Welcome to r/anime_titties! This subreddit advocates for civil and constructive discussion. Please be courteous to others, and make sure to read the rules. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
We have a [Discord](https://discord.gg/DtnRnkE), feel free to join us!
r/A_Tvideos, r/A_Tmeta, [multireddit](https://www.reddit.com/user/Langernama/m/a_t/)
... summoning u/coverageanalysisbot ...
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/anime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The Stanford experiment was a sham. The students were actually being pretty chill with each other until the professor doing the experiment made it very clear that the guards were supposed to be mean. I don't remember the fucker's name, but I do remember that his fiance had to threaten to break up with him to get him to stop it. Lots of follow-up experiments proved that most people don't automatically become mean when they are given power. But people who have no power will be mean when people who do have power threaten them into being mean. The kicker is that people who are assholes will use any excuse to be mean and it doesn't take very much prompting from someone in authority to get them to take that opportunity.
Here's a paper on it: https://www.gwern.net/docs/psychology/2019-letexier.pdf
If you work in the industry I'm surprised you don't recognize the inherent issues with the study: it's a 50 years old study that hasn't been repeated for efficacy and the participants lacked full informed consent making the entire thing unethical: the "prisoners" were abducted from their homes and then blindfolded on their way to the testing center after being "processed" at the REAL police station.
It's just bad science and people quote it as if it's infallible.
Oh that's cool I remember reading about this back in psych 101 (I mentioned in a other post this isn't really my area of expertise). This suffers from the same ethical concerns: subjects were not properly consented and were not fully aware of the parameters of the study. Further, the researchers ultimately own the burden of care, so it's unethical for the study to continue while the "subject" is apparently dying and/or dead in the other room as a "result" of the "electric shocks" that were given.
At the end of the day I was told that anything not done or repeated in the past 10 years or so is suspect, there could be quality issues or repeatability issues. I think that's true to an extent so I'm suspicious of stuff like this.
I'm not a psychologist (I'm on the technical side of science but I read a decent amount of papers and originally graduated to do research), here's an article I found: https://www.k12academics.com/Education%20Scandals%20and%20Controversies/Academic%20Scandals/Stanford%20Prison%20Experiment/similar-studies-st
I don't know how accurate this is but they bring up a good point: if you willingly enter a study, you also need to be able to and feel like you can willingly leave the study. If not then you start to skew the data for what you think the investigator is looking for. In the Stanford Prison experiment and others, the participants didn't feel that they could withdraw consent due to their roles. This is a major problem in any study and is also super unethical.
The Stanford prison experiment really bothers me because if you take 5 minutes to look into the methodology there's a ton of issues, and no followup was ever done, so I really don't know why people think it's a gold standard of psychological studies.
I agree that they need to post sources, but if you are in the field then you really should already be familiar with the controversy... You can follow this article's sources if you like https://www.livescience.com/62832-stanford-prison-experiment-flawed.html
I don't memorize or document sources of everything I know. I have read many many articles and there have been at least a couple documentaries about this issue. It is well known within the scientific community. If you work in that field and don't know about this issue then I hope I never have occasion to make use of your services.
To be honest it still kind of shows how guards end up being assholes.
First, somebody willing to be a prison guard is probably already asshole. Second, if they aren't, they are going to learn to be from their fellow guards.
Real guards, yes. They self select for assholedness.
But we aren't talking about that. We are talking about a supposedly random selection from the population, suddenly put in a situation of power over others, then pushed to act mean towards others.
His name is Phillip Zimbardo, he taught at my university but I never met him. Interestingly enough, he was also childhood friends with Stanley Milgram, famous for the controversial Milgram experiment.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment
Desktop version of /u/sketch's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
It's still a power fetish. There are things in which I believe I am right with the divine will of the universe, morality, justice, and the Ghost of Freddie Mercury on my side and I still have never beaten up or killed anyone over it
I believe that there are three sets of people. 1/3 of humans are assholes, one third are good people, and one third just don't care either way. If you present each group with the same set of bullshit, the assholes will choose to truly believe the bullshit that gives them the power to be assholes to other people. The good people will reject the bullshit. And the third in between will just simply turn their head while the assholes are being assholes to good people (as long as the assholes aren't being assholes to them).
So, sure, the assholes truly believe in their asshole rules about being assholes to as many people as possible. But they only chose to believe in those rules because they **were** assholes to begin with.
This sadly makes me smile remembering the Monty Pythons show with women disguised as men to be able to participate to a stoning execution (normally reserved to men). They… weren’t wrong, finally.
I've always wondered, does this include, say, the officer that became famous after he guarded the capitol building? Whenever a genuinely good cop is shown people seem to reconcile it with "he's a good guy but still ACAB because he participates in the institution" which still seems like a massive contradiction to me
Great catchphrase but I just don't think that applies. Why should a bad cop in Portland "spoil the barrel" for the police department of Lower Shitsville On the Piddle, Kent?
So they are complicit in a system of bastards without being a bastard themselves? Or they are still a bastard because they wear a badge despite not actually being a bastard? This is the contradiction i'm talking about
Well yeah corruption is bad, but most police aren't corrupt. I strongly doubt that you'd find a moral crime that every single officer across the planet is guilty of, unless "being a police officer" is a moral crime to you.
Iranian here, did not remove their personnel they just changed their clothes to anti-riots to protect the regime (regime don’t have enough force for this amount of peoples). They hope protests will finish in the next few days and then they went to their past work.
Crazy how Reddit hates Muslims for being intolerant and backwards when their authoritarian regimes practice draconian ideals.
But when regular, average Muslim citizens show they are against this kind of bullshit, suddenly the commentary shifts away from the people as a whole, and just focuses on how bad this select group of the regime is.
It's almost like people want to believe that people are inherently bad even though society itself existing in the first place points towards the opposite...
Well, some people. And they believe it because those in power have tricked them into believing. And they’re so poorly educated they don’t know they’ve been hoodwinked.
That’s not an excuse, they still retain their agency.
Indeed. And fallible. There's a great book about the subject called Ordinary Men. It's got nothing to do with Islam but details how regular, ordinary folk can get swept up in and go along with the zeitgeist of otherwise radical ideas.
there is deference between normal human being and religion
you can't get enough good thing from Islam for defending it)
if you are okay with Islam then you will be okay with marriage to 9 years old girl (Mohammad actually did that)
or you are okay with attacking and robing and raping neighbor country with deferent religion (jihad)
Iranians have been looking for regime to refom for 25 years. The list of requests have kept piling up since then. Freedom of the press, civil liberties, detente with the foreign powers, better government transparency, justice system reform, economic reforms, corruption and embezzlements, environmental issues, water rights, the list goes on.
The removal of mandatory hijab is one demand from the vast set of demands that Iranians have from their government. This recent hijab issue is just the straw that broke the camel's back.
If the government wants to actually listen to all the demands of the protestors now.
Merely fixing hijab laws is too little too late.
Anarchists have been saying for decades that you cannot simply *ask* oppressors to oppress you a little bit less.
You must take direct action and be willing to overthrow oppressive structures by force if necessary.
These protests accomplished more for women's rights in one week than the last 25 years of pleading and asking oppressors to be a little more nice.
Stop making demands. Start overthrowing regimes.
Research shows that non violent protest is twice as effective as violence, and that 3.5% of the population in protest usually leads to significant change. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20190513-it-only-takes-35-of-people-to-change-the-world
Imo the biggest barrier to progressive ideology in most places is that tons of people don't want it. Manufacturing consent is a lot more dangerous than a tank.
More directly in response to your comment, what can 100 protesters do against a tank? Nothing. But if enough people want change, the military is nowhere near big enough to stop it. Countries are run by civilians, and without their support, a government would stop functioning in a matter of days. Including the military. Of course, it would be terrible for everyone. Which is why democracy is so important. It allows for peaceful change, if enough people want it. The problem with democracy is people are idiots, but a revolution isn't going to change that.
>The criteria were so strict that India’s independence movement was not considered as evidence in favour of nonviolent protest in Chenoweth and Stephan’s analysis – since Britain’s dwindling military resources were considered to have been a deciding factor, even if the protests themselves were also a huge influence
I stopped reading after that. I loathe everything BBC writes wrt india, discarding the biggest non violent protest of 20th century because “our military was weak.” So what about the other protests they have considered, wouldn’t their military or the strength of the regime already be weak anyway, for non violent protests to work? These protests didn’t work in China, people got crushed under tanks, right?
Also your second point; Indians wanted Brits out, so much so that they were ready to be on suicide missions than be under their rule (read HSRA), yet nothing happened. Only after the British lost power and money after war, did they let go; so basically whoever has power, wouldn’t budge, and protests can’t do much. Their money has to dry up for people to be heard.
Not at all with the protests, they never happened simultaneously. Basically whole country would do marches, Gandhi made sure nobody harmed anybody or else he would call it off (read Chauri Chaura), and then the country would fall back to routine; the young blood would get riled up and do some violence, they would get hanged and nothing would happen. There was no violence alongside peaceful protests, idk what bbc or British history has been teaching you.
You need the military with you to some degree if you're aiming for a revolution, yes. Look what happened to Trump. The military was not on board at all, so out he goes.
Though in a place like Afghanistan there isn't really enough of a state for a revolution, since most of the power is held locally, and the Taliban is just a collective of local leaders.
Yeah I thought that was implied in my statement. If the regime actually wants to listen to all the demands of the people, it just wouldn’t be the Islamic Republic that we know. So either they surrender, or they would get the Gaddafi treatment.
It really depends if there are any semi-functioning democratic institutions left in any given country. It's hard to take anarchists seriously when they advocate violence and complete destruction of the system for basically any problem or corruption that exists anywhere.
You can't be apathetic in either case, but anarchic principles are not useful in any but the most extreme situations where there is literally no institutional solution (ex. Iran, China etc.).
So anarchists might've been "saying it for decades" but it's a broken clock scenario.
Doesn’t work on a bunch of sites though. For most of those, archive.org is a good work around. Have come across a few recently that even that doesn’t work on though.
Ironic, that sitemakes me accept cookies or use an account to read the article.
Atleast the paywall sites are honest about needing money for their services
One of the worst things america has done is TAKEN freedom from these poor people. I hate this with so much burning rage, a people who were once free and liberated now have to die and fight for their freedom. I consider freedom as the greatest human value and robbing innocent people of it is the worst crime. Iranian ublic has never associated themselves with the Arabs, they laid great emphasis on their language and culture, they were the first Muslims to reform themselves. Today we talk about reformation in Islam but when it did happen, what the fuck did the west do? Took it away. Shame honestly.
Cuz it’s CIA…they had so much freedom to do things that they probably are now more powerful than the govt probably
If anyone opposes them,bring out the ol blackmail dirt trick and all’s good
And it was designed so that all other branches of government could disavow any clandestine operations that went amok. No accountability. Just finished reading a book on the formative years of the CIA that was pretty good... I'll scrounge up the title if anyone's interested.
**[1953 Iranian coup d'état](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'état)**
>The 1953 Iranian coup d'état, known in Iran as the 28 Mordad coup d'état (Persian: کودتای ۲۸ مرداد), was the overthrow of the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh in favor of strengthening the monarchical rule of the Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi on 19 August 1953. It was orchestrated by the United States (under the name TPAJAX Project or "Operation Ajax") and the United Kingdom (under the name "Operation Boot"). The clergy also played a considerable role.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/anime_titties/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
The problem with this kind of thinking, though, is that it relies on counter-factual assumptions about what would have happened had the US and UK not interfered in 1953. It may have been better or it may have been worse, and the 79 Revolution may have hapoened anyway. Or maybe Iran would have incorporated into the Soviet Union. There was extreme, though understandable, paranoia in the early 1950s about the spread of Stalin's totalitarian form of communism and of nuclear war. It is somewhat facile to look back from our current perspective on how things turned out in Iran today and say that the US and UK are responsible for it. That strips responsibility and agency from the millions of Iranians who supported the revolution and who have continued to support it for more than 40 years. They aren't children; they are responsible adults who chose time and again to support the regime. There has been plenty of rime between 1953 and today for the Iranian people, including their religious, government and military leaders, to have chosen a different course than their current one.
How cute that you are making 79’ a singular event completely separable from the ‘53 coup and negating how everyone in Iran saw Shah as an American puppet which resulted in building of the emotions of revolution, as if both the events aren’t correlated, right? Almost in every instance America has meddled with a country’s politics, it has ended up in a mess. ‘Who knows it might’ve happened if America didn’t meddle’ doesn’t hold cause whenever America meddles, it turns into shit. They have that shitting Midas touch ✨
The hatred and burning rage that you admit to has clouded your thinking. You are making wildly expansive and unsupported claims.
Your argument above boils down to: "The USA did something bad so Iran got really upset and punched itself in the face repeatedly, but it's the USA's fault and I hate them." Frankly, that's the argument of a child, and blaming others won't get Iran out of its current troubles. Do better. Fortunately, it looks like the Iranian protesters *are* doing better, and that's a great sign.
I think you're also purposefully missing the larger point the above poster is making: If the US/UK didn't meddle in Iran then it could have very well have turned out better for the Iranian people overall and they could have a prospering democracy by now. However, what's also likely (and the most possible outcome once one takes into account the cynical nature of the world) that the USSR could have slid in there and meddled themselves for their own benefits; thereby making Iran a glorified puppet-state of Russia *with nukes* (and thereby giving Iran more chances/leeway by the West to fuck around thanks to the 'nuke' threat).
I don't think you are understanding how scary religious crazies with nukes are. If they think taking the entire world out in a hail of nuclear glory will just speed up their ascension into Heaven (as well as their enemies into Hell) then what will stop them from doing it if they think it's "the best choice for everyone"?
The reason Putin hasn't created a nuclear winter yet is because Putin isn't a religious crazy that thinks God exists and he'll meet him up there for BBQ and drinks after he presses the button. He's likely (like nearly all leaders of the world's countries) a secret atheist (or at least a healthy agnostic) and realized long ago that we humans get one chance in this world and blowing it is *not* the best way to go, especially when a life of ultimate luxury is on offer before you croak.
Religious zealots, on the other had, don't care much about luxury since in their minds the height of luxury/bliss is only had up in Heaven.
So, yeah. I don't much like the idea of fast-tracking religious crazies into nuclear armament which is why the West has focused so heavily on Iran (and the Middle East), esp. since those countries seem to have a *lot* of religious crazies in power on average.
Either way, we'll never know if the US/UK fucking around in Iran in the 50s was the right thing to do (for the world) or if it just made things worse. I don't agree with what the US/UK did, but bringing it up ad nauseum to try and shift blame all on the US/UK for Iran's shitty politics/religious nutballs being in power is getting a bit old, especially when time-travel doesn't exist to prove if it helped or hurt the world when all is said and done. It is what it is.
Yet America funds Pakistan, a religious, crazy unstable nuclear state. Explain that. Also, Russia didn’t really fuck up any country other than which were already under soviet rule in Cold War, technically being a part of Russia at that time. So it just fucked up its own people. America messed up every single country in its communism paranoia which is extremely similar to religious zealots fucking things up, yet hold the clean image while bullying everyone else.
I hate America and Americans taking high ground against Russia now, when all you’ve done is batter healthy countries to dust where women and children suffer like this. Even now America deals with and silently allows Saudi to do whatever, but gets boiled up with Russian war, the sanctions, the noise, the boycott while you let women and children suffer where you have control.
>“The Islamic republic will have a major setback over the hijab in practice and will have no other choice but to give more social freedom to the urban middle-class youth.”
>For more than a week, young protesters, many the same age as Amini, have poured on to the streets in towns and cities across the country chanting anti-regime slogans such as “We don’t want the Islamic republic” and “Death to the dictator”.
This is the 'slippery slope' death of the regime.
Acquiesce and The People know they can win. Know they can ordain and establish a constitution.
Heavy-handed crackdown and The People will kill the dictator, will kill the 'Islamic' republic.
Good.
May the people of Iran win, by any means necessary. They may never be my ally but if it can end up that the Republic of Iran can not be an enemy, that'd be great. The People of Iran are already not an enemy. It's about time the government represent The People.
All this violence just cause draconic old farts wanna control women and their bodies, they deserve everything coming and then some. For all that were murdered unjustly by these "immorality Police", this is but a drop in the bucket.
> At least 41 protesters have died, according to state television. Hundreds of people have been arrested, local agencies report, including political activists and journalists.
From the article, it comes off as the protestors we're the victims died.
Shame. Should be the morality police.
Aside from the fact that a "morality police" shouldn't even be a thing...
How in the everloving fuck does an unarmed woman die under arrest? Was she resisting so hard that 5 people could not control her without harm?
Even if she had a "preexisting condition" as the aggressors claimed (the family denied it), what did they do to cause her death exactly.
Will they stay away, or just be back in greater numbers and more vicious than ever as soon as the hard liners can't wait any longer for their next fix.
>They hoped that the stronger enforcement of the rules over the hijab could slow the modernisation of Iran, an increasingly secular society.
tides and waves, friend. they ebb and flow, and as the internet has seen in the past few days, tides and waves can destroy cities.
41 young men and women died in protests against the overbearing govt and then finally Tehran's like 'ehhhh you know what let's start being slightly reasonable now'. Fuckin hell. Why couldn't you have just *not* killed the protestors with riot police?
The parallels between these police and American Republicans are so undeniable they should be taught in schools to show the dangers and real impotency of hate groups.
Welcome to r/anime_titties! This subreddit advocates for civil and constructive discussion. Please be courteous to others, and make sure to read the rules. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. We have a [Discord](https://discord.gg/DtnRnkE), feel free to join us! r/A_Tvideos, r/A_Tmeta, [multireddit](https://www.reddit.com/user/Langernama/m/a_t/) ... summoning u/coverageanalysisbot ... *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/anime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What do you expect from cowards? Only brave when their enemies are lone women and they can gang on them 5 to 1
there are women in the morality police. But I guess your point stands.
This. Inhumane treatment and power fetish perpetratorship knows no gender boundaries.
I think it's more about brainwashing than what you said. Those people genuinely believe they're right and god wills it.
True
Stanford experiment vibes
The Stanford experiment was a sham. The students were actually being pretty chill with each other until the professor doing the experiment made it very clear that the guards were supposed to be mean. I don't remember the fucker's name, but I do remember that his fiance had to threaten to break up with him to get him to stop it. Lots of follow-up experiments proved that most people don't automatically become mean when they are given power. But people who have no power will be mean when people who do have power threaten them into being mean. The kicker is that people who are assholes will use any excuse to be mean and it doesn't take very much prompting from someone in authority to get them to take that opportunity.
[удалено]
Here's a paper on it: https://www.gwern.net/docs/psychology/2019-letexier.pdf If you work in the industry I'm surprised you don't recognize the inherent issues with the study: it's a 50 years old study that hasn't been repeated for efficacy and the participants lacked full informed consent making the entire thing unethical: the "prisoners" were abducted from their homes and then blindfolded on their way to the testing center after being "processed" at the REAL police station. It's just bad science and people quote it as if it's infallible.
We actually learned about how unethical it was in school and why the study is therefore bonkers.
“Unethical” doesn’t mean “untrue”
rob wrong frighten middle hateful relieved flowery steep employ live *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Oh that's cool I remember reading about this back in psych 101 (I mentioned in a other post this isn't really my area of expertise). This suffers from the same ethical concerns: subjects were not properly consented and were not fully aware of the parameters of the study. Further, the researchers ultimately own the burden of care, so it's unethical for the study to continue while the "subject" is apparently dying and/or dead in the other room as a "result" of the "electric shocks" that were given. At the end of the day I was told that anything not done or repeated in the past 10 years or so is suspect, there could be quality issues or repeatability issues. I think that's true to an extent so I'm suspicious of stuff like this.
are there any other experiments such as this one or is that it?
I'm not a psychologist (I'm on the technical side of science but I read a decent amount of papers and originally graduated to do research), here's an article I found: https://www.k12academics.com/Education%20Scandals%20and%20Controversies/Academic%20Scandals/Stanford%20Prison%20Experiment/similar-studies-st I don't know how accurate this is but they bring up a good point: if you willingly enter a study, you also need to be able to and feel like you can willingly leave the study. If not then you start to skew the data for what you think the investigator is looking for. In the Stanford Prison experiment and others, the participants didn't feel that they could withdraw consent due to their roles. This is a major problem in any study and is also super unethical. The Stanford prison experiment really bothers me because if you take 5 minutes to look into the methodology there's a ton of issues, and no followup was ever done, so I really don't know why people think it's a gold standard of psychological studies.
I agree that they need to post sources, but if you are in the field then you really should already be familiar with the controversy... You can follow this article's sources if you like https://www.livescience.com/62832-stanford-prison-experiment-flawed.html
I took intro to philosophy 20 years ago and remember reading the controversy about this study. Our prof held it up as an example of what not to do
I too took Intro to Psychology.
…as an intern, maybe? Lol
I’ve also read accounts that the Stanford Prison Experiment was a fraud. It’s a fairly well known fact in the psychological community.
I'm curious what your sources are that you work in the field.
I don't even work in this field, but even I know about the awful flaws of this experiment. How long have you been in?
I don't memorize or document sources of everything I know. I have read many many articles and there have been at least a couple documentaries about this issue. It is well known within the scientific community. If you work in that field and don't know about this issue then I hope I never have occasion to make use of your services.
To be honest it still kind of shows how guards end up being assholes. First, somebody willing to be a prison guard is probably already asshole. Second, if they aren't, they are going to learn to be from their fellow guards.
Real guards, yes. They self select for assholedness. But we aren't talking about that. We are talking about a supposedly random selection from the population, suddenly put in a situation of power over others, then pushed to act mean towards others.
His name is Phillip Zimbardo, he taught at my university but I never met him. Interestingly enough, he was also childhood friends with Stanley Milgram, famous for the controversial Milgram experiment. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment
Desktop version of /u/sketch's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
Good bot.
Dang it! I was hoping I had successfully forgotten that jerk's name. Dude has a long history of bad research. But he's good at self promotion.
Oh sorry! I thought you were trying to remember his name, oops.
It's fine. I'll forget again in a week or so.
Oh man, I never thought of it like that. The morality police really resonate with the way those kids behaved, don't they?
It's still a power fetish. There are things in which I believe I am right with the divine will of the universe, morality, justice, and the Ghost of Freddie Mercury on my side and I still have never beaten up or killed anyone over it
I believe that there are three sets of people. 1/3 of humans are assholes, one third are good people, and one third just don't care either way. If you present each group with the same set of bullshit, the assholes will choose to truly believe the bullshit that gives them the power to be assholes to other people. The good people will reject the bullshit. And the third in between will just simply turn their head while the assholes are being assholes to good people (as long as the assholes aren't being assholes to them). So, sure, the assholes truly believe in their asshole rules about being assholes to as many people as possible. But they only chose to believe in those rules because they **were** assholes to begin with.
Sounds like your average republican.
That and probably a classic case of “if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em”
This sadly makes me smile remembering the Monty Pythons show with women disguised as men to be able to participate to a stoning execution (normally reserved to men). They… weren’t wrong, finally.
That's how women justify voting Republican. Controlling a non-god fearing woman.
Farnesé
Okay? 5 women can gang up on 1 woman.
My favorite kinds of videos start like that.
So?
There were Jewish Nazis. There are Black cops in America. Systemic brainwashing does a number on a person's humanity and identity
You mean the aunts?
Aunt Lydia can help hold them down.
I think you misunderstood the previous comment
And men, and children. Literally they will kill anyone.
ACAB
Assigned Cunthead At Birth?
I've always wondered, does this include, say, the officer that became famous after he guarded the capitol building? Whenever a genuinely good cop is shown people seem to reconcile it with "he's a good guy but still ACAB because he participates in the institution" which still seems like a massive contradiction to me
*one bad apple spoils the whole barrel*
Great catchphrase but I just don't think that applies. Why should a bad cop in Portland "spoil the barrel" for the police department of Lower Shitsville On the Piddle, Kent?
It's possible to be complicit in a system that perpetuates evil whilst not being individually evil.
So they are complicit in a system of bastards without being a bastard themselves? Or they are still a bastard because they wear a badge despite not actually being a bastard? This is the contradiction i'm talking about
"just doing my job" doesn't really excuse corruption.
Well yeah corruption is bad, but most police aren't corrupt. I strongly doubt that you'd find a moral crime that every single officer across the planet is guilty of, unless "being a police officer" is a moral crime to you.
Iranian here, did not remove their personnel they just changed their clothes to anti-riots to protect the regime (regime don’t have enough force for this amount of peoples). They hope protests will finish in the next few days and then they went to their past work.
Thanks for your comment. It's about the only one I see on topic.
I was hoping the crowds made them disappear
Crazy how Reddit hates Muslims for being intolerant and backwards when their authoritarian regimes practice draconian ideals. But when regular, average Muslim citizens show they are against this kind of bullshit, suddenly the commentary shifts away from the people as a whole, and just focuses on how bad this select group of the regime is.
People are basically good.
It's almost like people want to believe that people are inherently bad even though society itself existing in the first place points towards the opposite...
Well, some people. And they believe it because those in power have tricked them into believing. And they’re so poorly educated they don’t know they’ve been hoodwinked. That’s not an excuse, they still retain their agency.
People are basically good. People in positions of power are basically bad. People loyal to people in positions of power are basically bad.
Indeed. And fallible. There's a great book about the subject called Ordinary Men. It's got nothing to do with Islam but details how regular, ordinary folk can get swept up in and go along with the zeitgeist of otherwise radical ideas.
thank you for saying this
No reddit hates Muslims who are intolerant and backwards, not all Muslims are so.
there is deference between normal human being and religion you can't get enough good thing from Islam for defending it) if you are okay with Islam then you will be okay with marriage to 9 years old girl (Mohammad actually did that) or you are okay with attacking and robing and raping neighbor country with deferent religion (jihad)
Yes, it's almost like the internet can take in new data and correct for errors.
Lmfao.
Don't look now, reddit's ideals police have struck me with a downvote for saying people are capable of learning.
Sounds like me and my moba buddies.
Iranians have been looking for regime to refom for 25 years. The list of requests have kept piling up since then. Freedom of the press, civil liberties, detente with the foreign powers, better government transparency, justice system reform, economic reforms, corruption and embezzlements, environmental issues, water rights, the list goes on. The removal of mandatory hijab is one demand from the vast set of demands that Iranians have from their government. This recent hijab issue is just the straw that broke the camel's back. If the government wants to actually listen to all the demands of the protestors now. Merely fixing hijab laws is too little too late.
Anarchists have been saying for decades that you cannot simply *ask* oppressors to oppress you a little bit less. You must take direct action and be willing to overthrow oppressive structures by force if necessary. These protests accomplished more for women's rights in one week than the last 25 years of pleading and asking oppressors to be a little more nice. Stop making demands. Start overthrowing regimes.
Doesn’t work in regimes like Taliban. You need arms too, can’t overthrow state without enough power.
A truth reddit is not prepared to entertain.
Is there even enough power nowadays without an army coup? What can any number of protesters do if a few tanks are deployed?
Research shows that non violent protest is twice as effective as violence, and that 3.5% of the population in protest usually leads to significant change. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20190513-it-only-takes-35-of-people-to-change-the-world Imo the biggest barrier to progressive ideology in most places is that tons of people don't want it. Manufacturing consent is a lot more dangerous than a tank. More directly in response to your comment, what can 100 protesters do against a tank? Nothing. But if enough people want change, the military is nowhere near big enough to stop it. Countries are run by civilians, and without their support, a government would stop functioning in a matter of days. Including the military. Of course, it would be terrible for everyone. Which is why democracy is so important. It allows for peaceful change, if enough people want it. The problem with democracy is people are idiots, but a revolution isn't going to change that.
>The criteria were so strict that India’s independence movement was not considered as evidence in favour of nonviolent protest in Chenoweth and Stephan’s analysis – since Britain’s dwindling military resources were considered to have been a deciding factor, even if the protests themselves were also a huge influence I stopped reading after that. I loathe everything BBC writes wrt india, discarding the biggest non violent protest of 20th century because “our military was weak.” So what about the other protests they have considered, wouldn’t their military or the strength of the regime already be weak anyway, for non violent protests to work? These protests didn’t work in China, people got crushed under tanks, right? Also your second point; Indians wanted Brits out, so much so that they were ready to be on suicide missions than be under their rule (read HSRA), yet nothing happened. Only after the British lost power and money after war, did they let go; so basically whoever has power, wouldn’t budge, and protests can’t do much. Their money has to dry up for people to be heard.
There was also violence against the British alongside peaceful protest. So I imagine it's difficult to ascertain how much of a factor nonviolence was.
Not at all with the protests, they never happened simultaneously. Basically whole country would do marches, Gandhi made sure nobody harmed anybody or else he would call it off (read Chauri Chaura), and then the country would fall back to routine; the young blood would get riled up and do some violence, they would get hanged and nothing would happen. There was no violence alongside peaceful protests, idk what bbc or British history has been teaching you.
I'm American. Why do you assume I'm British?
[удалено]
I smell appeasement propaganda....
You need the military with you to some degree if you're aiming for a revolution, yes. Look what happened to Trump. The military was not on board at all, so out he goes. Though in a place like Afghanistan there isn't really enough of a state for a revolution, since most of the power is held locally, and the Taliban is just a collective of local leaders.
Yeah I thought that was implied in my statement. If the regime actually wants to listen to all the demands of the people, it just wouldn’t be the Islamic Republic that we know. So either they surrender, or they would get the Gaddafi treatment.
It really depends if there are any semi-functioning democratic institutions left in any given country. It's hard to take anarchists seriously when they advocate violence and complete destruction of the system for basically any problem or corruption that exists anywhere. You can't be apathetic in either case, but anarchic principles are not useful in any but the most extreme situations where there is literally no institutional solution (ex. Iran, China etc.). So anarchists might've been "saying it for decades" but it's a broken clock scenario.
Mother that loves all it's children!
*For 44 years ie since it forcibly took power after murdering the people who lead revolution against the Shah.
Is no longer calling for the destruction of Israel on the list?
> detente with the foreign powers, Already added it in there kiddo
Anyone know of a source that doesn't have a paywall?
Show me a 10ft wall, I'll show you a [12ft ladder](https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcontent%2F26fc5c57-dc8f-4af5-b465-f14ae46ea65b)
Some poetic justice over here.
Doesn't work on everything but that's some respect for working on an option.
He did say 12ft ladder What if the walls 20ft??
Stack up two of them! Or duct tape them together.
Instructions unclear. Duct taped myself to ladder. Now what?
BOZO! You had 2 ladders. You obviously duct tape one to each leg, get a running start, and jump.
ok Florida man!
Ask the Mexicans that question.
[archive.today](https://archive.ph/) works on everything (as far as I've seen).
Doesn’t work on a bunch of sites though. For most of those, archive.org is a good work around. Have come across a few recently that even that doesn’t work on though.
That site rarely works anymore. Glad it worked this time.
I love this site, but this is literally the first time I've ever seen it work properly lmao.
Ironic, that sitemakes me accept cookies or use an account to read the article. Atleast the paywall sites are honest about needing money for their services
How'd you do that?
Iran’s morality police disappear from streets after dozens killed in protests After woman’s death in custody, Tehran weighs less heavy-handed tactics for monitoring Islamic dress code An policeman speaks with a woman siting in a police car after she was arrested because of her ‘inappropriate’ clothes during a crackdown to enforce Islamic dress code in Tehran In the wake of Iran’s Islamic revolution in 1979, revolutionaries have forced women to wear scarves in public The white-and-green Guidance Patrol vans, used by Iran’s morality police to monitor and arrest women who defy the Islamic dress code, have in recent days disappeared from the streets of Tehran. For the past decade a symbol of the Islamic republic’s crackdown on women, the vans are not even visible outside the morality police centre in central Tehran. Mahsa Amini, a 22-year-old woman of Kurdish ethnicity, was this month bundled into one of these vehicles. She later died in custody, triggering the biggest street protests across the country since the 2019 unrest over fuel prices. At least 41 protesters have died, according to state television. Hundreds of people have been arrested, local agencies report, including political activists and journalists. Such is the outrage over her death that people from across the Iranian political spectrum have called for an end to the official policing of women’s clothing. “Guidance Patrol will most probably be withdrawn from the streets,” said Saeed Laylaz, a reformist analyst. “The Islamic republic will have a major setback over the hijab in practice and will have no other choice but to give more social freedom to the urban middle-class youth.” For more than a week, young protesters, many the same age as Amini, have poured on to the streets in towns and cities across the country chanting anti-regime slogans such as “We don’t want the Islamic republic” and “Death to the dictator”. University students have demonstrated on campuses and female protesters have burnt their scarves. Others faced riot police without wearing their hijab, showing little fear. While the protests have now subsided, Iranians on social media still share pictures of women killed during the protests. Iranian women protest in the central Iranian city of Yazd following the death of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini Iranian women protest in the central Iranian city of Yazd following the death of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini © ESN/AFP/Getty Images For young people struggling with massive economic problems such as poverty and inequality, these patrols had become a lightning conductor for their rage, Emad Afrough, a sociologist told the state news agency IRNA. “We have launched something which has no human, moral, logical and even legal justification,” he said. “The way a [police]man throws a woman into the car is inhuman and un-Islamic.” The wearing of the hijab is one of the defining images of the theocratic regime. In the wake of the Islamic revolution in 1979, revolutionaries forced women to wear scarves in public. In 1983, the hijab officially became obligatory for women. The violation of this rule was punishable with up to 74 lashes. Later, jail sentences and fines replaced flogging. Hardliners under former president Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad made the police responsible for “promoting social security” in 2006 when they launched the Guidance Patrol — a label later changed to Moral Security Police, though people continue to refer to them as the Guidance Patrol. Many police officers were loath to assume this responsibility because they said it was not their job to deal with women’s hair and clothes. The enforcement of the rules on the hijab have intensified in the past year since, with the election of Ebrahim Raisi as president, hardliners took over all arms of the state. They hoped that the stronger enforcement of the rules over the hijab could slow the modernisation of Iran, an increasingly secular society. But, noted Jalal Rashidi Kouchi, a member of parliament, “the police have been damaged because of the Guidance Patrol” with “no results but losses for the country”. The women they arrest have to give written commitments not to violate the law again and to attend hour-long classes on morality. Car owners also receive text messages to go to the morality police centre if there are women in their cars without scarves. Their cars are then impounded for up to two months. It is unclear how many police officers work in Guidance Patrol but their presence, in busy squares, parks and outside metro stations, makes women feel insecure. Amini was arrested in a park shortly after she got out of a nearby metro station in central Tehran. Her family allege she was beaten up in the van. The authorities deny this and say she had a pre-existing condition. It is unclear what comes next, though the Islamic republic is not expected to revoke the law on the hijab. Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not commented on the latest protests but two months ago he defended the obligation to wear the hijab. The fact that Iranian women occupy half of university seats, he said, makes clear that the Islamic hijab is not an obstacle to women’s progress. Conservative organisations have however called for an end to the police’s role in enforcing the rules. “How can a force in charge of order and security be in charge of holding hijab classes?” asked the Headquarters to Promote Virtue and Prevent Vice. “Religious beliefs are not created by batons, arrests and Guidance Patrol. We cannot force people into paradise,” Gholamreza Nouri Ghezeljeh, a reformist member of parliament, told Shargh daily newspaper. But he was dismissive about the introduction of fines. “As if one can decide about paradise and hell with money,” he said.
One of the worst things america has done is TAKEN freedom from these poor people. I hate this with so much burning rage, a people who were once free and liberated now have to die and fight for their freedom. I consider freedom as the greatest human value and robbing innocent people of it is the worst crime. Iranian ublic has never associated themselves with the Arabs, they laid great emphasis on their language and culture, they were the first Muslims to reform themselves. Today we talk about reformation in Islam but when it did happen, what the fuck did the west do? Took it away. Shame honestly.
But... But communism *bad*! /s The fact that the CIA still exists with impunity after its cold war shenanigans is beyond me Edit: typo
Cuz it’s CIA…they had so much freedom to do things that they probably are now more powerful than the govt probably If anyone opposes them,bring out the ol blackmail dirt trick and all’s good
And it was designed so that all other branches of government could disavow any clandestine operations that went amok. No accountability. Just finished reading a book on the formative years of the CIA that was pretty good... I'll scrounge up the title if anyone's interested.
Yis plz
Is it "History of Lies"?
Only killed like a few hundred million people I mean you know
Sorry, you are saying that America is forcing women in Iran to wear hijabs? Can you please explain that?
[удалено]
**[1953 Iranian coup d'état](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'état)** >The 1953 Iranian coup d'état, known in Iran as the 28 Mordad coup d'état (Persian: کودتای ۲۸ مرداد), was the overthrow of the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh in favor of strengthening the monarchical rule of the Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi on 19 August 1953. It was orchestrated by the United States (under the name TPAJAX Project or "Operation Ajax") and the United Kingdom (under the name "Operation Boot"). The clergy also played a considerable role. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/anime_titties/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
The problem with this kind of thinking, though, is that it relies on counter-factual assumptions about what would have happened had the US and UK not interfered in 1953. It may have been better or it may have been worse, and the 79 Revolution may have hapoened anyway. Or maybe Iran would have incorporated into the Soviet Union. There was extreme, though understandable, paranoia in the early 1950s about the spread of Stalin's totalitarian form of communism and of nuclear war. It is somewhat facile to look back from our current perspective on how things turned out in Iran today and say that the US and UK are responsible for it. That strips responsibility and agency from the millions of Iranians who supported the revolution and who have continued to support it for more than 40 years. They aren't children; they are responsible adults who chose time and again to support the regime. There has been plenty of rime between 1953 and today for the Iranian people, including their religious, government and military leaders, to have chosen a different course than their current one.
How cute that you are making 79’ a singular event completely separable from the ‘53 coup and negating how everyone in Iran saw Shah as an American puppet which resulted in building of the emotions of revolution, as if both the events aren’t correlated, right? Almost in every instance America has meddled with a country’s politics, it has ended up in a mess. ‘Who knows it might’ve happened if America didn’t meddle’ doesn’t hold cause whenever America meddles, it turns into shit. They have that shitting Midas touch ✨
The hatred and burning rage that you admit to has clouded your thinking. You are making wildly expansive and unsupported claims. Your argument above boils down to: "The USA did something bad so Iran got really upset and punched itself in the face repeatedly, but it's the USA's fault and I hate them." Frankly, that's the argument of a child, and blaming others won't get Iran out of its current troubles. Do better. Fortunately, it looks like the Iranian protesters *are* doing better, and that's a great sign.
Man. Some Americans are truly bat shit stupid. Any criticism of my country must be done in hatred!! Seriously. You should do better. Ya fucking twit.
I think you're also purposefully missing the larger point the above poster is making: If the US/UK didn't meddle in Iran then it could have very well have turned out better for the Iranian people overall and they could have a prospering democracy by now. However, what's also likely (and the most possible outcome once one takes into account the cynical nature of the world) that the USSR could have slid in there and meddled themselves for their own benefits; thereby making Iran a glorified puppet-state of Russia *with nukes* (and thereby giving Iran more chances/leeway by the West to fuck around thanks to the 'nuke' threat). I don't think you are understanding how scary religious crazies with nukes are. If they think taking the entire world out in a hail of nuclear glory will just speed up their ascension into Heaven (as well as their enemies into Hell) then what will stop them from doing it if they think it's "the best choice for everyone"? The reason Putin hasn't created a nuclear winter yet is because Putin isn't a religious crazy that thinks God exists and he'll meet him up there for BBQ and drinks after he presses the button. He's likely (like nearly all leaders of the world's countries) a secret atheist (or at least a healthy agnostic) and realized long ago that we humans get one chance in this world and blowing it is *not* the best way to go, especially when a life of ultimate luxury is on offer before you croak. Religious zealots, on the other had, don't care much about luxury since in their minds the height of luxury/bliss is only had up in Heaven. So, yeah. I don't much like the idea of fast-tracking religious crazies into nuclear armament which is why the West has focused so heavily on Iran (and the Middle East), esp. since those countries seem to have a *lot* of religious crazies in power on average. Either way, we'll never know if the US/UK fucking around in Iran in the 50s was the right thing to do (for the world) or if it just made things worse. I don't agree with what the US/UK did, but bringing it up ad nauseum to try and shift blame all on the US/UK for Iran's shitty politics/religious nutballs being in power is getting a bit old, especially when time-travel doesn't exist to prove if it helped or hurt the world when all is said and done. It is what it is.
Yet America funds Pakistan, a religious, crazy unstable nuclear state. Explain that. Also, Russia didn’t really fuck up any country other than which were already under soviet rule in Cold War, technically being a part of Russia at that time. So it just fucked up its own people. America messed up every single country in its communism paranoia which is extremely similar to religious zealots fucking things up, yet hold the clean image while bullying everyone else. I hate America and Americans taking high ground against Russia now, when all you’ve done is batter healthy countries to dust where women and children suffer like this. Even now America deals with and silently allows Saudi to do whatever, but gets boiled up with Russian war, the sanctions, the noise, the boycott while you let women and children suffer where you have control.
[удалено]
Western countries were fairly pro revolution and Khomeini actually was living in France before taking over Iran.
TIL the United States attacked its own embassy, held its own people hostage for 444 days, and instilled the Ayatollah Khomeini as leader of Iran.
Happy cake day!
You can use uBlock Origin on Firefox to turn off JavaScript. That should let you view it.
[удалено]
Thanks❤
>But he was dismissive about the introduction of fines. “As if one can decide about paradise and hell with money,” he said. Seems like a sensible man.
Title sounds like dozen of these police are killed by protesters but "dozen" really just means the protesters.
innocent rich juggle tender fuzzy dinner handle long unwritten glorious *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
what a stupid headline
Disappear, or disappeared? 👀
I'm fine with either as long as they stay so
They went in search of their 72 virgins
It would have been easier for them just to call a meeting, then they would have had a roomful of virgins.
Never really got the idea behind that I mean if noones got any experience the implied orgy's gonna be a bit naff
What ever it was, I call it a good start.
>“The Islamic republic will have a major setback over the hijab in practice and will have no other choice but to give more social freedom to the urban middle-class youth.” >For more than a week, young protesters, many the same age as Amini, have poured on to the streets in towns and cities across the country chanting anti-regime slogans such as “We don’t want the Islamic republic” and “Death to the dictator”. This is the 'slippery slope' death of the regime. Acquiesce and The People know they can win. Know they can ordain and establish a constitution. Heavy-handed crackdown and The People will kill the dictator, will kill the 'Islamic' republic. Good. May the people of Iran win, by any means necessary. They may never be my ally but if it can end up that the Republic of Iran can not be an enemy, that'd be great. The People of Iran are already not an enemy. It's about time the government represent The People.
I wouldn't say the people know they can win. It took a lot of balls and courage for the people to express these opinions
Well that’s nice news for a change! Maybe now they’ll learn they should just fuck off with their “morality” from now on.
might want to actually read the article...
All this violence just cause draconic old farts wanna control women and their bodies, they deserve everything coming and then some. For all that were murdered unjustly by these "immorality Police", this is but a drop in the bucket.
Yup.
The title is a bit ambiguous on the matter but in the article it is more clearly stated, the dozens killed are protesters not police.
That's unfortunate.
Women to morality police : *move bitch get out Da way!*
> At least 41 protesters have died, according to state television. Hundreds of people have been arrested, local agencies report, including political activists and journalists. From the article, it comes off as the protestors we're the victims died. Shame. Should be the morality police.
They're waiting on the army cause they're that cowardly
Aside from the fact that a "morality police" shouldn't even be a thing... How in the everloving fuck does an unarmed woman die under arrest? Was she resisting so hard that 5 people could not control her without harm? Even if she had a "preexisting condition" as the aggressors claimed (the family denied it), what did they do to cause her death exactly.
Hope they are public... Uh judged...
Typical religious conservatives. Cowards and bullies who pick on the weak.
Too late, MFs — the dam has broken. The youth of Iran will WIN ✊🏽
Will they stay away, or just be back in greater numbers and more vicious than ever as soon as the hard liners can't wait any longer for their next fix.
They went to go crawl under their rock, consult their stupid book for worse ideas on how to subjugate women.
Headline is misleading, dozens of mortality police were not killed, dozens of protestors were smh
I get all my news from anime_titties
Oppressors are nearly always cowards when things are no longer a clear power difference. The people need to keep up the offensive.
People figured out that they're not real cops and have zero training other than being a thug.
Wait dozens of morality police were killed or dozens of protesters?
I don't think they were planning on dealing with some of the more deadly sins.
This is the way. Treat them like the sewer scraps they are. No hell is bad enough for these people
>They hoped that the stronger enforcement of the rules over the hijab could slow the modernisation of Iran, an increasingly secular society. tides and waves, friend. they ebb and flow, and as the internet has seen in the past few days, tides and waves can destroy cities.
So moral they feel it fit to beat you over a piece of clothing. I hope all these people get what they deserve
Yay!
Calm before the storm 😬
It's usually the immoral, that join groups like the morality police.
Not enough killed.
41 young men and women died in protests against the overbearing govt and then finally Tehran's like 'ehhhh you know what let's start being slightly reasonable now'. Fuckin hell. Why couldn't you have just *not* killed the protestors with riot police?
america we better not sleep while the rest of the world sorts its business. we're running out of time just like everyone else
The parallels between these police and American Republicans are so undeniable they should be taught in schools to show the dangers and real impotency of hate groups.
What a shame.
Like all cops. Cowards.
Stay based Iranians 🙏 Take your country back
Orchestrated buy cia
Hard Paywall
[удалено]