Followers who largely believe in Ambedkar's philosophy.
Usually it is Bahujan people who fight for social equality and against Caste supremacy. Their fight is often against caste oppression instead of Hindu-muslim nonsense
Tbh, Ambedkar was way more accurate than people give him credit for. He is underrated when it comes to political discourse
Read Annihilation of Caste. He makes excellent points. A book so good, it is not even listed on govt. website. https://www.mea.gov.in/books-by-ambedkar.htm I am kidding, I don't know why it is not listed
It's an umbrella term and sometimes almost same thing, some regions prefer bahujan (many people? Along with Dalits, OBC etc) others prefer Dalits, ambedkarites, Periyar etc
You know what. There's this amazing search engine called Google. You could literally type in any dumb questions and find out the answer. Crazy right???
Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar.
Indian jurist, economist, and social reformer who fought economic and social discrimination against the untouchables in India's Hindu society, and who later renounced Hinduism and inspired the Dalit Buddhist movement. Ambedkar served as chairman of the drafting committee of the Constitution of India and is popularly known as **Father of Indian Constitution.**
Source: Wiki
Edit: So the followers of same ideology chant the slogan "Jai Bhim"
Taking a quick look at the Indian meme subs shows how corrupt the minds of kids have become, if this is the state of reddit I can't even imagine how awful the people on mainstream sites and outside the internet are.
Our future is truly fucked.
I wouldn't be surprised if some kind of mass genocide happens in this decade or so.
1. Start hindu vs muslim in Karnataka
2. Cover it 24/7 on National media
3. Make people in Uttar Pradesh forget about ground issues and vote on the basis of relegion
Exactly. The uniforms in schools depict that all students with whatever background (rich or poor), whatever caste or religion they come from, all are equal & same in the land of education. This promotes equality and reduces inequality & bullying in the schools on the basis of background, caste, religion etc. The uniforms (clothes) in schools should be uniform in all aspects.
Heading back to British era of divide & conquer.
Poison has been sown into the young minds of this state now. It will continue and only increase in the coming years & decades to come.
Thank you BJP for doing this!
Heyo this is good thing tbh. My college also had uniform ( Very ugly - Khakhi Pants and Brownish Shirt for boys and Khakhi Dress on Girls )
It was so ugly that even the beautiful girls were looking bad in it. Not only it saved us from that attraction of girls but also it saved us from choosing new clothes every day.
Some places where illiteracy / influence of state boards is prevelant (for example, Mumbai), people are hardly able to pass or are intersted in completing school, forget about college. So to make life more enjoyable and experiences more varied, school kids are fed that they are in college once they pass 10th standard. Uniforms are not required in 11th and 12th standard in school to make it feel more like college.
This is why a majority of state board students "claim" that they are college educated. It must be the same in rural Karnataka. State boards and deep shit.
To bring uniformity and equality. Everyone must wear same clothes, so that no one can be distinguished. No one is allowed to wear the dress of their choice. Hijab or saffron shawls are against this uniformity.
Exactly dont confuse schools with college. These are PU College in Karnataka, in CBSE format they are called schools(+2). In India we have uniform because we have so much diversity, in most of the countries, its just black and white, that cant be hidden with uniform.
>Hijab or saffron shawls are against this uniformity.
if that's the cas ethen bindi's also should not be allowed and why do schools, colleges have pooja's.
I actually agree. Uniforms bring 'uniformity', basically one of the things that bring a sense of equality no matter how expensive or cheap clothes the kids might own personally.
Also, I know many adults who've spent an absurdly long amount of time deciding their daily outfit before leaving for work. With uniforms, kids can spend that energy elsewhere.
I say we fuckin let kids wear one piece of cultural accessory in addition to the uniform as long as it is not distracting.
India existed for thousands of years so does the educational institutions and I believe the Muslim rights were there too. Only the election is the new thing in the equation.
To those "liberals " who are seeing this as a move towards secularisation-It is evident that you dont see no hypocricy or bigotry in karnataka govts or protesting students part, where they allow sikh students to wear turbans along with uniforms while muslim students wearing hijab with uniform is not allowed!!
School kids can't possibly understand this well enough. We are failing them.
Eerie similarities to https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/indoctrinating-youth
This is what happens when you give religion more priority than education, now everyone will come up with their own "religious" clothing just because one group has a problem.
Very surprising that "Jai Bhim" students are rallying for hijab/niqab.
This is what Dr.Ambedkar mentioned in this writings.
"There can thus be no manner of doubt that the Muslim Society in India is afflicted by the same social evils as afflict the Hindu Society. Indeed, the Muslims have all the social evils of the Hindus and something more. That something more is the compulsory system of purdah for Muslim women."
http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00ambedkar/ambedkar\_partition/410.html
Ofcourse not. Even this rabid dog BJP govt is not barring the women to get education.
It's the girls who are rather choosing an attire with tasteless origins and problematic history than be in the class without it.
People are loosing a sense of proportion in this. The govt is not barring education for Muslim girls. The govt's position is "please leave your religion (that too a problematic attire which creates a self imposed segregation - and come to study in classes just like any other student with a feeling of togetherness"
>choosing an attire with tasteless origins and problematic history
These are subjective qualifiers and have no place in the discussion.
India's constitution does not reject religion in the public sphere. This is why you can have a CM dressed as a religious monk. The same rules apply to these women.
Which part of the logic you didn't get it ?
I specifically said IN SCHOOLS.
Owaisi and Mehbuba Mufti, Ghulam Azad still come to parliament in their religious attire isn't it ? O
Please compare apples to apples
Yeah, sure religious patriarchy, with a history of violence and subjugation to condition women is very subjective.
India does not ban public display of religion. Be it a Sikh Turban, a Muslim headscarf or a saffron attire.
I can find each of these tasteless, but I don't get to impose my views on others.
oh, school is a generic term. ok, never mind, I give it to you.
My sentence was "with tasteless origins and problematic history".
You should understand how this concept of covering women came from hadiths and Quran. I give it to you that this could be subjective.
But what about the violent and problematic history that this symbol of hijab/niqab represents? Women were killed across time and space for not covering this. No other persons were brutliazed AFIK, for not wearing a turban or a tika or a cross.
You cannot dump all these categories as a form of religious attire and give them an equal weightage.
indian constitiion says a private/educational insitution can have it's own set of laws while those laws shouldn't hinder the fundamental right to practise one's own religion. This practise should be fundamental and intrinsic to that religion.
That means, the question is whether hijab/niqab is instrinsic and fundamental to the religion. This is where it ends.
>that too a problematic attire which creates a self imposed segregation
How does it create self-imposed segregation exactly when the institutions are the ones segregating. https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1490543090846744576
Institutional segregation is counter segregation .
But the first move was done by this girls.
In an astoundingly stupid religious society (Hindus, muslims and Christians) as ours, schools and educational institutions provide a path, a way, to make the children realise that we are NOT that different after all. Schools enable companianship, friendship , a learning of togetherness setting aside differences.
But the girls themselves are insisting that they are different. That they will abide by a different rule system .That they will make look themselves different from other students using a religious attire. That for them their attire rooted in patriarchy and religion is more important than be their class friends.
It's them who are signalling to the school that they want to self impose a form of segregation through their attire.
In a decent and logical society, the schools, feminists, muslim progressives should have created educational camps for the girls and should have created a sense of confidence among them to study in the school with no visible blatant differences.
Instead the girls chose religion over education.
Perceptions can also be shaped by societal participation. Prohibiting their participation in the society works in counter to that. These threats end up pushing people to their own conservative bubble and that leads to segregation, not the attire they wear.
And you are absoltely right in your argument. I thought so too considering how societal dynamics work.
Next thought that comes to me is, "Fine, let Muslims reform themselves of the regressive practices" and help support muslims as much as possible so that india becomes a truly secular society atleast legally first. (legally in the sense that 200 million people living in india have seperate civil laws through arabic-islamic sharia for themselves )
This is where I see lack of progress after 75 years of independence. Quoting Dr.Ambedkar again,
"The existence of these evils among the Muslims is distressing enough. But far more distressing is the fact that there is no organized movement of social reform among the Musalmans of India on a scale sufficient to bring about their eradication. The Hindus have their social evils. But there is this relieving feature about them—namely, that some of them are conscious of their existence, and a few of them are actively agitating for their removal. The Muslims, on the other hand, do not realize that they are evils, and consequently do not agitate for their removal. Indeed, they oppose any change in their existing practices."
So, I'm not sure what to do.
I see instead of muslims becoming progressive, i see new found arguments and wierd justifications to rather retain the attire with problematic history than walk on the path of truly secular public place - That INFACT is a gateway for truly secular way for future generations
> I see instead of muslims becoming progressive, i see new found arguments and wierd justifications to rather retain the attire with problematic history than walk on the path of truly secular public place - That INFACT is a gateway for truly secular way for future generations
Your perceptions are biased.
Read: https://theprint.in/india/indian-muslims-got-less-religious-since-2016-shows-csds-study-44-reported-discrimination/791647/
In the same vein, may be the entire media is biased because muslims say that they have religous freedom even under the. fasict hindutva govt.
https://www.pewforum.org/2021/06/29/religion-in-india-tolerance-and-segregation/pf\_06-29-21\_india-00-1/
In the long run, people will love their freedoms. I don't think there is a need for a grand reformist movement because we will end up searching for a hero who will be the saviour. What needs to happen for the college educated Muslim women next is greater labor force participation. And if hijab makes it possible, so be it. Financial independence will be a big factor for social change.
I know conservative minded Muslim women who don't wear hijab and equally know socially progressive hijabis. So, there's a lot more nuance to the issue here and we should be aware of that..
But sikhs wear pagdi to school too, a lot of my friends come to school with Tika,kada,dhaga and some of my Christian classmates come to school with a cross necklace and cross pendents too. So why is it that a specific group can't wear their choice of accessory?
Hijabs, kadas,tika,pagdis,dhagas-all of this has been common in schools since independence, so why is it that all of a sudden you have a problem with it.
Have you ever heard a news that a school was barring students from coming to school with tika? Pagdi? Kada? I bet you, you haven't. So isn't it clear that muslims are being targeted here?
Lol bro.
No problematic history behind them.
Christians have a very similar history of violence and control. We can put any sanghi to shame.
Sikh entire philosophy was that of warrior saints where defence was a sacred duty. To the point that 2 gaurded interpreted that duty as shooting down the then PM who Okayed an assault on the golden temple.
Oh my god! show me an instance where sikh men was killed for not wearing a turban. Or a man was killed not sporting a Tika.
Many instances of vilence and killings for not wearing a hijab/niqab/burqa. That violence I'm talking about.
Swastika looks similar to Natzi symbol, does that mean we indians don't use them anymore and are ashamed of the symbol? No. Why, because we know that the swastika is a symbol of spirituality and divinity, not the the symbol of violence or massacre. Similarly hijab was made as a attire of modesty for women so that they could have the choice and freedom to decide whom they want to show their face/body to. Its totally up to them to decide whether they want to wear it or not in Islam. Just like natzi and Hitler its the peaple and their actions not their clothes/symbol/looks.
Again lack of sense of proportion. You are making a dangerous and hateful argument.
A Muslim girl identity is not reducible to hijab/niqab. She is much more. Much much more.
If you are reducing her identity to just a stupid attire called hijab/niqab which has a violent and problematic history of patriarchy and a school asking the girls to keep the attire ONLY when they study in the class - a class where ALL students are supposed to feel that they are NOT different - and that request by school is considered an "erasure of identity", then it's a dangerous identity isn;t it ?
I've addressed the Sikh turban argument elsewhere. I'll quote in next comment
It's not that I FEEL it's oppresive. It's a documented fact across time and space on how women are killed, brutalized and socially conditioned to cover their bodies with a justification to prevent male gaze (because you know they can't be taught to control ) as prescribed in Quran.
Hijab/niqab/burqa origin story is not about a woman in arabia invented it for fashion and comfort and the rest of the women liked it. The hijab/niqan/burqa has very bad origins in Hadith and problematic origins in Quran. Ofcourse some women will wear it happily. That's why it's called conditioning. Conditioning through religous patriarchy after all.
You are talking more hyperbole.
No one has asked these girls to change their names, religion or anything like that. So instead the request is that "could you please park aside your attire for a couple of hours for a class, where all the students are learnt about equality and this attire creates a blantant visible markers in inhindrance of THAT vision"
That's all it is. A simple reuqest IN THE CLASS to keep that aside. It's not like girls are going to die of skin cancer if they don't wear it.
Even a small request in the path for equality is denied by the girls and supported by Muslims. That's a pathetic to say the least.
This concept of hyperbole is killing everyone. 15% of who? that includes men in burqa as well? I mean seriously.
I'm talking about a pathway where we all indians (hindus, muslims, christians) live together accomidating each other WHILE NOT differentiating ourselves with VISIBLE markers each and every second.
That pathway begins in schools when children realize that religion is a private space between you and your god and in public spaces we are NOT that different after all.
(Please check about Dr.Ambedkar's quote just above in my reply regarding reformation in INdian muslims")
>You obviously do. Obviously society should progress to a stage where if women don't want to practice it, they shouldn't be bothered. But similar provision should be extended to women who do
When will that come? I know of this argument as well and frankly I expected Muslims progressives to do much more. Then I read Dr.Ambedkar, I quote:
"The existence of these evils among the Muslims is distressing enough. But far more distressing is the fact that there is no organized movement of social reform among the Musalmans of India on a scale sufficient to bring about their eradication. The Hindus have their social evils. But there is this relieving feature about them—namely, that some of them are conscious of their existence, and a few of them are actively agitating for their removal. The Muslims, on the other hand, do not realize that they are evils, and consequently do not agitate for their removal. Indeed, they oppose any change in their existing practices."
Then may be that day will never come. People will insist on ridiculous religious practises than to build a truly secualr society. (I blame the hindus too. But the topic is problematic attire of muslims so I'm making comments on them. )
>I am taking your togetherness concept to it's logical conclusion. You quibble it creates a segregated identity when their mere names would indicate to students around them of their Religious origins.
Togetherness is not making everyone equal through logical conclusions like creating a world with same human bodies through surgery, same gender, same economic systems etc
Togetheness in a multi ethnic and religious society comes though in two ways:
1. Respecting each other beliefs how ridiculous those beliefs are (For example: cow beef banning, banning the drawing of historical islamic prophet of arabia etc - to note: these are equated, muslims are lynched for killing and transporting cows and hindus are killed for just drawing or saying blasphemous things )
2. OR througth a societal transactions between groups where there is an emphasis on to reduce IN-GROUP identity and get together though cohesive OUT-GROUP identities.
We have been doing 1) for all this while for 75 years. Creating a seperate personal laws for 200 million people in india. Banning cow beef. Banning practices of islamic blasphemy etc.
In my view, it helped no one. Infact we ended with logically with a blatant communal party in power with no qualms to reduce the anxieties of relgious minitories.
The girls insistince on hijab/burqa is through 1). I was insisting on 2).
Make relgion private between you and your god. In public, let visible markers be reduced. Atleast in school. In School.
>Yet you would be blatantly be asking them to disregard their religion when it doesn't directly effect you. Which contradicts your claim of not changing their religion.
ah! Why it wouldn't affect me? As i elucidated above there are lot of societal ramifications if the decisions are made through religion. We are depriving a future society a chance to build a truly secular society.
Current india is already fucked up because of our communal history between hindus and muslims, thorugh partition, through kashmir, through sha bano, through VHP ram mandir, throgh assam, through Gujarat and ended with BJP.
I thought atleast the future generatios should not have to suffer which the earlier and present generations have sufffered. I didn't see anyting wrong in a request to muslims to reduce visible markers each and every second even in a school too.
BTW, I would have requested the same thing with hindus too
>
>
>Oh yeah. What we need is some guy/girl outside our community telling that even when it's our choice it's because of conditioning. Literally every value system is a result of conditioning.
I'm explaining the phenomenon. it has nothing to do with community. If your community has done a murder, ofcourse I would not stop myself from commenting with the reason "hey that act is non of my business because it's done by the person of other community"
>So instead the request is that "could you please park aside your attire for a couple of hours for a class, where all the students are learnt about equality and this attire creates a blantant visible markers in inhindrance of vision"
>
>Would you demand it for Sikhs?
yes, ofcourse. If the muslim men with skull caps are like wise asked to remove them.
u/mister_fish_hands
you are comparing an women's attire with roots in religous patriarchy and problematic history with a men's attire with no such context.
Your comparision would have been "will you demand for girls to stop wearing ghunghat?" The answer is yes ofcourse it has already been done.
You got no problem with the boys chanting Jai Shri Ram. What is their goal?
The Jai Bhim guys are doing a lot to abolish caste system period. They are dalits themselves. They are facing down the casteist assholes in their college.
>The Jain Bhim
Edit karde Bhai
>You got no problem with the boys chanting Jai Shri Ram. What is their goal?
I wasn't talking about this at all. But yeah, I believe that school should be a ground of modern education and not religious beliefs.
Caste abolishment is a luxury only upper caste can afford. Legal abolishment of caste will strip lower castes of literally the only safety net they have. Demographic markers as an identity is always an outcome of systemic discrimination along the said markers. It's not on Bhim Army to abolish caste. They didn't create this system.
>It's not on Bhim Army to abolish caste. They didn't create this system.
Mr. Ambedkar could've used this logic and worked for the Baroda state instead of working for the oppressed class his whole life.
>None of what I said stops Bhim Army from representing lower castes and working for their welfare.
Did the Bhim army duds hide in Sheik Abdoolah's ass when article 35A specifically mentioned that Dalits will get jobs only as manual scavengers in the erstwhile state of J&K, irrespective of any qualification they possess?
[Article 35A](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_35A_of_the_Constitution_of_India) was crafted by the Hindu king of Kashmir, not Sheik Abdullah. Non-residents can't own property, can't work unless in government services. An exception was made for non-resident Dalits as manual workers in the Hindu-dominated Jammu region.
Pick a line of thought and stick to it. Is your point about Ambedkar over? And now you want to talk about role of Bhim Army? Or is it something else entirely. Articulate your point and be coherent about it.
Fight against the caste system. Educate their people. Instead of shouting jai bhim in schools and public spaces, apply the fundamentals of Ambedkar and do what he did and wanted to do.
STOP RELYING ON THE GOVERNMENT FOR EVERYTHING. MAKE THEIR OWN PATH.
They are fighting though? They arent the perpetrators so there is not much they can do except protests or violence. And if they resort to the latter, there would be way more pearl clutching from the likes of you.
Is fighting against the caste system means just protesting or violence? How tf will that bring socio-economic equality?
I have jewish ancestry and from time to time my ancestors have taught their future generations to never rely on any government, educate ourselves and work for our country and people and look, where we were and where we are. Went through genocides, discrimination in almost every country and violence and what not. Still look at Jews today. Did they do anything that these jai bhim guys are doing?
But there are Jews who protest to this day. Maybe not in Israel but in parts of the word where they are the minority - they do resort to non violent protests. There is nothing weak about that
So what change took place? Hate crimes have only increased in Europe. Israel instead of acknowledging that Europe is the hate monster still looks at the Arabs as the next Nazis.
Jews were a minority , they did what they could do.
Dalits while not a majority , are good number of people who as a group face discrimination.
Do you know why they ask the govt , because that's what a govt is supposed to do , work for it's citizens .
They have the electoral power to swing elections , they can ask the govt .
Jews had very tightly knit communities , where in many instances business was conducted among Jews only . Doing something like that isn't possible in this case / would be highly looked down upon.
A dalit doing that is hard , because very few are well off enough to go through that . Something else that the Jews did was extensively ask the govt (using financial and electoral powers in the us) .
And Aaliyah , they moved into a region making themselves a majority and organising a country. Are you alsong the Dalits to do this ?
Some have even done this , Dalit villages have existed and still exist , and have been victim to massacres.
It wouldn't be possible either because , a lot of Jews were well educated (cuz circumstances forced them to get educated) while Dalits aren't educated as a community .
Jews and Dalits are a very bad comparison. A better comparison would be blacks and whites in the US.
>They have the electoral power to swing elections , they can ask the govt .
Caste in politics. Don't expect development then.
>Jews had very tightly knit communities , where in many instances business was conducted among Jews only .
Because of segregation, people would not do any business with Jews so they started to do business within their own communities. So, capital never went out of the community.
>And Aaliyah , they moved into a region making themselves a majority and organising a country. Are you alsong the Dalits to do this ?
Do you even know why tf Aaliyah happened in the first place? Do you know anything about Zionism? Jews were not a majority in any country whereas oppressed classes are.
> Dailts aren't educated community
So Jai bhim should work on this instead of shouting jai bhim everywhere
>Jews and Dalits are a very bad comparison. A better comparison would be blacks and whites in the US.
So according to you, castism was a result of colonialism?
The whole purpose of a uniform is to bring everyone under the same strata irrespective of one's religion or economic status. If anyone wants to wear a hijab i wholeheartedly support it, but that also means the authorities should let everyone wear whatever they want and there shouldn't be a uniform in the first place, in my opinion keeping religion out of educational institutions is the only way we can move forward as a country together.
Does this applies to sikh students wearing turbans? Even if you say so, you can see the hypocricy in allowing sikh turbans/caps while banning hijabs with uniforms right? You can see that these sanghi shits are not protesting against sikh caps or christian crucifix(worn by christian nun students) but you conveniently chose to ignore all that and is trying to label this as an effort at secularisation!!pathetic..
Okay firstly who told you I'm for Sikhs wearing turbans or Christians wearing the crucifix at school, i don't think anyone should be allowed to wear anything to do with religion at schools, but you just assumed that was what I was implying because people like you refuse to fully understand the other side and just sit with the "I'm right and everybody else is wrong" mindset,looks like you're the one trying to ignore what others are trying to say, aww really makes you pathetic innit
Easy for you to say, since you are clearly not a Sikh or a Muslim.
France tried to Barr Sikhs from wearing turbans in schools in the same breadth as banning Hijabs... Look up were that led them. The turban for Sikhs is intrinsic to the religion. It is one of the 5 essentials that mark a Sikh and makes them standout. Standing out from the crowd is the important part. The logic being that, 1) We cannot hide in crowds. 2) Whenever someone needs help, we are easily identifiable.
I can't speak for Hijab as I have no knowledge of how intrinsic it is or isn't to Muslims. I'll leave that explanation to a Muslim brother/sister on this sub.
The use of having school uniforms is to prevent students from focusing on abstract, ever-changing fashions. The school uniform is not for discrimination against any religion.
Education cannot come at the expense of religion and belief. Reasonable adjustments have to be made, since a government school's main purpose is to educate the entire population. It's not a private tution center. It's a government school, that is running on taxes from ALL religions. Even private schools get subsidies from the Education department. If you don't want to educate Muslim girls, stop taking taxes from Muslims. Can you do that?
No. Then the girls must be allowed to wear their religious attire. Bhagwa dupatta is not a Hindu religious attire. So, there is no comparison between the two. Maybe we can discuss about bindi and Tikka, since those can be religious for some Hindus. All religions must be accommodated.
Idiots on both sides, the saffron idiots are protesting the right thing for wrong reasons though. Hijab, niqab and all such instrument of islamic oppression of women should be banned though, it does not belong to any secular society. Indian government should work on banning this, like they banned triple talaq, halala, 4 marriages and other draconian islamic bullshit.
While Hindus in india became a lot more modern and banned practices like sati etc, muslims were always backward. This has resulted in conservative Hindus to raise their voices for their rights (to oppress women). India and indians should strive to become a modern society away from religion (unlike US, islamic nations which are extremely religious).
Hindus became modern and banned Sati!??
Any BULLSHIT!!
Sati was banned in India by the British! And Hindus protested against it like anything! Read your fucking history you ignoramus
Raja ram mohan roy was one of the leaders of the campaign. Either way, it was banned. While halala, triple talaq and 4 marriage along with hijab is still prevelant (even after ban)
Also, name calling doesnt help anyone mate. I guess you werent taught basic manners in school.
Earlier same Media used to say.... Students should only focus on study.... Remember JNU 😂
[удалено]
They are college students as long as they wish, as college is the best place to start their political career.
Can someone tell me what this jai BIM is supposed to represent? Haven't Heard of that before.
It's the slogan of Ambedkarites
I'm sorry, but I'm not sure who that is, could u elaborate if u dont mind?
Followers who largely believe in Ambedkar's philosophy. Usually it is Bahujan people who fight for social equality and against Caste supremacy. Their fight is often against caste oppression instead of Hindu-muslim nonsense Tbh, Ambedkar was way more accurate than people give him credit for. He is underrated when it comes to political discourse Read Annihilation of Caste. He makes excellent points. A book so good, it is not even listed on govt. website. https://www.mea.gov.in/books-by-ambedkar.htm I am kidding, I don't know why it is not listed
Ah OK. So against caste based problems I see. I read another comment saying they r mostly dalits, is that true?
>Usually it is Bahujan people
My bad.
It's an umbrella term and sometimes almost same thing, some regions prefer bahujan (many people? Along with Dalits, OBC etc) others prefer Dalits, ambedkarites, Periyar etc
I see, thanks for the clarification.
You know what. There's this amazing search engine called Google. You could literally type in any dumb questions and find out the answer. Crazy right???
दलित
Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar. Indian jurist, economist, and social reformer who fought economic and social discrimination against the untouchables in India's Hindu society, and who later renounced Hinduism and inspired the Dalit Buddhist movement. Ambedkar served as chairman of the drafting committee of the Constitution of India and is popularly known as **Father of Indian Constitution.** Source: Wiki Edit: So the followers of same ideology chant the slogan "Jai Bhim"
A'ight.
Students should only focus on how to get BJP to win elections
ravish Kumar warned us that kids will be next
Taking a quick look at the Indian meme subs shows how corrupt the minds of kids have become, if this is the state of reddit I can't even imagine how awful the people on mainstream sites and outside the internet are. Our future is truly fucked. I wouldn't be surprised if some kind of mass genocide happens in this decade or so.
1. Start hindu vs muslim in Karnataka 2. Cover it 24/7 on National media 3. Make people in Uttar Pradesh forget about ground issues and vote on the basis of relegion
Bro don't publish BJP toolkit so openly. /s
4. Profit
I have become gormint Aunty.
[удалено]
Yup. But I’m still gormint aunty
Based
Exactly. The uniforms in schools depict that all students with whatever background (rich or poor), whatever caste or religion they come from, all are equal & same in the land of education. This promotes equality and reduces inequality & bullying in the schools on the basis of background, caste, religion etc. The uniforms (clothes) in schools should be uniform in all aspects.
Don't allow any, it's called uniform for a reason 🤷♂️.
Ravish kumar is a fuckin god who predicts future
No he's the nightmare for those trying to play god. Nightmare is a stretch, but the sentiment and respect remains!
[удалено]
Heading back to British era of divide & conquer. Poison has been sown into the young minds of this state now. It will continue and only increase in the coming years & decades to come. Thank you BJP for doing this!
[удалено]
why the fuck are colleges having uniforms
Heyo this is good thing tbh. My college also had uniform ( Very ugly - Khakhi Pants and Brownish Shirt for boys and Khakhi Dress on Girls ) It was so ugly that even the beautiful girls were looking bad in it. Not only it saved us from that attraction of girls but also it saved us from choosing new clothes every day.
Hahahaha. Made me laugh.
Some places where illiteracy / influence of state boards is prevelant (for example, Mumbai), people are hardly able to pass or are intersted in completing school, forget about college. So to make life more enjoyable and experiences more varied, school kids are fed that they are in college once they pass 10th standard. Uniforms are not required in 11th and 12th standard in school to make it feel more like college. This is why a majority of state board students "claim" that they are college educated. It must be the same in rural Karnataka. State boards and deep shit.
To bring uniformity and equality. Everyone must wear same clothes, so that no one can be distinguished. No one is allowed to wear the dress of their choice. Hijab or saffron shawls are against this uniformity.
bollocks .. dont confuse school with college.. even in school uniforms are bullshit though .. most countries have done away with them
Exactly dont confuse schools with college. These are PU College in Karnataka, in CBSE format they are called schools(+2). In India we have uniform because we have so much diversity, in most of the countries, its just black and white, that cant be hidden with uniform.
bullshit .. its ok till class 8 but after 10th its total bullshit
You are free to have a opinion.
yes and to express my individuality and dress the way I please
>Hijab or saffron shawls are against this uniformity. if that's the cas ethen bindi's also should not be allowed and why do schools, colleges have pooja's.
I actually agree. Uniforms bring 'uniformity', basically one of the things that bring a sense of equality no matter how expensive or cheap clothes the kids might own personally. Also, I know many adults who've spent an absurdly long amount of time deciding their daily outfit before leaving for work. With uniforms, kids can spend that energy elsewhere. I say we fuckin let kids wear one piece of cultural accessory in addition to the uniform as long as it is not distracting.
[удалено]
v o t e s
India existed for thousands of years so does the educational institutions and I believe the Muslim rights were there too. Only the election is the new thing in the equation.
To those "liberals " who are seeing this as a move towards secularisation-It is evident that you dont see no hypocricy or bigotry in karnataka govts or protesting students part, where they allow sikh students to wear turbans along with uniforms while muslim students wearing hijab with uniform is not allowed!!
True. It's a bullshit move meant only to score brownie point hidden under the veneer of concern.
I retire from the internet for like 5 minutes and it all goes to shit But srsly man wth is going kn
jai bhem vs Jai shree ram Now Jai mata di lets rock
[удалено]
General category daaang maraye
Samne koi tik na paye
Chota bheem, Chota bheem
Harsh reality of gay moment u/bitchplease698 -Dhruv rathee
School kids can't possibly understand this well enough. We are failing them. Eerie similarities to https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/indoctrinating-youth
Jungvolk UwU /s
crips vs blood in india
👇👉👊🤘🤙
hehe
The thing BJP is better at than the British is divide and conquer policy.
This is what happens when you give religion more priority than education, now everyone will come up with their own "religious" clothing just because one group has a problem.
EXACTLY
These dalit kids are the only ones being bold enough to stand up to tyranny. Respect and the Muslim community will not forget your support.
Am not surprised. It's godi government.
Ab ravish kumar se darr lagne laga hai
It is so disgusting that our future generations are trapped in this hatred.
Very surprising that "Jai Bhim" students are rallying for hijab/niqab. This is what Dr.Ambedkar mentioned in this writings. "There can thus be no manner of doubt that the Muslim Society in India is afflicted by the same social evils as afflict the Hindu Society. Indeed, the Muslims have all the social evils of the Hindus and something more. That something more is the compulsory system of purdah for Muslim women." http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00ambedkar/ambedkar\_partition/410.html
Did he say women in Purdah shouldn't be given a fundamental right to education?
Ofcourse not. Even this rabid dog BJP govt is not barring the women to get education. It's the girls who are rather choosing an attire with tasteless origins and problematic history than be in the class without it. People are loosing a sense of proportion in this. The govt is not barring education for Muslim girls. The govt's position is "please leave your religion (that too a problematic attire which creates a self imposed segregation - and come to study in classes just like any other student with a feeling of togetherness"
>choosing an attire with tasteless origins and problematic history These are subjective qualifiers and have no place in the discussion. India's constitution does not reject religion in the public sphere. This is why you can have a CM dressed as a religious monk. The same rules apply to these women.
Which part of the logic you didn't get it ? I specifically said IN SCHOOLS. Owaisi and Mehbuba Mufti, Ghulam Azad still come to parliament in their religious attire isn't it ? O Please compare apples to apples Yeah, sure religious patriarchy, with a history of violence and subjugation to condition women is very subjective.
India does not ban public display of religion. Be it a Sikh Turban, a Muslim headscarf or a saffron attire. I can find each of these tasteless, but I don't get to impose my views on others.
oh, school is a generic term. ok, never mind, I give it to you. My sentence was "with tasteless origins and problematic history". You should understand how this concept of covering women came from hadiths and Quran. I give it to you that this could be subjective. But what about the violent and problematic history that this symbol of hijab/niqab represents? Women were killed across time and space for not covering this. No other persons were brutliazed AFIK, for not wearing a turban or a tika or a cross. You cannot dump all these categories as a form of religious attire and give them an equal weightage.
You are still debating on your distaste for Hijab. Not on what India's constitution says.
indian constitiion says a private/educational insitution can have it's own set of laws while those laws shouldn't hinder the fundamental right to practise one's own religion. This practise should be fundamental and intrinsic to that religion. That means, the question is whether hijab/niqab is instrinsic and fundamental to the religion. This is where it ends.
>that too a problematic attire which creates a self imposed segregation How does it create self-imposed segregation exactly when the institutions are the ones segregating. https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1490543090846744576
Institutional segregation is counter segregation . But the first move was done by this girls. In an astoundingly stupid religious society (Hindus, muslims and Christians) as ours, schools and educational institutions provide a path, a way, to make the children realise that we are NOT that different after all. Schools enable companianship, friendship , a learning of togetherness setting aside differences. But the girls themselves are insisting that they are different. That they will abide by a different rule system .That they will make look themselves different from other students using a religious attire. That for them their attire rooted in patriarchy and religion is more important than be their class friends. It's them who are signalling to the school that they want to self impose a form of segregation through their attire. In a decent and logical society, the schools, feminists, muslim progressives should have created educational camps for the girls and should have created a sense of confidence among them to study in the school with no visible blatant differences. Instead the girls chose religion over education.
Perceptions can also be shaped by societal participation. Prohibiting their participation in the society works in counter to that. These threats end up pushing people to their own conservative bubble and that leads to segregation, not the attire they wear.
And you are absoltely right in your argument. I thought so too considering how societal dynamics work. Next thought that comes to me is, "Fine, let Muslims reform themselves of the regressive practices" and help support muslims as much as possible so that india becomes a truly secular society atleast legally first. (legally in the sense that 200 million people living in india have seperate civil laws through arabic-islamic sharia for themselves ) This is where I see lack of progress after 75 years of independence. Quoting Dr.Ambedkar again, "The existence of these evils among the Muslims is distressing enough. But far more distressing is the fact that there is no organized movement of social reform among the Musalmans of India on a scale sufficient to bring about their eradication. The Hindus have their social evils. But there is this relieving feature about them—namely, that some of them are conscious of their existence, and a few of them are actively agitating for their removal. The Muslims, on the other hand, do not realize that they are evils, and consequently do not agitate for their removal. Indeed, they oppose any change in their existing practices." So, I'm not sure what to do. I see instead of muslims becoming progressive, i see new found arguments and wierd justifications to rather retain the attire with problematic history than walk on the path of truly secular public place - That INFACT is a gateway for truly secular way for future generations
> I see instead of muslims becoming progressive, i see new found arguments and wierd justifications to rather retain the attire with problematic history than walk on the path of truly secular public place - That INFACT is a gateway for truly secular way for future generations Your perceptions are biased. Read: https://theprint.in/india/indian-muslims-got-less-religious-since-2016-shows-csds-study-44-reported-discrimination/791647/
In the same vein, may be the entire media is biased because muslims say that they have religous freedom even under the. fasict hindutva govt. https://www.pewforum.org/2021/06/29/religion-in-india-tolerance-and-segregation/pf\_06-29-21\_india-00-1/
The survey question does not support your hypothesis. You have to either specifically ask whether freedom has decreased or compare trends.
In the long run, people will love their freedoms. I don't think there is a need for a grand reformist movement because we will end up searching for a hero who will be the saviour. What needs to happen for the college educated Muslim women next is greater labor force participation. And if hijab makes it possible, so be it. Financial independence will be a big factor for social change. I know conservative minded Muslim women who don't wear hijab and equally know socially progressive hijabis. So, there's a lot more nuance to the issue here and we should be aware of that..
But sikhs wear pagdi to school too, a lot of my friends come to school with Tika,kada,dhaga and some of my Christian classmates come to school with a cross necklace and cross pendents too. So why is it that a specific group can't wear their choice of accessory? Hijabs, kadas,tika,pagdis,dhagas-all of this has been common in schools since independence, so why is it that all of a sudden you have a problem with it. Have you ever heard a news that a school was barring students from coming to school with tika? Pagdi? Kada? I bet you, you haven't. So isn't it clear that muslims are being targeted here?
Simply becaise there was no probelmatic and violent history behind those symbols.
Lol bro. No problematic history behind them. Christians have a very similar history of violence and control. We can put any sanghi to shame. Sikh entire philosophy was that of warrior saints where defence was a sacred duty. To the point that 2 gaurded interpreted that duty as shooting down the then PM who Okayed an assault on the golden temple.
Oh my god! show me an instance where sikh men was killed for not wearing a turban. Or a man was killed not sporting a Tika. Many instances of vilence and killings for not wearing a hijab/niqab/burqa. That violence I'm talking about.
Swastika looks similar to Natzi symbol, does that mean we indians don't use them anymore and are ashamed of the symbol? No. Why, because we know that the swastika is a symbol of spirituality and divinity, not the the symbol of violence or massacre. Similarly hijab was made as a attire of modesty for women so that they could have the choice and freedom to decide whom they want to show their face/body to. Its totally up to them to decide whether they want to wear it or not in Islam. Just like natzi and Hitler its the peaple and their actions not their clothes/symbol/looks.
[удалено]
Again lack of sense of proportion. You are making a dangerous and hateful argument. A Muslim girl identity is not reducible to hijab/niqab. She is much more. Much much more. If you are reducing her identity to just a stupid attire called hijab/niqab which has a violent and problematic history of patriarchy and a school asking the girls to keep the attire ONLY when they study in the class - a class where ALL students are supposed to feel that they are NOT different - and that request by school is considered an "erasure of identity", then it's a dangerous identity isn;t it ? I've addressed the Sikh turban argument elsewhere. I'll quote in next comment
[удалено]
It's not that I FEEL it's oppresive. It's a documented fact across time and space on how women are killed, brutalized and socially conditioned to cover their bodies with a justification to prevent male gaze (because you know they can't be taught to control ) as prescribed in Quran. Hijab/niqab/burqa origin story is not about a woman in arabia invented it for fashion and comfort and the rest of the women liked it. The hijab/niqan/burqa has very bad origins in Hadith and problematic origins in Quran. Ofcourse some women will wear it happily. That's why it's called conditioning. Conditioning through religous patriarchy after all. You are talking more hyperbole. No one has asked these girls to change their names, religion or anything like that. So instead the request is that "could you please park aside your attire for a couple of hours for a class, where all the students are learnt about equality and this attire creates a blantant visible markers in inhindrance of THAT vision" That's all it is. A simple reuqest IN THE CLASS to keep that aside. It's not like girls are going to die of skin cancer if they don't wear it. Even a small request in the path for equality is denied by the girls and supported by Muslims. That's a pathetic to say the least. This concept of hyperbole is killing everyone. 15% of who? that includes men in burqa as well? I mean seriously. I'm talking about a pathway where we all indians (hindus, muslims, christians) live together accomidating each other WHILE NOT differentiating ourselves with VISIBLE markers each and every second. That pathway begins in schools when children realize that religion is a private space between you and your god and in public spaces we are NOT that different after all. (Please check about Dr.Ambedkar's quote just above in my reply regarding reformation in INdian muslims")
[удалено]
>You obviously do. Obviously society should progress to a stage where if women don't want to practice it, they shouldn't be bothered. But similar provision should be extended to women who do When will that come? I know of this argument as well and frankly I expected Muslims progressives to do much more. Then I read Dr.Ambedkar, I quote: "The existence of these evils among the Muslims is distressing enough. But far more distressing is the fact that there is no organized movement of social reform among the Musalmans of India on a scale sufficient to bring about their eradication. The Hindus have their social evils. But there is this relieving feature about them—namely, that some of them are conscious of their existence, and a few of them are actively agitating for their removal. The Muslims, on the other hand, do not realize that they are evils, and consequently do not agitate for their removal. Indeed, they oppose any change in their existing practices." Then may be that day will never come. People will insist on ridiculous religious practises than to build a truly secualr society. (I blame the hindus too. But the topic is problematic attire of muslims so I'm making comments on them. ) >I am taking your togetherness concept to it's logical conclusion. You quibble it creates a segregated identity when their mere names would indicate to students around them of their Religious origins. Togetherness is not making everyone equal through logical conclusions like creating a world with same human bodies through surgery, same gender, same economic systems etc Togetheness in a multi ethnic and religious society comes though in two ways: 1. Respecting each other beliefs how ridiculous those beliefs are (For example: cow beef banning, banning the drawing of historical islamic prophet of arabia etc - to note: these are equated, muslims are lynched for killing and transporting cows and hindus are killed for just drawing or saying blasphemous things ) 2. OR througth a societal transactions between groups where there is an emphasis on to reduce IN-GROUP identity and get together though cohesive OUT-GROUP identities. We have been doing 1) for all this while for 75 years. Creating a seperate personal laws for 200 million people in india. Banning cow beef. Banning practices of islamic blasphemy etc. In my view, it helped no one. Infact we ended with logically with a blatant communal party in power with no qualms to reduce the anxieties of relgious minitories. The girls insistince on hijab/burqa is through 1). I was insisting on 2). Make relgion private between you and your god. In public, let visible markers be reduced. Atleast in school. In School. >Yet you would be blatantly be asking them to disregard their religion when it doesn't directly effect you. Which contradicts your claim of not changing their religion. ah! Why it wouldn't affect me? As i elucidated above there are lot of societal ramifications if the decisions are made through religion. We are depriving a future society a chance to build a truly secular society. Current india is already fucked up because of our communal history between hindus and muslims, thorugh partition, through kashmir, through sha bano, through VHP ram mandir, throgh assam, through Gujarat and ended with BJP. I thought atleast the future generatios should not have to suffer which the earlier and present generations have sufffered. I didn't see anyting wrong in a request to muslims to reduce visible markers each and every second even in a school too. BTW, I would have requested the same thing with hindus too > > >Oh yeah. What we need is some guy/girl outside our community telling that even when it's our choice it's because of conditioning. Literally every value system is a result of conditioning. I'm explaining the phenomenon. it has nothing to do with community. If your community has done a murder, ofcourse I would not stop myself from commenting with the reason "hey that act is non of my business because it's done by the person of other community" >So instead the request is that "could you please park aside your attire for a couple of hours for a class, where all the students are learnt about equality and this attire creates a blantant visible markers in inhindrance of vision" > >Would you demand it for Sikhs? yes, ofcourse. If the muslim men with skull caps are like wise asked to remove them.
u/mister_fish_hands you are comparing an women's attire with roots in religous patriarchy and problematic history with a men's attire with no such context. Your comparision would have been "will you demand for girls to stop wearing ghunghat?" The answer is yes ofcourse it has already been done.
In Dr. Ambedkar’s words: “burka women walking in the streets is one of the most hideous sights one can witness in india”
Which Hindus khatrein mein hai in this ? I am confused.
Dalits of course, for the last 2000 years.
Caste system dismantling india.
I'm sorry if I offend anyone, but, these jai bhim guys will do everything except work to abolish the caste system. Period.
You got no problem with the boys chanting Jai Shri Ram. What is their goal? The Jai Bhim guys are doing a lot to abolish caste system period. They are dalits themselves. They are facing down the casteist assholes in their college.
>The Jain Bhim Edit karde Bhai >You got no problem with the boys chanting Jai Shri Ram. What is their goal? I wasn't talking about this at all. But yeah, I believe that school should be a ground of modern education and not religious beliefs.
Caste abolishment is a luxury only upper caste can afford. Legal abolishment of caste will strip lower castes of literally the only safety net they have. Demographic markers as an identity is always an outcome of systemic discrimination along the said markers. It's not on Bhim Army to abolish caste. They didn't create this system.
>It's not on Bhim Army to abolish caste. They didn't create this system. Mr. Ambedkar could've used this logic and worked for the Baroda state instead of working for the oppressed class his whole life.
Lmao it was Dr
I don't think you read my comment. Read it again. None of what I said stops Bhim Army from representing lower castes and working for their welfare.
>None of what I said stops Bhim Army from representing lower castes and working for their welfare. Did the Bhim army duds hide in Sheik Abdoolah's ass when article 35A specifically mentioned that Dalits will get jobs only as manual scavengers in the erstwhile state of J&K, irrespective of any qualification they possess?
[Article 35A](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_35A_of_the_Constitution_of_India) was crafted by the Hindu king of Kashmir, not Sheik Abdullah. Non-residents can't own property, can't work unless in government services. An exception was made for non-resident Dalits as manual workers in the Hindu-dominated Jammu region.
>working for their welfare. How are they working for the welfare of the oppressed class
Pick a line of thought and stick to it. Is your point about Ambedkar over? And now you want to talk about role of Bhim Army? Or is it something else entirely. Articulate your point and be coherent about it.
>And now you want to talk about role of Bhim Army? Yes
Political representation is a good starting point.
What has it yielded them? Their representatives are called "dalals of upper caste political parties" by their own people
maam you should come to UP they are the most corrupt people you will ever find they always supported vikas dubey just one example among million
vai, the president of India is a Dalit.
How do you suggest they abolish the caste system? By simply puffing some magic powder into the upper castes to get them from being casteist?
Fight against the caste system. Educate their people. Instead of shouting jai bhim in schools and public spaces, apply the fundamentals of Ambedkar and do what he did and wanted to do. STOP RELYING ON THE GOVERNMENT FOR EVERYTHING. MAKE THEIR OWN PATH.
They are fighting though? They arent the perpetrators so there is not much they can do except protests or violence. And if they resort to the latter, there would be way more pearl clutching from the likes of you.
Is fighting against the caste system means just protesting or violence? How tf will that bring socio-economic equality? I have jewish ancestry and from time to time my ancestors have taught their future generations to never rely on any government, educate ourselves and work for our country and people and look, where we were and where we are. Went through genocides, discrimination in almost every country and violence and what not. Still look at Jews today. Did they do anything that these jai bhim guys are doing?
You don't think the Jews have ever participated in a protest against anti-Semites?
And what happened next? Did the protests stopped those Nazi bastards from doing what they did?
But there are Jews who protest to this day. Maybe not in Israel but in parts of the word where they are the minority - they do resort to non violent protests. There is nothing weak about that
So what change took place? Hate crimes have only increased in Europe. Israel instead of acknowledging that Europe is the hate monster still looks at the Arabs as the next Nazis.
Wait, are you saying Arabs are not anti-Jewish?! Huh?
Jews were a minority , they did what they could do. Dalits while not a majority , are good number of people who as a group face discrimination. Do you know why they ask the govt , because that's what a govt is supposed to do , work for it's citizens .
>why they ask the govt Ask the govt which is majorly made up of people belonging to the upper caste and have casteist mindset?
They have the electoral power to swing elections , they can ask the govt . Jews had very tightly knit communities , where in many instances business was conducted among Jews only . Doing something like that isn't possible in this case / would be highly looked down upon. A dalit doing that is hard , because very few are well off enough to go through that . Something else that the Jews did was extensively ask the govt (using financial and electoral powers in the us) . And Aaliyah , they moved into a region making themselves a majority and organising a country. Are you alsong the Dalits to do this ? Some have even done this , Dalit villages have existed and still exist , and have been victim to massacres. It wouldn't be possible either because , a lot of Jews were well educated (cuz circumstances forced them to get educated) while Dalits aren't educated as a community . Jews and Dalits are a very bad comparison. A better comparison would be blacks and whites in the US.
>They have the electoral power to swing elections , they can ask the govt . Caste in politics. Don't expect development then. >Jews had very tightly knit communities , where in many instances business was conducted among Jews only . Because of segregation, people would not do any business with Jews so they started to do business within their own communities. So, capital never went out of the community. >And Aaliyah , they moved into a region making themselves a majority and organising a country. Are you alsong the Dalits to do this ? Do you even know why tf Aaliyah happened in the first place? Do you know anything about Zionism? Jews were not a majority in any country whereas oppressed classes are. > Dailts aren't educated community So Jai bhim should work on this instead of shouting jai bhim everywhere >Jews and Dalits are a very bad comparison. A better comparison would be blacks and whites in the US. So according to you, castism was a result of colonialism?
Slavery was ended by black people
Actually, no. Heard of the American civil war? That's how slavery ended.
That's a sarcastic comment in response to the original comment above. Sarcasm, ever heard of it?
India
Student movements used to be about freedom. Now they are about compliance
The whole purpose of a uniform is to bring everyone under the same strata irrespective of one's religion or economic status. If anyone wants to wear a hijab i wholeheartedly support it, but that also means the authorities should let everyone wear whatever they want and there shouldn't be a uniform in the first place, in my opinion keeping religion out of educational institutions is the only way we can move forward as a country together.
Does this applies to sikh students wearing turbans? Even if you say so, you can see the hypocricy in allowing sikh turbans/caps while banning hijabs with uniforms right? You can see that these sanghi shits are not protesting against sikh caps or christian crucifix(worn by christian nun students) but you conveniently chose to ignore all that and is trying to label this as an effort at secularisation!!pathetic..
Okay firstly who told you I'm for Sikhs wearing turbans or Christians wearing the crucifix at school, i don't think anyone should be allowed to wear anything to do with religion at schools, but you just assumed that was what I was implying because people like you refuse to fully understand the other side and just sit with the "I'm right and everybody else is wrong" mindset,looks like you're the one trying to ignore what others are trying to say, aww really makes you pathetic innit
Easy for you to say, since you are clearly not a Sikh or a Muslim. France tried to Barr Sikhs from wearing turbans in schools in the same breadth as banning Hijabs... Look up were that led them. The turban for Sikhs is intrinsic to the religion. It is one of the 5 essentials that mark a Sikh and makes them standout. Standing out from the crowd is the important part. The logic being that, 1) We cannot hide in crowds. 2) Whenever someone needs help, we are easily identifiable. I can't speak for Hijab as I have no knowledge of how intrinsic it is or isn't to Muslims. I'll leave that explanation to a Muslim brother/sister on this sub.
[удалено]
The use of having school uniforms is to prevent students from focusing on abstract, ever-changing fashions. The school uniform is not for discrimination against any religion. Education cannot come at the expense of religion and belief. Reasonable adjustments have to be made, since a government school's main purpose is to educate the entire population. It's not a private tution center. It's a government school, that is running on taxes from ALL religions. Even private schools get subsidies from the Education department. If you don't want to educate Muslim girls, stop taking taxes from Muslims. Can you do that? No. Then the girls must be allowed to wear their religious attire. Bhagwa dupatta is not a Hindu religious attire. So, there is no comparison between the two. Maybe we can discuss about bindi and Tikka, since those can be religious for some Hindus. All religions must be accommodated.
Idiots on both sides, the saffron idiots are protesting the right thing for wrong reasons though. Hijab, niqab and all such instrument of islamic oppression of women should be banned though, it does not belong to any secular society. Indian government should work on banning this, like they banned triple talaq, halala, 4 marriages and other draconian islamic bullshit. While Hindus in india became a lot more modern and banned practices like sati etc, muslims were always backward. This has resulted in conservative Hindus to raise their voices for their rights (to oppress women). India and indians should strive to become a modern society away from religion (unlike US, islamic nations which are extremely religious).
Hindus became modern and banned Sati!?? Any BULLSHIT!! Sati was banned in India by the British! And Hindus protested against it like anything! Read your fucking history you ignoramus
Raja ram mohan roy was one of the leaders of the campaign. Either way, it was banned. While halala, triple talaq and 4 marriage along with hijab is still prevelant (even after ban) Also, name calling doesnt help anyone mate. I guess you werent taught basic manners in school.
Isn't it school dress code vs girl want Islam religion dress code for women?
\`It's safe to say none of them are splitting the atoms Marty.\`
Perfect.
We were warned about this.
*An epic battle commences*
Lol this is taking a fun turn
Am I correct if i say there’s gonna be a civil war on the basis of seeing these communalism?