In a fresh controversial move from the French, the city of Cannes has banned the burkini, with Mayor David Lisnard claiming that the beach clothing is “a symbol of Islamic extremism”. 

Lisnard may be confused; I hardly think the so-called Islamic State (ISIS) would support clothing that actually enables women, who might otherwise feel uncomfortable undressing, to swim at the beach. In fact, ISIS might not be overly pleased with women going out at all.

However, while I believe that the burkini ban is a flagrant violation of a woman’s choice to wear what she wants, I am certainly not going to endorse it as an item of clothing. It is important to recognise that the burkini is not a symbol of Islamic extremism, rather of extreme conservatism.  

Unfortunately, Lisnard’s rhetoric is more problematic still.  He goes on to say that the burkini is not “respectful of good morals”, referring to the secularist tenets of the French state.  What Lisnard says here inversely (and ironically) feeds into an ideological, and arguably dangerous, assumption regarding the burkini itself: that the clothes one chooses to wear denotes the moral character and value of an individual.  The majority of burkini-wearing women choose to do so themselves. It is nonsensical to pretend that they are all forced into wearing it, although choices are never made in a vacuum. 

However you wish to look at it, the burkini is both a symptom and symbol of a cultural consciousness, and does not carry straightforward religious connotations; just like everything else we choose to wear, it makes a statement.

The burkini is often considered a “modest” garment by its wearers; just as David Lisnard believes that typical swimwear is “respectful of good morals”, I imagine many wearers of the burkini genuinely believe themselves to be no different. Wouldn’t it sound absurd to classify regular beachwear as “respectful of good morals”? 

Interestingly, the burkini is often marketed under the category of so-called “modest-wear”.  We need to move away from the idea that what women wear is a marker of their morals; this is a total non sequitur, and such branding of clothing like the burkini doesn’t help.  By calling certain items of clothing “modest-wear”, less obscuring garments are relegated to some morally inferior position. This then passes an implicit judgement on those who, by not wearing them, are patently not “modest”. 

The notions of respectability and modesty which wearers of the burkini believe they espouse is an indication that the cultural consciousness which influences their choice to wear it can be damaging towards women.  No-one can escape from the myriad of external factors when making choices which we believe are objective.  Proponents of the burkini have made statements supporting the rights of women to choose to wear them, and there is no doubt that we should wholly respect people’s choices.

However, there is an underlying current to the pro-burkini narrative that is more worrying.

Huda Jawad recently defended the burkini in The Independent, saying it is for women ‘to feel safe from the sexual gaze of society while engaging in a very ordinary past-time’.  Jawad’s statement is borne of a belief that in order to escape unwanted sexual attention, a woman must arm herself against it. This is not far from victim-blaming.  If I choose to display my body, I am not inviting “the sexual gaze of society”. The belief that the onus falls upon the woman to protect herself from sexual harm is part of a wider, damaging social consciousness. It betrays an attitude which sees men as unable to control themselves when faced with a woman’s bare skin; this attitude in itself is what gives men the licence stare or grope. Worst of all, it creates a cultural sphere where an outdated notion of sexual morality is allowed to run rampant, and ultimately define the women it applies to.

However, banning the burkini is not the answer; at the very least this would inhibit women who feel they can’t swim any other way. There is no need to make life any harder for women than it already is.   We must remember that the burkini is not a symbol of a woman’s devotion to God; it is undoubtedly a cultural phenomenon, which is steeped in archaic fear of female sexuality. There is no easy answer to the debate surrounding the burkini, but removing a woman’s choice to wear it is an assault on the foundations of any secular democracy.

Too many countries in this world censor and restrict women’s clothing, behaviour and sexuality.  A pioneer of secular ideals such as France should not stoop to that level. Instead, we must give women choices, and subsequently provide them, and wider communities, with the means to make those choices as informed and progressive as possible.