Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Iran installs cameras in public places to identify, penalise unveiled women

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 217 posts

Re: Iran installs cameras in public places to identify, penalise unveiled women

#61

Post by Macha »

ybinator604g3 wrote: post #56
sosborn wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's real simple: "Don't take away my choice to wear what I want." For whatever reason, fragile people get real offended by what other people wear.

Is it really a choice when you are talking about religion? I am from Iran. In the school they teach (scare) children that if you don’t wear hijab, you will be hanged from your hair and burned on a stick till eternity in hell after you die. By the way that subject is not elective. You have to pass it. What kind of choice is this? Update (context): I am not talking about the people in west who want to (not)wear hijab.…

Yes. Compare the commercial secular Christmas to the mainstream Christian versions to the biblical literalists version. People in different parts of the world treat their religion and culture with different levels of severity and it's possible for an item associated with an oppressive interpretation in one part of the world to be a cultural pride item in another.

Re: Iran installs cameras in public places to identify, penalise unveiled women

#62

Post by macintux »

sdfghswe wrote: post #36
paulryanrogers wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reminds me of the "guns don't kill people" argument. Surveillance cameras have everything to do with consolidating power into fewer and fewer hands. Therefore fewer voices of dissent on the levers of power. Iran is going through a demographic shift. The protests and strikes are evidence of a desire for change. With tools like this even small acts of defiance become higher risk.

> This reminds me of the "guns don't kill people" argument. > Surveillance cameras have everything to do with consolidating power into fewer and fewer hands. Therefore fewer voices of dissent on the levers of power. > Iran is going through a demographic shift. The protests and strikes are evidence of a desire for change. With tools like this even small acts of defiance become higher risk. People with guns kill more p…

Technology being (mis)used to increase oppression is generally interesting to a technical audience.

Re: Iran installs cameras in public places to identify, penalise unveiled women

#63

Post by potsandpans »

1101010010 wrote: post #30
paulryanrogers wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reminds me of the "guns don't kill people" argument. Surveillance cameras have everything to do with consolidating power into fewer and fewer hands. Therefore fewer voices of dissent on the levers of power. Iran is going through a demographic shift. The protests and strikes are evidence of a desire for change. With tools like this even small acts of defiance become higher risk.

> This reminds me of the "guns don't kill people" argument. So you're telling me if we banned cameras in Iran, women would no longer be oppressed?

check this out, I'm gonna get on the internet and argue in bad faith

Re: Iran installs cameras in public places to identify, penalise unveiled women

#64

Post by renewiltord »

ybinator604g3 wrote: post #56
sosborn wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's real simple: "Don't take away my choice to wear what I want." For whatever reason, fragile people get real offended by what other people wear.

Is it really a choice when you are talking about religion? I am from Iran. In the school they teach (scare) children that if you don’t wear hijab, you will be hanged from your hair and burned on a stick till eternity in hell after you die. By the way that subject is not elective. You have to pass it. What kind of choice is this? Update (context): I am not talking about the people in west who want to (not)wear hijab.…

Obviously that's the reason why people in (say) France are arguing to be allowed to wear it and people in Iran are arguing to be allowed to not wear it.

It's the same argument: don't make me do something I don't want to do.

Re: Iran installs cameras in public places to identify, penalise unveiled women

#65

Post by kube-system »

victorcreator wrote: post #32

Meanwhile, feminists in the western world fight to wear a hijab, burkha, abaya, etc. and don’t see them as signs of oppression. I wish i understood the logic. Wish we could all stand up against this together.

Because it’s not about the clothing, it’s about people having the freedom to choose.

Re: Iran installs cameras in public places to identify, penalise unveiled women

#66

Post by anthk »

aerodog wrote: post #3
anthk wrote: post #2

[flagged]

I don't think HN is the place for your naked racism

Which race? Arabic culture was spread over with the sword upon Islamic expansion. The same with Christianism in Western Europe. If you think about it, both cultures are totally alien to Europe and Iran. The Christianism itself had to steal lots of Greek philosophy so it could fit in the Roman Empire and the further Middle Ages.

With the Enlightenment we got the Graeco-Roman aesthetic and philosphical values back.

Is not a matter of race. Since the Roman empire, all of the Western Europe it's pretty mixed with Atlantic and Mediterranean features all over the place. It's a matter of culture.

Turkey with Ataturk got it pretty fast. Either evolve, or die as an irrelevant country with backward values.

Re: Iran installs cameras in public places to identify, penalise unveiled women

#67

Post by paulryanrogers »

sdfghswe wrote: post #36
paulryanrogers wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reminds me of the "guns don't kill people" argument. Surveillance cameras have everything to do with consolidating power into fewer and fewer hands. Therefore fewer voices of dissent on the levers of power. Iran is going through a demographic shift. The protests and strikes are evidence of a desire for change. With tools like this even small acts of defiance become higher risk.

> This reminds me of the "guns don't kill people" argument. > Surveillance cameras have everything to do with consolidating power into fewer and fewer hands. Therefore fewer voices of dissent on the levers of power. > Iran is going through a demographic shift. The protests and strikes are evidence of a desire for change. With tools like this even small acts of defiance become higher risk. People with guns kill more p…

I think that tech surveillance, and news about ratcheting oppressive governments do, is interesting -- especially where they overlap

If nothing else it spurs discussion about the ethics of our field. Perhaps it will give some pause before pushing the state of the art forward, or working for shady operators.

Re: Iran installs cameras in public places to identify, penalise unveiled women

#68

Post by d-z-m »

mrshadowgoose wrote: post #24
d-z-m wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand you're being sarcastic, but it isn't hard to realize that the compulsory veiling of women is objectively wrong. The issue is to the coercion of women and girls. Arguments about which culture is good and decent need not factor into it.

> I understand you're being sarcastic, but it isn't hard to realize that the compulsory veiling of women is objectively wrong. Just to be crystal clear here, I find this behavior as abhorrent as you do. But to claim that any human behavior is "objectively wrong" is asinine. What's "wrong" and "right" just exists in our heads.

I used the word "objectively" to close the door to moral relativism. However, I can defend the use of the word more thoroughly.

I base my morality on the well-being of conscious creatures.

What constitutes well-being is open to debate, but whatever it is, it will be facts about the state of the brain/physiology of conscious creatures in the physical universe. If you admit the physical universe is objective basis for measurement, actions that decrease a creatures well-being can be thought of as objectively wrong.

Re: Iran installs cameras in public places to identify, penalise unveiled women

#69

Post by colechristensen »

victorcreator wrote: post #32

Meanwhile, feminists in the western world fight to wear a hijab, burkha, abaya, etc. and don’t see them as signs of oppression. I wish i understood the logic. Wish we could all stand up against this together.

A lot of “liberal” people are starting to get progressively more strange ideas and it’s troubling. Jumping from not wanting to prosecute minor drug crimes (reasonable) to not wanting to prosecute murder (troubling).

Trying to support other cultures (admirable) by encouraging oppressive practices (troubling). Not seeming to understand that very much of the women’s clothing is worn out of fear ranging from family shaming to extreme violence.

The far and even moderate left is becoming increasingly bigoted classifying people into bins and setting behavior standards. You’re not just a person you’re a complex set of race, gender, and creed and you have to stay in that lane or you’re immoral. It’s all very odd.

Re: Iran installs cameras in public places to identify, penalise unveiled women

#70

Post by rhamzeh »

achow wrote: post #46
sdfghswe wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've personally known 2 women from Iran who are not fans of the US foreign policy, but become red with anger and visibly shaking when talking about their govt's treatment of women. Why "but"? Those are usually the same groups of people.

Don't get it; 'but' seems to be very legitimate use. Intuitively, it is more likely that people who are not fan of US policies would be fan of Iranian govt's policies (you know because Iranian govt and US govt don't see eye to eye and all that..).

"Intuitively, it is more likely that people who are not fan of US policies would be fan of Iranian govt's policies"

In what world but an American worldview is that even remotely intuitive? That statement is plain wrong.

Post reply on HN