Iranian womens' soccer uniform controversy

[Lee.]

I think it might be pertinent to the conversation, as well as help us see exactly where you're coming from, if we knew what form of Christianity you're a follower of.

[IceCap]

"See my concern here is about the Iranian government forcing their women to cover every inch of their bodies as a form of oppression."

That's not true.

Yes, it is. Women can be arrested, and beaten, by the police in Iran if they're wearing garments that are not deemed religiously tolerable. That's oppression.

And another thing. All countries oppress their citizens in terms of what they can wear. Even I, as a man, would be arrested if I went to a store without any pants on. I'm so oppressed! I can't dress the way I want! The government is out to get me! It's all relative to local culture.

If you HONESTLY think that's the same thing that is being discussed here then you need help.

"Secondly, you don't get to dress how you want when you wish to partake in organized sports."

Umm, says who?

In MLB, Ive seen players wear do-rags and winter caps.

In NBA, players can wear face masks and headbands.

In tennis, players can wear baseball caps and headbands.

And dont get me started on the NFL.

Again, not the same thing. In those sports they modify the uniform, but not to the extent that the Iranian government is modifying their women's soccer team uniform.

I'm Jewish. Should I be able to demand the right to play pro sports while wearing a prayer shall?

As a side note, I don't know if this contributes to your antagonistic view of Islam.

Not only is this a very cheap tactic in a discussion, not only is it disgusting, but I'm offended as well. You really are a piece of work.

And for the record I don't have an antagonistic view of Islam. I have an antagonistic view of religious fundamentalism, regardless of the base religion it uses to corrupt, and that includes fundamentalist Judaism. I don't have a problem with the Islamic religion, I have a problem with the government of Iran using it as an excuse to oppress their own citizenry.

Like women. Look it up if you don't believe me, but women are considered second class citizens in Iran, so much so that if one is raped, the victim is punished for it. The full body dress is a symbol of that oppression.

But anyway, my Jewish friends have told me that prayer shawls (I think you meant shawls)

I mis-spelt a word. Sue me. It was early, and I saw through your wall of BS.

are typically only used by men during ceremonies and prayers. If it's normal to go to Israel and see boys running around on soccer fields playing soccer while wearing prayer shalls (which I know it's not), then it would be a fairly resonable request, but in your case, its just being difficult.

Wrong again Sparky. The prayer shawl, if we're going to be fundamental about it, is to be worn by Jews at all times. Most Jews who wear them only wear them during religious services, but it is a commandment that we wear them all the time. Orthodox wear them all the time, in fact.

So really it's the same thing with Iran. Their government is forcing their women's soccer team to wear a religious garment outside of ceremony and prayer. Not only is it a tool of oppression, but it's also a clear violation of FIFA's uniform code, one that would apply to any other religious garments of any faith. It just so happens that the fundamentalist Islamic regime in Iran is making an issue about it.

Finally, you agree with me about gender equality but then say it's a myth? Which is it?

I agreed that we need to strive for gender equality. I say its a myth because anytime a woman does something that is considered "insulting" (such as wearing a headscarf), then people come out and says that she is oppressed.

Maybe because she is? Again, check the Iranian criminal code if you want. Women over there are FORCED to cover their entire bodies.

[loogodude90]

To Ice_Cap:

What you consider to be "oppressive" isnt the same for everybody. If I believe that I am being oppressed by having to wear pants in public, then thats what I believe. There is no litmus test for oppression. Conversely, there are many Muslim women who wear the headscarf out of choice. Not oppression.

As a sidenote, I know it seems like we are at odds here, but Im against fundamentalism in any religion too.

"Wrong again Sparky. The prayer shawl, if we're going to be fundamental about it, is to be worn by Jews at all times. Most Jews who wear them only wear them during religious services, but it is a commandment that we wear them all the time. Orthodox wear them all the time, in fact."

Right, but is this done in practice? The fact is that its not. But, in Iran, women actally play soccer in headscarves.

[The_Admiral]

FIFA is within its rights to ban countries from imposing political and religious statements. Since Iran is a theocracy, the headscarf is both a political and religious statement.

[IceCap]

To Ice_Cap:

What you consider to be "oppressive" isnt the same for everybody. If I believe that I am being oppressed by having to wear pants in public, then thats what I believe. There is no litmus test for oppression. Conversely, there are many Muslim women who wear the headscarf out of choice. Not oppression.

I would be more inclined to believe that if the headscarfs weren't required by law. Also, this is the country that declares the victim of rape to be in the wrong, and they beat women for not rearing the necessary religious garments. So really, when you look at Iran's recent track record, I have a hard time believing this is a completely voluntary thing. The fact is women are oppressed in Iran, and the covering of every inch of their bodies is a symbol of that oppression.

As a sidenote, I know it seems like we are at odds here, but Im against fundamentalism in any religion too.

Then don't try to generalize my thoughts on a subject based on my religion just so you can win an innerwebs argument.

"Wrong again Sparky. The prayer shawl, if we're going to be fundamental about it, is to be worn by Jews at all times. Most Jews who wear them only wear them during religious services, but it is a commandment that we wear them all the time. Orthodox wear them all the time, in fact."

Right, but is this done in practice? The fact is that its not. But, in Iran, women actally play soccer in headscarves.

It's done in practice by the Orthodox. The only difference with Iran is that the orthodox fundamentalist Muslims who run the government are forcing ALL women to wear the headscarfs, even those who may not want to. They're also in violation of FIFA uniform code, so there's that as well.

[loogodude90]

FIFA is within its rights to ban countries from imposing political and religious statements. Since Iran is a theocracy, the headscarf is both a political and religious statement.

Disagree. Players showing their religion through clothing or actions hasnt been a problem for non-Muslims.

From Kaka's Wiki:

"He removed his jersey to reveal an "I Belong to Jesus" t-shirt and openly engaged in prayer moments after the final whistle of Brazil's 2002 World Cup, and Milan's 2004 Scudetto and 2007 Champions League triumphs. He also had the same phrase, along with "God Is Faithful," stitched onto the tongues of his boots."

I don't think he was banned or anything for that.

[IceCap]

FIFA is within its rights to ban countries from imposing political and religious statements. Since Iran is a theocracy, the headscarf is both a political and religious statement.

Disagree. Players showing their religion through clothing or actions hasnt been a problem for non-Muslims.

From Kaka's Wiki:

"He removed his jersey to reveal an "I Belong to Jesus" t-shirt and openly engaged in prayer moments after the final whistle of Brazil's 2002 World Cup, and Milan's 2004 Scudetto and 2007 Champions League triumphs. He also had the same phrase, along with "God Is Faithful," stitched onto the tongues of his boots."

I don't think he was banned or anything for that.

Was it political? No. Was it a statement about the subjection of any other group of people? No. The headscarfs Iran is insisting on for its women's team falls into both of those categories.

Not only that, but again, these scarfs violate FIFA's uniform policy. They have every right to enforce that. If one country doesn't want to go along with the uniform policy based on outdated ways of thinking and a dress system that hasn't been relevant in centuries, then fine. They don't get to play.

[Lee.]

FIFA is within its rights to ban countries from imposing political and religious statements. Since Iran is a theocracy, the headscarf is both a political and religious statement.

Disagree. Players showing their religion through clothing or actions hasnt been a problem for non-Muslims.

From Kaka's Wiki:

"He removed his jersey to reveal an "I Belong to Jesus" t-shirt and openly engaged in prayer moments after the final whistle of Brazil's 2002 World Cup, and Milan's 2004 Scudetto and 2007 Champions League triumphs. He also had the same phrase, along with "God Is Faithful," stitched onto the tongues of his boots."

I don't think he was banned or anything for that.

Stop Posting.

Both of you, shut up. You're talking in circles, and it's annoying as . Enough. When The Admiral is the voice of reason in any thread, then something is incredibly wrong.

Loogodude, you're being willfully ignorant of any amount of proof and logic being thrown your way. Ice, you're arguing with a professional agitator. It was entertaining at first, now it's just two babies trying to yell the loudest. Stop.

[IceCap]

As you wish, el capitan. I'm out.

[UnclearInitial]

FIFA is within its rights to ban countries from imposing political and religious statements. Since Iran is a theocracy, the headscarf is both a political and religious statement.

Disagree. Players showing their religion through clothing or actions hasnt been a problem for non-Muslims.

From Kaka's Wiki:

"He removed his jersey to reveal an "I Belong to Jesus" t-shirt and openly engaged in prayer moments after the final whistle of Brazil's 2002 World Cup, and Milan's 2004 Scudetto and 2007 Champions League triumphs. He also had the same phrase, along with "God Is Faithful," stitched onto the tongues of his boots."

I don't think he was banned or anything for that.

Yeah but that is under your shirt, not over it. if some of the players i the iranian women football team wore long-sleeved shirts with Allah hu akbar written on it BY THEIR OWN CHOICE, I wouldn't have a problem with it. but if the government forced the whole team to do it, I would.

[BBTV]

FIFA is within its rights to ban countries from imposing political and religious statements. Since Iran is a theocracy, the headscarf is both a political and religious statement.

Disagree. Players showing their religion through clothing or actions hasnt been a problem for non-Muslims.

From Kaka's Wiki:

"He removed his jersey to reveal an "I Belong to Jesus" t-shirt and openly engaged in prayer moments after the final whistle of Brazil's 2002 World Cup, and Milan's 2004 Scudetto and 2007 Champions League triumphs. He also had the same phrase, along with "God Is Faithful," stitched onto the tongues of his boots."

I don't think he was banned or anything for that.

Yeah but that is under your shirt, not over it. if some of the players i the iranian women football team wore long-sleeved shirts with Allah hu akbar written on it BY THEIR OWN CHOICE, I wouldn't have a problem with it. but if the government forced the whole team to do it, I would.

It doesn't matter if it's under your shirt or not. Once that shirt comes off, it becomes a statement made on a sanctioned playing field. Hell - it doesn't matter if have "I <3 Jesus!!!" tatood on your stomach. If you display it at a privately-sanctioned sporting event that bans such statements, it's wrong.

[altius]

Hi,

This Forum is very nice, I want share on Singapore Youth Olympics related information

*spam*

[anntaylor]

crap...

Womens Trousers

[charger77]

I dunno, what gives us the right to drop bombs and kill over a million people just because we don't like their religion?

When the hell has that ever happened?

[jimbojohnny56]

No you mean drop bombs on people that want to kill innocent civilians because of their own religion.Everyday and twice on Sunday.There is nothing like seeing some ordinance being unleashed on those ******* swine.Loogodude, wake up and join reality unless your one of them then I can hook you up with this great dating service I know It's called the 72 Virgins Dating Service alot of my buddies personally set up the meetings.

[loogodude90]

I dunno, what gives us the right to drop bombs and kill over a million people just because we don't like their religion?

When the hell has that ever happened?

2003-present.

[The_Admiral]

You know, plenty of Iranians are moderate modern people who aren't any happier about their country's position than we are, and as such it's not really fair to call them swine.

[charger77]

I dunno, what gives us the right to drop bombs and kill over a million people just because we don't like their religion?

When the hell has that ever happened?

2003-present.

Nothing like good old fashioned revisionist history.

[jimbojohnny56]

Yeah okay and the majority are raised to hate us from when they come out the womb. The swine I'm referring to are Radical Muslims. Nobody is dropping bombs on Iran. Loogodude is talking about the current wars I'm guessing Afghanistan and what's going on in Pakistan(the real problem).

admiral, you ever been in Iraq,Iran,Afghanistan or Pakistan? I'm just wondering cause you sound like you speak from experience.NOT!

[charger77]

I know what logodude is getting at but the United States has not

droped bombs and kill over a million people just because we don't like their religion

That has not happened.