view the rest of the comments
World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
I consider an example of "true freedom" as the following:
Don't ban the hijab, AND don't force people to wear the hijab. Just let the person decide what they wanna wear, and leave them alone if it makes you uncomfortable. Simple.
How would you realistically enforce that it is not worn involuntarily?
How can you enforce any clothing is worn voluntarily? A partner could coerce someone to dress as modestly / revealingly as they want and you would need to rely on them to say they are being coerced.
Exactly so you ban the clothing that was traditionally used to coerce someone. There is a difference between colored socks and a hijab
Where's the line? Because controlling men force women to cover up all the time with all sorts of pieces of clothing.
The line is drawn with systemic issues with "culture". If banning ultimately better for society, then ban it.
Well given that there is some relation to Iran, as a government it would help to not force people to wear it anymore.
In terms of European societies it’s a common allegation that women would be forced to wear it but in countries like France, Germany, UK, etc. it’s usually non-Muslim people speaking about this issue but no one actually speaks to Muslim women and asks them what they want.
So it’s not like there’s actual data on this and I doubt that it’s possible to collect reliable data on this issue. IMO a first step would be to work together with Muslim women instead of patronizing them.
It is just a piece of clothing that goes on your head at the end of the day, how could its presence or absence possibly be offensive?
I also don’t get it but people nowadays obsess over the weirdest things.
Totally. I never understood that either.
It's the brainwashing that's the problem.
Let me guess, politicians and religious "scholars" are involved in it... right?
But that is the reason behind theboutright bans, the argument that some people do not get to choose to wear them or not.
This is so stupid. That's causing the same issue, but in the opposite direction
If you ban them nobody gets to choose to wear them or not...