There are a lot of people that are capable of suppressing women without the US just fine. Just have q quick look at the Arabic peninsula, or the Taliban.
It’s why iran has so many educated women and is weirdly technologically powerful for a theocratic regime. Iran in the 70s was modern. Inshallah the people of iran will be freed from the tyranny of theocracy.
But yeah, iran is what should scare you the most because their collapse was fast and unexpected.
Those photos are of Shah-era Iran, when the West was propping up (including providing weapons, training and funding to) an unpopular authoritarian that had been installed by the UK and US when the previous democratically-elected government dared to attempt to nationalise the oil industry, which was owned by BP. Under the Shah, traditional Islamic dress was outlawed, which is why everyone’s in 1970s clothes. If you disagreed with the Shah, the secret police would take you away and kill you.
Eventually, a coalition of leftists and religious leaders overthrew the Shah. The religious faction then assassinated all the prominent leftists and switched the secular authoritarian dictatorship for a theocratic authoritarian dictatorship. Under the Ayatollah, traditional Islamic dress was mandatory, which is why women in contemporary photos from Iran always have some kind of headscarf unless it’s in a news report about a protest that someone got executed for. If you disagree with the Ayatollah, the Revolutionary Guard will take you away and kill you.
So Iran’s had laws forcing women to wear only the clothes approved by a dictator both with and without help from the West.
Nah, we funded both Iran and the Taliban. We even elected a guy who illegally funneled weapon sales to Iran in order to take that money and give it to Nicaraguan death squads. Arguably, without US support, neither gets the critical mass it needs to effect regime change or become anything more than an upstart.
bob_lemon@feddit.org 3 weeks ago
There are a lot of people that are capable of suppressing women without the US just fine. Just have q quick look at the Arabic peninsula, or the Taliban.
BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
This is Iran in the 1970s, before the US got involved.
Image Image
Call_Me_Maple@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Wow, I’ve never seen this before. I don’t mean this in a derogatory way or anything, but they look like people.
Mossheart@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
They still are, they’re just people that are repressed by a theocracy now.
captainlezbian@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
It’s why iran has so many educated women and is weirdly technologically powerful for a theocratic regime. Iran in the 70s was modern. Inshallah the people of iran will be freed from the tyranny of theocracy.
But yeah, iran is what should scare you the most because their collapse was fast and unexpected.
AnyOldName3@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Those photos are of Shah-era Iran, when the West was propping up (including providing weapons, training and funding to) an unpopular authoritarian that had been installed by the UK and US when the previous democratically-elected government dared to attempt to nationalise the oil industry, which was owned by BP. Under the Shah, traditional Islamic dress was outlawed, which is why everyone’s in 1970s clothes. If you disagreed with the Shah, the secret police would take you away and kill you.
Eventually, a coalition of leftists and religious leaders overthrew the Shah. The religious faction then assassinated all the prominent leftists and switched the secular authoritarian dictatorship for a theocratic authoritarian dictatorship. Under the Ayatollah, traditional Islamic dress was mandatory, which is why women in contemporary photos from Iran always have some kind of headscarf unless it’s in a news report about a protest that someone got executed for. If you disagree with the Ayatollah, the Revolutionary Guard will take you away and kill you.
So Iran’s had laws forcing women to wear only the clothes approved by a dictator both with and without help from the West.
Mirshe@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Nah, we funded both Iran and the Taliban. We even elected a guy who illegally funneled weapon sales to Iran in order to take that money and give it to Nicaraguan death squads. Arguably, without US support, neither gets the critical mass it needs to effect regime change or become anything more than an upstart.
bob_lemon@feddit.org 2 weeks ago
The Taliban hated women long before being funded by the US, and hating women was not why they are funded. Same for the fundamentalist Iranian Muslims.
Them being in power (and the subsequent suffering of women) can be attributed to the US, but not them hating women per se.
I like hating on the US as much as anyone, but let’s not pretend they’re the source of all evil (only lots).
plyth@feddit.org 2 weeks ago
Without the funding, most of those people would believe different things.
CaptnNMorgan@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
The women in the middle east weren’t nearly as suppressed before the US got involved