Iran's only female Olympic medalist reportedly defects

[trotsky]

http://www.startribune.com/iran-s-only-female-olympic-medalist-reportedly-defects/566921882/

Iran's only female Olympic medalist said she defected from the Islamic Republic in a blistering online letter that describes herself as “one of the millions of oppressed women in Iran.”

Taekwondo athlete Kimia Alizadeh posted the letter on Instagram as Iran's semiofficial ISNA news agency said she had fled to the Netherlands. She criticized wearing the mandatory hijab headscarf and accused officials in Iran of sexism and mistreatment.

...Her defection comes amid unprecedentedly high tensions between Iran and the United States.

In recent years, many Iranian athletes have left their country, citing government pressure. In September, Saeed Mollaei, an Iranian judoka, left the country for Germany. He said Iranian officials had forced him to not compete with Israeli judoka.

[spooky3]

1. Interesting. Article said she went to The Netherlands.

Good choice!

[Ron Obvious]

2. I wonder what she thinks of western "feminists" agitating for the "right" of women to wear them here

I always thought that was an amazing bit of dissonance. Especially when many even agitate for the "right" of women to go around in oppressive burkas, when they're mostly wearing them under threat of violence from their male family members.

I suspect this athlete's attitude mirrors that of the majority of women in countries where they're mandated. Not having to wear them represents freedom from oppression.

[Act_of_Reparation]

3. I can see the argument.

If your position is, "women should have the right to wear whatever they want to wear", then it stands to reason women should have the right to wear a hijab if they want to.

Why they would want to is a separate issue. You can address that without telling people what they can or can't wear.

[Major Nikon]

4. I'm not so sure it's so easy to separate those two

It’s a pretty safe bet millions are being compelled by the threat of violence to wear it, and it’s a fact the rule of law is being used in many countries to force it. It’s also a fact you rarely ever saw one anywhere before those countries started forcing women to wear it.

[Act_of_Reparation]

6. I didn't mean to imply the two aren't connected.

They are. But one is the symptom of the other. Going after the hijab isn't going to persuade those who don't want to wear it not to wear it. You need to address the compelling social forces.

[Major Nikon]

9. It certainly worked the other way around

Forcing women to wear it created a social force that it was acceptable to do so. The fact that so many take up the hijab as a symbol for "religious freedom" is quite telling. It's far closer to a symbol of religious oppression which is also not surprisingly a symbol of sexism.

[Dorian Gray]

37. They aren't agitating that women should be forced to wear them...

they ARE agitating that women should be able to wear them if they choose to.

It's a big difference, and while there could be complications at home with families who pressure women into wearing the particular clothing, it's still a choice.

In her country, they HAVE to wear the clothing. In the Netherlands, she can CHOOSE not to.

[Cartoonist]

5. the mandatory hijab headscarf

Religion is so full of free will, isn't it?

[trotsky]

7. Yeah it's funny how the people who want to attack "burqa bans"...

strangely never want to talk about why so many Muslim women feel the need to cover up.

[Major Nikon]

10. Tolerance does not require one to tolerate intolerance

Those who think this so-called "tolerance" is acceptable should probably do a bit of reading on what Karl Popper had to say on the subject.

[guillaumeb]

8. The Netherlands?

Well, speaking of the Netherlands,

Dutch laws increasingly target Muslims’ rights

A series of laws recently enacted in the Netherlands have increased discrimination against Muslims and the violation of their rights, Dutch academics are warning.
Martijn de Koning of Amsterdam University's Anthropology and Sociology Department told Anadolu Agency (AA) that legal regulations affecting religious groups have been made in the past in the Netherlands, but recent steps are now aimed entirely at Muslims.

https://www.dailysabah.com/islamophobia/2019/10/01/dutch-laws-increasingly-target-muslims-rights

Dutch rally protesting Soleimani killing includes caricature blaming Jews

Participants at a protest rally in the Netherlands against the US killing of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani waved anti-Semitic posters, a local watchdog group told police.
At the demonstration Tuesday in front of the American Embassy in Wassenaar near the Hague, two women were photographed holding up a poster titled “the makers of terrorism,” which featured a caricature of two men, one wearing an American flag and another dressed as an ultra-Orthodox Jew, standing on the shoulders of a scarecrow labeled “terrorism.”

https://www.timesofisrael.com/dutch-rally-protesting-soleimani-killing-includes-caricature-blaming-jews/

That said, intolerance does not excuse intolerance.

[trotsky]

11. WHATABOUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jesus.

[guillaumeb]

12. Do you claim an exclusive right to it?

Sorry, I had no idea.

But if you read to my ending, you might have seen this:


That said, intolerance does not excuse intolerance.

So the secularists in the Netherlands should not engage in intolerant behavior even as they criticize it when it is done by theists.

[trotsky]

15. You need to decide if you want to be taken seriously or not.

Because on any thread of yours, if anyone deviates even the slightest from what you've deemed as the topic, you scream and attack them.

But then you go and do it to others ALL. THE. TIME.

If you are proud to be acting like a hypocrite, then fine.

But you should understand that's one of the reasons why people don't take you seriously.

Now, do you have anything to say about the topic of the OP? Or will you just double down on the whatboutism, and hypocrisy?

What would Jesus want you to do, gil?

[Major Nikon]

16. You just don't understand

He is the decider of what is proper to discuss. Self-righteousness doesn’t always allow for consistency.

[guillaumeb]

20. A truly ironic post. eom

[trotsky]

26. Yes, yours is. n/t

[guillaumeb]

19. Your power of projection is formidable.

What Is Projection?
Projection is the process of displacing one’s feelings onto a different person, animal, or object.
The term is most commonly used to describe defensive projection—attributing one’s own unacceptable urges to another.
The concept emerged from Sigmund Freud’s work in the 1890s.
Unconscious discomfort can lead people to attribute difficult feelings or impulses to someone else to avoid confronting them. Projection allows the difficult trait to be addressed without the individual fully recognizing it in themselves.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/projection

[trotsky]

25. I gave you yet another chance to redeem yourself.

You spat in my face once again.

If you think you're behaving like Jesus wants you to, you worship a very awful Jesus, guillaumeb.

[guillaumeb]

27. No, you once again demonstrated, as if it were needed,

your commitment to dialogue and discussion.

[trotsky]

28. So are you still going to whatabout and change the topic in other people's threads...

and have absolutely no qualms about doing so?

So much for dialog and discussion.

Be the change you want to see, guillaumeb, or quit whining when people dish it right back to you.

Jesus must be so proud of your behavior. What an awesome Christian you are.

[edhopper]

13. two women in the Netherlands equals

The Iranian government.

Pathetic attempt at equivalency.

Funny how you only post about women who want to wear the burqa. But never against the violence that regularly happens to women in Muslim countries that don't.

[Cartoonist]

14. Someone here thinks . . .

that hijabs and burqas are symbols of religious expression. They aren't. They are symbols of religious oppression.

[guillaumeb]

18. Good of you as a white male American to explain

to Muslim women what these things really are.

[Cartoonist]

21. It never stopped you

And you aren't even Chinese.

[guillaumeb]

22. An excellent use of the CHinese card.

Well played.

[Major Nikon]

24. You just don't understand

Since you are white, and American, and male, (and especially atheist) you must ignore patriarchal religious oppression.

OTOH, it's perfectly acceptable for a white, Canadian, (former?) Catholic, to ad nauseum point out oppression in China by alleged atheists perpetrated on a group of people(including atheists, even though never mentioned) which happen to include adherents to Islam(which is always mentioned).

It almost seems as if there is a common thread here. But regardless, for further reading, see...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink

[Major Nikon]

17. It's a safe bet that violence isn't limited to Muslim countries

When the Quran and Hadith prescribe the proper way to beat your wife, it’s not as if the epidemic of domestic violence is going to end at the border.

But yeah, there are some who would just as soon conveniently ignore the associations between religion and domestic violence. So long as it allows them to cry religious persecution it’s all good I guess.

[guillaumeb]

23. Nor is violence limited to theists. eom

[Act_of_Reparation]

38. Where in the Atheist Bible does Not-God encourage violence?

[AtheistCrusader]

29. So, the state is anti-muslim, and in response, the muslims are anti-jewish?

What the fuck is going on over there?

[guillaumeb]

30. Do you put "all" of any category of people in one basket?

Perhaps what we are seeing is the same intolerance based tribalism that has always existed.

[AtheistCrusader]

31. It is 'all' in the context of all that you posted.

Obviously, the people who didn't show up to the protest, or weren't party to the creation of said laws, aren't necessarily involved.

You posted them for a reason right?

[trotsky]

32. You did in post #8 on this thread.

Hypocrisy.

[guillaumeb]

33. You obviously misunderstood or misread the articles.

Nowhere is "all" mentioned.

[trotsky]

34. Don't gaslight. n/t

[guillaumeb]

35. Stop making unsupported claims.

It is that easy.

[trotsky]

36. I guess you must have misunderstood my claim. n/t