An autoethnography of affective–moral dilemmas in writing about authoritarian and patriarchal contexts

Abstract

Research ethics teach us how to protect the people we portray in our studies. Yet while researchers hold the power to harm participants through what they write, they are also vulnerable in the writing process itself. In this autoethnographic piece, I revisit six moments from my recent fieldwork in Iran and reflect on the affective and moral tensions I experienced while turning lived encounters into academic arguments. Focusing on research conducted within an authoritarian theocratic system, I describe the moral weight involved in portraying state officials and religious authorities. I also reflect the tensions I felt as a male feminist researcher writing about women’s lives and gender justice in a patriarchal context. By foregrounding the writing phase, this paper argues that vulnerability does not end with fieldwork but intensifies when interpretation becomes public and consequential.