To burkini or not burkini, that’s the question.

[Senegalboy]

Football supporters don't fight. Hooligans do.

There's a dress code for so many occasions. Sometimes it's mandatory by law to wear or not to wear something. Sometimes it's an unwritten law. We just know what to wear in a given context.

It seems that some people don't know what to wear in the given context of a populated European beach.

A burkini isn't a part of the European culture, you shouldn't push your culture and just wear it.

Certainly when you know there's a cultural and emotional association with this swimsuit. If you ask me, it's just a kind of trolling by Muslims fundamentalists.

In the interest of consistency, would you support Middle Eastern countries forcing all visiting women to wear a burka?

But they don't
Do you know what a Burqa is
A Burqa is a traditional Afghan dress worn by women and I covers the face completely.outside Afghanistan,it is virtually none exisitant

[Galloism]

Oh no, I see what you're saying. You're fighting fire with fire - you're fighting misogyny with misogyny. As I said, you have to destroy the village in order to save it.

Sure, if acknowledging and dealing with religious misogyny is misogynistic, we are. The ultimate results of our misogyny are fortunately better for women than the other side's. It's better to be a woman in France than in any Muslim country today.

Also, better for a woman in Canada than in France.

Of course, Canada is pretty much great anyway, once you get used to the moose cavalry.

[Australian rePublic]

RE: The poll
Geez you damn Americans have to shove your country everywhere
What's Hillary Clinton gotta do with anytning? It's even an American beach
-----------------------------
I see nothing wrong with women wearing a burqini. So longnas they aren't wearing street cloths. That's a health and safety issue

[Gravlen]

What issue? You still haven't - nor have the French authorities - shown that there is an issue with this garment.

So no issue which warrants the banning of the "burkini".


So the French mayor is a liar, and the ban is being imposed for no good reason. Understood. It's worse, but it's understood.

There is an issue in what it is.

Full body swimwear worn by a muslim?

Again, the affair in Corsica brought this to light internationally, but this started in late July when Cannes first made the decision to ban.

Right, they banned it for reasons of racial purity hygiene. No wait, that was the other place. Cannes did it for an equally stupid reason, because they see it as a garment showing religious affiliation. Which, again, boils down to full body swimwear worn by a muslim.

Bigoted line of thinking all around.

[Olerand]

Sure, if acknowledging and dealing with religious misogyny is misogynistic, we are. The ultimate results of our misogyny are fortunately better for women than the other side's. It's better to be a woman in France than in any Muslim country today.

Also, better for a woman in Canada than in France.

Of course, Canada is pretty much great anyway, once you get used to the moose cavalry.

Is the hijab common in Canada? Is it the majority of women's wear?

[New haven america]

Of course they're still alive - women who don't wear burkas in France are still alive too.

I didn't say you'd be killed. I said you'd face societal backlash.

Much more mild than not covering up in certain parts of France, but yes, I agree, you will face raised eyebrows and comments. A reaction that is mild, in comparison to women who wear certain clothing items (or don't wear them) in certain places in our country.

What issue? You still haven't - nor have the French authorities - shown that there is an issue with this garment.

So no issue which warrants the banning of the "burkini".


So the French mayor is a liar, and the ban is being imposed for no good reason. Understood. It's worse, but it's understood.

There is an issue in what it is. Again, the affair in Corsica brought this to light internationally, but this started in late July when Cannes first made the decision to ban.

You are being silly, I never said the attackers had the right to do what they did, however, it was the people taking pictures of other people without their permission that caused to confrontation, wasn't it?

Hence, it makes sense that the confrontation was their fault to begin with. Does it give the attackers an excuse to do what they did? No, but the camera wielder/wielders should've been using common sense and either A. Asked for permission to take the pictures, or B. They shouldn't been taking the pictures.

So yes, you are being rather illogical and dense with this situation.

No, no. When you take a picture of someone without their consent, it does not open up the possibility of a physical confrontation. Had it not escalated there, the people who took the picture would have been in the wrong. But it did escalate, and their faults are not the main faults anymore.

See, you're doing it again, you're trying to defend the stupid things your country's done.

They're still in the wrong no matter what, sure the attackers definitely weren't correct in their actions, but the camera wielder/wielders shouldn't have been taking the fucking pictures to begin with.

So yes, the camera wielders were in the wrong, and trying to use "B-b-but they were attacked, so they were innocent!" doesn't fucking work.

[Gravlen]

Oh no, I see what you're saying. You're fighting fire with fire - you're fighting misogyny with misogyny. As I said, you have to destroy the village in order to save it.

Sure, if acknowledging and dealing with religious misogyny is misogynistic, we are.

That would depend on the methods used. And you chose to use misogyninist methods.

The ultimate results of our misogyny are fortunately better for women than the other side's. It's better to be a woman in France than in any Muslim country today.

Wrong question.

The question is, is it better to be a woman in France today than yesterday? The answer is, no. Today, you have reduced the freedom of women in France in order to protect them from absolutely nothing.

[Olerand]

There is an issue in what it is.

Full body swimwear worn by a muslim?

Again, the affair in Corsica brought this to light internationally, but this started in late July when Cannes first made the decision to ban.

Right, they banned it for reasons of racial purity hygiene. No wait, that was the other place. Cannes did it for an equally stupid reason, because they see it as a garment showing religious affiliation. Which, again, boils down to full body swimwear worn by a muslim.

Bigoted line of thinking all around.

We are clearly intolerant of intolerance. I know that in this age, intolerance and misogyny are good when they come from a certain direction, but we are intolerant of them. We have the same reactions to fundamentalist Catholics, fascists, hate speech. Intolerant of intolerance, that is indeed our position.

[Galloism]

Also, better for a woman in Canada than in France.

Of course, Canada is pretty much great anyway, once you get used to the moose cavalry.

Is the hijab common in Canada? Is it the majority of women's wear?

No, but the high court decided you can't discriminate against people based on their religion.

Which makes it much better than France.

[Gravlen]

That's true. Well, sometimes it's better to light a flamethrower than curse the darkness.

I've never heard that expression before, and I'm not quite sure what it means, but I like it.

This might mean you haven't read enough Terry Pratchett! Oh man, you may have a blessed future!

[Olerand]

Sure, if acknowledging and dealing with religious misogyny is misogynistic, we are.

That would depend on the methods used. And you chose to use misogyninist methods.

The ultimate results of our misogyny are fortunately better for women than the other side's. It's better to be a woman in France than in any Muslim country today.

Wrong question.

The question is, is it better to be a woman in France today than yesterday? The answer is, no. Today, you have reduced the freedom of women in France in order to protect them from absolutely nothing.

Uh... Uh... Uh... Right.... Better to be a woman in France in the past than in today. When the burkini becomes the metric for measuring women's rights...

[Olerand]

Is the hijab common in Canada? Is it the majority of women's wear?

No, but the high court decided you can't discriminate against people based on their religion.

Which makes it much better than France.

A subjective opinion. Now, what nation where the burkini is the dominant wear on the beach has a better record of women's rights than France, for this to be the latest fight for women's rights? For this to be the metric nations are judged by, as some have apparently made it.

[Baltenstein]

Everytime I hear of a new Islamic Veil-related controversy I'm wondering: Wasn't the original idea behind wearing the veil to not stand out in society?

[Gravlen]

Full body swimwear worn by a muslim?


Right, they banned it for reasons of racial purity hygiene. No wait, that was the other place. Cannes did it for an equally stupid reason, because they see it as a garment showing religious affiliation. Which, again, boils down to full body swimwear worn by a muslim.

Bigoted line of thinking all around.

We are clearly intolerant of intolerance. I know that in this age, intolerance and misogyny are good when they come from a certain direction, but we are intolerant of them. We have the same reactions to fundamentalist Catholics, fascists, hate speech. Intolerant of intolerance, that is indeed our position.

Also an intolerance for personal freedom. That's the downside, when you have the same reactions to fundamentalist Catholics, fascists, hate speech, and swimwear.

[Olerand]

We are clearly intolerant of intolerance. I know that in this age, intolerance and misogyny are good when they come from a certain direction, but we are intolerant of them. We have the same reactions to fundamentalist Catholics, fascists, hate speech. Intolerant of intolerance, that is indeed our position.

Also an intolerance for personal freedom. That's the downside, when you have the same reactions to fundamentalist Catholics, fascists, hate speech, and swimwear.

We are proudly intolerant of intolerance. We have certain beliefs, values, worldviews. If one finds them cumbersome, I suggest they find their personal comfort across the Channel, for their sake.

[Lost Memories]

That's true. Well, sometimes it's better to light a flamethrower than curse the darkness.

I've never heard that expression before, and I'm not quite sure what it means, but I like it.

Isn't that you just like the imagery of flames?

[Gravlen]

That would depend on the methods used. And you chose to use misogyninist methods.


Wrong question.

The question is, is it better to be a woman in France today than yesterday? The answer is, no. Today, you have reduced the freedom of women in France in order to protect them from absolutely nothing.

Uh... Uh... Uh... Right.... Better to be a woman in France in the past than in today. When the burkini becomes the metric for measuring women's rights...

Of course it is. You're regulating what private individuals may wear in public places, and you're saying that adherents of Islam should be regulated while others shouldn't.

You're infringing on women's rights, but because it's mainly muslims that will be targeted, you're fine with it.

[Galloism]

No, but the high court decided you can't discriminate against people based on their religion.

Which makes it much better than France.

A subjective opinion.

Also a correct one, when it comes to this issue.

Now, what nation where the burkini is the dominant wear on the beach has a better record of women's rights than France, for this to be the latest fight for women's rights? For this to be the metric nations are judged by, as some have apparently made it.

We're not saying women should be FORCED to wear a burqa. That would be anti-woman. We're not saying women should be PROHIBITED from wearing a burqa. That would be anti-woman.

We're saying women should have the choice. That's because women should be treated as functional adults who can make their own religious choices.

[Galloism]

I've never heard that expression before, and I'm not quite sure what it means, but I like it.

Isn't that you just like the imagery of flames?

Maybe.

[Olerand]

Uh... Uh... Uh... Right.... Better to be a woman in France in the past than in today. When the burkini becomes the metric for measuring women's rights...

Of course it is. You're regulating what private individuals may wear in public places, and you're saying that adherents of Islam should be regulated while others shouldn't.

You're infringing on women's rights, but because it's mainly muslims that will be targeted, you're fine with it.

When the burkini is a symbol of women's liberation. Ignoring its context, the reasons for its existence, the profoundly misogynistic theological idea behind it.... Oof, I mean I guess, I'm not of that... Worldview, so I'll say, sure.

[Olerand]

A subjective opinion.

Also a correct one, when it comes to this issue.

Now, what nation where the burkini is the dominant wear on the beach has a better record of women's rights than France, for this to be the latest fight for women's rights? For this to be the metric nations are judged by, as some have apparently made it.

We're not saying women should be FORCED to wear a burqa. That would be anti-woman. We're not saying women should be PROHIBITED from wearing a burqa. That would be anti-woman.

We're saying women should have the choice. That's because women should be treated as functional adults who can make their own religious choices.

Still a subjective opinion. Is religion or women's liberation more important, we fall on different sides of this issue.

No, no, I'm not talking about someplace that forces them, by law. I'm not drawing a comparison to Iran. I'm asking of the countries in the Muslim world where the burkini is ubiquitous at the beach, not by law, but by societal acceptance and cultural mandate. Can any of those countries hold a candle to us? This is the Gramscian battle. What does society accept? We don't want to be like those countries, and we don't want pockets of our country being like them too.

[Gravlen]

Also an intolerance for personal freedom. That's the downside, when you have the same reactions to fundamentalist Catholics, fascists, hate speech, and swimwear.

We are proudly intolerant of intolerance. We have certain beliefs, values, worldviews. If one finds them cumbersome, I suggest they find their personal comfort across the Channel, for their sake.

Yes, you proudly infringe on the rights of women, and your values are bad. And if you don't like it, get out, right?

[Galloism]

Also a correct one, when it comes to this issue.


We're not saying women should be FORCED to wear a burqa. That would be anti-woman. We're not saying women should be PROHIBITED from wearing a burqa. That would be anti-woman.

We're saying women should have the choice. That's because women should be treated as functional adults who can make their own religious choices.

Still a subjective opinion. Is religion or women's liberation more important, we fall on different sides of this issue.

It's a false dilemma. You can have both freedom of religion AND women's liberation, but sometimes when women are liberated, they make choices you don't agree with.

That's ok.

You, on the other hand, are attacking both freedom of religion AND women's liberation.

[Olerand]

We are proudly intolerant of intolerance. We have certain beliefs, values, worldviews. If one finds them cumbersome, I suggest they find their personal comfort across the Channel, for their sake.

Yes, you proudly infringe on the rights of women, and your values are bad. And if you don't like it, get out, right?

Exactly. If you believe women are inherently inferior and sinful, and when you see them and lust after them, they are the ones at fault, please, go. We'll both be better off for it.

[Gravlen]

Of course it is. You're regulating what private individuals may wear in public places, and you're saying that adherents of Islam should be regulated while others shouldn't.

You're infringing on women's rights, but because it's mainly muslims that will be targeted, you're fine with it.

When the burkini is a symbol of women's liberation. Ignoring its context, the reasons for its existence, the profoundly misogynistic theological idea behind it.... Oof, I mean I guess, I'm not of that... Worldview, so I'll say, sure.

Right.

Let's just remember this for later. Remember that you agree with revoking rights and restricting freedoms when it's about something which you don't like. Never bitch when that attitude is used against you, OK? Thanks.