Had the multi-party conference not stolen the limelight, the motorway rape story might still have been catalysing the national debate. The shock and dismay may someday turn into an effective public demand for fundamental changes in social and judicial institutions.

There has been scathing critique of misogyny in law enforcement agencies. The hope is that it can morph into a vigorous demand for the overhauling of the policing system and the ineffective criminal justice system.

The reaction to the rape incident was quite predictable. A senior police officer faulted the victim for lowering her guard. Many people called for a summary trial of the case and exemplary punishment (some would not settle for anything short of public hanging) for the culprits. The government showed its eagerness for exemplary punishment but also mentioned that Pakistan is a signatory to international treaties on capital punishment. A compromise of sorts it hinted at was chemical castration of the culprit.

While the debate highlighted various aspects of the problem, most people agreed that rape incidents were an indicator of a general decay in moral values. Some of the most cited reasons were immodest dressing, co-education, greater access to communication by mobile phone and the high cost of marriage.

These explanations are backed by data to varying degrees. It was argued that finding a life partner is not difficult in the societies where per capita income is high. There is reason therefore to expect fewer rape incidents in high-income countries. However, data do not support the proposition.

According to the World Population Review cross-country data, rape rates are the highest in the upper-middle-income countries (15.4 per 100,000 people), followed by lower-middle-income countries (14.9 incidents per 100,000 people) and high-income countries (11.7 incidents per 100,000 people). Rape is relatively rare in low-income countries (1.21 incidents per 100,000 people). With 63.5 incidents per 100,000 people, Sweden tops the developed world in terms of rape cases.

As regards the association between having no life-partner because of the high cost of marriage and a culture of sexual abuse, it is argued that young men have to work for more years before they have sufficient means to shoulder their marital responsibilities. Consequently, having no life partner at the right time leads to a culture of sexual abuse. Data show that rape rates in the countries where the mean age of men at the first marriage is above 30 is double the rates in the countries where age at first marriage is less than 26. The data, in fact, supports the hypothesis that delaying the marriage for long may increase the number of rape incidents.

In popular Pakistani imagination, lax sexual values promote the culture of sexual abuse. In other words, the absence of strict government oversight leads to an increase in rape cases. Gen Zia’s flogging of culprits of sexual crimes is often cited as the only possible deterrent against sexual crime. Data contradicts this view.

Rape rates in countries where prostitution is illegal are nearly double those where prostitution is legal. According to World Population Review data, countries where prostitution is legal, have rape rates around 9.63 incidents per 100,000 individuals, but the countries where prostitution is illegal, the rape rate is around 20 incidents per 100,000.

Some rights groups have called the motorway rape incident a result of embedded patriarchy in Pakistan. Patriarchy is often poorly understood in Pakistan and sometimes confused with male-headed households.

According to one feminist theory, patriarchy is caused by biological differences between men and women. For example, women bear children, while men do not. Male control over women’s sexuality and reproductive functions is the fundamental cause of patriarchy, which in turn leads to women’s oppression. The patriarchal system oppresses women by denying women control over their bodies. It is in this context that the feminist slogan “my body, my choice” needs to be understood.

Gen Zia’s flogging of culprits of sexual crime is often cited as the only possible deterrent against sexual crime. Data contradicts this claim.

Competing theories of patriarchy vary in nuances. A biological theory suggests that sexual conflicts of interest underlying patriarchy precede the emergence of the human species. The amount of testosterone produced in male body holds the key to understanding sexual coercion. The hormone increases the risk-taking behaviour and can, in turn, determine one’s social status.

Women’s biology is considered better suited to an anonymous child-rearing role. This results in a sex-based division of labour. An essential part of biological theory, Bateman’s principle, suggests that women prefer men who control more resources because that assures their welfare as well as that of their offspring. As a consequence, there is an evolutionary pressure on the males to compete with one another to maximise resources and power. In turn, this leads to men’s dominance in the society.

Sociological theories reject biological explanations and suggest that the socialisation processes are primarily responsible for dividing gendered roles. People develop gender biases, which are perpetuated across generations by those who benefit from them. For example, the claim that women cannot make rational decisions is used to deny women space in decision-making.

Psychoanalytic theories suggest that it is erroneous to consider patriarchy as male domination. Patriarchy is, in fact, the rule of the father. Patriarchy, in this sense, is an expression of power, which depends on age and gender. The pressure of older men over women, children, and young men is a relevant example. It was in this context that Marx observed that family contained within itself the seeds of antagonism against women which later spreads across society. Therefore, the way to get rid of patriarchy is to uproot the basic social organization: the biological family.

Many people in Pakistan suspect that there is some sinister, hidden and diabolical agenda at work to destroy the family system. It is alleged that TV dramas routinely project households with the problems of extra marital relationships for a reason. Is this a subtle effort to convince the people that the institution of marriage is unfeasible and having extramarital relationships should be accepted as a social norm?

Ignoring the subtleties of patriarchy and confusing patriarchy with male-headed family structure often leads to a flawed prognosis of sexual abuse and the framing of a contradictory narrative. An evolving feature of the dominant narrative, as shown by the protest of the rights group after the motorway tragedy, is that most men should be feared as potential rapists. An important demand of the rights groups is that the male family members should not put any constraint on the movement of the female family members. In other words, the male family members should have no say in the affairs of the women in the world populated by perverts and rapists. Seen against the backdrop of the abject failure of the state, the failure of the male family members to provide a modicum of protection would put vulnerable women between the proverbial rock and a hard place.

The solution lies in a better understanding of the forces that generate and perpetuate the culture of sexual violence against women. Maligning any sex is the least helpful strategy in this situation. Presence of strong, effective, and responsive institutions is a precondition for a reduction in the incidents of rape.

The writer is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Economics at COMSATS University Islamabad, Lahore Campus