Olympe in burkini

This morning I heard a French politician say : France is the country of the liberation of the Woman. It’s the country that invented the miniskirt. It’s the feminists’ country.

How dare he pretend to defend women, when he exhibited such ignorance, in so few words, enough for me to gag on my coffee ? Why didn’t the journalist correct him ? Remind them of our history…

“Pays des droits de l’homme”

France, the feminists’ country ? Yes, the word was born in France. But the first feminist philosopher is the English Mary Wollstonecraft, before Simone de Beauvoir, whose readers were more numerous abroad than in France, where her Deuxième Sexe was harshly criticized. Not especially French, the first wave of feminism emerged in many Western countries. It was in Germany that an international movement of women was born, under the leadership of the journalist Clara Zetkin. It was in the UK that the claim for women’s suffrage was the most virulent, and suffragettes even fought the authorities as early as 1889. Compared to foreign protests, the French mobilization remained weak.

France, the country of the women’s liberation ? We waited a century before France deigned to grant the vote to women, after Spain, Turkey, Burma and even Uzbekistan. Even today, women are better represented in parliaments in Sudan, Iraq and Afghanistan than in France, which was just demoted from the 36th to the 60th spot. Our country distinguishes itself mainly by its delays in equality.

In short, France is not in a position to give lessons in feminism, especially by a political man. Hey guy, a little modesty and discretion, please !

France is above all the “Pays des droits de l’homme”, which means “country of the rights of man”, not human rights, as elsewhere in the world. Because the same word “homme” represents man and human, in this language artificially gendered, in the 17th century, so that the masculine prevails over the feminine, by a dedicated institution, the Académie Française, misogynistic relic, but still active. Keeping this historic designation continues to remind those who forget that the "Declaration of the Rights of Man", which France is so proud of, voluntarily applies only to men : the National Assembly of 1789 considered that women did not deserve rights, before guillotining women who dared claim rights, like Olympe de Gouges. In such a conservative country, the French feminists do what they can, but are struggling.

As for the miniskirt, I’m always astonished by the fact that it’s associated with the “woman’s liberation”. Culturally, this is the same level as the advertising recovery of the slogan “Moulinex liberates the woman” to sell kitchen equipment. Coming from a politician, it’s low. And so stereotyped ! Where does the idea that the more a woman undresses, the more she is emancipated ? Freedom for whom ? Since it’s so important that he talks about it, note that the miniskirt frees the woman less than her thighs and obviously the male desire to access it. Incidentally, this is not the French invention he claims, because it was created by the British designer Mary Quant for her famous model Twiggy, before being popularized in France by the fashion designer Courrèges, a few years later (another case where the woman is forgotten for retain man only). But in the self-absorbed fantasy of this man, France seems to have invented everything.

When I hear that statement I mostly hear that France is the country of arrogant men and ignorant policies. Shut up, please shut up, you make us ashamed. But certainly he starts at the ignorance of my fellow citizens, to better seduce them, taking advantage of the microphone to draw to himself a needy electorate. But why didn’t the journalist confront him with his mistakes and contradictions ?

French woman undress !

In his vision, the liberated woman is wearing short clothes. While the other remains covered ? This is what angers him : he supports municipal decrees of this summer that forbid women to go covered on the beach. Thus at Cannes city, women are now ordered to undress, while in 1918, a similar decree required them to dress in a full bathing suit [...] blouse and trousers for women, i.e. what we now call a "burkini”, neologism formed from the contraction of "burqa" and "bikini".

It’s incredible but, in the state of emergency, although they repeat that we are at war, French political men have nothing better to do than to worry about women’s swimwear ! Rising unemployment and the ecological debt concern them less than the fact that women’s bodies are not offered to people’s eyes.

So much so that some women are now fined for wearing a simple scarf or a pareo. Others are forced to undress in public. How can we denounce the veil as a means of oppressing women [...] and at the same time, assault them in public spaces because of it ? ask the efFRONTé-e-s.

Meanwhile, Canada authorizes the veil in its police, in Australia, the Islamic veil is corporate, while in England, the TV star Nigella Lawson, bathes in burkini, not by religious modesty, since she’s an atheist, but for sun protection. Across the world, many women, because they are modest, believing, hung-up or sick, rediscover the pleasure of swimming with this covering swimwear marketed in recent years, that France would forbid them. By what right ?

Stop telling us what to wear !

Again, in this darkened land, the light comes from elsewhere : London’s Mayor, passing yesterday in Paris, said that nobody should dictate women what they should wear. And that’s all. It’s as simple as that. Yes, just leave us alone !

Since we are at the female clothing and historic reminders, do not forget that wearing pants has been granted to French women only 3 years ago. Some women were interned in mental asylums for daring to wear pants. Today in France, girls are excluded from classes because of their look, because of a scarf or blue hair.

The man who was speaking this morning was a regional deputy, but could be any other French politician, as they all speak so foolishly, because they are blinded by the terrorist threat, which he ended up making the game. So the former president Sarkozy wants to legislate on women’s dress "throughout the territory of the Republic", while covering his wife when he’s going to negotiate juicy contracts abroad. In their hysteria, they all obscure that a country that prohibits a garment is no better than one that imposes it.

Besides the escalation in ridicule, mockery in the foreign press, they have in common to speak for the people concerned. And this is the worst. These men, elected officials, supposed to represent us, cover our words with their speech. They know. They decide. For us. Despite us. For our good. Like the Talibans they claim to denounce.

Women politicians who rebel are called to order, such as bad students, infantilized by the Prime Minister himself. We are in the country of the rights of man, remember ! Women do not have a say. Concerned people are inaudible. And feminists are manipulated.

Feminists defend the freedom to choose

Make no mistake, the feminism mentioned here is only an opportunistic pretext. Because there are immediately fewer people to be indignant about violence against women, rather than a few veiled women. Through this piece of cloth that obsesses them, they condemn not the oppression of women, but a race and a religion. The feminist argument is used by the government to cover its islamophobia. But do not mistake who the enemy is !

Contrary to what men of power are trying to put into their mouths, for feminists, the prohibition is worse than the veil. They defend the freedom to choose. For every woman. Wearing a miniskirt or pants, a combi surfing or a three-piece suit, shaved head or scarf, high heels or rangers, bikini or burkini if she likes it. Every woman has the right to dispose of her body as she wants. No one has to dictate how to dress.

Hey guys, mind you, the State Council has just given reason to them, by suspending the decree which forbade the use of the beach for women according to their dress, because it carries a serious and manifestly illegal attack on fundamental freedoms such as the freedom to come and go, freedom of conscience and personal freedom.

However, ignoring this, instead of resigning, our Prime Minister, as the candidates in presidential campaign, continues to support the racist elected and their illegal decrees that humiliate women.

In doing so, they guillotine Olympe every day.