What is all this nonsense about Iranian women having no rights?

Question

The moderator at Columbia university claimed that Iranian women didn't even have "basic" rights in Iran, to which the Iranian President replied that they were active in all sectors of Iranian society, which is true: Consider this

1) 60% of university students in Iran are women
2) Iranian women have the right to vote and hold public office
3) They can drive ( unlike in Saudi Arabia)
4) They can work and compete for any job with men
5) They serve in the police and security forces
6) They can and do own businesses
7) They are highly visible in the media and arts
8) Iranian law is very severe to violence/harassment of women
9) They are entitled to receive a dowry from their husband upon marrying him

The only matters that are unresolved in Iran regard interpretation of Islamic law on civil affairs such as divorce & inheritance: Here, Iran has not pandered to Western moral decadence. Women cannot break up families as easily as in the West which has led to such social havoc

The US opposes the Latin American democracies whilst supporting states like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan , Uzbekistan etc

The points made by the answerer are flawed: not worth replying to: However I will answer this question.

If a women cannot leave a husband who beats her, what sort of marriage is that?

You are wrong: Unless the man has a very good reason for doing so ( like being caught with another man), any court in Iran will grant the woman an immediate divorce.

Answer 1

Personally, I admire a culture or country where divorce is not favored.

We should stop spreading such rumors about Iran. That is very unfair and very destructive.

I am not an Iranian (I am a Filipino) but nonetheless, cheers and hooray for Iran. Because as a muslim country it is doing a great job on human rights - on women in particular.

And on the way muslim countries handle their affairs, its their business. It may be different from what westerners are practicing, but thats their business.

If we see or think that there are times when human rights are being violated in a muslim country, my response to that is, does a country need to be a muslim in order for human rights violation to exist? NO I DONT THINK SO.

Even in non muslim countries there are a lot of human injustice and human rights being violated. The only difference is, in non muslim countries, its being done in more sneaky and more 'democratic' way. But those things also do exist even in non muslim countries!

So please dont be so judgemental and self righteous and talk (trash) like those inhumane acts are only being done in muslim countries.

I am a christian and not a muslim, and i am no muslim fan or anything. Its just that i am fed up of hearing and reading unfair opinions and judgements on muslim countries.

Sure there are a lot of bad things we can see and say about them, and they may be true. But no matter what country or religion, humanly speaking, theres bad and there is also good . So in a way, muslim countries are the same as ours - there are good things in it and bad things in it, not all are bad, not all are good. We have problems, they also have problems. And dont tell me theres no terrorists or killers or evil organizations existing in non muslim countries. There are! The difference is that they are more sneaky and most of the time dress up nicely and put up a good front.

On a certain level we are all brothers. Sure there are evils in any society. But on a certain level we are all just the same and we should be bonded in brotherhood and goodwill.

So lets be fair on them. Lets be fair on everyone.

Answer 2

The "nonsense" is about this..

The country where the statement originated officially looks down upon Iran's government. Saying a government doesn't support the rights of it's citizens is common political rhetoric. Look at all the countries the USA sees as an adversary. Notice what they typically say about such countries? They are oppressive, dictatorships, terrorism-supporters, etc..

Now, keep in mind, since every nation in the world has a different government, with different rights offered to different people, in different ways, these claims could well be "accurate" for many nations. But, for the most part, whenever something like this is mentioned publically, it's meant as an insult. I would expect Columbia University's staff to display more pragmatic behavior than to insult a guest, especially a guest who was present by their invitation.

A very poor situation when a speaking session's moderator displays no ability to act as such.

Answer 3

If we predict that the Iranian diplomats are incredibly diplomats and not progressive shield attempting to furnish weapons.....then the only distinction I see is that the british have been squaddies in contested waters and the iranians have been in a contested u . s . a .. With our government's checklist on torture, you will think of that there may well be thoughts approximately any torture or loss of torture. incredibly, 2 iranians have been launched precise around the time that the warriors have been. there is not any distinction between an Iranian, an Israeli, or an American. we are everybody. some are solid, some are undesirable. All Iranians are actually not our enemies and its silly to think of of a complete u . s . a . is your enemy while its incredibly basically our government against their government.

Answer 4

Give me a break. Western countries seem to have no reason to vehemently defend themselves. It is not necessary. The law is the law and religion stays seperate.

Yes women in Iran have more liberty than is some Muslim countries. But it comes down to this. My wife is my TOTAL partner and I did not need not need money from my father in law. She and her family did not need money from me. I can say anything that I want in the press.

I suppose one good stoning just proves the point. Yes Tehran says "that's rural areas". Still happens though and if that is acceptable do you not think that that attitude does not pervade urban areas as well? What about the imprisoned people who have US citizenship? If all is well and all is free and open to the world why keep them? What is the harm in a little dissent? If they are wrong the truth would come out.

Your premise is not real world based.

Your next question should be a rant about Isreal.

Answer 5

I offer a refutation:
1) Attending university is worthless if you cannot choose which books to read and debate
2) The right to vote without the ability to form an alternative political party is worthless
3) They can drive but not carry a male friend as a passenger
4) Work is not a right: fair pay is
5) Are policewomen not under state control?
6) No-one truly 'owns' their business under socialism or a theocracy
7) Attractive women present TV news? What a surprise!
8) It is severe in the same way and spirit that it is severe against theft of property
9) Being bought does not increase you rights relative to others.

You clearly have studied this subject, so I suggest you explain to Westerners that Iranian and other Arabic law treats things like murder as private civil matters, while we in the West see them as criminal matters for State courts. It is a different legal tradition.
If a women cannot leave a husband who beats her, what sort of marriage is that?

Answer 6

Women in Islamic states have fewer rights as against the men.