Recent Posts

  • Going in for buying a new air purifier? Check out air purifier reviews to get a clear picture!


    The present times has brought with itself a whole new range of environmental problems, not just external but internal as well. The deteriorating environmental conditions has taken a toll within the internal domains of one’s house as well. This is the primary reason, why the need for air purifiers at home has increased manifold.

    In this case, it is important that one makes a point to go through air purifier reviews here before making the final purchase. This is important for making the correct purchase, so that rather than being a mere showpiece, the whole thing is actually useful for maintaining the air quality of the house.

    Certain important features:

    There are two very important features that are to be taken care of in case of buying an air purifier.

    1. Clean Air Delivery Rate:

    This shows the rate at which the cleaner purifies the airborne pollutants and neutralizes it into pure air that is worthy of breathing. The rating is in direct proportion with the type and size of the filter.

    2. Hepa Purifiers:


    In this case, the filters are arranged in such a manner that whiles the air is passing through, the air passes through and gets purified in the process. At the same time, larger contaminants and allergens, get stuck in the filters.

    There are two ways in which the allergens are captured; one is by direct contact and the other by partial contact with the glass fiber. In this case it is best that one checks hepa air purifiers reviews for making the correct purchase.

    Another very important feature that needs to be checked in these reviews is that whether they are injecting any degrading air into the house. This is a very important aspect as; there are a large number of purifiers, which do not have proper ozone control layers.
    They inject more than specified ozone into the room. At times they also spread certain impure air into the households, not good for humans or even the pets.

    Hence, it is best to check out reviews of best air purifiers for homes with pets for the perfect buy.


    Continue Reading
  • A Microcosm of Life under Discriminatory Laws


    I entered the court looking for someone to interview, but to my total surprise, I ran into my former classmate Maral. Both of us were stunned. She hugged me and cried profusely. I calmed her down and we sat down. I asked her what she was doing there. Maral said, “I feel ashamed. I did not want any of my friends to see me in this situation.” I assured her that I would not tell anyone else. She started telling me the story of her life. When she was 16 she had been pressured by her father to marry Mahmood. Nobody dared to act against one’s father’s wishes. Not long had passed since she had started living with Mahmood when she realized that Mahmood was a drug addict and had lost his job as a result of his addiction. Maral had become pregnant and because of her child, she had tried unsuccessfully to make Mahmood overcome his addiction. To make a living and to make ends meet, Maral had to go to people’s houses to do domestic work so that at least she could put food on the table; she even paid for her husband’s drugs because if she did not she would have to put up with being punched and kicked by him. No one would help her. When she told her father that she could no longer live with Mahmood, her father disagreed and said that he couldn’t afford to take care of her and the child.

    Not having any other choices, Maral came to Tehran to her sister. Through much hardship and effort, she was able to borrow some money and rent a small house. With the help of her sister’s husband, she found a job at a school and became a primary school teacher. Meanwhile, she filed for divorce, but her husband had fled for fear of being imprisoned.

    After six years, Maral finally succeeded in getting a divorce from her irresponsible husband and get custody of her child. And now she was at the court to go through the final stages of the legal process. She said, “I can’t believe that I am finally succeeding in getting a divorce. It is a very tiring process because a woman cannot easily get a divorce from her husband. I had to prove that he was both a drug addict and a fugitive.”

    I wished her success and gave her some information about the Million Signatures Campaign. She started crying again and said, “Are there really people who fight for women’s rights? After six years, I was able to prove to the judge at the court what my rights were. Of course, I gave up many of my rights and my child’s rights because I got neither Mehrieh (2) nor child support. Who would I get those from, anyway? I will sign the petition hoping that I may save another woman who is in the same situation as I was.” I said good-bye to Maral and she went on to finally get her divorce decree from the court clerk. Maral is now 26, but she looks like a 40-year-old woman. She is a broken and lonely woman who has custody of her son, and without getting any support, she lives on meager earnings working as an hourly contract teacher.

    Continue Reading
  • Family Protection

    The first measure taken towards changing family laws within the framework of Iran’s civil laws was Dr. Maehangiz Manouchehrain’s proposed draft of the family law. This document was first published as an addendum to a book titled “Legal Status of Women in the World”, a book published by the Iranian Women Lawyers’ Association in February 1963. This proposed draft was published again in 1964 as a standalone pamphlet named “Proposed Draft of Family Law Based on the Equality of Women and Men.” It was then published in the weekly women’s magazine “Etellaat-e-Banouvan” in four consecutive issues. However, at that time, because of the reactions of the religious leaders stating that the proposed draft was against Islamic jurisprudence and because the then Justice Minister (Dr.Ameli) opposed the idea, Manouchehrian was unsuccessful in gaining the support of at least 15 parliamentarians to take the bill to the Senate floor. The Justice Minister at the time announced that the civil laws of Iran would not change. He called Manouchehrian’s proposed draft of the family law “a product of her own conclusions of her research” and stated: “in the Judiciary, no proposed law which is deemed to be incompatible with the enlightened religion of Islam would receive any consideration.” Manouchehrian, because of her answer to the Justice Minister’s comments, was banished to Tafrash for three months.

    After Manouchehrian’s proposed bill, which was vetoed because of the position that the Justice Minister had taken, the discussions of the family laws came to a standstill. This went on until towards the end of 1965 when the issues concerning women’s rights once again received some attention, especially in women’s publications. Manouchehrian, despite all the problems and difficulties that had arisen, started laying the groundwork for bringing up the proposed bill for discussion in the Senate. On October 24, 1996, in her speech before the call to order in the Senate, Manouchehrian presented the proposed family protection bill. After the introduction of the family protection bill in the Senate, some publications started printing news about the proposed law. One of these publications was “Payghame Emrouz”, which published the news about the introduction of the bill in the Senate and printed articles about the elimination of polygamy and temporary marriage (sigheh). But unfortunately, many publications, including women’s magazines chose to remain silent and some publications called the proposed bill premature and radical.

    Manouchehrian’s proposed bill, even though it opened a new door to discussions of family protection measures and women’s rights in the press and in the society, did not ultimately get anywhere and as Sharif Emami said, it wasn’t examined according to appropriate standards. But all of a sudden, in February 1967, with much propaganda, a bill named “Family Law” appeared in government publications. In the presentation of the bill, there was no mention of Mehangiz Manouchehrian’s name whatsoever nor was there any acknowledgement of her efforts in starting the discussion of family laws. On the contrary, Manouchehrian’s proposed bill was labeled as hasty and immoderate. Women’s weekly magazine “Zane Rouz” reported of the passage of the bill in Majlis (the lower house of the parliament in Iran at the time) on May 27, 1967 and published a detailed explanation of the articles of that law. At last, after being passed by the Majlis, the bill was sent to the Senate for final approval. Finally, on June 17, 1967, “Zane Rouz” reported the final ratification of the bill in the Senate, after which it was signed into law.

    At that time, even though the Family Protection Act had been signed into law and was enforceable, many of the old laws were still being upheld unless they were in stark contrast to the new law. In such instances, the court had to act on the basis of the Family Protection Act. Although this law had a lot of positive aspects which, compared to the previous conditions, were in favor of women, it had its shortcomings, too. This is to say that in comparison to Manouchehrian’s proposed bill, it appeared conservative. The Family Protection Act only modified the previous laws whereas Manouchehrian’s bill aimed at more profound changes. As an example, in Manouchehrian’s proposed bill polygamy was to be abolished altogether, whereas in the bill that was signed into law, polygamy remained unchanged. Even so, after the ratification of the bill, “Zane Rouz” reported that the gaining of new rights by women, however little those rights were, had caused men to react and raise the issue of dowry (mahrieh). Some men had written to the editor stating that in the light of the Family Protection Act and granting the right to divorce to women, dowry (mahrieh) was an old-fashioned tradition and a thing of the past that was no longer relevant.

    Continue Reading
  • The One Million Signatures Campaign

    One of the main criticisms against the Iranian women’s movement is that it advocates for the demands of elite groups and disregards the demands and needs of women at the grassroots. Critics claim that the Iranian women’s movement is an elite movement rather than a grassroots movement, and given the fact that the discourse of elite classes differ from that of the masses, ordinary women cannot participate in this movement. Women’s rights activists in recent years too have heard criticisms that claim that the demands of the women’s movement are in reality the demands of a group of Tehran-based and educated women.

    The 22nd of Khordaad, 1385 (12th of June, 2006) during which a protest objecting to discriminatory laws against women and demanding reform of the law was staged in Hafte Tir Square, was a different and interesting experience. On the one hand were are the drawbacks of this protest: authorities preventing our protest from taking shape in Haft-e Tir Square, the violent attack of police against protesters and the subsequent beatings of those present in Hafte Tir Square, and the absence of some activists who for various reasons were unable to participate in the protest. On the other hand and the positive side we witnessed the participation of ordinary women in this protest. In fact these women were not members of any social group or NGO, but in unison with women’s rights activists who had organized the protest, these ordinary women demanded equal rights, suffered beatings and yes some were even arrested and taken to prison.

    Perhaps one of the reasons contributing to the participation of ordinary citizens in the June 12, 2006 protest can be attributed to a broad call to action which was issued before the protest. A week prior to the protest, booklets which explained the discriminatory nature of laws and their negative impact on women’s lives were printed and 5000 copies distributed to women in Tehran who were informed about the upcoming protest and invited to take part in the effort designed to object to discriminatory laws and in demand of equal rights.

    The positive reaction of women, who received the booklets and whom we spoke to on the streets, in the metro, and on busses, created much hope for the organizers of the protest. Their reaction along with the presence of ordinary citizens at the protest was so encouraging that immediately after the protest, we started to think about how to take our message to the grassroots, and to broaden our demand for reform of discriminatory laws, beyond the tight circle of elite communities, such as intellectuals, university students, professors, and women’s rights activists.

    The implementation of this idea was not so simple. Despite the fact that inequities supported by and promoted in the law impacted the lives of women from all walks of life irregardless of social and economic class, amplifying the voices of those who suffer because of their gender and who object to the discriminatory nature of the law proved a challenging task. Despite the fact that women were unhappy with the status quo and current laws, the general public’s knowledge on this issue remained limited. As such it was difficult to transform this general discontent into a protest movement. On the other hand, for many of those women who do come into contact with the law and understand how damaging it can be for them, an individual solution seemed the strategy for addressing their problems. Many women in fact understand legal obstacles to be personal problems rather than general problems, and some believe that creating change is not possible, and some are unaware of the negative impact of current laws on women’s lives.

    Continue Reading