A. Completely ignoring the veil laws, classic.
B. Adults raping children and adolescents is disgusting. Adolescents having sex with each other is a completely different thing. You wanna convict the 16 years old for having sex with their 15 year old partner? Is that “child sex” to you? I lost my virginity before I turned 18, should I go to jail? You should brush up on your definition of children.
So they have nothing in common with the IR.
Iranian women have to get permission from their husbands to work and if a husband deems the employment of a woman to insult the honor of the family, he can revoke said permission at any time. If a woman is killed, the nearest living male relative can decide whether or not to forgive the murderer. This decision cannot be made by female relatives. A women’s testimony can always be overruled if a man testifies the opposite. If the family of a murder victim wants to receive money instead of seeing the murdered hanged, the murderer has to pay only half the blood money if the victim was female. Leaving Iran without the husbands permission is prohibited.
Women are routinely banned from certain events like football games or other public spectacles. Women are more often rejected as candidates in “elections”.
Rape has to be proven by at least three witnesses; spousal compensation ends, as soon as women leave their marital home.
Women are second class citizens in Iran. Not just through societal patterns, but by law.
I totally agree with you on your stance towards western involvement, but the amount of people outright denying that the IR is terrible for its people just disgusts me.
Age of consent in Germany is the age at which 14 year old can fiddle each other and people up to 18. They can not marry adults.
Iran allows marriage after the occurrence of the first period.
You see the difference?
Oh, and the harshest European law against hijabs is France’s asinine ban of full face coverage, which punishes the wearing of the niqab or tshador with a maximum fine of 150€. If one forces someone to wear these veils, they can be punished with a fine of up to 30.000€ and a year in prison. This law is horseshit, I wanna make that clear.
The Iranian law on Veils punishes the first offense with a suspended fine of 6.7 million toman, then on the second offense ramps up 13 million, then between 20 and 80 million and the fourth between 80 and 165. After the fifth, it’s two to five years in prison. For not wearing a veil.
It gets even funnier: if you advocate for people to not wear a veil, and you did so in corporation with some non-iranian entity or person, you will immediately be sentenced to a fine of between 300 million and 550 million toman and 5 to 10 years in prison. You can even be sentenced to death if the court determines that your actions are spreading “corruption and evil on earth”.
You’re conflating Israel with Jews.
A large part of islamophobes are also antisemitic.
Alles klar, Regal 23 im Bauhaus
Where can one acquire an anti air missile?
Thanks, that’s refreshing to hear.
It’s so hilarious how they try to spin any criticism of the IR as blind Zionism. Gotta love it.
Didn’t know the people in bleeding Kansas started executing slaves, but hey, what’s a little repression of Kurdish and Arab rebellions in an empire eh?
And why, if no other possible party was there and the Islamists achieved their goal totally unopposed, did they feel the need to massively purge their own revolutionary government within the year?
Framing a fucking Shariah state as “trying to keep western influence out”, while said State encodes the legal discrimination of women and non-shia Muslims into law, retains apostasy laws and oppresses the shit out of it’s Kurdish and Balochi minorities, is the most “West bad” type of shit I’ve seen in days.
I don’t hate the Basijis and Mullahs because the western media told me, I hate them because of my Iranian friends. I am sure, Nika Shakarami, Mahsa Amini and Hadis Najafi can rest easy knowing that the Regime that murdered them at least isn’t a disgusting westernized one.
Fuck off. Go suck basij dick somewhere else.
In the United States, the president does not approve candidates and he doesn’t appoint anyone who approves candidates.
| A government more liberal than Iran in the middle east.
You might as well ask for the most slave friendly state in the antebellum South. They’re shit. The 2009 elections might have yielded a more liberal parliament, but those elections got fudged and when people took to the streets, the state murdered 1.500 of them. If there ever was any democracy, it died that year.
Not a single man will ever be able to run in Iran on a platform that doesn’t rely on the Shariah to dispense justice, that does not demand the subjugation of women or liberalizes society in any meaningful way. Iran had a democracy. It got couped, replaced with a monarchy and now Iran lives under a theocracy with a democratic theater in front.
I don’t have time or will to dive into all of this but this one part: “It is theocratic because the majority of it’s constituents are conservative theocrats” There are no non-theocratic politians in Iran, they do not get approved for standing in an election. Every candidate, on every level, has to be approved by the Guardian Council. Who elected that council? Well, half of the council are clerics, appointed the Supreme Leader. The other half are jurists, who are selected by the Majilis from list approved by the Chief Justice. Who appointed the Chief Justice? The Supreme Leader.
Meaning all 12 positions of the body that decides who can stand for election are either appointed by the supreme Leader or appointed by someone with direct allegiance to the Supreme Leader.
Take the president for example: Pezeshkian would legally not be able to stand for election if he wasnt a Shia Muslim or didn’t affirm that the Supreme Leader is the ultimate authority in matters of religion and social issues. Meaning by law, both social and religious reforms can only be done with the consent of the supreme Leader.
The constituents send up theocratic politicians because there are no other politicians. A theocrat has the ultimate power of determining who is and isn’t a viable candidate.
Well fuck UK media then, lol.
Maybe I misunderstood you. I’ve been seeing too many people running defense for Iran these days, and by running defense I don’t mean justifying Iranian retaliation (totally justified to strike back if you’re attacked) but rather defending the Iranian government retroactively.
Both Myanmar and Ethiopia are in active states of civil war. By the very nature of civil war they are doing much worse to their citizens. Iran hasn’t been in a civil war, yet it’s still brutalizing its citizens. Even more than the Saudis.
Khomeini hijacked the revolution that ousted the Shah and turned it from a triumphant moment and chance for change into a “under new management” situation.
Khamenei now presides over this theocratic regime and continues to oppress Iran.
Mate, I don’t rely on mainstream media to tell me what to think about Iran. I have in-laws there. My partner regularly talks to them.
Iran was always shite and during the protests, the media said as much. When they executed protestors, It got reported upon. There was never a time in which Iran was like anywhere close tolerable. Did UK media not pounce on the Shahed drones to Russia? Come on, mate.
It has been touched upon for years, then fell off the news wagon because of other events.
The attacks are unjustified, but this narrative of “the media had no problem with Iran” when again, in the past years, executions and state violence carried out by Iran have been reported, is false.
That’s the Friday one.
Yes, this current attack on Iran is absolutely nonsensical if you’re trying to get a regime change done. Any sensible person should condemn the intervention.