Women on the march

Despite the threats and attempted intimidation by the retrogressive forces in politics and society, the Aurat (Women's) march was held on March 8, 2020 in many cities throughout Pakistan. Rallies were held in Islamabad, Karachi, Lahore, Multan, Peshawar, Quetta, Sukkur and many other smaller towns. An aroused, conscious and brave women's community is blazing a new path in Pakistan's retrograde, backward, misogynistic and patriarchal society where women are denied their human, gender, social, economic and political rights.

The reactionary patriarchal and misogynistic forces that attempted to paint the Aurat march in lurid colours as something bordering on vulgarity, moral laxity or against our religion, either deliberately or out of ignorance twisted their interpretation of slogans such as "Mera jism, meri marzi" (My body, my right) in this direction. In actual fact, the slogan speaks to the parlous state of safety of women from harassment, sexual assault and rape, etc. It also envisages the agency of women in deciding about their life choices, e.g., whom and when to marry, to have children or not, etc.

The reaction from the Jamaat-i-Islami (which held counter-rallies under the rubric Haya - modesty - march), accompanied by the burqa-clad girls and women of Jamia Hafza and Lal Masjid, chose to vent their hatred of the Aurat march in Islamabad by allegedly pelting it with rocks and batons when the two rallies were separated by a mere police tenting barrier. At least one Aurat march participant was injured. Thankfully, the police intervened to quell the disturbance.

Elsewhere, the rallies went off peacefully and without any adverse incident. However, the strict security measures by the police to pre-empt any trouble emanating from the wild threats flung at the Aurat march in recent days had the effect of dampening the spirit of this year's march in the 'absence' of the public. Roads and venues were sealed off, resulting in the marchers not being able to interact with the general public. An empirical observation that the numbers in this year's march did not match those of last year can be explained by reference to the threats hurled at it in the build-up to the day, and perhaps the lingering shadow of the coronavirus affliction that militates against crowds.

It is interesting to note the respective attitudes towards the Aurat march of the mainstream political parties. The ruling Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaaf gave its support, but not before Dr Firdous Ashiq Awan had resurrected General Ziaul Haq's retrogressive slogan 'Chadar or char diwari' (Veil and sanctity of home) and condemned unnamed NGOs as working for values repugnant to Islam and our traditional culture. The Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz too supported the march with reservations about some of its slogans and demands that in their view transgressed the acceptable according to our social norms. The Pakistan People's Party on the other hand unequivocally and without ifs and buts came out in support of the march.

Maulana Fazlur Rehman had exposed his mindset on the eve of the march by threatening to stop it by force, but fortunately his bluster was exposed on the day as just hot air, since his party, the Jamiat-i-Ulema-i-Islam-Fazl did not move a muscle. The Jamaat-i-Islami showed its hate-filled intimidatory nature in Islamabad, but was quickly defanged. The PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari has asked for action by the authorities against the goons who attacked the Islamabad rally.

What the opponents of the Aurat march and women's mobilisation miss, are ignorant of, or steeped in received patriarchal and misogynistic ideas is the origins of women's subjugation historically, the factors that contributed to this outcome in antiquity, and how it has played out throughout history ever since. Early human society was not stratified into classes or dominant-subservient groups. Primitive means of production (including land) were collectively owned and used. The turn came when private property arose. This had a number of consequences. Monogamy came to be established because the owner of private property wanted to make sure his true progeny (males only, by the way) inherited his wealth. In the institution of monogamous marriage, women were largely treated like little else than chattel.

Through the long unwinding course of human history, this was the 'model' for human society. It was only in modern times that women began to stir against the deprivation of their rights, enjoyed by men as a matter of entitlement. As examples of how things changed, one can quote in the political sphere the gaining of adult franchise for women, only conceded after protracted struggle and in an uneven sequence globally, largely in the 20th century. Now the Aurat march is demanding more. The cry is equality in the political, economic, social and personal domain.

This is not as outlandish as our Neanderthal misogynists attempt to portray it. If our religion Islam is studied in its true spirit, it was nothing less than a revolution in social norms, especially vis-à-vis extending rights to and empowering women. But our monopolists of religion (the religious parties) forget this fundamental aspect of Islam and justify patriarchal and misogynistic control and repression of women by falling back on 'traditional' values, which as explained above, stem from the great counter-revolution in gender equality encountered in the wake of the emergence of private property.

The Aurat march and women's mobilisation in the third year of its holding is now a fact of life and deserves our unstinting support. The only question remaining is to assess whether the demands of the women's movement can be achieved solely by a women's platform (which by the way has rightly won the admiration and support of all progressive and liberal elements in our society) or whether such a platform also needs to strategise a wider and more effective movement of resistance that can feed into the kind of change needed that would not be less than a social revolution.

[email protected]

rashed-rahman.blogspot.com