NationStates

Ostroeuropa wrote:How do you figure? Do you have any evidence of that being the case?

Since the Islamic Revolution in 1979, the restrictions on men have often been far less extensive and far less strictly enforced. Principally because they were not a salient concern for the IRI and are often more about cracking down on political dissidents than on imposing a rigid version of sharia on the public. Guidelines on men's hair for instance weren't really imposed until 2010 or 2011. This makes sense. There's no provision against men wearing long hair in the Quran or hadiths. Judging by blogs related to travel, enforcement largely remains lax. Shorts exist in a similar situation despite the government discouraging them.

Meanwhile, we have women and girls being arrested, being sentenced to lashes by courts, and being murdered by police for not wearing the hijab or violating modestly laws by intermingling with boys. And it's pervasive enough that a cursory Google search will reveal four or five instances of the police arresting women on these grounds. I tried to find instances of men arrested for wearing shorts or having long hair, and haven't been able to manage it for about three pages.

The rules and enforcement are completely different on this issue, and men are definitely not getting the brunt of it.

Ostroeuropa wrote:Incidentally, 3.5% of Iranian prisoners are women. With the aforementioned 18% rate of police brutality. And now it's a major issue for... some reason. It's a mystery.

I mean... Iran's criminal justice and prison policies have been a problem that has received fairly widespread commentary and criticism globally. The Iranian government has carried out executions of Kurdish minors based on allegations that they were engaged in revolutionary activity. They have also executed and tortured anti-regime protestors. And there's a serious overcrowding problem even in spite of ongoing promises of reform.

All of these can be issues while uneven application of laws enforcing modesty is also an issue.

Ostroeuropa wrote:Incidentally Fahran, *typically*, when society isn't letting the feminist movements myopic psychosis influence the discussion, we regard forcing people to cut their hair as a bigger deal than forcing them to wear something on their head.

So I agree with you Fahran. There is no equality in the Iranian dress code. It privileges women. To believe otherwise one has to temporarily unhinge themselves from ordinary reality and start believing things one wouldn't ordinarily believe in order to rationalize the thing they are hallucinating and explain it ( I.E, womens oppression), rather than admit "I am hallucinating".

This is perhaps the most insane argument you've ever made. Do you believe the Taliban privilege women as well?

Fahran wrote:

Ostroeuropa wrote:How do you figure? Do you have any evidence of that being the case?

Since the Islamic Revolution in 1979, the restrictions on men have often been far less extensive and far less strictly enforced. Principally because they were not a salient concern for the IRI and are often more about cracking down on political dissidents than on imposing a rigid version of sharia on the public. Guidelines on men's hair for instance weren't really imposed until 2010 or 2011. This makes sense. There's no provision against men wearing long hair in the Quran or hadiths. Judging by blogs related to travel, enforcement largely remains lax. Shorts exist in a similar situation despite the government discouraging them.

Meanwhile, we have women and girls being arrested, being sentenced to lashes by courts, and being murdered by police for not wearing the hijab or violating modestly laws by intermingling with boys. And it's pervasive enough that a cursory Google search will reveal four or five instances of the police arresting women on these grounds. I tried to find instances of men arrested for wearing shorts or having long hair, and haven't been able to manage it for about three pages.

The rules and enforcement are completely different on this issue, and men are definitely not getting the brunt of it.

Ostroeuropa wrote:Incidentally, 3.5% of Iranian prisoners are women. With the aforementioned 18% rate of police brutality. And now it's a major issue for... some reason. It's a mystery.

I mean... Iran's criminal justice and prison policies have been a problem that has received fairly widespread commentary and criticism globally. The Iranian government has carried out executions of Kurdish minors based on allegations that they were engaged in revolutionary activity. They have also executed and tortured anti-regime protestors. And there's a serious overcrowding problem even in spite of ongoing promises of reform.

All of these can be issues while uneven application of laws enforcing modesty is also an issue.

Ostroeuropa wrote:Incidentally Fahran, *typically*, when society isn't letting the feminist movements myopic psychosis influence the discussion, we regard forcing people to cut their hair as a bigger deal than forcing them to wear something on their head.

So I agree with you Fahran. There is no equality in the Iranian dress code. It privileges women. To believe otherwise one has to temporarily unhinge themselves from ordinary reality and start believing things one wouldn't ordinarily believe in order to rationalize the thing they are hallucinating and explain it ( I.E, womens oppression), rather than admit "I am hallucinating".

This is perhaps the most insane argument you've ever made. Do you believe the Taliban privilege women as well?

We're discussing the present. Do Iran's laws, presently, privilege women over men. Not "Well a decade ago". If your point is that it used to be the case but is no longer, i'm not sure what can be gained from discussing it beyond "Well mens situation seems to be worsening rapidly and globally".

Is it seriously your position that if Iran mandated women have particular hairstyles, that would be preferable? As it currently stands they are capable of self-expression when not in public because the nature of the prohibition is temporary and removeable when no longer within the context it is mandated, akin to a hairnet. Men are not capable of that as regards their hair. The attack on their self-expression causes them to be unable to have the freedom afforded to women to express themselves within private spaces, since their expression within public spaces is not merely "covered up", but physically altered to comply with the states demands.

As for "Does the Taliban". I find it odd you would bring this up given my initial example was the episode of psychosis western feminists engaged in over Boko Haram and "Missing girls" being evidence of their misogyny, while completely overlooking the boys being in a worse situation. You may not know this, but Boko Haram is a branch of the Taliban. I appreciate if you're going to deny reality in the one instance then it becomes tempting to use your previous denial of reality as evidence further denying of it is sensible.

"How can you say the voices aren't coming out of my walls, after all, we know they're coming out of the fireplace so why would it be a hallucination in the one instance when we know it wasn't in the other?".

Then tommorow;

"Ofcourse it's not a hallucination that my ceiling fan is speaking to me, that strains credulity, after all, we know my fireplace and walls talk to me all the time, why would this suddenly be a hallucination?".

And so on. I'm not interested in the self-referential delusions of feminist theory Fahran. Yes, The taliban often privileges women in many circumstances as well, and this is often not understood because of the constant feminine psychosis our feminist media environment inculcates, see the boko haram example. (And for the record, becoming detatched from reality as a result of constant media propoganda is not limited to feminists and the left wing, see Qanon).

Does it also privilege men in some circumstances? Almost certainly. I would not contest that. This, however, is a fairly clear example of female privilege.

The world did callously ignore male victims of Boko Haram and only suddenly decided to care when there are female victims, and it’s merely one example of men and women contributing to sordid cultural attitudes which usually treat men’s lives as disposable in comparison to women, but insisting that Iranian culture is harsher in terms of male dress codes is a rather bizarre position to assume.

Ostroeuropa wrote:Around 18% of arrests in Iran feature police brutality according to my quick and dirty math.

It's higher than US police brutality levels. But not high enough IMO to suggest that the beatings are necessarily connected to the reasons for arrest as a kind of "Well criminals get beaten that's just what happens". It is possible that while they would have arrested whoever, the beating occurred because she was Kurdish. It's also possible that some crimes more than others prompt police brutality and this is one of them though.

I think it's possible that "Morality" crimes feature police brutality *and* because she was Kurdish, she was also going to experience police brutality regardless of the type of crime, and the result of being "A minority who does a crime that prompts police brutality" is you get straight up murdered as a result of an extreme beating in an intersectional sort of way.

Your math is based on a faulty premise.

You originally said "The police brutality rate in Iran is 36 per 10 million", and while you've now removed that part (but kept the math) it needs be pointed out that it's not a brutality rate, it's a rate of police killings. Also, that's just a "Low estimate. Actual total is likely higher".

And it is higher. We can easily tell: The absolute number the estimate is based on is 304+ killed in 2019. Well, in the month of november 2020 alone, 304 people were unlawfully killed by Iranian security forces.

This is just to point out that your estimate for police brutality is waaaaaay off the mark. Police brutality is common, as is the use of torture.

Authorities commonly used arbitrary arrests to impede alleged antiregime activities, including by conducting mass arrests of persons in the vicinity of antigovernment demonstrations. According to Amnesty International, these arrests sometimes included children and bystanders at protests and were often conducted in a violent manner, to include beating detainees.

This happens to women who fail to dress "appropriately" too.

There have been reports of women not complying with the hijab laws being insulted and physically assaulted by the morality police (including being slapped in the face or beaten with batons) and by members of the public.

Now, the laws banning certain hairstyles are wrong, problematic, and in my mind completely inacceptable, but they aren't worse than the laws forcing women to dress in a certain way. One thing to examine is the punishments meeted out: Men who have the banned hairstyles may face fines. Women, however, face fines and worse:

Article 638 of the Penal Code stipulates that women who appear in public without a proper hijab (the generic term for the proper Islamic dress for women) be imprisoned from 10 days to two months or pay a fine of between 50,000 and 500,000 rials (approximately AUD0.50-5 at current market rates). Women appearing in public without a proper hijab can also be punished with 74 lashes. There is no similar rule for men.

The enforcement seem more lax when it comes to men's supposed transgressions in this area:

International and domestic observers agree that men are subject to less strict controls on personal appearance than women. DFAT is aware that some men have claimed to have been harassed or discriminated against on the basis of their appearance — for example, for having ‘Western-style’ hairstyles (including through use of hair gel) or clothing styles (including long hair and ripped jeans), visible tattoos or visible hair removal (such as plucked or waxed eyebrows). Notwithstanding such reports, it is common to see young men fitting all of these descriptions on Iranian streets, particularly in larger cities such as Tehran.

DFAT assesses that authorities are far more likely to target women than men for dress code
violations. Where there have been incidents of harassment of men for violating the dress code, DFAT assesses these were most likely the result of either over-zealous enforcement by individual security authorities in particular locations (particularly outside of major cities) or because the individual had come to the attention of the authorities for other activities, particularly political activism. DFAT assesses that the restrictions the dress codes place on men do not amount to discrimination. DFAT is not aware of the authorities targeting people on the basis of a ‘Western’ appearance or for having visible tattoos. While such appearances may be frowned upon by more conservative Iranians, DFAT assesses that people of ‘Western’ appearance, including people with visible tattoos, face a low risk of official and societal discrimination.

Also, "You're privileged because you're oppressed less" is a gold medal entry in the oppression olympics. Completely absurd.

We're continuing this thread right? I say we ignore the poll.

Saiwania wrote:We're continuing this thread right? I say we ignore the poll.

I messaged Gio to build a new one. This one will get locked if they don't get to it right away.

Farnhamia wrote:

Saiwania wrote:We're continuing this thread right? I say we ignore the poll.

I messaged Gio to build a new one. This one will get locked if they don't get to it right away.

Ugh. That's too bad. Oh well, better to gather it in one thread over the next two years where the same people repeat the same things over and over instead of spreading it out in topics to be discussed.

Gravlen wrote:

Farnhamia wrote:I messaged Gio to build a new one. This one will get locked if they don't get to it right away.

Ugh. That's too bad. Oh well, better to gather it in one thread over the next two years where the same people repeat the same things over and over instead of spreading it out in topics to be discussed.

I suppose I could start the new one with a copy of this one's first post, and Gio edit it.

feminism