Iran needs some democracy

dialamah · February 1, 2018

3 hours ago, Goddess said:

My apologies for misconstruing your comments. I'm used to being attacked on here, so I may be a bit more paranoid then I need to be at times.

Thank you.

Truce?

Perhaps we both need one of these more often:

Sure. No snickers for me though, I joined Weight Watchers and today my weigh-in has me 10 lbs lighter.

eyeball · February 1, 2018

On 1/14/2018 at 9:38 AM, DogOnPorch said:

Yes a Soviet satellite puppet nation that steals other countries' property is always a good idea.

It never occurred to anyone how threatening a democracy on the Soviet Union's border might have been? I mean, look at how unglued we got over Cuba?

Quote

Protesters in Iran are calling for the Shah's son to take charge. I'm with them...you're with the bearded fellows.

No doubt you'd be with another Shah TAKING charge as opposed to simply governing after an election. I'm simply with democracy. I would have been all for The Shahs dad running against Mossadegh to govern the country. How about you?

Oh, right...almost walked right into that one didn't I?

Edited February 1, 2018 by eyeball

DogOnPorch · February 1, 2018

16 hours ago, eyeball said:

It never occurred to anyone how threatening a democracy on the Soviet Union's border might have been? I mean, look at how unglued we got over Cuba?

No doubt you'd be with another Shah TAKING charge as opposed to simply governing after an election. I'm simply with democracy. I would have been all for The Shahs dad running against Mossadegh to govern the country. How about you?

Oh, right...almost walked right into that one didn't I?

I enjoy the occasional beer, too.

CITIZEN_2015 · February 2, 2018

Iran police arrested 29 women for peaceful protest against the most visible symbol of oppression.

https://www.rferl.org/a/iran-police-arrest-hijab-head-scarf-protest-tehran/29013882.html

Edited February 2, 2018 by CITIZEN_2015

kactus · February 2, 2018

On 31/01/2018 at 8:06 PM, Goddess said:

Sorry, I got stuck in meetings all morning.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to express my opinion, especially as I understand it varies widely from your own.

First to clarify – Dialamah said that I “hate Islamic dress”. This is designed to give the impression that I just randomly and with no thought automatically disapprove of all Islamic dress. This is incorrect. I very much enjoy and appreciate the clothing styles of many cultures and I have no problem with people wearing their cultural dress. But we are not talking about that here, and Dialamah knows this. We are talking about a specific item of apparel, that has a specific purpose, carries with it a specific history and as she has even admitted here – is controversial. It is controversial for a reason and I don’t believe those reasons should be brushed aside with a casual “It’s my choice”, as if all the reasons that make it controversial in the first place, are nothing. To admit it is a controversial garment, and then not allow discussion of those controversies, or to quickly dismiss them with accusations of “Islamophobia!!!” is at best, poor debating. Women and girls all over the world, including in Western countries are being forced into this garment, are dying and being killed because of it. So yes, I have serious reservations about the legitimacy of this particular garment.

(Incidentally, this is what makes your question a “loaded question”. In addition, Dia’s comment is designed to distract from the discussion by creating the false impression that I am prejudiced against anything Islamic so therefore not to be listened to, and your question is designed to force a Yes or No answer to a more complex question, based on Dia’s false allegations of myself, and also designed to distract from the discussion of this particular garment. But hey, I’ll bite today. )

Secondly, to clarify – my background is that I was born and raised in a high-control cult. Long story short, I managed to get myself free of it. That is no easy task, because it involves more than just getting physically free. You also must get mentally free. For me, getting mentally free meant fully and honestly researching my former cult. I also researched the mind control and thought-stopping techniques involved in brainwashing and how to break free from these processes. I researched logical fallacies and debating so that I could identify when these were being used in my former cult’s literature.

When I got myself mentally free, I worked for 10 years on a discussion/recovery forum for others who were also trying to get free. We occasionally had Mormons show up on our board who also needed help, so I ended up researching the shit out of that religion, too. There aren’t many Mormon or JW or Hutterite or Amish threads here, so…..while it may seem that I only have issues with Islam *here*, I could totally blow a lot of wonky religious beliefs from many religions out of the water as well. Blowing JW’s out of the water over the blood issue is a particular favourite of mine because this is also a belief that people are literally dying from. It wasn’t until I lived in a town with a high Muslim population and saw their reaction to the birth of ISIS and saw the issues arising from the religion’s adherents that I said, “WTF is going on in THIS religion??” and started looking into it more. So my interest is not just in exposing Islam, no religion is safe from me. Haha! It would be more accurate if you called me a “Religionophobe”.

Now, to get to your question:

Unfortunately, my answer is: It depends.

It depends on a variety of factors.

What is the history of the dress?

What is its purpose?

What is its function?

Is the dress code truly a part of the religion, or is it an extreme interpretation of it?

Is it enforced for just religious functions? Or is it enforced at all times?

Does it harm or does it benefit the wearer – physically, psychologically, emotionally, socially, etc?

If the garment’s purpose is to make a public statement of values, does that public statement agree or disagree with what the prevailing society’s values are?

Does it harm or does it benefit society as a whole?

Of course there are lots of other considerations to take into account when evaluating a religious belief. And I wouldn’t completely dismiss any particular belief based solely on any ONE of the above criteria, except maybe the harm/benefit factor, and especially if people are dying over it.

So, back to you – find me the religion that is not just quietly practicing, but actively promoting a proven harmful article of clothing, that its adherents are being killed over and dying for, that promotes an extreme interpretation of the basic religion, that promotes social values far out of step with the rest of the modern world – and I will condemn that garment as well.

My research on this garment leads me to believe there is more harm inherent in it, than benefits. So while I completely understand your argument that it is a woman’s choice to wear this or not, I don’t believe that should be what is of prime importance.

I think because of its many harmful attributes, it should probably treated much the same as seatbelts. It’s totally your choice to wear or not wear them. If you choose to not wear them, there are fines. You also should accept the more serious consequences of choosing not to wear them – you may be seriously injured or killed by your choice. Same with these garments, a fine if you insist on wearing it. And you will not be shielded from society’s disapproval (within legal boundaries, of course.)

Now, Doggie! May I borrow your umbrella to deflect the rotten tomatoes?

Thanks for sharing your opinion. It is always good to see and refreshing what people's background is and the kind of experience they may have endured that will impact their value and belief system. This must have been a terrible experience for you to be born and raised in a high control cult! I can't imagine what kind of scars this must have left on you as a child but kudos for having been able to emancipate your body and mind from the past....

I do share your opinion about the garment and the purpose it serves for people in the society especially if people's life is at risk. My question was actually intended to understand if your prejudice is specifically designed against a certain religious groups (this applies to certain members on this forum) or is it part of a wider discussion which you have already clarified i.e. application to other groups/ sects like mormons, jehovas etc.

It goes without saying that it is human nature to become defensive if I started speaking about garments of other religious beliefs like Sari for Indians or Kippot and shtreimel for jews without looking deeper for what purpose they serve. However, it is part of their culture and it is to be respected.

Back to the topic, a lot of the factors/ generic questions you have raised here are debatable and depends on the individual's circumstances and experience IMO. I am not a scholar on this and have provided some basic answers based on my own understanding. I am sure people like Dialamah can articulate much more on this:

What is the history of the dress? It dates back to the foundation of Islam.
What is its purpose? To cover a woman's hair and body from strangers. (Men)
What is its function? To protect a woman from harm.
Is the dress code truly a part of the religion, or is it an extreme interpretation of it? Given that women from these countries wear them it is ingrained as part of their culture/ religion
Is it enforced for just religious functions? Or is it enforced at all times? Depends on the country. Some muslim countries like Turkey have adopted a more moderate approach where women are free from not wearing them in public. In Iran it isn't just for religious functions. It is observed at all times when women are in public.
Does it harm or does it benefit the wearer – physically, psychologically, emotionally, socially, etc? Depends....From the posts that you may have seen on this thread you can see that most women in Iran do not wish to wear them.
If the garment’s purpose is to make a public statement of values, does that public statement agree or disagree with what the prevailing society’s values are? As above, in Iran the topic being discussed here the garment's value does not agree with the prevailing society's values in majority of cases. The government tried very hard to 'brainwash' women into wearing them but failed miserably. I do not believe this to be the same in many Arab countries and particularly in Pakistan where women strongly endorse Hijab regardless of the government.
Does it harm or does it benefit society as a whole? This is subjective based on own personal beliefs, prejudices, etc. Personally, and I say this again I do not have anything against people who wear them as these garments is part of their culture belief system. I am only responsible for me and my loved ones and cannot exercise my preferences on others.

Now, what is happening in Iran right now is unique. That's because more and more women are voicing their concern and dissatisfaction with wearing this piece of garment. This is the result of years of repression and women being forced to what to wear in public. That has not washed with many Iranian women and quite rightly so....If women on the streets of Iran had a choice between wearing this garment or walk free in public with their hairs fully exposed then that will negate the argument of the harmful effects of wearing these garments. The fact that these women cannot walk free is one of the reasons we are seeing these series of protests across Iran. However, the authorities in Iran have for years 'enforced practices' to crack down and arrest Iranian women who do not adhere with the dress code they have imposed on the society...And this is where as a male I find myself in agreement with these women and share your experience and sentiment.

Where I find myself in slight disagreement with you is that here in the West people do 'have a choice'. Women of other religions can wear a piece of garment for their religious ceremony or belief system or not to wear it if they wish to do so . I believe it is not prescriptive for us to apply one principal for all and decide who should wear what. Of course people can be educated about the harmful effects (if there are physiological scars) of wearing them but ultimately it is their choice.

No rotten tomatoes from me

Goddess · February 2, 2018

4 hours ago, kactus said:

What is the history of the dress? It dates back to the foundation of Islam.

What is its purpose? To cover a woman's hair and body from strangers. (Men)

What is its function? To protect a woman from harm.

Where I find myself in slight disagreement with you is that here in the West people do 'have a choice'. Women of other religions can wear a piece of garment for their religious ceremony or belief system or not to wear it if they wish to do so . I believe it is not prescriptive for us to apply one principal for all and decide who should wear what. Of course people can be educated about the harmful effects (if there are physiological scars) of wearing them but ultimately it is their choice.

No rotten tomatoes from me

Thank you, Kactus, for taking the time to understand where I'm coming from and for discussing in a respectful way.

If you have further interest in the subject, I would suggest that you investigate your first 3 responses a bit more. Read the exerpts from the book on the thread I linked to before.

I really, really do understand and respect the idea of "choice". The point at which that "choice" is not of prime importance is when it no longer is a choice that only affects them PERSONALLY. When the choice being made starts to impact society, especially in a negative way, is where I draw the line on personal "choice". Many Muslims have come to Canada to escape these medieval type of beliefs and I think their feelings also need to be taken into account. They express great disappointment and fear when they come to Canada to escape such things and see it being promoted here, as well. Why should their feelings be less important? I suspect there are more Muslims who would also like to see an end to these garments, than there are ones who want to bring it back, especially in Canada. Those who cling to it, IMO, do so out of fear of reprisals from their community and/or families, lack of correct information, lack of education, comfort in the familiar - more so than out of any "choice".

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/raheel-raza/niqab-burka-ban-canada_b_8189112.html

http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/khan-the-niqab-takes-us-back-to-where-muslim-women-should-not-be-going

I relate this to the blood transfusion issue with JW's. All JW's make the choice to not have blood transfusions under any circumstances but that choice is not based on accurate information, only information they have been force-fed through the religion and must comply with or else lose their families, livelihoods, etc.

The government had to step in and many JW's had their children taken away from them during medical emergencies. The JW reaction was to fight back by focusing on indoctrinating their children to shun blood transfusions and to stand up to the doctors and judges. I was part of the religion when we were instructed very strongly to make sure that our children also denied themselves this medical treatment. This works to an extent - the government then decided that if a mature minor felt very strongly about it, they could make their own "choice". But I'm sure you can see the "choice" is really not their own. It's an illusion of choice, which I cannot support.

And every JW will say, "It's my choice" about blood transfusions, too. Thank the goddess, the government stepped in and denied them this "choice" or there would have been many many more deaths.

Edited February 2, 2018 by Goddess

CITIZEN_2015 · February 2, 2018

Our best wishes for the victory of Iranian females against tyranny of compulsory hijab.

https://en.radiofarda.com/a/iran-police-arrests-girls-hijab/29014920.html

DogOnPorch · February 2, 2018

34 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

Our best wishes for the victory of Iranian females against tyranny of compulsory hijab.

https://en.radiofarda.com/a/iran-police-arrests-girls-hijab/29014920.html

Best wishes. Well.

That has those Mullahs just shivering in their boots....sandals? Sandals.

dialamah · February 2, 2018

49 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Thank you, Kactus, for taking the time to understand where I'm coming from and for discussing in a respectful way.

If you have further interest in the subject, I would suggest that you investigate your first 3 responses a bit more. Read the exerpts from the book on the thread I linked to before.

I really, really do understand and respect the idea of "choice". The point at which that "choice" is not of prime importance is when it no longer is a choice that only affects them PERSONALLY. When the choice being made starts to impact society, especially in a negative way, is where I draw the line on personal "choice". Many Muslims have come to Canada to escape these medieval type of beliefs and I think their feelings also need to be taken into account. They express great disappointment and fear when they come to Canada to escape such things and see it being promoted here, as well. Why should their feelings be less important? I suspect there are more Muslims who would also like to see an end to these garments, than there are ones who want to bring it back, especially in Canada. Those who cling to it, IMO, do so out of fear of reprisals from their community and/or families, lack of correct information, lack of education, comfort in the familiar - more so than out of any "choice".

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/raheel-raza/niqab-burka-ban-canada_b_8189112.html

http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/khan-the-niqab-takes-us-back-to-where-muslim-women-should-not-be-going

I relate this to the blood transfusion issue with JW's. All JW's make the choice to not have blood transfusions under any circumstances but that choice is not based on accurate information, only information they have been force-fed through the religion and must comply with or else lose their families, livelihoods, etc.

The government had to step in and many JW's had their children taken away from them during medical emergencies. The JW reaction was to fight back by focusing on indoctrinating their children to shun blood transfusions and to stand up to the doctors and judges. I was part of the religion when we were instructed very strongly to make sure that our children also denied themselves this medical treatment. This works to an extent - the government then decided that if a mature minor felt very strongly about it, they could make their own "choice". But I'm sure you can see the "choice" is really not their own. It's an illusion of choice, which I cannot support.

And every JW will say, "It's my choice" about blood transfusions, too. Thank the goddess, the government stepped in and denied them this "choice" or there would have been many many more deaths.

I was a JW too for a period of time. I joined voluntarily and accepted their teachings. After some years I left.

The important aspect to this is that I "chose" to join. I wasn't force-fed or brainwashed. When I wanted to leave, I did, and like you, I lost family and friends. To paint all adherents to JW's as helpless victims of brainwashing is wrong, imo. I don't mean to downplay or dismiss the influence of religious teachings on adults, but at some point I think you have to let adults choose even that which you believe is ill-advised.

With children, I agree with you that parental and religious teachings can have a much more profound effect and lead them into serious harm and even death. I think in those cases it is appropriate that the larger society, through the government, protect kids in those situations.

I have to say, it seems odd to me that your acknowledgement and understanding of kids being harmed by extreme religious teachings does not extend to Khadr, who was 12 when taken to Afghanistan and had spent his childhood exposed to an extreme ideology.

DogOnPorch · February 2, 2018

Khadr volunteered to go to Afghanistan. No taken involved.

eyeball · February 2, 2018

6 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

Khadr volunteered to go to Afghanistan. No taken involved.

I'm pretty certain a 12 year old needs official permission that also acknowledges parental permission has been granted before being allowed to go abroad on their own. Surely a learned historian possessed of your incredible abilities should be able to produce such a record to prove the veracity of your claim so where is it?

BTW what you'll be looking for usually called a Form of Indemnity.

DogOnPorch · February 2, 2018

8 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I'm pretty certain a 12 year old needs official permission that also acknowledges parental permission has been granted before being allowed to go abroad on their own. Surely a learned historian possessed of your incredible abilities should be able to produce such a record to prove the veracity of your claim so where is it?

BTW what you'll be looking for usually called a Form of Indemnity.

He was told he'd be staying home with the women...that's when he asserted himself about going along to fight with the rest of the men. Very mature.

CITIZEN_2015 · February 2, 2018

Arrests did not stop Iranian lions to continue protests"

http://www.cbc.ca/news/thenational/the-national-today-newsletter-iran-u-s-secrets-super-bowl-1.4510911

Goddess · February 2, 2018

51 minutes ago, dialamah said:

To paint all adherents to JW's as helpless victims of brainwashing is wrong, imo. I don't mean to downplay or dismiss the influence of religious teachings on adults, but at some point I think you have to let adults choose even that which you believe is ill-advised.

Few JW's are converts. The majority of those who convert come from 3rd world countries. JW's also have the lowest retention rate of all religions, most who are born into it, no longer follow it or leave when they get older. Being a born-in, not a convert, I do not fully understand why grown adults would join the religion. In working with them, they all say, almost to the individual - that much was hidden from them in the early days of becoming a JW and that if they had fully understood what all would be expected of them, they would have never joined in the first place. This is common in cults. One of the first things they tell you when you get interested in them is that you will face opposition to your studying from your family and freinds and advises you to cut them off and not listen to them. This is common in cults. If you were a JW, then you know the massive amount of time that must be spent at meetings, in service, in prayer, in association only with other JW's and in study (OMG the studying!!!). This is also common in cults. The brainwashing must be done repetitively and often. I was surprised when I researched mind-control and cults and found out how pervasive it is in the JW religion. If you went into it and joined up fully aware of what you were signing up for, my experience in working with survivors tells me you would be the exception.

Am I painting ALL JW's as helpless victims of brainwashing? I know you are against generalities and that you like to point out the 1-2 % of exceptions to anything and that somehow nullifies the other 98% in your mind. But it doesn't for me. When I was working with survivors, if I had spent time worrying about the 1-2% instead of the 98%, I wouldn't have been very helpful.

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

I have to say, it seems odd to me that your acknowledgement and understanding of kids being harmed by extreme religious teachings does not extend to Khadr, who was 12 when taken to Afghanistan and had spent his childhood exposed to an extreme ideology.

**swims around your bait, but doesn't bite**

Yes, Khadr was pretty exceptional. Most religions don't teach their children to kill.

eyeball · February 2, 2018

1 hour ago, DogOnPorch said:

He was told he'd be staying home with the women...that's when he asserted himself about going along to fight with the rest of the men. Very mature.

Do I really need to drag you back to where you shit through your teeth and said a 12 year old wasn't taken to fight with adults?

Charles Anthony · February 2, 2018

Folks,

Avoid thread derailment syndrome.

CITIZEN_2015 · February 2, 2018

3 hours ago, Charles Anthony said:

Folks,

Avoid thread derailment syndrome.

I have reminded them several times already but it falls on death ears. Somehow it appears they wish to overshadow Iran women's cry for equality and news on Iranian women's bravery risking their lives in demanding for basic human rights with their totally unrelated posts. They possibly don't even realize that by diverting the thread into radical Islam, or Nazis or personal life then they are undermining the struggle of millions of these defenseless women crying out for support. Very Sad!!!.

Edited February 3, 2018 by CITIZEN_2015

CITIZEN_2015 · February 3, 2018

The United States condemned the reported arrests in a press release Friday.

"We condemn the reported arrests of at least 29 individuals for exercising their human rights and fundamental freedoms by standing up against the compulsory hijab," State Department spokesperson Heather Nauert said.

kactus · February 3, 2018

12 hours ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

The United States condemned the reported arrests in a press release Friday.

"We condemn the reported arrests of at least 29 individuals for exercising their human rights and fundamental freedoms by standing up against the compulsory hijab," State Department spokesperson Heather Nauert said.

The problem with these uprisings and protests is that it is lacking clear leadership and purpose to make a political change. In the past students and political activists have tried very hard to initiate reform through peaceful protests. Their protests were met with the brutal force of the conservative elements within the regime.

It shows a tremendous level of bravery and courage for these women to come out in numbers and defy their rights by not wearing the head scarves. It it worth mentioning that the issue for not wearing this piece of garment is just a tip of the iceberg and underlies a much deeper issue within the country that will further undermine the legitimacy of the regime. Furthermore, these women are challenging the authorities with their lives if/ when they get arrested.....

The issue of women's rights in Iran right now needs to be addressed with other pertinent political aspects that affects the daily lives (rising inflation/ unemployment) and needs to be orchestrated by IRANIANS in a structured and organised manner.

Having said that, in the absence of any credible opposition directly challenging the regime what are the alternatives?

The scenario can be even worse if MEK or MKO (a terrorist organisation) came to power. Most Iranians hate them for what they have done against Iranians and never shared any support for them. The US senators however have held meetings with their leader Maryam Rajavi in Albania:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/senior-us-senators-meet-iranian-opposition-leader-in_us_598f68fae4b063e2ae058020

http://iran-interlink.org/wordpress/?p=8302

This is why the change for formulating a coherent strategy to directly challenge the Mullahs needs to be carried out with credible opposition that is popular for planning these uprising. The regime knows this fully well and that's why they manage the fight at every corner by censoring the social media and limiting access of people with other news sources....

Edited February 3, 2018 by kactus

kactus · February 3, 2018

19 hours ago, Goddess said:

Thank you, Kactus, for taking the time to understand where I'm coming from and for discussing in a respectful way.

If you have further interest in the subject, I would suggest that you investigate your first 3 responses a bit more. Read the exerpts from the book on the thread I linked to before.

I really, really do understand and respect the idea of "choice". The point at which that "choice" is not of prime importance is when it no longer is a choice that only affects them PERSONALLY. When the choice being made starts to impact society, especially in a negative way, is where I draw the line on personal "choice". Many Muslims have come to Canada to escape these medieval type of beliefs and I think their feelings also need to be taken into account. They express great disappointment and fear when they come to Canada to escape such things and see it being promoted here, as well. Why should their feelings be less important? I suspect there are more Muslims who would also like to see an end to these garments, than there are ones who want to bring it back, especially in Canada. Those who cling to it, IMO, do so out of fear of reprisals from their community and/or families, lack of correct information, lack of education, comfort in the familiar - more so than out of any "choice".

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/raheel-raza/niqab-burka-ban-canada_b_8189112.html

http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/khan-the-niqab-takes-us-back-to-where-muslim-women-should-not-be-going

I relate this to the blood transfusion issue with JW's. All JW's make the choice to not have blood transfusions under any circumstances but that choice is not based on accurate information, only information they have been force-fed through the religion and must comply with or else lose their families, livelihoods, etc.

The government had to step in and many JW's had their children taken away from them during medical emergencies. The JW reaction was to fight back by focusing on indoctrinating their children to shun blood transfusions and to stand up to the doctors and judges. I was part of the religion when we were instructed very strongly to make sure that our children also denied themselves this medical treatment. This works to an extent - the government then decided that if a mature minor felt very strongly about it, they could make their own "choice". But I'm sure you can see the "choice" is really not their own. It's an illusion of choice, which I cannot support.

And every JW will say, "It's my choice" about blood transfusions, too. Thank the goddess, the government stepped in and denied them this "choice" or there would have been many many more deaths.

Frankly, you are talking to someone who loathes all religions and cults to a certain extent. They all have their short comings....What you said about JW's blood transfusion reminds me of scientology cults where 'silent birth' is prescribed to women! I guess this is where you can appropriately use your 'seat belt' analogy....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_birth

Back to the topic, whilst choice may not be the best option for women to wear this piece of garment (known as hijab) unfortunately that choice in a country like Iran today is a necessity. If a women in Iran does not comply with the rules about wearing of this piece of garment she will get arrested. It is not a choice - It is a necessity and yet many women defy them. Whilst your point for defying that choice in Canada is valid and admirable same cannot be applied collectively in a country that restricts choice...

CITIZEN_2015 · February 3, 2018

2 hours ago, kactus said:

The problem with these uprisings and protests is that it is lacking clear leadership and purpose to make a political change. In the past students and political activists have tried very hard to initiate reform through peaceful protests. Their protests were met with the brutal force of the conservative elements within the regime.

It shows a tremendous level of bravery and courage for these women to come out in numbers and defy their rights by not wearing the head scarves. It it worth mentioning that the issue for not wearing this piece of garment is just a tip of the iceberg and underlies a much deeper issue within the country that will further undermine the legitimacy of the regime. Furthermore, these women are challenging the authorities with their lives if/ when they get arrested.....

The issue of women's rights in Iran right now needs to be addressed with other pertinent political aspects that affects the daily lives (rising inflation/ unemployment) and needs to be orchestrated by IRANIANS in a structured and organised manner.

Having said that, in the absence of any credible opposition directly challenging the regime what are the alternatives?

The scenario can be even worse if MEK or MKO (a terrorist organisation) came to power. Most Iranians hate them for what they have done against Iranians and never shared any support for them. The US senators however have held meetings with their leader Maryam Rajavi in Albania:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/senior-us-senators-meet-iranian-opposition-leader-in_us_598f68fae4b063e2ae058020

http://iran-interlink.org/wordpress/?p=8302

This is why the change for formulating a coherent strategy to directly challenge the Mullahs needs to be carried out with credible opposition that is popular for planning these uprising. The regime knows this fully well and that's why they manage the fight at every corner by censoring the social media and limiting access of people with other news sources....

These are good points. The uprising lacks leadership however, it appears the most popular slogans have been those calling for the return of the Shah and monarchy.

Oh Shah of Iran Return to Iran

Iran which does not have a King is in Chaos

Reza Reza Pahlavi

Prince of Iran where are you? To come to our aid?

Not one slogan even in support oh hated MEK. Maybe it is the time that the Prince of Persia takes the leadership however, he seems reluctant to call people on streets as he knows what the regime would do to them and he does not wish bloodshed.

Edited February 3, 2018 by CITIZEN_2015

Goddess · February 3, 2018

7 hours ago, kactus said:

Back to the topic, whilst choice may not be the best option for women to wear this piece of garment (known as hijab) unfortunately that choice in a country like Iran today is a necessity. If a women in Iran does not comply with the rules about wearing of this piece of garment she will get arrested. It is not a choice - It is a necessity and yet many women defy them. Whilst your point for defying that choice in Canada is valid and admirable same cannot be applied collectively in a country that restricts choice...

Point taken. Will think on how that aspect of choice fits in.

February 3, 2018

8 hours ago, kactus said:

Frankly, you are talking to someone who loathes all religions and cults to a certain extent. They all have their short comings....What you said about JW's blood transfusion reminds me of scientology cults where 'silent birth' is prescribed to women! I guess this is where you can appropriately use your 'seat belt' analogy....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_birth

Back to the topic, whilst choice may not be the best option for women to wear this piece of garment (known as hijab) unfortunately that choice in a country like Iran today is a necessity. If a women in Iran does not comply with the rules about wearing of this piece of garment she will get arrested. It is not a choice - It is a necessity and yet many women defy them. Whilst your point for defying that choice in Canada is valid and admirable same cannot be applied collectively in a country that restricts choice...

It cannot be said to be choice if it is a necessity. it cannot be said to be choice if it is made due to the fear of repercussions were any other choice made.

kactus · February 3, 2018

15 hours ago, bcsapper said:

It cannot be said to be choice if it is a necessity. it cannot be said to be choice if it is made due to the fear of repercussions were any other choice made.

Point of reference is the country not religion. Sadly, in Iran wearing this piece of garment is a matter of necessity as it is exercised by government by force. In Canada it is a matter of choice.

Edited February 4, 2018 by kactus