WOMEN

verrrrry okkkkkkay

نیگا کن بابا جان به این حرکت شما تو ایران میگن جندگی بهش میگن زنا یکی از دوستان یه مطلبی گفته بو که به اینکار که قصد شما از آن غربتا الی الله هست و هیچ پولی دریافت نمی کنید (خداوند شما رو حفظ کنه که چه نیت خالصی دارید و به مادیات بها نمیدید) میگن پتیاره گی اما پتیاره و جنده این هردو به یک معنی بکار برده میشه یعنی دیگه نمیگن طرف پتیارست میگن جنده است به مردش هم طبق همین تعریف میگن یارو جاکش یا بعضا هم میگن کسکشه گمونم سرو صدای این جریان قتل رو شنیده که یه زنه تو تبریز یا یکی از شهرهاش با یه یارو ریختن رو همدیگه بعد هم شوهر رو کشتن اسم زنه هم سکینه هست اما فامیلیش الان یادم نمیاد طرف رو اولا به جرم زنای محصنه و بعد به جرم قتل متهم شناختن خود زنای محصنه که به خودی خود حکمش اعدامه و این دیدگاه تو ایران که یه کشور با اعتقادات مذهبی هست وجود داره ولی اینجور که معلومه تو کشوری که شما زندگی میکنی اینجوری نیست وبه اینکار به عنوان یه کار والا و با ارزش نگاه می کنن و پرداخته میشه حالا شما اونجایی خودت رو زیاد قاطی ایرانی ها نکن طبق نظر همونا زندگی کن و برای همونها و تو سایتهای خارجی مطلب بنویس در ضمن من که این حرف رو می زنم الان 32 سالمه از یکی که تو ایران بوده بپرسی بهت میگه بنده تو کوچه برلن مغازه لباس فروشی داشتم که بورس لباس زنونه و جای خیلی شلوغیه که 90 درصد مشتریام خانمها بودند تو میدون انقلاب درست جنب یکی از دانشگاههای علمی کاربردی مغازه بوتیک داشتم که مشتری هام دختر های دانشجو و کلا خانمها بودن ولی عزیزم تا این سن که رسیدم شکر خدا نه زنا کردم نه به امید خدا میکنم یه چیزی به نام اعتقادات و مذهب هست که تو اونجایی که شما هستی وجود نداره و جندگی رو بهش وجهء قانونی و عرفی می بخشه و یه کار معمولی مثل آب خوردنه ولی اینجا یه تعریف دیگه ای داره و اگر کسی این کار رو انجام بده به دید یه کار خوب بهش نگاه نمیکن تو اینتر نت یه سرچ کنی با نام فقر و فحشا یه فیلم رو بهت پیشنهاد میده که بخری شاید بتونی دانلودشم پیدا کنی تو این فیلم یه دختره هست که می گه برای امرار معاش مجبورم این کارو بکنم نه اینکه بگه دوست دارم خوشم میاد یا.... نه چون اینکار چه تو شرع چه تو عرف جزو بدترین و ززننده ترین کارها بوده و هست درسته شاید تو غرب یه افتخار باشه مخصوصا برای شما اما اینجا تو ایران جزو بدترین و کثیف ترین کارها بوده و هست نه حالا تاریخ هم همینو نشون میده

پریناز حمایتت میکنم

Let's clarify something here,

Prostitute = whore = person who provides sexual services for a fee 

 طبق تعریف "جنده" به  سکس  در مقابل پول اطلاق میشه بنابرین جمله زیر کاملا درست و منطقیه

    "به شوهرم خیانت کردم، با مردای غریبه خوابیدم، و از سکس لذت می برم، اما جنده نیستم."

خانم پریناز شجاعترین زنی هستند که من تا بحال دیده یا شنیده ام و من که هنوز مجرد هستم اگر با چنین زنی که میدونه چی میخواد و چی دوست داره برخورد کنم حتما برای ازدواج با او ترغیب میشم

اشکال بیشتر خانمها اینه که اون جوری رفتار میکنن که مردها دوس دارن نه اون جوری که خودشون دوس دارن. البته این موضوع آقایون روکه در ارتباط با خانمها معمولا از هوش زیادی هم برخوردار نیستن گیج میکنه و هیچوقت نمیفهمن که خانمها واقعا چی میخواستن

   ترس آقایون از نوشته بالا اینه که نا کارآمدیهاشون درجذابیت جنسی ممکنه باعث بشه که زنشون رو از دست بدن که به نظر من خیلی طبیعی و منطقیه همینطور که وقتی زنها جذابیت جنسی رو برای مردها از دست میدن بعضی از مردها دوست دختر یا زن دوم میگیرن یا از زنشون جدا میشن

اگر همه موضوعات به همین شفافی نوشته بالا مطرح میشد بیشتر مسایل بشریت بسرعت قابل حل بود

sallam

واقعا تنم لرزید!!یه زن چطور میتونه به شوهرش خیانت کنه؟؟در ضمن شما خودتو به اون راه نزن واقعا ... هستی!!
خودت پیدا کن ... یعنی چی!!

mardan

Mardan Yad begirand ke sex chist v zan ra beshenasand v sexkardane dorost rabiyamoozand ta zan mojboor be jostejooye ouj nabashad ke ouj ramardash midahad.hich zani jendeh nist jendeh bi maaniast

zanaano mardane fasedo

zanaano mardane fasedo nabekaar
nadarand hichgooneh vafayi be yaar

konand sohbat az paeene andame khish
nadanad cheh gooyand gar biaii be pish

sokhan bas begooyand hamcho ahreemanan
nadani koja miravi gar rahi az jahaan

nakon goosh be ahreemano divan sefat
nasho gomrah cho aayi boroon az manzelat

chanin mardano namardano zanhaye palid
beshod aghebat kheir aankeh harfam shenid

What a vanilla!!

are you a "deenee" teacher at some junior high? your reasoning sounds like it.

"if you write here and someone reads it and then they get AIDS and die, you will be guilty."

ha ha ha!! you sound like the "little kids" you are trying to "protect."

umm.....E for effort.

زدی به سیم آخرا!!!! شرم و حیا هم خوب چیزیه.

Are you really like that? well that's not a good thing you know. LET ALONE THE MORAL PART. You might already have so many Sexualy transmitted diseases and plus soon you will exhaust your sexual organs and your body. have you ever thought why you don't like the men that you know and use ony for sex? because a good, morale, disciplined and lovable man never comes around a woman lik...(so easy). anyways I don't wanna waste my time with you anymore I hope you find some directions in life.

so the conclusion is to be

so the conclusion is to be good and avoid all temtations and control yourself. If you have bad friends who may lead you in wrong direct5ion in life avoide them and also avoid reading at materials that can trigger bad deeds and thoughts which may procede them.
best wishes to you all. I hope you can use your enrgey to do constructive writing.
just think that if you write something bad here some poor children may be affected by them and go and do wrong things. And when they get AIDS and die, you will be guilty by encouraging them to do immoral things.
so, the best life one has is one man and one woman. not one man 4 or more women.
believe me if you do not thick this way you do have a mental problem. Work on it and fix it if you can. i am talking to everyone and not a particular person.

دخثری پرسید ز

دخثری پرسید ز خود گه من کبستم
خود نداتم که جنده و یا نیستم

در تور کردن مردها من بیستم
ولی نگهداشتن را بلد نیستم

گر لطف کنی بگو گه من کیستم
گر چه بدانم که زن خوبی نیستم

I think farsi is beautiful, just look.

could someone please use

could someone please use farsi fonts and enter the poems so we can red. ther are a few typos there but i am sure you can understand them

bedidam zani dar khiaban bi

bedidam zani dar khiaban bi shoharash
hamana keh bod ze hamkarane man shoharash

zanak bood dast bedaste baa yek marde ajanabi
nadashtam baavar zane ziba ra baa marde mexiki

hamana keh mardi keh hamkaram bebood
yeki najenstar azoo dar company nabood

bebood yel marde irani vali bas palid
bedozdid shoghle daostash ra va bal da-vid

begoftam bekhod pas chanin ast rasme roozgaar
faribe namardi sahabe jendeh zan ra makhor

befahmidam keh zan chera rafteh ba yek mexiki
bebood in dooste hamkar namardtarin dar zendegi

bafahman keh hala jendeho madar jendeh chist
hamana keh danam namardo binamooso bidin kist

Jendeh is that Jendeh does.

Wow! there's some real great stuff posted here. Especially the ones that are not so great :-)

I think the original article was simply...too simple to address the nuances of how messed up our culture's outlook on women and sexual expression is.

I enjoyed the discussions on "the literal meanings of words" and "deffinitions" of what is and isn't a jendeh. But it's hardly what this situation is about, and I could only wish that merely flipping through a dictionary and pulling out some deffinitions would cure our repressions, gender roles and various heirarchies.

No, not any woman who has multiple partners is a Jendeh.

Sure, there is a prevailing sentiment in Iran (and many many other places) that a girl who is not bakere is jendeh.

even as far back as high school - before I had even "lived" abroad and "expanded" my horizons - right at the point where most guys are going from "eeew grrlz" to "oooh...girls" I can recall many many arguments with my buddies, during which I tried, most often to no avail, to explain to them "baba!! harki quosth [I have a little lisp] mideh ke jende nees!"

I admit, that this was not because I'm some kind of defender of gender equality, but rather, I needed to "teach" my "bros" that they ain't gonna git no lovinz if they can't make the girl feel secure about being with them.

I think what Parinaz might have wanted to talk about is the phenomenon of "jende bazi" which is a condition that could effect even the most pure, hardly is exclusive to any one gender, and does not even have to involve sex. It is also hardly exclusive to our dear culture, though as we do with everything, we have taken it to a new order of magnitude.

Lying two faced behavior is Jendeh bazi.
Getting the doctor to stitch your heiman together is jende bazi.
Sewing your oats and expecting to marry a goody two shoed virgin is Jende bazi.

but at the end, in a weird chicken and egg kinda way, the brute unyeilding characteristic of male chauvinism and hypocricy in our culture is beautifully reciprocated with the spectrum of jendeh bazi which [some] Iranian women have refined to an art.

The dumbass that goes to Iran looking for a "mommy approved bakereh" deserves to marry the "jendeh" that may have even paid for her heiman reconstruction with sex.

If we could all just be a little more honest with ourselves and with others about who we are, what we like and what we need, less of us would wake up in the morning feeling like a ho!

baraye khanomi keh bazigar

baraye khanomi keh bazigar ast

'dokhtari porsid az khod ke kistam
khod nadanam keh jendeh yaa nistam

dar toor kardane mardhaa bistam
vali negahdashtan ra balad nistam

gar lotf koni begoo keh man kistam
gar cheh bedanam zane khoobi nistam"

Peykan brings some sense of

Peykan brings some sense of values here and baba taher provides entertainment

Paykan

zani keh mo bedadom noono

zani keh mo bedadom noono abesh
bebordom ranj bahre doono kaahesh

baraft baa marde digar hamcho heivan
ajab zan bihaya gashtom bas geryaan

zani keh raft pahlooye marde digar
az avval jendeh bood cho khana bi-dar

I'm Probably Brainwashed so Let's Connect on Science

I would guess that since Parinaz wasn't able to get this off her chest with Haj Khanoum, she decided to do so here. I would be interested to know if she feels guilty about her status or not, but I would guess that she does, at some level, hence wanting to share this with others in hopes that she could find peers like Flying Solo, Ari and others almost condoning her lifestyle.

I want to make another assumption here and say that Parinaz's husband does not know about her extra-marital affairs. Now leaving aside all religion for our atheist friends, I hope at least we can meet where honesty is a virtue. If so, and if all of my assumptions above are true, wouldn't it be fair to say that Parinaz is at least dishonest?

Is it fair to cougars to have their name be given as an adjective to describe Parinaz in lieu of the words Jendeh or Pateeyareh? Cougars may be promiscuous, but I'm sure their partner is aware of the sexual dynamics of their species, so that doesn't make them dishonest. My plea is, please be more considerate and respect science.

The internet can also be harmful in ways that it brings people with negative intentions together to condone each other and set into action what would have otherwise been only a thought. Example: Mass internet suicides. I hope that suicide is considered negative by our atheist peers here, and that example is enough to prove my point for other behaviors.

So please be careful as well as considerate. You never know what you're triggering in others by your seemingly harmless words.

Triangulating

As much as citing a religious verse is subject to personal belief, social science is also subject to different schools of thought.  Neither one of the two can be used as a REASON for intellectual discourse.  Except, of course, within the scope of relevant discussions; i.e. a verse in Quran is a reason amongst Muslims and a Quote from Freud is a reason amongst Freudians!  

Pregnancy was simply an example, and, of course, both men and women can make themselves infertile.  Nonetheless, the complex issue of social relations is related to differential consequences, intended or not.  As an example, traffic light is designed for safety and smooth flow of traffic.  Now, you may see no car coming from the other side and safely pass the red light.  Obviously, you have neither endangered the safety of others nor interfered with the smooth flow of traffic.  Yet, you have violated the traffic rules and regulations!  An officer may not be present to give you a ticket, but you are still a BAD driver because you are at fault in the complex issue of social relations.  The society as a whole bonds its individual members (in public roads) with rules and regulations NOT subject to selective discretion and/or enforcement.

 Just for the sake of another example, let’s say a man is attracted to a woman or the other way around.  One party is morally against infidelity or extramarital affairs, the other one is not, but hides his/her marital status and/or is “powerful” enough to deceive the other into a sexual engagement.  The consequence is obviously different for either party.  You see, a sexual engagement --as opposed to let’s say masturbation—is not personal, and, therefore, subject to the complex issue of social relations.  The complex structure (including all tools, i.e. constitutional laws, rules, regulations, code of moral conducts, social stigma, etc.) is generally designed or well rooted in a culture to prevent abuse of power and injustice against the less fortunate segment of the society, etc.

Examples are many, and I trust you appreciate the point.  Yet, I have already exceeded my allowable time on this.  I am a very busy working man for a living and on the top of that I am a philanthropist in many socio-political and cultural activities including moderating my own groups.

Personal Attack

Okay, I am glad I do not need to argue with Ms. Azad anymore.  Apparently, she does not tell the difference between personal attack (an emotionally charged statement) and scholarly work.  Since she has forced me to respond to her personal attack, and just for the sake of a case in point, I decided to dignify her childish accusation by a reply.   

First off, I chair Kamal Cultural Foundation that was founded by a woman, and just last year we celebrated the centennial International Women’s Day (//kamaal.net/Old/Mar0708.htm).  I know many fine feminists who I discuss different issues with them some of which we do not share the same opinion.  My wife was a board member to one of Mrs. Ebadi’s organizations.  I wrote an article in her favor when she won the Nobel Prize (//iranian.com/Purqurian/2003/November/Nobel/) and I disagreed with some of her positions recently.   I am well known in San Diego for genuinely and highly respecting women.  In fact, my comments on these two articles were due to suggestions by some group members who are fine feminists.  In effect, they ordered me to do so!

So, in my book of intellectual discourse, people who resort to personal attack –failing to discuss an issue on its own merit -- share the same mindset.  When Ms. Azad attacks me for “Islamic misogyny” she is no different from a mullah who attacks me for blasphemy.  Both of which might fit in preemptive doctrine!  The only difference is the socio-political status and the “power” associated with it.  I hope I am wrong, but I think a Ms. Azad in power is even more brutal than a mullah because of her sense of insecurity vividly present in most of her comments that I have read so far.  Again, it does not have anything to do with her gender, but her mindset thinking a different opinion is a cancerous tumor against women.  

While I am educated in the West, as a student of reason, I do not trash either my cultural background or the western civilization I chose to live by.  I have inked tons of written works to support this claim.  Also I have earned my Ph.D. degree in human behavior, but I do not need to sign off a comment with the “Dr.” Title!  I save it for business purposes!  I think a comment can stand on its own merit and self aggrandizing statements or engaging in personal attack, defaming, and so on, do not help readers to understand an issue.  Nonetheless, I still welcome and read anything she might ever write in reference to a written/spoken work of mine, but her nonsense childish game will not be dignified anymore.

Your misogyny, Pourqurian

It is you who confuse men's "physical strength" with their "power" of "protecting women" - as if women are children in need of protection.

Calling my scholarely writing that was done for your education, "an emotionally charged statement," or an "accusation" (that you could not make a connection with what you said) demonstrates both your Islamic misogyny *and* your low IQ. Why do you think that the moment a scientific concept is uttered from the mouth of a woman it becomes emotional?

On the second thought, I already have the answer to this question: your disregard for women and constant belittling of them is part of your Islamic outlook; you can't help yourself! And no amount of Ta'arof can mask its ugly head!

As for your only email to me, it was NOT simply a link, but came with a belittling sentence: "Make sure you actually read it this time," or something like that. Your sentence was not out of courtesy, but out of contempt for me as a woman.

As a consequence of these distasteful misogynistic attitudes on your part, I'd like to let you know - if you have not already noticed - that I too have an utmost contempt for you as a male chauvinist. You are a typical reactionary Akhoond, and my conversation with you is over here and now, and for good!

Dr. Azad, Sociologist

Mohamad Purqurian, a few more data points

Thanks Mohammad. We’re getting closer to the hub. You state,

“…i.e. the male partner cannot become pregnant.  Implications are many, and subject to in depth intellectual discourse.”  Would you explore the effect on power relationships in a society where the female can, at will, make herself as infertile as the male (birth control, hysterectomy, abortion). As an aside to help you triangulate me in regards to your responses, I am mindful of the role of structure (form, if you will) vis-a-vis the degree of complexity in a society (laws, institutions, taboos, various methods of collective feedback on individual behavior). I am engaging you because you argue your points with the kind of tools I am comfortable with, and because you frame consequences in terms of human rights and justice (as compared with, say,  “it says so in the Koran.”).

Triangulating!

In the scope of “social relations” the reason for sexual need is personal and irrelevant.  In fact, partners can engage for entirely different reasons.  Let me make another example.  Once you get on the road, you are subject to traffic rules and regulations irrespective of your reason for driving, i.e. pleasure, work, etc.

Keep in mind the fact that in most futile arguments the fundamental premise -- “cause and effect” or consequences for actions —is ignored.  Furthermore, social justice is less concerned with the reason—that is relatively subjective--, but highly sensitive to the consequence that is vividly objective.    

Now narrowing down the scope of “social relations” to the issue, and assuming the sexual engagement is consensual, the consequence is NOT the same for partners; i.e. the male partner cannot become pregnant.  Implications are many, and subject to in depth intellectual discourse, i.e. who is entitled to what?  But the fact remains the same that the partner in power (generally the male partner, but not necessarily so) can get away from equitable suffering or can enjoy inequitable benefit as the consequence of the same engagement.

That is where social justice plays its role in constitutional laws, rules, regulations, code of moral conducts, social stigma, etc.  That is NOT to say social stigma is always just and proper, but it serves a purpose to some degree.  Furthermore, other elements of social justice are also subject to abuse.

Finally, not only when you make your private life public, you ask people to judge you on their own terms, but also social relations are –to a great extent—social contracts.  As much as you are bond to explicit and implied labor rules for employment, you are also bond to explicit and implied social rules for sexual engagements.  And while men enjoy more power in male dominated societies, they have never escaped social stigma –to say the least—for social justice.  So, injustice is never uninhibited!

Mohamad Purqurian, triangulating

 تازمانيکه بشر نتواند مرد را نيز باردار کند!، بين زن ومرد نيز همين نا برابری وجود دارد

Regarding your statement about sexual need being the substance, do you separate the need for sex as a method of reproduction from the need for sex as a means of physical and emotional satisfaction? 

Mr. Art Siletz

I thank you for your kind words.  Also in reference to your previous question رويای خيس,

I did not intend to obscure the “shift in the underlying social relations”  Quite to the contrary, I acknowledge it, but I would follow a natural shift that is usually in form not substance.  So, sexual need is the substance, the related social contract is the form.  In a shift of social relations, the society takes the accepted form and updates it.   

Ms. Azadeh Azad

I could not make a connection between what I said and your accusation.  Looks like you confuse the physical strength with power.  I was not writing a book, but in a relatively short comment I made the distinction without having to analyze it.  

Nonetheless, I appreciate your taking the time to respond, but I am not sure if I should apologize for causing you to write an emotionally charged statement!

P.S. The only email I personally sent you was simply a link to my new article.  It was out of courtesy to let you know that I responded to a comment of yours in the article. 

to AZAD99

Don't be so gullible thinking that the revolution made Iran more pious, if anything, it made it much more promiscuous. When limitations are put on people , it makes them wanna do even more, from chadori-mazhabi to shomal-shahri.

مگه جندگی شاخ و دم داره؟

"به شوهرم خیانت کردم، با مردای غریبه خوابیدم، و از سکس لذت می برم، اما جنده نیستم."

Mr. Ari

To Azadeh Azad

Of course, when one combines "scientific" arrogance with half-baked post-modern feminist nonsense, we can expect such gibberish conclusions as "Fatherhood is indeed an oppressive institution."

Now, following your feminist version of the theory of evolution, what do you prescribe for today's society? That we put aside the "oppressive institution(!!) of fatherhood" and allow women to have as many sexual partners as they want with no strings attached and no claims to fatherhood?!

I am not at all a supporter of the Islamic Republic, but if you people are its alternative, then THANK GOD for the revolution!

نظر ِ شخص ِ بنده

اين صحبت ها نشانگر اينست كه حتى وقتى خانم ها اهل سكس هستند، هنوز كلى جر و بحث هست
"وخداوند زن را آفريد تا هيچ مردي به مرگ طبيعي نميرد"
سوره سكته
آيه دق