An art historian from the NTNU (where else?) has published his thoughts on the ongoing Dagbladet cartoons controversy. As expected, the learned historian turns to dirty rhetorical tricks to present the cartoon as an argument against child cruelty, and therefore a valuable and important contribution to the public discourse in Norway. It is of course a bogus argument, and reveals more about the learned professors lack of education and cultural sensitivities (now that we are living in a multiculti society) than it does about his specific knowledge about circumcision in general and anti-Semitism and how it has been expressed throughout the times in particular.
lifted from dagbladet.no (bad google translate)
Unpleasant Truth The real issue is the children’s legal rights, therefore the adult religious feelings trifles. Published on 11 June 2013, at. 11:28 by Jørgen Lund, Associate Professor of Art History, NTNU
RUNE BERGLUND Steen, Head of Anti-Racist Centre, launches an attack on Dagbladet on the 10th June and the infamous drawing referring to so-called circumcision. Certainly the cartoon “is unusually sharp, it is both as simple and as serious as that.” But what is serious and grave are the real actions that the satirical drawing shows, namely the abuse that currently still called “circumcision of male children» and which is also now official Norwegian policy to get into “proper forms” in the public health care system. It must be repeated and repeated: This case is neither about Judaism or other minority or religious issues, but about the health and integrity of a great deal of young male children that Christian US-Americans, Muslims and Jews become parents of and who have their healthy sexual organs cut into. It is tragic, and not infrequently directly cynical, that the ongoing work of getting a statutory prohibition that must, and eventually will come in today’s Norway, is derailed by reference to anti-Semitism and the “Jewish section”.
WHEN THE HEART of the matter is the children’s legal rights, the adult world’s pictorial historical connotations and “religious sentiments” become and will remain mere trifles. It is simply about how to protect little boys from the abuse that takes place today, in the same manner that society finally prevented that little girls are subjected to what we a few years ago called “ritual female circumcision.” Giving children – regardless of their parents’ faith and tradition – the same rights to their own bodies as most Norwegian children today have, of course, has nothing to do with discrimination and injustice. Injustice and discrimination is inherent in the current practice, and to get anywhere internationally, we must begin in Norway.
YES, the motive depicted in the cartoon is unusually crude . But the wonderful thing is, Berglund Steen, that this case actually holds the option to finish the painful and crude, something, which might happen when we break away from the confusion and misdirection and realize who it actually hurts. It has always been the case, that through such honest, good and painful moments, that we are actually able to mourn the abuses of the past and fight clearly against the same in the present.
Read the Rune Berglund Steen’s post “A hellish caricature.”