Because it is not particularly religious clothing? It is not exclusively used by religious people, it just happens to be mainly used by one group of people.
Also, please, “no one in France is allowed to wear religious iconography”. Tell me you didn’t go to school in France without telling me you didn’t go to school in France. Some religion are overlooked quite often.
I’m all for banning religious iconography from schools; but if that was the real goal (hint: it was not), do it fully, and only do it for actual religious stuff. This is about banning a sleeved dress that have little to no connection with religion except that “some people off said religion sometimes wears it”. I’m sure they sometimes wear snickers too, should we also ban them?
The problem is, theres no definitive distinguishihg description of an abaya. It’s a loose dress. How do you distinguish someone who wants to be comfortable in a loose dress from a girl being oppressed by an abaya?
Maybe this will help: What is more important, allowing girls to feel comfortable in a loose dress or helping girls that are being opressed by an abaya?
There are better ways to prevent oppression than controlling what people wear (which is ironically exactly what their oppressors are doing). These girls and women should feel comfortable and free to wear whatever they want, without being forced by religion or the french government. The answer to oppression and authoritarianism isn’t more oppression and authoritarianism.
Hmm no? Please tell me how to distinguish a “regular” dress from a “religious” dress, when they have roughly the same coverage and no specific patterns. That would be helpful to enforce this new restriction without relying on the wearer’s religious belief.
Well, a bunch of men are certainly forcing them not to wear it now. I find it interesting that your answer to men controlling women is to have different men control the same women.
Edit: Honestly, fuck people who use religion as an oppressive tool. But, I find it really frustrating that people are acting like they’re liberating women and girls by controlling what they wear. That’s not liberation. These kids should be given access to confidential in school therapy and resources to report and deal with abusive parents if we’re actually worried about them being oppressed. But that’s not really what this is about.
Additionally, banning the abaya doesn’t prevent oppression. If these girls are being forced to dress modestly and being made ashamed of their bodies, they will just be forced to dress modestly in a vaguely different way now. Acting like this will bring meaningful change to these girls lives is just theater.
Do you actually have anything to argue what I said though? Like… really. Your best answer to oppression is more oppression? And that makes me an idiot?
Because it is not particularly religious clothing? It is not exclusively used by religious people, it just happens to be mainly used by one group of people. Also, please, “no one in France is allowed to wear religious iconography”. Tell me you didn’t go to school in France without telling me you didn’t go to school in France. Some religion are overlooked quite often.
I’m all for banning religious iconography from schools; but if that was the real goal (hint: it was not), do it fully, and only do it for actual religious stuff. This is about banning a sleeved dress that have little to no connection with religion except that “some people off said religion sometimes wears it”. I’m sure they sometimes wear snickers too, should we also ban them?
I think the point is that this particularly religious clothing is used to shame women of their bodies.
You know other religions used to have women cover their bodies too, but that has been left behind a lot of years ago.
I have a question for you, why dont men also cover their bodies? why is it that only women have to cover their bodies?
“That is our culture!” It is a culture based on religion, based on regressive and mysoginistic ideals.
The problem is, theres no definitive distinguishihg description of an abaya. It’s a loose dress. How do you distinguish someone who wants to be comfortable in a loose dress from a girl being oppressed by an abaya?
Is it really that hard for you to answer that?
Maybe this will help: What is more important, allowing girls to feel comfortable in a loose dress or helping girls that are being opressed by an abaya?
There are better ways to prevent oppression than controlling what people wear (which is ironically exactly what their oppressors are doing). These girls and women should feel comfortable and free to wear whatever they want, without being forced by religion or the french government. The answer to oppression and authoritarianism isn’t more oppression and authoritarianism.
You’re really just arguing to argue.
Hmm no? Please tell me how to distinguish a “regular” dress from a “religious” dress, when they have roughly the same coverage and no specific patterns. That would be helpful to enforce this new restriction without relying on the wearer’s religious belief.
Here’s a fucking clue: is a man FORCING them to wear it?
Well, a bunch of men are certainly forcing them not to wear it now. I find it interesting that your answer to men controlling women is to have different men control the same women.
Edit: Honestly, fuck people who use religion as an oppressive tool. But, I find it really frustrating that people are acting like they’re liberating women and girls by controlling what they wear. That’s not liberation. These kids should be given access to confidential in school therapy and resources to report and deal with abusive parents if we’re actually worried about them being oppressed. But that’s not really what this is about.
Additionally, banning the abaya doesn’t prevent oppression. If these girls are being forced to dress modestly and being made ashamed of their bodies, they will just be forced to dress modestly in a vaguely different way now. Acting like this will bring meaningful change to these girls lives is just theater.
You couldn’t be a bigger idiot.
Do you actually have anything to argue what I said though? Like… really. Your best answer to oppression is more oppression? And that makes me an idiot?