Tag: Iran

  • Calling on participants to respect “cultural differences”

    The Independent reports:

    The world’s top female chess players have reportedly been told they must wear hijabs if they wish to compete in next year’s world championships.

    The next Women’s World Championships are due to be held in Tehran, Iran in March 2017 but several Grandmasters have threatened to boycott the tournament if female players are forced to conform to the country’s strict clothing laws.

    Here’s an idea – don’t hold international championships and other contests in countries that do that. Saudi Arabia and Iran should be off that particular list.

    Chess’ governing body, FIDE (Fédération Internationale des Échecs), has come under criticism for its decision to host the tournament in Iran and was accused of failing to stand up for women’s rights.

    …

    The body’s Commission for Women’s Chess defended the move, calling on participants to respect “cultural differences”.

    No. No no no no. Never “respect” the kinds of “cultural differences” that entail unequal treatment of some people.

    Also what about the “cultural differences” within Iran? It’s not as if the imposition of hijab is universally loved in Iran; it’s not as if there are no women who hate it and rebel against it as much as they can. What “cultural differences” exactly does the body’s Commission for Women’s Chess have in mind? Those of the theocrats as opposed to the population? That’s just saying “bow before power” – and it makes no sense in this context, which is the choice of venue.

    US Women’s Champion Nazi Paikidze also expressed her frustration that she would “have to miss her first Women’s World Championship for many reasons” and tweeted a link to the US State Department’s warning about American citizens still being at heightened risk of arrest.

    “I understand and respect cultural differences. But, failing to comply can lead to imprisonment and women’s rights are being severely restricted in general.”

    Cultural differences are one thing and human rights are another. Human rights take precedence over cultural differences. If a cultural practice violates human rights, no one should “respect” it.

  • Iran’s sickening enthusiasm for putting juveniles to death

    Amnesty International:

    Amnesty International has revealed that a teenager was executed in Iran after being convicted of the rape of another boy, the first confirmed execution of a juvenile offender in the country this year.

    The organization, which has been carrying out extensive research into the situation of juvenile offenders on death row in Iran, found that Hassan Afshar, 19, was hanged in Arak’s Prison in Markazi Province on 18 July, after being convicted of “lavat-e be onf” (forced male to male anal intercourse) in early 2015. The execution went ahead even though the Office of the Head of the Judiciary had promised his family that they would review the case on 15 September 2016.

    “Iran has proved that its sickening enthusiasm for putting juveniles to death, in contravention of international law, knows no bounds. Hassan Afshar was a 17-year-old high school student when he was arrested. He had no access to a lawyer and the judiciary rushed through the investigation and prosecution, convicting and sentencing him to death within two months of his arrest as though they could not execute him quickly enough,” said Magdalena Mughrabi, Deputy Middle East and North Africa Programme Director at Amnesty International.

    He had no access to a lawyer – so that made it very easy for the judiciary to “investigate” and convict him.

    Just days after Hassan Afshar was executed, the authorities scheduled Alireza Tajiki, another youth who was under 18 at the time of his alleged offence, for execution. The implementation of his death sentence, which had been scheduled to take place on 3 August was, however, postponed yesterday following public pressure.

    “While we welcome the stay of execution for Alireza Tajiki, his life has been saved for the moment because of public pressure and not because the Iranian authorities are seriously considering stopping the horrendous practice of executing juveniles. This is illustrated by the fact that just two weeks ago Hassan Afshar was hanged in anonymity – publicity should not make the difference between life and death,” said Magdalena Mughrabi.

    …

    Hassan Afshar was arrested in December 2014 after the authorities received a complaint accusing him and two other youths of forcing a teenage boy to have sexual intercourse with them. Hassan Afshar maintained that the sexual acts were consensual and that the complainant’s son had willingly engaged in same-sex sexual activities before.

    While authorities must always investigate allegations of rape and, where sufficient admissible evidence is found, prosecute those responsible in fair trials, rape does not fall into the category of offences for which the death penalty can be imposed under international law. Furthermore, the existence of laws in Iran that criminalize consensual male to male sexual intercourse with the death penalty means that if the intercourse in this case had been deemed consensual, the teenager who accused Hassan Afshar of rape would himself have been sentenced to death. The criminalization of same-sex sexual activity between consenting adults violates international human rights law.

    Quite a trap, isn’t it – either you say he raped you, or we execute you. Of course women have been in that trap as far back as we can see.

    At the Times, Bel Trew reports from Cairo:

    Iran is second only to China in the number of people it executes, according to rights groups. A total of 977 people were executed in Iran last year, the highest death toll since 1989. Most were hanged on non-lethal charges such as drugs-related crimes. Iran also conducts public floggings.

    At least 259 people have been executed this year, according to the US-based Iran Human Rights Documentation Center, which keeps a tally of media and official reports.

    The latest mass execution allegedly took place yesterday when as many as 20 Sunni prisoners were killed in Gohardasht prison, according to the National Council of Resistance of Iran, the exiled opposition movement.

    Their relatives were told, “Sorry, too late to say good-bye.”

  • Then again

    Also on Twitter:

    Roya Boroumand ‏@RoyaBoroumand May 13

    Absurd: An exciting soccer day in #Iran without women in the stadium. 40 yrs ago, they played in the stadium.

    H/t Maryam

  • A van, a few bearded men and one or two women in black chadors

    The BBC reports on a new app in Iran that warns people of the location of the “morality police” aka Ershad.

    Ershad’s mobile checkpoints which usually consist of a van, a few bearded men and one or two women in black chadors, are deployed in towns across Iran and appear with no notice.

    Women?! But isn’t that immoral? Unless they’re related to all the men.

    Ershad personnel have a very extensive list of powers ranging from issuing warnings and forcing those they accuse of violating Iran’s Islamic code of conduct, to make a written statement pledging to never do so again, to fines or even prosecuting offenders.

    Ershad graphic

    It’s such a horrendous way to live I can’t even really imagine it. Or maybe I can but I turn away because it’s too awful.

    The range of offences which Ershad patrols deal with are extensive. From wearing too much makeup in public to wearing too little Hijab or head cover for women, to what is called western influenced hair style and trendy clothing for men.

    Just exactly what amounts to immoral behaviour, can be widely open to the interpretation of the Ershad agent on the spot. So buying your clothes and or makeup from authorised shops, won’t necessarily keep you out of trouble. If an Ershad agent sees the combination unfit according the Sharia code of conduct, you can still end up being warned or even prosecuted.

    Also, if you’re caught walking or riding with your opposite sex friend, you still could end up being stopped, questioned and prosecuted by Ershad because that’s another violation of Islamic code of conduct.

    It’s all clothes and sex. Being kind, helping people who need help, not pushing people into puddles – never mind all that, just arrest that woman for having some hair showing.

  • It has been claimed

    Barney Henderson at The Telegraph reports on an item about Iran’s women’s football team, in that typically passive, agent-free language that journalists use when they’re not sure, or want to obfuscate, what’s going on.

    Eight of Iran’s women’s football team are actually men awaiting sex change operations, it has been claimed.

    The country’s football association was accused of being “unethical” for knowingly fielding eight men in its women’s team.

    “It has been claimed”; “was accused”; by whom? What are you talking about? If I were a newspaper editor I would make that against the rules. It could mean some drunk on the bus said it. It could mean anything. It’s crap journalism.

    In the third paragraph he finally specifies an agent.

    Mojtabi Sharifi, an official close to the Iranian league, told an Iranian news website: “[Eight players] have been playing with Iran’s female team without completing sex change operations.”

    We still don’t know what that means. An official of what? What kind of official? What is “the Iranian league”? We know what Iran is, but we don’t know what the reporter means by “the Iranian league.” What news website, and how reliable is it? What kind of news website? One like the Associated Press, say, or one like Breitbart?

    Anyway. If the claim is true…what should we think? Should we think that’s a great thing for the rights of trans women? Or should we think it’s an underhanded way for Iran to pretend to allow women to play football without actually allowing women to play football?

    Gender change operations are legal in Iran according to a fatwa – or religious ruling – pronounced by the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, spiritual leader of the 1979 Islamic revolution.

    The law contrasts with the strict rules governing sexual morality under the country’s Sharia legal code, which forbids homosexuality and pre-marital sex.

    No it doesn’t, not really. Or it does if you look at it one way but not if you look at it another way. Allowing people to change gender is entirely compatible with forbidding homosexuality.

    Football is highly popular among many Iranian women, despite religious rules that bar them from entering stadiums to watch matches between male teams.

    Earlier this month the women’s national team captain was unable to fly with the squad to Malaysia because her husband refused her permission to fly.

    Well just because she can play football doesn’t mean she can travel without a man’s permission. Get real.

     

  • So a handshake is a sexual relationship

    They have got to be kidding.

    Iran. The Independent reports:

    An Iranian artist currently serving more than 12 years in prison for criticising the government now faces further charges of “indecency” for allegedly shaking her male lawyer’s hand.

    Amnesty International reports that Atena Farghadani, 29, who was jailed after she depicted Iranian government officials as monkeys and goats in a satirical cartoon, may face a longer sentence amid claims over the handshake.

    Charges of an “illegitimate sexual relationship short of adultery” have been brought against Farghadani and her lawyer Mohammad Moghimi amid allegations he visited her in jail and shook her hand – which is illegal in Iran.

    Seriously? Seriously? A longer sentence for shaking a man’s hand??

    What can they possibly be thinking? Even Iran?

    Farghadani was sentenced to 12 years and nine months in prison earlier this year following the publication of her cartoon which was drawn in protest at plans by the Iranian government to outlaw voluntary sterilisation and to restrict access to contraception.

    The cartoonist was arrested in August 2014 after publishing her satirical artworks on Facebook and spent three months in Evin prison in Tehran before being released in November.

    She was later found guilty by a Tehran court of “colluding against national security”, “spreading propaganda against the system” and “insulting members of the parliament” through her artwork.

    Then she wrote letters of protest to the Top Mullahs, and Amnesty thinks that’s why she got a 12 year sentence.

    And now this.

    It’s outrageous.

  • Permission

    Iran is worried about its shocking ungodly laxitude about the always-vexing problem of women going anywhere without permission. It’s thinking about tightening up.

    The draft law, set to go before the 290-seat Majlis, stipulates that single women up to the age of 40 must receive official permission from their father or male guardian in order to obtain travel documents.

    Under current law, all Iranians under 18 years of age — both male and female — must receive paternal permission before receiving a passport. Married women must receive their husband’s approval to receive the documents.

    The proposal is expected to find support in the conservative Majlis.

    I don’t think I knew that single women in Iran were required to have male guardians. I thought that was a Saudi thing.

    Anyway – you get the drift. Unmarried women under 40 can’t be allowed to go places without permission, because they’re whorey sluts who will fuck every man they encounter unless they have permission to go places from a man. Permission from a man obviates the whole whorey sluts thing. It’s magic.

    Iran’s civil code overwhelmingly favors fathers and husbands in all personal matters related to marriage, divorce, inheritance, and child custody.

    Girls may be legally married as early as 13, and some lawmakers argue the age may, under Islamic interpretation, drop as low as 9. All women require permission from a male guardian to marry, regardless of their age.

    Under Iranian law, women are also strictly compromised in terms of rights to compensation and giving legal testimony.

    They are also bound by a strictly observed Islamic dress and conduct code, which forbids casual contact with the opposite sex and ordains that a woman must keep her hair and body covered in public.

    That’s because everything is more of a guy thing. It’s all perfectly fair.

     

  • If women have choices

    What do you do when women attain not only equality but, in some areas, numerical superiority?

    Well if those areas are things like doing most of the domestic work, or low pay, or getting hassled in the street, you do nothing. But when those areas are desirable things like university education?

    You slam the door on them, so that they won’t have any numerical superiority any more. You make sure there won’t be more women than men graduating from universities by not letting so god damn many women in in the first place.

    In Iran,

    36 universities have announced that 77 BA and BSc courses in the coming academic year will be “single gender” and effectively exclusive to men.

    It follows years in which Iranian women students have outperformed men, a trend at odds with the traditional male-dominated outlook of the country’s religious leaders. Women outnumbered men by three to two in passing this year’s university entrance exam.

    Senior clerics in Iran’s theocratic regime have become concerned about the social side-effects of rising educational standards among women, including declining birth and marriage rates.

    Yes, that is a worry. Always. If women have choices about what to do with their lives, many of them will not get married very young, many of them will not start having children very young, many of them will have one or two children instead of five or ten. Some will not get married at all, some will not have children at all. That’s how it is when people have choices – many of them will decide for themselves what kinds of lives they want to have. (Many, not all. Some will do the expected thing, or submit to pressure, or make mistakes that commit them to lives they never actually chose to have.)

    Theocrats, naturally, think that’s an outrage. They think god wants people to have the kinds of lives that god thinks they should have, and they also think they know that, and they also think they know that what god wants should be binding on humans.

    So they move to stunt and truncate the lives of women, and to take choices away from them, so that they will revert to marrying young and having children young and often, because of their lack of choices.

    Under the new policy, women undergraduates will be excluded from a broad range of studies in some of the country’s leading institutions, including English literature, English translation, hotel management, archaeology, nuclear physics, computer science, electrical engineering, industrial engineering and business management.

    The Oil Industry University, which has several campuses across the country, says it will no longer accept female students at all, citing a lack of employer demand. Isfahan University provided a similar rationale for excluding women from its mining engineering degree, claiming 98% of female graduates ended up jobless.

    Shirin Ebadi has written to Ban Ki Moon and to Navi Pillay, the UN high commissioner for human rights.

    Ebadi, a human rights lawyer exiled in the UK, said the real agenda was to reduce the proportion of female students to below 50% – from around 65% at present – thereby weakening the Iranian feminist movement in its campaign against discriminatory Islamic laws.

    “[It] is part of the recent policy of the Islamic Republic, which tries to return women to the private domain inside the home as it cannot tolerate their passionate presence in the public arena,” says the letter, which was also sent to Ahmad Shaheed, the UN’s special rapporteur for human rights in Iran. “The aim is that women will give up their opposition and demands for their own rights.”

    …

    However, the science and higher education minister, Kamran Daneshjoo, dismissed the controversy, saying that 90% of degrees remain open to both sexes and that single-gender courses were needed to create “balance”.

    Because if women ever have more of a good thing than men do, that’s “imbalance.” This principle does not hold true in the other direction.