What are people's thoughts on the burkini ban in France?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Another double standard: Allowing non muslim french women to wear whatever they want to the beach (including head coverings), but banning muslim women from wearing burkinis.

Exactly.

It's a pair of leggings and a swimming cap, oh and a long sleeve shirt lol.

Leggings.
Swimming cap.
Shirt.

That's it.

Cant believe the media ****storm some muslims wearing a combination of above items of clothing is causing, and it's depressing to see all the idiots eating it up. OK fair enough it's far from stylish but who the heck cares? Forcing people to remove clothing is some seriously messed up stuff.
 
Last edited:
Exactly.

It's a pair of leggings and a swimming cap, oh and a long sleeve shirt lol.

Leggings.
Swimming cap.
Shirt.

That's it.

Cant believe the ****storm some muslims wearing a combination of above items of clothing is causing. ok fair enough it's far from stylish but who the heck cares? Forcing people to remove clothing is some seriously messed up stuff.

Lol. Standby to be labelled a limp wristed lefty Liberal terrorist sympathising scum bag. Shame on you! :)
 
If they are divisive - which the burkha, and burkhini clearly are.

Divisive only to people like you.

You're also conflating burqa and Burkini again. This is a thread about Burkinis, and the article was also about Burkinis. If you want to discuss Burqas, may I suggest starting another thread.
 
Last edited:
Lol. Standby to be labelled a limp wristed lefty Liberal terrorist sympathising scum bag. Shame on you! :)

lol
You tell one of these people there's a woman wearing a swimming cap, leggings, and a t-shirt at the beach they would wonder why the heck you're telling them this.

Use the word burkini however and it will manifest an entirely different response, one immediately feels shock, horror, disgust. ;)

Try it :p

The use of neurolinguistics to help maintain civil unrest (and sell news stories) isn't anything new. Sadly a lot of people are susceptible to such things.
 
Last edited:
You know what (OCUK I hope you're swear detection is on form)


I am ****ing sick to death of muslim this muslim that, burkini, hijab clothing etc.

Just **** off and live will you people, I don't care for your religion one single bit, or any other religion for that matter.

It is grinding my nads more than it should but I am sick to ****ing death of hearing about muslim this and that.

Advice, pay no attention and don't click on links about muslim stories.

Am ****ing sick of it. :mad:

Rant over. ;)
 
This is a blatant attempt by Muslims to outbreed good atheists and Christians by increasing the longevity of their life by not exposing themselves to the risk of skin cancer. Totally unacceptable.
 
Is that advice to yourself?

Am trying, trust me I am trying. :mad:

Why is religion even discussed in the 21st century, I thought it was a personal thing that you keep to yourself, as in ones personal belief in god. :confused:

Its all absolutely ****ing ridiculous. :mad:

The fact its even a topic is ridiculous, if you want to look like a seal on the seaside so be it.

Why in this day and age do people care?

Now the letter box people I have an issue with, but if I can see your face who bloody cares if you dress like my nan in the sun.
 
. It still sounds to me like you are arguing that because the certain counties in the middle east have authoritarian, sexist policies France should to?

You are very nearly there. I am saying they have these laws and nobody bats an eyelid. That is a double standard.

Eg our standard is this but then the other country does this and oh well, that's ok then.

Another double standard: Allowing non muslim french women to wear whatever they want to the beach (including head coverings), but banning muslim women from wearing burkinis.

Well as we said at the start of this thread: I) France imposed a ban thus its their rules and II) the ban has now been lifted so this should be the end of the discussion, no?
 
[..]
*Out of interest why do we call it a "pair" of trunks, or "pair of boxers/trousers etc? Last time I checked I only put one boxer(s) on in the morning.:p

History. Leg coverings used to be two seperate pieces in many places, including England. To get the general idea, imagine just the legs from a pair of trousers, cut off at upper thigh level. They were held up by being tied to the clothing you were wearing on your torso, your underwear or a form of belt. Same sort of setup as a suspender belt and stockings, but without any gap between the hose and the torso clothing. The length of the hose could vary from long shorts to complete leg and foot coverings with soles.

You can see examples by looking for "medieval hose" or if you want a slightly more detailed explanation you could watch the beginning of this video on arming garments, which is what you should wear under medieval armour, especially a full plate harness. I'll link rather than embed the video as that seems to be the preferred way outside of the video thread.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQDMtFiDaEA

I recommend the whole channel if you have any interest in medieval English armour, by the way. There is a lot of detail.
 
Last edited:
A display of antagonistic policies doesn't really help.

I'm not talking about those who have already put there alligence with terrorists, but the everyday folk who get reinforcement of 'us vs them'.

A good point...and clothing is a big part of displaying and strengthening division between "us" and "them". So your argument also goes against your point as well as in favour of it.

I'm on the fence about it. On the one hand, it is a display of seperation and different allegience and thus of conquest. On the other hand, it could be a compromise that might reduce those things. Maybe. Possibly.

People who dismiss it as being just trousers, a long sleeved shirt and a bathing cap are either completely failing to understand the point or are pretending to do so for rhetorical reasons. Symbols chosen to display a particular meaning and/or to proclaim allegience to a particular ideology have far more meaning than their literal ones. A Christian cross is just two lines...but it isn't. A white flag is just a piece of cloth...but it isn't. A CND symbol is just a few lines in a circle...but it isn't. An orange sash is just a piece of cloth...but it isn't (not in Ireland, anyway). And so on.
 
it should be a worldwide ban i admire france for their stance. If they want to wear burkas they should stay back in the countries where its normal i would like to get rid of it here in england. When i walk through town here in yorkshire i see loads of them its not normal and we should not put up with it.
 
Last edited:
it should be a worldwide ban i admire france for their stance. If they want to wear burkas they should stay back in the countries where its normal i would like to get rid of it here in england. When i walk through town here in yorkshire i see loads of them its not normal and we should not put up with it.

How can there be countries where it is normal if there's a worldwide ban? Why do you have to "put up with" anything, what difference does it make to your life what other people chose to wear?
 
People who dismiss it as being just trousers, a long sleeved shirt and a bathing cap are either completely failing to understand the point or are pretending to do so for rhetorical reasons. Symbols chosen to display a particular meaning and/or to proclaim allegience to a particular ideology have far more meaning than their literal ones. A Christian cross is just two lines...but it isn't. A white flag is just a piece of cloth...but it isn't. A CND symbol is just a few lines in a circle...but it isn't. An orange sash is just a piece of cloth...but it isn't (not in Ireland, anyway). And so on.

Yep, this pretty much confirms what i was saying.

You're seriously comparing this ridiculous outfit which was invented last week to christian crosses?

Does a Christian cross give a person who isn't used to walking around half naked in public the ability to go to a beach naked? There isn't even a connection to the things you've spouted lmao.

A woman who isn't confident in going around half naked everywhere simply wants to go to the beach and you're there thinking its some kind of political display or some sort of military uniform? :D Must be horrible living life with a minset like that.

I guess seeing a crescent moon and stars also evoke this same irrational responses in you? When you see a crescent moon in the sky do you think Allah is trolling you? :D
 
Last edited:
[..]
I guess seeing a crescent moon and stars also evoke this same irrational responses in you? When you see a crescent moon in the sky do you think Allah is trolling you? :D

No, I think there's a partial eclipse of the moon.

When I see a particular crescent moon and stars symbol made by a person I see a symbol that has a meaning other than a curved line and some shapes.

You can't possibly be so limited in your understanding that you can't understand that a symbol has a meaning other than its physical form. If you were that limited you wouldn't be able to read or write because you wouldn't be able to understand the concept of a letter, let alone words. You would only be able to see the physical forms of letters - they would be meaningless lines to you.

So you are pretending to not understand when you are making your "reply" to my post, as a rhetorical device. Which only goes to show that you don't have a real reply.
 
Am trying, trust me I am trying. :mad:

Why is religion even discussed in the 21st century, I thought it was a personal thing that you keep to yourself, as in ones personal belief in god. :confused:

Its all absolutely ****ing ridiculous. :mad:

The fact its even a topic is ridiculous, if you want to look like a seal on the seaside so be it.

Why in this day and age do people care?

Now the letter box people I have an issue with, but if I can see your face who bloody cares if you dress like my nan in the sun.

I think largely because people keep bringing it up, usually not the people of the religion themselves (see this thread as an example - Some people just want to wear a (pretty boring) style of clothing, yet it's been made newsworthy by idiots trying to ban it, for no real reason).
 
You are very nearly there. I am saying they have these laws and nobody bats an eyelid. That is a double standard.

Eg our standard is this but then the other country does this and oh well, that's ok then.

I don't think you'll find many people commenting negatively about the Burkini ban just ignoring the fact Saudi has stupid dress requirements as well. The difference is this is a thread about Burkinis, hence the title - "What are people's thoughts on the burkini ban in France?". Saudis dress policy is pretty irrelevant to this thread.


Well as we said at the start of this thread: I) France imposed a ban thus its their rules and II) the ban has now been lifted so this should be the end of the discussion, no?

Well ask the OP why he started the thread then?
 
History. Leg coverings used to be two seperate pieces in many places, including England. To get the general idea, imagine just the legs from a pair of trousers, cut off at upper thigh level. They were held up by being tied to the clothing you were wearing on your torso, your underwear or a form of belt. Same sort of setup as a suspender belt and stockings, but without any gap between the hose and the torso clothing. The length of the hose could vary from long shorts to complete leg and foot coverings with soles.

You can see examples by looking for "medieval hose" or if you want a slightly more detailed explanation you could watch the beginning of this video on arming garments, which is what you should wear under medieval armour, especially a full plate harness. I'll link rather than embed the video as that seems to be the preferred way outside of the video thread.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQDMtFiDaEA

I recommend the whole channel if you have any interest in medieval English armour, by the way. There is a lot of detail.

So basically like Chaps. Makes sense. Thanks.:D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom