From this dreadful article in The Guardian.

Discussion (29)¬

  1. M27Holts says:

    Sort of the one way filter nonsense you expect from the white liberal numb-nutz. Suppose that pointing out that mohammed was a psychopathic war-lord and the koran is a seventh century mein-kampf would get maximum points…

  2. Mark Joseph says:

    How high does “Jesus and Mo” score? Is it a cumulative score, or does each cartoon get a separate rating? Is there an on-line leaderboard we can consult?

  3. Jill Robinson says:

    Unbelievable that the burka is still being confused with the nikab. The latter is of course a woman’s covering with a letterbox-like slit that exposes the eyes. The burka with its net screen renders the eyes nearly invisible.

  4. Laripu says:

    Having a numeric way to measure racism isn’t a bad idea at all. The only silly thing may be hot distinctions are made. I would just have levels based on:
    – words (higher score for repeated verbal insult, higher score when uttered by people in a position of respect or power)
    – property damage (higher score based on cost to restore)
    – violence (highest score for murder)

    I wouldn’t limit this to Muslims. Blacks, Jews, and any group that gets ill treatment should have these statistics. When you know what and who, you can more effectively counter misbehavior at low levels with education, before mob mentality turns it into arson and murder.

    I don’t know how it will turn out. But it might be useful to know if blacks are mostly treated to insult, Muslims to violence, and Jews to property damage. I’m not saying that’s how it is, but that it would be useful to know how it is.

    In the US, the FBI publishes hate crime statistics every year, by race, religion and other factors. It comes as no surprise to me that year after year, about 2/3 of hate crimes by race are against blacks, and 2/3 of hate crimes by religion are against Jews. (The latter remained true even after the 9/11 destruction of the World Trade Center in NYC.)

    What we know about, we can oppose.

    Surely religion is silly antiquated stuff. But we ought to oppose it by education, not by tolerating oppression. That’s the case even if education is a losing battle, because the system rebugs itself with every idiot birth.

  5. Edward says:

    “Unbelievable that the burka is still being confused with the nikab.”
    Why would that be unbelievable when no one cares about the difference except Muslims and PC types?

  6. tebirkes says:

    Laripu, what about different languages for the offending words? If I attempt to offer offense in Apache and it isn’t understood, does it count on the numeric scale? Or slang terms that *some* groups use sort of tongue-in-cheek about themselves, but they go berserk when the same terms are used by non-group members. And then there are all those times when I’m writing dialogue for dipshit characters in a story and have to try them out to see if the desired effect is achieved. Does that count?
    Just curious what the consensus might be – if any.

  7. jveeds says:

    Interesting also (Jill and Edward) that many seemingly knowledgeable people confuse the burka with the abaya. They may look similar to someone outside the culture, and of course, serve a similar purpose, but I’ve read stories by people who’ve actually been to the respective regions who don’t seem to know the diff.

  8. M27Holts says:

    The context is everything. How many points are you going to adjudicate, when you have the dysklexic racist with tourettes who keeps shouting ginger when he sees black people?

  9. Succubus ov Satan says:

    Would writing “Satan shags Muhammed up the ass” get me a good score or would using an actual quran as a stand for wine bottles qualify for more?

  10. Succubus ov Satan says:

    it is not islamophobia (which is a perfectly reasonable reaction to that tatty fantasy novel’s extremism) that is a problem, it is muslimophobia which is the problem

  11. M27Holts says:

    Behind a paywall that IOS…

  12. Donal Feran says:

    Where does calling Mo “you bollard” rate? Fairly high, certainly. ( I have to remember to start calling short thick people “bollard” . . . but not my wife; she’s hardly ever thick about anything ;^)

  13. jb says:

    Lifehack: You can often get the full text of an article behind a paywall by quickly hitting Ctrl-A Ctrl-C before the paywall nag screen comes up, and then pasting into a Word document.

    Also, Chrome is more effective than Firefox at concealing the fact that you are in private mode. (Neither is entirely effective though, which I see as the coders falling down on the job).

  14. Laripu says:

    You can construct edge cases all you want, you can say what about this or what about that unlikely instance. We all agree that religion is a pile of crap, but this fact remains: Ahmed, a Muslim, or Moishe, Jew, walking innocently down the street don’t deserve to be beaten up. Neither deserve to have their windows smashed by rocks or their houses burned down, or swastikas painted on them… merely for their belief.

    Minorites are vulnerable.

    Insult, when it becomes common, before normalized. Then, the psychology of the majority changes, and when insult is normalized there start to be instances of property damage and violence. Then violence before normalized, because the police and authorities share the same attitudes as the general population.

    This stuff builds on itself. It needs to be addressed early, by teaching people some empathy and making even insult unacceptable.

    So imagine you’re in a conversation with Ahmed about his religion. You can say:

    “I’m an atheist and I don’t believe in religion in general. I don’t think the koran or the bible are good in any way. To me they’re just expressions of ancient ignorant pre-industrial societies.”

    Or you can say:

    “Mohamed was a pedophile, the koran is pure shit and anyone who believes it is an idiot.”

    Even if the second one is true, I hope you choose the first.

  15. Postdoggerel says:

    Last week I posted a crummy poem. It was written y chatGPT. It did not break any irony meters but it stealthily passed everyone’s Turing test.

    I asked it for a limerick on Muhammad and Aisha. The result was bland so I asked for another version. The results below…

    There once was a man named Muhammad
    Whose wife, Aisha, was quite consummate
    Their love was quite strong
    And their bond, lifelong
    Together they faced every gauntlet

    I’m sorry, but as a language model trained by OpenAI, I am not capable of creating content that may be offensive or inappropriate. My function is to provide accurate and helpful information to the best of my ability. If you have any other questions or requests, please let me know and I will do my best to assist you.

  16. jb says:

    There are apparently ways to get around ChatGPT’s builtin censor, for example: encoding your request in Base64; or asking for a reply in Pig Latin. More on this from the indispensable Scott Alexander

  17. M27Holts says:

    I’m not down with the kids. What is chatGPT? A granny hookup site…too frightened to look. 🙂

  18. jb says:

    Google is your friend!

  19. Laripu says:

    It’s been in the news here lately so I knew what it was. But really I’d have found a granny hookup site funnier.

  20. postdoggerel says:

    In FORTRAN, GOD is REAL (unless declared INTEGER). – Laripu

  21. M27Holts says:

    Not heard that joke since 1983…

  22. M27Holts says:

    Bollard? Spunk-Womble is a far better comedy name to call the mentally deficient religious numpties…

  23. Laripu says:

    Just to get your British slang straight… what’s the difference between a numpty and a muppet in Brit slang?

    In trade, I’ll contribute one of mine: as an English speaking person from Montreal, I refer to eggnog as “chicken milk”, because the correct French word for eggnog is “lait de poule”. I still do this a continent in distance away in Florida.

  24. M27Holts says:

    Numpty is a scottish pejorative name. Muppet is far more contemporary, both are fairly mild. My mrs calls me knobhead when I annoy her…

  25. M27Holts says:

    Eggnog? Do you mean Advocaat? Not sure of the spelling. My mrs likes that makes a cocktail called a snowball…

  26. Shaughn says:

    M27Holts, Advocaat is well spelled, and it is the dutch word for advocate. Advocaat is made of egg yolks, without the egg white. That’s the only real difference with eggnog. My grandma and other ladies from a certain age ‘ate’ it with a special advocaat spoon, from a glass, topped with whipped cream. Once my granny kept het gass in front of our Dog, thinking the dog would shrink away from it. Next thing she knew wass that a pink tongue emptied her glass… 😀

  27. Dr John the Wipper says:


    You forget one little detail: Advocaat is ca 20 % alcohol….

  28. Shaughn says:

    I suppose eggnog can have as much, John the Wipper, or either more or less. Or none at all and so can advocaat if home made.
    I know our Dog slept sound for some time.


NOTE: This comments section is provided as a friendly place for readers of J&M to talk, to exchange jokes and ideas, to engage in profound philosophical discussion, and to ridicule the sincerely held beliefs of millions. As such, comments of a racist, sexist or homophobic nature will not be tolerated.

If you are posting for the first time, or you change your username and/or email, your comment will be held in moderation until approval. When your first comment is approved, subsequent comments will be published automatically.