Sidechat logo
Download TikTok Instagram X
Sidechat icon
Join communities on Sidechat Download
US Politics icon
US Politics 19h
What really grinds my gears is the constant portrayal of the keffiyeh as a symbol of terrorism, like can you imagine if people started calling the kippah a symbol of terrorism??? The backlash would be insane, yet somehow it’s okay the other way around.
comment

8
upvote 6 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 19h

It’s okay somehow because uh uh uh Arabs bad or something

upvote 6 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 15h

For some odd reason yikyak won’t let me reply directly to #2 so I’ll leave it here: the logic you’re using, that actions of some define entire symbols, could just as easily be applied to the kippah to say it represents genocide and apartheid. So yes, it is racist to say the keffiyeh represents terrorism just as it is antisemitic to say the kippah represents genocide

upvote 3 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 15h

They are treated differently because they are different. A keffiyeh isn’t religious garb and in the early 1900s was literally used as a symbol of militancy and into the late 1900s were worn by terrorists mid bombing and hijackings. Kippot on the other hand are religious garb and at no point in history were ever, intentionally or by association, associated with violence, rebellion, or terror.

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #2 15h

To ask the question is purposeful ignorance. You can argue it shouldn’t have the connotation today, but to pretend like the association came out of nowhere and is based on racism is pretty ignorant of its history

upvote 4 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> OP 15h

It’s not the actions of some, it was deliberately used as a symbol. Like how camouflage is associated with the military because they wear it. It’s literally part of designated terrorist organization’s uniforms. It’s still disingenuous to make the comparison to a religious garb that has never functioned as an organizational emblem of a militant group.

upvote 0 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #2 15h

I’m starting to think you are the one who has no idea about the keffiyeh’s origins and uses, it’s been around for centuries it was not some recent development for use exclusively by terrorists. You are either deliberately lying about it or you are so blinded by hate and ignorance you just don’t care

upvote 6 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> OP 15h

Again, I’m not saying it originated that way. But it was co-opted by terrorists for the majority of the 20th century. It is disingenuous to pretend like the association was thrust upon it by racists and to compare it to religious garb. If you wanted to make the argument about the hijab then sure, that’s association with terrorism is completely rooted in racism. But not the keffiyeh. It’s identity was completely co-opted

upvote 0 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> OP 15h

Next they’re going to claim that an agal (the thing that’s mostly known as a Saudi headdress) is terrorist and it’s Definitely Not Because They’re Arabs Trust Me Bro

upvote 2 downvote