Support NeoGAF

[Phil0sophy]

https://nytlive.nytimes.com/womenin...al-womens-team-in-iran-for-not-wearing-hijab/

In an email to Women in the World, Alinejad said, “At My Stealthy Freedom, we have been striving to expose the hypocrisy that the regime officials resort to with regards to compulsory veil. When you talk to the officials in interviews, they often downplay the importance of the compulsory veil by saying, ‘This is an unimportant issue. We have bigger issues in Iran.’ Yet, the case of Shiva and those of many other Iranian women who have seen their dreams shattered because of the compulsory veil depict a different picture.”

She continued, adding, “If the compulsory veil is such an unimportant issue, then why would people like Shiva be disqualified at the drop of a hat despite [after] having devoted 13 years of her life to this sport with the hope of bringing a medal to Iran? Why would the Iranian government spend huge sums of money and arrest and/or verbally warn millions of women annually? In 2014 alone, the official statistics of the government indicate that 3.6 million were arrested/warned/fined for their attire.”

Let's celebrate the freedom of the hijab GAF!

 

[hodgy100]

oh dont be so fucking disingenuous OP

you can be against oppressive cultures forcing the Hijab on women and ok with allowing women to choose to wear the hijab if they want to.

 

[azyless]

Things like this make me ashamed of the brand of western feminism constantly defending the hijab with no concern for the women actually suffering from it, even talking over them, telling everyone they're some symbol of feminism, what a joke.
If I remember correctly during olympics qualifiers there were also cases of players not being able to fly because their husbands didn't allow them too.
Won't stop some people here from defending Iran's treatment of women.

 

[hodgy100]

The hijab is born out of oppression, if you knew anything about the history of it rather than virtue signalling you would know that.

YOU are the one being disingenuous trying to make it out to be some sort of symbol of diversity or strength or empowerment when it's anything but that in Iran or anywhere else for that matter, the truth is it was made to be oppressive.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/realsp...-symbol-of-political-oppression/#2a16f919150f

im not virtue signaling and im not making it out to be some " symbol of diversity or strength or empowerment"

I'm saying that if in a country where the hijab isnt forced onto women and a women wants to wear it then thats ok.

if a woman is forced to wear a hijab then thats not ok.

Things like this make me ashamed of the brand of western feminism constantly defending these practices with no concern for the women actually suffering from it, even talking over them, telling everyone they're some symbol of feminism, what a joke.
If I remember correctly during olympics qualifiers there were also cases of players not being able to fly because their husbands didn't allow them too.
Won't stop some people here from defending Iran's treatment of women.

if you think people are defending this then i think you are completely missing peoples point. its disgusting that women are forced to wear the hijab.

im not defending iran treating women like this. im defending people's right to wear the hijab if they want to. wheras people like you and the OP seem to be keen to see it banned in western culture.

 

[azyless]

if you think people are defending this then i think you are completely missing peoples point.

Yes people are constantly defending wearing the hijab. Which is fine to a point, you can wear it if you want. But don't ignore that it's a tool of opression and always has been, and it's certainly not "feminist" in any way to wear it. And pretending it is hurts the efforts of millions of women trying to get rid of it in plenty of countries.
edit : And I don't want the hijab banned, don't make me say things I haven't said.

 

[hodgy100]

The Hijab's sole purpose for exsistance is to oppress women, how is that hard to understand?

The Hijab being used to oppress people is terrible and shouldn't happen.

But if someone wants to wear it then whats the problem?

like freedom to wear what you want. how is that hard to understand?

Yes people are constantly defending wearing the hijab. Which is fine to a point, you can wear it if you want. But don't ignore that it's a tool of opression and always has been, and it's certainly not "feminist" in any way to wear it. And pretending it is hurts the efforts of millions of women trying to get rid of it in plenty of countries.
edit : And I don't want the hijab banned, don't make me say things I haven't said.

I'm not saying its an icon of feminism and im not hand waving the cases where it is used to oppress people.

but the hijab isnt inherantly opressive its a piece of cloth. its the people and institutions that force others to wear it that are oppressive.

 

[Parham]

People should be free to wear whatever kind of attire they want. To that end, if a woman chooses to wear a hijab, that should ultimately be her decision alone and, obviously, not compelled by state law. It's absurd that Amini was denied the opportunity to be involved with the national team because she didn't wear a hijab in an Instagram photo.

 

[azyless]

but the hijab isnt inherantly opressive its a piece of cloth. its the people that force others to wear it that are oppressive.

Yes it is.

 

[Condom]

Yes it is.

Can you elaborate?

 

[hodgy100]

Yes it is.

So my friends sister that wears a hijab is oppressed? despite wearing it out of choice? and my friend who doesn't wear one out of choice isnt oppressed?

 

[Fliesen]

Yes people are constantly defending wearing the hijab. Which is fine to a point, you can wear it if you want. But don't ignore that it's a tool of opression and always has been, and it's certainly not "feminist" in any way to wear it. And pretending it is hurts the efforts of millions of women trying to get rid of it in plenty of countries.
edit : And I don't want the hijab banned, don't make me say things I haven't said.

I feel it's more the case of people arguing that dictating women's clothing is to be rejected in general - no matter whether it's dictating what they must or what they mustn't wear.

I don't think anyone's defending the hijab, niqab, burqa or any specific piece of clothing in particular.

 

[azyless]

So my friends sister that wears a hijab is oppressed? despite wearing it out of choice? and my friend who doesn't wear one out of choice isnt oppressed?

Can you elaborate?

The hijab is born out of will to opress women and has been used that way for centuries, and is still used that way in many parts of the world. You can't just pretend it's a random piece of cloth and separate it from what it represents.
Of course your friend's sister can wear it and no she isn't oppressed. But she is wearing a symbol of women's oppression whether she wants it or not, and I don't see many western feminists acknowledge that.

 

[Exodust]

The hijab is born out of oppression, if you knew anything about the history of it rather than virtue signalling you would know that.

It is, but those who wear it aren't always oppressed into doing so. I wish it was that simple, dawg.

I fucking hate Hijab, Burka and all variations. And I would say the most women who do wear it do so because they're made to. But in quite a few arabic countries where it isn't mandatory in the slightest. Quite a few women do choose to do it to feel "closer to god" or some variant of it.

I will not pretend I get it or that I support it, but yes some women do choose to wear it. So banning it isn't exactly fixing the issue.

Back on topic, it's not shocking to me that this happened in Iran. It's a bit more progressive than Saudi, but not by much.

 

[RustyNails]

The hijab is born out of will to opress women and has been used that way for centuries, and is still used that way in many parts of the world. You can't just pretend it's a random piece of cloth and separate it from what it represents.
Of course your friend's sister can wear it and no she isn't oppressed. But she is wearing a symbol of women's oppression whether she wants it or not, and I don't see many western feminists acknowledge that.

His friends sister might see it as a symbol of piety and her freedom from materialism. Why do you get to define what it means?

 

[Derwind]

I'm going to ignore all the chest thumping over what the hijab means and doesn't mean going on in this thread.

What I find funny about governments like Iran that wield theology like a blunt tool. No where in the Quran does it say the Hijab is compulsory(as far as I remember) but that it's optional. It's meant to be a symbol of piousness and nothing more.

Both men and women are advised in the Quran to cover themselves. But again, that's between the individual and God.

Has the Hijab been used as a tool for oppression, without going too far to cite examples, clearly given the topic of the thread.

Is that the only meaning it has. Not at all.

Nor am I going to be the arbiter of what a piece of clothing means to anyone.

That includes my Mom & Sister who both wear hijab. My Sister wears it occasionally and it's no one's business to tell her otherwise.

 

[siddx]

So my friends sister that wears a hijab is oppressed? despite wearing it out of choice? and my friend who doesn't wear one out of choice isnt oppressed?

I think he is indicating that choosing to wear the hijab doesn't automatically mean it's being done with out oppression. I live in a nation in the middle east at the moment and women in this country are not required to wear a head covering anywhere except a religious building. However many women still choose to do so because they are afraid of society's reaction and treatment towards young women who choose to go without head coverings. So there is really just an illusion of choice.

You can also argue that the religion itself is oppressive in that it is I infused into every single solitary part of life here, from schooling to the law to health care to relationships to food to dress. So anything related to Islam, included head coverings, are oppressive by default.

 

[azyless]

His friends sister might see it as a symbol of piety and her freedom from materialism. Why do you get to define what it means?

Nothing to do with what she sees, it's what it is.
But of course that gets denied too, god forbid religions aren't as perfect as they're supposed to be.

 

[hodgy100]

If someone wishes to wear any form of clothing that is their choice, I never said otherwise did I?

I am simply saying that the Hijab is and always has been a tool of oppression since it was created for that very purpose do you really find it believable that women would choose to wear this?

The only argument you could make for that would be that it's being worn because they are trying to remove the power away from the oppressor by wearing it for themselves but the fact is, the oppressor still wins, so where is the benefit in it?

Let's not pretend it's a fashion item here, it's buried in oppression and guess what? Oppressed people mostly don't speak out against things that oppress them.

If you want to believe the propaganda from individuals who wish to continue to oppress women then so be it but history shows exactly what this item is used for.

Let's see some views from women who "choose" to wear it shall we?

http://metro.co.uk/2017/02/21/found...ing-the-hijab-really-means-for-women-6461954/



So seeing her mother, sister and grandmother wearing a symbol of oppression made her want to wear the Hijab? That doesn't seem like a conscious decision to me, that seems like a pressured decision because every other woman in her family wore it.



Does that not sound like someone who is oppressed to you? A person who feels an item of clothing designed by men, that when they choose not to wear it makes them feel "dead inside" so then they feel forced to put it back on? That doesn't sound like freedom to me.



Or about what her husband/family has to say, how can something be liberating that is designed for the sole purpose of hiding who you are as a human being? Hiding the individual you are for the sole purpose of another human beings insecurities?

It sounds like Stockholm syndrome.

people wearing an item of clothing because their family members did is not oppression though. People often mimic and copy their family members and immediate environment. Thats just natural.

I agree its sad that someone feels so attached to an item of clothing that they feel "dead inside" without it, but unless thats because they've been forced to wear it by their environment then i see no harm, its like when i feel lost without my bag or if i go out without my wallet.

i just think you are focusing on an item of clothing which is a symptom rather than the cause of the actual oppression which is performed by their environment, the people and institutions that force people to wear such religious clothing.

I think he is indicating that choosing to wear the hijab doesn't automatically mean it's being done with out oppression. I live in a nation in the middle east at the moment and women in this country are not required to wear a head covering anywhere except a religious building. However many women still choose to do so because they are afraid of society's reaction and treatment towards young women who choose to go without head coverings. So there is really just an illusion of choice.

You can also argue that the religion itself is oppressive in that it is I infused into every single solitary part of life here, from schooling to the law to health care to relationships to food to dress. So anything related to Islam, included head coverings, are oppressive by default.

and I'd agree with you there. but OP is making out that anyone that wears a hijab is oppressed and the hijab is the cause of oppression, which is ridiculous. There are countries where women arent forced to wear the hijab and face no persecution for not wearing it (infact they probably face more for wearing it in the case of the US & UK).

its not as black and white as hijab = bad. it depends on the country, environment, family and local culture.

obviously the culture in iran surrounding the hijab is opressive. but no one is denying that here. but that doesn't all of a sudden mean that all women wearing it are oppressed and that the hijab is inherently oppressive. Do you not think that progressive muslims would like to reclaim the hijab in the same way that some racial slurs of the past have been reclaimed by their oppressors.

 

[kingslunk]

So my friends sister that wears a hijab is oppressed? despite wearing it out of choice? and my friend who doesn't wear one out of choice isnt oppressed?

Depends why she is wearing it honestly. If she's wearing it due to a fear of a god then yeah I think it's safe to say she's being oppressed.

 

[RustyNails]

Nothing to do with what she sees, it's what it is.
But of course that gets denied too, god forbid religions aren't as perfect as they're supposed to be.

Why do you think your interpretation of what Hijab is is more valid than hers?

 

[G.ZZZ]

So my friends sister that wears a hijab is oppressed? despite wearing it out of choice? and my friend who doesn't wear one out of choice isnt oppressed?

Historical context and internalized oppression are a thing.

The case of the veil is a bit peculiar because here the people who suffered oppression for centuries and still do right now are the ones who wears it, so it become the question become: "at which point societal pressure become coercion?" which is obviously extremely context sensitive and as such, unanswerable as a whole but only as a singular.

It's not something that you resolve by forbidding the veil for sure. But forbidding it is easy and cheap and bring you votes, unlike offering proper support for women's rights.

 

[azyless]

Why do you think your interpretation of what Hijab is is more valid than hers?

Because it's not an interpretation, it's a fact, it's why the hijab exists and has existed for centuries. Someone can wear it for whatever reason she wants but the hijab itself will always be a symbol of women's oppression, I don't even know how someone can deny that.

 

[Lifeline]

No one should be forced to wear a article of clothing. No one should be banned from wearing a article of clothing.

It's that simple.

 

[Fliesen]

Nothing to do with what she sees, it's what it is.
But of course that gets denied too, god forbid religions aren't as perfect as they're supposed to be.

like, who in this thread said anything remotely close to that? Whom are you talking to?

Also, there's plenty of women's wear with varying degrees of 'gender oppression'. It's not just religious clothing. The Austrian / Bavarian Dirndl - something that many women and girls proudly wear - has the marital status, even whether or not the woman's still a virgin, coded in how you wear the ribbon around your waist.
An incredibly objectifying piece of clothing, if you ask me. Still, many women love wearing it, because they think it looks neat and 'traditional'. - am i going to tell them they're wrong for liking it? Hell naw.

"YOU MUSTN'T LIKE THIS!" feels like a rather patronizing approach to empowering women, imho :/

 

[msdstc]

No one should be forced to wear a article of clothing. No one should be banned from wearing a article of clothing.

It's that simple.

So this may be an extreme example, but how do you feel about wearing swastikas or other oppressive symbols?

 

[azyless]

"YOU MUSTN'T LIKE THIS!" feels like a rather patronizing approach to empowering women, imho :/

Not what I'm saying at all. You can like something and acknowledge that it has heavy symbolic values.

 

[biggersmaller]

Iran represents a way of life that actively discourages baseline feminist principles established 100 years ago. Would people defending the "choice" women in Islamic countries have to wear a Hijab have no issue with American social progress regressing to when women did not wear jeans? I mean, it was their "choice" to wear a dress and most women were happy to defend that way of life.

 

[RustyNails]

Because it's not an interpretation, it's a fact, it's why the hijab exists and has existed for centuries. Someone can wear it for whatever reason she wants but the hijab itself will always be a symbol of women's oppression, I don't even know how someone can deny that.

For you its a fact. Its not universally accepted. You don't get to define it's meaning to someone who cherishes it without "we know whats best for you, women" attitude. Calling it a symbol of oppression doesnt make it so. It can act as whatever symbol women who freely chose to wear it can prescribe to it. It can be part of their identity, and therefore their agency. It seems like you never heard a Muslim woman answer why she wears it and just coming to post with "religion bad, oppression, sexism!" angle.

 

[Lifeline]

So this may be an extreme example, but how do you feel about wearing swastikas or other oppressive symbols?

Wear it all you want. It's not illegal right now and it shouldn't be in the future.

 

[msdstc]

Wear it all you want. It's not illegal right now and it shouldn't be.

Thats fair. I tend to agree with this argument.

 

[Fliesen]

Not what I'm saying at all. You can like something and acknowledge that it has heavy symbolic values.

Symbolic values can and do change though. Just like the Nazis ruined the Swastika, modern, empowered muslim women could elevate headscarves to something positive.

I don't see the point of being so focused on "But back then, they were used to ..." when (certain) women, right now are trying to redefine it for themselves.
It's like not scrolling further than the etymology section on any Wikipedia article, because original intent / meaning is all that matters :/

Of course - where it is still used as means of oppression, like in the case of the OP, it is to be rejected. That goes without saying.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

When I'm walking around campus today I'll be sure to free those blind girls going to class.

I'm sure they will understand why I'm ripping off their hijab from their head as I scream, "Freeeeeeeeedoooooooooom!".

I mean, it's not like government authoritarianism is completely different from just people wearing stuff they want.

 

[azyless]

For you its a fact. Its not universally accepted. You don't get to define it's meaning to someone who cherishes it without "we know whats best for you, women" attitude. Calling it a symbol of oppression doesnt make it so.

Right, I'm sure all these women back in the year 600 suddenly all started covering themselves by choice. If 1500 years of being used as a tool of oppression doesn't make it a symbol I don't know what does.
But then again according to you apostasy and blasphemy laws have nothing to do with religion (and Chechen leaders sending gay men to extermination camps are gay themselves !) so I think I'm done answering you.

Symbolic values can and do change though. Just like the Nazis ruined the Swastika, modern, empowered muslim women could elevate headscarves to something positive.

I mean the premise of this thread is that it is still used that way in a large part of the world.

 

[Shito]

Wear it all you want. It's not illegal right now and it shouldn't be in the future.

It is very much illegal in plenty of countries.
That idea that the freedom of speech should be absolute is very american-centric, in quite a lot of other countries it is tempered by making hate-speech illegal.

 

[RustyNails]

When I'm walking around campus today I'll be sure to free those blind girls going to class.

I'm sure they will understand why I'm ripping off their hijab from their head as I scream, "Freeeeeeeeedoooooooooom!".

Oh and they will just leap into your arms and call you their knight in shining armor!

Right, I'm sure all these women back in the year 600 suddenly all started covering themselves by choice. If 1500 years of being used as a tool of oppression doesn't make it a symbol I don't know what does.
But then again according to you apostasy and blasphemy laws have nothing to do with religion (and Chechen leaders sending gay men to extermination camps are gay themselves !) so I think I'm done answering you.

Meltdown in aisle 11.

 

[biggersmaller]

For you its a fact. Its not universally accepted. You don't get to define it's meaning to someone who cherishes it without "we know whats best for you, women" attitude. Calling it a symbol of oppression doesnt make it so. It can act as whatever symbol women who freely chose to wear it can prescribe to it. It can be part of their identity, and therefore their agency. It seems like you never heard a Muslim woman answer why she wears it and just coming to post with "religion bad, oppression, sexism!" angle.

Obviously anyone is allowed to love and cherish whatever they like. However, universal sign-off is not required for the Hijab to symbolize anti-feminism. Just because a religion created something doesn't mean they have control its meaning.

 

[jay]

People can choose regressive, oppressive things for themselves. Perceived choice alone does not make a thing good or worth defending.

 

[MUnited83]

I see you are back to argue against imaginary boogeymen and picking on women statements and saying they are lies and "here is how they really feel". So much for being against oppression.

 

[creatchee]

For you its a fact. Its not universally accepted. You don't get to define it's meaning to someone who cherishes it without "we know whats best for you, women" attitude. Calling it a symbol of oppression doesnt make it so. It can act as whatever symbol women who freely chose to wear it can prescribe to it. It can be part of their identity, and therefore their agency. It seems like you never heard a Muslim woman answer why she wears it and just coming to post with "religion bad, oppression, sexism!" angle.

If a few words in this were swapped to "southerner(s)", "Confederate flag" and "racism", would your position change?

 

[dakun]

People can choose regressive, oppressive things for themselves. Perceived choice alone does not make a thing good or worth defending.

Cultural oppression is a real. Woman who think they had a choice in wearing a hijab when that choice was already made for them when they were born as a girl.

 

[Fliesen]

If a few words in this were swapped to "southerner(s)", "Confederate flag" and "racism", would your position change?

i do believe there's a difference in oppressors (white folks from southern states) embracing the item of oppression as opposed to (former?) oppressees.

But it's way too hard to draw clean-cut analogies here. Neither the Swastika nor the Confed flag comparison is really working, in this case - because we're not talking about afro americans or jews sporting these symbols :/

If the members of the jewish community in Europe were to adopt armbands with the Star of David as a sign of post-war empowerment, that'd maybe be a more apt analogy, wouldn't it?

 

[Derwind]

If we're citing Swatsikas & Confederate Flags, the examples are only correct if the oppressed are redefining the meaning of it. Why would the oppressors (Racists & Nazis) be the ones redefining the meaning?

*goes back into the corner*

Edit; Beaten dammit

 

[womfalcs3]

oh dont be so fucking disingenuous OP

you can be against oppressive cultures forcing the Hijab on women and ok with allowing women to choose to wear the hijab if they want to.

I agree.

 

[creatchee]

i do believe there's a difference in oppressors (white folks from southern states) embracing the item of oppression as opposed to (former?) oppressees.

But it's way too hard to draw clean-cut analogies here. Neither the Swastika nor the Confed flag comparison is really working, in this case - because we're not talking about afro americans or jews sporting these symbols :/

If the members of the jewish community in Europe were to adopt armbands with the Star of David as a sign of post-war empowerment, that'd maybe be a more apt analogy, wouldn't it?

If we're citing Swatsikas & Confederate Flags, the examples are only correct if the oppressed are redefining the meaning of it. Why would the oppressors (Racists & Nazis) be the ones redefining the meaning?

*goes back into the corner*

Edit; Beaten dammit

Heard.

 

[Fliesen]

Yes Bernardo, imaginary boogeymen, that's exactly what this is, known oppression of women and an example of it in the OP is imaginary.

Why don't you go and crawl off to a mod and complain about me being "Islamaphobic" or just stay here and argue with me instead? It doesn't matter what you do, doesn't make what I am saying any less real.

You live in an imaginary land of make believe, you value your own perceived virtue over the value of human beings lives, that's YOUR problem.

I am completely against oppression, hence my stance against religions in general, I am also against the oppression of speech and ideas, something that seems to be an underlying theme on here these days because of people like yourself trying to dictate and shut down discussions with identity politics and emotion or because it offends you rather than things based on reality and facts.

I didn't say the womens statements were lies, they might truly believe that to be the case and it might 100% be the case but I also understand that when something is used as an oppressive tool, the people being oppressed struggle to state the truth, this much should be apparent to anybody with half a brain cell, it's the reason these things exist in the first place.

I was giving my opinion on their statements.

People can ultimately choose to wear whatever they wish (within reason, given the security concerns, anything covering individuals face and concealing their identity should be banned in certain circumstances and settings as far as I am concerned and that doesn't just mean religious garments either.)

well, uhm, so i guess we're all in agreement, then? cool.

 

[Skyzard]

Nuns are being oppressed by wearing hair cover.

-said no one, because it's not Islam.

Half a billion people are muslim women. If some want to wear a hijab, I'm not going to condemn them for it like a moron. If they're being forced to wear (or not wear) it, that's a completely different story.

oh dont be so fucking disingenuous OP

you can be against oppressive cultures forcing the Hijab on women and ok with allowing women to choose to wear the hijab if they want to.

Yep.

 

[Derwind]

Well that is exactly what people are arguing here when talking about the Hijab and arguing it's a choice, like I said before.

So, whom and in what way can a hijab be redefined into something other than a "tool of oppression"?

Because women who wear it by choice either exist or don't.

Or choice is real or not.

As long as we agree that the my definition is the only correct definition, it serves to be whatever I deem it , and by choosing to wear it and doing so they are wearing a symbol I've defined , then yes.

Fixed.

 

[MUnited83]

Yes Bernardo, imaginary boogeymen, that's exactly what this is, known oppression of women and an example of it in the OP is imaginary.

Why don't you go and crawl off to a mod and complain about me being "Islamaphobic" or just stay here and argue with me instead? It doesn't matter what you do, doesn't make what I am saying any less real.

You live in an imaginary land of make believe, you value your own perceived virtue over the value of human beings lives, that's YOUR problem.

I am completely against oppression, hence my stance against religions in general, I am also against the oppression of speech and ideas, something that seems to be an underlying theme on here these days because of people like yourself trying to dictate and shut down discussions with identity politics and emotion or because it offends you rather than things based on reality and facts.

I didn't say the womens statements were lies, they might truly believe that to be the case and it might 100% be the case but I also understand that when something is used as an oppressive tool, the people being oppressed struggle to state the truth, this much should be apparent to anybody with half a brain cell, it's the reason these things exist in the first place.

I was giving my opinion on their statements.

People can ultimately choose to wear whatever they wish (within reason, given the security concerns, anything covering individuals face and concealing their identity should be banned in certain circumstances and settings as far as I am concerned and that doesn't just mean religious garments either.)

Both you and azyless have both repeatedly framed your arguments as if somehow any people here support government's forcing the use of the hijab. Guess fucking what : no one here supports that, so you might want to stop complaining about those imaginary arguments.
"My opinion"? Bro you outright called every single one of them as liars and said every single one of them is wearing it out of internalised oppression. It's completely fucking hilarious that you continuosly complain about opression when you continue to tell women what they must be thinking or feeling or that can't possibly make choices on their own.
"Completely against opression" my fucking ass. You're just against opression by others. You'd take the place of those opressors in a second if you could.

I'm not going to argue with you. Your shtick is old as a fuck and your intentions are clear as hell. I've argued with you on several threads and I know the exact kind of person you are. You can go right back to Voat. That you somehow still have thread making privilege is ridiculous.

 

[TWrecks310]

You guys that are so anti-hijab might want to talk to a woman that wears one out of choice.

 

[azyless]

Both you and azyless have both repeatedly framed your arguments as if somehow any people here support government's forcing the use of the hijab. Guess fucking what : no one here supports that, so you might want to stop complaining about those imaginary arguments.

Not what I said at all.