MADRID, July 26 (Reuters) - An Iranian chess player who moved to Spain in January after she competed without a hijab and had an arrest warrant issued against her at home has been granted Spanish citizenship, Spain said on Wednesday.

Sarasadat Khademalsharieh, better known as Sara Khadem, took part in the FIDE World Rapid and Blitz Chess Championships held in Kazakhstan in late December without the headscarf that is mandatory under Iran’s strict Islamic dress codes.

Laws enforcing mandatory hijab-wearing became a flashpoint during the unrest that swept Iran when a 22-year-old Iranian-Kurdish woman, Mahsa Amini, died in the custody of the morality police in mid-September.

The 26-year-old has told Reuters she had no regrets over her gesture in support of the protest movement against her country’s clerical leadership.

Spain’s official gazette said the cabinet approved granting Khadem citizenship on Tuesday “taking into account the special circumstances” of her case.

  • ColorcodedResistor
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1361 year ago

    Imagine not being able to return ‘home’ because you took your hat off. 🤔

    I hope her friends and family wont catch any retribution for her ‘escaping’ shitty islamic justice

    • Carighan Maconar
      link
      English
      561 year ago

      Imagine not being able to return ‘home’ because you took your hat off. 🤔

      I never quite realized just how pedestrian taking the hijab off is, yeah. Never really thought about it. It is quite literally just taking your hat or well, head-scarf, off. It’s like when my great-grandma came in from the rain and took that plastic headband off she always wore to keep her hair dry.

      Ridiculous how backwards we as a species can be, and sadly often are. 😔

      • @okamiueru
        link
        English
        31 year ago

        Is it too reductive to conclude this is just men wanting to be able to dictate what women should and shouldn’t do? Anyone claiming otherwise, even women who “would gladly wear it” feels like Stockholm syndrome to me.

        Maybe I’m wrong to think this, but alas, I do.

        • Carighan Maconar
          link
          English
          21 year ago

          I don’t think it’s too reductive, considering religion as a whole is always about exercising control.

    • @CantSt0pPoppinOP
      link
      English
      141 year ago

      Yeah the whole thing sucks just remember their are religious fanatics within all religions.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        321 year ago

        Fanatics and extremists exist regardless of religions. The latter just allows them to control people easier, and islam happens to be particularly good at that.

        Of course, most ‘religious’ people have enough common sense to not follow them to the T. When the government is religious though, like islam encourages, you have a big problem

        • Carighan Maconar
          link
          English
          231 year ago

          Fanatics and extremists exist regardless of religions. The latter just allows them to control people easier, and islam happens to be particularly good at that.

          This is more accurate.

          It’s not that “fanatics exist in all religions”, it’s “fanatics exist”, and religions just give them a cover that is depending on society difficult to challenge as in many places, a religion’s influence on society and rules is quite normalized, completely ignoring how ridiculous this influence is.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            21 year ago

            it’s “fanatics exist”, and religions just give them a cover

            It isn’t much of a leap to understanding that religions have always served the purpose of controlling people.

            When a leader has a tool that allows the people to think his pronouncements have the endorsement of a God, that leader is going to use that tool.

        • oce 🐆
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Islam isn’t better at it than other religions it just happens to be the major religions in the countries where those fanatics managed to seize the power. You can find similar examples with Christianism (Europe, USA), Judaism (Israel), Hinduism (India), Buddhism (Myanmar) and probably many more.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            111 year ago

            Islam isn’t better at it than other religions it just happens to be the major religions in the countries where those fanatics managed to seize the power

            That’s no coincidence imo.

            I see all religions as negative, but Islam is the only one I can personally attest to, being an ex muslim. It’s cult-y and tends to bring out the worst in people, more so than most religions from what I’ve seen.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          01 year ago

          Islam doesn’t encourage any more for theocracy than other Abrahamic religions. The existence of religious fundamentalist Islamic theocracies is a lot more complex than Islam. A lot of it can be traced to colonialism, the decolonization process and Western interference in Islamic countries. This is largely why Iran is one of those. The last Shah was seen corrupt autocratic puppet of the West by many. As a counter to it, the country over-corrected and landed in fundamentalist Islamic theocracy. Radicalization of Islam leading to similar governments happened in other Islam-majority countries. Before the 60s and 70s, many Islamic countries didn’t differ a lot from Western countries when it came to social liberties. There are a lot of images of Tehran and Kabul with women in mini skirts for example.

          While I am not saying that modern Islamic countries are not problem or thousand when it comes to civil liberties and democracy, Islam in my knowledge was more tool and less reason behind it.

      • @Aceticon
        link
        English
        61 year ago

        The problem is when a government is captured by religion.

        There is nothing quite so bad as religious types getting power based purelly on being religious types.

        I suspect that, because it’s the most fanatical power-hungry types (Moralism is really just a way of justifying the forcing of others to your will) who both have the most motivation to seek positions were they can have free rain to really go on powertrips on other people, and display more overtly the very religiosity that is the whole reason for a government whose power is based on religion.

        Certainly those who feel no need to impose their will on others and who can even *gasp* see some actions as overzealous, don’t have anywhere the same drive, zealotry and backstabbing instincts to climb up the ladder in such power structures.

        • @CantSt0pPoppinOP
          link
          English
          61 year ago

          You are very right the same is being seen in the united states with Evangelical fanatics taking over all forms of government and a disturbing pace.