Like, I get wanting to defend the rights of women under oppressive religions and governments, but how exactly does controlling what women are allowed to wear accomplish that?
It’s because this has nothing to do with that. It’s virtue signaling that they don’t like Muslims, nothing less and nothing more.
Being Islamophobic is a Virtue now?
Yes. Yes it is. Welcome to 2023.
2023 sucks.
It’s a lot like the 70s but we have WiFi.
It is for conservatives.
This law isn’t exclusive to women, it applies to men too
I just hate these hijab wearing men that I see all the time.
Hijabs are still legal
I get wanting to defend the rights of women under oppressive religions and governments
No, you dont get it.
deleted by creator
im not the biggest fan of the muslim faith but this is stupid
Austria also has a law like that, and it has been a complete shitshow. There have been fines for someone wearing a scarf while riding a bike and for someone at work dressed up in a body suit in front of the shop for advertisement reasons (like a mascot).
When the law went into effect, the newspapers reported that there were about ten muslim women currently wearing coverings in the whole country.
After years of covid where everyone would supposedly die in terror attacks if the face coverings happened I’m surprised this fear mongering still manages to pass.
Full face covering burqas are not really an Islamic thing. The headscarves are. The burqas are a cultural thing for some. And usually almost nobody actually wears them. But you can get brownie points with the racists for passing these laws and show that your country is well on the way to moral decline.
Gotta make sure you don’t compromise that facial recognition
Apparently measuring a person’s natural walking gait is far more effective at identifying people. Who knew Monty Python had it right, so long ago.
Stub your toe for the Revolution
Put a pebble in my shoe, gottit.
[insert goofy stone-in-shoe scene from White House Plumbers]
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Who knew Monty Python had it right, so long ago.
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
YES!
It’s important how much clothing you wear. Not too much and not too little. It MUST BE the RIGHT amount.
Humans.
Personally we need to ban underwear and socks
As far as I know socks are banned already in the case they’re white.
Only if you wear sandals.
Yeah that will certainly solve all of the main issues that our societies face today. Climate change, extreme poverty unseen since the 1920’s, fascists, war…but telling people how to dress, yeah. This is important right now.
deleted by creator
It’s not supposed to?
Yes, that’s exactly the point: It is a meaningless measure improving absolutely nothing, but throwing another hate-treat to the rabid racist crowd while blowing the dog whistle so hard, it sounds like a foghorn. It’s legislative procrastination with hate.
What a stupid take.
What a stupid law.
You forgot sexism, but I guess you are a man and that doesn’t affect you.
Well, you could’ve reminded me a bit nicer of my oversight, but yeah, I totally forgot that one.
so, it will certainly help solve a problem our society faces today.
Taking away a woman’s choice is not helping against sexism. Only a sexist would think that.
Making women have to cover themselves to be pure is sexist AF, especially because muslim men can dress whatever they want. The whole philosophy that socializes women to willingly do this to themselves is the problem, and a problem that is enforced by muslim religion.
“no, you are the sexist for not letting us make women dress how we want”. What a joke.
Making women have to cover themselves to be pure is sexist AF, especially because muslim men can dress whatever they want. The whole philosophy that socializes women to willingly do this to themselves is the problem, and a problem that is enforced by muslim religion.
Oh, so these women live in a free society that gives them the right to chose what they want to wear (= Switzerland), and it’s actually their men who tell them how to dress? But your response to that situation is to limit the rights of the women to chose instead of limiting the men responsible?
Yeah, found the male, sexist, christian extremist. Don’t try to pretend that you actually give a single shit about these women, I can see through your excuses.
You forgot to read this:
“The whole philosophy that socializes women to willingly do this to themselves is the problem”
deleted by creator
Maybe you are being downvoted because you are not adding anything to the conversation either? What does that suppose to mean?
deleted by creator
I haven’t even made made any sort or argument for or against yet and am still downvoted
“I haven’t actually said anything and my post has no value”
Sounds like downvotes are working as intended.
deleted by creator
Once again, seeing as OP hasn’t replied to you, there is no reason not to sort this to the bottom/hide it as there’s no value here to anyone else reading the comments.
This is easily avoided by simply saying “If you live in Europe, {Argument for people living in Europe}. If you don’t live in Europe, {Argument for people not living in Europe}” As both groups of people will be reading your comment.
deleted by creator
I hate this. What if I wanna cover my face to evade facial detection? That’s illegal now?
Nope, wear a surgical mask.
That’s not good enough with current facial detection tech…
Add sunglasses?
https://www.datasciencecentral.com/sunglasses-and-face-mask-wont-fool-facial-recognition/
“More recent studies have developed CNN-based systems that can correctly identify who is behind the sunglasses, scarf, or facemask, with up to almost 99% sensitivity”
Well, that sucks
Jup 🙃
no dont worry, its only the brown people face coverings that are bad
Yeah, there’s no way I can trust any comment against this. This bullshit needed banned decades ago.
I hate religion as much as the next guy. But becoming more authoritarian is definitely not the way to go. Instead we need more education.
Nope. And I would ban a hell of a lot more, too. KKK robes? Jail sentence. Religious apparel of any sort in a political role? Absolutely not. Nazi tattoos, jail sentence and forced removal. I’ve got zero tolerance for any of this hot garbage.
I share your emotions toward those things, but you’re asking for totalitarian measures. The solution is not to put people who “missbehave” into jail but to educate them better and to create a social environment which promotes compassion.
Yeah, been hearing that my whole life and I’m sure leftists were saying it for long before me. It’s done. The world is literally dying and I’m done with half measures.
What if I’m cold or want to go skiing? I could wrap a scarf over my face which I have done. Is that not illegal because it’s not the same garment?
What about COVID? Wouldn’t masks conflict with that also? Of all countries I’d never imagine one with a colder climate to make such a law.
There are exceptions for sport and health&safety. You can do all of these things.
Does getting spanked by my husband if I don’t cover my face count as a health and safety concern?
Depends on the safe word
It counts as a crime against your physical integrity and dignity and you should report him to the police
I’m sure you’re joking, but this is actually the problem here. No women are wearing them by choice, they are either forced or have been indoctrinated their entire lives to believe it’s their choice, but in a vacuum they would not choose persecution and near enslavement by their own volition. It’s just misogyny on a grand systematic scale.
Austria has a similar law. And a website that connects the local whether report with the rules for when wearing a scarf is okay.
So I have to look at the internet to see if I’m allowed to protect myself from the cold? Oh not officially cold enough even though it’s making my face hurt, guess I’ll just suffer because God forbid I’m allowed to be the one who decides how much of my body I went exposed to the elements.
You like authoritarian control of the most basic parts of people’s lives, most people don’t want to live in a world like that.
Exactly
I can understand the reasoning for government officials and kids at school, but what are they smoking to straight up ban it in their country?
The same thing islamist countries are smoking when they kill women not covering their head, probably.
i am glad that we are fighting these terrible regimes that enforce what women can and cannot wear by letting the regime enforce what women can and cannot wear
high five gang
Ah, yes, let’s allow women to be forced to cover all of their bodies, that’s the right step
/s
…so as i was saying, i am glad we are fighting women being forced to dress themselves a certain way by forcing them to dress themselves a certain way
deleted by creator
Ah, yes, let’s allow women to be forced to cover all of their bodies, that’s the right step
/s
I’m sorry, why is the ability of choice, an inclusion of force to you?
Don’t u see the 3 “shades”?
-Force women to wear smt -Let women choose what to wear -Force women not to wear something
I know the problem is that you don’t wanna sre it, but hopefully somebody sees this before going the wrong path.
Ok let’s look at your alternative.
What do you ACTUALLY think women who are being forced by their families or communities to wear the veil are going to do with this kind of ban in place?
If you guessed anything other than “become a domestic prisoner”, you’re wrong and have no place spouting off about this shit.
This is the hostile architecture of multicultural feminism. You’re not helping shit, you’re just pushing the problem into the corners where it isn’t going to be seen by anyone who could raise the issue.
Sounds like we need to ban smoking
These do seem inconsistant. What about 95 masks? that covers the face and nose.
But not the eyes. Besides it’s easy to include an exception for legitimate medical purposes - even considering the law was written by a bunch of quasi-fascists I would be surprised if that’s not covered in the law, especially since the article mentions there are exceptions.
Seems like this is the initiative they passed.
The English language selection in the top right doesn’t seem to work but (3) states:The law provides for exceptions. These include exclusively reasons of health, safety, climatic conditions and local customs.
It’s a bit vague but they seem to have thought of it.
What I find curious is that this seems to be no mere law but a change to the constitution.
What I find curious is that this seems to be no mere law but a change to the constitution.
That’s how the Swiss do it: Change the constitution via referendum, let the government figure out the details which it has to because it’s bound to the constitution.
Do those other things cover the eyes? How do they see? Isn’t something that covers the eyes essentially a blind fold. This makes em wonder further. I have never been to switzerland but I am under the impression it can be cold. I am from a place where it is cold. In extreme cold I have scarf, baclava, etc combined with goggles. Is that not allowed? Is skiing at all popular there??? (yeah that last one is a bit satirical rhetorical)
I translated the law on Deepl (emphasis mine):
Art. 10a Prohibition of covering one’s own face
1 No person may cover his or her face in public places and in places that are accessible to the public or where services that can be used by anyone are offered; this prohibition does not apply to places of worship.
2 No one may force a person to cover his or her face on account of his or her gender.
3 The law shall provide for exceptions. These include exclusively reasons of health, safety, climatic conditions and local customs.
Art. 197 para. 122 12 Transitional provision to Art. 10a (prohibition of covering one’s own face)
The implementing legislation for Article 10a shall be drafted within two years of its adoption by the people and the cantons.
1 SR 101 2 The final number of this transitional provision will be determined by the Chancellor’s Office after the referendum.
ok. its sounding more reasonable.
Never go full Trump.
This gave me a good laugh
I can’t even take half of you seriously. Every religion is a cult, but this one is an extremely misogynistic cult and you don’t get anything for being their unpaid defenders online beyond the knowledge that you protected extreme womanizers.
so u punish the act, you dont do a blanket statrment that mostly affects the followets of one religion, u make it illegal to: -force someone to wear something not make it illegal to: -wear smt
Dont you rralize that thosecountries that are fucked up, have sharia law etc, are doing the same thing? One thing in common: Controlling how people dress.
In one you are controlling by telling people they have to wear x, in the other by telling people they cannot wear x, at the end of the day the affected are those who want to be able to choose, not some fucking terrorist.
not even trying to mask that this law is literally just about bullying muslims lol
Ah yes not being able to oppress people is bullying.
I guess bullying can sometimes be a good thing.
i think youre commenting on the wrong post, ‘not being able to oppress people’ isnt featured in this one
this one actually specifically features religious oppression getting approved as law
luckily for those
dipshit cultistswhoops sorry, ‘muslim women whose safety we care about very much’, getting forced to go against their fundamentalist families or bite continuous fines is very safe, and will turn out very well for them
I wonder if all the Muslims here saying “women should be dressing whatever they want”, also protest the same in muslims countries where women are killed for not covering their hair.
What’s the official reason for that law?
The official reason is “in our culture we show each other our faces”
The real reason is “I’m racist and I hate muslims”
Source: am swiss. (I voted against this law.)
Are you Muslim or just dense?
My density is approximately 0.9 g/mL
It’s called freedom. I don’t like the custom and I’m not religious but forbidding others from practicing theirs isn’t OK.
This is the work of right-wing conservatives making empty gestures to “protect traditional Christian families” instead of doing something useful. But fearmongering gets them easy votes and with an aging population, even easier to scare old grandma and grandpa with “Muslim invaders”.
Who?
Swiss People’s Party. But as a direct democracy, it means they’ve convinced/scared enough old folks to vote in favor of this, and the rest of us have to accept it.
The problem with this one in particular is that there was an unholy alliance between some misguided women’s rights activists and the racists
That must be an odd match.
I understand the woman’s right angle of it but I doubt its effectiveness. Religious patriarchs are just going to keep these women from going outside.
I meant who asked
Literally you.
Literally you.
I’d rather see swiss banks having to spill the beans about their many criminal enterprises and criminal customers. Tax evasion is a crime, for those unaware
