Prof Rahmat Karim Baig
As far as the structure of Chitrali society is concerned, through the lenses of modern sciences like sociology, anthropology, human resource management, etc., it seems a highly patriarchal unit. But it must be kept in mind that the role of women in the development, management, control, and consumption of local resources has had a pivotal role in the history of both Kho and Kalash communities.
The Kho society has been termed as aurat abad – namely, the prosperity of a family depends on the hard work and resource management skills of the housewife/head woman, and she leads in a managerial capacity because of her diligent work in agriculture, animal husbandry, food rationing, and relations with neighbours, relatives, the widows, and orphans of the vicinity. Her role carried weight. She was not outrightly excluded from decision-making within the household. Many extraordinary women overruled the decision-making process. She was the ruling queen of the family, and she liked her position as head of the ‘petticoat’ government in the three-tier class system.
At present, the class system does operate – and to be frank – operates more strongly than ever. The endeavours of women to gain superior status and authority in the family have grown and have become stronger and dangerous, and the role of men has been relegated. The females are no more as obedient as they used to be in the society of old Chitral. Now it has turned upside down. The females are dominant and males subservient. Now our social structure is that of a matriarchal society, and negation of that status incites females to resort to extreme measures like suicides or elopements.
Female education – both religious and western – has brought about serious change in the thoughts of females, and they have snatched the power of decision-making from their husbands. In case of resistance, the family faces quarrels and divorces or Khula. Family ties have weakened, and respect for parents or mother/father-in-law has almost disappeared – an outcome of western education and enlightenment. It is the byproduct of NGOs who injected the toxic idea of female empowerment to give them feminist views such as: why should they live with families overburdened with domestic chores, rebukes, ill treatment by in-laws, and remain bound to the dictates of their husbands instead of living an independent life like those in the West—have boyfriends, get separations from them as per will, and take to the streets in the name of human rights and throw away all inhibitions of an organized and disciplined social system.
The idea first came from AKDN and lent to like-minded girls selected out of loose social units, and once the germs spread, the support increased from behind the curtain and more were attracted. Champions of the feminist cause appeared and championed that cause wittingly or without comprehending its final outcome. The recruitment of girls in NGOs was the beginning of this venture.
The empowerment by education is welcome, but it has hit the family system very badly, and social media has led young women to paths which were unimaginable in the past. The old cultural values have been shattered, parents neglected, and the standard of raising kids has fallen to fathomless depths. Even the women after graduating from the seminaries are refusing to contribute to the family system and claim not to be responsible for service to the parents of their husbands. In this scenario, men have got to use their second option – to resort to a second marriage to take care of their parents. This privilege or power has to be exercised where a woman refuses to help in the chores inside a family system.
Remember, a woman’s nature is just like a horse: when a horse feels the weakness and lack of skill of the rider, it turns rebellious and throws the rider down on the earth. But if the horse feels the expert skill of the rider, it obeys humbly. This has been a common proverb in Khowar since time immemorial—that a wife measures the riding skill of her husband and acts accordingly, like a horse.
In order to maintain our traditional and cultural family system of the golden days, women have to be bridled and kept within a specific circle to get rid of their mischief. Let’s exercise the right to go to a second marriage and popularize it with rationale and explanation of the step, if the first wife shows disobedience in one way or another.
Today’s husbands are cruelly hit victims – economically and socially. Currently, husbands are under high pressure from the cost of living and are the most badly hit section of society, versus their wives. The grumblings of the wives are just tools to suppress their husbands. It is easier to live without a wife than to live with a disobedient wife.