WOMEN

Azadeh

For Pourqurian & Siletz

As usual, Pourqurian’s statements are male-biased, yet called "beautifully argued" by Siletz!

You Mr. Pourqurian are unable to get out of the patriarchal framework. Your concept of physical strength is so entirely male-centered that you consider the woman’s strength in conceiving life and giving birth and perpetuating human race a "weakness" while men’s ability to lift a heavier rock, a fundamental "strength."

In hunter-gatherer societies where male muscle strength should have had, following your logic, a more central role in the domination of women by men, there was equality between the sexes and female had a central role. Women were the strong side of the equation because not only they were able to bring children into this world, but also their main occupation, i.e., food gathering, was vital and central to the survival of the community. While men went out hunting for months and sometimes came back empty-handed, women had to make sure that children and older people ate on a daily basis. Hunting is low yield / high risk, while gathering is high yield / low risk. Sexual relationships of the members of these clans or bands happened with the outsiders (exogamy) and with several of them (polygyny/polyandry.)

Historically, until 6000 years ago, human beings were not aware of the connection between sexuality and child-bearing. Which, along with women's gathering and later agricultural roles, gave women a more central role in the community. As you see, in the least technologically advanced form of society, the male "muscle strength" played no role in the male-female equation, while female capacity and physical strength to give birth did.

With the discovery of biological paternity after the observation of the animals that women had domesticated, everything changed. Men wanted to be related to children directly, as fathers, not as the mothers' brothers like before. But paternity is an idea. Anybody could be the father. To create the institution of paternity, men, or rather every man, decided to (had to) isolate one or several women from *all other men*, to make sure that he was the father. This is the foundation of the double standard between the sexes, not the silly male muscle strength that Pourqurian is bringing up. The institution of social paternity is the core of patriarchy and the foundation of the inequality between men and women to this day.

That’s why I believe that as long as we have the institution of fatherhood in any human society, there won’t be real equality between the sexes. In a society where children get their names and identities only from their mothers and don’t care who their biological fathers are, there won’t be any double standard in sexuality.

Fatherhood is indeed an oppressive institution.

Azadeh

Ps. Mr. Pourqurian, please abstain from contacting me via email. I have no desire receiving any more emails from you and consider it harrassment. Thanks.

To persianwoman in NY

I wonder if you would shout the same slogans about "nothing being wrong with sleeping with random men", in front of your husband (or future husband). But I doubt it. Today's Iranian women have learned to act like sluts and promote promiscuity by the name of "modernity" on one hand, and act like innocent virgins when they meet someone they might marry. Promiscuity and dishonesty these are the new values of the new "sophisticated" Iranian woman.

TheMrs

you go Parinaz

nothing is wrong with sleeping around with random guys to satisfy your needs. just try not to get or spread STD. If you are happy with what you do, don't give a damn to what that HAJ KHANOM or others think of you and more important don't feel guilty.
each individual has different sex appetite. some have more needs some less. so go ahead Parinaz , pick handsome guys lots of them on craigslist and enjoy yourself. you iranian gus and gals who think is immoral mind your business. nothing is wrong with her.no physically no mentally.

Mohammad Purqurian:

To: TheMrs You are

To: TheMrs

You are intelligent, a great communicator and really with class. All your posts are logical and deserve A+.
I think iranian.com and its viewers/readers are really benefitting by your presence in this wild web.

by the wawy i would say

by the wawy i would say this of a man too. with stds flying around i don't know what a don juan is. these days they're called male sluts. if parinaz wants forward thinking readers she should step up to her own plate. the world isn't as sexist as she thinks...not in these matters and not in the west where most of us live.

the real question is...does she mind being a jendh. is it a bad thing? I don't know. being a prude is worse,

A bit of practicality

I can't believe people are discussing etymology here, it's very funny. When we swear at people, which is not nice, regardless of the root of the words, we try to associate them with something bad. If you call someone a skunk, they're not actually a skunk. If you call someone jendeh, they don't have to technically be one in the professional sense of it.

So in this case, Parinaz jan is as jendeh as jendeh gets! What makes her jendeh is that she just can't shut up about what she does with her body.

I'm no puritan and I think people are free and should explore themselves without being called names but this is just really pointless.

بشر متمدن امروزی، بشر اوليه نيست

هرچند ريشه يابی يک لغت ميتواند آموزنده باشد، نتيجه گيری غلط ازآن نميتواند مفيدباشد.  بحث لغوی يک پديده در مفهوم اجتماعی وکاربرد آن بسان آب درهاون کوبيدن است.  علاوه برآن برداشتی که مثلآ بشر اوليه محدوديتی درروابط جنسی نداشت مثل اين است که بگوئيم وقتی اتومبيل اختراع شد، مقررات راهنمائی ورانندگی وجود نداشت!

دوستان توجه ندارند که بشر متمدن امروزی، بشر اوليه نيست وبازهم بتجربه دريافته است که نميتواند بسياری از ويژگيهای فطری خودرا فدای نيازهای جنسی کند.  بشر حتی در خوردن غذا برای حفظ سلامت خود محدوديت قائل ميشود.  و درست بهمين دليل روابط خود را تابع اصولی ميداند که در ماهيت جهانی است.

بسياری از تآسيسات حقوقی بشر (چه دينی وغير دينی) برای حمايت از آن دسته ازاعضای جامعه است که بدلائل مختلف (از جمله فيزيکی) در وضعيت متفاوتی قرار گرفته اند مثل کودکان وزنان.  آيا درست است که شخص بالغی با يک کودک رابطه جنسی برقرارکند ولو اينکه بتواند رضايت اورا جلب کند؟  تازمانيکه بشر نتواند مرد را نيز باردار کند!، بين زن ومرد نيز همين نا برابری وجود دارد چرا که مرد نه تنها از عواقب بارداری درامان است، بلکه حق دارد مانع سقط جنينی شود که خود را پدر آن ميداند.  صيغه نيز در همين رابطه در حمايت اززن (ونه درتحقير او) تآسيس شده است والا مرد نيازی به آن ندارد وترجيح ميدهد از قدرت نابرابر جنسی بنفع خود وبدون هيچگونه عواقبی بهره گيرد.  شعرتآسف بار زير از يک دختر جوان غربی نمايانگر واقعيتی است که من بارها به آن اشاره کرده ام:

Kissing is a habit

Sex is a game

Guys get all the pleasure

Girls get all the pain

The guy says I love you

You believe it is true

But when tummy starts to swell

He says to hell with you

Ten minutes of pleasure

Nine months of pain

Three days in hospital

A baby without a name

The baby is a bastard

The mother is a whore

This never would have happened

If the rubber wouldn’t have torn

What is missing or at least confused in some of the comments I read, is taking gender as the decisive factor in sexual relationship in which women are oppressed.  While historical evidence supports such a notion, it is a monumental misleading factor.  Oppression and/or degrading element is NOT gender related; it is a POWER attribute.  So historically, and physically women happen to be on the weak side of the equation, but NOT necessarily.

وبازهم در همين رابطه است که اگر زن اعمال قدرت کند (بهره گيری از جنسيت خود در رابطه جنسی با افراد مختلف) حمايت اجتماعی خود را از دست ميدهد.  بعبارت ديگر با مرد برابر ميشود!  چرا که مرد از هيچ حمايتی برخوردار نيست.  سخن کوتاه ومخصوصآ در دنيای امروز زن و مردی که روابط عاطفی خود را فدای غرائز جنسی نميکنند، اگر متمدن تر نباشند، حد اقل از شعور بالاتری برخوردارند. وآنها که خودرا فارغ از هر قيد وبندی ميدانند همانقدر در جامعه خلل ايجاد ميکنند که قوه مقننه با قوانين ومقررات دست وپاگير زندگی کردن را ازمردم ميگيرد.  و شايد رنسانس ما اين باشد که با فرهنگ خود "آشتی" کنيم، چرا که بسياری از آنچه هست ميتواند مفيد باشد ويا به روز شود بدون آنکه لازم باشد خود را برده فرهنگی نوپا، نا متجانس و ازهم گسيخته کنيم.

خطاب به آزاده آزاد

این چه حرفی است که "مردانگی" مفهومی ندارد و "زنانگی" زیباتر است؟

من خودم بعنوان یک زن معتقدم که لغت مردانگی زیباترین لغت فارسی است و تنها کسانیکه با این حرف مخالفند احتمالا اشکالاتی با مردان دارند از جمله طلاق و طلاق کشی و یا آنکه باصطلاح فمینیست هستند که آنهم خودش دردسر دیگری است.

توی لغات دست نبرید

if you talikng about this

if you talikng about this all Iranian women out of Iran are jendea
haji zerang

Dear Shazde

"Mardaanegi" is a very negative concept in my world - look at what this concept has done to humanity, past and present. It is my "Zanaanegi" that is synonymous with all the good qualities I have!

Thanks for your understanding :-),

Azadeh

دستت درد نکنه آزاده خانم

این همون سایتی‌ یه که اون به اصطلاح ' امیر صغیر ' کپی‌ کرده بود ولی‌ بروز نمیداد.

بازم 'مردانگی‌ ' این خانوم با فرهنگ.

هوی ' امیر نا کبیر ' مگه دم حموم فین به دستم نیفتی‌ !

Azadeh, Paul Giamatti

Dehkhoda website

//www.loghatnaameh.com/

I don't want to judge

I don't want to judge anybody. I think for men and women, of course you can sleep with whomever and how many times as you wish , but please ask yourself if you really feel good after that! majority of people who have realized their souls won't go for that because they know, it brings nothing but misery. The differnce between human and animal is in ability to choose the right or wrong or in another words use the wisdom. There is so much happiness and joy in loving rather than having sex and feeling terrible right after. That is one of the main reasons that couples usually end up fighting the next day. Now suit yourself.

great site capt_ayhab

Ari Jan

Try this site. It is from Dehkhoda, It is pretty good.

//www.mibosearch.com/

capt_ayhab [-YT]

امیر کبیر

I absolutely love it,,,, Bravo

capt_ayhab [-YT]

Simple Answer

اگر یک زن با چند تا مرد بخوابد جنده است؟

only if she gets paid for it....that's my take.... 

(P.S. The same concept applies to men as well)

my poem: ey zan gar bekhosbi

my poem:

ey zan gar bekhosbi baa mardaane faraavaan
kam kam koni dino rooho jaane khish ra viran

pas naporso nagoo baa-dan kem man kistam
bedaan keh man dar sher neveshtan bistam

konam betou khanome iranio zibaa yek nasihat
keh nist goftane chizi bejoz kolle haghighat

gar bekhakhi mardaan faravaan khosban kenarat
pas nakon shohar yeki badbakht marde baa gheirat

Thats narcissim

The way "haji kanoom", thinks is simplistic, its not prostitution, its really narcissism. Essentially when there is money involved (maybe even gifts and position), but when sex is used only for self pleasure, its based on narcissistic motivation and it may result in pain for others.

Farinaz jan, I don't think

Farinaz jan,

I don't think you're a whore when you sleep with many men (out of wedlock), but I do think you're a whore when you use sexual intercorse with a multitude of men just to show that you can!

Certain women think they can use sex as a way to show their masculine lack of sensitivity. To themselves it seems that this way they're 'in charge' and for some it even gives them a sense of power to make themselves think that they can detach themselves from their feelings when having sex just for sex. This might even go as far as eventually using sex as a power tool to hurt people, just so they can feel powerful themselves.

You see this a lot with women who've either had very bad experiences with sex during their youth or early adulthood. It's their way of 'getting even' with men! It's rather sad, because in the end they turn something that could be very special and perhaps even spiritual into something very plain or even nasty.

And when it comes to men who sleep around a lot: I definitely don't think that's a sign of success! I think it's a rather pathetic outcry for affection and attention. Nobody wants to lick a lollypop that has already been licked by a whole lot of other people!

Hatman!!!!!!!

Hatman benevisiono baramoon tarif konin.
Thanks !

as a MAN

I think a person's body belongs to him/herself. A woman can decide what to do with her own body and us Iranian need to be democratic about it. In regard to selling it, a point everyone tends not to remember is that women who are selling their body basically are serving their community. YES they are serving because they help needy men.

Thank you.

There is no hope for the day

There is no hope for the day that the average Iranian learns to "live and let live".

I'm happy to know that people like Flying Solo still live among us.

Parinaz, thank you for sharing the story with us.

Amir Kabir, Shazdeh

Shazda jaan,

Where did you find all this from, Amir Kabir?

Where did you cut-and-paste all of that from?

Nice job!