During the early years of the revolution (in France), Mary was the symbol of the republic. Eventually, the imaginary image of Hercules replaced Mary, with Hercules representing the reconstruction and re-imaging of the government in a masculine form, a concept that still carried signs of domination.

Rapid transformation and extensive political changes are important characteristics of revolutions, which primarily promise a complete transformation of society and often fail to achieve the promised society, often leading to a Thermidorian period and a return to the pre-revolutionary state. Our question in this article is whether a revolution has the ability to bring about change in the status of women? And if the answer to this question is positive, how sustainable is this change? And what goals does it pursue? With this explanation, Ms. Moghadam’s article provides a theoretical framework for examining the impact of revolutions on the status of women.

In response to the question “Does the revolution have the ability to change the status of women?”, the 1979 Iranian Revolution can be considered a notable example of the possibility of sustainable change. Although this change did not result in anything other than setbacks and a worsening of the situation for women in many cases, it is still recognized as a form of sustainable change. For example, for about thirty years now, the Iranian government has been able to enforce the mandatory hijab law almost completely and without any major opposition, except for occasional protests against veiling.

On the other hand, the Nicaraguan revolution can also be considered as a type of sustainable change in the status of women. Unlike many other revolutionaries, the revolutionaries of this country did not condemn feminists as an anti-revolutionary movement and some sections of the Sandinistas recognized the legitimacy and need for women’s freedom and supported feminists in Nicaragua. This was while in the poor country of Nicaragua, there were many supporters of strict gender discrimination, which created many divisions in this society. But ultimately, the change in the status of women was one of the achievements of the Nicaraguan revolution.

With the definite answer that these two revolutions – especially the Iranian Revolution – provide the possibility of a sustainable change in the status of women, only the third question remains: “What are the goals of the revolution towards women?” However, it should also be noted that many revolutions throughout history have not brought about any change in the status of women, or if they have, these changes have not been sustainable and have only had temporary effects. Afghanistan is an example where the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan, after the Saur Revolution (in this article, we have not focused much on the word “revolution” and have not distinguished between real revolutions, coups, etc., and above all, we have considered rapid and extensive changes and transformations), passed significant laws to support women’s rights, which can be considered as a form of unstable changes in the relationship between revolution and the status of women. These laws were not even implemented in many parts of the country, and in the areas where they were implemented,

In the study of revolutions, more than anything, two general patterns can be identified: “women in the family” and “women in an equal position”. Although revolutions that ultimately wanted women in the family and within traditional frameworks (such as the revolutions in Iran and Algeria) had placed the foundation of this desire on women in their real, divine, and natural position and revolutionary responsibility, they were completely following the project of returning the family system to the traditional pattern.

Rapid social changes with the pattern of women in equal positions can also be divided into two types, left and right. The extensive changes that Atatürk and Reza Shah implemented with the goal of elevating the status of women in society were more aligned with the right-wing approach, particularly in the case of Turkey, where the promotion of women to the status of citizenship or semi-citizenship was comparable to men. Left-wing revolutions also aimed to bring women to a revolutionary and committed position, but in any case, equal to men.

The relationship between gender and revolution is well represented by the fact that structuralist theories alone are not sufficient to explain the phenomena and consequences of revolutions, and the cultural element also significantly influences the direction of revolutions and their resulting impact on at least half of the population of countries.

The ultimate result that can be drawn is that in political discourse, the ideals of the government and legal policies, women and the issue of gender have a prominent position, and this can be seen as an answer to the third question, that although the revolutionary changes themselves were influenced by gender relations, the transformation of values and societal ideals in the process of revolution also have an impact on gender relations and determine its goals. During times when the political system and social structures are being reshaped, the gender composition of families and relations between men and women become fundamental issues. The differences between revolutions can be seen in the changes they bring about in the status and position of women and the relationship between men and women, indicating that gender and revolution have a very significant and complex relationship.