You noted previously that "The rules leave the attire up to the competitors." Isn't that the way it should be? Is it wrong that the Egyptian women's team chose attire did not violate their own sense of propriety?
Besides, the example about the Egyptian woman's uniforms was one paragraph --- the fifth paragraph, with only 2 sentences actually referring to the Egyptians' uniforms --- in an eleven -paragraph article. It was not part of the lede. It was not the overall topic.
Once again, you fault the author for making *his* points instead of *your* points, for writing *his* article instead of *your* article. You want to write an article against Sharia? Have at it. I assure you I'd find many areas of agreement with you.
Anybody who studied "context" and "structure" in middle school Language Arts, could see that this was merely one of several examples in making a point about modest dress and athletic performance, not about Islamic jurisprudence.
And as I said in my original post to this thread. The Brazilian team are favored to make it to finals in this Olympics and wore body suits. Thus an alternative was available that didn’t involve burkas. The author made a choice to use that.
It may have been one paragraph, but it was part of what he wrote and it should not have been. The context of being inside an article on modesty only made the offense worse. Good intentions, or some non-offensive paragraphs don’t make up for the offensive example.
A key question is: did the Egyptian women wear the modest uniforms because they “chose”, or because they wanted to avoid being killed when they returned to Egypt?