THE WAY IT WAS: Women for the taking? —Mian Ijaz Ul Hassan
Let us not be deceived. Some people do find great fascination in wielding
power and ruthlessly exercising it. For them it is better than being bogged down
with abstractions like love and law. There is only a marginal difference between
a despot and a rapist. One forces himself on a woman, the other on an unwilling
people
With every passing year we are becoming loud, angry and rude. There can be
several plausible explanations for this. It is abundantly evident that
fundamental contradictions between the poor and the rich, civil society and
military bureaucracy, the Centre and the federated units and between democracy
and autocratic rule are visibly sharper. Whatever democratic consensus lingered
feebly over the years has virtually ceased to exist. Besides the social and
political factors, the smoldering anger may be due to our sense of guilt for
condoning the slow obliteration of the founding principles of our country
through our political passivity. But spitting rude adjectives at the
protagonists, instead of resisting the antagonist, cannot sooth our wounds. It
is through preserving one’s anger, restraining oneself from futile bickering
and togetherness in the struggle to change the circumstances that one can be at
peace with oneself. Those burdened by guilt and frequently bruised by
frustrations tend to expend their anger on their immediate friends rather than
direct it against the enemy. Being closer, a wife, a son or a daughter, a
brother or a companion are convenient targets. They are also unlikely to
retaliate. Learning to distinguish friends from foes is vital even if it is not
easy.
Dr Shazia, the Sui rape victim, seems to have been forced to migrate and settle
in Canada. How Doctor Sahiba got the Canadian residency and was transported out
of the country may remain an enigma. The process was secret and the honourable
court dealing with the case was not aware of it. It was also efficiently handled
considering that a few days earlier the authorities were refusing to allow Dr
Sahiba to transfer some of her household belongings to Karachi, where, rumour
had it, she was under strict surveillance. The deed done, it doesn’t perhaps
matter much how it was done. As a consequence, the culprit will go unpunished.
The state, whose bounden duty it is to ensure that criminals are punished, has
not muttered a word on the subject.
And what has been the reaction of the self proclaimed religious scholars? It has
apparently been confined to the pathetic insistence on having a religion column
in our passport. So, rape is not a serious issue on their agenda? Sex crimes
should be taken as a part of a vigorous life? It all depends how you look at it.
In sick societies, I am afraid, imagining a woman being raped titillates males.
Are we not all aware of some creeps who gloat over sexual perversions, reported
in the press in sordid detail. Some of the readers appear to be actually envious
of those who indulge in them. Is it strange that a person should find greater
satisfaction in forcing himself upon a stranger than care for a woman who might
love him? Let us not be deceived. Some people do find great fascination in
wielding power and ruthlessly exercising it. For them it is better than being
bogged down with abstractions like love and law. There is only a marginal
difference between a despot and a rapist. One forces himself on a woman, the
other does it to an unwilling people.
Would you agree that there can be a greater sense of self-attainment in
perversity than in honest labour? No? Then why do the villains fascinate the
imagination more than heroes do? Mephistopheles, Lucifer, Satan — call him by
any name — has a striking dramatic presence compared to our dusty Adam. Satan,
made of fire, takes exception to God for pronouncing Adam, who is made of common
clay, his better. Surprisingly, he is charged with vanity that later becomes an
important human attribute. Today no one would find it surprising — no they
would in fact find it most natural — for a wife to protest if the husband were
to announce another woman into the house and insist that the wife should
prostrate before the new wench. The more robust wife would go to the extent of
hitting the husband on the head with a ladle or the vatta out of the chuttoo —
whichever is handy. Satan was similarly overcome with jealousy and failed to
comprehend God’s larger scheme of things, brought almost to naught by the
fickle Adam who is so easily seduced by Eve. Adam the pampered, lets his Creator
down at first opportunity. Apples are juicier and crunchier than some other
fruits but for Adam to lose his head over it sounds a bit far fetched unless, of
course, there was more to the apple. God is angry. Adam is thrown out of the
Heaven. Eve, considered responsible for his misdemeanour, is also asked to
vacate her apartment. Why should Eve be punished for sharing an apple with Adam
would escape any one who has any sense of good manners?
God demands that Adam and Eve live a life of penance on planet Earth. They are
told that it is only when they have redeemed themselves by personal trial and
suffering that they can be allowed back in Heaven. For most people the question
whether Eve invited Adam to have the apple or Adam took it off her without being
asked, will remain unanswered. It is best perhaps to assume that they were
courteous consenting companions. Why should any one object to that?
Adam, the free loader, was greatly grieved when free board and lodging
facilities were withdrawn and he was asked to leave. From now on he would have
to work for God and fend for himself. He was determined not to let God down this
time. He brushed back his hair from over his dark brow with his long fingers,
looked for a big fig leaf and persuaded Eve to pluck three for herself. There
had been enough trouble already. After a few days when he felt his spirits
restored it dawned upon him that in order to redeem himself he needed to better
the place where the lived. Thus he immediately proceeded to have instead of one
— as prescribed by the doctors today — several apples a day so that he could
raise a veritable workforce to help him in his endeavours. Unfortunately one of
his sons was greedy and a lecherous lout. Finding an opportunity one dark night
he struck and killed his brother. He then took possession of his brother’s
wife and other material assets. It was not a nice thing to do, you will agree.
One bad precedent leads to another. Thus it becomes difficult to eradicate evil.
To this day honest men have been trying to rewrite the story of Cane and Able
but to no avail. Look at what bad precedents have done to our own country. The
new precedents being claimed to remedy our problems are further adding to our
pains and trials.
Conquests have been incessantly followed by plunder and rape. The victors feel
victorious only when the honour of the vanquished is defiled by rape of their
women. Would women have been raped so frequently if man’s honour was not
linked to them? Sex can exercises so awesome power over the mind of men that it
can actually impair it. It is unfortunate that men should gain a greater sense
of manhood from war and subjugation than from defending the meek and caring for
them.
Aitzaz Ahsan and his associates have filed Mukhtar Mai’s appeal in the Supreme
Court of Pakistan. There are not many men who can plead the cause of the
wretched as valiantly as Aitzaz. We have now to wait and see what the Superior
Court has to say on the subject. Are women for the taking?
Prof Ijaz Ul Hassan is a painter, author and political activist. He can be
reached at http://www.ijazulhassan.com