The recent assassination of Benazir Bhutto, the former prime minister of Pakistan, calls the attention of feminists around the globe and urges them to mourn. Bhutto was the first female prime minister of any Muslim nation and had huge plans for change. She urged moderation in a time of extremist views and was determined bring equality to women in Pakistan. She was, and still is, a role model for women everywhere. She gracefully balanced her political career with her other role, a wife and mother of three.Bhutto showed the world that women are fit for the workplace as well as the home (and don't need to chose between one or the other), but her tragic assassination shows the opposition that women face. Benazir Bhutto represented the dream that many women have, and she was giving hope to millions by paving the way. We do not know all the facts as to what happened or who killed her, but we know one thing for sure; a great leader and great hope is gone. However, determination and desire for both democracy and equality in the world remains. Her 19-year-old son has taken her place as the head of her political party and is now running in the Pakistani elections, which should be held the 8th of January. Now it is time for the rest of the world to mourn the loss and finish what the amazing woman started.
13 comments:
Its awful and selfish the way that people take others lives just because they don't agree with them,( JFK,MLKjr.,Abraham Lincoln,ect.)
she will be missed.
"She was, and still is, a role model for women everywhere."
She was no role model for women anywhere. Benazir Bhutto was courageous and charismatic but she was also appallingly corrupt and ruthless. She was no democrat either, which is why her son and her husband (Mr. 10%) are now the leaders of her party. Before she was assassinated, probably at the behest of US-backed dictator Musharraf, she was the darling of Washington DC.
Maria C.
P.S. Pakistan is not part of the Middle East
To address your points:
Pakistan is technically located in the South Asia region, but as an Islamic Republic it is more similar to the Middle Eastern countries that border it very closely, like Iran, than another bordering nation like China.
Her son was elected as leader by other members of the PPP. Her family was highly political because of their shared desire to initiate change, not create a monarchy.
The United States' relationship with Musharraf is complicated: Pakistan is a potential major political ally, but Musharraf's actions coincide less and less with the image the US wants to project. US politics have near nothing to to with the assassination of this great woman, and your "If the US gov't likes it, I don't. If the US gov't dislikes it, I like it" attitude is obstinate.
The "Islamic Republic" bit is a pretty thin reed to hang your argument on, since Iran is the only Islamic republic in the Middle East. Pakistan is an Islamic republic, too, but hardly in the same way that Iran is one, esp. in the implementation of sharia. It is unlikely that Benazir Bhutto would have ever been elected prime minister if Pakistan were an Islamic republic like Iran. Staunch Pakistani Islamists have generally opposed the PPP and the Bhuttos. You're probably confusing Islamic republic with the Arab Islamic monarchies. In any case, I think most scholars in the field would agree that history, culture, and geography all link Pakistan much more closely to neighboring India than Iran/the Middle East.
Benazir Bhutto's son was NOT elected as PPP chair, he was appointed to the position by PPP officials. You say, "Her family was highly political because of their shared desire to initiate change, not create a monarchy." Monarchy no, dynasty yes. The English language PPP web site identifies Benazir Bhutto as "The Life Chairperson - Pakistan Peoples Party." How democratic is that?
I don't think top US officials wanted Benazir Bhutto assassinated. On the contrary, I think she was being groomed to replace the current US-backed dictator, Musharraf. But it is naive, at best, for you to claim "US politics have near nothing to to with the assassination".
Where did I ever indicate, as you imply, "If the US gov't likes it, I don't. If the US gov't dislikes it, I like it"? You're quite wrong about that and you had no basis to impute such a notion to me. I didn't support Benazir Bhutto because she was ruthless and corrupt, not because she was backed by the US gov't. Although it seldom happens that the US gov't long, if ever, backs a foreign leader who is not ruthless and corrupt.
P.S. Thanks for the review of *Enchanted*.
P.P.S. It is a betrayal of core feminist principles to lionize Benazir Bhutto merely because she was a woman.
I'll admit that my knowledge of Asian politics and history is lacking, and I thank you for your reply. However, I would like to respond to the issue you raised, that Bhutto is not a role model because of her possibly corrupt politics:
Bhutto's political life was indeed filled with scandal and misconduct, and in that respect, you have changed my thinking by noting this, and I apologize for my hasty judgement of your thinking.
I feel Bhutto can still be a symbol of change and democracy, much like, say, Martin Luther King Jr. or Gandhi. While her actions both in and out of office were questionable, to many she represented, and represents, empowerment and equality.
At risk of sounding corny or contrived, and while we may agree to disagree, I would like to thank you for taking the time to express your views and engage in debate.
Thanks for your gracious reply, Marissa. Benazir Bhutto was charismatic and courageous, I said that at the outset, and the bad things she did don't detract from that. I don't expect role models/heroines to be perfect but in my personal opinion she just had too many marks in the negative column but I can certainly see where others might disagree.
In my first comment I wrote, "She was no role model for women anywhere." I still I agree with that but I could have been less stark and provocative about it. Thanks for bearing with me.
There was an interesting discussion of Bhutto at feministing.com/archives/008306.html Have you seen it?
I did see it. I was thinking of the post that said something along the lines of "one can be imperfect and still be a role model" when I wrote my reply.
Vfpdissident, you have no idea how much it heartens me to read a great debate on this blog! You are clearly knowledgable about this topic.
That being said, I disagree with you claiming that this post glorifies her for being a woman. She should be recognized as a great leader for being a role model through the reasons I listed in the post. Also, when you said that she isn't a role model to women anywhere, this is clearly not true since for as many articles or debates discussing her corruption allegations, there is one discussing how she was a role model for many.
But again, thank you for presenting an opposing view! Not only does it makes this blog better and much more interesting to read, it let's Marissa and I know that people actually read and think about what we say.
Hi Emily,
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that your post "glorifies [Bhutto] for being a woman". I was making a general statement about evaluations of Bhutto or anyone else in light of feminist thought. And when I said, "She was no role model for women anywhere" I was expressing a normative judgment. Of course, I realize that some people consider Bhutto to be a positive role model.
You and Marissa have a nice blog. In case you missed it, I said earlier that I appreciated your critique of Enchanted although I mistakenly thought Marissa had written it. Any way, that post is how I found your blog, which I've bookmarked.
I just completed a post on my blog that you and Marissa might find interesting. It's called "Women Leaders in Muslim & Christian States."
In my attempt to click to your blog I accidentally deleted your original comment! Eep! Sorry!
Nevermind, it's still there. Whew.
Post a Comment