@RawMimosa It isn't my business how an individual woman dresses. But “she chose it” doesn't confer any special legitimacy on what she chose. If “it's her choice” means the norm itself is suddenly beyond criticism, then choice is a shield against criticism rather than an argument for norms
@RawMimosa the decision themselves, not treating the fact that they chose something as the end of the argument.
None of this requires treating Muslims as a homogeneous category or claiming that Islam mechanically determines individual beliefs. Religion can scaffold and organize beliefs
@RawMimosa without dictating any individual’s beliefs, just as culture, family, politics, and other systems of meaning do. Muslims differ enormously in how they interpret, embrace, negotiate, or reject religious norms. That variation is perfectly compatible with criticism and opposing bans
@RawMimosa Likewise, “she chose hijab” may establish her right to wear it. It does not establish that the religious claim behind it is true, that the gendered norm is justified, or that criticism of that norm is illegitimate. Trusting women to decide should mean trusting them enough to make
@RawMimosa My preference for a refrigerator may be shaped by capitalism, advertising, my parents, and American domestic norms. So what? That fact alone neither condemns nor vindicates refrigerators. You still need an argument about the practice itself.
@RawMimosa from scrutiny. But obviously they aren't. Choosing makeup, choosing to be a housewife, rejecting evolution, and buying a refrigerator can all be socially conditioned while differing radically in their truth claims, social meaning, relationship to existing norms, and consequences.
@RawMimosa Voluntary choice establishes her right to make the choice; it does not establish that the belief behind it is true, that the norm is justified, or that the practice is beyond criticism. “She chose it” establishes agency, not validity.
The social-conditioning point doesn't solve
@ArielLegume By effectively suggesting the the wholesome “melting pot” is soooo much more advanced and better than those racial nations (but if you suggest that their racial ancestry is actually not a thing I will criticize you for it???)
@ArielLegume Of course, this leads them to look like hypocrites when confronted with the annoying heritage American racists by effectively allowing non-whites to do völkisch gleichheit but excoriating whites for demanding it. It’s even worse because it lends itself to American chauvinism
@xereeto@concernedfutur@RealDianeYap Imagine instead of contesting the premise of blood and soil or that “Japanese blood” exists (it doesn’t), American chauvinists instead choose to argue for the spiritual superiority of America. Everyone in this thread, including Diane herself, has fully reified fascist bromides
@HannahHabtu@BadEmpanadx@Gabewatch@_carlbeijer The fact that we have to pull out a case as exceptional as George Floyd really demonstrates that even among some of the lowest strata of the American working class, the standard of living is objectively well above those of workers outside of the west
@HannahHabtu@BadEmpanadx@Gabewatch@_carlbeijer Well, that’s not really his point. I think that exploitation is exploitation, but the wretched condition of the working class can be somewhat more tolerable in other places than others, and in these places, the strength of the middle class has made communist agitation, harder