By SUE BLACKMORE
Added: Tue, 06 Mar 2007 00:00:00 UTC

Reposted from:
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/sue_blackmore/2007/03/offended_muslims_should_be_ash.html

In the name of academic freedom, Clare College, Cambridge, should have defended the pupil responsible for printing cartoons depicting Muhammad.

A Cambridge student is in hiding because he dared to print one of those infamous Danish cartoons and have a laugh at Islam's expense. Yet if offended Muslims want people to stop laughing at them, this latest incident will only have backfired.

I bet I'm not the only one whose reaction was to go straight to Google Images and type in "Muhammad". And yes, you find lots of pictures of him who must not be pictured - "about 88,400" to be precise. The top 20 includes some ancient depictions (and I've no idea whether these offended anyone), a selection of Muhammad clipart, and several cartoons. I especially like the first one that Google throws up - Muhammad looking at himself in a mirror and exclaiming "Blasphemy". Ha ha. Then there's one I regularly use in my lectures on memes. It shows some suicide bombers arriving in heaven to be met by the man himself shouting "Stop, stop, we've run out of virgins".

These are just simple jokes, available to all, but when a student at Clare College reprinted one in the college magazine, offended students complained in droves and the college started an investigation. Even worse, senior tutor Patricia Fara said, "The college finds the publication and the views expressed abhorrent." But isn't it the college's reaction that is abhorrent? I think the "offended" students are the real culprits, and the college should have had the guts to stand up to them in the name of academic freedom - and the good old freedom to laugh at ideas we find silly or disagree with.

The whole sad story is told on Cambridge University's "Varsity" site and in the Cambridge Evening News. On February 2 Clare College's prize-winning student paper, Clareification, published a special issue renamed "Crucification" and largely devoted to religious satire (and presumably, from its name, not just Islam). In its regular "lookalikes of the week" the cartoon of Muhammad was set next to a photograph of the president of the union of Clare students, along with a caption suggesting that one was "a violent paedophile" while the other was "a prophet of God, a great leader and an example to us all".

OK it's offensive, and funny, and that's what satire is all about. But the magazine apparently "provoked anger in Cambridge", with enraged students complaining in droves. A second-year student said these were "some of the most offensive things I've ever seen." The president of the university's Islamic society said "I found the magazine hugely offensive ... freedom of expression does not constitute a freedom to offend."

I say to him - oh yes it does, and you should be ashamed of yourself. You didn't have to read the magazine. You didn't have to spread the news about it. And you certainly didn't have to encourage other Muslims to believe that claiming to be offended gives them the right to stop the rest of us having a laugh. Yet you did so.

We are talking here about a student magazine read by a handful of students at one college at one university. Student magazines have always been satirical and satire hurts. The president of Clare students might have been offended too, along with any other students who get picked on by their student mag. I expect the politicians who are regularly lampooned in Private Eye feel offended and upset, but unless they have been libelled they accept it. The freedom to laugh and poke fun at things we disagree with is fundamental to freedom of thought.

And freedom of thought is fundamental to education, scholarship, and learning - all the things that Cambridge University should be standing up for. Great thinkers and scientists are always offending people by overthrowing the dogmas and false beliefs of the past. People were offended at the thought that earth was not the centre of the universe; they were offended at the idea that mountains and rivers were created by natural processes; they were offended at the idea that species were not immutable and they were offended at the suggestion that we humans might be descended from apes. Happily, in the end the evidence overwhelmed them.

I hope the same will happen with these claims, and society as a whole will not let religious believers claim a right not to be offended. When I contacted the college the master told me that the student has not been reprimanded and the disciplinary process will determine whether he has infringed any regulations. I sincerely hope he has not and that the college will offer him and his magazine their support. The freedom to think, to argue, and to laugh at silly ideas must be allowed to flourish.

TAGGED: COMMENTARY, RELIGION