“Bikinis versus Burkinis”

For the last 2 days, the theme “Bikinis versus Burkinis” has been overwhelmingly dominating the news in all media outlets and is especially a hot matter of debate in social networks — not only for the Muslims and secularists of France, but also for those from all over the globe. It was only in last Tuesday (August the 23rd, 2016) when global media went in a complete state of uproar.

Photographs were taken of French police standing by a Muslim woman as she was laying on the beach of Nice. At this point, nothing seems out of the ordinary, as there are over 1.7 billion Muslims in the planet, and like other citizens from different religions and schools of faith, they too have the right to enjoy a sunny day at the beach.

The alarming detail that all of the viral images share — which has raised many outrageous questions and protests — reveals that the Muslim woman was removing her long-sleeved tunic involuntarily. It was now clear to the entire world, that the French police had indeed ordered this woman to infringe one of the most fundamental instructions of her faith.

The “extremeness” of the French authorities’ action this Tuesday has shed light on a controversial ban that has been on an exponential rise in dozens of French cities over the last few months. The consecutive implementation of such obnoxious law that is apparently fully backed-up and supported by the Interior Minister, Bernard Cazeneuve, has been irritating an angry crowd of not only Muslims but also non-Muslim leftists and even rightists from all over Europe.

At first glance and looking at it most objectively, it seems that the French authorities, although taking their job a tad bit too “seriously”, were rightful in their decision — merely applying law and order. However, and upon further investigation, there appears to be many underlying factors that would in a sense justify the angry opposing stance.

“I had no intention of swimming.”

Said Siam, the 34-year-old woman in question, to the AFP agency.

Without involving religion, and for all we know, the woman could have well been suffering from skin cancer — and even if that wasn’t the case, people from all over the world can easily suffer severe skin injuries if sunscreen is not properly applied. Muslim or not, wearing tunics has been a very known alternative to sunscreen in seeking protection from the harming sun rays. This doesn’t mean that anyone who wears it is a Muslim — let alone a terrorist.

Obviously, the chain of consecutive terror attacks on France is one of the main motors behind the integration of the burkini ban. Consequently, the main reasoning behind such “obnoxious” law is that in its display of religious affiliation, it will inevitably create disturbance of public order — especially since the wound from the latest terror attacks is still “open”.

What’s more and heart-breaking were the tears of Siam’s daughter. Apparently, as the police officers were issuing an immediate fine, the surrounding locals were showing hostility by applauding the French authorities and some have even gone as far as to shout offensive utterances such as: “Go home!” and “We don’t want you here!”.

A devil’s advocate may wonder:

Has France always been this hostile towards cultural and religious diversity? Or is this simply a call of help from the terror it endured and may very well endure more of?

The answers to such questions remains yet to be found.

Undeniably, the scenery of Islamic outfits in such a space of leisure can indeed remind the average French citizen of past terrorizing events — especially if they suffered a family or acquaintance loss as a result. Although this would not be a conscious mind-association for most locals, it is simply an inevitable one that their subconscious cannot just ignore.

What’s more is the Islamic headwear; the item that separates both a non-Muslim person and a Muslim person wearing a tunic for sun-protection is indeed the headscarf. There are many explanations as to why a non-Muslim person may wear a headscarf, but they aren’t as valid and necessitating as the ones behind wearing a tunic.

Inevitably then, an intriguing question presents itself:

Why did she remove her tunic and not the headscarf?

This question although a bit provocative (not intentionally by any means) is quite hard to ignore. The answer to it — however simple and obvious it may be — just begs another even more intriguing question:

Is it necessary to wear a headscarf at the beach of a country that is still suffering psychologically from an unusually high frequency of recent terror attacks?

Those who are particularly demanding the abortion of the ban need to ask themselves such questions.

As humans, we all have emotions — Muslim or not. If a headscarf has sadly came to symbolize terror and is going to trigger unpleasant memories, then this at the very least raises the supporters of the ban’s cause to an equal level of legitimacy to that of the opposing cause.