Slashdot Mirror
Iran Universities To Ban Women From 77 Fields of Study
New submitter jasper160 writes "An August 20th, 2012 announcement from Iran places restrictions on female university students. Iran will be cutting 77 fields of study from the female curriculum, making them male-only fields. Science and engineering are among those affected by the decree. 'The Oil Industry University, which has several campuses across the country, says it will no longer accept female students at all, citing a lack of employer demand. Isfahan University provided a similar rationale for excluding women from its mining engineering degree, claiming 98% of female graduates ended up jobless.' The announcement came soon after the release of statistics showing that women were graduating in far higher numbers than men from Iranian universities and were scoring overall better than men, especially in the sciences. Senior clerics in Iran's theocratic regime have become concerned about the social side-effects of rising educational standards among women."
Iranian Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Shirin Ebadi wrote to the UN that this effort is "part of the recent policy of the Islamic Republic, which tries to return women to the private domain inside the home as it cannot tolerate their passionate presence in the public arena,"
Apparently lowering women to the level men want them to be is easier than raising men to the level of the women.
This is what you get when you base your life on what you imagine your invisble friend in the sky wants you to do.
The Iranian people are historically a fairly progressive bunch. Cutting off women who have become wage earners, those on their way, and the modernization of that country is going to seriously piss of the population. I see another revolution in their very near future.
Where genius and insanity become confused true wisdom is found
My opinion might come from living in a "western" country, but I just don't get why some countries seem to want to stay in the dark ages.
Are they oblivious to the fact that their region as once the "mecca" of science and math?...and maybe could be again if they tried?
I have worked in both a female dominated field (child psychology) and a male dominated field (software engineering). Teams are always better with a touch of gender balance. Every single time.
I have 2 daughters. While the USA still has a long way to go towards full gender equality, I'm grateful that fate has me raising them here in the USA rather than in Iran.
Ultimately this will backfire on the insecure men who rule Iran. They are afraid of empowering women but countries that do will run circles around them.
It is hard enough to believe Iran had made enough forward progress to take such a large step backwards.
This post comes with a double-your-money-back guarantee!
Any offense taken to this post is at your sole discretion.
That trick only works when women have the right to say no.
It's a bit like a labor union. Artificially restrict supply to create the illusion that demand is driving the market higher. It's a bit like a free economy. When there is a glut in the market, stop producing so much to maximize profit. Oh, I know these are "people". But ultimately, "people" are just a commodity. I'm in Human Resources. They don't call it "human relations" for a reason.
Iran had a secular democracy back in 1953. The west, especially England and the US, and overthrew it with a dictatorship, much more ruthless than the present government.
As the left was the great fear, the dictatorship jailed, (effectively) exiled and killed the left. When the people overthrew the foreign-backed government, the only power left in the country were the mullahs, and bazaar shop keepers, and that is who is in control now.
Harvard only began admitting women in 1999, although the first openings of that were in the 1960s. It's amusing to see westerners, who were just invading Iraq and torturing and forcing Abu Ghraib detainees to masturbate on camera, are now all sanctimonious about how Iranian universities are preparing classes. Iran is a paradise of academic freedom for women compared to US ally Saudi Arabia, why don't we hear about that? And why all the concern about women's studies in Iran, something Americans can do nothing about because the US doesn't even have diplomatic relations with Iran, at the same time the US is stepping up pressure on Iran on other fronts? The US is who overthrew Iran's secular democracy in 1953, then the CIA worked with the Savak to wipe out the left. Now they complain the mullahs have too much control over the universities. No Slashdot headlines about women's education in Saudi Arabia. Women can't even drive in Saudi Arabia, where's the noise about that? As there is none, it's clear this is just more propaganda as the war drums are being beaten. As smug, hypocritical, imperialist westerners stick their fingers into the Middle East, torture their people in prisons like Abu Ghraib, kill off and take over new land in the West Bank with US funds - you can be sure the inevitable 9/11s will come in response, as some people will always resist imperialism and foreign tyranny.
There is nothing in what you said that should prevent women from getting an education.
Just because they get an education, that doesn't mean that they are required to get a job. An education is good even for people who do jobs that don't require one. Education introduces us to different ways of solving problems and different ways of thinking creating a more well rounded person.
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
The Christian community then does not include the Convservative/Fundamentalist sects that do the exact opposite?
I hear there's a shortage of engineers in the US. Maybe we should grant asylum to women seeking engineering degrees over here and kill two birds with one stone.
What of course is lying through statistics.
Women who exhibit the same patterns as men tend to earn as much as and often more than men. The trick is finding female oranges to compare to male oranges and not female apples to male oranges.
If a woman has the same educational attainment, works the same job for the same number of hours and years in position their pay is typically the same or better. But that almost never happens.
Women have babies, men don't. All of the differences trace back to that inescapable fact of biology and everything else flows from that. If you don't make it clear you aren't planning on having a baby you won't get picked for any position that can't easily cope with a sudden unplanned absence of up to a year. That right there will explain a fair amount of any measured difference. And of course many women DO actually have babies, which interrupts their career track, especially since many choose to take more time away than the purely medically required absence. Women tend to select careers which provide the work flexibility to permit their family obligations, another significant contributer to measured differences. And while we might argue endlessly whether it is good, correct, etc. there are still more cases of the male partner in a marriage getting a job offer that requires relocation disrupting the female's career track. Add all that up and you have most of the difference.
Now add in the fact, again we can argue endlessly about the rightness of it, whether it can or should be changed by social policy, etc., that men and women have different ideas of what a 'good job' is. Whether they can do it or not, women don't tend to seek jobs in a lot of industries that pay rather well but have difficult working conditions, require erratic schedules with a lot of overtime, etc. This preference is fairly uniform whether the female has children or not, plan on having children, is or is not married, etc. There is also a fairly pronounced difference in the selection of majors and all majors do not pay equally.
Democrat delenda est
Whem there is a glut in the market, stop producing so much to maximize profit
Except that is not what you do in a free economy. You only stop producing whem hit the point you can't sell at a profit, because in a free economy someone else would decide to produce and take your market share if the cost of supply was still lower than the price of demand.
If someone talks about cutting supply to maximize profit, they are almost certainly talking about an economy that someone has regulated or restricted others from emtering in some way. That is not a free market. Well outside those incredibly rare cases where someone literally controls the only know source of a mineral or something.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Stopping women from working/learning is a specific example. All of the religions mentioned have faith based rules that are generally not as harmul, but do exist. Not eating pork, no contraception, can't use modern medicine, etc. Simply put, they have rules in place that are based on what their invisible friend in the sky is imagined to have said. ... and yes, I do ealize that some of these once had a historical purpose (not eating pork for example), but I'm sure at one point women were less safe in public as well.
Exactly. When it's 'my' religion, anyone who does anything bad is not really part of 'my' religion. When it's 'their' religion, anyone who does anything bad is indicative of 'their' religion.
Don't you know? The only true Christians are the ones who believe exactly the same things as I do. We're not all stupid and take all of the Bible literally except for the parts that we don't. Some of us don't take all of the Bible literally, except for the parts we do.
Now, if you excuse me, there's a slut in the market square and I need to stone her for adultery.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
I've known many Persians. To a man and woman, they were intelligent, passionate, vocal and idealistic.
I've met a lot of Cubans, and most of the older ones hate Castro with an energy I wish I could bottle. Also, I have never been to Cuba.
More bluntly: I'm assuming you met those Persians outside of Iran, because Iran seems like the kind of place that "intelligent, passionate, vocal and idealistic" people would be better off emigrating from.
This. This times a million. To me, there's nothing scarier than the social conservative wing of the Republican party. They demonstrated that science means nothing to them (by spinning Akin's comments as a misunderstood slip of the tongue, rather than just plain wrong), they demonstrated that they're willing to put THEIR interpretation of the bible over anybody else's opinion on how to handle themselves, and they've demonstrated that they're willing to go to great lengths to make sure that their political dogma becomes the law of the land.
Quite frankly, I'd rather shack up with the Paulites and the actual communists than the social conservatives. I don't actually care about their position, but the amount of work they're putting into shoving their stone-age principles down my throat is far greater than that of any other political group in the US. Not to mention that they're also far more successful.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
I find it so fascinating. I've known many Persians. To a man and woman, they were intelligent, passionate, vocal and idealistic. So how did a nation with such cultural depth,
Islam.
How could you have missed that fact?
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Tip: stop using the words 'men' and 'women'. Use the word 'people'. Problem dissappears. Why? Because it's not a problem to begin with.
The burden of proof lies with the party making the more bizarre assertion.