- cross-posted to:
- europe@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- cross-posted to:
- europe@lemmy.dbzer0.com
You must log in or # to comment.
Pre-adolescent girls in muslim countries usually don’t wear headscarves.
For most families in the Eurosphere, if a boy wanted to go to school in a dress instead of pants, they would probably face significant social pressure to not do so.
Clearly this means that boys are being FORCED to wear pants and we should ban them from being worn.
/s
Unless someone can prove that some harm comes from wearing a frickin’ headscarf, this law is just racist bullshit.
Governments and telling people how they’re allowed to dress. Name a more iconic duo.
Religion and telling people how they’re allowed to dress predates governments.
All religion should be banned.
Pretty hard to say since they both go so far back, and in past times there was no distinction between them.
Religion today is voluntary, at least in most of the world.
Banning religion is just replacing one master with another. No thanks.
Religion today is voluntary, at least in most of the world.
You often don’t have the autonomy to not participate in religion as a child if your parents want you to.
True but I mean no one respects child autonomy anyway, so we would need to levy that criticism far more widely if we want to take it seriously.
Plus I’m not sure I trust governments to protect child welfare more than their parents do. Parents are imperfect but when governments get it wrong the consequences are far more catastrophic.
yup. we need to listen to kids more and treat them with more respect and do more to protect their rights. dress codes don’t remotely accomplish this and do the opposite
With the lack of social acceptance for those of a different mindset, choosing differently usually makes one’s life significantly more difficult than is justifiable. Therefore, no - it may technically be “voluntary,” but the reality doesn’t come close to matching that ideal.
Fair but it’s still more voluntary than stupid attempts by the government to tell people how to dress.
The solution is to cultivate an educated, tolerant culture. This rule is a step in the opposite direction.
How we dress or adorn ourselves is a fundamental part of human freedom of expression and I think it needs to be taken way more seriously than it typically is in most societies.
I agree, but control freaks will do whatever it takes to have their way, and so will manipulate people in any way possible to reach that end - including preventing that open-minded culture from taking root. Just look at Murdock’s manipulation of the masses via his media empire for a blatant example.
Governments and telling people how they’re allowed to dress. Name a more iconic duo.
Judaism and male genital mutilation.
It’s a little weird to call out specific religions here for behavior they all engage in. Or at least all of the abrahamic ones, not as familiar with others.
Anyway yeah religions are bad but as long as we live in a world where they are voluntary and government is not then I’m going to be a bit more upset about one than the other.
It’s a little weird to call out specific religions here for behavior they all engage in.
First, some religions have worse track records than others. Second, your imploration was to “name a more iconic duo”, which you got. Third, what’s actually weird is FGM and kiddy fiddling.
religions are bad but as long as we live in a world where they are voluntary
Religion isn’t voluntary because it’s perpetuated by the indoctrination of children.
Well specifically with genital mutilation and pedophilia it seems to be common across all abrahamic religions (maybe not equally in every sect though).
We can quibble about what is truly voluntary but I just mean you’re free to stop participating any time. If you decide you no longer want to follow their silly rules then you don’t have to. Governments don’t have that option unless you want to leave the country but that’s not reasonable.
you’re free to stop participating any time. If you decide you no longer want to follow their silly rules then you don’t have to.
Sorry, nothing personal, but this is remarkably out of touch with reality. You frame it as being just as easy like not believing in Santa anymore. When children are raised in strict religious conditions it often means their entire identity and social structure is built around it. The slightest hint of doubt could mean negative repercussions, and wavering faith or leaving it has a high likelihood of being ostracized by the community. Not to speak of severe punishment. Moreover, brainwashed people lack the cognitive capabilities to question themselves. I’d even say the majority of humans struggle with this whether they are religious or not.
I think you’re exaggerating a bit here. I never said it was easy but society is chock full of people who have exited religion. For the ones that are more cultlike it may be more difficult but otherwise it’s fairly common for people to realize it’s nonsense and leave.
The ones where it’s truly borderline impossible are where the religion is intwined with the state. In Islamist countries you can be prosecuted for leaving your religion. But is that a problem with religion or with government? To some extent it’s both but the real issue is the ability of people to do violence to you with impunity. In modern society this is a feature of government and not religion.
Seems like Australia has been on quite a roll recently… now this decision is debatable i suppose but the social media ban is draconian and stupid
Edit; guess i misread lol, apologies
Austria, bud.
Different country. Gotta read carefully lol
Ah my bad 😭
Neos, says the law is a “clear commitment to gender equality”, but critics say it will fuel anti-Muslim feeling…
If a religion is fundamentally incompatible with gender equality it deserves “anti… feelings.”
That goes for all religions. No reason to single out Muslims.
from a personal choice? sure. you can be a douche to these peoples.
but if my religion says “no beards” and a gov agency say “must beards” … what right does a gov have in controlling my choice? completely inappropriate.
That’s very different. Its more like a religion telling men to always wear gloves for modesty reasons and the government saying that you can’t wear them in school.
The reason “for modesty” and only one gender is kind of important. That makes this a gender equality issue.
The law still feels a bit weird, but Islam has to modernize, just like Christianity is doing. Both have a lot of work left and this government is probably more islamophobic than they care about equality.
if $reason is from $religion - then state has no say outside of other existing laws. if the state was “truly” concerned DCF would be called. we already have child safety laws. why have they used those laws? because it’s about intimidation and control instead.
a school should have zero say in what parts of a person’s faith is valid or not unless they are going to use existing mandatory reporting laws. not stupid control via things like dress codes because it’s not even a dog whistle at this point.
I disagree. I think the religious indoctrination of children is bad.
In my opinion the weirdest part is, that they are banning hijabs, but circumcision on babies is somehow still legal. Seems like we’re mixing our priorities a bit.
i never said if i think it is bad or good. just that a nation state should not be legislating it via side channel controls like school “policy” but instead, if care was had, through child laws.
I agree with your point… but i think the problem here is how can the government judge whether one is wearing it out of fear, culture… or simply a personal choice. Now the fact this is applied to under 14 only cancels out the personal choice thing, but there is no way for the government to differentiate between fear based / internalized misogyny or just simply something they wear because its just a cultural thing to do, A lot of progressive muslims wear hijab simply as a personal choice or as identity
Also a lot of muslims start clinging to stuff like hijab more after they feel their identity is being continuously suppressed, banning it simply attacks a symbol rather than the core issue… you cant fix coercion by coercing them the other way, it can only be fixed through education and ground up change… Christianity didn’t modernize while being in under attack, it modernized when people inside weren’t fighting for their existence (they were erasing others lol but i digress), but rather when they had their basic conditions met and were thinking about stuff like liberty, equality, freedom of expression etc… andeven then it was a very messy and slowly moving discussion
Its a complex issue I think personally, but the fact that the right wingers are the one pushing for this makes me think its definitely them wanting to erase identity/culture than anything about equality as u said
Yea, this might be a good law, but not from this government.
You can’t.
So remove it entirely because it’s so fucked up that we can’t even tell if a person is “willingly” doing it due to being brainwashed or because they’ll be killed by their family if they don’t.
Because your religion never stops at you. History has shown that every chance it can, religion will try to control peoples lives.
It’s like being anti-capitalist. Wanting a revolution would infringe your freedom to choose to exist in a capitalist society, but everyone else would be better off for it.
i am indeed anti capitalist. the thing is - a state has laws already for breaking down systems of religious control through child safety laws. yet here it’s done via “policy”. why?
Religious freedom or gender equality, apparently you can only choose one.
My grandfather believed in a Hildegard von Bingen based religion that got him convinced putting rocks under his pillow and following a strict monotonous diet would be good for his health. He died.
“Men will continue to commit atrocities as long as they continue to believe absurdities.” ―Voltaire
All religion should be a thing of the past. If banning something is the best course of action I don’t know, but currently it would be something I’d vote yes to if I could; unless someone convinces me otherwise without using ad hominems, nonsensical claims such as being racist, or any other fallacies. I simply despise anything that makes humanity dumber.
To consider antireligion instead of atheism
“The harm of religion is historically evident whereas the presence or absence of gods is not. Ultimately, the continued existence of religion is predicated on the indoctrination of children and suppression of rational thought. Therefore, I am against religion but not necessarily against the idea of gods. For all we know gods are computer scientists and we are in their video game.” ―https://www.arscyni.cc/file/antireligion.html
