-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Swedish "Feminist" officials wear headscarves in Iran
- Thread starter icehorse
- Start date
You think they should have broken the law?
One can be critical of a law without breaking it themselves.
Looks like those darn Swedes have figured out how to be progressive and respectful at the same time.
I think it's hypocritical of them to call themselves feminists and submit to this misogynistic law.
Then you don't go to Iran unwilling to accept local customs.
psychoslice
Veteran Member
I think Iran should respect Sweden, and not expect them to wear that custom.
I think blaming the Swedish officials for abiding by the law forcing a particular dress code on women amounts to barking up the wrong tree. You don't change laws by breaking them in your capacity as a government official while visiting another country. Instead, I think the problem here--along with Iran's religious tyranny--is that there isn't enough opposition to and condemnation of such authoritarian laws by countries, leaders, and lawmakers both inside and outside Iran who are actually in a position to significantly pressure Iranian authorities and other countries with such regressive laws to change their laws.
The fact that foreign officials have to wear religious dress code in Iran is a mere extension of the fact that the dress code is imposed on women in Iran to begin with. The former is just a symptom of the latter.
The fact that foreign officials have to wear religious dress code in Iran is a mere extension of the fact that the dress code is imposed on women in Iran to begin with. The former is just a symptom of the latter.
If I were a government official and had to visit Saudi Arabia or Iran, I would abide by their laws and not openly criticize religion there even though I'm an atheist. Do I agree with their laws? I think the answer is obvious. Do I think it would be futile and pointless to break their laws while visiting voluntarily? Yes.
No, it's good and right what they did.
In Rome, do as Romans do.
This means that any person who visits European countries is supposed to respect the secular laws and the rules of those countries. And if we forbade head-covering, that rule would have to be respected by anyone.
This is a very good point, but in my opinion they are the same thing. Because if I were a woman, and I would visit Iran, I wouldn't find despicable to wear the headscarf: I would think it's a rule, a custom and it must be respected. If I choose to go to a foreign country (and nobody forces me), I am fascinated by that culture, and I don't intend to criticize the customs or the laws of that country.
Maybe because I have a cosmopolitan mindset that prevents me from comparing different cultures with one another. Also because any culture deserves respect and not criticism.
In Rome, do as Romans do.
This means that any person who visits European countries is supposed to respect the secular laws and the rules of those countries. And if we forbade head-covering, that rule would have to be respected by anyone.
This is a very good point, but in my opinion they are the same thing. Because if I were a woman, and I would visit Iran, I wouldn't find despicable to wear the headscarf: I would think it's a rule, a custom and it must be respected. If I choose to go to a foreign country (and nobody forces me), I am fascinated by that culture, and I don't intend to criticize the customs or the laws of that country.
Maybe because I have a cosmopolitan mindset that prevents me from comparing different cultures with one another. Also because any culture deserves respect and not criticism.
Last edited:
I think a distinction needs to be made between respecting a law and merely abiding by it; I don't think the two are always the same. I would abide by the rules of many countries if, say, I visited them voluntarily, but that doesn't mean I don't think a lot of those rules are reprehensible.
buddhist
Well-Known Member
Hopefully she was progressive enough to ensure that she was properly chaperoned by her father, brother, or husband, or she might be considered to be of "dubious moral standing".
I think your argument is a false choice.
And I think everyone who assumed I was advocating for breaking the law was creating a strawman.
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
The absurdity here is the suggestion that foreign diplomats would be arrested for not wearing the headscarf. Diplomats by their very nature enjoy diplomatic immunity.... in civilized countries, at least.
Notanumber
A Free Man
Sometimes you need to stand by your principles.
Shad
Veteran Member
Diplomatic immunity
If one goes to a country which has a dress code, I don't see a problem with following the code.
Don't like it....then don't go.
If a Yanamami came to Americastan in their normal attire, they'd get arrested.....& they'd be cold.
So we all have some standards we impose upon others.
We can make minor accommodations when in ferrin lands.
Don't like it....then don't go.
If a Yanamami came to Americastan in their normal attire, they'd get arrested.....& they'd be cold.
So we all have some standards we impose upon others.
We can make minor accommodations when in ferrin lands.
Last edited:
How is my argument a false choice?
Also, wouldn't not wearing the headscarves--as you say the Swedish officials should have done--have broken the law?
dust1n
Zindīq
And thus, the meeting didn't happen. Great diplomatic skills.
Notanumber
A Free Man
If it happened more often, they might get the right message.