Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Why are a lot of people Islamophobic? Watch

    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AishaGirl)
    And yet they still invaded Iraq and killed hundreds of thousands of people. Tell me again how the publics opinion matters in a democratic country?

    When it comes to war, the citizens have NO voice.
    The thing is though the violent actions that western powers do isn't my ideology. I protest against what they do because they're wrong. So to direct any hate or anger towards me as a westerner who objects would be irrational.

    A Muslim does follow the ideology of Islam, an ideology that contains violence. It's rational there for if you disagree with the ideology, to direct that sentiment towards a Muslim who follows it.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AishaGirl)
    I absolutely promise you that more people die from mass shootings by non Muslims than from terrorism in the united states.

    So you should fear gun owners MORE than Muslims.

    In fact in general you should fear non muslims more than muslims as your chances of being killed by a non muslim is far greater than by a muslim. Simply by the ratio of non muslims to muslims, in the west at least anyway.
    In general, America has fairly decent immigration vetting processes, and aside from the obvious 9/11, and Orlando nightclub shootings, there hasn't been a significant amount of Islamic terrorism. Europe, on the other hand (which was the place I was referring to and to which you haven't offered any significant response), has had a vastly different time to America. But I guess that happens when you let in a million unchecked 'refugees'.

    And dealing in absolutes doesn't account for the fact that a higher percentage of terror attacks, at least in recent years, have been perpetrated by Muslims. Or the fact that such regressive attitudes are generally held by most people in the Middle East.

    Anyway, can you justify that quote from the Qur'an, please? You're a girl yourself, do you find it justified that you're worth less than a male in your own religion? Were the Charlie Hebdo attackers right to 'defend the prophet', and in so doing curb the right of the French to free speech? Is it right that German school girls were asked to cover up to not offend the 'culture' of refugees? Is it right that homosexuals are often killed in the Middle East, for something that they cannot control?

    Please answer, because if you don't denounce each of these I'll just assume that you agree with them. And if you do agree, then you've answered the question of why there is conflict between Islam and the West.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Islamophobia is a contrived term. There is nothing wrong with being Islamophobic. Islam is a set of ideas, and like any set of ideas it deserved to debated and criticised. The whole concept of Islamophobia makes absolutely zero sense. Why should it be wrong to dislike certain ideas within the Quran or the Hadiths? If someone disagrees with Islam why must they be branded a bigot? Islamophobia in my opinion is a buzzword that is used to silence any criticism of Islam.

    However, discriminating against Muslims is wrong. And I would condemn anyone doing so.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AishaGirl)
    You know what I mean and don't think you're being smart.
    Please do answer the question.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Count Bezukhov)
    In general, America has fairly decent immigration vetting processes, and aside from the obvious 9/11, and Orlando nightclub shootings, there hasn't been a significant amount of Islamic terrorism. Europe, on the other hand (which was the place I was referring to and to which you haven't offered any significant response), has had a vastly different time to America. But I guess that happens when you let in a million unchecked 'refugees'.
    If Europe had the same 2nd amendment that the U.S has you would see mass shooting committed more by non muslims, just as you do in the U.S


    Anyway, can you justify that quote from the Qur'an, please? You're a girl yourself, do you find it justified that you're worth less than a male in your own religion?
    In some areas, men are greater than women and in others women are greater than men.


    Were the Charlie Hebdo attackers right to 'defend the prophet', and in so doing curb the right of the French to free speech? Is it right that German school girls were asked to cover up to not offend the 'culture' of refugees? Is it right that homosexuals are often killed in the Middle East, for something that they cannot control?
    Muslims living in a non Muslim country simply have to obey and respect the laws of that land. Those attackers of the nightclub and charlie hebdo had no right to break the law of the land they live in.

    Please answer, because if you don't denounce each of these I'll just assume that you agree with them. And if you do agree, then you've answered the question of why there is conflict between Islam and the West.
    You don't have to try to manipulate me into replying. I will chose to reply or not regardless of what you assume.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hydeman)
    Irish people, who are predominantly white, suffered the same association with terrorism during the Troubles. The killer of Jo Cox is rightly referred to as an assassin - that is what he is. A targeted killing is not the same thing as indiscriminately shooting up a Christmas market.





    Some valid points, but why do you believe that the Sun and the Mail are representative of the whole media? I would say the great problem of our time is sectionalism - everybody simply wants to advance their own narrow interests. That's evident from your generalisation about the media - you cite the Sun and the Mail, but neglect to mention the Independent, or the Huffington Post, or the Guardian. All of those would take the wind right out of your argument that there is an organised media conspiracy against your interest group (Muslims).

    Regarding false stories, I would just say that quite a number of instances of anti-Muslim crimes have later been found to be fabricated. But did you know of that before I told you? I expect not. The truth is always more complicated than a good guy and a bad guy.
    So you wouldn't say the killing of say Lee Rigby wasn't an assassination? The killer of Cox was targeted, but so are most killings no? they target certain areas for certain reasons, we would need to first establish the definition of a terror killing ahaha! Plus the murderer of Cox was motivated by his radical views.

    True, they are not the whole media, but the majority of those that we would consider to be Islamophobic would be from working class backgrounds. And this group of people is largely uneducated to the extent that people who we consider to be 'educated' are if you get me therefore they have not been surrounded in environments where there is a lot of diversity. For example schools in london where im from are very culturally diverse and I have been fortunate enough to be exposed to a variety of cultures and backgrounds. For many of the working class they stay in the same community all their lives and hence get no real interaction with other people, therefore their views of other people are shaped by the media? And when the media makes stories like these it is unfortunately the working class who fall victim. Why do you think parties like BNP and UKIP are predominantly white working class?

    In regards to papers like the guardian I may be naive in saying this but they largely target educated readers who are better at formulating their own more balanced opinions about say something like terror attacks. And my theory on there being a conspiracy would only extend to the working class for reasons just mentioned.

    Fair point many stories can be fabricated and therefore you are partially true in that respect
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gwaggy)
    No, that's what jihadists do, and that's not Islam. They warped their religion into something disgusting and unrecognisable. The problem is people can't or won't disassociate between the two, and that's their problem and fault.
    It's not people's ignorance, it's islamic rhetoric. They have different styles of child-raising and have different inherent values. In all islamic countries today, if a girl disobeys her father, the father can legally kill his daughter (honour killings, look them up). My point is that a lot of people think that people just hate muslims because they're different. That is true in some cases but not all. Most people are concerned by how contrasting their ideology is.
    • Offline

      18
      (Original post by AishaGirl)
      And yet they still invaded Iraq and killed hundreds of thousands of people.
      Even assuming that there's any certainty about the number of deaths in Iraq post-2003, it's well-established that a majority of all violent deaths were the result of the so-called insurgency and the sectarian bloodbath that followed. You can't expect to be taken seriously when you casually attribute the crimes of Muslims to a convenient non-Muslim scapegoat. In the opposite context you would probably call someone who did this an Islamophobe.

      Tell me again how the publics opinion matters in a democratic country?
      You really can't condemn a lack of understanding in others given how poorly you understand things yourself. 'Democracy', in a western context, is not simply a system of majority rule. Governments in the west are founded on the idea of the rule of law, not the rule of men or the mob. I understand though that these things are too subtle for people with a pathological hatred of the west, and therefore an unthinking need to oppose anything associated with it.
      Online

      17
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Lord Gaben)
      Islamophobia is a contrived term. There is nothing wrong with being Islamophobic. Islam is a set of ideas, and like any set of ideas it deserved to debated and criticised. The whole concept of Islamophobia makes absolutely zero sense. Why should it be wrong to dislike certain ideas within the Quran or the Hadiths? If someone disagrees with Islam why must they be branded a bigot? Islamophobia in my opinion is a buzzword that is used to silence any criticism of Islam.

      However, discriminating against Muslims is wrong. And I would condemn anyone doing so.
      I can subscribe to every word of your post

      luckily, I see that this basic distinction is making its way : shouting "Islamophobe" is not sufficient to silence people anymore

      of course that hate against Muslims as persons can be a problem (and in fact often is), but does this mean that we should refrain from criticising all the aspects of Islam that we consider as incompatible with our societies and, more in general, with universal human rights ?

      we would be doing a very bad service to our societies and, ultimately, to Muslims themselves

      best
      Offline

      2
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Hydeman)
      Even assuming that there's any certainty about the number of deaths in Iraq post-2003, it's well-established that a majority of all violent deaths were the result of the so-called insurgency and the sectarian bloodbath that followed..
      Keep telling yourself that.


      You really can't condemn a lack of understanding in others given how poorly you understand things yourself. 'Democracy', in a western context, is not simply a system of majority rule. Governments in the west are founded on the idea of the rule of law, not the rule of men or the mob
      .

      They only listen to the people when it suits them, your true opinion on anything is meaningless.


      I understand though that these things are too subtle for people with a pathological hatred of the west, and therefore an unthinking need to oppose anything associated with it.
      I don't hate the west. I live in the UK for goodness sake. I hate the governments policies on certain issues, the exact same way you do.
      Offline

      17
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by AishaGirl)
      If Europe had the same 2nd amendment that the U.S has you would see mass shooting committed more by non muslims, just as you do in the U.S

      In some areas, men are greater than women and in others women are greater than men.

      Muslims living in a non Muslim country simply have to obey and respect the laws of that land. Those attackers of the nightclub and charlie hebdo had no right to break the law of the land they live in.

      You don't have to try to manipulate me into replying. I will chose to reply or not regardless of what you assume.
      Obviously there would be more mass shootings in general since firearms would be easier to access. Having said that, the fact that Islamic terrorists will have therefore acquired their firearms illegally is a testament to just how far they are willing to go to accomplish their aims, whereas the inability to legally acquire firearms clearly prevents many would-be non-Muslim attackers from acting, since such attacks are very rare. Yet following your logic, they should still commit more attacks than Muslim extremists, which they clearly don't.

      And mathematically, more in total doesn't necessary equal a higher percentage of that group committing the crime. If there were 10 non-Muslims and 2 Muslims in a room, and 2 non-Muslims went outside and shot some people, whilst 1 Muslim went outside and did the same, there would be more non-Muslim shootings yet only 20% of the population, as opposed to 50%, committed the act. Obviously these numbers are exaggerated, but you get my point. And evidently terrorist attacks in Europe seem to be coming almost exclusively from Muslims, which is concerning.

      At any rate, I think the threat of terrorism is actually a lesser concern than the general values that a lot of people in the Middle East bring over; that is, the aforementioned misogny and homophobia, because they are in far greater numbers than terrorists.

      And men being greater than women in some areas means they have the right to beat you?

      Well, thank you for at least admitting they were wrong to break the law. Although, the way you worded it does imply (at least to me, but I may be reading into too much), that the reason that they were wrong was because it was against the law of the land, and not because the act of repressing free speech and/or killing homosexuals was wrong. Do correct me if I've made a big assumption though...

      I'm not trying to manipulate you, but when you clearly disregard parts of my argument that provide evidence from your own scriptures, clerics, and other news reports, it does make one wonder whether you are avoiding them because you have nothing to say against them.
      Offline

      2
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Count Bezukhov)
      And mathematically, more in total doesn't necessary equal a higher percentage of that group committing the crime. If there were 10 non-Muslims and 2 Muslims in a room, and 2 non-Muslims went outside and shot some people, whilst 1 Muslim went outside and did the same, there would be more non-Muslim shootings yet only 20% of the population, as opposed to 50%, committed the act. Obviously these numbers are exaggerated, but you get my point. And evidently terrorist attacks in Europe seem to be coming almost exclusively from Muslims, which is concerning.
      You're missing the point though. If 5% of the U.S population is Muslim and 99% of mass shootings are carried out by non muslims, then what sense is there to be fearful of the muslims? It's pure probability, you are more likely to be killed by a non muslim, end of story.

      And men being greater than women in some areas means they have the right to beat you?
      Well there is evidence to suggest that your husband can discipline you physically if you are missing prayers or being disobedient but it is a last measure and even then he is not to use such force as to mark her. I will tell my husband that if he hits I will divorce him. You seem to think that women have no say in a marriage? My husband will obey everything I tell him to though so it's all good


      Well, thank you for at least admitting they were wrong to break the law. Although, the way you worded it does imply (at least to me, but I may be reading into too much), that the reason that they were wrong was because it was against the law of the land, and not because the act of repressing free speech and/or killing homosexuals was wrong. Do correct me if I've made a big assumption though...
      You made a big assumption

      I'm not trying to manipulate you, but when you clearly disregard parts of my argument that provide evidence from your own scriptures, clerics, and other news reports, it does make one wonder whether you are avoiding them because you have nothing to say against them.
      You post big responses and it's time consuming to reply to every detail so I just reply to the most relevant / important parts. Sorry if this is not sufficient for you.
      Offline

      17
      ReputationRep:
      Because of people like Donald Trump.
      • Offline

        18
        (Original post by BusyStarGazing)
        So you wouldn't say the killing of say Lee Rigby wasn't an assassination? The killer of Cox was targeted, but so are most killings no? they target certain areas for certain reasons, we would need to first establish the definition of a terror killing ahaha! Plus the murderer of Cox was motivated by his radical views.
        An assassination is the targeted (in the sense that it's targeting one specific person, rather than a group) killing of an important or high-profile person. It's made distinct from a normal murder by her status as an MP, and from an act of terror by the fact that it was not indiscriminate. Lee Rigby on the other hand wasn't targeted personally - he was targeted because he was a member of the British army. His killers would have been fine with killing any other British soldier because they were protesting the actions of the British military, not Rigby's personally. Cox's murderer specifically took issue with her as a supposed race traitor (he was in deep with neo-Nazi groups).

        And yes, definitions are badly needed.

        True, they are not the whole media, but the majority of those that we would consider to be Islamophobic would be from working class backgrounds. And this group of people is largely uneducated to the extent that people who we consider to be 'educated' are if you get me therefore they have not been surrounded in environments where there is a lot of diversity. For example schools in london where im from are very culturally diverse and I have been fortunate enough to be exposed to a variety of cultures and backgrounds. For many of the working class they stay in the same community all their lives and hence get no real interaction with other people, therefore their views of other people are shaped by the media? And when the media makes stories like these it is unfortunately the working class who fall victim. Why do you think parties like BNP and UKIP are predominantly white working class?

        In regards to papers like the guardian I may be naive in saying this but they largely target educated readers who are better at formulating their own more balanced opinions about say something like terror attacks. And my theory on there being a conspiracy would only extend to the working class for reasons just mentioned.
        I agree that the less educated in society are generally more vulnerable to believing silly things. I wouldn't say the Guardian targets educated readers specifically - they ideally want as many readers as possible, regardless of background, like any newspaper - it just attracts more educated people because it's not trash journalism like the Express, as well as the fact that it's political alignment corresponds with certain demographics that tend to be more educated than the working class.

        I'm on board with that kind of 'conspiracy' - the Sun is known to have influenced elections decisively because of its hold on certain sections of the population. What I object to is the lazy assumption that the whole media is somehow conspiring against Muslims - it's just not true. Moreover, the hold of papers like the Sun on the working class is a more general problem, not just a Muslim problem - they've been at it for a lot longer than Islam has been a current affairs issue.

        Fair point many stories can be fabricated and therefore you are partially true in that respect
        :hat2:
        Offline

        16
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by AishaGirl)
        You're missing the point though. If 5% of the U.S population is Muslim and 99% of mass shootings are carried out by non muslims, then what sense is there to be fearful of the muslims? It's pure probability, you are more likely to be killed by a non muslim, end of story.
        People do not have time to do a risk analysis of every potential threat in life and build a rational hierarchy of where to apportion their fears. This leaves us vulnerable to manipulation, of that you are correct. Statistically, there is more danger driving to the Christmas market in a car, than a terrorist attack at the market taking your life.

        But people's concern with Islam isn't just terrorist attacks. I have Muslim students on my course in college, I don't have an ounce of fear that one will commit violence towards me. I doubt they actually like me given how up front I am about my atheism, as I understand it Islam teaches against befriending none believers. But it would not benefit Islam to harm me in our situation. So I don't fear them physically, but their ideologies concern me when I hear talk of them welcoming armageddon. I have concerns when surveying shows a majority of Muslims within the UK believe aspects of their ideology such as homosexuality being illegal should be enforced within the UK.

        Your beliefs are that Islam is right so I don't expect you to agree with my concerns, in your mind you are on the side of good. But don't insult my intelligence by saying the concerns of people like me are irrational, or phobic.
        • Offline

          18
          (Original post by AishaGirl)
          Keep telling yourself that.
          Well, that's original. :rolleyes: The fact that you've responded in this way serves only to convince an objective reader that it is you who is reliant on 'telling yourself' something repeatedly to remain convinced that it's true.

          They only listen to the people when it suits them, your true opinion on anything is meaningless.
          This has nothing to do with the distinction I drew between the rule of law and the rule of men. It doesn't matter that X number of people turned out to protest a given policy. If you knew anything about political philosophy or the history that has led us to the present, instead of watching videos on YouTube claiming to 'absolutely DESTROY' (the arguments for) democracy, this would be apparent to you.

          The fact of the matter is that you are claiming that the system has failed because it is supposed to do Y yet does not do Y, when nobody who understands the system has ever claimed that it's supposed to do Y. I could as easily approach a giraffe, pretend it has claimed it can fly, and then parade triumphantly when it fails to do so. That's what you're doing here.

          I don't hate the west. I live in the UK for goodness sake. I hate the governments policies on certain issues, the exact same way you do.
          I've seen your posts - let's not bother with this farce of 'I only disagree with some policies like you do.' It doesn't work. You may well like living in the UK - and I've no quarrel with that - but your objections go far beyond government policy which can be resolved in the normal way of campaigning for a change in the law or challenging it in court.
          Offline

          9
          ReputationRep:
          I think the issue is that the media and our politicians stir up uneccessary fear in people in regards to Islam. No one really wants to find out what Islam is really about-we're kinda just spoon fed with whatever the media gives us-we're passive in accepting all of these narratives that are given to us.
          In reality Islam and Christianity are very similar but it's easier to scapegoat Muslim's because they don't look like the majority of the Western World. Christianity is the religion of the white man and God forbid we ever criticize the white man (!)
          Online

          18
          ReputationRep:
          (Original post by YoloBaggins00)
          Because of the media.
          Explain.
          Offline

          2
          ReputationRep:
          (Original post by BigYoSpeck)
          But people's concern with Islam isn't just terrorist attacks. I have Muslim students on my course in college, I don't have an ounce of fear that one will commit violence towards me.
          So why are you fearful from muslims in general if 100% of the muslims you know are nice people? You are fearing that which is incredibly unlikely. the opposite would be like feeling confident about winning the lottery.

          But don't insult my intelligence by saying the concerns of people like me are irrational.
          I believe your concerns about being killed by an islamic terrorist attack are irrational.

          You live in fear, you are scared, you are weak, this is not my problem. If a terrorist flies a plane into a building, will you cancel your flight the next day?

          If a truck plows down people in a market, will you not go shopping the next day? I bet 99% of the time when you are out and about in public you never look over your shoulder and think "I wonder if today is the die I get killed by a terrorist" so don't sit there and try to tell me that your fears a rational, they are as irrational a fear as it gets.

          Like people fearing walking under a bridge because they think it might collapse on them.
          Online

          18
          ReputationRep:
          (Original post by S.olk)
          I think the issue is that the media and our politicians stir up uneccessary fear in people in regards to Islam. No one really wants to find out what Islam is really about-we're kinda just spoon fed with whatever the media gives us-we're passive in accepting all of these narratives that are given to us.
          In reality Islam and Christianity are very similar but it's easier to scapegoat Muslim's because they don't look like the majority of the Western World. Christianity is the religion of the white man and God forbid we ever criticize the white man (!)
          Can you provide examples? In my opinion the media does not necessarily do this. I'll explain if you can give some examples of such "indoctrination".

          Of course Christianity and Islam are somewhat similar, as they are both Abrahamic faiths.

          There are no "white" Muslims, that's a fact. So I agree with you there.

          Spoiler:
          Show

          /s - that is absolutely bloody absurd.
         
         
         
      • See more of what you like on The Student Room

        You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

      • Poll
        Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
      • See more of what you like on The Student Room

        You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

      • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

        Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

        Quick reply
        Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.