The latest Jesus and Mo strip, called “looks,” came with a message: “It’s World Hijab Day on Sunday! Fortunately, it’s also No Hijab Day, so it balances out.”
And (a recurring theme): Mo himself shows precisely the phenomenon he criticizes.
Here are the guidelines for World No Hijab Day from the Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain:
How to take part in No Hijab Day:
- We are calling on women of all beliefs and backgrounds to take off their hijab, and put it on a man on February 1.
- Use this opportunity to spark meaningful conversations about purity culture in Islam, challenge sex-apartheid, and show your solidarity with ex-Muslim, Iranian, Afghan, and other women around the world who refuse to wear the hijab.
- Share your thoughts, experiences, and support using #NoHijabDay and #HijabSilences
- Let your voice inspire real change for women’s rights.
But I don’t want to wear a hijab!
Note that you can support the strip for as little as $1 per month. Also, see the funny FAQ about the strip.
So…. does a balaclava count?
‘Cause I’ll definitely be wearing at least one!
🥶
Muhammad, you are a bigger liar than J.D. Vance. Here’s the truth: you don’t want women to wear hijabs so that they can concentrate on developing their intellects, because you don’t believe women have any intellects to develop in the first place.
I asked AI to tell me what Muslim clerics say that YOU say about women’s intelligence:
You say women are morally inferior to men, too:
Of relevance to today’s Shermer/Free Will post, I’ll point out that the concept of “freedom” invoked here is nothing to do with determinism and whether choices are caused or uncaused.
If we ask, in this context, “Do women in Iran wear hijabs of their own free will?” we’re not asking about whether that “will”, and her choices, are uncaused, we’re asking about the extent to which her choices are coerced by others, against her internal “will”.
These are utterly different, though confusingly the same terminology is used for both. Discussions of “free will” would thus be clarified if we dropped the ambiguous term “free will” and replaced it with the two terms:
1) “Uncaused choosing”, for the libertarian free will concept.
2) “Uncoerced choosing”, for the concept of “freedom” that is fully compatible with determinism.
This is more or less what I said to you yesterday, ie gun to the head sense of free will. Women in Iran have a metaphoric gun to the head or increasingly often a real one. I think most sensible people will recognize this difference in the use of the phrase ‘free will’.
gun to the head is a pragmatic use. The hard determinist (incompatibilist) use is philosophical. I try not to conflate pragmatic and philosophic discussions.
“There are those who think that life has nothing left to chance
A host of holy horrors to direct our aimless dance
A planet of playthings, we dance on the strings of powers we cannot perceive
The stars aren’t aligned or the Gods are malign, blame is better to give than receive
You can choose a ready guide in some celestial voice
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice
You can choose from phantom fears and kindness that can kill
I will choose a path that’s clear, I will choose Freewill”
– Rush, Freewill (song)
Thanks for the link to the FAQ. That was hilarious. I liked today’s strip as well.
Hilarious, as usual. This is a site well worth supporting.