Muslim group: If you want rapes to stop, accept that we’re animals

Muslim group: If you want rapes to stop, accept that we’re animals
Training tool.

It’s a real question, whether the ridiculousness of the current clash of cultures in the streets of Europe is a function of the age we live in, or simply of the human condition.

Have our group manifestations as a species always been this absurd?

I’m voting no, actually.  Legitimately, it’s unusually bizarre out there, like sensible people are paralyzed behind an electric fence of political correctness that’s way past its expiration date.

Consider, for example, this measure German authorities have taken to try to train Muslim migrants not to sexually assault Germans.  (The public service campaign produced the feature image for this post, in fact.)

You almost don’t know where to start: with the futility, or the soft bigotry of bottom-feeding expectations, or even something else.  There are so many things wrong with this.

So it’s probably not a really big surprise that a major Muslim group in Germany, MuslimStern (“Muslim Star”), has come out to make a case it might want to seriously rethink, about what Germans need to do to avoid rape now that so many Muslims are in town.

Daily Mail reports this under the headline “Germans must ban ALCOHOL if they want to prevent further sex attacks.”  But that’s not really the important point made by MuslimStern.  The important point is this one:

The group claimed: ‘You cannot expect to chuck a naked antelope in front of a lion and not expect it to react. It is mind boggling that with so much time spent teaching children about sex at school, they completely forget to pass on this basic biological fact.’

According to MuslimStern, therefore, Muslim migrants are animals who can’t control themselves.  They’re not morally responsible.  They’re driven by instinct, and can’t behave in any other way.

Logically, that’s their proposition.  The West’s proposition is that humans can control themselves, and are morally responsible.  Self-control and modesty both matter.  Communities can get out of balance at times, regarding which one they insist on more or work harder to deconstruct.  But the basic proposition is that humans are not animals, and that’s why men and women can expect to live and work together, and not have to be physically sequestered from each other, or denied all forms of group enterprise or recreation.

The MuslimStern proposition, by contrast, is that no form of give and take is possible, because people are driven like animals to behave in predatory ways. This drive is unreachable by any concept of moral compulsion.  The only way to exercise any control of it is to treat the humans involved like animals, separating them physically, building layers of protection between them, and denying them things (like alcohol) that may trigger their instinctive impulses.

The spokesmen for MuslimStern know their media audience well, and undoubtedly perceive correctly that the Western media will run with this as a rebuke to Germans.  Whether the media get indignant about it, as Daily Mail seems to, or start preemptively bleating “diversity” and “Islamophobia,” the point is that they’ll accept discussing it in the spirit intended: as if Germans have to adjust their behavior, because this is how “Muslims see things.”

(I put that in quotes because most of us can agree, I think, that this is not how “all Muslims” see things.  How much that matters will depend on how much Muslims themselves make common cause with the rest of society, rather than ritually flogging “Islamophobia” allegations.)

The good news is, we can cut the crap, here, using our natural right to freedom of thought and speech.  There’s another way to see the MuslimStern proposition, and what Germans need to do about it.  It’s the Western way: empirical, logical, and assuming moral accountability.

Humans do adjust their behavior when confronted with predatory animals.  Humans put them in zoos.  Humans chain them, hobble them, and train them – where possible – to be approachable for certain purposes.  When humans have to move around in areas where they can’t be caged, the humans carry guns so they can shoot animal predators to defend themselves.

Get over it, parlor scolds.  We are way past the time when “most people” would be horrified at hearing that said.  MuslimStern brought it up, and it needs to be responded to.

So let’s all just agree that Muslims are human.  They’re not animals, and neither are we, and the remedies we use for animals are not applicable for them or anyone else.

We don’t make German women wear abayas, or deny alcohol to Germans – or sit by fretting while German women are subjected to sexual assault and rape – just because of the limitations imposed by “Muslim” sensibilities.  We don’t do that, any more than we put people in cages just because that’s where we have to put bears and lions.

We expect better of people.  Sometimes, we have to use deterrence and rebuke pretty stringently to get better from them.  Maybe this will be one of those times.

J.E. Dyer

J.E. Dyer

J.E. Dyer is a retired Naval Intelligence officer who lives in Southern California, blogging as The Optimistic Conservative for domestic tranquility and world peace. Her articles have appeared at Hot Air, Commentary’s Contentions, Patheos, The Daily Caller, The Jewish Press, and The Weekly Standard.


Commenting Policy

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

You may use HTML in your comments. Feel free to review the full list of allowed HTML here.