Iran cracks down on women's dress

[democratic]

http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20060829-070309-8053r

TEHRAN, Aug. 29 (UPI) -- Police in Tehran have been ordering Iranian women to cover up, stopping those they perceive as "badly veiled."

"We are certainly seeing a return to behavior we haven't seen for 10 years," Hadi Ghaemi of Human Rights Watch told The Telegraph. "Generally, the imposition of strict Islamic codes has been increasing under Ahmadinejad."

"The person could end up in jail depending on their relationship with the authorities," he said. "Generally, the imposition of strict Islamic codes has been increasing under Ahmadinejad."

[ECH1969]

1. fun with burkas

[longship]

2. Religious fundemenalism is the enemy of mankind.

And, especially, of womankind.

[noonwitch]

3. Yeah, I keep forgetting that it's women's fault that men are lustful

I always wonder about american women I see who voluntarily wear burkas, how low their self-esteem is that they would be willing to join a religion that expects that type of behavior from them.

The head scarf is one thing-I have no problem with their religion requiring them to cover their hair. The apostle Paul admonishes women to do the same. But to cover your entire body from head to toe, because a man might lust after you if you don't? Please.

[SoCalDem]

5. It's really all about the women.

It's really all about the women.

Posted by SoCalDem in General Discussion (Through 2005)

Sun Jul 10th 2005, 07:42 PM

Radical Islam, The Taliban, The Religious Right, The African miseries.

The (mis)treatment of women by any society is the measure OF that society.

In days gone by, societies were closed off and people didn't know what was happening a village away. Modern life has brought the whole world into their living rooms. Cloistered women in locked-down societies can now see that other women are treated better than they are, and they don't like it.

Even in western society, women have only been "equal" for under 100 years. Some would say that even now, in America, women are not equal...and they would be right, BUT women have it much better here (as a group) than anywhere else.

This is what is scaring the militant males of the world. Whether they are Taliban, Islamic, African..whatever.. they fear the rise of women, because it means they will lose power.

For centuries, males have been able to use females, and discard them at will.

Western culture frowns on this, and in order for non-westerners to be accepted, they must stop mistreating women.. They are not willing to do this. They want nothing to do with modernity if it means their women will stop obeying them.Nothing we say or do to them will change their minds...and they ARE willing to kill to preserve THEIR way of life.

In the US, we may not have honor killings" and arranged marriages, but women are still kept under the thumbs of men...and if the religious right has their way here, women will retreat to the sanctity of the kitchen, the baby-nursery and the car pool.

Women are the majority, but we have yet to act like it...

[unschooler]

You got that right.

Women are the majority, but we have yet to act like it... :applause:

[unschooler]

6. There's really no difference between a burkha and scarf.

St. Paul's first-century ideas about how women ought to dress carry no more authority than those of Mohammed or a 21st century "mullah." None of them has the least right to tell women how to dress.

[CJCRANE]

8. It should be a choice

to wear a scarf, but there's nothing wrong with it per se.

Wearing a burkha or veil is a bit strange though.

[unschooler]

10. It's all strange if you're doing it because some self-appointed

"prophet" or "apostle" who lived centuries ago is telling you to do it.

Of course, strange or not, it should all be a choice - the woman's choice.

[susanna]

24. You know something, though?

I live in an area of Detroit (predominately Muslim) where women do cover their hair; no big deal, I thought at first. But then it dawned on me; what else might they give up? Sounds crazy, I know, but it still bothers me.

Also, if I am not mistaken, God mentioned that women's crowning glory is their hair. (Which explains why so many fundies never cut theirs.)

Just the standard "WTF" from a lesser being. :-)

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CJCRANE]

7. The Burkha is worn in Afghanistan not Iran.

Also, this is probably just a way for the police to make more money from bribes:
"Ghaemi said that the penalty for violating a code that requires the complete covering of women's heads and bodies in public depends on the officers involved and the women's political connections."

[MrPrax]

13. The oppression of women

has always had a class dimension.

For example for rich and middle class could always 'bribe' a doctor to perform a DNC, whereas poor women were usually left bleeding alleys or in front of charity hospitals.

But it's a good point that you bring up this fact that runs across the less than equal treatment of women regarding their class...the hypocrisy of wealthy religious types knows no bounds and only goes to show that religion is tool used for oppression -- never enlightenment.

Money trumps religiosity evertime...good pillar of the community at home, party hardy when no one is looking...

[oblivious]

9. Outlandish hairstyles and dog-walking also a no-no.

Officers will also be authorised to confront men with outlandish hairstyles and people walking pet dogs, an activity long denounced as un-Islamic by the religious rulers.

...Young women shopping in north Tehran's fashionable Tajrish neighbourhood yesterday, however, were uncowed. Matin, 24, a nurse, was wearing a gaudily patterned light-blue head scarf pushed back to reveal sunglasses and bleached blond hair. Her tight, short black manteau with intricate gold patterns seemed designed to provoke the ire of the authorities. But she was unrepentant. "I'm a married woman and it should be my husband who tells me what and what not to wear. He likes the way I dress," she said.

Surprisingly, Narges Asgari, 20, a dressmaker wearing an all-encompassing black chador, was also critical. "I don't think people will listen because they want to take decisions themselves," she said. "Clothes depend on the culture of their families. I wear the chador because, in my family, it's something we accept."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,1757071,00.html

Somehow, I think the fundies are gonna have a tough time enforcing this one.

[fujiyama]

23. What's amusing

is that the woman herself doesn't make the decision regardless - even the one that sounds somewhat modern - notice how she says "it should be the husband that tells me what to wear".

[noonwitch]

11. My great aunt was arrested in WWI era Austria for showing her ankles

Her skirt was too short, and revealed her ankles. My grandpa still laughs about it, as he was a little kid at the time.

It seems his older sister was quite the rebel, in many, many ways. She stayed behind when the rest of her family came here. She worked for the underground in WWII, because she spoke 5 languages and the Nazis forced her to work their phones. Of course, no good Nazi spoke any language but german, so she was able to pass messages in french or the nearby slovenian dialect without them knowing what she was saying.

She was the only one of my great-grandmother's kids who knew the family secret. Great Grandma was jewish.

[ninkasi]

14. She sounds like someone I would like to know

I'll bet the story of her life would make an interesting biography.

[susanna]

25. Yeah! Love that story!

Good on her. :-)

[Opusnone]

12. Daily dose of Iran propaganda

Where would we be without it?

Do any of you actually know any Iranians, or anyone who lives in or has traveled to Iran?

[daleo]

15. I knew an Iranian PhD student a few years back

He had been drafted into the Iran-Iraq war, and wounded. I suppose he must have been in his teens then. He spent some time as a refugee in Europe, then came to North America. He was basically a socialist, and had no use for Saddam, the religious leadership of Iran, or the imperialist west. He was an interesting and highly intelligent fellow.

He frequently talked about how friendly his countrymen were to strangers, and their tradition of hospitality. I had no reason to doubt him.

You are correct - personal acquaintanceships like this help to insulate one from the force of propaganda.

[No Exit]

16. Ding ding ding! We have a winner!

Or, should I say, I agree with what you said.

Ever so long ago (the 70's) we used to see a lot of Iranians on college campuses. I disliked them because the men would STARE really HARD at the girls in a way that is considered rude and overly aggressive in our culture.

Later, I realized that those Iranians were the ones who had come here because of the Shah's being deposed. Since we (the U.S.) had supported the Shah, therefore, I reasoned, those guys must've been the Iranians who were more sympathetic to Americans (as opposed to the ones we always saw screaming in the street in support of the Ayatollah, or, as he was generally known in America, "public enemy number one.") It was only later that I learned that the Shah's regime was totally corrupt and shouldn't have been supported by us anyway, but when has our "leadership" here in the U.S. ever turned down a chance to support a corrupt regime in order to get all it could out of such a regime and out of the people oppressed by said regime?


Now, however, I have learned that the ol' Ayatollah was the one who said that Iran should not involve itself AT ALL in having nuclear weapons because having such weapons was against their religion. A commendable view, IMO.

Needless to say, the situation was a lot more complicated than "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran". I see that now.

And my view of today's emphasis (by President Feeblemind) on Iran is that it is essentially an attempt by him to victimize and attack YET ANOTHER country that does not pose a serious or imminent threat to us. WE DO NOT NEED TO INVADE IRAN. * is the most corrupt dictator of them all.

[oblivious]

17. My main point in post 9 was to show how ineffective the crackdown is.

The Guardian article I posted seems to indicate women are just ignoring it.

My subject line perhaps gives the wrong impression. I just thought the hair and dog walking thing was pretty funny.

Anyway, this article is less harmful than Democratic's usual postings on upcoming stonings and hangings (which never seem to actually take place).

[Opusnone]

21. Point taken - some do cautiously ignore them

And they are allowed to wear only head scarfs, they aren't required to wear full chadors.

Behind closed doors Iranians are just like us. They watch satellite TV, they listen to music, they drink and laugh and all the other illegal things, too.

I'm told the pizza delivery guys bring the booze to parties (among other things).

Overall it seems like any other theocratic society, no different than Christian, Jewish or Hindu cultures. Do I agree with them? No way.
I sanction no fundamentalism other than love for all living things.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ConcernedCanuk]

19. IF we are the "superior being" on this planet, why do we cover ourselves?

.
.
.

Tens of millions of creatures on this planet (more maybe?)

None but us hoomans think it is necessary to cover themselves, excepting for warmth.

Loincloths were to protect the man's "parts" from getting smacked by branches as they traveled through the bush - NOT to hide anything.

Long robes were designed to protect people from the sun in hot hot climates

Fur clothes were designed to keep people warm in colder climates

If it's 85+ degrees - why wear anything??

Ya sweat all over the clothes - they get stinky, and then you got laundry to do

Heck, we wouldn't be over-populating this planet if we went naked when the weather allowed.

Most of us wouldn't even mate!

Jus my Canuk opinion . . .

[Matilda]

20. I don't know about Ahmadinejad ..

Just a couple of months ago (during the World Cup), he said he was in favour of allowing women
to attend men's soccer matches, but he was howled down by the mullahs (because women shouldn't be
looking at men wearing shorts).

It's the mullahs, and particularly Ayatollah Khameini, who drive these decisions, but I also wonder
how much is in response to perceived western aggression. Seems the more Islamic countries feel
threatened, the more the fundamentalists tighten up.

If they were left alone and didn't feel under threat, would they relax some of their rules?

[LynnTheDem]

22. They voted for him.

Thanks to bush.

Sure are a lot of extremist rightwingnuts around -including OBL and his al Qaeda- who owe bush big time.