WHY WE ONLY FIGHT THE PARTS OF RACISM THAT FEEL COMFORTABLE

 The history of human discrimination is long and complex, rooted in centuries of rigid social hierarchies. While modern legal frameworks are now designed to protect individuals from harassment based on race, physical appearance, or age, the application of these protections often feels inconsistent. To dismantle these systems, we must first understand the psychological and societal mechanisms that sustain them.

Harassment often stems from deep-seated psychological triggers within the aggressor rather than any action taken by the victim. By examining these triggers, we can see how personal history and cognitive biases shape discriminatory behavior.

1. The Projection of Insecurity

Frequently, those who target others for their "posture," "body shape," or "race" are manifesting an internal fear or a desperate need for control. When an individual feels inadequate or threatened by their own perceived shortcomings, they may project that negativity onto others. By demeaning someone else’s physical presence, the harasser attempts to stabilize their own fragile sense of superiority.

2. Childhood Development and "Othering"

Psychologists often note that exclusionary behaviors can be traced back to early environments. If a child grows up in a household or community where "othering"—the act of treating a group as intrinsically different or alien—is modeled as a defense mechanism, they are likely to carry those patterns into adulthood. In these cases, harassment isn't just a choice; it is a learned response to the unknown or the "different."

3. The Cognitive Bias: Halo and Horn Effects

Society often reacts disproportionately to physical appearance . ​While modern society has made strides in labeling certain forms of discrimination as unacceptable, a significant blind spot remains. We are witnessing a peculiar phenomenon where harassment based on "better" or "stronger" physical traits—or specific racial identities—is frequently ignored or, in some cases, even encouraged by media and advertising.

The most concerning aspect of this trend is how it has been absorbed as an acceptable behavior. While the law is designed to prevent harassment, there is a systemic ignorance regarding those targeted for traits that are "not in human control," such as genetics, skin color, or a naturally strong constitution.

Isn't it time we actually manage and stop racism in every single dimension? We cannot continue to only address the parts that are convenient or comfortable for us to notice. Real change doesn't happen when we pick and choose; it happens when we confront the systemic, the subtle, and the institutionalized bias that we’ve ignored for too long.

THE MOTIVES BEHIND THE "ANTI-DIGITAL" HARASSMENT CAMPAIGN

There is a coordinated group actively monitoring comments and new posts to immediately launch fresh accusations. They employ a tactic of mimicking legal warnings—treating every word as if it will be "used against you in a court of law"—but they transform this into a "sport court" dynamic, acting like hostile in-laws who twist every statement.

However i personally has been experiencing this harassment forvyears but I tested by a simple comment acknowledging that police are responsive 24/7, including holidays and after midnight which is a fact .

Bullies immediately weaponized the statement, claiming it meant the writer was "against" doctors, lawyers, or other professions. They use negative inference to create a "no-win" situation for the author.

This abusive spying and harassment has been in place for 15 years, with the primary goal of preventing online posts and digital production. The perpetrators often present themselves as:

 * Manual laborers or those who work with their hands.

 * Athletic or physical workers.

 * Those in non-office environments.

* A group against AI

While these groups currently performing they are fighting against AI to protect their jobs from being replaced, this is a recent excuse.

 This pattern of harassment and digital suppression existed for over a decade before AI became a mainstream concern. In their minds, attacking a writer's post is a "fight against AI," but their history proves the harassment is actually rooted in a long-standing desire to stifle online and digital work as well as independence work.

For years, I was subjected to constant, 24/7 unpleasantness and threats targeting my weight, body shape, and even my grocery choices. I often wondered what was behind this relentless intrusion into my private life.

​It has become clear that these groups have a specific bias against authors and writers who work independently and digitally. They prefer creators to be dependent on a system they can control, rather than standing alone based on the merit of their own digital work.

​The mystery of their motivation is now solved: they are operating as "in-laws" within their own self-styled "sport court." They have brought the messy, abusive, and toxic dynamics of a family conflict into the professional and digital space.

They treat the writer like an unwanted relative, using personal insults and "in-law" style interrogation to create a hostile environment.To use the "worst messy abusive acts" to break the writer's spirit and stop their digital production.

THE SHADOW OF STATUS

I often look back to my younger years when I was first searching for a job. Even then, I noticed a strange, recurring pattern: if you already had a job, you were in high demand. But if you were unemployed, you were often dismissed as "unqualified" before anyone even glanced at your resume or sat you down for an interview.

As time went on, I realized this pattern wasn't restricted to the workplace—it bled into our personal lives, too.

In relationships, the logic was just as flawed. If someone was already in a partnership—even a toxic or unhappy one—they were viewed as a "success." Others suddenly found them more attractive or worthy. Yet, if a woman was single, she was often cast as a "failure" by default. At the time, we didn't fully grasp how unfair this environment was. We just lived in it.

It wasn't until I started writing and observing the world with more intention that I saw how deep these assumptions run. This unfair judgment follows us through every stage of life:

 * The Professional: You are only as good as your current title.

 * The Personal: Your worth is tied to your relationship status.

 * The Retired: Once you stop working, society treats you as if you’ve committed a crime—suddenly, you are seen as "unqualified" for life itself.

There is a coldness in how society treats those it deems "extra." People treat the elderly as if they occupy an "unpleasant status," forgetting the most basic law of time: Life moves faster than we realize. Those who judge others for being jobless, single, or old are ignoring their own future. Tomorrow, they will be the ones without the job, the ones outside of the relationship, or the ones facing the quiet of retirement. We are all just one sunset away from being the person we once looked down upon.

"We judge others by their current status, forgetting that status is a temporary shadow cast by time."

PERSONHOOD OVER GENDER

 In every industry—from the construction site to the courtroom—we are surrounded by a vocabulary of the past. We hear terms like manpower, foreman, and man-hours. While many dismiss these as "just words," they are actually the lingering echoes of a world that once decided men were the sole architects of business and society.

​We are finally witnessing a shift. In progressive circles, "manpower" is becoming person-power, "foreman" is becoming supervisor, and "man-hours" are becoming person-hours. This isn't just about being "correct"; it’s about acknowledging that expertise does not have a gender.

​However, we are also facing a fierce "pushback." There are still those who insist that being a man is synonymous with power and supervision. In my own journey through law, medicine, and finance, I have seen men in critical positions use their gender as an excuse to "teach a woman a lesson," or worse, to sabotage her work because they believe power is a male birthright.

​For years, I wondered where this desperate need for dominance came from. I eventually realized that this mentality starts long before a man enters an office. It begins in the home.

​In many societies, women still live in male-dominated environments where marriage is treated like a hierarchy rather than a partnership. When a man is raised to believe he must be the "boss" of his home without question, he naturally tries to control the women in his professional life under the guise of "manpower."

​The most frustrating part of this journey has been the judgment I faced after my separation. I encountered a "shallow group" of people—both men and women—who tried to evaluate my life based on the absence of a man. To them, a woman living without a man is "weak," "needy," or "desperate."

​Even more insulting is the "Mystery Man" myth: the idea that if a woman is successful, her accomplishments must secretly be credited to a man behind the scenes. This is a deliberate attempt to prove that women are incapable of holding power on their own.

​The interference these groups try to run in our lives—the constant questioning of our strength and the credit given to men for our hard work—is more than just an annoyance. It is a form of harassment.

​We are not "needy" because we are alone; we are powerful because we have chosen to define ourselves. It is time we retire the vocabulary of the past and start recognizing power for what it truly is: a matter of character and skill, not a gendered legacy.

BEYOND THE BETRAYAL: WHY I REFUSE TO LEAVE

 Thank you for your thoughtful questions and for engaging so deeply with my story in my book ( Can we talk ). Many of you have asked if, given the hardships I’ve faced, I regret moving to Canada. It is a complex question that deserves a clear answer.

​In my book, I shared the pain of trusting my ex-husband’s promise of a shared future, only to be told that if I couldn't find work, I should return to Iran alone. To be left behind after years of building a life—especially during a period of illness and job loss—was a profound betrayal of that initial trust.

​However, it is important to distinguish between the regret of a personal relationship and my commitment to my life here. While I have faced long-term discrimination and a toxic environment that authorities have yet to fully address, I am not willing to leave.

​I have spent decades in Canada. This is where I have stood up for my rights and where I continue to demand the dignity and professional respect I deserve. My journey is no longer about the person who brought me here; it is about the person I have become while staying here. I am staying to see my fight for justice through and to ensure that the time I have invested in this country is honored.

​I hope this clarifies my perspective and helps you understand the strength behind my decision to stay.

A RESPONSE TO NONSTOP HARASSMENT

 It has come to my attention that a significant amount of energy is being spent by strangers—people I do not know and who have no place in my private life—to speculate on my relationships. This has moved beyond simple gossip; the constant creation of theories and the linking of my every move to a past or current partner has become a form of emotional and mental abuse.

To clarify once and for all:

 * Regarding my Ex-Husband: We have no interest or plans to reunite. We have both decided that separate lives are in our best interest, and we are both living better for it.

 * Current Status: I am not currently in a relationship, nor do I have any plans to enter one. My focus remains entirely on my professional life and my writing.

It is clear that these attacks on my personal life are a tactic to stop me from posting my political opinions. To those who try to threaten me with "Do not tell," or who respond to my social posts and books by attacking my character: Stop this abusive approach.

I am an independent writer. I will continue to write and say whatever I believe needs to be said. Your attempts to create a toxic environment—including the "echoing voices" and threats in my own home—only prove that what I am saying contains a truth you are desperate to cover up.

This pattern of abuse has unfortunately extended into my neighborhood, the healthcare system, telecommunications, and even legal structures.

 * If you do not like my writing, simply do not read it. Leave it for those who value the work and need an outsider eyes for improving society and countries. 

 * Those who are open to critics and listen to an Independent voice , stop this unpleasant threatening. My life is not a targeted project, and my voice will not be silenced by abusers gossip.

CONDOLENCES TO THE PEOPLE OF IRAN

 To the people of Iran, and to all those mourning the loss of loved ones, and fellow citizens:

I wish to offer my deepest and most sincere condolences. The loss of those who stood up for their convictions and their dignity is a profound tragedy that resonates far beyond borders. Their courage and their stories are held in solemn remembrance.

May the families find strength in their shared memory, and may the collective grief of the nation find a path toward healing and solace. My thoughts are with every individual carrying the weight of this loss.