Never Mind the Bullocks: A Call to Arses

With the Danish embassy in Damascus in flames, radical Muslims parading through the streets of London calling for another 7/7, and the Bush administration siding with the Islamic protesters, this editorial by Matthew Parris defending the right to satirize and mock figures of authority, religious or otherwise, was an inspiring read: So they have thin skins. That shouldn't stop us poking fun at them.

Indeed, perhaps a little mad laughter would do us all good right about now, for the outcry over a bunch of cartoons is simply absurd. Isn't it a bit silly for the Bushies to be siding with the 'offended' Islamic fundamentalists? Is the Bush Administration cowardly backstabbing the Danes in their hour of need, or is this finally, a show of that much vaunted compassionate conservatisim? I wonder? And there is something perversely funny about the stupidity (or is it just hypocrisy?) of the Muslim protesters in London who brazenly celebrate the 7/7 bombers as the "Fantastic Four" and call for more terrorist killings whilst claiming to be offended by the now infamous cartoons of Muhammand.

The pen, it seems, is, if not mightier, than more offensive than the sword.

I tip my hat (sadly, my stylish souvenier Danmark stocking cap is back in Chicago) to the Brits for not [ahem] taking offense and maintaining order in what, I imagine, could have become an ugly situation. While I respect the London police for upholding the right to a public assembly, I hope that they, and the MI5, were monitoring the protest carefully. I've been critical of the way civilian populations have been surveilled by Western intelligence agencies (most notably in the U.S. and France) but in this instance, where people are openly calling for the killing of innocents, it's perfectly just to keep close tabs on them.

But back to the op-ed piece that prompted these thoughts...

Parris's essay does an excellent job explaining what it means to believe in something and why we should not capitulate and cater to those who choose to take offense at our refusal to believe something which we regard to be mistaken and wrong. Doing so foolishly allows the supersensitive group member's feelings - which, as affective responses, cannot be judged right or wrong - to trump rational argumentation.

But Parris is not so naive as to believe that arguing one's position well in a rational debate will convince the other to change his or her mind. The next step isn't a call to violence, but - in the tradition of Rabelais, Swift, Voltaire, Joyce, Pynchon, Python, Groening - a call to satire, to ridicule, to mockery.

Against reverence and awe the best argument is sometimes not logic, but mockery. Structures of oppression that may not be susceptible to rational debate may in the end yield to derision. When people see that a priest, rabbi, imam or uniformed official may be giggled at without lightning striking the impertinent, arguments may be won on a deeper level than logic.

We should never, therefore, relinquish, nor lightly value, our right not to argue in the face of other people’s gods — but to fart.

In the name of wits and wiseasses around the world, I propose a collective toot. If some smørrebrød and a few beers are required, by all means indulge (may I humbly suggest a Tuborg Gold or a Carlsberg Elephant - reminding us not to forget the GOP's betrayal - on this occasion)! It's time to get cheeky! Blow yr butt-trumpet loudly and proudly in support of not only the right to free speech but also the right to satirize.

I'm sick and tired of people taking offense. It's a big, bad, dirty world and we're allowed to be a little bit lewd, a little bit crude, even a little bit rude at times.

Let the hypersensitive plug their noses. Raise yr arse and let the would-be censors know that their authoritarian demands Stank!