this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2023
132 points (95.8% liked)

Europe

8484 readers
1 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, 🇩🇪 ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures

Rules

(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)

  1. Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
  2. No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
  3. No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out !yurop@lemm.ee

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] frostbiker@lemmy.ca 51 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (19 children)

I'm all for letting people wear whatever they want. What is the harm?

Here in Canada I've seen police officers wearing turbans. Works for me. Nude beaches? Sure thing. I've seen people in my neighborhood wearing Saudi-style niqabs and Afghan-style burqas.

Who am I to tell people what they should or shouldn't wear? How could it be my business?

I'm also for people burning the Qur'an if they so please. Or the bible, or the rainbow flag, or the national flag if that's how they want to protest. Ideas are there to be challenged.

I draw the line at threatening or harming people.

[–] Leax@lemmy.dbzer0.com 29 points 1 year ago (14 children)

France is a secularist Republic. Freedom of religion is guaranteed but every religious sign is banned in the public space.

[–] frostbiker@lemmy.ca 25 points 1 year ago (14 children)

I understand that's how things are, but I don't think that is how they should be. And while I'm an atheist, I also understand many people aren't. Why force my irreligiosity on them?

So while students should not be indoctrinated on any particular religion in school, I don't see the harm in letting both teachers and students wear whatever they like, including religious symbols.

In fact, it would be great if we taught all students the basics of multiple world religions in school and let people of different faiths talk to each other about what is important to them.

[–] squaresinger@feddit.de 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I really like this stance. Understanding other people is absolutely important. You don't have to agree with them, but you do have to understand them and see them as people.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
[–] tryptaminev@feddit.de 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Every sign being banned in public? So what about all the crosses on the churches, or the ringing of their bells? What about people wearing crosses and nunns wearing the traditional dress? What about the easter processions in some places?

Sorry, but claiming that this would be in line with a secular policy doesnt work. It is target against muslims and muslims specifically without any actual bearing on secularism

[–] Ziggurat@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

These laws have been made to kick of the priest out of the school. If you're a nun or a priest and attend school you have to wear civil clothe.

I am fine saying that these laws are over used against Muslim,but religious signs are banned in school and for government employee

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Syndic@feddit.de 10 points 1 year ago

Freedom of religion is guaranteed but every religious sign is banned in the public space.

No it's not! Thousands of people walk around with religious symbols and garnments in public all the time in France.

Secularism is enforced in government offices and employed people.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] BestBouclettes@jlai.lu 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

It's a smoke screen to get right wing voters on their side once again. Public services in France are in shambles, our education is getting noticeably worse by the decade and this is what these fucks focus on.

[–] Zorque@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They've been doing this shit for years, though...

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] frostbiker@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That makes sense. Here in Canada they use similar tactics to distract people from stuff like the astronomical cost of housing, crumbling health care, underfunded education, etc.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] letmesleep@feddit.de 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nude beaches? Sure thing. I

In other words: Nudist "clothing" is banned from the entire public safe very few exceptions.

[–] frostbiker@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In Spain you are allowed to walk around naked on any public spaces, with very few exceptions. It doesn't happen very often in practice, but it's allowed.

[–] letmesleep@feddit.de 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Yeah, that is how you actually let people decide to wear what they want. Afaik Spain also doesn't have burqa ban or anything similar (at least not in general, there may be rules in special cases).

I'm just always a bit annoyed when US-Americans criticise it when European countries ban certain clothing. They have rather draconian laws at home as well. And of course we're talking about schools here, hence school uniforms provide another relevant and rather widespread example of infringements on clothing-freedom.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)
[–] denissimo@feddit.de 48 points 1 year ago (3 children)

"When you walk into a classroom, you shouldn't be able to identify the pupils' religion just by looking at them,"

Sir I'm sorry but a abaya doesn't prove someone is religious. You can wear one if you so please even if you're not Islam. It's just a dress.

[–] Turun@feddit.de 32 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Sure, and you an atheist could wear a cross and speak a prayer every morning. They just usually don't and until we can telepathically determine what someone actually believes such insignia are the best way to show support for religion.

[–] Rozauhtuno@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

But the abaya is not a religious symbol, it's literally just a fucking dress like any other, it's just what they wear typically in that part of the world. It's like saying that pants are a christian symbol because all Europeans wear pants, and Europe is majority christian.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] CleoTheWizard@beehaw.org 7 points 1 year ago (8 children)

I think saying this largely denies the cultural implications of many religiously associated garments and symbols.

Most religious symbols are not just that, they’re cultural ones. People adopt them, change them, redefine them. Drawing lines between religion and culture is very difficult so attempting to stop someone dressing some way is just a restriction of freedom, regardless of religion.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Blamemeta@lemm.ee 16 points 1 year ago

But pretty much only devout muslim women wear them. Might as well be a hijab at this point.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Renacles@discuss.tchncs.de 38 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You know, the solution to women being told what to wear is not to tell them that they cannot wear it.

[–] tal@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I don't agree with this prohibition, and I doubt that it's likely going to achieve much, but if my experience looking at past government restrictions on things that people want to do is predictive of the situation here, it'll mean that someone will sit down and figure out the exact limit that the French government prohibits and then figure out a garment or combination of garments that accomplishes as much of the original aims as possible without crossing whatever specific garment line is there.

I mean, what's a women's garment that does the head and neck? The bonnet?

googles

Hmm. Apparently it actually did have some religious background.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonnet_(headgear)

Bonnets remained one of the most common types of headgear worn by women throughout most of the 19th century. Especially for a widow, a bonnet was de rigueur. Silk bonnets, elaborately pleated and ruched, were worn outdoors, or in public places like shops, galleries, churches, and during visits to acquaintances. Women would cover their heads with caps simply to keep their hair from getting dirty and perhaps out of female modesty, again, in European society, based upon the historical teaching of the Christian Bible. In addition, women in wedlock would wear caps and bonnets during the day, to further demonstrate their status as married women.

But, as far as I know, they aren't banned. So someone says "Okay, so people can't wear (religious) abayas, but can wear (secular) trenchcoats? This new garment isn't an abaya. This is a bonnet and trenchcoat." Or, you know, whatever.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Wirrvogel@feddit.de 31 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (13 children)

The problem with religious clothing is that the more people who wear it, the more pressure can be put on children to wear it or stand out/be condemned. It gets worse when the clothing is gender-specific.

It also puts children in a situation where their religious background can be seen from afar, making them Christian/Muslim/Jew etc. first and citizen second, when in a secularised country it should always be the other way round.

It is twice as bad when teachers wear religious clothing, because how can you not wear it if your teacher is wearing it. And when children wear religious clothing and have to defend wearing it, they get into a situation where they may have to defend it and wear it and even be part of peer pressure because there is no way out, you are either pushed from one side or the other and many choose to then rather push themselves.

Religious freedom is a double-edged sword: Freedom to live your religion, but also the freedom to live without religion, and especially children who are brought up in a religious family need the school as a place where religion isn't a thing, so that they have a place to even think about what it feels like to live without it. Religion needs to be a personal choice and only if you have a place to check what it means to be without it you can choose.

If your religion can not give children a place to be without it so they can then freely choose, there is something severely wrong with that religion. Unfortunately I have yet to find a religion that does allow it.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] Knusper@feddit.de 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I did not know what an abaya is, but it did not matter to know this is a stupid ban. Just let people wear whatever the fuck they want to wear.

[–] Mubelotix@jlai.lu 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The thing is some children do not have a say in the clothes they get. Those children still deserve the same conditions in school

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] LazyKoala@feddit.de 21 points 1 year ago (15 children)

So much for freedom of religion.

"When you walk into a classroom, you shouldn't be able to identify the pupils' religion just by looking at them,"

What a dumb fucking reason. Really, that's the best he could come up with? Why not? What's so bad about knowing someone's religion, when they are obviously not shy about it?

I get banning religious symbols from schools, because the institutes themselves are supposed to be non-religious (seperation of state and church and so on), but if the students themselves want to express their religion, let them.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

French laicite is not freedom of religion, as the Anglosphere would understand it. (Which makes their insistence that it's just the direct translation of "secularism" frustrating.) It's a consistent effort to make religion every individual's private business.

Compare fucking. You can do whatever you want with whoever you want. Just not on a street corner. Other people don't want to deal with that.

I don't personally endorse this approach, for a variety of reasons, but you have to understand it to condemn it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Mubelotix@jlai.lu 17 points 1 year ago (4 children)

School is a special place. Religion must not get in

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] noctisatrae@beehaw.org 11 points 1 year ago (24 children)

Before being muslim you are French. Disallowing any religious symbols allow people to bond easily because they are not blocked by religion.

They can see something else at school, it allows them to widen their perspective. Either, since childhood, the only thing they’ll do is practice a religion their parents have forced unto them.

After high school, I see no problems about showing your religious symbols because normally at this point of your life, you are educated about a lot of things and able to choose for yourself…

load more comments (24 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)
[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 13 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Students will be banned from wearing abaya, a loose-fitting full-length robe worn by some Muslim women, in France's state-run schools, the education minister has said.

"When you walk into a classroom, you shouldn't be able to identify the pupils' religion just by looking at them," Education Minister Gabriel Attal told France's TF1 TV, adding: "I have decided that the abaya could no longer be worn in schools."

The garment has being increasingly worn in schools, leading to a political divide over them, with right-wing parties pushing for a ban while those on the left have voiced concerns for the rights of Muslim women and girls.

France has enforced a strict ban on religious signs at schools since the 19th Century, including Christian symbols such as large crosses, in an effort to curb any Catholic influence from public education.

The debate on Islamic symbols has intensified since a Chechen refugee beheaded teacher Samuel Paty, who had shown students caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed, near his school in a Paris suburb in 2020.

The announcement is the first major policy decision by Mr Attal, who was appointed France's education minister by President Emmanuel Macron this summer at the age of 34.


The original article contains 388 words, the summary contains 199 words. Saved 49%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] geissi@feddit.de 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

France has enforced a strict ban on religious signs at schools since the 19th Century, including Christian symbols such as large crosses, in an effort to curb any Catholic influence from public education.

It has been updating the law over the years to reflect its changing population, which now includes the Muslim headscarf and Jewish kippa, but abayas have not been banned outright.

So going by the article, some religious clothing is outright banned while crosses are allowed as long as they are not large?

[–] Mubelotix@jlai.lu 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

All crosses are banned. Totally unacceptable. Source: I'm a 20yo french.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] CookieJarObserver@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago (9 children)

Good. Religion shit has to stop.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] skankhunt42@feddit.de 8 points 1 year ago

Great news for all women and Europe

[–] radix@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

Is it a bad idea for me, a non-religious person, to wear one in solidarity? (As well as for privacy, sun protection, etc.)

(I do not live in France.)

[–] denissimo@feddit.de 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I fail to see why not. It's just a dress. You shall wear whatever resonates with you.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Akasazh@feddit.nl 7 points 1 year ago (6 children)

So many people here either intentionally or not misunderstanding the point...

There's freedom of religion, but not in official governement settings. This is not to infringe on rights, it's just the opposite. Just for your religion you shant get treated differently. This is why you don't get to advertise your religion as a governement employee, nor as a citizen when appealing to the governement. This is exactly the inverse of authorianism, it's a reaction to a state forcing people from a certain religion to wear a distinct mark (star of david) by which they were discrimnated against and eradicated.

Furthermore there should be some norms in place for what can be worn in school. I'm no advocate for uniforms, but dressrules respectful of the institution can be demanded (e.g. not wearing headwear in church or covering ones hair when visiting a mosque)

[–] Killing_Spark@feddit.de 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (19 children)

but dressrules respectful of the institution can be demanded (e.g. not wearing headwear in church or covering ones hair when visiting a mosque)

How is an abaya disrespectful to a school? If anything it's one of the more appropriate kinds of clothing.

France may have banned large crosses from their schools but it is not forbidden afaik to wear necklaces. I did not find an english source, here is a german one with my translation:

In Frankreich herrscht Kopftuchverbot an Schulen

Bereits 1994 trat ein Gesetz in Kraft, dass in Schulen nur noch diskrete - nicht aber auffällige - religiöse Symbole erlaubte. Zehn Jahre später wurden Kopftücher in Schulen vollständig verboten - Kippa und Kreuz nicht. 2010 folgte das Verbot der Vollverschleierung in der Öffentlichkeit.

France bans headscarfs at schools

In 1994 a law was passed that said that only discrete - but not prominent - religious symbols would be allowed. Ten years later headscarfs where banned from schools - while kippa and cross were not. 2010 the ban of the full body veil in public was passed.

https://www.zdf.de/nachrichten/politik/frankreich-verbot-abaya-schulen-100.html

Allowing kippas and crosses while disallowing a dress that is at most a religious gesture not even a concrete symbol is just weird.

load more comments (19 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›