IRANIAN WOMEN IN PRISON

Zorya

Maybe this has been talked about on Boards, I have not been about much, but if it has not this is a topic that has occupied my interest of late.
Just wanted to post something about it so that anyone interested might know how things are going along for some women in Iran. There has been some media coverage, but not nearly enough.
When I see westerm women embrace the veil as a cutesie/quirky symbol of cultural respect, I shudder and think instead of these beautiful girls and women languishing in what must be hell on earth in Iranian jail. All because of a piece of cloth.
It is one thing to wear a veil if one desires to, and scarves can be very lovely, people can wear them if they wish. It is another thing to give any support or credence to a symbol that is devastating the lives of women in other parts of the world.

I want these women to be known by their names and not forgotten.

I think of Yasaman Ariyani. Gorgeous, brave 23 year old Yasaman who has been sentenced to 16 years in Iranian prison for peacefully protesting against mandatory Hijab.



Her mother Monireh Arabshahi, who has also been jailed for 16 years.


Their friend Mojgan Keshavarz, who has been jailed for 23 years.



Of course, one of the forerunners was Human Rights lawyer and activist Nasrin Sotoudeh, not only jailed for 38 years but also sentenced to be lashed.


There is Saba Kordafshari who has been jailed for 24 years.



Lovely Sahar Khodayari attempted to enter a football stadium recentlly but was arrested as women are not permitted to do so in Iran. She self-immolated and died last week from her injuries.


Vida Movahed. the original Revolution Girl, got one year in 2017, but the authorities have been cracking down much more severely since then.


Just so you know.

Fiery mutant

There are governments in this world that provide no benefit to human society at all. The Iranian government is one of them.

Glass fused light

For anyone looking to learn more you can search for white wednesday on social media etc.


https://metro.co.uk/2019/04/23/women-are-wearing-white-on-wednesday-to-protest-irans-strict-hijab-laws-9286149/

Portsalon

I share your revulsion for the régime, but every one of those young women knew the risks that they were taking and the likely consequences of taking such action, thus, it must be said, they were the architects of their own destiny. Not nice, not fair and, to educated Western eyes, it's wholly cruel and unnatural, but if you choose to play with fire in a country run by woman-hating religious maniacs, then you're quite likely to end up badly burnt.

For your next photo study, why not focus on FGM, where helpless infants and children are abused without their consent, rather than on cases where adults freely take adult decisions in situations where they are aware of the likely consequences?

Zorya

Glass fused light wrote: »

For anyone looking to learn more you can search for white wednesday on social media etc.


https://metro.co.uk/2019/04/23/women-are-wearing-white-on-wednesday-to-protest-irans-strict-hijab-laws-9286149/

Yes. Masih Alinejad is very good. A power house.

Zorya

Portsalon wrote: »

I share your revulsion for the régime, but every one of those young women knew the risks that they were taking and the likely consequences of taking such action, thus, it must be said, they were the architects of their own destiny. Not nice, not fair and, to educated Western eyes, it's wholly cruel and unnatural, but if you choose to play with fire in a country run by woman-hating religious maniacs, then you're quite likely to end up badly burnt.

For your next photo study, why not focus on FGM, where helpless infants and children are abused without their consent, rather than on cases where adults freely take adult decisions in situations where they are aware of the likely consequences?

I do focus on FGM. I mentioned it on Boards already today. I can't do all the things at the one time.

I totally disagree with your playing with fire caution - nothing would ever change anywhere if people adopted that rule

TheValeyard

Portsalon wrote: »

I share your revulsion for the régime, but every one of those young women knew the risks that they were taking and the likely consequences of taking such action, thus, it must be said, they were the architects of their own destiny. Not nice, not fair and, to educated Western eyes, it's wholly cruel and unnatural, but if you choose to play with fire in a country run by woman-hating religious maniacs, then you're quite likely to end up badly burnt.

For your next photo study, why not focus on FGM, where helpless infants and children are abused without their consent, rather than on cases where adults freely take adult decisions in situations where they are aware of the likely consequences?

If people dont stand up to these regimes then they will remain in power indefinitely without change.

The Iranian one is odd. Extremists took the 79 revolution and made it their own. But I genuinely thought Iran was slowly reforming and modernising with the Nuclear deal struck during the Obama era. Then Trump, with support from his Israeli buddies, goes and balls it all up.

Overheal

TheValeyard wrote: »

If people dont stand up to these regimes then they will remain in power indefinitely without change.

The Iranian one is odd. Extremists took the 79 revolution and made it their own. But I genuinely thought Iran was slowly reforming and modernising with the Nuclear deal struck during the Obama era. Then Trump, with support from his Israeli buddies, goes and balls it all up.

Well look how that was portrayed in the US: 'Obummer negotiated with terrorists. Obummer gave away a pallet of cash. etc' All bunk, but when you can lie with impunity on prime time TV and daytime radio your base takes that in as truth (did they learn nothing from the Bush Administration?)

"Negotiating with terrorists: no president has ever done anything worse."

Zorya

TheValeyard wrote: »

If people dont stand up to these regimes then they will remain in power indefinitely without change.

The Iranian one is odd. Extremists took the 79 revolution and made it their own. But I genuinely thought Iran was slowly reforming and modernising with the Nuclear deal struck during the Obama era. Then Trump, with support from his Israeli buddies, goes and balls it all up.

Pictures from Iran in the 1970s are incredible compared to now.



I am not sure Trump has particularly anything to do here. Or at least not anything more than previous incumbents, all of whom, without exception, have been lizard tongued re the Middle East because of resource wars. Am not sure though about my opinion as I can hardly bear to listen to current affairs anymore.

Portsalon

Zorya wrote: »

I totally disagree with your playing with fire caution - nothing would ever change anywhere if people adopted that rule

Whether or not you choose to agree with me isn't of very much relevance to the women in prison. They knew the likely consequences of their actions and still chose to act, so whether these were heroic acts or futile gestures is purely a matter of judgement.

Ralph Ciffereto

Disappointed. Thought the thread title would direct to a film on XVideos.

Mojgan Keshavarz, rarrr! :pac:

The Late Late Show

Extremists in Iran have been able to 'get away with it' because of the way the West has treated Iran. Any time a moderate emerges in Iran and tries to end this 'Handmaid' laws, a Gilead type in the West like John Bolton scuppers things and a Gilead type in Iran then capitalises.

Also, it is sad to say that there is nothing particularly original about Iranian hardliners' laws. They are just copied from Iran's ENEMY Saudi Arabia. Why should Iran copy its evil enemy when Iran always was a much better place prior to 1983? Also, Iran sees Saudi Arabia REWARDED for being Gilead/The Handmaid's Tale/The Testaments. The West often do not like progressives such as Rouhani, Khatami, Pahlavi and even Ahmadinejad, all of who try and end the Gileadism in Iran. The West secretly like the Ebrahim Raisi and Ali Khamenei types who are the cause of Gileadism within Iran. Why? Moderate, non-Gileadised Iran would be a superpower (this was where the Shah was going) but Gileadised Arabised Iran would self destruct as we are seeing and set Iran back 100s of years.

Glass fused light

Zorya wrote: »

Pictures from Iran in the 1970s are incredible compared to now.

Yep anyone looking for the western version of this can tune into the Handmaidens Tale where the radical element of society captured its citizens with fundementalism.

TheValeyard

Glass fused light wrote: »

Yep anyone looking for the western version of this can tune into the Handmaidens Tale where the radical element of society captured its citizens with fundementalism.

At least they are not doing some stupid camera stare shot :P

The Late Late Show

Glass fused light wrote: »

Yep anyone looking for the western version of this can tune into the Handmaidens Tale where the radical element of society captured its citizens with fundementalism.

True, and we must remember this can happen anywhere. It is very clear the US prefers theocracy to socialism. Look at all the anti-communist rhetoric of extremist Republicans calling moderate Republicans and Democrats (who are NOT communist but centre right) communists! Iran could have had a socialist government in 1979 but the Americans made sure a theocracy copied from their pals Saudi Arabia emerged.

Iran's presidents have often tried to end the Gileadism but have been blocked by powerful forces who want to keep Iran down and poor. Even Ayatollah Khomeini said once 'he didn't intend to bring Iran back to the stone age' and spoke out against deep state actors in Iran who were ruling it in his place, especially after his health began to decline around 1983 when compulsory Handmaid wings became the law.

If the Americans were serious about ending Gileadism in Iran, they would empower the moderates. Prior to John Bolton taking over America, the handmaid's laws were actually being phased out in Iran by Rouhani's admin. The ending of the Iran deal weakened Rouhani and the handmaids of Iran remained. Americans calling Iran 'Axis of Evil' is hypocrisy: Americans are keeping hardliners alive in Iran and are on their side against the elected officials in Iran.

If the Americans were serious about ending Gileadism in Iran, they would empower the moderates. Prior to John Bolton taking over America, the handmaid's laws were actually being phased out in Iran by Rouhani's admin. The ending of the Iran deal weakened Rouhani and the handmaids of Iran remained. Americans calling Iran 'Axis of Evil' is hypocrisy: Americans are keeping hardliners alive in Iran and are on their side against the elected officials in Iran. Gileadism is alive and well in America too with Bolton and the like so they are going to covertly support their equivalents in Iran who keep 'Iran in its place'. Now, with Bolton gone, a more moderate approach hopefully can be formed. But I won't hold my breath.

Glass fused light

Portsalon wrote: »

Whether or not you choose to agree with me isn't of very much relevance to the women in prison. They knew the likely consequences of their actions and still chose to act, so whether these were heroic acts or futile gestures is purely a matter of judgement.

And it is in the same way that FGM is being combated is by the brave women who stand up in their own community's and speak out against FGM.

About how their mothers, grandmothers, and aunties chose allow them to be harmed as children.

About how their fathers, grandfathers and uncles chose to allow them to be harmed as childern.

And for those women who suffered FGM, who speak out and are condemned for it by the people who should have protected them. They loose their family and community. They made this choice and are aware that there are consequences but still act in the hope that their choices will lead to the betterment of girls they will never meet in countries they will never visit.

end of the road

Portsalon wrote: »

Whether or not you choose to agree with me isn't of very much relevance to the women in prison. They knew the likely consequences of their actions and still chose to act, so whether these were heroic acts or futile gestures is purely a matter of judgement.

it's not purely a matter of judgement though.

it is actual reality, that what these women did was correct, brave, legitimate, heroic, necessary, just, and right, and they must be released without question.

Portsalon

Glass fused light wrote: »

And it is in the same way that FGM is being combated is by the brave women who stand up in their own community's and speak out against FGM.

About how their mothers, grandmothers, and aunties chose allow them to be harmed as children.

About how their fathers, grandfathers and uncles chose to allow them to be harmed as childern.

And for those women who suffered FGM, who speak out and are condemned for it by the people who should have protected them. They loose their family and community. They made this choice and are aware that there are consequences but still act in the hope that their choices will lead to the betterment of girls they will never meet in countries they will never visit.

Whatever you're having yourself! It's the difference being being a pragmatist and being an idealist I suppose.

Me, I want to stroll down to the pub on a sunny afternoon, enjoy an occasional pizza and french onion soup in my local bistro and watch my grandkids growing up; and I don't really care whether or not a statue is erected to commemorate my courage in 50 years' time.

Glass fused light

Portsalon wrote: »

Whatever you're having yourself! It's the difference being being a pragmatist and being an idealist I suppose.

Me, I want to stroll down to the pub on a sunny afternoon, enjoy an occasional pizza and french onion soup in my local bistro and watch my grandkids growing up; and I don't really care whether or not a statue is erected to commemorate my courage in 50 years' time.

And you think that the women are doing it for a statue ....

Good luck your future hope it works out for you.

Portsalon

end of the road wrote: »

it's not purely a matter of judgement though.

it is actual reality, that what these women did was correct, brave, legitimate, heroic, necessary, just, and right, and they must be released without question.

Good call! I applaud your cyber heroism!

Now, why not give both Khameni and Rouhani a bell and let them know your views? Then, with any luck the lassies will be out of the clink in time to watch the Dublin - Kerry game. :rolleyes:

Zorya

Portsalon wrote: »

Good call! I applaud your cyber heroism!

Now, why not give both Khameni and Rouhani a bell and let them know your views? Then, with any luck the lassies will be out of the clink in time to watch the Dublin - Kerry game. :rolleyes:

May I applaud your cyber-apathy..and your choice of flavoursome soup?

Portsalon

Glass fused light wrote: »

And you think that the women are doing it for a statue ....

Good luck your future hope it works out for you.

My future is death, cremation and nothingness; and I won't need any luck to achieve it.

Zorya

Portsalon wrote: »

My future is death, cremation and nothingness; and I won't need any luck to achieve it.

I want to be cremated too. And I will die. We have at least these thing in common. I can appreciate your cynicism - on a bad day I share it. But it is misplaced I feel with these women. Time will tell, I suppose, if they will win the day. Hopefully before you or I leap into the nothingness. :pac:

jam_mac_jam

What amazingly brave women. I wish there was more focus on them. I hope I would havery the guts they have when faced with such oppression.

I don't really understand how you could say they knew what they were doing, should people just accept being oppressived and not stand up for themselves.

PCeeeee

Portsalon wrote: »

Whether or not you choose to agree with me isn't of very much relevance to the women in prison. They knew the likely consequences of their actions and still chose to act, so whether these were heroic acts or futile gestures is purely a matter of judgement.

With the greatest of respect, the word that seems to be eluding you is brave.

We can pass judgement if we wish from our great remove on how heroism and futility but those women chose to act rather than passively wait for their rights to be given to them.

That is brave. And for the life of me I cannot see how that isn't a virtue.

Portsalon

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

I don't really understand how you could say they knew what they were doing, should people just accept being oppressived and not stand up for themselves.

I'll explain it to you in simple terms: some people think with the rational side of the brain, others with the emotional side.

I, being of an aspergerish bent, lean towards the "I know the consequences ----> I'm willing to do the act ---> ergo I am willing to suffer the conseqences of my actions " approach; in short it's the suicide bomber approach.

Others appear to operate under the "I know the consequences but believe that the law isn't just

---

> so I'm going to break the unjust law

---

> I wonder what will happen next?" approach.

I'm not in any way doubting the courage of the women involved, merely pointing out that, putting it simply, they achieved the predictable outcome of their actions. They are every bit as brave as the kamikaze pilots of WW2. Whether or not their actions will prove as effective must, for the moment, be moot.

batgoat

Would love to hear what the above poster thinks of Suffragettes, MLK and Rosa Parks...

JMMCapital

Same could be said about Saudi Arabia, terrible rights towards women the amount of them locked up for just protesting for the right to drive as Mohammed Bin Salman wanted to get all the credit for lifting the ban.

Iran is a real sad case however, the country was beautiful and westernized during the khan's rein then comes the Revolution which brought the country back another thousand years, with all the country's potential wiped down the drain.

Odhinn

JMMCapital wrote: »

Same could be said about Saudi Arabia, terrible rights towards women the amount of them locked up for just protesting for the right to drive as Mohammed Bin Salman wanted to get all the credit for lifting the ban.

Iran is a real sad case however, the country was beautiful and westernized during the khan's rein then comes the Revolution which brought the country back another thousand years, with all the country's potential wiped down the drain.

It was a police state that tortured tens of thousands and much of the 'westernising' was done by force. There's a better option than dictatorship and/or theocracy.

JMMCapital

Odhinn wrote: »

It was a police state that tortured tens of thousands and much of the 'westernising' was done by force. There's a better option than dictatorship and/or theocracy.

That is true but still the Shah did led Iran through a series of sweeping changes.
Under his rule Iran's economy and educational opportunities expanded.
The United States and UK counted the country as a major ally in the
Middle East among many other changes.

I think Iran was still a much more pleasant and progressive place to live
in under the Shah's rule than the Ayatollahs.

Odhinn

JMMCapital wrote: »

That is true but still the Shah did led Iran through a series of sweeping changes.
Under his rule Iran's economy and educational opportunities expanded.
The United States and UK counted the country as a major ally in the
Middle East among many other changes.

I think Iran was still a much more pleasant and progressive place to live
in under the Shah's rule than the Ayatollahs.

....I suggest you might read a bit more about it - he was put in power to replace a democratically elected regime that sought to take back control of its oil. He supported the US and Britain because he was a puppet of the Americans.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat