Talk:Falaka

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Law Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.
???	This article has not yet received a quality rating on the assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received an importance assessment on the assessment scale.

	Falaka is part of WikiProject Iran, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Iran-related topics. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of objectives.
???	This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's quality scale.
???	This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's importance scale.
	After rating the article, please provide a short summary on the article's ratings summary page to explain your ratings and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses.

[edit] Consequences

I recently read a statement by some doctors that "shocks" throughout the body was a common consequence of falaka; could anyone comment on whether this is related to nerve damage, bone damage, soft tissue damage, swelling or bones pressing on nerves? Along with some information about how much it takes to cause it (as it is still being used as a punishment in various places) and whether it is permanent? Thanks. Zuiram 20:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Victimhood

It does not make any more sense on a NPOV basis to call a person punished by falaka for a crime a "victim" than it would to call someone incarcerated in prison for a crime a "victim" unless there are exceptional circumstances making the punishment fundamentally unjust. But justice and injustice are POV and therefore beyond the scope of Wikipedia. St. Jimmy 15:10, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Such willfull ignoring of the wider scope of the term victim (the injustice notion was the last to come into use!) is linguistically wrong. However, since the matter is not essential to an understanding of the falaka as such, I won't keep reverting this. By the way, I like to point out that I have no particular hostility to corporal punishment, in fact my many descriptive contributions on various instruments etcetera have mainly been challenged by people who clearly think (erroneously, in most cases based on their strong aversion) them to positive. However, a better point could be made that systematically calling the punishee 'offender' is a one-sidedly positive point of view: do you suggest in earnest that every person who suffered this painfull treatment had actually offended, even under such oppressive regimes as Sadam's Iraq? Even a staunch supporter of corporal punishment (never mind whether any of us is, of course) must admit that it can be at least as injust as alternative punishments when there is no just reason to punish at all! Fastifex 07:33, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I do admit that, however, normally we don't see people defined as "victims" of incarceration, fines, community service, etc., so we shouldn't reserve the term for those experiencing politically incorrect punishments. As for "offender", I think we can presumptively assume that a person subjected to falaka has offended against some rule, whether it is a particularly reasonable rule or not. And just because we CAN use the word "victim" in a certain circumstance by repairing to the dictionary does not mean it is the best word in its full context. If we have to choose between a technically correct word that has negative connotations and a technically correct word that does not, it stands to reason that we choose the one that does not. To me, it seems clear that "victim" is more prejudicial than "offender", although in a pinch "subject" seems acceptably neutral. St. Jimmy 08:01, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Falaka.gif

Image:Falaka.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:02, 4 June 2007 (UTC)