Support NeoGAF

[The Doc]

What human dignity have to do with covering ? Are we lacking dignity because we are all in burqa according the the norms of amazonian tribes ?

"[women] should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; they should draw their khimār over their breasts and not display their beauty"

why doesn't it apply to men though?
I think you're just minimizing the issue (outright discrimination), reducing it to a matter of traditional attires/freedom of worship.

 

[Principate]

"[women] should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; they should draw their khimār over their breasts and not display their beauty"

why doesn't it apply to men though?
I think you're just minimizing the issue (outright discrimination), reducing it to a matter of traditional attires.

I thought adam and eve were naked

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

"[women] should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; they should draw their khimār over their breasts and not display their beauty"

why doesn't it apply to men though?
I think you're just minimizing the issue (outright discrimination), reducing it to a matter of traditional attires.

It's apply to men as well, it's the verse just before:

"Tell the believing men to lower their gaze and guard their modesty. That is purer for them. Indeed, Allah is Acquainted with what they do."

There is a general ruling in the interpretation of the Quran that anything that apply to women apply to men, except if there is a specific mention that it doesn't.

Like in this verse, the punishment also go for the one who accuse a man of adultery without the four witnesses, but the verse only speak about women:

"And those who accuse chaste women (of adultery) and then do not produce four witnesses — lash them with eighty lashes and do not accept from them testimony ever after. And those are the defiantly disobedient. Except for those who repent thereafter and reform, for indeed Allah is Forgiving and Merciful." [Quran 24: 2-5]"

(You can understand why you hardly find any report of punishment for adultery in islamic history)

It's of course not an accident that one verse speak about women and another about men, since women would generally more likely to be accused of such things and men will get free pass.
Also the modesty of women in the public sphere is emphasized because, we could say, Islam is against that a society equate the value of a woman with her attractiveness. It was the case in pre-Islamic arabia and we could argue that it is the case nowadays in the West, just look about makeup or clothing budget gender wise.

Clothing-wise, all traditional wearing for men is as covering as the women one. With westernization, women tend to maintain traditional clothing, especially if it have a religious base. If you go in Bolivia, it's the same. A lot of women is wearing traditional garment and the men are not.

In any case, it's prohibited for a man to wear anything revealing, even the shape of the thighs.

It's not like in the West we don't make a difference between men and women in clothing, in many countries you can go shirtless in the street if you're a man but not as a woman, why? Without mentioning the topless situation in many western beach. I believe it's widely forbidden in USA, no ?

 

[BarringGaffner]

No i don't deny the possibility,but i don't have any reason to believe it's the case. I know many muslim women in France with different degree of religious practice and i never saw fear as a criteria. Most of them would wear hijab if it was not so damn hard in the french society, especially to find a job.

Surely it's exist but it's not something exclusive to muslim communities. I can evoke to you a convert woman who was beaten up by her christian husband everytime he saw her praying. That say anything about christians ? Nope.

You don't have reason to believe people are living in fear due to religion? Are you seriously that oblivious? Go read some accounts of apostates and get back to me.

and yes that might say something about Christians if he is beating her because of his beliefs, and moreso if it was accepted.

Are you saying that i am living in fear? Without knowing it?
Now that's scary.

I'm not saying you are living in fear... of course you would know it if you were.

For a clear example- Lets look at the option of leaving the faith. If there is something to fear, or something to lose, for becoming an apostate, then of course we can't take you entirely at your word that you said you choose to stay in the faith. This does not just apply to Muslims.

And when members of ISIS say they are doing what they do for religious reasons, do we just take them for their word? No, most people will look for just about any reason other than what they are saying.

It's never as simple as just believing people. It's not sexist to say that.

 

[Despera]

It's apply to men as well, it's the verse just before:

"Tell the believing men to lower their gaze and guard their modesty. That is purer for them. Indeed, Allah is Acquainted with what they do."

There is a general ruling in the interpretation of the Quran that anything that apply to women apply to men, except if there is a specific mention that it doesn't.

Like in this verse, the punishment also go for the one who accuse a man of adultery without the four witnesses, but the verse only speak about women:

"And those who accuse chaste women (of adultery) and then do not produce four witnesses — lash them with eighty lashes and do not accept from them testimony ever after. And those are the defiantly disobedient. Except for those who repent thereafter and reform, for indeed Allah is Forgiving and Merciful." [Quran 24: 2-5]"

(You can understand why you hardly find any report of punishment for adultery in islamic history)

It's of course not an accident that one verse speak about women and another about men, since women would generally more likely to be accused of such things and men will get free pass.
Also the modesty of women in the public sphere is emphasized because, we could say, Islam is against that a society equate the value of a woman with her attractiveness. It was the case in pre-Islamic arabia and we could argue that it is the case nowadays in the West, just look about makeup or clothing budget gender wise.

Clothing-wise, all traditional wearing for men is as covering as the women one. With westernization, women tend to maintain traditional clothing, especially if it have a religious base. If you go in Bolivia, it's the same. A lot of women is wearing traditional garment and the men are not.

In any case, it's prohibited for a man to wear anything revealing, even the shape of the thighs.

It's not like in the West we don't make a difference between men and women in clothing, in many countries you can go shirtless in the street if you're a man but not as a woman, why? Without mentioning the topless situation in many western beach. I believe it's widely forbidden in USA, no ?

Since you brought up testimonies in the Quran, how do you explain this part of verse 282 from Al Baqara:

"وَاسْتَشْهِدُواْ شَهِيدَيْنِ من رِّجَالِكُمْ فَإِن لَّمْ يَكُونَا رَجُلَيْنِ فَرَجُلٌ وَامْرَأَتَانِ مِمَّن تَرْضَوْنَ مِنَ الشُّهَدَاء أَن تَضِلَّ إْحْدَاهُمَا فَتُذَكِّرَ إِحْدَاهُمَا الأُخْرَى"

"And get two witnesses out of your own men. And if there are not two men (available), then a man and two women, such as you agree for witnesses, so that if one of them (two women) errs, the other can remind her."

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

You don't have reason to believe people are living in fear due to religion? Are you seriously that oblivious? Go read some accounts of apostates and get back to me.

I am not denying the fact that this exist, in place like Saudi Arabia or Iran where atheism is skyrocketing between the youth and i can perfectly understand why, i deny the generalization you made. Most of muslim country don't have any law against apostasy and it would be even less the case in a western country. It's not rare in France to know people who are atheist or agnostic and have muslims parents, nobody make a fuss about it. Of course, if you are born in a very religious family you may face rejection, as it could be in some bible-belt state in the US.

But killing, no. Nobody is even thinking about it. Most muslim scholar in the West are very vocal against apostasy punishment and interpret the issue in a totally different way.

For a clear example- Lets look at the option of leaving the faith. If there is something to fear, or something to lose, for becoming an apostate, then of course we can't take you entirely at your word that you said you choose to stay in the faith. This does not just apply to Muslims.

So you should proove that most muslim women live in fear of being divorced and it's why they are covering up.

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

Since you brought up testimonies in the Quran, how do you explain this part of verse 282 from Al Baqara:

"وَاسْتَشْهِدُواْ شَهِيدَيْنِ من رِّجَالِكُمْ فَإِن لَّمْ يَكُونَا رَجُلَيْنِ فَرَجُلٌ وَامْرَأَتَانِ مِمَّن تَرْضَوْنَ مِنَ الشُّهَدَاء أَن تَضِلَّ إْحْدَاهُمَا فَتُذَكِّرَ إِحْدَاهُمَا الأُخْرَى"

"And get two witnesses out of your own men. And if there are not two men (available), then a man and two women, such as you agree for witnesses, so that if one of them (two women) errs, the other can remind her."

It's speaking about a specific issue in a specific time and was later abrogated by another verse. This is the first verse of 5 about the issue of women testimony. Many laws in Islam were progressively introduced by the Quran, alcohol prohibition faced the same process, you'll find verses who speak about the benefits of alcohols and not explicit prohibition. It's the same here. Women had zero voice in pre-islamic arabia, so it was preparing the ground for full equality in testimony.

In the end, one man = one woman in court. Except in place like Saudi Arabia or Iran or others countries, then you have to separate what is from the culture and the power structure, and what is about the religion. Like FGM who is specifically prohibited by the Quran and Hadith (as mutilation) but many muslim country do practice this awful act.

I can give you a video who go in this issue extensively but it's in french, with spanish subtitle if you happen to understand one or the other language.

 

[Despera]

It's speaking about a specific issue in a specific time and was later abrogated by another verse. This is the first verse of 5 about the issue of women testimony. Many laws in Islam were progressively introduced by the Quran, alcohol prohibition faced the same process, you'll find verses who speak about the benefits of alcohols and not explicit prohibition. It's the same here. Women had zero voice in pre-islamic arabia, so it was preparing the ground for full equality in testimony.

In the end, one man = one woman in court. Except in place like Saudi Arabia.

I can give you a video who go in this issue extensively but it's in french, with spanish subtitle if you happen to understand one or the other language.

Thanks for the link but I don't understand either language. If you don't mind can you summarize the reasoning behind why one man couldn't be replaced by one woman to testify in that particular situation?

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

Thanks for the link but I don't understand either language. If you don't mind can you summarize the reasoning behind why one man couldn't be replaced by one woman to testify in that particular situation?

Some commentator point out that the verse is speaking about a woman who have a bad memory, and that she'll need to be accompanied by another woman for her testimony to be valid. Other commentator also point out that calling another woman at this early period of women participation would protect her from intimidation from the male counterpart. Of course, some commentator induce that women are inferior in testimony, but they don't have any proof about that since we have many report from the Salaf (the three first generation of muslim, viewed as the exemplar generations) who accepted the testimony of women as equal as men in many different situation.

Source : The Study Quran

 

[The Doc]

It's apply to men as well, it's the verse just before:

"Tell the believing men to lower their gaze and guard their modesty. That is purer for them. Indeed, Allah is Acquainted with what they do."

There is a general ruling in the interpretation of the Quran that anything that apply to women apply to men, except if there is a specific mention that it doesn't.

Like in this verse, the punishment also go for the one who accuse a man of adultery without the four witnesses, but the verse only speak about women:

"And those who accuse chaste women (of adultery) and then do not produce four witnesses — lash them with eighty lashes and do not accept from them testimony ever after. And those are the defiantly disobedient. Except for those who repent thereafter and reform, for indeed Allah is Forgiving and Merciful." [Quran 24: 2-5]"

(You can understand why you hardly find any report of punishment for adultery in islamic history)

Clothing-wise, all traditional wearing for men is as covering as the women one. With westernization, women tend to maintain traditional clothing, especially if it have a religious base. If you go in Bolivia, it's the same. A lot of women is wearing traditional garment and the men are not.

In any case, it's prohibited for a man to wear anything revealing, even the shape of the thighs.

It's not like in the West we don't make a difference between men and women in clothing, in many countries you can go shirtless in the street if you're a man but not as a woman, why? Without mentioning the topless situation in many western beach. I believe it's widely forbidden in USA, no ?

I don't know much about the us laws , but in europe topless swimsuits are completely legal.
On the contrary , i never saw a man wearing a niqab or a burqa. You rhetorically ascribe it to some kind of "westernization" of the islamic world (by chance , just the men), and this is how our conversation ends.

Ps bolivia...nice try ahah

 

[Despera]

Some commentator point out that the verse is speaking about a woman who have a bad memory, and that she'll need to be accompanied by another woman for her testimony to be valid.

In this case why not let the woman with the good memory testify in the first place.

Other commentator also point out that calling another woman at this early period of women participation would protect her from intimidation from the male counterpart.

The narrative in this interpretation, while plausible, was not even alluded to in the verse.

The verse simply and clearly states, in a generalized tone that, in case there was no second trusted male witness, to fetch two trusted women in his stead. And the reason for having two women is so if one forgets the other can help remind her.

Of course, some commentator induce that women are inferior in testimony, but they don't have any proof about that since we have many report from the Salaf (the three first generation of muslim, viewed as the exemplar generations) who accepted the testimony of women as equal as men in many different situation.

The proof is right there in the Quran, written in plain Arabic.

since we have many report from the Salaf (the three first generation of muslim, viewed as the exemplar generations) who accepted the testimony of women as equal as men in many different situation.

But not in all situations, which is the main issue we're discussing here. Even if needing two women to replace one man for testimonies is limited to monetary affairs/disputes, it's still a clear case of inequality.

 

[Elchele]

People often point to France as a liberal and forward thinking nation, but why is it that they still can't grasp the idea of a basic freedom like freedom of religion?

If you move to a different culture, you should adapt to it. Having to hide your body because you're a woman is not something that screams "freedom".

Like it or not, Europe and América have a very different culture and traditions than islamic countries. If people want to move, they should accept that some adaptation is needed.

I guess not being able to stone women to death is also cutting the freedom of islamist people.

 

[Lamel]

If you move to a different culture, you should adapt to it. Having to hide your body because you're a woman is not something that screams "freedom".

Like it or not, Europe and América have a very different culture and traditions than islamic countries. If people want to move, they should accept that some adaptation is needed.

I guess not being able to stone women to death is also cutting the freedom of islamist people.

Hijab (and by extension the "burkini", which is basically a hijab swimsuit) is not an "islamist" or "extremist" thing dude. A lot of women in muslim countries wear it (ex. the middle eastern countries) and a lot of women don't (ex. the south asian countries). The burqa (full face cover) is a much more conservative look worn by the minority of muslim women (mainly older generations).

I really don't see how wearing a hijab (by the woman's own volition of course), goes against the culture of western countries. They are expressing their freedom of religion without hurting anyone; their faces are completely visible.

 

[GhostWriter24]

Don't be so disingenuous. This is not about fashion, but people being scared of Muslims and the bombs they hide under their clothing.

Woops.

 

[Htown]

of course a thread about France infringing on people's freedom of religion turns into a thread where people of that religion have to defend it

GAF threads about European xenophobia are a real trip

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

In this case why not let the woman with the good memory testify in the first place.

The narrative in this interpretation, while plausible, was not even alluded to in the verse.

The verse simply and clearly states, in a generalized tone that, in case there was no second trusted male witness, to fetch two trusted women in his stead. And the reason for having two women is so if one forgets the other can help remind her.


The proof is right there in the Quran, written in plain Arabic.


But not in all situations, which is the main issue we're discussing here. Even if needing two women to replace one man for testimonies is limited to monetary affairs/disputes, it's still a clear case of inequality.

The general reach of a verse is determined by the jurists and the verse don't say anything like "One man is like two women in testimony", the verse speak about bringing another woman to be able to help the first one. It's like when

It can and it was restricted to it's own time period and canceled by ulterior verses, it's what is called abrogation, naskh (نس&#1582.

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

If you move to a different culture, you should adapt to it. Having to hide your body because you're a woman is not something that screams "freedom".

Like it or not, Europe and América have a very different culture and traditions than islamic countries. If people want to move, they should accept that some adaptation is needed.

I guess not being able to stone women to death is also cutting the freedom of islamist people.

Plain stupidity. But not surprising. How many country in the world stone adulterer to death ?
Saying this is like me saying: "Oh my God, those american who want to eat hamburger in Paris, what next? Open carrying?"

Anyway Islam is not a culture but a religion, and muslims french are F.R.E.N.C.H. They don't have to adapt, they are not foreigner nor tourists. They are not moving from a place to another, they are 2nd, 3rd or 4th generation. Without speaking about the converts. They are have the same right and obligation as anybody else. Since everybody have the right to cover his body at the beach, muslim women should be able to do so.


The funny thing is even muslim country like Morocco is banning the burkini in many beaches to not upset westerners, and then they speak about "respecting the local culture" :/

 

[Cat Party]

If you move to a different culture, you should adapt to it. Having to hide your body because you're a woman is not something that screams "freedom".

Like it or not, Europe and América have a very different culture and traditions than islamic countries. If people want to move, they should accept that some adaptation is needed.

I guess not being able to stone women to death is also cutting the freedom of islamist people.

Bullshit. America has never required people to adapt. And these bans would be illegal in the US.

 

[Elchele]

Anyway Islam is not a culture but a religion, and muslims french are F.R.E.N.C.H. They don't have to adapt, they are not foreigner nor tourists. They are have the same right and obligation as anybody else. Since everybody have the right to cover his body at the beach, muslim women should be able to do so.

It would be foolish to think that western culture wasn't directly influenced by christianism, and the same applies to arab countries with Islam. Like it or not, those religions divided the culture of those two "regions".

France, as many western countries, have been moving away from christianism culture to a more secular culture. And now people want the western world to stop and move back to religion cultures of the stone age such as those discussed in this thread.

If you want to live in western countries, adapt. I doubt you could move to Saudi Arabia and dress, act, and do as you would do in France/USA/Argentina.

If arab people want to move to Europe or the Americas, they have to adapt. As easy as that.

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

It would be foolish to think that western culture wasn't directly influenced by christianism, and the same applies to arab countries with Islam. Like it or not, those religions divided the culture of those two "regions".

France, as many western countries, have been moving away from christianism culture to a more secular culture. And now people want the western world to stop and move back to religion cultures of the stone age such as those discussed in this thread.

If you want to live in western countries, adapt. I doubt you could move to Saudi Arabia and dress, act, and do as you would do in France/USA/Argentina.

If arab people want to move to Europe or the Americas, they have to adapt. As easy as that.

How can i adapt to my own culture ? From what ? I am muslim and i am no arab.

A woman wearing a burkini in France is not reversing secularism, she applying it: you can be french and choose the religion you want. The damn thing come from Australia not from Saudi Arabia.
In fact it's a western garment.
I don't know from what authority you pretend to say what should we European should do or not do.

 

[GuessMyUserName]

Punishing women definitely sounds like a brilliant solution to oppressing women

This ban doesn't get women to wear "normal" swimsuits, it just forces them out of the pool entirely. Congratu-fucking-lations France, true warriors for women you are.

 

[Dalibor68]

Religion is not a culture and burkini is not a cultural wear. It's about covering body parts. Traditionally in many muslim countries, women and men used to go to the beach with their clothes on. Burkini is a modern phenomenon who try to accommodate modern concept of beaching and watersports and islamic piety.

Oh please, don't try to paint this as some sort of "it's just a muslim thing to dress moderatley, it doesn't have anything to do with oppression of women". I see chechens here basically everyday where the women wear at least a niqab while the men are in shorts, t-shirts and sandals.

Ain't they?

it would be hilarious if it weren't so predictable

Something I've always wondering while lurking on GAF was why people make posts like this one. You do not engage in any conversation with this post, you just pat a poster that has the same opinion as you on the back in a way that is supposed to ridicule the opposing view and thus limit any conversation to be had.

Punishing women definitely sounds like a brilliant solution to oppressing women

This ban doesn't get women to wear "normal" swimsuits, it just forces them out of the pool entirely. Congratu-fucking-lations France, true warriors for women you are.

Again, I really don't see a scenario where suddenly all those muslim women that have been wearing burkinis (which aren't many to begin with according to french people in this thread) now have to stay at home and become isolated. Also let's not act like they don't have any other options. The thing that is imo much more likely to happen is that many of those (of the group) who so far chose to wear normal beach clothing will now choose to wear burkinis instead, because salafists and the like would succeed in pushing the norm of "proper islamic clothing" into the public eye making them feel bad if they don't dress "according to how a proper muslim woman" should dress.

I also disagree with this notion of "a Burkini is just like a hijab". A hijab is a headscarf and especcially in my area I see most young girls that wear it still wear western clothes like skinny jeans etc at the same time, whereas the burkini is full-body clothing that from pictures seems especcially designed to not show any female features as in curvature (and also like it's not very functional for swimming tbh).

 

[excelsiorlef]

of course a thread about France infringing on people's freedom of religion turns into a thread where people of that religion have to defend it

GAF threads about European xenophobia are a real trip

Ain't they?

 

[orochi91]

Hopefully the courts step in and reverse this nonsensical ban.

It's crazy and needlessly vindictive.

 

[Htown]

Ain't they?

it would be hilarious if it weren't so predictable

 

[Kill Your Masters]

It would be foolish to think that western culture wasn't directly influenced by christianism, and the same applies to arab countries with Islam. Like it or not, those religions divided the culture of those two "regions".

France, as many western countries, have been moving away from christianism culture to a more secular culture. And now people want the western world to stop and move back to religion cultures of the stone age such as those discussed in this thread.

If you want to live in western countries, adapt. I doubt you could move to Saudi Arabia and dress, act, and do as you would do in France/USA/Argentina.

If arab people want to move to Europe or the Americas, they have to adapt. As easy as that.

So what you are saying is, we should be as ass backwards as Saudi Arabia and tell people how to dress?

Because if we ban clothing and how to dress or act in France/USA, we are no better than oppressive countries.

 

[Regginator]

If you move to a different culture, you should adapt to it. Having to hide your body because you're a woman is not something that screams "freedom".

Like it or not, Europe and América have a very different culture and traditions than islamic countries. If people want to move, they should accept that some adaptation is needed.

I guess not being able to stone women to death is also cutting the freedom of islamist people.

You know what also doesn't scream freedom, being forbidden to wear whatever the fuck you want out of "public order" concerns.

Liberté, égalité, fraternité my ass.

 

[Dalibor68]

So what you are saying is, we should be as ass backwards as Saudi Arabia and tell people how to dress?

Because if we ban clothing and how to dress or act in France/USA, we are no better than oppressive countries.

This is so disingeniuos it's ridiculous. How is it the same? One says "hide your entire body or you're a slut/infidel/etc and face extreme punishment", the other says "wear anything but this because we don't want salafi influence, otherwise pay a 38€ fine".

 

[Kill Your Masters]

This is so disingeniuos it's ridiculous. How is it the same? One says "hide your entire body or you're a slut/infidel/etc and face extreme punishment", the other says "wear anything but this because we don't want salafi influence, otherwise pay a 38€ fine".

Ah yes because everyone wearing anything relating to Islam is salafist influence. The bigotry is strong in this one.

 

[danowat]

What happened to respecting the laws and beliefs of the country you are in?

I know when I have visited countries like Egypt and Saudi I make damn sure I don't do anything that would offend, even though those things are the norm in the country I come from.

White woman visiting, or residing in those countries can't generally dress like they would in their home country, and if they do, they get a heck of a lot of grief for it.

 

[MistakenMobius]

You know that French killed in 200,000 Catholic French people in the late XVIIIth century in order to put God where it belongs, this Burkini interdiction is actually quite mild.

Also note that Moroccan private sector is doing the same:
http://www.jeuneafrique.com/349805/...-reelle-confrontation-entre-pro-anti-burkini/

Situation is really tense in France for the moment:
The government is completely inefficient against terrorism.
And other group of population ( Chinese, Corsican) are starting to feel that they have to take the matter in their own hands.

 

[DiipuSurotu]

You know that French killed in 200,000 Catholic French people in the late XVIIIth century in order to put God where it belongs, this Burkini interdiction is actually quite mild.

Also note that Moroccan private sector is doing the same:
http://www.jeuneafrique.com/349805/...-reelle-confrontation-entre-pro-anti-burkini/

Situation is really tense in France for the moment:
The government is completely inefficient against terrorism.
And other group of population ( Chinese, Corsican) are starting to feel that they have to take the matter in their own hands.

Chinese??

 

[The Jackdog]

Or maybe they just want to live according to their faith ?
This is clearly sexist by the way, to deny even the possibility of muslim women agency based on cultural prejudice.

This is sexist but not making men wear them at all isnt?

 

[Markoman]

Banning Burkas...Yes, I see why but this is stupid, France.

 

[MistakenMobius]

Chinese??

http://mobile.lemonde.fr/societe/ar...munaute-chinoise-s-organise_4985818_3224.html


Chinese people are seen like Jewish people: rich businesspeople.

Then you have the fact that they might be illegal so lot of cash on them and not going to the police.

 

[spekkeh]

it would be hilarious if it weren't so predictable

Not as hilarious as spinning a burkini as female agency in the West.

 

[DiipuSurotu]

http://mobile.lemonde.fr/societe/ar...munaute-chinoise-s-organise_4985818_3224.html


Chinese people are seen like Jewish people: rich businesspeople.

Then you have the fact that they might be illegal so lot of cash on them and not going to the police.

What does this have to do with terrorism? And by "take the matter in their own hands" I thought you meant getting violent or something, but they're just demonstrating.

 

[ShironRedshift]

Not as hilarious as spinning a burkini as female agency in the West.

But yet the definition of "female agency" isn't actually getting to know these women, asking them what they want and letting them dress that way and allowing them to practice their faith in peace, but the brave, strong white man just inherently knowing better than them what's good for them no matter what they say (since obviously no matter what they say, they're really being oppressed--as enlightened members of the white tribe, we know this to be true and if they say otherwise they're just too brainwashed to understand the more enlightened ways and it's our duty to save them from themselves, so asking's just a waste of time anyway) and forcing that choice to be made for them, whether they like it or not. Such agency. Very wow.

 

[MistakenMobius]

What does this have to do with terrorism? And by "take the matter in their own hands" I thought you meant getting violent or something, but they're just demonstrating.

Because the terror attack obviously raised the distrust of Muslim ( I say that as a Turk)

I'm really expecting that if the government do not do anything, the Chinese community will have triad "protection " forming.

 

[DiipuSurotu]

Because the terror attack obviously raised the distrust of Muslim ( I say that as a Turk)

I'm really expecting that if the government do not do anything, the Chinese community will have triad "protection " forming.

Distrust? Again what does that have to do with Chinese agressions??

 

[His Majesty]

You know what also doesn't scream freedom, being forbidden to wear whatever the fuck you want out of "public order" concerns.

Liberté, égalité, fraternité my ass.

I think it's obvious you can't wear 'whatever the fuck you want'. There are already facial coverage and nudity laws in a lot of European countries.

 

[spekkeh]

But yet the definition of "female agency" isn't actually getting to know these women, asking them what they want and letting them dress that way and allowing them to practice their faith in peace, but the brave, strong white man just inherently knowing better than them what's good for them no matter what they say (since obviously no matter what they say, they're really being oppressed--as enlightened members of the white tribe, we know this to be true and if they say otherwise they're just too brainwashed to understand the more enlightened ways and it's our duty to save them from themselves, so asking's just a waste of time anyway) and forcing that choice to be made for them, whether they like it or not. Such agency. Very wow.

Such stanning for Uncle Tom. Nobody should deny his right to be a slave. Who are we Westerners to talk about sex equality anyway. No let's take an example from the fucking Muslim world, get the fuck outta here.

 

[Derwind]

But yet the definition of "female agency" isn't actually getting to know these women, asking them what they want and letting them dress that way and allowing them to practice their faith in peace, but the brave, strong white man just inherently knowing better than them what's good for them no matter what they say (since obviously no matter what they say, they're really being oppressed--as enlightened members of the white tribe, we know this to be true and if they say otherwise they're just too brainwashed to understand the more enlightened ways and it's our duty to save them from themselves, so asking's just a waste of time anyway) and forcing that choice to be made for them, whether they like it or not. Such agency. Very wow.

To think otherwise is to fully endorse Wahabism and radical terrorism. Glad you've seen the light.

Now go free women by telling them how to think, like a true patriot.

 

[Kurdel]

Because the terror attack obviously raised the distrust of Muslim ( I say that as a Turk)

As a society, it's our responsibility to make sure that terrorism DOESN'T work.

Admitting they managed to scare people to this point is like admitting defeat, legislating against muslims just undermines the odds of intergration and adds fuel to the fire.

 

[MistakenMobius]

Distrust? Again what does that have to do with Chinese agressions??

You act like French doesn't conflate the North African youth that robbed them one day for a potential Isis fighter in a few months/years.

 

[The Doc]

freedom of religion and equality of rights cannot be put on the same footing. This is the whole point.

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

Ah yes because everyone wearing anything relating to Islam is salafist influence. The bigotry is strong in this one.

It's the new way to be stealth-islamophobe in France: pretending to be only against "salafism" (if you ask them a definition of the word, the funny part begin) while none of the salafi scholars approve the burkini. Nor does any scholar really.

It's a compromise, a sign of social integration and agency.
But some people want desperately to lead us toward a more fragmented society.

 

[Rest]

If you move to a different culture, you should adapt to it. Having to hide your body because you're a woman is not something that screams "freedom".

Like it or not, Europe and América have a very different culture and traditions than islamic countries. If people want to move, they should accept that some adaptation is needed.

I guess not being able to stone women to death is also cutting the freedom of islamist people.

Women living in free countries are able to choose their own dress. Banning forms of fashion because you don't like their origins doesn't make people freer, it makes them less free. This swimsuit is the equivalent of a hijab for swimming, and many women who convert to Islam wear hijabs because they find that it suits them, not because someone is forcing them to hide their bodies.

If someone is forcing women to wear certain clothing in the west they have recourse against that person, the government has no place to assume that these women dress within their own definition of modesty because they are being coerced. If these cities feel that they need to help women to realize their own liberty then they need to establish outreach programs into the communities where they think there is a promblem to make everyone aware of their rights and ensure that they're educated about how break free of a repressive home life, not add new kinds of repression at a municipal level.

Laws in free societies need to reinforce the freedoms that people already have, not take them away.

 

[The Doc]

Women living in free countries are able to choose their own dress. Banning forms of fashion because you don't like their origins doesn't make people freer, it makes them less free. This swimsuit is the equivalent of a hijab for swimming, and many women who convert to Islam wear hijabs because they find that it suits them, not because someone is forcing them to hide their bodies.

If someone is forcing women to wear certain clothing in the west they have recourse against that person, the government has no place to assume that these women dress within their own definition of modesty because they are being coerced. If these cities feel that they need to help women to realize their own liberty then they need to establish outreach programs into the communities where they think there is a promblem to make everyone aware of their rights and ensure that they're educated about how break free of a repressive home life, not add new kinds of repression at a municipal level.

Laws in free societies need to reinforce the freedoms that people already have, not take them away.

the hijab is meant to state one's obedience to the sharia, as a greenpeace t-shirt symbolizes membership to a specific nonprofit organization.
The matter of debate here wasn't muslim fashion, but if shari'a complies or not with some fundamental human rights.
Beating around the bush won't help at all.

 

[Rest]

the hijab is meant to state one's obedience to the sharia, as a greenpeace t-shirt symbolizes membership to a specific nonprofit organization.
The matter of debate here wasn't muslim fashion, but if shari'a complies or not with some fundamental human rights.
Beating around the bush won't help at all.

Choosing whether or not to have a guiding philosophy around which you base your life is a basic human right, and choosing which that is is included in that, so yes, Shari'a complies with that. Once again, the government doesn't get to ban people from doing things because they don't like the reason they do them if their doing so doesn't hurt anyone else. Freedom of thought, freedom of expression, and the right to pursue happiness ensure ones right to follow whatever philosophy one chooses, and how much of that philosophy one applies to their own life.

Again, it's the government's job to ensure freedom, not take it away. If these cities feel that there is an infringement of people's rights going on in certain communities within them, they need to make sure that people know that they have a choice, not take choices away from them.

Not wanting governments to persecute ethnic and religious minorities, and reiterating the fundamental reasons why it's wrong for them to do so, isn't beating around the bush, but making excuses for governments that do so just might be.