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?
Sibshops@lemmy.myserv.one
on 18 Jun 22:13
nextcollapse
Morality laws are stupid, in any country.
switcheroo@lemmy.world
on 18 Jun 22:21
nextcollapse
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.
eatCasserole@lemmy.world
on 18 Jun 23:14
nextcollapse
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.
ryannathans@aussie.zone
on 19 Jun 00:06
nextcollapse
Literally, there’s an incredible amount of footage from Iran where the vast majority of women aren’t wearing anything of the sort. Do just high profile people get targeted?
LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
on 19 Jun 01:11
nextcollapse
Probably trying to make an example out of her. There has been significant public resistance to the hair covering laws in recent years and the government has made various attempts to bring women back under control. But as with all tyrannical governments, if enough people resist, they simply can’t go after everyone.
That’s a good point, bit like the UK with social media posts
Eldritch@piefed.world
on 19 Jun 01:17
nextcollapse
It’s the number one perk of being an authoritarian ruler. Your Authority is absolute and unquestionable. Meaning your hypocrisy is sanctioned and allowed. The rules are only enforced to punish the vulnerable. Whether it’s Trump, Putin, Xi Jinping. The rules are flexible if not invisible until the moment you cross leadership. Then they will descend on you feigning morality.
It’s common for a lot of authoritarian places to have laws that are selectively enforced. Since the enforcement is rare many people don’t bother following them but if someone bothers someone high up for any reason then breaking the law (that tons of other people break all the time anyway) is an easy excuse for the authorities to come down like a sack of bricks with a pretext ready. Being higher profile makes it more likely that you catch the eye of someone who hates you so it can be safer being some random person too low to notice instead. Though higher profile people also have more people ready to defend them generally so if you do get on someone’s list it’s better to have people in your corner who will make noise and maybe get punishment lessened or called off.
I know before the war started, I read some coverage from the Guardian of the protests in Iran that was leaning pretty hard into some lurid details and leaving out relevant information that didn’t suit the narrative.
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.
LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
on 19 Jun 01:11
nextcollapse
I agree but I wish people would act this way towards western modesty laws as well.
We’re not great, but we don’t publicly torture women for not covering their heads…
a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world
on 19 Jun 03:54
collapse
I’m not going to defend their bs, but let’s not pretend that puritanical views on female (reproductive and otherwise) morality aren’t killing people in places like the US.
We kill women for having a uterus, not for appearance. Look at the supreme Court’s garbage triggering abortion laws across the country. There is a death toll.
In my experience many of the most strident critics of hair coverings refuse to see the similarity to anti-nudity laws, especially nipple covering which is specific to women.
I mean I think the downvotes speak to the fact that the average person is not willing to admit the harms that our own ideas of modesty cause.
Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 19 Jun 11:09
collapse
As soon as Religion gets into Politics, things invariably go backwards to a 7th century (or whenever that specific religion was invented) mentality.
Apparently you’re trying your very best to defend Iran here with multiple comments under mine. And nowhere have I said people were rooting for women to be lashed, my dear straw man. I said they were rooting for the regime.
atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
on 19 Jun 11:54
collapse
Iran has long supported terrorist organizations that have killed many innocent people.
Cool. So Iran supports and donates to Terrorist organizations. That’s 100% true.
America straight up skips the middle man and does the terrorism themselves. One of the first targets the USA bombed was an elementary school in Iran. Why fund terrorism when you can just do it yourself?
Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 19 Jun 11:03
nextcollapse
Over 120,000 killed by America in Iraq and estimated over 1 million indirectly dead because of the invasion. An estimated over 200,000 Gazans killed by Israel (much more than the official numbers, as those pretty much stopped going up after Israel blew up the Hospitals in Gaza which is where the bodies were officially counted)
vs
Iranian star Parastoo Ahmadi reportedly sentenced to 74 lashes for singing without hijab
The Iranian “Regime” is so much less evil than the American “Regime” and the Israeli “Regime” that it’s not even comparable.
People aren’t rooting for the Iranian “Regime”, they’re rooting against the American and Israeli “Regimes”, same logic as we are told again and again by American Liberals for why people should vote Democrat because it’s the Lesser Evil to stop the greater one, only in this case the difference in evilness as measured by body county between these Regimes is far larger than even the difference in evilness Democrats and Republicans in the US.
It makes far more sense to root for the lesser evil “Regime” against the more evil “Regimes” in this case than it does to vote Democrat in the US to stop the Republicans because even the Republicans don’t just murder hundreds of thousands more and get millions killed as collateral damage more than the Democrats.
ReluctantZen@feddit.nl
on 19 Jun 11:40
nextcollapse
The Iranian “Regime” is so much less evil than the American “Regime” and the Israeli “Regime” that it’s not even comparable.
At least make an honest comparison when you say that.
Comparing decades of events by US and Israel to one event in Iran as if it’s not a brutal theocratic authoritarian regime, is very dishonest.
That’s not to say the US and Israel should’ve invaded, fuck no, but at least be honest about it.
Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 19 Jun 13:39
nextcollapse
Literally the only way to make just the Israeli “Regime” seem less murderous than the Iranian one is by cheery-picking a “from date” that excludes most of the Genocide in Gaza whilst including the recent violent repression in Iran and a “to date” that excludes Israel’s current invasion of Lebanon and the Israeli participation in attacking Iran.
Israel has been way more murderous than Iran in pretty much any time frame you chose within the last 5 decades unless you’re activelly cherry-picking start and end dates to make it seem otherwise.
As nasty as the Iranian Regime is, next to the Genocidal White Supremacist Regime in Israel they’re pussycats - their respective body counts aren’t even in the same dimension.
You are right when it comes to body count comparisons with the US, though, as the last big mass murdering done by the US ended in 2021 (Afghanistan) though the country activelly supported the Israeli Genocide in Gaza.
For the US the “is it the same Regime” logics applies, IMHO - have the political systems and general political stance when it comes to foreign intervention really changed for the better in the US. As far as I can tell, it has not. That being the case, then it makes sense to point at the past sins of the Regime in America even if from a decade or two ago and say “this is the kind of people they are” because that’s still how American political structures operate and that’s still how much the American Public cares about those the American Military murders abroad, same as it would make sense if for example the NAZIs were still in Government in Germany to keep pointing out at the Holocaust (which was almost a century ago) as an example of the kind of people the NAZIs are, but since the NAZIs are not in power in Germany and it’s an entirelly different “Regime” it makes no sense at all to point at the Holocaust as representative of the character of present day Germany and its Government.
So, has the US really changed when it comes to how much Americans (both in power and public opinion) care about the lives of those outside America or about American Militarism?
From the outside, it doesn’t at all look like it: America is still hyper-militarist, most of the American Public care very little about the lives of those abroad and both the last US Governments either supported mass killings abroad, most notably with Biden sending Israel 2000lb bombs - which have massive collateral damaga - to be used to bomb the denselly populate Gaza, and then Trump continued support for Israel, randomly droned boats of the South American coast and bombed Iran with such recklessnes and disregard to civilian lives that they let Grok choose targest and blew up a school full of children.
Nice use of logical fallacies. Whataboutism and straw man in one comment.
But let’s stick to the facts:
2019:
On 23 December, Reuters reported that a death toll provided by three unnamed Iranian interior ministry officials was “about 1,500” including “at least 17 teenagers and about 400 women”.
2022:
At least 551 people, including 68 minors, had been killed as a result of the government’s intervention in the protests, as of 15 September 2023.
2026:
The Iranian government has acknowledged more than 3,000 dead, and the US-based organisation HRANA (Human Rights Activists News Agency), whose figures have been reliable during previous crackdowns, says it has verified more than 6,000 dead and has more than 17,000 more recorded deaths under investigation, giving a possible total of about 22,000. Other estimates from doctors based outside Iran range up to 33,000 or more.
And then we haven’t even talked about the terrorist attacks by Iran’s proxies.
So no, dear Iran fanboy. They’re not much less evil.
Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 19 Jun 13:16
collapse
Sure mate, Israel and the US are not at all the most murderous nations on the face of the planet of this century to the point that a fucking Theocracy are vritably pussycats in comparison, and instead it must be me being an “Iran fanboy”.
That very tall pile of bones you stand on is not a moral high ground.
Ahh yes, mr mass murder apologist. Let’s compare how many people they have killed. Because it’s not human lives we’re talking about but data points to win our meaningless internet discussion.
Somehow I don’t think I’m the one dying on a hill made out of skeletons….
There are no good guys in this war will always be true, no matter how much you try to twist it.
Reason cannot be on the side of those who act in contravention of international law.
TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
on 19 Jun 11:41
collapse
I spent my formative years living in a pretty poor small town that is disaster prone where I woke up in my bedroom being flooded. The adults in the house love watching primetime news and thus at an early age I am exposed to politics and news about murders and so on. It’s not that I don’t care, I really do because my parents and having been raised Catholic taught me empathy, but the wars and killings (although I’m aware that the rate of homicide is gradually decreasing over the course of human history) has become non-news to me. So I have been made aware early in life that not everything is always roses. There are something’s one cannot have control of but i participate in things I could change like with protests, even if it’s little. But broadly speaking, I am desensitised of the news on the conflicts in Middle East or Africa. So when the market reacts, I’m like: “how are you guys not used to it?”
Yeah but OP is similar to those who were against Israel bombing Gaza as being “anti-semetic”. If you think Iran shouldn’t be invaded by America Illegally, you clearly defend and support the Iranian regime.
Literally single context / single brain cell thinking. Not a complex thought in that head.
And what is the difference between them and the other countries in the Persian Gulf that leads Trump to regard some as friends and others as enemies? 🤔
What does that have to do with anything? When was Whataboutism ever an argument?
TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
on 19 Jun 11:43
nextcollapse
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.
Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 19 Jun 13:44
collapse
It’s “Turd” vs “Turd Sandwish of Turd on Turd”
Nobody wants to eat either whilst strictly speaking there is no denying that the former is less shit than the latter.
dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 19 Jun 14:02
nextcollapse
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.
This is the regime all these Iran apologists on Lemmy are rooting for
No one is rooting for this regime to succeed. We are rooting for the innocent citizens who were killed by an illegal American invasion and also believe that Iran doesn’t deserve to be invaded illegally.
Nope. Just got here. But this thread alone destroys your theory. Not to mention your cherry picked comments that apparently means everyone supports Iran.
If everyone on Lemmy supports Iran, why do you support Iran?
Obviously, that is what I want as well, as does every sane person on the planet. But those are not the ones I am talking about.
ikidd@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 19 Jun 03:33
nextcollapse
How’d that liberating of the Iranian people go again?
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
on 19 Jun 14:30
nextcollapse
תפשת מרובה לא תפשת
snugglesthefalse@sh.itjust.works
on 19 Jun 14:56
collapse
It looks like the us definitely bit off more than they can chew if that’s what you meant and my translation is accurate.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
on 19 Jun 15:22
collapse
Intended it more directed at Israel than the US.
YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today
on 19 Jun 15:52
collapse
Could you elaborate? Despite my username, I had to look up a translation and what I got was “you don’t understand a lot”. That kinda reads that like pro invasion considering the dude you’re responding to had some palpable sarcasm. I’m not accusing you, just letting you know my train of thought.
It made a lot of extremely wealthy Americans even wealthier. So we got that going for the world.
crystalmerchant@lemmy.world
on 19 Jun 13:41
nextcollapse
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??
Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 19 Jun 13:58
nextcollapse
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.
You’re right on the aggregate, but Iran has been doing things like this for decades. Iran was moving in the right direction in the past 15 years but that development has been blocked and likely reversed now with the reformists losing all of their momentum and legitimacy, especially given this past year of war.
Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 19 Jun 15:57
nextcollapse
On the way to Revolution, things typically get worse before they get better - as authoritarian governments start losing control of the street they invariably increase the intensity of their repression and that’s what trigger a similarly violent response from the population, i.e. the actual Revolution.
The American/Israeli War Of Agression almost certainly walked the whole process back, “wasting” the lives that were lost when the Iranian Government responded to the increased discontent with increase repression.
True, before there was no guarantee that what followed that increased repression was a the public responding by themselves increasing their actions against the government - as murderous government repression doesn’t always trigger a successful mass violent response from the population - now that will for certain not happen because even an oppressive regime is still a “protector” in the eyes of most of the locals when a bunch of murderous foreigners (and both the US and Israel are undeniably massively murderous towards muslims in the Middle East) attacks the nation, so even those in Iran who desire change have to keep their mouths shut since the majority don’t want to risk losing those who have “protected” them from the murderous foreigners.
Or you know, when they had a fully democratic government before the US came in and installed the puppet Shah which led to the Islamic Revolution of 1979 and brought the fundamentalist government in power.
according to the article the event in question took place in 2024 which was obviously before the war of israeli and american aggression began.
Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 19 Jun 17:49
collapse
According to the article the Court sentence came out now.
It makes sense that the regime there feels more emboldened to act in more hardline ways (such as giving the maximum possible sentence in this case) because right now they’re likely seen by most of the Iranian population as “protectors” against the two foreign regimes attacking Iran, both of which are far more murderous that even the regime in Iran at the peak of repression.
It’s the same reason why the most outrageous and intrusive civil society surveillance and control legislation in the US was passed in the period just after 9/11 - times when society at large feel under attack by external forces are ideal moments for those in control to extend and entrench their power and steer the country faster towards their views even if civil society is uncomfortable with it, not least because reasonable and logical criticism against it can easily be painted as being Against The Good Of The Nation and even as Treason.
Doomsider@lemmy.world
on 19 Jun 14:15
nextcollapse
Mission accomplished!?
AI_toothbrush@lemmy.zip
on 19 Jun 15:02
nextcollapse
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.
threaded - newest
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?
It’s more of a vibe thing. There’s not any data sheets required.
checks
Apparently the sharia court gave her the maximum sentence for a single act.
web.archive.org/…/1000000351-islamic-penal-code-o…
Wait, am I reading this wrong? Doesn’t the note mean that hijab crimes aren’t punished with lashing?
Morality laws are stupid, in any country.
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.
Literally, there’s an incredible amount of footage from Iran where the vast majority of women aren’t wearing anything of the sort. Do just high profile people get targeted?
Probably trying to make an example out of her. There has been significant public resistance to the hair covering laws in recent years and the government has made various attempts to bring women back under control. But as with all tyrannical governments, if enough people resist, they simply can’t go after everyone.
That’s a good point, bit like the UK with social media posts
It’s the number one perk of being an authoritarian ruler. Your Authority is absolute and unquestionable. Meaning your hypocrisy is sanctioned and allowed. The rules are only enforced to punish the vulnerable. Whether it’s Trump, Putin, Xi Jinping. The rules are flexible if not invisible until the moment you cross leadership. Then they will descend on you feigning morality.
It’s common for a lot of authoritarian places to have laws that are selectively enforced. Since the enforcement is rare many people don’t bother following them but if someone bothers someone high up for any reason then breaking the law (that tons of other people break all the time anyway) is an easy excuse for the authorities to come down like a sack of bricks with a pretext ready. Being higher profile makes it more likely that you catch the eye of someone who hates you so it can be safer being some random person too low to notice instead. Though higher profile people also have more people ready to defend them generally so if you do get on someone’s list it’s better to have people in your corner who will make noise and maybe get punishment lessened or called off.
Everything I’ve seen from The Guardian is reputable.
I know before the war started, I read some coverage from the Guardian of the protests in Iran that was leaning pretty hard into some lurid details and leaving out relevant information that didn’t suit the narrative.
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.
I agree but I wish people would act this way towards western modesty laws as well.
We’re not great, but we don’t publicly torture women for not covering their heads…
I’m not going to defend their bs, but let’s not pretend that puritanical views on female (reproductive and otherwise) morality aren’t killing people in places like the US.
We kill women for having a uterus, not for appearance. Look at the supreme Court’s garbage triggering abortion laws across the country. There is a death toll.
We aren’t exactly doing great in the west.
My BS? This is exactly what I’m talking about. Western governments need to be shamed too.
I believe the “their” there was referring to Iran’s BS, not yours
Oh. Well that’s a weird thing to say because I don’t think anyone is defending them but OK.
It is because that is the behavior being questioned, and it was trying to make it clear that I had no interest in glorifying it in any way.
That is exactly what I was doing.
Which people? Pretty sure you’d find lots of people doing just that, mostly those who are criticizing policies like the one in the article as well.
In my experience many of the most strident critics of hair coverings refuse to see the similarity to anti-nudity laws, especially nipple covering which is specific to women.
I mean I think the downvotes speak to the fact that the average person is not willing to admit the harms that our own ideas of modesty cause.
As soon as Religion gets into Politics, things invariably go backwards to a 7th century (or whenever that specific religion was invented) mentality.
This is the regime all these Iran apologists on Lemmy are rooting for. There are no good guys in this war.
There will be protests and I’m hopeful she won’t actually face punishment.
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
Apparently you’re trying your very best to defend Iran here with multiple comments under mine. And nowhere have I said people were rooting for women to be lashed, my dear straw man. I said they were rooting for the regime.
Iran has long supported terrorist organizations that have killed many innocent people.
en.wikipedia.org/…/Iran_and_state-sponsored_terro…
Nobody gets a free pass.
Cool. So Iran supports and donates to Terrorist organizations. That’s 100% true.
America straight up skips the middle man and does the terrorism themselves. One of the first targets the USA bombed was an elementary school in Iran. Why fund terrorism when you can just do it yourself?
vs
The Iranian “Regime” is so much less evil than the American “Regime” and the Israeli “Regime” that it’s not even comparable.
People aren’t rooting for the Iranian “Regime”, they’re rooting against the American and Israeli “Regimes”, same logic as we are told again and again by American Liberals for why people should vote Democrat because it’s the Lesser Evil to stop the greater one, only in this case the difference in evilness as measured by body county between these Regimes is far larger than even the difference in evilness Democrats and Republicans in the US.
It makes far more sense to root for the lesser evil “Regime” against the more evil “Regimes” in this case than it does to vote Democrat in the US to stop the Republicans because even the Republicans don’t just murder hundreds of thousands more and get millions killed as collateral damage more than the Democrats.
At least make an honest comparison when you say that. Comparing decades of events by US and Israel to one event in Iran as if it’s not a brutal theocratic authoritarian regime, is very dishonest.
That’s not to say the US and Israel should’ve invaded, fuck no, but at least be honest about it.
Literally the only way to make just the Israeli “Regime” seem less murderous than the Iranian one is by cheery-picking a “from date” that excludes most of the Genocide in Gaza whilst including the recent violent repression in Iran and a “to date” that excludes Israel’s current invasion of Lebanon and the Israeli participation in attacking Iran.
Israel has been way more murderous than Iran in pretty much any time frame you chose within the last 5 decades unless you’re activelly cherry-picking start and end dates to make it seem otherwise.
As nasty as the Iranian Regime is, next to the Genocidal White Supremacist Regime in Israel they’re pussycats - their respective body counts aren’t even in the same dimension.
You are right when it comes to body count comparisons with the US, though, as the last big mass murdering done by the US ended in 2021 (Afghanistan) though the country activelly supported the Israeli Genocide in Gaza.
For the US the “is it the same Regime” logics applies, IMHO - have the political systems and general political stance when it comes to foreign intervention really changed for the better in the US. As far as I can tell, it has not. That being the case, then it makes sense to point at the past sins of the Regime in America even if from a decade or two ago and say “this is the kind of people they are” because that’s still how American political structures operate and that’s still how much the American Public cares about those the American Military murders abroad, same as it would make sense if for example the NAZIs were still in Government in Germany to keep pointing out at the Holocaust (which was almost a century ago) as an example of the kind of people the NAZIs are, but since the NAZIs are not in power in Germany and it’s an entirelly different “Regime” it makes no sense at all to point at the Holocaust as representative of the character of present day Germany and its Government.
So, has the US really changed when it comes to how much Americans (both in power and public opinion) care about the lives of those outside America or about American Militarism?
From the outside, it doesn’t at all look like it: America is still hyper-militarist, most of the American Public care very little about the lives of those abroad and both the last US Governments either supported mass killings abroad, most notably with Biden sending Israel 2000lb bombs - which have massive collateral damaga - to be used to bomb the denselly populate Gaza, and then Trump continued support for Israel, randomly droned boats of the South American coast and bombed Iran with such recklessnes and disregard to civilian lives that they let Grok choose targest and blew up a school full of children.
The Israelis just shot a 3 year old in the head
An American cop just
killedmurdered a 1yo in Mississippi a few days ago.Really struggling to find the difference here.
Nice use of logical fallacies. Whataboutism and straw man in one comment.
But let’s stick to the facts:
2019:
2022:
2026:
And then we haven’t even talked about the terrorist attacks by Iran’s proxies.
So no, dear Iran fanboy. They’re not much less evil.
Sure mate, Israel and the US are not at all the most murderous nations on the face of the planet of this century to the point that a fucking Theocracy are vritably pussycats in comparison, and instead it must be me being an “Iran fanboy”.
That very tall pile of bones you stand on is not a moral high ground.
Ahh yes, mr mass murder apologist. Let’s compare how many people they have killed. Because it’s not human lives we’re talking about but data points to win our meaningless internet discussion.
Somehow I don’t think I’m the one dying on a hill made out of skeletons….
There are no good guys in this war will always be true, no matter how much you try to twist it.
This is why I’ve emotionally divested myself from anything involving the middle east. No matter who you support you are supporting evil.
All I care about now is the economy specifically getting that strait opened back up. Right and wrong takes a back seat when nobody is right.
Reason cannot be on the side of those who act in contravention of international law.
I spent my formative years living in a pretty poor small town that is disaster prone where I woke up in my bedroom being flooded. The adults in the house love watching primetime news and thus at an early age I am exposed to politics and news about murders and so on. It’s not that I don’t care, I really do because my parents and having been raised Catholic taught me empathy, but the wars and killings (although I’m aware that the rate of homicide is gradually decreasing over the course of human history) has become non-news to me. So I have been made aware early in life that not everything is always roses. There are something’s one cannot have control of but i participate in things I could change like with protests, even if it’s little. But broadly speaking, I am desensitised of the news on the conflicts in Middle East or Africa. So when the market reacts, I’m like: “how are you guys not used to it?”
Who was rooting for the regime? Who?
Well, you have one commenter under mine already.
But look up the posts about any Irani successes in the war. They’re al like: “way to go Iran, keep it coming!”
Edit: two examples: here and here.
So two extremely cherry picked users = the entire Lemmy community?
You don’t got a lot going on in that head of yours, eh?
I think people were rooting against the US/Israeli aggression, not particularly for the Irani regime.
Of course! Tell that to the guy I was replying to
Yeah but OP is similar to those who were against Israel bombing Gaza as being “anti-semetic”. If you think Iran shouldn’t be invaded by America Illegally, you clearly defend and support the Iranian regime.
Literally single context / single brain cell thinking. Not a complex thought in that head.
And what is the difference between them and the other countries in the Persian Gulf that leads Trump to regard some as friends and others as enemies? 🤔
What does that have to do with anything? When was Whataboutism ever an argument?
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.
It’s “Turd” vs “Turd Sandwish of Turd on Turd”
Nobody wants to eat either whilst strictly speaking there is no denying that the former is less shit than the latter.
I am 14 and this is deep
Good for you man
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.
Try to find an actual mistake in my reasoning rather than sarcastic nonsense
Your premise is flawed. You can’t have a founded argument with a flawed premise.
You still can’t do it…. Maybe try to find out how it is flawed
No one is rooting for this regime to succeed. We are rooting for the innocent citizens who were killed by an illegal American invasion and also believe that Iran doesn’t deserve to be invaded illegally.
No one? Really? Have you been to Lemmy before?
Nope. Just got here. But this thread alone destroys your theory. Not to mention your cherry picked comments that apparently means everyone supports Iran.
If everyone on Lemmy supports Iran, why do you support Iran?
You can totally be against a regime that tortures it’s citizens, and still wish that same country doesn’t have it’s schools bombed by outside sources.
Obviously, that is what I want as well, as does every sane person on the planet. But those are not the ones I am talking about.
How’d that liberating of the Iranian people go again?
תפשת מרובה לא תפשת
It looks like the us definitely bit off more than they can chew if that’s what you meant and my translation is accurate.
Intended it more directed at Israel than the US.
Could you elaborate? Despite my username, I had to look up a translation and what I got was “you don’t understand a lot”. That kinda reads that like pro invasion considering the dude you’re responding to had some palpable sarcasm. I’m not accusing you, just letting you know my train of thought.
It made a lot of extremely wealthy Americans even wealthier. So we got that going for the world.
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??
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.
You’re right on the aggregate, but Iran has been doing things like this for decades. Iran was moving in the right direction in the past 15 years but that development has been blocked and likely reversed now with the reformists losing all of their momentum and legitimacy, especially given this past year of war.
On the way to Revolution, things typically get worse before they get better - as authoritarian governments start losing control of the street they invariably increase the intensity of their repression and that’s what trigger a similarly violent response from the population, i.e. the actual Revolution.
The American/Israeli War Of Agression almost certainly walked the whole process back, “wasting” the lives that were lost when the Iranian Government responded to the increased discontent with increase repression.
True, before there was no guarantee that what followed that increased repression was a the public responding by themselves increasing their actions against the government - as murderous government repression doesn’t always trigger a successful mass violent response from the population - now that will for certain not happen because even an oppressive regime is still a “protector” in the eyes of most of the locals when a bunch of murderous foreigners (and both the US and Israel are undeniably massively murderous towards muslims in the Middle East) attacks the nation, so even those in Iran who desire change have to keep their mouths shut since the majority don’t want to risk losing those who have “protected” them from the murderous foreigners.
Or you know, when they had a fully democratic government before the US came in and installed the puppet Shah which led to the Islamic Revolution of 1979 and brought the fundamentalist government in power.
according to the article the event in question took place in 2024 which was obviously before the war of israeli and american aggression began.
According to the article the Court sentence came out now.
It makes sense that the regime there feels more emboldened to act in more hardline ways (such as giving the maximum possible sentence in this case) because right now they’re likely seen by most of the Iranian population as “protectors” against the two foreign regimes attacking Iran, both of which are far more murderous that even the regime in Iran at the peak of repression.
It’s the same reason why the most outrageous and intrusive civil society surveillance and control legislation in the US was passed in the period just after 9/11 - times when society at large feel under attack by external forces are ideal moments for those in control to extend and entrench their power and steer the country faster towards their views even if civil society is uncomfortable with it, not least because reasonable and logical criticism against it can easily be painted as being Against The Good Of The Nation and even as Treason.
Mission accomplished!?
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.
A nice little reminder that, even with everything else, Iran is still a shit hole.