Backwater trash policies.
Omg men saw your HAIR! Give me a fucking break. Grow the fuck up and stop acting like children who can't control themselves.
Backwater trash policies.
Omg men saw your HAIR! Give me a fucking break. Grow the fuck up and stop acting like children who can't control themselves.
You can actually go on YouTube and search "Tehran walking tour" or something similar, and like half the women aren't wearing any head covering whatsoever...
I don't know if there are different rules for performers, but I am a bit suspicious. Is the guardian trying to drum up consent for restarting the war? I think some skepticism is warranted.
And before y'all downvote me to oblivion for for being a dictator loving tankie or whatever, remember that the Guardian is British corporate media...the same country where protesting genocide gets you charged as a terrorist. It's not exactly a place where the ruling class has ever given a shit about human rights.
It's worth noting that Tehran (the city) is generally a little more lax than most of the rest of Iran/* ... I'd guess she was singled out because her lack of hair covering could be seen easily from other parts of the country, and they don't want the women there getting ideas
/* Source: I dated a girl from Tehran once, and that's what she told me
People have increasingly challenged the "modest dress" mandates over the past decades, but there used to be a "Guardian Patrol" that would try to enforce modest dress in public spaces. After Mahsa Amini's death the Guardian Patrol was shut down, and there was a massive increase in women skipping head coverings, in particular in larger cities like Tehran and Esfahan.
However, skipping modest dress in media is a different matter. It has become laxer, but not by the same extent. The religious leadership is extra sensitive about modesty in music, so I think the context of "singing for men without head covering" is the signal here.
I'd also mention that there will be a lot of backsliding of these hard-won victories with this war, as ultraconservatives are gaining a lot of power and legitimacy.
As soon as Religion gets into Politics, things invariably go backwards to a 7th century (or whenever that specific religion was invented) mentality.
A nice little reminder that, even with everything else, Iran is still a shit hole.
That's right. Trump shouldn't have started a war with Iran, but it's still a shithole country.
Imagine being such a shit hole that the world is rooting for Iran.
This mentality exhausts me. If people can stop treating geopolitics like a fucking sports match that would be great. We don't have to root for anyone in a given conflict. We can acknowledge both sides are bad and not matter the outcome it will be bad for common people.
If we ever are able to do this we might actually have some progress. But until then we continue to worship inherently evil states
Imagine being so morally bankrupt, you can't pick a side. It's called critical support. I don't support the actions of the Iranian state, but I support them in their defensive war against the global hegemon.
Funny how your type will double down on how there's no moral choice between democrats and Republicans
Yet somehow you can find the "moral" choice between a theocratic dictatorship (also capitalist btw) and an imperial nation.
A) nobody mentioned any political party affiliation; if you want to fight people you've made up in your head, I recommend some grippy socks.
B) nobody has to support Iran. People support peace, which by definition means opposing the US in this conflict. Seeing as how this conflict literally has 2 sides, that definitionally means "supporting Iran." If anything, YOU'RE the one boiling a desire for peace and stability down to "team sports."
How'd that liberating of the Iranian people go again?
It made a lot of extremely wealthy Americans even wealthier. So we got that going for the world.
Well, Iran had a democratic government before the U.S. and U.K. orchestrated the coup in 1953 that installed the Shah. The government was led by Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh, who was democratically elected and nationalized the oil industry.
This is the regime all these Iran apologists on Lemmy are rooting for. There are no good guys in this war.
Shitty, aboslutely.
How many American school children have Iran bombed?
Dont try to give America a free pass by diluting the narrative.
Please cite the part where I gave America a free pass.
Please cite those Lemmy users rooting for women to be lashed for singing
People are not rooting for Iran, but more like everyone knows attacking Iran is illegal and distraction from the Epstein file. This made Iran look like a less shitty looking shit.
Who was rooting for the regime? Who?
I think people were rooting against the US/Israeli aggression, not particularly for the Irani regime.
You definitely interpret people wanting the Iranian people to succeed vs the Iranian regime. Good on you for getting the nuance completely correct without a single ounce of error on your part. Terrific job.
Obviously terrible, but how do they end up at 74? Is there a table for number of words sung without a hijab?
It's based on how butt hurt the men feel after a woman pretends to be a human being.
Is it 74 men, or the average butthurtness per man who was butthurtted?
checks
Apparently the sharia court gave her the maximum sentence for a single act.
Article 638- Anyone in public places and roads who openly commits a harām (sinful) act, in addition to the punishment provided for the act, shall be sentenced to two months’ imprisonment or up to 74 lashes; and if they commit an act that is not punishable but violates public prudency, they shall only be sentenced to ten days to two months’ imprisonment or up to 74 lashes.
Note- Women, who appear in public places and roads without wearing an Islamic hijab, shall be sentenced to ten days to two months’ imprisonment or a fine of fifty thousand to five hundred Rials.
Wait, am I reading this wrong? Doesn't the note mean that hijab crimes aren't punished with lashing?
Isnt that basically an execution by torture? I dont think anyone could survive 74 actual lashes if they do it like other countries with lashings.
My understanding is that it is not. It is more like a humiliation ritual. They don't do full force.
They don't whip them like the Americans whipped their slaves.
Thank God you're here to tell us the correct way to whip our troublesome women 🙏
Good thing we’re about to give them a half a trillion dollars. Goddamn the entire world sucks.
Holeeee fuck. I mean I know Iranian leadership is intensely conservative and traditional, but shittttttt. Do they actually still give whippings as legal punishment?? This will be enforced and she will actually get lashes like it's 1840s Mississippi??
There was an Iranian football player who spoke out a while back and they basically said, "do that again and we'll kill your family."
Their Lego shit is pretty on point but they're seriously not good dudes.
Shithole country doing shithole things.
At least they uphold their laws, even if they're religious trash. We can't even get Trump out after two impeachments and evidence he's a pedo. So who's worse, a country with extreme religious laws that actually enacts said laws or one with much more reasonable ones but never enforces them.
Enforcing shitty laws is shitty. And you're right: both are shithole countries doing shithole things.
Amongst other things the American/Israeli War of Agression on Iran makes this shit more likely, since in countries at war anybody who demonstrate against the authorities are easilly slandered as being traitors and if it's a war that they didn't start then the public opinion is far more likely to side with the Authorities.
A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/