
Iran is in the throes of an unprecedented sexual revolution (2013) - Vigier
http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/05/29/erotic-republic/
======
beloch
I know at least two Iranian women who came to Canada on education Visa's in
the last decade and have refused to go back, even to visit their families. I
worked with one of them from when she first arrived. Initially she wore a
head-scarf and was extremely nervous working with and even just talking to
men. She gradually became more relaxed and one day the scarf went in the bin.
The other considered her relatives "dead to her" from the moment I met her.
Not surprisingly, she was not from Tehran.

Studying abroad is an important thing for Iranian students, but this presents
some huge problems for a theocracy where sexual discrimination is so firmly
entrenched. For every student that leaves and never returns, there are
probably several who go home and try to change things for the better.

The fact that Iran allows students, especially female students, to study
abroad suggests that things are not as dire there as one would expect from
consuming U.S. media. The U.S.'s policy of confrontation with Iran's leaders
is, strangely enough, probably one of the few things keeping them afloat. Fear
of foreign powers is a powerful tool, as anyone in the U.S. should now know.
The best course of action over the next few years may be to reduce the level
of confrontation with Iran's leaders and let the Iranian people, who are
increasingly at odds with their country's policies, take care of their leaders
on their own.

------
pluma
> When someone mentions Iran, what images leap into your mind? Ayatollahs,
> religious fanaticism, veiled women?

No, that's Saudi Arabia you're thinking of. You know, the "good" theocracy
that's one of our biggest business partners. Despite the foreign politics a
few years ago, Iran is reportedly rather moderate in practice.

~~~
adventured
Isn't Iran still backing numerous terrorist organizations, including
Hezbollah, while proclaiming it their goal to essentially kill everyone in
Israel?

What's so moderate about having an extremely oppressive theocracy as the
foundation of your political leadership? One need only look at the revolts of
a few years ago and how Iran dealt with that, to see exactly how non-moderate
they are in practice.

And before you jump to saying: but America does X, and Saudi does X - yes, and
such things do not alter or justify the terrible things that Iran does.

~~~
pluma
Islam is a bit more complex than "Iran supports Hezbollah, so they support
terrorists". Look into the Sunni vs Shia split some time and then look at
which organizations and countries identify with which side of that split.

Saudi Arabia is far worse than Iran. While Iran's strict theocracy is slowly
falling out of favour with its population, Saudi Arabia is quite effective at
perpetuating its theocracy thanks to its wealth and international
relationships.

It's not just that Saudi Arabia does some bad stuff. It does the same bad
stuff as Iran -- and worse -- yet we (and in this case I mean us, Germany, in
particular) sell weapons and military equipment to the Saudis and buy their
oil while sanctioning Iran.

I'm an atheist, so I'm strictly opposed to any form of religious influence on
politics (be it Muslim, Christian or Jewish). But you have to acknowledge that
Iran is taking a turn towards the better while Saudi Arabia sits comfortably
in a Bronze Age form of government and legal system (with full access to the
Post-Space Age technology we are selling them).

~~~
adventured
No, if you support a terrorist organization, then you support terrorists.

I said nothing about Islam. Supporting terrorists has nothing to do with
Islam. Iran supporting Hezbollah has to do with Iran supporting terrorists.

I _never_ said Saudi or Iran were worse. That has absolutely nothing to do
with what I said. This isn't an argument over what the worst country on earth
is.

My point was: Iran is an oppressive theocracy that directly finances
terrorism. They are, very blatantly. And if Saudi is worse, that does not mean
Iran isn't still an oppressive theocracy.

~~~
pluma
I'm not really disagreeing then, I'm just failing to see your point.

Iran is an oppressive theocracy. Saudi Arabia is an oppressive theocracy. Both
of them support people/groups we would call terrorists. The only regard in
which Iran is somehow worse than Saudi Arabia is that they have a more
outspoken hate of Israel while the Saudis are clever enough to avoid speaking
too badly about a country in their region that is a close ally to the
countries they're so good at doing business with.

One country being worse than another doesn't make the other country any
better. I'm not saying Iran is moderate. It's just a heck of a lot more
moderate ( _in practice_ ) than Saudi Arabia, a country that televises PSAs
that women shouldn't drive and that you better don't skip on any of your
prayers throughout the day because God will literally kill you if you do that.

~~~
adventured
Here is my point, the parent I initially replied to said this:

"Despite the foreign politics a few years ago, Iran is reportedly rather
moderate in practice."

I disagreed. There is nothing moderate about Iran's oppressive theocracy or
their support of terrorism. Iran is at the extreme far end of the scale when
it comes to not being moderate, among countries.

------
Retric
I remember seeing plenty of pictures of Iran in ~1960 that looked like the us
in the 60's. So, plenty of people living in Iran recall a much more liberal
time period.

ex:
[http://izismile.com/2014/02/26/a_look_at_life_in_iran_during...](http://izismile.com/2014/02/26/a_look_at_life_in_iran_during_the_31_pics.html)

I suspect the current regime is in many ways a backlash in the first place.

~~~
wsc981
Iran is only a very "young" country (by which I mean lots of young people)
while at the same time the ruling class seem to be mainly the older people. So
I wouldn't be surprised if there is a very big disconnect between the rulings
of the state and the desires of the general populace.

For Dutch people the VPRO documentary "Onze Man In Teheran"[0] (Our Man In
Teheran) might be interesting. It's a documentary about a Dutch reporter that
married to an Iranian woman and emigrated to Iran.

\---

[0] [http://www.vpro.nl/programmas/onze-man-in-teheran/onze-
man.h...](http://www.vpro.nl/programmas/onze-man-in-teheran/onze-man.html)

------
esfandia
There's a big difference between Tehran and the rest of the country though. I
wonder how much of what is said in the article is true in a city like Esfahan,
for example. In fact, there's even a big difference between the North and the
South of Tehran itself.

~~~
joosters
Definitely! I don't think these cultural freedoms will have reached Qom, for
example...

I'd recommend anyone to visit Iran and explore the country. It's not all
ayatollahs, you know...

------
hackertux
"The cure for poverty has a name, in fact: it's called the empowerment of
women. If you give women some control over the rate at which they reproduce,
if you give them some say, take them off the animal cycle of reproduction to
which nature and some doctrine - religious doctrine condemns them, and then if
you'll throw in a handful of seeds perhaps and some credit, the floor of
everything in that village, not just poverty, but education, health, and
optimism will increase. It doesn't matter; try it in Bangladesh, try it in
Bolivia, it works - works all the time. Name me one religion that stands for
that, or ever has. Wherever you look in the world and you try to remove the
shackles of ignorance and disease stupidity from women, it is invariably the
clericy that stands in the way." — Christopher Hitchens

------
Mz
_When someone mentions Iran, what images leap into your mind? Ayatollahs,
religious fanaticism, veiled women?_

Having been friends for a time with an Iranian, the thing I think of is
politeness:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taarof](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taarof)

The second thing I think of is that Farsi is a genderless language:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_neutrality_in_genderless...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_neutrality_in_genderless_languages#Persian)

I knew this person well and I learned that Persian culture, unlike American
culture, has concepts for sucking up to female authority figures as well as
male. The expressions I learned were pretty sexually explicit and I don't know
if I remember them well. But I was very struck by the fact that the culture
had egalitarian qualities my own culture lacks. For me, it was a growth
experience and provided much needed mental models for my own life.

No culture is a monolith. The modern government in Iran is being transposed
over a culture that is thousands of years old. It is a rich culture and has
many fine qualities.

------
will_brown
Coincidentally, I recently meet a group of 5 Iranian women (all here on
student visas) while at happy hour in Miami. When I asked if there was any
comparable night life in Iran, I was informed that in Iran nightclubs where
men and women to commingle are non-existent and more generally women may not
consume alcohol. There is a _thriving_ underground scene of house parties
where young men and women interact (and drink socially), but these too are
illegal gatherings that are often broken up and lead to multiple arrests.

>Declining birth rates, for example, signal a wider acceptance of
contraceptives and other forms of family planning

I would theorize the declining birth rates is not a signal of a wider sexual
revolution, including, the adoption of contraceptives, rather a signal that
State suppression of socializing of the sexes is succeeding. This would
probably also account for the increase in average age of getting married.

~~~
discodave
Errr... a high birth rate is usually due to women having _multiple_ children.
i.e. they are married.

Also, people marrying late is not usually due to 'suppression of socializing
of the sexes'... in western countries the opposite effect has been seen. If I
were to follow the logic of your argument then we should expect western
countries where teenagers mingle freely to have people marrying early... that
is clearly not the case.

~~~
will_brown
> If I were to follow the logic of your argument then we should expect western
> countries where teenagers mingle freely to have people marrying early...
> that is clearly not the case.

That is not a logical extension of my position.

Logic:

if the government does not allow commingling of the sexes, then people will
get married at an older age (if p, then q)

You are extending that to:

The US government does not prohibit commingling of sexes, therefore we should
expect people getting married earlier (not P, therefore not q)

That is a logical fallacy.

I think we can both agree the US average age of marriage is increasing, and
certainly it can be for different reasons. To follow my argument is very easy,
there can be other explanations for decreased birthrates and increased average
age of marriage, than a sexual revolution, especially if the government is
prohibiting men and women from socializing (something I don't think other
western countries ever did)

------
jcampbell1
Prosititution is technically semi-legal in Iran. There is a temporary marriage
/ dowry arrangement where you can be "married" for as little as 15 minutes. I
think it is also okay to have an actual wife in addition to the temporary
wife. I have no idea how much this loophole is used in practice.

~~~
smnrchrds
Almost never. The part about temporary marriage most westerners seem to
oblivious about is after the end of marriage (for any reason: death, divorce
or end of the term of temporary marriage), the woman cannot get married for 4
months and 10 days. It makes "legal" prostitution impractical, as the cost for
a "15 minute" sexual encounter should be high enough to cover 4+ months of
unemployment.

That and the fact that it's the most socially unacceptable thing around here.

There is only one situation where temporary marriage is acceptable, maybe even
expected. Because of the economic realities of the recent decades, young
people may stay engaged for more than a year before they can afford to get
married. So, many people "temporarily marry" their fiancé/fiancée upon
engagement in order to be able to hang out without offending social and
religious values.

(Even with temporary marriage, it's still taboo for engaged people to move in
together or have sex, but this is different from family to family and from
town to town.)

------
tim333
I was surprised when I visited Iran years back how different it was on the
street to what you might imagine from TV news. I'd just come from Pakistan
where all the women are covered up or mostly kept at home and in comparison
Iran felt a bit like France, modern and with women wandering about fairly
normally, maybe with some head scarfs. The Iranian people I think are pretty
normal and modern. It it the dictatorial government that is all 'death to
apostates' and hardline Islamic and quite different in outlook to the
populace.

------
mirimir
In the 60s, many Western hippies went through Iran on their Hippie Trail (Silk
Road) tours. Many minds were bent. See _Magic Bus: On the Hippie Trail from
Istanbul to India_ by Rory MacLean (2008, Penguin).

------
jkot
That website is broken, I had to use links to read it.

------
lotsofmangos
Not that surprising given that for most of the time, back when it was Persia,
the culture of the region was considered practically synonymous with
hedonistic pleasure and luxury.

------
user9756
And how does this relate to US foreign policy? Or any foreign policy? Or how
about HackerNews?

I'd like to comment though on the awfulness of the sign up pop up (popsign?)
and the clunky website. It's awful.

