What the French legislative does doesn't define what liberty and agency mean. > proof that Islam itself is not incompatible with women mingling with men or not

What the French legislative does doesn't define what liberty and agency mean. > proof that Islam itself is not incompatible with women mingling with men or not being veiled There are many branches of Islam, the same as there are many branches of Christianity. In any case, my point was just that I can see how it's liberating for someone who would have personally chosen separation anyway. The Taliban imposed it. The author's argument that "many women saw it as a liberating invention" is like saying "many African slaves did live happy lives in the US south, and remained with their masters after liberation". Even if it's factually true, it's dishonest. If the veil's so good, let each woman choose. > Men have been beat for wearing drag or for dressing effeminately. (or if you care specifically about women, see: transgender women) Gang members kill people over the color of their shirt or shoes. You know that has nothing to do with fashion, which is what the author talks about. And you know those things are illegal, as opposed to mandated by law. So I don't think you're being frank in this conversation, rather just arguing for the sake of it.