About the discussion of students’ self-initiated actions to eliminate gender segregation in student dormitories, it is necessary to first briefly examine the concepts of university and student by borrowing from the opinions of intellectuals. The writer attempts to use these interpretations to advance the topic of university, which has various definitions.

The university, which is, in a sense, a gathering of truth-seekers for the discovery of knowledge and truth, consists of three interconnected components: academic education, scientific research, and creative cultural life. In case of imbalance in the progress of any of these components, weakness and destruction of that component is possible, ultimately leading to the loss of the spirit of the university. Considering that the majority of students will be employed in the same country after graduation, students and graduates of universities are generally recognized as educated and intellectual members of society and have the ability to influence society. The management and self-governance of the university and the level of government interference in the university have always been a subject of controversy. The extent of this controversy depends on the rulers’ views on the level of control and imposition of their own ideas on society and, consequently, the university. In line with this perspective, they use various tools, even blatant violence. Since the use of blatant violence has a very high cost

If rulers interpret Michel Foucault’s concept of “shepherds and flocks,” which in its most primitive and lowest form considers themselves as shepherds and other officials as watchdogs and society as a flock, these contradictions and interventions will be more tangible and prevalent. A student who is truly striving to engage in these three components of university life will naturally be recognized as an intellectual and at times may be seen as a nuisance, opposition, and an unwelcome element due to their dual dependence on power and utilization of the system’s talents, as well as their individuality and demand for rights.

The history of student movement in Iran, with all its ups and downs in different decades, despite differences in methods, demands, and nature, has one constant principle, which is idealism. In the 1920s, universities were mostly the site of protests and demonstrations, in the 1940s and 1950s, different political groups were formed, and after the revolution, student activities aimed at structural reforms, strengthening civil society, the Green Movement, and labor demands in the 1990s. It is not unreasonable to use the term “temperature” to describe society. Now, with the introduction of the aforementioned background, we can discuss the efforts of students to eliminate gender segregation.

In the current situation, the concept of self-righteousness in governance has intensified and individuals with similar beliefs have gained more power in the structure of governance, believing that it is the duty of the government to forcefully lead people to paradise. Even the possibility of operating within the framework of their own structural laws has decreased. The government’s circle of interference has expanded not only to the streets through propaganda, but also through the approval of laws under the pretext of population growth, invading people’s privacy and the most personal aspects of life. This has resulted in the violation of basic principles of medicine, professional ethics, principles of reproductive freedom, and so on.

People are becoming poorer day by day under economic pressure and class differences are intensifying. Student activities in universities are also being restricted. For example, the regulations for student councils in the Ministry of Health are being changed, which essentially turns them into a structure without any specific purpose or ability.

In general, society is facing severe dissatisfactions and the government has adopted a model of controlling dissatisfaction instead of choosing a model of creating satisfaction. People have become hopeless about improving conditions and in the most peaceful manner, they expressed their disappointment by boycotting the presidential election and the unprecedented high percentage of invalid votes in the ballot boxes compared to previous periods. As predicted, the new government was inefficient and their empty promises, such as building one million homes per year, were not fulfilled.

The “Women, Life, Freedom” movement caused suppressed, exploited, and suffering groups to unite and students also identified themselves as part of these groups and joined the movement, chanting slogans such as “From Kurdistan to Tabriz, poverty, corruption, and discrimination.” Naturally, in any protest and demand, protesters resort to creating symbols or weakening and destroying symbols of the opposing side. In this movement, one of the student protest movements was the effort to eliminate gender segregation in dining halls. As Kant said, experience (intuition) without concepts is blind, so it must be said that the concept of this movement is that the student, as a subject or for the recovery of their subjectivity, turned to the dining hall as one of the symbols of system intervention and in the face of deprivation, caused a change in the way these dining halls were used, which even goes against the norms of society, as no dining hall in the country is managed in this way. In a prescriptive sense, it

Therefore, we can summarize it as follows: Since we believe that the university is the last bastion of freedom, this action is a symbolic movement to eliminate the intervention of authority, defend and reclaim freedom.