> The app also “triggers a text message (in real-time) to the registered owner of the vehicle, warning them that they had been found in violation of the mandatory hijab laws,
The article frames Iran’s actions as repressive, aligning with Western media’s frequent critical stance toward Iran’s government. It emphasizes human rights violations and crimes against humanity, which are serious allegations from the UN mission. However, without access to the full UN report, it’s unclear how much of the article is direct reporting versus editorial interpretation. Iran’s perspective—whether it denies, justifies, or contextualizes these measures—is not included, which could indicate a one-sided narrative.
It is, i agree, but what i believe the earlier commenter was alluding to was the fact that there are repressive governemnts enacting very similar laws that are hostile to women, and ethic minorities in a significant portion of western countries too.
the report/article seems to have a singular focus on demonising Iran and it's government.
google searches for "hijab ban", "muslim ban", "woman forced to remove hijab" yields a lot of results. And i'll add, it's not just hijabs; hoodies, skateboarders, rap music, masks, books? etc. have all been made skapegoats in recent times for authoritarian governments everywhere are trying to control individual liberties. Albeit in a different fashion, the government is trying to control the individual liberties of what an individual wears, reads, watches, listens to etc.
To suggest that an article can’t focus on the perceived wrongs of an individual country without also giving a fair and balanced view of similar wrongs everywhere else in the world would render reporting of most things impractical. And it’s also verging on whataboutism.
> The app also “triggers a text message (in real-time) to the registered owner of the vehicle, warning them that they had been found in violation of the mandatory hijab laws,
That's not what MQTT was made for... or was it?
Using most modern technology to enforce most regressive step. I am sure this will extended to go after dissidents
How long until someone funds a company pitching social credit tracking as a service? Imagine all the opportunities for third party integrations.
The article frames Iran’s actions as repressive, aligning with Western media’s frequent critical stance toward Iran’s government. It emphasizes human rights violations and crimes against humanity, which are serious allegations from the UN mission. However, without access to the full UN report, it’s unclear how much of the article is direct reporting versus editorial interpretation. Iran’s perspective—whether it denies, justifies, or contextualizes these measures—is not included, which could indicate a one-sided narrative.
> The article frames Iran’s actions as repressive
In what way is the government monitoring and controlling what people wear not repressive?
It is, i agree, but what i believe the earlier commenter was alluding to was the fact that there are repressive governemnts enacting very similar laws that are hostile to women, and ethic minorities in a significant portion of western countries too.
the report/article seems to have a singular focus on demonising Iran and it's government.
google searches for "hijab ban", "muslim ban", "woman forced to remove hijab" yields a lot of results. And i'll add, it's not just hijabs; hoodies, skateboarders, rap music, masks, books? etc. have all been made skapegoats in recent times for authoritarian governments everywhere are trying to control individual liberties. Albeit in a different fashion, the government is trying to control the individual liberties of what an individual wears, reads, watches, listens to etc.
Both can be bad at the same time, right?
To suggest that an article can’t focus on the perceived wrongs of an individual country without also giving a fair and balanced view of similar wrongs everywhere else in the world would render reporting of most things impractical. And it’s also verging on whataboutism.