What's new

Girls arrested for removing Hijab during sports event in Iran (Shiraz city)

The more you cage people the more they want to fly away. This is how people leave Islam.

In France they won't let women wear the hijab wforfear of penalty. In Iran ,women want to take the hijab off and they are punished.

The world is mental. 😂
A perfect example of caging a bird makes it yearn for freedom. No wonder when you meet Iranian on holiday they are seen taking sighs of relief this is the opposite when you see people from Pakistan or India.
 
one thing changed , the colorful clothes Iranian were wearing was changed with black and as a result many Iranian textile worker lost their job, some import oriented merchant get reach and we spent our hard earned cash to make job for Korean and Japanese worker instead.

That is something I always have noticed about us compared to pics or videos I have seen from countries around us. We are one of the least colorful clothes-wearing nation in the region. Its either black, some shade of dark grey or navy blue. Shit, I dont even live in Iran, and my wardrobe of full of black, dark grey pants and coats.

Compare the Iranian clothing color choices from before the revolution to modern times. Yes fashion and trends are followed but color choices got limited. More urbanized people are getting, more they are becoming like this.

1656333531292.png


1656334923079.png
1656333677660.png
1656333697237.png
1656333754521.png
1656333823972.png

1656334280646.png
1656334298701.png
1656334313708.png
1656334330820.png
1656334556284.png
1656334639983.png
1656334656047.png
1656334982129.png
1656335075652.png
 
Iranians can adopt this simple dress.
Wearing shorts but tasteful.
Pakistani girls probably wear this for a evening out , so not so strange for a Muslim country.
 
Every female Iranian in Deylam indeed. Which is far from negligible already, since this is traditionally the most densely populated region of Iran (superseded today only by the likes of Alborz and Tehran for obvious reasons).
simply no , they are not .
Secondly, even if accurate, how is this colorful in any shape or form? These are clearly dark, not particularly colorful garments.
as I said mid to end Qajar era in tehran
They're giving a variety of reasons as to why domestic production isn't covering the demand, but none of it amounts to deliberate backstabbing by religious institutions. As for merchants, they will do what merchants do and will try to advance their interests, which conflict with those of local producers. Self-sufficiency is achieved step by step, there's nothing abnormal about the fact that the process isn't fully completed yet.

Also textile producers themselves aren't exempt of responsibility, it is and was also up to them to acquire the required tools and to boost their output. The IRNA paper is stressing how government authorities are endeavoring to encourage production of black fabric inside Iran. It confirms that technically, this is well within Iran's capabilities, as I've been indicating all along.
what Tasnim article say sho nothing less than backstabbing

Iran has the most religious population in the world according to studies.
I don't consider what we call حاجی بازاری as religion , they are nothing but hypocrites
 
simply no , they are not .

Yes, every female had to wear black dress in 10th century Deylam. And yes, the region is most densely populated historically.

d.png


The north didn't rank much differently a thousand years ago, owing to its peculiar geological and climatic conditions.

as I said mid to end Qajar era in tehran

Nope, false. Zandiyeh era, Buyid / Justanid era, and surely more. Including in provincial areas outside of Tehran, such as Yazd or Torbate Heydariye.

https://virgool.io/@amirmojiry/این-رنگ--چادرها-زنان-ایرانی-و-چادر-مشکی-wqm4svdngyfv

what Tasnim article say sho nothing less than backstabbing

Couldn't detect anything along those lines in the article. By the quoted logic, any and all sector of the economy where Iran isn't self-sufficient yet is a case of "backstabbing". Not to mention that when using such a term, it is paramount to clarify whom exactly one is talking about. If this is about merchants then as indicated, there's nothing extraordinary about it - their behaviour follows the same pattern for every commodity.

I don't consider what we call حاجی بازاری as religion , they are nothing but hypocrites

There are hypocrites everywhere, among adherents of every single belief system. It changes nothing to the fact that Iran's one of the most religious societies on earth and certainly not a hotspot of atheism, contrary to the contention I was addressing.
 

Attachments

  • d.jpg
    d.jpg
    58.7 KB · Views: 32
Last edited:
Couldn't detect anything along those lines in the article. By the quoted logic, any and all sector of the economy where Iran isn't 100% self-sufficient is a case of "backstabbing". Not to mention that when using such a term, it is paramount to clarify whom exactly one is talking about. If this is about merchants then as indicated, there's nothing extraordinary about it - their behaviour follows the same pattern for every commodity.
no about government m the article clearly say they brought the technology for producing black chador in 85 let quote it again
شفیعی گفت: در یک سالی که کارشناسان کره‌ای در کشورمان بودند؛ تحت لیسانس آنها کار می‌کردیم و با برندهایی که داشتیم اقدام به فروش محصولاتمان می‌کردیم اما پس از یک سال مدیرکل صنایع وزارت صنعت از کارخانه ما بازدید کرد و پس از آن نیز استاندار اصفهان به کارخانه ما آمد و با رسانه‌ای شدن تولید این کارخانه کمتر از بیست روز تعرفه واردات چادر مشکی از 72 درصد به 66 و از 66 به 16 درصد کاهش یافت​
Yes, every female had to wear black dress in 10th century Deylam. And yes, the region is traditionally most densely populated.

d.png
10th century deylam
why not say this is 10th century deylam was half of the orange area
and I wonder how women could not go out of their house in deylam but worked alongside men on the field
مردان دیلمی بسیار جسور بودند. از میان سلاحهای ایشان به زوبین و سپر بلندی منقش به رنگهای روشن اشاره شده است . از قوم دیلم گاه بعنوان غلام و برده که در خدمت امرا و لشکر خلفا بودند نام برده شده . زنان دیلم مانند مردان کار کشاورزی میکردند. دیلمیان روابط خانوادگی و آداب و رسوم مخصوص داشتند درمرگ کسان خود و حتی در گرفتاریهای شخصی سخت بی تابی و زاری میکردند.​
and please don't mistake Al-Buyed with َAlavian
5108912.jpg
 
no about government m the article clearly say they brought the technology for producing black chador in 85 let quote it again

One blunder by the government 15 years ago. Can be corrected anytime, but the state of the Iranian textile industries has not been determined just by this single instance of product-specific import tariff reduction.

10th century deylam
why not say this is 10th century deylam was half of the orange area

10th century Deylam, widespread use during the Zandiye dynasty, widespread use in a series of provinces.

And on top of that, other uniformly colored chadors, often in dark tones such as purple or brown. Last but not least, even the all-white chadors dominant during the Safavid period do not qualify as "colorful" in any way. As we all know, white is actually defined as the absence of color.

In sum, there's no evidence that those pictures of multicolored or vividly colored tribal / clanic female represent the nationwide norm anymore than dark and monotonous chadors (of whatever conservative single color).

and I wonder how women could not go out of their house in deylam but worked alongside men on the field

Feel free to contact the career historian who reported it, and suggest to him that he's wrong. Ditto with Encyclopaedia Iranica.

and please don't mistake Al-Buyed with َAlavian
5108912.jpg

In the 10th century AD the Alavids enjoyed independence for only 28 years, after which their land was integrated into the Samanid empire. Whereas the Buyids reigned until 1062, and so did the Sallarids in all probability. I stated Buyid era because I was referring to the period of time not necessarily to the geographical abode. Both Buyids and Sallarids were Deymalites themselves.
 
Last edited:
One blunder by the government 15 years ago. Can be corrected anytime, but the state of the Iranian textile industries has not been determined just by this single instance of product-specific import tariff reduction.
after 15 year, well they did nothing , only with one year money of importing black textile from east Asia , we could have become an exporter. why didn't we did that , not because it was fattening pocket of some people in power ?
10th century Deylam, widespread use during the Zandiye dynasty, widespread use in a series of provinces.

And on top of that, other uniformly colored chadors, often in dark tones such as purple or brown. Last but not least, even the all-white chadors dominant during the Safavid period do not qualify as "colorful" in any way. As we all know, white is actually defined as the absence of color.

In sum, those pictures of multicolored or vividly colored tribal / clanic female dress did not represent the norm, dark and monotonous chadors did.
what i can say to you the chador was not the colorful one , the clothes behind it was colorful and 70% of Iran population didn't wear it as they were not in big cities but in urban area and they wore what i posted before . it was colorful and whatever you do you cannot deny it.
and again no in zandyeh the black chador was not widespread .
Feel free to contact the career historian who reported it, and suggest to him that he's wrong. Ditto with Encyclopaedia Iranica.
career historian not even put his foot inside Iran ,compared to an scholar from the exact same region . also if I'm to believe every nonsense from career historians do you agree that you also accept anything they say about other matters
by the way did the career historian brought any proof for his claim
The Buyids were Deymalite themselves.
were deylamite , but didn't have that nonsense law that women are not allowed out in days .
the area was an agricultural area that women worked side by side by their men , it was impossible to restrict them to their house during the day.

b
 
scheiwiller-11.jpg


With all due respect bro but I don’t think the above is a lady? On topic - I personally admire the hijab especially when it is worn as a personal choice!
That's Esmat-Al-Daula , second daughter of Naser-Al-Din Shah Qajar .
the family was total useless and degenerate and moved Iran backward for 2 centuries while the world was moving forward.
to be honnest between the family she was one of the few who was not total useless she is called the lady of first
it seems she put that mustache to annoy Nayeb-Al-Saltaneh one of his brother ,
these two picture were taken at the same day at the home of Zel-al-sultan
esmat-ghajar.jpg



a picture of Kamran - Mirza nayeb al saltaneh
Kamranmirza.JPG

you see the mustache are the same style and size

Yes, brother. And a princess (daughter of the shahanshah), too!
that style seems to be her way to annoy his brother by copying him
 
That's Esmat-Al-Daula , second daughter of Naser-Al-Din Shah Qajar .
the family was total useless and degenerate and moved Iran backward for 2 centuries while the world was moving forward.
to be honnest between the family she was one of the few who was not total useless she is called the lady of first
it seems she put that mustache to annoy Nayeb-Al-Saltaneh one of his brother ,
these two picture were taken at the same day at the home of Zel-al-sultan
View attachment 857290


a picture of Kamran - Mirza nayeb al saltaneh
Kamranmirza.JPG

you see the mustache are the same style and size


that style seems to be her way to annoy his brother by copying him

Thanks for the detailed explanation on this individual sir. Very interesting to say the very least. Definitely need to read more into it. Especially considering a woman undertaking such steps at those times. I mean if our daughters start growing a mustache we would probably lose it but a kings daughter doing it well that takes some hypothetical balls!
 
after 15 year, well they did nothing , only with one year money of importing black textile from east Asia , we could have become an exporter. why didn't we did that , not because it was fattening pocket of some people in power ?

No idea, would need to research the topic. Also no idea what the current import tariff on the black fabric used in chadors is.

But as it stands, blame cannot be pinned onto religious institutions. Nor is the fact that black chadors were welcomed after the Revolution a cause onto itself for the loss of income incurred by the domestic textile industry in this regard. Negligence and/or corruption may be but then again that wouldn't be unique to black chadors.

what i can say to you the chador was not the colorful one , the clothes behind it was colorful and 70% of Iran population didn't wear it as they were not in big cities but in urban area and they wore what i posted before . it was colorful and whatever you do you cannot deny it.

You didn't offer evidence to that effect. I showed valid sources documenting the use of black chadors during various periods of time as far back as thousand years ago and straight across Iran's vast territory (north, center, east).

And some of the historic documents you yourself shared, like the accounts by French travelers during the Safavid period contradict your statement, since they show there was no color at all in the standard female dress of that time (plain white equaling absence of color, by definition)

and again no in zandyeh the black chador was not widespread .

There's no evidence for this claim. And even less so for the hypothesis that those bright multicolored tribal garments were as dominant as that.

career historian not even put his foot inside Iran ,compared to an scholar from the exact same region . also if I'm to believe every nonsense from career historians do you agree that you also accept anything they say about other matters

How do we know he never visited the region? Besides this is history not archeology or sociology. Depending on the topic and on the location of archives as well as on the availability of primary source reproductions, a historian may well forego in situ field research and still produce competent work.

by the way did the career historian brought any proof for his claim

I doubt that authors who contribute to the Encyclopaedia Iranica will reference just any random source, including ones which don't conform to the absolute minimal threshold in terms of following the scientific method. And I'm saying this despite the problems I have with this publication, in light of its editor in chief Ehsan Yarshater's political background.

were deylamite , but didn't have that nonsense law that women are not allowed out in days .
the area was an agricultural area that women worked side by side by their men , it was impossible to restrict them to their house during the day.

Sure it was possible, and there's no reason to assume such a law couldn't have been in place. Female workforce in agriculture wasn't an omnipresent occurrence during that period of time.

that style seems to be her way to annoy his brother by copying him

Some contemporary feminist narratives tell a different story, claiming that this was part of cultural perceptions of beauty in 19th century Iran, which they seek to misrepresent as tainted by transsexualism. In fact a book was published in English based on that kind of thesis. But we all know how useless feminist and homosexualist discourse is now, don't we.
 
Last edited:
That's Esmat-Al-Daula , second daughter of Naser-Al-Din Shah Qajar .
the family was total useless and degenerate and moved Iran backward for 2 centuries while the world was moving forward.
to be honnest between the family she was one of the few who was not total useless she is called the lady of first
it seems she put that mustache to annoy Nayeb-Al-Saltaneh one of his brother ,
these two picture were taken at the same day at the home of Zel-al-sultan
View attachment 857290


a picture of Kamran - Mirza nayeb al saltaneh
Kamranmirza.JPG

you see the mustache are the same style and size


that style seems to be her way to annoy his brother by copying him
Thanks for the detailed explanation on this individual sir. Very interesting to say the very least. Definitely need to read more into it. Especially considering a woman undertaking such steps at those times. I mean if our daughters start growing a mustache we would probably lose it but a kings daughter doing it well that takes some hypothetical balls!

I wouldn't be so sure about it.

Because this is her sister, Zahra Khanom Taj ol-Saltane:

zahra-khanum-taj-al-saltaneh.jpeg


So unless both sought to annoy their brother simultaneously, their deliberate growing of facial hair would have had other reasons.

This said, I personally reject all feminist-oriented historical reconstructions in this case as in others - both the LGBTism-tainted theory that this "transsexual" appearance supposedly echoed common perceptions of beauty in 19th century Iran, and also all the romanticized, never proven stories about courageous emancipated princesses breaking cultural norms in order to snob their bad dominant male brother or more generally advocate gender equality etc.

Even the most fact-based papers on these figures cannot seem to avoid rehashing at least one of the obligatory feminist tropes. Like the following for instance (which apart from that, is actually a good one, in my opinion): https://medium.com/@tvmartinez/princess-qajar-and-the-problem-with-junk-history-memes-44e15260af67
 
Last edited:

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom