Macron’s party moots banning headscarves in public for under-15s
Posted by Anony_mouse202@reddit | anime_titties | View on Reddit | 176 comments
Posted by Anony_mouse202@reddit | anime_titties | View on Reddit | 176 comments
pinpoint14@reddit
When are we allowed to admit that France just doesn't like a segment of their own population? This type of moderated racism will end well for nobody.
Assimilation should be a consensual process!
EliBadBrains@reddit
I'm french, not muslim--I'm not even a big fan of Islam as a religion. But our government's hostility towards maghrebi people and muslims as a population, as well as their denial of the racism and lack of resources or help besides policing lower-income/immigrant majority neighbourhoods is actively pushing a lot of despondant, cynical second-gen kids from immigrant families to embrace more radical islam. the government is trying to ban hijabis doing sports, going to the beach, even going to university--instead of embracing that moderate muslims want to participate in public life, our government's pushback and hostility to *anything* muslim and the ambient racism is actively pushing these young people into the arms of the same preachers who say "see? this heathen country hates you and is no good at all." All of this tied with how the government has repressed pro-palestinian speech and declared it as analogous to antisemitism by default, we are heading into dark times with government policies becoming more and more racist and islamophobic and a lot of young french muslims and maghrebis becoming more hostile in return. This is leading to terrible conflict, if not outright civil war (which a number of factions who are connected to rich billionnaires and powerful politicians in the country are outright calling for, so they can ethnically cleanse muslims!)
Bhavacakra_12@reddit
I've seen Muslim communities embrace 'radical Islam in Muslim majority countries as well. Blaming France's tolerance for religious doctrine isn't telling the full truth regarding this communities propensity to radicalizing at the slightest inconvenience. No other religion is as delicate in their feelings as Islam. It's ridiculous!
kapsama@reddit
Give me a break. Christians and Jews are every bit as delicate as Muslims .
Bhavacakra_12@reddit
They're delicate, sure, but as equally fragile as Muslims? Not by a long shot.
kapsama@reddit
If anything both communities are worse in fragility. Victim hood is basically a pillar of Christianity, it's a pillar of their lore and how the Romans fed them to the lions.
And you cannot criticize anything Jewish or tangentially Jewish without being branded antisemitic.
Bhavacakra_12@reddit
They are guilty of fragility but I wouldn't say in equal parts to Muslims. We've seen have happens if you insult their god or religion, that's a level of religious violence I've not seen any other religion commit.
kapsama@reddit
That works if you're arguing that Muslims are more prone to mob violence.
Christians still commit plenty of rogue violence against minorities, abortion providers, LGBTQ.
But you have a hard time naming anything in the modern world that doesn't offend Christian and they aren't trying to ban. Even something as benign "happy holidays".
Bhavacakra_12@reddit
I never said Christians don't do mob violence. My point is that Muslims in general tend to be more prone to these acts because they're far more orthodox in their beliefs than other religions. I've not seen a teacher get beheaded for saying mean things about Jesus nor have I seen an writer get stabbed in the eye because some religious nut issued a fatwa against him over a book he wrote in the 80s.
I'm going to repeat myself here, this is not me saying mob violence is exclusive to Muslims. But the scale & severity of the reactions is the point here.
kapsama@reddit
I never said you did. The evidence you provide would work if your claim was that Muslims are more prone to mob violence. They don't work as evidence if you claim that Muslims are more eager to be outraged.
Abortion doctors have been killed by Christians have they not? Abortion is being banned by Christians is it not? These people don't even attack Christianity. Hell Christian extremism is a core part of attacks like the Christchurch massacre.
Christians are opposed to 90% of modern culture and concepts.
Bhavacakra_12@reddit
I'm not quite sure I understand...wouldn't being quick to outrage be connected to being quick to resort to mob violence? Even independent of mob violence, most terrrorist attacks are lone wolf attacks with maybe a handful of people...at least in the case of Europe, US or Canada, it's really not comparable at the level of violence perpetuated by certain religious extremists.
Abortions doctors have been killed and clinics also bombed by Christians. But once again, I'm talking about the difference in sheer scale. For every Christian nationalist doing shootings like the one in Christchurch, how many similar massacres are happening in Africa by jihadists?
I remember reading a statistic somewhere where it said the majority of victims of terrorism are Muslims...and considering the religious makeup of the majority of Muslim nations, what should that tell you?
kapsama@reddit
You speak of scale and yet the guy in Christchurch has killed more people than have been killed by Muslim mobs over caricatures many times over.
Bhavacakra_12@reddit
That's a weird measuring stick...why limit the attacks inspired by caricatures? A single terror attack involving a truck in Nice killed almost twice as many people & injured close to 500. That's just one attack in a long history in just France.
kapsama@reddit
It's not my measuring stick. You're the one who introduced it. Do we know the motivation of the Nice terrorists? Because the Christchurch gunman left an entire madman's manifesto of aggrieved White Christian extremism.
zanotam@reddit
gestures to the US and Israel. Ah yes, the only Western nations controlled by fascism are the two that most closely identify with Christianity and Judaism.
Bhavacakra_12@reddit
There are plenty of other western nations and they seem to be doing fine. Now shall we talk about the Arab world where slavery is still practiced?
JellyfishSolid2216@reddit
Are you kidding? Christians feel attacked just for not being able to force their religion on schools.
Bhavacakra_12@reddit
My friend. A teacher was BEHEADED because a student lied and said he insulted their prophet. I'm not excusing all of the nonsense Christian nationalists do, but nothing compares to that horror show.
Soft_Customer_1520@reddit
Exactly!! Like, how can we forget when Charlie Hebdo made a satyrical picture of Jesus and the whole editorial staff was massacred with AK-47? Or when a teacher showed the same picture in a class about freedom of speech and was beheaded in reaction?
Oh right... those were muslims
kapsama@reddit
Christians fundamentalists don't ever kill anyone of course.
Soft_Customer_1520@reddit
How many people were killed in France by christian fundamentalists in this century? How many killed by islamists?
kapsama@reddit
If it did not happen in France it doesn't count .
Soft_Customer_1520@reddit
Can you even read?? This post is about France, now answer the question, how many killed by "christian fundamentalists" (non-existant in France) and how many by islamists?
kapsama@reddit
I read just fine. The person I replied to wasn't talking about French Muslims. He was talking about all Muslims.
Soft_Customer_1520@reddit
French embassies and consulates were literally attacked and set on fire all over the world when somebody in France and In Denmark made a comic strip about their prophet. Nothing happened when those same people made caricatures of Jesus. Yep, they are pretty much the most delicate, fragile people in the world
kapsama@reddit
Christians are plunging an entire country of 300 million into the dark ages as we speak over their little grievances. Their work will cause a lot more destruction and death.
pinpoint14@reddit
I think the funniest thing is that there's a long track record of wealthier nations actively funding fundamentalists, and smashing more moderate actors in the middle east. Like no shit the fundamentalists are all that's left
EliBadBrains@reddit
Extremely funny comment coming from a hindutva and zionist defender.
Bhavacakra_12@reddit
You're just throwing buzzwords at me because you're incapable of any critical thinking.
I am neither a Hindutva nor a zionist defender. Feel free to show me evidence to back up your claim.
For your future reference (make sure to write this down next to your other notes), I come from a Sikh & Muslim family. Not a single hindu anywhere in my family tree.
EliBadBrains@reddit
Your comment history is disparaging the pro-Palestine movement and talking about how hindus are oppressed by muslims lmfao come on man
Bhavacakra_12@reddit
False. That particular comment you're talking about is me criticizing the path palestinian protestors in the US took. Which, obviously, has failed. That was not a comment on what I thought about the movement in general.
Once again, your engaging in bad faith. That comment you're talking about is the treatment of Hindu's (I also mentioned Sikhs but you left that part out curiously), by Muslims in Muslim majority Kashmir. That "treatment" is a complete genocide btw. Do you disagree with that or are you simply not knowledgeable enough to warrant an opinion beyond going off on faulty information and patting yourself on the back for a job well done?
createwarsellweapons@reddit
How is that guy a hindutva and Zionist defender??
pinpoint14@reddit
You get it.
And I do appreciate you saying you're not necessarily a fan of Islam. Nobody is asking you to be! I personally think they're chill and have great food and a welcoming culture that reminds me of my own culture.
But all we need to be now are fans of democracy. And you sound like one. Keep speaking up. Keep calling out these shortsighted racist fucks for what they are. We'll win in the end.
EliBadBrains@reddit
My own feelings about islam don't matter; the fact of the matter is muslims and people perceived as such are being systematically discriminated against by the government, and pointed at as scapegoats for all of french society's ills. the right-wing candidates the new presidency are all falling over each other to express how much they hate islam *more* than other candidates. that worries me far more than supposed islamic encroach. the government is limiting all of our rights and free speech, and making a scapegoat of racial and religious minorities while supporting very dangerous media discourse. My feelings on Islam as a religion asides, muslims as a whole are not a monolyth and need to be defended as ful lhuman beings.
Current-Wealth-756@reddit
when you say assimilation should be a consensual process, do you mean that immigrants should consensually assimilate, or do you mean that immigrants should be under no obligation to assimilate unless they feel so inclined?
smokeyleo13@reddit
It should be consensual. I think heavy-handed stuff like this really only serves to make the separate identity even more defined.
Current-Wealth-756@reddit
"should be consensual" is the exact ambiguous passive voicing that I'm trying to clarify the meaning of.
I drew a distinction between two possible interpretations above; which one do you mean by that phrase, or do you mean something else?
pinpoint14@reddit
A good example of what I'm talking about is how people don't like immigrants speaking their native tongues. Fears around stuff like this and pressure from my elementary school teachers means I can't speak the same language as my grandmother.
Folks should not feel pressured to fit in. They should be able to chose which aspects of their culture they hold onto and drop, even as they move through the world.
Certain baselines, like respect for other minorities or groups discriminated against should obviously be maintained.
But this sort of heavy handed "free the Muslim women from the tyranny of the hijab" is stupid, and just enforces the separation they're claiming to care so much about eroding. At this point I'm convinced that's the point. It's more about creating two Frances. Why else would they so selectively go after Muslims.
Forcing people to accept French culture will not make them like French culture.
Current-Wealth-756@reddit
that sounds great in theory, but in practice, what it leads to is parallel societies where divisions along economic, religious, linguistic, and ethic lines coincide.
This is not good for social trust, stability, or unity. You can have these divisions to some extent when they line up in different places, e.g. you have some wealthy French speakers and some wealthy Arabic speakers, some Muslim European people and some Christian and atheist North African people.
However, when you have a majority of wealthy, white, French speaking, Christian and Atheist people, and then a minority of poor, brown, Muslim, Arabic speaking people, you no longer have a society, you have two parallel societies that are suspicious of each other and are probably going to come into conflict.
Finally, there is something called the familiarity bias, in which people naturally prefer things they are familiar with. In other words, forcing people to accept French culture as children will in fact make them like French culture more than if they grow up unfamiliar with it and feeling like they're not part of it.
zanotam@reddit
No it fucking doesn't you ignoramus! It's literally the system the US uses which is unironically the most effective country at integrating immigrants and does it successfully with much larger numbers than fucking France fails to do it with!
Rukoam-Repeat@reddit
Current events have demonstrated that the US is no longer effective at integrating migrants. A significant portion of the population actively supports mass deportation of immigrants without due process.
Current-Wealth-756@reddit
It's a well-established phenomenon the technical term for which is "cross-cutting cleavages," in case you'd like to find out more about it. You can find examples in Bosnia, Lebanon, several countries in Africa which have recently split or are in the midst of civil wars, and increasingly in the United States where the cleavages that are aligning are urban/rural, high/low education, party affiliation, religiosity, and patterns of media consumption.
You have an interesting way of talking to people that's not particularly effective at getting your point across nor at elevating either of our understanding of the topic. It might be worth trying a different approach where you don't start off by insulting people, or where you swap out the word fuck with a cogent argument.
test_test_1_2_3@reddit
Your last sentence is mental. Immigrants should be expected to integrate with the host nation and if they don’t they can go somewhere else.
pinpoint14@reddit
No, thinking that everyone in a nation of 70M has to live like you is what's silly. They aren't hurting anyone.
test_test_1_2_3@reddit
They don’t have to ‘live like me’, but they should have to conform and share the fundamental values that underpin the host countries’ society.
hc600@reddit
Fundamental values like letting the government dictate when strangers get to see your hair? Weird.
Negative-Bowler3429@reddit
As apposed to letting those girls be forced into being brainwashed by an abhorrent ideology that mandates them to cover their hair? Hmm seems like an obvious choice.
createwarsellweapons@reddit
You have to follow rule of the country you are moving in.
hc600@reddit
Does mean it isn’t a dumb rule
createwarsellweapons@reddit
No it isn’t a dumb rule
test_test_1_2_3@reddit
Sure, we have all sorts of limitations on expression.
Not that weird at all if it’s counter to the social and cultural norms of that society. France banned burqas previously because covering the entire face is not something we do in western culture, especially not if it’s underpinned by a notion of female modesty to avoid causing men to lust after them.
hc600@reddit
Why do you want to see women’s hair so bad bro?
test_test_1_2_3@reddit
You’re projecting, I don’t live in France and I don’t care if they implement this rule or not.
I’ve said elsewhere I don’t consider this to be a particularly productive policy. That said it’s still France’s prerogative to define these things as it sees fit and immigrants who aren’t willing to accept can go live in one of the many countries that do share their values on this particular matter.
No bald spot thanks, I own precisely zero hats so I’m sure I’d be welcome in France next time I choose to visit.
zanotam@reddit
No. That belief is why Europe is somehow more racist than the fucking US!
pinpoint14@reddit
test_test_1_2_3@reddit
Yes, to the fundamental values of the host nation. Your attempt to strawman is weak, there’s plenty of scope of individual expression without holding values antithetical to those of the host nation.
pinpoint14@reddit
I've never once said that.
test_test_1_2_3@reddit
I didn’t say you said it, I was defining the parameters of my position. Do you know what strawman means?
pinpoint14@reddit
Point out where I've said anything that disagrees with this sentiment. I agree with this statement.
But the article in question goes well beyond that, clearly.
test_test_1_2_3@reddit
You quoted me saying this to try and present my position as more extreme than it was. This is strawman tactics.
I then clarified the extent of my position with the words you’ve just quoted. I.e. I wasn’t putting words in your mouth I was clarifying my position as it was being misrepresented.
pinpoint14@reddit
Hmm fair. I was annoyed by that statement because of the context of the article. I read conforming with the baselines of society meaning "not wearing religious scarves and such".
I think certain baselines have to be established. Treatment of women and other minorities for instance.
But forcing folks to wear or not wear their religious clothing in public goes way too far. You cannot force assimilation. But you can create baselines for how folks are expected to treat one another.
test_test_1_2_3@reddit
I agree that this isn’t the best way to go about assimilating immigrants. I believe it’s far more effective to properly vet the people coming in and limit the numbers so that things are sustainable and don’t result in too much change too fast.
But in the same vein I also think France is entitled to handle this as they choose to, France has always taken bolder actions in this area than other European nations and in places like Paris you can argue it’s justified given the extremes of ethnic division across different arrondissements and the resulting societal issues.
shabi_sensei@reddit
People that say this are conveniently “just expats” when they’re working in a non-white majority country like China or India where it’s harder to assimilate
If the pay is good enough people don’t really care about assimilating, that’s what being an expat is all about out
FabulousOcelot7406@reddit
I mean, I don't think wealthy people are typically the problem. It's the poor ones. So, yes, if you are wealthy you can get away with it.
Pizzashillsmom@reddit
Expats usually leave.
Soft_Customer_1520@reddit
You can't be racist towards a religion duh plus assimilation is never consensual. you either come and assimilate or you can go back to your country. No way you can bend your host country's laws to your home country's values. If you try, you can't blame others for not wanting to be associated with you, especially when those mores are so repugnant to the average citizen
pinpoint14@reddit
Islamophobia + antisemitism
All of the Americas, South Africa, Australia, Israel
This isn't happening anywhere
That's just racist
Soft_Customer_1520@reddit
None of those replies made sense, at all. You say it's not happening while literally commenting on a post about French secret service unraveling a well detailed plot by the terrorist organization Muslim Brotherhood to subvert the State and its laws to implement sharia-law on a local level through hundreds of organizations, mosques, associations and lobbying at the highest level by Gulf countries like Qatar through muslim councils. The question is: are you dense or you simply wish to live in a delusional reality?
zanotam@reddit
His replies made perfect since, you're just smooth brained
Available_Command252@reddit
Integration shouldn't be optional, Arab counties don't give nearly as much freedom
pinpoint14@reddit
Dumb comment. Run your own race
marcusaurelius_phd@reddit
It's true. We as a nation have long disliked religious fundamentalists, in fact at one point we even shortened them mechanically by one head. It took a whole century to come up with a steady state that everyone reluctantly agreed on.
Now a new type of fundies is coming to our shore, trying to impose their foreign and middle-age practices, disturbing a precarious equilibrium and expect special treatment.
Most people in France. Do. Not. Like. Religion.
We tolerate it, as long as it's festive and not intrusive.
Muslims are not being treated badly or unfairly; they are treated much, much better than homosexuals, women, atheists, christian, buddhists and so on are treated in muslim lands.
What they have a problem with is that their religion is not respected and it's indeed not. No religion is. But no other religion demands that unmerited respect.
CRoss1999@reddit
Not a terrible compromise to allow adults to wear what they want while giving children more freedom. Of course I’m a bit suspicious of anything that could fall more heavily on a minority group
TraditionalGap1@reddit
I like how banning children from wearing headscarves is 'giving them freedom'
Negative-Bowler3429@reddit
Because Children cant make consensual choice of being forced into ideologies like religions that mandate them to “wear headscarves”. Really not a hard concept to grasp on brainwashing and grooming.
TraditionalGap1@reddit
Not really up on what 'giving' or 'freedom' means, eh
Negative-Bowler3429@reddit
Do you also argue on “giving them freedom” when big bad government bans lead candy for children? Or do you believe children need to be protected?
TraditionalGap1@reddit
I'm sorry, are you equating lead in foodstuffs with wearing the veil? This seems like a good faith and accurate analogy in your eyes?
Negative-Bowler3429@reddit
One which will poison a childs body and harm them and another that poisons a childs mental and harm them. Yes. Irrespectively the equating was to question why you think government should mandate one harm and not the other to children.
If you ever bothered to ever interact with children who had to survive religious brainwashing, you’d understand. But alas, cant expect everybody to be knowledgeable of topics they talk about.
Prince_Ire@reddit
That's like saying it's a good compromised between someone's desire not to get raped and a rapist's desire to rape to make the victim walk around naked, but nobody having sex with them. Their should be no need for compromise, the girls should be allowed to wear hijabs if they want to.
WhoAmIEven2@reddit
Eh, not sure about this one. There are definitely girls who are forced to it, but there are also a substantial amount who just want to look like their mother. Children want to replicate what their parents are doing is really common, and I'm not too sure I want to criminqlize that.
FabulousOcelot7406@reddit
Isn't that the whole point here though? You don't want kids emulating problematic behaviors or patterns from the parents.
Prince_Ire@reddit
Why is wearing a cloth over your hair problematic? Similar clothing was popular in France less than a century ago.
FabulousOcelot7406@reddit
You could be right. I am obviously biased as a non-religious person. But it's hard for me to imagine that any significant percentage of woman would willingly choose that if they weren't exposed / indoctrinated in that from a young age. It's hard for me to not see it as anything but a visible symbol or sign of oppression.
chilldotexe@reddit
I knew a girl in college who chose to wear one even though her parents encouraged her not to. The reasoning her parents gave was so she could assimilate (her mom didn’t wear one either). Her reason for wearing one was partly religious, but she also considered it liberating not to worry about doing her hair or comparing herself to other women.
IIRC there was a period in Egypt when it was not very popular for Muslim women to wear head coverings, and at some point during the 80s they became popular again with the younger generation at the time. So there was a time when older women weren’t covering their heads but younger women were. I’m not sure of the reasoning here, but just wanted to give some examples to consider.
I’m against indoctrination, but I also think as long as it’s their choice, they should be free to do it. I also think the whole “trad wife” trend is kind of dumb, but part of “women’s liberation” is that women should be able to choose how they present themselves whether that’s refusing to wear bras or dressing more conservatively. Women aren’t a monolith and what is liberating for one woman isn’t for another.
FabulousOcelot7406@reddit
I said "it's hard for me to imagine that any significant percentage of woman would willingly choose". I didn't say zero.
I am going to guess this is related to President Nasser who tried to westernize / modernize Egypt. He was killed by Islamic extremists after he made peace with Israel.
The Muslim / Middle Eastern world basically got left behind by the Western world. You had one faction who argued the Middle East needs to become more western to compete. And you had another faction who instead thought Allah was displeased with them and that they needed to double down on even more conservative Islamic adherence.
I'll let you guess which side won.
I agree, in principle, but, in practice, it's hard. For example, people should be free to choose polygamy if they want as long as they are consenting adults. However, in practice, a lot of people that do that are that way because of indoctrination and being part of cults when they were kids. It's hard to separate these things.
Prince_Ire@reddit
There's plenty of people who would say that it's hard to imagine women wearing short shorts and miniskirts without being indoctrinated into doing so and that these clothing articles are visible symbols of female oppression by a society that objectifies women.
Your world view--whatever it is--is almost certainly less self-evident than you believe it to be and likely owes a lot to "indoctrination" from your youth.
FabulousOcelot7406@reddit
I don't know about you, but I've never seen my mother in a mini-skirt lol. And I don't think it's typically worn by mothers. At least, I've never seen my friends moms in it. It's definitely a younger, single woman thing.
And, no, sorry going to disagree quite hard on that being an article of oppression. Women wear it because its attractive, not because they are told to or because they are trying to hide anything.
But, again, I already conceded that I am obviously biased. But I really do think I'm correct and that most people would agree with the sentiment I expressed (other than Muslims of course).
Lathariuss@reddit
My sister was never forced to wear it but was raised into the religion and chose to start wearing it as soon as she hit puberty. No doubt there are many girls like her who will be affected by this.
No-Commercial-4830@reddit
“Chose to start wearing it” after being indoctrinated into the religion since birth and told that not wearing it could potentially land her in hell lmao
Reasonable-Ad4770@reddit
You just being mean. Raising your children to be kind and respectful is also indoctrination,you know.
Prince_Ire@reddit
If we're considering teaching your children your values and beliefs to be indoctrination, then the French indoctrinates countless children through its school system. So the leadership in France only believe what they do because they're indoctrinated.
pineapplegrab@reddit
So when your parents are Christian, and you are raised as a Christian, it is a culture, but it is indoctrination for Muslims?
Sir_Penguin21@reddit
Whataboutism won’t save you. Everyone who wasn’t indoctrinated knows that both are indoctrination and both are awful for human flourishing, especially for women.
NamerNotLiteral@reddit
There are millions of devout Muslims who don't wear headscarves and won't ever force anyone else to wear them. So, yes, it is indoctrination to raise them with a fundamentalist set of beliefs that goes against established tenets as interpreted by billions of other Muslims.
ExtremeAcceptable289@reddit
This is false? Hijab is fardh, you must wear it
Gyuttin@reddit
Nice whataboutism. It’s both indoctrination
pineapplegrab@reddit
I might have overgeneralized a bit, and I apologize for that. I respect that, and you are probably correct.
Pure-Pass7223@reddit
is turkey a Muslim country?
pineapplegrab@reddit
Secular, laic (French secularism) to be accurate, but huge majority are Muslim on paper. Even I am registered as Muslim in the database and I don't want to risk changing it even though I don't believe in Allah or Muhammed.
Erdoğan had singlehandedly ended the laic rules and regulations, but we are laic in constitution. I see him as a response to long oppression of religious folks under laicism and I understand their fear of going back to how it was before if Erdoğan steps down. I feel like there should be a more humane and sustainable approach, so I was a bit disappointed of this news. I might have overgeneralized lots of stuff here, and I am sorry for that.
Pure-Pass7223@reddit
I see that alot of Turks on Reddit are atheists , they don't wanna be seen as Muslims lol, one even said he would rather convert to Christianity then be called a brother by another muslim
pineapplegrab@reddit
Yeah, that happens. It is another end of an extreme. Instead of being overly religious they are just extremely non religious and a bit Islamophobic maybe. Just a weird bunch. I feel conflicted about religion mostly because of the cultural and social aspect of it, so I respect religious practices even though I find them flawed. That's my personal opinion and I am probably the minority here. Being able to express yourself in English already separates a Turkish person from the monolingual Turkish folk, so our opinion don't reflect the reality most of the time. Again, personal opinion and observation.
test_test_1_2_3@reddit
It’s indoctrination regardless, but modern Christianity doesn’t tell women to cover their hair so men aren’t encouraged to rape them.
France and other European countries are also culturally founded on Christianity so it stands to reason that the prevailing culture and values will align more closely with Christianity than with Islam.
pineapplegrab@reddit
France has a history of colonizing, and influencing others with their culture. In some of those countries, the state religion was Islam. If a certain Muslim population influenced by France's previous actions of colonisation decides to immigrate to France, I believe they are entitled to bring their culture with them.
You can't force progression. It happens over time. Do I have to remind you what was before the modern Christianity, or what is written in holy books like Quran and Bible? Either take a proper stance as an atheist, or accept the fact that every religion has a stained history and lots of black apples.
FYI, I am not offended by the fact that you are looking down on Muslims. I was born and raised as one, but decided to become an atheist later on. I was just curious how twisted you can be to justify your inflated ego.
test_test_1_2_3@reddit
You can believe that they are entitled to bring their culture, the leadership of France is entitled to ignore that perspective and run their country without consideration of historical guilt about colonialism. No country needs to live in perpetual atonement for stuff that happened in previous generations.
I am well aware of Christianity’s bloody history, I’m also aware that it had a reformation and in the modern day is quite different from Islam which has had no reformation.
I’m not a Christian, I’m completely agnostic to any organised religion and don’t really participate in some kind of spiritual analogue either.
My point remains that France is a Christian country and just as Muslim countries protect their religious culture they can too.
Your little jabs about inflated ego are just passive aggressive and pathetic, you seem like a quintessential Redditor.
If people want to immigrate to the west they can integrate or go live somewhere that already aligns with their values. Pretty simple.
nopnopnopnopnopnop@reddit
Ah merde la France chrétienne c'est quand même bien du cul. La France depuis 1905 c'est surtout la laïcité et avant ça on avait quand même cramé pas mal d'église après la révolution donc la France chrétienne pas vraiment voir plus du tout. Donc les petites lois islamophobes c'est tout sauf français. Merci de ne pas se revendiquer d'une culture qu'on ne connait pas. Chier sur la colonisation française c'est pas très charlie au passage. On peut avoir une pensée un peu complexe et comprendre que même si on est pas l'auteur de la colonisation on en est héritier et qu'on bénéficie tjs des systèmes de domination issue de cette colonisation donc c'est bien a nous de les réparer. Bonne soirée
test_test_1_2_3@reddit
In English, don’t know why you would respond to a conversation in a different language.
pineapplegrab@reddit
We’ll see how that plays out. It’s not the first time a government has attempted something like this — and the example of Turkey shows that backlash from religious communities can be intense. Do you truly believe this is a well-thought-out structural plan for the betterment of France?
If France is governed so perfectly, why can’t it distinguish between those who integrate peacefully and those who provoke religious tension? And yet it thinks it has the authority to dictate which religions are acceptable? Maybe get the screening process right first — then we can talk about who has what rights.
If religious expression was going to be restricted, people should’ve been informed before they ever entered.
test_test_1_2_3@reddit
You either have reading comprehension issues or you are purposefully attributing perspectives I’ve never espoused in an attempt at bad faith debate.
I do not think France is perfectly governed, I don’t even think banning head coverings is a particularly productive policy. All I have said is that France is a country founded on Christianity and broadly aligns with Christian values and they are entitled to restrict other religious expression if they see fit too. Banning things that are antithetical to western/French values is the prerogative of France and the French government.
I fully agree with the screening process needing to be fixed. It’s a problem across pretty much all European countries right now with a few notable exceptions like Denmark. I’m sure the average French national is very unhappy with the number of people who’ve come in with wildly different values who refuse to integrate. People across many other European nations feel the same way, ask the average Brit in the UK (my country) and I’m sure they’d agree that many people who’ve come should never have been allowed in.
Your last sentence is literally impossible and it’s just empty words. Things change and effects aren’t always seen until the changes have played out, nobody has a crystal ball to figure stuff out before it becomes an issue.
pineapplegrab@reddit
Whether or not France “aligns with Christian values,” freedom of religion is protected under Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights — both of which France is bound by. These explicitly guarantee the right to express one’s religion publicly, including through clothing like headscarves.
So no, a country doesn’t get a free pass to suppress religious expression just because it was "founded on Christianity." That’s not cultural preservation — that’s state interference in personal belief, and it borders on a human rights violation.
And just to clarify what I meant by “perfectly governed” earlier: even a perfectly run government — one with flawless policies and competent leadership — could not implement what you're suggesting without violating fundamental rights. It's not about the government's ability to govern. It's about the incompatibility of your idea with basic human freedoms.
You can’t have it both ways — claiming moral high ground while endorsing policies that contradict international human rights law.
test_test_1_2_3@reddit
Are you really quoting ‘International Law’ at me as if it’s some kind of higher power? You’ve clearly spent too much time on Reddit if you think the UN trumps domestic policy.
We’re not going to agree, but it sure seems like a lot of western countries are now coming round to the notions I have put forward and away from what you are advocating. Which is a step in the right direction as far as I and many Europeans are concerned.
AntonioH02@reddit
The difference is Christians have a choice, my mom is Christian but I am not.
No-Commercial-4830@reddit
It’s also indoctrination when it’s Christianity.
pineapplegrab@reddit
That's not the general consensus, and I don't think a person who has moved to France is being actively indoctrinated anymore. They have changed places, opened up to a new culture, etc., so I believe it is a choice at that point.
Lathariuss@reddit
Fake feminist hypocrite. “Freedom of choice” until that choice is to be religious, right?
How about you spend less time being a bigot and more time finding a therapist for your arrogant, self righteous, condescending, savior complex? Youre the perfect fit for the SJW stereotype. Disrespectful asshole.
Lathariuss@reddit
You dont talk about my family like that. “Indoctrinated”? Like you with your BS values and fake feminism? “Freedom of choice”, until they choose to be religious, right? You hypocritical piece of garbage. How about instead of spending so much time being a dickhead online, you spend that time finding a therapist for your arrogant, condescending, self righteous, hero complex? Bigoted dirtbag.
That_taj@reddit
Ah yes, because choosing to wear a hijab after growing up in a religious household is definitely more indoctrinating than being told from birth that if you don’t wear pants in public, you’ll likely be shamed and possibly arrested for “public indecency.” But go off.
Lathariuss@reddit
Shut the fuck up cunt. You dont talk about my family like that. “Indoctrinated”? Like your bitchass with your bullshit values and fake feminism? “Freedom of choice”, until they choose to be religious, right? You hypocritical piece of shit. How about instead of spending so much time being a cunt online, you spend that time finding a therapist for your arrogant, condescending, self righteous, hero complex? Islamophobic dirtbag.
marcusaurelius_phd@reddit
If removing that stupid piece of clothing is too much too ask, then maybe there are better places to go to.
It's a sacrifice we are willing to make.
_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_@reddit
They’ll ban the adults too: problem solved.
L0L303@reddit
I force my daughter to wear pants and sunscreen - im her dad - government should fuck off!!
pinpoint14@reddit
This made me laugh, ty
Pedantichrist@reddit
I am not a fan of telling teenage girls that they have to wear less clothing than they want to.
Even ignoring the thinly veiled racism, who the hen are the government to tell me whether or not I wear a hat in the sunshine, or how much of my neck I want to display?
stoiclandcreature69@reddit
Banning headscarves for anyone is genocide the international community has to do something about this abhorrent crime oh wait this is France not China my bad
Stu161@reddit
Had me in the first half
AniTaneen@reddit
This seems so strange to me, as someone living in the United States.
I’m going to quote a source that is almost 10 years old, and also from an institution that is one of those “free market liberals”. But alas, here it goes,
I’m genuinely curious to hear why American Muslims assimilate better than European Muslims.
I’m sure that not banning their head dress helps. And I’m also sure that black Americans who adopted Islam in the 1960s and later also help, since Muslim immigrants meet American Muslims whose families have both been here for generations, and have a history of fighting for rights within the democratic process.
RockstepGuy@reddit
The US is a nation built on inmigration, the muslims that went to the US have done so slowly, so there has been time to have children and assimilate, and since they were few, it was assimilation or exclusion.
In contrast the EU countries have defined cultures and were not really built on migration, on top of that the muslim refugee waves of the 2010s and on brought way too many people at the same time from all kinds of backgrounds, those people also decided to form their own block communities and for now many have seen no need to adopt French culture as their own.
The US once also had the same problems with people like the Irish and Italians, but that was ages ago and since cultures were not that apart, they managed to assmiliate eventually.
However, French culture and the many other cultures from the refugees are widely different (religion is also a very hot topic, since Islam and Christianity have not been very good friends for most of history), and will take a very long time to assimilate.. if they ever do, otherwise bad things will happen.
zanotam@reddit
Dude, you're just repeating almost word for word an anti-Iridh screed from 100 years ago in the US. Because you're racist, to be clear
RockstepGuy@reddit
If you see it that way, then it's your problem, i don't think i said anything racist, when you try to mix 2 different peoples that have different culture, there will be problems, and there will be clashes, that's why we live in separate nations, and most nations also happen be divided by cultural lines, people usually like to live between other people that also share their same values.
We do have cases of 2 or more cultures working together in one nation, but they have needed centuries of assimilation in order to achieve such stability and peace, and even to this day it's not 100% united, for example, the Scottish people and the UK, their independence movement is still very strong.
We also have the US, a country that emerged "recently" by cultural standards, and was built up by a very wide range of cultures from almost all across the world (wich probably helped a ton on assimilating new people), but that place is the exception, not the rule, and it also still has some problems to this day.
Tom-Rath@reddit
Dude is talking about "recent waves of muslim refugees" as though France doesn't have a 1200-year-history with Islam, as if southern France wasn't Islamic for 200 years, as if Algeria wasn't a départment for 100+ years, and like France didn't have several dozen muslim-majority colonies and overseas protectorates.
I'm not sure whether I'm more offended by the racism or the historical illiteracy. All I know is that morons like u/RockstepGuy need to invest in a library card.
RockstepGuy@reddit
Muslims have been living in France in big minorities, or in places outside of "main France", wich is the E
RevenueStill2872@reddit
It's not the same population immigrating in Europe and the US : it's much harder for the lower-income, lower-education population from Muslim majority countries to come to the US since there's an ocean or two between them. I guess most came through green cars/visa program based on merit/competence.
It's like wondering why the mexican immigrant community in France is better integrated and well off than their US counterparts.
AniTaneen@reddit
But the Mexican community in the USA is supper assimilated. Often grandchildren can’t communicate with their grandparents because of the language barrier.
adoreroda@reddit
You're comparing apples to oranges. Mexicans are catholic, still a type of christian even if they aren't protestant. The majority of Arab in the US are Christian. The majority in Europe are Muslim. You can't compare the overall assimilation of the two because you have two different cohorts
zanotam@reddit
Lmao the US was originally vehemently anti-Catholic - the KKK hates papists as much as blacks!
ForskinEskimo@reddit
It's not even thinly veiled racism, it's just overt racism and discrimination under the guise of "national identity".
Specifically targetting 1 group to make them need to choose to perform an obligatory religiois practice (that affects nobody but them) or divorce themselves from multiple areas of society (government, sports, public life) is insane. No better way to hurt national identity then clearly stating "we do not want you as you are".
They can deflect with "oh, but christians can't wear a cross, jews can't wear a kippa, and sikh the turban in gov positions so it's fair!". Ya, but none of them are explicitly mandated in their faith. What, muslim women now need to choose their faith or their employment? And nobody is proposing that sikhs can't wear turbans in public, but it's just regular french politics to single out muslim women.
Clown government.
Soft_Customer_1520@reddit
Not even hijab is mandatory in islam, plus nobody is forbidding them from wearing it, just not at school when you are a minor
ForskinEskimo@reddit
Crock of shit that is.
Listen their book is free to look up. It about modest apparel and covering up. Through social and religious evolution, the hijab has become the normalized approach to performing women's religious obligation to cover up. That's their choice and their culture's business.
But you can't be a secular republic that preaches about how it wants to "foster equality for all private beliefs" and "safeguard everypne's freedom to practice their own faith" when it obviously, repeatedly targets 1 group.
Soft_Customer_1520@reddit
It literally doesn't. Everyone has to abide by these laws, be them christians, hindus or jews. The law has been in place since 1905. The only ones crying about it are muslims because they feel persecuted by equality of treatment.
The hijab is not the norm, it literally wasn't a thing for a huge part of islamic history. In Egypt it made a comeback when a certain group called Muslim Brotherhood (ironically the one who are trying to extend their tentacles in Europe) through Sadat pressured women into wearing hijab in the 70s.
France is a secular State and wants to remain so. These are the rules and they have been in place long before all these migration waves, if you value your faith so much you can't stop forcing hijab on your children you can leave to one of those rich Gulf countries where hijab is mandatory, they'll be happy to accomodate you.
ForskinEskimo@reddit
How exactly is it equality of treatment when everyone else loses nothing to these rules, but muslim women specifically lose something? Where exactly os the "equality" when the rules are not felt equally?
It'a the modern, readily available item that lets women "veil". Ya, 1000 years ago it was a literal "viel", as it is im their book, but the religious norm for covering has been more or less the same? Only thing that changed is the social outlook on if it shpuld/shouldn't be done.
Listen, if some group wants to change the social norm to make it more common to use the hijab within their religion, what's the issue? Again, that's their religious business. Under France's republican principles those religious practices should be fine.
You're not argueing with a muslim, youre argueing with an American you stupid bottomfeeder. I'll go to bat for freedom of religious practice for anyone, and shit on france when they're clear hypocrits. Just say "I dont like what those other people do because it's scawwy, I want to ban it" with your chest onstead of moralizing.
Soft_Customer_1520@reddit
You sound painfully stupid so I won't waste my time engaging with you, I just want to point out that 1) this law affects all aspects of public life and not just the garments and it affected christian people 100 years before it affected muslims, so you CAN'T read the law because you don't even know what the law is all about and 2) you are commenting on a post about French secret service unraveling a well detailed plot by the terrorist organization Muslim Brotherhood in which they go into the details on how they intend to subvert the State and its laws to implement sharia-law on a local level through hundreds of named organizations, mosques, associations and lobbying at the highest level by Gulf countries like Qatar and Kuwait through muslim councils.
You making all of this about muslim feelings and victimhood shows just how tone deaf and idiotic your comment is.
ForskinEskimo@reddit
I've attempted to make a good faith engagement with you but you keep showing your neither able to think for yourself nor attempt to read/understand what you read.
I'm glad you do nothing of importance in life. It's be aweful if your inability wouls cause harm to someone else.
Take care.
Soft_Customer_1520@reddit
says the guy spending his days in his mom's basement painting plastic miniatures
Tom-Rath@reddit
First you make a series of braindead comments like this:
(We're literally commenting on a thread about a public headscarf ban.)
Then you trying to invalidate the other guy's argument by making fun of Warhammer? Damn, you're not only illiterate and a dumbfuck, you're a complete square.
rulakarbes@reddit
Muslims who think Hijab is mandatory are free to leave Europe. No one will miss them anyway.
ForskinEskimo@reddit
Obligatory =/= mandatory you mong, try not to conflate the 2.
ToWriteAMystery@reddit
It offends people because the reasoning is misogynistic, just like people get offended by the Catholic Church not allowing female priests for misogynistic reasoning.
ForskinEskimo@reddit
And frankly it's equally rediculous because religion isn't fair and equal, but here we don't legally force compliance one way or another. It is always an American's choice as long as it doesn't harm another. That's the core of true "seperation of church and state", freedom and lack of government infringement, and we frankly do it much better then France.
ToWriteAMystery@reddit
I agree that in the US, you are spot on. However, France doesn’t have our same “freedom of religion”, but instead “freedom from religion”. I am not sure how I feel about the French philosophy here, but this type of law doesn’t seem to be out of the bounds of typical French understanding of religious freedom.
ForskinEskimo@reddit
Maybe it is. But when your constituional preamble say
Statutes shall promote equal access by women and men to elective offices and posts as well as to professional and social positions.
...and you introduce laws that do not treat all religions (and specifically, subgroups within religions) equally, clearly doesn't respect beliefs, and said laws effectively restricr access to a certain group of only women to elecrive offices, I wonder what exactly is thier understanding of religiois freedom and secularism?
ToWriteAMystery@reddit
The belief is called laïcité, secularism isn’t really a good translation, but the Wikipedia article does a good job explaining the philosophy even if the translated title is bad.
The basics is France believes in two spheres: private and public. Anyone in the public sphere must not appear to have any affiliation to religion, which is why crucifix necklaces, kippah, and hijabs are banned from public schools. In the private sphere you are allowed to showcase religious symbols.
It’s a very extreme stance, but one that is pretty consistent.
ForskinEskimo@reddit
I don't know, as written, the constitution doesn't explciitly forbid religious perephanial, but focuses on religion not influencing the affairs of state. I don't personnally subscribe to the idea that subsequently banning periphenial will do anything to alter one's core beliefs, if anything failing to meet the afformentioned parts of article 1 and tbe premble.
ToWriteAMystery@reddit
I don’t subscribe to the belief either, but it is a belief that is tightly held in the French government.
jadedflames@reddit
This is disgusting. Are they going to ban nuns from wearing a wimple? Are they going to ban Jews from wearing a yarmulke? Are they going to ban Sikhs from wearing turbans?
What if a 13 year old has childhood cancer and loses their hair from chemo? THAT HEAD MUST BE UNCOVERED.
If we're worried about religions that want women to be modest, why don't we also ban maxi skirts? All women must wear miniskirts and must have long flowing blond hair.
Goddamn, France. But only the politically approved god.
_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_@reddit
No god is politically-approved in France.
Prince_Ire@reddit
Yes, which is stupid and backwards. In a civilized society, you'd be allowed to wear religious garb in schools.
jadedflames@reddit
This ban is about “all public places,” not schools. So it certainly sounds like any God but the Muslim version is allowed.
hc600@reddit
Mhm. It’s very strange to ban hair coverings but presumably only if you’re doing it for the wrong reasons.
Like muslim women aren’t the only ones to do so for religious reasons as you note. I grew up around old order Mennonite and Amish people and there’s orthodox Jewish women and pagans who veil.
But there’s also lots of practical reasons to wear a scarf of kerchief. It’s raining and you have a perm, you’re hiking or trail running on a dusty trail, you haven’t had a chance to wash and style your hair, you’re going for a ride in a convertible or it’s windy, etc.
How are they going to determine what scarfs are ok?
Did macron’s wife wear a veil to meet the pope?
Bastard_of_Brunswick@reddit
Banning headscarves in itself doesn't solve the problem. The problem is the parents and other family members who force girls and women into modesty garbs with the threat of violent consequences for non-compliance. All girls and women need to understand their rights in secular societies, cultist men who insist on pushing cult values onto women need to understand that this is unacceptable and what the consequences are for doing so; and police need to be able to respond swiftly and effectively when girls and women become the victims of violence and any religious prohibitions on their conduct and dress imposed on them by others. The values that insist on modesty garbs for women need to be thoroughly challenged and the barbarian cultists who push for such backwards, sexist bullshit should be publicly shamed. Having said all that, people should be free to make their own decisions about what to wear themselves, so long as they consent to it and so long as they don't treat others as being in any way immoral or non-compliant for not doing so.
jadedflames@reddit
Also, if we are worried about hard-right religious extremists, then this won't mean the girls can go outside without a headscarf. This will just mean they won't be allowed to go outside. This will destroy even more freedoms of the children.
But we won't have to look at them or think about them any more, so I guess that's better. /s
RockstepGuy@reddit
Impressive how you manage to turn it all around and blame the government while in the same sentence saying that the girls will not be able to even go outside because of their families.
Clearly the government is in the wrong yes /s
jadedflames@reddit
I’m saying the government is affecting the rights of everyone in trying to tackle a problem. And rather than fixing the problem, the government’s action will make the problem worse.
For people that just want to cover their hair - this action hurts them.
For people that are being abused - this action hurts them.
RockstepGuy@reddit
They can cover their hair when they reach 16 and so, this is not a total ban on hijab.
It seems a good solution to not force children to wear the hijab, eventually once they grow older and can think for themselves (wich is around the age of 15) they can choose.
jadedflames@reddit
Should we also ban children under the age of 16 from wearing crosses? Should we ban boys from wearing yarmulke’s under the age of 16?
What if the girl is Muslim but just likes wearing scarves?
What if the girl isn’t Muslim but just likes wearing scarves?
And if you do have a fundamentalist family, what do you do about the fact that strict adherence to religious law forbids girls from being outside without a scarf? Those families will just not allow the kids outside.
This is a ban targeting only one group of people that will only negatively affect people. There will be zero positive effects. Children that are abused will still be abused and healthy religious families will be banned from practicing their religion.
RockstepGuy@reddit
Wearing a cross is not required as mandatory by the big branchs of christianity, neither is the yarmulke for the Jews.
The Hijab however is required at the bare minimum as "mandatory", as modern Islamic scholars usually agree.
Again, that's a problem, and is basically telling us who is clearly right, if you have to forcefully remove your child of society because they are not wearing a mf scarve on their heads..
jadedflames@reddit
Alright, so why don’t we ban anyone under the age of 14 from attending a religious service? You can’t take your child with you to church. Strictly banned.
Bat Mitzvah is at 12. Shall we ban Bat Mitzvahs?
No one may have their children baptized anymore I suppose, either? We can’t have infants involved in a religious service without their consent.
SeaBet5180@reddit
Yes
kitti-kin@reddit
The point is that this is not a viable solution to the problem, and is in fact one that risks making the problem worse.
RevenueStill2872@reddit
Frenchman here, for what it's worth.
This proposed law is profoundely stupid since headscarves (and any other visible religious bans) are already banned in schools where these girls are supposed to be most of the time at this age.
So what's the plan ? Stop every young woman in the street to ask them for ID ?
This will only lead to further isolation for the girls that themselves or their family are hellbent on wearing it.
The presidential election is coming closer, expect more populist nonsense like this up until may 2027.
BabylonianWeeb@reddit
Good, hijab doesn't belong in secular modern European countries like France, they belong to backqard Arabic countries like Iraq and Syri. they should ban them, and hopefully more European countries will follow them.
Aussiepharoah@reddit
You forgot the /s
L41L41@reddit
Ragebait used to be believable :(
Extra-Spinach9053@reddit
JJaajajajajaj
faultydesign@reddit
Don’t worry kids, we’re making you freer by telling you what you can’t wear.
empleadoEstatalBot@reddit
Maintainer | Creator | Source Code
Summoning /u/CoverageAnalysisBot
coverageanalysisbot@reddit
Sorry empleadoEstatalBot,
I haven't found any additional coverage for this story (yet!).
I’m a bot. Read here to learn how it works or message us with any feedback so we can improve the bot for you.