TO SUPPORT OR NOT TO SUPPORT THE BANNING OF BURKINIS - APPROACH WITH CAUTION

Several weeks ago I wrote a post criticising a journalist who criticised the British TV channel, Channel 4, for using a Muslim journalist, dressed in a headscarf to present a news programme dealing with the Nice massacre, by a mad and evil man who apparently depicted himself as being a Muslim.

Today, I am writing a post questioning the prudence of this same Muslim journalist, Ramona Aly, in an article she wrote in The Guardian newspaper, criticising the a French local authority for banning the wearing of 'burkinis' on its beaches. Ramona has, essentially, argued that, there are more important things which could exercise the intellect of the French, than to be bothered with deliberations as to whether or not to ban the burkini from their beaches.

The burkini, it should be said, is a bathing garment, worn by orthodox Muslims who have an obsession with covering up the human body, in such a way as to make it devoid of all its individuality and beauty. Yes, it is the kind of garment that people in 18th century and before would have worn. 

In a paradoxical way, the burkini, while intending to repel men from looking at the wearer, probably would tend to have the opposite effect of attracting unwelcome attention from both males and females, as they endeavour to fathom the motive of the wearer.

This underlying sentiment, I believe, demonstrates some insensitivity on the part of Ms Ramona, as she seems not to be taking account of the fact that she is referring to the people of a country, which is still mourning the catastrophic loss of nearly 100 innocent citizens who were cruelly murdered as if they were insect, and the grievous maiming of scores of others.

Ms Ramona, it seems to me, is speaking from the perspective of herself, and others of her faith, who are more conservative in their religion, and would want to exercise their right to wear the burkini, in order to enjoy the soothing and exciting joy of having a bathe and frolicking on the beach.

I am concerned that people of minority ethnic, religious, cultural, and political backgrounds, should not unfairly be expected or forced to simply assimilate into an amorphous whole with the majority populations. Since that can only be achieved with these smaller communities giving up all that defines, differentiate, and identifies them, within the mainstream culture. At the same time, line water encroaching on the surrounding land and submerging it, given time and with some helpful planning, accommodation and a high level of 'assimilation' of the constituents populations in a society, does take place; through an evolutionary process.

There might be a case to argue that, people of different religious and cultural customs do need a period of time to be allowed to make the transition from being 'the other', 'the them', 'the outsider', to 'the us', 'the we', but that this period of time should not become permanent or so long as to simple allow 'the them', 'the outsiders' to become permanently 'them', 'the outsiders.' 

If they are to become an integral part of their 'new family' or 'new country', then, it is vital that they, at a suitable time, begin to 'dress themselves in its clothing, its values, and its societal aspirations.' That they superficially assume its weltanschauung', its worldview, before making it genuinely as much theirs as any other citizens.

The point which Ms Ramona, and others who would argue in support of the burkinis, needs to be mindful of, is this. It is one thing to speak in defence of 'controversial issues such as the wearing of burkinis, and even the burqa, in an hypothetical sense, and in the context of the defence of the right of the individual. However, when the 'war has come to and is being fought in Europe, by the Extreme Islamists such as Isis/Daesh, priority has to be given to measures to preserve life, and not to the right of this or that group to be able to wear a particularistic clothing.

It is right that liberals and progressives will and should defend the rights of people to be free to wear what they want to wear and to be free to say things which are not going to harm people or induce others to harm them because of their ethnic or cultural origins and religious affiliations. However, at any given stage of what is still a developing situation, they should review what is happening and decide whether to continue to support such rights, and, if so, under what condition.

As humans, in general, we cannot change our physical characteristics.  However, where we can make changes, such as in how we dress and practice our religious beliefs, to make them more congruent with our new home countries, we might find that it is prudent for us to do so. By being less reluctant to 'let go of the past', we should become more receptive of the changes which are necessary to equip us for the new kind of living we aspire towards. 

Holding onto too much of the past places us as greater risk of recreating the conditions which we are trying to escape, and deprives us and future generations of the aspirational living we year for.

We humans have to wear our skin colour and our gender as givens which cannot be readily changed, but our clothing, language and many of our cultural attributes are not immutable, and, where making some changes to them are necessary to promote trust, personal safety and peaceful co-existence, should be given serious consideration.