Attack over women’s ‘shorts’ in southern France

[Albertoo]

Religion vs women's rights. Again.

Young Muslim men beat up the husbands and boyfriends of women deemed too scantily clothed on the beach (in shorts). Why do I read many more comments in defense of the burkini (the recently invented 'islamic' swimwear), but precious little about the attempts at religion to encroach on the beach?

I love the PC denial of the article "There is no information on the alleged perpetrators’ .. religion." Who calls girls "whores" for wearing shorts? French Buddhists?

Attack over women’s ‘shorts’ in southern France inflames social media

Controversy around female clothing in France gained further momentum after a dozen young men assaulted a family in the country’s south. Males suffered a severe beating after attackers deemed the women’s clothes excessively revealing.

The incident occurred last Sunday in the city of Toulon, southern France. According to local prosecutor Bernard Marchal, the family of two sisters, their husbands, their brother and three children aged between 10 and 14 had been riding bikes and rollerblading through an eastern neighborhood of the city. They were approached by a group of about 10 young men, who insulted the women for wearing ‘inappropriate’ clothing. The husbands and brother intervened and were severely beaten. One of them suffered multiple facial fractures, and another got his nose broken.

“They [the attackers] shouted to them [the women] 'whores' and 'go on, get naked’,” the Valeurs Acuelles magazine quoted Marchal as saying.

Two suspects, reportedly one 17-year-old and one 19-year-old, were apprehended on Tuesday. It is thought they have a preexisting criminal record. The identity of the alleged perpetrators remains undisclosed. An investigation is underway to track down the others.

Mayor of Toulon Hubert Falco said that “attacking my fellow citizens in shorts is abnormal and pitiable.”

“I am happy that thanks to the efficiency of the national police and CCTV cameras of the city, we could apprehend the perpetrators. One does not attack a woman because she is wearing shorts. This heinous act must be punished harshly,” France Bleu quoted the Mayor as saying.

One of the victims, named only as Marie, commented on the incident to the Nice Matin newspaper on Friday.

“We were not wearing shorts. We were in sportswear. One youngster badmouthed us and then things quickly escalated,” newspaper quotes the victim.

There is no information on the alleged perpetrators’ identities, nationalities, citizenship or religion. However, some in France linked the attacks on short-wearers to the burkini controversy and Islam in general. Julien Leonardelli, the department secretary for the far-right National Front in Haute-Garonne, claimed on Twitter, that "Sharia is already installed in Toulon."

https://www.rt.com/news/358949-france-toulon-attack-shorts/

[uppityperson]

1. People should have no say in what others wear, and if they are titillated, then it's their own damn

problem.

[left-of-center2012]

2. Shouldn't people who migrate assimilate?

Shouldn't they try to fit in and adapt,
instead of enforcing values brought with them?

[Albertoo]

3. Erdogan TOLD ethnic Turkish Germans NOT to assimilate at a rally in Germany

[Nye Bevan]

4. Or how about just following their own values themselves,

without imposing their views on others? The Amish, for example, aren't big on bikinis and shorts but for some reason I never hear about Amish people assaulting non-Amish folk who wear shorts.

[Warren DeMontague]

7. because some people lose their shit over skin, nude bodies, or bathing suits?

Seriously, it's like they come fucking unglued.

[davidn3600]

24. Most progressives would rather favor multiculturalism

Basically a variety of different cultures, religions, customs, people, etc, all living under the same social umbrella peacefully all minding their own business.

In other words, they want a salad bowl and not a melting pot.

It's a bit of a fantasy, especially when it comes to religion. Both Muslims and Christians seem to have a serious problem minding their own business. They like to exert social control, especially over women and homosexuals. They become very irritated when their neighbor doesn't worship or live in the manner they like. They both advocate conversion and expansion, not to keep to themselves.

[romanic]

25. It is a bit of a fantasy

Well more so in the Middle East where non-muslims and foreign labor are treated like shit and persecuted for simply existing.

[AngryAmish]

42. If you moved to Saudi Arabis would start to follow their mores?

[left-of-center2012]

62. I would not physically attack them for theirs n/t

[WestCoastLib]

78. No. And I would not move to Saudia Arabia for precisely that reason.

[whathehell]

80. Exactly..If you have serious differences with a country's laws & culture, don't go there.

End of story.

[Abq_Sarah]

86. I certainly followed their dress code in public

They weren't as uptight back in the 70's but I damned sure didn't go out without a kaftan.

[whathehell]

79. Yes, and hell yes!

How dare they impose on the hospitality of another country by trying to violently FORCE their values upon them? And people wonder why so many in Europe are wary of immigration?

[Warpy]

5. They're just like the western men who justify rape

according to what the victim was wearing, even when what she was wearing was perfectly appropriate.

I know France has laws against assault. Maybe it's time to deport some of these punks.

[Warren DeMontague]

6. I hope all the people outraged over the burkini ban will similarly stand up

and defend the right of people to wear scant or even provocative clothing, if that's what they want to do.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

17. You can hope all you want

I don't expect 100+ replies in this thread.

[awoke_in_2003]

19. Against the burkini ban

and against these fuckstcks, too

[True Dough]

27. Agreed

There are many people opposed to oppression either way.

[Warren DeMontague]

28. That's me, too.

I'm what is known in the vernacular as, "pro-choice"

[Dorian Gray]

30. I'm anti burkini ban

and I think that if these attackers should be arrested for assault. And if they are immigrants, they should lose their residency over something like this.

It's terrible. Nobody should attack any woman for what she wears. It's horrible. This woman was riding a bike. Good Lord, let her ride in peace.

[Warren DeMontague]

32. I'm on the same page.

I think individuals should be free to choose for themselves. That goes for shorts, it goes for burkinis, it goes for pirate garb, all of it.

[Taitertots]

33. Wish in one hand and poop in the other...

How about they stop letting people immigrate from cultures where violence is regularly used to force religious dogma on people? Instead of wishing for a fantasy world where the immigrants have shared values.

[Warren DeMontague]

34. I think if people want to immigrate into a pluralistic, secular society

they need to be prepared to exist and co-exist peacefully in such.

But I'm not in charge of France's immigration policies, of course.

[jberryhill]

35. Well of course

I missed your comment on the woman set on fire in New York yesterday. So there is selective outrage all around.

[ck4829]

36. It's also weird that nobody demands that Emirjeta Xhelili "assimilate"

And I haven't seen anybody call for her deportation.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/12/suspect-punched-muslim-women-in-face-and-tried-to-pull-off-their/

I'm pretty sure trying to set people on fire or punching strangers aren't American cultural values.

[Warren DeMontague]

38. She should go to jail, is what she should do.

As should the shorts attackers.

Edited to add: Its true, punching people and setting them on fire arent tolerant values appropriate to a pluralistic 21st century society.

Neither are having a meltdown over shorts, bathing suits, nudity or sex.

[Warren DeMontague]

40. I didnt see the thread. But i condemn all such acts of violence.

And unlike the people here who fell all over themselves to make excuses for the charlie hebdo shooters, etc. i will unequivocally condemn the perpetrators of such acts and hold them solely responsible with no victim blaming.

[jberryhill]

41. Threads, plural

There were several posts about the Muslim woman set afire in New York yesterday, by a Christian immigrant.

They attracted very few comments relative to this story.

That says something about DU.

A very common feature of online discussion forums is selective engagement. For example, at freeperville one will no doubt find frequent stories of the "illegal immigrant commits crime" variety. Are there undocumented immigrants who commit crimes? Yes, any population of persons includes persons who commit crimes. But the effect of selective engagement with that variety of story is to create a broader association of undocumented immigrants and crime.

Your observation was about what other people on DU should be doing, to wit:

"I hope all the people outraged over the burkini ban will similarly stand up..." etc.

The hypocrisy is not in your attitude about people being free to wear what they want, it is about your urging "people outraged over the burkini ban" to condemn this incident or somehow have some odious view attributed to them by silence. If you are going to expect other people to comment on this incident, then it seems odd that you, and "all the people" who agree with you, did not comment on the other story, posted multiple times here.

Essentially, your comment was intended to scold a group of people for not condemning this incident to your personal satisfaction, while it is quite clear that none of the "people who were not outraged over the burkini ban" - which group I assume from context excludes you, since you refer to them as a "them" - have had anything to say about a woman being lit on fire in the United States.

Yes, you didn't see the thread. Neither, apparently, did any of your ilk. See how that works?

[kcr]

69. I would rec this if I could

[11 Bravo]

75. If you wish to call Warren a liar, why not just spit it out?

I didn't see the thread in question either. Oh, FUCK! I'm an ilk!

[jberryhill]

76. WTF?

No, I am not calling him a liar, and you clearly do not seem to have understood what I was saying, nor the intent of the last line of my post.

He is calling out an un-named group of - burkini ban critics - to condemn this reported assault, as if there were some requirement for others to comment on threads of his choosing and in the manner of his choosing while, apparently, the various threads about a woman in New York who was lit afire by a Christian immigrant do not seem to have attracted much commentary at all.

That is distinct from saying "I condemn both things", because his initial point was to suggest there is some moral defect in those who do not rush to comment on the threads he wants others to comment upon.

[Warren DeMontague]

88. Like I said, I condemn both. But... I'm consistently pro-personal freedom.

I just wonder whether the people who think blasphemous cartoons and the sports illustrated swimsuit issue should be illegal, would be able to bring themselves to do the same.

[muntrv]

60. Oppose both. People should be free to wear conservative swimwear or

outfits that leave nothing to the imagination.

[JI7]

8. i do think there is a problem with islamic fundies but do you have another source besides RT for

this story ?

[melman]

12. here's two

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/09/09/in-france-women-in-shorts-become-another-symbol-of-the-clothing-culture-war/


http://nytlive.nytimes.com/womenintheworld/2016/09/08/string-of-attacks-on-women-wearing-shorts-in-france-prompts-fears-of-islamist-morality-police/

[smirkymonkey]

9. Sick bastards.

[nolabels]

77. This old man had to get his glasses on, I thought you posted ' thick beards '

ZZ Top - Legs (OFFICIAL MUSIC VIDEO)

[mwrguy]

10. Russia Today?

That's a trumpette propaganda site.

[Warren DeMontague]

11. Here's a different source on the same story.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/attack-france-women-clothing-sexist-abuse-violence-burkini-ban-a7233386.html

Despicable, isn't it? People having violent temper tantrums over bikinis, women wearing shorts, nudity, sex, etc.

What the fuck. it's the 21st century. Fuckin' Fred Flintstone needs to get with it, already.

[Divine Discontent]

13. right on, Warren! They're a bunch of Fred Flinstones. So archaic in their judgments.

Like is said above, if they want to follow those strict rules for themselves, fine, but do not harm any person in your family or not, for choosing to wear what they want. I don't want this judgmental ignorance seen here.

[Dorian Gray]

31. It's France

There shouldn't be anybody policing the streets except for french police.

This is disturbing.

(And I know it happens here in certain religious communities, and it shouldn't.)

[Albertoo]

14. I'm sure you condemn these Muslim attackers now you have been given other sources

NB: this assault on women for being 'improperly dressed' (read in bathing suits or shorts) is a frequent occurrence now in Algeria ever since society bowed to appease the pressure of the armed Islamic groups of the 80s, 90s.

This very summer, there were occurrences of women denied entrance to a/ a clinic b/ a courtroom for not being dressed conservatively enough. In each case, the decision to deny entry was made by a security guard based on his opinion, but was endorsed by their hierarchies when the guards both claimed religious reasons.

Religion vs women's rights. Again.

[Marr]

18. You know, it's exactly this sort of insistence that there is no problem...

that is the biggest problem.

Enough with the bullshit, kneejerk defense of anything with a Koran.

[cpwm17]

15. It appears officials are looking for the criminals.

This crime wasn't supported by the local government. I don't think there is much support for the criminals.

Local governments did pass laws on what women could wear to the beach. Obviously many people have strong opinions about that, including many people supporting the new laws.

[Albertoo]

20. you do not "think there is much support for the criminals"?

You probably did not read my answer in my post #14:
this type of physical enforcement of prudery is now mainstream in Algeria and Tunisia.
And by reason of geographic origin of migrants, spreading to France.

It is not what most Muslims in Algeria and Tunisia practice, but that behavior of young thugs who want to play god by enforcing clothing prudery is not condemned by bystanders for fear of being called antireligious themselves. So the thugs get away with it, which gives an example to others it's OK to order women around.

Religion appropriated by bigots against women's rights amid a hapless majority. As often.

[TipTok]

16. Good way to get shot in the US...

[closeupready]

21. Russia Today as a source? Um, no. Daily Mail is just as credible.

[Albertoo]

22. Story confirmed by the NYT and WaPo (as mentioned in the thread)

[KitSileya]

23. It really shows how women are being policed no matter what they wear.

Young Muslim men use violence to force women to wear approved-by-them clothing, and male police officers use force and economic power to force women to wear approved-by-them clothing. The victims are, as always, women in general who have always known that society polices what we wear, no matter what we wear.

[saltpoint]

26. It's not a venue designed to sanction

religious dogma.

The beach really belongs to Poseidon and Poseidon for some thousands of years doesn't care who wears what to swim.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

29. K&R "WORKERS OF THE WORLD UNITE! YOU HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE BUT YOUR Xis & Cheneys

“You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one. I hope someday you'll join us. And the world will live as one.”
― John Lennon
IMAGINE - greater

[Bettie]

37. Both groups can be wrong

If you don't like burkinis...don't wear one.

If you don't like shorts...don't wear them.

It is none of person A's business what person B wears or otherwise adorns his or her body with.

Follow the laws of the country you are in and it should all be good. Though, banning clothing specifically because it is worn by one religious group is a douche move, designed to discriminate against a said religious group.

[randome]

43. So your 'solution' is to insist that everyone behave nicely. Sorry, that's not going to happen.

There is too much of a cultural divide between the East and West. What we see as the very essence of social norms -not trying to hide yourself or disguise yourself- is seen as the very opposite in much of the Eastern world.

This is more basic than even religion. It's a cultural divide.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]“If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.”
Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)[/center][/font][hr]

[Bettie]

68. My solution is to ask that people be grown-ups

and not decide for others what they are to wear or not wear.

If you harass people because you do not like their clothing choices, you should be ticketed and/or arrested depending on the severity of the incident.

What is your solution? Do you have one?

Asking adults to behave like adults shouldn't be that much of an issue, but authoritarianism tends to go hand in hand with fundamentalist religion, of all varieties.

[randome]

71. They can't find the attackers so they apparently got away with it.

I don't know if there is a solution other than encouraging immigrants to try and assimilate. This clash of cultures will never resolve itself, imo. If we try to remain 'pure' in philosophy, pretending there is no difference between the East and West, nothing will change.

That is not meant to be a license to discriminate, btw, it's just an acknowledgement that the cultural clash is real.

On edit: they did find the attackers, I was wrong. But that occurs after someone has been injured and telling people after the fact to behave better -or ticketing or imprisoning them later- will probably not be a deterrent.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]“If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.”
Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)[/center][/font][hr]

[GulfCoast66]

82. If they are not French Citizens

And they shipped their sorry asses back to the hellhole the came from, even if is Syria,then I am thinking it would be a damned effective deterrent against future incidents of this nature.

People who do things like this generally quit when their actions harm them more than their victims.

[MohRokTah]

44. I don't believe a word of this story because your source is RT.

If you find a REAL source, I'll consider the story.

Until then, the story is complete BULLSHIT.

[Ace Rothstein]

45. If you would have read through the thread, you would have seen links from other sources.

[MohRokTah]

46. I don't wste time reading long threads.

Link is not in the OP ergo the story is complete bullshit.

[Ace Rothstein]

47. This place has gone off the deep end when it comes to protecting Islam.

[MohRokTah]

48. This place has gone off the eep end when it comes to protecting Putin. eom

[Ace Rothstein]

49. When did I protect Putin?

Project much?

[MohRokTah]

50. OP cited a Putin propaganda rag.

The story is complete bullshit because it comes from a Putin propaganda rag.

You supported that, ergo, you are protecting Putin.

[Ace Rothstein]

51. No, I have the sense to verify the non-bullshit story with other sources.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/09/09/in-france-women-in-shorts-become-another-symbol-of-the-clothing-culture-war/

http://nytlive.nytimes.com/womenintheworld/2016/09/08/string-of-attacks-on-women-wearing-shorts-in-france-prompts-fears-of-islamist-morality-police/

[MohRokTah]

52. I won't click those links

The OP cited RT, ergo, the story is complete bullshit.

[Ace Rothstein]

53. What do you have against the women of France?

[MohRokTah]

55. Nothing.

I refuse to believe anything posted here citing RT. The OP could have edited their post with a REAL citation at any time.

Don't like it? Start a REAL thread citing a REAL source.

[Ace Rothstein]

57. Eh, just because I might not like a source doesn't fully discredit a story.

Especially when many news outlets are reports the same. It is intellectually dishonest to claim otherwise.

[MohRokTah]

58. RT is a bullshit source that publishes nothing but Bullshit.

I will never believe anything citing RT as a source.

NOT. ONE. WORD.

[Taitertots]

59. You are being trolled. Stop feeding it.

[smirkymonkey]

84. Seriously, it's almost laughable.

It's like a conservative parody of the bat-shit crazy PC liberal.

[TipTok]

54. You do have the time to type out several responses though...

[MohRokTah]

56. I will typically respond to people who respond to me. eom

[bighart]

61. Hope this helps

http://nytlive.nytimes.com/womenintheworld/2016/09/08/string-of-attacks-on-women-wearing-shorts-in-france-prompts-fears-of-islamist-morality-police/

[MohRokTah]

63. I never click links provided in comments.

Only the OP.

The OP cited a known bullshit site, ergo, the story is false.

[bighart]

64. That seems a bit obstinate.

"The OP cited a known bullshit site, ergo, the story is false."

It almost sounds like you are saying if one bullshit site runs a story it is unquestionably false regardless of any other agency that runs the same story.

Not meaning to be confrontational just trying to understand your point of view.

[MohRokTah]

66. I had a bad experience clicking a link in a comment a few years back and have never done so since.

[ProfessorGAC]

65. Willfully Obtuse (eom)

[MohRokTah]

67. See Post #66. eom

[GummyBearz]

81. See post 65

[Albertoo]

87. So if a RW media posts an accurate fact, you reject the authenticity of the fact?

The rule about RW media was obviously set to avoid making posts the echo chamber of RW opinion (expressed or implied)

However if a RW media states a fact like an eclipse of the sun or the temperature yesterday in Saskatchewan, rejecting the fact because of the source becomes .. weird.

In the present case, the OP states a fact which has been confirmed by media across the political spectrum, which would tend to make it an objective fact.

[LanternWaste]

70. About one third of all males in any given American bar.

"Who calls girls "whores" for wearing shorts?"

About one third of all males in any given American bar, regardless of how un-PC that may be as well.

[randome]

72. But not that many to their faces. Your point is taken but there is a difference.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]“If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.”
Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)[/center][/font][hr]

[romanic]

73. Well unlike Saudi Arabia

Those males are allowed to drink in public so there goes that analogy. :/

[melman]

74. Nonsense

[GulfCoast66]

83. Really?

I have been going to bars for over 30 years, often times with scantily clad ladies. Never once did it result in religious nuts putting a beat down on the ladies dates or husbands.

And the only times I have seen women assaulted it was by other women.

Horrible analogy.

[riderinthestorm]

90. Link to stats for that please. nt

[JanMichael]

85. Another take on the incident by one of the people attacked:

http://www.thelocal.fr/20160909/womens-shorts-prompt-violent-attack-in-southern-france

[JanMichael]

89. No one give two shits about a first person account on this do they? nt

[riderinthestorm]

91. Uhm, that account is woefully scant on details. nt

[JanMichael]

92. Like RT and others are better with their BS?

"UPDATED: A French mother whose family were attacked on the Riviera by a group of young men has denied the motive for the assault was the fact the women were wearing shorts, as was initially claimed."

Scant? They were just teen assholes nothing special.