4 ms·

The framing is odd though describing it as "forced" instead of simply the school's dress code. Especially when comparing it to a case in Britain a few weeks ago

The framing is odd though describing it as "forced" instead of simply the school's dress code. Especially when comparing it to a case in Britain a few weeks ago where a girl was threatened [1] with legal action because her skirt was 'too long'. Or how france forces girls to remove their hijabs [2]. One can always find rhetoric to justify one's decision, what I find odd tho is how a group of people will use words like "forced" in one case but will bend over backwards to justify the same forced rulings with more euphemistic language when it's in favor of their own worldview. You'll hear "it's just the law" kind of excuses, while not realizing that their own arguments could easily be used to justify the opposing case as well. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/education/2021/jan/12/school-threatens-legal-action-muslim-girl-siham-hamud-skirt-too-long https://www.theguardian.com/education/2021/jan/12/school-thr... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_scarf_controversy_in_France https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_scarf_controversy_in_F...

underseacables 6y ago
I don’t think you’re putting enough thought into what it means to be forced to do something. Girls in France are forced by their elders to wear the hijab. People around the planet are forced to do things according to a religious code that violently oppresses free will and freedom of expression. France has done the right thing, it has allowed girls to choose, unfortunately this has led to their parents and others who make choices for them to choose instead to force them to adhere to a strict religious code and keep them out of School, and the public. Anything that forces you to adhere to a code by means of force means a lack of free will. Now, you have free will to violate that code, but the consequences of a young woman choosing not to wear the hijab could be life-threatening. That is not free will. That is inhumane terrorism
- jedimind 6y ago
  > Girls in France are forced by their elders to wear the hijab. That's a vile and bigoted generalization. While that can be sometimes the case, it certainly isn't mostly so. A huge number of girls who are forced to remove their hijab feel oppressed and alienated. > France has done the right thing, it has allowed girls to choose No, this is nonfactual. France forces girl to remove their hijabs that's a fact. Your rhetoric is exactly what I was referring to, not only nonfactual but grossly misleading and outright deceptive.
  - LiberatedLlama 6y ago
    There is nothing 'vile or bigoted' about pointing out that parents frequently force religions on their children. My christian parents sure as shit did, and it was common in other families in my community too. I see no reason to think it would be any less prevalent in Muslim families than in Christian ones.
  - sheepdestroyer 6y ago
    Religion should be reserved for 16yo and more. Forcing it on susceptible children minds should be considered child abuse. There is no freedom of religion if indoctrination starts from the earliest and most vulnerable age. This is what's really vile and bigoted here. At least France's public school system aims to be a neutral ground free from this kind of influences
    - jedimind 6y ago
      Atheism should be reserved for 16yo and more. Forcing it on susceptible children minds should be considered child abuse. There is no freedom of religion if indoctrination starts from the earliest and most vulnerable age. This is what's really vile and bigoted here. At least Indonesia's public school system aims to be a neutral ground free from these kind of influences
      - bsagdiyev 6y ago
        Turning it around like that doesn’t really work in this case. Is atheism not a religious choice (or lack of) anyways? So his point stands.
        aptidude187 6y ago
        It works perfectly well. The only thing that stands is your bias.
        zakki 6y ago
        I don’t think atheism is a religion choice. Religion is about believing the existence of God, the Creator. Atheism is about not believing the existence of God. You choose a religion after you choose you believe in the existence of God. The flipping is acceptable.
- zakki 6y ago
  The different with current action from the Indonesian minister of education is the school is not allowed to ‘force’ the students to wear religion dressing but also the schools are not allowed to ban the students who want to use it. In France it is still not allowed even though it is the student decision.
- knolax 6y ago
  > France has done the right thing, it has allowed girls to choose France bans face veils in public. How is banning one of the two choices allowing them to choose? You don't respond to people being forced to do one thing by forcing them to do the opposite thing. It's also completely patronizing to just assume that women only wear the hijab just because "their elders force them to". I know plenty of people who choose to wear it of their own volition.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
ibn_khaldun 6y ago
I imagine this is because we are dealing with a people who feel that they are morally superior than the rest of the world due to worldly advantage and dominance. Whether or not this school was correct in their dress code [1] is shadowed by the immediate conclusion for many that “Islam = Bad, oppressive, unfair, archaic” the moment that it ceases to be just an “internal, private belief for some” and becomes an external way of life that sovereign countries implement in their own territories. This is so even if what a country is implementing is not congruent to the tenants of Islam (see, the flogging of the Homosexuals for example). Let them (viz. The West) tell it, the sociocultural climate of their localities are in exemplary order. [1]: I see no issue with private institutions enforcing a dress code that makes the hijab mandatory. Non-muslim students need not attend and even to force them to wear it would obfuscate the intent of the hijab. It is far more than just a cloth that is draped over the head of any woman and its virtue is neglected so long as its wearer is void of virtue herself.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- prigadita 6y ago
  “Non-muslim students need not attend and even to force them to wear it would obfuscate the intent of the hijab.” hear hear. now imagine the uproar if christians would have said “non christians need not attend” [insert anything].
  - ibn_khaldun 6y ago
    By what logic would a person enroll their child into a private institute that enforces a non-arbitrary code that they disagree with? I see no problem with a private Catholic school saying “If you’re not Catholic and have an issue with what we enforce here (e.g. dress codes), then you should enroll your children here.” I imagine that’s what they all would say. If I didn’t make it clear, this applies appropriately to private institutions, meaning “you are enrolling here on your own conscious accord.” If a person has any issues with how a private academic institute operates, then they are not mandated to attend it. Furthermore there is a difference between blatant discrimination (“No non-Christians allowed”) vs. "there is a particular culture that is being observed here; we aren’t going to bar anyone from attending this establishment, but it’s illogical to expect us to bend to your will because you are in opposition to what we practice upon you joining."

underseacables 6y ago

I don’t think you’re putting enough thought into what it means to be forced to do something. Girls in France are forced by their elders to wear the hijab. People around the planet are forced to do things according to a religious code that violently oppresses free will and freedom of expression. France has done the right thing, it has allowed girls to choose, unfortunately this has led to their parents and others who make choices for them to choose instead to force them to adhere to a strict religious code and keep them out of School, and the public. Anything that forces you to adhere to a code by means of force means a lack of free will. Now, you have free will to violate that code, but the consequences of a young woman choosing not to wear the hijab could be life-threatening. That is not free will. That is inhumane terrorism

jedimind 6y ago
> Girls in France are forced by their elders to wear the hijab. That's a vile and bigoted generalization. While that can be sometimes the case, it certainly isn't mostly so. A huge number of girls who are forced to remove their hijab feel oppressed and alienated. > France has done the right thing, it has allowed girls to choose No, this is nonfactual. France forces girl to remove their hijabs that's a fact. Your rhetoric is exactly what I was referring to, not only nonfactual but grossly misleading and outright deceptive.
- LiberatedLlama 6y ago
  There is nothing 'vile or bigoted' about pointing out that parents frequently force religions on their children. My christian parents sure as shit did, and it was common in other families in my community too. I see no reason to think it would be any less prevalent in Muslim families than in Christian ones.
- sheepdestroyer 6y ago
  Religion should be reserved for 16yo and more. Forcing it on susceptible children minds should be considered child abuse. There is no freedom of religion if indoctrination starts from the earliest and most vulnerable age. This is what's really vile and bigoted here. At least France's public school system aims to be a neutral ground free from this kind of influences
  - jedimind 6y ago
    Atheism should be reserved for 16yo and more. Forcing it on susceptible children minds should be considered child abuse. There is no freedom of religion if indoctrination starts from the earliest and most vulnerable age. This is what's really vile and bigoted here. At least Indonesia's public school system aims to be a neutral ground free from these kind of influences
    - bsagdiyev 6y ago
      Turning it around like that doesn’t really work in this case. Is atheism not a religious choice (or lack of) anyways? So his point stands.
      - aptidude187 6y ago
        It works perfectly well. The only thing that stands is your bias.
      - zakki 6y ago
        I don’t think atheism is a religion choice. Religion is about believing the existence of God, the Creator. Atheism is about not believing the existence of God. You choose a religion after you choose you believe in the existence of God. The flipping is acceptable.
zakki 6y ago
The different with current action from the Indonesian minister of education is the school is not allowed to ‘force’ the students to wear religion dressing but also the schools are not allowed to ban the students who want to use it. In France it is still not allowed even though it is the student decision.
knolax 6y ago
> France has done the right thing, it has allowed girls to choose France bans face veils in public. How is banning one of the two choices allowing them to choose? You don't respond to people being forced to do one thing by forcing them to do the opposite thing. It's also completely patronizing to just assume that women only wear the hijab just because "their elders force them to". I know plenty of people who choose to wear it of their own volition.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

ibn_khaldun 6y ago

I imagine this is because we are dealing with a people who feel that they are morally superior than the rest of the world due to worldly advantage and dominance. Whether or not this school was correct in their dress code [1] is shadowed by the immediate conclusion for many that “Islam = Bad, oppressive, unfair, archaic” the moment that it ceases to be just an “internal, private belief for some” and becomes an external way of life that sovereign countries implement in their own territories. This is so even if what a country is implementing is not congruent to the tenants of Islam (see, the flogging of the Homosexuals for example). Let them (viz. The West) tell it, the sociocultural climate of their localities are in exemplary order. [1]: I see no issue with private institutions enforcing a dress code that makes the hijab mandatory. Non-muslim students need not attend and even to force them to wear it would obfuscate the intent of the hijab. It is far more than just a cloth that is draped over the head of any woman and its virtue is neglected so long as its wearer is void of virtue herself.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
prigadita 6y ago
“Non-muslim students need not attend and even to force them to wear it would obfuscate the intent of the hijab.” hear hear. now imagine the uproar if christians would have said “non christians need not attend” [insert anything].
- ibn_khaldun 6y ago
  By what logic would a person enroll their child into a private institute that enforces a non-arbitrary code that they disagree with? I see no problem with a private Catholic school saying “If you’re not Catholic and have an issue with what we enforce here (e.g. dress codes), then you should enroll your children here.” I imagine that’s what they all would say. If I didn’t make it clear, this applies appropriately to private institutions, meaning “you are enrolling here on your own conscious accord.” If a person has any issues with how a private academic institute operates, then they are not mandated to attend it. Furthermore there is a difference between blatant discrimination (“No non-Christians allowed”) vs. "there is a particular culture that is being observed here; we aren’t going to bar anyone from attending this establishment, but it’s illogical to expect us to bend to your will because you are in opposition to what we practice upon you joining."