Why We Are Happy To Confront Jesus And Mohammad, But ‘Fear’ Photos Of Breastfeeding Mothers

Protestors burn the American and Israeli flags in Bangladesh in anger at the “Innocence of Muslims” film, that they say mocks Islam and Prophet Mohammad (Star Tribune).

Google, owners of the video broadcast website YouTube, refused to remove “Innocence of Muslims”, the video that has outraged Muslims all over the world and led to violent protests in Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, Sudan, Yemen, Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan. The American ambassador and three other diplomats in Libya, were killed when protestors attacked the US consulate in Benghazi.

Google, however, agreed to temporarily block access to the video from selected Muslim countries.

“Innocence of Muslims”, according to its critics, mocks Islam and blasphemes the Prophet Mohammad.

Videos of “Innocence of Muslims” have also been posted on the social media site Facebook. Indeed in Egypt, a Coptic Christian who posted the film on his Facebook page is currently under 15 days detention on charges of insulting religion.

The storm over “Innocence of Muslims” is already passing. What interests me though is something different. While, for example, Facebook allows videos of “Innocence of Muslims” to be posted on its site (and it should in the spirit of freedom of expression), it does not allow photos of breastfeeding mothers.

Last year, it created quite a bit of clamour when it deleted the page for the provocatively named The Leaky B@@b, a popular breast-feeding group.

I think the right to breastfeed, and to express it in photography is equal to, if not greater than, the freedoms to profess a religion, to be atheist, and to blaspheme Jesus or the Prophet Mohammad.

Facebook censors breastfeeding photographs and video, within the overall policy against pornography. I am confounded that anyone can confuse a breast held out to feed a child, with one displayed to titillate.

My sense is that there is a deeper struggle going on. Media (social media, newspapers, TV, and news sites) are uncomfortable with breastfeeding photos for the same reason they are queasy about photographs taken in maternity wards, and why they find photographs of farmers working the fields boring: They remind us of

We are more comfortable attacking Jesus than allowing photographs of breastfeeding mothers, because the latter have a “subversive” quality about them (fredhoogervost.com photo).

how basic our start in life is, a stage where we are very helpless; and that we are able to be alive, at the end of the day, because we do something very simple – eat.

Yet the only way we are able to come to terms with ourselves, is as complex creatures. The internet and social media succeed because they do something that sophisticated, clever and highly rational people think defines them – they ritualise impersonality.

One of many parts of being a rational 21st Century citizen is to carry on the work started by our forefathers during the Enlightenment, like continuing to question religious dogma.

In this scheme of things, the spat over a religious film like “Innocence of Muslims” is a much-needed test, which helps separate those of us who have reached a “higher stage” of intellectual and scientific development and are unperturbed by such things, and those who are still on the lower rung of the evolutionary ladder, and kill over it.

Indeed, as some Muslims still fumed over the “Innocence of Muslims”, along came Harvard University Professor Karen King.

Professor King had studied an ancient papyrus that recorded Jesus Christ speaking to his disciples about “my wife”, which suggests that the son of God was married – to Mary Magdalene no less.

The Daily Mail called this finding “explosive”, and quoted Professor King telling the Smithsonian Magazine that the fragment casts doubt “on the whole Catholic claim of a celibate priesthood based on Jesus’s celibacy” (Read more on: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2205235/Jesus-married-Proof-God-spoke-wife-Mary-Magdalene-ancient-papyrus.html#ixzz270x6lxLr ).

You see Professor King’s statements are based on scientific study of an object, an incomplete manuscript. And her findings were presented this week at a very “civilised” scientific conference on Coptic studies in Rome. There were no demonstrations by Christians, and Professor King will not return home to find that Catholic zealots had torched her house.

A depiction of Jesus and Mary Magdalene in “The Marriage Proposal” by Russ Docken. New research suggests the two were an item.

The contrast between that, and the riots in the Muslim countries over “Innocence of Muslims” could not have been starker. But, then, that is the point, isn’t it?

Bring in a breastfeeding mother into this picture, and you ruin this narrative. Because you will be saying, “Guys, forget all this highfaluting stuff. You all started in the same place; blind, groping for your mothers’ breasts, and left on your own, would fall off your mothers’ laps”.

DISCLOSURE: The author is mostly rational, and a messy cross between occasional-praying Catholic, agnostic, and atheist.

•cobbo@ke.nationmedia.com / twitter@cobbo3


3 comments on “Why We Are Happy To Confront Jesus And Mohammad, But ‘Fear’ Photos Of Breastfeeding Mothers

  1. rosebell
    September 20, 2012 at 5:22 pm #

    Reblogged this on Rosebell's Blog and commented:
    I thought Charles’ post raise most questions i have had over the past week. And why would you claim freedom of expression and can’t stand a photo of a breastfeeding mother? Well where i come from women are free to breastfeed in public and not feel ashamed and Google and Facebook ought to know better.

  2. MIchael
    September 20, 2012 at 8:07 pm #

    I think the same way we are taught to salute by word or sign, a man you meet in isolation or a lonely place, be it a friend or stranger, the same way we are taught to trouble no one about their religion, it all goes back to respecting one anothers views hoping that they will respect yours and if you do that and they dont do their part, then your expected to demand from them to do their part. No one is right here Charles and the moslems have stod up to demand their respect. I agree with them to an extent because as a practising catholic, i think of myself as an apologist, we need to put our foot on the ground against such insults and not cover it up under freedom of expression.

  3. birdie
    September 21, 2012 at 1:02 am #

    I think there is a nobility, a certain greatness, that comes with breastfeeding that makes it hard to reproach. The basic start you talk about- it is hard to condemn that. So because people don’t like to look at breasts- well, they like to say they don’t like to look at breasts- they just block everything. (also can you imagine if social networks let them post? It would be boobs galore).

    But this post reminded me of two incidents- one in New York, on a ridiculously hot day, a woman walked through Manhattan in just a skirt.
    The second one was when I was in Miami one summer and made a comment about the skimpiness of the dresscode. It was really hot and I was one of the culprits anyway so I wasn’t passing any judgement. But then someone told me that everything pretty much goes as long as you “don’t show your nipples.” Breastfeeding in public, for them, is illegal because your nipple would be shown and that is against their nudity laws. I couldn’t believe that we were allowed to walk around practically naked, as my grandmother would have said, but mothers could not breastfeed.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: