Opinion on 'burkini' ban?

[Antonio the Sixth]

A wedge issue created by politicians looking to score cheap populist points.

[Antonio the Sixth]

France is taking unprecedented steps in the face of a crisis that is spiralling out of control.

Dear Green Line,

Please shut up.

Regards,

A French citizen

[Antonio the Sixth]

The garment allows women to compete or participate in sports with mobility so you shouldn't ban it.  However the fact that they couldn't, until this garment became widespread still stems from a fundamentalist interpretation of what constitutes 'modesty'.

Yes, especially since there are plenty of other religions with rules for modest dress (generally for women but in some cases for men as well) that make exceptions for swimwear/sportswear in general. I hope none of us here on Atlas Forum would argue that the demand for burkinis is in itself a good thing.

I certainly wouldn't.

This issue (unlike another issue that's being currently discussed on here...) is actually a good example of why not everything that's morally wrong should be illegal.

[Antonio the Sixth]

The browns Muslims are an existential threat to the French value/right of freedom of religion, so clearly the French should take away the Muslims' right to freedom of religion. Can't imagine how that could ever (further) alienate and marginalize a deeply religious minority community that is already alienated and marginalized (and literally ostracized, in many cases) from French society!

I don't think anyone is claiming Muslims are a threat to any French freedom of religion (which would imply that is something that actually exists).

Religion really doesn't have all that much to do with this. At the end of the day, it's just plain old xenophobia.

[Antonio the Sixth]

So what if someone wants to wear a swimsuit like that for non-Islamic reasons? (Such as being really afraid of getting sunburned and wanting as much skin to be covered up as possible?)

The only logical argument I can think of for this ban would be in the case of public pools. Looking at photos, it looks like most of the "burkinis" have loose fabric that could ostensibly get caught in a pool filter and cause the wearer to potentially drown. But that logic doesn't hold up when it comes to public beaches.

Hygene issues.  Those things are probably filthy.

Hey, they're just trying to integrate into the local culture:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2219163/One-29-French-people-dont-shower-WEEK--13-wash-hands-using-toilet.html

Crabcake, I get that you're rightfully pissed off at France for this whole nonsense, but seriously, the Daily Fail??

[Antonio the Sixth]

Ironic because its supposed to be against oppression but banning a type of clothing is exactly that. If people choose to wear them and they're comfortable with it, that's fine. What it instead does is piss Muslim women off who want to wear it and sends a message to them that the west is uncomfortable with Islam. Its leftist intolerance.

Is it? Seems like these types of things usually get the most support from right wing secular nationalist types. 

Most people who would be for it are for progressive reasons, progress. The burka is a traditional outfit, therefore I would think conservatives would not be the ones to want to ban it. Not saying all leftists support banning it, and I'm sure you'll find right wingers supporting it for different wrong reasons too.

No. The real reason for it is Islamophobia. While there are left-wingers who support it, they only do so in an (obviously failed) attempt to chase after the votes of the right and far-right, who are the real proponents of these policies. The idea that this has anything to do with social-liberalism (or even with "laïcité") is ludicrous.

[Antonio the Sixth]

BRTD, you just had to chime in just when I was trying to defend social liberalism by making it clear we weren't the ones pushing for a ban, didn't you?

(I've seen women preaching at church wearing less than that)

Of course you have.

[Antonio the Sixth]

As I've said before, this is a very good example of why everything that's immoral, dumb, or socially harmful shouldn't necessarily be illegal.

[Antonio the Sixth]

As I've said before, this is a very good example of why everything that's immoral, dumb, or socially harmful shouldn't necessarily be illegal.

Lol dude you don't even support the full legalization of marijuana.

I've made it very clear that I don't want to put people in jail for smoking marijuana. Similarly, I don't want to put women in jail for wearing an oppressive outfit.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Ironic because its supposed to be against oppression but banning a type of clothing is exactly that. If people choose to wear them and they're comfortable with it, that's fine. What it instead does is piss Muslim women off who want to wear it and sends a message to them that the west is uncomfortable with Islam. Its leftist intolerance.

Is it? Seems like these types of things usually get the most support from right wing secular nationalist types. 

Most people who would be for it are for progressive reasons, progress. The burka is a traditional outfit, therefore I would think conservatives would not be the ones to want to ban it. Not saying all leftists support banning it, and I'm sure you'll find right wingers supporting it for different wrong reasons too.

No. The real reason for it is Islamophobia. While there are left-wingers who support it, they only do so in an (obviously failed) attempt to chase after the votes of the right and far-right, who are the real proponents of these policies. The idea that this has anything to do with social-liberalism (or even with "laïcité") is ludicrous.

Is it? They are using the exact same arguments for the exact same kinds of policies. The xenophobic motive here is obvious, but why would that be inconsistent with a progressive ideology?  If the main concern is social progress, gender equality, secularism, etc, as opposed to pluralism, why wouldn't you seek to exclude culture that has the same characteristics as those you are trying to change in your own society?

Because most progressives are generally aware of which policies actually help to further the causes they care about, as opposed to policies that just serve to further alienate people you're trying to bring over to your values.

Most of us agree that, in an ideal world, no religion should serve as an excuse promote patriarchal notions of "modesty" and dictate what's acceptable for women to wear. The point is how you get people who have been socialized in a viciously patriarchal context to reject this worldview, and it's ridiculous to claim that these bans help.

[Antonio the Sixth]

The fact that Muslims are minorities that generally face hatred and discrimination for reasons that have nothing to do with the prevalence of regressive and patriarchal views in modern Islam is, indeed, highly relevant to the discussion. As is the fact that you rarely fight oppression by criminalizing the victims of oppression.

[Antonio the Sixth]

The fact that Muslims are minorities that generally face hatred and discrimination for reasons that have nothing to do with the prevalence of regressive and patriarchal views in modern Islam is, indeed, highly relevant to the discussion. As is the fact that you rarely fight oppression by criminalizing the victims of oppression.

But surely you'd be criminalizing them for the right reasons, no? Or am I to understand that being an oppressed minority gives one the right to do something otherwise considered oppressive?

(I really don't care about your, y'know, whatever policies; it's obvious that you'd have to defend Islam in a Christian country in order to weaken the existing paradigm; once that has been struck down the regime will no doubt "augment" its methodology in order to weaken all religion. You probably are a legitimate pluralist or something. Or whatever.)

I, personally, am against burka bans due to my desire to create a Coalition of the Truly Reactionary to oppose attempts at secular modernization.

Oh for f**k's sake. This is the fourth time in just a few days that I've been accused of being insincere in the views I express - whether it's to please or mimic another poster, to find a "pulpit" for its own sake, or to advance another, more sinister goal than the one I claim to have (this one twice now, thanks to you!). I'm sick of this sh*t. If you don't believe in my good faith, that's your f**king problem. I have better things to do with my time than try to prove it to you.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Also, if the burkini as such a manifestation of Islamic oppression to women, why has it suddenly become so popular among non-Muslim women worldwide? And don't f**king say "the patriarchy."

This is a good example of how 'patriarchy' has been misused to the point of meaninglessness. Putting frat boys and guys who won't let their daughters be educated together in the same box as if they have the same worldview is ridiculous.

The fact that patriarchy can take a myriad of forms to adapt itself to its cultural context is precisely what makes it so hard to combat. Some thought the "sexual revolution" would finally bring about gender equality, but, while it did help matters in many respects, it's clear that patriarchal views of women can survive and thrive in a "sex-positive" society.

[Antonio the Sixth]

We can all agree that modern Sweden is less patriarchal than Saudi Arabia. The point of the concept isn't to lump 99.9% of societies that ever existed in the history of humanity together. Rather, it's to bring attention to a series of specific attitudes that exist in all those society and to their root cause.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Shouldn't this be moved to individual politics?

Still not sure what the point of the individual politics/political debate split is, tbh.

[Antonio the Sixth]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Good.

Yeah, that's great news. I had little hope in that respect.

Valls said earlier that the government had no intention of legislating, and I don't think the government would want to get involved in this issue too directly, so this should put an end to this whole mess (for a year at least).