Much has been made over the French government’s back and forth about a woman’s right to wear a burqini – a burqa/bikini combination made so Muslim women can go to the beach in a more comfortable garment than a traditional burqa. France first enforced a burqini ban on many beaches, then eventually rescinded the law, only for the country’s police to continue to force women on beaches to remove their burqini’s in front of everyone else spending a day by the ocean despite the court’s ruling. There are a variety of reasons why burqinis should be allowed on beaches, especially those supposedly in “free” sovereign countries, the least of which is that the garment allows very religious women to be more empowered, not less.
Even with all the opposing viewpoints, a letter sent to a newspaper in England perfectly paints a picture as to why a burqini ban is ridiculous. As a bonus, he even offers up another piece of clothing that should be banned and all of the reasons it has done more damage than a full-body swimsuit. Henry Stewart, the level headed man in question, writes,
“No woman in a burqa (or a hijab or a burkini) has ever done me any harm. But I was sacked (without explanation) by a guy in a suit. Men in suits missold me pensions and endowments, costing me thousands of pounds. A man in a suit led us on a disastrous and illegal war. Men in suits led the banks and crashed the world economy. Other men in suits then increased the misery through millions through austerity. If we are to start telling people what to wear, maybe we should ban suits.
In most cases it is thought that a woman could best articulate an argument against a policy that directly effects women, and that’s still probably true in this case. But with so much back and forth and racist views all around the world in regards to such an innocent piece of clothing, it’s nice to have any sort of common sense presented regardless of the speaker’s gender.