Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Lmao these poor women are probably being abused enough at home as it is, the society that is supposed to 'help/free' them has turned them away and treats them like **** and now they won't even feed them.

    Why are the women being discriminated against anyway... most terrorist attacks are carried out by men, and i think all of the most recent ones in France were all carried out by men. It's only because women visibly look Muslim by their hijabs and men don't because they dress in t shirts and jeans.

    Where da feminists at? Or are they too busy freeing the nipple? :/

    (Jk dont kill me it was a joke i promise you i swear plz spare me)
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by z33)
    It's only because women visibly look Muslim by their hijabs and men don't because they dress in t shirts and jeans.
    the paradox is that the hijab, according to Quran 33:59, is designed so that the believing women will be "recognised and not annoyed"

    doesn't work quite like that, I would say
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by minjinoor)
    tbh it is a bit sad but i (hijabi) personally am a passive person so i would just leave and try to get over the shock because nobody expects to be kicked out of anywhere do they? i dont think it would occur to me to change the law or whatnot, or call them racist though... as an enthusiast of french culture (yh ironic ikr) i can confidently say that PC is irrelevant in france, they will do what they please
    Remove your hijab, perhaps? It's a cloth that was used to distinguish free women from slaves in 7th century Arabia; it belongs to the past.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by teenhorrorstory)
    This is relevant how?
    Because ELVsLP compared the two as like things, when they are actually conceptually different.

    You can't criticise or oppose people for being gay.
    You can criticise or oppose them for being communist, or fascist, or holding any other ideologically based beliefs. Especially if those beliefs condone or prescribe discrimination against other groups.

    The owner was wrong not to serve them, but people need to understand why it was wrong, or nothing is learned.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by z33)
    Lmao these poor women are probably being abused enough at home as it is, the society that is supposed to 'help/free' them has turned them away and treats them like **** and now they won't even feed them.

    Why are the women being discriminated against anyway... most terrorist attacks are carried out by men, and i think all of the most recent ones in France were all carried out by men. It's only because women visibly look Muslim by their hijabs and men don't because they dress in t shirts and jeans.

    Where da feminists at? Or are they too busy freeing the nipple? :/

    (Jk dont kill me it was a joke i promise you i swear plz spare me)
    Muslim women who wear the hijab or niqab, are the most visibly Muslim people. They are easy to identify. Whereas Muslim men often are more difficult to identify.

    I think part of the problem lies in some of the more extreme male salafi Muslims. As one salafi Muslim on TSR said "frankly I don't care if we are being offered a PR boost if we sell our beliefs in exchange." Many extremist male salafi Muslims do not care about the image of Islam. These people will do and say controversial things that will make Islam look bad and do so quite proudly. But they can do this, as they don't suffer the consequences from the bad PR Islam gets. Rather, it is always the hijab/niqab wearing female Muslims who suffer the backlash.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by teenhorrorstory)
    So it is permissible to discriminate against someone of a different political party to you, or against a vegetarian, or someone who supports abortion, or someone who thinks the colour purple is better than pink?
    Define "discriminate"?

    Do you think there would be the same fuss if a bar owner refused to serve a couple of white supremacists wearing identity-specific regalia, especially if the owner knew someone who had been killed in a racist attack?

    Of course not.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Because ELVsLP compared the two as like things, when they are actually conceptually different.

    You can't criticise or oppose people for being gay.
    You can criticise or oppose them for being communist, or fascist, or holding any other ideologically based beliefs. Especially if those beliefs condone or prescribe discrimination against other groups.

    The owner was wrong not to serve them, but people need to understand why it was wrong, or nothing is learned.
    Why is it worse to discriminate against a gay person as opposed to a Muslim?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by teenhorrorstory)
    France is even worse than I thought
    You think it is wrong that some French people object to those who voluntarily and publicly identify with an ideology that is at odds with French society and values, sometimes violently?
    Have you not been reading the news over the last couple of years?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Returning back to Paris next week and with the recent events, I've never felt so unwelcome.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    You think it is wrong that some French people object to those who voluntarily and publicly identify with an ideology that is at odds with French society and values, sometimes violently?
    Have you not been reading the news over the last couple of years?
    Quite simply, I think it's wrong to discriminate against Muslims.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Define "discriminate"?

    Do you think there would be the same fuss if a bar owner refused to serve a couple of white supremacists wearing identity-specific regalia, especially if the owner knew someone who had been killed in a racist attack?

    Of course not.
    False comparisons. All white supremacists by nature will support such attacks, it's what makes them a white supremacist. Not all Muslims in fact hardly any would support terrorist attacks.

    Someone who is a white supremacist is necessarily a racist and extremist, someone who is Muslim is not necessarily.

    Also you are comparing a religion and culture with political beliefs. They're not the same.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    You think it is wrong that some French people object to those who voluntarily and publicly identify with an ideology that is at odds with French society and values, sometimes violently?
    Have you not been reading the news over the last couple of years?
    It's wrong that innocent people are punished for it for sure.
    There seems to be an outrage on the political right at the suggestion that ordinary Muslims who have done nothing wrong should not be punished for the actions of a few extremists.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vegito)
    then he is judging them on their beliefs
    There are only three things that you can legitimately judge people on:
    1. What they do
    2. What they say
    3. What they believe (which fundamentally determines 1 and 2)

    and that still makes him a Islamophobic and a racists as he is banning only Muslims.
    First...Muslims are not a race!!!

    Second, we are all entitled to judge others by their beliefs. What we can't do is unfairly discriminate against people because of these beliefs.
    "Discrimination" itself is not necessarily wrong. If you are interviewing people for a job, you will discriminate between them on the basis of many things; their attitude, their ability, their personality, their clothes, etc. What you can't discriminate against is something that they have no control over, or has no relevance in the context of the job.

    Not serving someone because of their belief may seem wrong, but if it was two white supremacists wearing neo-nazi regalia, the comments on here would have been somewhat different.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by candyaljamila)
    It mind-boggling the effort you're putting in to prove he's not racist when he clearly is.
    Being strongly opposed to an ideology that he sees as violently at odds with French values is not racist.

    Not serving people because of their association with that ideology is not racist either.

    I don't think he was planning to perform his ban checks by asking every single customer whether they're Muslim or not before they make their way into his restaurant.
    Clearly the guy has a certain picture of how a Muslim looks to him. Might be a headscarf/cultural wear or he might be judging on certain skin colours or language spoken. Whatever it is, he would be judging them on appearance rather than ideology (since he can't read their minds), and that's as a result, pure bigotry!
    Just as another shop owner might not quiz every customer on their beliefs, but they have a certain picture of how a white supremacist looks, and may refuse to serve skinheads wearing swastika armbands.

    InB4 "But you can't compare Muslims to Nazis!"
    I know. That's why I'm not.
    Just saying that either both shop owners are right, or both are wrong.
    Which do you think?
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by childofthesun)
    Returning back to Paris next week and with the recent events, I've never felt so unwelcome.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oShahpo)
    True, but in that case he is a bigot, by dictionary definition, so the use of the pejorative could not have been better placed.
    Bigotry requires the intolerance of others' views to be "unreasonable".
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Grand High Witch)
    Evidence?

    You do realise that imams (as well as priests) are allowed to refuse to marry same-sex couples? That is on-going discrimination rather than a one-off incident, yet people seem fine with that. So I don't think you can say that people are always outraged by LGBT discrimination compared to Muslim discrimination when the former is still very much entrenched.
    Discrimination is fine if god sez.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Bigotry requires the intolerance of others' views to be "unreasonable".
    Not serving two people who have done nothing wrong based purely on their religion is bigotry.



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    Imams are internal within the mosque and Muslim community.
    Restaurant owner is internal within his restaurant.

    Your argument makes zero sense. Yet again.

    Being refused to be let into a restaurant is an entirely different, and more worrying matter
    So why is discriminating against someone because of not being in a religion okay, but the opposite is wrong?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Bigotry requires the intolerance of others' views to be "unreasonable".
    Refusing to serve Muslims is not unreasonable? It is not unreasonable to view Muslims in a monolithic manner and assume they all support Daesh and approve of their actions?
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.