LGBT Club Night Sink The Pink Accused Of Islamophobia Over 'Jihadi Cat' Meme To Promote Parties

The organisers of a popular LGBT club night in east London have been accused of being "tasteless" and "Islamophobic" after using cat memes to promote their parties. Sink The Pink posted a picture of a cat dressed up as a suicide bomber on its Instagram account, with an accompanying caption reading: “Jihad cat is readies… for my virginz!”



Another picture showed a kitten wearing a headdress and said: “I iz prophet meowhammad.” Zing Tsjeng wrote beneath one of the pictures on Instagram: “I've been coming to your nights since they were at BGMWC [Bethnal Green Working Men's Club], but this is just tasteless (and not in a fun, cute way). "Seriously, you’re one of the biggest queer nights in London. You can do better than trashy Islamophobic memes."
Another club-goer Martin Chivers, 29, said he has stopped going to Sink The Pink’s parties after feeling uncomfortable about its use of “problematic stereotypes”.




http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2016/03/01/lgbt-club-night-accused-of-islamophobia-_n_9357878.html?utm_hp_ref=uk



This point really made me laugh?


He told the Evening Standard: “I thought the memes were trying to be deliberately offensive - depicting Mohammed, mocking suicide bombers - by punching down on a marginalised community in the UK.




WTF?????

In every capacity we should mock suicide bombers, that is not being Islamophobic as riddle me this
If Suicide bombers is as claimed not Islamic, then how can mocking suicide bombers be Islamophobic?
By saying that its Islamophobic is defining suicide bombing as Islamic.
As to mocking some schizophrenic, who heard voices in his head who lived 1600 years ago, executed people, endorsed slavery, polygamy, sex slaves, using unwarranted aggression to conquer people and land, rendering those non-Muslim to a secondary status, deserves every sense of mocking as possible. If they cannot see how barbaric he was, then they clearly are brainwashed. Christians have had the piss taken out of their religion for years, its time Muslims learnt that people have a right to take the piss and get on with it. If they are offended by some suicide cat, then they view suicide bombers as fundamentally Islamic, as why should they be offended at that if its meant to be unislamic?

I think the worst thing is using cats like that. They should dress themselves up and take photos of themselves if they want to take the piss and behave like twats. Why would they be googling religious cats? Stupid morons.

Raggamuffin wrote:I think the worst thing is using cats like that. They should dress themselves up and take photos of themselves if they want to take the piss and behave like twats. Why would they be googling religious cats? Stupid morons.

People dress up cats all the time

Its harmless fun

If people are offended, its because they revere someone who deserves no such recognition

The cat is indifferent to any of this, so how is the cat harmed in anyway?

Its not and to me I want to see more and more people normalize this type of mocking because people should not shy away from takingt he piss out of beliefs, even more so beliefs that are based on zero evidence.

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:I think the worst thing is using cats like that. They should dress themselves up and take photos of themselves if they want to take the piss and behave like twats. Why would they be googling religious cats? Stupid morons.

People dress up cats all the time

Its harmless fun

If people are offended, its because they revere someone who deserves no such recognition

The cat is indifferent to any of this, so how is the cat harmed in anyway?

Its not and to me I want to see more and more people normalize this type of mocking because people should not shy away from takingt he piss out of beliefs, even more so beliefs that are based on zero evidence.

I don't think it's harmless to dress up a cat as a suicide bomber. People do that stuff, not cats. It's disrespectful and pathetic. Cats shouldn't be used as pawns in some kind of stupid dig at Muslims or anyone else. If those want people want to take the piss, they should dress themselves up instead of hiding behind innocent cats.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

People dress up cats all the time

Its harmless fun

If people are offended, its because they revere someone who deserves no such recognition

The cat is indifferent to any of this, so how is the cat harmed in anyway?

Its not and to me I want to see more and more people normalize this type of mocking because people should not shy away from takingt he piss out of beliefs, even more so beliefs that are based on zero evidence.

I don't think it's harmless to dress up a cat as a suicide bomber. People do that stuff, not cats. It's disrespectful and pathetic. Cats shouldn't be used as pawns in some kind of stupid dig at Muslims or anyone else. If those want people want to take the piss, they should dress themselves up instead of hiding behind innocent cats.

The cat is oblivious to any of this, so there is no harm done and yes I think we should show how daft suicide bombers are.
Cats are dressed up all the time as well as dogs and used in films and taught tricks. So if you are arguing against exploiting animals, then you stop the purchase of any animals to people as they all exploit them for a need of companionship.

I think its hilarious what they did.

What next show respect to those who idolize and respect Hitler?

It's one thing to just take a photo of a cat, and then attribute an amusing quote to it, but to dress it up as a suicide bomber is animal abuse. Cats don't generally like to wear clothes, and I doubt very much it just sat there whilst it was dressed up. Putting it on the internet for people to laugh at is totally pathetic, and using animals to bait Muslims is just horrible.

As for this claim that it was a "mistake", well that's rubbish. They googled "religious cat" for some bizarre reason, and then uploaded that one. How could they not have noticed what it was supposed to represent? They were clearly having a dig at Muslims, and they're lucky they haven't been arrested for inciting hatred.

In addition to that, we know that there are some extremist Muslims in this country, and they're not going to take too kindly to this kind of thing, and they may well retaliate, so it's pretty stupid to bait them in this manner.

Raggamuffin wrote:It's one thing to just take a photo of a cat, and then attribute an amusing quote to it, but to dress it up as a suicide bomber is animal abuse. Cats don't generally like to wear clothes, and I doubt very much it just sat there whilst it was dressed up. Putting it on the internet for people to laugh at is totally pathetic.

As for this claim that it was a "mistake", well that rubbish. They googled "religious cat" for some bizarre reason, and then uploaded that one. How could they not have noticed what it was supposed to represent? They were clearly having a dig at Muslims, and they're lucky they haven't been arrested for inciting hatred.

In addition to that, we know that there are some extremist Muslims in this country, and they're not going to take too kindly to this kind of thing, and they may well retaliate, so it's pretty stupid to bait them in this manner.

Balderdash is it animal abuse, that is just utter bullshit on every level as has the animal been harm or effected in any capacity?

No

lol So now you are saying how a cat feels and understands? Wow, are you telepathic Rags?
As to them saying it was a mistake, I think that was gutless and they should say it was meant and as like I say its hilarious to show how daft suicide bombers are that they take some idiotic belief to end their pitiful wasted lives

Inciting hatred, what nonesense, what crimes has been committed?
Please share this Rags, as I am going to have fun watching you struggle
Typical religious person over sensitive to taking the piss out of what are essentially bad things
So you are saying we should bow down to extremists, well leave the country you coward, as we should never bow down to fear or the threat of violence. When the Charlie hebdo attack happened the world should have stood united and every media should have printed the cartoons.
This is what you fail to grasp, we have to stand united that we are not going to bow down to threats because some idiots take their religion to extremes. How on earth do you think we overcame the same idiocy within Christianity?

What if a Muslim group decided to take the piss of gay people and made "jokes" about AIDS or something to promote one of their meetings? Those pink people would soon start crying and accusing them of inciting hatred wouldn't they?

Anyone using a cat in that manner should be reported to the RSPCA for animal abuse.

Raggamuffin wrote:What if a Muslim group decided to take the piss of gay people and made "jokes" about AIDS or something to promote one of their meetings? Those pink people would soon start crying and accusing them of inciting hatred wouldn't they?

Anyone using a cat in that manner should be reported to the RSPCA for animal abuse.

You can take the piss out of gay people, they take the piss out of each other themselves all the time.
Well considering Aids has nothing to do with homosexuality that would be homophobic associating it to homosexuality
Homosexuality is not a belief, Islam is a belief, do you understand the difference?
Homosexuals cannot change who they are, but Muslims can stop believing in islam

Yes please report this to the RSPCA and watch them to do this

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:What if a Muslim group decided to take the piss of gay people and made "jokes" about AIDS or something to promote one of their meetings? Those pink people would soon start crying and accusing them of inciting hatred wouldn't they?

Anyone using a cat in that manner should be reported to the RSPCA for animal abuse.

You can take the piss out of gay people, they take the piss out of each other themselves all the time.
Well considering Aids has nothing to do with homosexuality that would be homophobic associating it to homosexuality
Homosexuality is not a belief, Islam is a belief, do you understand the difference?
Homosexuals cannot change who they are, but Muslims can stop believing in islam

Yes please report this to the RSPCA and watch them to do this

That's the point - suicide bombing has nothing to do with most Muslims in this country either, but they've all been lumped together by these dickheads.

It's interesting that you find animal abuse amusing.

muchadoaboutnothing again, unless moggy was distressed of course

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


You can take the piss out of gay people, they take the piss out of each other themselves all the time.
Well considering Aids has nothing to do with homosexuality that would be homophobic associating it to homosexuality
Homosexuality is not a belief, Islam is a belief, do you understand the difference?
Homosexuals cannot change who they are, but Muslims can stop believing in islam

Yes please report this to the RSPCA and watch them to do this

That's the point - suicide bombing has nothing to do with most Muslims in this country either, but they've all been lumped together by these dickheads.

It's interesting that you find animal abuse amusing.

If it has nothing to do with Islam, then how can it be Islamophobic
By saying it is Islamophobic is placing suicide bombing as Islamic

I found it hilarious to be honest as anything that reveres a person that endorsed slavery, sex slaves, a view to marry under age girls to the extent countries allow this to happen, should have every ridicule possible of that person, to show how ridiculous it is people believe in something so abhorrent. Its like revering Hitler or Stalin.

No

If anyone idolized this idiots and people took the piss, would you have an issue? Would you have an issue if a cat was dressed up as a Kamikaze pilot? Its called harmless fun.

I mean have you ever seen the life of Brian with the crack suicide squad from the Judean People's Front?

I just don't think that using animals to mock murderous human behaviour is funny. I also don't think that animals like being dressed up in that manner. Therefore, it's animal abuse. I'm not going to change my mind, so there's no point trying to persuade me to.

Raggamuffin wrote:I just don't think that using animals to mock murderous human behaviour is funny. I also don't think that animals like being dressed up in that manner. Therefore, it's animal abuse. I'm not going to change my mind, so there's no point trying to persuade me to.

Its mocking the concept of Jihad with killing through suicide to show how daft it is.
It should be mocked in every capacity to show how stupid it is
Not saying you should change your mind, but the fact is as seen Christianity has had seven bells of piss take ripped out of it and it has moved on and got used to the piss take. The point is, if people really have true faith, why would they be offended?
Their faith and love of their belief should be all that matters, not what others think. If they do get so angry they want to commit harm to others, then there is something fundamentally wrong then with religion

Didge, would you dress up a little baby as a suicide bomber, and then take a photo and put it on the internet with the caption "Jihad baby is readies ... for my virginz" for everyone to laugh at? After all, the baby wouldn't mind being dressed up, and it wouldn't know what suicide bombing was.

Raggamuffin wrote:Didge, would you dress up a little baby as a suicide bomber, and then take a photo and put it on the internet with the caption "Jihad baby is readies ... for my virginz" for everyone to laugh at? After all, the baby wouldn't mind being dressed up, and it wouldn't know what suicide bombing was.

No, but that is human, a cat is not human and thus is indifferent and has no comprehension of how and what it is being dressed up as.

That would be child abuse

A cat is not human

There is a vast difference

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Didge, would you dress up a little baby as a suicide bomber, and then take a photo and put it on the internet with the caption "Jihad baby is readies ... for my virginz" for everyone to laugh at? After all, the baby wouldn't mind being dressed up, and it wouldn't know what suicide bombing was.

No, but that is human, a cat is not human and thus is indifferent and has no comprehension of how and what it is being dressed up as.

That would be child abuse

A cat is not human

There is a vast difference

The baby wouldn't have any comprehension of what its being dressed up as either, so there's no difference.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

No, but that is human, a cat is not human and thus is indifferent and has no comprehension of how and what it is being dressed up as.

That would be child abuse

A cat is not human

There is a vast difference

The baby wouldn't have any comprehension of what its being dressed up as either, so there's no difference.

Again the baby is a human, a cat is not human

Will a cat be able to make a suicide vest and then go out and commit Jihad?

So there is a vast difference, as you are equating cats to humans

They are not equivalent, as humans effectively have animals as slaves to their will. Domestication has denied them the ability of freedom and the ability to fend for themselves. Humans have rendered cats thus inferior to them, by their own need to satisfy a need of companionship.
You may want to think about that if you want to go on about abuse.

and...some cats love being dressed up

we had a siamese years ago that the girls over the road used to dress in dolls clothes and trundle it about in the pram...

now, my estimation of it was the cat clearly enjoyed itself.....cos it kept going over to the girls and fussing round them...and voluntarily jumped into the pram waiting to be dressed in dolls clothes....

Now, if it didnt like it, it would have avoided them like the plague....cats being what they are...

you cant, at least if you value your hide, MAKE a cat do much of anything.

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

The baby wouldn't have any comprehension of what its being dressed up as either, so there's no difference.

Again the baby is a human, a cat is not human

Will a cat be able to make a suicide vest and then go out and commit Jihad?

So there is a vast difference, as you are equating cats to humans

They are not equivalent, as humans effectively have animals as slaves to their will. Domestication has denied them the ability of freedom and the ability to fend for themselves. Humans have rendered cats thus inferior to them, by their own need to satisfy a need of companionship.
You may want to think about that if you want to go on about abuse.

nah...

DOGS have owners

CATS have servants......

A baby also wouldn't be able to make a suicide vest and go and commit Jihad.

Cats are not play things, or tools to be used to mock Muslims. If people want to mock Muslims they should do so themselves, instead of hiding behind their cat like a coward.

I'd like to know how many people on here would dress up their dog or cat as a suicide bomber and then post it on the internet.

It seems that Sink the Pink have a habit of using cats to mock religion. I do hope they never whinge about homophobia.

Raggamuffin wrote:A baby also wouldn't be able to make a suicide vest and go and commit Jihad.

Cats are not play things, or tools to be used to mock Muslims. If people want to mock Muslims they should do so themselves, instead of hiding behind their cat like a coward.

I'd like to know how many people on here would dress up their dog or cat as a suicide bomber and then post it on the internet.

Again irrelevant as there is laws which are different to animals

Its not mocking Muslims, as again are you now saying Muslims are suicide bombers?

I thought again and am told time and time again, that these people are not Muslims or followers of Islam, so which is it?

Mocking a Muslim is dressing a cat up as a Muslim in say for example a Burka and then by demonizing then in some way
Taking the piss out of a belief or extremists is not insulting Muslims

Lord Foul wrote:

Didge wrote:

Again the baby is a human, a cat is not human

Will a cat be able to make a suicide vest and then go out and commit Jihad?

So there is a vast difference, as you are equating cats to humans

They are not equivalent, as humans effectively have animals as slaves to their will. Domestication has denied them the ability of freedom and the ability to fend for themselves. Humans have rendered cats thus inferior to them, by their own need to satisfy a need of companionship.
You may want to think about that if you want to go on about abuse.

nah...

DOGS have owners

CATS have servants......

lol How very true

Well if any extremist Muslims see what's still on their Instagram page, and realise that it wasn't a mistake because this group make a habit of mocking religion, I hope this group don't start whining if they get threatened.

Raggamuffin wrote:Well if any extremist Muslims see what's still on their Instagram page, and realise that it wasn't a mistake because this group make a habit of mocking religion, I hope this group don't start whining if they get threatened.

Religion?

A belief, extremists and one very twisted individual who deserves utterly no respect.
Again what you are saying is that this group if they insulted Hitler and the Nazis and the Waffen SS, should not whinge if they are threatened by Neo Nazi's?

Really?

Look, some gay people whine about homophobia, or whine that some people take the piss out of gay people, but this group are absolutely no better. There's no need for them to mock religion in order to advertise themselves. They can just have gay parties or whatever without doing that. They're just bigots, and it's a good thing that this latest stunt is in the national news because now people will see what they're like.

They're also condoning animal abuse, so that's a double whammy.

Raggamuffin wrote:Look, some gay people whine about homophobia, or whine that some people take the piss out of gay people, but this group are absolutely no better. There's no need for them to mock religion in order to advertise themselves. They can just have gay parties or whatever without doing that. They're just bigots, and it's a good thing that this latest stunt is in the national news because now people will see what they're like.

Whine?

Again do you understand that homosexuality is something people are born as
Islam, is a belief, that has zero evidence which is taught
Again there is nothing wrong again taking the piss out of homosexuals as long you do not demonize them because they are homosexual.
Again you can take the piss out of a Muslim, as long as you are not demonizing them because they are a Muslim

Ripping this shit or of suicide bombers is not attacking Muslims
Ripping the shit out a petty warlord, that endorsed slavery, rape, polygamy, child brides, etc is not demonizing Muslims, its demonizing a historical character

Do you understand the difference?

I hope that a lot of people report their Instagram account on the grounds that it's inciting hatred, and is therefore breaking the terms and conditions.

They need to be closed down.

Raggamuffin wrote:I hope that a lot of people report their Instagram account on the grounds that it's inciting hatred, and is therefore breaking the terms and conditions.

Its not inciting hatred, as you are equating the piss take of suicide bombers an a historical character to a hate crime

That is just plain bollocks to claim

I don't mind reporting them - they're nasty bigots.

perhaps the bible should be banned for the same reason...
after all it tells its readers that homosexuals are "an abomination" etc etc ...

Lord Foul wrote:perhaps the bible  should be banned for the same reason...
after all it tells its readers that homosexuals are "an abomination"  etc etc ...

Why don't you write a letter to someone about it then?

We've seen this kind of thing with Charlie Hebdo. They knew they were baiting the wrong people, and a load of them got shot. Is it really worth it? Sink the Pink are lucky that there probably aren't a bunch of extremists in this country who would go that far.

because I dont need to...it (the bible) is the agent of its own demise, as folks see that it is utterly irrelevant to life today...

Lord Foul wrote:perhaps the bible  should be banned for the same reason...
after all it tells its readers that homosexuals are "an abomination"  etc etc ...

In reality the Quran, Torah and bible should be banned based on rags view for inciting violence against women, homosexuals, non-believers, those who leave the faith, adulterers, those children who answer back their parents etc.

Its staggering how religious people use the victim card claiming bigotry, yet their faith is based on the worst bigotry going, a religious racism, that renders all non-believers to an eternity of suffering

I'm loving how two people in this thread are condoning Islamophobia and animal abuse. It's not much of a surprise I guess ...

Lord Foul wrote:because I dont need to...it (the bible) is the agent of its own demise, as folks see that it is utterly irrelevant to life today...

Sink the Pink obviously don't think so, as evidenced by their desperate attempts on Instagram.

Raggamuffin wrote:I'm loving how two people in this thread are condoning Islamophobia and animal abuse. It's not much of a surprise I guess ...

Its neither

islamophobia is an oxymoron. You are saying its an offense to take the piss out of a religion.
Its not
The animal is not effected in any capacity at all

So you are just inventing bullshit

Raggamuffin wrote:We've seen this kind of thing with Charlie Hebdo. They knew they were baiting the wrong people, and a load of them got shot. Is it really worth it? Sink the Pink are lucky that there probably aren't a bunch of extremists in this country who would go that far.

yeah Ragga, of course we should tread on eggshells around these people...

give into em

of course that means YOU will end up in a burkah, walking 3 paces behind your husband, who will be allowed in law to beat you....

Even some people who would normally attend one of these parties are objecting to the bigotry and Islamophobia. If they believe that it was a "mistake", they should go and look at the Instagram account and then they'll see that it wasn't.

This group have really shown themselves up for the bigots they are.

since you are basing your claim of animal abuse on nothing more factual than your emotive childish mawkish soppy anthropomorphic view of animals, it is irrelevant anyway...

you watched too much Disney as a kid.....

Besides...doesnt that book you place so much store by, make it plain that man has "dominon over" the animals...

rather contradictory for you isnt it?

Raggamuffin wrote:Even some people who would normally attend one of these parties are objecting to the bigotry and Islamophobia. If they believe that it was a "mistake", they should go and look at the Instagram account and then they'll see that it wasn't.

This group have really shown themselves up for the bigots they are.

Thats because they are regressive idiots and are in fact endorsing the idea of blasphemy, which is nonsense as again Islam is just a belief that deserves no protection from ridicule, piss take and criticism

I am glad they did this, its time to take the stance opf standing up to people who think they can silence people through violence and threats

Lord Foul wrote:since you are basing your claim of animal abuse on nothing more factual than your emotive childish mawkish soppy anthropomorphic view of animals, it is irrelevant anyway...

you watched too much Disney as a kid.....

Would you dress up your dog as a suicide bomber and put a photo on the internet? If so, you don't deserve to have a dog.

I suppose you'd dress up a baby the same way and think it was a jolly joke.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:since you are basing your claim of animal abuse on nothing more factual than your emotive childish mawkish soppy anthropomorphic view of animals, it is irrelevant anyway...

you watched too much Disney as a kid.....

Would you dress up your dog as a suicide bomber and put a photo on the internet? If so, you don't deserve to have a dog.

I suppose you'd dress up a baby the same way and think it was a jolly joke.

Based again on what?

Your opinion?

Show me what law states you cannot dress up animals and that its animal abuse?

In your own time?

why?

he's been seen dressed in ear muffs, goggles and a leather jacket as a flying ace....

loved every min of it...hes like

of course he wears ear muffs (MUTT MUFFS (tm)) when we are shooting...to protect his hearing

Okay two points to address:

Firstly - free speech. If these people want to dress up something and take the piss then it's up to them. I defended Charlie Hebdo to have the right to sleek freely and publish what they wanted.

Secondly - animal abuse. I'm not sure dressing a cat up is "abuse" but I certainly wouldn't treat a pet that way, but that's personal preference.

eddie wrote:Okay two points to address:

Firstly - free speech. If these people want to dress up something and take the piss then it's up to them. I defended Charlie Hebdo to have the right to sleek freely and publish what they wanted.

Secondly - animal abuse. I'm not sure dressing a cat up is "abuse" but I certainly wouldn't treat a pet that way, but that's personal preference.

It's also up to people if they want to condemn those idiots as bigots, hypocrites, Islamophobes, morons, and animal abusers.

The people who were killed at Charlie Hebdo won't be publishing what they want now will they?