Opinion ID: 726383
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Feminism

Text: 10 However, Moghaddam offers an alternative ground for establishing her status as a refugee. She contends she is a member of a particular social group composed of feminists. 1 We note, however, that feminism more appropriately refers to a political opinion than a particular social group and analyze the claim as such. See Fatin v. INS, 12 F.3d 1233, 1242 (3d Cir.1993) ([F]eminism qualifies as a political opinion within the meaning of the relevant statutes.). Moghaddam claims that, because of her feminist beliefs, she abhors compulsory compliance with Iran's ultraconservative laws, sometimes referred to as the moral codes. 11 In Fisher v. INS, 79 F.3d 955 (9th Cir.1996), we stated that [p]ersecution requires the government actor to inflict suffering on account of an individual's religious or political beliefs, race, nationality, or membership in a particular social group. It does not include mere discrimination, as offensive as it may be. Id. at 962 (citations omitted). To establish that she had been persecuted, we concluded that Fisher must show that the Iranian government's potential act of persecution stemmed from its desire to single her out for unique punishment because of her actually-held or perceived-to-be-held political or religious beliefs. Id. (quotations and alterations omitted). We held that [b]ecause Fisher has demonstrated only discrimination on account of her sex, not persecution on account of her religious or political beliefs, she has failed to carry her burden under Ghaly. 2 Id. at 963. 12 Moghaddam contends sanctions by the regime for her inadvertent noncompliance was an attempt to persecute her for her feminist beliefs. Pursuant to our recent decision in Fisher, we hold that Moghaddam has demonstrated only discrimination on account of her sex, not persecution on account of her religious or political beliefs. See id. 13 Moghaddam also claims that she is fearful of returning to Iran because she could be punished for leaving the country without an exit permit and for having been involved in political activities against the government. We reject this claim and hold that Moghaddam has failed to establish a well-founded fear of future persecution. 14 Although Moghaddam may be punished for leaving the country without an exit permit, this fear of punishment is insufficient to establish grounds for asylum. It is not enough for an alien to establish that she faces a possibility of prosecution for an act deemed criminal in her country, which is made applicable to all people in that country. Abedini v. INS, 971 F.2d 188, 191 (9th Cir.1992). 15 Furthermore, although Moghaddam testified that she found the Iranian moral codes to be oppressive, the evidence establishes that she complied with them. No evidence suggests that Moghaddam would refuse to conform and suffer the consequences if she were to return. At most, Moghaddam is reluctant to conform to Iranian customs and laws. However, reluctant compliance with gender-specific customs and laws cannot be considered a form of persecution. See Fisher, 79 F.3d at 962-63; Fatin, 12 F.3d at 1242.