We shouldn't police women's clothing.

Ban anyone for coercing someone into or out of clothing.

Granted, I haven’t put a major amount of thought into the nuance, but the idea of making it a sin for some people to legally go outside is absurd.

The approach of these laws makes it so the victims of mistreatment are the ones breaking the law.

It’s like making it illegal to be homeless or illegal to have been mugged. It’s fucking outlandish.

We shouldn’t ban clothing. We should ban the coercion of anyone to wear particular clothing.

There’s no contradiction here.

I think a lot of the reddit type atheists are so far removed from religion in general they only view religious people as a cartoonishly idealized strawman that has no thoughts other than what their book says and their preacher teaches, who every second of every day is thinking only about god and how to be more godly and who believes the simplest interpretation of their religion. I have encountered it quite a few times as well since my username "outs" me as christian.

It's that plus for muslims the sheer racism that makes for a particularly potent mixture of arrogance and ignorance resulting in this weird "white savior thats sneering at their lessers" postings

it's perfectly fine to judge the members of a group that follows a set of texts by what those texts say

Yes you're absolutely right, anyone of any gender should be able to wear or not wear what they want.

My point was more philosophical. It is indeed random and pointless, but I find it interesting to think of things like this. You may not find this interesting or read something misogynist into this, which was definitely far from what I meant so I'm sorry for offending you.

They are not deciding for themselves. That’s the point. Although banning is also not the solution either, I agree.

Yet you don't wear 16th century Shakespearean clothes to work because you don't live in 16th century England

Is the western man being oppressed when he has to wear a tie and suit to the office in order to keep his job?

Suits are expensive and unnecessary. Some people (i.e. autistic) might have sensory difficulties when they wear them. If someone is vegan, most suits aren't so it further restricts what they can wear and they have to worry more about differences in look due to the stricter dress code. Fortunately, being restricted only while working certain jobs isn't as bad as being restricted in all public spaces.

Do we free him from this oppression by ostracizing him or making it illegal for wearing a tie?

No

You know, this is a fair point, but there's a few differences.

Not all jobs require a suit, there's a lot of choice (you could get through life never wearing one). Its also only required during working hours. Not around the clock. Women have been killed over these expectations. Its not the same.

Perhaps because the other dress code constraints are for more universally accepted reasons while the question of things like the hijab/niqab are tied to an inherent contradiction within one of the standard political camps, disrupting the placement of the (un)acceptability line. Wearing a uniform is a sign of responsibility. (If you wear the fuel station attendednts' uniform, you are responsible for the fuel station, etc.) Wearing a minimum quality of clothing is related to the service provided. (Showing up to a black tie restaurant in board shorts and flip flops 'lowers the tone' of the restaurant, which is often more the product being sold than the actual food. In that kind of restaurant, you are paying more for the exclusivity of the space than the chef's produce.) However, Muslim women's headjoys are more fraught because they simultaneously occupy two symbolic spaces, one as a symbol of Islam itself, which is coded as evil by one broad sector of politics and, because of that, something to be protected by the opposition, but the other as a symbol of Muslim patriarchy, which has the exact opposite coding by the standard broad political binary. Resolving the hypocrisy would require abandoning one set of symbols or the other and taking a position currently held by the opposition. Most people aren't willing to do that.

Conservatives don't need their consent manufactured to go bomb people. This is for liberals. This is to make them believe that they need to save people by bombing them.