Kazakhstan Bans Face Coverings, Muslim Women Asked To Embrace National Style

[Ayesha Erotica 1,924]

9 hours ago, River said:

 like in the US or Europe where Muslims are oppressed or hated, it's totally different.

Trans people in Europe are disproportionately attacked and despised by a large share of Muslims. Gay people are also insulted and disproportionately harassed by Muslims in Europe. Yes, non-Muslims can also be hostile to LGBT people, but the proportion is particularly high among Muslims, and the contempt and lack of understanding towards trans and gay people is particularly strong.

Muslims are not universally oppressed in Europe; they are granted all civil liberties; they are far too often oppressors themselves - towards those of different faiths, trans people, lesbians, gay people, and their wives and western lifestyle women. We shouldn't give Muslims in Europe the generalized "victim card".

I condemn the US/UK/France invasion of Muslim countries and the exploitation of their natural resources. Yes, the US has also created and financed hardcore radical Muslim  groups in the past. Muslims have reasons to be bitter against the West, but it's not right to fight injustice with injustice.

The US and Western Europe differ significantly: the US has only 1% Muslims, and Muslims have little influence on social life. In Western Europe, and partly also in the Balkans and Russia, Muslims make up a significant portion of the population. Because they are younger and have higher birth rates and because they marry younger, they are particularly prevalent in younger demographic groups. And in Western Europe, they significantly shape social life. In many European schools, gays are bullied by Muslims. What happens when a rainbow flag is raised at schools in Brussels, Marseille, Duisburg, Rotterdam, Lille, and London? There is an outcry, protest marches, and witch hunts by Muslims against the rainbow flag (carrier).

In the US, some romanticize, idealize, or even have rose-tinted glasses when viewing Muslims, as they never make experience themselves with them, but in Europe, too, many deny reality, even though they should know better than those in the USA.

River, I agree with you that this veiling is a sign of oppression and discriminates against women. The voluntary women card is a pretext for undermining Western values with a Western principle. Islam is defeating the West with its own weapons and there are many naïve leftists who are useful to them and the Muslims know how to use them to their advantage. Even within the left, LGBT is only a minority and when there is a clash in society between the interests of Muslims and LGBT, then take a closer look, then LGBT are secretly betrayed and the interests of Muslims are valued higher, even by the parties themselves who claim to be protecting LGBT, and suddenly reasons are sought in the socialization of Muslims to justify their behavior. Islam is not just a religion, it is also a political ideology with a totalitarian claim to society. Wherever veils are common, further discrimination and restrictions on women's rights and other non-traditional groups occur in short or mid-term intervals, directly and indirectly. It doesn't stop there. It continues with legal claims to halal food, exemptions for girls from swimming lessons, gender-based seating, etc.

This topic now has over 100 posts, but an important aspect hasn't been raised yet. Others have said that the ban is not for women's rights, but to introduce facial recognition technology. That is only partially correct, not the full reason. If surveillance were truly the issue, other hardcore Muslim states that are much stricter than Kazakhstan would have already done so. But they haven't, because the full veiling of women isn't fundamentally a major security problem, it can be solved through police force and most of these women do not protest either way because they are sozialized not to engage in such things.

Another main reason is that Saudi Arabia has recently been investing more heavily in Kazakhstan and is thus also promoting Saudi-influenced Islam. In the Muslim world, there are various Muslim sub-denominations and forms, and Kazakhstan and Saudi Arabia are certainly different from each other. Full-face veiling belongs to the ultra-conservative wing, which is present not only in Saudi Arabia, but also in North Africa, Iran, and other countries, and is also promoted by various countries there. Kazakhstan has only been independent since 1991 and has recently done a lot to become less dependent on Russian influence. While Kazakhstan was busy with Russia, it failed to notice for a long time how Saudi Arabia was using its power to Saudi-Islamize Kazakhstan as it saw fit. Kazakhstan cannot make the real reason public in order not to worsen relations with Saudi Arabia, as Saudi Arabia and its speicfic Islam enjoy a high level of authority in the Islamic world.

Kazakhstan is now countering this by placing emphasis on traditional Kazakh clothing and thus banning Saudi-style veils. This new law is in reality an anti Saudi-Arabia law, possibly the first after many anti Russian laws, to "keep Kazakhstan Kazakh and independent and not be foreign-inlfuenced". By and large, this is an internal Muslim issue, in which Kazakh distinguishes itself from the rest of the more rigid Islam. Of course, traditional Kazakh Islam is far from LGBT-compatible either. But this isn't Islam versus Liberalism or Islam versus mass surveillance, this is Islam-sub-type (of Kazakhstan) versus another Islam-sub-type (of Saudi Arabia). So this an internal Islamic battle behind the law.

 

 

[PopMusicForever 746]

10 minutes ago, AyeshaErotica said:

Trans people in Europe are disproportionately attacked and despised by a large share of Muslims. Gay people are also insulted and disproportionately harassed by Muslims in Europe. Yes, non-Muslims can also be hostile to LGBT people, but the proportion is particularly high among Muslims, and the contempt and lack of understanding towards trans and gay people is particularly strong.

Muslims are not universally oppressed in Europe; they are granted all civil liberties; they are far too often oppressors themselves - towards those of different faiths, trans people, lesbians, gay people, and their wives and western lifestyle women. We shouldn't give Muslims in Europe the generalized "victim card".

I condemn the US/UK/France invasion of Muslim countries and the exploitation of their natural resources. Yes, the US has also created and financed hardcore radical Muslim  groups in the past. Muslims have reasons to be bitter against the West, but it's not right to fight injustice with injustice.

The US and Western Europe differ significantly: the US has only 1% Muslims, and Muslims have little influence on social life. In Western Europe, and partly also in the Balkans and Russia, Muslims make up a significant portion of the population. Because they are younger and have higher birth rates and because they marry younger, they are particularly prevalent in younger demographic groups. And in Western Europe, they significantly shape social life. In many European schools, gays are bullied by Muslims. What happens when a rainbow flag is raised at schools in Brussels, Marseille, Duisburg, Rotterdam, Lille, and London? There is an outcry, protest marches, and witch hunts by Muslims against the rainbow flag (carrier).

In the US, some romanticize, idealize, or even have rose-tinted glasses when viewing Muslims, as they never make experience themselves with them, but in Europe, too, many deny reality, even though they should know better than those in the USA.

River, I agree with you that this veiling is a sign of oppression and discriminates against women. The voluntary women card is a pretext for undermining Western values with a Western principle. Islam is defeating the West with its own weapons and there are many naïve leftists who are useful to them and the Muslims know how to use them to their advantage. Even within the left, LGBT is only a minority and when there is a clash in society between the interests of Muslims and LGBT, then take a closer look, then LGBT are secretly betrayed and the interests of Muslims are valued higher, even by the parties themselves who claim to be protecting LGBT, and suddenly reasons are sought in the socialization of Muslims to justify their behavior. Islam is not just a religion, it is also a political ideology with a totalitarian claim to society. Wherever veils are common, further discrimination and restrictions on women's rights and other non-traditional groups occur in short or mid-term intervals, directly and indirectly. It doesn't stop there. It continues with legal claims to halal food, exemptions for girls from swimming lessons, gender-based seating, etc.

This topic now has over 100 posts, but an important aspect hasn't been raised yet. Others have said that the ban is not for women's rights, but to introduce facial recognition technology. That is only partially correct, not the full reason. If surveillance were truly the issue, other hardcore Muslim states that are much stricter than Kazakhstan would have already done so. But they haven't, because the full veiling of women isn't fundamentally a major security problem, it can be solved through police force and most of these women do not protest either way because they are sozialized not to engage in such things.

Another main reason is that Saudi Arabia has recently been investing more heavily in Kazakhstan and is thus also promoting Saudi-influenced Islam. In the Muslim world, there are various Muslim sub-denominations and forms, and Kazakhstan and Saudi Arabia are certainly different from each other. Full-face veiling belongs to the ultra-conservative wing, which is present not only in Saudi Arabia, but also in North Africa, Iran, and other countries, and is also promoted by various countries there. Kazakhstan has only been independent since 1991 and has recently done a lot to become less dependent on Russian influence. While Kazakhstan was busy with Russia, it failed to notice for a long time how Saudi Arabia was using its power to Saudi-Islamize Kazakhstan as it saw fit. Kazakhstan cannot make the real reason public in order not to worsen relations with Saudi Arabia, as Saudi Arabia and its speicfic Islam enjoy a high level of authority in the Islamic world.

Kazakhstan is now countering this by placing emphasis on traditional Kazakh clothing and thus banning Saudi-style veils. This new law is in reality an anti Saudi-Arabia law, possibly the first after many anti Russian laws, to "keep Kazakhstan Kazakh and independent and not be foreign-inlfuenced". By and large, this is an internal Muslim issue, in which Kazakh distinguishes itself from the rest of the more rigid Islam. Of course, traditional Kazakh Islam is far from LGBT-compatible either. But this isn't Islam versus Liberalism or Islam versus mass surveillance, this is Islam-sub-type (of Kazakhstan) versus another Islam-sub-type (of Saudi Arabia). So this an internal Islamic battle behind the law.

 

 

You have made some good points. Islam is slowly ruining Europe and people are so blind about it because they don’t wanna look Islamophobic but Islam doesn’t give any **** about anybody’s right. Just take a look at Brussels and some other European cities. It’s not a good look. Sorry not sorry.

[PartySick 172,545]

6 minutes ago, PopMusicForever said:

You have made some good points. Islam is slowly ruining Europe and people are so blind about it because they don’t wanna look Islamophobic but Islam doesn’t give any **** about anybody’s right. Just take a look at Brussels and some other European cities. It’s not a good look. Sorry not sorry.

The only way Islam is "ruining Europe" is by pushing xenophobic people to vote for far right politicians 'cause they promise to limit immigration then they get f*cked by the people they voted for.

Also keep in mind many people are fleeing Islamic countries in favor of Europe due to how much the west has f*cked around in the middle east. A whole ass genocide of Arab Muslims is taking place as we speak, supported by Europe and the US. I'm sure they wouldn't be leaving their home countries if it weren't for the constant risk of war, terrorism, and foreign nations replacing their political leadership whenever they please.

I don't vibe with the "migrants are ruining this land" sh*t. That same notion is what's making people get kidnapped without warning while their civil rights get violated here in the States.

Just my two cents.

[Ayesha Erotica 1,924]

Latinos in the USA and Muslims in Europe are not the same, they are fundamentally different cultures. In the third generation, Latinos have adapted, integrated, and adopted Western values; some Latinos are already partially Western. They even shift towards Hollywood industry and find Hispanic-language entertainment not as hot as US-American media. Meanwhile, third-generation Muslims in Europe have formed parallel societies, insisting on special Islamic rights, accusing the majority society of constant discrimination, receive and watch overseas TV channels from their ancestors countries and segregating themselves from those of other faiths whenever possible, remain very conservative e.g. by not allowing daughters to marry non-Muslims. They try to shape their countries of arrival like their home countries that is to Islamize them and harbor contempt for the "sinful" Western culture. Muslims in the USA are somewhat different in this regard. Due to the lack of social welfare in the USA, they have to work, and due to their small numbers, they are not yet in a position to form parallel societies en masse, and are a bit more liberal than those in Europe.

In no way can we compare Latinos in Florida or California with Muslims in Europe. In Los Angeles, one can be trans and live freely. In Brussels, as a remarkable transgender person, one is very likely to be attacked by Muslims at night, or by the many youth gangs during the day. Of course, one can also be attacked in LA, but that's rather unlikely because one is LGBT. It makes a big difference whether a city has a high Muslim population or not or other cultures like Chinese or Latinos. Chinese and Latinos are compatible with Western lifestyle.

And yes, Wikileaks showed that the US doesn't see Europe as a friend, but rather as a competitor (except for the UK/Ireland) and rather as strategic overseas military base hosts, and it (the USA) uses radical Islam as a means to plunge countries into chaos, including its competitor continental Europe. In some ways, the US is in a better position than Europe. It is not affected by Islamization, whereas Europe suffers from US policies.

 

 

[PopMusicForever 746]

9 minutes ago, AyeshaErotica said:

Latinos in the USA and Muslims in Europe are not the same, they are fundamentally different cultures. In the third generation, Latinos have adapted, integrated, and adopted Western values; some Latinos are already partially Western. They even shift towards Hollywood industry and find Hispanic-language entertainment not as hot as US-American media. Meanwhile, third-generation Muslims in Europe have formed parallel societies, insisting on special Islamic rights, accusing the majority society of constant discrimination, receive and watch overseas TV channels from their ancestors countries and segregating themselves from those of other faiths whenever possible, remain very conservative e.g. by not allowing daughters to marry non-Muslims. They try to shape their countries of arrival like their home countries that is to Islamize them and harbor contempt for the "sinful" Western culture. Muslims in the USA are somewhat different in this regard. Due to the lack of social welfare in the USA, they have to work, and due to their small numbers, they are not yet in a position to form parallel societies en masse, and are a bit more liberal than those in Europe.

In no way can we compare Latinos in Florida or California with Muslims in Europe. In Los Angeles, one can be trans and live freely. In Brussels, as a remarkable transgender person, one is very likely to be attacked by Muslims at night, or by the many youth gangs during the day. Of course, one can also be attacked in LA, but that's rather unlikely because one is LGBT. It makes a big difference whether a city has a high Muslim population or not or other cultures like Chinese or Latinos. Chinese and Latinos are compatible with Western lifestyle.

So so true. This is so accurate. Latinos always integrate easily and US should always be supportive of them. Muslims in the other hand especially the ones from Middle East always try to form their own thing and never integrate but always try to change other peoples views and perceptions of things which is wrong. Not to bring also how they sexually assault European women and demanding them to be covered at the same time. It’s crazy.

[Jakesnyders673 75]

19 hours ago, A Fried Egg said:

We always criticize Christianity but not Islam? At the root of it all it’s the same. The face covering is meant to suppress women and has almost nothing to do with being prude. It’s a practice concocted by men in power who wanted to treat women like property since medieval times (and perhaps it was necessary back then for political stability? Powerful men making harems is not uncommon, think Chinese and Greek concubines.). It signifies that women should keep their mouths shut and obey.

I grew up around Muslims and an independent woman is an unthinkable and dangerous prospect. 

Do you think I sound cynical? I consider myself rather conservative but I’ve never supported women having their faces hidden. You gays should know what it’s like to hide our selves from the public and pretend we’re straight.

 

And incase you’re not convinced. Look at what happened to Iran before and after the 1979 Islamic revolution: 

Women were attending universities in the 70s, and in 2024, the morality police beat them for dancing in public. You can look it all up. 

Iranians generally supported the Islamic revolution back then though. They thought the Western way of life was forced upon them by the government.

[faysalaaa 5,336]

19 hours ago, SHALLOW said:

Nah. Those women have internalized values that go against their humanity and dignity.

It's like a man with internalized homophobia who thinks he must be straight and have a family because anything else is wrong. They believe it's the right thing but they've just been brainwashed.

Remember that at the end of the day all religions have been created by men, who in fact have always had a lot of interest in keeping women down. It's important to deconstruct religions and not only accept them just cause "you want to accept everyone". There are things which are just wrong and we shoild be able to see that and speak about it. I criticize these practices just as much as i criticize Christianity. There's nothing wrong with that and whoever made you think that is wrong.

Dont women wear makeup and dress a certain way because they internalized the patriarchy? To the point where its the norm now for young women to get botox, fillers, surgeries, and risk their health to look good. Should we be against women choosing to wear makeup and botox now?

At the end of the day, we all live in constructs, we are all kinda brainwashed, but we also have the will to be free of it if we want.

[faysalaaa 5,336]

19 hours ago, Gabi001 said:

I wonder if all people here fighting for "women's right" to be covered in cloth are also fighting for womam circumcision, as it is also a religious and cultural belief and women from some cultures are socially pressured by their religion into doing it, same as islam is socially pressuring covering the face

Female circumcision happens to women who are under age or an infants, so she is forced and cant consent to it. Wearing a hijab is a choice a woman can make regardless of preassure. How can you compare them? lol

[PartySick 172,545]

43 minutes ago, PopMusicForever said:

So so true. This is so accurate. Latinos always integrate easily and US should always be supportive of them. Muslims in the other hand especially the ones from Middle East always try to form their own thing and never integrate but always try to change other peoples views and perceptions of things which is wrong. Not to bring also how they sexually assault European women and demanding them to be covered at the same time. It’s crazy.

This line of conversation needs to stop now or else I'm gonna start handing out warnings tbh.

"Muslims are rapists" ain't the kind of statement we're gonna allow on this site.

[faysalaaa 5,336]

18 hours ago, A Fried Egg said:

Politics isn’t black and white and we all have to pick our fights. At the very least, in a democratic society everybody gets a vote.  

But you can be sure those rights will be gone once that religion grows large enough and takes over the law, which is what those of us who grew up around it witnessed. Please don’t take your freedom for granted.

Trauma, Fear, and not having strong values makes people fascist and a tyrants like you. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and you have way too much good intentions. Stop trying to save the world by projecting your trauma on humans

[faysalaaa 5,336]

I always wonder how alot of people here view themselves as progressive, and me as conservative lol

[faysalaaa 5,336]

19 hours ago, A Fried Egg said:

Your heart is in the right place, but you should consider coming over to Muslim majority countries and see what it’s really like. Once they cover up, it’s a quick decent into loss of rights. 

No driving, no owning your own home, no making decisions without a man, no choosing your own future. No abortions and absolutely no gays. Pray you have a good husband because one that beats you will see no repercussions. 
 

I grew up in Singapore, but visited Malaysia and Indonesia quite often. Then I moved to Europe and made some ex-Muslim friends who are from the Middle East. This is our experience. 

You can criticize Islam without lying, its not that hard

[Chromanne 2,608]

2 hours ago, AyeshaErotica said:

Kazakhstan is now countering this by placing emphasis on traditional Kazakh clothing and thus banning Saudi-style veils. This new law is in reality an anti Saudi-Arabia law, possibly the first after many anti Russian laws, to "keep Kazakhstan Kazakh and independent and not be foreign-inlfuenced". By and large, this is an internal Muslim issue, in which Kazakh distinguishes itself from the rest of the more rigid Islam. Of course, traditional Kazakh Islam is far from LGBT-compatible either. But this isn't Islam versus Liberalism or Islam versus mass surveillance, this is Islam-sub-type (of Kazakhstan) versus another Islam-sub-type (of Saudi Arabia). So this an internal Islamic battle behind the law.

This. 

Kazakhstan is like 95% Muslim majority country. But they want to promote their own style of Islamic clothing rather than abayas that originate from Arabia.

Abayas are technically worn because of sandstorms in their desert and you can also notice that Arab men too wear a similar clothing. Therefore Kazakhstan wants to put forth their culture values first to promote nationalism.

This is how Kazakh Muslim women traditionally dresses which is also suitable for their climate.

However hijab is not banned in Kazakhstan. So a religious Muslim woman there can still wear a hijab if it doesn't cover her face.

Other Muslim majority countries like Turkey also used to have similar laws where women weren't allowed to wear abayas or even hijab in government offices.

It is up to the Kazakh women to decide if they want to wear a veil or not. But keep in mind that Kazakhstan could be overwhelmingly Muslim majority but they were also part of communist USSR which restricted religion and promoted atheism due to which a significant portion of their population is not that religiously Muslim. This also has a big impact in the current affairs of Kazakhstan.

 

[Jill 31,812]

21 hours ago, A Fried Egg said:

We always criticize Christianity but not Islam? At the root of it all it’s the same.

This is a laughable position to hold, as there's perhaps nothing more naturalized in Western society than Islamophobia

[Horny Chicken 10,935]

3 hours ago, faysalaaa said:

You can criticize Islam without lying, its not that hard

You’re right, I think my choice of words was too harsh and only highlighting extreme cases. I think the violence I witnessed in certain households was etched into my mind since I was a child. I have also been treated kindly by most Muslim families that I have become friends with till this day. I’m against the religion (all the Abrahamic ones), not the people. 
I apologize if I come across as tyrannical. 
 

@AyeshaErotica I think you’ve best summarized the situation most of living in Europe are experiencing without sounding too crazy, and I don’t have anything else to add to this topic. 
 

@PartySick you absolutely cannot compare what it’s like in the US with Europe. It’s completely different. Read what @AyeshaErotica wrote. Everyone here (including immigrants) is protected by the law and have a right to be here. Nobody is chasing anybody out. The US is extremely corrupt compared to Europe. 

If you feel that the thread is turning into a hate fuel, you can always lock it. But the reactions on the first page shows how most people feel about this topic, which I’m assuming are from European members. 

I’m also afraid of things getting out of hand from either side and I don’t like the black and white way of thinking. This is all evil or this is all good. But I am not originally from the West so value I western freedom very much. I’m also very aware of why people have to move away from war torn places in the first place, nonetheless I will always put innocent gay and trans people first.