By The mayor of Cannes in France has banned women from wearing swimsuits that cover too much skin on local public beaches. Targeted specifically are the burkinis, a play on “burqa” and “bikini,” a hijab-friendly wetsuit that is commonly worn in the water by Muslim women who observe the headscarf.
This comes soon after an attack that killed French celebrators on Bastille Day in Nice and nearby its site, on the tourist-friendly French Riviera near the Mediterranean coastline.
Good custom would suggest a tolerance of religion and secularism would allow all people of faith to peacefully express their religion without fear of penalty, rather than allowing religious prejudice taint political discourse.
“If a woman goes swimming in a burkini, that could draw a crowd and disrupt public order,” David Lisnard, the mayor of Cannes, told a French newspaper. “It is precisely to protect these women that I took this decision. The burkini is the uniform of extremist Islamism, not of the Muslim religion.”
However, it seems that the ban has more to do with underlying Islamophobia than it does with public safety. Not only is the burkini unaffiliated with Islamic extremism, but the ordinance also states, “Access to beaches and for swimming is banned to anyone who does not have [bathing apparel] which respects good customs and secularism,” suggesting that Lisnard and his supporters believe wearing the a modest headscarf instead of a pseudo underwear and bra is disrespectful to the country’s moral and secular foundation.
Rather than having the intention to protect the public or the safety of Muslim women — historically, a similar burqa ban in 2010 resulted in an explosion of hate and violent crimes — the legislation means to restrict the exact virtues, secularism and good customs, that it boasts.
Good custom would suggest a tolerance of religion and secularism would allow all people of faith to peacefully express their religion without fear of penalty, rather than allowing religious prejudice taint political discourse.
Muslims are not the criminals — if anything, they bear the brunt of both “Islamist” terrorist attacks and the resulting Islamophobic policies that restrict their rights in the name of liberation.
It is known that France is no stranger to Islamic prejudice and today’s policies are only the tip of an iceberg that is entrenched deep in the Muslim-French divide. The initial expulsion of Muslims from Europe began long before this century, tracing as far back as 732 A.D., when Frankish leader Charles Martel defeated Abdur-rahman and his Umayyad Caliphate in a battle over the Iberian Peninsula, now part of southern France, which was then owned by the Muslims.
Since then, France’s colonization of Algeria and its eager involvement in the Syrian crisis have exacerbated the already fragile relations between the two groups.
Recent “Islamist” attacks, which may be the backlash of France’s increasing ignorant policies and “holier than thou” attitude, have left politicians such as Lisnard unhinged and susceptible to making rash decisions in an attempt to placate its citizens.
What is lost in the process is the awareness that Muslims are not the criminals — if anything, they bear the brunt of both “Islamist” terrorist attacks and the resulting Islamophobic policies that restrict their rights in the name of liberation.
I don’t see how Charles Martel’s victory has anything to do with anti-Islamic prejudice. The Muslim Moors in that case were an invading army. What were the Franks supposed to do? But leaving that aside, it’s pretty galling that a supposedly democratic society like France is now telling Muslim women what they’re allowed to wear—in the name of “women’s liberation,” no less! It’s apparently liberating to be arrested for choosing to wear cultural clothing. It’s apparently freedom to be told what to wear by the government. France’s Minister of Women’s Rights, Laurence Rossignol, asserted that women who choose to wear the burqa are “like negroes who supported slavery.” And yeah, she literally said “negroes.” Listen, I know the writers on this website lean towards feminism, but all of you should be wary of the truly radical feminists. They oppose all religion and they sure as hell don’t respect your right to be a “Muslim Girl.” Most Muslim activists, I merely distrust. Radical feminists, I absolutely loathe.
The problem is not the clothing itself as the comparison with the wetsuit shows. The problem is the reason for wearing a burkini, the ideology behind it. A wetsuit and a burkini are worn for different reasons. It’s like comparing the french flag to the ISIS/Daesh flag and saying that because both are square there’s no difference. Now the burkini is of course not a symbol of Daesh, but it is an expression of a conservative interpretation of Islam. Although women in the west wore similar bathing suits in the victorian era, so I personally don’t understand the overreaction. The burqa/niqab is a different matter. There’s no doubt that those two represent an interpretation of Islam that is not just very conservative, but extreme.
Are you suggesting the Battle of Tours arose from “French prejudice”? That’s ridiculous.
Furthermore, you seem to be implying Islamist attacks in France are not Islamist at all and that it doesn’t matter anyway because the French were acting all uppity-like with their own domestic policies so they had it coming.
As a german muslim of Arab heritage, i really think it is strange to call the Battle of Tours the “expulsion of muslims from Europa, its like calling salah al Din the “explusion of the french people from Palestine”.
If you’re going to use my graphic, it would be nice to give me credit: https://twitter.com/shahed/status/765172804740386816