Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    Given this is for 1 beach (possibly 2 now) in the whole of France and it is a local decision I can see no issue with this

    All the mayor wants is people to do is dress appropriately for the beach and show some consideration towards the people who live there given they have just suffered a massive attack by another muslin.

    Is this wrong of them? is showing them consideration too much to ask?
    Muslims have been killed in those attacks too. Isn't this disrespectful to them? Or are you saying all Muslims share the blame, despite being the victims of these attacks too.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Ban Christian nuns from going to the beach, clearly they think that women who don't dress like them are "impure" and anyway, they're wearing clothing dictated to them by a religious book that is misogynistic. This will surely free them, once they realise that they have no choice but to remove their religious garb. So you see, they're being restricted and excluded for their own benefit.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Samosa)
    Muslims have been killed in those attacks too. Isn't this disrespectful to them? Or are you saying all Muslims share the blame, despite being the victims of these attacks too.
    I wouldn't bother trying to reason with someone who despises you and everyone in your religious group (if you look at their post history). Most bigots choose to be the way they are, it's often not because they need guidance.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Samosa)
    Muslims have been killed in those attacks too. Isn't this disrespectful to them? Or are you saying all Muslims share the blame, despite being the victims of these attacks too.
    It's not all about Muslims but yes we know Muslims kill more of each other than anyone else and sadly this has always been the way but you ignore the issues with this argument

    They share an ideology and displaying symbols of this ideology given the circumstance has been deemed to be a little too much at the moment and a little respect is being asked from a tiny number of people.

    Also given the history of France and its dislike of blatant religious symbols this can hardly come as shock.

    But as we say a lot of wadded panties over the actions of 1 mayor for one town in the whole of France.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    It's not all about Muslims but yes we know Muslims kill more of each other than anyone else and sadly this has always been the way but you ignore the issues with this argument

    They share an ideology and displaying symbols of this ideology given the circumstance has been deemed to be a little too much at the moment and a little respect is being asked from a tiny number of people.

    Also given the history of France and its dislike of blatant religious symbols this can hardly come as shock.

    But as we say a lot of wadded panties over the actions of 1 mayor for one town in the whole of France.
    We reject their view on Islam, and i don't see how a group can hijack our religion, wreak havoc, and then the ones who did nothing wrong have to pay the price.

    And the reason people are angry over this, is because this sort of repression of freedom could to other parts of Western Europe. It's not just about one mayor, it's what it could lead to.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WBZ144)
    How else would you interpret telling someone "if you don't like it, go back to Saudi Arabia/go live in a Muslim country". That's pretty much telling someone that they shoudn't be in a country which is supposed to support the right to freedom of expression because they dared to criticise a law or opinion, something that they should be well within their rights to do. The same way people should be able to criticise religious laws, they should also be able to criticise so-called secular laws and it is hypocritical to support one but try to silence those who attempt the other by trying to shame and alienate them with "you don't belong here, anyway".
    There is a difference between saying "you should go there", and "I want to deport you".

    (Original post by WBZ144)
    You really think that burkini designers were thinking of ways of spreading "sectarian beliefs"? Firstly. hijab is nothing new, and it is simply a swimsuit which enables women who wear hijab to go swimming in public places.
    Burkini designers created something that fits regressive beliefs. They perfectly knew what they were doing. Hijabis could have simply worn a swimming cap to hide their hair in order to avoid being assaulted by the beasts men.

    (Original post by WBZ144)
    Secondly, can you see into the minds of every woman who wears a burkini?
    I don't have that power, but I see that every woman wearing a burkini is doing some sort of propaganda -- consciously or not.
    (Original post by WBZ144)
    How do you know that she is wearing it because she thinks she is "pure" and that women who don't wear it are "impure"? The hijab itself was originally used to distinguish free women from slave women, so it represents 6th century Arabian culture rather than what you claim it does. Why a woman chooses to dress like a 6th century Arabian (and if you bothered to ask their opinions you would see that their reasons vary) shouldn't be the business of the State, especially not in a society that claims to promote personal freedoms.
    Well, distinguishing pure women from impure women is pretty much like "distinguishing free women from slave women". It is used to visually separate the good from the bad.

    The state has every right to ban something that threatens social cohesion. That's why people who would really like to dress like in Germany between 1933-45, or the Deep American South after the Civil War, or in their birthday suit, are prevented from doing so. Radical Islam has already caused so many deaths and distress that I accept a reduction of my personal freedom to contain this death cult.
    (Original post by WBZ144)
    And if she did not choose to dress like a 6th century Arabian, but the choice was made for her then how will she benefit from the ban? She would only have more restrictions imposed on her by those claiming to be protecting her.
    What do you suggest for helping these women then?

    (Original post by WBZ144)
    Thirdly, the reason specified for this ban was that these women were showing an affiliation to terrorists, and I already demonstrated why that was nonsense, as did other users here.
    Perhaps these women did not have sympathy for ISIS, but this is not what most people think. They see radical Islam growing, and they want to stop its obvious manifestations.

    (Original post by WBZ144)
    Do you think that Sikh dastars and Jewish kippah's encourage sectarian religious beliefs? Should they be banned too?
    Sikhs and Jews are not proselytic, so my distaste for their religion is less pronounced than for Islam. I do think that they shouldn't display their religion in public, although I don't think I ever saw a Sikh in France and most French Jews don't wear the kippah (and none commits terrorist attacks).

    Btw, the law against religious symbols in school or the public service also applies to them, but you don't see them moaning in the media about the evil government oppressing them and preventing them from practising their religion.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    is showing them consideration too much to ask?
    Stop oppressing Muslims!
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Samosa)
    Muslims have been killed in those attacks too. Isn't this disrespectful to them? Or are you saying all Muslims share the blame, despite being the victims of these attacks too.
    People like to use this argument.Isis kills other muslims so it cant be anything to do with Islam.The thing is Isis doesnt regard those muslims that it kills as real muslims.It thinks it has the correct interpretation of Islam and all others are wrong.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Samosa)
    So it's okay to take away their freedom to wear something harmless?
    Isn't that what we do we with nudism already?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    There is a difference between saying "you should go there", and "I want to deport you".


    Burkini designers created something that fits regressive beliefs. They perfectly knew what they were doing. Hijabis could have simply worn a swimming cap to hide their hair in order to avoid being assaulted by the beasts men.


    I don't have that power, but I see that every woman wearing a burkini is doing some sort of propaganda -- consciously or not.

    Well, distinguishing pure women from impure women is pretty much like "distinguishing free women from slave women". It is used to visually separate the good from the bad.

    The state has every right to ban something that threatens social cohesion. That's why people who would really like to dress like in Germany between 1933-45, or the Deep American South after the Civil War, or in their birthday suit, are prevented from doing so. Radical Islam has already caused so many deaths and distress that I accept a reduction of my personal freedom to contain this death cult.
    What do you suggest for helping these women then?


    Perhaps these women did not have sympathy for ISIS, but this is not what most people think. They see radical Islam growing, and they want to stop its obvious manifestations.


    Sikhs and Jews are not proselytic, so my distaste for their religion is less pronounced than for Islam. I do think that they shouldn't display their religion in public, although I don't think I ever saw a Sikh in France and most French Jews don't wear the kippah (and none commits terrorist attacks).

    Btw, the law against religious symbols in school or the public service also applies to them, but you don't see them moaning in the media about the evil government oppressing them and preventing them from practising their religion.
    A couple of questions for you:
    1) For starters, which of your "personal freedoms" have been reduced?
    2) What "propaganda" do you believe burkini wearers to be promoting and why?

    It is nevertheless an attempt to shame and alienate them for criticising that particular law in order to shut down debate, like calling someone a racist from criticising religious teachings. I would expect better from self-proclaimed supporters of free speech, but I always knew that most of these people where not anything of the sort to begin with.

    I don't agree with the premise for the hijab either, but the same applies to nuns' habits and all of the many other religious veils. That does not mean that I do not support the rights of women to wear them or prejudge them for doing so. Nor do I have a problem with reasonable restrictions on religious freedoms, provided that there is no discrimination, with one religious group being singled out (unlike this burkini ban). And no, it shouldn't have anything to do with your personal animosity towards the religion in comparison with other religions, so that's irrelevant.

    If an Indian mayor decided to ban dastars due to terror attacks that were carried out in his country by extremist Sikhs, I would be just as much against it, because no one deserves to be punished for the actions of another individual. How exactly is dressing like a KKK member or a Nazi relevant, unless you approve of holding all Muslims accountable for the actions of Islamist terrorists? Or punishing them because of the way a portion of the public views them? And how would that not fuel the us vs them mentality that you claim to be against?

    There are many ways to help women who are forced to wear hijab that are far more effective than taking away their ability to go swimming (punishing the victim), but that does not belong in this thread.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WBZ144)
    2) What "propaganda" do you believe burkini wearers to be promoting and why?


    There are many ways to help women who are forced to wear hijab that are far more effective than taking away their ability to go swimming (punishing the victim), but that does not belong in this thread.
    2) the notion that women are inferior to men; they must be subservient. The Quran tells men it is acceptable to beat their wives. Beyond the religion's basic misogyny, the propaganda of the Islamic State, Taliban & other hardcore Islamic groups that discourage women from achieving equal status, a basic education & having even basic freedoms.

    If you dislike the banning of the burkini on the basis that it is not the optimal way of helping people forced to wear it but refuse to provide evidence/ideas then you are not going to change any minds with your superb tactics of persuasion.

    Perhaps we could only allow women to wear a burkini if they are married and their husband dresses in the same outfit //snort.

    But seriously, my ears are open to suggestions... I'm interested in hearing what solutions those who defend Islamic dress can come up with to protect people from being forced to wear it. To me it seems like a difficult situation as most of this is clearly happening behind closed doors with parents and husbands...
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 1010marina)
    2) the notion that women are inferior to men; they must be subservient. The Quran tells men it is acceptable to beat their wives. Beyond the religion's basic misogyny, the propaganda of the Islamic State, Taliban & other hardcore Islamic groups that discourage women from achieving equal status, a basic education & having even basic freedoms.

    If you dislike the banning of the burkini on the basis that it is not the optimal way of helping people forced to wear it but refuse to provide evidence/ideas then you are not going to change any minds with your superb tactics of persuasion.

    Perhaps we could only allow women to wear a burkini if they are married and their husband dresses in the same outfit //snort.

    But seriously, my ears are open to suggestions... I'm interested in hearing what solutions those who defend Islamic dress can come up with to protect people from being forced to wear it. To me it seems like a difficult situation as most of this is clearly happening behind closed doors with parents and husbands...
    I was raised with Islam, I know what it teaches and do not need to be "educated" by a random user on an Internet forum, thank you very much. But regardless of the misogynistic teachings, how is that relevant to dictating to women what religious attire they can or can't wear? The Bible is rife with misogyny, why not ban nuns from wearing habits because covering themselves supposedly shows that they are inferior to men?

    Where did I say that was the reason I was against the ban? I simply discarded the notion that stopping women who were forced to wear hijab from going swimming is somehow going to free them. Do you think that controlling and abusive families are suddenly going to let them take it off because they won't be able to go to the beach otherwise? Rather that's just another freedom that is being taken from them, so don't try to pretend that this was done for the benefit of the women.

    If your curious then start a thread about it. We were discussing the ban on burkinis, not solutions to making women more aware of their rights and empowering them to utilise these rights. Such a discussion requires plenty of depth and detail, and I am not about to stray off topic.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WBZ144)
    I was raised with Islam, I know what it teaches and do not need to be "educated" by a random user on an Internet forum, thank you very much. But regardless of the misogynistic teachings, how is that relevant to dictating to women what religious attire they can or can't wear? The Bible is rife with misogyny, why not ban nuns from wearing habits because covering themselves supposedly shows that they are inferior to men?

    Where did I say that was the reason I was against the ban? I simply discarded the notion that stopping women who were forced to wear hijab from going swimming is somehow going to free them. Do you think that controlling and abusive families are suddenly going to let them take it off because they won't be able to go to the beach otherwise? Rather that's just another freedom that is being taken from them, so don't try to pretend that this was done for the benefit of the women.

    If your curious then start a thread about it. We were discussing the ban on burkinis, not solutions to making women more aware of their rights and empowering them to utilise these rights. Such a discussion requires plenty of depth and detail, and I am not about to stray off topic.
    a) if you don't want information don't ask questions. That's the propaganda you asked for.
    b) I am not Christian. I have not read (most of) the Bible, but from what I gather most Christian women are not nuns. I make no excuses for anything in the Bible, either. Not my text.
    c) I sincerely hope you understand the meaning the word "if" ... So I will just ignore that one lmao
    d) I don't believe the motive behind the ban was to benefit Muslims, I actually think it benefits the (non Muslim) French, if we believe what the mayor says. But my reason for supporting the ban is what we've already talked about; supporting Muslim women by limiting their chances of suffering that kind of abuse and dehumanisation.

    & No, you're talking about how you hate the ban but you're still not providing us with what you'd like to see instead. It is perfectly on topic, you're just making excuses. I have no idea how else we could discourage people from forcing their wives/daughters to cover up and treating them like objects, short of making it more difficult to do so. Believe me, if you come up with a solution I'm happy to hear it. Prove me wrong, I dare you ^^

    Does anybody else have any ideas?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 1010marina)
    a) if you don't want information don't ask questions. That's the propaganda you asked for.
    b) I am not Christian. I have not read (most of) the Bible, but from what I gather most Christian women are not nuns. I make no excuses for anything in the Bible, either. Not my text.
    c) I sincerely hope you understand the meaning the word "if" ... So I will just ignore that one lmao
    d) I don't believe the motive behind the ban was to benefit Muslims, I actually think it benefits the (non Muslim) French, if we believe what the mayor says. But my reason for supporting the ban is what we've already talked about; supporting Muslim women by limiting their chances of suffering that kind of abuse and dehumanisation.

    & No, you're talking about how you hate the ban but you're still not providing us with what you'd like to see instead. It is perfectly on topic, you're just making excuses. I have no idea how else we could discourage people from forcing their wives/daughters to cover up and treating them like objects, short of making it more difficult to do so. Believe me, if you come up with a solution I'm happy to hear it. Prove me wrong, I dare you ^^

    Does anybody else have any ideas?
    I already stated my reasons for being against the ban on this thread many, many times and you are welcome to look back at my posts if you want to know what they are because I do not like to repeat myself. I also did not state that I wanted a substitute solution to banning burkinis, as I couldn't care less if a woman chooses to wear one. For those who only have the choice between wearing one and not going swimming at all, that is a deeper issue of being forced to wear hijab, which you are more than welcome to create a thread on. I'll happily post on it.

    It is very naive to presume that this ban will make it harder for families to force girls to wear hijabs and clearly you don't know these communities like I do. Even if the hijab in its entirety was banned, what would happen is that certain women won't be able to leave the house at all. So life is being made harder for the victim only, not the abuser. That alone proves you wrong, and wasn't at all difficult. Moreover, it's less to do with discouraging people from abusing women in their families than it is to do with encouraging victims to stand up to the abusers and take charge of their lives. Many of these women are unaware of the rights they have and the support they can get.

    I didn't ask whether you defended the Bible and the number of Christian women who cover is irrelevant (just as the fact that quite a number of Muslim women don't cover has no bearing on this discussion). I asked whether it's feasible to ban nuns from wearing habits, as they are also doing so on the orders of a misogynistic god.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Grand High Witch)
    Isn't that what we do we with nudism already?
    Maybe encouraging nudism would be a better solution to this non issue.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I wonder if all those saying they support the right for people to choose how they dress also would you support the right for Muslim women to go topless on this beach?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/...s-North-Africa

    (there are other sources)

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37077837

    RIOT police had to be drafted in after a man was attacked with a harpoon for taking pictures of women in burkinis.


    Once again we are being asked to change our social norms for immigrants because they don't like what we are free to do (in this case take pictures of a beach)

    But I'm glad the residents fought back on this one
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WBZ144)
    I already stated my reasons for being against the ban on this thread many, many times and you are welcome to look back at my posts if you want to know what they are because I do not like to repeat myself. I also did not state that I wanted a substitute solution to banning burkinis, as I couldn't care less if a woman chooses to wear one. For those who only have the choice between wearing one and not going swimming at all, that is a deeper issue of being forced to wear hijab, which you are more than welcome to create a thread on. I'll happily post on it.

    It is very naive to presume that this ban will make it harder for families to force girls to wear hijabs and clearly you don't know these communities like I do. Even if the hijab in its entirety was banned, what would happen is that certain women won't be able to leave the house at all. So life is being made harder for the victim only, not the abuser. That alone proves you wrong, and wasn't at all difficult. Moreover, it's less to do with discouraging people from abusing women in their families than it is to do with encouraging victims to stand up to the abusers and take charge of their lives. Many of these women are unaware of the rights they have and the support they can get.

    I didn't ask whether you defended the Bible and the number of Christian women who cover is irrelevant (just as the fact that quite a number of Muslim women don't cover has no bearing on this discussion). I asked whether it's feasible to ban nuns from wearing habits, as they are also doing so on the orders of a misogynistic god.
    As has been said many times before, a burkini is not the only option you can swim in if you are Muslim.

    & OK. Because nobody with a different perspective than you can offer anything worthwhile to the discussion ^^
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    As I stated on the previous page - I believe the ban should be enforced because, among other reasons, so many girls are forced into wearing these garments by relatives.

    I don't see any other easy way to protect women & children that are abused this way, because it is so often something that happens behind closed doors & is not talked about. If there is another way, then I'm happy to hear it. If not, then I'm afraid I can't support something that leaves the door wide open for abusers.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/...s-North-Africa

    (there are other sources)

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37077837

    RIOT police had to be drafted in after a man was attacked with a harpoon for taking pictures of women in burkinis.


    Once again we are being asked to change our social norms for immigrants because they don't like what we are free to do (in this case take pictures of a beach)

    But I'm glad the residents fought back on this one
    Bah didn't see this before my post.

    Highlights the intolerance of those wearing burkinis and their families... Who the heck uses harpoons and hatchets over such a small disagreement? O.o disturbing. Thoughts with the French once again
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: August 18, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.