- cross-posted to:
- worldnews@lemmit.online
- cross-posted to:
- worldnews@lemmit.online
You must log in or register to comment.
Any islamic subject is a very good way to drive people attention away from other subjects. Each time the government wants to avoid to talk about a given subject they found something new to make scandals. For example, they don’t have enough teachers anymore, thousands of them are needed but the most important subject that the whole country should discuss is a few hundred people wearing abayas.
Giving these girls a chance to enjoy school life without being subjected to indoctrination every minute of their lives by their parents is a good thing.
If even some of them see past the bullshit of religion and can function as normal people it will be of benefit.
This will probably lead to them being pulled out of state school and attending a Muslim school where they will truly get 100% indoctrination every second.
Yes, because turning them away is such a good way to give them a chance to enjoy school life. You know what would have been good too? Let them in the school instead of putting them in the light like this and refusing entry for some of them.
But, I suppose we have a different view of “enjoy a school life”; my vision happens in the school, yours happens in the school without some people.
No one in France is allowed to wear religious iconography/clothing in public schools so why do you believe there should be an exemption for abayas?
Small prayers before meals is effectively religious iconography. So is muslums call to prayer. But are they prosthilitizing?
iconography ī″kə-nŏg′rə-fē noun
- Pictorial illustration of a subject.
- The collected representations illustrating a subject.
- A set of specified or traditional symbolic forms associated with the subject or theme of a stylized work of art.
An action is not iconography, though public prayer is absolutely proselytizing but how you think that relates to clothing standards is not clear.
Because it is not particularly religious clothing? It is not exclusively used by religious people, it just happens to be mainly used by one group of people. Also, please, “no one in France is allowed to wear religious iconography”. Tell me you didn’t go to school in France without telling me you didn’t go to school in France. Some religion are overlooked quite often.
I’m all for banning religious iconography from schools; but if that was the real goal (hint: it was not), do it fully, and only do it for actual religious stuff. This is about banning a sleeved dress that have little to no connection with religion except that “some people off said religion sometimes wears it”. I’m sure they sometimes wear snickers too, should we also ban them?
I think the point is that this particularly religious clothing is used to shame women of their bodies.
You know other religions used to have women cover their bodies too, but that has been left behind a lot of years ago.
I have a question for you, why dont men also cover their bodies? why is it that only women have to cover their bodies?
“That is our culture!” It is a culture based on religion, based on regressive and mysoginistic ideals.
The problem is, theres no definitive distinguishihg description of an abaya. It’s a loose dress. How do you distinguish someone who wants to be comfortable in a loose dress from a girl being oppressed by an abaya?
Is it really that hard for you to answer that?
Maybe this will help: What is more important, allowing girls to feel comfortable in a loose dress or helping girls that are being opressed by an abaya?
There are better ways to prevent oppression than controlling what people wear (which is ironically exactly what their oppressors are doing). These girls and women should feel comfortable and free to wear whatever they want, without being forced by religion or the french government. The answer to oppression and authoritarianism isn’t more oppression and authoritarianism.
You’re really just arguing to argue.
Hmm no? Please tell me how to distinguish a “regular” dress from a “religious” dress, when they have roughly the same coverage and no specific patterns. That would be helpful to enforce this new restriction without relying on the wearer’s religious belief.
Here’s a fucking clue: is a man FORCING them to wear it?
Well, a bunch of men are certainly forcing them not to wear it now. I find it interesting that your answer to men controlling women is to have different men control the same women.
Edit: Honestly, fuck people who use religion as an oppressive tool. But, I find it really frustrating that people are acting like they’re liberating women and girls by controlling what they wear. That’s not liberation. These kids should be given access to confidential in school therapy and resources to report and deal with abusive parents if we’re actually worried about them being oppressed. But that’s not really what this is about.
Additionally, banning the abaya doesn’t prevent oppression. If these girls are being forced to dress modestly and being made ashamed of their bodies, they will just be forced to dress modestly in a vaguely different way now. Acting like this will bring meaningful change to these girls lives is just theater.
No one in France is allowed to wear religious iconography/clothing in public schools
Yeah that’s fucking evil and we should sanction France for it.
lol okay buddy
A little extreme i admit, i would agree with a weaker take
Giving these girls a chance
You mean forcing them.
subjected to indoctrination
What about those who chose it of their own will because they deem it modest and don’t want to be sexualized?
Children don’t really choose many things, especially the way they dress
No sure, which is why they need a law restricting them even more.
You’re deadass arguing that teenage girls don’t choose how they dress???
Oh, like yeah most teenage girls can wear whatever they want, no parents will never ever say “where are you going dressed like that?”
Like literally whatever the standard of the parents is, they will enforce it on their teenagers in most cases, sure they can pick any clothes they want, as long as it fits the standard.
Of course they do!
Copy/pasting my answer to the other comment
Oh, like yeah most teenage girls can wear whatever they want, no parents will never ever say “where are you going dressed like that?”
Like literally whatever the standard of the parents is, they will enforce it on their teenagers in most cases, sure they can pick any clothes they want, as long as it fits the standard.
If they want to dress like this they are free to do so in Arabia. But not in France. Nobody forcing those people to live here, they chose.
They are… French…
Removed by mod
You can be Muslim (a religion), Arab (an ethnicity), and French (a nationality) all at once…
If you’re French living in France then you MUST obey the laws of France. And the law is simple - FUCK RELIGION!
Such a brave statement.
Have you? Or you are just assuming based on the stereotypes you were fed?
deleted by creator
Do the world a favour and stick your head in a blender you fucking dumbass.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
Okay, let’s look at several arguments that have been presented here in favor of this law:
- “Display of religion must be banned for a secular learning experience”: Firstly, how do you even define “display of religion”? If I say “Merry Christmas”, is it a display of religion? If I grow my hair out, is that display of religion? If I wear a steel bracelet, is that display of religion? Because the last two actions are actually associated with Sikhism. If I wear the Mormons’ holy underwear, is that display of religion? If I say “Jesus fkin Christ” when I hear about a fascist law like this, is that banned too now? Secularism is respecting all religious classifications and allowing them to coexist. Secularism is NOT forcing everyone to look and behave as if they are in the same religious classification.
- “The abaya dress isn’t even French/Respect the culture of the country that you are in:”
Individuals who say this seem to have what is known as the “conventionalist” ethical framework. This framework has maaany problems. However, even if we look at this law from the point of view of this framework, it becomes unethical. The official national motto of France is “Liberty, Equality and Fraternity”. This law seems to contradict all three of these principles.
It contradicts “liberty”, as it literally permits the government to tell its citizens what they can and cannot wear on their body. Abayas are not even inherently religious. It is like the government banning polo t-shirts because they are “Christian”.
The law contradicts “equality” as it unequally affects Muslims and Sikhs, as their religious expression involves the use of clothing more than other religions. Sure, harmful clothing must not be permitted (like the knives that Sikhs are supposed to carry according to their religion). Abayas are not harmful in any way. Hence, they do not fall into this category.
Finally, this law contradicts “fraternity”, as fraternity literally means “brotherhood” in this context. “No matter how different we are, we are still brothers with a goal to work for the people of France” is what this implies. Banning something as harmless as clothing attributed to a given religion is not a sign of brotherhood.
-
“Just have school uniforms”: Clothing is one of the most important mediums of expression for humans. All humans have their own individual identities. The goal of schools should not be to make Stormtroopers. Rather, it should be to make students better versions of themselves. Having school uniforms goes strongly against this idea. One may argue that this also goes against the idea of “liberty”.
-
“Did you know that Abayas and Hijabs are the result of an authoritarian religion?” Firstly, no. Abayas have nothing to do with religion. Sure, it is possible that a parent(s) may force their child to wear a particular type of clothing that aligns with their religious beliefs. In that case, the school can provide support to such students. However, what if a child themself wish to wear a particular type of clothing? What’s the harm in that? This argument for the ban is similar to saying “some individuals are buttfucked without their consent. Therefore, let’s ban buttfucking”.
I’m atheist and socialist. I’m sad to see some of my fellow socialists arguing for the ban as well. Atheists have and are presently being persecuted in many countries in the world. By supporting the persecution of other religious classifications, we are essentially doing exactly what is being done to us. There is no moral difference between us and the individuals persecuting us in this case.
- How do I know abays is religious dress? Hmm yeah, so much debate here, it’s really non-conclusive. We should ask some kind of Counsel about it
Ehh… Doesn’t prove this by any means. For example, a type of clothing called a “kurta” is worn by Hindus and Muslims both. In religious ceremonies in both religions, attendees usually wear it. Now, this doesn’t mean that the garment suddenly is a religious garment, does it? It just is a cultural garment that is usually worn in the Indian subcontinent.
Now, even if the abaya is a religious garment, the points that I mentioned above still apply. What if I started a new religion called “Religion of yellow clothes”? Let’s say my religious clothes are all yellow clothes. Does France ban everyone from wearing yellow clothes now because of me?
Sir, you just said kurta is being weared during religious ceremonies… It’s hard argue that it is not a religious dress…
Well if that yellow thing becomes widely acknowledged as a “religious display” then yes, it will be banned in public schools… It does sound dumb but only because you made an extravagant decision to make “yellow” a religious sign. If you claimed “let’s have a crossed bar” as religious sign, suddenly it becomes easier to imagine
Watched a video on institutions in France today. Specifically police, I had no idea how terrible it is.
Video for context: Warning incredibly sad but its important to know how terrible people are so we don’t repeat history. https://youtu.be/jUxiTdRTPMg?feature=shared
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/jUxiTdRTPMg?feature=shared
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
I’ll NEVER understand the need for so many non Muslim people to defend what is absolutely a disgusting sexist practice meant to degrade, humiliate and dehumanize women. Fuck so many of you loser fucking idiots and especially fuck you idiots saying shit like, “well what if they choose to be an object?” “What if they like being obedient to every whim of men?”
Freedom is non-negotiable.
Ima leave this here. Speak to opressed people as a peer, your not their parents.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=asjmdBOUjQI
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
Dude the only loser here is you. Itsa fuckjng dress. It’s not even like a hijab or anything it’s a fucking dress, goet over yourself you utter wank stain.
Anger issues eh?
This is BS
Let people wear what they want. If they want to wear religious clothing, let them. It’s not hurting anyone. This law, while technically applying equally to all religions is very clearly targeted at a single group that has been persecuted for this before
Giving religion safe spaces in society normalizes it. Normalizing religion does hurt people. It hurts the mind’s ability to think rationally, not to mention all the intolerance that seems to come from it.
I disagree. I’m an atheist, and we shouldn’t restrict anyone’s ability to practice their religion unless it actually harms others. This isn’t a safe space, it’s simply persecuting a single religion because the population dislikes Muslims.
Religion is not an exclusively bad thing. It has done harm, but it also does have good effects.
Well, you are wrong that religion is a good thing when people do good in spite of religion rather than because of it. If someone’s belief system is aligned with a particular religion, they can just adopt the practices of that religion without professing faith in it.
Whatever makes them less susceptible to manipulation from religious leaders is a win in my book.
Agree to disagree I guess. I think we’re better off without sky fairies, regardless of whether they’re named Zeus, Jesus, Allah, whatever. The society that I’d want to live in would discourage public practices of religion.
Another point I should have made above. As Dawkins says, normalizing religion gives the especially nutty and violent ones room to breathe. They don’t stick out so badly when their neighbor believes and practices 90% of what they do.
As you are a minority population member who supports democratically limiting the religious beliefs of members of the population, I have to ask if you’ve ever considered that such beliefs may backfire spectacularly against you?
deleted by creator
Maybe I lack imagination. What backfire should France expect with this limitation of public practice of religion?
I’m not sure where I come down on this issue, but teaching women to be ashamed of their bodies is harmful to the young women.
Absolutely. And that behaviour should be condemned. But punishing people for their choices of clothing is not the way to go. Target the harmful ideas, not people’s personal expression.
Ok but how does a school do that? You have young women being raised in a harmful faith where they are taught harmful things. The school can’t stop that. They can prohibit wearing harmful clothing in school.
I support encouraging kids to express themselves, but schools can set limits to what is appropriate and what is prohibited expression. And the abaya is the opposite of freedom to express themselves. It represents shame, conformity, and the subjucation of women, backed by a faith that tells them they are less than men.
First off, the abaya is not a burka. It’s a fairly standard clothing item. The idea that an abaya in itself is harmful is absurd.
The harm comes from limiting the freedom of self expression. And that’s what France is doing now. Most Muslim girls in the west are fairly progressive, they don’t feel that they’re being forced to wear what they wear. So what happens then when the government actually infringes on their self expression? It’s not gonna make them look kindly on the institutions that will teach them western values, they will gravitate more to the institutions that will teach them Muslim values.
If you want rid people of their conservative ideals, you do that through education. If you try to force people to conform, you’ll get blowback and people only get more radical.
An abaya is a long outer gown or robe, covering the legs to the ankles, the arms to the wrists, to be worn over clothing. It can be worn by men or women, but women are required to dress modestly and cover their skin. It’s not commonly worn in France except by muslim women conforming to the modest dress code.
Kids aren’t allowed to wear any religious adornments in French schools. No caps, crosses, or satanic tee shirts. That ban has been in place for almost 20 years, along witb burquas, niqab, and other ostentatious displays of religious expression.
I’m really glad all the smug atheists came over from reddit too
Why don’t you pray about it?
Because I’m an atheist. I just don’t think being one means I’m smarter or more civilised than religious people.
One of us! One of us!
It sucks, I beleave this was the wrong move because its a government acting as a parent to school kids, trying to hevy handedly disrupt that child’s religion. Wanna get these kids “free from their opressive religion”? Talk to them as a peer. Social movements are there to do that, even ones that work mainly in the school system.
Couldn’t they’ve picked a less extreme way of handling this situation than “we are your parents, we think you shouldnt have to dress like that so now you wont”.
It is very efficient at having people talk about it, and temporarily forget all the places missing teachers, the sad state of a lot of school buildings, the lack of recognition (and decent salary) that’s been the norm for decades at this point, and actual issues regarding kids.
The law is there to remind that no religious sign or clothe are accepted into the public system. People who disagree with it can go to the private school.
Except it’s been extended beyond religious clothing. An abaya is not specifically a religious clothing or something mandated by a religion, it is something worn in some places where people happens to be of that religion. No religious texts calls for it, where other things like burka and headscarfs where more directly linked to islam. Here, it’s a dress, that people in arabic countries wear. It’s literally fashion police.
Is it a part of the French culture ?
Does it need to be? Like if they want everyone to wear something very specific and French, then they should do uniforms. Until then, no one is required to wear something of “French culture.” Like I’m a huge fan of punk and metal. I’m 34 years old and still wear band shirts. It’s arguably not the typical culture of my country, but should that matter? Would kids be kicked out of school for that?
I have never seen a student excluded for wearing a group T-shirt in France into the public school. Secularism is a pillar of any modern society, which should not be a source of division but a link between all sensitivities and communities. Abdelali Mamoun, an imam at the Paris mosque, mentions that in Islam there is no religious dress, but that the abaya is an outfit advocated by fundamentalists.
So if the problem is people excluding others because that person practices a different religion, then the problem isn’t the person practicing the religion, it’s the fuck sticks excluding them.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a fan of religion. I’m fairly anti-theistic. Especially for the Abraham’s religion. And out of the three, especially Islam. I am also against the religion telling women how to dress for the reasons they do.
But I don’t think this should be the schools decision. I don’t think they should tell kids they can’t dress a certain way based on the fact that it’s religious. If a kid wants to wear a cross necklace or a shirt that says something about Jesus, cool. A Yamaha? That’s fine. I might not personally be for it, and think it’d weird for kids, but also I don’t think that’s for me or the school to decide.
Just as I’m against the authoritarian religion telling these girls what to wear
I’m also against an authoritarian government doing the same.
“But secularism!”
Secularism doesn’t necesarily mean keeping religion out of everyone’s life. Just out of the government and school. Teachers shouldn’t preach it. Laws shouldn’t be mandated around it. But that doesn’t mean no one gets to practice it in anyway shape or form. It just means they don’t have any say I no the system based on their religion.
And banning something because it’s also worn by fundamentalist makes it sound even dumber. I was raised Mormon. They wear a lot of things people wear on a lot of occasions. I wouldn’t say to ban those types of clothing because the Mormons wear them. That’s fucking stupid. No more long sleeve shirts? How about blouses? If a woman happens to like those, too bad apperantly. Fundamentalists also wear them, so now they’re no longer allowed.
“We are banning all religious clothing, but also all clothing worn by religious people.”
It’s not self-important or pretentious, so no, we have to concede that it isn’t part of traditional French culture.
It is, however, part of the culture of these French people.
Above all, it is an attack on secularism.
France is the country of human rights, it protects by the right of asylum any person who is the victim of persecution in his country. The School of the Republic allows any dress, as long as it is not proselytising.
This prohibition is not compatible with private life, freedom of religion, the right to education and the principle of non-discrimination. This dress is part of a logic of religious affirmation. It is compulsory for women in Qatar. There is no evidence that a student in France is forced or not to wear the abaya.
This story of the abaya illustrates a question that runs through the whole of society: the question of boundaries. It seems increasingly difficult to impose rules, to apply them, without running the risk of being accused of authoritarianism.
If someone wearing religious garb is an attack on secularism, your institutions suck and that’s where your focus should be.
This is exactly my problem with this. Regardless of your position on the issue it’s just a diversion to get us all riled up.
You mean targeting a group that is forcing clothing?
Removed by mod
Oh I see, you’re actually just a blatant racist. That explains why you expect others to give a shit about your opinions on certain jokes too I suppose.
I’m definitely a weirdo, I’ll give you that. But you’re a genuine scumbag so I’ll take weirdo all day long :) x
You know who are really the fucking worst? Racists.
Removed by mod
If you wanna split hairs to justify your hateful behaviour then go for it. Thankfully most of us will see it for what it is.
Removed by mod
Racism is not just for a person’s nationality or whatever your twisted definition is anyway, but when it comes to religion and race there is a blurring.
Judaism is a religion too, but you think anti semitic people aren’t racist?
Racism is attributing negative traits to people based on their perceived belonging to cultural, biological, religious, national origin, and to allow this to legitimate their subordination.
You sub human stain you :) x
Removed by mod
Set against the 12 million school boys and girls who started term on Monday, the government believes the figures show that its ban has been broadly accepted.
Lol the target was like 300 girls tp start with. What a pitiful way to call this a win.
I’m sorry… WHAT?!
France banned basically all religious symbols in public schools. This includes crosses or the Jewish kippah. It’s now expanded to include the abaya dresses. Veils and headscarves were already banned.
I think it’s stupid since the dress isn’t necessarily religious. It’s just commonly worn by Muslims. Might as well ban white buttoning down shirts at this point because that’s what some christians wear, especially to church.
I’m curious as to how they even define and abaya. Like… Other than being a loose fitting dress made of a square piece of cloth, theres not much to define it. Dresses that fit the description are also worn by “westerners.”
Any dress that is too long and wide.
Nah, covering your head at all times is explicitly a religious thing.
That’s the thing, an abaya doesn’t cover your head. There might be some designs that do but in general it’s just a maxi-dress with long sleeves. So that’s why I think this is stupid. I can understand banning wearing it with an Hijab or other types of headscarves. But as it stand they are sending children home because their dress is too long.
America: get sent home if your skirt is too short
France: get sent home if your dress is too long
One of them is a misogynstic state which criminalises abortions in parts of the country, another state is activelly fighting misogyny.
Except that this is supposedly don’t because it’s seen as a religious thing. Don’t get me wrong, I’m against Islamic people forcing women to wear certain things. It is oppressive. But that’s not what this is. They are seeing it as a religious piece of clothing, and banning it for being a religious piece of clothing. And it’s not even strictly a religious piece of clothing.
It’s also just the dress. We aren’t talking about any sort of head or face covering. But the dress.
There’s a few layers to this, but none of it is “France is fighting against Islamic misogyny”
Please stop white-washing misogynsts!
Well, if you have read the article, you should have noticed the girls are also covering their heads
Where in the article is it mentioning that they covered their head? Do you mean the picture? They aren’t even showacsing an abaya in the picture. Some of the girls are wearing sweaters and long sleeved shirts. And the head is covered by a headscarf. Yes, it will be very difficult to find any depiction of people wearing an abaya without a headscarf because it’s mostly worn by muslims and they will cover their head with an additional headscarf. Just as it will be very rare to find any clothing displayed by muslim women without them covering their head.
At the end of August, the education minister announced that pupils would be banned from wearing the loose-fitting full-length robes
That is how they defined the abaya. A loose-fitting full-length robe. There is no mentioning of covering the head. The abaya is no more a religious clothing than any “church clothes” are. It’s like black ties that are worn at funerals, like white button down shirts worn by certain missionaries. These items see use outside of their religious areas and so to abayas. They are worn to many occasions and not explictly religious.
You are also assuming they are banning Abayas, are you not? They never explicitly said it, nor its mentioned in the article.
No I am not assuming it literally says so. They banned the Abaya starting this year. The headscarf ban and stricter enforcing of religious symbols was back in 2004.
The French education minister has said that nearly 300 pupils arrived at school on Monday wearing the abaya, the long Muslim robe which was banned in schools last week.
Yes, it is very hard to differentiate between cultural and religious clothings in the Arabic world. And that’s why banning the hardscarf while controversial is still supported by most. But things are starting to get ridiculous and is closer to “banning what is different”.
the dress isn’t necessarily religious
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abaya
essentially a robe-like dress, worn by some women in parts of the Muslim world
It is common that the abaya is worn on special occasions, such as Mosque visits, Islamic Holiday celebrations for Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha and also during the Islamic Holy month of Ramadan
I also wear a kippa on my head and a cross around my meck. But it’s not necessarily religious. I just like the design. /s
France is a secular country. It’s probably hard to understand for you free people of freedomland, but ALL signs of religion are banned from public institutions.
Yes but lots of abayas are cultural and non religious like the Jordanian thobe https://www.albawaba.com/editors-choice/jordanian-thobe-evolution-cultural-significance-1519939
Funny how no one cared about teachers having a cross around their neck when I was in school. I guess it wasn’t for religious reasons, right?
But they do care now, all religious items are banned.
So let’s ban underwear and shoes because those are also worn in the Muslim world. And anyone who is wearing a baseball cap or hat isn’t allowed to take it off because taking off a hat inside has christian influence.
The abaya is just like a suit or a dress worn by people to church. And neither are banned in public schools. If a french girls wears an abaya few would even know it’s an abaya. And ton of western style maxi-dresses are similar in style to an abaya.
It is a an item of clothing that is used to cover the women body because of religious reasons.
One one hand, it seems a little extreme, on the other hand, if they have a religious exemption to a school uniform and they are blocking religious items/clothing at school then it kinda makes sense.
(Do the French do school uniforms?)
French schools in France/French territories don’t have uniforms. But they ban any form of group/gang/religious symbols.
That included my baseball hat with a team logo on it. We actually had uniforms but that was due to the local country imposing it on the French school. France has set up French public schools all around the World.
I’m not saying I fully agree with their approach but they are consistent in their policy and not targeting any single religion/group.
Well that’s a 50/50 on the “not targeting any single religion/group” since they accept crosses that are not too big, meaning necklaces and earrings (at least in my experience). And since christian people tend not to wear specific attire except for cross-shaped jewelry, it’s like a whole exception just for them. I also think that the abaya thing is a sign that they really fight against Muslims, since it is more cultural than religious,. But yeah, you’re kinda right in the sens that they just harass every other religions than cristians in general, and would probably ban a christian with a huge cross on a shirt too.
It’s probably hard to enforce such rules when teachers have their own biases. Ideally it should be all or nothing.
My experience was they were very secular. I had a small crucifix necklace (mother tried and failed to indoctrinate me) that I wore under my t-shirt so it wasn’t visible. Some sad Christian fundamental kid tried bringing his religious books during class break and was laughed into not trying again with his very hard sell of no-wank/no-sex until marriage religion.
yes, i agree with, my experience was close to yours. I think the difference here is people are secular in general while system/dirigeants are less clear about it, and tend to fight harder when it’s a non-christian religion, though it was not the case when Christian religion was still in control
since they accept crosses that are not too big, meaning necklaces and earrings (at least in my experience).
If thats the case, then we should fight for them to be banned. It is a good thing that education is separated from religion.
And since christian people tend not to wear specific attire except for cross-shaped jewelry, it’s like a whole exception just for them.
But they used to, even now the highest priests all cover themselves, they just dont force it to other people like muslims. Thats a good thing. A religion shouldnt force people to be dressed a certain way. A person can be religious without having to cover all but their face. And exactly this ban is helping with that.
Except muslims want to force women to dress in a certain way.
Well it is not that simple. I agree on the point education and religion should be separated, but just on what children learn, not how they just dress.
But i maintain that catholic common folks do not have any specific attire. In christian cultures, people just wore basic attire, like long skirts or dress for women. But it was not specifically religious, it just was a blend of habits, morals and fashion, so cultural things. At some point, religious people, who tend to be conservative on those subjects, did advocate those clothes because they matched some vague ideal of decency of their religion. That’s why now conservative catholics still ask their daugther to were those clothes. And it is exactly the same thing with the abaya : a cultural fact only slightly mixed with religion, and in both case people who tend to wear just long dress to cover their body. It is not proselytism, it’s just cultural .
On a second note, i do not understand how anyone could support such a ban and still think they are doing a favor to these people. Do you think it will really help indoctrinated people to ban them from school and universities ? I mean, either
- the person wear it by choice, and then there’s no problem
- the person was told to, and then they should be welcomed in schools and universities more than other, to make them see other options exist.
It’s also very weird that religion should not tell people how to dress, but a state can. It’s weird that people say “you can be religious and do whatever you like”, but at the same time they consider that “you cannot be democratic/republican and do whatever you like, there are rules to follow”.
Muslims do not want to force women to dress in a certain way, it’s beyond religion, it’s included in morals, cultures. Some muslims do not give a fuck the way women dress. Some atheist do force the women in their lives to dress in specific ways (and this includes people of the conservative tradition). This is not something you change by hating on a religion which is just a medium for this, and which is already discriminated a lot, this is something you change by including people in a free society and help them make a real choice about it. It’s absurd to ban people of a free society because they’re not free.
Btw it’s a common thing in france to want to control how kids dress. Religious, culturals outfits are banned, but also “indecent” clothes like crop-top. I even remember talks about forcing girls to wear bras, so their nipples are not visible (though i did not remember any political consequence for the bra part, but the crop top was explicitly banned). In some schools, coming disguised on specific days could be banned, and punished. I experienced that, along with critics against outfits like torn pants. It’s just people disliking some clothes, but some of those people become headmaster, and they ban what they dont like. And some of them become minister, and they ban what they dont like in every schools. “Secularism” and “Republican values” are always mentionned then, like they are absolute truth that enable you to prohibit things and still think you’re fighting for liberty.
But yeah sure. Religion bad. Muslim bad. What muslim wear bad. Ban bad. When done, only good.
The existence of a philosophy that makes women willingly want to cover themselves for men to think that they are pure is wrong. It is sexist and retrograde thinking.
You can say a thousand things and decorate it with whatever you want, it is still going to be wrong.
people to ban them from school and universities
The abaya ban It’s only in schools. Not in universities.
Muslims do not want to force women to dress in a certain way, it’s beyond religion,
You are a muslim shill. Look at the egypt!
-
How it started https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZIqdrFeFBk
-
How is it going: https://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/28/weekinreview/28slackman.html
Today the debate is less over whether women should adopt Islamic dress — as many as 90 percent of women cover at least their head
Or this: https://www.algemeiner.com/2022/07/28/an-egyptian-womans-brutal-killing-sparks-renewed-hijab-debate/
Instead, they blamed the victim, arguing that Ashraf was killed because she didn’t wear a hijab.
The bold is mine. It’s for you to not miss it!
-
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Joke is on them, my religion forces kids to wear jeans!
Good.
Yeah, I’m not concerned by this at all TBH. I would like to see more countries fully ban them outright.
Classy
Very good. If you want to live in a European society, finally integrate and don’t separate from it actively. We don’t need a divided society with unrest. Look at Sweden rn.
It’s a loose dress. How is a generic loose dress preventing people from integrating? My american grandma has dresses like this.
It’s a loose dress. How is a generic loose dress preventing people from integrating? My american grandma has dresses like this
I think its the headscarf thingy most people have a problem with. Nobody cares about the dress part. But you likely knew that already.
I dont care either way about the subject at hand (Not Canadian) but it would be nice if we could leave these bad faith arguments on Reddit so nobody wastes their time arguing about nonsense if its a dress or a burka.
They already banned the head scarf years ago. The abaya is just a dress. Please don’t accuse me of bad faith arguments without even googling what an abaya is.
Very good
Before this made the news, barely anyone knew what it was. The most prominent people in favor of this could not distinguish an actual fashion dress from an abaya on a picture. Stop pretending it is to help integration; it’s just harassing a very, very small minority of people, because it’s easier than address issues.
Consider that the kids that got trouble there were actually going to a public school, and were turned away. Please tell me how that helps them integrate.
Sweden is cool. It integrates the immigrants and does not exclude them for generations like France.
What kind of exclusion for generations are you talking about ?
Immigration per country in EU : France : 7.4 millions Sweden : 1.1 millions
Yeah tell us more about Sweden?
Add another racist loser to the ban pile
Removed by mod
Your comment is literally insulting people. Not directly to them, but you’re still talking shit about people.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
