Support NeoGAF

[Skellig Gra]

It doesn't, if "disrespecting your host" would mean subjugating under ridiculous customs that have you as less-worthy human.

Head scarf really isn't that bad at all. There are far more sexist customs in Muslim majority countries. I don't think any of those women in the Swedish government were forced at gun point to A) go on the trip and B) wear the head scarf

 

[freeofgreed]

I think it is hilarious that the bigots who complain about "you should respect the traditions of the native country" are loosing their shit over this.

Pretty much.

Why would you expect them to go to another country and deliberately antagonize them?

I've always been under the impression that's just what you do when diplomats visit other countries.

Seems like an unfortunately necessary thing when doing diplomacy- don't piss the other party off. Seems like the alt-right make this into a huge deal because they think 'Sweden is a cucked country' or something.

Yup. Seems like a none issue and is pretty common. You can be totally against headscarfs and still have diplomatic relations with a country who enforces them. Doesn't make you a hypocrite, as i'd be pointless to antagonize each other over it.

 

[Murkas]

Do these people ever bring up women rights in the Middle East without using it to discredit feminists in Western countries in a ""haha you claim to be feminists but what about hurrr" style?

 

[APF]

Should no one come on diplomatic missions to the US until the gender wage-gap is filled?

 

[Mimosa97]

Western european diplomats keep bowing and caving under pressure from authoritarian and archaic regimes in the name of diplomacy when the diplomats from those countries refuse to change their ways when they visit european countries.

I remember the italian government hiding statues of naked people during a visit of the iranian primer minister. Anyone in this thread who says " this is just diplomacy in action " is an idiot. It would be okay to say this if the feeling was mutual and there was some kind of reciprocity. When only one side takes the adage " when in rome ... " to hearth while the other shits all over it, then it isn't called diplomacy it's called being weak and letting your values get trampled in the name of religion.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

Well, the second article features criticism by Masih Alinejad, so not quite.

Meant here in the thread but there's men in the story also criticizing them for 'hypocrisy' when it comes to feminism.

 

[Ri'Orius]

Diplomacy is hard. There are times it is best to be confrontational, there are times it is best to be submissive. Some people (like our esteemed President) seem to think that you should just be aggressive all the damn time. Others have pointed out that sometimes that just leads to the other guy digging in harder (like in the case of our recent election).

I see no indication that these Swedes made the choice they did out of malice or deviation from their stated aims of promoting equality worldwide. And while it's conceivable that choosing to be aggressive in this case would eventually yield better results, ultimately that's a judgment call and I put more stock in professional diplomats' judgment than my own, or that of any other random schmuck on the internet (no offense y'all).

 

[Kinyou]

Should no one come on diplomatic missions to the US until the gender wage-gap is filled?

Does the US demand that they reduce their daily wage for the time of their visit?

 

[Dalibor68]

Should no one come on diplomatic missions to the US until the gender wage-gap is filled?

Because obviously a gender wage-gap is the same as forcing women by law to cover themselves up.

 

[Pusherman]

Western european diplomats keep bowing and caving under pressure from authoritarian and archaic regimes in the name of diplomacy when the diplomats from those countries refuse to change their ways when they visit european countries.

Our freedom, understanding and tolerance of other cultures is not a fucking weakness. It's a strength that needs to be underlined especially if you want to criticize other countries for not having it.

 

[ant_]

Bunch of men criticizing women for not being feminist enough.

What does this even mean? Do you have anything to contribute to the argument beside ad-hominem attacks?

I'm a man and feminism is an important issue to me. Especially feminism on the global scale. Women suffer greatly in the middle east and it pains me that western countries seem to favor tolerance of anti-western values over equality for women.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

This is disappointing. They should not have worn it, if they truly think it is unjust.

 

[Spaced Harrier]

Bunch of men criticizing women for not being feminist enough.

^^^^^^^^^

Damn straight I am.

 

[Dalibor68]

Our freedom, understanding and tolerance of other cultures is not a fucking weakness. It's a strength that needs to be underlined especially if you want to criticize other countries for not having it.

It's exactly the opposite, misguided tolerance in regards to very problematic aspects of other cultures is what led to many of the problems we have in the 21st century. Caving in and just accepting this one-sided value judgement is as weak as it gets. Cultural relativism in regards to extremely backwards policies is a very big problem.

 

[Kinsei]

If they're not going to stand up against injustice like this (even if it ends up harming the country) then they shouldn't be calling themselves feminists. No diplomats should call themselves feminists cause they'll never actually stand up for it when it matters most.

 

[WarrenD]

I constantly read here about how every Trump voter has screwed the pooch. How even if it was because he promised jobs in a rural area he's still thrown minorities and women under a bus, and that is not acceptable. But now we're talking compromise? Doing the right thing in the right place? GTFO. Certain things (human rights) are not up for compromise and reading this genuinely disgusts me. A countries trade is higher valued than the people of the country they're trading with, that's not acceptable in any way shape or form. Should have cancelled the meeting or taken a hard stance over this.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

Our freedom, understanding and tolerance of other cultures is not a fucking weakness. It's a strength that needs to be underlined especially if you want to criticize other countries for not having it.

You can be tolerant of different customs; it's not the headscarf itself that's the problem, it's that they were forced to wear it, and they capitulated. Many women in Iran do not want to wear the headscarf, but are forced to, by law. The diplomats should have stood up for these women by, at the very least, telling the Iranian lawmakers that, no, if I want to wear a headscarf, it will be by my own accord, not because you obliged me.

 

[petran79]

How do u think homosexuals member of the delegation were feeling being in a country that has stellar records about LGBT rights?

Didnt their leader also talk to a USA university some years ago, claiming there are no homosexuals in Iran? Audience were constantly booing

 

[skullmuffins]

Yup. Seems like a none issue and is pretty common. You can be totally against headscarfs and still have diplomatic relations with a country who enforces them. Doesn't make you a hypocrite, as i'd be pointless to antagonize each other over it.

Do these people ever bring up women rights in the Middle East without using it to discredit feminists in Western countries in a ""haha you claim to be feminists but what about hurrr" style?

Yeah, this. They decided it would be better to follow the law of the country they visited rather than try and make a stand over this. It doesn't make them hypocrites or not real feminists. And don't post photos of politicians visiting Saudi Arabia without headscarves - they're not legally mandated for foreign women there, so it's a completely different dynamic. Let me know when the Swedes start wearing headscarves in their own country when Iranian politicians are visiting and I'll start to care.

 

[Jumeira]

They're entering public office, they follow the dress code, I don't have any qualms about it if it's a mark of respect. Change will happen on thier terms you can't force it, theres more pressing issues like human rights that they, having ganined respect should bring up.

Also, re the statues, that was Italians from what I remember. Yes, it was wrong but the Iranians had a good laugh reading the outrage for something they didn't demand.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

What does this even mean?

It means what it says. What difficulty are you having?

 

[ant_]

It means what it says. What difficulty are you having?

I see that you clipped the entirety of my post, lol. When you want to address it completely, feel free. 'll even repeat it for you: I'm a man and feminism is an important issue to me. Especially feminism on the global scale. Women suffer greatly in the middle east and it pains me that western countries seem to favor tolerance of anti-western values over equality for women.

 

[Cartman86]

They're entering public office, they follow the dress code, I don't have any qualms about it if it's a mark of respect. Change will happen on thier terms you can't force it, theres more pressing issues like human rights that they, having ganined respect should bring up.

Also, re the statues, that was Italians from what I remember. Yes, it was wrong but the Iranians had a good laugh reading the outrage for something they didn't demand.

They can do what they want. Make a strategical move etc, but I don't for second believe that you "can't force change".

 

[Pusherman]

You can be tolerant of different customs; it's not the headscarf itself that's the problem, it's that they were forced to wear it, and they capitulated. Many women in Iran do not want to wear the headscarf, but are forced to, by law. The diplomats should have stood up for these women by, at the very least, telling the Iranian lawmakers that, no, if I want to wear a headscarf, it will be by my own accord, not because you obliged me.

No, I was talking about the people complaining that Iranians 'get away with' not shaking hands with women when they are here or having European governments act culturally sensitive. What I meant was that it is stupid to portray that as some kind of capitulation on our part instead of a shining example of freedom, understanding and tolerance. The people saying things like: "we conform to their culture but they'd never do the same here" sound like the people going on about getting cucked. It wrongly identifies a strength as a weakness because someone else makes use of it.

I agree with you on what happened here. I think that being a feminist diplomat does not preclude wearing a headscarf but that in this case, where a country obliges women to do so by law, it legitimizes misogynist laws. So I'd prefer it if diplomats took a stronger stance here. However, diplomacy is a complex and nuanced affair and I also think it's important to not engage with Iran in too an adversarial manner.

It's exactly the opposite, misguided tolerance in regards to very problematic aspects of other cultures is what led to many of the problems we have in the 21st century. Caving in and just accepting this one-sided value judgement is as weak as it gets. Cultural relativism in regards to extremely backwards policies is a very big problem.

I strongly disagree. Most problems have their own specific causes but if I had to name a big important one I'd say it's the pervasive ignorance of the history behind many of the situations and processes in the world today and an inability to reckon with our pasts and the way they lead to our present.

 

[ClosingADoor]

My problem, which is why I chose that example, is that the criticism is asynchronous. All this is without taking into account diplomacy.
Whether or not these politicians made the correct decision is another question altogether.

For diplomatic reasons, I understand why they did it. But it is not the message a Western government should sent, because it shows they are OK with complying with sexist laws.

So I think they made the wrong choice. If you go there for personal reasons and choose to do this (or have to do this) that is your choice for going there and going along with the laws. But a government visit has different standards and should take that into account.

Should no one come on diplomatic missions to the US until the gender wage-gap is filled?

You can play this game both ways; should Muslim countries still sent their government representatives to the US if the Trump administration pushes through anti-Muslim laws? But it has little to do with this discussion and is just a form of whataboutism.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

I see that you clipped the entirety of my post, lol. When you want to address it completely, feel free. 'll even repeat it for you: I'm a man and feminism is an important issue to me. Especially feminism on the global scale. Women suffer greatly in the middle east and it pains me that western countries seem to favor tolerance of anti-western values over equality for women.

I cut it off at the appropriate time. I don't waste my time with faux-intellect who pull the fallacy-fallacy. So I stopped when my eyes rolled out of my skull with the hilariously incorrect usage of one.

But since you're having trouble I guess I will extrapolate this for you:

Men don't have to deal with the same pressures society places on women. They are universally respected in nearly every culture. So men attacking a professional woman by labeling her a 'hypocrite', or putting her feminism into question because she elected to wear a headscarf in order to conduct discussion in another country is almost always done by those looking to undermine women. Sometimes the fight for equality means obliging something temporarily in order to make headway down the line. It's called playing the long game and it's something good officials or representatives consider. Them wearing headscarves is in noway the affront to feminism some people are trying to make it out to be.

Does that help you any? Or do I need to be needlessly verbose.

 

[Toxi]

Over the weekend, Prime Minister Stefan Lofven led a Swedish delegation to Iran. Lofven was received warmly by the Islamic Republic's political elite — Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei tweeted positively about his meeting with Lofven, adding that Sweden had a ”good reputation" in his country — and the two countries agreed upon a number of trade-related deals.

I don't know how to feel about this.

Iran is an authoritarian and oppressive regime. So trading with them legitimizes their government's oppression. But we also know from experience that refusing to trade with them doesn't change them. So what's the solution here? The US has the same dynamic with other countries like Saudi Arabia. At what point should we actually do something about economically supporting a nation that violates human rights?

 

[Ratrat]

Or you could meet in Sweden and expect the same of them.

'Crickets'

Pretty much.

So which is it?

 

[Gordon Shumway]

I think it is hilarious that the bigots who complain about "you should respect the traditions of the native country" are loosing their shit over this.

Indeed..

 

[King Gilga]

They shouldn't have done it but it's not thaaat big of a deal.

 

[ant_]

I cut it off at the appropriate time. I don't waste my time with faux-intellect who pull the fallacy-fallacy. So I stopped when my eyes rolled out of my skull with the hilariously incorrect usage of one.

But since you're having trouble I guess I will extrapolate this for you:

Men don't have to deal with the same pressures society places on women. They are universally respected in nearly every culture. So men attacking a professional woman by labeling her a 'hypocrite', or putting her feminism into question because she elected to wear a headscarf in order to conduct discussion in another country is almost always done by those looking to undermine women. Sometimes the fight for equality means obliging something temporarily in order to make headway down the line. It's called playing the long game and it's something good officials or representatives consider. Them wearing headscarves is in noway the affront to feminism some people are trying to make it out to be.

Your first paragraph holds nothing of value. You merely attack my "faux-intellect" and call my argument hilarious.

Your second paragraph is an argument, so I'll engage with it.

Are they not hypocrits? They are feminists who want to promote feminism worldwide. In Iran there is a feminist movement in which women are struggling to gain the same rights under the law as men. Women in Iran are mandated to wear headscarves when in public. An incredibly male-centric, degrading, and archaic policy. It's incredibly sad to me that a country so in-favor of womens equality (Sweden) can work with a country that is so obviously struggling with treating women as equals (Iran). I would have hoped they would have sympathized with the struggle for equality within that country.

You say that obliging inequality temporarily is necessary for struggles of freedom. In what world do you live in? Where in the world has the attempt to "work" with backwards regimes ever worked out in the favor of everyday people? I encourage you to look at the relations with Germany before WW2. Most European countries attempted to treat them diplomatically, too. The US suffers this same problem in the modern day. We have no fucking backbone and will work with any country if it serves our national interest (see: Saudi Arabia). And thus, these countries become legitimized by working with the United States. Fuck, even Russia is an example of this. They've been legitimized by the lack of backbone from Western countries.

Don't kid yourself. Iran doing business with Sweden doesn't push Iran any closer to equality for women. It merely legitimizes their stance of inequality. It's showing them that they can have their cake and eat it too.

 

[Micael]

Bunch of men criticizing women for not being feminist enough.

Given that feminism is about equality between men and women, I fail to see why shouldn't a men be just as entitled to criticize a women commitment to feminism as a women is? In fact I would argue excluding a men view on feminism is anti feminism by definition, even if you don't agree with their views.
To clarify I don't really agree with the idea that they should have said fuck it, if they feel like they want to wear it for the benefit of the diplomatic mission (or for what ever reason) it is their choice to do so, and I think it is the right choice, especially considering their job is to help Sweden and its people, not the people of Iran.

 

[Spyware]

At the risk of sounding arrogant: 95 % of the world has shadier governments than ours. If we let that be a limiting factor for trade, we'd starve. The arms export, for instance, is supposed to allow us to funnel enough money back into our own defence to make sure that we don't have to either end up invaded by or dependent on said shadier governments.

Spoiler

Well yes, the last point isn't really in play anymore because our defence is now totally inadequate. But that was the original spirit behind our exports and worked well enough until after the Soviet Union collapsed.

This is pretty much what I was gonna answer. If we said "Screw you!" to everyone we deemed lesser than us in any meaningful way, we wouldn't be able to do business with anyone other than perhaps Norway. That's just not how it works in the real world.

 

[Toxi]

Just like we shouldn't do business with any country that is supporting inequality like gay marriage, LGBT rights, pro death penalty etc?

(In that case we shouldn't have done any business with the US until a few years ago)

We still got the death penalty in many states and are already backing down on transgender rights.

 

[pringles]

Overreaction imo. Diplomacy can solve a lot more than making some kind of statement by refusing to comply with something as relatively simple as wearing those headscarves. Iran isn't going to change it's ways because Sweden stops doing business with them, but by having a decent relationship between the countries, Sweden might be able to influence some things.

Sweden is not tolerant anymore. It is getting seperate bathtimes for men and woman cause of religion for example.
No wonder its got a "good reputation" from Iran.

Sorry, could you elaborate on this please?

No, he can't elaborate because he has no idea what he's talking about.

Long story short: some public baths in Sweden have separate times for women and men, most of them only a day or two a week. Some have had this arrangement since forever, others instated it recently. For the latter group, they typically argue that it's because some women feel uncomfortable being half naked around men or don't feel safe. This particularly applies to Muslim immigrant women, and the baths want to accomodate them, while also giving the option to native women who might share the same opinion.

The Swedish alt-right, however, either claims that it's proof of the breakdown in Swedish secularism, takeovers by Muslims and/or an attempt to cover up that Swedish women are no longer safe from sexual assaults by immigrant men in the baths.

Thank you.

 

[Alienfan]

#1 - You assume they respect Western values when in the West? The handshake issue and the statue issue would both say no, they don't.

#2 - Regressive policies and ways of thinking should not be catered to, period. Nobody anywhere in the world should get a free pass.

Yep. No one should be respecting these misogynistic practices

 

[Toxi]

This is pretty much what I was gonna answer. If we said "Screw you!" to everyone we deemed lesser than us in any meaningful way, we wouldn't be able to do business with anyone other than perhaps Norway. That's just not how it works in the real world.

As someone living in one of those countries with a shadier government than yours, it's definitely a relevant question when governments should prioritize opposing regressive policy above material gain. Especially when it's a major trade ally.

International politics are ugly business (With an emphasis on the business part).

 

[Airola]

I think it is hilarious that the bigots who complain about "you should respect the traditions of the native country" are loosing their shit over this.

But isn't that usually concerning people who come to permanently live in their country and not about people who are just visiting / being tourists / etc? That the people who are about to make the country as their new home should respect the traditions of that country?

 

[Spyware]

As someone living in one of those countries with a shadier government than yours, it's definitely a relevant question when governments should prioritize opposing regressive policy above material gain. Especially when it's a major trade ally.

I guess we're sorta trying to do both at the same time.
If we're gonna start saying "no they are just too bad"... then where do we draw the line? :/

 

[T.O.P]

They don't seem too happy.

What a sad picture

 

[PatThePassive]

Western european diplomats keep bowing and caving under pressure from authoritarian and archaic regimes in the name of diplomacy when the diplomats from those countries refuse to change their ways when they visit european countries.

I remember the italian government hiding statues of naked people during a visit of the iranian primer minister. Anyone in this thread who says " this is just diplomacy in action " is an idiot. It would be okay to say this if the feeling was mutual and there was some kind of reciprocity. When only one side takes the adage " when in rome ... " to hearth while the other shits all over it, then it isn't called diplomacy it's called being weak and letting your values get trampled in the name of religion.

This seems more up to the women themselves if they want to wear the headscarf or not.

The incident with the covering of statues was actually bad, I still don't know how they thought that was a good thing to do.

It hardly seems like one group is weak and the other is using their religion for an upper hand or whatever, just seems like certain European governments want to go all out in being polite, and sometimes its to a fault like with the statues.

 

[Toxi]

I guess we're sorta trying to do both at the same time.
If we're gonna start saying "no they are just too bad"... then where do we draw the line? :/

I don't know.

 

[APF]

Because obviously a gender wage-gap is the same as forcing women by law to cover themselves up.

They're different things, but I'm not sure which is objectively worse?

You can play this game both ways; should Muslim countries still sent their government representatives to the US if the Trump administration pushes through anti-Muslim laws?

No, they should not.

 

[Napalm_Frank]

This is pretty much what I was gonna answer. If we said "Screw you!" to everyone we deemed lesser than us in any meaningful way, we wouldn't be able to do business with anyone other than perhaps Norway. That's just not how it works in the real world.

I was talking about selling weapons to countries like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Point being business almost always triumphs over holier than thou politics. Same thing as this feminism thing, of course they are not gonna push their ideology if they wanna talk business.

 

[chillybright]

Weak.

 

[d00d3n]

The Swedish alt-right, however, either claims that it's proof of the breakdown in Swedish secularism, takeovers by Muslims and/or an attempt to cover up that Swedish women are no longer safe from sexual assaults by immigrant men in the baths.

To be fair, the criticism of separate times in bathhouses was not an alt-right only thing. Sakine Madon has been one of the most prolific debaters regarding this issue, and she can hardly be described as alt-right.

 

[Luxorek]

And meanwhile Ajatollah won't shake hands with female dignitaries when visiting foreign countries.

Some of the posts on the first page are downright uninformed and disingenuous. This isn't 'respecting' the culture and tradition of Iran, this is comforming to the oppresive religious regime that holds power there. Google 'women Iran pre revolution' if anybody is curious what it was like once.

I guess some concessions have to be made, that's how diplomacy works. We don't have to like it though.

 

[m_shortpants]

Isn't that what diplomacy is about?

That's why Bush W held hands with Saudi Kings. Presumably not because he wanted to.

 

[fr0st]

Isn't that what diplomacy is about?

That's why Bush W held hands with Saudi Kings. Presumably not because he wanted to.

As other have pointed out.

When Iranians visit other countries they don't shake hands with female officials.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

Iran should see how far they can push it: now wear this clown nose, now wear this badge that says "women aren't as good as men". It'd be like a game of feminist Buckaroo!