The Kidnapping of Women: 40 Years of Prohibition from Stadiums

For nearly four decades, women have faced a significant barrier to entering sports stadiums in Iran. Civil activists and women's rights advocates have long fought to dismantle this barrier, and despite some officials in the Islamic Republic promising to lift these restrictions, the crackdown on women attempting to enter stadiums has intensified, leading to the detention of several women. In this week's program, we discuss the issue of why half of the society is denied the right to enter stadiums, featuring Shadi Sadr, a lawyer and women's rights activist residing in Britain, and Hossein Ghazian, a sociologist living in the United States. Ms. Sadr, if you allow me, let’s start this discussion with you. Why is the entry of women into stadiums prohibited in Iran? When did this prohibition start? When you ask about the reasons for the prohibition of women's entry into stadiums, it seems that this should be questioned to the authorities of the Islamic Republic. Because until today, nearly forty years after this prohibition was enacted, they have not provided a convincing or even logical reason for it, and their statements in the public sphere are mostly general, citing the unsuitable atmosphere of stadiums for women, or claiming that women might fall into sin by seeing male athletes, or that it could lead to the mixing of genders, and so on. The main issue is that there is no written law on this matter. As far as we know, until the early 1980s, women could attend sports stadiums if they were interested in watching a match. After that, based on resolutions or regulations of which we have no information and which have never been codified into law, this prohibition was established and continues to this day. Some say that the Physical Education Organization imposed this prohibition, while others refer to the directives of the provincial security council, but there is no clear and documented law in this regard. Hossein Ghazian, sociologist: 'Like many things, the Islamic Republic is currently hostage to its historical identity regarding women's entry into stadiums. At some point, some people banned women's entry into stadiums. From then on, this became a norm. It may be easy to come to terms with this issue, but it has become harder now because it represents a kind of acceptance of defeat.' Mr. Ghazian, as a sociologist, what do you see as the root cause of the prohibition of women's entry into stadiums? As Ms. Sadr mentioned, it is really unclear at what level and how the initial decision for this purpose was made, and whether this decision was documented or not. But when we look at the overall behavior of the Islamic Republic regarding this issue, we may find two main reasons: one is that, like many things, the Islamic Republic is currently hostage to its historical identity in this regard. At some point, some people who were less inclined to trouble banned women's entry because they felt that if women came, some would criticize, annoy them, or lose their positions... From then on, this became a norm, and now the Islamic Republic is hostage to this norm. It may be easy to take steps to accept this issue, but it has become harder now because it represents a kind of defeat, a kind of acceptance of protests. Accepting that we abandon this demand that we have insisted on until now and pay attention to the demands of others, namely the people's demands, is a process that the Islamic Republic resists. Because it does not want to consider this as a victory for its opponents. You can even see this in sports. For example, when an Iranian team loses, in the official discourse of radio and television, they say 'the Iranian team was stopped at the top of the opponent,' they do not say they lost. Or when they do not win a war, they do not say we lost, they say 'we were not granted victory.' Thus, the symbolic acceptance of defeat in the face of a relatively public demand, from the perspective of the Islamic Republic, means that at some point you have given in, and other areas may also require concessions. This may be one of the roots of the resistance against this issue. On the other hand, when women go to the stadium, it means they will behave in a way that does not align with the official behavior desired by the regime. They will not have the hijab that the Islamic Republic wants, they will not behave with the opposite gender in a way that the Islamic Republic approves, and such things. And these are expressed symbolically and demonstratively, and this is something that the Islamic Republic fears, including in the area of hijab. Mr. Ghazian, I apologize for interrupting you... You mentioned that they would not have a hijab in the stadium, or would not behave in a way that is suitable or approved by the Islamic Republic. What difference does it make with the hijab and behavior, for example, in the street? Many may not properly observe the hijab that the Islamic Republic prescribes, as the Islamic Republic considers it to be improper hijab or bad hijab. For the Islamic Republic, what difference does it make between the stadium and the street? In fact, my reference to the hijab was for this reason. This resistance that the Islamic Republic shows regarding women's hijab does not seem to have any religious roots. Because from a religious perspective, many more important values in religion are trampled in society. It may not matter to the Islamic Republic. The demonstrative and performative aspect of the issue is what matters. The place where public displays are made and this public display is recognized. For example, through broadcasts on television. Through photographs that may be taken from sporting events. You see this type of women absent in the official discourse of the Islamic Republic. For example, in the Islamic Republic's radio and television, except on special occasions, you see women with a specific and official hijab on television. It seems as if other women in society do not exist. The Islamic Republic does not want to say they are not there, but it wants to deny the display and expression of them, and thus deny their existence. Because if it accepts and submits to the reality that such people exist in society, that is, people who are not as Islamic as it wants, its legitimacy is called into question. Legitimacy means the reason for the rule of the clergy and Islam in Iran, according to officials, is that the people want Islam. Well, if it becomes clear that the people do not want Islam or do not want it in the way that officials claim, then what reason is there for the rule of these individuals in society? Thus, you see that a seemingly simple issue like hijab can be linked to the legitimacy of the government. And therefore, when this is displayed in the stadium, it means the display of the so-called improper hijab or loose hijab of women according to the narrative of the Islamic Republic, and also their mixing with the opposite gender, meaning two criteria that the Islamic Republic has been strict about not displaying, then this may be considered a danger. For this reason, it continues to stand firm on this issue. As I said, accepting women's entry into the stadium means accepting defeat as well. Especially now that its regional or religious rival in the Islamic world, namely Saudi Arabia, has taken the lead in this regard, and if it accepts this, it would be considered a disgraceful defeat. This is why it resists more on this issue. Shadi Sadr, lawyer: 'Arresting, harassing, and preventing women from entering stadiums is against the law. There is no written law regarding the prohibition of women's entry into stadiums. Legally, women who have been arrested for attempting to enter the stadium have the right to file a complaint against the police.' Ms. Sadr, Mr. Ghazian mentioned the defeat of the Islamic Republic if it accepts this issue and allows women into stadiums. It has also taken some actions regarding this. For example, it has been observed that some women who go to stadiums to watch sports games have been arrested. An example is the recent match between Persepolis and Esteghlal on Thursday, where several women who were in front of the stadium were arrested. Do we have anything in law regarding these arrests? I mean, are these arrests legally justified? If we want to take a legal perspective, first of all, and before addressing the arrests, we should not forget that the prohibition of women's entry into stadiums, or actually depriving women of participating in part of a public space due to their gender, is a clear violation of the principle of non-discrimination, which is one of the most important international human rights laws that obliges governments to refrain from enacting laws or implementing policies that deprive individuals of their rights based on their gender or religion, race, and other characteristics. Therefore, here we see on one hand the violation of the principle of non-discrimination, and the Islamic Republic is also obligated to implement this because it is a member of international conventions and covenants on civil-political rights, and economic-social and cultural rights. On the other hand, I think that if we stay within the discussion of public space, there are no laws or written laws that exist, but I personally see practices that are implemented for the prohibition of women's entry into stadiums within a broader framework of gender segregation in public spaces. If we review from the beginning of the revolution to now, we have witnessed the implementation of gender segregation policies in various fields and public spaces. I think this stadium issue has gradually and increasingly seen resistance from women and society, leading to the breaking of gender segregation in many public spaces. In some other areas, gender segregation is still strictly enforced. However, regarding sports stadiums, for various reasons, this struggle and resistance have intensified in recent years, and I think more than the issue of women's presence in the stadium—which many women find important due to their interest in watching football or other sports in the stadium—this is important in a broader context for society and for women who are not particularly sports fans. Because it has taken on a symbolic aspect. That is, the resistance and struggle over the seizure of a part of the public space, which more than anything shows how symbolic this issue [of women's presence] in stadiums has become. You mentioned the arrest of some women who intended to enter Azadi Stadium to watch the Persepolis and Esteghlal match. As far as we read from their writings on social media, it was more important for them than to see the match itself to seize that space and remind once again that they have been deprived of participating in a public space due to being women. But as I said, given that there is no law regarding the prohibition of women's entry into stadiums, naturally any form of arrest, harassment, and any form of prevention of women from entering the stadium is completely against the law, especially since it violates the principle of non-discrimination and the principle of legality of crimes and punishments. Citizens should know what laws govern them and what punishments await them in case of violations. This is the same principle of legality of crimes and punishments that is indeed present in the penal laws of the Islamic Republic. Here, the police, by arresting some of these women, have violated the penal laws of the Islamic Republic, and their actions are completely against the law, and as I said, this action falls within the framework of international laws, not only violating the law of discrimination but also constituting harassment and falls under the framework of the law prohibiting torture, and is considered a serious violation of human rights law. Ms. Sadr, legally, can women who are arrested in front of stadiums pursue this issue within the Islamic Republic with these laws? Legally and on paper, and by referring to the law books, women who have been arrested for their attempts to enter the stadium have the right to file a complaint against the police and all the officers who have arrested them in violation of the laws of the Islamic Republic and have harassed them. Whether this complaint results in anything or not is, in my opinion, a secondary issue. I personally think we should utilize all the capacities that exist in the laws of the Islamic Republic of Iran, even though we know that it may ultimately lead to no result. Because as citizens of that society, we should once again demand our rights, and this is one of the most important and legitimate methods of claiming rights to use all legal mechanisms and frameworks in that society and file complaints. Pursuing this complaint may not lead to judicial success, but the issue of the prohibition of women's entry into stadiums and the illegal harassment and arrests will remain a current issue, and this ongoing conflict between women who resist these discriminatory laws and the Islamic Republic, which on the other hand creates obstacles for them to enjoy their basic rights, will continue to be a current issue.