I guess she’s a Spanish chess player now. And that’s how brain drain works.
this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2023
176 points (97.3% liked)
World News
38188 readers
1978 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
A very gifted programmer I met from Iran had to do the same. Originally from Iran, he wanted to marry a girl from Myanmar. This was forbidden for some reason so they said "fuck it, let's go to where there is loads of tech jobs". I was working in the Netherlands at the time when I met them. He's now flourishing in the open source software space over there. Brain drain 100%.
Someone from Iran marrying someone from Myanmar in the Netherlands sounds like a movie musical... "Two oppressed people from different parts of the world find love in beautiful Amsterdam!"
Actually there is no problem to marry someone from a different country. The problem is you cannot marry with a non-muslim person, so he/she should accept Islam first. 😟😄 weird like many other rules! I don't know if other religions have such restrictions or not, I would be happy to hear if someone knows.
The problem is you cannot marry with a non-muslim person, so he/she should accept Islam first.
I'm a muslim and as far as I know, there's no law that forbid you to marry non-muslim. There's many muslim clerics or saints who are marry a non-muslim in history of Islam.
But to do that, first you need to have a really strong faith so your partner in future will slowly understand and accept Islam by her/his own will. The common understanding that seems to not marry a non-muslim by many muslims because is not an easy path to have a relationship with different faith. Especially family and tradition on both side.
The most common cases about this are men muslim married a woman non-muslim. On the opposite, is very rare cases that happen in history of Islam. Some (fiqh) law by clerics forbids woman muslim to married a men non-muslim, and some allowed that with requirement the woman need to have a strong faith first.
I have many friends who's their parents married with different religion (islam and christian, islam and shinto, islam and confucius). I admit is not an easy path than married with same religion as far I can see in my own cases, but I respect their choice..
I was talking about how it works in Iran
Iran has more freedom than you think. Yes, the law about how to dress is very restricted there. But as far as I know for marriage law, Iran (Shia islam) surprisingly very flexible on that compared to other Islam sects. There's no problem on marriage in Iran to married a non-muslim partner, even without any requirement (of course an agreement from both side men and woman is needed, even parents agreement are not needed for some Shia sects and its legal). But for sure exclusively, any muslim woman in Iran who's not obey on how to dress properly according to Shia Islam (even she's married with non-muslim), the punishment will severe.
Do you live in Iran?!! If not then I should say I was living there and I know the law well. So I invite you to read more about the marriage law in Iran. Sorry, but freedom doesn't make any sense in Iran.
Brain drain is one of those things that isn’t felt immediately, but over the course of months and years. Slow death :/
Imagine not being able to return 'home' because you took your hat off. 🤔
I hope her friends and family wont catch any retribution for her 'escaping' shitty islamic justice
Imagine not being able to return ‘home’ because you took your hat off. 🤔
I never quite realized just how pedestrian taking the hijab off is, yeah. Never really thought about it. It is quite literally just taking your hat or well, head-scarf, off. It's like when my great-grandma came in from the rain and took that plastic headband off she always wore to keep her hair dry.
Ridiculous how backwards we as a species can be, and sadly often are. 😔
Is it too reductive to conclude this is just men wanting to be able to dictate what women should and shouldn't do? Anyone claiming otherwise, even women who "would gladly wear it" feels like Stockholm syndrome to me.
Maybe I'm wrong to think this, but alas, I do.
I don't think it's too reductive, considering religion as a whole is always about exercising control.
Yeah the whole thing sucks just remember their are religious fanatics within all religions.
Fanatics and extremists exist regardless of religions. The latter just allows them to control people easier, and islam happens to be particularly good at that.
Of course, most 'religious' people have enough common sense to not follow them to the T. When the government is religious though, like islam encourages, you have a big problem
Fanatics and extremists exist regardless of religions. The latter just allows them to control people easier, and islam happens to be particularly good at that.
This is more accurate.
It's not that "fanatics exist in all religions", it's "fanatics exist", and religions just give them a cover that is depending on society difficult to challenge as in many places, a religion's influence on society and rules is quite normalized, completely ignoring how ridiculous this influence is.
it's "fanatics exist", and religions just give them a cover
It isn't much of a leap to understanding that religions have always served the purpose of controlling people.
When a leader has a tool that allows the people to think his pronouncements have the endorsement of a God, that leader is going to use that tool.
Islam isn't better at it than other religions it just happens to be the major religions in the countries where those fanatics managed to seize the power. You can find similar examples with Christianism (Europe, USA), Judaism (Israel), Hinduism (India), Buddhism (Myanmar) and probably many more.
Islam isn't better at it than other religions it just happens to be the major religions in the countries where those fanatics managed to seize the power
That's no coincidence imo.
I see all religions as negative, but Islam is the only one I can personally attest to, being an ex muslim. It's cult-y and tends to bring out the worst in people, more so than most religions from what I've seen.
Your personal experience is not a good argument.
Here's a recent exemple of Hindu fanatics attacking Muslims: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Delhi_riots and another from Christian fanatics attacking the institutions of the USA https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_6_United_States_Capitol_attack
Let's not compare atrocities committed by religions; islam's would be never-ending if we did, as your comment also suggested.
I will add though that buddism's continued oppression of muslims in Myanmar is sickening, in addition to your examples
Let’s not compare atrocities committed by religions
Isn't it what you do when singling out Islam ?
If the poster hadn't specifically stated that they were commenting because that was their former religion, yes. But given the context, no.
Yup. I think the conclusion is obvious, as my comment indicates, so there's not much need to compare them here.
Islam doesn't encourage any more for theocracy than other Abrahamic religions. The existence of religious fundamentalist Islamic theocracies is a lot more complex than Islam. A lot of it can be traced to colonialism, the decolonization process and Western interference in Islamic countries. This is largely why Iran is one of those. The last Shah was seen corrupt autocratic puppet of the West by many. As a counter to it, the country over-corrected and landed in fundamentalist Islamic theocracy. Radicalization of Islam leading to similar governments happened in other Islam-majority countries. Before the 60s and 70s, many Islamic countries didn't differ a lot from Western countries when it came to social liberties. There are a lot of images of Tehran and Kabul with women in mini skirts for example.
While I am not saying that modern Islamic countries are not problem or thousand when it comes to civil liberties and democracy, Islam in my knowledge was more tool and less reason behind it.
The problem is when a government is captured by religion.
There is nothing quite so bad as religious types getting power based purelly on being religious types.
I suspect that, because it's the most fanatical power-hungry types (Moralism is really just a way of justifying the forcing of others to your will) who both have the most motivation to seek positions were they can have free rain to really go on powertrips on other people, and display more overtly the very religiosity that is the whole reason for a government whose power is based on religion.
Certainly those who feel no need to impose their will on others and who can even *gasp* see some actions as overzealous, don't have anywhere the same drive, zealotry and backstabbing instincts to climb up the ladder in such power structures.
Hooray for Spain for the second time today. The other "hooray" was for standing against far-right movements.
4D move by Spain; even better than Bb5, aka the "Spanish opening" or Ruy Lopez.
she cute
When this story appeared last year, my first thought was:"Well, I hope she plans on never going back to Iran"
Glad to see she is safe.
You and me both so many young Iranians have not been so lucky. My heart breaks for them all.
Well, good. Hope things are smooth sailing from here!
And another person who couldv'e helped Iran move past its issues leaves.
Sadly the impression I get, from when I've spoken with Iranians, is that the establishment don't see those things as issues to move past at all.
First of all, if she went home she would've just been arrested, how does that help anyone? And second, why's it on her to move Iran past it's issues? Good on her for her brave protest and good on her for not going back and choosing to do more with her life than end up a martyr in an Iranian prison.
Its not just her. Its everyone with a brain.
If the Irani government already intends to arrest her, her only avenue to "help Iran" was taking up arms. I think everyone here has enough brain cells to understand why you can't shame any random person for just not making that choice.
I would say it's the other way around.
The way to "help" Iran is for more people to leave. Significantly more, basically anybody with two brain cells to rub together. Leave only the most assinine idiots behind and then they can run their own country into the ground hardcore but they no longer affect anyone with it as everyone else has left.
Basically, Iran has to cease to exist in its current form. By burning itself out. This is incidentally the same way we could move past idiotic religious believes in the first place.
I would say that what you say makes sense but it doesn't really work super well in practice. I'll give the best example. North Korea. We have choked them on food, energy, medicine etc. For going on 70 years now. They are still a cancerous blight on the world. With nukes. Sure I guess the argument could be made that they stay inside north Korea and keep to themselves though.
When does that ever work? Can you name some examples?
The aptly named Arab Spring got pretty far, as those things go. Not perfect by any stretch, of course.
I'm struggling to think of alternatives that didn't involve foreign intention. Peaceful revolution is hard.
Yeah, while I am happy for her and wish nothing but the best for her, is this really going to change anything back home? How many other women have the means and training to do what she did? I guess the one thing this does is highlight to the rest of the world how terrible things are in Iran, but I'm under no illusion that this is going to improve the lot of oppressed women in Iran. They might be even more restricted from attending overseas competitions.
I don't know why she would be responsible for changing anything in Iran?
She made a statement to highlight the atrocities in a terrible country and it put her in the crosshairs. This is the same thing as putting on your oxygen mask before you help others while on a plane.
view more: next ›