Some university professors have not understood the issue of multi-layer hijab
group Women And Youth news agency Fars: Since the fall of last year, the constant concern of hijab in Iranian society has entered a new phase. With the riots that took place that year under the pretext of the hijab law, the sensitivities about this law increased in the society, and as a result, a bill titled “Afaf and hijab” was examined in the parliament this year.
The articles of this bill also had many supporters and opponents, but in the meantime, some political and academic figures entered the door of denial instead of criticism and claimed that dealing with the issue of hijab is not the priority of the people or that the government will not do anything about the discovery of hijab.
In an interview with Fars reporter, Seyyed Abdul Rasool Alamulhadi, a sociologist and university professor, said about these statements: I wonder how some university professors claim that today we can have a greater guarantee for the preservation of the Islamic Republic and the satisfaction of the people with freedom in the hijab. These people do not understand exactly the problem of hijab.
The multi-layered and hybrid issue of hijab is not understood
He added: This comment arises when we do not understand the multi-layered and combined issue of hijab. Today’s hijab is not cultural, not only political and security, but a combination of all these things that have added to each other and created this issue.
Regarding the opinion of a university professor who said, “Anyone who appears in society without a veil is being themselves, and this is more for the benefit of the society in terms of mental health than to show something else,” said: removing the law on the requirement to wear veils on public roads is definitely our brings it into the moral and sexual layer. As it is quite obvious, some daring behaviors on the part of girls and boys are behaviors aimed at the spread of sexual matters, and if the issue of hijab is removed, the events after that in the family area will become very difficult and complicated to control.
This cultural politician continued: Maybe some professors of our university will refer to the global experience. Is the global experience now a successful experience? Reducing marriage and increasing divorce and the formation of liquid love and accidental love are successful things?
What about social law?
Seyyed Abdul Raswal Alam Al-Hadi said: It is clear that the western world, with the decrease in population growth, sees a strong individualism in its society, for which it seeks help from immigrants. In addition, the flow of Iranian society is extremely family-oriented and sensitive to family privacy.
He continued: We should be more careful about these kinds of comments. When a university professor says that someone who doesn’t want the hijab is forcing himself to pretend to cause dissatisfaction by wearing the hijab, and he says that if we remove the law, everyone can be present in society as they are; I ask them, what should we do with those who want to be homosexuals or Satan worshipers, who happen to have special clothing and appearance? They also want to have a social presence as they are in their individual lives. What about the issue of social law? Where in the world is the social law so up in the air?
If the hijab law is removed, the sexual issue will arise
This university professor said: Morality is very important in Iranian society, and for the sake of morality, the government has the duty to protect the public demand of the people, and this public demand is the morality and moral security of society and family. For this reason, the government should stand on the hijab and the hijab law, and if this law is removed, it is absolutely certain that we will enter into the issue of sexuality and the immorality of social life.
Discovering hijab in the first stage is not a crime
In the continuation of his speech, Alam Elhadi talked about the details of the chastity and hijab bill and stated: Two introductions are needed for the discussion of the chastity and hijab bill. An introduction about the place of legislation in macro-politics and an introduction about our current problem regarding hijab.
He said: Regarding the first introduction, we must know what position legislation has in terms of policy making. We use legislative tools in policy-making, especially in penal legislation, where we reduce the possibility of crime and the possibility of deviating from the policy process by fearing fines and punishments. Therefore, our law and our punishment must be a deterrent. And inhibition depends on different forms of actors. This means that different actors should pay their own fines.
The director of the Department of Education and Islamic Education Studies Center added: Policy-making must have a part such as economic interests, education and intellectual persuasion, media and culture building, and these different parts together complete policy-making. In the law of chastity and hijab bill, it does not mean all issues related to hijab, but only the criminal law issue that is considered.
He said: First of all, the criminal law does not consider the discovery of the hijab as a crime and considers it as a violation and a mistake, which does not require a court. If the violation is repeated and proved to be repeated, the issue of intention is removed and at this stage, because of the intention, the consequences of criminalization and prosecution follow.
The hijab issue has become politicized
Alam Elhadi continued: But regarding the problem of the hijab, which was the second introduction of my essay, I must say that today’s hijab in Iran is not just a cultural issue. In periods like before the revolution, the issue of hijab could be a social, cultural and religious issue, but today, especially after the autumn sedition of 1401, we faced a political action to subvert and a security action to find subversive networks, and this made the issue of hijab completely different. .
He said: Therefore, the problem now is not only cultural; Rather, even political protest has been associated with the act of uncovering the hijab. Of course, the reading of the political action in the autumn of last year was very serious. Some current polls show that that reading has changed from political to moral and cultural. In parentheses, I should say that this is also a misfortune, that is, if we enter the spaces of individual choice in the direction of ethical life, then the moral flow of society will not necessarily be our individual choice.
This sociologist said about the positive aspects of the Hijab and Chastity Bill: The very important thing about the Hijab and Chastity Bill is that it has paid attention to the morality of removing the hijab and reduced it from the criminal law to a kind of violation. Only in the case of repetition or daring behavior, he punishes the discussion and takes it to the court. This is one of the positive aspects of the bill. Or its other positive aspect is that it has allowed the actor and the technology system that discovers the actor to be alerted. That is, the observer’s bill is that the person may have removed the hijab under the influence of the atmosphere, or even the camera may not have correctly detected the removal of the hijab. Therefore, in the first step, he warns him with a warning SMS.
Fines are not a deterrent
Seyyed Abdul Raswal Alam Al-Hadi stated: But the act of nudity or showing one’s body requires a different reaction from a person, for which a fine has been considered, which, of course, is not a deterrent in my opinion, and this is one of the negative points of the bill.
He continued: The bill has described three types of activists. One activist wears a hijab and her clothes are common in society, the second is an activist who removes the hijab and shows off her body, and the third is an activist who gives media coverage of her exposure in the virtual space and emphasizes the political nature of her work. A distinction should be made between these three actors, almost this difference has been seen in the bill, but there is no deterrent fine for the second and third cases.
Alam Al-Hadi added: The next part that is omitted in the said bill is about how to order the bailiff and the order of fines, etc. If the judicial officer is only the police force, it will definitely not be possible to deal effectively. Here we are facing an unreality. Along with the police force, Basij and IRGC popular forces can also be active as judicial officers and solve this issue much sooner in the sense of moral security.
He continued: Second, apparently, no provision has been made for someone who can escape detection by cameras by covering his face with a hat, smoked glasses, etc. Here, another fine is probably needed for those who openly spread social insecurity but escape from its cost, who should be double fined.
This sociologist and university professor said: This double fine even with media work can be “cowardly” to introduce them so that they are not remembered as heroes.
People’s movements are closed
Alam Elhadi mentioned one of the main flaws of the Chastity Bill and said about it: One of the strange things about the bill is its Article 8, which is about the revelations of the hijab under the title of insult, defamation, assault and violation of privacy. Does this mean strengthening popular activity?
He continued: Article 8 has reversed the situation. It is obvious that assault should not be committed as a command for good and forbidding evil, but if it becomes a law and punishment is considered for it, it will basically close the hands of popular movements. Besides, now the situation is reversed with the state of chastity and hijab in the society, and the leaders are famously hurt in the social atmosphere.
In the end, Alam Elhadi said: Anyway, I will defend the whole bill. Because even in this situation, if it is approved faster, it can determine the seriousness of the system regarding hijab in the social space and show that the Islamic Republic still protects this law in the course of social life.
end of message/