Interesting quote, my emphasis, from Alom Shaha on his book “The Young Atheist’s Handbook”:

Perhaps publishers cannot be blamed for being cautious? After all, as recently as September 2008 the offices of Gibson Square were indeed firebombed just as it was about to publish The Jewel of Medina, a fictional account of the life of Mohammed’s youngest wife, by Sherry Jones. But, as both Kenan Malik and Nick Cohen have described elsewhere, the firebombing may not have been caused so much by the “offensive” nature of the book as much as by the fact that the book was publicly announced to be offensive by a Western and non-Muslim academic. It may have been the case that the book would largely have been ignored by Muslims had it not been for the publicity generated by this — having been pronounced offensive, it then almost required at least one fanatic to act. Jones believes that “If Random House had simply published my book, I don’t think there would have been any trouble. The real problem is not that Muslims are offended but that people think they will be.”

I’ve encountered the idea that Muslims will be offended by my book from numerous people — from the publishers who looked at my proposal to the people who have interviewed me since publication and even from some friends. The only people who have not suggested that the book might be offensive to Muslims are Muslims themselves. Not a single Muslim has come forward to say that he or she has been offended by my book. The most strongly worded email I’ve received is one that expressed pity that I had “lost the one truth path” and the hope that “Allah would guide [me] back to it”.

via We need to talk about Islam | Index on Censorship.

The problem is not the actuality of the situation, but instead the fear of what other people might think?

Where else have we seen this recently?

Oh yes, the Twitter Joke Trial verdict; my emphasis:

33. We are of course well aware that the Crown Court concluded, as a matter of fact, that the message sent by the appellant was of a menacing character. Proper respect must be paid to such a finding. However, the findings do not address the unbroken pattern of evidence to be derived from the responses of those who read or must have read the message before the South Yorkshire Police investigated it. No weight appears to have been given to the lack of urgency which characterised the approach of the authorities to this problem, while the fact that those responsible for security at the airport decided to report it at all, which was treated as a significant feature, rather overlooked that this represented compliance with their duties rather than their alarmed response to the message. By contrast, disproportionate weight seemed to be placed on the response of the appellant in interview to how “some” people might react, without recognising that the care needed to approach such a widely phrased question in context. The response was part of the interview as a whole, when looking back at what the appellant admitted he had done and his assertions that it was a joke. The question based on what “some” people might think embraced everyone, included those who might lack reasonable fortitude. This entirely equivocal response added nothing which supported the contention that the message was of a menacing character.

Sensitivity to other peoples’ feelings and respect of others’ beliefs is one thing; inaction due to moral timidity is another.

Fearful cowardice cloaked as moral respect is yet a third.

I am pleased that somewhere in the legal system there is now referenced the concept of reasonable fortitude; perhaps we should seek to draw out the details of these two simple words, as a prophylactic against the general disease of:

Well it won’t upset, or damage, or corrupt me, but I can see how it would all too easily upset, or damage, or corrupt someone else. Someone other than me. Someone less sophisticated. Less educated. You know. Stupider.

Instead let’s start by assuming a reasonable populace who have reasonable morals, reasonable education and reasonable fortitude, and stop trying to mollycoddle them.

I hope to see Alom later this week at Reading Skeptics.