But, it can't happen here, right?

RIGHT?

Also, if you know any Iranians, they don't wear hijab in the house there.

So yes, this photo would still be possible.

(And of course I am strongly against the theocracy in Iran)

America helped

The beginning

U.S. and British intelligence agencies help elements in the Iranian military overthrow Iran’s prime minister, Mohammed Mossadeq. This follows Mossadeq’s nationalization of the Britain-owned Anglo-Persian Oil Company, which led London to impose an oil embargo on Iran. The coup brings back to power the Western-friendly monarchy, headed by Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. Deeply unpopular among much of the population, the shah relies on U.S. support to remain in power until his overthrow in 1979.

Then

The shah flees amid widespread civil unrest and eventually travels to the United States for cancer treatment. Grand Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, a Shiite cleric who opposed the shah’s Westernization of Iran, returns to the country after fourteen years in exile. Khomeini takes power as the supreme leader in December, turning Iran from a pro-West monarchy to a vehemently anti-West Islamic theocracy. Khomeini says Iran will try to “export” its revolution to its neighbors. In 1985, the militant group Hezbollah emerges in Lebanon and pledges allegiance to Khomeini.

Fun fact: Iran was one of the Middle East's first democracies. Turns out UK and US don't care about democracy, just money.

Add in some having your settler colonial entity in the region be best buddies with that monarch, help train his intelligence and army, which then made tens of thousands of people "disappear".

Bonus points for then framing it, as the counterrevolution being motivated by antisemitism, instead of hating the supporters of their former opressor.

Because it’s ultimately about control. They’ve found it through their method and don’t like the others see like it.

They hate them because they're the rival gang.

And then America Happened

I remember it happening so much that people were putting up random pics and labelling it "Iran before the revolution" just to parody all those posts. Like this one: https://www.reddit.com/...

Also, Hitchen's take on how women are treated in Iran against an Iranian woman: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXjm31Bvomo

Nobody ever posts the "Here's a teenage boy who has been beaten bloody by the Shah's secret police" photo from the 1970s

Neither do we get the "Meet the PhD student who graduated without a penny of debt" from the 2020s.

But the sepia photograph of a hot girl in a short dress? Literally the only evidence we have that Iran even exists.

(Sincere) are you implying that these pictures are the elite/upper class and the counter narrative is more the norm of the time?

Edit: nvm, other comments in the feed seem to add further context.

Evil muslims that hate freedom, obviously!

Wuzzat? The previous Iranian government was a corrupt monarchy set up by USA-UK because of oil? Nonsense! When the did the USA and UK ever orchestrate a coup to set up a friendly government for their own profit? That's totally NOT something they did back in 1953, no sir!

/s

Wasn't there a video years ago where an young Iranian women schooled reporters when they hit her with this propaganda? This was the period far more intense political repression and violence against the public than the Islamic Republic. You could be beaten in public for wearing the hijab at this time.

I'm a bit East of Iran and also clueless...

That's an odd way to spell "intentionally miseducated", but it tracks.

No access to travelling band instruments salesmen?

And yet Tankies still "critically support" modern Iran

Edit: Lmao, Tankies dont like it when you provide documented (by their own side) proof that they're in love with fascist governments

Probably some shit that happened before I was born that makes me more responsible than the people that are actually beating women to death right now?

At a certain point maybe we should consider that Iranian assholes to shitty things to people in their country are responsible for their own actions? I mean there's only so far you can take the "White Man's Burden" narrative isn't there?

This picture was almost certainly taken in a city. The urban population in Iran at that time was educated, secular(ish), liberal, and pretty cosmopolitan. The rural population, however, was mostly none of those things. Religious fundamentalism was always a thing and the hijab was common.

Damn, that sounds pretty familiar as a USAian.

Not to mention it appears to be in a private home where all the public appearance laws aren't applied.

There are better photos of women in public from the time that demonstrate the societal shift better.

Note that she was able to get

the F out of Iran during the revolution

. People living like on this photo were not the majority by any measure. Those crowds of poor ignorant religious people yelling "ya hossein" were.

People posting such photos say, of course, what they wanted to say. But westernization of Iran was not too different from what MBS is doing in Saudi Arabia. A monarch's hobby.

He even was self-confident enough to say in interviews that his oil-powered kingdom with the majority of population still living in middle ages is the future and the western nations are the past.

Idealizing Shah's Iran is one of the stupid things people do today all the time. I dunno why - to forget that the revolution was supported by the West? Only somehow mojaheds and others such forces turned out to be weaker than Homeini.

Bruh 😶

Well

The CIA backed Islamic Revolution*

The photo above was taken while Iran had a government that was friendly to the US.

The present day oppression of women is being done by the people that overthrew the US backed government. People chanting "Death to America" should be a clue that the oppressive government there today may not be on friendly terms with the US.

Assuming you're asking for real, the hijab isn't a requirement. And before I get too much shit, I'm an atheist that spends a lot of time in a Muslim country and sees first hand how it is nothing like most of the West is taught.

To break it down simply: If you want to be a good Muslim, you need to be modest. For a women to be modest, covering their hair after puberty around men is common. Some take it further and dress in the niqab, the beekeeper style suit.

Note that while some are "forced" to wear it, most are not. Socially it is the same as you're allowed to wear a itsy bitsy teeny weeny yellow polka dot bikini, but most women would find that uncomfortable in the super market or Applebee's. So they dress more modestly. The definition of what is modest just changes slightly.

In your own home most do not wear the hijab since there's no expectation of modesty around husbands and no need around kids or immediate family. But this is also true of public spaces where there aren't men. Many places will have women's only beach days or gyms or cafe days, etc and you'll find women in there that are total strangers without coverings.

The super strict places with morality police are not common. But thanks to US intervention, it is more common in Iran. Kind of like how if you wear a drag outfit downtown in Alabama, you're going to have a bad time and in many US states, now get arrested.

One of the modern things that has been an issue with West and middle East mixing is when hijabis (women who wear the hijab) go to like a bachelorette party or a women's party and then take off their hijab. Then they do what they do and take a bunch of photos. The hijabis don't post any of those on social media, they only post while covered because some reasoning is "you don't know who or why someone is looking at a public photo". But western women will just post them all. And this has been an issue for the past decade+. Back with film you "posed" and it was explicit it was to be shared. You wouldn't waste 1/18th of your roll for nothing! But now it isn't.

jihad requirement

Its hijab. Jihad is struggle.

I'm pretty sure it applies when you're around men who are not immediate family.

Oh, so she'd have to change her outfit to be allowed to leave the confines of her master's home? That makes it so much better.

Or look at the literacy rates. At the time of the revolution, so past when this photo was taken, less than 40% of Iranians could read and write. And let's not mention The Celebration of the 2,500th Anniversary of the Founding of the Persian Empire by the Western puppet ruler, spending millions and millions on a tent city for foreign dignitaries in the desert plains, while his subjects were living in abject poverty without access to education or health care. Let's just look at the mini skirt in the photo and wonder at the enlightenment of those days and the backwardness of today, when the literacy rate has more than doubled in 40 years for example. But they have hijab, therefore the society has obviously regressed. That's the measure for how advanced a society is, the length of the skirts of the few who are well off.

Shut up.

M.O.R.O.N.

Some people lack baincells to understand hijab or not hijab is matter of choice

It was a coup that installed the authoritarian government there. Aided by the CIA.

They hate him because he spoke the truth.

And also many of the forces participating in the revolution were quite democratic and even progressive. It's just that Homeini and co gave them sort of a night of the long knives and created the theocracy.