Banning the Burkini in Cannes: Continuing Oppressing Women Under the Name of Liberation

So recently, the mayor of Cannes in France issued a ban on burkinis. Burkinis is a made-up name for special full-body swimming garment: a hybrid between Burqa and Bikini. In reality, a burkini is a swimming suit composed of leggings and a sort of a short dress worn on top of it. Some burkinis have a hoodie attached and with some other you add a hijab that would cover the head.

I didn’t grow up knowing burkinis. I used to go to the beach and wear a bathing suit. Later, when I decided to wear hijab, I used to put a long dress and hijab. In water, this can be so uncomfortable and heavy and when you go to sit on the beach it collects tons of sand and you feel you instantly gained extra pounds of weight.

At some point I decided to stop swimming, as I felt so much annoyed by the sand and the curious looks. An experience that was supposed to be fun and joyful turned to become itchy and embarrassing. I had the impression everyone would like at me.

And then, I started hearing about some nice suits that modestly cover the body but are made of appropriate fabric that wouldn’t keep the water and would dry as soon as you are out of the water. At that time, no body called these suits burkinis. We didn’t have a specific name for them. We just called them bathing suit for hijabis.

I think they first appeared in Turkey and Malaysia ( I also read somewhere that it was originally designed by an Australian designer of Lebanese descent, Aheda Zanetti) and I remember one of my friends borrowed a suit from another friend who bought it from Turkey and took it to a seamstress and asked her to do something similar.

In Tunisia, Burkinis made their appearance in beaches in the early 2000s. Before then, many women swam either in bathing suits; some others in bikini but many women would wear long dresses or didn’t swim at all. The contact of the long dresses with water and by the effect of pressure and water, they inflate like balloons so women have to keep burst these bubbles of air each time they stand up in the water. Needless to say, that with a long dress, you can’t really swim and move fast. You just dip in the water and stay there. Moreover, once outside the water, the wet dress becomes so tight on the body revealing the shape of the woman and thus defeating the purpose of modesty that a full body suit is supposed to achieve.

Burkini came as the ideal creation. It gave women the opportunity to enjoy water, beach, swim with her friends, kids and family without necessarily looking like an alien.

I remember the first time I went to buy a burkini in Tunisia, it was like trying to buy alcohol in Canada when you are underage. It was in 2008, the dictatorship of Ben Ali was still in place and all sign of religious symbols were suspicious to say the least. Burkini, like hijab, was of course considered in Tunisia as a sign of affiliation with Islamic groups and thus selling them would mean for the regime encouraging women to join these mouvements. So I went to the souk and I asked some store about them. The seller would look at me and assess my real intentions and then once I passed the “test”, he would bring from, literally under the table, one or two packages with a burkini inside them so I can see the models.

But after, the Arab Spring, burkinis were freely sold even in large supermarkets and women who whished to buy one, could freely do so.

It is interesting to note that Tunisian beaches today are full of women wearing burkinis. Even some women, who are not wearing hijab, would go for a burkini.

(It must be mentioned here that women in bathing suits are not harassed but it is very common in these societies that men would stare at women so burkinis is a way to keep some of these unwanted stare away or limited. By no means, burkini would become a way to control to opposite sex attitudes, as this is a matter of education that has never been tackled)

Of course, for people who still consider women covering their bodies as a sign of oppression, burkinis joined the list of words and clothing that linked Muslim women to the world of darkness. For many Muslim women who didn’t want other people commenting on their bodies or showing off their skin for public consumption, burkini achieved the total opposite. It combined liberation with modesty: the best of two worlds!

The recent decision of France to ban burkini from the beaches in Nice is another example of anti-Muslim attitudes wrapped under the disguise of women liberation and combatting religious extremism. All what it will do is: to alienate French Muslim women furthermore and of course prevent them from a nice refreshing swim in the Mediterranean Sea.

What bothers me even more is the total silence of Western feminists. Their silence is disappointing for this is a perfect example of male interference with female choices.

When women are banned from driving in Saudi Arabia, all western feminists would mobilize and stand up (rightly so) to denounce the arbitrariness, abusive and patriarchal nature of such decision. When women in Iran are punished for showing more hair in public or going out with make up, the outrageous reaction of Western feminist is so intense ( and yes we should be outraged) but when Muslim women are banned from going to the beach wearing a burkini, all you hear is silence or whispers. The burkini ban perfectly fits the old equation, so why bother?

Islam= Women oppression

How can a country, considered as a beacon of rights and freedom go so low and do this to its won citizens?

In France, it isn’t a secret that women are allowed to go topless on beaches. There are even some beaches especially designated for nudists. But to prevent women to swim because of the length of their swimming suit is a silly and a simply revengeful reaction. Once again, one of the most vulnerable groups of a society have to pay for the incompetence and failures of the politicians.

At least, and for a small temporary confort, we have some powerful words from Arundhati Roy who commented about the banning of burqa in France in 2010:

“When, as happened recently in France, an attempt is made to coerce women out of the burqa rather than creating a situation in which a woman can choose what she wishes to do, it’s not about liberating her, but about unclothing her. It becomes an act of humiliation and cultural imperialism. It’s not about the burqa. It’s about the coercion. Coercing a woman out of a burqa is as bad as coercing her into one. Viewing gender in this way, shorn of social, political and economic context, makes it an issue of identity, a battle of props and costumes. It is what allowed the US government to use western feminist groups as moral cover when it invaded Afghanistan in 2001. Afghan women were (and are) in terrible trouble under the Taliban. But dropping daisy-cutters on them was not going to solve their problems.”

 

Reflections of a Muslim Woman in a post 9/11 World

These are difficult times for all of us. Difficult for the non-Muslims because all of sudden they find themselves in front of people that they don’t know. They found themselves in front of concepts, vocabulary, ideas they have not paid attention to them before. They found themselves participating in military conflicts in far away countries. Countries on which they ignore almost everything: the language, religion, culture even the geography.

This is also an extremely difficult time for people of Muslim faith. Many of them came to Canada to flee war, famine, persecution, and oppression… Today, many of these Muslims find themselves obliged to take sides in complex wars. Sometimes they see their own children going back to the wars they themselves fled. And many of them find themselves going through discrimination and fear.

Faced with this painful situation, one is conflicted:

• do nothing
• keep watching the news with a passive attitude
• live in fear
• despise the other
• surround yourself with people like you

Or instead:

• be proactive
• learn about the other
• understand the other
• surround yourselves with people different than you

I came to Canada in 1991 in the middle of the first Gulf war. I was against the war. In Tunisia, I participated in my first demonstration to show my disagreement with it. Many of my friends, my family, everyone around me didn’t want to see the Americans drop bombs on Iraq. I didn’t like Saddam Hussein. I thought he was a ruthless dictator. He killed his own people with chemical weapons. He persecuted Shias but also he persecuted Sunnis who didn’t approve of his crimes. But I saw in that war a huge injustice to the Iraqis people. I saw in this injustice a continuation of the imperialistic attitude the American government have been implemented around the world for many years in South America, in Asia and in the Middle East.

When I came to Canada I lived several years in Montreal in Quebec. I was one of the few who wore a hijab, or scarf over my hair. I was exotic and people rarely paid attention to me. I was an invisible minority.I barely heard programs on TV or radio about Islam. Internet as we know today was inexistent. And then there was the huge debate in France about the “foulard”. The media in Quebec picked upon that issue. Some journalists started reporting about it. Questions were being asked whether to introduce such a measure of banning the Islamic scarf in school like France did or not.

And the glances at me in the streets started to change. From an exotic creature, I became to represent the veil of the Muslim French girls that were presented on TV. I became to represent Islam with all the unanswered questions about it. People started asking me questions like:

“What is this on your head?”

“Do you wear it by choice or are you forced to wear it”

With a smile, I answer back that “I wear it by choice” and all of a sudden the face of the person asking me the question became so radiant. They were happy that I am able to choose. As if my simple words reassured them about something. But what if I was lying to them? May be I was oppressed at home. What if my brother beat me everyday so I can wear it. They didn’t want to know anything else. My words sufficed.

But one at home I would ask myself : “why did these strangers think that a scarf can’t be worn by a woman with her own choice?” What made these strangers stop me in the middle of the streets or in the halls of my university worried about my well being and about my own decisions or lack of it?

Personally, I wore the veil when I was 20 year old after 8 years of intense reflection. For me, hijab had a strong sense of religious identity. It defines me, it gives me what we call today confidence.

When I hear some women saying that I can’t get out of the house without make-up. I am surprised. And then they elaborate and they say make-up gives me some confidence then I am still surprised but I understand better. However, when I go out with my hijab people look at me as an alien. They think I am oppressed. I tell them this is my religious identity. And they don’t get it. I try to be smarter and tell them that this is my confidence and then they laugh at my silly argument.

But despite all this incidents, anecdotes happening in North America, Muslims and non-Muslims kept ignoring each other. Each group burying its head in the sand with the hope that God or Allah, will intervene. So for the main stream society, everyone dream of the day when all the Muslims can became less religious, less oppressed, less invading or more westernized and on the other hand, many Muslims lived with the hope that one day all the non Muslims will become with beards and hijab!

And unfortunately, the 9/11 attacks came. The dreams and hopes of both groups were shattered. The war began and the two groups started looking at each other with defiance and suspicion.

After 9/11, two new wars were declared: one in Afghanistan and Iraq. And another one, very insidious, off the radar, was conducted all over the world. This other war is called: war on terror.

Both wars were ugly devastating and with many victims. But on TV, only pictures of Muslims women in burqa were shown and coffins of soldiers being sadly brought home.

As if the message conveyed was the following:

“The men who went there to liberate women in burqa are killed by the horrible terrorists”

But the reality is far more complex than this easy cliché.

Today who still cares about women in burqa in Afghanistan? Who still care about the thousands of refugees, orphans, displaced because of the war? The TV doesn’t show any of their pictures.

What about children elders bombarded? What about men arrested for being suspected as terrorists? What about drones attacks killing civilians? Those were not mentioned they are called collateral damages.

Today the whole word seems to care only about ISIS, the Islamic State. Everyone confuses the Islamic State with Islam. Equally everybody seems to confuse terrorism with Islam.

Personally, I think this is the time where each one of us has some serious homework to do.

As a Muslim, I condemn all sort of violence. As a Muslim I try everyday to answer questions about my religion. I try to educate my own children about their religious identity but I try also to inform people around me about my faith. I don’t pretend to be the only true Muslim or the best representative of my faith. I don’t want to be called a moderate Muslim. I don’t want to be named an extremist Muslim. I am neither a liberal Muslim nor an oppressed Muslim. I am just a Muslim. I am a human being with some strength but also with a lot of weakness. So why do I have to be always the defender of Islam?

If you are a Christian, can I blame you for all the sexual abuse scandals that happened inside the church? No! If you are a German can I blame you for all the horrors of the world war II? Of course not! Today, as a Muslim I can’t be always denouncing and denouncing and denouncing the crime of a group that I don’t have any control on. I can have an opinion yes and I can act upon it.

Also I can have some little control or at least some influence over my family, my friends and my community. I can build strong bridges between people of different faiths. I can explain what Islam requires me to do and I can choose arguments to discuss with the others.

But this can only works if the other is listening. This can only work if the other doesn’t feel superior over me. This can only work if we do it together. This is like a marriage. It can only work with communication and consensus.

Also what I think is important for me to do is that I can give my own narrative. I can speak of Muslim women as I understand them as I see them. I can write books about them to show them like human beings and not simply like beings in cages or in boxes being oppressed. This is how we can eliminate the solitude between us.

Yes we are different but at the same time we are close to each other in our humanity.

 This was the speech I gave on March 3, 2015 at the Emmanuel United Church.

Petit lexique des symboles des femmes musulmanes

Ces derniers jours, j’ai l’impression que plus la Charte des valeurs fait les manchettes dans les nouvelles, plus les esprits des gens sont confus et plus leur vocabulaire devient imprécis et bourré d’erreurs. Un grand méli-mélo de termes, exactement comme dans un bazar perse ou un souk arabe. Ce charabia de termes et de mots à connotation barbare rajoute au climat de peur et d’ignorance.
Alors, par pure magnanimité et pour dissiper le brouillard qui s’est emparé des esprits et des dictionnaires, ainsi que pour sauver le Québec de la grande noirceur qui s’abat sur lui, j’ai décidé de faire un cadeau à Madame Marois et aux partisans de la Charte (allez dire que les musulmanes ne sont pas généreuses).

En fait, j’ai décidé d’écrire un guide lexicologique pour les novices qui se lancent dans ce débat pour la première fois. Ce guide peut aussi être consulté sporadiquement par les intermédiaires à chaque fois que les choses se brouillent. Je ne pense pas que les «pro» comme Bernard Drainville et compagnie en ont besoin! Mais à eux de décider…

Le hidjab ou hijab: mot toujours féminin, jamais masculin à cause de l’oppression des femmes musulmanes. Aussi écrit dans les commentaires des partisans de la Charte comme ijab ou idjab ou parfois même la «chose» ou le «torchon sur la tête». Ce mot est d’origine arabe et veut dire dérober au regard ou cacher.

Il peut être attaché de différentes façons. De gauche (pour les plus modernistes) de droite (pour les conservatrices) ou au milieu pour les vieilles mémères comme moi. Mais parait-il, selon les sondages, quelle que soit sa forme, sa couleur, sa marque, il reste très dangereux, d’où sa prochaine interdiction par Pauline Marois.

Le foulard: anciennement utilisée par les grand-mamans et les arrières grand-mamans québécoises pures laines pour aller à l’église le dimanche. Encore utilisé par des grands-mamans d’aujourd’hui qui sortent de chez le coiffeur de peur que leur mise en plis ne se défasse. La Charte des valeurs québécoises est restée muette là-dessus. Toutefois, quand on lui rajoute l’adjectif «islamique», il rejoint le mot hidjab et peut montrer des signes d’agressivité.

Le tchador: prononcé «chat-dort», mais rassurez-vous les souris, les politiciens, sont là pour le surveiller! Mot originaire d’Iran et qui veut dire littéralement «tente». Oui, oui, vous avez bien lu. Tente, comme la tente de camping qu’on prend avec nous l’été, avec la seule différence qu’elle est toujours de couleur noire. Ce symbole fait beaucoup peur, car il rappelle de mauvais souvenirs comme le film américain des années 90 Jamais sans ma filleou Khomeiny avec son regard perçant et ses sourcils froncés. Étrangement, le tchador ne fait pas l’unanimité entre les politiciens. Fatma Houda Pépin en a fait son cheval de bataille, suivi là dedans par Philippe Couillard, en prenant bien soin de la mettre à la porte et de s’approprier l’idée. Mais Bernard Drainville, lui, hésite encore. Car même s’il a pensé que le «chat-dort» sera interdit dans la fonction publique, il sera quand même permis dans les universités. Cherchez la logique!

Le voile: quand il est sage et innocent, c’est un voile qui recouvre la tête sans faire de dommages au cerveau, comme par exemple le voile de la mariée. Toutefois, quand il se marie à l’islam, deux mutations génétiques peuvent se produire. La première: le voile islamique. La femme devient opprimée, contrôlée, sans opinion. Elle montre des signes de détresse qui n’échappe pas aux yeux de Bernard Drainville. Mais heureusement, son visage reste intact. Cependant, avec le voile intégral, c’est la catastrophe. Tout le visage est couvert et on ne laisse qu’une seule petite fente au niveau des yeux et des petits trous au niveau du nez pour respirer. Au cas où le fabricant du niqab (toujours un homme) omet ces trous, c’est la suffocation totale.

Le niqab: mot qui veut dire «masque», mais pas aussi inoffensif que les masques portés à l’Halloween. Apparemment, il peut être porté par les voleurs pour effectuer des hold-upd’où la raison de son interdiction. Selon les rumeurs qui circulent, les femmes qui le portent sont toujours fâchées qu’elles n’osent pas afficher leur visage. Certaines préfèrent se tourner vers le mur pour parler à la classe au lieu de vous regarder en face.

La burqa: selon Nicolas Sarkozy, ex-président français, la burqa est un «signe d’asservissement» de la femme. Malgré tous ses efforts pour obtenir la nationalité française, la «burqa n’est pas la bienvenue sur le territoire de la République française», encore selon les dires de Sarkozy. Pauline Marois a tellement adoré les mots de Sarkozy qu’elle a décidé de lui emboîter le pas. Laura Bush, la femme de Georges W. Bush, ex-président américain, a imploré les Américains d’aller en guerre en Afghanistan pour sauver les Afghanes de la burqa. Michelle Obama n’a encore rien dit surement préoccupée par les frasques supposées de Beyoncé et de Barack.

Voilà, c’est fait! Si vous avez d’autres mots que vous ne comprenez pas, n’hésitez surtout pas à me contacter.

Ce texte a été publié sur le Huffington Post Québec