Author Topic: Iranian women’s rights lawyer gets 38 years, 148 lashes  (Read 846 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Quetzalcoatl

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4795
Re: Iranian women’s rights lawyer gets 38 years, 148 lashes
« Reply #15 on: June 02, 2019, 03:17:18 PM »
Odd that this story hasn't garnered any attention whatsoever, especially from those members who purport to be so interested in women's rights.

I think to them, she is the wrong kind of victim.

How so?

I believe the reason it's been ignored is because Islamic theocracy is the wrong villain.

There's an inclination in some quarters of the Left to refrain from criticizing Islamic fundamentalists out of fear that it will result in more violence. So they think it's better to just look the other way, ignore the atrocities and let the Muslims sort out their own shit.

I recall the French philosopher Michel Onfray, in a somewhat different context, referring to "proper misery" and "dirty misery". The former was what misery you are expected to be concerned about, the latter what misery you are supposed to ignore. I think it's a useful concept. Different political tribes have different proper miseries and dirty miseries.
"I’m a member of no party. I have no ideology. I’m a rationalist. I do what I can in the international struggle between science and reason and the barbarism, superstition and stupidity that’s all around us." - Christopher Hitchens

Offline John Albert

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 6001
Re: Iranian women’s rights lawyer gets 38 years, 148 lashes
« Reply #16 on: June 02, 2019, 06:56:09 PM »
I recall the French philosopher Michel Onfray, in a somewhat different context, referring to "proper misery" and "dirty misery". The former was what misery you are expected to be concerned about, the latter what misery you are supposed to ignore. I think it's a useful concept. Different political tribes have different proper miseries and dirty miseries.

Many large city news agencies have a policy of declining to report on gang-related murders, because publicizing those kinds of crimes directly benefits the street reputations of the perpetrators. There's also a belief that the general populace don't care much for victims who are themselves involved in organized crime. That's why gang murders seldom make the news unless the victim is an innocent bystander. Hence, newspaper reporters on the crime beat used to describe these kinds of crimes with a rather callous term. They called these murders "cheap," meaning there's no money to be made by reporting on them. 

Offline Quetzalcoatl

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4795
Re: Iranian women’s rights lawyer gets 38 years, 148 lashes
« Reply #17 on: June 03, 2019, 01:57:00 PM »
That seems like an odd priority to me. Sure, there are many interests, but to my mind, the public interest in knowing about murders taking place takes priority over not raising the street reputation of the perpetrators.

Otherwise, to think of an example of dirty misery, recall the thread about intolerance toward atheists in Morocco. Some people at this forum tried to stamp that out by hurling smears and personal attacks. To them, I suppose, the intolerance of atheists in Morocco was dirty misery.
"I’m a member of no party. I have no ideology. I’m a rationalist. I do what I can in the international struggle between science and reason and the barbarism, superstition and stupidity that’s all around us." - Christopher Hitchens

Offline John Albert

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 6001
Re: Iranian women’s rights lawyer gets 38 years, 148 lashes
« Reply #18 on: June 04, 2019, 03:08:01 AM »
That seems like an odd priority to me. Sure, there are many interests, but to my mind, the public interest in knowing about murders taking place takes priority over not raising the street reputation of the perpetrators.

The news still reports on them, but they avoid details. If a reporter learns that a particular shooting is related to gang action, they'll just leave it at that.

It's not just about the killer's reputation; publicizing gang murders is generally seen as destructive. Most gangs operate on a strict reputational honor culture. If an inter-gang murder is publicized, the demand for retaliation becomes more urgent so the victim's gang can avoid looking weak. When these troubles escalate the death toll can rise very fast, with innocent citizens often getting shot by mistake. Reporting on gang crimes is also seen as contributing to the racist narrative that certain minorities are inherently violent. 

Besides the moralistic rationale, reporters also know that the public does not respond sympathetically to stories about teenage gang members murdering each other. The victims are often considered as scumbags and even deserving of their fate.


Otherwise, to think of an example of dirty misery, recall the thread about intolerance toward atheists in Morocco. Some people at this forum tried to stamp that out by hurling smears and personal attacks. To them, I suppose, the intolerance of atheists in Morocco was dirty misery.

I don't recall that discussion.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2019, 04:48:52 PM by John Albert »

Offline Quetzalcoatl

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4795
Re: Iranian women’s rights lawyer gets 38 years, 148 lashes
« Reply #19 on: June 04, 2019, 05:42:11 AM »
That seems like an odd priority to me. Sure, there are many interests, but to my mind, the public interest in knowing about murders taking place takes priority over not raising the street reputation of the perpetrators.

The news still reports on them, but they avoid details. If a reporter learns that a particular shooting is related to gang action, they'll just leave it at that.

It's not just about the killer's reputation; publicizing gang murders is generally seen as destructive. Most gangs operate on a strict reputational honor culture. If an inter-gang murder is publicized, the demand for retaliation becomes more urgent so the victim's gang can avoid looking weak. When these troubles escalate the death toll can rise very fast, with innocent citizens often getting shot by mistake. Besides that rationale, reporters know that the public does not respond sympathetically to stories about teenage gang members murdering each other. The victims are often considered 'dirty' and even deserving of their fate. It's also seen as contributing to the racist narrative that certain minorities are inherently violent.

If there is a gang-war going on in a city, it would still be in the public interest to know. And the rival gangs are going to mete out retaliate anyways. It might be true that the public doesn't care about criminals getting killed, but as you say, innocent people who get in the way can be harmed (which has happened), and having violent vendettas between gangs would still need to be combated.

At least here, in the case of court convictions for crime that receive widespread national interest, the media tend to make public the faces of those convicted in most cases, except if the perpetrators are minors (there are media guidelines regulating this). And this applies to gang crimes as well as non-gang crimes. I don't see how hushing gang-related crimes would do any good.

Otherwise, to think of an example of dirty misery, recall the thread about intolerance toward atheists in Morocco. Some people at this forum tried to stamp that out by hurling smears and personal attacks. To them, I suppose, the intolerance of atheists in Morocco was dirty misery.

I don't recall that discussion.

You don't? You were active in it. Here is the thread: https://sguforums.com/index.php?topic=50480.0

At some point, someone made a claim that Morocco was super-tolerant of atheists. I pointed out how this is wrong, with reference to various human rights sources. heyalison (who else?) implied that it was covert racism to criticize Morocco's human rights record, with the approval of the usual suspects. random poet dismissed the human rights reports on Morocco as spurious.

That's the level of discourse on this incredibly stupid forum.
"I’m a member of no party. I have no ideology. I’m a rationalist. I do what I can in the international struggle between science and reason and the barbarism, superstition and stupidity that’s all around us." - Christopher Hitchens

Offline gebobs

  • Seasoned Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 549
  • Me like hockey!
Re: Iranian women’s rights lawyer gets 38 years, 148 lashes
« Reply #20 on: June 04, 2019, 09:02:34 AM »
Odd that this story hasn't garnered any attention whatsoever, especially from those members who purport to be so interested in women's rights.

This would be a great opportunity for the Trump administration to carry on with it's cold war with iran and attempt to repair the burned bridges with women.

Offline Rai

  • PIZZASAURUS
  • Global Moderator
  • Too Much Spare Time
  • *****
  • Posts: 6812
Re: Iranian women’s rights lawyer gets 38 years, 148 lashes
« Reply #21 on: June 04, 2019, 09:04:29 AM »
Odd that this story hasn't garnered any attention whatsoever, especially from those members who purport to be so interested in women's rights.

This would be a great opportunity for the Trump administration to carry on with it's cold war with iran and attempt to repair the burned bridges with women.

I hope this is sarcasm

Offline gebobs

  • Seasoned Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 549
  • Me like hockey!
Re: Iranian women’s rights lawyer gets 38 years, 148 lashes
« Reply #22 on: June 10, 2019, 11:02:45 AM »
Odd that this story hasn't garnered any attention whatsoever, especially from those members who purport to be so interested in women's rights.

This would be a great opportunity for the Trump administration to carry on with it's cold war with iran and attempt to repair the burned bridges with women.

I hope this is sarcasm

Sarcasm, a bit, cynicism, definitely.

 

personate-rain