First Iranian Woman to Compete in Official Match Wins; Can't Come Home Because She Wasn't Wearing Hijab in Match - But I thought the hijab was feminist and optional? I thought the Middle East was feminist?

[Basketball Jones]

So...a fatwa? Or is “warrant” the better word to use here? Given the circumstances, “warrant” seems to be a much softer word than the woman and her coach’s reaction suggest.

 

[Rand /pol/]

Where are you Western feminists?

Memory hole approaching in 5... 4... 3... 2... 1...
DRUMPF!
There we go. Back to normal.

They're too busy bitching about a mostly imaginary pay gap.
They really only care about themselves.

Either being mad about troons, or trying to rationalize troons, probably. Although some are also sperging about all the various ways that they, as women in 1st world countries, are viciously oppressed, and are in desperate need of liberation, even though they're more free than anyone in human history.

The rest are busy being fat and bitching that they can't get laid, though.

EDIT: OT - I'm actually looking forward to the first tard on social media that screeches a comparison to a nun's habit; habits are worn after a voluntary vow to the Church, and hijabs are something that some Imam's will tell you a girl should be wearing by age 7, or beaten until she submits out of fear.

My guy, I've been seeing people screech about how "muh nuns' habits are literally hijabs!!! CHECKMATE CHRISTIANS!!!" for a while now. It grinds my geeahs Peter Griffin style.

Habits and hijabs are both religious garments won by women around the head and neck area. The similarities stop there.

Habits are worn by nuns. A nun is essentially a female monk. Catholic women volunteer to be nuns. It's a position within the church or the faith. Again, essentially a female deacon or monk or whatever. Christian women, or specifically Catholic women (because protestants don't really have nuns), aren't forced to wear them.

Spoiler

Hijabs (and burqas by extension) are worn by all women of Islamic (and Islamic-based) faith, aside from a few tiny split-off groups and individuals who want to be progressive in the real sense (these groups are of course targeted). If women are seen in public without them, they are subject to stoning, death, and rape- often all three. Women have to begin wearing them at very young ages because the Middle East evidently sees 7 year olds as sexually attractive. Middle Eastern culture really is animalistic (with men at least); if a woman is seen in public without one, or her ankle is showing, the culture basically says "well I, as a man, was so overcome with primal sexual urges after seeing an inch of skin that I had no choice but to rape her in the street." IIRC there was a time in Iran, or one of those countries, where wearing the hijab was actually optional, but then the governments became Islamic theocracies. I don't have a link, but you know that photo of women taking off their hijab in protest?

When western female reporters (or one belonging to an outside culture) goes to interview a leader from one of those nations, 99% of the time they're wearing a hijab and covered head to toe. If I wear to interview Pope Francis today, go visit a Catholic priest, go to a Catholic funeral, etc. as a non-member I would not have to dress as a nun.

Again, the habit is worn by a specific group of women (female "leaders") within the Catholic church and it's a voluntary "career" path; AFAIK Islam, or any of its offshoots, does not have any church leading positions for women, because women are seen as property and lower than dogs. Buddhists, Taoists, and Hindus do, though!

muh libs

Have sex.

 

[Recoil]

Have sex.

What did he mean by this?

?

 

[Clockwork_PurBle]

What did he mean by this?

?

He has autism and we should laugh at him.

 

[NOT Sword Fighter Super]

View attachment 735820
Have sex.

Libtard.

 

[PS1gamenwatch]

Yep, before the Revolution in 1979 Iran was rapidly urbanizing and westernizing. Photos from the 50s through the late 70s look like they could be from any European nation of the era, landscape and architecture aside. They had a secular but extremely totalitarian monarchy for the decades leading up to it. The last monarch, Mohammad Reza Shah, actually banned veils and hijabs in 1936 in an effort to modernize the country and enforced it with extreme gusto for the first few years. The revolution started as a leftist backlash about the extravagance and corruption of the royal family, colonialism, and suppression of individual freedoms, but was quickly coopted by ultra-conservative religious extremists.

Spoiler: historian spergs about women in the Iranian revolution

In the 1960s, Reza Shah enacted the "white revolution" which tried to dismantle traditional Islamist practices and, importantly, enfranchise women. He tried to at least pretend to support working class and peasant class people by taking down traditional land distribution schemes, etc, to westernize the country even more. He was hoping it would legitimize his dynasty and create a popular support base amongst the rural poor. He instead created this huge population of angry students, academics, women, and urban poor people who opposed his regime and supported socialism or communism instead. Many of them started to support a kind of uniquely Iranian anti-capitalist, anti-western leftist Islamic socialism. There was also a fairly sizable urban middle class who supported a constitutional democracy based essentially on western forms.

So Khomeini wasn't initially seen as a real threat because the protesters were mostly lefties who wanted to break down the top-heavy power structure of the monarchy by some means. No one really expected them to rally behind an insanely conservative religious dictator who immediately began a draconian Islamist crackdown. He used a bunch of (alleged) false flag operations like the arson of a locked theater that killed hundreds of civilians to get more moderate clerics and muslims on his side, then courted more liberal groups with the help of the moderates.

Women were highly involved in the initial student movements and later protests against the Shah, including getting the military guards in Tehran disarmed because they'd go out and protest with babies in their arms and the Shah knew shooting a woman holding a baby would be game over. Khomeini applauded them for their work for the protests and encouraged them to be more involved, stoked their hatred of the Shah, and allowed them to participate in positions that held real power, but he also made the hijab a symbol of the revolution and encouraged women to wear them again. After he took power, he made it mandatory for women in the government to wear hijab. Then he kicked them all out of the government. By 1983, hijab was mandatory for all women in public, no exceptions, and it had to be worn neatly; "bad hijab" that showed hair or too much skin could get you arrested just like no hijab. Last year the "bad hijab" law was officially repealed but in practice it hasn't gone away.

tl,dr: lefty women started wearing the hijab voluntarily with the support of radical religious nutjobs who made it seem like a symbol of their power as muslim women or some shit, and now they can't not wear it.

We call this "foreshadowing".

You mean like this:

 

[Clockwork_PurBle]

Saw this today and thought here would be a nice place for it. Not sure of the source.

 

[Liber Pater]

Based