Polish Pop Star Fined $1,450 for Blasphemy

In the US, we often joke about things like this, but it’s pretty unsettling that in some places in the world, it is literally a crime to say meany-weany things about someone’s fucking stupid beliefs. 

The concept of free speech is an Americanism that isn’t shared in most of the world. I expect in Poland, there is no line between free speech and “offending religious feelings.”

Nergal’s (lead singer of Behemoth and Doda’s ex-boyfriend) blasphemy case was dismissed.

Look on the bright side…at least we got a picture of her!

You’d think in a country with a recent history like Poland’s, they’d  be more vigilant about freedom of speech and religion.

Don’t EU laws supercede this nonsense?

It’s only sexism if he doesn’t drool over guys too. Someone post a picture (not it)

I think it was dismissed because the charges against Adam Darski (aka Nergal) weren’t about verbal blasphemy, but because he only tore up a bible on stage.

Not sure how they’ve gotten away with anything else though haha

Unfortunately the EU are terrified of butting in religious matters – at least on the side of secularism. In fact, EU recently added discrimination due to religion to the definition of racism, making it illegal, so they’re actually actively supporting this.

I honestly can’t name one good thing to ever come out of the EU, but I can sure as hell make a long list of the bad.

“Well, so what, What’s wrong with being sexy? I mean, there’s nothing wrong with…”

Law is not THAT bad here. Constitution states separation and doesn’t include comments about any religious dogmas. Previous goverment (PiS) was trying to put there some quotes about the Jesus being the King Of Poland (or something), but they failed. In fact I believe that this law contradicts constitution and isn’t really valid. but someone would have to prove that.

The problem really seems to be that she made a specific claim. I could give very good reasons for doubting the bible, starting with that it gives two very different accounts of the same death. I would not presume to tell you what the writers were drinking.

Implying that she’s a good looking woman is sexist…?

Really, I don’t get it. Why it’s sexism to say someone is beautiful?!

The original EU plan was to prevent the Germans from owning Europe. Mission accomplished?

Hemant, really?

I just don’t see sexism here.  I just don’t  find the comment laden with discrimination or devaluation based on a Doda’s sex, no blatant application of stereotyping.  Perhaps a bit of condescension, but that is pushing it.

Part of the newsworthiness of this incident is the very fact that she is a good looking woman and sexual icon.  If there is any doubt do a GIS for Doda.
Perhaps Big Fat Al is only guilty of pointing out the obvious.

Thank you, Rose. Commenting on how somebody looks in a story focused on how blasphemy laws restrict freedom of speech is unacceptable, and it only happens when the person pictured is a woman. Showing a picture of someone does not invite sexist comments. Blaming sexist comments on the fact that she is a woman and happens to be pretty creates an atmosphere and culture where it is deemed “ok” to focus only on her looks. Seriously, this crap is why I don’t go to the local atheist meet up anymore.

Two reasons: – 95% of comments like this (only about somebody being attractive) are made about women.  When was the last time somebody made a spontaneous comment here saying that a man was attractive? (ie, without anybody asking why men don’t get the same treatment)
 – By saying somebody is beautiful, and ONLY saying that somebody is beautiful, you effectively write off anything else they had to say.  It’s a post about how somebody got fined for blasphemy laws; her appearance doesn’t have anything to do with that.

Seriously??? You want to posit the assertion that all sexist comments arise from depictions of women?? You want people to think that you believe that no sexist comment has ever been made about a man?

That makes you about as naive as anon22 is stupid.

Now, now. Let’s not call everything that isn’t ‘Christian’ gay. Evil, blasphemous, heretical, Satanic, sinful, wrong, sinister, bad, … …, and the gays can’t be ‘Christian’ so they’re included, but they’re not the only ones.

Seriously??? You want to posit the assertion that all sexist comments arise from depictions of women?? You want people to think that you believe that no sexist comment has ever been made about a man?

That makes you about as naive as anon22 is stupid.

It would be naive to say that all sexist comments are against women. AmyC didn’t say that, however.
She is entirely correct to say that showing a picture of a man does not draw the same response of immediately ignoring the meat of the issue to exclusively discuss his appearance. If you doubt this, please find a counter-example, because I’d love to see one.

It’s objectifying. It reduces Dorota to merely a sexual object, thus erasing her as a person. I don’t want to thought of for my looks first, before my talents, skills, accomplishments values, or anything else. 

This may be hard to understand, but men are generally seen as people first, male second; women are seen as female first, people second. And yes, that’s a bad thing.

Wut. No. Just, no. You are the problem, and the same reasoning you use here is what is used to justify rape. “She was asking for it.” Do you not realize what a load of crap that is? How a woman looks is never an excuse for sexist comments – nothing, absolutely nothing, is an excuse for sexist comments. And saying what you just said is what perpetuates sexism!

When can you men stop seeing women as sex objects first and people second? Reading things like this coming from fellow free thinkers wants me to throw up my hands and leave! 

It’s not because you’re a woman. It’s likely because you are ugly and think that having a “good personality” actually counts for something.

I believe that a lot of these blasphemy laws are not about protecting Christianity. Many European nations enacted religious sensitivity laws after World War II to prevent another round of ‘Blame the Jews’. Ireland is an exception, their blasphemy law is recent. Americans, used to First Amendment protection, can see more easily that that probably isn’t the best solution to the problem. I hope that Doda does appeal just so that the Polish people have more opportunity to discuss the issue. The law there allows for anti-religious artistic expression (the Nergal case), so perhaps they aren’t that far from applying the standard that US citizens take for granted.

I’m from Poland and I have to say that I do not understand my country really! We’re living in XXI age now and if I want to say something I don not want to think I can go to jail if I say something wrong! Come on!

Some photos appear to show Doda with angel wings tattooed on her back. I wonder if this had an impact on the decision to prosecute her, assuming they’re real.

I am a scientist and at conferences and meetings all over the world during 30 years I have come into contact with men from all nations advanced enough to have scientists in my field (over 50 for sure). American men stand out.
Only American scientists have asked me at the first meeting about my marital status (a large percentage did). Only American men have commented on my appearance at the first meeting (fewer, but still too many – at least when I was younger). If this is standard at atheist meetings I fully understand why women are scarce. Men from other nations simply do not do this, whether European or Asian or non-USA Americans. So, it is obviously not a biological imperative as a number of sexist men on this blog claim. Most scientists in the world realise that this is not the way to treat a colleague.
I should stress that not all Americans are obnoxious in this way, just that in all the cases were it happened to me at a scientific meeting it was an American that made me uncomfortable. So, you do have a unique over-sexualisation over there (I have been exposed to it in situ too).
I thought men on this site had thought deeper and have a better understanding than the average American. Obviously there are a number who, like the religious, manages to have tight bulkheads in their minds which create subject areas unreachable by reason.
Two more thoughts:
What happens after a longer acquaintance is a totally different matter.
The best conversation starter I have ever had was from an American: “Do you think Richard III did it?” The guy had been using it for a long time on both men and women and I was only the third who gave an interesting answer. Needless to say, we talked a lot at a number of meetings after that…

You realize that you just said that “blasphemy laws restrict freedom of speech” and that “commenting on how somebody looks” is “unacceptable”. Do you or do you not believe in free speech, I’m confused?

Of course someone can say whether they find someone else attractive. Just be aware that there’s a time and a place. Like, say some high-profile woman has been raped, and there’s a picture of her in a news story about it – can you accept that is a very bad time and place to de-lurk and say “I would so totally tap that.”? I’m going to assume that you can, because I would like to continue conversing with you as a human being rather than pond-slime. So, these things are on a sliding scale, from inappropriate not to (your lover asks how they look), to highly inappropriate to do so – is that so hard?

The Catholics are saying “you must face legal consequences for insulting something made up”.
Feminists are saying that you should face social consequences for marginalising real people, treating them as objects for your visual entertainment, and then denying there is a problem afterwards.
Can you really not see the difference?

2 things:

1. No one in this thread has said or even implied that there is never an appropriate time to comment on someone’s appearance.  That is a blatant strawman.

2. The situation will not improve unless people are called out on it.  Isn’t that the whole rationale behind vocal atheism?  I don’t see how someone can be okay for atheists to call out religious people when they say something wrong but not okay for people not to call out others on sexist comments.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting that being an asshole should be illegal.

1. I guess what I got from Libby’s first comment was that we cannot speak about a woman’s appearance. I guess what she’s really saying is we shouldn’t until we speak about her “talents, skills, accomplishments values, or anything else” first. I was honestly questioning the intent of her comments not trying to create a fallacious arguement. I wanted her comments to be taken forward to the end point. To me she does seem to be saying men shouldn’t comment on a woman’s appearance and that to do so is sexist no matter what is said. I’m looking for more information. 

2. Yeah I argee with you about your second point in general but, I don’t see how it applies to this situation. His comment was not sexist. In poor taste, yes. Rude, possibly, but it had no hint of hatred or prejudice. You can imply all that if you want but that’s unfair and has no basis in reality. To me this all smacks of the witch-hunting mentality that I find so detestable about religion.

I find this discussion pathetic. I would never be offended if someone said that I’m attractive. I think you are over reacting.

And yes, I’m a woman.

Never?  What if you had a really good point to make that challenged readers intellectually and was written specifically to invite discussion and debate and all you got in way of response was how good you look with your hair down?  That wouldn’t annoy you at all?

Sexism doesn’t necessarily imply discrimination.  From the dictionary.com definition:

“1. attitudes or behavior based on traditional stereotypes of sexual roles.”

I would say dismissing the issue at hand and reducing the woman in question to mere eyecandy certainly meets that criteria.

No, women can be sexist too, but in my experience, and the experience of many people commenting here, these sorts of comments in these sorts of situations are far more common from men.

Again, I’m referring to her first comment. The  quote you are referencing comes from her second comment.

In the real world the term sexist carries with it the implication of discrimination and even hatred. It is not a word to be thrown around about a guy who commented about how he liked seeing a picture of a pretty woman. Also just to comment about the male bashing I’ve seen on here  about this (not necessarily by you TheBlackCat), I know quite a few girls who might have said something very similar or even more explicit than Big Fat Al. We are all sexual beings. Two thousand years of Christianity has not rid us of that burden and I don’t think rabid feminine political correctness will either.

She’s an attractive woman. Now I am sexist.

 Aristotle also said, in his Politics, “It is natural that the free rule the slave, the male the female, and the man the child. But they are different. The slave has no portion of the deliberative faculty; the female does have it, but it is inoperative; the child has it, but it is underdeveloped.”

Aristotle was a total ass, and sexist.
I also completely agree with captwasabi, to say that someone is beautiful, or sexy, or hot, is not sexism. Where he to insinuate that she was a moron, simply for being a woman, that would be sexism. One could argue that the original commenter has the wrong priorities, but his comment was in no way sexist, there is nothing that indicates that he ONLY sees her as beautiful, and nothing else, as long as he is still aware that she is a person, whether he actually places any weight behind that, is completely irrelevant. Female supremacism is becoming a religion, especially in the developed western world, where women now have more rights than men, and maleness is considered abhorrent, and is repressed in young men. As a young male of that generation, raised in Sweden (most “equal” country in the world, or somesuch) during the 1990’s, I can tell you that the whole thing disturbs me a lot, the way men are no longer allowed to be men, for fear of being socially ostracised.

The reason why 95%
comments about beauty are directed toward women is they are beautiful and they
care about beauty.  They do their hair, nails,
makeup – they shave legs, wear  jewellery
and paint their toenails.

 Men are not beautiful and do not care to be.  Men may be handsome, charming or have charisma
but beauty is not the appropriate way to describe men.

Some men are concerned with their appearance and some women are not.  Don’t get confused by stereotypes as to what is beautiful and what isn’t.