Iranian in UK flees to Israel after pulling off headscarves
Iranian in UK flees to Israel after pulling off headscarves
An Iranian monarchist who filmed herself pulling the headscarves off Iranians in London fled to Israel after UK police announced they were investigating her. The woman allegedly responsible is an...
An Iranian monarchist who filmed herself pulling the headscarves off Iranians in London fled to Israel after UK police announced they were investigating her.
The woman allegedly responsible is an Iranian pro-Israel activist called Bahar Mahroo, who later closed her Instagram and TikTok accounts and claimed she found the videos online. However, a reserve image search found no sources for the video, other than her Twitter account.
You're viewing part of a thread.
Do you have any other reason than the woman being Iranian for your remark that there's no reason to believe she's not a muslim? You don't, so my comment stands. You decided that she being Iranian is a good reason to assume she's Muslim, despite the article saying she was attacking Muslim women. We both know why, so stop clutching your pearls and have look at your own assumptions.
Sorry, I'm not going to have a legitimate conversation with someone who called me a racist when I said nothing racist.
Also, we have a civility rule here and you have broken it twice now. Please do not continue.
You can hide behind whatever rule you'd like. I've been more civil in my replies than your remarks call for. And it's pretty clear in my unedited comments for everyone to see. Knock yourself out with whatever rule you need to hide behind, in order to avoid having an honest look at your own beliefs and biases.
As I suggested at the beginning, what you are looking for is not a discussion, it's a person to berate. All you do is keep proving it.
However, I will indulge you:
I could point you to multiple different posts I have made where I have shown that it is clear that multiple ethnicities of people in different parts of the world are Muslims and they practice Islam in different ways.
Those posts were in response to two misogynists claiming that Muslim women who did not wear headscarves were either sinners or not Muslims.
One of them also said Iranians are Arabs.
And yet rather than attack them for their misogyny and one of them for saying something that really is racist, you attack me for daring to suggest that maybe an Iranian woman is a Muslim because we don't know what she claims her religion is right now.
Just amazing.
I'd stick around and wait for your criticisms of their posts, but you've latched on to hating me and once you're on that hate teat, I know how hard it is to let go.
I don't 'hate' you, you're just a commenter on Lemmy. I pointed out the obvious bigotry in your assumption of the woman being Muslim because she's Iranian, despite the article making it clear she was harassing Muslim women. And you have done absolutely zero to dispell that conclusion. Assuming that my criticism is 'hate' just makes it clear that you're unwilling to examine your own ideas from a critical perspective. Criticizing the civility of my comments reinforces the same conclusion. I've been very matter of fact, criticizing the substance of what you've written. I haven't made any personal attacks as far as I can see. But you just keep doing the holier than thou thing.
Pointing to other bigoted comments doesn't change the bigotry in your assumption, it just points to even more bigoted assumptions. Yeah, yours is more nuanced, but a more nuanced bigotry doesn't mean it's not bigotry.
Again, you assumed an Iranian woman is Muslim despite the article making it clear she was being bigoted against other muslim women. Ask yourself why you made that assumption if not because in your view, Iranian=muslim.
I assumed nothing. What I said was this:
But I think calling her a racist for what she did when she could be Muslim herself is going a bit too far.
Lying about what I said in order to continue to berate me is not a good way to go about doing things and I do not advise you either lie or call me a bigot again unless you wish to take a long break from this community. Rule 5 in the sidebar is very clear:
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!
You are engaging with neither good faith nor respect. And you will have one more opportunity to do so.
Incidentally, I literally talked about Iranian Armenian Christians in another comment, making your lie an extremely silly one.
You literally wrote there's no reason to believe she's not a muslim herself. It's still up there in your comment. If that's not assuming then what is?
You do whatever you need to do. Again, it's clear what I wrote and I stand by it. There's nothing uncivil about what I wrote, that's clear to all who read it. I don't need one more opportunity, if you consider criticism and questioning of your ideas disrespectful, that's your prerogative. So stop trying to threaten me into silence and do whatever you need to do in order to avoid examining your own biases.
True. It's assuming you can't know someone's religion unless they let you know what it is.
Unlike you, I do not define people for them. I let them define themselves.
You have no problem declaring this woman isn't a Muslim even though she's never told you her religion. I wonder if you feel the same way about people and their gender? Would declare about someone whose gender you didn't know what their gender was based on a news article?
I sure wouldn't.
And again, I notice you haven't said anything to the misogynists including the racist who does think Iranians are Muslims. And Arabs.
I do like how you accused me of believing all Iranians are Muslims and when I point out that I was talking about Armenian Christians from Iran, you pretended you never made that accusation. So it's very amusing that you say you stand by such a silly lie.
I do appreciate your returning to civility, however. Thank you.
You assumed she was muslim because she's Iranian, I assumed she wasn't because she was being bigoted against muslim women., which was the point of the article What you did is the equivalent of assuming Ayaan Hirsi Ali is Muslim because she's Somali, ignoring that she's made it her brand to vilify Islam.
Regarding the ridiculous comparison to gender: gender isn't connected to nationality, which is the point we were discussing. Furthermore, I think most people would consider it reasonable to assume a person attacking trans people for being trans isn't trans themselves. That you have trouble making this connection is the issue I have been criticizing all along.
Regarding what I comment on other people's comments or don't, you're just reaching and it's getting sad. It's none of your business at all what I comment on, and no amount of nagging on your end has an impact on that decision. Either respond and defend your position or don't. Beyond that is none of your business.
I did not change my tone in any of the comments I wrote, and it's obvious to the people reading the exchange. It's funny that you call it "returning to civility", but whatever helps you cope I guess.
Nope, I literally did not assume she was Muslim. That is a lie. One of many lies you have told about me.
I have given you many opportunities and have been very lenient, but you are done here for the next week.