伊朗，自由以及女权主义
全世界的媒体不约而同地将伊朗此时此刻正在发生的故事放上了头条。
今天，我从犹他大学的Union走出来，便能在广场上听到拿着麦克风的女性一遍又一遍的控诉。震惊，愤怒，悲伤与同情，围绕着这个焦点事件，大众的情绪被一下子点燃并且依旧要持续很久的时间。
事件的起因是一名玛莎·阿米尼被殴打致死。虽然官方声称其死于心脏衰竭，但是她的头部扫描图可以看出骨折，出血和脑水肿的症状。
我的图像处理课程的教授来自中东，她在上课的时候总是围着一个头巾。戴头巾这种行为本身是对于宗教虔诚的一种表现。但当这种行为成为了政治，成为了一种对于女性的强制要求，其也失去了对于宗教本身的意义。
这个行为其实源自于伊斯兰教，现如今，无数的人起身以女权主义标榜自己去反对该行为。虽然我往往也自自誉为一个女权主义者，但这个事件本身我不认为与女权有任何关系，这个事件的本质是一种政治对于自由主义的压迫。
无论伊朗的女性如何选择自己的穿戴，这些都是她们自己的行为。卢梭曾经说过人的自由并不在于一个人可以随意的做自己想做的事，而在于他们可以随时拒绝他们不想做的事情。如同伊朗正在发生的一样，如同罗诉韦德案的推翻，其本质上是剥夺了女性拒绝的权力，这并非女权主义的男女平等的理想，而是一个比女权更加基本的问题：政治对于人类自由的侵犯。
我们的选择往往收到时间以及环境等多种因素的影响，对于普通人来说大部分时间都是在不得不做的事情上耗费大部分的人生。但是，这不代表他们没有拒绝的权力。潇洒裸辞虽然听起来不可理喻但仍旧是你永远可供选择的选项这才能诠释自由的含义本身。这与追求更多的权力截然不同。
女权主义的进行往往伴随着自由思潮的兴起。虽然偶尔伴随着自由主义的泛滥，但其依旧在历史长河中缓慢前进。这个观点来自于历史唯物主义，在自由的思潮泛滥的时候往往秩序取而代之，而秩序往往造成专制和压迫又会迫使自由思潮的兴起。我坚信，随着整体经济再一次上行，自由与全球化的时代终将回归。
Translated:
Media outlets around the world are coincidentally putting the story of what is happening in Iran at this very moment in time in the headlines.
Today, as I walked out of the Union at the University of Utah, I could hear the women with microphones in the plaza complaining over and over again. Shock, anger, sadness and compassion were the focus of the story, and the public's emotions were instantly ignited and will remain so for a long time.
The incident began when a Martha Amini was beaten to death. Although officials claim that she died of heart failure, scans of her head show signs of fractures, bleeding and cerebral edema.
The professor of my image processing course is from the Middle East and she always wears a hijab during class. The act of wearing a hijab itself is an expression of religious devotion. But when it becomes political, when it becomes a compulsory requirement for women, it loses its meaning for the religion itself.
The practice actually originated in Islam, and nowadays, countless people have risen up to oppose it by labeling themselves as feminists. Although I tend to call myself a feminist, I don't think the event itself has anything to do with feminism; it is essentially a political oppression of liberalism.
Whatever women in Iran choose to wear, it is their own doing. Rousseau once said that the freedom of a person is not that they can do what they want, but that they can always refuse to do what they don't want. What is happening in Iran, as in the overturning of Roe v. Wade, is essentially the denial of women's right to refuse, not the feminist ideal of gender equality, but a more fundamental issue than feminism: the violation of human freedom by politics.
Our choices often receive a variety of factors such as time as well as circumstance, and for the average person most of their time is spent spending most of their life on what they have to do. But that doesn't mean they don't have the right to refuse. Although it sounds incomprehensible to quit in style, it is still an option that is always available to you to interpret the meaning of freedom itself. This is very different from the pursuit of more power.
Feminism has often been accompanied by the rise of liberal thinking. Although occasionally accompanied by a proliferation of liberalism, it has continued to move slowly through history. This idea comes from historical materialism, that when liberal ideas proliferate, they are often replaced by order, and that order often results in tyranny and oppression, which in turn forces the rise of liberal ideas. I firmly believe that the era of liberalism and globalization will eventually return as the overall economy moves upward once again.
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)