By: Roonak Hosseini & Robin Fakhari (Roozbeh)
In Iran, women resist the dictatorial Islamic regime in the streets and domestic violations within their homes—at the hands of fathers, husbands, and ex-partners. Persian media and human rights organizations expose harrowing accounts of femicide: a woman beheaded for serving cold tea, a daughter slain by her father for having a boyfriend, a wife shot dead for adding too much tomato sauce to a dish. These murders are not aberrations; but symptomatic of a corrupted Islamic system.
Iran’s Islamic legal framework, rooted in a patriarchal culture, places women under male control, viewing them as extensions of male honor (namus). In this context, a woman’s life is valued at half that of a man, and her murder often results in minimal consequences. A tragic example is Romina Ashrafi, a 14-year-old girl killed by her father after fleeing with her boyfriend. Learning that, as her guardian (wali-ud-dam), he could escape retribution, he took a sword and ended her life. In court, the judge chillingly asked: “If the father’s honor had been stained, why not kill the boyfriend?” The father’s response exposed the system’s logic: “If I had killed Bahman, I would have been executed.”
Reports scarcely reflect the true scale of such crimes. At the core of this increasing crisis is a societal shift: women asserting autonomy and demanding personal and sexual freedoms. For many Iranian men, such defiance is seen as a direct assault on family honor, culminating in “honor killings.” Central to this tragic issue is the convergence of two forces: Iran’s authoritarian Islamic regime and Persian patriarchal traditions, united in their repression of women. Human rights activists must confront, investigate, and question this alliance, rather than adopting a one-sided analysis.
Historical Context: A Short Review
Classical Persian literature, shaped by Islamic influence, reflects historical reductionist views on Persian women. The poet Saadi said, “Speaking to a woman is a waste.” Khagani wrote upon his daughter’s birth and death: “I bowed in shame when my daughter was born, but with honor, I looked to the sky when she was gone.” Such utterances, shaped by the socio-cultural dynamics of their respective eras, reflect deeply ingrained gender prejudices—biases that, while regrettable, are, within the historical context, somewhat understandable. What is striking, however, is that Quranic literature—regarded by its adherents as “the word of a divine, non-historical entity”—upholds the same patriarchal norms. Despite its claimed transcendence beyond human temporality, it echoes similar biases, complicating efforts by many Muslims to portray Islam as a doctrine of universal compassion. A “compassion” so rigidly defined that any attempt to question misogynistic Quranic verses, as will be discussed in the next section, is often met with accusations of Islamophobia or irtidad (apostasy)—charges that can carry severe consequences, including persecution or even death.
Women’s Oppression in Iran: From the Pahlavi Era to Today
Centuries after the era of Persian classical poets, Iran was first established as a country under the Pahlavi dynasty in 1925, later transitioning to the current Islamic regime in 1979. The Pahlavi monarchy, often idealized as Iran’s “golden age,” superficially “elevated” women’s status by outlawing the hijab in 1936—not through social reform, but through coercive force—alienating many women from their traditional backgrounds. This move, however, mistakenly equated progress with the “freedom” to wear revealing attire, overlooking the deeper complexities of women’s rights and autonomy. While some women embraced these changes, many others resisted and also were imprisoned. In any case, Pahlavi was a figure who, during a debate with Oriana Fallaci in 1973, referred to women as “schemers” and “evil.”
In the ensuing years, the regime consolidated its control and methodically disbanded approximately all independent women’s groups and organizations. However, this paper is not to focus on the Pahlavi era but on the dictatorship that rules Iran today. This historical context served to highlight a crucial question: Why, despite regime changes and revolutions, does the systemic subjugation of women in Iran persist?
Reading Some Verses from the Quran
Islamic law, rooted in the Quran and Hadith, institutionalizes gender discrimination. By adding extra information in parentheses, Islamic translators often try to soften violent Quran verses. In most cases, the interpretations of them also vary. Some Muslims believe violent verses must be followed as divine law, while others argue they are context-specific. Regardless of which interpretation is “correct,” what matters is that the Quran has the potential to be read violently—especially against women, and, by extension, non-Muslims as well. Consider these verses from the Quran:
Surah 2:228 asserts that “men have a degree over [women].” This opinion is reinforced by Surah 2:178, which states: “O believers! [The law of] retaliation is set for you in cases of murder—a free man for a free man, a slave for a slave, and a female for a female.” This verse exactly reflects the words of Romina’s father, who told the judge, “If I killed my daughter’s boyfriend, I would be executed.” Surah 4:34 permits men to beat disobedient women: “The good women are obedient… As for those from whom you fear disloyalty, admonish them, and abandon them in their beds, then strike them.” Surah 2:223 objectifies women, framing them as mere instruments of reproduction: “Your women are farmland for you; so approach your cultivation whenever you like.”
Islamic literature establishes a clear hierarchy—placing men above women, Muslims above non-Muslims, and suchlike. This structure is evident in verses such as Surah 47:4: “When you encounter those who disbelieve, strike at their necks.” The Sunna further reinforces this order, declaring: “The Messenger of Allah said: Whoever changes his religion, kill him.” While this literature may be understood in its historical context, the real concern arises when these often inhumane teachings are subjected to present-day criticism. The Quran itself warns in Surah 22:51: “The ones who strove against Our verses… those are the companions of Hellfire.” This mindset of intolerance is woven into Iran’s political structure, particularly through the doctrine of Wilayat al-Faqih, as upheld by Ali Khamenei. Under this doctrine, his critics face enduring torture and imprisonment—conditions that mirror the mentioned Quranic hellfire. Under his regime, Iran’s Islamic penal code assigns a woman’s life a value of half that of a man’s, measured in diya (blood money, a compensation paid for taking a life)—the equivalent of 50 camels—while the value of a man’s left testicle is set at 66 camels, surpassing even the worth of a woman’s life.
Conclusion
While the Iranian government is directly responsible for widespread human rights abuses, misogynistic attitudes stem from a legal, religious, and cultural framework that systematically restricts women’s freedoms. The convergence of patriarchal culture, religious justifications, and suppression of dissent creates a condition where violence against women is institutionalized. While gender-based discrimination is a global issue, Iran stands out for how Islamic law perpetuates these injustices. Without legal and ideological reform, femicide in Iran will persist, shielded from accountability.