The Motorway Rape Fiasco

Setting the Agenda:

  1. Act of rape is seldom based on sexual urges, but surely on revenge and other psychological disorders. What sexual pleasure? The offenders achieved with raping a mother of two and that too in public. If only “Sexual gratification” stands the primary goal, then it is better achieved in closed spaces, and not on the roadside. Hence, the act seems more of revenge, some disorder, as the presumed rapist (initial investigations of case support) has a track record of raping a mother and a daughter.
  2. The glamorous objectification of sexuality is constructed with almost no recourse, hence creating a sexual frustration among male and female of all age groups.
  3. The alleged rapists could have snatched the vehicle, value-able belongings, but they preferred raping her, creates suspicion.
  4. The statement of CCPO is partially correct, where he has vehemently revealed that Pakistani society has become a savage society now, especially when history tells us that usually, rape has been institutionalized e.g Mukhtaran Mai, Dr Shazia, Zainab etc. the Police, judiciary, and the State have hardly the guts to give exemplary punishment to deter crime.


  1. Now, there is a hue and cry and a strong reaction is expected from Women and Humanitarian social circles in the days to come, where men (all) would be called as rapists, molesters, patriarchal and the list go on, will create a huge gap between sexes while taking blaming-defending stances among them.
  2. In the protest demonstrations, play cards would show men as abusers and culprits with vulgar slogans and cheap publicity stunts. Men-equated with patriarchy would be portrayed as following nature (biological impulses to penetrate), while women as nurtured (accepting this penetration), which would altogether further establish this assumption. So in a fight between sexes, the “humanity” is lost
  3. A new set of doctrine would be constructed that would come in competition with the patriarchal doctrine, ultimately paving a way for a ‘confrontational doctrine’.
  4. Call for ‘culprit-hanging’ would be given applause and those who would even mildly resist such radicalization would be dealt with outrage by such fanatics.


  1. ‘Confrontational doctrine’ would become the fashion or a mode of societal acceptance. The youth would become radical in their approach. Marriage institution would be also criticized as Patriarchy yield a solution in form of early marriages to cope with the sexual frustrations. Resultantly, religion and family institutions would become obsolete or it would be restructured in the quest to achieve a humane society.
  2. The ‘Women’ taking benefit from patriarchy (majority) would resultantly lose their power in case of a patriarchal marriage dynamics, hence feminists are also not ready to include such women in their “Sister-hood dogma” they were previously direct beneficiaries of patriarchy
  3. The political doctrine of religion would jump into action (Jamat-e-Islami Women Wing etc), inviting a more strong reaction from liberal ideologies, as their slogans of the hanging of rapist in public are more acceptable with the majority revenge based mindset of people.
  4. More radicalization would develop, men and women would be compelled to stand on opposite poles which is against the law of nature.


  1. A balanced society is the need of the time, where respect and equality in all spheres must be ensured through both norms, values as well as legislation.
  2. Sexual urge is a natural urge, hence it must be channelled through consensual relationships, although the concept of “consent” need to be educated among youth, recreational activities, youth clubs, youth political socialization and participation, Art- dance performances, sports, are high need of time.
  3. The mothers in a family are the real culprits, praying/desiring for sons to secure their marriages, misogynistic socialization of their sons and later always standing on the male side to be beneficiary of patriarchy, need to get addressed. Families always stopped girls to interact with boys till they reach the age of marriage and later taught their daughters to portray their beauty to one-man and to look to his face to get praise as if she is an object of gratification. They also taught their sons to exercise patriarchy as their fathers did so. Boys need to be resocialized, but not by their patriarchal mothers, but by gender-sensitive agents of socialization.
  4. Basic life skills need to be taught to girls like self-defence. Manoeuvring the vulgar intentions of boys/ men need to be learnt. As a matter of fact, tears, cries and abuses make offenders satisfied. The more the girl cries, the more men (offender) becomes satisfied. Girls need to STOP it. Using aggressive gestures will make men (offender) insecure. A powerful representation of her space in public is the need of the time to fight this menace and in lieu of it, girl/ women-groups, bikers reflecting their visibility would counter the ideal construction of “femininity”. More movement of women in public spaces in “odd timings” will normalize the phenomena of women mobility linked with the timings and clothing.
  5. Our National curriculum needs to be revised where it has become imperative to redefine gender roles and must represent women in more powerful roles/professions. Women as embodiment of house-hold and men of public chores need to be altogether changed as it has become obsolete in combating the challenges of the current social milieu.



Latest posts by Farrah Ahmed (see all)

Facebook comments