537
submitted 1 year ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

Pupils will be banned from wearing abayas, loose-fitting full-length robes worn by some Muslim women, in France's state-run schools, the education minister has said.

The rule will be applied as soon as the new school year starts on 4 September.

France has a strict ban on religious signs in state schools and government buildings, arguing that they violate secular laws.

Wearing a headscarf has been banned since 2004 in state-run schools.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Lmaydev@programming.dev 159 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm not very comfortable with these type of bans.

People say women shouldn't be forced to wear certain items of clothing and deal with it by forcing them to wear different items of clothing.

Doesn't seem very productive.

I always think of that meme with a women in full body coverings and a women wearing a bikini and they're both thinking about how awful it is that society pressures women to dress like the other.

[-] daellat@lemmy.world 68 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Playing the advocate of the devil: the reason given is clearly stated as not being about being forced to wear anything, but about a general ban on religious signs in state schools. For example I imagine wearing a Christian cross around your neck is also banned.

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 42 points 1 year ago

A consistently enforced bad law is still a bad law. All consistently means is that everyone has to suffer.

[-] daellat@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Yeah, I simply stated what reason was given for the ban by the minister, which the comment above me seems to have read over.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Yep. Yarmulkes are also banned, and I wouldn't be able to wander around the school with my 9 pointed star necklace or ring, even though NO ONE knows what they mean.

[-] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago
[-] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Yes, but did you know that before looking it up? Also we aren't the only ones to use the symbol, just the latest.

[-] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I admit I did not. I appreciate you sharing your anecdote, I learned something new today thanks to you.

[-] hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 year ago

Still, schools shouldn't be able to dictate how people can dress as long as they cover their genitals and their clothes aren't dangerous.

[-] Damage@feddit.it 9 points 1 year ago

Eh, maybe... In my public, absolutely standard highschool we still had a dress code, you couldn't have bare legs or excessively low collars

[-] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 27 points 1 year ago

And here in sweden the justice system has to dole out yearly reminders to schools that dressing freely is protected by the constitution, and dress codes or uniforms are literally illegal.

[-] PrincessLeiasCat@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 year ago

That’s….amazing tbh

[-] duviobaz@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

That's amazing, why don't we have something like this in Germany

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)
[-] nogooduser@lemmy.world 42 points 1 year ago

It’s difficult to say whether someone is wearing what they are wearing through choice or because it is demanded of them.

I agree with you, demanding that they wear something else is not the answer.

[-] CoderKat@lemm.ee 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Especially when they're kids. People should be able to wear whatever they want. But kids don't often get to choose what they want. They're often at the mercy of what their parents want and that's it.

There's also something to be said about pressure from family members. Even if the kid chose to wear something, did they really do so out of their own free will? Or because their parents said they'll burn in hell for all eternity if they don't?

And it's not like we're talking about something like simple taste in clothing or mild culture differences. We're talking about clothes that are drenched in misogyny. It's not about literal clothing in a vacuum, but rather what those clothes imply about women as a whole.

[-] SulaymanF@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Then you’re just replacing the oppressor with the state.

Let children wear what they want.

[-] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago

What if their community's pressure is the reason why they wear certain types of clothing?

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] duviobaz@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

The eradication of the will to wear this stuff is the answer. Without religion, barely anyone will want to wear religious signs.

[-] ImExiled@artemis.camp 13 points 1 year ago

It's not the point of the ban. You shouldn't wear any religious signs. It's the same as banning christian cross (which is obviously already banned since years and years)

[-] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Yes. France is extremely militant about keeping religion and state separate. That extends to state institutions like state schools.

[-] SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago

I always think of that meme with a women in full body coverings and a women wearing a bikini and they’re both thinking about how awful it is that society pressures women to dress like the other.

Equating the pressure of society, at large, when you're an independent adult, and the pressure of your parents, when you're still under their authority is not fair.

[-] nxfsi@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

It's the same reasoning behind pride parades and banning hate speech. Right wingers will hide behind "free choice" to spread their oppression of women and to shelter their children from progressive ideology, therefore we must forcibly expose them to tolerant viewpoints in the name of equity.

[-] Chee_Koala@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

I agree that it will not be effective in reducing the amount of these types of robes that will be worn. But it will be effective in reducing the visibility of this particular religious clothing, and thus the religion itself. We (everyone everywhere) already ban lots of clothing styles, there are minimums you have to attain. can't have nipples or genitalia showing, and even though that might sound nitpicky, I'm from team #freethechest and having a covered chest is something I personally do not think should be required. It's just nipples/boobs, everyone should just grow up and let it fly

load more comments (7 replies)
this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2023
537 points (97.2% liked)

World News

39153 readers
2907 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS