Forum:Muslim Cell Phone

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forums: Index > Village Dump > Muslim Cell Phone
Note: This topic has been unedited for 6405 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

i think my VFP photo titled, Muslim Cell Phone was removed while i was composing a reply to porcopius . i'll figure out, after posting this, why it was removed but i cannot help but feel a little sick inside - a reassessment of Uncyc is sorely required here for i think my honeymoon period has just expired. -- mowgli 16:19, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

to continue the discussion in the "discuss this VFP" page (that is now extinct/linkless), let me repost the messages and the "reply" to porc. i was composing:

Talking to Allah, he is. Or he hopes. (Prayer -> Cellular service -> Dropped call -> "Holy" war.) --The King In Yellow (Talk to the Dalek.) 13:15, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
no it's not a play on "dropped (mobile) call" <-- i think that's what you meant. see talk page for more. -- mowgli 13:43, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
(to continue the discussion from UN:VFP)
going prostrate, facing "mecca,' and praying (more than once a day for devout muslims) is the way of performing Wikipedia:Salat or "Namaz." from wikipedia:
"Once the time for salat has begun and the call to prayer given, a Muslim performs salat by reciting various verses of the Qur'an coupled with supplications praising Allah whilst prostrating in various positions. A Muslim must perform these actions with sincere devotion (khushoo), otherwise the salat is considered invalid"
pic. from wikipedia:Muslims performing salat -- mowgli 13:59, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
In fact, if you observe a muslim perform "namaz" or "salat," you'll notice that he repeatedly bangs (well almost) his forehead on the floor (of the mosque or a prayer mat). ok i've tried explaing this joke way too much. the universe might crash. -- mowgli 14:06, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Against. Not comfortable with mocking someone's spirituality.--Procopius 14:10, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
i can't believe this. lollll. i nominate this comment to be featured on the main page. i can see that i am going to enjoy the votes to this pic. brave are those who have voted so far. braver are the ones who have unabashedly expressed their ignorance. -- mowgli 14:19, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Meanwhile, just below this pic....Rad 14:21, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
I'll explain my thinking here. This picture mocks someone in prayer, following the precepts of their religion. Whatever you think of Islam (or religion, for that matter), saying that someone is "banging their head" on the ground to reach God is juvenile and offensive. The GI Jew picture uses some Jewish elements but is fundamentally a GI Joe parody and not an attack on Jewish practices; if it were a picture of Hasidic Jews at the Wailing Wall, I would vote against it as well. I'm fine with mocking organized religion and its leaders, but I'm not comfortable mocking people's sincere practice of their faith. If that makes me ignorant, so be it.--Procopius 15:15, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Procopius, a couple of things:
  • In your first post you mentioned, "mocking some one's spirituality." This post mocks a religious ritual, which is about as meaningful or meaningless, as, (i) going around a slab of stone in mecca in huge concentric circles, (ii) breaking bread and drinking wine in a chapel, or, let's be frank (iii) worshipping icons of god like photos, sculptures, spots, places. all this has nothing to do with spirituality.
  • muslims will see the humour in that picture and caption. it does not attack islam - it attacks an "inane" ritual and there are 1001 rituals in islam of which, perhaps, even the most devout of muslims is able to observe only a 101 but he doesn't feel any the less pious because of it? you'd insult muslims (don't take all of this personally btw - we are only arguing your instant POV, not you) by imagining that they cannot see the humour behind repeatedly banging one's head on stone to reach God? Just because i find breathing in and out, day in and day out, a hilarious thing to do, i won't necessarily stop doing it or stop taking it seriously; but i won't also take it so seriously (at least not most of the time in my life!!!) that i'll stop seeing the the inanity and humour behind the repetitive action? if muslims don't find the photo and caption funny (it's shoddiness apart), i say let's make them see the humour behind it (and that includes you). humour that really attacks islam, it's people or it's prophet is a different thing. for example - this <-- that's JUVENILE -- so juvenile that it's almost forgivable. we cannot possible distinguish the subtleties between the two kinds of "attacks" or "humour" (one good, the other bad)in this short thread (or even in that long thread for that matter - wherever that may be).
  • even spirituality is not sacrosanct. nor the prophet. nor it's followers. it too can, should and will be mocked - if not in uncyc then somewhere else. only humans and their inviolable free will and their right to equality are sacrosanct (the last one being debatable, lol).
  • sacrosanct (as things we should not indulge in) is racism (the 'blackened' pic of al jolson i posted earlier today - see American - was funny. a white humourist was parodying a black and the caption was pointing out america's diversity while also alluding to a bygone culture - see Wikipedia:Blackface - of american comedy that even the blacks perpetuated back then). sacrosanct is cruelty, insensitivity beseeching hurtful actions (nazism, kkk), insensitivity beseeching hurtful actions to appear juvenile-ly cool (ED Afghanistan) and so many other twisted things/actions/words/photos/articles. -- mowgli 16:19, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Point by point. And to jump on what Ghelae said, I don't mean for you to take this personally, because this is directed at the picture itself:
  • You're right, the picture is mocking a ritual. But it's also mocking the person at prayer in the ritual, by saying he's banging his head on the floor trying to get God, which to me is a very crass joke at someone's expense.
  • I agree not to take it personally. But I doubt that Muslims would see a daily duty prescribed five times a day in their religion as an "inane" ritual, and I'm sure many derive comfort from it. Moreover, I don't think you can "make" someone see the humor in something -- particularly when the image has a title like "Muslim Cell Phone," which gives me uncomfortable reminders of offensive terms I heard growing up, like "Puerto Rican Shower."
  • No argument here. I'm just not comfortable with the tone of that image.
  • Blacks perpetuated blackface because they didn't have much of a choice in the 19th century -- white America would not accept blacks as equal human beings, much less as anything not resembling a caricature. I agree that the use and abuse of blackface can be a complicated issue and that individual entertainers had individual reasons for donning it, but frankly, it was used mainly to depict blacks as lazy, watermelon-eating dependants singing irrationally about their love for Ol' Massa. Getting back to the photo: People have reasons for what they do, and to reduce a particular religious practice to the level of a silly joke isn't funny and shouldn't be on this website.--Procopius 17:24, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

right. all your points of are well taken good sir (you've just been knighted! rejoice i say. take a break from the 'puter - eat lunch for a change. but let us respectfully agree to disagree that that pic is darn hilarious. i have it saved to my 'puter hard disk and i'm going to be banging my cursor against it ever day - i have nothing better to do (oh wait...maybe i could learn spleligns?) -- mowgli 17:50, 4 August 2006 (UTC)


Ok, back to this forum topic, and my point

  • When I said that I don't get it, I meant that I don't see how a picture of a Muslim banging his head on the ground to talk to Allah is funny. Plus, I don't get the cell phone part of the joke. Also, why are you so obsessed about this single picture getting featured? ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 16:25, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
  • a muslim banging his head on the ground to talk to allah is not funny -- i get that! i did not get it the first time, i agree. but i did the second time.
  • re: "why are you so obsessed..." - hey, it's the first time i ever posted anything to VFD. i've been around like for a month. i'm slow. and i always get excited whenever i find or do something new. -- mowgli 16:36, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
  • re:"i get that! ..." - Your point is?
  • re:"VFD" - You mean VFP.
Oh, and try to use proper grammar. Thank You. Merci. AAAAA AAA. etc. ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 16:43, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
ghelae when was the last time you got laid? "try use proper grammar to" lame is rather.
Huh? ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 16:54, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

wait. be honest with me others who are reading this. are you guys trying to be politically correct here? humour is not so esoteric. or do you perhaps think i'm a muslim-hater by birth (in a warped guilt projection way)? or some other really esoteric reasons, like (i) there's a clique working here, (ii) etc. -- mowgli 16:51, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think you're a Muslim-hater, I just think the concept of the picture is unfunny. ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 16:54, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
right. i've understood that for a second time (please don't kill me by repeating it sir ghelae - you kill me with your subtle wit). now what motivates you (dare i say obsess, sir ghelae) to point out my grammar (but not correct it in an "any mokey can edit" wiki)? don't take it personally. i ask you 'cos you are an admin something (correct wrong is i if). (i'll ask you some other time what wrong my grammar with is)-- mowgli 17:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, I'm not an admin, but anyway, the problem with your grammar is how you write it. If you do not know this already (and even if you do):
  • "i" → "I",
  • Any name starts with a capital letter,
  • Remember correct punctuation,
  • I feel like an English teacher. Will humans never learn that it's never good to use bad grammar. *sighs*... wait, I'm doing a King In Yellow, erm... Just rember those points! Yes... that should do it... ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 17:12, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

i am deeply offended my i's were not taken for duly capitalised I's, my lowercased proper nouns were not taken for words with the first alphabet duly capped, my commas were not taken for semicolons and that i was taken so unseriously in a dump. i hope such bigoted, unfunny statements, bad grammar and incorrect punctuation never feature on the main page of the "Village Dump." (sir ghelae i won't even bother pointing out the bad grammar in your post - ask me another day if you're really curious)

... ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 17:52, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

eh, sir ghelae, why did you change my signature to belongings to that of yourselves above? i also noticed that you put a space in "correctpunctuation" (from your post earlier) to create two totally new words in the english lingo? i also noticed on your wikipedia page that you are a "native speaker of english." for a native speaker of english to exercise a monopoloy on grammar, spelling and punctuation is like the ultimate irony deserving to be featured in all it's manifestations on the main page here? no? -- mowgli 18:06, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

1) I didn't change your signature (read what is before it), 2) Minitrue remake goodthink fullwise, 3) That's getting old now. ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 18:09, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
"read what is before it" read-what-is-before-it readwhatisbeforeit readwhatisbeforeit. STOP!! this uncyclopedia is killing me. i give up! buy buy you clowns. humour∞. such subversive humour was never to be. uncyclopedia is evil. -- mowgli 18:28, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Again, ... ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 18:29, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

(reboot)

ok we have a few uncycops featured above (who aren't admins) and who take themselves way too seriously. how many others would like to join this bandwagon. please vote here. [below my signature] -- mowgli 17:26, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

It's not really VFH worthy, since it's so hideously ugly. The speech bubble is pretty funny, mocking as it does, mobile users and crappy reception, but then the caption suddenly drags it down to Muslim bashing, which is getting pretty dull. If it were changed to something like, 'A Muslim struggles to get reception in the mosque' and the picture was edited so it doesn't bring on my epilepsy it would be a lot better. FreeMorpheme 18:56, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

yes, good point freemorphene (free morphine? hey, did you read my article on Soma, Haoma and Stoned?) i agree "muslim-bashing" has come to become rather lame and hackneyed of late (but not for ever - the photo + caption is just ahead of it's time). your suggestion does administer a shot of life saving morphine to the cliched "funny-muslims" caption. btw, in india an effective remedy for epilepsy is to have someone smell you (edited in, lolll -- mowgli 20:01, 4 August 2006 (UTC)) a shoe (but how does one do that when one is beseiged by an epileptic fit? -- POFOUND IRONY! i need to write an uncyc on "the idiot" ) -- mowgli 19:43, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
For the record, I found it more ignorant that funny. We shot down our most celebrated photoshopper on the same charge just last week. Of course, then he came back with a new one that was awesome. That's why he's the best.  :) "G. I. Jew." Isreal is real, damn it!  :)--<<Bradmonogram.png>> 03:31, 5 August 2006 (UTC)


On a more serious note

Some extremly devout Muslims do infact bang their heads at the floor when they pray. Zawahiri (Al Qaida's number 2) is in fact a good example. Look for a pic of him and you can see that he has a scar on his forhead, this is from repeating banging....With some Muslims this is considered to be a sign for extreme devoutness (did I spell that right?) -- Brigadier Sir Mordillo Icons-flag-il.png GUN UotY WotM FP UotM AotM MI3 AnotM VFH +S 14:25, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

True, that's what the picture is based on. The reasons the picture was voted against was simply because it wasn't really (or even a bit) funny, and it was considered racist by some. (yes, you spelt it right) ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 14:35, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Then delete all of the ones mocking Christianity just to be fair. After all, we don't want biased discrimination on Uncyclopedia to mock one religion but not mock another. If you don't delete the ones mocking Christianity, then undelete the Muslim cell phone one if you really want to be ethical and fair. --2nd_Lt Orion Blastar (talk) 16:53, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
I believe the image was deleted because it had already reached the level of minus votes required to remove it. The image itself wasn't really that funny. The fact that most people could have put the image together inside of five minutes (it was just a photo with a speech bubble and some words) doesn't to my mind speak of what should be considered a featured image. If you look at my Thermopylae image you can see something that took many hours, and has a nice little play on words (as does the GI Jews image). We have a great section that people can go to to discuss images and ways to improve them in Uncyclopedia:Reefer_Desk, if people post their images there first, instead of going straight to VFP then the quality issue may be resolved, without all this. -- Sir Mhaille Icons-flag-gb.png (talk to me)
Basically, what I said, but longer. ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 15:51, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
AIGZAACTLY!! racism = religious intolerance = jingoism = cultural insensitivity = xenophon-o-phobia = unfunny = racist. i'll phone you next time to find out what i mean before voting on what i am yet to vote for. the comments appended to your vote, in that forum, were the most lucid and unambiguous on this score, i believe, or weren't they sir ghelae? or do you think i need another obsession? -- mowgli 16:35, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
No, I believe that I don't care what you're talking about because you don't make it clear enough. ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 16:42, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
actually sir ghelae never voted, lol. i *should* read more closely before jumping the gun. -- mowgli 16:46, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Isn't Islam open to all races? If so, then something that mocks Islam is not racist. Something that mocks Persians or Arabs is racist. It is anti-religious and anti-Islam, but not racist because it is a religious tradition being mocked and not a race. I am a Christian and my religion and spirituality gets mocked all of the time here. I get used to it and learn to joke back and take it as funny. In fact I think that God or Allah has a sense of humor and that is why we aren't getting hit with lightning bolts and plauges of locusts, etc. --2nd_Lt Orion Blastar (talk) 16:53, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
True, but there isn't yet a word that describes someone intolerant to a particualr religion, so "racist" is used. And Mowgli, I did vote. Why do you seem to think I didn't? ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 16:57, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Actually we use the word terrorist to describe someone who is intolerant to someone else's religion so much that they have to kill themselves to kill the others in the other religion. To quote John Candy from SCTV ("May the Lord take a liking to you and Blow you up real soon!"). Just because it was voted on for deletion does not automatically make the image racist. The word you are looking for is possibly bigot, or religious bigot, in that the image may have been of religious bigotry. That makes more sense, and if someone as insane as I am is making sense, what does that possibly say? Anyway delete all of the religious bigotry towards Christianity and other religions on Uncyclopedia as well, if you do not want to appear as a hypocrite. If not, why does Islam get a free pass and other religions do not from parody? --2nd_Lt Orion Blastar (talk) 17:35, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
no sir you did not. someone (probably you) made a mistake in counting. you voted, to recapitulate, "Err... Don't get it." which is like saying "phone me NOW to know if this is racist or not." if i were you, i'd have voted "REALLY STRONGLY AGAINST ~~ 'cos it's RACIST" if the pic. were racist and left uncyc. for good measure if the pic. had not(ed. typo) been featured regardless. -- mowgli 17:11, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Huhhh... see the top of the last section for what I meant that I don't get it. Due to that reason, it was practically a vote against and should be assumed as such. And why would I leave Uncyc just because of that pic? ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 17:17, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
ghelae, the person who commented below your post (in that forum, then, once upon a time), some king-in-yellow, i think, did not get what you now mean in "Huhhh...see the top of the last section for what i meant," until you posted the top of the last section and then even i understood - and i was thankful (i seriously would have called you if i had your phone number. i take you sooo seriously).
ok, i don't know about you, but i, I, I,I would leave uncyc. if i found that the admins here, or the culture here, were even remotely RACIST. the fact that i haven't left, yet, speaks for itself (i don't know about tomorrow but i'm surely not calling you for advice).
re: "True, but there isn't yet a word that describes someone intolerant to a particular religion"
what rot!! ain't fanaticism or zealousness good enough for you?? is "religious intolerance" so obfuscate or difficult to type with one finger (than "racism")? is "racism" the closest association for "religious intolerance?" do you know what "racism" even means (or even "religious intolerance" or that matter)? -- mowgli 17:37, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
But but but calling something racist is a sure way to influence votes to delete it faster. After all, you can manipulate people that way, and liberals do it all of the time. You can call someone or something racist even when it is not, and lie and trick people into voting your way on an issue or VFD. It mocks Islam, it is racist, it mocks Christianity it is not racist. See how easy it is. That way you can keep the intolerant articles on Christianity but not on Islam. --2nd_Lt Orion Blastar (talk) 17:53, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Please do not use bold text. i'm sensitive to bold text - i have a skin condition. Please do not be racist. -- mowgli 18:09, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Again, an explaination, to Mowgli: About leaving - why would someone want to leave when such racism is mostly from people who haven't been editing more than two months, from vandals, or is used in such a satirical way that it doesn't matter? Other words: No. Zealousness and Fanaticism are just having enthusiasm for a concept. And I typed "word". "religious intolerance" is two words. For the racism bit, acting like someone is stupid for getting a word mixed up is stupid in itself, and hypocritical with your bad typing, grammar and spelling is plain hypocritical. ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 18:04, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
well i agree sir ghelae (except with the semantic bit) but i'd give out a loud call (i do give the site leeway for a lot of shit that JUST gets posted here - not for VFP, VFH, or just vote, or featured stuff which are all in admin radar); like address the admins in whatever way possibly for one who is "just" some user (not that some user) to know their opinion - to digress, in jurisprudence, sometimes "intent" (intent of the perpetrator), is investigated to justify the severity of the action taken against him/her -- and the admins here are responsible for everything save that which slips under the radar or is NOT pointed out to them. we should point out to them more often (i mean i should). if they FAIL to correct a slight after having been informed by an aggrieved (i dramatise too much) then...you know, fait accompli. -- mowgli 18:21, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

...fait accompli, capiche? (hey jew !!) etc. i just wanted to restore some girth and spunk to this enervating discussion. well, to cut a long story short, sir ghelae, i'm a sorry person of a human being. i'm 39. and i know this site is dominated by folks much younger than me (but wayyyy older than you, don't lie!!). just that i'm of the idiot-species who likes to believe that man is (inately) good unti proven bad (hit me with hitler once again. and kapish, i shall surrender -- i'd have said g bush but he's more cliched that hitler here) -- mowgli 18:40, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Ageism? Actually I'm of the same age group, but thats neither here nor there. I personally don't have anything against your image, and do not think it is racist in any form. I'm not the sort of person who thinks that religion or anything else that makes us "different" is something that should be immune to humour, but then I did write Holocaust Tycoon. For what its worth my religious practices are regularly ridiculed, doesn't bother me in the slightest, other than proving beyond a doubt that some people are ignorant and/or plain stupid. IMHO this image should not be featured because its crap, not because it might offend someone. :) -- Sir Mhaille Icons-flag-gb.png (talk to me)
yes i know it's crap, :) agreed, wholeheartedly agreed, but the discussion was interesting and i enjoyed it. the icing on the cake, of course, was to learn that sir mhaille is no younger than me. i'm staying (sorry if some find that insensitively ageist). -- mowgli 19:24, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Everything is in shades of grey for me. People like Hitler are more towards the darker shades of gray, people like Gandhi and Jesus are towards the lighter shades of gray. In my religious beliefs all are sinners and have fallen short of God and only God is good, that means there are no innocents and we all must repent. Democratic voting is flawed anyway and the majority rules, and what the majority votes on might not be good at all to some people. Someone is going to get slighted even in a Democracy. Muslim cell phone, the idea is funny to me, and if I have to suffer the cannibalism remarks of eating the body of Christ and drinking the blood of Christ in my spirituality, then the Muslims must suffer that banging their head on the floor as a cell phone remarks of their praying. The difference is that I have a sense of humor and I find it funny, even if it is intolerant of Christianity or Islam. Might as well delete Allah for being intolerat of Islam, or the many other Islam/Muslim articles on Uncyclopedia. But then you have to delete every image and article on Jesus, Odin, and other religious things. You know I have a point here, even if I have to keep bringing it up. --2nd_Lt Orion Blastar (talk) 21:32, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, since we're all going to hell, might as well keep insulting every deity around no? -- Brigadier Sir Mordillo Icons-flag-il.png GUN UotY WotM FP UotM AotM MI3 AnotM VFH +S 21:42, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I think God is dread (and not in an archaic sense). -- Imrealized ...hmm? 22:43, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

...just chill. You guys are killing my buzz. I thought the pic was okay: it mocked both an awful ad campaign and poked the bull of religion. I've done a bunch of the latter myself. I didn't find it to be racist, just not good enough to be featured. Yes, it feels bizarre for me to be telling others to relax, as my own pics and their rise to mediocrity on VFP gets me all wound up. I'm getting better about it, there's hardly any twitching anymore. As I commented in my vote for "Muslim Cell Phone", make it pretty and I'll vote for. This is democracy in action, people! Do you think Bush is spying on everyone that voted for Kerry? Okay, bad example... Modusoperandi 03:59, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.uncyclopedia.co/w/index.php?title=Forum:Muslim_Cell_Phone&oldid=976741"