In the post-ecstatic phase of the milestone conference ICPD (International Conference on Population and Development), Cairo, 1994, I pursued my postgraduate degree in public health. While examining gender inequalities and inequities in reproductive health, including family planning, I realized that despite providing the social development world with a new lexicon, definitions, and newer categories of people in the demography discourse, the ICPD does not offer an exact definition of male involvement in Family Planning, which it emphasizes. As an enthusiastic first-time formal researcher, I drafted a definition, sought approval from my thesis advisor more than twice, and spent hours imagining the recognition I would receive for being the first to do so. This all happened before the age of digital transformation, so my futuristic fantasies could not materialize, although I achieved many “firsts” at that time, including presenting the communication model from my thesis into a pioneering award-winning Gender Watch series on our own beloved state-owned conservative PTV.
At that time, the word “disrupter” did not have the divine connotation that it has now, so I was content with merely “disturbing” some old-styled custodians of the gender fort and continued with my ideas of social innovation. One of the initiatives I took was to present the first-ever show on male gender needs in my TV series. I aimed to advocate for male involvement, participation, and partnership in all gender issues, including contraception, parenting, and creating enabling environments for promoting women in leadership roles. I do not regret my endeavours and vision. However, it is equally important and required from a transparency perspective that, like a few other farsighted thinkers in the sector, I remain conscious of the risks and continue to warn in my writings, talks, consultations, etc., that male involvement must not become a new burden or dependency for women and girls.
Feminist and gender-based activism continues to highlight different manifestations of sexism and misogyny.
While we are doing certain things and thinking so much, life keeps on happening, and it does not happen in a controlled environment or abide by the Terms of Reference or Standard Operating Procedures documented in any (if any) training manual. Hence, it was not surprising to see many funny and grim stuff, actions, plans, etc. evolving and getting noticed, supported, and scaled up in the name of the inevitable male involvement to “de-vemonize” popular anti-men interpretations of feminism (maybe). Meanwhile, feminist and gender-based activism continues to highlight different manifestations of sexism and misogyny. While the origin of “Manel” is unclear, the term “mansplaining” was inspired by an essay, “Men Explain Things to Me: Facts Didn’t Get in Their Way,” written by the historian Rebecca in 2008. These two phenomena have started occupying a lot of space on social media platforms. Sadly, neither “manels” nor “mansplaining” are ending. Rather, some strange developments have been happening continuously. The stranger part is the absence of the required degree of criticism of such anti-women developments. In my view, the most unjust and harsh aspect has been the selection of men (no matter how pro-women or feminist they may be) to lead women-focused non-profits, and other influential platforms, including UN agencies and their initiatives. This seemingly benign, goodwill gesture to position men as empathetic partners is depriving many competent women of their due appointments at such positions and endorsing the systemic occupancy of power within males who undoubtedly have much stronger networking.
In 2022, my country Pakistan was ranked 145 out of 146 countries, as reported by the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Global Gender Gap Report for that year. However, in the most recent report by WEF in 2023, Pakistan has achieved its highest score on gender parity since 2006, resulting in a rank of 142 out of 146 countries, with a gender parity rate of 57.5 per cent. This index includes cumulative scores in four areas of human development. We attained the 143rd position in economic participation and opportunities, 138th in education, 132nd in health and survival, and 95th in political empowerment. These inequality indices, however, do not unmask class disparities to any unfamiliar eye. Nevertheless, it remains a fact that our parliaments are largely dominated by the affluent. Nowadays, even commenting on the display of luxury accessories by women legislators can instantly label any defenseless as a non-feminist too.
What we, as students of gender equality, representation, inclusion, diversity, and belonging, need to understand with greater clarity and strive to implement in our calls to action is the fact that gender mainstreaming does not disallow an exclusive focus on women with different disadvantages. Thus, the need to pay attention to class and women-specific needs and challenges remains intact, as does the justification for affirmative actions aimed at supporting them.
As someone who has always believed in gender harmony, sharing such ( not so-popular) narratives and sentiments can be risky and harmful. But I believe like all lowly paid/unpaid legacy journalists and non-elite activists, who were embedded or “misguided” with the teaching of their committed idealistic, proud, and committed mentors that our job is, to tell the truth, no matter the cost, cannot help but divulge the truth. In any case, I always calm myself down after realizing the consequences of uttering such inconvenient truths and forbidden content. I was never destined to become a goddess in any way, so why not remain a sidelined odd comrade?
The writer is a serial social entrepreneur ,activist ,gender expert and former TV anchor & producer. She can be reached at founderkafekaam@gmail.com