Gratuitous use of the term would, in their mind compromise what in their religion is a symbol of purity. They did say that they would certainly also take into account context and intent, thus where offense is not meant, it should really not be taken.

One related a story of when she was in labour, and was being assisted by a very christian nurse. She said she shouted "oh god" or some such thing, and this nurse, mid-contraction, took offense. The point of her story was that you have to be a bit reasonable sometimes.

Anyway, I was a bit suprised that both of these people, whom I have known for some time, said that there would be occasion for offense in the term.

Oh and SLD, you have absolutely no idea what Nakwa feels like. None. And you probably never will.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stargazer:
Hey SLD, do you think I'm white you sanctimonious ass?

Jesus, you take the cake.

---

Hey Stargazer, the personal attack rule goes for you too. Please don't.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stargazer:
Hey SLD, do you think I'm white you sanctimonious ass?

Jesus, you take the cake.

---

Wow, hypocritical and defensive, at the same time. I wasn't being any more "sanctimonious" then you were in YOUR reply. (i.e... "thanks for stopping this attack on 500 Apples....I am a lefty but I do not want to be the thought police.) What the f*ck is that?

Did I call you names? Did I question or call out your "whiteness?" I could give two shits about if your not white. Your comments are as fair game as any others, to dissect and reply to.

Hahahaha, you're amazing. But where's Michelle with the slap on the wrist? I got called a name! I demand justice! JUSTICE! hahahahaaha.

Fuck this board is messsssseeeddd up! I love it.

Get over yourself Stargazer, rest assured, I did.

Bye, SLd.

The bottom line is, you guys do a hard job, and Michelle, you speak your mind, and it seriously pisses me off when some people question your moderating abilities. It's like they have nothing to add, so why not attack the moderator. You're a woman, and to some I think that makes you an easy target.

Damn I am sorry, I had three drinks last night and massive anxiety attacks from being downtown and this is the result.

I'm sorry you're feeling that way after a night out. Hopefully you'll be feeling better soon!

[ 25 June 2008: Message edited by: Michelle ]

quote:

---

Damn I am sorry, I had three drinks last night and massive anxiety attacks from being downtown ...

---

What do you mean by "being downtown"?

That would normally be funny, unless you know the background to Stargazer's comment, which is something she explained in another thread a while back where she talked about the after-effects of being sexually assaulted, including difficulty leaving the house.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pogo:
My grandmother hated it when we said 'gosh' as she had read that it was just slang way of using the Lord's name in vain. I still think twice* about saying it around deeply religous people.

---

What about "gol dern it!!"???

[ 12 September 2008: Message edited by: Sven ]

1, I am not racist
2, so nothing I have said is racist
3, so if I have said something in the past and you imply it is racist, you need your head ripped off.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pogo:
It is all about politeness. Just like there is someone I work with that I won't tell jokes about stupid idiots running companies into the ground.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
The idea that a normal person of any (or no) faith would be "offended" by a harmless expression is a bit condescending to that person - isn't it? Doesn't it imply that their religion is so overpowering that they feel bad even when no offence is intended?

---

I feel that unionist raises a good point.

I think both the left and the right are guilty of overgeneralizing and stereotyping when it comes to Muslims.

Why?

Well, it's obvious what the right does - they infantilize and denigrate Muslims and treat the lot of them as though they were Pavlovian automatons who go berserk the instant an imam says "fatwa", "American devil" and so on.

But consider the left; there is an unstated but definite bias against the showy piousness (you have no idea how close I came to writing Piusness ) of organized Christianity, and certainly in many left-wing circles, Israel's bullying tactics and its government's willingness to hide behind the concept of the "Jewish state" when convenient, are quite repellent.

However no such equivalent skepticism seems to be about when it comes to the Muslim faith, as far as I can tell, among left-wing circles. It is, at least as I see it, considered acceptable for various sexist tendencies to make themselves felt and given the imprimatur of legal force, as witness the kerfluffle over potentially allowing Muslims to bypass the civil courts and apply Sharia in Canadian civil proceedings (which, we have been assured, could create a built-in imbalance against a woman trying to bring suit against a man).

quote:

---

Originally posted by DrConway:
...they infantilize and denigrate Muslims...

---

[ 13 September 2008: Message edited by: DrConway ]