This is not a complete sentence, so it cannot be accurately translated. It appears to be a caption for an image, which reads: “Attachment 7397, aligned to the right, with a width of 96.”
Hope Shams

The relationship between power and sex is undeniable, both in natural primitive societies and in modern civilized societies. The most basic manifestation of this relationship is competition and coercion over sex or various forms of mate selection rituals. However, what specifically applies to civilized societies is the politics of sex; a set of contractual mechanisms that go beyond the purely biological level of sexual activity and are laden with complex symbols and values. In other words, the politics of sex directs the diverse relationships between power and sex through these mechanisms and uses various forms of care and punishment to control social groups in a targeted manner. This note focuses on a brief overview of sexual control in Iran, the politics of sex in the Islamic Republic, and the resulting crises, and attempts to show that contrary to popular belief, there are deep contradictions and conflicts between the politics of sex in Islam and the politics of sex in the Islamic Republic, which demonstrate the specific goals, mechanisms, and motivations of the Iranian government as not only a religious government, but also as

History of Sex Politics.

Control, regulation, and manipulation of sexual relationships have existed since the beginning of the formation of the Iranian empire until now. It can be said that sexual control has been one of the earliest manifestations of political and economic control. During the Achaemenid era and based on Zoroastrian tradition, only three types of sexual relationships were accepted: temporary marriage, permanent marriage, and cohabitation. Temporary marriage was not much different from the current practice of marriage and was based on the same patriarchal laws that considered women as the physical and spiritual property of men. However, permanent marriage was a sign of continued sexual control over women even after the death of the owner. When a man died and left behind a son, his widow would be married off to his closest relative. If there was no widow, his daughter would take on this responsibility, and if he had no female relatives, a woman would be purchased and given to his closest relative, and the son born from this union would be considered

In all of the above cases, we are faced with a sex economy that is enforced through political guarantees (laws and punishments). An economy that defines sex only as a consumable value in the simple circulation system of goods: selling (sex) to buy (livelihood). This relationship is not unique to Iran or specific to that era. However, the relationship between government and sex, or better yet, sex policy, has had many ups and downs and expansions and contractions. This means that there has never been a strict and rigid alignment between the customs and boundaries of sex, which have originated from religion, and sex policy. As in the Parthian Empire, despite harsh punishments for adultery, in some parts of Iran, extramarital relationships for married women were not condemned, but rather accepted. (2).

But what is of special importance is whether in this cycle of exchange, what comes to the forefront is the most important element of sex, which is desire?

The conditions governing sex in Iran after Islam are of special importance in answering this question. Despite the many similarities that can be seen in the structure of sex laws before and after the introduction of Islam, the policy of sex in Iran after Islam has several unique features. Firstly, Islam explicitly addresses the concept of sexual desire and recognizes it officially. Secondly, it establishes a systematic form of sexual discourse that defines the policy of sex and, in turn, the policy of desire in Islam.

Islam, love, and sexual speech.

In Islam, the concept of sexual desire has been addressed under various titles, including “Qawwah Baah”. In the book Sahih Bukhari, it is mentioned that Muhammad advised young men to fast if they are unable to marry, as fasting “suppresses the Qawwah Baah”. Although in some Islamic traditions, suppression of sexual desire is encouraged, it cannot be overlooked that in Islam, sexual desire is not inherently considered as something filthy and harmful.

In fact, Islam has paid more attention to the topic of sex than any other Abrahamic religion and has firmly established speaking openly and in detail about sex alongside its obsessive focus on sexual politics. While Zoroastrianism was content with defining boundaries and forms of sexual relations in a tripartite manner, Islam delves into the minutest details of sex and institutionalizes sexual discourse in a way that reflects the strange duality in its sexual politics. On the one hand, like all Abrahamic religions, and in line with its collective human population policy, Islam advocates monogamy, and therefore defines sexual interaction (not behavior) solely within the framework of marriage and sees sex as a means of procreation. On the other hand, it acknowledges a wide range of sexual desires, the scope of which varies depending on different schools of jurisprudence, but clearly includes the concept of sexual pleasure independent of its procreative aspect.

It can be boldly stated that the discourse of sexuality in Iran is rooted in Islam, which is institutionalized in a wide range and in the most explicit form. An important feature of sexual discourse in Islam is that, unlike other Abrahamic religions, it is not limited to negative aspects, but rather has positive dimensions, although these positive dimensions are very rare.

The Attire of the Pious, as narrated by Muhammad to Ali, is as follows:

«

It is recommended to have sexual intercourse on the first night of Ramadan, and it is narrated from Abu Sa’eed Khudri that the Prophet (peace be upon him) advised Imam Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) to treat his wife like a bride entering her new home. He should take off her shoes so she can sit comfortably, and wash her feet with water from the entrance of the house to the end of the house.

Oh Ali, if you have intercourse on Tuesday night and a child is born to you, after the happiness of Islam, he will become a pious person, with a sweet mouth, a kind heart, a courageous hand, and a pure tongue free from backbiting and slander. Oh Ali, if you have intercourse on Friday night and a child is born to you, he will become a ruler among the rulers of the law, or a scholar among the scholars, and if you have intimacy with your wife on Friday when the sun is in the middle of the sky, and a child is born to you, Satan will be far from him…“

It is written elsewhere.

“

They asked Imam Sadiq (AS), “If a man sees his wife naked, what is the ruling?” He replied, “Is there any pleasure better than this?” They asked, “If he plays with the private parts of his wife or slave girl, what is the ruling?” He said, “There is no harm, but he should not do anything else with their bodies.” They asked, “Can he have intercourse in the water?” He replied, “There is no harm in that.”»

I’m sorry, there is no Farsi text provided for translation. Please provide the text so I can assist you.

The honesty that is apparent in these words is rare in pre-Islamic Iran; while such honesty and meticulousness in details is prevalent in Islamic jurisprudence texts, a significant portion of which is dedicated to laws and dos and don’ts of sex.

This extensive discourse on sexuality, and particularly its frankness and detailed examination, reveals two fundamental aspects. First, it demonstrates that while Christianity emphasizes shame and natural disgust towards sex, Islam openly accepts sex and especially desire, albeit within its own reductionist framework. Secondly, it highlights the authoritarian spirit of Islam and its unhealthy desire to control even the most private and intimate human actions.

The question now is what is the relationship between the Islamic Republic and Islamic sex politics?

Islamic Republic and Sex Politics.

Contrary to the explicit and open approach of Islam towards sexual discourse, the policy of the Islamic Republic is based on the complete elimination of sexual discourse and erasure of all sexual manifestations from the visible surface of society. While many Islamic teachings exist regarding the do’s and don’ts of sex, the Islamic Republic has adopted a policy of removing sex from society. The ideal image is a society without sexual organs, with the aim of strict control. The complete erasure of sex from the public image has resulted in a huge gap in sexual awareness and has also had contradictory consequences. Desire has an inseparable connection with absence. The driving force of desire is the absence and unattainability of the object. To the extent that some have considered the fundamental object of desire to be the mother and the unattainability of her and other objects of desire as a substitute for this unattainable object. (4) Lacan writes about desire: “Desire requires the support of fantasy,

Erasing sexual speech and appearances and the immense loss that has resulted, has turned all public spaces into a “fantasy scene” which in turn has fueled a frenzy of desire. This is where the government’s only tool for control is violence and punishment. In other words, the Islamic Republic has even sexualized Islamic policies and has gone so far as to depict sexual seasons in jurisprudential texts as unusual, shocking, and forbidden. In a society where sex has no visible presence, everything – absolutely everything – is entangled with sex.

On the other hand, government policies of gender segregation have created special conditions in the sexual experiences of children and adolescents. The first sexual experiences in understanding the body, sexual organs, and attraction among the same sex occur. However, not due to a natural attraction, as in any same-sex relationship, but due to the imposition of a single-sex social environment. This is how the sex policy of the Islamic Republic has resulted in all cases that are fundamentally contradictory to the sacred principles and beliefs on which this policy is based.

However, the internal crises of this policy do not end here. The biggest internal challenge is the confrontation between the modern aspects of authoritarian social control and the traditional aspects of a dominant and oppressive religion. This contradiction is most evident in the framework of the compatibility of Iranian criminal and penal laws with Islamic teachings.

A government that, on one hand, relies on superficial and deceitful aspects of modern legislation for dealing with the world, while on the other hand considers itself obligated to enforce Islamic laws, is ultimately a loser in both arenas.

A look at the laws of child marriage, child abuse, and sexual assault is enough to reveal the depth of the contradictions and difficulties of the government in reconciling its traditional values with its international commitments within the framework of modern laws.

In the year 1313, in the Iranian Civil Code, in article 1041, the issue of child marriage was addressed for the first time and a minimum age of 15 for girls and 18 for boys was approved. In the year 1353, article 23 of the Family Protection Law increased this minimum age to 18 for girls and 20 for boys.

After the revolution, Article 23 was abolished and replaced by Article 1041. In 1370, with the approval of the Guardian Council, the minimum age for girls was changed to 9 years and for boys to 15 years. In 1371, with the mediation of the Expediency Discernment Council, the minimum age for marriage was changed to 13 years for girls and 15 years for boys. Since then, the parliament has been struggling to change this law. Finally, today, the minimum age for marriage in Iran is neither acceptable based on Islamic laws nor acceptable according to international standards.

These contradictions, especially in the case of child abuse and sexual abuse of children, are problematic. According to the writings of Ayatollah Khomeini:

«

Someone who is less than nine years old cannot be a spouse, whether they are a permanent or temporary spouse. Other forms of intimacy, such as touching with desire, embracing, and seduction, are also not allowed.

(6) شش

It doesn’t matter if he is a suckling child, and if he has not reached the age of nine, if he has not committed any sin, except for the sin of not performing ablution. And if he has, it means that he has combined the passage of urine and the passage of menstruation, or the passage of menstruation and feces, and this will remain forbidden for him forever.

(7)

Although the writing of the instrument is from the reference books of the current laws of the Islamic Republic of Iran, it is clearly in conflict with current laws. However, regardless of the text of this ruling, which is a clear and reprehensible example of child abuse, the spirit of this ruling can be used as a reference for avoiding legal consequences or applying leniency in cases of child abuse.

In this manner, Khomeini’s laws regarding the issue of homosexuality, which is related to many cases of child abuse, will create problems for the judicial system. Khomeini writes in Al-Wasilah:

«

“If someone penetrates a male and has sexual intercourse with him, both the penetrator and the penetrated will be considered guilty of murder, assuming that both parties are adults, sane, and consenting… However, if the penetrator is an adult and the penetrated is a minor, and the act of penetration results in the death of the minor, the penetrator will be sentenced to death and the minor will be punished. If two minors engage in such an act, both will be punished… And if an adult engages in such an act with a minor, the adult will be executed and the minor will be punished.”

(8)

In this ruling, Khomeini clearly considers the child to be guilty and deserving of punishment. In other words, for the child, he has established the right to discernment and responsibility for their actions, which is unclear if the child is capable of discernment and responsibility, why their sentence would be different from that of an adult (when the legal significance for an adult in court is solely based on their ability to discern and understand responsibility). And if they are not capable of discernment, how can they be held responsible and deserving of punishment? Another aspect of this ruling is that whether the child is capable or not, they are still responsible and deserving of punishment. This is the most terrifying aspect of this ruling, as it means that even the victim of abuse will be punished.

A major concern for families is the reporting of child abuse or child sexual abuse cases, which should be sought in such laws. On the other hand, the existence of such a law will complicate the conditions for judicial proceedings in cases of sexual abuse. In addition to this central role in the Islamic legal system (which is clearly evident in this law), it will also lead to a drastic change in the level of punishment in different forms of abuse.

The existence of these laws on one hand, and international obligations and heavy costs of implementing these laws on a global scale on the other hand, has created a ridiculous situation for the judicial system and legislation of Iran, and on a larger scale, for the idea of an Islamic government. In the realm of speech and sexual education, where Islam is relatively more open and direct about the issue of sex, the Iranian government strictly and even cruelly suppresses any talk about sex. And in situations where Islam strictly and decisively issues inhumane and oppressive laws, the government has no choice but to compromise or delay in order to maintain appearances in enforcing these laws. As a result of this double-edged sword, the Islamic Republic has lost both sides of the conflict. In the eyes of the world, it is a religiously savage state with a modern government facade, and in the eyes of traditional Islamists, it is a pseudo-Western and heretical government.

But the root of the politics of sex in the Islamic Republic must also be sought elsewhere. The first result is sexual deprivation, a feeling of weakness and submission. It is not without reason that in prisons, schools, barracks, workplaces, and wherever there is a system of control and submission, sex is suppressed. The policy of suppressing sex in Iran, to the same extent or even more than simply being a result of religious submission and control, is one of the vital tools for controlling society, which its rulers need in order to take all its power and seize all its assets. That is precisely why the issue of sex in Iran, after 57 years, has been from the very beginning a security and political issue.

On the other side, in a society where sexuality has become completely underground and self-taught, a frenzy of desire is brewing, like Sodom and Gomorrah in the heart of the Islamic world. Just as there has never been a time in America where alcohol consumption was as prohibited as during the “Prohibition” era, perhaps in no other country in the world, sex of this twisted, unnatural, and extreme nature is not prevalent as it is in Iran. While the existence of desire and sex is openly denied by ordinary citizens in society, the situation for special citizens such as the disabled, elderly, underweight and overweight individuals, those with facial or body deformities who naturally have difficulty finding sexual partners, has no place in the Arab world.

Poverty, loss, and sexual repression in public spaces have even caused a crisis in the common practice of sex work in past centuries. The black market for sex in Iran, like any other black market, is full of violence, crime, and cruelty, and occasionally one of its thousands of stories comes to light and plunges society into shock and mourning.

Notes:

1. The book “Floor, Willem, A Social History of Sexual Relations in Iran” was published by Mage Publication in Washington in 2008.

2. This is a reference to a chapter in the Book of Recognitions, written by Clement.

3. Majlesi, Mohammad Baqer, Halat al-Muttaqin, Chapter Three: On the Etiquette of Marriage.

4. Zizek, Slavoj, From desire to drive: Why Lacan is not Lacanian.

5. Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p. 275.

6. Placing the tool between the legs and shaking it without penetration.

7. Khomeini, Ruhollah, Tahrir al-Wasilah, Volume 4, Book of Marriage, Issue 12.

8. The same, speech in consequences, chapter two in debauchery and destruction and leadership.

9. Prohibition of alcohol in America during the years 1920 to 1933. During this time, alcohol consumption was about sixty to seventy percent of what it was before and after prohibition.