7 ms·

Not sure how this affects Iran that much at all. I mean it won't affect the people or the government. The Tournament will go on happily without this player's pa

by bilbo0s 10y ago

Not sure how this affects Iran that much at all. I mean it won't affect the people or the government. The Tournament will go on happily without this player's participation. In my own opinion, a better response would be to hold the tournament in a place other than Iran. I'm not sure why that isn't the route that was chosen for protest ?

saint_fiasco 10y ago
If enough other players protest, I think they would move the tournament somewhere else. But like you say, if it's only this one player then the tournament can go on and there will be no reason to move it.
Scarblac 10y ago
It's not FIDE (the world chess federation) that's protesting this. They simply had one country offering to host the tournament and automatically gave it to them, period. For FIDE this also isn't a controversial place to hold this, they held a world championship in Khadaffi's Libya, wanted to hold one in Hussein's Iraq, and their president believes in aliens and makes money doing business with Assad.
mason240 10y ago
She isn't an organizer, she's a player, so doesn't have any direct control over where they hold events. Boycotting the event though does put pressure on the organizers to move the event.
hackuser 10y ago
> a better response would be to hold the tournament in a place other than Iran If the standard for moving the tournament because some people object to the local sartorial rules, they will never find a location. Someone will always find objection. Potentially every culture in the world is participating; they can't avoid some cultural adjustment for everyone.
- Chris2048 10y ago
  It's not some people, it's some player. And it's not "cultural adjustment" as if all morality is relative - this player is right, and can argue so on the basis of societal equality rather than on the existence of a grandiose deity.
  - hackuser 10y ago
    You may be right that it rises above the typical issues in such situations. Certainly I personally agree that women should wear what they want. So, does it rise to that level? I'm hesitant to go into someone else's home and tell them what is good for them; it's often ignorant (what do I know?), arrogant and becomes another kind of oppression with a long history, from missionaries to colonialists to aid workers to militaries 'freeing' other nations. Imagine Chinese players in the U.S. protesting racial prejudice - it would not be welcome and would be counterproductive.[0] Note that nobody has asked what Iranians think about it (AFAIK). I'd rather give people in Iran the freedom to do what they choose. Of course, the world is complex, my preference is not always an option and sometimes you have to take a stand. Is this one of those times? In such an ideologically charged environment, using such a loaded symbol which many people use to demonize all Muslims, I don't think this is a good choice. Whatever the player's intent, it will encourage ignorant stereotypes, hatred and oppression of Muslims. It may satisfy the choir, so to speak, but I think it will harm more people, and Muslim women, than it helps. Will the same player also insist on wearing a hajib at a tournament in a location in Europe where it's banned? Then I would support it; it would make a point for women's rights while fighting against anti-Muslim discrimination.[0] Other than that, there are plenty of ways for that player to protest oppression in Iran and elsewhere. [0] To be clear, oppression in the U.S. and Europe isn't at a comparable level to Iran and other non-free countries.
    - Chris2048 10y ago
      > I'm hesitant to go into someone else's home and tell them what is good for them What about a home consisting of a parent that abuses their children? "Missionaries, colonialists, aid workers and soldiers" sometime did free people; maybe we should focus on improving the success rate? > Imagine Chinese players in the U.S. protesting racial prejudice Actually, I think the liberal US media praise any racial protest. The question would be could the players back up their claims, given how much the US cares about racial justice. > I'd rather give people in Iran the freedom to do what they choose. this sounds nice, but over-tolerance is self defeating when you start tolerating intolerance. The question isn't about the freedom to wear a piece of clothing, its about the freedom to impose this requirements on others with aggressive theistic, non democratic derived authority. > it will encourage ignorant stereotypes, hatred and oppression of Muslims ... it will harm more people, and Muslim women, than it helps I not sure if this is true. You can let sleeping dogs lie, and you can ignore the problem too. I also think the crimes "Islamophobia" pales in comparison to the ills of Islam, the latter is a greater problem, not the former. > Will the same player also insist on wearing a hijab at a tournament in a location in Europe where it's banned? Depends on what her beliefs are. Most people don't consider hijab-bans a form of oppression, but as a way of combating it. Litter laws are a way of saying that the right to clean streets are more important that the right to litter. Hijab-bans are a way of saying reducing implicit religious oppression of women is more important than the right to religious expression. Any law or ban can be seen as "oppression", but only by looking at the context can we tell. Do any of the hijab-banning western countries also ban Muslims, mosques, or other Islamic religious practice? If their goal was to discriminate against Muslims, why not do those things too, why just hijabs? In contrast, Are the countries that require women to wear hijabs doing so out of respect for religious freedom? Don't mandatory hijab laws highlight the oppression, imposed on non-Muslim women too, and inform the reason for anti-hijab laws in non-Muslim countries exist?

by bilbo0s 10y ago

saint_fiasco 10y ago

If enough other players protest, I think they would move the tournament somewhere else. But like you say, if it's only this one player then the tournament can go on and there will be no reason to move it.

Scarblac 10y ago

It's not FIDE (the world chess federation) that's protesting this. They simply had one country offering to host the tournament and automatically gave it to them, period. For FIDE this also isn't a controversial place to hold this, they held a world championship in Khadaffi's Libya, wanted to hold one in Hussein's Iraq, and their president believes in aliens and makes money doing business with Assad.

mason240 10y ago

She isn't an organizer, she's a player, so doesn't have any direct control over where they hold events. Boycotting the event though does put pressure on the organizers to move the event.

hackuser 10y ago

> a better response would be to hold the tournament in a place other than Iran If the standard for moving the tournament because some people object to the local sartorial rules, they will never find a location. Someone will always find objection. Potentially every culture in the world is participating; they can't avoid some cultural adjustment for everyone.

Chris2048 10y ago
It's not some people, it's some player. And it's not "cultural adjustment" as if all morality is relative - this player is right, and can argue so on the basis of societal equality rather than on the existence of a grandiose deity.
- hackuser 10y ago
  You may be right that it rises above the typical issues in such situations. Certainly I personally agree that women should wear what they want. So, does it rise to that level? I'm hesitant to go into someone else's home and tell them what is good for them; it's often ignorant (what do I know?), arrogant and becomes another kind of oppression with a long history, from missionaries to colonialists to aid workers to militaries 'freeing' other nations. Imagine Chinese players in the U.S. protesting racial prejudice - it would not be welcome and would be counterproductive.[0] Note that nobody has asked what Iranians think about it (AFAIK). I'd rather give people in Iran the freedom to do what they choose. Of course, the world is complex, my preference is not always an option and sometimes you have to take a stand. Is this one of those times? In such an ideologically charged environment, using such a loaded symbol which many people use to demonize all Muslims, I don't think this is a good choice. Whatever the player's intent, it will encourage ignorant stereotypes, hatred and oppression of Muslims. It may satisfy the choir, so to speak, but I think it will harm more people, and Muslim women, than it helps. Will the same player also insist on wearing a hajib at a tournament in a location in Europe where it's banned? Then I would support it; it would make a point for women's rights while fighting against anti-Muslim discrimination.[0] Other than that, there are plenty of ways for that player to protest oppression in Iran and elsewhere. [0] To be clear, oppression in the U.S. and Europe isn't at a comparable level to Iran and other non-free countries.
  - Chris2048 10y ago
    > I'm hesitant to go into someone else's home and tell them what is good for them What about a home consisting of a parent that abuses their children? "Missionaries, colonialists, aid workers and soldiers" sometime did free people; maybe we should focus on improving the success rate? > Imagine Chinese players in the U.S. protesting racial prejudice Actually, I think the liberal US media praise any racial protest. The question would be could the players back up their claims, given how much the US cares about racial justice. > I'd rather give people in Iran the freedom to do what they choose. this sounds nice, but over-tolerance is self defeating when you start tolerating intolerance. The question isn't about the freedom to wear a piece of clothing, its about the freedom to impose this requirements on others with aggressive theistic, non democratic derived authority. > it will encourage ignorant stereotypes, hatred and oppression of Muslims ... it will harm more people, and Muslim women, than it helps I not sure if this is true. You can let sleeping dogs lie, and you can ignore the problem too. I also think the crimes "Islamophobia" pales in comparison to the ills of Islam, the latter is a greater problem, not the former. > Will the same player also insist on wearing a hijab at a tournament in a location in Europe where it's banned? Depends on what her beliefs are. Most people don't consider hijab-bans a form of oppression, but as a way of combating it. Litter laws are a way of saying that the right to clean streets are more important that the right to litter. Hijab-bans are a way of saying reducing implicit religious oppression of women is more important than the right to religious expression. Any law or ban can be seen as "oppression", but only by looking at the context can we tell. Do any of the hijab-banning western countries also ban Muslims, mosques, or other Islamic religious practice? If their goal was to discriminate against Muslims, why not do those things too, why just hijabs? In contrast, Are the countries that require women to wear hijabs doing so out of respect for religious freedom? Don't mandatory hijab laws highlight the oppression, imposed on non-Muslim women too, and inform the reason for anti-hijab laws in non-Muslim countries exist?