France : proposal to ban wearing of the veil for minors and the Burkini

[shamans]

https://www.lefigaro.fr/politique/s...-du-voile-des-mineures-et-le-burkini-20210331

I read this on social media but then didn't get a lot of links online so if this is false news apologize in advance.

This again is rising part of the rising Islamphobia of France (a theme across Europe and the world imo). Apart from whether it's right or wrong I can't believe how stupid the French government is. Stuff like this only makes muslim women who never thought of wearing the hijab to wear it with even more conviction. It promotes polarization and extremist view and in the end is just bad for french society.

 

[Dan_F]

I never even understood why racists wanted burkini’s banned. Banning a woman from wearing a piece of clothing at a beach? It’s literally no different to supposedly less progressive countries making women cover their skin.

 

[Eendracht maakt macht]

Disgraceful to ban that. They can wear what they want. That’s part of freedom too.

 

[WI_Red]

Disgraceful to ban that. They can wear what they want. That’s part of freedom too.

if anything they should ban massive fat dudes from speedos. THAT is offensive.

 

[Infra-red]

if anything they should ban massive fat dudes from speedos. THAT is offensive.

Agreed.

Can we also make wearing sandals with socks, illegal.

https://www.sadanduseless.com/socks-and-sandals-fashion/

 

[Paul the Wolf]

if anything they should ban massive fat dudes from speedos. THAT is offensive.

Fat dudes in speedos is compulsory in public swimming pools. No stray pubic hairs.

As for the point - it hasn't been made law, the government haven't banned them - an amendment voted onto a bill voted by a group of RW senators that has to go to a committee stage and studied, eventually may come before parliament/government who still have to approve it .

Summary - not banned

 

[shamans]

Fat dudes in speedos is compulsory in public swimming pools. No stray pubic hairs.

As for the point - it hasn't been made law, the government haven't banned them - an amendment voted onto a bill voted by a group of RW senators that has to go to a committee stage and studied, eventually may come before parliament/government who still have to approve it .

Summary - not banned

Then my bad. I did disclaim I wasn't sure about this.

 

[maniak]

Agreed.

Can we also make wearing sandals with socks, illegal.

https://www.sadanduseless.com/socks-and-sandals-fashion/

The only positive about the pandemic, the sandals with socks army didn't invade lisbon last year.

 

[JakeC]

I never even understood why racists wanted burkini’s banned. Banning a woman from wearing a piece of clothing at a beach? It’s literally no different to supposedly less progressive countries making women cover their skin.

I completely disagree with any sort of Burkini ban, its clearly quite a progressive move.

Full Burqas in public places is a different story.

 

[JakeC]

The only positive about the pandemic, the sandals with socks army didn't invade lisbon last year.

Whats the name of the part of Lisbon were the underwater zoo type thing is? Near the expo centre i think. I got burnt to a CRISP there, no shade for about 2 km

 

[calodo2003]

Disgusting, a blatant attempt at repression. This should not take place in the public arena.

Good to know that it is not law. What are the prospects for it actually becoming so?

 

[Charlie Foley]

The only positive about the pandemic, the sandals with socks army didn't invade lisbon last year.

You live in Lisbon? I am jealous

 

[maniak]

Whats the name of the part of Lisbon were the underwater zoo type thing is? Near the expo centre i think. I got burnt to a CRISP there, no shade for about 2 km

Now it's called the Park of the Nations neighborhood. To be honest there's really nothing to do there during the day, unless you are inside the mall or in the Oceanarium (the underwater zoo) area, you have some shade there. At night you have some decent bars.

 

[maniak]

You live in Lisbon? I am jealous

In Almada, across the river. The best of both worlds, I can get to Lisbon in 15 minutes and I don't have to pay turist prices for everything.

 

[JPRouve]

Disgusting, a blatant attempt at repression. This should not take place in the public arena.

Good to know that it is not law. What are the prospects for it actually becoming so?

I would say slim. LR already tried to add it to a previous law in 2019 and the same majority rejected it. The government and the Interior minister are opposed to it, keeping in mind that Darmanin is himself a massive twat, so when he thinks that it's not morally acceptable that's telling.

 

[WI_Red]

I would say slim. LR already tried to add it to a previous law in 2019 and the same majority rejected it. The government and the Interior minister are opposed to it, keeping in mind that Darmanin is himself a massive twat, so when he thinks that it's not morally acceptable that's telling.

As I have gotten older I am becoming more and more confused as to why people let how others live their lives bother them so much. Why does someone's gender identity/sexual orientation/clothing choice/religion/ etc. matter so much. I can't wrap my head around it.

 

[calodo2003]

I would say slim. LR already tried to add it to a previous law in 2019 and the same majority rejected it. The government and the Interior minister are opposed to it, keeping in mind that Darmanin is himself a massive twat, so when he thinks that it's not morally acceptable that's telling.

Good.

 

[calodo2003]

As I have gotten older I am becoming more and more confused as to why people let how others live their lives bother them so much. Why does someone's gender identity/sexual orientation/clothing choice/religion/ etc. matter so much. I can't wrap my head around it.

Agree with absolutely everything here except when religion exerts too much pressure on the secular arenas of society, primarily education & government.

 

[ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg]

Agreed.

Can we also make wearing sandals with socks, illegal.

https://www.sadanduseless.com/socks-and-sandals-fashion/

or white socks with shoes.

 

[Withnail]

I never even understood why racists wanted burkini’s banned. Banning a woman from wearing a piece of clothing at a beach? It’s literally no different to supposedly less progressive countries making women cover their skin.

It's ridiculous. I can go down the beach wearing a feckin space suit if want.

 

[Withnail]

if anything they should ban massive fat dudes from speedos. THAT is offensive.

Agreed.

Can we also make wearing sandals with socks, illegal.

https://www.sadanduseless.com/socks-and-sandals-fashion/

I second both of these motions

 

[calodo2003]

Agreed.

Can we also make wearing sandals with socks, illegal.

https://www.sadanduseless.com/socks-and-sandals-fashion/

Christ, that Neapolitan motherfecker needs to be put out of his misery.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Then my bad. I did disclaim I wasn't sure about this.

No problem , sensationalised by the journalist, opposed by the government . Got a year or so of nonsense leading up to the presidential election next year.

 

[Eendracht maakt macht]

Agree with absolutely everything here except when religion exerts too much pressure on the secular arenas of society, primarily education & government.

Yes it must work both ways. So non-religious people should also have the right to do what they want and that’s often not the case and often that comes from oppression from religious people but that’s not the point of this thread.

 

[Infra-red]

Disgusting, a blatant attempt at repression. This should not take place in the public arena.

Good to know that it is not law. What are the prospects for it actually becoming so?

Indeed - it's total bollocks and would be a ludicrous overreach. From what I have read, it is very unlikely to become law.

 

[Dan_F]

I completely disagree with any sort of Burkini ban, its clearly quite a progressive move.

Full Burqas in public places is a different story.

What’s your concern with a full burka?

 

[calodo2003]

Indeed - it's total bollocks and would be a ludicrous overreach. From what I have read, it is very unlikely to become law.

I can see restrictions on wearing the burqa during the photograph for an ID, for example, but how in the feck is wearing a hijab on a beach an affront to anyone, even a secular dickhead like myself?

 

[JPRouve]

I can see restrictions on wearing the burqa during the photograph for an ID, for example, but how in the feck is wearing a hijab on a beach an affront to anyone, even a secular dickhead like myself?

You are trying to understand idiots that happens to be sufficiently xenophobic that they propose laws that are against the interest of a substantial part of their traditional electorate, practicing catholics. There is no point wasting your time with them.

 

[Eendracht maakt macht]

I can see restrictions on wearing the burqa during the photograph for an ID, for example, but how in the feck is wearing a hijab on a beach an affront to anyone, even a secular dickhead like myself?

In Holland the argument that’s being made is that balaclava’s and such are also banned in the public space. So it’s purely because it’s face covering. Personally I’m not for it but I do get you want to draw one line in a way.

 

[calodo2003]

In Holland the argument that’s being made is that balaclava’s and such are also banned in the public space. So it’s purely because it’s face covering. Personally I’m not for it but I do get you want to draw one line in a way.

I can see the reason for balaclava’s being potentially banned, but I cannot get my head around a hijab being banned.

 

[shamans]

Yes it must work both ways. So non-religious people should also have the right to do what they want and that’s often not the case and often that comes from oppression from religious people but that’s not the point of this thread.

Really is not the point of this thread but I would be curious to know what freedom a non religious person doesn't have.

 

[Eendracht maakt macht]

I can see the reason for balaclava’s being potentially banned, but I cannot get my head around a hijab being banned.

Both face covering pieces of clothing. At least those (the face covering ones, which in the Dutch discourse are called burqa’s) are banned in The Netherlands. You won’t get a fine or get arrested if you wear one though.

Still don’t think they should be banned just stating the argument that’s used that face covering pieces of clothes should be banned and thereby the burqa.

 

[Dan_F]

Both face covering pieces of clothing. At least those (the face covering ones, which in the Dutch discourse are called burqa’s) are banned in The Netherlands. You won’t get a fine or get arrested if you wear one though.

Still don’t think they should be banned just stating the argument that’s used that face covering pieces of clothes should be banned and thereby the burqa.

Why are they banned? Are you allowed to wear a beanie and face mask?

 

[Eendracht maakt macht]

Really is not the point of this thread but I would be curious to know what freedom a non religious person doesn't have.

In many parts of the world to even be an atheist is problematic. In the Netherlands people who leave Islam or Christianity are being haunted and sometimes even violence is used by family and relatives.

 

[Eendracht maakt macht]

Why are they banned? Are you allowed to wear a beanie and face mask?

Because your face should be recognizable in the public space. I think in the case you mention the police won’t fine you because of the current situation but you can be fined for wearing a balaclava.

 

[WI_Red]

Because your face should be recognizable in the public space. I think in the case you mention the police won’t fine you because of the current situation but you can be fined for wearing a balaclava.

doesn’t the past year make this argument invalid?

 

[Dan_F]

Because your face should be recognizable in the public space. I think in the case you mention the police won’t fine you because of the current situation but you can be fined for wearing a balaclava.

Hasnt the last 12 months shown how weird that rule is? Has there been loads of issues with extra crime due to people’s faces not being seen?

 

[Eendracht maakt macht]

Hasnt the last 12 months shown how weird that rule is? Has there been loads of issues with extra crime due to people’s faces not being seen?

I agree it’s a weird rule. Don’t know the crime figures.

 

[Eendracht maakt macht]

doesn’t the past year make this argument invalid?

Like I said a couple of times I don’t agree with the law. But if face covering clothing isn’t allowed then burqa’s shouldn’t be allowed either of course.

 

[calodo2003]

doesn’t the past year make this argument invalid?

This will be interesting in the coming years.