advertisement


Muslim women are not allowed to wear Burka at the shore in France

Is there difference between Burka and Burkini?

The problem with cloth in the water is that cloth when absorbed with water become to be very heavy to a point that it is impossible to float. When everything is OK there is no problem, but when in distress in the sea, weight can make the difference between life and death.

Arye

I'm taking my trunks off then next time I go swimming.
I had no idea they were so dangerous.
Thanks.
 
Can't find a single example of someone coming to harm (in the water) as a result of wearing one, let alone drowning.
I would think the sample size is way too small. Given the inability of non-burkini wearers around the UK to keep themselves safe in the sea it would appear, to me, that anything that hinders swimming is a bad idea.

If you think any visible worn item with a religious connotation is an affectation fair enough.
Something like that. Although I would include wearing your trousers around your ankles in the affectation class.

You appear to fancy yourself as a liberator of muslim women.
Conversely you perhaps support the oppression of some muslim women?

Yet when a muslim woman's opinion differs from yours, you think you know what's best for her.
As the UK is also a male dominated culture perhaps that's not so surprising!
You have that around the wrong way. I'm a liberal. I think you should be allowed to behave and dress as you wish subject to some vague constraints involving your impact on others. I'm also for gender and sexual equality. I don't know how to approach the contradiction, other than that banning burkinis, nijabs and burkas isn't it, because that further oppresses the women who are not being given a choice.

Paul
 
Be happy then, you are wrong. They are made out of a lycra fabric intended for swimming and have concealed ties to prevent the upper part ballooning dangerously. They are similar to the lycra wetsuits worn in warm climates for snorkeling
The one illustrated by Still upthread doesn't meet that description.

Or, for example,

3828019118_115785bc0e_b.jpg


Paul
 
I'm taking my trunks off then next time I go swimming.
I had no idea they were so dangerous.
Thanks.

It depends on what they are made of. They might very well be dangerous if they covered you from head to foot and were made of a naturally absorbent material like cotton or wool. Did you really not know that? Have you ever tried swimming fully clothed?
 
As a monk I can tell you that swimming in the sea in a habit is a terrible thing. The only benefit, assuming you survive, is it kills the lice. Lost a sandal once off Hastings, took me ages to get back across the pebbles!

Mind you at least I wasn't surrounded by french coppers trying to get me to strip down to the hair shirt!
 
I would think the sample size is way too small. Given the inability of non-burkini wearers around the UK to keep themselves safe in the sea it would appear, to me, that anything that hinders swimming is a bad idea.

What sample size?
Clearly you don't understand how burkinis work.
No excuse, as this has been explained on this thread today.

Conversely you perhaps support the oppression of some muslim women?

What makes you think that? You have been opining on what muslim women should do.

You have that around the wrong way. I'm a liberal.

You claim to be a liberal, and sometimes appear to be.
But up thread you believed you knew better than Muslim women what's best for Muslim women.
That is highly illiberal, as well as arrogant and sexist.

I think you should be allowed to behave and dress as you wish subject to some vague constraints involving your impact on others.

pablumium

I'm also for gender and sexual equality. I don't know how to approach the contradiction, other than that banning burkinis, nijabs and burkas isn't it, because that further oppresses the women who are not being given a choice.

Me too, but earlier you wanted to take their choice away.

The one illustrated by Still upthread doesn't meet that description.

What makes you think that is a burkini? It doesn't look like one - certainly not of the original design.
Possibly you have found a cheap knock-off.

It depends on what they are made of. They might very well be dangerous if they covered you from head to foot and were made of a naturally absorbent material like cotton or wool. Did you really not know that? Have you ever tried swimming fully clothed?

It's designed for the mother loving purpose. Would you worry about the materials used for a wetsuit?
 
What sample size?
The sample of burkini wearers from all beach and sea users. Obviously.

Clearly you don't understand how burkinis work.
No excuse, as this has been explained on this thread today.
You do seem rather confused about hydrodynamics.

What makes you think that? You have been opining on what muslim women should do.
No I haven't.

You claim to be a liberal, and sometimes appear to be.
But up thread you believed you knew better than Muslim women what's best for Muslim women.
That is highly illiberal, as well as arrogant and sexist.
And not related to anything I've written. And what about the muslim women that know that doing what they are told is best for them? Do you tolerate that with equanimity? Do you deny it?

What makes you think that is a burkini? It doesn't look like one - certainly not of the original design.
Possibly you have found a cheap knock-off.
I pointed at your illustration of a burkini, are you now backtracking? Not suitable for swimming. I then offered an example of (presumably) muslim women in water covered in even less appropriate clothing.

It's designed for the mother loving purpose. Would you worry about the materials used for a wetsuit?
It's quite clearly not designed for swimming. You can get swim suits that completely cover, and swim caps that cover the head. Designed for purpose. Banned in competition. Not burkinis.

Anyway this is off point. If muslim women want to emphasise their separation from their adopted culture that's a cultural problem. But it's not fixed by banning their posturing.

Paul
 
Paul R's opinions on this thread are highly offensive. Carefully worded to not break the AUP but with really nasty bigoted undertones.

It shouldn't really be allowed unless we can attack Jewish culture in the same way IMO. It's about equality and a lack of discrimination.
 
Paul R's opinions on this thread are highly offensive. Carefully worded to not break the AUP but with really nasty bigoted undertones.

It shouldn't really be allowed unless we can attack Jewish culture in the same way IMO. It's about equality and a lack of discrimination.

So racism is OK if we are all allowed to do it?
 
As a monk I can tell you that swimming in the sea in a habit is a terrible thing. The only benefit, assuming you survive, is it kills the lice. Lost a sandal once off Hastings, took me ages to get back across the pebbles!

Mind you at least I wasn't surrounded by french coppers trying to get me to strip down to the hair shirt!

Blessed art thou, a monk swimming.
 
On channel one the commendation says that no matter what will be the supreme court decision on Sunday, in the elections next spring Sarkozy supports the law to forbid Burkini, but what is more important, Marine Le Pen will be a strong enough political power to support this too. This will also influence religious Jews and Christians in France.

Arye
 
Paul R's opinions on this thread are highly offensive. Carefully worded to not break the AUP but with really nasty bigoted undertones.

It shouldn't really be allowed unless we can attack Jewish culture in the same way IMO. It's about equality and a lack of discrimination.

Interesting comment there. I have often wondered why it is acceptable generally to attack and criminalize the whole of the Jewish population of the world for the few crimes of the Jewish state, but cannot attack the Muslim population in a similar manner for the atrocities carried out by the Nutjobs who claim to represent Islam, even against their own. I await the forthcoming ban.
 
Interesting comment there. I have often wondered why it is acceptable generally to attack and criminalize the whole of the Jewish population of the world for the few crimes of the Jewish state, but cannot attack the Muslim population in a similar manner for the atrocities carried out by the Nutjobs who claim to represent Islam, even against their own. I await the forthcoming ban.
Anyone who does the former (blames all Jews for the actions of Israel) is a bigot.

Anyone who does the latter (blames all Muslims for the actions of Islamic terrorists) is a bigot.

I try my best to do neither. It's not rocket science is it?
 
Interesting comment there. I have often wondered why it is acceptable generally to attack and criminalize the whole of the Jewish population of the world for the few crimes of the Jewish state, but cannot attack the Muslim population in a similar manner for the atrocities carried out by the Nutjobs who claim to represent Islam, even against their own. I await the forthcoming ban.

...

Anyone who does the former (blames all Jews for the actions of Israel) is a bigot.

Anyone who does the latter (blames all Muslims for the actions of Islamic terrorists) is a bigot.

I try my best to do neither. It's not rocket science is it?

This.

I've seen very little real anti-Semitism here (criticising Israel's foreign policy is not this), but a rather disapointing amount of Islamophobia (much this thread being a prime example). I moderate as I find, though only when I have the time, so it can be a little inconsistent at times. As an example Paul R is right over the line at present, so folk can take this as a moderation post too!
 


advertisement


Back
Top