Iranian singer sentenced to 74 lashes for performing without hijab, says human rights group

ThatRobGuy · Friday at 7:28 PM

Iranian signer sentenced to 74 lashes for singing without hijab - human rights group

The 29-year-old and eight other musicians have been punished by the autocratic regime for sharing ‘vulgar and immoral content’

www.independent.co.uk

Iranian singer Parastoo Ahmadi has been sentenced to 74 lashes for performing without a hijab during a live-streamed YouTube concert in 2024, human rights groups have said.

Ahmadi, 29, and eight members of her production team including musicians have been sentenced for the performance, according to court documents from the criminal court of Qom province seen by rights activists.

The group have been banned from leaving the country and engaging in artistic activities for two years.

Just another friendly reminder that while it's obviously fair to condemn the US institutional support for Netanyahu's government and to critique our approach to dealing with Iran, nobody should be pretending that Iran is "the good guy". So when protestors are hitting the streets cheerleading the entities who are at odds with the entities that are institutionally aligned with the US conservatives, they should be remember things like this as a reminder that "the enemy of my enemy isn't always my friend".

Servus · Friday at 11:52 PM

Probably a lot of those who support Iran would never survive living there.

Gunny · Friday at 11:54 PM

Servus said:
Probably a lot of those who support Iran would never survive living there.

Truth be told.

Pommer · Saturday at 6:32 AM

Servus said:
Probably a lot of those who support Iran would never survive living there.

I do not “support Iran” but it is a sovereign nation and as such is supposed to be respected enough to run its own affairs as it sees fit.
If the Iranians decide that they’re not going to kowtow to the United States and Israel…something that they should be able to decide, (for themselves), then other nations have to let them be or incur their wrath; in the instant case by flexing the only muscle that they have, closing the strait of Hormuz.

Seeking to dislodge them from the strait would take an effort and will that not even the current President seems to have.

Nithavela · Saturday at 6:53 AM

So.. send back in the bombers?

Belk · Saturday at 7:50 AM

ThatRobGuy said:
Iranian signer sentenced to 74 lashes for singing without hijab - human rights group

The 29-year-old and eight other musicians have been punished by the autocratic regime for sharing ‘vulgar and immoral content’

www.independent.co.uk

Iranian singer Parastoo Ahmadi has been sentenced to 74 lashes for performing without a hijab during a live-streamed YouTube concert in 2024, human rights groups have said.

Ahmadi, 29, and eight members of her production team including musicians have been sentenced for the performance, according to court documents from the criminal court of Qom province seen by rights activists.

The group have been banned from leaving the country and engaging in artistic activities for two years.

Just another friendly reminder that while it's obviously fair to condemn the US institutional support for Netanyahu's government and to critique our approach to dealing with Iran, nobody should be pretending that Iran is "the good guy". So when protestors are hitting the streets cheerleading the entities who are at odds with the entities that are institutionally aligned with the US conservatives, they should be remember things like this as a reminder that "the enemy of my enemy isn't always my friend".

Is there anyone claiming Iran are the good guys? Everyone I have seen is clear they are bad actors who we really would rather did not have a hard line government.

durangodawood · Saturday at 8:00 AM

Servus said:
Probably a lot of those who support Iran would never survive living there.

I support Iran. But I would probably hate it there, except for the food and the liberal half of the population.

I can't stand the current political regime tho.

durangodawood · Saturday at 8:07 AM

None of this validates a massively ignorant and strategically incompetent US war there which has netted the USA a worse position on most metrics.

Just in case anyone was going there....

Servus · Saturday at 8:13 AM

durangodawood said:
I support Iran. But I would probably hate it there, except for the food and the liberal half of the population.

I can't stand the current political regime tho.

The regime is what I was talking about, not the oppressed citizens or the food.

durangodawood · Saturday at 8:18 AM

Servus said:
The regime is what I was talking about, not the oppressed citizens or the food.

You should have said so. Just talking about "Iran" means the country as a whole, people, culture, land, history.

Governments are much more transient. Your take is like asking a maga person 4 years ago if they support America..... and then you're like "oh I see you support the Biden administration."

Plus who here even supports the Iran leadership? Who are you even talking about?

ThatRobGuy · Saturday at 9:08 AM

Belk said:
Is there anyone claiming Iran are the good guys? Everyone I have seen is clear they are bad actors who we really would rather did not have a hard line government.

Actually, yes... there have been numerous protests out in the streets where people wave the flags of Iran (or praise their proxy groups) simply to voice their distaste for US/Israel.

It'd be like if the Bloods did something really bad, and people started wearing blue bandanas to show solidarity with the Crips as a response to it.

And that sort of flawed thinking has started creeping up on the right flank as well. I've seen more and more where the "America First" crew has started downplaying Iranian flaws on the basis of "well, they actually revere Jesus more than the Israelis do"

Belk · Saturday at 9:21 AM

ThatRobGuy said:
Actually, yes... there have been numerous protests out in the streets where people wave the flags of Iran (or praise their proxy groups) simply to voice their distaste for US/Israel.

It'd be like if the Bloods did something really bad, and people started wearing blue bandanas to show solidarity with the Crips as a response to it.

And that sort of flawed thinking has started creeping up on the right flank as well. I've seen more and more where the "America First" crew has started downplaying Iranian flaws on the basis of "well, they actually revere Jesus more than the Israelis do"

Once again displaying that the horse shoe theory of politics is not without some validity. Bizarre.

ThatRobGuy · Saturday at 9:48 AM

Belk said:
Once again displaying that the horse shoe theory of politics is not without some validity. Bizarre.

That's part of it, the other part is that when people get so dug in on opposing a specific entity (or anyone perceived to be allied with it), it creates a tunnel vision of sorts.

I touched on this back when the Russia/Ukraine stuff started ramping up.

Since the perception was "Russia is buddies with Trump, and we must signal our distaste for Trump", rather than the non-intervention approach (that would have been the norm for the left a decade prior), they all popped Ukrainian stickers on everything they could, and started advocating for interventionism and treating Zelensky like he was some sort of rock star folk hero. Despite the fact that it was one of the most corrupt governments on the planet, and they had no such reaction when Russia did their "pre-Trump" invasion of Ukraine back in 2014.

Same would apply here. The left doesn't like Trump (which is understandable) and a plurality of people don't like Netanyahu or our unconditional support for Israel (which is also understandable), so there's a knee jerk reaction to downplay the bad stuff about the nations they're against (and in some cases, actually give vocal support).

I think people need to be able to detach the concept of "victimization" from the concept of "being good".

That's why, despite me being very critical of Israel, you won't see me ever attaching "river to the sea" or "I stand with Palestine" type slogans to anything.

While they are definitely the victims in this situation and Israel is wrong for conducting themselves the way they have in this exchange, the Palestinian leadership structure (and the underlying culture of the area in general) have created a place that would be pretty terrible to live in objectively by modern standards.

In an alternate timeline, if Israel hadn't been established on those lands in the 40's, and Palestine had been left to their own devices to govern how they see fit, free of any interference, it likely wouldn't be a place that anyone in the US (conservative or progressive) would want to step foot in.
-- my supporting evidence for that assertion is how the other countries (with the same underpinning ideology) operate in the region.

This is where not everything always has a clear cut "good guy vs. bad guy" dynamic. An entity (that's objectively worse across a variety of other metrics) can still be legitimately victimized by an entity that's objectively better.

Belk · Saturday at 10:06 AM

ThatRobGuy said:
That's part of it, the other part is that when people get so dug in on opposing a specific entity (or anyone perceived to be allied with it), it creates a tunnel vision of sorts.

I touched on this back when the Russia/Ukraine stuff started ramping up.

Since the perception was "Russia is buddies with Trump, and we must signal our distaste for Trump", rather than the non-intervention approach (that would have been the norm for the left a decade prior), they all popped Ukrainian stickers on everything they could, and started advocating for interventionism and treating Zelensky like he was some sort of rock star folk hero. Despite the fact that it was one of the most corrupt governments on the planet, and they had no such reaction when Russia did their "pre-Trump" invasion of Ukraine back in 2014.

Same would apply here. The left doesn't like Trump (which is understandable) and a plurality of people don't like Netanyahu or our unconditional support for Israel (which is also understandable), so there's a knee jerk reaction to downplay the bad stuff about the nations they're against (and in some cases, actually give vocal support).

I think people need to be able to detach the concept of "victimization" from the concept of "being good".

That's why, despite me being very critical of Israel, you won't see me ever attaching "river to the sea" or "I stand with Palestine" type slogans to anything.

While they are definitely the victims in this situation and Israel is wrong for conducting themselves the way they have in this exchange, the Palestinian leadership structure (and the underlying culture of the area in general) have created a place that would be pretty terrible to live in objectively by modern standards.

In an alternate timeline, if Israel hadn't been established on those lands in the 40's, and Palestine had been left to their own devices to govern how they see fit, free of any interference, it likely wouldn't be a place that anyone in the US (conservative or progressive) would want to step foot in.
-- my supporting evidence for that assertion is how the other countries (with the same underpinning ideology) operate in the region.

This is where not everything always has a clear cut "good guy vs. bad guy" dynamic. An entity (that's objectively worse across a variety of other metrics) can still be legitimately victimized by an entity that's objectively better.

I don't disagree with your assessment, but I will note that human nature tends towards polar thinking and that is hard for people to get away from. Once a side is staked out it becomes difficult for most people to make good assessments of data that might contradict that stance. Doubly so if that stance is associated with self identity as most political stances are.

Landon Caeli · Saturday at 10:37 AM

74 lashes.. Is that really enough? Why not 274?

Stopped_lurking · Sunday at 1:15 AM

ThatRobGuy said:
That's part of it, the other part is that when people get so dug in on opposing a specific entity (or anyone perceived to be allied with it), it creates a tunnel vision of sorts.

I touched on this back when the Russia/Ukraine stuff started ramping up.

Since the perception was "Russia is buddies with Trump, and we must signal our distaste for Trump", rather than the non-intervention approach (that would have been the norm for the left a decade prior), they all popped Ukrainian stickers on everything they could, and started advocating for interventionism and treating Zelensky like he was some sort of rock star folk hero.

"I need ammunition, not a ride" that is enough to make you a folk hero. The quote may be apocryphal, but the staunch resistance in response to Russia's invasion wasn't.

ThatRobGuy said:
Despite the fact that it was one of the most corrupt governments on the planet, and they had no such reaction when Russia did their "pre-Trump" invasion of Ukraine back in 2014.

Russia was even more corrupt in 2021 (https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2021), so what am I to do with that information? While place 122 out of 180 is a bad placing (Russia were in position 136), but calling it one of the most corrupt government on the planet seems hyperbolic.

When it comes to the invasion of Crimea, it was because the fighting de facto ended before Ukraine could muster any attempt to take it back.

ThatRobGuy said:
Same would apply here. The left doesn't like Trump (which is understandable) and a plurality of people don't like Netanyahu or our unconditional support for Israel (which is also understandable), so there's a knee jerk reaction to downplay the bad stuff about the nations they're against (and in some cases, actually give vocal support).

I think people need to be able to detach the concept of "victimization" from the concept of "being good".

That's why, despite me being very critical of Israel, you won't see me ever attaching "river to the sea" or "I stand with Palestine" type slogans to anything.

While they are definitely the victims in this situation and Israel is wrong for conducting themselves the way they have in this exchange, the Palestinian leadership structure (and the underlying culture of the area in general) have created a place that would be pretty terrible to live in objectively by modern standards.

In an alternate timeline, if Israel hadn't been established on those lands in the 40's, and Palestine had been left to their own devices to govern how they see fit, free of any interference, it likely wouldn't be a place that anyone in the US (conservative or progressive) would want to step foot in.
-- my supporting evidence for that assertion is how the other countries (with the same underpinning ideology) operate in the region.

This is where not everything always has a clear cut "good guy vs. bad guy" dynamic. An entity (that's objectively worse across a variety of other metrics) can still be legitimately victimized by an entity that's objectively better.

Matt5 · Sunday at 5:40 AM

I asked Grok AI about this. Does she get the lashes with a bare back or what?

Grok AI:
In Iran, women sentenced to flogging (like the 74 lashes for Parastoo Ahmadi) are typically lashed while seated and fully clothed, with clothing kept tight to the body. This follows Iranian penal code rules for female convicts in ta'zir (discretionary) punishments, which apply to hijab-related offenses under articles like 638.

Procedure for Women

Position and clothing: Seated, body fully covered (unlike men, who are often stripped except for genitals and lashed standing). The whip strikes over clothes, targeting the back, shoulders, buttocks, and legs—but not the head, face, or genitals.
Implement: A woven leather belt/whip, about 1 meter long and 1.5 cm wide.
Administration: Often in a private room (described by victims as a "medieval torture chamber"), sometimes in front of a judge. A female officer may assist with clothing/hijab. Blows are delivered one by one, with the recipient sometimes required to recite or endure silently.

Women cannot choose to go bare-backed; the law requires clothing. However, thin or tight clothing transmits the force, and repeated strikes can still cause significant injury through the fabric.

Physical Effects of 74 Lashes

74 lashes is a common sentence (often the maximum for ta'zir offenses like public indecency/hijab violations) and qualifies as severe corporal punishment. Effects vary by factors like the executioner's force, exact placement, victim's health, and whether strikes overlap, but victim accounts and medical observations describe:

Immediate pain and shock: Intense burning/stinging with each blow. Victims report jumping uncontrollably, numbness after a point, moaning, or dissociation. One woman (lashed ~80 times) said the first lash shocked her so badly she couldn't scream or cry initially.
Skin and tissue damage: Severe bruising, welts, swelling, and often broken skin/open wounds (especially if blows overlap). Lashes land on the back, shoulders, buttocks, and legs. Roya Heshmati (74 lashes in 2024 for a hijab protest) described blows to her neck, back, legs, and rear.
Short-term: Extreme pain lasting days/weeks, difficulty sitting/sleeping/moving, risk of infection in open wounds, possible scarring or keloids. Psychological trauma includes humiliation, anxiety, and fear.
Longer-term: Healing can take weeks; infections prolong pain. Repeated or heavy flogging risks deeper muscle damage, though 74 in one session is not usually fatal for a healthy adult (unlike extreme cases with hundreds of lashes).

Real victim example: Roya Heshmati endured 74 lashes over her clothes for defying hijab rules. She chanted protest lyrics during it, refused to show pain afterward, and removed her hijab immediately after—highlighting the punishment's intended humiliation alongside physical harm.

Note on Parastoo Ahmadi: Her sentence (along with team members) stems from a 2024 livestreamed performance without hijab, charged as "offending public decency." It is reportedly appealable and not yet carried out as of recent reports.

Flogging is widely condemned as cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment (prohibited under international human rights law, including the UN Convention Against Torture). It remains part of Iran's legal system for many offenses. Accounts come from victims, human rights groups (e.g., Amnesty, Iran Human Rights), and Iranian penal code descriptions. Individual outcomes depend on execution details.

RileyG · Sunday at 12:03 PM

ThatRobGuy said:
Iranian signer sentenced to 74 lashes for singing without hijab - human rights group

The 29-year-old and eight other musicians have been punished by the autocratic regime for sharing ‘vulgar and immoral content’

www.independent.co.uk

Iranian singer Parastoo Ahmadi has been sentenced to 74 lashes for performing without a hijab during a live-streamed YouTube concert in 2024, human rights groups have said.

Ahmadi, 29, and eight members of her production team including musicians have been sentenced for the performance, according to court documents from the criminal court of Qom province seen by rights activists.

The group have been banned from leaving the country and engaging in artistic activities for two years.

Just another friendly reminder that while it's obviously fair to condemn the US institutional support for Netanyahu's government and to critique our approach to dealing with Iran, nobody should be pretending that Iran is "the good guy". So when protestors are hitting the streets cheerleading the entities who are at odds with the entities that are institutionally aligned with the US conservatives, they should be remember things like this as a reminder that "the enemy of my enemy isn't always my friend".

That’s really sad and inhumane.

Hans Blaster · Sunday at 12:16 PM

ThatRobGuy said:
Actually, yes... there have been numerous protests out in the streets where people wave the flags of Iran (or praise their proxy groups) simply to voice their distaste for US/Israel.

distaste for US/Israel doing what? Bombing Iran?

Did it occur to you that there are lots of Iranians in the US (and in other places) at that is their flag too?

ThatRobGuy said:
It'd be like if the Bloods did something really bad, and people started wearing blue bandanas to show solidarity with the Crips as a response to it.

The Crips are a gang with a clothing choice, they are not a nation or ethnic group. Your analogy is weird.

ThatRobGuy said:
And that sort of flawed thinking has started creeping up on the right flank as well. I've seen more and more where the "America First" crew has started downplaying Iranian flaws on the basis of "well, they actually revere Jesus more than the Israelis do"

Flawed think has *started* creeping up on the right flank? Late to the party are you?

ThatRobGuy · Sunday at 6:05 PM

Hans Blaster said:
distaste for US/Israel doing what? Bombing Iran?

Depends on who you talk to...

For myself, the distaste centers around how Israel is conducting themselves and the fact that we're bankrolling that bad bahavior.

For others, that distaste is a simple as "colonial = bad, therefore we need to side with whoever is anti-colonial"

Hans Blaster said:
Did it occur to you that there are lots of Iranians in the US (and in other places) at that is their flag too?

If you're referring to American citizen's of Iranian descent, then the Iranian flag isn't their flag anymore.

This one is:

Hans Blaster said:
The Crips are a gang with a clothing choice, they are not a nation or ethnic group. Your analogy is weird.

So is Islamic Theocracy. Religion (or the choice to implement a religion as the supreme law of a nation) is a choice/preference, not an immutable characteristic.

Hans Blaster said:
Flawed think has *started* creeping up on the right flank? Late to the party are you?

I'm referring to this particular conflict. Not in a broader sense.

In a broader sense, logical flaws in the way the US political factions approach issues has been a staple since as long as I've been old enough to pay attention to politics.

In terms of this particular issue, "stay out of it" used to be the prevailing mindset of the two polar opposite ends of the spectrum, and it was all of the establishment people who seemed to be more hawkish and feeling the need to "pick a side" in foreign conflicts. The inversion of that dynamic is somewhat recent.

Even as recent as the US interventions in places like Iraq, Syria, and Libya, I don't recall the anti-colonialist & libertarian cohorts going as far as flying the flags of any of those nations or portraying it as if "they had no other choice, we provoked them". (at least not in any noteworthy amount), it was still more of a Ron Paul'ish type of position of "This isn't our fight, we just need to stay out of it full stop"

Iranian singer sentenced to 74 lashes for performing without hijab, says human rights group

Part of the IT crowd

PhD in Everything

Remnant

Future History Slab Carver

you're in charge you can do it just get louis

Senior Member

re Member

re Member

PhD in Everything

re Member

Part of the IT crowd

Senior Member

Part of the IT crowd

Senior Member

Gone away

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Procedure for Women​

Physical Effects of 74 Lashes​

Veteran

Reconstruction 3 will come

Part of the IT crowd

Similar threads

Procedure for Women

Physical Effects of 74 Lashes