They’re equating a piece of clothing with its use by autocratic regimes to oppress women, while conveniently ignoring the fact that outside of those autocratic regimes, in the most progressive countries in the world women choose to wear burqas and other similar articles of clothing of their own free will every day.
And I’m saying this as an atheist American. I see absolutely no difference between a woman choosing to wear a burqa or to wear the attire of a catholic nun or to wear a potato sack. What she chooses to wear is her own damn business.
You think that muslim women aren’t oppressed in western countries? Sure, the government won’t lock them up, but their social circles will shun them if they don’t comply.
First of all you do not know whether they wear it out of being opressed or their own choice.
Second of all by banning these clothing all you will do is add more opression. In the first level, by simply taking away from their choice and on the second level because the opressed ones will be forced to stay home when they cannot wear these clothes.
What would actually help would be community outrech and social services that can support opressed women.
But that would actually help them and respect womens rights. The recent bans and appeals for bans are just there to opress muslim women, because that is what the far right and fascists like. it is not there to help them. France has denied multiple girls education, because they were not adhering to the recent ban on abayas.
There are so many cases of women being absolutely bullied, to killed by their close (and even foreign) social circles in the west simply for taking out the hijab. Many. Many in the UK (where the author of this article column is from). Look up a youtuber named Dina Tokyo for a sample.
The writer of that column, his main argument, if it does not affect, it means I don’t care. But this affects millions of opressed women in the UK.
But none of these women are helped by a ban to wear such clothes. It is just reinforcing the separation and making the problem “go away” by making it invisible. Interestingly enough it is the same approach of conservatives and the far right to poverty and any other social issue
But none of these women are helped by a ban to wear such clothes.
It would give them a breathing space, and another lifeline for every women who is forced to wear it. I know lots of white liberals who think islam is such a marginalized religion because “non-white origin”, but the reality is, muslim women are either brainwashed from childhood to wear it or are forced into it. Enforcing such laws would alleviate and lead many of the to question the circumstances of “why do we wear it”. If you are unaware, the history of the hijab dress in Islam started after Omar (one of the Caliphate) and bff with Mohamed harassed the latter’s wife so that Allah would tell Mohamed to wear the hijab. He used to follow them when they pee or take a shit, to creep on them to force a “revelation” as if their God needed a reminder.
That aside, many many many muslims have no idea about these origins and are as brainwashed as white liberals into the “religion fo peace”. And that’s why islam inherently is an anti-feminist religion. Just look up on r/exmuslim how many women were distraught for being forces to wear the hijab. This law is less than an ideal solution, but it is better than nothing.
If you think that forcing people to do something to get them out of some brainwash you claim them to have, you are just trying to opress and brainwash them yourself. It is also amazing, that you immediately use fascist buzzwords like “white liberal” to reduce the arguments to “haha you are just unenlightened”, which is the same way the opressive fundamentalists think.
Sure and everyone in all the social circles I grew up in have shunned me for giving up my faith. The government banning me from choosing to wear a cross necklace wouldn’t change that or give me any more freedom of choice.
Slaves are rarely dangerous.
Are you implying women in burqas are slaves? lol
They’re equating a piece of clothing with its use by autocratic regimes to oppress women, while conveniently ignoring the fact that outside of those autocratic regimes, in the most progressive countries in the world women choose to wear burqas and other similar articles of clothing of their own free will every day.
And I’m saying this as an atheist American. I see absolutely no difference between a woman choosing to wear a burqa or to wear the attire of a catholic nun or to wear a potato sack. What she chooses to wear is her own damn business.
You think that muslim women aren’t oppressed in western countries? Sure, the government won’t lock them up, but their social circles will shun them if they don’t comply.
First of all you do not know whether they wear it out of being opressed or their own choice.
Second of all by banning these clothing all you will do is add more opression. In the first level, by simply taking away from their choice and on the second level because the opressed ones will be forced to stay home when they cannot wear these clothes.
What would actually help would be community outrech and social services that can support opressed women.
But that would actually help them and respect womens rights. The recent bans and appeals for bans are just there to opress muslim women, because that is what the far right and fascists like. it is not there to help them. France has denied multiple girls education, because they were not adhering to the recent ban on abayas.
There are so many cases of women being absolutely bullied, to killed by their close (and even foreign) social circles in the west simply for taking out the hijab. Many. Many in the UK (where the author of this article column is from). Look up a youtuber named Dina Tokyo for a sample.
The writer of that column, his main argument, if it does not affect, it means I don’t care. But this affects millions of opressed women in the UK.
But none of these women are helped by a ban to wear such clothes. It is just reinforcing the separation and making the problem “go away” by making it invisible. Interestingly enough it is the same approach of conservatives and the far right to poverty and any other social issue
It would give them a breathing space, and another lifeline for every women who is forced to wear it. I know lots of white liberals who think islam is such a marginalized religion because “non-white origin”, but the reality is, muslim women are either brainwashed from childhood to wear it or are forced into it. Enforcing such laws would alleviate and lead many of the to question the circumstances of “why do we wear it”. If you are unaware, the history of the hijab dress in Islam started after Omar (one of the Caliphate) and bff with Mohamed harassed the latter’s wife so that Allah would tell Mohamed to wear the hijab. He used to follow them when they pee or take a shit, to creep on them to force a “revelation” as if their God needed a reminder.
That aside, many many many muslims have no idea about these origins and are as brainwashed as white liberals into the “religion fo peace”. And that’s why islam inherently is an anti-feminist religion. Just look up on r/exmuslim how many women were distraught for being forces to wear the hijab. This law is less than an ideal solution, but it is better than nothing.
If you think that forcing people to do something to get them out of some brainwash you claim them to have, you are just trying to opress and brainwash them yourself. It is also amazing, that you immediately use fascist buzzwords like “white liberal” to reduce the arguments to “haha you are just unenlightened”, which is the same way the opressive fundamentalists think.
Sure and everyone in all the social circles I grew up in have shunned me for giving up my faith. The government banning me from choosing to wear a cross necklace wouldn’t change that or give me any more freedom of choice.
A cross necklace is a little different than having to cover your head or your entire body, don’t you think?
My point was more that more oppression is not the answer to oppression.
Removing one of the ways someone is being oppressed doesn’t sound oppressive to me
Removing the freedom of choice is textbook oppression but ok.