Iranian star Parastoo Ahmadi reportedly sentenced to 74 lashes for singing without hijab - "Iran Iranian star Parastoo Ahmadi reportedly sentenced to 74 lashes for singing without hijab Musicians and production team understood to be facing same punishment after livestream of patriotic song Deepa Parent Thu 18 Jun 2026 21.35 BST The Iranian singer Parastoo Ahmadi and eight members of a production team, including musicians, have been reportedly sentenced to 74 lashes for performing in a concert livestreamed on Ahmadi’s YouTube channel in 2024. According to court documents, the criminal court of Qom province sentenced the artists to flogging, a two-year ban on leaving the country and a two-year ban on engaging in artistic activities on charges that include offending public decency through the production and publication of “vulgar and immoral content” online... In December 2024, the 29-year-old singer performed the patriotic song Az Khoone Javanane Vatan (From the Blood of the Youth of the Homeland) without a hijab in a livestreamed performance that went viral... For Iranian artists, the ruling, though not unexpected, has deepened fears of escalating cultural repression. The Iranian-British actor Nazanin Boniadi said: “The sentencing of singer Parastoo Ahmadi to flogging for the simple act of singing publicly without a hijab is a stark reminder that, despite talk in Washington of a ‘new regime’ in Iran, the Islamic republic’s machinery of repression remains unchanged. “Accommodating a regime that flogs women for their voices and kills citizens for demanding their rights only emboldens it to continue down its tyrannical path.” The Iranian actor Setareh Maleki, who was forced into exile after starring in Mohammad Rasoulof’s Oscar-nominated film The Seed of the Sacred Fig, said the performance had a powerful emotive impact on her. She told the Guardian: “When I watched the video of Parastoo Ahmadi’s concert, it reignited the spirit of resistance in me. For days, I kept watching the videos over and over again, and I felt immensely proud of Parastoo. “Knowing all the consequences she would have to face, she still refused to give up her right, as a woman, to live, to sing and to be heard. Iranian women never stop fighting against tyranny, not even for a moment, and that is truly remarkable.” She added: “For an Iranian artist who refuses to comply with censorship inside Iran, the daily routine is a form of resistance."
Damn 1953 CIA "coup" forcing Iran to impose the hijab on women!
Meme - "OTTAWA-CARLETON DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD 2025-2026 Excellence in Equity Student Award Nominees
Achta M. Bell High School *girl [?] in niqab with tiny eye window*"
Does equity mean that non-Muslim women need to wear niqabs too?
Meme - "FEMINIST *Ayaan Hirsi Ali*
-Supports equality
- Anti misogynistic regimes
- Anti Islam
- Anti domestic abuse
- Anti human trafficking
- Anti female genital mutilation
- Anti aranged marriages and honor killings
- advocates for womens education and freedom of speech
WESTERN "FEMINIST" *Sarah Wakefield*
- Worships "Diversity"
- Supports grooming gangs
- Throws rape victims in jail for "hate speech"
- imports millions of rapists from the most mysoginistic cultures on earth
- Gives cross-dressing sex pests access to underage girls' bathrooms
- Refuses to deport human traffickers
- legalised incest specifically to cater to muslims"
Feminist sub debates the aptness of calling men trash, overwhelmingly agrees that REVENGE for the past 4000 years is a "fair and sensible" justification : r/MensRights - "The OP poses a valid question; if it's ok to generalize about men, what about women?
If a man says that “women are manipulative”, we rightly regard the statement as a sexist generalization;
https://imgur.com/a/VmAxr0J
By far the most upvoted response is that REVENGE for the past 4000 years is a "fair and sensible" justification for generalizing about men but not about women:
https://imgur.com/a/TkNkn3t
I mean, it is refreshing to see feminists openly reveal what they really think."
Clearly, feminism helps men too
NotMelissaVitelli on X - "Democrats screamed about Trump putting us all in the handmaids tale Meanwhile their entire party is turning into burka wearing women š¤£ It’s too easy"
A Moral Double Standard on Marital Infidelity - "Surveys have consistently found that most Americans find marital infidelity morally objectionable. Yet, American attitudes are more complex than they first appear. Public attitudes about the morality of infidelity are conditioned on whether it is committed by a man or a woman. Roughly two-thirds (66 percent) of Americans say that when a man has an affair it is always morally wrong. Fewer Americans (55 percent) say it is always morally wrong when a woman has an extramarital affair. Both women and men exhibit a double standard in evaluating the morality of extramarital affairs, although this is somewhat larger among women. Seventy percent of women say that a married man who has an affair is always morally wrong, while fewer (56 percent) say the same when married women have relationships outside their marriage. Gender plays a more modest role among men in how they judge the morality of marital infidelity. Fifty-three percent of men say it is always morally wrong for a woman to have an affair, while 61 percent say same for men. The extent to which women judge the behavior of married women and men varies significantly by race. There is a massive gap in the views of Hispanic men and women. Nearly three-quarters (73 percent) of Hispanic women believe that a man having an affair is always wrong, while slightly more than half (53 percent) of Hispanic men agree. Conversely, black women assess the morality of marital infidelity about equally whether it is committed by a man or woman (65% vs. 63 %) Differences also emerge by educational attainment. No group of women is more forgiving of marital infidelity than those with post-graduate degrees. Less than half (45 percent) of women who have an advanced degree say it is always wrong when women commit adultery. In contrast, 61 percent of women with no more than a high school education say this is morally wrong regardless of the circumstances. There is a notable age gap as well. Nearly three-quarters (73 percent) of young women say it is always morally wrong for a man to have an affair, while only about half (51 percent) say the same for a woman. The double standard among older women is not nearly as large. Sixty-nine percent of senior women say it is always wrong for a married man to have an affair while six in ten say it is always wrong when a woman does."
Yet another sexual double standard that feminists don't care about. Given the age and education effects, it looks like feminism is promoting the double standard. The author is wrong about the literature on the alleged body count double standard
Proposed tougher penalties for theft would punish mostly women – and harm their daughters - "New Ministry of Justice projections predict a dramatic gender shift in New Zealand’s prison population over the next decade, partly due to a proposed law that would increase penalties for theft. While the total number of people in prison is expected to grow by around 35%, the number of women behind bars is forecast to jump by 63%, almost double the overall rate. The government’s Crimes Amendment Bill seeks to introduce a new category of low-value theft committed in an “offensive, threatening, insulting or disorderly manner”... If this bill becomes law, it will affect women disproportionately because theft is more commonly a charge that leads to women being put in remand prison. Share article Print article New Ministry of Justice projections predict a dramatic gender shift in New Zealand’s prison population over the next decade, partly due to a proposed law that would increase penalties for theft. While the total number of people in prison is expected to grow by around 35%, the number of women behind bars is forecast to jump by 63%, almost double the overall rate. The government’s Crimes Amendment Bill seeks to introduce a new category of low-value theft committed in an “offensive, threatening, insulting or disorderly manner”. The bill’s explanatory note makes the intention clear: it is designed to allow harsher penalties for “retail crime […] when the threshold for robbery is not met”. Under current law, robbery requires stealing from a person using force, threats or intimidation. The new category blurs an important legal distinction because it covers conduct that is non-violent but would attract penalties closer to those used for violent crime. If this bill becomes law, it will affect women disproportionately because theft is more commonly a charge that leads to women being put in remand prison. Men are typically remanded for other offences than theft, so they are less likely to be affected by the proposed law... The policy intended to make the public safer may, in fact, make life far less safe for the children of the women who will be imprisoned for petty theft... New Zealand research estimates the mass incarceration of MÄori men in the 1980s and 1990s – largely driven by MÄori urbanisation, biased government policies and practices, and the youthfulness of the MÄori population – likely exposed MÄori girls to a 5.5 times greater risk of childhood sexual abuse compared with PÄkehÄ girls."
If you think female criminals should go to prison, you're a misogynist and hate children. Just like if you think Maori criminals should go to prison, you're a racist and coloniser
James L. Nuzzo, PhD on X - "Gender studies academics are holding panel discussions on how to deal with the growing public criticism of their work. Of course, the problem is not them; it is you. You do not fully understand their greatness. "Programmes like [Gender Equality and Social Justice] are vulnerable in this moment because what we do is both crucial and hard to count. At our best, we do not simply deliver content. We build capacities that universities and democratic societies say they want but rarely know how to recognize, much less defend, when money gets tight. We teach students how to read power, how to think across difference, how to stay with difficulty, how to reflect on themselves as knowers, and how to move between intellectual and social worlds that do not easily meet.""
Jonathan Kay on X - "one of the “threats” to gender studies listed by the authors is “enrolment targets”"
Michael De Robertis on X - "When I first joined the faculty at a leading Canadian university, Women's Studies could do no wrong. Their programs were flooded with $ and bodies. Within a generation, their enrolments dwindled and they were incorporated with Gender Studies. And so it goes!"
Meme - Feminist News: "Bravo to this mom for supporting her child and leaving behind people who won't."
Kim Ji-yoo: "My daughter is 17, she's a senior in high school. Her boyfriend's 18, also senior in high school. They've been dating for three years. They have just started being sexually active. I told myself I'd handle these situations better than my parents did. What should I do? I guess I'll talk with her father when he's home."
Kim Ji-yoo: "Took my daughter out to play tennis today. Yesterday I discussed getting her on birth control with her father. He was angry and started yelling at her. Called her a slut, said she was grounded and can never leave the house. Well Do- Yun ... If you are reading this .. she is out of the house, with me ... Having a nice little girls day. Also if I didn't tell you, we are getting a divorce."
"Those commending this have some serious issues. I cannot imagine being an adolescent and my mother exposing my deeply personal stages of life to the internet for likes. No words can express how f**king weird this is."
Feminists hate men and love divorce
Adam Grant on X - "It's sad that women's success is a threat to marriages. 544k couples, 29 countries: Separation is 36% more likely when women outearn their partners. The risk goes up further if they have children. A woman's prosperity should be a source of pride, not relationship conflict."
Lisa Britton on X - "This post implies it’s men who are not able to handle their woman being “successful.” But tons of research shows that women still desire partners who earn more than they do. What if it’s not simply “ugh, men!” that’s the problem, but it’s the women who are resentful?"
The Conscious Lee (@theconsciouslee) - "iMa bE a fEmiNiSt bUt cApItAliSm jUsT nEeDs sOmE rEfOrM. Nah. You can't divorce the two, because the two was never separate to begin with. Patriarchy and capitalism ain't roommates who happened to move in together, they are load bearing walls in the same house, and you can't knock one down while promising to keep the other one standing. Start with the history, because the history is where the receipts live. Silvia Federici showed us that capitalism didn't just inherit patriarchy, capitalism built itself on patriarchy. Before the factory could exist, Europe had to enclose the commons, criminalize women's independence, burn hundreds of thousands of women as witches, and convert women's bodies into machines for producing the next generation of workers. Apply Federici here: the witch hunts wasn't some medieval superstition, the witch hunts was labor discipline. Capital needed a class of people whose work would never be paid, whose cooking and cleaning and birthing and raising would be renamed "love" and "duty" so the boss could pay one wage and extract two lifetimes of labor. That's not capitalism tolerating patriarchy. That's capitalism requiring it."
The left wing agenda is all connected. The same people who claim capitalism is inherently linked to patriarchy mock those who point out that feminism and other post Marxist ideologies are linked to Marxism
Million-year-old footprints show gender divide among our ancient relatives - "Fossilised footprints of our ancient human relatives show that even in the Pleistocene, males and females had separate roles. Around 1.4 million years ago, a group of eight hominins left their prints in the moist ground surrounding Lake Turkana – located in what is now Kenya – where they were preserved. The group members, all male, were stocky ancient relatives of humans called Paranthropus boisei and new research shows they would have stood as tall as Homo erectus, which lived nearby. The reason for the all-male trip is unknown, but there is a noticeable absence of women and children, suggesting there was sex segregation for certain excursions or tasks in the earliest hominin communities. In modern ape groups, males form strong, cooperative networks, jointly defending territory, patrolling boundaries and hunting together."
How ignorant. Don't they know about the myth of Man the Hunter?!
Emma Watson, 35, says the pressure to get married is 'a violence' against young people
LindyMan on X - "Reminder. All traditional patterns have collapsed. You are free to do anything and organize your life as you want. There is no pressure from any group or society or institution. The modernity project is complete. You are liberated. Many people cannot handle this truth so they make up fake statements about things "pressuring" them. It doesn't exist."
To left wingers, speech they disapprove of is violence, and violence they approve of is speech
Young women are completely wrong about relationships - "Did you know that one of the fastest-growing cohorts in the US is single, child-free, young women? So much so, in fact, that by the end of this decade, 45 per cent of women aged 25 to 44 will neither have married nor had a baby, according to a report by Morgan Stanley. Keen to better understand this – and concerned because trends that originate across the pond typically turn up on UK shores before long – I found myself drawn into reading the bank’s reflections on the “Rise of the SHEconomy”. It suggested that young women today are staying single because they are “more focused on advancing their careers”, they “desire more financial independence”, their “relationship standards are higher” and “their priority is personal fulfilment”. Ouch... Having a partner is not “embarrassing”, as a piece in Vogue suggested last year, but a source of deep fulfilment. It needn’t be the case that a love life comes at the cost of professional success, or vice versa. I say this as a woman who has had a very successful career, including garnering that all-important financial independence, while also being a wife and mother. I know I am fortunate to be part of the first generation able to “have it all”. I just hope the young women of today don’t decide to also make us the last. The simple truth is that it’s all very well focusing on the career or the money, but no job ever loves you back. The graveyards are full of “essential” chief executives, editors, politicians and leaders. All careers end. And we are, whether we believe it or not, all infinitely replaceable to our employers. However good you are, they can always find someone else to do your job. The only people to whom we are truly irreplaceable are our families and friends. Yes, it is fulfilling to earn your own money. Yes, it is gratifying to be respected and esteemed in an industry. But it is even sweeter to do both of those things and have deliciously gorgeous children, plus a partner who loves you. I worry that by prioritising “personal fulfilment”, money and career success over their relationships, young women today are going to miss out on the one thing that is crucial to true human flourishing – being seen, loved and valued for who we are. Nothing is more important than having an intimate witness to grow old with who cares what we had for lunch. And that’s without mentioning the demographic disaster these trends are unleashing, with birth rates in the West plummeting rapidly. Of course, it is tiring to try to do – and have – it all at once, which is why it is so important for those who want a family to choose their partners wisely. The most successful women I know tend to have a partner whose job is not their defining feature, and who is around to do school drop-offs and go to Sainsbury’s. One who realises that a family needs different kinds of inputs and isn’t too macho to be the lead parent or the domestic chief executive."
James Lindsay, anti-Communist on X - "Canada seems to be trying to set some kind of record for being a completely self-unaware Woke retard country, and this official parliamentary report on combating antifeminism is a great unintentionally hilarious but terrifying new example."
James Lindsay, anti-Communist on X - "Everything in this ultra-retarded report is guaranteed to make worse the exact problem it seeks to address, to the degree it hits legitimate points, because their answer to backlash to feminism and male and normal person alienation is more alienating, unfair feminist nonsense."
Uri Kurlianchik on X - "Liberal women see men from soft and peaceful societies as rapists and oppressors but treat men from hardened barbarian tribes as if they were stray puppies. Make this make sense."
Pamela Anderson declares herself an ‘anti-feminist’ - "the 49-year-old discussed her concerns over gender roles as people become more 'androgynous'. 'Men get weaker in an authoritarian environment; they don't need to be as manly. And women are working... who's watching the kids? I may get some heat for this, but I consider myself an "anti-feminist",' she said... 'I obviously believe in treating people equally, but men and women are different for a reason, with very important roles to play,' she explained. Pamela also claimed she worries the 'world will forget how to make love'."
We should be putting more women in prison, not letting them all out - "Send fewer women to prison. That’s the consensus across the political spectrum. It is part of Andy Burnham’s plan to free up prison places for men. The Conservatives have said they are sympathetic and even Colin Sutton, Reform’s newly elected Police and Crime Commissioner for Norfolk, advocates it. Needless to say, prison reform charities are all in favour. Apparently enough women could safely be released to repurpose HMP Bronzefield, England’s largest women’s prison housing over 500, for male offenders. As with anything that has become an unquestioned truth, the idea that we are locking up too many women needs to be interrogated. A strong case can be made for the opposite position: that too few women are serving custodial sentences. There are over 87,000 prisoners in England and Wales, but only around 4 per cent or 3,500 of these are women. This is a dramatic change from times past. According to House of Commons figures, in 1900 17 per cent of prisoners were women... At 4 per cent of the prison population, we imprison a lower proportion of women than many other countries. In the United States about 10 per cent of the prison population is female. In Hong Kong, with the highest proportion, it is over 20 per cent; in Iceland it is 12 per cent and in famously liberal Sweden it is double that of the English and Welsh rate at almost 8 per cent. The only major Western countries that imprison a lower percentage of women are France and Israel. Having low female incarceration rates is hardly an indicator of female empowerment: Saudi Arabia’s are amongst the world’s lowest. Should there be more men in prison than women? Of course, men are responsible for vastly more violent crime. That said, it must be noted that over 1,000 of the 3,500 English and Welsh female prisoners are inside for violent offences, including murder. Three hundred and fifty or so are serving life sentences, which will be predominantly for murder or, in some instances, manslaughter... There will always be a gender disparity in prison populations. But it appears to have got out of hand here in Britain... Prison reformers always argue that non-custodial punishments can be more onerous than prison time and are getting tougher. If this were the case, one might imagine some defendants would prefer a prison term to a non-custodial alternative. Speak to any defence solicitor: they will never have met a defendant who would rather be banged up than face a community order. There is good reason to believe that many fewer women are charged with offences than could be. Speak to defence lawyers and some will admit that there is often enough evidence to charge wives and girlfriends of drug dealers and other serious criminals with offences themselves, but they very rarely are so charged. As the Nicola Sturgeon affair indicates, it may be entirely possible for a fraudster’s wag to be unaware of her man’s crimes. But to be living with a drug dealer, you would need to be exceptionally obtuse not to know what your partner is up to. With some narrow exceptions (largely relating to terrorism, child sex offences, or performing a job in, for example, banking with specific reporting responsibilities) not reporting a crime is not a crime. But for many criminals’ wags, defence lawyers will tell you there is often clear evidence that their involvement goes much further. Criminals respond to incentives and deterrents like the rest of us. If virtually no non-violent female offenders will face prison (and only this would make a meaningful difference to prison overcrowding), then the number of non-violent female offenders will surely go up. And criminal gangs will be incentivised to use them. To argue that fewer women should be sent to prison is not feminist and denies them agency. True equality means banging up more women."
Of course, if you want women to be sentenced the same way as men, you're a misogynist
William Meijer on X - "Western women have won nearly every political battle over the last century, and yet they seemingly feel worse than ever compared to men. Social scientists have no good explanation why. My theory is that people high in empathization and low in systemization tend to unknowingly pursue multiple desires incompatible with one another, as well as unique desires incompatible with their own persistence. Optimizing for women's incompatible desires thus creates frustration and unfulfillment in women. An example of desires incompatible with one another is women's marital and political preferences. Women tend to be attracted to men of equal or higher socioeconomic status, while they tend to vote for income equality. The result is too few eligible men, dissatisfaction with the male dating pool, and lower-than-ever coupling rates. An example of a desire incompatible with its own persistence is the desire for social liberalism. Western women want to feel kind and consistently vote for liberal parties that orchestrate mass immigration from illiberal cultures. They then denounce the rise of masculinist figures such as Andrew Tate, a man much more popular among non-Whites, a man whose audience they voted to bring into their country. This is the best theory I could think of. What's yours?"
Moral Dynamics on X - "Theory: This form of a Kafka trap is biology’s way of periodically pumping up male dominance orientations. Either an invader comes to “right” things, or the local guys step up into fascism (or equivalent) to get the momentum to do so. Either way you get a large group oriented toward aggression. What’s counter-fit at one level, like unhappiness, is very-fit at another level, like large-group society. My 0.02"
