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.


Zrc,
@Zrc@hexbear.net avatar
some_guy,

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

I was initially torn on this, but as long as it’s for all religions, I support it. I firmly believe that I shouldn’t know your religion unless I ask. Religion is toxic.

I do think you should have the freedom to wear religious signifiers as an adult. I just don’t approve. But I don’t want to stop you. Children in school? This is the same (to me) as requiring them to leave their phones at home.

Cethin,

In the Americas there were schools for native American children where they forced them to dress, eat, speak, and behave “properly” and not practice their religion. The goal was to eliminate their culture and make them homogeneously American or Canadian. (They also killed a fucking ton) This sort of nationalism has generally been looked back on as a mistake and a horrible atrocity. Why should it be acceptable towards other religious groups?

some_guy,

These kids aren’t being taken from their families. They aren’t being forced to give up their religion in their homes. These are not the same. This isn’t about “other religious groups.” It’s all religions while at school, and I’m fine with that.

Uncaged_Jay,

Okay, so how is this different from saying “I don’t care if they’re gay, as long as it’s in the privacy of their own homes”? It’s the same sentiment about what is (to some) also an immutable characteristic about their personality

some_guy,

This is a strong argument and initially left me speechless. However, religion is something you choose. I don’t think people choose to be gay.

Cethin,

The goal is to replace religion with nationalism, which isn’t an admirable goal. They may not literally say it out loud, but it’s pretty obvious.

some_guy,

I’m not in support of nationalism. I don’t know if what you said is accurate or not. I simply approve of keeping religion out of schools.

MashedTech,

As much as you wish, I don’t think you can because it is a part of one’s life. Whether you are Atheist or practice a religion, the beliefs and practices you have are in my opinion fundamental for you. Let’s take the reverse, would you as an Atheist pretend to believe in a certain religion for 4-6 hours a day just so you could learn? You can take this and experiment with all kinds of situations. Sure, religion shouldn’t be taught in schools, religion has nothing to do with schools but while we shouldn’t teach religion we shouldn’t also take religion out of the human. Your beliefs are fundamental to you. I think there is a certain level of tolerance we should have towards other people as long as they don’t interfere and infringe on the freedoms and liberties of others. Having the freedom to wear what you want and act the way you want while you don’t bother others should be allowed.

If you want to have a private school where everyone follows a specific rule set, regulation, specific formal clothing etc. Go ahead, make your own.

But I do feel public schools as a public good should allow everyone to learn while also not requiring one to remove parts of things that form one’s identity.

Spzi,

would you as an Atheist pretend to believe in a certain religion for 4-6 hours a day

France wants people to not show their religion in school. That’s different from pretending to have another, or no religion.

Like in moments when I don’t wear my favorite sports team’s insignias, I’m not pretending to be fan of another team instead.

some_guy,

I generally wish to respect others. But I can’t help but note that mass shooters are frequently deeply Christian. I’m not advocating for someone to pretend that they believe in another religion or that they don’t believe in their own. I’m mildly offended by people who advertise their religion by wearing a cross above their clothing. I think they should tuck it below so that I don’t know what their religion is because frankly, I find their faith offensive. It’s unfortunate that some religions require that their faithful observe traditions that make it obvious that they are faithful.

Religion is, at its root, a system of control and an excuse for bad behavior. At it’s worst it is a grift and a shortcut to genocide. I know that there are many religious people who are good and descent (my mother, for example), but I still resent that her religion guides her politics in ways that are illogical. I had a friend who believed in 1999 that the earth was ~5000 years old and that dinosaurs were a test of his faith by god. Religion is holding us back.

GarbageShoot,

This is like the democrats who applaud gun control even when it is used with surgical precision to prevent black communities from defending themselves from police violence. “I don’t support police violence, I simply approve of gun control”.

u_tamtam,
@u_tamtam@programming.dev avatar

The goal is to replace religion with nationalism

It really isn’t, though?

Adkml,

I was initially torn on this, but as long as it’s for all religions, I support it.

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

Yea they made it so nobody could wear religious cultural clothes but there’s only one religion that includes wearing those clothes as a belief.

Would you also support a policy that nobody named @some_guy should be allowed to talk, no matter who they are.

usernamesaredifficul,

Yea they made it so nobody could wear religious cultural clothes but there’s only one religion that includes wearing those clothes as a belief

there are multiple such as Islam and Sikhism to give two examples. This law is just an example of religious persecution against religions that don’t fit in with the French idea of which religions a French person should have

Adkml,

Your right should have said there’s multiple religions it was discriminating against just highlighting how it lines up with Frances history of Islamophobia.

uralsolo,

Presumably if a bunch of Mormons or Mennonites or whatever else set up in France and all their kids dressed the same way, the school would step in on that too. Maybe they wouldn’t, but then the problem isn’t the policy it’s biased enforcement.

nudnyekscentryk,
@nudnyekscentryk@szmer.info avatar

Yea they made it so nobody could wear religious cultural clothes but there’s only one religion that includes wearing those clothes as a belief.

One, this is not true. Two, this includes other symbols like pendants

some_guy,

The first is a good argument. And I support breaking that law.

The second is a good argument in that I wasn’t factoring the requirement (which I kinda don’t care about because I reject religion, so I know that I’m wrong even though I reject religion, fuck religion). Were religion not so toxic, I would have more sympathy. In this case, I’m gonna sound like a real fuckwad, but assimilate.

The third is just silly.

GarbageShoot,

“Just assimilate to Christian culture, Muslims. I’m anti-religion of all kinds, btw.”

You are too caught up in liberal abstraction to allow yourself to understand the material reality.

uralsolo,

The kids aren’t being made to attend church on Sunday. They’re being made to be part of a secular society, one that takes its secularism more seriously than many other countries do.

GarbageShoot,

Pure reactionary sophistry. They are not made to go to church, but they still get the Christian Sabbath off but not Muslim Jumu’ah (their equivalent, midday prayer) on Fridays. France is “secular” but it just so happens that the laws of its “secularism” cut in a direction that wildly favors Christianity.

You claim to be a communist, don’t you? You should know this quote:

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.

– Anatole France

As I said, liberal abstraction that obscures the deliberate material impact of the laws.

uralsolo,

deleted_by_moderator

  • Loading...
  • GarbageShoot,

    I was taking an opportunity to demonstrate a point with what you said, not suggesting that all bread stealing should be legalized.

    Your ideology is a joke. “Surely, some girl wearing too baggy a dress will hamper education and heighten religious differences. No, we must teach these children tolerance by socializing them in an environment where we have eliminated any visible deviations from the dominant (liberal Christian) culture. Then, when they go out on the street and see people who look different, they will in fact be more tolerant of people with traits alien to how they were socialized.”

    Every word you say is just laundering reactionary bullshit under a veil of virtue.

    uralsolo,

    any visible deviations from the dominant (liberal Christian) culture.

    This is an impasse. You look at French culture and see a liberal Christian one, I see a liberal secular one. When Christianity infects schools you don’t get dress codes you get much more overt and disgusting propagandizing, like what’s being pushed in Florida right now.

    GarbageShoot,

    How can you be so far gone that you don’t see the Islamophobia all over France as being connected to Christianity?

    neshura,

    Christian Sabbath off but not Muslim Jumu’ah

    hear me out: that just might be, really far stretch I know, but it just might be because the western weekend formed out of the Jewish Sabbath, which was adopted by Christianity. However it is not anymore the justification for having it. The only reason Saturday and Sunday are the weekend is because nobody bothered moving the date after the religious meaning was largely lost on the general population. Religion in Europe is in steep decline, unlike in certain other parts of the western world.

    France has a population of ~40% Atheist/Agnostics. If you seriously think Christianity dictates the laws in France you are delusional.

    Jakeroxs,

    Lmao conflating Christian culture with Secularism, classic blunder

    Adkml,

    Wow. So literally saying they should just assimilate, so much for that whole “they have to respect our culture because we respect theirs”

    Also yea the third point was stupid, it was to illustrate how dumb your argument was.

    Bit then you just came out and admitted to being a bigot and leapfrogging my point.

    some_guy,

    I am bigoted against religion. I otherwise accept everyone for who they are. I have no shame in taking this stance.

    Assian_Candor,
    @Assian_Candor@hexbear.net avatar

    LOL

    AOCapitulator,
    @AOCapitulator@hexbear.net avatar

    The point people are trying to make is that it’s not the religion that’s being targeted, but the minority non white culture, and it’s being done in a way to hide its true intent, which you are supporting based on its appearance.

    This has nothing to do with secularism and everything to do with punishing and invalidating nonwhite culture

    some_guy,

    I suspect that you’re right and if that’s the case, that’s terrible. I would support removal of religion from schools simply on the basis that it’s the source of most of the world’s wars. In the US, I think we should take the gloves off and churches should pay taxes. I detest that it causes people to vote and behave irrationally and is used as a smoke screen to excuse bad behavior. My support for kicking religion out of schools is based in that and does not apply as a tool to suppress non-western peoples.

    It’s unfortunate that what you’re suggesting is probably the real reason. Put me in charge and it really will be because I’m sick of religion in a completely colorblind fashion.

    GarbageShoot,

    I would support removal of religion from schools simply on the basis that it’s the source of most of the world’s wars.

    This is false. It was used as the pretext for most of the world’s wars, just as secular equality is used as the pretext for this law, but the actual cause of those and virtually all wars lies in material motivations (land, resources, etc), just as the true objective of the law is to forcibly assimilate minorities.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    Well if we look at the Romans, Assyrians, British, French, and Germans and their wars it’s abundantly clear that most of their wars were for the aquisition of wealth. The vast majority of wars even in the middle ages were openly about arguments between noble families over land

    some_guy,

    You’re discounting the Protestant Reformation and Crusades, not to mention all other wars for religion. Yes, people fight for territory and resources. People also fight for a fictional man in the sky.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    yeah if you discount all the secular motives behind the wars of the reformation as well. The French have basically always been trying to keep Germany down as Germany’s large population worries them financially and militarily. Henry the 8th didn’t convert for religious reasons he converted because he needed a strong male heir to keep the plantagenots at bay and the pope wouldn’t let him annul his marriage to Catharine of Aragon who kept having stillbirths

    AOCapitulator,
    @AOCapitulator@hexbear.net avatar

    world’s wars

    You may have a leg to stand on in terms of premodern history, but for the last 150 years most wars have been due to capitalism, not religion. You are not exactly incorrect, but you are in my view taking symptoms as the disease, when we really need to zoom out, religion itself isn’t the base level problem, its authoritative structures not derived from the consent and for the betterment of the people, religion is but a powerful historical tool

    some_guy,

    You’re right. I have no argument with your statement other than to say that religion has justified violence on a non-war scale. Take all the violence that has been influenced by religion that isn’t a war and factor that in with the wars.

    Yes, capitalism is destroying lives, the world, etc. Absolutely.

    The thing that I was thinking about last night is if I had one wish that would come true, what would it be? I hate that there are people unhoused. I hate that there are people who are abused. I hate that there is hunger. But to cure all terrible things, I think erasing religion would be the greatest step to removing barriers in finding consensus. I think it’s the thing most responsible for dividing people. Tribalism will still exist, but if you removed this all-present motivation from personal interactions and people’s sense of morals, I think we’d make progress on all other fronts.

    GarbageShoot,

    Organized religion like Catholicism is an undebatably malignant social entity, but religion in general? I think Marx has it completely right:

    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.

    When he calls it “the opium of the people” he doesn’t mean “they do it recreationally and it kills them,” he means “though it hampers them, it anesthetizes pain inflicted on them from without”. If you want humanity to be free of religion rather than merely having an atheistic upper class be free of needing to see the rabble practice religion (by persecuting the latter), then the primary answer is not to legislate against religion but to legislate against the problems that, in turn, drive people to religion. It can be difficult to accept, but whether it matches your personal experience or not, religion serves useful social functions, just as opium serves useful medical functions (whatever else we may rightly say about both). If you want to get rid of religion, you need to do the good that it does better than it. If you want the oppressed creature not to sigh, end its oppression. To simply stifle its sigh is to strangle it.

    some_guy,

    Great response. I’d counter that fear of death will still provide a gateway to religion, but there’s nothing else with which I’d quibble. Cheers!

    AOCapitulator,
    @AOCapitulator@hexbear.net avatar

    Capitalism is positive to no one’s lives but a vanishingly small % of the smallest % of the world, and does great harm to all others

    Religion is integrated into a number of oppressive systems that largely prop up capitalism, but is also neutral for many people.

    I definitely don’t disagree that humanity has moved past the need for religion as we have now, and it’s destruction would definitely be a net positive.

    The thing is though, destroying capitalism and bringing about communism would also destroy organized religion as it now exists, but the opposite is not true, deleting religion from the world would do almost nothing to change anything for most people.

    Palestinians would still be getting genocided by Israel, because it’s not religion that is the cause of that, it’s just a tool for the messaging of the Israeli state, not the actual reason, for one concrete example

    Sure, it would probably make the world a better place, but it would not advance humanity much towards a brighter future

    We’d just have the current world but instead of division along religious lines, it would be more explicitly along economic or racial/ethnic lines

    US Evangelical Christian’s wouldn’t suddenly become good nice people, they’re still vicious racist monsters, the way they talk about the people they hate and dehumanize would simply be slightly different words

    btbt,

    What the fuck I thought Christopher Hitchens died

    GarbageShoot,

    Dawkins and Harris yet live, unfortunately

    Adkml,

    Yea bigots generally aren’t shameful about their bigotry they just usually try to tap dance around the word bigot, good for you for being honest I guess.

    CyborgMarx,

    My North African grandfather lost a leg to untreated necrosis defending that gallic shithole from nazism, they can go assimilate his rotted leg

    usernamesaredifficul, (edited )

    I’m gonna sound like a real fuckwad, but assimilate.

    bruh-moment

    can’t believe you just said “facing persecution for your religious faith simply don’t be a member of the religious minority being persecuted”

    Colour_me_triggered,

    Being religious is a choice, not a birth defect

    PolandIsAStateOfMind,
    @PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml avatar

    It’s not a choice when they indoctrinate kids in it, which all religions do.

    Colour_me_triggered,

    At which point it becomes child abuse. And the state should step in. Let’s not forget that France also doesn’t permit the display of any religious symbolism instate institutions including Christian. Either these kids are free to choose a different item of clothing, or they’re being abused by their family. Simple.

    PolandIsAStateOfMind,
    @PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml avatar

    Every kid of belivers is being rased in their faith, worldwide. It is religious indoctrination and frankly i agree that this is child abuse, but it’s not illegal anywhere. People refraining from this and allowing the children to choose are very rare. And even then it might still not exactly be the choice, in basically all societies there is considerable peer and social pressure to conform to its values.

    m0darn,

    An Abaya is just a flowing robe.

    This ban is like an American school saying you’re allowed to wear cowboy hats but not sombreros because sombreros are associated with catholicism, in that they are mostly associated with the culture of a predominately catholic country.

    This is like banning kids from wearing rainbows because it signifies their values.

    electrogamerman,

    Dont compare an Abaya to a rainbow. They are nothing a like.

    some_guy,

    I support a ban on cowboy boots, too.

    books,

    Then what’s the big deal? No hats.

    m0darn,

    The rule isn’t no flowing robes.

    The rule is “no flowing robes on kids suspected of being muslim”.

    books,

    So let the french kids who are not muslim, wear these robes and see what happens.

    packadal,

    I disagree, the Abaya is not just a flowing robe.

    It is a garment that is required by the Sharia law (see Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries where women are not allowed to choose what they wear).

    Allowing this is the first step in letting religion in the public schools in France, where it has always been explicitly banned.

    And it is very unlike banning rainbows, those are a symbol used to promote acceptance of the diversity of others, something religions struggle with (ever notice how religion is closely tied with extremism?)

    Another factor to take into account is that these young girl may be forced by their family to wear such a garment, imposing upon them something they may not be old enough to refuse.

    Also, look up the paradox of intolerance, as allowing anyone to do as they please causes the rise of extremism.

    ursakhiin,

    This is a very hyperbolic take on that paradox.

    An article of clothing can’t be religious on its own. Saudi Arabia may have done the wrong thing by requiring this specific article of clothing but banning it is also bad.

    A girl may want to wear a loose fitting dress for any number of reasons. Some people are just more modest than others and that shouldn’t be punished.

    Looking at abaya online, and as a westerner I actually kinda like the style of them as well. I could see them being work as a strictly fashionable article of clothing.

    packadal,

    An article of clothing can’t be religious on its own

    Really? What about a kippa ? Or a priest’s robes ?

    The kippa is forbidden in french schools for this very same reason, it signals religion.

    Loose fitting dresses are not forbidden, abayas are. They are a specific kind of loose fitting dresses. One that signals religion.

    I don’t see them working as a fashion article, but that may just be my taste.

    m0darn,

    I really appreciate you engaging in more than just one liners.

    I disagree, the Abaya is not just a flowing robe.

    It is a garment that is required by the Sharia law (see Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries where women are not allowed to choose what they wear).

    From le Monde

    [Saudi Arabia] Since 2022 (…) has outlawed the wearing of abaya for women during examinations.

    It is not a religious garment. It is a cultural garment. You’re right that it is often worn by Muslim women/girls to achieve islamic notions of modesty. But it’s predominately worn by people strongly influenced by Arab culture, not muslims everywhere.

    I agree that countries should not generally be dictating what people are allowed to wear.

    Allowing this is the first step in letting religion in the public schools in France, where it has always been explicitly banned.

    Except it’s not the first step in letting religion in schools. It was already allowed and then was banned. The pendulum is swinging away from religious tolerance. It would be more accurate to view the ban as the next step in a series of measures further disembracing France’s ethnic minorities.

    And it is very unlike banning rainbows, those are a symbol used to promote acceptance of the diversity of others

    So you support symbols of the acceptance of the diversity of others. But you do not support actual acceptance of cultural diversity.

    ever notice how religion is closely tied with extremism?

    Yes. Too many religions have dark histories/presents.

    Another factor to take into account is that these young girl may be forced by their family to wear such a garment, imposing upon them something they may not be old enough to refuse.

    I think the best way to help people in situations like this is to get them into environments where they can make strong relationships with people outside their family’s religion. Like public schools.

    Also, look up the paradox of intolerance, as allowing anyone to do as they please causes the rise of extremism.

    I’m familiar with the concept and agree that limitations to freedom are necessary to protect freedom. But is it intolerance to wear an Abaya or is it intolerance to forbid unfamiliar styles of clothing?

    I applaud France’s goal of a secular society. But I think this policy is a misstep.

    Look at images of abaya compared to duster cardigans and maybe you’ll see what I mean.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    as requiring them to leave their phones at home

    you can’t just leave religion and culture at the door and freedom of conscience isn’t a right only adults are entitled to nor is it comparable to playing on your phone

    uralsolo,

    Are kids meaningfully capable of exercising their freedom of conscience though? I’m not suggesting that every religious parent would kick their children out of the house for not dressing a certain way, but I am saying that every religious parent puts their finger on the scale of their kids’ decision. Schools can and should seek to eliminate these kinds of cultural differences within the student body because it teaches kids to segregate themselves, that’s why school uniforms are generally a good thing.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    Are kids meaningfully capable of exercising their freedom of conscience though

    arguably not but you could also make that argument in favour of all children being forced to wear islamic dress.

    yes religious parents put their finger on the scale of the kids decision but so do non-religious parents with regards to their kids religious views that’s just how raising children within a culture works. It’s not a lifetime commitment the same freedom of conscience that means they have a right to practice their faith also means they have a right to abandon it if once they are older they change their minds.

    ols can and should seek to eliminate these kinds of cultural differences within the student body because it teaches kids to segregate themselves, that’s why school uniforms are generally a good thing.

    school uniforms are a good thing but exemptions to uniform rules on religious grounds have been a long recorded tradition. When the British forced sepoys to use cartridges that meant they had to partially consume beef and pork fat were the Indians wrong to compain or were the British merely removing cultural differences between the Muslims, Hindus, and British.

    Kahlenar,

    Oh France, always there to show the world that you can be as stupid as America but in completely different ways

    EternalNicodemus,

    Based

    zikk_transport2,

    Who should respect who?

    • Girls with abayas should respect local culture and not wear them.
    • Locals should respect girls with abayas and let them wear them.
    • Locals should respect girls with abayas and every girl should wear it.
    MashedTech,
    Nationalgoatism,

    Except that you can’t separate girls with abayas from locals/local culture. They are also French, of a nation with many ethnicities living in it. To say that people of certain ethnic minorities are not “locals” is profoundly xenophobic.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    Locals should respect girls with abayas and let them wear them

    this one obviously

    zikk_transport2,

    Can you elaborate why?

    Adkml,

    Can you elaborate why they shouldn’t respect the girls or how it’s disrespectful for girls to wear a piece of cultural clothing.

    zikk_transport2,

    Because culture respect works both ways.

    If a girl travels to islamic country, she is expected to wear cultural clothing, because it’s the culture of islamic country.

    And instead of “why locals shouldn’t respect girls” I am referring to “why girls should respect local culture”.

    GarbageShoot,

    And here I thought neoliberal society was supposed to be culturally and religiously pluralistic

    Adkml,

    And I’m asking you, again, how wearing the clothing they want is “disrespecting local culture” unless you’re just saying French culture is inherently Islamophobia in which case you might be onto something.

    zikk_transport2,

    And I’m asking you, again, how wearing the clothing they want is “disrespecting local culture”

    Because wearing them makes them different. In French culture, wearing them is not something French people would do.

    unless you’re just saying French culture is inherently Islamophobia in which case you might be onto something.

    Got it. Not wearing = islamophobia. Thanks for explaining this to me.👌

    AssortedBiscuits,
    @AssortedBiscuits@hexbear.net avatar

    The Moors shouldn’t have stopped at Tours.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    Because wearing them makes them different

    they are different they have a different religion. Are you saying that to live in France you must belong to the same ethno religious background as white Frenchmen. Bacause that’s so unprogressive you might as well go back to persecuting Huguenots.

    Got it. Not wearing = islamophobia

    no it is not islamophobic to not wear Islamic religious dress it is islamophobic to forbid anyone else of wearing it. Similarly it would not be anti-semitic to not wear a kippah but it would be anti-semitic to forbid anyone else wearing a kippah

    GrumpigPoopBalls,

    wearing them makes them different. In French culture wearing them is not something French people would do

    hitler-detector

    This is just a (not very) roundabout way of saying that you’re upset that brown people live in France. Nobody is saying that non-Muslim French people not wearing them is Islamophobia, just that this reaction is very obviously rooted in racism and Islamophobia.

    zikk_transport2,

    I don’t understand. So France is islamic country? Or islamic and non-islamic country? Afaik majority of France population does not follow islam, or am I wrong here?

    This is just a (not very) roundabout way of saying that you’re upset that brown people live in France.

    Are you trying to force me to be racist or what are your intentions? We are discussing about culture of islamic countries vs non-islamic and respect for each other. You should focus more on the discussion rather than me.

    I’ll mention it again - I am talking about girls, who should respect local culture and not wear a hijab. Where do you see racism/islamophobia?

    Let me call it the other way - lady tourists, when visiting islamic country, should wear cultural clothing to show respect for islamic culture. What are you gonna say about this statement?

    GrumpigPoopBalls,

    You’re either the dumbest person on this website or just racist (I know which one my money is on), take your just asking questions routine back to reddit-logo

    AOCapitulator,
    @AOCapitulator@hexbear.net avatar

    They are just a racist piece of shit

    usernamesaredifficul,

    I don’t understand. So France is islamic country? Or islamic and non-islamic country? Afaik majority of France population does not follow islam, or am I wrong here?

    people can and should be allowed to be members of minority ethnicities and religions and practice their religion and culture without being impeded by the state

    Are you trying to force me to be racist or what are your intentions

    no man you’re doing that on your own

    I am talking about girls, who should respect local culture and not wear a hijab. Where do you see racism/islamophobia?

    in the position that everyone should be forced to conform to the native culture. Glad to clear up the confusion

    usernamesaredifficul,

    Also if the girls are born and raised in France whatever they do is what French people do.

    The French idea of nationhood whereby everyone has to conform to just one set of ethno-religious traditions is stuck in the 19th century

    Thordros,
    @Thordros@hexbear.net avatar

    deleted_by_author

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

    I could tell this comment was racist without translating, translating simply allowed me to know it was sarcastic

    Thordros,
    @Thordros@hexbear.net avatar

    Bienvenue à Revachol! racist-lorry-driver

    I hindsight, I’m going to self-censor that bit. Ironic racism doesn’t hit quite right—even if it’s dunking on “apolitical” French law.

    AOCapitulator,
    @AOCapitulator@hexbear.net avatar

    Probably for the best, same reason I avoid 14 words parodies and such

    Thordros,
    @Thordros@hexbear.net avatar
    Adkml,

    Jesus christ that’s a hell of a strawman especially imnediatly following up “Muslims aren’t actually french people”

    lckdscl,

    In French culture, wearing them is not something French people would do.

    Explain to me what French people wear in French culture. Are you trying to stereotype French people here? What do you call the Muslim population who migrated to France, hold citizenships, have children, speak French, work in France? Are they not French? Or are you implying that French people cannot be Muslims? What about white French who converted to Islam? Are they no longer French?

    AOCapitulator,
    @AOCapitulator@hexbear.net avatar

    You are a racist

    This is racism

    You are doing a racism

    Shut the fuck up

    Armen12,

    Religion is not a race

    AOCapitulator,
    @AOCapitulator@hexbear.net avatar

    Wow I had no idea, you racist piece of shit

    We all know you don’t care about the religion, you want to destroy the culture of the scary brown people, fuck off

    CyborgMarx,

    Because it’s none of your business what those girls wear, and it’s definitely not the state’s business

    usernamesaredifficul,

    because of freedom of conscience these girls should have the freedom to follow the religious beliefs they choose and the state or school system has no business intervening

    Djtecha,

    What’s this logical trick called? Pinning? Let’s give some bad examples to lead you to what we want.

    GarbageShoot,

    “Those Jews whose families have lived here for centuries and whose first language is French should really assimilate to the local culture”

    kier,

    Everyone should respect each other religion or lack of, and not display things that could be associated with religion to avoid problems and conflicts.

    It’s unnecessary if I go to university with my shirt of Satan and a patch with a pentagram. Better to leave that at home.

    zikk_transport2,

    Everyone should respect each other religion or lack of

    Mmm yes, good thinking

    and not display things that could be associated with religion to avoid problems and conflicts.

    So girls should not wear them?

    iegod,

    Religion deserves no respect because there is nothing intrinsically objective about it. Anyone can believe anything. So, I propose we simply have rules that are for everyone, ignores religion, and we just live by them. As long as your religion doesn’t break those rules, do whatever the fuck you want.

    Grimble,

    This is only a tough answer if you dont consider the social hierarchy. Otherwise, literally no nuance

    bleepbloopbleep,

    We are expected to respect local culture when we visit islamic countries. Although I’m all for self-expression and freedom I can’t see why France is making a mistake here.

    zikk_transport2,

    Majority would disagree with me, but I am leaning towards “girls should respect local culture” and not wear them. The same applies to islamic countries (as you just mentioned) - tourist girls, when going there, are respecting local culture and wear them.

    Respect works both ways, and those girls should respect local culture.

    Tankiedesantski,

    In EVIL CEE CEE PEE CHYNA, Muslim children are denied education if they wear their cultural attire to school.

    sooper_dooper_roofer,

    bit idea:

    shove this in libs’ faces and say “China has already annexed France, it’s over”

    Tankiedesantski,

    Okay colonialism is bad but think of how good the food would be.

    salsamolle,

    pls Xi come and liberate us

    TheBlue22,

    If they WANT to wear it, they should be allowed to. Instead, they should be taught all about how insane and evil their backwards religion is.

    Vree,

    Those girls get pressured by their family and then pressured again in school/work. They have to wear it but also mustn’t…

    Anonbal185,

    It’s France they’re very xenophobic. Just look at how they treat the Corsicans, Brentons, Basques and Catalans.

    Night and day to even a few hundred metres across the road in Spain or Andorra.

    echodot,

    I’m not saying France isn’t racist because they absolutely are but this doesn’t seem like that this seems like applying the same rules to everyone equally.

    Just going by the article.

    Pipoca,

    A law that requires everyone to eat bacon would apply to everyone equally, but it’s still antisemitic and islamophobic.

    electrogamerman,

    What about a law that requires only women to cover their bodies and not men? What would that be?

    DrownedAxolotl,

    Absolutely sexist. I’m honestly kind of dumbfounded by the number of people opposing this. France has done some stupid shit recently, but they are absolutely in the right here.

    variaatio,

    However I would note… France has rule about no crosses or cross wearing in schools. So it isn’t like Islam is being singled out. Well this specific rule is about them, but France has very wide rule of “no religious clothing, items or symbols” in school and they don’t much pick sides. Jewish kids… No kippas, Protestants and Catholics, no crosses, Muslims, no head scrafs, no face veils, no religious robes. Sikhs, no turbans.

    So it isn’t xenophobic, since the local majority religion is also under rules of “no religious symbols wearing”.

    What one can say is, that it is highly anti-religious. However that isn’t same thing as xenophobic or say specifically antisemitic or islamophobic. Islamophobic would be “Muslim girls aren’t allowed to wear scarfs, but it’s okay for catholic girls to wear crosses”.

    French government “doesn’t like” the local traditional majority religion either.

    One absolutely can argue about “is it too much restriction of religious liberty in general”, however one can’t argue “well but this is about jews or muslims”. It isn’t. This specific rule about abayas is mostly a technocratic decision based on wider political decision of “we have principle of no religious displays in school”. It was decided “oh yeah, we missed this one religious clothing wearing/display. Add it to the long list of specified banned religious displays of all kinds”.

    I’m sure, if member of the church of the flying spaghetti monster tried to walk to French school with colander on their head, the courts would rule "no colander hats either, that is religious display also. You can go join the Jewish and Sikhs on the club house of “France banned our religious hat” club.

    Pipoca,

    So it isn’t xenophobic, since the local majority religion is also under rules of “no religious symbols wearing”.

    However, does the local majority religion mandate wearing a religious symbol?

    Wearing a cross doesn’t seem akin in significance to wearing a turban or a kippah. From what I understand, it’s more of just a Christian fashion statement than a deep part of the religion.

    So yes, this seems quite xenophobic to do something that’s a mild annoyance at worst for the dominant religion and a major issue for minority religions.

    echodot,

    I suppose the French government would argue that really isn’t their problem. And it isn’t.

    They have a rule that has been standing for a long time and is simply been enforced, it’s the individual religions who dictate how severely they see this.

    Pipoca,

    How does that in any way address the question of if the law is xenophobic or not?

    pankkake,
    @pankkake@lemmy.world avatar

    this seems like applying the same rules to everyone equally

    Though it can seem fair, applying the same rules to everyone equally can be very racist.

    loutr,
    @loutr@sh.itjust.works avatar

    That’s rich coming from you, assuming you’re Australian :) How are we mistreating them exactly? I live in Nantes, Breton culture is everywhere, street signs are translated in Breton, there are bilingual schools… They don’t seem very oppressed to me.

    Anonbal185,

    Well let’s start.

    In Spain the medium of instruction can be and is set by the regional government. Catalan, Basque, Occitian and Galician is used extensively as a medium of instruction in public schools (fully funded by the government)

    There’s extensive media which includes government owned media in those languages. And for government services you can ask for someone to speak to you in those languages.

    The languages are promoted and are co-official. I have friends from Galicia and have been there.

    loutr,
    @loutr@sh.itjust.works avatar

    OK, good for them I guess? But the regional language and culture thing is a much different and bigger issue in Spain.

    Anyway, speakers of regional languages are not repressed in France. There are bilingual schools, newspapers and cultural associations which are partially funded by the state. Things might not be perfect, but I’ve never heard of anyone having to hide their regional origin for fear of repercussions, or discriminated against because of it. Those are things I personally experienced in Australia BTW.

    pm_your_fav_recipe,

    deleted_by_author

  • Loading...
  • Anonbal185,

    Whether they do or not isn’t really the question. Can more be done? Yes of course. But Catalan, Occitian, Basque and Galician is co-official which affords them use as a medium of instruction, media usage, can ask for services from the government in those languages etc. How’s France doing for those points?

    And more importantly Spain has changed in the past 50 years. Keep in mind even half a century ago Spain was the same as France in terms of repressing cultures. France well, it’s still the same.

    Arkarian,

    Basque here. Yes.

    We have our own parliament and laws (like all the autonomous communities) and police. Basque, Catalan and Galician are official languages, and they now can be used in the Spanish Congress too.

    Obc not everything is perfect, but that can be said of everything. You can’t compare that with a centralist country as france.

    SoyViking,
    @SoyViking@hexbear.net avatar

    Racism against children must be one of these “western values” I’ve been hearing so much about.

    pedro,

    You’re mistaken on the definition of racism. This has nothing to do with race and everything to do with how France deals with secularism

    ArmokGoB,

    You’re arguing with people from Hexbear. You’d have better luck against a brick wall.

    robinn2,

    I agree, face the wall

    AntiOutsideAktion,
    @AntiOutsideAktion@hexbear.net avatar

    Yeah no shit a brick wall will let you say all the dumb shit you want without pushback

    Tankiedesantski,

    Hexbears: Stronger than brick walls.

    You heard it here first folks!

    forcequit,

    :)

    NuPNuA,

    Thicker than a brick wall maybe ;-)

    Adkml,

    Love to tacitly admit I can’t have a conversation if the other person points out things like “why what I said was wrong”

    nohaybanda,

    Step right up

    wall-talk

    usernamesaredifficul,

    secular means not taking a religious stance and being neutral about it. Being secular would mean letting people wear them as they choose not allowing people to wear religious attire is taking a religious stance and thus isn’t secular

    rather than secularity this is religious persecution

    nudnyekscentryk,
    @nudnyekscentryk@szmer.info avatar

    No, secularism is about people having the freedom of religion. Being forced by family or peers to wear religious clothing is incompatible with freedom of religion.

    CyborgMarx,

    Religion in France is racialized as it is in most parts of the world, pretending otherwise is just a denial of reality and history, the French state couldn’t care less for secularism on its own merits, it only cares about religion in the context of the eternal “immigrant” communities who it refuses to actually integrate because of the continuous French colonial mindset and a 19th century conception of frenchness which is centered around white pan-europeanism

    If secularism was the point, the french state would have launched a social crusade against the Catholic church decades ago

    It’s not a coincidence the law was implemented in 2004 at the height of the war on terror

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

    I think you’re underestimating how aggressive french laicity originally had to be to extract a church that was entrenched deep within government and culture and felt entitled to exert more ultraconservative political influence than it is today:

    en.wikipedia.org/…/1905_French_law_on_the_Separat…

    In 1886, another law ensured secularisation of the teaching staff of the National Education.[10][11]

    Other moves towards secularism included:

    the introduction of divorce and a requirement that civil marriages be performed in a civil ceremony[12]

    legalizing work on Sundays[13][14]

    making seminarians subject to conscription[14][15]

    secularising schools and hospitals[8][12]

    abolishing the law ordaining public prayers at the beginning of each parliamentary session and of the assizes[14][16]

    ordering soldiers not to frequent Catholic clubs[17]

    removing the religious character from the judicial oath and religious symbols from courtrooms[18]

    forbidding the participation of the armed forces in religious processions[14]

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

    Yeah, everything to do with secularism. That’s why France has Christian public holidays. And Macron called for closer ties between the state and Catholic church, and said Europe has “Judeo Christian roots”. Oh wait…

    loutr,
    @loutr@sh.itjust.works avatar

    Europe doesn’t have judeo-christian roots?

    Landrin201,
    @Landrin201@lemmy.ml avatar

    No, it has Christian roots. I’m Jewish, and I hate the term “Judeo-christian.” We do not believe the same things, and we do not share the same history. Christians have been persecuting us for well over a thousand years, they’ve driven us out of our homes, murdered us en-masse multiple times in multiple different countries in multiple different centuries, and have refused to give us any respect and dignity until after World War 2, when it became politically convenient for them to do so.

    Our values are different, our history is different, the only thing we have in common is that the Christians read our bible sometimes when it’s convenient for them to cite it to reinforce their intolerance.

    loutr,
    @loutr@sh.itjust.works avatar

    Fair enough, though one could also see it at recognizing the Jewish roots of the christian religion. And I genuinely believe that the holocaust and general hardships endured during WW2 bought the Jewish people a fair amount of goodwill, it’s not all cynical political calculations.

    Landrin201,
    @Landrin201@lemmy.ml avatar

    It got us so much good will that the French still ban us from wearing religious garments in public, and antisemitic attacks across Europe have been increasing steadily for at least 20 years, with governments seemingly unable to do anything about it.

    If you “recognize your roots” but changed your name and also have spent your entire lifetime attempting to murder your parents and grandparents, I think it’s fair to say that you don’t respect or care about your roots.

    loutr,
    @loutr@sh.itjust.works avatar

    the French still ban us from wearing religious garments in public

    This is completely wrong. You are legally free to wear a kippa or any other religious signs almost everywhere in France. Exceptions are:

    • in public schools
    • at work if:
      • you’re a civil servant
      • there is a legitimate reason for a ban (security, hygiene, …)

    That’s literally it. I lived in a Jewish neighborhood in Paris and saw kippas constantly, nobody gave a fuck.

    If you “recognize your roots” but changed your name and also have spent your entire lifetime attempting to murder your parents and grandparents, I think it’s fair to say that you don’t respect or care about your roots.

    OK?

    pedro,

    Again, this is not racism. There are white Muslims and black christians everywhere in France

    Adkml,

    Ok it’s a slightly different form of bigotry does that make it ok since your only argument seems to be “it’s not racism because it doesn’t explicitly say it’s discriminating against a specific race”

    pedro,

    You’re right, it’s not ok

    space_comrade,

    Racism isn’t exclusively about skin color you dolt.

    echodot,

    It sounds like they’re not saying that Muslims are not allowed to practise their religion. They’re just not allowed to do it in school, but no one’s allowed to practise their religion in school apparently so not it’s not racist.

    Harrison,

    “The law in it’s great magnanimity prohibits poor and rich alike from sleeping under bridges and stealing bread.”.

    A law can be applied equally to everyone and still target a specific group of people.

    h3doublehockeysticks,

    I would be less likely to reject that totally if it wasn’t because of the obvious inequality of enforcement

    TheCaconym,

    I’m French and actually he’s bang on the money, it’s entirely about racism under the bullshit cover of “secularity”

    pedro,

    I’m also French and I don’t know, maybe you’re right and that’s a way to hide the real racist motives. I’m probably biased because I dislike all religions equally though

    What_Religion_R_They,
    @What_Religion_R_They@hexbear.net avatar

    Dislike all religions equally… blah blah blah… some religions more equally than others blah blah

    Maybe think of the outcome of your country’s rightism instead of being so preoccupied with sticking it to the religions very-intelligent

    NuPNuA,

    When did the far left become so pro-religon? Back when I used to go to punk shows as a teen, the far left were militantly atheist.

    Devorlon,

    There’s a difference between not believing in a religion and not wanting the views of religion forced apon you. (secularism)

    Vs.

    Banning all religious symbolism. (Fascism)

    NuPNuA,

    I think fascism is a bit far unless they’re banning the religon at all and are investigating people at home or closing mosques.

    GarbageShoot,

    I’m an antitheist and, speaking as one, let me request that you pull your head out of whatever it is stuck in. France is notoriously Islamophobic and these are girls who are just wearing loose-fitting clothes because of a religious practice based on modesty. Is either the religion or the practice itself above critique? Certainly not, but forcing people not to do something so harmless is ridiculous religious discrimination.

    pedro,

    You know what? I’ll think about it

    ShimmeringKoi,
    @ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net avatar

    Props honestly, I definitely have a hard time not digging my heels in

    space_comrade,

    Do they ban catholic children wearing crosses around their necks?

    aaaaaaadjsf,
    @aaaaaaadjsf@hexbear.net avatar

    They do according to the article and what I know

    GarbageShoot,

    I think a better line is that they have school on Fridays but not on Sundays

    nudnyekscentryk,
    @nudnyekscentryk@szmer.info avatar

    Yes

    maporita,

    Yes of it’s visible. Religious symbols are allowed to be worn if they are not visible.

    fibojoly,

    Religion is a private matter. When you start spreading it all over the place, then no, it has no place in school or in our (France) society in general.
    I was the victim of this attitude when I was a teen and my family wanted me to follow our religion and yet I still agree with this attitude. My main beef wasn’t with the institution but with how specific teachers decided to deal with me. Ultimately I got over religion, and hopefully some of those kids will, too.

    NuPNuA,

    Firstly, Religon is a choice, nothing about your skin tone or where you were born scientifically dictates you must follow a Religon.

    Secondly, this applies to all religions in France, it’s just that one particular religion takes their costumes a bit more seriously than others so it seems like they’re being singled out.

    Tankiedesantski,

    What’s even the point of this line of argument? At best you prove that this technically isn’t racism in the strictest definitional sense but it’s still just as harmful to kids and Muslims as racism.

    AssortedBiscuits,
    @AssortedBiscuits@hexbear.net avatar

    It’s not racism, it’s just a racism-adjacent form of bigotry. Feeling owned yet, tankie?

    Tankiedesantski,

    Actually, I shot everyone in that refugee camp regardless of religion so I didn’t do genocide, just ordinary everyday mass murder smuglord.

    This was an actual argument that was run in one of the Yugoslav tribunals BTW.

    Nationalgoatism,

    If it’s not from the racism region of France than it’s just sparkling bigotry

    axont,

    I don’t think you could define this as strictly not racist, since “race” constitutes arbitrary characteristics decided upon largely by white hegemony. It’s how Africans became a singular black race despite being different cultures and language groups. It’s why Jews are sometimes white, sometimes not.

    It’s absolutely why most Americans consider a native Spanish speaker a different race, no matter how white they are. We’re in a moment where being Muslim is a racial marker excluding a person from whiteness.

    Here’s a trick I do. Go show an uniformed white American a picture of Bashar al-Assad. Every time I’ve done this, they’ll say he’s a white guy. Then tell them he’s the president of Syria and a Muslim. They instantly flip.

    AntiOutsideAktion,
    @AntiOutsideAktion@hexbear.net avatar

    “You can’t be racist against Mexicans because it’s a country not a race!”

    nudnyekscentryk,
    @nudnyekscentryk@szmer.info avatar

    Well, yes. “Hating Mexicans” is not racism. Just like hating the French, Poles, or Americans. It’s nationalism, xenophobia, chauvinism etc, but not racism

    pedro,

    Words matter. There are different ones for a reason

    usernamesaredifficul,

    “You can’t be racist against Irish Catholics because it’s a religion not a race”

    ShimmeringKoi,
    @ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net avatar

    Oh cool, looking forward to this rehashing of the 2017 era “Islam isn’t a race, therefore islamophobia has no connection to racism” rhetoric.

    Piye,

    Religion is not a race

    sooper_dooper_roofer,

    I want to ban people from eating tuna mayo sandwiches and rotting shark I’m not racist

    autismdragon,
    @autismdragon@hexbear.net avatar

    Race is made up. Anything can be a race if you treat it like one. And Muslims are treated like one.

    Piye,

    deleted_by_moderator

  • Loading...
  • forcequit,

    as if that’s not used as a cudgel against brown people anyway

    autismdragon,
    @autismdragon@hexbear.net avatar

    Really disappointing to see this 2012 discourse point brought up by a lemmygrad user. As a communist you should know that race is made up, a social construct with no basis in reality. Any group that is treated like a race is a race within that culture. And Muslims have been racialized in most Western countries, and ESPECIALLY so in France.

    “Its not rocket science” actually the subject of race is a pretty complex topic in sociology! Maybe you should read a book or two about it.

    Armen12,

    Religion is not a race

    Kosh,

    French people will claim that secularism is the most important value in all of France but them half of the national days off are Catholic holidays.

    Elderos, (edited )

    Because we keep national days purely for religious reasons, right? How about we abolish Halloween too, all those hypocrite atheists all over the world pretending not to believe in religions.

    Landrin201,
    @Landrin201@lemmy.ml avatar

    Also I’m willing to bet really good money that if a nun wore a habit to a beach, she wouldn’t get fined. A muslim woman wearing a burkini would though.

    loutr,
    @loutr@sh.itjust.works avatar

    There’s such a thing as cultural heritage. Revolutionaries tried to do away with it but it didn’t take. Most of them were pagan holidays which were co-opted by the church anyway.

    Schlemmy,

    Yes, let’s exempt them from proper education. That’ll solve the problem.

    electrogamerman,

    Its easy, get the girls some new clothes

    space_comrade,

    “We will forcefully integrate you into our culture by excluding you from our culture”

    Genius, what could possibly go wrong.

    huf,

    next up: “why do they live in segregated ghettos?!”

    GenderIsOpSec,
    @GenderIsOpSec@hexbear.net avatar

    france-cool:its so sad how those savages just refuse to assimilate into our superious culture 😔😔😔

    RaivoKulli,

    Make proper education mandatory

    CaptainAlcohol,

    Isn’t it already like that?

    RaivoKulli,

    I guess, though attendance in school isn’t

    Schooling in France is not mandatory (although instruction is). Since French law mandates only education, and not necessarily attendance at a school, families may provide teaching themselves, provided that they comply with the educational standards laid down in law and monitored by the State.

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_France

    bouh,

    The fascist way to inclusion!

    electrogamerman,

    Because muslims and Islam are so inlcusive, tolerant and respectful

    bouh,

    So it’s a competition and you have to be more of a zealot than them?

    electrogamerman,

    Bro, no one is more zealot than Muslims and islam, and France is stopping them, and im happy of that.

    bouh,

    No one is more zealous than the fascists we have in France. But apparently you share their views so whatever.

    electrogamerman,
    bouh,

    How is that relevant with France? Iran being fascist is completely irrelevant to France becoming fascist. The same kind of argument was used against Jews and roms by Hitler.

    electrogamerman,

    Yikes. What a poor comparison.

    When France suggests the imprisonment of Muslims, then I’ll be in your side. Right now Muslims are the ones imprisoning and killing women and members of the LGBT community for not following their ideals.

    bouh,

    Police is litteraly killing Arabs in france this year and imprisoning people who protest against that.

    electrogamerman,

    Source?

    bouh,

    France since June. No one in France is unaware of that. A boy was killed, which led to riots, which led to more kills and something like 3k arrests. “Peace” is back, but that only means that people killed don’t make the news anymore.

    electrogamerman,

    So no source. Go tell your made up stories to someone else.

    bouh,

    What the fuck how insane are you? You don’t know France obviously so what are you even trying?

    Schlemmy,

    People are down voting you but your sentiment is right. By excluding these girls from school you only punish the girls involved and deny them and the schools a chance to make things work.

    ParsnipWitch,

    They aren’t exempt from education, school is mandatory in France. It’s their parents who will get into trouble.

    Schlemmy,

    Do you think? Their parents have sent them to school.

    ParsnipWitch,

    Yes, the parents have to make sure their child gets to school and can participate in class. This also means they have to make sure their child (is able to) follow the rules.

    Anamnesis,

    People should be allowed to wear what they want. That said, nobody should voluntarily wear these terrible symbols of sexism and oppression. The literal religious purpose of the abaya and even the hijab is to promote modesty, with the rationale that men can’t control themselves and it’s women’s responsibility to do that for them. Fuck that message and fuck the ideology that it perpetuates.

    Piye,

    Exactly, I can’t for the life of me understand why so many fake leftists today would even defend this oppressive garbage, it makes no sense

    Anamnesis,

    Yeah, I’m a leftist and I find Islam as abhorrent as Christianity. I get that Muslims are a minority in the west, and so they’re often unjustly persecuted. But that doesn’t mean we should accept conservative nonsense just cause it comes from a minority religious group.

    electrogamerman,

    Im glad I read this. I support any minority and any freedom of religion, but not in a thousand years will I support conservative, ancient ideals.

    electrogamerman,

    But that doesn’t mean we should accept conservative nonsense just cause it comes from a minority religious group.

    Especially a minority religious group that is growing. I am all for tolerance and acceptance, but not of extremist religious groups. They need to be stopped before its too late.

    MashedTech,

    It’s not about defending THIS religion. It’s about religion in general. In our western countries it’s normal that this religion is the odd one out. While I do not agree with what everyone has to say, I still want to keep supporting freedom of religion. You get my point? Look I don’t agree with what you have to say but isn’t it nice that you can still express yourself here and have this conversation?

    electrogamerman,

    This is exactly the problem. If men had to cover their bodies, I wouldnt mind it, but because only women have to cover their bodies, it is sexist.

    Yoru,
    @Yoru@lemmy.ml avatar

    men have to cover their bodies as well, just not as much as women. I think it’s unfair to assume gender equality will ever be real because of the amount of difference they both have.

    Piye,

    Women and men ARE equal, what are you talking about? What’s unfair is not allowing women to express themselves freely because you can’t control yourself

    electrogamerman,

    What differences have men and women that make women have to cover all but their face/eyes and men dont?

    bouh,

    Modesty is not a religious value. Many philosophies promote it.

    Honytawk,

    Secularism doesn’t, and that is what France is.

    cyclohexane,

    As someone who comes from Muslim upbringing, I am 100% against face veils and abayas. But this is very clearly racist. Those girls are the victims, so why punish them even further? France is such a fascist place.

    Honytawk,

    Please learn what fascism means.

    And racism while you are at it.

    autismdragon,
    @autismdragon@hexbear.net avatar

    Is this a “Islam isnt a race” thing or? Because the these types of laws in France are very clearly targetted towards Muslims and in the west Muslims have been heavily racialized. Races are made up categories so anything can be a race if its treated like one, and muslims are treated like one.

    Also France might not technically be “a fascist country” but it has a lot of fascist policies and this would be one.

    cyclohexane,

    Thanks for the recommendation, but I already know.

    sooper_dooper_roofer,

    dude it’s literally a fucking scarf. you are saying you’re against people wearing scarves

    I am AGAINST women wearing JEANS AND T SHIRTS because they are being OPPRESSED into NOT SHOWING more of their skin in a WONDERFUL and MISOGYNY-FREE alternative such as a BIKINI or THONG

    usernamesaredifficul,

    it’s a dress but same difference

    cyclohexane,

    I am not against the abaya itself. I am against women or girls being coerced into any kind of clothing. Unfortunately, most girls wearing abayas are coerced by their families. But again, I am against France coercing clothing onto girls too. What they do is even worse.

    set_secret,

    can you be racist if it’s targeting a religion? honest question. I mean you can be any race and musilm. is it religious discrimination? maybe, but they ban religious garbs for all other religions too, ironically from my understanding, the whole point of it is to level the education playing field so religion isn’t discriminated against during the Education process.

    I guess you could argue some religious garb is heavily tied to cultural identity and that’s probably a fair argument that it disproportionately affects some more than others. Poples right to express their culture shouldn’t be infringed upon by the state, the policy is definitely messy, but i don’t think it’s racist.

    Pipoca,

    I guess you could argue some religious garb is heavily tied to cultural identity

    More importantly, some is tied to religious identity.

    For example, regardless of your culture, if you converted to orthodox Judaism you’d be obligated to wear a kippah if you’re male.

    ExLisper,

    I guess you have to check what % of native French are Muslim vs what % of immigrants from middle east are. If by targeting Islam you’re pretty much exclusively targeting immigrants I would say it’s kind of racist.

    luk3th3dud3,

    Clearly not racist. Same rules for everyone.

    gnuhaut,

    Weird how in practice this seems to only affect one group of people. Weird how all the bigots seem love this. But this couldn’t be the reason for this, could it? Who would ever try to exploit the widespread Islamophobia in France to gain popularity and distract from real problems?

    CybranM,

    Are urinals sexist?

    gnuhaut,

    Is the intention of urinals to bully women?

    luk3th3dud3,

    From what I understand, this affects everyone. All religious symbols are banned from school. I do not know what the rest of your murmuring has to do with the specific topic.

    tryptaminev,

    because the Abaya is not a religious symbol. It is a long dress that is worn for religious reasons, in this case to not reveal too much of the body. So if they want to ban this religious “symbol” then they need to ban all clothes that arent very revealing.

    luk3th3dud3,

    Yes of course, it is just a piece of clothing. A piece of clothing that women are forced to wear in public in the women’s rights loving state of saudi arabia. It is not about very revealing clothing, you are intentionally missing the point here. It is specifically about this piece of religious clothing.

    tryptaminev,

    You are wrong. There is no forcing of women to wear an abaya in saudi arabia. they are forced to wear clothes that arent revealing, but it is not specific to this kind of clothing.

    Also it is a weird flex to say that it is good to force women to wear certain clothing because saudi arabia forces them to wear different clothing. You still end up forcing women to wear or not to wear certain things, taking away their liberty.

    Again it is not a religious symbol because it is not defined by the religion, unlike the robe of a priest, the cross or the head scarf.

    If you want to ban the underlying “symbol” of not wearing revealing clothing, youd need to ban all clothing that does that and not just the abaya. But they wont do that because they are bigoted hypocrites.

    Pipoca,

    Uniform rules don’t always affect everyone uniformly. It’s really not hard to create uniform laws that disproportionately target a particular group.

    For example, North Dakota passed a law that required Voter ID with a residential street address on it. However, many Native Americans living on tribal land in the state didn’t have a residential street address.. Most people in the state who lived in a house that didn’t have an address lived on a reservation. The law was clearly racist and specifically designed to depress the Native American vote for partisan gain, yet used the same rules for everyone to do so.

    electrogamerman,

    France is such a fascist place.

    As opposed to muslims?

    CybranM,

    The middle east was a haven for philosophy and science, two thousand years ago. A shame so much of it fell apart due to religious extremism

    Piye,

    The Middle-East was also home to the Arab Slave Trade, which is exactly why everyone left and went to Europe

    And there was no Islam two thousand years ago, Islam is newer than Christianity. There were people living in the Middle-East before both religions started you know

    cyclohexane,

    It fell apart after colonialism, and then Western powers proceeded to fund extremist political groups like the brotherhood, Wahhabists, Al-Qaeda, etc. to combat the leftists.

    cyclohexane,

    Yes. “Muslims” aren’t (isn’t?) a fascist place

    sudneo,

    As you can read in the article, most simply agreed to wear something else. For those who refused, some talks with families will follow. To me it seems a fairly rational way to enforce the rule.

    TheCaconym,

    You are correct, this is part of a series of laws over the past decade specifically aimed at muslims in France, and it indeed issues from racism

    But also:

    Those girls are the victims

    lmao, wearing an abaya is not “being a victim”, it’s a fucking dress

    How about just letting the girls wear whatever the fuck they want to wear

    usernamesaredifficul,

    I never understood the depth of feeling over this.

    In the west there are laws about public indecency which legislate what people may wear outside and these rules demand women wear shirts but do not demand the same of men. We therefore categorically do not culturally believe in the absolute freedom of a person to wear what they will and in fact are arguing a position of where the line is on acceptable dress

    Nationalgoatism,

    In the west there are laws about public indecency which legislate what people may wear outside and these rules demand women wear shirts but do not demand the same of men.

    Such laws are categorically reactionary and misogynistic, and we should obviously oppose them

    usernamesaredifficul,

    so if you’re in a mcDonalds you think that a man should just be able to show anyone his dick then because that’s what a lack of public indecency laws would entail

    Nationalgoatism,

    I was mostly referring to laws setting different requirements for men and women’s clothing in public. However I grew up in a place where it was not unheard of to walk down the street completely naked. It was just something some people did. So I will say that there is a big difference between being naked and deliberately trying to flash your genitals.

    Harrison,

    In the west there are laws about public indecency which legislate what people may wear outside and these rules demand women wear shirts but do not demand the same of men.

    In some western countries, there are ones that do not make a distinction

    socsa,

    Man, the underlying philosophy of hexbear tankies really is hard to pin down. You defend it when China’s leader gets up and says batshit crazy stuff like “we need to focus on the sinofication of islam,” but you don’t like it when France says “we don’t want religion in schools.”

    It almost feels like that underlying philosophy is “west bad.”

    cyclohexane,

    Wearing a hijab or abaya is not “bringing religion into school”. It is bringing a person with whatever they always dress in outside into school. They are not trying to convert people or loudly calling for prayer in a disruptive manner. They are simply existing.

    MF_COOM,
    Honytawk,

    Nobody forces you to live there.

    AOCapitulator,
    @AOCapitulator@hexbear.net avatar

    Don’t know what this comment said but I assume it was speech-r cracker

    TheCaconym,
    tallwookie,

    hot take: just educate the kids regardless of what they’re wearing

    muad_dibber,
    @muad_dibber@lemmygrad.ml avatar

    Sacre bleu!!!

    espentan,

    Or not wearing. I just had a chat with the flying spaghetti monster, and it told me I had to stop wearing pants in public. I’ll be seriously pissed off if my lack of garments will stop me from getting an education.

    Nerorero,

    Don’t forgot your colander hat!

    SheeEttin,

    If you can do so in a hygienic and non-disruptive way, I’m all for it.

    Kuori,
    @Kuori@hexbear.net avatar

    "mon dieu! b-but that wouldn’t discriminate against anyone at all!’

    gnuhaut,

    New criminal offense: Learning while Muslim.

    electrogamerman,

    Huh? Muslims can still go to school, cant they?

    qyron,

    Only that is not.

    Crucifixes and other outter religious symbols are facing the same restriction.

    For what reason a particular creed holds such tight restrictions on what garments are considered adequate over others evades.

    This is a quite harsh way to impose a rule but it is a fair one. No one is being denied education. This is “keep your beliefs to yourself and do not impose it onto others”.

    bouh,

    That is blatantly wrong! What’s banned is the sign in the room, from the teacher, a representative of the state.

    Only Muslim get to get new laws to ban any sign of their religion. Cross pendant were never banned. Scarfs were only banned when Muslim wear them.

    Keep your beliefs to yourself should apply to fascists too.

    Honytawk,

    No, every religious sign is banned.

    Christians are just less of an arse when it comes to those symbols. They either stop wearing it or hide it under clothes.

    But if a Christian came in wearing a hat with a cross on top, they would also get send home.

    Same with orthodox Jews. They need to hide their payot or will be send home.

    If you can’t handle secularism in education, don’t go live in a secular country.

    Pipoca,

    How exactly do you hide sideburns?

    If they wear a hat to put them under, it’d probably be interpreted as a religious head covering and they’d be sent home anyways.

    Christians are just less of an arse when it comes to those symbols.

    That’s like saying that Christians are less of an arse when it comes to religious dietary rules. It’s just not a part of their religion in the same way that not proselytizing is a part of Judaism.

    Honestly, as someone who grew up in the US, Christian proselytizers are orders of magnitude worse than the modern orthodox kid in school who wore a kippah.

    bouh,

    That’s not secularism, that’s authoritarianism. I wish my country wasn’t becoming fascist.

    gnuhaut,

    So Christians are just less annoying than Muslims? And they should leave if they don’t like it here?

    Spoken like a true bigot. And you were trying so hard to convince others it’s got nothing to do with Islamophobia. Just can’t stop yourself, can you?

    qyron,

    I’m a little south of France, secularism and laicism are built into our constituion and we still have a rather fresh memroy of what fascism was and did to our people and country.

    Public school is to be non confessional, which implies you keep your personal beliefs private.

    The best parallel I can find to the muslim code of dress would be the monastic dressing of catholic orders. It is not optional, it’s enforced. But unlike the muslim dress code, the monastic dressing implies you are away from the common world 90% of your time and you actively and willingly chose that way of life.

    Who would care if a muslim was to go every now and then dressed in their religious attire? It would be a personal choice, perhaps something moved the individual to dress that way on a given day as they felt fragile for a loss or some other reason where they felt the need to seek comfort in their belief. But mandated out of oppression, because women tempt men and thus need to be modest? That is saying that men are forever children (and by default stupid) and force women into a perpetual motherhood, from birth.

    Catholics carry their cross around their necks but can easily tuck inside their clothes. Jewish men can fold and keep their head cover in a pocket (do women have any equivalent?). And so on and so forth.

    Pipoca,

    Catholics carry their cross around their necks but can easily tuck inside their clothes. Jewish men can fold and keep their head cover in a pocket (do women have any equivalent?).

    Are catholics religiously obligated to wear crosses at all times? Reform and conservative Jews only wear kippot while praying, but orthodox Jews wear them all the time and consider it to be an obligation to wear one all the time.

    Do you also require orthodox Jewish and Muslim children to eat pork and shellfish in school lunches, and appreciate how flexible catholic parents are about letting their kids violate the kosher or halal rules?

    qyron,

    Nowadays, I think it depends on who you ask.

    Growing in a somewhat religious family, it was never a mandatory item to carry, although it was a common sight on both men and womens jewelry, usually made out of gold or silver.

    Today I find it increasingly common to see more devout church goers using crucifixes or even rosary beads around their necks.

    So… it depends?

    Dietary difference is not on the table to discuss; it’s a non subject. Many people have differentiated diets for multiple reasons besides a given creed.

    And if the law stipulates that an animal must be slaughtered by a means that guarantees the least possible suffering, then the law is actually pushing aside religious precept over objective benefit.

    If my memory serves me well enough, jewish and muslim slaughtering involves slicing the carothide artery to allow the animal to bleed out, which is a slow and stressful death. In my very own barbaric country, that is considered cruelty.

    Although not a vegan or vegetarian, I find distasteful the image of an animal slowly fading away as it bleeds to the ground, when a more humane method os available.

    bouh,

    I am French, I know very well how it works. Laws that tell people how they can dress are not secularist, they are authoritarian. Removing children from school because they aren’t dress correctly is not secularism, it’s authoritarian.

    France is becoming fascist, that’s all there is to see here.

    qyron,

    Isn’t it in Cannes that beach goers cannot be by the boardwalk without their shirts?

    I remember seeing a news cover where a man, sitting on the dividind wall without a shirt, was acosted by the police and eventually walked to the police station.

    Is that fascism as well?

    I think it’s exaggerated but the reasoning behind the ordnance was enforcing common social etiquette/decorum.

    Do I agree with the principle behind this? No. But there should be no need to enforce basic social norms because one creed understands itself as being above all norms that are not perscribed by a book cobbled together from oral narrations, 600 or 800 years ago.

    Religious belief does not deserve special treatment from the law.

    Anyone from any non muslim country faces similar or worst impositions when settling on such a nation; “tolerated” is not “accepted”.

    bouh,

    You can generalize as much you like it’s irrelevant. The matter at hand is that a law is 1) telling women how to dress and 2) fucking with Muslims.

    The irony is that these dresses are deemed “too modest”.

    Also, what happen in a Muslim theocracy is completely irrelevant. We’re talking about France policy. France doesn’t have to become fascist just because theocracies are fascists. That’s not how it works.

    qyron,

    You’re in your right to dislike or disagree of my arguments. Could not care any less.

    The law is, to what I can gather, telling any and all religious confessions that no outter signs are tolerated in the school space. If the halfwit of the minister that divulged focused on the muslim attire, they are either idiots or aiming at picking up dirt to snuff some other event.

    I wonder if this thread would have garnered so much attention if instead of muslim women the event would have had involved jewish male teens and their sideburns.

    My parallel with the muslim nations was not to excuse a so called “fascist” imposition from the french government to cull religious zealotry but to remind what that same zealory aspires to have in nations where the creed is minoritary: total, complete, absolute and inquestionable control over people’s lives, including what they can or not wear.

    gnuhaut,

    “Ackshually, technically, totally fair.” This clearly only affects this one group of people in practice. The law was obviously made to garner the bigot vote and distract from the incredibly unpopular shit this government is pulling. This “technically” shit is only deflection. I mean it works great on people who are Islamophobic but don’t actually want to admit that to themselves. Plausible deniability.

    impose it onto others

    How are these children “imposing” anything onto others? You see one abaya, and now you’re forced to accept Mohammed as your prophet? Do you know what “impose” means? You used it correctly just two sentences before that.

    qyron,

    “Ackshually, technically, totally fair.”

    Want to throw “mansplaining” and “neckbeard” there too? Seems to be missing to finish the bouquet.

    This clearly only affects this one group of people in practice. The law was obviously made to garner the bigot vote and distract from the incredibly unpopular shit this government is pulling. This “technically” shit is only deflection. I mean it works great on people who are Islamophobic but don’t actually want to admit that to themselves. Plausible deniability.

    Could not care any less. By definition, I uphold that no creed, whatsoever, deserves special treatment. And fascism is the hot buzzer nowadays: everything and everyone is a fascist nowadays, the moment they are not willing to concede by default on any given point.

    The abaya is an outter sign of religiosity, usually imposed to women that come from muslim backgrounds or go into it. It is not a fashion statement or personal style: it’s forced differentiation that no one has to respect or endure.

    Have the girls and women have a say on what they use, not a father, or male relative or a religious figure nor a so called sacred book.

    impose it onto others

    How are these children “imposing” anything onto others? You see one abaya, and now you’re forced to accept Mohammed as your prophet? Do you know what “impose” means? You used it correctly just two sentences before that.

    Inadvertantly answered to this point above but I’ll expand a little more.

    Personally speaking, which makes the following an anecdote, which by the force of argument engagement voids it of validity, I actually find quite beautiful the elaborate embroidery and decorations the traditional northern Africa and Turkish garments can sport. I find it lavish, elaborate and just beautiful. The art and work put into it is fabulous. But this same elaborate work is usually absent in the abayas and other “traditional” muslim associated garments we usually see in Europe, which are often bland, in drab colors. Why?

    If it is about defending culture, which is the default argument, why aren’t those traditional garments sewn and used here, where they could even contribute to counter the prêt-à-porter seasonal discardable fashion? Make an actual contribution to the local culture and enrich it.

    tryptaminev,

    the Abaya is just a long wide cut dress. They are banning girls from wearing long dresses, because these are popular with muslims. If the girls decide to wear hoodies now to be conservative about what they show of their body it would need to be banned by that logic too. Basically anything that is not skin tight hot pants and crop tops should be banned because it might be worn by muslim girls to adhere to their religious values.

    This ruling has nothing to do with actual secular values. It is just to discriminate against muslim children.

    qyron,

    Tailored to specifications dictated by an unquestionable authority or are the abaya user free to order the garment to be tailored to their personal specific taste?

    Because to what I can gather it is supposed to be used as a form to preserve modesty, which implies simplicity and discretion.

    Flowing, straight cut dresses are not exclusive to the muslim world.

    Afiefh,

    And crosses are just lines meeting at right angles. And purity rings are just small cylinders. We don’t ban any cylinder or lines meeting at right angles. You’re making a sad attempt at a slippery slope argument.

    luk3th3dud3,

    Hoodies are not banned. You are making stuff up.

    Lhianna,

    According to German news (source) girls already had to defend their choice of wearing an oversized sweater and long skirt. That’s going way too far in regulation in my opinion.

    tryptaminev,

    i didnt say they are banned. but by the pretended logic behind the ban they would need to ban hoodies too. Which shows that the law is not aimed at enforcing secularism but at discriminating muslims. Most likely to appease the far right.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    what’s next sikhs can’t wear turbans in school

    Harrison,

    The law covers that also. All visible religious garments are forbidden.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    ok so straight up religious persecution of multiple groups

    CyborgMarx,

    Except the Catholics of course, can’t touch them

    Landrin201,
    @Landrin201@lemmy.ml avatar

    It’s so funny to me that so many people in this thread are like “well technically it also applies to christians wearing crosses! So it isn’t discriminatory.” I guarantee you that a kid wearing a cross won’t get in any trouble for it, they certainly won’t be sent home. They’d probably be asked to hide it better and let off by the teacher, if anything at all was said.

    These kinds of laws are classic examples of laws that are deliberately targeted at specific groups, but worded in a way which technically makes them apply to everyone, with the intent that enforcement will not target the group it wasn’t supposed to.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    also Christianity doesn’t have a commandment about people wearing crosses at all times so it’s not an equivalent ask to not wear a cross

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