Schools in France send dozens of Muslim girls home for wearing abayas

Schoolgirls who refused to change out of the loose-fitting robes have been sent home with a letter to parents on secularism.


French public schools have sent dozens of girls home for refusing to remove their abayas – long, loose-fitting robes worn by some Muslim women and girls – on the first day of the school year, according to Education Minister Gabriel Attal.

Defying a ban on the garment seen as a religious symbol, nearly 300 girls showed up on Monday morning wearing abayas, Attal told the BFM broadcaster on Tuesday.

Most agreed to change out of the robe, but 67 refused and were sent home, he said.

The government announced last month it was banning the abaya in schools, saying it broke the rules on secularism in education that have already seen headscarves forbidden on the grounds they constitute a display of religious affiliation.

The move gladdened the political right but the hard left argued it represented an affront to civil liberties.

The 34-year-old minister said the girls refused entry on Monday were given a letter addressed to their families saying that “secularism is not a constraint, it is a liberty”.

If they showed up at school again wearing the gown there would be a “new dialogue”.

He added that he was in favour of trialling school uniforms or a dress code amid the debate over the ban.

Uniforms have not been obligatory in French schools since 1968 but have regularly come back on the political agenda, often pushed by conservative and far-right politicians.

Attal said he would provide a timetable later this year for carrying out a trial run of uniforms with any schools that agree to participate.

“I don’t think that the school uniform is a miracle solution that solves all problems related to harassment, social inequalities or secularism,” he said.

But he added: “We must go through experiments, try things out” in order to promote debate, he said.


‘Worst consequences’

Al Jazeera’s Natacha Butler, reporting from Paris before the ban came into force said Attal deemed the abaya a religious symbol which violates French secularism.

“Since 2004, in France, religious signs and symbols have been banned in schools, including headscarves, kippas and crosses,” she said.

“Gabriel Attal, the education minister, says that no one should walk into a classroom wearing something which could suggest what their religion is.”

On Monday, President Emmanuel Macron defended the controversial measure, saying there was a “minority” in France who “hijack a religion and challenge the republic and secularism”.

He said it leads to the “worst consequences” such as the murder three years ago of teacher Samuel Paty for showing Prophet Muhammad caricatures during a civics education class.

“We cannot act as if the terrorist attack, the murder of Samuel Paty, had not happened,” he said in an interview with the YouTube channel, HugoDecrypte.

An association representing Muslims has filed a motion with the State Council, France’s highest court for complaints against state authorities, for an injunction against the ban on the abaya and the qamis, its equivalent dress for men.

The Action for the Rights of Muslims (ADM) motion is to be examined later on Tuesday.


WuTang,

By the way, Gabriel Attal is jew … knowing the love there’s between jews and muslims, how d’you say… hem.

MEtrINeS,

Good! The rules are for everybody. Freedom from religion!

GarbageShoot,

The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.

MEtrINeS,

Oh, we are doing quotes now? I prefer this one from an ex-muslim:

My school and my family became increasingly radicalised in the 2000s - 2010s and while I used to wear the headscarf, I never used to wear the abaya. At home, I was being reprimanded for wearing non-loose fitting clothes. At school, I was told by a Muslim girl to start wearing more modest clothes and think about the Hereafter. Everywhere in the Muslim community at my college, there was ´Islam’. There was this pressure to act like a pious Muslim. The Islamic society segregated girls and boys. One Friday sermon included the reminder for « sisters to stop distracting the brothers »! I saw a Muslim girl put on the headscarf. She came to the prayer room and eventually she started wearing the scarf. I think there was another girl I knew too who did the same.

Eventually, I started wearing the abaya alongside my headscarf. This lasted a week because I could not handle it anymore.

It is therefore not true to say that a Muslim woman wearing an abaya is cultural and about her freedom. What France is seeing is a radicalisation of Muslim youth. Girls coming to school in ´modest’ Islamic clothing will actively encourage other more moderate Muslim girls to do the same. Just like it happened to me.

GarbageShoot,

Typical NuAtheist reactionary bullshit. Yes, mistreating someone and pressuring them to wear this or that is bad, but that includes using the law to force people who do themselves prefer to wear an abaya or whatever else to not do so. Insofar as we can even call this a legitimate issue, it is one with far greater complexity than can be solved with sledgehammer legislation, even if some people do benefit, because many do not.

The sermon bit reminded me of Deen Squad.

MEtrINeS, (edited )

Typical reply from an islamist that never left the muslim country where he lives. Where were you crying when Turkey had the same law?

Abayas and qamis are religious garments. However only women were the abayas. Why don’t the men wear the qamis? What a strange thing: In a mysogynist religion the woman are so religious that wear religious garments! Lol.

it is one with far greater complexity than can be solved with sledgehammer legislation

Yes it’s better to not do anything. Because it might hurt the feelings of muslims…

even if some people do benefit, because many do not.

Even if 1 person benefits with the law then the law is worth it. Or do you think that the law needs to benefit everybody? The law needs to protect the most vunerable. In this case the muslim women.

GarbageShoot,

Typical reply from an islamist that never left the muslim country where he lives.

I’m an American atheist and you’re a chauvinist troglodyte

Even if 1 person benefits with the law then the law is worth it. Or do you think that the law needs to benefit everybody? The law needs to protect the most vunerable. In this case the muslim women.

If all it did was marginally help people, that would be good. But it doesn’t just do that, it also hurts people, and that’s the only reason people here are arguing against it (we don’t have “Haram Police” here decrying infidels). It is punishing children for adhering to a clearly mostly benign cultural practice. Yeah, we can criticize it, but that’s different from indiscriminately outlawing it or framing every single girl wearing a baggy dress as a victim of child abuse, and this all fits within a larger framework of plainly anti-Muslim policy forcing people to either assimilate or have no place in public life.

MEtrINeS, (edited )

I’m an American atheist and you’re a chauvinist troglodyte

ahahahaha.

framing every single girl wearing a baggy dress

You definitely don’t know what’s an abaya, and it’s purpose. But it’s ok, you are an american. I don’t expect much. They can dress baggy dresses. They can dress baggy pants and sweat-shirts. Do you know what they can’t wear? religious attire.

it is punishing children for adhering to a clearly mostly benign cultural practice

Nice choice of words. using “Adhering” to white wash that they are forced to use it, Otherwise how do you explain that that only women wears abayas and the boys don’t wear qamis? Do you think that women are more religious than men?

this all fits within a larger framework of plainly anti-Muslim policy forcing people to either assimilate or have no place in public life.

The law is the same for everybody. Jewish people, can’t wear kippah, shtreimel and tallits. Go cry a river. And btw, they should assimilate. Not assimilating means living in ghettos, something that you as american should know about it (since there are a lot of them in US).

lunicoDee,

TLDR?

usernamesaredifficul,

the french won’t let muslim children wear their religious dress in school

Aagje_D_Vogel,

Any children, to be fair. It’s not limited to Muslim attire.

usernamesaredifficul,

yes they are also persecuting sikhs, and the branches of Judaism that mandate wearing yarmulkes etc

Aagje_D_Vogel,

And those dastardly Christians.

usernamesaredifficul,

well except for the fact that Christianity doesn’t have an item of clothing it’s members are expected to wear and thus such a rule doesn’t target Christianity equally

axont,

That depends, but it’s probably irrelevant in France. Some churches expect women to wear head coverings, like in the eastern Orthodox church. Mennonite women wear bonnets. Some very fundamentalist churches ban wearing mixed fabrics.

There are also mormons, who wear the “temple garment” underwear

usernamesaredifficul,

ok that’s fair but christianity as a movement doesn’t have the recognisable item all members are expected to wear and so the rule doesn’t apply to them as much. French catholicism specifically is not affected by such a law

Also France discriminating against the way protestants and other non catholic christians dress would be bad as well.

GarbageShoot,

Some very fundamentalist churches ban wearing mixed fabrics.

It’d be funny if some school uniform used mixed fabrics and there was a fundie Christian outcry over it.

Armen12,

I don’t want religion in schools, outside that, you’re still free to practice what you want, but keep religion out of education. France got this one right

axont,

An abaya isn’t religious, they’re just worn in places that are usually Muslim and often worn by Muslims. This is racist discrimination.

usernamesaredifficul,

even if it was religious (which it partially is) muslims have a right to practice their faith. Keep religion out of education is a slogan that means don’t let religious groups control the content of educational content but has been coopted in this thread to mean “don’t allow children the right to practice their parents faith”

ThePenitentOne, (edited )

I agree with the first point, and I think if they want to promote secularism (which is good) they should go about it by educating people in philosophy and logical reasoning as an additional class. Although, I still feel saying ‘practice their parents’ faith’ is problematic. I don’t think any kid should be taught that one religion is true since they can’t really logically think or reason and are very emotionally immature, at least before being a teenager. The indoctrination of young children is very damaging and much harder to get out of. This goes for any ideology, but religion especially since belief is based only on faith. They can wear what they want ofc, but there is also a problem with acting like religion can’t be criticised. However, here the way they went about it is just unproductive.

usernamesaredifficul,

if they want to promote secularism (which is good)

you mean athiesm. Secularism is when you don’t take any stance about what people should believe.

and you can’t just have parents not involve their children in their religious belief even athiest parents involve their children in their beliefs on religion

MEtrINeS, (edited )

Bullshit. Abaya is a religious garment. The equivalent for men is the qamis, however you don’t see muslim boys using it.

nednobbins,

Do they ban other forms of religious expression? Crosses/crucifixes? Yarmulke/kippah?
Or is it just Islamic symbols?

Fraylor,

From what I’ve read they ban all of it. Granted I don’t live there nor do I see it in practice, but they’ve mentioned it in a few articles.

nednobbins,

I read up on it a bit more.

en.wikipedia.org/…/French_law_on_secularity_and_c…

It seems like regulations on religious attire are selectively applied. Small crosses and stars of David, some variations of Sikh turbans, Fatima’s hands are acceptable and the final decision is left up to school headmasters.

It also sounds like the legislators who created it specifically intended to target Muslim headdress.

It’s one thing to keep religion out of education. It seems that they’re disproportionately concerned about suprsesssing Islam in their schools.

Fraylor,

Ah, thanks for the link. Yes, they’re definitely in the wrong if there’s even an iota of selective enforcement.

nednobbins,

I want to be very careful around judging the intentions of people who live 5000 miles away and speak a language I don’t understand. There’s a lot of room to misunderstand people’s intentions.

But from what I can see, it’s looking like there’s an intentional bias.

electrogamerman,

so let girls bring small muslim symbol in their necklaces? that seems fair to me.

nednobbins,

I could see that as fair as long as everyone agrees that a small symbol on their neck is an appropriate expression of their religion.

If I were to think of a Muslim country that officially embraces secularism in government what would that look like? What if they said that everyone can wear a discreet head covering. Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Daoists, Jains, etc are also allowed to wear small headscarves appropriate to their religion.

The problem is that headscarves just aren’t generally meaningful to those other religions.

I’m even more suspicious of the intent of the French law since they apparently went out of their way to create an exemption for non-Muslim head scarves. The law seems to be constructed and interpreted as, “If we can tell that its related to Islam, it’s out.” The case where a girl was sent home for wearing a skirt that was too long really just looks like they want to make Muslims (and Muslim girls, in particular) more uncomfortable.

electrogamerman,

The difference here is that headscarves is a symbol of opression, you have to understand that.

nednobbins,

The thing with symbols is that they don’t have have objective meanings. Their meanings are entirely a matter of interpretation and they’re incredibly fluid.

Necklaces can also be symbols of oppression. Chains, in general are far more commonly used as symbols of oppression than any article of clothing. There’s the obvious association with collars that are used to control slaves and livestock. There is also slavery symbolism associated with ankle and wrist bracelets, largely due to their similarity to shackles.

The ultimate test is what the individual thinks of it. If we’re forbidding a girl from wearing some article of clothing that she wants to wear, we’re the oppressors. If we’re truly worried about some situation where parents are forcing their children to wear some clothing a more appropriate response would be to either ban all religious clothing or to adopt a policy of clothing choice being a protected privacy matter and barring schools from discussing a student’s clothing choices with their parents.

From the evidence I’ve seen, this policy is less about protecting the rights of girls and more about using that as a rationalization to marginalize Muslims.

electrogamerman, (edited )

First of all, your comparison of a small necklace with a slave chain, completely out of place.

Second, there is no country/religion forcing people, specifically forcing women to wear necklaces. You dont hear in the news “women gets sentenced to death for not wanting to wear a necklace”. You know what does happen? “Women gets sentenced to death for not wanting to cover her hair”.

“The policy is used to tarjet one group”. It applies to everyone. If other people were forcing clothing into their girls, they would also need to change that. Except only muslisms are forcing clothing into girls.

Gsus4, (edited )
@Gsus4@feddit.nl avatar

After looking at what an abaya is and understanding some of the overt and covert reasons for doing this and the reaction, the cool solution would be if abayas (they’re really just a loose dress) started to be marketed at everyone, so that anyone could wear them and end this stupid debacle. What do people wear in the west if they don’t want people to look at their “curves” anyway? Huge market gap, right there. Or maybe instead of abayas they’ll start wearing long trench coats to school, lol.

PS: meanwhile, in SA: reuters.com/…/us-saudi-women-socialmedia-idUSKCN1…

MEtrINeS,

started to be marketed at everyone

The equivalent for men is the qamis, however you don’t see them using it. Just this tells everything you need to know about the abaya.

Armen12,

“Women in Saudi Arabia have for decades been required to wear the abaya - a loose, all-covering robe - in public, a dress code strictly enforced by police.”

And there are still people in here defending this lol

Flyswat,

People are oppressed in that part of the world, let’s oppress the ones in our country with the opposite this way they are more free!

neshura,

From personal experience with people whose parents are Muslim: a lot of those kids aren’t wearing this out of their own free will.

I understand how this is controversial but I think it is absolutely necessary. Parents have no right to force their religion on their kids and unless there are laws against it those kids will not have any second of time free from that oppression. And before you claim hypocrisy: The same goes for Christianity and any of its bullshit like crosses everywhere.

electrogamerman,

I mean, im pretty sure a women not wearing an Abaya in Saudi Arabia would have it waaaaaaaaaaay worse than a girl not being able to wear it in school. That doesnt seem like the opposite to me

Armen12,

Yes, telling people not to bring religion into public education is so oppressive right?

Give me a break, this is the 21st century, not the 15th century

Venus,

Sincere question. Obviously France is racist as fuck and instituting (or enforcing, whichever) policies in a racist way. But I’m seeing a lot of people saying that these outfits being banned are not actually religious at all, and are only culturally popular within the cultures of the people being targeted. If that’s the case, why are they still coming to school wearing them? If I were a kid and the government suddenly decided I’m not allowed to wear blue jeans to school, I’d wear khaki pants and then meet up with my friends and say “wtf is the deal with this new policy”

If they’re just clothes and not religious garb, why are kids still wearing them to schools which don’t allow them?

jeena,
@jeena@jemmy.jeena.net avatar

I guess the whole point is that they are forced by their fathers and brothers to do so.

Farman,

Some people want to dress modestly. Would you feel uncomfrtable if they told you to strip at school?

Gsus4,
@Gsus4@feddit.nl avatar

What does modestly mean to you?

Flyswat,

It means not showing skin or curves

Gsus4, (edited )
@Gsus4@feddit.nl avatar

That’s just a modern abusive interpretation of the Koran in some societies anyway. E.g. abdullahyahya.com/…/proof-muslim-women-dont-have-…

Of course once your family has inculcated in you that body privacy is a duty, you may begin to see it as your right in France where institutions are secular, which creates these integration problems.

If there is a pair of kids in a school who doesn’t want to wear what their parents force on them, to me that is still worth protecting at the expense of Muslim conservative students’ right to wear a traditional dress.

Flyswat, (edited )

Please, if you want to read on religious matters read from accredited scholars who know what they are doing. This is ridiculous to link a blog post from a web developer… The guy even is a Hadith (transmitted sayings and actions of the prophet, peace be upon him) rejector, making him a non-muslim.

Qur’anists - people who only consider Qur’an as the only source of religious law- are not considered Sunni (people following the Sunna, the teachings of the prophet transcribed in Hadith) who are the majority Muslims. Qur’anists are not taken seriously because they contradict their principle by not following the verses in the Qur’an ordering them to obey the Prophet because whatever he tells or does is part of divine revelation.

If you have a question pertaining to a health issue, you go to the doctor, not the baker.

The conclusions he draws are ludicrous too. The state not mandating it in a period of time has absolutely nothing to do with what the religion mandates. States and laws change, religion does not (except through prophets of God).

To use his last analogy: one needs to be qualified to write about a matter; him writing a blog post about it does not literally require that he is qualified.

Edit: I mean no disrespect to you, sorry if I came as rude. I just wanted to stress that there are many things you can find on the internet and one needs to get his information from reputable sources especially regarding such sensitive matters.

DarthVader,

Is an Abaya the only way to accomplish this?

Flyswat,

No it is not.

But this law is now being misused to harass kids who are known to be Muslim although they comply with it by wearing something else.

For the non-frog eaters, the linked video is from a right-wing French TV station where they are asking a girl (left) who was denied entrance to her school because of her clothes. This is not a abaya she is wearing and she says other muslim and non-muslim girls wearing the same outfit got no problem going in that same morning. She is known to wear a hijab (which she removes upon being to school as required by the other law).

I will not comment on the interviewers trying to find fault in her or their ignorance.

Venus,

That seems like a very disingenuous framing. Khaki pants are no more or less modest than jeans. A rule saying “don’t wear this specific article of clothing” is not a rule against dressing modestly, and I’m certain that there are plenty of modestly dressed children of all sorts of cultures at all these schools.

ThereRisesARedStar,

I think you just missed their point, which was about the original clothing being connected to modesty culturally.

Venus,

I just don’t know if I believe that their culture has exactly one garment considered modest.

ThereRisesARedStar,

Do you think France would be cool with them wearing other garments considered modest by their culture?

Venus,

I haven’t yet seen evidence they wouldn’t.

Farman, (edited )

Modesty is a cultural framework. If our current society had evolved fron the cultural norms of the yanommame what we consider an aceptable amount of clothes to wear would be much less. In the culture of cartoon bears it is very unusual to wear pants. In the culture of these girls wearing an abaya or similar clothing is the aceptable standard.

Imagine you get transported to an alterative reality were the french goverment banned pants as to make you conform to cartoon bear culture. You would likley be uncomfrtable.

Venus,

Are you telling me that they have one garment considered modest and all other clothes on earth are immodest?

Edit: also I understand your point but personally I’d fit in just fine in cartoon bear culture, I don’t need pants

Dolores,
@Dolores@hexbear.net avatar

meet up with my friends and say “wtf is the deal with this new policy”

i’d wear blue jeans and say fuck these assholes, and get to go home for a day off sicko-power

newerAccountWhoDis,

Exactly. Can’t expect kids not to rebel against arbitrary chicanery

redcalcium,

It’s a protest. I doubt that their parents would force them to wear the banned clothes knowing full well the kid will be sent back home.

nestEggParrot,

Why is it not religious and only cultural? It is more commonly worn by conservative muslims who adhere to strict interpretations of the sacred texts they follow. Based on that it is infact religious. Although I doubt it is a religious symbol like the article mentions.

The wearer of it exists across the globe and not limited to any distinct culture or even region. Further prohibiting a cultural dress is even more weird than the case for religious wears.

Venus,

Why is it not religious and only cultural?

I don’t know, that’s literally my question.

nestEggParrot,

Marking it as ‘question’ but then making definitive statements based on interactions with ‘others’ is asking a question now ?

To answer your unasked question, depends on how you seperate religion from culture. Its often difficult to do so in many places of the world where religion is widespread among the soceity.

The female clothing requirements are from strict interpretations in islam that is followed to varying degrees mostly based on how religious a person/family is. I’ve had teachers wear full covering on their way to and from school but remove them once inside. There were college classmates who wore head covering everywhere and others almost never in social circles. The behavior varies widely among any given culture.

Etterra,

How much of human stupidity can be boiled down to “I don’t like you wearing a silly hat,” I wonder.

phoenixz,

It’s not about that, it’s about oppressive religions being forced to be slightly less oppressive, at least in France. Good for them

IveGotRedOnMe,

Oh man the irony of this statement. Jesus Christ.

phoenixz,

I’ll assume you mean this is oppressive against Islam? It’s not, it’s a blanked no-religuous clothing rule and that is perfect.

That this hits islam rather hard is because that religion IS oppressive, especially to women. Girls should be free to dress the way they like and not be told they’re garbage if someone can see their hair or body shape

electrogamerman,

More ironic than opressive religions asking for tolerance and respect?

30mag,

The 34-year-old minister said the girls refused entry on Monday were given a letter addressed to their families saying that “secularism is not a constraint, it is a liberty”.

Anyone picking up “Freedom is slavery” vibes, or is it just my paranoia?

Gsus4, (edited )
@Gsus4@feddit.nl avatar

That’s because every liberty is somebody else’s constraint. en.wikipedia.org/…/Freedom_of_religion_in_France

The French concept of religious freedom did not grow out of an existing pluralism of religions but has its roots in a history with Roman Catholicism as the single official religion and including centuries of persecution of people not endorsing it, or straying from the most official line, from the Cathars to the Huguenots and the Jansenists – this lasted until the French Revolution.

French insistence on the lack of religion in all things public (laïcité or secularism) is a notable feature in the French ideal of citizenship. This concept of secularism, also plays a role in ongoing discussions about the wearing of scarves by Muslim women in public schools. In 2004, the French Parliament passed a law prohibiting the wearing of ostentatious religious garb in public primary and secondary schools; motivations included the tradition of keeping religious and political debates and proselytism out of such schools, as well as the preservation of the freedom of Muslim female students forced to wear certain costumes out of peer pressure.

Nerorero,
@Nerorero@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

Freedom to and freedom from.

France just values the freedom from higher than the freedom to. That’s usually a more social approach

30mag,

That’s because every liberty is somebody else’s constraint.

It seems that I am not just being paranoid.

Gsus4,
@Gsus4@feddit.nl avatar

yep, your slavery increases somebody else’s freedom from work, but they are not the same thing, that “is” is doing some heavy lifting there.

The point by George Orwell is that when you accept propaganda soundbites unthinkingly, you become somebody’s tool.

uralsolo,

deleted_by_moderator

  • Loading...
  • forcequit,
    Flyswat,
    ScrewdriverFactoryFactoryProvider,

    I really can’t stress enough that schools enforcing dress codes isn’t related to counter-terrorism just because the girls were Muslim

    Assian_Candor, (edited )
    @Assian_Candor@hexbear.net avatar

    What

    Edit: these are right wing talking points coming from a hexbear user cool cool rust-darkness

    Gsus4,
    @Gsus4@feddit.nl avatar

    “Religion is the opium of the people.” (Karl Marx, you might have heard of him)

    Armen12,

    These are not right-wing talking points, right-wingers love Islam because it’s a religion that oppresses women and openly attacks LGBT folks

    Assian_Candor,
    @Assian_Candor@hexbear.net avatar

    Yes famously pro-immigrant, especially Muslim immigrant, right wing political parties

    Adkml,

    Web be fucked if they ever figure out that Islam is a right wing ideology but absolutely fucking not do republicans support Muslims.

    The only time they’ve ever pretended to care about lgbtq people is when they could use it to attack Islam (while conveniently giving Christianity a pass)

    salsamolle, (edited )

    “while france has many instances of islamophobia, i’m going ignore it and make a case for why france should actually force women to dress in this or that way”

    segregate themselves

    It happens anyway because of the color of the skin or the accent or whatever. You make it sound like a solution when it isn’t, really.

    vermingot,

    Uniforms in school don’t wipe distinctions, they make them less visible to outsiders, every kid still knows who is rich, who is poor, who is religious and who is not. Uniforms serve as a security theater, and limit considerably the freedom of every child who wears one while augmenting the parents expectations of how safe a place the school is.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    wiping away those distinctions at the door is an extremely valuable part of social education.

    no the role of education is not to erase minority cultures that is not only on the face of it terrible it’s also directly and extremely counter to China’s policy on ethnic minority cultures within China which is based on Stalin’s policy on Russian ethnic minorities specifically that they should be enabled to practice their culture without the state getting in the way. It’s much more in line with the Tsar’s attitude towards ethnic minorities and russification. Stop making China look bad by attributing this terrible idea China wouldn’t do to China

    uralsolo,

    I worded it poorly, but my point was that France’s enforcement of a dress code is far less extreme than the cultural intervention in Xinjiang. Furthermore I think that all of the people in this thread who’ve compared it to Native American residential schooling are themselves engaging in genocide denial by way of minimization.

    2Password2Remember,

    least racist european country

    Death to America

    sooper_dooper_roofer,
    Elderos,

    Somehow this sort of stuff always get portrayed as anti-Muslim, but secularism is a core principle in France and they would kick you for wearing Christian garments just as well.

    muad_dibber,
    @muad_dibber@lemmygrad.ml avatar

    France is so impartial towards Muslims, they even do their nuclear tests in unconsenting Muslim countries!

    uralsolo,

    tbf to France I’m pretty sure that if girls showed up in nun habits they would be sent home too. They make you take off visible jewelry if it has a cross on it AFAIK.

    7heo, (edited )
    @7heo@lemmy.ml avatar

    Cross, Star of David, Hand of Fatima, Om, etc.

    Pretty much anything associated to (especially monotheistic) religion is a no go.

    School in France is strongly Laic, and while it may vary from teacher to teacher (esp. with small symbols - earrings or pendants, etc - and discrete signs - triskelion, wheel of dharma, etc), obvious religious attire will definitely get you in trouble. It’s like entering a bank with your motorcycle helmet on: its color doesn’t matter, people will assume you are ill intended.

    People tend to really forget that the defining event for the French republic, the Revolution, was as much about the church as it was about the nobility. And while the French society has regrettably become corrupt with an ever increasing tolerance to the return of nobility, it has fortunately retained a much more rigid stance towards religion. Religion is a personal affair. Once you start making it a public affair, be prepared for very public consequences.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    not sure how the way you choose to dress isn’t a private affair

    7heo, (edited )
    @7heo@lemmy.ml avatar

    In “your freedom ends where mine begins”, the keyword isn’t “you”…

    usernamesaredifficul,

    so you have freedom to tell others how to dress and which religious beliefs they can practice but others do not have freedom to dress as they will or practice their religion got it

    7heo, (edited )
    @7heo@lemmy.ml avatar

    No. You set limits. I understand your confusion if all you know is authoritarianism, but “setting limits” is actually diametrically opposed to “forcing”. Setting limits is literally how any fair society functions, literally how to educate, etc. Also, punctuation exists.

    usernamesaredifficul, (edited )

    setting limits on whether or not minority ethnic groups are allowed to practice harmless and innocuous aspects of their faith. Which are enforced by being denied education if they don’t comply.

    Call it what you want but these limits are in violation of the UN recognised rights of freedom of conscience and the right to education

    uralsolo,

    Everybody has limits set on their behavior in society generally, and in schools those limits are often more strict. I also object to the notion that enforced dress on a gendered basis is a “harmless or innocuous” practice.

    invoking the UN

    lol nerd

    usernamesaredifficul,

    you’re the one who wants to tell the teacher on islam

    we have enforced dress on a gendered basis in our society

    UltraGreen,

    deleted_by_moderator

  • Loading...
  • autismdragon,
    @autismdragon@hexbear.net avatar

    abuse their children

    Its a dress.

    Piye,

    It’s a religious garment women are forced to wear because men can’t control themselves. It’s literally the definition of “oppression”

    Assian_Candor,
    @Assian_Candor@hexbear.net avatar

    Let me, a smart white man, tell you dumb brown people what your religious garments actually represent

    Farman,

    I think its more opresive to force someone to undress in public when they dont want to.

    Spzi,

    undress in public

    That seems like a dishonest wording, suggesting they would be publicly visible while undressing.

    The article talks about “change out of”. I assume this is done with the normal level of privacy: In a separate room, or a cabin.

    Farman,

    Unless the girl in question puts on a similar garment before leaving, the end result is that she ends up undressed in public.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    also the french had soldiers on beaches ripping off islamic garments there is no reason to trust they would handle this with any sensitivity whatsoever

    TheCaconym, (edited )

    literally lmao

    Like the school year started three days ago here in france-cool and there have now been several examples of “abaya” dresses being stopped despite not “being abayas”; and the reverse as well (and of course there would be; they’re fucking casual dresses, I’m fairly certain you’d get a different answer on whether one is or isn’t even from fucking textile experts or something). Often with the deciding factor being the color of the skin of the person wearing it.

    The whole thing is a racist trip; along with a sadly common recurrent theme in french politics to divert the national attention when other shit is going on

    Assian_Candor,
    @Assian_Candor@hexbear.net avatar
    btbt,
    @btbt@hexbear.net avatar

    Why did you immediately jump to the conclusion that these kids aren’t wearing their abayas voluntarily?

    Piye,

    I’m ok with this. If you truly want atheism and secularism then what’s wrong with making a broad ban on all religions?

    usernamesaredifficul,

    you can’t have secularism that bans religion

    AOCapitulator,
    @AOCapitulator@hexbear.net avatar

    Can you elaborate?

    usernamesaredifficul,

    secularism means the state not involving itself in matters of religion. Banning a religion is the state involving itself in matters of religion and therefore definitionally not secular

    also it’s a violation of human rights and just a terrible idea as you can’t effectively ban a religion the outside pressure tends to make religious groups more insular and can even deepen faith especially in abrahamic religions which have doctrines about martyrdom and oppression

    uralsolo,

    I would argue that indoctrinating a child into wearing religious dress is a violation of that child’s human rights and that they should be protected from it by the state.

    Farman,

    More so than forcing children to strip?

    usernamesaredifficul,

    all cultures indoctrinate children into how it’s appropriate to dress dumbass that’s what cultural ideas of clothing are. You didn’t on your own learn that you have to wear shoes shirts etc

    uralsolo,

    wear shoes and shirt

    wear dress that is explicitly designed to dehumanize you

    these are the same thing

    sysgen,

    Abaya and the male equivalents are mostly adaptations to arid, sunny climates and predate Islam.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    wear dress that is explicitly designed to dehumanize you

    it’s not desinged to dehumanise that’s the least charitable possible interpretation

    also you don’t think they’re the same because you have been raised thinking one is normal and one isn’t

    Armen12,

    Religion is not being banned, so that argument is invalid

    Try again

    usernamesaredifficul,

    the comment I was replying to was literally talking about banning religion

    u_tamtam,
    @u_tamtam@programming.dev avatar

    More accurately, this is french secularism, not a ban on religions, just good old state/church separation applied to public institutions where religious symbols are not welcome.

    TheCaconym, (edited )

    This is not a religious garment (not that it’d matter if it was IMO, it’s hardly obnoxious); this is a cultural one, mostly (even that is pushing it, a lot of them look basically indistinguishable from the basic dress).

    Let people wear what they want

    Piye,

    “French public schools have sent dozens of girls home for refusing to remove their abayas – long, loose-fitting robes worn by some Muslim women and girls”

    It literally says in the article it’s religious. If you’re a real atheist, and I suspect none of you really are, then follow your principles, otherwise, please feel free to also shut up about Christianity then seeing as it’s a 1500 year old religion now and older than Islam

    The hypocrisy is off the charts, either you’re an atheist or you’re just lying about being one

    SpaceDog,

    There’s nothing religious about an abaya, apart from that they’re fashionable among Muslim women. It’s just a modest, loose-fitting dress.

    GivingEuropeASpook,
    @GivingEuropeASpook@lemm.ee avatar

    I get what you’re trying to say - historically “Muslim garb” was just “desert garb” suited to the dry heat but I do also think these terms have some religious connotation now.

    What really grinds my gears in this is that actual Muslim feminists, not just white knight crusaders (and i pick that word deliberately) Europe are out there and people who claim to be worried about how Islam treats women could you know, listen to their perspectives instead of just assuming European “secular” values are objectively better.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    If you’re a real atheist, and I suspect none of you really are, then follow your principles

    to be an athiest you only have to not believe in a religion yourself that’s it the sole principle required for athiesm

    do you think it should be illegal to follow religions you personally don’t approve of because what gives you the right to dictate what others are allowed to believe

    Piye,

    So not an atheist

    FactuallyUnscrupulou,
    @FactuallyUnscrupulou@hexbear.net avatar

    Atheism is a religion too…

    smuglord

    Drug_Shareni,

    to be an athiest you only have to not believe in a religion yourself that’s it the sole principle required for athiesm

    Atheism is a belief in the nonexistence of divine beings, not the lack of belief. What you’re describing is irreligion.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    I don’t understand the difference between lack of positive believe in something and believing that thing isn’t true

    if you tell me about a magic cat and I don’t believe you is there some extra level of unbelief I would need to do to fit your standard of not believing you

    Drug_Shareni,

    I don’t believe you’re a removed.

    I believe you’re not a removed.

    Can you notice a difference?

    One’s a lack of belief, the other is a negative belief.

    axont,

    Do you think a requirement of being atheist means you have to embarrass kids or be racist? Do you think atheists have a moral obligation to do genuine persecution against people for wearing a robe?

    Secularism in education doesn’t mean you have to strictly control what clothes kids wear. Just don’t have private religious schools, it’s as easy as that. That’s what socialist governments do when they have a secular state ideology, they ban religious schools, shelters, hospitals, etc and replace them with secular, public ones. They don’t ban religion outright because that’s absurd, it’s a waste of time, and it’s needless cruelty.

    Why does it matter if some people are Muslim? Do atheists have a moral obligation to control what Muslims wear or believe? Why?

    Piye,

    deleted_by_moderator

  • Loading...
  • axont, (edited )

    do you trust the state of France to do something that largely targets Muslims and there to be a positive outcome? Furthermore I should mention the abaya isn’t even religious, it’s just a dress worn by some people of northern African or middle eastern culture/ancestry. Nothing about Islam mandates wearing it and not all Muslims wear abayas.

    listen, only about 50% of Cubans profess they’re part of a religion, compared to other places in the Caribbean like the Dominican Republic where the number is a much higher 97%. Cuba didn’t ban religion outright or wearing religious clothes, they banned religions from operating public services, charities, etc. The Cuban government gave people things that religions had previously given them, rather than taking away things like what kinds of clothes they could wear.

    even if you’re an atheist and you believe in secularizing the entire world, changing beliefs, do you really think the way you do that is by first deciding what kids are allowed to wear to school? Do you think there are any positive ways to persecute a religious group, not even the leadership or whatever, but persecuting literal children and telling them which clothes to wear? If you’re some kind of atheist proselytizer then I’d expect you wanna go for methods that actually work.

    I’m gonna quote an obscure guy named Marx you don’t seem to have read much of:

    Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.

    if you wanna criticize religion, then criticize the thing that makes religion happen, namely human suffering. Don’t cause more suffering. Demand people’s real happiness.

    GarbageShoot,

    If you’re a real atheist, and I suspect none of you really are

    lol

    then follow your principles,

    Yes, let me just consult the Atheist bible for the definite set of principles all atheists have.

    GivingEuropeASpook,
    @GivingEuropeASpook@lemm.ee avatar

    It’s conveniently targeting one group and their religious expression. It’s different when they do it to themselves, like in Turkey before the AKP took power and started weakening secularism there.

    Armen12,

    Or maybe one group doesn’t want to adhere to the rule of secularism while the rest do

    usernamesaredifficul,

    That’s not what secularism means. Secularism is when the institution doesn’t have a religious stance you could have a secular prayer room if you made it open to all faiths

    GivingEuropeASpook,
    @GivingEuropeASpook@lemm.ee avatar

    No, secularism is when no hijab ./s

    electrogamerman,

    Not all religious expressions are right. A lot of religion ideals are ancient.

    GivingEuropeASpook,
    @GivingEuropeASpook@lemm.ee avatar

    And who gets to decide?

    electrogamerman,

    Definitely not the religion killing women for not covering their hair or lgbt people

    GivingEuropeASpook,
    @GivingEuropeASpook@lemm.ee avatar

    So who then?

    So now its “secularism is when some religions are better than others?”

    electrogamerman,

    Bro, who is saying some religions are better than others? All religions are shit. I swear you all with your imaginary gods fighting for nothing

    GivingEuropeASpook,
    @GivingEuropeASpook@lemm.ee avatar

    If the rules of “secularism” disproportionately impact people only of certain religions then that is displaying favoritism, implicitly saying “this religion is approved, this religion is not”. That’s not very secular.

    electrogamerman,

    What exactly is being impacted here? A religion that forces women to cover themselves so men think they are pure? Seems like a good impact.

    AOCapitulator,
    @AOCapitulator@hexbear.net avatar

    Well they should have voted then

    Hawk,

    All the students should start wearing abayas.

    It will entirely break down the argument that it’s a religious symbol.

    While secularism is important for the school as an official institution, the fact that this applies to private persons is absolutely dumb.

    electrogamerman,

    All the students should start wearing abayas

    Or none should wear abayas?

    It will entirely break down the argument that it’s a religious symbol.

    Hawk,

    That makes zero sense???

    electrogamerman,

    and the comment I replied to makes a lot of sense, lmao

    Hawk,

    If nobody wears it, it enforces the idea that it’s a religious symbol. Everybody wearing it just makes it another piece of clothing.

    💡

    electrogamerman,

    Nope,

    If nobody wears it

    it just makes it another piece of clothing.

    Be real, the only reason Muslims are making a big deal out of this, its because its a religious symbol. If the government would have banned jeans or whatever, Muslims wouldn’t bat an eye.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • worldnews@lemmy.ml
  • rosin
  • thenastyranch
  • osvaldo12
  • cubers
  • InstantRegret
  • DreamBathrooms
  • cisconetworking
  • magazineikmin
  • Youngstown
  • Durango
  • mdbf
  • slotface
  • ngwrru68w68
  • kavyap
  • JUstTest
  • tacticalgear
  • modclub
  • khanakhh
  • Leos
  • ethstaker
  • everett
  • tester
  • GTA5RPClips
  • normalnudes
  • megavids
  • provamag3
  • anitta
  • lostlight
  • All magazines