As is well known, many French cities and towns, and even local swimming pools, have banned the “burkini,” the islamically correct bathing garb that covers a woman, leaving only her face, hands, and feet exposed.
Many French people regard this swimsuit as a symbol of political Islam and incompatible with secularism.
The story is here.
The Jean Bron swimming pool is among many in France that ban burkinis.
“Operation burkini” was launched last month by members of the group Citizen Alliance of Grenoble to defend what they say is the right of Muslim women.
After changing into burkinis, the Muslim members of the group were told by lifeguards that their swimsuits were not allowed.
Despite this, they entered the pool and bathed for about an hour with members of the community, many of whom cheered and applauded them for doing so.
The women were later questioned by police and each fined €35 ($40; £30) for breaching the rules, news outlet France Bleu reported (in French).
Speaking to the BBC, two of the Muslim women involved in the protest, Hassiba and Latifa, said they should have the same rights as other citizens.
“We have a dream: to have fun in public swimming pools like all other citizens, to accompany our children whenever they want to have a swim while it is very hot in the summer here in Grenoble.
“We must fight against discriminatory policies and prejudice in France, as we are actually deprived of our civil rights of access to public services and city-owned infrastructures.”
In a Facebook post, the Citizen Alliance said the move was part of a campaign that began in May 2018 with a petition signed by more than 600 Muslim women urging the Grenoble Mayor Éric Piolle to reform the rules governing public swimming pools.
Responding to events on Sunday, a member of France’s centre-right party The Republicans, Matthieu Chamussy said: “Political Islam is moving forward step by step and the cause of women receding.”
Burkinis, a mix of the words “burka” and “bikini”, are marketed to Muslim women as a way for them to swim in public while adhering to modesty edicts.
But the Burkina remains controversial in France, where authorities in several French towns have proposed banning the garment altogether [and they have done so].
Is the burkini a symbol of a Muslim woman’s right to choose, that local regulators in France, by banning it, impermissibly infringe upon? That is what the women who took part in this defiant act want us all to think. But without men to pressure them to wear the burkini, how many would freely chose to do so? If modesty is the issue, is not the old-fashioned one-piece bathing suit still available and modest enough? When one wears the “burkini,” does this not put others inexorably in mind of the burka, the niqab, the chador, all variants on the extreme cover that is imposed on women in such strict Muslim countries as Afghanistan (burka), Saudi Arabia (niqab), and Iran (chador)? Have these Muslim women, in their eagerness to wear the burkini, not simply internalized a certain unflattering view of Muslim men? Cover is meant to prevent Muslim women from being too alluring to men, who need to be helped to control their sexual passion. It is a view of men as crude animals, while the French male Unbelievers, seem able to control themselves without the need for women to wear such cover as the burkini to control the natural desires of the men. Is it possible that the male Unbelievers are in this respect superior to Muslims? But surely that cannot be; the Qur’an tells Muslims they are the “best of peoples” (3:110) while Unbelievers are the “most vile of created beings.”(98:6) Perhaps Muslim women should put Muslim men to the test, to see what self-control they can exercise, by wearing a regular bathing suit (albeit one-piece), instead of a burkini. Will Muslim men be able to master their own supposedly unbridled lust, in the same way that non-Muslim men manage to do?
A local mayor who bans the burkini can turn the tables on Muslims: “The wearing of the burkini is based on a view of Muslim males that I find disheartening. That view suggests that Muslim women must be covered up, as much as possible, to avoid arousing men. I allow myself to believe that Muslim men are fully as capable of self-control as non-Muslim men, and the wearing of the burkini is therefore not really necessary. But Muslim men are behind the felt need of some Muslim women to wear the the niqab, the burka, the chador and, for swimming, the burkini; the women claim no one is forcing them, but they feel the intense pressure from men to dress “modestly,” and when they wear the burkini, they are offering mute testimony to the animalistic urges of their menfolk, which the burkini is supposed to curb. I do not think Muslim men are any less capable of self-control than are non-Muslim men, and it is in that spirit of equality that I have chosen to ban the burkini.”
Furthermore, the women wearing the burkini are choosing to promote Muslim values by defying the laws of local French authorities. They are choosing the rules of Islam over the rules of the French laic state. This is intolerable. The fines imposed on wearers of the burkini — $40 dollars apiece — were derisory, and ought to be increased tenfold to make an impression. If defiance of the law banning the burkini, however inconsequential that defiance might seem, were to be permitted, it would inevitably lead to more challenges by Muslims to French secularism. There is a war now on in France, between those trying to maintain the validity and authority of the French laic state, and Muslims who are intent on defying that secular state, by imposing step by step their own values and, if they are successful, proceeding to the next challenge to French authority.
Such challenges might take any number of forms. French Muslims could insist on same-sex swimming hours, claiming that allowing men and women to freely mix in pools violates their religious values. They could demand separate seating for men and women in sports stadia. Or they might challenge the Ministry of Education’s nationwide curriculum, claiming that there is too much, or not enough, or not the right kind of, attention paid to certain subjects. One can imagine the complaints of Muslims in France about what is taught: the history of Christianity is dwelt on in schools at too great length; the evils of the Crusades are grossly understated; the deism and skepticism of the Enlightenment are dangerous subjects for impressionable young Muslims, for they suggest that religions can be questioned; French colonialism is taught as if it were not an irredeemable evil; the Holocaust is given far too much attention, and unfairly arouses sympathy for Jews. In school biology classes, Muslims could insist that evolution — which they describe as a ‘theory” that they do not accept — should not be taught. In all of these cases, there is a challenge to the state’s authority. It is not clear what would be the result if Muslim parents, en masse, simply kept their children home from school, until their demands for curriculum changes were met. What about demands that Muslim pupils be excused from class three times a day to say their prayers? Those who would defy the burkini ban are looking for ways to challenge the authority of the French state; the burkini is not a cause but an excuse; if they win on this, Muslim appetites for further defiance of the French will not be sated, but whetted. That is why the burkini ban matters: it is a test of wills that the French cannot afford to lose.
Where it has been adopted, the burkini ban must be imposed with the full force of the law. That means fines that inflict real pain ($400 not $40), or other punishments, possibly preventing repeat offenders from using any municipal pool, no matter what bathing costume they finally agree to wear. If Muslims get away with violating the burkini ban in Grenoble, then the test of wills between Muslims and the secular French state will only move to other cities, in Marseille, Lille, Dijon, Toulouse, Paris, and then to other matters, such as what’s in and what’s out of the school curriculum. It’s not a battle the French can afford to lose.
Buraq says
Just apply the ‘eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth’ principle. Would women wearing bikinis be allowed bathe in public swimming pools (if they had them) in Muslim majority countries? No? Then burkinis are banned in secular countries until they can!
What’s sauce for the goose, ………. etc..
jarmanray says
Buraq,
I would go to the next level. Governments of Judo/Christian/Secular nations should ban any place of worship for Muslims, whether a mosque or even a meeting house, until Muslim countries permit open Christian, Jewish, Buddhist and other religions to build churches, temples and cathedrals in their nations. It can be summed up in one word, reciprocity.
To conclude your thought…is good for the gander.
Brian hoff says
Only Saudic Arabic ban non muslim place of workship for over 1400 years. Other muslim nation do allow other religious building. Afew ago the women complain about than muslim man who wear very tight low cut pant in the last line in front of window of the woman prayer room.. The men found who he was than since he was newly convert they just talk to him about the dress code. No problen since then. About two year ago we have than new marry couple convert to Islam. The second firday she wore than very short sleeve tunic down to her knee with than near skin color body stocking it met the dress code. So I ask some sister to talk to her bout her outfit whict they did. The women did try to talk that man about how he wasnot dress correctly to avoid haveing than screen inpublic he didnot want to listern to the women.
Angemon says
“Other muslim nation do allow other religious building. ”
On paper? Perhaps. In practice, it’s a different story…
FYI says
“the woman prayer room”
Yes ,it is important in islam that the muslima knows her place especially during menses.
After all,the reason a woman’s testimony in islam{mandated by the unholy koran}is HALF that of a man k2:282 is because “of the DEFICIENCY OF A WOMAN’S MIND” according to muhammed{
{who laughably was killed by a Jewish woman who cunningly applied the poison test which he failed thus revealing himself to be a FRAUD,which he admitted to anyway al tabari 6;111:she didn’t have a deficiency of the mind did she?She outsmarted muhammed.Mighty mo the great warrior defeated by a female…}
Ouch!
And all that virtue-signalling false piety and hijab wearing by the muslimas in honor of Al LAH,a pagan Arab god who despises women and sends them to hell anyway for being TAKFURNA{“ungrateful”}Sahih Muslim 241
You see?All that hijab wearing for nothing.
Such islamic modesty!
On behalf of a god who PERMITS THE RAPE OF WOMEN{ABU DAWUD vol 2 #2155},child brides and polygamy and a”prophet” who raped 9 year old Aisha.
Such islamic modesty!
the holiest people in the world k3:110,a religion whose members even allah himself says are HYPOCRITES
k4:142
{BTW according to this teaching muslims should not be clogging up the streets with their “prayer” sessions as they are doing it to be “seen by others”,something allah actually condemns.But of course muslims don’t know their own koran}
islam and logic;separated at birth
Battle says
Buraq hits nail on head. Good.
CRUSADER says
We can extend Western laws to correspondingly reflect
what other nations under different systems do, but that
might seem a bit ….extraterritorial to do so, perhaps?
Philosophically it makes sense. Legally, maybe it does or not.
What is known is this:
Among the Moslem population, it is the women’s duty to cover up
so that the men do not feel tempted. In a public setting, there would
be great temptation. The men can’t handle it, so those women who
are in the know about this characteristic are to take it upon themselves
to dress accordingly. It isn’t so different from a hundred years ago in
most of the Western countries, when “modesty” was prized and socially
enforced. There were exceptions such as (ironically) parts of France
where the bikini became widely worn; and also (ironically) in Sweden
where clothes were often discarded among sun-bathers — in the 1950s…
Two countries now which are having some of the most problems with
Muslims….
When it comes to covering up, sometimes I wonder what the difference
is — particularly at an outdoor beach or lake — when women want to be
in a wetsuit for swimming or diving, and they also want to keep their skin
from burning or from getting chilled in the water or they are just really modest….
Compare
and
Contrast that with — this burkini thang….
CRUSADER says
Another symbol gets “reconsidered”:
— So typical of the Leftist playbook of denigration and disruption
in order to cause mayhem and doubt, and then (joining with Jihad)
causing resources to become overwhelmed so changes occur or
restructuring is enforced into an endless downward cycle —
=============================================
Authorities in Colorado restored an American flag to its place Friday evening after protesters demonstrating outside a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility pulled down the star-spangled banner and flew the flag of Mexico in its place.
The protesters also removed a “Blue Lives Matter” flag, honoring law enforcement, spray-painted it with the words “Abolish ICE,” then raised the flag upside-down, on a pole next to the Mexican flag, according to local media.
Hundreds of protesters had gathered in Aurora, Colo., outside the federal facility that holds illegal immigrants, to protest ICE raids scheduled to begin across the U.S.A.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/colorado-protestors-rip-down-american-flag-at-ice-facility-raise-mexico-flag-vandalize-blue-lives-matter-flag
Myron J. Poltroonian says
Regarding the Colorado Incident, one patriot with a sharp belt knife in their hand (and a .45 inside their waistband) could’ve taken care of the situation in a few minutes.
CRUSADER says
Pen/Knife
would do in a fight….
Battle says
Citizen Alliance of Grenoble is not defending Islam women’s rights because Islam women have no right to choice. CAG is defending the one-way right of Islam men to tyranically dictate no choice to the Islam women.
The French are not victimizing the Islam women. The Islam men are victimizing the Islam women.
Battle says
CRUSADER hits nail on head. Good.
CRUSADER says
Battle, thank you, regarding my 10:48 posting.
You might also want to read what I wrote above, however,
at the 10:59 posting….
Rarely says
Much ado about nothing. Who cares what they wear if it poses no danger or health risk? When a muslim gets a ticket for purposely parking illegally do we really believe that this will lead to a demand for change in school curriculum? There is certainly a necessity to draw a line but this surely isn’t it.
CRUSADER says
Rarely, is this parking outlaw a Muslima? If so, how did she get the right to drive?
This discussion has to do with whether the enforced customs of Islam are correctly
applied in Western nations where civil / human rights are more liberally appreciated
and codified….
Muslima school girls pressed into garbs which cry “oppression” are a schooling issue.
Just as supposedly liberated American school boys freely choosing to wear MAGA hats
at schools is also about personal liberty and a schooling issue…
Paul J says
Much ado about nothing? One thousand small insignificant cuts soon adds up to one massive haemorrhage. Read the article again, it details what incremental erosion of civic law is. How many little cuts before the bikini itself is banned? All women have to cover up? Just to appease muslim sensibilities.
Westman says
“Those who would defy the burkini ban are looking for ways to challenge the authority of the French state; the burkini is not a cause but an excuse; if they win on this, Muslim appetites for further defiance of the French will not be sated, but whetted. That is why the burkini ban matters: it is a test of wills that the French cannot afford to lose.”
This is exactly the crux of the matter. Like a petulant child, Islam refuses to recognize non-Shariah law if it cannot be correlated to the Quran or Hadith. The dogma is: Allah allows no one to share his lawmaking powers, including unbelieving lawmakers. Allah has no one beside him, and no son(Jesus).
It is so completely obvious that French Law will increasingly be ignored by a growing parallel Muslim society until it breaks down. Policing and public functioning depends upon a very high majority of citizens, perhaps 98%, being respectful and law-abiding. Respect for the law will also degrade among the non-Muslim population if Muslims are allowed to flout it. France is facing a crisis in which civil society may be lost.
If police are already saying they want to quit because PC toward Islam has made their job impossible – what does the future hold for France and the EU?
gravenimage says
+1
Brian hoff says
In the 1920 s america ban the drinking of allchol which alot of people broke the law.
gravenimage says
“Brian hoff”–really, “DefenderofIslam”–wants to see forced veiling, FGM, child marriage, the institutionalized persecution of unbelievers, the stoning of women–that’s a lot of ugly lawbreaking.
And odd that “DefenderofIslam” would mention prohibition, since he wants to see flogging for taking a sip of alcohol.
Brian hoff says
This the first time america broke the law on than large scale as they want to drink alcohol. The rest of you bring up with you islamoprobic want to cause touble in society like Tony Robertson’s in the UK.
Angemon says
Speaking of prohibition, do you drink before posting?
Angemon says
“In the 1920 s america ban the drinking of allchol which alot of people broke the law.”
And how, exactly, is that relevant?
Angemon says
“That is why the burkini ban matters: it is a test of wills that the French cannot afford to lose.”
indeed.
PRCS says
So many labor under the FALSE notion that hijab is just a ‘headscarf’.
If hijab really were just that (it’s not), Muslim women would be able to swim in a bikini–and a headscarf.
That they insist on the burkini makes clear that hijab is NOT just a headscarf.
See this informative article for further info:
As Muslim women, we actually ask you not to wear the hijab in the name of interfaith solidarity
“We reject this interpretation that the “hijab” is merely a symbol of modesty and dignity adopted by faithful female followers of Islam.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/12/21/as-muslim-women-we-actually-ask-you-not-to-wear-the-hijab-in-the-name-of-interfaith-solidarity/?utm_term=.2ba144e6d579
HugoHackenbush says
Here’s a suggestion, the rejection of which by Muslims would be proof of the intent to dominate. Ok the use of standard wet suits including the the head cover. Coverage is the same as the “burkini” but it is not a religious garment. Let me guess what the response would be: 1. too warm, 2. too expensive, 3. violates the right to choose, etc. ad-nauseum.
Lynn says
Wearing Islamic garb including the hijab and the burkini is not done because Muslim women are modest. The Koran says that women must cover themselves with their outer clothing so that Muslim men can recognize them as Muslims (belonging to a Muslim man) so that the Muslim men will not molest them. Uncovered women (non-Muslims) are available to Muslim men for sex. The Koran tells Muslim men that the women who are available for sex are their wives and women that their right hands possess. Captives of the right hands are infidel women who are taken in war. This gives you an idea that Muslim men in Europe think they are invaders who will take over.
PRCS says
Correcto Mundo!
What so many overlook: Islamic law applies only to Muslims, their dhimmis, their slaves, and ‘filthy unbelievers’ traveling through Muslims lands where Islamic law is THE law of the landand no where else.
Qur’an 33:59
“O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves [part] of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused.
By Muslim men.
That nonsense obviously has no place, here.
gravenimage says
Spot on, Lynn.
Kerry Wade says
Those who support these Muslim women in their public display of Islams abuse should also be fined, better still a 5 year prison sentence for all of them. They are breaking the law and must therefore suffer the consequences.
gravenimage says
Does France’s Burkini Ban Matter?
……………..
Yes, it matters–but is only a small part of the resistance to Islam.
jewdog says
The real problem is France’s lax immigration system which has resulted in a Muslim minority that is very difficult to assimilate. I’m not sure that this issue is the right one to pick a fight over. I worry that it will only stir up sympathy for Muslims as victims of alleged racism, and it probably reinforces the Muslims’ sense of righteous anger over their sartorial martyrdom.
Go ahead and let them wear it so that the other bathers can see the consequences of their government’s policy, and ruminate on what it signifies.
Lotus says
Regarding teaching Islam in schools: it’s already happening in Britain, in so-called ‘faith schools’.
At the taxpayers’ expense, these schools offer a mix of the national educational curriculum (80% of school time) with Islamic subjects (20% of school time).
The (Muslim) author of the following 2014 study rather disingenuously says that these Muslim faith schools are teaching ‘tolerance and respect’. It’s hard to see where that comes in, because the schools are more like little hothouses for Islamic ideas, an ‘Islamic ethos’ no less.
Oh, and in the science class the pupils get the latest in the Quran’s erroneous embryo teaching, and are also exposed to creationist ideas. As the study’s author blandly puts it:
‘I also came across cases where differences exist between Islamic and national curriculum perspectives, for example evolution and creationism. Teachers taught such topics by discussing the contrasting perspectives and expected students to reflect on both.’
Oh, so that’s all right then…
Here’s the link to the study.
https://theconversation.com/how-muslim-faith-schools-are-teaching-tolerance-and-respect-through-islamicised-curriculum-32239
Walter Sieruk says
To explain the obvious, changing the clothing of a woman doesn’t change her beliefs.
Nevertheless , it’s still a good idea of the French not to “cave in” to Muslim pressure and not have a policy of appeasement to the Muslim mob as is done of some other countries.