5 ms·

> France has democracy do they not? Democracy is not a binary thing, that’s here or not here. It’s a spectrum. Yes, last time the French people had to vote and

by hk__2 3y ago

> France has democracy do they not? Democracy is not a binary thing, that’s here or not here. It’s a spectrum. Yes, last time the French people had to vote and had the choice between someone they really didn’t want and someone they didn’t really want but had no choice they voted for the later. Does that make every governement decree an expression of the French people as a whole? Of course not. Decrees like this tell you more about the political power of the meat industry than anything about the culture of the country. > Ironically, in many contexts you are required to wear less clothes, such as at the beach or in a swimming pool. Citation needed. There isn’t any law requiring you to wear less clothes on the beach; it would be ridicule and contrary to the Constitution.

shortrounddev2 3y ago
turns out you are correct about beaches, the french beach burkini ban was a local ordinance which was thrown out. However, swimming pools still require less clothing: Burkini ban: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/france-court-rules-burkini-swimwear-religious-reasons-rcna34833 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/france-court-rules-burkin... And in that article, on swimming pools: > Clothing rules in public pools in France are strict, for what authorities say are reasons of hygiene: caps are required, and baggy swim trunks or other voluminous clothing is generally banned. Wetsuits are not allowed in many pools too, as are some sun-protection suits. Officially this is a matter of public health, but it's a pseudo-scientific law that likely has more to do with French culture and national identity as a more libertine place (or else)
- hk__2 3y ago
  > Officially this is a matter of public health, but it's a pseudo-scientific law that likely has more to do with French culture and national identity as a more libertine place (or else) It’s a law from 1981 that says that for hygiene reasons bathing clothes must adhere to your body. Burkinis were invented in 2004.
  - shortrounddev2 3y ago
    It's a pseudo-scientific law
jakear 3y ago
> Citation needed. There isn’t any law requiring you to wear less clothes on the beach; it would be ridicule and contrary to the Constitution. Tell that to the courts. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-61883529 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-61883529
- shortrounddev2 3y ago
  It turns out that's for swimming pools, not beaches
  - jakear 3y ago
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37093420 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37093420 "So far a small number of women have been fined (€38 in Cannes - £33; $43) for wearing a burkini on the beach at Cannes." What an awful place to live. I was commenting with a friend the other day who was claiming the old "food in Europe is better for you because they have more regulations". I countered that they also have the most regulations about all the ways a website has to harass you with absolutely Zero (0) legitimate justification, so why should we expect their food regulations to be any better founded? He seemed to find that line of reasoning well founded.
    - mrguyorama 3y ago
      >regulations about all the ways a website has to harass you For the hundredth time, the regulations do NOT tell companies to harass you. They do that to make you angry at the laws that prevent them from data harvesting you to the extent they do in the US. It's that simple. You can comply with GDPR and the cookies law 100% without ever asking the user anything. If a website is asking you for consent for anything, they're trying to treat you as cattle they can harvest data from for sale. That's the only reason. That or utterly incompetent lawyers.
      - shortrounddev2 3y ago
        It's more common that they're using the data themselves for tracking (product suggestions, advertising), selling it isn't as common for most sites. These 3rd party publisher websites don't usually harvest enough data to make it worth selling. Usually, they're the ones buying data to enrich their tracking set

by hk__2 3y ago

shortrounddev2 3y ago

turns out you are correct about beaches, the french beach burkini ban was a local ordinance which was thrown out. However, swimming pools still require less clothing: Burkini ban: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/france-court-rules-burkini-swimwear-religious-reasons-rcna34833 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/france-court-rules-burkin... And in that article, on swimming pools: > Clothing rules in public pools in France are strict, for what authorities say are reasons of hygiene: caps are required, and baggy swim trunks or other voluminous clothing is generally banned. Wetsuits are not allowed in many pools too, as are some sun-protection suits. Officially this is a matter of public health, but it's a pseudo-scientific law that likely has more to do with French culture and national identity as a more libertine place (or else)

hk__2 3y ago
> Officially this is a matter of public health, but it's a pseudo-scientific law that likely has more to do with French culture and national identity as a more libertine place (or else) It’s a law from 1981 that says that for hygiene reasons bathing clothes must adhere to your body. Burkinis were invented in 2004.
- shortrounddev2 3y ago
  It's a pseudo-scientific law

jakear 3y ago

> Citation needed. There isn’t any law requiring you to wear less clothes on the beach; it would be ridicule and contrary to the Constitution. Tell that to the courts. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-61883529 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-61883529

shortrounddev2 3y ago
It turns out that's for swimming pools, not beaches
- jakear 3y ago
  https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37093420 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37093420 "So far a small number of women have been fined (€38 in Cannes - £33; $43) for wearing a burkini on the beach at Cannes." What an awful place to live. I was commenting with a friend the other day who was claiming the old "food in Europe is better for you because they have more regulations". I countered that they also have the most regulations about all the ways a website has to harass you with absolutely Zero (0) legitimate justification, so why should we expect their food regulations to be any better founded? He seemed to find that line of reasoning well founded.
  - mrguyorama 3y ago
    >regulations about all the ways a website has to harass you For the hundredth time, the regulations do NOT tell companies to harass you. They do that to make you angry at the laws that prevent them from data harvesting you to the extent they do in the US. It's that simple. You can comply with GDPR and the cookies law 100% without ever asking the user anything. If a website is asking you for consent for anything, they're trying to treat you as cattle they can harvest data from for sale. That's the only reason. That or utterly incompetent lawyers.
    - shortrounddev2 3y ago
      It's more common that they're using the data themselves for tracking (product suggestions, advertising), selling it isn't as common for most sites. These 3rd party publisher websites don't usually harvest enough data to make it worth selling. Usually, they're the ones buying data to enrich their tracking set