Hijab is a religious footbow that Islam wants to seduce girls and women with.

Hijab is a religious footbow that Islam wants to seduce girls and women with.

Hijaben serves as a social marker on virtue and is designed as a mechanism to control the woman's sexuality with. Iran is undergoing a dehijabization movement.



One of the highlights of that movement was Revolution Street girls who waved their hijab. Shaparak Shajarizadeh was one of those who had early lifted up Vida Moahed's dehababing party. The regime then threatened to punish the hijacking activists but also their relatives very strictly. In the days, Shaparak's judgment came. She was sentenced to two years in prison and a conditional sentence of 18 years in prison. Hijab is Islam and, in particular, Islam's political Islam. Challenging hijab is challenging Islam's being. Antihijabism is therefore not seen with tender eyes.
Your knowledge about the hijab and how you resemble it at a religious footbow must be spread. This stifling of girls and women must end.
And just as you correctly describe .... all the restrictions that these girls and women are forced to live with.
No boyfriend, do not use contraceptives, do not laugh and show your teeth, do not swim and swim, do not go by car with a man you're not related to, do not dance, do not walk alone ... yes, the list can be done very long.
The brave Iranian women pay a very high prize for their freedom.
And here in Sweden, cultural rebelists with the hijab trample as if it were a clothes that was put on and off when it fits!
Ruefully!
The question is whether the hijab activists in the West who claim that they are wearing hijab of their own "free will" do not belong to the movement of political Islam? There are, as said, slaves who claim to have chosen slavery and stay in it of "own free will". Slavery is no longer human and tolerable for it. It is the dissatisfied, enslaved and freedom-destitute interests of the slaves who should be given precedence and not the slaves who are prepared to buy new fjords even after any release. In relation to the hijab question, this parallel question arises of whose interests should be given priority? The answer assumes a statement: hijab is forced. A compulsion that either Allah or his male depictions on the earth exposes girls and women. Against this background, society / state should guard those who do not want the constraint and their rights and freedoms. Those who "voluntarily" submit to the compulsion and the abomination (do not have a boyfriend, do not have sex, do not have contraception, travel with male classmates / colleagues, spend the same time with classmates / colleagues, etc.) that hijab means , in consequence, should be prepared to take away his hijab in state domains if it is so voluntary or is freedom of justice just a platform to mislead and disarm westings that value free elections, freedom and self-will?
 They are accused of encouraging and spreading decadence and corruption. At the same time they sabotaged the moles that 9-year-old girls are married and can be married to the father's flair. This at the same time as the IS founder of Iran, Khomeini, writes in detail in one of his books about how men can satisfy sexually without penetrating their wives younger than 9 years. At the same time as a Qur'anist who stands at Khamenei Archaelogical Criminal Court, close escaped punishment even though it was promised that he had deported to several boy children.
What a barbarian and hypocrisy!
The worst thing is that the western world has knowledge of this but chooses to bite ... and take on the hijab of solidarity!
What a coward! It's about someone else's kids, sisters and mothers who have to pay the price ... and not even their own children, sisters and mothers ....
Fy and usch ... I'm so sacred upset!