Submitted 2 days ago by BrikoX@lemmy.zip to globalnews@lemmy.zip
A debate is erupting around Islamic face coverings in Finland’s educational institutions.
Archived version: archive.is/20250813123725/https://…/74-20177195
Disclaimer: The article linked is from a single source with a single perspective. Make sure to cross-check information against multiple sources to get a comprehensive view on the situation.
I always love the irony when people worry that others are being dictated on how to dress so they then themselves dictate to people how they can dress.
I always love the irony when people making such comments are unable to understand that setting SOME dressing rules in schools and working places is absolutely NOT the same as the dictation of wearing distinct clothing anytime and anywhere. The latter has far bigger restrictive impact on your freedom of expression.
On the one hand I agree that some dressing rules in schools and working places are fine - but on the other you have to be willfully ignorant if you can’t see the blatant Islamophobia at play with targeting religious head coverings like this. Note how they always go after niqabs, but never dastars. Dressing rules at school should be about teaching kids what’s expected in polite society, and polite society should make room for cultural expression.
This puts a lot of pressure on Muslim girls and places them in a further disadvantaged position compared to not only Christians, but even to Muslim boys.
Also, while Finnish schools are expected maintain confessional neutrality, display of a cross somehow doesn’t count.
Fuck religion. Embrace personal experience over dogmatic teachings.
Ah yes, religion. Famously not part of anyone’s personal experience.
Figuring out answers to essential questions is personal experience. Forcing dogmas written by long dead horny men is religion to give cookie cutter answers to such questions is religion.
This is pure and simple Islamophobia and racism. Their head dressings do not detract from anyone’s learning including their own. This is like banning hair dye because it might “disturb and distract” other students. Bullshit.
This is stupid but also dumb. The article said that it would make it illegal to wear face coverings. So does that include, like, medical masks?
This law is just straight up Anti-Islam.
Can you imagine the outcry if a similar law was passed to prevent people from wearing yamakas on the idea of “freedom”?
Everyone should be free to wear whatever they want - but that’s not what this is about. Nobody wears a burka or niqab because they genuinely want to.
Maybe this European country could also make a law that prevents children from face masks prevent them from getting diseases or prevent immunocompromised patients from wearing face masks since they’re both forced to?
Nobody wants to wear a face mask because they genuinely want to.
I really can not believe you just used the line that nobody wants to wear this religious garb of their chosen religion and culture. Let’s just ignore the major amount of assumptions and xenophobia present in this line of thought.
The factor of the matter is, you have no idea why people choose to wear that, and while I’m sure some people may be coerced into it, but for the most part, I’m positive that the majority of people are choosing to wear these garbs willingly.
Are you really about to sit here and tell me that there’s a difference between a yamaka and a burka? Do people willingly choose to wear yamakas, or do they have to wear them? Do people choose to wear dastars or do they have to be worn? Given this is a European country, I’m going to assume that there isn’t any sort of religious law here, meaning that people can dress how they want.
I can very easily make this argument that you made about yamakas and why those should not be allowed in public, and then I can use the fact that the country that claims to be the sole representive of Jewish people, is using their religion to commit a genocide, so I can even make an argument that wearing a yamaka causes people to feel unsafe in public areas.
…Unless they want to
I feel like a lot of comments here suffers from The Paradox of Tolerance.
This is about a minister setting down their foot on what degree of tolerance outside of cultural and societal norms this country should have. Just like any other country. Look at for example at Afghanistan, Japan, and Estonia - are they any different? Better or worse?
Still pretty anti-muslim.
The paradox of tolerance is that in order to have a tolerant society you must be intolerant of tolerance. Not allowing people to wear religious garb due to some perceived notion of freedom, I would say is pretty intolerant.
The minister is a bigot and racist.
Your profile says “religion is cancer” yet you seem fine with forcing women to cover their faces because their religion mandates it and their father/husband doesn’t want other men seeing them.
Okay imagine you move somewhere where all the guys go outside with their dicks out, but you don’t want to because you were raised to think your dick should be covered. Even without somebody explicitly forcing you to cover your dick, you’ll still instinctively want to do it because it’s a deeply held cultural taboo to go outside with your dick out, especially if you’re part of an immigrant community that still covers their dicks. Now imagine that your school says you have to go to school with your dick out even if you feel uncomfortable with it.
Yes, the requirement for Muslim women to cover their hair is rooted in and perpetuated by misogyny, but ideas about modesty and decency don’t just disappear overnight and it’s kind of unfair for western societies to put girls in ththat position.
I disagree with religion but I still think people should have the freedom to follow one.
Who said I’m fine forcing women to do anything? Some women make the choice to wear religious clothing. I’m for the individual choice to do whatever you want with your own body as long as it doesn’t directly affect someone else’s.
Every finn should get an emotional support burka.
Finland
AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 2 days ago
Good. Fuck religious indoctrination among the kids.
DeviantOvary@reddthat.com 2 days ago
Agreed, and this goes for any religion that does it. But what really grinds my gears about (other) leftists defending this kind of religious expression is, this isn’t something women choose. They’re forced to and groomed from young age to cover themselves. Meanwhile, their brothers, fathers, sons all walk around free to wear shorts, t-shirts, etc. If men had to cover themselves the same way, then sure, at least there would be some level of equality. This is just plain old misogyny that has no place in modern societies.
However, with that said, there’s a real possibility banning head coverings would ultimately hurt girls, instead of helping them. Good education and financial independence and stability in adulthood would give these girls a better and safer way to escape. Like with any other societal problem, it’s complex and can’t be simply “magiced” away.
JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world 2 days ago
It gets even worse, once the ‘gods chosen people’ and ‘dirty heathens’ discussions start. Kids have no filter. I’m speaking of all abrahamic religions and a a good chunk of everything else.
Vanilla_PuddinFudge@infosec.pub 2 days ago
God sure does enacting genocides on his “chosen people” quite often. I guess Muslims and Christians sometimes forget what they’re chosen for lol.
AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 2 days ago
Yeah, they’ll even repeat your username!
Zos_Kia@lemmynsfw.com 2 days ago
I think that’s a misinterpretation of the concepts of Freedom of Religion and Laicity (freedom from religion).
In the French understanding, laicity means that no representative of the State is allowed to show their religion, or treat people differently according to their religion / political orientation. Traditionally it even extended further : for example teachers would refrain from exposing their religion / political views because they recognized the influence they held on their community, and that being outspoken is unfair to those who do not share those views.
That being said, the Burqa laws are an attempt to place that burden on the users of the services of the State. It’s pretty toxic because they should be served equally, which obviously they can’t be when you write laws that target one specific group over others.
The attempt to place the blame on parents is equally toxic. You have the freedom to raise your kids the way you see fit : having a conscience is not illegal. If that leads them to do illegal stuff, well that’s when the law comes in, but not before.
It’s all fun and games until the next fascist administration uses the same Burqa laws to prohibit whatever you hold dear.
Dasus@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Yeah, next they’ll be saying something like “kids shouldn’t bring life-like replica guns to school” or something equally authoritarian.
The horror.