FIGAROVOX/TRIBUNE – The Muslim dating app “Muzz” offered to pay the fines for wearing the burkini. The idea is to obtain by provocation or by creating the conditions for violence, which the rule of law prohibits, argues the essayist Céline Pina.
Former local elected official, Céline Pina is an essayist and activist. She is the founder of “Viv(r)e la République”, she has also published guilty silence (Kero, 2016) and These essential goods (Books, 2021).
The banning of the burqini or bathing burqa in swimming pools was experienced as a failure for the Islamists with Muslim Brotherhood tendencies, whose relay associations have tried to impose this garment intended to mark civilizational separatism even in places of leisure. As with the Islamists, respect for the law does not count, when the fight is lost on the ground of legality, it takes to the streets and the calls to break the rules continue. The idea is to obtain by provocation, tension or by creating the conditions for violence, what the rule of law prohibits. Hence the proposal by Muzz, a community dating site based in England, to pay the fines of those who refuse to comply with French law: “Muslim sisters, it’s hot outside, take a leisurely swim. Don’t worry, Muzz will reimburse you if you are fined for wearing a burkini“.
This marketing operation made a lot of noise on the networks. The hashtag #freetheburkini quickly became trendy. The search for buzz has therefore worked well and fulfilled its function of identity call to order and victim lament. Indeed, to justify its positioning, the site uses Islamist rhetoric, explaining that Muslim women are condemned “to an unfair choice – escape the heat wave by swimming in a bikini or pay a fine for choosing a modest outfit“. To be forced to dress like an immodest “whore” because they cannot wear a modest outfit, this is how the Islamists present the prohibition of the full veil in the seaside version.
Second manipulation, it turns out that the “muslim” are not “condemned to an unjust choicebecause the veil is not the mark of a good or true Muslim, it is an Islamist marker. Many Muslim women are not veiled and even fight the wearing of the veil. Many of them frequent swimming pools and do not sink into a separatist fight where everything is good to show off the fact that civility and French law are refused. Swimming pools are not in fact forbidden to Muslim women because the burqini is prohibited there, it is the fundamentalists of political Islam who deprive themselves of swimming pools because they do not accept to comply with a regulation which is binding on all .
Not all those who wear the veil are aware of it, but they participate, even reluctantly, in the refusal of equality.
Of course, to allow the Islamo-leftist allies of the Muslim Brotherhood to step up to the plate in all hypocrisy, the site brings out the argument aimed at imposing the veil everywhere: it declares that it supports “the rights of all French women in their choice of clothing for bathing“. This is to forget that the veil is not a garment. So try to wear it one day, take it off the next day, put it back on after a week and take it off again and you will quickly understand the difference between a garment and a banner. The veil is not a garment, like shorts or a skirt, but a sign. It carries a message about women and their place in society. It plays a role in identity assignment and has a social function. It serves to install separatism, to claim an identity and carries only one message, that of the inferiority of women and the impurity of their bodies.
Not all those who wear the veil are aware of it, but they participate, even reluctantly, in the refusal of equality. Because that is what it is all about: to illustrate, through the wearing of clothing with an identity connotation, the refusal of French civility through the rejection of equality between men and women and community control. on a population. Thus, while the provocation is above all to be found on the Islamist side, the discourse is deeply victimized and plays with the idea of a persecution of Muslims. This victimization then makes it possible to pass the baton to the classic parties such as LFI and EELV, responsible for treating as “Islamophobes” all those who are not fooled by the maneuver.
For the moment the site is a winner: it has offered itself a free publicity stunt and has made it possible to widely disseminate the elements of language of the Islamists.
Muzz’s announcement is indeed a provocation, but by encouraging the rejection of the law, it encourages the establishment of a permanent balance of power in the name of community belonging. Certainly Muzz very quickly withdrew its publication as soon as the Ministry of the Interior took legal action, the initiative being perfectly illegal. This proves that the resistance of the public authorities is not in vain. But for the moment the site is a winner: it has offered itself a free publicity stunt and has made it possible to widely disseminate the elements of language of the Islamists, it would therefore be useful for this umpteenth provocation to be sanctioned in an exemplary manner, with a heavy fine or even a broadcast ban.
As long as it does not become more costly to support the vision of the world of the Islamists than to distinguish oneself from it, they will continue to gain ground among the French of the Muslim faith. They already have a very strong influence and their vision of the world is majority and dominant among the youngest. It might be time to look this reality in the face and draw the consequences by arming ourselves politically and legally to enforce on our soil one of the fundamental principles of our political society: the fact that we are equal in right to beyond race, sex, our political and/or religious affiliations. It is indeed this ideal that Islamism is attacking through the question of the veil. This is why it is a question of civilization and it is because of this that 61% of French people think that “Islam is incompatible with the values of French society“.