Once upon a time, progressives were truly progressive. They had people like Dr Martin Luther King Jr., who believed sensible and decent things such as it is best to judge a person by the content of his or her character rather than by his or her skin colour. Ignore the late New Atheist Christopher Hitchens’ incredible claim that King was at best a nominal Christian. King’s anti-racism emanated from his Christian faith, which has taught for two thousand years that all humans are made in the image of God and that God loves all people of all ethnicities. This is one of the reasons why Christianity became the world’s first global religion. Its message was and is for all people. A Christian racist (or a racist Christian if you will) is an oxymoron.
Another wise belief of the once upon a time progressives, was that segregating people on the basis of their ethnicity is a very bad idea. Segregation denies the common humanity of people, sets up a hierarchy of races in which Black people are apportioned the poorest districts to live in, and prevents the personal and professional relationships that otherwise would have flourished among diverse communities.
But the cycle of history has turned full circle and puked up neo-segregation. Now it is not racists from Montgomery or Pretoria who are dividing people along racial lines, but so-called progressives here in the UK – or Leicester to be more specific. As a consequence of their view that non-whites are forever victims and need to be treated differently and preferentially, Leicester University and the Unity Swimming organisation are together organising segregated swimming sessions at the university’s pool for Black and ethnic minority students only.
The reason for this is explained by Unity Swimming. According to their website’s statistics, 95% of Black adults and 93 % of Asian adults in the UK do not swim. The figures are better for children, but not by much: 80% of Black children and 78% of Asian children do not swim (https://www.unityswimming.co.uk/). Does this mean that these are the figures of those who cannot swim, or who can but do not anymore, or a combination of both? The expression is ambiguous. Perhaps it was written by a year ten on work experience. Whatever the meaning, it is clearly not ideal that so many people either cannot swim or do not keep up their swimming skills, for swimming is a life-saving ability. However, their view is that to encourage more non-whites to learn to swim without feeling awkward in the presence of white people, they must have their own swimming lessons and sessions. In other words, a ‘safe space’.
This would mean, Unity Swimming claim, that Black students do not have to worry that they might be stereotyped as less buoyant because of alleged high bone density or low levels of body fat. It means too that female Muslim students can swim without being embarrassed because they choose to swim in ample costumes adapted to their faith’s emphasis on modest dress. While I do not dismiss these concerns, the solution is not to deny white students access at certain times to what should be a shared, public space. Would only-white swimming slots be tolerated? Absolutely not, and neither should they be. Segregated swimming hours are no solution. What then are the alternatives?
To get more non-whites into the water, swimming pool authorities ought to be more vigilant regarding discriminatory comments and behaviour. Those who behave like this ought to be told to leave the pool. Memberships can be cancelled for any persistent offenders. Any swimming pool that denies access to Muslim women in ‘burkinis’ must cease to do so. If Sikh men do not have to wear crash helmets, then I am sure the same understanding of religious sensibilities can be extended to Muslim women whose swimming costumes resemble those women used to wear in this country during 19th century.
Unity Swimming ought also to live up to its name. Rather than dividing people, they should be advertising the importance of learning to swim to Black and Asian communities in lessons at which all can attend. Those learning to swim should only be segregated according to ability. In their zealous attempt to be inclusive, Leicester University and Unity Swimming have ended up being exclusivist, which is an all too familiar paradox in these weird, wacky days of woke.
Peter Harris is the author of two books, The Rage Against the Light: Why Christopher Hitchens Was Wrong (2019) and Do You Believe It? A Guide to a Reasonable Christian Faith (2020).
If you enjoy The New Conservative and would like to support our work, please consider buying us a coffee or sharing this piece with your friends – it would really help to keep us going. Thank you!
Pingback: Racist Swimming Pools | UK Reloaded
I’m in full support of the sentiments behind the article – except the call to clamp down on discriminatory comments and behaviour because this falls into the ‘far-left’ delusion of racism (by whites naturally) everywhere. Do any white swimmers indulge in this? I think not or we’d have heard about it by now. Do white swimmers think (when seeing Muslim women swimming and even using poolside mixed sex saunas and steam rooms wearing head covering hoods and entire body covering clothes) this is crazy – yes of course, just as they would if seeing someone wearing retro-Victorian swimsuits or a swimming nun in wimple and robe.
Personally I worry about the real likelihood of safe space segregation for group x during normal opening hours (and to hell with the non-x majority who are then held back) leading to group x preferences eventually being adopted as the unchallengeable norm. This happened even with single sex days at steam/sauna/spa facilities (some historic) where the wearing of swimming trunks or shorts was imposed due to the wishes of prudes, religious or otherwise.
I used to swim at a pool mainly used for schools but open to the public at lunchtime and weekend. The worst equality obsessed council on the south coast restricted the sessions to specific groups. All men were one group but women had several groups and sessions but could go to any of the sessions. The council policy was equal access to everybody. I complained that men did not have the same access as women and the answer from the council equality chief was that women were not safe in swimming pools when men were present. They could not provide any evidence to support that claim. I tool my money to a private club with no restrictions.
Sadly private clubs also sway with the breeze as well, mine allows private bookings (separate children learners and adult learners groups). These take over a roped off third of the pool for very long periods on several days a week, it’s incredibly noisy and the kid’s families all stand around the pool getting in regular member users way. The club is deaf to complaints (even on obvious safeguarding issues in the changing rooms and showers, although a glut of school lessons abruptly stopped presumably due to these safeguarding concerns). Is it too much to think that pool operators would limit inconvenient, or by most members unwelcome, uses to one day a week and this day then closed to all others or simply outside normal opening hours?
The use of swimming pools should really be restricted to chaps and their dogs, don’t you think?