[Trooper]

Walk of shame: Sweden’s “first feminist government” don hijabs in Iran





GENEVA, Feb. 13, 2017 — In a statement that has gone viral on Twitter and Facebook, UN Watch, a non-governmental human rights NGO in Geneva, expressed disappointment that Sweden’s self-declared “first feminist government in the world” sacrificed its principles and betrayed the rights of Iranian women as Trade Minister Ann Linde and other female members walked before Iranian President Rouhani on Saturday wearing Hijabs, Chadors, and long coats, in deference to Iran’s oppressive and unjust modesty laws which make the Hijab compulsory — despite Stockholm’s promise to promote “a gender equality perspective” internationally, and to adopt a “feminist foreign policy” in which “equality between women and men is a fundamental aim.”

In doing so, Sweden’s female leaders ignored the recent appeal by Iranian women’s right activist Masih Alinejad who urged Europeans female politicians “to stand for their own dignity” and to refuse to kowtow to the compulsory Hijab while visiting Iran.

Alinrejad created a Facebook page for Iranian women to resist the law and show their hair as an act of resistance, which now numbers 1 million followers.

“European female politicians are hypocrites,” says Alinejad. “They stand with French Muslim women and condemn the burkini ban—because they think compulsion is bad—but when it happens to Iran, they just care about money.”

The scene in Tehran on Saturday was also a sharp contrast to Deputy Prime Minister Isabella Lövin’s feminist stance against U.S. President Donald Trump, in a viral tweet and then in a Guardian op-ed last week, in which she wrote that “the world need strong leadership for women’s rights.”

Trade Minister Linde, who signed multiple agreements with Iranian ministers while wearing a veil, “sees no conflict” between her government’s human rights policy and signing trade deals with an oppressive dictatorship that tortures prisoners, persecutes gays, and is a leading executioner of minors.

“If Sweden really cares about human rights, they should not be empowering a regime that brutalizes its own citizens while carrying out genocide in Syria; and if they care about women’s rights, then the female ministers never should have gone to misogynistic Iran in the first place,” said UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer.

The government has now come under sharp criticism from centrist and left-wing Swedish lawmakers, who said the ministers should not have deferred to “gender apartheid.”

“They go to my country,” said Aliinejad recently in the European Parliament, “and they ignore millions of those women who send their photos to me and put themselves in danger to be heard. And [the European politicians] keep their smile, and wearing hijab, and saying this is a ‘cultural issue’—which is wrong.”

Below, Sweden’s feminist trade minister Ann Linde dons the hijab and wears a black cloak like her Iranian counterpart.



Writing in the Guardian, Deputy prime minister Lövin contrasted Swedish policy with that of President Donald Trump, saying that the world “needs strong leadership for women’s rights” and “Sweden will have an increasingly important role to play in this.” She added that “many countries could learn an important lesson from this.”

Her viral tweet above was meant to emphasize her government’s focus on women’s rights, as opposed to Trump.



https://www.unwatch.org/walk-shame-swed ... jabs-iran/

[AFAIK]

I like Frollein's summary of feminism's development;

1st wave: Burn your corsets!
2nd wave: Burn your bras!
3rd wave: Wear a burqa!

What's the weather like in Tehran?
They look really overdressed.

[mikema63]

So what should they have done instead? Refuse to engage in diplomacy because they'd have to wear a scarf on their head?

In what way would it be helpful to refuse to engage in diplomacy with or refuse to visit a country because we disagree with something as superficial as a piece of cloth?

If your going to complain about Sweden doing diplomacy with Iran at least make it about how Iran hangs homosexuals or something actually important.

[Hong Wu]

They're willing to call out Donald Trump because they're "feminists" and then they rush to submit to one of the most most anti-feminist countries in the world. This is not the behavior of sane people.

Does anyone seriously think that European countries like Sweden won't be facing major upheaval in 20 or so years?

[One Degree]

"mikema63"]So what should they have done instead? Refuse to engage in diplomacy because they'd have to wear a scarf on their head?

Yes, because a sign of obeisance is very poor diplomacy.

In what way would it be helpful to refuse to engage in diplomacy with or refuse to visit a country because we disagree with something as superficial as a piece of cloth?

You have already failed in diplomacy if you fail to insist upon meeting on neutral terms.

If your going to complain about Sweden doing diplomacy with Iran at least make it about how Iran hangs homosexuals or something actually important.

Why do you believe homosexual rights should be more important than women's rights?

[AFAIK]

That's a false dichotomy, mike. German politicians manage to visit Saudi Arabia without wearing any Burqas or Niqabs.

[mikema63]

The question is what is their goal. What do they want from Iran? What do they want from the US? What is it they want to accomplish?

I would guess they criticize trump because it works well with their voting base, so it serves the goal of getting elected. They may also believe that there will be a strong reaction against him in the US and a new government would be more kind to them, and that they aren't likely to get much out of Trump anyway so why bother trying to be on his good side.

Where Iran is concerned they seem to want to promote gender equality, but what is the most important gender equality issue in Iran? Modesty laws are probably not high on the list. How is gender equality served by either refusing to go or insulting their customs over the least important gender issues in Iran?

There are goals, and means to achieve those goals. Grandstanding serves no one.

You have already failed in diplomacy if you fail to insist upon meeting on neutral terms.

Diplomacy isn't some set of magical principles that are always correct.

Why do you believe homosexual rights should be more important than women's rights?

In general they aren't any more or less important. But in the specific comparison between hanging people to death and a headscarf one is clearly worse.

That's a false dichotomy, mike. German politicians manage to visit Saudi Arabia without wearing any Burqas or Niqabs.

It's not a dichotomy, it's a question of what they are trying to accomplish and what's the best way to do it. Maybe, just maybe now, they think it doesn't serve their goals to make a statement about Iranian clothing laws.

[noir]

Where are the Swedish men? Why do they prefer women to lead them?

[The Sabbaticus]

It turns out that the female equivalent to 'cuck' is 'cuckquean'. And we all know how much of a 'beta-cuckquean' movement the European feminists are. So apologetic about 'colonialism', American racial problems and assorted historical (saviour complex/virtue signalling) twaddle that they let loud-mouthed hijab-feminists and BLM'esque types take the lead in pretty much everything.

[Rugoz]

This thread is just retarded.

They're on a diplomatic mission. Small countries like Sweden have to flexible in that regard. They cannot just trample on everybody's feet like the US.

[One Degree]

This thread is just retarded.

They're on a diplomatic mission. Small countries like Sweden have to flexible in that regard. They cannot just trample on everybody's feet like the US.

What does Iran have that Sweden could not get somewhere else? There is no need to debase themselves unless there is a real need, otherwise it is just spineless stupidity.

[anasawad]

Uranium ? minerals ? oil ? growing consumer market ? growing industrial region ? growing scientific community ? or maybe a country that has large influence in central Asia and the middle east and parts of Africa which Sweden doesn't have ?

Or maybe, just maybe, the fact that Sweden along other European countries are having a refugee crisis and Iran has 4-5 million refugees without any sign of a problem thus could take part of the burden off of Europe and Sweden in particular in this case since the infrastructure to support refugees already exist in Iran ?

None of those come to mind ?

[noir]

And what about so called "human rights"?

[anasawad]

I suppose we'll now have to listen to an Israeli about human rights ?

If Sweden or any other government is so interested in human rights, perhaps they should cut relations with countries like Israel, or the US being the largest human rights violator across the globe ?

[The Sabbaticus]

This thread is just retarded.

They're on a diplomatic mission. Small countries like Sweden have to flexible in that regard. They cannot just trample on everybody's feet like the US.

It's because of this photo:



In reaction to:



But it turns out that they're nothing more than cuck-savvy virtue signallers.

[Hindsite]

I don't much understand diplomacy.
However, did you notice that all those women are wearing pants?
Tell me, what does that have to do with diplomacy?

[mikema63]

Does Iran ban pants?

[Political Interest]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with Muslim ladies wearing hijab. There is also nothing wrong with a foreign delegation wearing it in a Muslim country. However, these women support a movement that is deconstructing Western culture but when they go to Iran they make a gesture of respect towards the established culture there. It is complete hypocrisy of them to want to deconstruct their own society but then nod their heads to the conservatism of another culture. You can be certain that they would object to any Swedish conservatives asking them to wear hijab in Sweden.

[mikema63]

An interesting debate in and of itself would be if it's a deconstruction, modification, or inevitable conclusion of their culture. In any case they have the right to work to change the culture they live in for what they perceive to be the better.

[One Degree]

An interesting debate in and of itself would be if it's a deconstruction, modification, or inevitable conclusion of their culture. In any case they have the right to work to change the culture they live in for what they perceive to be the better.

I would agree with this if the methods they used were based upon the 'will of the people', otherwise I would not.
You should not have the 'right' to bypass the will of the majority.