Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)
Saturday, May 5, 2007 | Reason : In the News | print version Print | Comments

Document The kiss that brought immorality debate to a head

by Jerome Taylor

Reposted from:
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2514303.ece

ahmadinejadScores of Iranian women have been arrested over the past few weeks for improper dress, known as "bad hijab", and even the country's President has found himself on the wrong end of the conservatives' wrath.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad came under fire from his own support base of hardline traditionalists after he was photographed publicly kissing the hand of his first grade teacher.

Some hardliners were infuriated by the gesture even though the woman was wearing a headscarf, a thick black coat and gloves to cover her hands.

One newspaper accused the President of "indecency", arguing that the act of kissing his teacher's hand was contrary to sharia law which theoretically forbids a man to have any physical contact with a woman to whom he is not related.

"This type of indecency progressively has grave consequences, like violating religious and sacred values," seethed the hardline daily Hizbollah on its front page.

"The Muslim Iranian people have no recollection of such acts contrary to sharia law during Islamic rule."

Mr Ahmadinejad's faux pas occurred during a ceremony on Tuesday to mark National Teachers Day. According to reports from Iran's official news agencies, the President was "surprised" to discover that one of the delegates at the ceremony was none other than Najmeh Gholi Pour, Mr Ahmadinejad's first-grade teacher.

Mrs Gholi Pour, who was wearing a long coat and a headscarf, then climbed on to the stage with the help of a walking stick to receive a gift from the President, who stooped to kiss her gloved hands before embracing her with both arms.

It is unlikely that Mr Ahmadinejad calculated that kissing his teacher's hand would cause such an uproar in the conservative press particularly as Mrs Gholi Pour was also wearing gloves.

Criticism of the President from newspapers such as Hizbollah (which has no link to the Lebanese Hizbollah) is surprising because most of Mr Ahmadinejad's political support comes from the more conservative and orthodox sections of society.

Meanwhile in many of Iran's major cities, police and members of the basij revolutionary militia have begun targeting women's dress with renewed vigour.

The annual crackdown on improper dress, which usually coincides with the beginning of summer, has been greeted with alarm by some who say far more people have been targeted this year than usual. Some reports have even suggested that men wearing ties or too much hair gel have been stopped by police.

Commentators critical of Mr Ahmadinejad suggest that the crackdown is part of an initiative by the President to win back support from the conservative sections of society where his popularity has been rapidly falling because of his failure to bring about much-needed economic reforms.

"Ahmadinejad is losing his popularity and he's trying to keep a number of different groups happy," says one dissident commentator. "By introducing a particularly intense crackdown this year on hijab he's hoping to win back support from the hardline conservatives. The kiss was an attempt to win over teachers who are becoming increasingly critical of him. He's getting a bit desperate."

Iran's blogging community, one of the few places where Iranians can publicly criticise the government, has been particularly vocal in condemning the latest crackdown.

"I wear hijab because of force and that force has been even more visible the past week," wrote one blogger. "Force will never allow me to make a religious choice of my own free will. It's a ridiculous notion."

Comments 1 - 25 of 25 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #37591 by Robert Maynard on May 5, 2007 at 9:17 am

 avatar"One layer of clothing is not enough! If you're going to kiss the hand of a woman that does not belong to you, nothing less than seven gloves will do! Failing that, a giant foam hand from infidel-ball, a hollowed out loaf of bread, or a miniature safe should suffice.
But just one glove is not enough by sharia law! Our top sheiks assure us that cooties can and will carry through most materials if not properly insulated."

What a bunch of children.
If that smirking madman Mahmoud isn't conservative enough for Iran, what monstrosity might the people replace him with?

Other Comments by Robert Maynard

2. Comment #37592 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on May 5, 2007 at 9:43 am

 avatarSurely they must be so sick (the people that is) of this crap, that they are going to simply push the regime aside by sheer weight of numbers?

From everything you read, Iranian and otherwise, they are sick to death of religious bullshit.

Other Comments by briancoughlanworldcitizen

3. Comment #37594 by Nebularry on May 5, 2007 at 9:59 am

And THIS is what our soldiers are dying for??? Unless and until the majority of people themselves voluntarily change their attitude we can never win the war.

Other Comments by Nebularry

4. Comment #37598 by Laurence Winch-Furness on May 5, 2007 at 10:13 am

 avatarAhmedinajad is not a fundementalist, he's a machievellian pragmatist who feigns religious extremism in order to gain support. If the Iranians get rid of him, which seems likely as he's fucked up the economy, I'd be woried about any reformsit sucessor being overthrown by the revolutionary guard. imagine the Ahatollah with the bomb. (shudders)

Other Comments by Laurence Winch-Furness

5. Comment #37599 by Robert Maynard on May 5, 2007 at 10:15 am

 avatar
Surely they must be so sick (the people that is) of this crap, that they are going to simply push the regime aside by sheer weight of numbers?
Well, I do think you're overestimating the demographics, but in any case it's a small side effect of becoming reasonable and "sick of religious bullshit" that one usually stops being a raving zealot willing to kill.
I am definitely encouraged by the fantasy of Islam disintegrating from the inside out, but I don't think that the growing populations of religious moderates and skeptics in thoroughly Islamic countries will stand much of a chance against the traditionalists any time soon, least of all in a fight to the death, for example. :P

I would think the most prudent thing to do, if I were an atheist in an essentially theocratic country, would be to get the fuck out of there as quickly as possible, rather than strive for social upheaval. One can call that cowardice, but it's also sensible!

Other Comments by Robert Maynard

6. Comment #37601 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on May 5, 2007 at 10:19 am

 avatarI would think the most prudent thing to do, if I were an atheist in an essentially theocratic country, would be to get the fuck out of there as quickly as possible, rather than strive for social upheaval. One can call that cowardice, but it's also sensible!

Maybe I'm being to hopeful, both almost all the youth seem terribly cynical, and I bet there is any amount of cleric abuse under the surface, there has got to be if christianity is anything to go by.

Might it all suddenly go poof, a bit like the end of the cold war. A theocratic 1989?

Other Comments by briancoughlanworldcitizen

7. Comment #37603 by ridelo on May 5, 2007 at 10:28 am

We should praise Ahmadinejad for showing some human kindness at last. And encourage him to keep up that habit. The former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami looked kinder even if he was a cleric.

Other Comments by ridelo

8. Comment #37605 by Robert Maynard on May 5, 2007 at 10:42 am

 avatarI guess that's definitely plausible. There's definitely grounds to foresee a "poof" (or maybe PSSSSHHHHHHT FPBLTPBLT!) if we try to imagine what will happen to places like Saudi Arabia in a decade or so when the world makes its inevitable shift away from petroleum dependence and the country realises that their second largest export is cultural suppression of human happiness.

But if you're talking about the youth, we're really making projections on a generational timescale, like 10 or 20 years, and cranky old men can do a lot of damage in that time. :|

Other Comments by Robert Maynard

9. Comment #37632 by Richard Dawkins on May 5, 2007 at 11:56 am

How dare you post this photograph when it is so obviously offensive to millions of Muslims? To make matters worse, the woman is a teacher, and for all we know she may during her long career have taught girls to read and write. It is at least a relief to learn that she was wearing gloves and that she made some token attempt to cover her hair, thereby partially reducing the otherwise uncontrollable lust which would necessarily afflict all males who encountered her. But even so, printing the photograph is an act of wanton insensitivity. And don't try to defend your editorial policy on grounds of freedom of the press. Freedom may be a virtue, but it doesn't licence you to go out of your way to give offence.

Other Comments by Richard Dawkins

10. Comment #37645 by Logicel on May 5, 2007 at 12:18 pm

 avatarWell done, RD!

Other Comments by Logicel

11. Comment #37662 by GBile on May 5, 2007 at 12:35 pm

This is a revolting story. Islam has been branded 'a backward culture'. I agree, also because no demonstrations will be held by 'moderate muslims' to protest what is going on in Iran.
But then again, all cultures founded on religion are backward.

Other Comments by GBile

12. Comment #37677 by HappyPrimate on May 5, 2007 at 12:55 pm

 avatarIsn't is so wonderful that kissing can get you into so much trouble. Richard Gere is is trouble for that kiss he gave in India as well. But stoning and beheading is acceptable and virtuous. Nice morals.

Other Comments by HappyPrimate

13. Comment #37691 by kade on May 5, 2007 at 1:21 pm

Maybe the president truly revered his teacher, and was not going to let some trifling tribal law curb his display of affection. This incident goes to show that teachers are venerated the world over, and that priests and educators will always be in conflict. Reminds me of a Victor Hugo quote....

Other Comments by kade

14. Comment #37708 by Manfred on May 5, 2007 at 1:53 pm

Comment #37599 by Robert Maynard : "I would think the most prudent thing to do, if I were an atheist in an essentially theocratic country, would be to get the fuck out of there as quickly as possible, rather than strive for social upheaval. One can call that cowardice, but it's also sensible!"

Yup!
That is exactly what I did. And I don't consider it cowardice. I call it survival!
There is not much one can do, really. Unless of course you want your life to be destroyed.

And Lawrence, the reformist predecessor of this madman, could not do much because the fundamentalist establishment has the hold on real power in Iran. And Ahmadinejad has been a memeber of the Revolutionary Guard, and is a fundamentalist. So in that sense the coup has already happened.

Really, I think people instead of being sick, are just used to these absurdities. You laugh and go on with your life. From time to time some groups, ususally university students, try to raise their voices, but that dies out too.

I for one am not very hopeful.

Other Comments by Manfred

15. Comment #37735 by deejay on May 5, 2007 at 2:53 pm

Flight or fight, evolution prevails . No wuckin furries .

Other Comments by deejay

16. Comment #37799 by foxfire on May 5, 2007 at 6:37 pm

 avatarRichard Dawkins wrote:
It is at least a relief to learn that she was wearing gloves and that she made some token attempt to cover her hair, thereby partially reducing the otherwise uncontrollable lust which would necessarily afflict all males who encountered her.


Professor, that is exactly what ran through my mind when I read the insane reaction to what appeared to me, to be an expression of gratitude and respect (Ahmadinejad does gallant? What a guy-Not!).

Then again......a bunch of twenty-something males that probably have never touched a woman except their mother and possibly sisters (when they were pre-pubescent)and rarely, if ever, get to even see a woman's face.....

From Najmeh Gholi Pour's perspective: she has got to be secretly pleased about the whole thing. Reminds me of the time a McCormick & Schmick's waiter "carded" me in Washington D.C. when I was about 43. He knew that I knew that he was B.S.ing and still...he got a very respectible tip.

Other Comments by foxfire

17. Comment #37829 by nworbynot on May 5, 2007 at 11:07 pm

stone them both to death for this disgraceful act of sexual debauchary

Other Comments by nworbynot

18. Comment #37833 by Big T on May 6, 2007 at 12:12 am

Let's face it. Sam Harris told the truth when he said that we (meaning, I suppose, the secular West) are at war with Islam. I was accused of bigotry on this website for saying that if Muslims in England (where I don't live) don't want to let their daughters go to school with their faces unveiled, they should move to another country. Perhaps that was out of line on my part, but countries in the modern world are simply not going to be able to coexist with this kind of medieval madness. If that means I'm a bigot, so be it.

Other Comments by Big T

19. Comment #37841 by epeeist on May 6, 2007 at 1:06 am

 avatarIt isn't just kissing that is a problem - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6628929.stm

Presumably it would have been okay if all the female players had worn a full tent.

Other Comments by epeeist

20. Comment #37843 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on May 6, 2007 at 1:19 am

 avatar18. Comment #37833 by Big T on May 6, 2007 at 12:12 am

Let's face it. Sam Harris told the truth when he said that we (meaning, I suppose, the secular West) are at war with Islam. I was accused of bigotry on this website for saying that if Muslims in England (where I don't live) don't want to let their daughters go to school with their faces unveiled, they should move to another country.


I get worried about this kind of tone. Imagine a world where women are naked, like the Ferengi in star trek:-) If someone was culturally uncomfortable being naked, would we enforce it on them?

As long as religions do not directly oppress their members, of either sex, we need to be cautious about legislation which is purely motivated to deal with some religious quirk. It also smacks of totalitarianism.

Other Comments by briancoughlanworldcitizen

21. Comment #37846 by Flagellant on May 6, 2007 at 1:56 am

 avatarPerhaps we could look at the French solution to religious stuff: no visible religious signs in the classroom, for a start. (I don't know how this is going, across La Manche.) This includes veils, skullcaps, and crucifixes. On balance, this appears sensible. We have several difficulties, though: an administration that generally thinks faith schools "a good thing" and a race-relations act. Unfortunately, the RRA allowed several religions (e.g. Judaism & Sikhism) to conflate the notions of race and religion. (The RRA needs overhaul in this respect.) This conflation permits some religiosi to hide behind the confusion, and others, principally Moslems, to argue that this is unfair and they want their anti-religious discrimination law, too.

It seems we've got into a mess by having been too acquiescent to the believers in the past; now, any measure will create outrage somewhere.

Other Comments by Flagellant

22. Comment #37890 by Manfred on May 6, 2007 at 6:11 am

I think there are two issues here. Muslims who live in Western countries ought to follow the laws of that country. As for their culture, they can keep it as long as it is not offensive to the host country's culture. Covering your face is not culturally acceptable in West. Thieves cover their faces. People rightly become suspicious of you. At the very least it is impolite to the host culture to cover your face and show up in public.

Wearing the head scarves though is not that big of a deal I guess, as long as it does not interfere with the woman's work and rights.

The other issue is in the Muslim countries (like Iran) where the law is that you have to cover your hair (not face in Iran's case). Here the law is oppressive. Not all women want to wear the head scarf, but they are forced to and will be punished if they don't.

The bigger problem in my opinion is that Muslim men and devout Muslim women think and believe that any woman who does not follow the strict Islamic dress code is morally corrupt and corrupts others.

I have lived in Iran, and I never had any problem with women who want to cover themselves from head to toe. It is thier life, none of my business. The problem is that they wouldn't leave me or women who think like me alone until they force their beliefs on us.

As a historical note, in Iran around 70 years ago, when Iran was still a kingdom, the king under the influence of Ataturk in Turkey, decided to westernize the country and banned the hijab. Police on horsebacks used to patrol the streets and pull off the sarves from women's heads (it happened to my grandmother). Well, this did not go well in a deeply religious culture. Many families decided that their daughters should not go out at all. It was not a very good experience.
After the ban was lifted several years later, then those who wanted to cover themselves did so, and those who didn't, went out normally. Until the revolution in 79 of course.

Humans are very reactionary. Ban something and they find a way to get around it.

My problem is not as much with the scarves of Muslim women but with the thinking that comes with it usually, that they think they are morally superior to other women and those who don't cover themselves according to rules of Islam are corrupt.

Other Comments by Manfred

23. Comment #37897 by WilliamP on May 6, 2007 at 7:15 am

It looks like Ahmadinejad better redeem himself and do something to show he is an upright and moral Islamic fundmentalist. Maybe to show that he hasn't lost his sense of ethics he can threaten Israel with nuclear war again. Or just have Hesbollah indiscriminately murder more civilians with their rockets.

I'm sure Ahmadinejad's faith will lead him away from this atrocious sin and back to the correct, moral path.

Other Comments by WilliamP

24. Comment #37949 by sanjiv on May 6, 2007 at 11:39 am

Intolerant Iran may be just the place that produces closet atheists on a large scale. Who knows, it may one day be home to the largest atheist population in the world!

Other Comments by sanjiv

25. Comment #37955 by stephenray on May 6, 2007 at 12:43 pm

One can only wonder why they are *so* frightened of women...

Other Comments by stephenray
Reload Comments | Back to Top

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password: