this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2023

126 points (97.7% liked)

World News

38979 readers

2642 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

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.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

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

How to spot Misinformation and Propaganda

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

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

Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

quinten@lemmy.world

NewsAutoMod@lemmy.world

jordanlund@lemmy.world

Tenthrow@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

lemmyAtom@lemmy.world

FlyingSquid@lemmy.world

126

French ban of abaya robes in schools draws applause and criticism (www.reuters.com)

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

35 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The French government's decision to ban children from wearing the abaya, the loose-fitting, full-length robes worn by some Muslim women, in state-run schools drew applause on Monday from the right, but also criticism.

all 40 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Takapapatapaka@lemmy.world 34 points 1 year ago (4 children)

The main problem with this subject is that the abaya is not a religious clothing strictly speaking. It is not enforced by any muslim sacred text, a lot of muslim women do not wear it, whereas non-muslim women wear it. It is rather typical from the arabic culture than from the muslim religion (it originated from bedouin culture in the first place).

Here in France people are mad about secularism because of an old hate of Christian Church, but nowadays it is rather used to discriminate jews and muslims. (At school, yarmulke and headscarf are banned, but christian crosses are allowed if they're not too big. Every day i saw people in school with christian crosses around the neck or as earrings, and no one bothered them, while they were harassing girls with a headscarf.)

Imo here the government is just creating a new debate on a stupid question, just to scare people about muslims and give hard right politicians a bone to chew, as they always do. While everyone talks and is afraid about what teenagers could wear, people talk less about the other laws they are passing, for having more control over Internet or whatever they want.

[–] magnor@lemmy.magnor.ovh 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah this is exactly what is happening. Use this as a talking point while the country rots from the inside thanks to Macron's antisocial and ecocidal policies.

[–] bobman@unilem.org 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yep. Make the masses squabble over social issues while the wealthy fucks them with monetary ones.

[–] sheogorath@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Bread and circus, my friend, bread and circus.

Although I'm not feeling so hot on the bread availability in the near future.

[–] magnor@lemmy.magnor.ovh 3 points 1 year ago

"Let them have brioche" as they said.

[–] bobman@unilem.org 5 points 1 year ago

"I don't like this thing so therefore neither should anyone else."

It's really the default mentality for the vast majority of people I come across these days.

[–] Akasazh@feddit.nl 4 points 1 year ago

Imo here the government is just creating a new debate on a stupid question, just to scare people about muslims and give hard right politicians a bone to chew

Good take, even I got riled up into a discussion on this, lately. It's rather divisive and therefore a good tool to get people further apart, instead of working together..

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Children shouldn't have to uphold any religion imo. It's tough here though as it's also their freedom to wear whatever so I don't think that ban is the best way to approach this issue here.

[–] A_Toasty_Strudel@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is correct. Even if we don't necessarily agree with why they're choosing to wear it, saying that they're outright not able to is completely unacceptable.

[–] TheBlue22@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

They are not choosing shit. They are being forced to wear them by their parents. It's indoctrination and abuse

[–] andrewrgross 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is dumb. I grew up going to a mainstream private Jewish school. We had to wear yarmulkes.

Every child grows up in the guidance of parents, and everyone thinks someone's lifestyle is abuse. Did you parents feed you meat? Yes? That's abuse. No? That's abuse.

[–] rustydomino@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Sure, they key here being private school. They’re regulating public schools.

[–] bobman@unilem.org 4 points 1 year ago

Funny, children don't have a choice when they go to public school.

This means that they should be even more accepting of different cultures than private schools. You're literally forced to go there if you're poor.

[–] andrewrgross 1 points 1 year ago

The point was about indoctrination.

You can't call a Muslim upbringing indoctrination unless you also call Jewish, Christian, and secular agnostic upbringings indoctrination too. Which might be true, but then you're just describing parenting.

[–] bobman@unilem.org 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

What? None of them are choosing to wear it?

It's all being forced upon them?

What about the government now literally forcing them to wear what is 'acceptable'? That just gets a pass, huh?

18 upvotes

Lol, lemmyers. Can't expect rational trains of thought from you, I guess.

[–] TheBlue22@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So it's okay to support a shit tradition meant to oppress women? Tradition that pushes inferiority of women over men?

[–] bobman@unilem.org 4 points 1 year ago

You mean support people making decisions for themselves instead of having the government do it for them?

Yeah, it is okay to support that.

Not sure why you're advocating suppressing their culture. Did you completely ignore the first question I asked?

[+] Buffaloaf@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

[deleted]

[–] Dremor@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Crucifixes and yarmulkes (also known as kippas) are also banned, yes.

[–] bobman@unilem.org 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The other commenter was saying 'crosses are allowed if they're not too big.'

Which is it?

[–] Dremor@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Usually if it isn't visible. Like a necklace worn under clothes. The idea being that you should not make your religious apparent.

[–] bobman@unilem.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

He was saying that they would wear them around their necks and in their ears and nobody would bother them about it.

[–] Dremor@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It is mainly up to the head of the school to define what is acceptable or not.

In my case it wouldn't bother me me if a Jewish, Muslim, or any other religion student wore a penny sized necklace under his clothes, but not if it is a ostensible one.

That's the problem with clothes, it shows ostensibly from which religion, caste or culture you are from.

[–] bobman@unilem.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, he didn't make any mention of obscuring it with clothing or it being up to the 'head of the school.'

[–] Dremor@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

The law is intentionally broad while leaving some space for interpretation in order to encompasse case that may not yet exist.

Law is like an onion. Each layer encompasses the previous one with more precise definition, while not contradicting it. In this case, the constitution protect the freedom of religion, but also separate religion from the state. Thus you are free to have one, but not to ostensibly display it in public (by that I mean in state owned) spaces.

From this point you have 2 way to say what is considered as ostensible according to said law. Application decrees, which is taken by the executive branch, and which is what was used in this case. And jurisprudence, which are the result of the judiciary branch.

[–] magnor@lemmy.magnor.ovh 1 points 1 year ago

They are banned but it is not exactly the same. Those are religious items. The abaya is a whole genre of clothing.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 9 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

PARIS, Aug 28 (Reuters) - The French government's decision to ban children from wearing the abaya, the loose-fitting, full-length robes worn by some Muslim women, in state-run schools drew applause on Monday from the right, but also criticism.

France has enforced a ban on religious symbols in state schools since 2004, to uphold its strict brand of secularism, known as "laicite".

"Our schools are continually put under test, and over the past months, breaches to laicite have increased considerably, in particular with (pupils) wearing religious attire like abayas and kameez," Education Minister Gabriel Attal told a news conference to explain Sunday's ban.

The SNPDEN-UNSA union of school principals welcomed the decision, saying what it needed above all was clarity from the government, its national secretary, Didier Georges, told Reuters.

They will, once again, feel stigmatised," said sociologist Agnes De Feo, who has been researching French women wearing niqab for the past decade.

Riffi said there was a wider fashion trend among female high school students, who buy long dresses and kimonos online.

The original article contains 510 words, the summary contains 172 words. Saved 66%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] electrogamerman@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Ironic the Muslims fighting for freedom, when they can't accept homosexuality.

[–] andrewrgross -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This is fucked up. France scares me.

[–] bobman@unilem.org -1 points 1 year ago

It's not unique to france.

All nations are controlled by petulant children who believe if they don't like something, then neither should anyone else.

Most adults are kids these days. It's really sad, but the ruling class has been successful in keeping us as stupid as possible for as long as possible.

[–] Mr_Blott@feddit.uk -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're probably a bit gullible then