Feminist Islamophobia
From Robert Spencer over at PJ Media:
Late-night comic Conan O’Brien tweeted Friday night: “Marvel Comics is introducing a new Muslim Female superhero. She has so many more special powers than her husband’s other wives.” The predictable self-righteous firestorm ensued.
O’Brien was referring to “Kamala Khan,” Marvel Comics’ new Muslim superhero, unveiled with great fanfare last week. They are only introducing this Muslim superhero because of the hugely successful post-9/11 campaign by Islamic supremacists and their Leftist allies to portray Muslims as victims of “Islamophobia” and “hatred” — when actually the incidence of attacks on innocent Muslims is very low (not that a single one is acceptable or justified), and the entire “Islamophobia” campaign is an attempt to intimidate people into thinking that there is something wrong with fighting against jihad terror and Islamic supremacism.
Will Kamala Khan fight against jihadis? Will Marvel be introducing a counter-jihad superhero? I expect that the answer is no on both counts.
In any case, O’Brien’s tweet was just a silly quip, but as the Ayatollah Khomeini said, “There is no humor in Islam.” One of those who were offended wrote: “I didn’t know that @ConanOBrien had Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller writing for him now. Interesting.” A legion of Leftists descended upon O’Brien’s Twitter feed, accusing him of being a “f***ing racist scumbag” and “Islamophobic,” and his joke of being “kinda tasteless,” “really ignorant and terrible,” “in very poor taste,” and “f***ing gross and racist.”
“Racist”? What race is Muslim polygamy again? I keep forgetting. O’Brien’s joke has a factual basis. The Qur’an says: “And if you fear that you will not deal justly with the orphan girls, then marry those that please you of [other] women, two or three or four. But if you fear that you will not be just, then [marry only] one or those your right hand possesses. That is more suitable that you may not incline [to injustice].” (4:3)
But as O’Brien is discovering now, calling attention to uncomfortable truths about Islam is “racist” and wrong, even if they’re undeniably…truths. I am sure that Conan O’Brien will not make this mistake again: almost immediately after people began criticizing him for it, he took the offending tweet down. After all, he wants to stay on television; bringing uncomfortable aspects of Islam to light is the quickest way to be read out of polite and decent society. Just ask Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins, formerly darlings of the Leftist intelligentsia — until they touched that third rail of American public discourse and dared to criticize the violence and brutality that Islamic jihadists commit and justify by reference to Islamic texts and teachings.
Polygamy devalues women, reducing them to the status of commodities, and stands as an affront to their equality with men as human beings. But none of the enlightened Leftists condemning Conan O’Brien for his little joke would dare speak out for the Muslim women who suffer in polygamous arrangements; to do so would be “Islamophobic,” “racist,” and probably “gross.”
Read the whole sorry thing here.
My question is twofold: First, is there any human reason why the Left, who are ideologically committed to feminism, would sacrifice their position on the equality of women to support their position on the supremacy of Islam? Why do the Left support the Islamists over the homosexuals, another core constituency of theirs? Why do the Left support Islamists over human rights, civil rights, the separation of church and state, and not one nor two but ALL of the other alleged positions the Left claims to support?
I invite any reader who cares to answer to explain how each and every Leftist could either be so blind as not to see the clearly what Islam stands for, or, if they are not blind, how they could be so cynical that they would maintain for years and decades, without cracking a smile, a pretense to supporting liberal government and individual freedom and a concern for equal rights which they do not, when it comes to Jihad, remember they support? Why are they suddenly pro-theocracy?
Let me refine the question. A Christian theocracy would not torture and kill them. As far as I know, Leftists are allowed to enter Vatican City without danger of being burned or stoned. Why are the Leftists devoted to defending an Islamic, that is, an Antichrist theocracy? What earthly reason could they have? If their motives are natural and human motives, what motive could they have?
Second, once we have eliminated all the human and natural reasons as being insufficient to explain this paradox, what is the supernatural reason why the enemies of Christ from the modern West are allied with the enemies of Christ who follow the Seventh Century heresiarch Mahound?
Ah, that question is a little easier to answer, is it not?
Let me repeat another question: When is Marvel going to introduce THE CRUSADER, James Matamoros, as a superhero?
He can fight for feminists and gays and the separation of Church and State and fight against the Jihad as the first All-Christian Superhero. He could be a strange visitor from another planet, whose parents were killed by Jihadists bombers before his very eyes, but who, because of his fearless faith, was given a mystical green lantern red cross by a dying alien named Richard Cour-De-Leon.
And he could want to stop the cold, cynical men who blow up innocent women, children, and Jews in cowardly acts of maniacally fanatic religious hatred against everything good and pure in life.
What in the bloody hell is so hard for Marvel Comics to grasp about that concept?
Truly, truly, were the Crimelords of the 1930’s or the Nazis of the 1940’s that inspired the comic writers of the golden age to draw the first superhero comics really that much worse than the current enemies of civilization?
If this generation of comic editors and artists had been alive during World War Two, Captain Nazi and Red Skull would have been their heroes and darlings, and Captain America, Wonder Woman and Superman all bigoted villains.
About John C Wright
John C. Wright is a practicing philosopher, a retired attorney, newspaperman, and newspaper editor, and a published author of science fiction. Once a Houyhnhnm, he was expelled from the august ranks of purely rational beings when he fell in love; but retains an honorary title.
