Abarmard

Dinner was served. We had started with a verity of appetizers and many toasts with some of my favorite wines. So far so good, there was no talk about politics. I knew that it wouldn't last.The previous time that we had get together, the outcome was an ugly fight of words among the entire group, ranging from my close family members to some not so close acquaintances. Later they had told me that even with that incident, they all had a great time and were amazed about the diversity of the group in the party. My neighbors were most appreciative of the diversity and commented more than once that they had never seen so many cultures in one place. 

So far so good, everyone remembering the last incident had kept their ideas to themselves knowing now how they differ. I raised my glass as usual. I never drink without a toast, it's a habit of mine. This time I made it short since I had to take the food out of the oven. "To you all", I said, "thank you for coming". We all cheered and I began to set the table. I was proud of what I had made, I had worked on the dishes and the plan of what goes where. The table was colorful although I noticed people didn't care as they attack similar to a conquering army yelling victory songs. 

Last time was a fun party, similar to this time. If that incident didn't occur. That was the second main reason that I wanted to redo this. The table was half empty and the bottles of wines were poured while the sound of glasses lightly touching for toasts could be heard in all four corners. Yes it was turning out good, again. So far so good.

Originally the argument had started when Steve had brought the idea of the war in Iraq, and it was the Republicans and Democrats took their party position and there we go. The conflict had started. I had a strong feeling about the war but had to remain impartial because I was the host. It would certainly be rude to those who did not agree with my political views to argue with me and possibly feel unwelcome. It was a wise decision to stay out because the heated conversation was only getting louder and less conversational. This time I would interfere and not let it get out of hand. I would not go to the corner as I did last time and make toasts with my best friends while ignoring the noise in the middle of the living room that was getting louder. It is very true that drinking and politics don't mix. Even if you would like to be impartial, it only takes one "wrong" statement to get your attitude changing from a calm, logical and friendly to harsh, obnoxious and illogical. It doesn't take long at all. I have seen too many of those sudden changes of behavior. Not this time.

Alex voice was raising, what was it this time? Should I interfere now or allow it to take its course? 

I excused myself from the group that I was discussing Persian modern poetry with and walked towards Alex. He was a good guy. I have known him for more than a decade. He always added extra spice to any gathering. He was talking to Laura, a neighbor of mine. She was very soft spoken and was a well read individual. I stood next to them. Alex and Laura did not react to my presence. They were talking about the women Rights and equal pay. Alex was arguing that it might not be the best way to force the independent businesses to assign a price for a position. "But how can you stop discrimination if you do not make a bold approach" Laura argued "and that might not be fair to some, but it would be fair to the majority. And that's what democracy is about". Looked like a peaceful debate, nothing to worry here. 

"What do you think?" I heard Alex's voice and turned to see if he was talking to me. He was. I walked back and listened to his argument that now seemed to have moved to women Rights and Iran. "Remember once in an argument you told me that Iranian women are doing better than before?" Alex looking for my agreement that Laura asked loudly "but you told me that the women's situation is not ideal in Iran?" waiting for my nod. What did I mean in both of those cases? I had done that many times. Depending on the situation I have had things that could be contradictory. "Come on just tell him what you told me" Laura insisted. 

"Alex what were we talking about when I told you that?" Looking at Laura I asked the same question. "I have no idea, we were pretty wasted. But I remember that we were talking about the Shah and you were telling me about some of your sweet childhood memories". Laura took a big sip from her glass and said "Oh yeah I remember, I was asking you about the divorce laws and single women life in Iran". That was the case. There were different cases. Can I make the case base on Laura's argument that life for women overall has become worse? It's a fact that women don't have similar rights to men under the Islamic Republic. But I didn't take her side. I went to explain the scenario in both cases and let them decide what they liked based on the historical information. 

Their questions did not leave my head. 

Why didn't I want to admit to Laura knowing well that she was right. In that discussion, Law was the focus and she was right. Was I embarrassed in front of Alex? No, that was not the case because I had said pretty harsh things before. I recall my best friend once telling me that when it comes to the issue of Iran, I can't be objective. Was that the case then? I had to justify something that I knew was wrong?

Are there different angles for the same issue? Why can't the women's right be an absolute argument, either it's acceptable to take the rights away or it's not. Yet there are times that knowingly I take the other side and that was puzzling to me. I wanted to figure it out for myself. I did that unknowingly. "Here's to the host" Farshid said in a dominating voice and raised his glass. Everyone followed and we all drank to me! My head was still struggling with thoughts that I heard Tammy, Alex's wife. She had picked up the argument and was now trying to convince Alex that one of the problems with Iranian society is the men who accept those laws which makes women inferior. Something was wrong with her logic although her argument was correct. What was missing? The laws were against women but were women in her mind similar to women in my mind? This might have been the key that I could not fully submit to their argument. The issue is looked at from a different lens that was missing some realistic sense. Women in Iran, all the ones that I see or know do not come across as submissive or scared, quiet or silenced by the society. They are the most visible, vibrant part of Iranian society. Where in that argument this image comes across? It doesn't. 

"Nothing is absolute" I said and they all became quiet listening, "Laura and Tammy are both correct from many different angles" I looked at them and continued "yet your understanding hides the true images that make up the women's life in Iran. I feel as if we are watching two different pictures from the same camera. The mistake that everyone makes about the people, societies, histories and countries are perhaps conclusive for an argument about the realities while the Sociocultural aspect of the problem is not considered". 

When we speak about Rights, we don't tend to think of those who blindly follow the rules and never question. We don't think of those women who work hard in the village, taking care of their families while their men enjoy the authority of the home. That's not the law, that's the accepted social norm from traditions which clearly are flawed. We think of those who are bothered and fight against it. Similarly in Turkey a secular State where the majorities are Muslim, we don't think of those who are fine with the secularity of the country but those who are bothered by the force of not being able to dress or practice what they believe. An opposite side of a coin of the same idea. The image that many carry in their mind when they perceive the Iranian women as a group of submissive, weak, and caged individuals who are suffocated by the authorities and men. Although legally so, socially it's far from the truth. Perhaps that's the core of the double standard that I carry with my arguments depending on the audience.

Once talking to a group of American women, my sister told them "In Iran we always thought of the Western people and societies higher than they really are, and in the West, people tend to think of the people and societies such as Iran lower than we really are". Is that why some of us have double standards? We feel as though they are right in the core argument, there is a great misunderstanding about the realities of the day to day life of the people and dominant culture.

My Party ended well. Hopefully next month we'll have another one.