5 ms·

I would consider the US approach fairly liberal, where everyone is free to do as they want as long as they're not affecting other people with their actions. Fr

by ZainRiz 10y ago

I would consider the US approach fairly liberal, where everyone is free to do as they want as long as they're not affecting other people with their actions. France goes to the extreme level of saying "You can't even wear your religious clothing inside the school, even if you feel naked without it." How would you define liberalism?

Shinkei 10y ago
Culture can be affected by draconian laws also. I believe religious clothing designed to oppress women is regressive and detrimental to Democracy. Please read this: https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2015/sep/03/hengameh-golestans-best-photograph-iranian-women-rebel-against-the-1979-hijab-law https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2015/sep/03/hengame...
- wavefunction 10y ago
  That's funny that you mention democracy and oppression of women. Ancient Greeks of Athens and the other city states kept their women cloistered out of public. Women had no rights and were basically chattel in these societies. Democracy is like technology, morally neutral yet capable of great good or terrible inhumanity.
  - Shinkei 10y ago
    Fair enough. I agree on both points. But my point was not that one system is 'better' or 'worse' but that religious head-wear should not be seen as some inalienable right that we have to accommodate to remain a free society. Even if many young Iranian women may feel 'naked' without it, it only took the religious dictators there one generation to make them forget how it used to be.
vidarh 10y ago
While I don't agree with the French approach of regulating dress, one of their arguments is that you do affect other people with your choice of how to dress, and that people should not have to be subjected to certain overt expressions of religion in certain contexts, with schools being a particularly sensitive topic because of their position in passing on the ideals of the republic. I think they go way too far, and a that some of it is bigotry hiding behind the excuse of secularism, but it illustrates that determining what sufficiently negatively "affects others" to be worth sanction can be used to reach widely different conclusions..
- king_phil 10y ago
  That means if I am a pastafarian (Google it if you don't know it - and yes, at least in Germany it is a approved religion) I can't put a noodle riddle on my head (because it is religious clothing for pastafarians) - or can NOBODY, just because it is religious clothing? And yes, you might not believe it, but in Germany there is a ruling that you are allowed to take your passport photo with a noodle riddle on your head because it is your religious headwear... I think we should throw all this religion in the toilet and flush.
  - vidarh 10y ago
    The starting point of this in France is the idea that we should throw all this religion in the toilet and flush. The principle governing French secularism - laïcité [1] - has its origin in freeing people from being subjected to the influence of the Catholic church. It's a such a direct reaction to religion being pushed onto people in the public sphere by putting in place restrictions aimed at severely curtailing religious influence in government and education. In this context, it's worth noting that Turkish secularism was explicitly modelled by Ataturk on French laïcité. E.g. Turkey, like France, is constitutionally a secular republic. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La%C3%AFcit%C3%A9 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La%C3%AFcit%C3%A9
gameofdrones 10y ago
French culture has some inconsistent, fascist, illiberalisms, especially in the differences of making fun of Christianity vs. making fun of Judaism, or similarly with Christianity vs. Islam. (govt demanding firing of Sine). Actual progressive liberalism should at least include listening to other viewpoints, being open to new ideas and generally being sensible and constructive. But narrow, identity-politics labels aren't all that useful in reality and end up inventing wedge-issues and false dichotomies. (There are some people looking for common ground while others are looking for Sayre's law fights.) Je suis Charlie
- selimthegrim 10y ago
  Sine was basically implying the religion was nothing but a tool of social climbing in that particular case. That's just an incredibly nasty, low and personal thing.
fsaneq2 10y ago
Having been brought up in a French system and then going to a US college, I must say I strongly prefer the French system. I guess Americans would take offense to this view, but I find wearing religious clothing in a public institution such as a school incredibly obnoxious and pushy -- it's akin to your professor suddenly starting to push his/her political views onto you in an unrelated lecture, or something. It's not that it's bad to wear religious clothing or have political opinions -- it's just that a school should be a place of learning, not propaganda.
- kiba 10y ago
  It's not that it's bad to wear religious clothing or have political opinions -- it's just that a school should be a place of learning, not propaganda. As an American, I think of nothing when people wear hijab or whatever, and trust me, I am an atheist who think religion is irrational and that humanity would be better off without it. Maybe the French would be better off thinking nothing of it when someone wears religious clothing, just as we are starting to think nothing of it when people are gay or transgender or whatever.
  - fsaneq2 10y ago
    I think the difference is that the French perceive obvious religious clothing similarly to someone wearing a T-shirt saying "I vote republican/democrat" in huge letters -- though I don't know, maybe that'd be considered fine too in the US (US schools, that is)? I see it as clearly unnecessary/voluntary (so it's quite different from being gay like in your example), so it's an attempt to advertise, which leaves a bad taste in a place like a school.
    - learc83 10y ago
      Yes. A Shirt that says "I vote Republican/Democrat" would be perfectly acceptable in most places in America. You'd get a bit of flack if you wore a conservative shirt in an extremely liberal environment and vice versa.
  - tcoppi 10y ago

by ZainRiz 10y ago

Shinkei 10y ago

Culture can be affected by draconian laws also. I believe religious clothing designed to oppress women is regressive and detrimental to Democracy. Please read this: https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2015/sep/03/hengameh-golestans-best-photograph-iranian-women-rebel-against-the-1979-hijab-law https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2015/sep/03/hengame...

wavefunction 10y ago
That's funny that you mention democracy and oppression of women. Ancient Greeks of Athens and the other city states kept their women cloistered out of public. Women had no rights and were basically chattel in these societies. Democracy is like technology, morally neutral yet capable of great good or terrible inhumanity.
- Shinkei 10y ago
  Fair enough. I agree on both points. But my point was not that one system is 'better' or 'worse' but that religious head-wear should not be seen as some inalienable right that we have to accommodate to remain a free society. Even if many young Iranian women may feel 'naked' without it, it only took the religious dictators there one generation to make them forget how it used to be.

vidarh 10y ago

While I don't agree with the French approach of regulating dress, one of their arguments is that you do affect other people with your choice of how to dress, and that people should not have to be subjected to certain overt expressions of religion in certain contexts, with schools being a particularly sensitive topic because of their position in passing on the ideals of the republic. I think they go way too far, and a that some of it is bigotry hiding behind the excuse of secularism, but it illustrates that determining what sufficiently negatively "affects others" to be worth sanction can be used to reach widely different conclusions..

king_phil 10y ago
That means if I am a pastafarian (Google it if you don't know it - and yes, at least in Germany it is a approved religion) I can't put a noodle riddle on my head (because it is religious clothing for pastafarians) - or can NOBODY, just because it is religious clothing? And yes, you might not believe it, but in Germany there is a ruling that you are allowed to take your passport photo with a noodle riddle on your head because it is your religious headwear... I think we should throw all this religion in the toilet and flush.
- vidarh 10y ago
  The starting point of this in France is the idea that we should throw all this religion in the toilet and flush. The principle governing French secularism - laïcité [1] - has its origin in freeing people from being subjected to the influence of the Catholic church. It's a such a direct reaction to religion being pushed onto people in the public sphere by putting in place restrictions aimed at severely curtailing religious influence in government and education. In this context, it's worth noting that Turkish secularism was explicitly modelled by Ataturk on French laïcité. E.g. Turkey, like France, is constitutionally a secular republic. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La%C3%AFcit%C3%A9 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La%C3%AFcit%C3%A9

gameofdrones 10y ago

French culture has some inconsistent, fascist, illiberalisms, especially in the differences of making fun of Christianity vs. making fun of Judaism, or similarly with Christianity vs. Islam. (govt demanding firing of Sine). Actual progressive liberalism should at least include listening to other viewpoints, being open to new ideas and generally being sensible and constructive. But narrow, identity-politics labels aren't all that useful in reality and end up inventing wedge-issues and false dichotomies. (There are some people looking for common ground while others are looking for Sayre's law fights.) Je suis Charlie

selimthegrim 10y ago
Sine was basically implying the religion was nothing but a tool of social climbing in that particular case. That's just an incredibly nasty, low and personal thing.

fsaneq2 10y ago

Having been brought up in a French system and then going to a US college, I must say I strongly prefer the French system. I guess Americans would take offense to this view, but I find wearing religious clothing in a public institution such as a school incredibly obnoxious and pushy -- it's akin to your professor suddenly starting to push his/her political views onto you in an unrelated lecture, or something. It's not that it's bad to wear religious clothing or have political opinions -- it's just that a school should be a place of learning, not propaganda.

kiba 10y ago
It's not that it's bad to wear religious clothing or have political opinions -- it's just that a school should be a place of learning, not propaganda. As an American, I think of nothing when people wear hijab or whatever, and trust me, I am an atheist who think religion is irrational and that humanity would be better off without it. Maybe the French would be better off thinking nothing of it when someone wears religious clothing, just as we are starting to think nothing of it when people are gay or transgender or whatever.
- fsaneq2 10y ago
  I think the difference is that the French perceive obvious religious clothing similarly to someone wearing a T-shirt saying "I vote republican/democrat" in huge letters -- though I don't know, maybe that'd be considered fine too in the US (US schools, that is)? I see it as clearly unnecessary/voluntary (so it's quite different from being gay like in your example), so it's an attempt to advertise, which leaves a bad taste in a place like a school.
  - learc83 10y ago
    Yes. A Shirt that says "I vote Republican/Democrat" would be perfectly acceptable in most places in America. You'd get a bit of flack if you wore a conservative shirt in an extremely liberal environment and vice versa.
- tcoppi 10y ago