Summary
The Taliban have banned windows in homes that allow views of areas where Afghan women might be seen, citing concerns over “obscene acts.”
This new decree mandates blocking or obstructing such windows in existing and new buildings, continuing the group’s systemic repression of women since regaining control of Afghanistan in August 2021.
The Taliban’s policies have included bans on women’s education, public appearances, and voices.
Critics, including the U.N., warn these actions dangerously erode human rights, while activists call out global inaction over the ongoing oppression.
Why not remove Muslim men’s eyes so they can’t see women?
That’s the other guy that said that, the taliban follows a different guy who wandered about a desert.
TBF they like that guy too. And the second guy didn’t suggest this - it’s all them and their weird homoerotic incel energy.
This just in: the taliban are afraid of women
Gun control is sexist. Women deserve the ability to defend themselves from those larger and stronger then them.
Women needing to be safe isn’t an argument for increasing the availability of guns, it’s an argument for improving safety for women.
If the objective is to protect women, allowing guns to circulate within the civilian population is counterproductive.
On top of that, gun control is inherently not sexist because it doesn’t discriminate between gender.
Those insecure little boys really are afraid of women.
It’s either that or they justify these repressive laws by saying men are lustful beasts who can never be trusted to contain their impulses. (And therefore those laws are for their “protection.”)
This is an attitude shared by all of the “girls have cooties” religions.
And just when I thought the Taliban’s laws against women were too extreme already, they decide to do this. They quite literally can stoop way lower than I thought.
I feel so bad. Thanks for ruining my first day of 2025, Taliban.
Next step: The Screwfly Solution
Linux, BSD, or MacOS?
TempleOS, obviously
or maybe an Islam-specific fork?
mOSque
That’s fucking hilarious.
When do we get to the part of the episode where James T Kirk, prime directive be damned, finds the meglomaniacal computer controlling these men, and blows it up?
Have you any idea how it feels to be a fembot… living in a manbot’s manputer’s world?
Why stop at windows? I mean, doors are even bigger openings.
Saddam Hussein housing about to go hard.
Today, Pakistan, tomorrow, USA. You might be sceptical today, but if you think it really couldn’t happen in America, you haven’t been paying nearly enough attention.
A authoritarian theocracy seizing control of the government? Sounds serious!
So when will democrats drop gun control considering this existential threat to the nation state?
Wild topic change there!
So when will democrats drop gun control
Nearly every legislative session, iirc. More permanently, probably when school shootings stop for good.
You think you can shoot your way out of this?
Comrade, I too am a member, but the way you shifted topics here is too abrupt to provide meaningful discourse. I like to lean into the “we keep us safe” slogan.
And to the doubters: yes, target practice, firearm safety training, and mutual aid support DOES make a difference in keeping communities strong, resilient, and safe. No one in the SRA is advocating for active resistance with force to anything or anyone.
MAGA furiously scribbling notes.
Ban eyeballs.
Why not just ban everything while you’re at it?
It’s Newsweek, but this does sound like a thing they’d do.
sad Russian assassin noises
Taliban doesn’t represent our religion Tbh
They may not solely represent a religion but they definitely represent it. Mormons also represent a part of a religion. As do crusaders. And the Klan. And people who circumcise women. And the child rapists in the Catholic church.
You don’t get to claim only nice things are representative and bad things aren’t as if religion as a power structure isn’t the core problem in and of itself.
Exactly, kind of. Religious fundamentalism is a fascinating concept, because basically it is exactly that - taking the fundamental ideas of the religion and using that interpretation to derive perspective and subsequent law or policy.
In a very real, significant way it’s a better representation of the religion than the watered down, culturally accepted version that moderate religious individuals will say is the ‘real’ version.
Orthodox is fundamentalism, and anything otherwise is not the actual religion, even if that is the majority, like modern Christianity.
I don’t disagree at all. It’s kind of like how the incoming US regime isn’t representative of all Jesus-people.
That said, it seems like Islamic and Chirstian groups hold people captive in the worst ways imaginable, using every dirty psychological trick ever thought of.
A “family” memeber has used a proxy-person to suggest I go to a turn-you-not-gay-anymore camp, as an adult… I have also experienced a “polite” conversation with a Musilm about the Quaran, over a meal. I pointed out my attempt to read it in high school in a book store, and surprise that it was almost all just “moral” rules. He said it was something like a guide book, and decided to inform me on how many lashes one receives as a gay person, before they’re “put to death.” What a confusing way to try to convert an unapologetically half-gay sketpic…
All I’m trying to express is that community and having a group/family of people that can rely on and relate to each other is very important to maintain sanity thru life, but it can come at a severe cost if the group is religious. Even budhist groups can become violent, so I don’t think it’s generally based on specific religions, as much as the microcosm within the book(s) club that you’re in.
I always hope religious people can escape, or at least glean something helpful from their beliefs, and not end up closed off from other people, and the ability to think on their own terms. Thank you for reading my Ted Talk lol.
I’d argue that they represent the word of the Quran more closely than moderate Muslims.
The taliban just takes the words of the quran wayy more strictly the Quran isn’t even strict at I all i would argue most of it is designed to protect you
If they are taking a very strict stance, it means they are deviating the least.
It’s regrettable that the most fundamentalist groups of any religion produce the most suffering, but that’s what happens when a book promotes/endorses/encourages bigotry.
I hear this isn’t the reality as media puts it, it’s not as strict there. Not yet at least. Heard it from someone who’s parents are from there and visited multiple times.
