The last time I visited a beach, I saw numerous variations of women’s swimsuits.
I recall seeing countless bright bandeaus, tiny triangle tops and push-up bikinis that might as well have been hydrophilic bras. Bottoms ranged from strappy, cheeky Victoria’s Secret versions to high-waisted bottoms. I spotted one or maybe two one-piece bathing suits.
However, amidst the array of swim attire worn on the Michigan Avenue Beach in Chicago, Illinois, not even the most risque looks would ever be fined by the police for not being “respectful of good morals and secularism,” not “appropriate” or for being disrespectful of “hygiene and security rules.”
So when an ordinance banished burkinis for these reasons on beaches across France, where the usual apparel worn for days enjoying the sea in countless cultures covers much less, it arouses confusion.
A burkini is a type of swimsuit that is intended for women. The suit covers nearly every inch of the body with fabric except the face, hands and feet. The suit was created for women who practice Islamic traditions, which include modest dress.
On Aug. 26, France’s highest administrative court overturned the ban in one of 30 French towns. While the other towns are anticipated to have the ban eliminated as well, the law’s existence still leads to countless questions about the logic behind it and its true purpose.
The argument that a burkini is not “respectful of good morals and secularism” raises the question: Can women ever win?
If a person deems that a female laying on the sand is wearing a top that reveals excess cleavage or swim bottoms showing off too much skin, without fail, cat-calling or slut-shaming is sure to follow. However, women should be sure not to shoot for the polar opposite, either.
Wearing a wetsuit that covers all parts of the body, despite being in cooperation with the traditions of one’s religion, is considered immoral as well.
Where a happy medium exists is a question that remains unanswered.
When a burkini is described as not “appropriate,” it reminds me of a dress code I once had to obey.
The difference was that I was in high school, and it was enforced if a hem was too short or shirt was too low. Never would an outfit covering all of the arms and legs be considered too inappropriate for school, and especially not on the beach.
However, one argument for banning burkinis has me the most frazzled — that they are disrespectful of “hygiene and security rules.”
There are children urinating in the ocean every day, and usual beach attire provides almost no boundaries between the body and the water or sand, yet this has never been of high concern pertaining to hygiene rules.
However, fear not, women in France are being fined for the dangerous germs that burkinis generate.
It would of course be a violation of human rights for the government to conflict with citizens’ freedom of religion, which is why the law leaves out what even the naked eye can observe.
The elephant on the beach is that these women aren’t being stopped for wearing clothing that is not “appropriate,” the women are being stopped out of fear.
While France has endured a gruesome year of attacks, there must be limits on overbearing attempts at protection. Overturning the ban seems like a step forward.
However, that’s recovering from taking five steps backwards after women all over France have been fined for simply demonstrating the same freedom of religion every person is entitled to.
apoudrie@indiana.edu
