oppressed persian muslim woman

Indentured servitude for men in Iran: The myth of patriarchal oppressive divorce

Editorial note: This item, first published in December 2013, is being republished to add important information noting that the number of men in debtor’s prison in Iran has been found to be higher than originally thought. –DE

This article is also available in Romanian and Farsi.

“…effectively denying (Iranian) women the right to divorce and re-establishing men’s unlimited right of divorce.”[1]

“A man may marry up to four wives and divorce them whenever he desires. But mere will is not enough for a(n Iranian) woman to divorce her husband.”[2] penned by Shirin Ebadi, the only Iranian Noble-prize winner. (She received her Noble Peace Prize for her efforts in the field of issues of women and children.)

“Iran’s rising divorce rate is all the more noteworthy given the laws on divorce. While husbands are empowered to end their marriages in a matter of weeks without stating any reason, women must establish sufficient grounds for divorce in a process that can take several years, even with professional legal advice… (women) facing such an uneven playing field…” [3]NY Times.

A quick search on the internet will tell you how much women are discriminated against in Iran when it comes to divorce. They will tell you that men have the absolute right to end marriage, and women cannot divorce their husbands if they wish. Some radical gynocentrists even tell you that a woman cannot divorce even if her husband beats her every day. So what do all these statements have in common? You can’t precisely find the similarity, because it is not just what they say; it is also what they don’t say. By the end of this article you have to decide for yourself how appalling these statements are.

When a couple decides to get married in Iran, upon registering their marriage, they announce to officials an amount of wealth and property–that their families agreed on–which the husband is mandated to pay to his wife. This is called mehrieh or mahr. Furthermore, this is just the beginning: sit tight!

The most prominent attribute of mehrieh is its value. So how much is mehrieh in a country where your average worker earns around US$270 a month? According to the Center for Population Studies of Asia and Oceania the average of mehrieh during the period 2003 to 2008 have been 450 pure gold coins[4]. The center also announced the alarming rate of increase in mehrieh, so the average mehrieh must be higher now. What’s more, the questionnaire only asked of the amount of gold in mehrieh, not the apartment buildings, lands, money, other statements in the marriage contract that may dictate the husband buy other things for his wife after they’re married, etc.

What is more interesting is that the authorities do register all mehriehs in their books. Why the need to ask people when the registry offices do have the real data? Especially considering that the state has some stigma around high mehriehs and seems reluctant to reveal the real statistics.

Personally, I have rarely seen a woman whose mehrieh is lower than 1000 pure gold coins. But let’s just go with the said 450 coins. How much is it? At the moment of this writing, 450 gold coins is roughly US$140,000. In the major metropolitan areas, mehrieh is often than not several million dollars. That is how insanely gynocentric this culture is.

Now, you are comparing this average on mehrieh with the monthly average salary of a worker, i.e. US$270, and thinking to yourself that this is impossible to pay. You are also perhaps confused and do not know what that has to do with divorce. Be patient. It is a little complicated, but it makes these simplistic suggestions made by the media and feminists scandalous.

A woman can demand her mehrieh any time she wants. Upon her suing for divorce, all the bank accounts of the accused are legally frozen and he cannot take one dime out of his bank account. He is no more allowed to sell or buy anything. Wait for the punch line:

What if he cannot pay the unbelievably high amount of mehrieh? “The Patriarchy” modified the law 2 years ago so as to go easier on men, but, let’s begin with the old law:

If the man could not pay, he would be sent to prison until the entire mehrieh was paid by him or his family. All his belongings, including his house, his land, his car, etc. would be confiscated by the court and sold as a part of mehrieh.

After decades of men being sent to prison at the whim of women, “the patriarchy” finally came up with the new law 2 years ago:

If the accused pays 110 gold coins (roughly US$34,000), one of his apartments (if he has any) won’t be confiscated, so he can at least live there. He will also be allowed to work to pay the rest of the debt monthly as ordered by the court. It is customary that the court orders the accused to pay two gold coins every month for the next several decades. That would be around US$615. A woman can live a luxurious life with that in Iran. The majority of working people earn less than that. Furthermore, he cannot leave the country until he has fully paid the mehrieh. All of this is only under the condition that the accused is proved to be working one job. If the court finds out that he works two jobs, he has to pay all of mehrieh right up-front.

The law was apparently changed to free many of the mehrieh prisoners whose families had already paid well over 110 gold coins to get their sons or brothers released from prison. After freeing many prisoners, the official statistics of mehrieh prisoners are as follows:

The chief of Iran’s Diah Center, Asadollah Jolayi, announced that last year, (Iranian’s year 1392), 20,000 men went to prison for their inability to pay Mehrieh [5].

This puts some myths in Iran’s culture to rest: When a man is in love, he is constantly asked by the family of his bride-to-be, “Who has ever paid mehrieh?” This is a shaming tactic to bring men into compliance for insanely high amounts of mehrieh which you better not believe.

Still too soon to get to divorce.

This is not the only financial responsibility of the husband. The husband is, by law, responsible for every dime spent in a marriage. According to Islamic law, the husband cannot ask his wife to spend a dime, or even consult her on how she can spend her money. Money for the expenses of life is called nafaqa, and the husband is mandated to give that money to his wife. She can sue her husband for not paying, and the court will order a monthly amount to be paid to the wife by her husband as her nafaqa.

Here is an even more interesting part: The amount of nafaqa depends on the class of the woman, but is mandated that it should not be lower than her standard of living prior to marriage. Meaning that if she used to have maids, the husband now should pay for maids. This helps to make it clear that in Iran, “deprivation” of a wife from her husband’s wealth is illegal. She doesn’t even need to sue further for mehrieh. While we are at it, in Islamic laws, a woman’s possession is her possession, but a man’s possession is the family’s possession.

This, by the way, is what feminists somehow forget to tell you, when they were screeching: “In Iran, sons receive twice as much inheritance as daughters in case of their parent’s death!”

Therefore, in a marriage, the woman is in for whatever resources her husband can provide, and she will not get much more out of her man by suing for her mehrieh. Rather, if needed, she can sue for her nafaqa.

So the unaffordability of mehrieh is actually a gun in her hands that any married woman can shoot any time she wants her husband in jail. This is apparently the “protection” of women in the old conservative cultures for every problem a woman might face in her marriage: Jail him by mehrieh! The equivalent of what is called alimony and child support in America is Nafaqa. There is no equivalent for mehrieh in the west. It is a debt the husband owes to his wife which is worth almost 200 years of salary. It is a slavery contract.

Do understand that mehrieh is leverage for almost anything desired, put in the hands of women.

So now we are ready to cross another feminist lie off the list:

“In Iran, women inherit 12.5% of their deceased husband’s wealth but husbands inherit 25% of their deceased wife’s wealth. No equality for women!” The rest of the inheritance by the way goes to children and parents.

Telling half the truth is a great way to lie, and I have got to admit, they are very good liars. Here is what was left out of the picture: mehrieh by law remains outstanding after death. Meaning:

    • Should a man die, the first thing done by the state is to pay his wife’s mehrieh out of the deceased’s properties, and if anything remains, again 12.5% goes to his wife. (The rest goes to children and parents.)
    • Should a woman die, her husband still has to pay her mehrieh to the deceased wife’s family (the ones who are the deceased’s next of kin), which almost always is much more than the 25% he inherits.

The net result is that a woman would inherit almost everything her husband had, whereas a man inherits almost nothing from his wife. All her inheritance goes to her family.

Finally, we get to divorce:

Men filing for divorce:

A man can indeed divorce his wife at any time. But this kind of divorce initiated by the husband is called Rojeie, meaning:

He is required to pay both the mehrieh and nafaqa. What’s more, if the court does not find the wife at fault for the divorce, the man also might have to pay Ojrat almesl.

Women filing for divorce (Bayen Divorce):

Either she agrees to let off part of her mehrieh, an amount of money she did not deserve to begin with, as specified by the judge, in return for her right to divorce, or:

She can extort her full mehrieh and still have the right to divorce in case:

  1. Husband is abusive.
  2. Husband has committed polygamy without wife’s consent.
  3. Husband has not paid nafaqa for six months.
  4. Husband has serious illness.
  5. Husband is mentally ill.
  6. Husband has not had sex with wife for six months.
  7. Husband has a job for which the wife feels humiliated.
  8. Husband is addicted.
  9. Husband has not fathered a child during the first 5 years of marriage.
  10. Husband is a criminal.
  11. Husband is punished (by the legal system) for something about which wife feels humiliated.
  12. Husband has been in prison for over 5 years.

In other words, if a man wants to divorce and his wife does not agree, he has to buy his way to freedom with a price that almost no man can pay.

Women on the other hand, will need to agree to lay off part of their mehrieh if their husband is not in the above categories, still perhaps get a lot of money, and move on. Think for a second what can happen with this so-called “equality” of right to divorce as defined by feminists: A woman can marry, file for divorce the next morning, and get mehrieh! Right now, if she wants to file for divorce the next morning, she will be asked by the judge to let go of part of her mehrieh, and if she does not consent, she is told that she only can get her entire mehrieh, if the husband is in one of the 12 above categories. For those who still cannot wrap their heads around this, it is not that women’s mere will does not give them the right to divorce, but rather that their mere will is not enough for the right to divorce AND mehrieh.

Now, go back and read the statements in the beginning of this article. In a lack of mutual agreement for divorce, it is impossible for almost any men to initiate divorce in Iran. But hey, feminists tell us that men have “unlimited right to divorce,” and that women need to build grounds to get both their Mehrieh and divorce simultaneously. But hey, they do not have the right to divorce because feminists said so, instead of saying that women do not have the right to both a divorce AND a mehrieh at the same time in the nonexistence of all of the 12 conditions above. How over 85,000 divorces occurred within the first 6 months of this year[5] which were mostly filed by women, is something they should ignore. After all, it does not fit well into the victim narrative.

The overall result is that you can meet many rich, divorced women who have not worked a single day in their lives. Their ex-husband is bound to pay them 2 gold coins monthly for the next several decades. She goes on trips with her new boyfriend while the ex-husband cannot leave the country.

Mehrieh fraud becomes a popular topic once in a while when some girl marries several men in less than a year and sues for mehrieh. But hey, to be fair, I am the one calling this a fraud, because many say that not paying mehrieh is the real fraud.[6] How about a little story? The story of a girl whose mehrieh was pure gold as much as she weighed. She sued for it as soon as it was recorded, before even planning for a wedding. The groom’s family were awfully rich, paid her, and divorced her. In fact this kind of fraud does not even require the woman to have sex to consummate the marriage. Don’t believe it? In case the couple have not had sex, the husband still has to pay half of mehrieh.

Speaking of frauds, it is not a bad time to mention another form of it: if a virgin has consensual vaginal sex, with a boy she can sue for mehrieh and claim that she assumed the boy wanted to marry her. Then the boy is wedded to her by force.

A logical solution to all this is to eliminate the unbelievably punitive financial responsibility slavery of men and give men and women equal rights to divorce. But feminists are not interested in that, because they know that women are already getting a much better deal in divorce than men:

“…mere will is not enough for a(n Iranian) woman to divorce her husband.”

This is what they claim, with no mention of mehrieh whatsoever! So according to Iranian feminists, women should be allowed to sue for mehrieh and nafaqa, extort an amount of money they did not earn to begin with, and their mere will should be enough for taking money and ending the marriage.

Such fine human rights activists they are. Men are in prison for mehrieh by the thousands, and feminists are whining for a draconian law that is no different from giving women the absolute guarantee of a lifelong servitude from a man.

Of course, women are already doing all this, by hiring lawyers to educate them on how to find legal ways to get their mehrieh and the right to divorce. Hell, they don’t even need lawyers for that. If you are a woman and are not good at fabricating domestic violence, just provoke somebody enough to give you a slap. Next morning, you are in one of Iran’s forensic centers with a woman issuing a passionate report to the chivalric judge, and bingo. Whatever your husband cannot pay in mehrieh, their family has to, in order to keep their son out of prison. But feminists do not like this as it might get time-consuming:

“…women must establish sufficient grounds for divorce in a process that can take several years…” NY Times.

Note also how cleverly it is written: “it can take” not “it does take.” Of course, if a woman has a forensic report for domestic violence, it is only a matter of weeks before she gets her divorce and extorts her mehrieh.

Even a woman who is a victim of domestic violence almost certainly does not deserve the extortion of mehrieh. Let’s walk through the logic: if you kill a man, you have to pay blood money to his next of kin. This is called diah, and right now is US$40,000. But guess what? Mehrieh is much more expensive than that. The worth of a woman injured, or who even claims injury, is almost 10 times than that of a man’s life!

This is their version of equality: they get funds and campaign for equality of right to divorce in Iran, yet somehow mentioning a draconian law like mehrieh, which is highly interwoven with the right to divorce, does not interest them at all.

But guys, be sure to let your issues be addressed by feminists, and meanwhile, just shut the fuck up.

Let it be clear that mehrieh is not a feminist-inspired law. It is a hard-core Islamic law that has given women of history the absolute right to throw their husbands in jail at their whim without having to come up with an explanation. But feminists have done nothing to fight mehriah or even acknowledge it. If you are paying alimony and child support, you might want to say “thank god I am not paying mehrieh and nafaqa.”

Want to hear some propaganda? How about the one published in NY Times?

“Iran’s rising divorce rate is all the more noteworthy given the laws on divorce. While husbands are empowered to end their marriages in a matter of weeks without stating any reason, women must establish sufficient grounds for divorce in a process that can take several years, even with professional legal advice.” NY Times.

Explanation of the stupidity of this sentence and the simplistic interpretation of a complicated set of laws should not at this point be needed, if you have bothered to read this article so far. But I’ll say this: Up to this point in this article of NY Times, the author has not said a single word regarding mehrieh. He has already censored the truth about it several lines above this:

“High dowries, high living costs, lack of jobs and financial support make young people fear marriage,” said a member of Parliament (regarding the increase in divorce rates and decrease in marriage rates).

Another disingenous statement. What that member of the Parliament said was that high mehriehs, which are to be paid by the husband, cause fear of marriage. Not high dowries. Dowry is the set of household furniture that the family of the bride gifts to the couple. Why did the author translate it to say “dowry” instead of mehrieh? Maybe he was just getting feminist consults? Perhaps that he did not know what mehrieh was? No, he has heard of it, he mentions it around the end of the article:

“Facing such an uneven playing field, marital lawyers say, Iranian women have increasingly turned to leveraging their legal right to a mehrieh — a single payment agreed on before marriage that constitutes a kind of Islamic marriage insurance. Husbands are obliged to pay this sum to wives when they divorce.”

He leaves this to the very end, and the fallacy of confusing cause and effect is easily detected here. Also, the husband is obliged to pay mehrieh whenever the wife asks for it, so it is not a marriage insurance. As mentioned earlier, it is a slavery contract. Find any newspaper article in English about Iran’s divorce laws. The ones that actually do mention mehrieh mention it in a minimal way to imply that this 1,400-year-old law has been recently added, as if to compensate for “women’s inequality.”

Now, who do you think really has the right to divorce in Iran? These laws seem to be there because divorce has historically been frowned-upon in Islamic philosophy. They were intended to complicate it. But in the modern Iran, attitudes have changed, and in the past decade, the rate of divorce has tripled. Recently, one out of each 7 marriages has ended in divorce, with the rate for metropolitan areas being almost 1 out of every 3.5 marriages. 30% of all divorces happen in less than a year from the date of the marriage.

Think about that for a second: there are men in Iran who now must pay several million dollars for putting their dicks in the wrong place for less than a year. In the past 5 years, things have changed so dramatically that some registry offices have been recording almost 50 divorces for every 3 marriages in a random month. One would wonder how many of these divorces have been filed by women, how many of them have taken all or part of their mehrieh, and how many Iranian families have lost every dime they had to a daughter-in-law who sued for mehrieh and got her divorce.


[4] http://www.mardomsalari.com/template1/News.aspx?NID=147503

In paragraph 5 it is written: A research carried in 1387 by the Center for Population Studies of Asia……has concluded that the average for Mehrieh has rised from 300 gold coins to 450 gold coins.

[5] http://alef.ir/vdccsoqsm2bqmx8.ala2.html?17txt

or: http://www.ghatreh.com/news/nn13034262/%D8%A2%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D8%AA%D8%B5%D8%A7%D8%AF%D9%81%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D9%85%D9%86%D8%AC%D8%B1-%D9%85%D8%B1%DA%AF-%D8%AC%D8%A7%D8%AF%D9%87-%D8%A2%D8%B2%D8%A7%D8%AF%DB%8C-%D9%87%D8%B2%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D8%B2%D9%86%D8%AF%D8%A7%D9%86%DB%8C-%D8%BA%DB%8C%D8%B1%D8%B9%D9%85%D8%AF

Translation of the last part:

He [Iran’s Chief of Diah Center Assadollah Jolayi] also addressed prisoners of mehrieh and added that: “Last year, 20,000 men have been prisoned for mehrieh…”

  • Seele

    Thanks for another insider’s report, Ali.

    I wonder how the current situation compares to what it was before the country became an Islamic republic. Many people on the outside, so to speak, would be under the impression that due to the fact that church and state were no longer separate, oppression of women began in earnest. But it does not seem to be the case.

  • kronk3

    Why in the world would any male EVER get married in that garbage pit? Where are the fathers, counseling their sons to ‘never get married’ having already gone through this themselves???
    Its their own damn fault if, after knowing what will happen to the vast majority of them, still decide to marry some ‘devil in a red dress’!
    I mean really, the men there are OK with this???

  • Abelard Lindsey


    Your postings (this one and the previous one) definitely provide the missing pieces to the puzzle of Iran for me. You see, I’ve met very few Iranian women in my life (3, maybe 4). Everyone of them was a real “ball-buster”. I did not like them personally. All of my friends who have met Iranian women have said the same thing. It seems as Iranian women have a reputation for being real “ball-buster hell-cats”. At the same time, the Western media, both the mainstream “legacy” media as well as the “conservative” alternative media, depict Iran as this totally harsh-out patriarchal oppressive Islamic state. This depiction of Iran does not match my admittedly limited experiences with Iranian women. I do not see how such “ball buster” women could knuckle under such a patriarchal regime. This picture does not make sense!

    I assumed the situation in Iran was similar to that of Japan (a country and people I have deep experience with) in the sense that Japan is depicted by the west as being patriarchal, but the women have all of the power in the household, including the family finances. Thus, Japanese society gives different roles for men and women, but get the women compensating powers for their “diminished” status. I assumed that a similar dynamic exists in Iran.

    Your explanations make a LOT of sense and definitely provides the missing pieces such that the puzzle I have about Iran all falls neatly into place. I have probably learned more about Iran from you than over the past 10 years of my life.

    I suspect there is a similar dynamic among Arab and Turkish societies as well. There is a lot more to “Islam” than meets the Western eye, I suspect.

    BTW, I never believe anything the New York Times says about anything, and neither should you.

    • Andrew Sheedy

      An Iranian woman I know reports that her father’s property is going to his daughters when he dies. She says this an exception, so I have a hard time believing that women are so well treated there.

      • alex brown

        Property goes to the male, because females do not look after men, do you not understand that?

      • Nunya Bidness

        Your comment is kind of like all of the media about killing female babies in China.

        If I say, ‘The Chinese frequently kill female babies shortly after birth,’ you can (incorrectly) surmise from that statement that the culture does not value females. You have to look at the whole picture.

        In China, a man is legally obligated to care for his parents until they die (parents can sue and will win). With the laws limiting the number of children that a couple can have and since there isn’t social security in China and since, a woman does not have the same legal obligation to care for her parents, the reason that female chinese babies are killed is because the parents are guaranteeing that they have someone who is legally obligated to care for them.
        If a woman had the same responsibilities, female babies wouldn’t be killed.

        Likewise, a man in Iran inheriting his parent’s property seems like a gender based entitlement, but since her is guaranteed to lose a tremendous amount of his wealth to marriage and is legally obligated to care for his wife, what does that inheritance matter? It’s not really his to keep, it’s his burden.

  • Abelard Lindsey


    One more thing. Please keep up the articles. They are very enlightening.

    • The Real Peterman

      Yes, this is a very interesting series. Thanks for writing it!

  • toothless

    patriarchy hurt men to fuck face!
    man debating as a feminist is so easy, i refuted the whole article without even reading past title.
    Amazing article and a real eye opener for us, who don’t know anything beside the lie the feminist driven media feed us from Islamic country.It is amazing how any man would ever agree to such obvious enslavement.

    • Bewildered

      Amazing article and a real eye opener for us…..

      The big problem is there’s very little of genuine reporting these days. All we get are opinion pieces masquerading as reports.’Reporters” see facts as triggers to go to town with their confirmatory biases.
      Whether it’s a ‘right wing’ source or a ‘left wing’ source we get tainted news and the truth lies hidden under the garbage.

      “Poor oppressed women of other cultures” is one of the many myths that have been manufactured in the West.

  • A.Z

    A little thing Ali forgot to mention is that women have to face 3 month waiting period after death of a husband or divorce in which they aren’t allowed to come in contact with males. This makes it difficult to keep a job and they rely on the husbands family for finance. How many times do you think a woman can pull this off in an year?
    Islamic law varies from country to country.and while it might sound brilliant and woman centered in this article there’s countries such as Saudi Arab where Islamic law is used to take basic rights from women such as driving or leaving the country. Just pointing that out so people don’t think Islamic law favors women OR men it generally screws anyone slightly falling from rigid gender roles. It’s all dependant on how you interpret it from culture to culture.
    Overall a good article pointing out feminism’s idiocy. Also ever notice how they try to bring western feminism in the rest of the world? Many Muslim women in America itself have complained about being tired of feminism asking them to take off their scarves and be ‘liberated’ totally ignoring cultural values or that *shock horror* women ACTUALLY have opinions on stuff that is against feminists. Le Gasp! What? Feminism doesn’t represent what women actually want?

    • Ali Mehraspand

      “A little thing Ali forgot to mention is that women have to face 3 month waiting period after death of a husband or divorce in which they aren’t allowed to come in contact with males. This makes it difficult to keep a job and they rely on the husbands family for finance.”

      WTF? Who told you that? You don’t possibly believe that to be true, right? Perhaps you are referring to this law called eddeh:
      In case of a husband’s death or divorce, an ovulating woman cannot register her next marriage for three months. This doesn’t apply to women who have gone through menopause. The reason for this law in the old days without pregnancy tests was to make sure the woman was not already pregnant. That would be three menstrual cycles.
      This is the exact reason these articles are needed. They have had people believe that after divorce a woman should leave her job! And not come in contact with males! Absolutely nothing changes after a divorce for a woman.

      • A.Z

        Yes I was actually referring to that! Thank you for pointing it out! Wouldn’t a woman before menopause have to leave her job though? Or take a 3 month holiday or something? I’ve heard women don’t have to come in contact with males, have I been misinformed?

        • Ali Mehraspand

          LOL! No leaving her job, no holidays! Not the slightest bit of change in her normal life.

          “have I been misinformed?”

          You bet.

  • Bluedrgn

    I think that “slavery of men” in one way or another is the ultimate goal of feminism… financial slavery like in this article and/or by changing the laws so that any woman can have any man jailed at any time just by making a false accusation.

  • Bewildered

    I need feminism because I love fairy tales about ‘evil’ men to make myself feel virtuous and self-righteous.

  • Alessandro

    Very interesting article. And what is the situation for the sons?

  • Codebuster

    Thank you for this excellent article and your previous. I have been wondering how to respond to the middle east “problem” (as feminists define it), and this kind of post sets the record straight. Excellent stuff. Here’s an example of the sort of unmitigated bullshit that emanates from the MSM that ignores the broader realities, such as men’s bodies on the battlefield:

    The feminist crusades are worse than any other kind of crusade in history, the way that they poison cultures that they know nothing about.

    • Ali Mehraspand

      Well next time tell them to either leave the propaganda and stop telling half the truth or shut the fuck up since what they are doing is not activism because get this:
      In those countries where they have this savage law of stoning, stoning is both for men and women. When a married woman has sex with another man, she and that other man will both be stoned and stoning of men is much more brutal. While stoning of women requires that only her head be left out so that all the stones strike her head, men’s stoning requires that all his upper-body be left out so that the stoning takes hours.
      This is a little known fact because stoning men has never gotten media coverage from the west. They actually openly lie that stoning is only for women.

      • Bewildered

        Ha! ha! ha! FTSU time !

        ” Fools rush in where angels fear to tread ”

  • http://unknownmisandry.blogspot.com Robert St. Estephe

    I looks like lots of NGOs across the world, and those forms as international entities and those under the aegis of the United Stations have “unfortunately misspoken.” So very many of them, and with a stated international uniform agenda. Fortunately we have the “incompetence theory” to explain to us that the billions wasted on the fake feminist rhetoric, studies and statistics is definitely not the result of two or more persons a long-term plan to influence governments through carefully concocted and coordinated means in a way that is unethical, immoral, fraudulent or illegal. Otherwise it would be a “conspiracy” and as every dogmatist and ideologue knows, such things cannot possibly exist. For if they did, it would be scary and your friends would make fun of you for thinking such an unfashionable, peer-pressure-unaffected thought — Stuff happens, fugeddaboudit.

    You are expected to pay higher and higher taxes and work longer hours so the fraudsters in the NGOs can paiod big salaries, with glamorous perks, just for making up outrageous lies. Seems like there is little difference between being a movie screenwriter and a tax-payer supported misandrist fiction writer (propagandist).

  • markis1

    thank you Ali for educating us..

  • http://menaregood.com Tom Golden

    Damn. Another blockbuster. I had my mouth wide open in shock through the whole thing. So true that the liars have accomplished their feat by telling only half the story. This is their tried and true routine and it works so well.

    One question. Can you tell us how to pronounce “mehrieh”? I found myself reading it “May’ Ra” but I am sure that is incorrect and would love to know the proper pronunciation.


    • The Real Peterman

      I would pronounce it “uh oh!”

    • Ali Mehraspand

      Thanks Tom. The phonetics would be:
      meh ri: ye

      • Stu

        sounds like marry ya

    • kakasia

      you should pronounce it this way meh like men rea like trea ye i don’t have example for this one

  • http://blog.StudioBrule.com Steve Brulé


    And, like all of western media, the NY Times is knowingly deceiving all of us. The mainstream media cannot be trusted in any way.

    • Bewildered

      The mainstream media cannot be trusted in any way.

      It’s not only the mainstream media but the academe that has been corrupted.

      The so called liberal arts have been liberally fucked.

  • Ralf

    Hi Ali,

    can you tell us any reasoning why men do not object to this things? meaning do just refuse to marry or refuse high mehrieh?

    Compared to that it is cotton candy what we have, and many here already refuse to get into that. So I do not really get how such a system can go on for so long?

    • Ali Mehraspand

      Hi Ralph
      A deeper understanding as to the reasons for not objecting to this would be a part of a bigger social dynamic that will be discussed in my next article. But just to touch a little on that, you will be amazed how much a tacit sexual starvation benefits women.

      • Astrokid

        Excellent stuff Ali. Thoroughly enjoying your articles and comments. I especially LOLed at this..
        Think about that for a second: there are men in Iran who now must pay several million dollars for putting their dicks in the wrong place for less than a year
        Our Iranian brother is speaking the same language as us LOL

        But just to touch a little on that, you will be amazed how much a tacit sexual starvation benefits women

        Indeed. Especially lower-status males.
        In my teen years in India, one of my friends was a lower class Muslim, and by 9th grade he was under massive pressure from his large parental family (3 brothers, many sisters) to start providing for the family. After school-hours, he would spent most of the day in our house, coz he was afraid of going home to face family and community shaming. He would even eat dinner at our place, and go home late at night just to quietly slip-in and sleep. He had to abandon school and look for job ANYWHERE.. and he ended up going to Dubai and suffering there in whatever job came his way.. just to benefit from the Foreign Exchange rate and send money home. PROVIDE WELL (and get sex), or perish was his state.

        • Ali Mehraspand

          Thanks for the kind words! We see a lot of teenage boys here too that provide for their families so that upper class women can watch feminist programs on the satellite and say to each other: fucking men. The oppressors.

  • http://gynocentrism.com/2013/07/14/about/ Peter Wright (Tawil)

    A facinating expose on the real (as opposed to Western fabricated) situation for men in Iranian marriages. They are clearly treated as financial utilities for women.

    Based on the astonishingly high amount of mehrieh and nafaqa I’m curious to ask has there occurred a reactionary bachelor or MGTOW movement in Iran? Would such a movement be tolerated by Iranian norms of behaviour? Do you have any knowledge of the recent marriage-rate trends in your country? I sincerely hope it’s falling – for men’s sake.

    • Ali Mehraspand

      “I’m curious to ask has there occurred a reactionary bachelor or MGTOW movement in Iran? ”

      Well, the average of the age of people getting married is on a rise which some politicians say is a national threat! Anti-marriage sentiment has emerged in a portion of young men. The rate of marriage is decreasing but a trend of MGTOW does not exactly follow from that fact for the population of those in their twenties is also decreasing. But evidence of the possibility of that has already emerged and the current norms of culture have adapted to fully accept this trend.

      • Seele


        Although I used to know many Iranians in the past, I cannot say I know enough of them recently to get the latest news. But I do have a suspicion that the established mentality of “man up, get married, have kids” is still pretty strong in the Iranian collective psyche, and most young men do not really see anything wrong about it. In fact I’d imagine that young men consider the financial burden and dangers as integral parts of marriage, and might even be surprised to learn that in other countries, marriage does not always means having the muzzle of a loaded gun superglued to the groom’s back. The rise of the average marrying age might be a reflection of the increased financial burden to the groom: a young man would have to work for a few more years to put together enough savings to contemplate marriage.

        Having said that, another “traditional” society – Japan – has seen the emergence of the MGTOW/Herbivore man, perhaps a totally indigenous phenomenon. Who knows what’s around the corner in Iran; it is something worth keeping an eye on.

        • Ali Mehraspand

          I agree, Thinking outside the box can be difficult when that kind of pre-assumption is held by a culture for men. You said that young men see the financial burden as an integral part of marriage. That is exactly right. But MGTOW is now a possibility more than ever.

        • Abelard Lindsey

          “Spengler” (David Goldman) has talked about the fragility of traditional societies in the face of modernity. Having lived in various Asian countries for 10 years, I think Spengler is correct on this point. The thing about Japan is that the system worked as long as there was continuous economic growth that made it worthwhile to live the traditional post-war life style. That of the salaryman and his wife. Both roles suck. The salaryman works all the time and the wife is expected to be the dutiful wife all of the time. You see, unlike the West, Japanese women really do not want to become “salarymen” because it sucks so hard. They would rather live with their parents, stay single, and spend their time and money traveling and buying hand bags, preferably Louis Vuitton (Iranian girls seem to me the type who like Louis Vuitton hand bags as well). The guys don’t want to be salarymen either because it sucks even with a growing economy, which they haven’t had for over 20 years.

          So, all of the younger people, both male and female, prefer to be slackers. This has been going on since the mid 90’s. More recently, South Korea has gone through this social change as well. There, the change has been even more dramatic, because the role of Korean women used to be more subordinate than that of Japanese women.

          From what little I know, there seem to be similarities between east Asian societies such as Japan and Korea and Iran. Iranians, like East Asians, seem to me a “face” people, which makes sense given that they are the original “Aryans”. They do not like humiliation. My guess is this is the reason why the men still buy into the system even though it is so bad for them. To refuse to get married and have kids is tantamount to loosing face (Ali can correct me on this if I’m wrong).

          I will say that Japan and South Korea used to be among the world’s most traditional societies. Both have undergone radical social change in the past 20 years. It seems to me that Iran is likely to undergo such change (and may already be occurring). I do notice their fertility statistics resemble those of Europe. As goes Iran, will the rest of the Muslim Middle-east follow? Only time will tell?

  • Krakhen

    Excellent. Wish i had the writing skills to write articles about where i live: Brazil. It’s also very different than the patriarchal heaven most outsiders are led to believe, it’s a matriarchal nest where men die almost 10 years earlier and have to work 5 years longer to retire.
    The facebook app where women can anonimously rate and post comments on men’s pages had the most success here, when a group said it was going to release an app for men, it was prohibited by law before it was even released.

  • brentlol

    Articles like this remind me why I come to AVFM. Insightful and informative, good journalism shouldn’t be this hard to find and shouldn’t be considered hateful rhetoric. It also helps to remind me that despite how derange western society has become there are numerous other places where man have it much worse than I in a place that never had a “feminism revolution.”

  • Turbo

    Thank you Ali. Another excellent and insightful article. A real eye opener.
    Looking forward to the next one.

  • Astrokid

    Re: Mehrieh
    Turns out that some Islamic people in the West still abide by the traditional rules of Mehrieh
    An interesting comment by an Iranian man who has suffered this

    Afshin said…
    I am glad that a number of intellectual Iranian women are speaking out about “Mehrieh”. Mehrieh has become a business for a number of families in Iran, even those who we think are well off and do not need the money. I like to very briefly tell you my own life story. I have lived here in the United Kingdom for over 26 years, educated to MSc level. I returned to Iran for a couple of years believing that I can settle in Iran and perhaps start my own business. It did not take me long to realise that Iran is not my home anymore and I cannot adapt to that life style and mentality!, However I did manage to find a good job in a so called International Company and I was earning reasonable amount of money in 1999.
    I met a girl aged 21 the eldest daughter of a reputable pediatrics Doctor and to cut the storey short got married in November 2000, few weeks before I returned to the United Kingdom with my wife. I organised a wedding which was unforgettable and everything else was done to my best ability and financial means. Before the marriage took place ofcourse, we had the “baleh boron”. The family gave me a piece of paper requesting for 1358 sekeh bahar azadi (my wife’s year of birth) amoung other things and an apartment. At the beginning I was shocked, disbelieved and speechless but soon came to terms with the reality. As I did not have an apartment in Iran, that was quickly dismissed, but during a night out with my future wife, Mehrieh was greatly challenged by my future wife and she would not negotiate anything less, because all her friends and relatives had their year of Birth as their Mehrieh. Anyway, 9 years after marriage and return to UK and completion of her education in Computer Science at my expense among other supports and guidance she had from me, supporting her to find a job at Visa International, she filed for divorce in October 2009. She is currently claiming her Mehrieh as well as she is claiming everything I have and worked for here in the UK!! She has enforcement orders against me in Iran. What she has done to me and put me through in the past two years is another story. I will not disclose details as I am writing a book about my life and marriage which I think will be a lesson to learn for other Men marrying Iranian Women in Iran. Unfortunately, majority of women in Iran marry to money not their husbands.
    September 14, 2010 at 6:44 AM

    Based on my Googling, 1 Bahar Azadi coin = 12410000 Rial = 500 USD
    So total = 679K $ LOL

    It would appear that lower-class people would fix Mehr at a lower rate. I found this on one Indian forum

    I had a question regarding Fatima Marriage,Daughter of Prophet. (Meher).As in India Muslim People asks for Fatima Meher. I want to know the Amount of the Fatima Meher. And is it permissible to give in gold or silver as Maher. As my Meher is 1.5kgs of silver as per advices by our local Imam. After calculating the Meher of Fatima. I request u to give details regarding Meher.

    1.5kgs of silver translates to approx 1000USD.

    • Ali Mehraspand

      Thanks a lot for sharing this. Yes, the famous date of birth. Most people go with that. 450 coins sounds really under-reported. The story you just shared has all the elements. Btw, sekeh bahar azadi is what I referred to as pure gold coin.

  • Seele

    Hmm… it seems women like to put dollar values on themselves, and men don’t like that. I wonder what the feminists would say about that, if they are prepared to acknowledge that it exists.

  • lula69

    Oh my, oh my., Truth hurts.. Thank you Ali for bringing it on. I am speechless and not sure what to do about all of this. Seems to me that we need to work hard to get the truth out into a large number of men. The horrible truth is that if men only check out, like MGTOW, women will still win this battle because they control reproduction.

    Do you want to live like a bonobo? I don’t. What are we going to do about it?

    • sadman365

      “because they control reproduction” ! Why? Did they just invent a new way for women to get pregnant without semen? Or are they going to force men to donate their semen for the earth’s women population to divide it among themselves so they can get pregnant without ever having to come near men? No matter how you cut it, no man no pregnancy. So, if men really wake up and check out and say FUCK this shit and you’re not getting my semen there would be NO reproduction. No?

      But here’s another myth especially men need to get over, procreation is NOT a biological need and not reproducing will NOT be the end of you. When men start pulling their heads out of their socially conditioned asses and start realizing this, it would be game over for women and society and men would NO LONGER be slaves and work mules. Sex is the single strongest instinct in humans and yet many people and MGTOWs and especially “the grass eaters” of japan have no problem whatsoever completely giving up sex (and relationships with women), If you can give up sex, you sure as hell can give up this so-called biological “need” (procreation). Procreation is a WANT, NOT a need. We’re constantly bombarded from a very young age with shit like “when you get married and have children…..” and that’s why it becomes ingrained in our heads and that’s why we mindlessly follow this stupid “life script…. (and most later regret it)
      Once you realize you don’t have to follow the “life script” ( getting married and having children), you will be as free as a bird.

  • sadman365

    Thank you Ali for this. Unfortunately, in the Western world the truth about the status of women in Islam and Middle Eastern cultures isn’t something the media or the feminazi controlled governments -or those NGOs- are interested in. Not the full truth and not even half the truth or even 1/10 of it. They’re totally infatuated with this imaginary “oppression of women” in Islam and Middle Eastern cultures. But if someone were to examine the situation, he would come to the conclusion that Islam, far from being a misogynistic religion -as some love to call it- is in fact a misandric religion to the bone, where a man is merely a disposable utility to be used by women and society. I can add more to what you had to say to show how far the oppression of men goes in Islam and Middle Eastern cultures but I’m just too lazy to write (type).

    Here’s one of the strangest Islamic laws regarding family/marriage – a wife has the right to charge her husband a fee for suckling (breastfeeding) their children !! ( I mean like her own biological children). WTF!
    Here’s another one, it’s up to the woman to decide if a man can pull out (during sex) or not. If she says no, then he shouldn’t ! Wow! How oppressed muslim women are !!

    A woman has an automatic right of custody of children under 9 years of age. A man can do jack shit about it. If you divorce your wife you can say bye bye to your children. No court hearing no nothing. Exceptions are similar to what we have here in the West ( a woman is a drug addict, abuser, an immoral person/slut…).

    And, if a man leaves his wife for more than 6 months -even if say he was working abroad- she can automatically obtain a divorce. All she has to say he’s been gone for 6 months and that’s it. It doesn’t matter if he’s slaving in some other country to provide for her and her children. He’s been gone for 6 months and she decides she wants a divorce. It will be granted.

    The other thing that the Western media doesn’t want to talk about is that even though they’re always telling us how men there are allowed to marry 4 women, they fail to mention that the vast majority of men (probably like 90%) only have one wife. They also fail to mention that a woman CAN stipulate (in a marriage contract) that the man is not to marry a second wife unless she (the first wife) allows him to.

    In other parts of the Middle East, there’s something called “mo’akhar”, which is a sum of money decided by the bride’s family and the groom has to agree to it. This is money that the groom has to pay in case of a divorce. This is different than the money that the groom has to pay upfront (dowery), which can also be in the 10’s-100’s of thousands of dollars depending on the woman’s social status. The thing is, this amount is sometimes so huge that the groom basically is trapped in the marriage. his wife maybe abusive but he cannot divorce her because he knows he cannot pay. In the Gulf states, this money can be in the 100,000’s of thousands of dollars. Like Ali mentioned here, some families are using their daughters to get rich (the girls are in on it too).

    People in the West are not told a lot of things when it comes to the status of women in the Middle East. I think it’s mentioned here but I’d like to repeat it, women have zero financial obligations towards their families, whether it’s her husband, children or parents and siblings. A woman can have a billion dollars sitting in the bank but she has the right to not spend even a dime on anyone but herself. She also does not have to go out and look for a job and she will not be shamed for it like men would be. If her husband cannot provide for her, she can stay home or leave him if she chooses to and by law she’s allowed to walk off.

    But all the feminazi filth and the western media is concerned with is the law -only in Saudi Arabia BTW- that prohibits women from driving. They’re not concerned however with the law in many countries around the world including the US that requires only MALES to register for the draft and serve in the military and die in wars. You know, if I had a choice between not being allowed to drive or being forced into registering for the draft and fighting in wars and killing and getting killed….you know which I’d pick.

    • Ali Mehraspand

      One mild correction to your great comment:
      “…they fail to mention that a vast majority of men probably 90% only have one wife.”

      Actually in Iran more than 99.99% of married men have only one wife. Polygamy is a very rare phenomenon in Iran. It is also ground for Rojeie divorce. Let’s repeat this:
      Rojeie divorce= life-long slavery of men and possibly their imprisonment:
      Men have the right to THIS divorce; also women have the right to this divorce under any of the 12 conditions including polygamy.
      Bayen divorce: ONLY WOMEN have the right to this divorce. A man does not have the right to this divorce under any conditions. Not even if his wife is a murderer who threatens to kill him.

      Also about the suckling thing: we can call it lactation price or milk price or milk money or whatever! In Islamic laws, a woman is not required to breastfeed her children. It is the husband’s responsibility to pay another lactating woman to breastfeed their child. But if the woman does breastfeed, the husband is in debt. In some rural areas a groom might also be required to pay this money to her mother in law for breastfeeding her daughter!!
      Now, do Iranian women actually not breastfeed their progeny? Of course they do, one might say this is a nonissue, but: feminists go into Islamic laws and find nonissues like the requirement of husband’s or father’s signature for passport and make a lot of fuss about something that the number of people in Iran who actually are dealing with this as a “problem” are literally zero! They repeatedly promote this propaganda and all of a sudden we have a world that actually thinks Iranian women do not have the right to travel!!!!!!!!!! They shamelessly say this! You know what happens when I tell Iranians how the world actually thinks this way about Iran? They either scoff at this or simply do not believe me. Then I have to explain that this is actually the case courtesy of feminism. Because we have feminists that read Islamic books to find nonissues like this to whine about. On the other hand aside from real issues that all men have to deal with, we have thousands of other nonissues that discriminate against men but nobody simply cares or even bothers to bring up.
      But do not forget: women are victims.

      • sadman365

        Ali, I am well aware of the fact that the overwhelming majority of men in the Middle East not only aren’t married to more than one wife, but have never had more than one wife (one marriage) their entire lives but I wasn’t sure of the figures and just wanted to be liberal about the numbers and be on the safe side. I’d say in any part of the Middle East -with maybe the exception of a few very remote towns here and there in the middle of nowhere- 95% of all men only have one wife. But don’t tell that to the average Westerner. They think the Arab/Middle Eastern man lives his life surrounded by his harem who do nothing but serve him and make sure he’s living like a king !! Only if they knew.

        The picture the West gets about women in the Middle East is totally skewed and distorted -not by accident. Some of the rights and privileges -AND EXCEMPTIONS OF RESPONSIBILITIES- a woman has under Islamic law men can only dream of. But I need to emphasize that in the eyes of islam, a man is no more than a beast of burden whose only purpose is to serve women (wives in particular) and society -not different than any other culture or religion- and of course to be sacrificed like lambs for the benefit of society. And woe to a man who dares to say no and who is not willing to sacrifice his life for the benefit of society (mostly the women).

        The breastfeeding fee is one of the most absurd things that I can never understand. A woman (wife) gets a free meal ticket for life once she gets married and lives off her husband’s hard work and sweat and blood without ever having to worry about providing crap for her family or spending one penny, and if she wants to have children SHE CAN CHARGE HER HUSBAND FOR THE BREASTFEEDING !!!!!!!!!!!!! Wow!! My head can’t stop shaking. I know wives generally don’t actually charge a fee but the fact that islamic law gives them a right to is really beyond me. Is it not enough that her husband is slaving his life away for her and her children? Women’s rights in islam! What rights !!!!

        You understand that feminazis have to always find these stupid little things that they call “oppression of women” and cry about them. Never mind that the most oppressed and most discriminated against and most neglected class of citizens is MEN, not women. You see, they can’t exist and make their billions of dollars if women no longer seen as “victims”. Like one guy elsewhere said, a woman’s biggest accomplishment is being seen as a victim. Women really never want to give up their victimhood. NEVER.

    • Astrokid


      In other parts of the Middle East, there’s something called “mo’akhar”, which is a sum of money decided by the bride’s family and the groom has to agree to it

      I am having to learn & memorize a few Islamic words because of this series of articles.. but this new word ‘mo-akhar’ is already covered under the Mehrieh (a.k.a Mahr). i.e there is a Mokadam (upfront) payment and an MoAkhar (deferred) payment. Presumably the upfront payment is not much.

      A woman has an automatic right of custody of children under 9 years of age. A man can do jack shit about it. If you divorce your wife you can say bye bye to your children. No court hearing no nothing. Exceptions are similar to what we have here in the West ( a woman is a drug addict, abuser, an immoral person/slut…).

      This is not accurate.
      Traditional laws arent arbitrary.. they are largely appropriate and evenly balanced for the environment/times they were built for. Child custody laws in Islam are similar to what was there in the West till the 1800s. The woman is primary custodian of the child in the years when its more dependant on the mother, and the man is the primary custodian of the the child in the years when its more dependant on the father. Of course, the man pays for child all the time.
      Child Custody after Divorce

      The mother has a right of custody for a male child until the child is capable of taking care of his own basic bodily functions and needs, such as eating, dressing and cleaning himself. This has been recognized at seven years of age.
      In the case of a female, the mother has this right of custody until she reaches puberty. This has been declared at nine years of age. (al-Mawsili, al-Ikhtiyar li ta’lil al-mukhtar, 3/237)

      The reason for this is that, in the early years, the mother and the other female relatives are more suitable for raising the young child (regardless of sex) with love, mercy, attention, and motherly care. The male child after reaching the age of understanding (7) is in need of education and acquiring masculine traits, which is why he is then transferred to the father. The female child, after reaching the age of understanding is in need of being inculcated with female traits, which she receives by living with her mother. After reaching puberty, she is in need of protection which the father offers.

      Interestingly, Iran seems to deviate from the Islamic law wrt age of child at which custody transition happens.
      Islamic Republic of Iran: Laws

      Child Custody and Guardianship: mothers custody ends at 2 years for boys and 7 for girls; custody reverts to father if mother remarries. Mother may be granted custody in certain cases if the father is proven unfit to care for the child.

      • Ali Mehraspand

        That was all correct.

      • sadman365

        astrokid, two things, “Presumably the upfront payment is not much”. Like I said, it depends on the woman’s status and what family she comes from. If she comes from a rich family or a family of status, then the man asking for her hand needs to be prepared and be willing to pay in the 100’s of thousands of dollars upfront -of course the wedding itself will cost a few 100’s thousands too and it all has to come out of his pocket, not the bride’s. The average woman in the Gulf states will not be married off for a “mokadam” less than several thousand $ at the very least.

        The other thing, how is what I said about the mother having an automatic custody of children under 9 “inaccurate”? Yes, I didn’t give details (7 years of age for aboy and 9 for a girl) but I had mentioned this elsewhere and just wanted to make it short this time. The important point is, the mother gets custody of the children automatically and the father can do nothing to change that. You’re the father, you’re out of luck and no court will listen to you or give you custody. And yeah, the father pays for the children even when he doesn’t have custody! Oh the patriarchal misogynistic religion of islam !!

  • Eoghan

    Rape culture is basically the idea that women are pushed to suppress their sexuality and gatekeep, while men’s sexuality is described as assertive and aimed at getting around that gate, violent rape and everything inbetween.

    Female circumcision and the cultural suppression of female sexuality may very well be female instigated, I think it is based on this one study (yes, I’m not very scientific basing an opinion on one paper!) http://www.femininebeauty.info/suppression.pdf, but anyway, the fact that its females doing it to negotiate doesn’t make it not rape culture by their defintion of it. It just means they are surprise, surprise – blaming men and patriarchy for it. They can actually do that though, because the study is saying it was done to negotiate with men.

  • justman

    I wonder if the word mehrieh is the root of the word marry, or has a common root with marry.

    In any case, the very old concept of merieh is quite “interesting”. It shows how marriage being a raw deal for men is not a new development, but rather a feature of thousands of years of misandry.

    That would explain a lot of things … matriarchy, anyone?

    And need I say that the article was awesome, Ali?

  • feartotread

    Interesting article. One thing that you haven’t mentioned at all is the unpaid labour of women. I ask you: how would you quantify all the unpaid labour a woman in Iran undertakes in her lifetime? Do you perhaps think Mehrieh addresses this? Also, have you thought about the obstacles a woman faces in actually getting a job? Eg.: family expectations that she works in the home, and Iranian homes are spotless, which is hard, never-ending, monotonous work. Also, who will look after the children while she’s working? How many Iranian men put their hands up to be house-husbands? What kinds of career choices are actually open to women, with this broad expectation that women don’t work? Would they get the jobs they want if they apply to them?

    • AlexB

      Unpaid labour?Really?I’m asking because I know single guys who do a job and does household work, since they live alone, and as far as I know they don’t get paid to keep their own homes clean, guess no one told them it was unpaid labour.
      And why do you think everyone else should make it easier for women to get a job or keep a career?Neither of those things are just handed to men, finding a job is difficult for most guys and in many cases it’s a choice between working or living on the road.

      • PoeTentiate

        That’s feminist EEkwalitee! So man up!

    • Ali Mehraspand

      You bring up two points as justification for Mehrieh: 1. Unpaid labor of women 2. discrimination against women when it comes to working and jobs.
      Both these assumptions are false. Unpaid labor of women?
      i) Read again about nafaqa which I should have mentioned had also put another 3500 men in prison at the same time as the statistic in the article for Mehrieh.
      ii) The budget for housewife insurance this year has been 100 billion Tomans ($US 37 mil. ). Paying housewives does not sound that much unpaid to me.
      iii) There are other laws to give women yet more money upon divorce.
      iv) When a woman works, her money is her money. Women rarely deviate from this cultural norm except when an unspoken agreement is there because these days many boys seek working women for marriage.
      Discrimination against women to force them stay home?
      Bullshit. Lower-middle to upper-class women only work if they find out that the option suits them despite families going out of their way to encourage them to work. I just attended a wedding where the bride had put this condition on the man that he never asks her to work.
      Fact of the matter is that right now in Iran, young boys seek working women for marriage. This priority is because shouldering the economic responsibility is so back-breaking that most Iranian men now work as non-registered taxi-drivers part time.
      There is an utterly huge amount of positive discrimination for women to work. You can hardly walk out of your home in Iran and not see flyers, bulletins etc. about women-only jobs. Ads for women-only jobs are all over newspapers and you know what? There is absolutely no reason why men should not be allowed in those jobs except that many of these jobs are pretty easy. Also a law will soon be legislated that says married women will earn equal to men for working less which I do not oppose if it is in fact intended for women who have children under 7.
      Where is that discrimination? I tell you where it is. I tell you why you think Iranians want women in home when in reality working women are a priority. Iranian feminists are responsible for this view because they constantly claim that there is a law which says men can prohibit their wives from working. This is of course just another manufactured lie. That law reads: A man cannot prohibit his wife from working unless it is considered by the court a shameful job in which case it is grounds for divorce. Well guess what? The exact same law applies to men: Read number 7 in the list above. It is grounds for divorce for wives as well in addition to entitlement to a full Mehrieh.

  • feartotread

    …to continue,
    The choices you present for women of going shopping, doing yoga or watching tv seem to me to be very limited (is this what men would prefer to be doing?) and I’m sure there would be more women in the workforce in Iran if the above mentioned obstacles were not in place.

    So Mehrieh sounds to me like a reasonable protection for women – that has gotten out of hand because Iranians (men and women) are obsessed by materialism and getting rich, much like the rest of the globalised world. The draconian punishments handed down by the Iranian govt around Mehrieh is in line with its stance on all punishment in Iran, tough and brutal.

    Your article makes a good point: that patriarchal law and attitudes have a negative effect on both men and women. You make the point that a fair feminist culture should benefit both men and women equally.

    • AlexB

      Except none of these things have anything to do with a patriarchy(meaning father-headed family or social systems where male members are leaders) it’s perfectly possible to get rid of these things while society is patriarchal and without feminism.Quit trying to portray patriarchal societies as a bad thing by associating it with everything bad in a society – FYI I live in a South Asian country that’s openly patriarchal but we don’t have tough or brutal laws like in Iran, in fact I’d say it’s quite a compassionate and humane society here, which is also patriarchal, wonder how that happened.
      As far as I can see the only legitimate argument one could make against the patriarchal nature of a society is that it’s unfair to women because they are exempt from leadership roles, everything else blamed on ‘the patriarchy’ is just propaganda by misandrists.

    • Nunya Bidness

      I don’t think you got it.

      A man in Iranian society is a slave in marriage. A woman is guaranteed everything and has every right to work or do whatever she wants. Her earnings are hers, her time is hers, her future is guaranteed by the legal system and courts. The man is just chattel.

      In order for there to be equality, women would have to give up mehrieh, alimony/child support and the laws regarding property that make the man fully responsible for everything.

    • Yaka

      Why the western feminist dihonestly distort the picture in the first place?

      • DukeLax

        They Inflame the public with womens suffering in Iran…to justify the massive manufactured statistics Alliances and “federal pork bloating Triangles” that are persecuting innocent American guys.

  • Llort Bew

    Ali, why do Iranian men even get married?

    • Reason

      Perhaps because most masturbation is considered haram. So you’re damned if you do, and damned if you don’t – but at least you’ll have money to burn if you keep your hands to yourself.

      • Llort Bew

        Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. And also, porn is banned.

      • http://www.warsie.deviantart.con/ Warsie

        If they’re going MGTOW they prolly dont care too much about some cleric.

    • kakasia

      there are 2 reason we do that 1) because you only can have real sex in iran when you are married and 2) stupidity.

      • Peter

        The Iranian men need to consider otaku in preference to real life. The soshoku danshi (herbivore men or grass eaters) of Japan are a great inspiration for us all.

        The west has MGTOW which is similar.

        As to who Iranian men. Same as men everywhere. Hormones and brain chemicals. These become less important as we grow older aider in addition by life experience.

        • kakasia

          it’s easy to say but it’s hard to practice

        • Bora Bosna

          Iranian government censors a lot of western culture, so Iranian men probably never even heard of MGTOW or cannot even come up with the idea by themselves.

  • John Holmes

    Why this article is even written is beyond me. Iran doesnt and will never care about the rights for women. One must simply, “get over it” and move on to where someone may actually care. You are beating a dead horse here.

    • Peter

      It seems you did not actually READ the article.

  • Bewildered

    Believe it or not I have read a feminist saying that Islam is the religion of choice for feminists.
    This article shows why she was not nuts.

    • DukeLax

      bro, Ive read multiple stories of girls who were angry / violent gender-feminist lesbians in college…who now wear a Burka.

    • http://www.StudioBrule.com Steve Brulé

      As usual … follow the money

    • Verum Serum

      That’s true, More women convert to Islam then any other religion, at least with regards on Western Women…..

  • http://www.StudioBrule.com Steve Brulé

    Every culture in the world treats men as slaves. Men are slaves to the state (the wealthy), sent to their deaths in wars, and marriage simply adds another layer of slavery on a man’s life. A man has only one path out of slavery: financial independence, and even that is perilous.

    • Ali Mehraspand

      “A man has only one path out of slavery: financial independence”

      Which is why traditional cultures hate single men like you can never imagine. Single men are illegal citizens in a traditional culture.

      • DukeLax

        maybe thats why the “MGTOW” movement is drawing such a feminist response.

        • CSM-1000

          That and because the authorities are losing the narrative. If enough men check out and stop responding to mental conditioning, it literally becomes dangerous for them.

  • Shinobi Theninja

    Just goes to show how amazing and insane men are. On one hand the knowledge of these laws is common in such a place and the men abide by them. India’s MRA movement has a lot to due with the severity of its enslavement. The fact that these men haven’t torn down the very society they’ve built is a testimony to something. I sometimes wonder if the truth of the enslavement of men actually became common knowledge if society would still be standing. How angry would men be? ‘Violence is never the answer’ is always the MRA way but if anger of that many men suddenly turning on a society they were enslaved too, seems a bit too poetic for the cosmos to pass up. On that note! How many revolutions in history actually ended up not being a bloody mess?

    As a ninja I do not condone violence. Unless no one sees me do it. So obviously I’m not calling the mra to violence; that would be dumb. Most of the MRA don’t know how to be ninja and therefore cannot do violence that is not seen.

    • http://www.StudioBrule.com Steve Brulé

      “The fact that these men haven’t torn down the very society they’ve built is a testimony to something.” … It is a testimony to the fact that the wealthy and powerful (male and female) will try to imprison, torture, and kill any man who tries to diminish their power or objects to the culture of male enslavement. Most men simply try to eek out some sort of life. Very few men ever stand up for themselves, and when they do stand up it is to protect the status of women and children.

    • Not buying it

      Ninja, eh, :) :):), Shinobi , no to the violence even if it’s not seen , and as much as I liked Chris Farley in that ninja movie, it’s just a movie. All the best Sir.

      • Shinobi Theninja

        As a ninja I respect your opinion, the boldness with which you state it and the conviction that I can smell in your posture. You will make a worthy opponent. Also Chris Farley was maybe 85% ninja at the time of filming, he never died he went ‘full ninja’ and is currently working with others of his family to right various wrongs.

    • Peter

      No need for violence. Withdrawal of services a la Mahatma Gandhi. There is also the example of MGTOW and ghosting out. Minimising one’s contribution to society. Another example are the herbivore men of Japan.

  • RiseOfDivergents

    They do not give a crap about Iran or its people, they deceive the ignorant in western countries to that they can exercise sexism and bigotry without anyone objecting.

  • Christie-The-Feminist

    Another article stereotyping feminists. Saying feminists don’t care about this issue is completely incorrect. When someone labels them a feminist group it can mean they are just going to focus on women’s issues, but that does not mean they are against men’s equality, and they would be totally okay with groups focusing just on men’s issues just the same. So just because they does mention this it does not mean they would think it’s okay. I’d be okay with AVFM if they were not being divisive towards people who would otherwise agree with men’s equality, and use they feminist label sometimes.

    I agree with a lot of what was said about how horrible this is, theocracy in general is horrible. I disagree that this is not a patriarchy. Patriarchy does not depend on who suffers more in society, it’s who are the authority figures. Women have no say in changing these laws in Iran. Instead it’s men oppressing other men, and women. That’s what happens in a patriarchy. It does not mean men are not oppressed. It’s half the reason to be against a patriarchy, or matriarchy.

    • http://www.StudioBrule.com Steve Brulé

      This is yet another twisted NAFALT argument. Feminists have deliberately and grotesquely misrepresented gender issues globally for more than 2 generations, for self-interest and profit. I have zero interest in arguments deflecting from this reality.

      • Christie-The-Feminist

        If you are not interested then why did you comment? Just go along your merry way. Sure feminists have, and as MRA becomes as old a label as feminism is many MRA’s will as well because humans are humans. There is no group that represents all feminists. Feminism is not a group, it’s a word with a definition that means someone who thinks they are for women’s rights. In what way exactly has differed ever since the word was coined. That is the only definition that has remained consistent. Some feminist groups completely contradict each other in their views, such as equality feminism, and difference feminism. Acting like all feminists think the same way, and can be put into a neat category is denying reality.

        • http://www.StudioBrule.com Steve Brulé

          All feminism subscribes to Patriarchy theory, and they are all just varieties of bigotry. Feminism is bigotry. Since you have a problem understanding “I have zero interest in arguments deflecting from this reality,” here is the translation : “Go fly a kite.”

          • Christie-The-Feminist

            Well you replied to me first. Just stop replying if you are not interested. You just copied what the last person said. Are people not allowed to give disagreeing opinions on this site? I’ll go with the rules of the site if that’s the case, but that’s the behavior of a view that has something to hide in my opinion. Only people with irrational views are afraid of free speech. I disagree that feminists have to agree with what someone wrote about patriarchy a couple decades ago, because feminism was coined nearly a century before that, and it was coined referring to a women’s equal rights group. There is nothing that gave one group suddenly the authority to define what all feminism is later on. Language does not work that way.

          • driversuz

            Name 10 feminists who don’t subscribe to the notion that women as a class are/were oppressed by men as a class.
            If you’re going to “go with the rules,” may I suggest you take a look at the one about derailing?

          • Christie-The-Feminist

            That’s too vague. Even I would say that, but specifically that women were oppressed in some ways by certain men, and not because they were men, it’s because of irrational views people were brought up in, in society. Please say in what way I have been derailing if you think I have.

          • driversuz

            “NAFALT” pretty much sums it up.
            Actions speak louder than word, especially when those words have so many definitions. We aren’t going to patiently read your relativist dodges. Bye now.

          • driversuz

            And btw, there is nothing “vague” about “Patriarchy Theory.” it is the belief that all men oppress all women for the benefit of all men. Myriad variables and qualifiers don’t change that simple fact.

          • http://www.StudioBrule.com Steve Brulé

            Your NAFALT is leaking all over the page. I believe in equality, and that we should be fair to feminists … treat them like any other hate group.

          • Christie-The-Feminist

            It’s not always wrong to give the argument of NAFALT because sometimes a word can have many meanings, and people can (and have) go by that label with different views. Feminism can be as vague as someone who thinks they are for women’s rights. So that can have many views. I’m an MRA as well, but that does not mean I agree with radical MRA’s. I’d be totally for AVFM if they were not being so divisive by strawman’ing people who would otherwise agree with them.

    • driversuz

      There is no “Patriarchy.” Oppression is a class issue and a religious zealotry issue, not a gender issue. Feminists are stereotypical because they all believe in “Patriarchy Theory.” It’s a lie made up a few decades ago, by some of the least oppressed humans in the history of our species. And it is perpetuated by more of the same “type.”
      Go fly a kite.

      • Christie-The-Feminist

        So women have never been restricted from having equality when it comes to law making? I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt that, that’s not what you meant, however that’s what many feminists mean when they say Iran is a patriarchy. *Goes to fly a kite* Yay!

        • driversuz

          Women didn’t want the obligations that came with “making laws,” and why would they when men were making laws that protected women? You do realize, don’t you, that as soon as the MAJORITY of American women wanted the vote, they were granted the vote (minus the obligation for conscription of course…)

          • Christie-The-Feminist

            That’s like saying gay marriage was always legal because as soon as they wanted it to be legal it became legal. It’s that feminist groups finally made enough of an uproar about it that caused long debates, which eventually led to allowing women to vote. Still before that if a women wanted to vote she couldn’t because it was not legal.

          • driversuz

            Bullshit. Go decorate your dorm room.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com/ David King

            How do you figure that feminism is solely responsible for the change in social attitudes towards gay people, especially when feminists don’t seem to be making any headway at all in social attitudes towards patriarchy, rape culture and the other fictions that feminists like to promote?

            I’m pro gay rights (including adoption and marriage) but anti feminism, because gay people are human beings deserving of the same rights, opportunities and obligations as straight — not because of feminism. So are women, of course, the difference is that gays really are oppressed relative to straights in a way that, for example, women as a class relative to men, are not.

            Social attitudes and mores change on their own, particularly when communication technologies improve as they have with the internet. What makes you think that these attitudes have not changed despite feminism?

          • ComradePrescott

            Women and gays are not the same thing. Women are also not ethnic minorities or anything else. Feminists may try to co-opt other movements, but like everything else feminists do it’s bullshit.

    • Phil McCracken

      If women are the majority of voters in a democracy does that make it a Matriarchy?

    • Peter

      I will stop stereotyping feminists if feminists stop stereotyping ALL men are rapists or potential rapists.

      I will stop stereotyping feminists if feminists stop stereotyping ALL men with T-shirts saying “Boys are stupid, throw rocks at them”.

      I will stop stereotyping feminists if feminists stop stereotyping ALL men
      with T-shirts saying “I bath in male tears”.

      I will stop stereotyping feminists if feminists stop stereotyping ALL men
      with T-shirts saying “Kill all men”.

      I will stop stereotyping feminists if feminists will stop complaining the T-shirts men wear (while wearing the above examples themselves).

  • Stu

    So the truth is, that Islam is really just feminism, with conservative dress codes for women, and slut shaming. Mmmmm…..sounds like a marriage between tradcons and feminazis doesn’t it. Dome to think of it, Radfems would probably come up with laws very similar to these.

    • Ali Mehraspand

      Wait till I tell you about Islamic feminism!

      • Stu

        Let me guess, maintian and enhance everything in Islam that benefits women, and get rid of everything that benefits men. Also, get rid of conservative dress for women, and allow them to parade anywhere they like with nothing but a g-string, pouting, posing, flirting…and having any guy that looks stoned to death.

        The new Islamic terrorism…..Islamic feminism.

        • kakasia


    • http://www.warsie.deviantart.con/ Warsie

      Remember, slut-shaming benefits women after all. So they can increase the value of the ‘pussy cartel’ when “sluts” drive down thw price…

  • Patrick DiSandro

    In America, or in Iranian states, the result is showing the same. Men are taken advantage of via a biased legal system. Many lose everything, many go into a debt which they cannot escape. How do you get out of that? Resolve yourself to a life of prison? Of servitude and slavery? Kill yourself and end it all now?
    Is there any wonder why men have such high suicide rates? Too bad many people belong to one religion or another that says you go to hell for killing yourself. Better toe the line and be a slave for the rest of your life.

    My only wonder is this. If you reach the point where ‘things can NOT get any worse’ and one decides to kill themselves to escape it all, at that point a different revelation is needed. If things can’t get any worse, might as well go nuts. There’s an insane freedom in hitting rock bottom. If you’ve reached the point of being ready to end your life, you might as well do whatever you want. Flee the country, steal from the guilty, what’s the worst they can do, kill you? Ha! You were going to do that anyway! “It’s only when you’ve lost everything that you’re free to do anything.”

  • Krolll

    @Ali Mehraspand: Am i right that unemployment and the obligation to pay Mehrieh or Mahr are both fueling islamist extremism and war?

    • Ali Mehraspand

      It is safe to say that unemployment and mehrieh have nothing to do with extremism; because these are endured by the general public, and the general public has a great resistance against extremism.

      • Krolll

        I was indeed not thinking of Iran. Sorry for creating that misunderstanding.

  • Frodo

    I hope men in Iran can learn about MGTOW

    • Peter

      I don’t know much about Iran but I dare say that judging by the article that many men in Iran will either learn about NGTOW in the outside world or failing that will work it out on their own. The choice seems pretty stark. Do you want to tie yourself to a railway track or not. the best option is not hard to work out.

  • CocoaNutCakery

    You need to fix your source links. #4 is the one that says that both 20,000 men have been jailed for failing to pay mehrieh as well as the 450 gold coins figure. #5 links to a change.org petition and copying and pasting the links leads to a short article about traffic-related incidents (BOTH links). #6 is the divorce figures and #7 is the article about not paying mehrieh.

    • Ali Mehraspand

      Thanks, you are right about having to copy and paste the links of source # 5. But the short article about traffic-related incidents IS the source for the announcement that 20000 men went to prison for mehrieh last year. It’s in the last paragraph.

      • CocoaNutCakery

        Ah, well, I don’t read any language other than English, so I was using an auto-translator for them.

  • AaronPike

    I have my suspicions about some things stated in this article. 1) are
    you talking 1 0z or 1/10 coins because you over and underestimated
    either way on value. 2) Knowing how much you are to give at divorce
    gives an advantage over American divorces. You can negotiate at the
    beginning what your willing to give up. Americans blindly go into
    marriage and those smart enough to get pre-nups don’t always realize
    they are thrown out by judges all the time. I would think that many men
    negotiate with women before getting married. 3)if she demands it during
    marriage and you don’t pay will you go to jail? 4) Unless the judge
    makes money from each court case or divorce (which would allow you to
    bribe) I don’t see them ruling always in the females favor. Abuse seems
    like the only one a woman can more easily argue.

    • Ali Mehraspand

      1) The coins are 10 grams of pure gold, each worth around 315$. The average mehrieh in 2008 was 450 coins which as I said was around 140,000$. Average Mehrieh has risen since then.
      2) You are talking about Mehrieh. Nafaqa and Ojrat almesl are not negotiable. I will discuss Ojrat almesl in another article. I dare you to find any laws in the US as misandric as Ojrat almesl.
      3) Yes. Also if you lose your job and cannot pay nafaqa, you will go to jail.
      4) The law regarding Mehrieh is not up for judges to interpret. It’s a solid law.

      • AaronPike

        Seems the answer is to not agree to too high mehrieh. No one is obligated to marry you. I agree the law is stupid but its stupid to agree to high merieh. You wouldn’t want a woman who is unable to come to reasonable agreement anyway

        • kakasia

          well when there isn’t any women in society who put up with lower than 500 coins you have no choice rather than agree with it or remain single which in this case you have to forget sex for good.

          • AaronPike

            um.. its simple economics. price via demand. Why do you think underground sex and prostitution is going through the roof in iran? Girls want sex and marriage to. There may be unrealistic culture pressures but the underground sex and prostitution is proofing that people still want sex.

          • kakasia

            in Iran girls must be virgin when they want to marry someone so there aren’t that much sex here

          • AaronPike

            plus in iran you can get married for a day or for a month or a year and work out the price before hand. This article didn’t touch on that.

          • Guest

            I call it legal prostitution but how many time do someone do this it’s not cheap my friend.

          • kakasia

            I call it legal prostitution but how many time do someone can do this it’s not cheap my friend and it is not as easy to do as you think.