Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
A Modesty Proposal
As you’ve probably heard, France is in an uproar about burqinis. Three French mayors have banned them. A brawl reportedly broke out in Corsica last Saturday over women swimming in burqinis.
The word is a portmanteau of “burqa” and bikini,” but it’s is a misnomer, because the garment in question, unlike a burqa, doesn’t cover the face. France banned the burqa and the niqab six years ago. I wrote about that decision here — I was reluctantly in support of the ban. “Reluctant” for obvious reasons:
Let’s be perfectly frank. These bans are outrages against religious freedom and freedom of expression. They stigmatize Muslims. No modern state should be in the business of dictating what women should wear. The security arguments are spurious; there are a million ways to hide a bomb, and one hardly need wear a burqa to do so. It is not necessarily the case that the burqa is imposed upon women against their will; when it is the case, there are already laws on the books against physical coercion.
But in the end, in favor of it:
At its core, the veil is the expression of the belief that female sexuality is so destructive a force that men must at all costs be protected from it; the natural correlate of this belief is that men cannot be held responsible for the desires prompted in them by an unveiled woman, including the impulse to rape her. …
A woman who has been forced to veil is hardly likely to volunteer this information to authorities. Our responsibility to protect these women from coercion is greater than our responsibility to protect the freedom of those who choose to veil. Why? Because this is our culture, and in our culture, we do not veil. We do not veil because we do not believe that God demands this of women or even desires it; nor do we believe that unveiled women are whores, nor do we believe they deserve social censure, harassment, or rape.
I was careless about my nomenclature in that article. By “veiling” I meant using garments that cover the face. We can’t pretend that a garment that makes it impossible to see whether a woman is smiling, afraid, or sad — a garment that erases her face, her identity and uniqueness — is just another fashion choice.
But the argument over the burqini has nothing to do with face covering. According to the ruling, women must wear swimsuits “that respect good morals and secularism.” The ordinance says that “beachwear which ostentatiously displays religious affiliation, when France and places of worship are currently the target of terrorist attacks, is liable to create risks of disrupting public order, which it is necessary to prevent.”
Needless to say, this has prompted international ridicule and outrage. The language of the ruling is weirdly reminiscent of dictates from the Saudi Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice. The British media, especially, is delighted at the opportunity to mock the French:
Nothing says “losing the plot” to me more than demonising what is, let’s face it, a wetsuit. Is full-piece swimwear really more offensive than seeing a middle-aged bum crack? Is it really going to terrorise your Mr Whippy into a total meltdown?
Non, they say, we must ban the burqa. Ban the burkini! Ban the bikini! Oh no, wait, the last one is OK because it’s not related to religion or politics. Apparently. Let’s not forget that back in the 50s, the itsy-bitsy bikini was not so welcome in wider society either: in addition to censure from the Catholic church, it was banned in Spain, Portugal, Australia, Italy and many states across the US. It was even banned from beauty pageants after contestants in the first Miss World scandalously wore the two-piece swimwear.
Politicians talk constantly about integration and inclusion, and then proceed to kick out to the fringes the very women they claim are oppressed and excluded from society.
On Saturday, French courts upheld the ruling, saying the move was legal under French law forbidding people from “invoking their religious beliefs to skirt common rules regulating relations between public authorities and private individuals.” The judge noted that the Cannes ban had been declared “in the context of the state of emergency and recent Islamist attacks, notably in Nice a month ago,” and “The wearing of distinctive clothing, other than that usually worn for swimming, can indeed only be interpreted in this context as a straightforward symbol of religiosity.”
Some background: I’ve never been to Cannes, but from what I understand, the influx of Saudi tourists has in recent years been a sore spot:
Tensions have been high in the French Riviera ever since it emerged that a Saudi king has been allowed to commandeer a public beach all for himself.
King Salman is expected to arrive in the Riviera on Saturday, where he and his family will stay at his plush villa which stands just metres from the Mirandole beach in Vallauris.
Local beachgoers from nearby Cannes and Antibes, however, have been protesting against the fact they will be barred from the beach for the entire duration of the family’s stay.
Saudi royals further inflamed relations with local hosts when they were given the green light to build an elevator down to the sand to make it easier for them to access the beach from their villa.
A regional councilor took the matter a step further and launched a petition against the privatization of the beach, gaining over 50,000 signatures of support, reported the BFM TV channel.
Locals are infuriated by this, but business-owners need the money. “Clearly this is good news,” said Michel Chevillon, president of an association representing hotel managers in Cannes.
“These are people with great purchasing power which will pep up not only the luxury hotel industry but also the retail and tourism sectors of the town,” he told the AFP news agency.
Anyway, France is clearly determined to say, “This is France. We don’t wear garbage bags to the beach in France.”
But I think there’s a way to make this point that isn’t needlessly mean to women who’d prefer to dress modestly at the beach. Ban black burqinis.
How does that solve anything?
Well, just look. A beach full of women dressed head to toe in black would be depressing, joyless, and un-French. Sights like the one to the right are calculated to inflame anti-Muslim sentiment. The mayor isn’t wrong to say that an insistence upon dressing like this is a provocation. Cannes is known, after all, for its film festival, its glamour, and the young Brigitte Bardot in a revealing bikini.
That said, not everyone beautifies a beach by wearing a bikini. Everyone could probably agree about that. A beach that allowed women to dress in bright, cheerful, modest wetsuits shouldn’t offend anyone but the profoundly bigoted. The difference between the black burqini and colored ones is the difference between funereal joylessness and “a pretty good fashion choice for women with cellulite.”
But French mayors want to prove that they’re tough on terrorism, so they’re going to plump for meaningless gestures like burqini-banning. And Islamists want to prove that France is at war with Islam, so they’re going to plump for maximal outrage about it. It’s a problem that could actually be solved by goodwill and common sense, but neither seem to be available in abundance.
Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community
of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.
Most Muslim clerics are fine with western swimwear in their countries. It makes it easier for the suicide bombers and snipers to pick out the infidels.
As for why Muslims who hate western values want to move here, that’s simple. Watch film from Normandy in June of 1944. It’s hard to invade carrying all that weaponry. Better to be invited in first. Then you rent the U-haul. (85 died and over 300 were hospitalized in the Nice truck attack. That ratio is totally acceptable to any military commander.)
Outstanding.
Good point.
If they pass a law requiring me to wear a Speedo, that’s it. Total boycott of France.
I think to get sufficient market share it would need to be a web store but from my experience women don’t like buying clothes without trying them on.
I beautify the beach by hanging out in the hotel bar, running up a tab, and sassing the bar maids, whom I tip generously.
You’re welcome.
(If your fly-blown country doesn’t have hotel bars, try to catch up.)
I like it. It makes me wonder that the reaction would be from the Muslim community in France? It puts the onus back on the pro-burkini caucus to come up with a raison why a colorful burkini is haram. (you know there will be those who will claim it’s immodest).
This reminds me of the evolution of the veil; I see pictures from the 60’s and 70’s of women in Egypt, Lebanon, and Syria wearing beautiful, sheer, colorful veils loosely around their hair. Now all the women wear the black garbage bag tightly around their face. Why, exactly? Is it really modesty, or is it an intentional, defiant statement (by the women or their ‘handlers’) equivalent to a woman wearing a thong in Mecca?
And you want to argue how to stuff a wild burqini?
I guess who cares what they wear as long as the lifeguards can save them in an emergency. Or not
Obviously, they would prefer “western” swim attire. Western women are under no compulsion either way, and naturally choose what is more comfortable and attractive. You try to get in the ocean fully covered and let us know :)
Then I guess I’m some kind of secret Muslim, because I’d wear a burkini (at least without the head piece) long before I’d be caught in a bikini.
Islam is how old? I don’t really care. Old enough. This is religious zealotry fashion, nothing more.
Catholics relax their rules, Muslims tighten them. Whatever.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/48901/how-veil-conquered-cairo-university-jamie-glazov
Well, remember the selection effect here – many Western women who aren’t comfortable in skimpy swimwear choose not swimming in public at all.
Why? What about a one piece swimsuit? At any rate, the key point is to have a choice.
Because I’m of good German peasant extraction, covered in coarse dark hair that can be seen under my skin even just after a shave and that is prone to ingrown hairs, particularly in the bikini region. Thanks to ten years of birth control hormones, I have mammaries far heavier than my ligaments can support, so I need control that simply can’t be found in a suit under $100. And thanks to having a sit down job, even if I have a suit that covers the stretch marks, it will still reveal that I have love handles and a paunch. This is why even though I have a swimming pool I can use at any hour of the day in my adjustment complex, I haven’t used it in three years.
You can see why I might not find it “obvious” that the only reason a woman would not want to wear a Western swimsuit is because of Muslim brainwashing or threats.
Great title, Claire haha! I honeymooned on the French Riviera, and I was the only one who kept my bikini top on. How do they handle that aspect? Are they supposed to avert their eyes from all the boobs? Because let me tell ya that whole thing is a sea of boobs. I don’t know what the answer is, but I do get it that these burqinis seem like an in-your-face “We’re here, we’re from the Amir, get used to it” thing. If you ask me, the French and all the other fatuous, feckless open-border countries shoulda thought ahead a little more. What a mess. A mess of their own making though.
Are there any reliable stats that tell at what rate Muslim women, when given the chance, no longer wear the Burqa or hijab? For instance, a comparison of the percentage of Muslim women who wear them in countries where it’s required (or severely socially pressured) vs countries where it is not required.
It might be interesting to see that, in furtherance of knowing how much of this is voluntary and how much is coerced.
I have a feeling a woman who’d never lived any other way would have great difficulty wearing a bikini. I’m sure it would feel very very strange and would even be traumatizing.
What percentage of people who don’t want to wear a bikini for the reasons you mention see the burkini as a solution? I don’t know but my guess is a low percentage.
[Pictured below: three French Muslims]
Relatedly, about a third of the victims of the Nice attack were Muslims.
The problem, Tommy, is that it makes no difference.
I live in the heart of Amish country. Nobody makes these people party like it’s 1857. And when the young are thrown out among the “English” to get it out of their system, the vast majority return to their enclaves.
The difference, of course, is that they want to left alone and have no desire to force you and I to live their lifestyle or pay their dhimmitude.
It’s a form of Stockholm syndrome. And they’re very open about it. Evangelicals often use the phrase, “Letting go, letting God.” Submitting (and that’s the literal translation of the word “Islam”) is comforting in its own way. You find comfort in making your own decisions in life and they find comfort in not having to.
I agree, a low percentage. People want to fit in. It’s why women who don’t like themselves in a bikini would rather stay home than wear a one-piece with a skirt. And plenty of women who look just fine and do wear bikinis find fault with their bodies and feel self-conscious in them and wish they didn’t have to wear them.
Well, given that most women don’t know about burkinis, don’t know where to buy one even if they knew about them, and probably don’t want to have to deal with the cultural baggage of wearing something called a burkini, it’s not terribly surprising they aren’t popular. That’s not the same thing as saying that Western and Muslim women don’t have similar concerns about wearing skimpy Western suits.
There is always amazon, if you are in the market for the best in Islamic complient swimwear.
I don’t look particularly good in a bathing suit, but hey I don’t care, it’s hot and i’m going swimming. A burqini is not a solution as, in my opinion, too much drapy fabric when swimming isn’t safe, but There are plenty of figure flattering suits that don’t break the bank.
Give Tom the credit for that.
France doesn’t and never has had open borders, except with the Schengen Zone. The borders between France and any Muslim-majority country aren’t and never have been open.
I fail to understand this mindset, which you share with Claire, that it’s somehow made “better” that there are Muslim victims, too. It’s not better.
Nationality is irrelevant to this type of barbarism. How many Germans did the Nazis kill? How many Russians died under the Soviets? How many Chinese are murdered by the ChiComs? The fight is against the totalitarian ideology.
OK, you live in a hellhole? Fine. Stay and fight or move. But if you move don’t bring your dysfunction with you.
Then I’ll help: the problem is within Islam but not coextensive with Islam.
Agreed. And my point is that Muslims are among the us who are being murdered, as well as the them who are doing the murdering (though, obviously, not in similar proportions). The totalitarian ideology here is not Islam itself, but a significant and core sub-group within it.
Agreed, and I’l go further and say (as I have before) that Western nations should be under no obligation to accept immigrant populations they deem unnecessarily risky. Again though, did Officer Merabet bring his dysfunction with him? Did the French Muslim victims in Nice?
My muslim friend wears mid-calf biking/yoga pants and a gym shirt around the pool when unrelated men are not around. While some may not be comfortable going full-west, I think it is safe to say they would opt for something a bit less cumbersome given the freedom to do so. I currently wear a gym shirt and bikini bottom to the pool. Its just easier and my boobs don’t pop out the top when swimming laps.
Sooo, Western women suffer from cultural oppression in the same way Muslim women suffer from religious oppression? You didn’t say that but it’s getting uncomfortably close.
Didn’t we just have a post a while back about women burning their buqua or hijab or whatever after ISIS was expelled from their town. That seems kind of telling.
No, but at its core is the same argument that’s been made again and again. It’s the Good German. “I was a good German. I wasn’t a Nazi.”
Well, guess what, Fritz? You had your chance in 1933 and f’ed it all up.
And millions fled. But the Nazis stayed home and served the Führer. They were too damn stupid to play the long game and send thousands of saboteurs in country to Britain and America.
Here, when the good Muslim flees he takes the stealth agents with him. When you demand the immigration be slowed down you’re calls a racist and an Islamophobe. And because they are rewarded with short term gain, the “good Muslim” embraces that, too.