The discourse of women’s agency is frequently defined within a binary framework: patriarchal traditionalism of pre-modern societies versus the individualistic emancipatory promise of Western secularism. Post-revolutionary Iran presents a noteworthy case study that challenges this binarism by articulating an indigenous, state-sponsored model of women’s empowerment rooted in Shiite political thought. Although this model has been central to the identity project of the Islamic Republic, international scholarship has often examined it through a secular-liberal lens and has largely overlooked the internal logic and strategic rationale of its framework. A systematic analysis of this alternative paradigm of agency remains a significant gap in the research literature. The present study seeks to answer the following question: What are the foundational components and operational mechanisms of the non-secular framework for women’s agency that has been developedin post-revolutionary Iran, particularly within the political thought of its Leadership? Adopting a qualitative approach, this article undertakes a discourse analysis of the statements and writings of Ayatollah Khamenei as the principal architect of this model. The key analytical concepts employed are sexual complementarity, cultural resistance, and discursive agency. The core idea is that the Iranian model proposes a “resistance-oriented agency” and positions women not as subjects seeking liberation from religion, but rather as strategic actors who are empowered through a religious framework to participate in a civilizational struggle against Western cultural hegemony. The findings reveal a coherent framework in which women are designated as primary agents in the reproduction of religious identity and the perpetuation of the “culture of resistance.” Their conscious socio-political participation is deemed essential for national sovereignty and cultural authenticity. By offering a nuanced analysis of an influential non-Western model of women’s empowerment, this study provides a critical alternative to the universalist claims of secular feminism and contributes to a deeper understanding of the relationship between gender, religion, and politics in the contemporary world.
Haeri et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: