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

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Grand High Witch)
    Well, it's a flaw in your argument because it's akin to saying it discriminates against all of Christianity to ban Amish communities for a side-practice that is not an express requirement of Christianity.
    it isn't, no one views burkinis as any culture other than Muslim, banning Muslim clothing is discriminatory and unnecessary, and worst of all, it does NOTHING to stop terrorism - in fact it encourages it to a small extent
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WBZ144)
    15 towns have already banned them in a short space of time, and the number will likely increase if this continues. Counting all of the beaches in those towns and cities, that's already way past a couple.

    If you look up the list of nudist beaches in France, there are much more than a few and that isn't counting the more isolated non-nudist ones where nudity is tolerated. On the other hand, there are no beaches specifically for burkini wearers, and even there was one, people would be coming up with conspiracy theories on how France is seeing the beginning of the implementation of Shariah law and it would be vehemently opposed.
    I am not sure how this supports your suggestion that banning the burkini is worse than banning nudism.

    No mainstream beach in France where families have access will permit nudism.
    Exception: some nudist beaches.

    Every beach in France permits burkinis by default.
    Exception: 15 towns (for perspective consider the length of the French coastline).

    Look at the UK (many discussing this issue are from the UK), where every beach is a burkini beach and only a handful of beaches are nudist beaches.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    it isn't, no one views burkinis as any culture other than Muslim, banning Muslim clothing is discriminatory and unnecessary, and worst of all, it does NOTHING to stop terrorism - in fact it encourages it to a small extent
    No one views Amish culture as any culture other than Christian, yet you haven't answered whether banning it is discriminating against all of Christianity.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Grand High Witch)
    No one views Amish culture as any culture other than Christian, yet you haven't answered whether banning it is discriminating against all of Christianity.
    Amish culture is vague compared to something as distinct as a burkini.

    You are literally dodging the point with this nonsense about amish culture.

    Banning the burkini, a Muslim style of clothing, is discriminatory against Muslims. This useless thread has literally taken a simple issue and exaggerated it into something massively overcomplicated.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    Amish culture is vague compared to something as distinct as a burkini.

    You are literally dodging the point with this nonsense about amish culture.

    Banning the burkini, a Muslim style of clothing, is discriminatory against Muslims. This useless thread has literally taken a simple issue and exaggerated it into something massively overcomplicated.
    You are trying to link a non-compulsory, minor cultural practice with an entire religion. If you want to be specific, then most people would not consider banning speaking in tongues as discriminating against all of Christianity, and yet that is in the Bible.

    Banning the burkini is discriminating against people who wear the burkini. It is not discriminating against all Muslims if a small minority practise it as a cultural thing rather than religious.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Grand High Witch)
    I am not sure how this supports your suggestion that banning the burkini is worse than banning nudism.

    No mainstream beach in France where families have access will permit nudism.
    Exception: some nudist beaches.

    Every beach in France permits burkinis by default.
    Exception: 15 towns (for perspective consider the length of the French coastline).

    Look at the UK (many discussing this issue are from the UK), where every beach is a burkini beach and only a handful of beaches are nudist beaches.
    We're talking about France, not the UK.

    My point is that a burkini only beach would never be accepted by the public and you know it, so the comparison to nudism isn't the best comparison. This is also a fairly new situation that we have seen unfolding, we do not know how many other towns and cities will ban the burkini, especially since the 15 did so in such a short space of time.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WBZ144)
    My point is that a burkini only beach would never be accepted by the public and you know it
    They accept nudist-only beaches so why not?

    It is a valid comparison for the reasons mentioned in the OP. As I said, they are two sides of the same coin: extreme exposure of the body vs. extreme covering up of the body, and both are banned in these situations for subjective feelings-based reasons.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Where has nudism been banned? there are still a lot of nude beaches out there
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    Its disturbing what lengths you people will go to justify plain religious discrimination. Should we ban anything and everything that is misogynistic and symbolic of oppression?

    These sorts of divisions in our society play right into the terrorists' hands. It will only warrant more terror attacks.
    Do you have to hijack every thread with your "don't offend Muslims it will just lead to more extremists" agenda?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Applepiex3)
    In both cases, men are telling women what to wear and what to not wear!

    A woman can decide for herself if she wants to roam around on beaches "nude" or fully covered in a "burkini".

    Just recently, there was no need for french police to go around acting like the fashion police. It would seem they would prefer nudes over burkinis; I would love to see the two types pair up and storm the beaches asking for their freedom.
    You make yourself sound like an 80 IQ Daily Mail reader when you call the police the fashion police.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SuperHuman98)
    Alright fine I dont mind being childish if that means I dont want to see random nude people of all ages when im walking downthe street. I dont mind nudity on TV because i could change channel.

    This is probably a dumb question, but if nature intended us to be walking around nude why dont we have thick fur? Isnt it too cold in winter to be walking around nude?
    Good question. We originated in Africa where some tribes are almost fully nude.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dima-Blackburn)
    A sensible response. I'm in favour of little to no state intervention when it comes to fashion and clothing.

    What are your thoughts on clothing that are deliberately provocative and have the potential to cause alarm and distress i.e. Nazi uniforms?
    Hi again

    Very interesting post. It highlights two issues that really bug me, well one with two parts, about this whole thing.

    The is that you even mention "intervention when it comes to fashion and clothing. This has nothing to do with fashion or clothing! As I said to that other poster using the term fashion police, it makes you look like you haven't thought one bit about what's going on here. "Oh no, they are telling women what to wear, how western how modern". Well firstly it's what not to wear, not what to wear. And secondly it's not about the clothing but the symbol. It is a symbol of oppression, a symbol of pretty extreme interpretations of the Quran a la ISIS. And now while that ofc doesn't imply that woman is in favor of ISIS, but some mayors decided a lot of people in their towns find that symbol distressing. It's a completely different debate why that is wrong (or not).

    Second, yes, I personally think SS uniforms or the swastika should be banned. And so the other part is, well if you are of the opinion that it's a terrible symbol, should you ban these terrible symbols.

    But no one is actually talking about that, except now you. People are just "OMG NO, Islamophobia, nice hypocrites France complain Islam tells women how to dress and here you are doing the same".
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Grand High Witch)
    You are trying to link a non-compulsory, minor cultural practice with an entire religion. If you want to be specific, then most people would not consider banning speaking in tongues as discriminating against all of Christianity, and yet that is in the Bible.

    Banning the burkini is discriminating against people who wear the burkini. It is not discriminating against all Muslims if a small minority practise it as a cultural thing rather than religious.
    Only Muslims wear the burkini really, maybe some members of other groups do as well, but the burkini is SPECIFICALLY a Muslim clothing style. ie - ONLY MUSLIMS WEAR BURKINIS...

    what is so hard to understand?

    you people will say some pretty strange things to justify religious discrimination
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WBZ144)
    Nudists are still getting better treatment than Muslim women in the towns which ban burkinis. Can you imagine the outcry if burkini beaches got introduced after the ban?

    Point is, nudists can go to the beach for a swim in all of those town, hijabis cannot.
    How about they wear other clothes that cover them? If you really only cared about being modest, you would care about covering up. And there are many ways of doing that. You wouldn't care about conforming to the standards of Islam. Simply adapt to the cultural norms of the country you live in. If you can't, you are free to move to a country more aligned with your values.

    There was one great photo of a burkini and a wet suit. Of course they were trying to make fun of the ban, but in reality it highlighted exactly my point. You know that a burkini is banned. You might disapprove, you might even hate that. But there are a ton of alternatives out there, and yet you choose to still wear one? Because you wear it is a symbol. Which brings me back to my first argument. It's a symbol. And if you really cared just for being modest, you would adapt to the norms and values of your country and cover up differently.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    its the cultural clothing worn by many members of the religion, stop trying to argue about how its technically not in the quran, you know exactly what I mean.
    So you admit it. As I said above. It is not about being modest, but about conforming to the culture of Islam.

    Well let me tell you something. You bash on about not offending Muslims because oh no that might just make some people turn into extremists.

    And yet you are fine with them not integrating into our culture? It is so mother****ing ironic your argument. We are not allowed to criticize them for fear of offending them. And yet they get to not integrate which is the main reason many are actually criticizing them in the first place.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    Only Muslims wear the burkini really, maybe some members of other groups do as well, but the burkini is SPECIFICALLY a Muslim clothing style. ie - ONLY MUSLIMS WEAR BURKINIS...

    what is so hard to understand?
    Because I just think it's a stretch to say banning a cultural side-practice associated with a particular religion discriminates against all of that religion's adherents and the entire religion itself.

    you people will say some pretty strange things to justify religious discrimination
    Religious discrimination is not inherently wrong; banning polygamy is religious discrimination. It comes down to whether that discrimination is justifiable and proportionate. I don't actually think it is with regard to burkinis, but the whole point of the topic is pointing out the hypocrisy of those who say this ban is so terrible, yet are in favour of banning nudism.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    you people will say some pretty strange things to justify religious discrimination
    And you would never say pretty strange things to justify your islamopology agenda?

    :rolleyes:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Grand High Witch)
    Because I just think it's a stretch to say banning a cultural side-practice associated with a particular religion discriminates against all of that religion's adherents and the entire religion itself.



    Religious discrimination is not inherently wrong; banning polygamy is religious discrimination. It comes down to whether that discrimination is justifiable and proportionate. I don't actually think it is with regard to burkinis, but the whole point of the topic is pointing out the hypocrisy of those who say this ban is so terrible, yet are in favour of banning nudism.
    Who said anyone's in favour of banning nudism?
    You've got this annoying complex of thinking there is a specific singular group of people who simultaneously are against the burkini ban but also in favour of nudism ban. People disgusted by the burkini ban are not necessarily tied to other types of bans, the views vary hugely.

    Regardless of whether or not you think the burkini ban targets Muslims, it evidently does. Without the Paris attacks, Nice attack or Charlie Hebdo, this would not have happened. Innocent Muslims are suffering discrimination because people are angry at terrorists, terrorists who have no regard for discriminating between non-Muslims and Muslims, who don't give a **** about the rest of Islam.

    France will learn its mistake the next time an attack happens, hopefully they will realise that this attitude is wrong and plays RIGHT into the hands of ISIL - who want to divide us in every way possible.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    Who said anyone's in favour of banning nudism?
    You've got this annoying complex of thinking there is a specific singular group of people who simultaneously are against the burkini ban but also in favour of nudism ban. People disgusted by the burkini ban are not necessarily tied to other types of bans, the views vary hugely.
    The OP is quite specifically aimed at those who are against the burkini ban but in favour of the nudism ban. That will be a significant amount of people in this debate. If you're not one of them I am not sure why you got involved in this thread.

    Regardless of whether or not you think the burkini ban targets Muslims, it evidently does. Without the Paris attacks, Nice attack or Charlie Hebdo, this would not have happened. Innocent Muslims are suffering discrimination because people are angry at terrorists, terrorists who have no regard for discriminating between non-Muslims and Muslims, who don't give a **** about the rest of Islam.

    France will learn its mistake the next time an attack happens, hopefully they will realise that this attitude is wrong and plays RIGHT into the hands of ISIL - who want to divide us in every way possible.
    You keep repeating this emotive language but discriminating against a religion is not inherently wrong in itself, or else the decision to ban polygamy would be inherently wrong. It's about looking at the ban and seeing whether it is justifiable and proportionate. It just so happens that it is not.

    ISIS will attack disbelievers in the West no matter what policies they enact. Even if what you are saying is true, we should not base government policy on what is most or least likely to result in an ISIS attack.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Grand High Witch)
    The OP is quite specifically aimed at those who are against the burkini ban but in favour of the nudism ban. That will be a significant amount of people in this debate. If you're not one of them I am not sure why you got involved in this thread.
    Oh, don't you know, he is TSR's number 1 islamopologist.
 
 
 
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 20, 2017
  • 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.