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.
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?
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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…
Then go and ask those people. They will call themselves Muslim/Arab, even if they are born in France and have french paper.
Have you? Or you are just assuming based on the stereotypes you were fed?
Do the world a favour and stick your head in a blender you fucking dumbass.
Removed by mod
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
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?
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.
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.
Joke is on them, my religion forces kids to wear jeans!
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
Good.
Classy
Yeah, I’m not concerned by this at all TBH. I would like to see more countries fully ban them outright.
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.
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
Add another racist loser to the ban pile
We have the big winner in life here, who cannot even lead a discussion without insulting people.
Your comment is literally insulting people. Not directly to them, but you’re still talking shit about people.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
