Traffic police regulate Iran's dress code

[beenie]

Yes, Iran is a weird place!!

In France:

Police arrest veiled women at 'burqa ban' protest - FRANCE - FRANCE 24
Girls Expelled Over French Head-Scarf Law - U.S. & World

Isn't France a weird place? What the heck is all about?
Islam thing? Huh?

While I agree with you and understand why you posted this, two wrongs don't make a right. Prohibiting or forcing...both are wrong.

 

[kai]

Yes, Iran is a weird place!!

In France:

Police arrest veiled women at 'burqa ban' protest - FRANCE - FRANCE 24
Girls Expelled Over French Head-Scarf Law - U.S. & World

Isn't France a weird place? What the heck is all about?
Islam thing? Huh?

Yep the whole world is weird and getting weirder

 

[Oneatatime]

Certainly there are bigger fish to fry?

Well little people can only do little things but personally I think that this is part of a larger programme of harrassment with the purpose of making the populace compliant with their overlords notion of an ideal Islamic state.

 

[Marble]

It is a differnce if you try to impose an Islamic-dress code on women, or if you are against people covering their faces.

 

[beenie]

It is a differnce if you try to impose an Islamic-dress code on women, or if you are against people covering their faces.

Actually it isn't. Telling women what they must wear and what they can't wear is oppressing them and taking away their rights to choose for themselves. We are all in agreement that face-coverings should be removed in safety situations, but to ban it outright is an entirely different situation.

Religious dress codes should not be legislated and enforced, period...after all, we're supposed to be modest for God, not the police or anyone else.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Religious dress codes should not be legislated and enforced, period...after all, we're supposed to be modest for God, not the police or anyone else.

Gotta figure that living in a theocracy according to laws that are allegedly God given, the police would be in charge of enforcing God's laws...


Just sayin.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

While both France and Iran have laws restricting certain forms of public dress, to pretend that they are equal is a bit silly.

France has passed one controversial law related to face coverings only. It was passed democratically, and someday it will be repealed democratically. This law is an exception to the more general rule: France is a free, democratic country.

The dress code of Iran, on the other hand, is far more draconian, with lashes as a punishment and restrictions on many aspects of dress and hair styles. It's much easier to imagine a plausible argument for a law against face covering vs. combing your hair a certain way. Furthermore, this is very unlike France in that it is symptomatic of a larger system which cracks down on its own people. They have to send out police squads to intimidate populations who don't want to follow their dress code, just as they have to intimidate people from opposing the Ayatollah.

From the article:

BBC Tehran correspondent Jon Leyne says it is the latest such drive by the government against what is considered un-Islamic behaviour.
But he adds that many people are continuing to ignore the authorities' warnings.
...
Despite the many attempts by this government to enforce Islamic standards, it seems to have absolutely no effect in north Tehran, our correspondent says, where some young women continue to perch their hejabs as far back on their hair as possible.

A friend of mine from Iran said the worst crime in Iran is being a political dissident. It's considered an act of forgetting how much you love the Ayatollah. And how much you love wearing the clothes he likes, and styling your hair as he likes. Just like in France ..... except not at all. :no:

 

[beenie]

Gotta figure that living in a theocracy according to laws that are allegedly God given, the police would be in charge of enforcing God's laws...


Just sayin.

ahhh yes, we have that "allegedly" problem, don't we?

 

[Sahar]

Actually it isn't. Telling women what they must wear and what they can't wear is oppressing them and taking away their rights to choose for themselves. We are all in agreement that face-coverings should be removed in safety situations, but to ban it outright is an entirely different situation.

Religious dress codes should not be legislated and enforced, period...after all, we're supposed to be modest for God, not the police or anyone else.

After all, there would be some rule about clothes. Except that the minimal requirement can be different. Is any rule that doesn't allow for showing certain parts of the body oppressive no matter what? Or Is it only oppressive when it comes to the Islamic dress code? I am thinking loudly with you.
Not to forget that the Iranians themselves, back then, agreed to such rules.

But the modest dress is for the society, in other words to create a society where modesty is emphasized. After all, God doesn't need our clothes but He prescribed modesty as a value embraced by the Muslim in his/her behavior with other humans including the dress. The social aspect of the modest dress is the point which naturally brings its spiritual effects.
I agree that it is supposed to come out of the conscience of the person, but I am thinking there are always rules to follow in any society and breaking them lead to some sort of penalty. Not all these rules can be seen as oppressive but in many times necessary to keep the order of the society.

Of course, balancing between keeping the order and identity of the society and not to suffocate the people and their freedoms must be taken into consideration especially when the Islamic awareness is weak just like the Muslim condition now. When we take a look at the women in the Iranian streets, we will know that the dress code thing is a real joke. So, in any case whether such rule was enforced or not, I believe that good Islamic education and culturing is the key and so even if the rule is to be imposed, it becomes representative of the public will. When it poorly represents the will of the people, it becomes problematic.

 

[beenie]

Sahar, I agree with your sentiment totally.
My problem is:
what level does government decide is "modest" enough?
do women HAVE to wear the headscarf in public?
what happens if a woman doesn't wear the headscarf? can she not live in Iran?
does said headscarf have to be tied and cover each and every solitary hair?
can women wear pants?
do men have rules, and are they enforced?
do men need to keep a beard?

Where do we draw the line? No one likes to be forced to wear anything. What do you mean by people agreeing with the government's dress code? Do they have elections with the rules attached? I know there will never be a time when everyone agrees to everything, but I'm really stumped at how all the religious revolutions would take place if everyone agreed with the government's guidelines on dress code.

Inherently, I have issues with any government sanctioning religious dress code; it will all be based on that government's level of "religiousness" at the time. This whole subject is very touchy, because it's quite obvious that every society and religion has their own idea of conservativeness. Even within the Muslim community there are various opinions...even regarding the headscarf, and particularly the jilbab/burqa, etc.

The problem also lies within mens' responsibility to lower their gaze and to control themselves in general. The old "men will be men" and "men are weak" argument is getting old. Their command from God is to lower their gaze...is that enforced as well? My guess is no.

Too much emphasis is placed on womens' dress code; even when the country is otherwise stable and if a correctly implemented Shariah is put into place, women will still resist being told what to wear.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Sounds like a revenue-generation measure.

As much as I think that the almighty dollar rules everything, this seems more like a way to abuse women more than anything else.

 

[Sahar]

ssainhu, I think it can be replied to your points and hence not being problematic.

Sahar, I agree with your sentiment totally.
My problem is:
what level does government decide is "modest" enough?
do women HAVE to wear the headscarf in public?
what happens if a woman doesn't wear the headscarf? can she not live in Iran?
does said headscarf have to be tied and cover each and every solitary hair?
can women wear pants?
do men have rules, and are they enforced?
do men need to keep a beard?

Where do we draw the line? No one likes to be forced to wear anything. What do you mean by people agreeing with the government's dress code? Do they have elections with the rules attached? I know there will never be a time when everyone agrees to everything,

Well in 1979, 99% of the Iranians voted in favor of the Khomeni's form of Islamic republic...this is not just an overwhelming majority but it's almost the whole people!!
This was the choice of the Iranians!

Who draw the lines is the people. This is how democracy works. The laws in any given democratic state represent the public orientation and mood. It's just like how the niqab was banned in France or the headscarves (what's called the ban of "religious symbols", ironically hijab is not a symbol) was banned in the French schools. The Parliament voted for the bans. The school managers stood at the gates of the schools prohibiting the Muslim girls with headscarves from entering their schools, up to prohibiting them because they wore long blouses and long dresses!!

Why should this be difficult when it comes to enforcing an Islamic dress code?
If we are talking about a democratic Islamic country and where there is separation of powers, then if any similar law was to present, why should it be any less democratic?
Why should it mean that it speaks about religiousness of the government rather than the people?

I know there will never be a time when everyone agrees to everything, but I'm really stumped at how all the religious revolutions would take place if everyone agreed with the government's guidelines on dress code.

Inherently, I have issues with any government sanctioning religious dress code; it will all be based on that government's level of "religiousness" at the time. This whole subject is very touchy, because it's quite obvious that every society and religion has their own idea of conservativeness.

Okay and each society can manage its affairs based on its own idea. We are not talking about Iranians who are supposed to impose their own idea on Egyptians!

Even within the Muslim community there are various opinions...even regarding the headscarf, and particularly the jilbab/burqa, etc.

I know there are silly details about this specific issue, and there are more important issues but whether more important or less important, there are various opinions about the variety of issues, and determining which direction to follow is through the democratic process.

The problem also lies within mens' responsibility to lower their gaze and to control themselves in general. The old "men will be men" and "men are weak" argument is getting old.

This is the argument of who? Men and women are required to lower their gaze.
The idea is women and men are created differently and God prescribed certain teachings that fit the uniqueness of each. Who added the requirement for women to cover more parts than men is God! So this shouldn't be the topic. The topic is whether to enforce an Islamic dress code by the way of Law or not. Or better the topic is about our reaction to the reality of imposing an Islamic dress code in some Muslim societies.

 

[beenie]

I agree with all that you said, and if the question is presented to me, I say that if Iran wants to have an Islamic Republic, that's fine and their right. However, I don't think enforcing the hijab and strict dress code on women is beneficial. Nor do I think it's right to ban the hijab either. Both are against religion and freedom of expression. But...that's just my opinion.

Here's a scenario: My husband gets a job in Iran and we have to live there for 5 years. For that 5 years, I have to wear a hijab or I'll be arrested/fined? Is it fair to enforce something that is between God and me to government and me? Can we force a person to fast? Pray? IMO there is no distinction, because all of these acts are for Allah and Allah alone.

 

[Sahar]

Hey ssainhu, I have no problem with your opinion. And personally I favor leaving this to the woman's will (forcing women give counter results ) but I believe it can be argued very well for a law that regulates the public dress according to the Islamic criteria.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Well in 1979, 99% of the Iranians voted in favor of the Khomeni's form of Islamic republic...this is not just an overwhelming majority but it's almost the whole people!!
This was the choice of the Iranians!

Who draw the lines is the people. This is how democracy works. The laws in any given democratic state represent the public orientation and mood.

At that time people voted for an Islamic Republic regime. Maybe they still want an Islamic Republic, or maybe they have changed their mind now and they want to vote for a non-religious government. Isn't it possible that they could have changed their mind?
Are they allowed to vote for a non-religious government? If yes, then that is democracy, if not, can we still say, it is democracy?

 

[kai]

I agree with all that you said, and if the question is presented to me, I say that if Iran wants to have an Islamic Republic, that's fine and their right. However, I don't think enforcing the hijab and strict dress code on women is beneficial. Nor do I think it's right to ban the hijab either. Both are against religion and freedom of expression. But...that's just my opinion.

Here's a scenario: My husband gets a job in Iran and we have to live there for 5 years. For that 5 years, I have to wear a hijab or I'll be arrested/fined? Is it fair to enforce something that is between God and me to government and me? Can we force a person to fast? Pray? IMO there is no distinction, because all of these acts are for Allah and Allah alone.

I agree that's its wrong to ban the hijab and just as bad to enforce the wearing of it. and i don't really see how it sits with the "no compulsion" thing, but i believe its more an Iranian thing than a Islamic thing.

I also agree that there is an argument that its none of our business its up to the Iranians. But its also my opinion that the situation in France and Iran are debatable and be nothing should be considered fait accompli just because we don't personally live there.

 

[kai]

Yep the whole world is weird and getting weirder

the more i look at that picture the more bizarre it looks.



Heres a disturbing side note to the Iran Headscarf discussion.


In a religiously conservative town near the city of Isfahan, women at a private party were abducted last month and gang raped at knife point.

One week later, a female university student was attacked and raped by unknown assailants on the heavily-guarded campus in Masshad, a holy city.

In both cases, officials accused the victims of not wearing the hijab or headscarf in the proper fashion and general un-Islamic conduct.

These high-profile cases and the derogatory comments made by Iranian authorities have outraged women's rights groups who have long complained of the increasingly high rate of sexual harassment.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-13777308

 

[beenie]

That story is suspicious.

the more i look at that picture the more bizarre it looks.



Heres a disturbing side note to the Iran Headscarf discussion.


In a religiously conservative town near the city of Isfahan, women at a private party were abducted last month and gang raped at knife point.

One week later, a female university student was attacked and raped by unknown assailants on the heavily-guarded campus in Masshad, a holy city.

In both cases, officials accused the victims of not wearing the hijab or headscarf in the proper fashion and general un-Islamic conduct.

These high-profile cases and the derogatory comments made by Iranian authorities have outraged women's rights groups who have long complained of the increasingly high rate of sexual harassment.

BBC News - Gang rapes in Iran cause fear and religious controversy

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Well in 1979, 99% of the Iranians voted in favor of the Khomeni's form of Islamic republic...this is not just an overwhelming majority but it's almost the whole people!!
This was the choice of the Iranians!

Who draw the lines is the people. This is how democracy works. The laws in any given democratic state represent the public orientation and mood. It's just like how the niqab was banned in France or the headscarves (what's called the ban of "religious symbols", ironically hijab is not a symbol) was banned in the French schools. The Parliament voted for the bans. The school managers stood at the gates of the schools prohibiting the Muslim girls with headscarves from entering their schools, up to prohibiting them because they wore long blouses and long dresses!!

Why should this be difficult when it comes to enforcing an Islamic dress code?
If we are talking about a democratic Islamic country and where there is separation of powers, then if any similar law was to present, why should it be any less democratic?
Why should it mean that it speaks about religiousness of the government rather than the people?

Iran's constitution may have been passed by popular vote, but Iran is not a democracy.

Normally, a democracy does not have an unelected Supreme Leader for life. The Supreme Leader of Iran is the one who declares war and peace, appoints the military commanders, controls who can run for election, controls which bills are passed, appoints the chief judge, and so on.

If 99% of the people voted to install a Supreme Leader in 1979, then they voted to largely get rid of democracy. And they severely wronged the next generation of Iranians, who never agreed to this arrangement.

Hence the protests in Iran, hence the necessity to send out police squads and lashings to enforce the dress code.

 

[kai]

Iran's constitution may have been passed by popular vote, but Iran is not a democracy.

Normally, a democracy does not have an unelected Supreme Leader for life. The Supreme Leader of Iran is the one who declares war and peace, appoints the military commanders, controls who can run for election, controls which bills are passed, appoints the chief judge, and so on.

If 99% of the people voted to install a Supreme Leader in 1979, then they voted to largely get rid of democracy. And they severely wronged the next generation of Iranians, who never agreed to this arrangement.

Hence the protests in Iran, hence the necessity to send out police squads and lashings to enforce the dress code.

Indeed: voting is effectively rigged by the council of unelected clerics that decide who would be allowed to run,for a president, that has no power to do anything the unelected clerical establishment does not want done