Spyke
world·World NewsbyMicroWave

Taliban ban windows to stop women being seen inside homes

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.

Taliban ban windows to stop women being seen inside homeshttps://www.newsweek.com/afghanistan-women-windows-ban-taliban-2007298Open linkView original on lemmy.world
sh.itjust.works

Hey Taliban, here’s an idea: ban eyes for men, problem solved.

203
lemmy.world

They can't be seen, can't speak, women's voices cannot be heard (even by other women), and now they can't have windows.

At this point, if they have such a problem, leave the men inside in a windowless box and let women do the work. It's men getting a half chub because they heard of someone thinking of a woman. Their obsession with women is so fucking weird. It's like they're the boogy man or some shit.

123

Yeah it's a weird fear fr. I wish I understood it but not sure if understanding it any better would make any difference. And that's even more labour on women yet again to figure out why are these men so scurred of women's agency? The imbalance is unconscionable.

16
Azzureply
lemm.ee

This is the best usage of this phrase I've ever seen

27
lemmy.world

Damn for a country that hates gay people, they REALLY hate looking at women.

65

No, it's more like each extremist Muslim doesn't want any other man looking at any of his women, because he knows what he'd be unable to stop himself from doing if he saw someone else's woman and assumes every other man is like that.

And that line of thinking breeds generations of men who rather than might think that way, actually do think that way, making the rule even more necessary.

It's also a lot easier for a man to punish or beat a woman than it is another man, and it's that line of thinking which turns women into property rather than people. And property can be treated however you like.

26
infosec.pub

Had to do a double take that I'm not in The Onion community.

57

at your rate we're gonna have a free tech stack before we have equality. The struggle against patriarchy is not a joke

19

Aside from the obvious egregious human rights violations here, there's going to be a lot of health repercussions for this.

Not getting enough, or any sunlight can cause vitamin d deficiency which can cause a whole host of problems. Including if a woman breastfeeds without getting enough vitamin d her baby will also be deficient. Get ready for a bunch of children who are going to be at a high risk for developing rickets.

I guess that's the price they're willing to pay to oppress women?

41
lemmy.world

Soooooo, instead of educating young boys and men about respect and decency, they instead force women to cover themselves completely, and now remove windows from buildings, because young boys and men can’t be trusted to be basic human beings?

Yeah, you know you’re doing it right when you have to force other people to bend to your degeneracy.

41

I think their goal is for the men to still be degenerate pigs, but only with a single woman.

9
SkunkWorkzreply
lemmy.world

Pederastry still happens in Afghanistan it’s called Bacha bāzi. They drug up a teenage boy and dress the boy up in women’s clothes. The boy has to dance in front of older men and then they rape the boy. They are gay pedophiles. This practice dates back to when that area was conquered by Alexander the Great.

11
lemmy.ml

Gun control is sexist. Women deserve the ability to defend themselves from those larger and stronger then them.

-12

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.

4
sh.itjust.works

That's the other guy that said that, the taliban follows a different guy who wandered about a desert.

5

TBF they like that guy too. And the second guy didn't suggest this - it's all them and their weird homoerotic incel energy.

1

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.

11
lemmy.ca

Why stop at windows? I mean, doors are even bigger openings.

27
lemmy.world

Those guys sure love banning things. They're gonna lose track of all the things they've banned, unless they hire someone to tally all their bans.

Unless of course there's a ban on that too

27

The point is to ban everything and lose track so that when they don't like you, they can always find something you did that was banned.

15

Let's just blindfold all men, or even better, seal them in cement to make sure they don't look at women and have impure desires!

12
fnrirreply
lemmy.world

TempleOS, obviously

or maybe an Islam-specific fork?

10
lemmy.world

I'm curious, are these women actually flirting with these perverted creeps from the window... or are they flashing signs to each other because it's the only way they can talk?

19

Probably because one of those Afghan whores flashed a bit of wrist at some pious innocent man who was trying to go about his day.

/s - like you hadn’t guessed.

4
lemmy.world

Why do fundies always spend their time on pointless bullshit instead of actually governing

17

Keeping the women barefoot and pregnant while doing chores and the kids fighting your feuds is governing for them

11
lemmy.world

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.

13
lemmy.ml

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?

SocialistRA.org

-6

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.

6

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.

3

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.

11
Tin
lemmy.world

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?

10

Have you any idea how it feels to be a fembot... living in a manbot's manputer's world?

2
lemm.ee

The only solution would be the women rising up and stealing their husbands and brothers guns to foment a violent revolution. Sure some will probably be killed in the uprising but I'm sure it will end quickly because it would be very inconceivably stupid of the men to kill such a large number of women, then whom would they procreate with?

I wonder what the region would look like without centuries of western capitalist oppression by europe and most recently the US.

10
Miaoureply
jlai.lu

"Centuries" aka barely one. But sure, everything is due to western imperialism. No way this religion of peace might be the issue here

9

Imperialism and feudalism are just capitalism wearing different hats. One can easily say that modern capitalism is a form of neo-feudalism

2

The men will just go back to the traditional method of asexual budding.

1
lemmy.world

So, does the Tali ban a ban on windows? So it's not allowed to ban windows? So they're the Talibanban now? Or did they approve a ban on windows, so they're the Taliaproveban now? This is so confusing.

8

I think Tali is the word for 'all' and 'ban' is a loan word. They're slowly making way to their namesake.

2

Keep poking the same dead end, Taliban. The way forward could never be behind you. You've got it basically figured out. Never question anything.

6

It seems they saw that one episode of X-Files with the mom under the counter and are aiming towards it…

6
lemmy.world

Reads about how Taliban take women's rights away and shut them in the houses with no windows so men won't be tempted to do bad things to them

🤔 Gets ideas about things we could do with CEOs so Luigi's won't be tempted to do bad things to them

4
lemm.ee

Taliban doesn’t represent our religion Tbh

1
lemmy.cafe

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.

25

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.

4

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.

5
Zozanoreply
aussie.zone

I'd argue that they represent the word of the Quran more closely than moderate Muslims.

0
Read Bioreply
lemm.ee

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

1

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.

5

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.

-5
sh.itjust.works

Yet the one country trying to increase rights to people is hated by the rest of the world and called baby killers.

-21
feddit.nl

Israel's occupation and destruction is not increasing Palestinian rights just like nazi Germany didn't increase jewish people's rights.

15
sh.itjust.works

When you learned about history, did you learn about the Kings of Phrygia? How about older history like Ancient Egypt, Anatolia? What I'm trying to say is that through 7,000 years of documented history kept by all of these countries. They all mention going to Judea or Israel. None of these countries mention going to Palestine until the Romans became involved.

-5

When I learned history, I learned that the original inhabitants of Palestine are the cannnites. And that it was the Jews that immigrated from Egypt to their land. I also learned that they massacred the people there according to the Bible and Torah (if you believe in that).

[1 Samuel 15:3] Now go and smite Amalek and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

Whats interesting to me is that despite Jews owning 5% of Palestine before the creation of the state of Israel, the UN decided to split Palestine in half and give them 50%.

2
lemmy.world

Quick we must liberate their women by murdering them all and destroying their infrastructure. Oh look they happen to have oil. How convenient!

13
sh.itjust.works

Israel - Both genders can vote, many non-Jewish Israelis hold public offices. You can be Muslim or Christian and not fear for you life due to your belief.

-5
Oascanyreply
lemmy.world

Yet Israel is also committing a genocide at this current moment. Even more so since they've blocked humanitarian aid to Gaza. All 3 points you've stated are really basic freedoms that aren't really anything to celebrate or brag about in 2024. The post is about a state currently run by an extremist terrorist organisation that seized power. Comparing this to freedoms afforded by a democratically elected government in order to justify a defense of a genocide of people in a different country more than 3000 km away who happen to share a religion with the former state is honestly bizarre.

3

No one wanted any of this but one area decided we'll tolerate "Middle Eastern David Koresh" and what did he do? He thought he would attempt Project Mayhem without actually planning it through and put all the Palestinians lives in danger by hiding his tools in areas he didn't think anyone would try to find them.

Why did every ally to Palestine refuse to assist after October? Egypt, Lebanon? And why does Saudi Arabia seem to have no issues with any of this?

-2

Israel has segregated roads for non-Jews what are you talking about. Read the latest book by Ta Nahesi Coates.

1

I very much will fuck off. But anger towards colonists in 2025 is a bit silly don't you think? That is a lot of angst towards a world that doesn't care about you.

-4
lemmy.world

At least here in Portugal there are a couple leftist parties that defend talibas and Sharia Law and at the same time you cant ask a woman what time it os because thats sexual harassment... The world its a beautiful place

-27

you cant ask a woman what time it os because thats sexual harassment...

I think that's a problem with how you're asking. I don't speak Portuguese, so I can't give specific advice, but I'm certain that you're doing something wrong if you have that problem.

5