@Madridi The majority muslim countries do not enforce hijab. (I'm mostly leaving this source for other people to read since you probably already now this)
For Iran even though Hijab enforcement by law is bad (women should have a choice), you do have women wearing it further back showing more hair. Its not as strict as the early years of the revolution. And technically women are not suppose to wear tight fitted clothing either (like anyone actually follows the law exactly), you do see women in tight jeans and shirts, especially around areas like Tehran.
And while people complain that Hijab is discrimination against women, and make it seem like women are only discriminated against in Middle East countries, no one mentions the 2 year forced labor every man has to go through called conscription. In Iran If they don't serve then they won't be able to leave the country, buy or sell anything in their names, get a license to work, use their university degree, etc. Basically a man will be reduced to a person with no rights.
While people say the horrors of Irani women of walking around in public without Hijab and dealing with the moral police, no one mentions the horrors of a man being forced to go out in the battle field and having his limbs blown off and guts ripped out. Since nearly 100% of all combat deaths and injuries are male in Iran. This slavery is also something many middle eastern men go through and many western men have to sign up for, and be obligated to fight in wars.
Why was I mentioned? Did you mean someone else? Or is there something I didn't get?
Yes, Hijab is a part of a Islam, but it's not enforced in any country (even Iran it's not completely enforced)
- About Hijab discrimination: Those who don't wear it, or don't want to wear it are the ones raising it up as an issue, which mostly comes from western countries. So no wonder it's an issue.
- The conscription you mentioned has nothing to do with any religion. It's a country by country basis. Depending of their political standing, what they offer their people, and stuff. Advanced countries like Japan has it as well. It's also not a set period. Here in Qatar for example, it only started 2 years ago, and it's only a 3 month service. During which:
1- You get paid in full by whoever you are employed with
2- We don't get enlisted in the military or anything. It's just so that let's say the country is invaded, we have the necessary tools to defends ourselves and family. The purpose is to keep peace if anything were to happen.
3- The country offers free electricity, water, healthcare, education, and gives a free piece of land for married couple to build with a loan of about $350k with zero interest paid over 20 years. We also have no taxes here (not on people anyway. There are taxes on corporations). So it's literally called national service. It's the least we can do.
We also go through thorough checkups before we get enlisted and get exempt from anything that we can't do. I personally had a broken leg at one point, and it wasn't completely healed. So I was exempt from stuff that required physical strength.
Given that we don't lose anything, and we retain all our rights, I wouldn't consider this "forced labor". Sure it's forced in the sense that you simply might not want to do it. But honestly, something is seriously wrong with a person if they expect the country to give them everything and they want to give nothing back.
Qatar is also studying extending the national service for those who only carry a high school degree to a full year. In that year, they would be attending a full fledged military college, in which they would get a college diploma, certified by most major universities around the world that would allow them to build up on it to get a bachelors degree. In Qatar we actively believe that the number one investment is education, and while there are those who couldn't wait to start working after high school to get a job, the country in a way is forcing them to get a degree, while getting their salary. Brilliant step in my opinion and I hope it goes through.
I know you probably are mostly talking about Iran, but I wanted to clarify that it's not a general rule.
- Genital mutilation for females: This is as well not something related to Islam. It's an unfortunate tradition in mostly Africa (By Muslims and non-Muslim countries). It's decreasing among African Islamic countries from what I hear, but they are not common to begin with. The tradition is not country-wide, rather than some than traditions of some families. It's mostly in the suburbs rather than in cities, and it's mostly attributed to the lack of education.
- About the death penalty: drifting away from what countries actually applies, I'll first talk about what Islam thinks about it. Islam takes it seriously. No one gets the death penalty for adultery without absolute proof. Even if I come in and testify that you have committed adultery, that's still not enough proof. I would have to have 2 (or was it 3? Too tired to think or look up atm) witnesses for what has happened. All of them explaining exactly how they could have witnessed such a thing happening, swearing in the Quran (swearing might be a non-issue in the west, but it's a big deal in Muslim countries, although obviously for some more than others) to what has happened. There are more rules to that but that's all I can remember atm. It's also applies in certain situations (married, not married, etc).
Now, what the countries actually applies, as far as I know, Saudia Arabia is the only Arabic country (Arabic, not Muslim countries as a whole.. not sure about the rest, which is why I'm excluding them here) that has the death penalty. All of our judicial systems are a mixture between Islamic, French, and English systems. That's why you see a bit of differences between one country to the other
- As for Iran: Iran is not inherently a bad country. They unfortunately do things differently. Most of what they do under the Islamic name does not represent anything in Islam. It just serves some sort of agenda. Fun fact: Iran wasn't always a tight up and closed country. It became like that with the last few rulers.
While I'm at it, and to get back on track on this topic, I should also clarify that, what people call Islamic state (ISIS), they represent nothing in Islam. They have killed more Muslims that they have ever killed westerners. This type of thing is a non-news with the media. But if it happens in places like Paris or London or NY, it will get wide coverage. It's just how the media system works.
ISIS's purpose is to give Islam a bad name. Muslims don't consider ISIS to be Muslims and as far as we are concerned, they can (and hopefully will) all burn in hell. So the notion of "radical Islam" is dumb to begin with.
It's ironic and ridiculous how easy it is for a bunch of people to come by, cause chaos, and attribute it to a certain religion, and people around the world would take that attribution as a given.