299

The Taliban publish vice laws that ban women’s voices and bare faces in public (apnews.com)

submitted 3 weeks ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

32 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Afghanistan’s Taliban rulers have issued a ban on women’s voices and bare faces in public under new laws approved by the supreme leader in efforts to combat vice and promote virtue.

The laws were issued Wednesday after they were approved by supreme leader Hibatullah Akhundzada, a government spokesman said. The Taliban had set up a ministry for the “propagation of virtue and the prevention of vice” after seizing power in 2021.

...

Article 13 relates to women. It says it is mandatory for a woman to veil her body at all times in public and that a face covering is essential to avoid temptation and tempting others. Clothing should not be thin, tight or short.

Women are obliged to cover themselves in front of non-Muslim males and females to avoid being corrupted. A woman’s voice is deemed intimate and so should not be heard singing, reciting, or reading aloud in public. It is forbidden for women to look at men they are not related to by blood or marriage and vice versa.

all 33 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 114 points 3 weeks ago

[-] hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone 80 points 3 weeks ago

If a woman existing in public is too 'tempting' for you, then either stay indoors or rip your ears and eyes out.

[-] yesman@lemmy.world 23 points 3 weeks ago

A religious coworker complained about women jogging, I reminded him what Jesus said to do when your eyes cause you to sin.

[-] Kraven_the_Hunter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 3 weeks ago

Well don't leave us hangin'! Did he do it or is he a hypocrite?

[-] hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 3 weeks ago

How did he react to that?

[-] lepinkainen@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago

Or the dangly bits between your legs.

They could investigate Nullo culture 😉

[-] Itdidnttrickledown@lemmy.world 47 points 3 weeks ago

Of course they do. They are trash humans.

[-] RockyC@lemm.ee 39 points 3 weeks ago

All of that war and they are right back to where they were before we invaded.

Your tax dollars at work.

[-] magic_smoke@links.hackliberty.org 26 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

They worked well, do you know how much oil we got, and how many defense contracts where signed? What did you think they where taking your money for? Social programs? That would be communism! 🙃

[-] Canadian_anarchist@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago

Don't forget the copious amounts of opium that were grown, harvested and sold.

[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago

The movie Charlie Wilson's War gives a nice prelude to the 2001 war. The good news is, the fraction of the cost of the war in the 80s that education of the people would have cost was saved...and spent in just days the next time around.

[-] Naich@lemmings.world 10 points 3 weeks ago

Oh no, the democracy bombs didn't work. Maybe next time, eh?

[-] vanontom@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

What if we send them to someone else first, and let them drop The Democracy right on the civilian population? Damn, still not working. Must need smarter, more sophisticated bombs...

[-] HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago

Course its right back - they won.

[-] Fades@lemmy.world -1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

More like Trump handed them a win (and all of their peeps freed). To say they “won” is reductive af

[-] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

Well the USA was never fighting for arabic womens rights....

[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 weeks ago

The number of well-educated men with comfortable lives who are willing to sacrifice themselves are very small. I'm not talking about people like Osama bin Laden, who are happy to send other people to die, I'm talking about the people who are willing to do the actual fighting, killing, and being killed. Some of the best solutions to terrorism are education and financial security.

[-] chellomere@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago

Right, afghans aren't arabs

[-] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

In what way do you say that?

[-] MapleEngineer@lemmy.world 38 points 3 weeks ago

Project 2025?

[-] Gsus4@mander.xyz 23 points 3 weeks ago

Project 1025.

[-] pyre@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

same difference

[-] Gsus4@mander.xyz 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

yeah, project 2025 should be called project 1025 too :/

[-] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 27 points 3 weeks ago

What the fuck is wrong with these people?

[-] theherk@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

Religion

[-] curry@programming.dev 26 points 3 weeks ago

A tragedy for the afghan people. Even more so, since there's a sizeable chunk of their own population supporting them.

[-] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago

Yeah but I bet a ton of that support is on an "or else" basis.

[-] butwhyishischinabook@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago

I wish I could agree with you, but we found out that isn't true the hard way over the last 25 years....

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 20 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

And voices? Damn, that's a whole other level. No casually looking at men is even more edgy yet.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

those Afghani trump trucks are ridiculous.

[-] Fades@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

Fucking pathetic and disgusting.

this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2024

299 points (98.1% liked)

World News

38529 readers

2303 users here now

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.
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.