Fighting elections and gender inequality at the same time in Pakistan

Have you seen any progress towards more gender equality in Pakistan’s politics in the past?

The establishment of the non-partisan Women’s Parliamentary Caucus has been a great platform in the country’s parliamentary history for rights of marginalized persons in Pakistan. It was set up in 2008 by a resolution of the National Assembly under the leadership of Fehmida Mirza, who has been one of the few female members of the parliament to have also served as the speaker of the National Assembly. Not only has the caucus enabled female parliamentarians to come together for their collective issues and challenges, it has also enabled them to develop pro-women laws in consultation with leading activists from the women’s movement in Pakistan. They have been able to spearhead, develop consensus over and push forward bills for child-friendly, women-friendly and otherwise progressive laws. Women who have served in constitutional roles, such as speakers or as parliamentary secretaries or heads of other committees within the assemblies, have also been able to play their part effectively for pushing gender equality and progressive laws in Pakistan. The collective efforts of women also enabled them to ensure that political parties were compelled to award at least 5 per cent of the general-seat tickets to female members. Although the process of allotment of such tickets needs more democratization, it is still a step forward for gender equality in Pakistan’s politics.

If we can take a step back for a minute, what do we mean by patriarchy?

The term “patriarchy” was originally used to describe households dominated by a male figurehead and where decisions about everyday facets of life, such as education and marriage, were made by the men. These dynamics are reinforced through culture, norms, religion, education and even laws.

The control of men over decisions and access to resources did not remain within the private sphere alone, rather, it led to their control of resources and positions in the public sphere as well. Access to better nutrition at home, to better schooling and education as well as more freedom of mobility in the society enabled men to work in various fields outside the home and capture senior leadership positions in diverse sectors, including the justice and policy sectors. This included the political arena as well as the executive, legislative and judicial organs of the state. Consequently, the social, legal, economic and political structures that emerged were male-centred, male-identified and male-dominated.

What does patriarchy mean in politics, more specifically?

As a system, patriarchy configures social relations between men and women in terms of power dynamics, wherein men wield power and control and women are expected to be subservient and submissive. Patriarchy is also used to set gender roles and determine what an acceptable space, public or private, for each gender ought to be: creating the public/private dichotomy of space and belonging, such that any crossover is more likely to be viewed as an intrusion into the ‘space’ of the other. In that sense, patriarchy appears to have created entitlement of one gender (usually men) to claim public space and role in the society, for instance, that of a “breadwinner” and has relegated the other (usually women) to the private space and role that it considered appropriate, such as a “homemaker”.

With the historical imbalance in the capture of key positions, decision-making roles and resources, both at home and in public, one gender has been able to bargain for itself the ability to cast greater influence and to position itself as a ‘centre of power’ that can address and fulfil the needs of a constituency. Patriarchy has thus influenced the structure, actors and norms of politics, as well as determined the power dynamics therein. Thus, patriarchy affects fair representation of women and other marginalized persons in politics, and hinders intersectional representation in political domain. It also hinders the advancement of women who are in politics, and may make them more susceptible to sexist abuse. This likely aims to reinforce and maintain the status quo of dominance that privileges one gender, by reminding the other that the public space is not their domain and, should they dare cross over, they should be prepared for the consequences.

Which reforms would you recommend to overcome patriarchy in politics?

The deeply entrenched social, economic and other barriers originating from the patriarchal distinctions cannot be addressed through legislation alone; they require more transformative, multisectoral and multidimensional approaches from civil society organizations and other stakeholders. It will require engagement with top leadership; more affirmative action within political parties to increase women’s participation in elections; more structure for appointments to reserved seats; and women’s economic empowerment as well as their increased access to education and networking opportunities. In addition, media and male politicians and other actors within the political sphere would benefit from sensitivity training as well as training on the importance of inclusive policymaking.

The views expressed in this article are not necessarily those of FES.