Flaws in the brother’s action
It is true that we feel an association with our siblings and at times we find that their actions are a reflection of us. Having said that we do feel or at least we should feel something else as well
I never saw QandeelBaloch as a hero or for that matter a stalwart of women’s rights.
I however did see her as someone with a sense of humor, who didn’t take herself too seriously and as a woman she wasn’t ashamed of her sexuality which in turn paved the way for others to have confidence in being a woman.
Her ways were of course far more outspoken than what most people even of a liberal out look would be comfortable with, and in this regard one can understand why her brother would have found her actions un-agreeable. However from no stretch of imagination did her actions justify her murder at the hands of her own brother.
I find Qandeel Balouch’s brother’s action flawed at three levels.
First, I find his understanding of his relationship with his sister flawed and the duties and responsibilities arising from this relationship as being flawed as well.
It is true that we feel an association with our siblings and at times we find that their actions are a reflection of us. Having said that we do feel or at least we should feel something else as well.
We should feel a certain level of love and affection and a certain level of belonging towards our siblings, which in turn inculcates a natural sense of responsibility to protect our own.
Qandeel Balouch for obvious reasons was heavily ridiculed and judged for the choices she made and more so for belonging to a particular society in which she made those choices.
Qandeel Balouch’s brother as opposed to being protective of his sister chose to do something far more vicious and cruel to her, which even the worst of her critics may not have so much as considered.
Secondly, I find the man’s sense of logic flawed. The whole idea of ‘honour killing’ is based on the premise that for the protection of ones honour one commits murder.
Now if the act that causes dishonour has already been committed then the act of killing becomes futile. The other problem with this form of killing is that there is a presumption that the perceived promiscuity of ones sibling and for that matter the perceived chastity of ones sibling determines how honourable one is.
Although based on my logic, which may not be shared by all, our honour and dishonour is determined by the choices we make in our lives and the way we conduct ourselves in our daily affairs and the things we achieve. Generally speaking our honour is determined by what we do as opposed to what others do, no matter how closely related they are to us.
Lastly, I find flaw in the audacity of this man. Accepting the fact that he had a flawed understanding of sibling responsibilities and a flawed concept of honour his audacity to take the life of another person with complete disregard of the law and the writ of the state is in effect a slap on all members of civilised society who are not only being condemned by a fool but their fundamental right to life can very easily be breached.
In light of this I find it essential that such a flawed man be taken to task and pay for his crime as the way this man is dealt with will determine if more brothers will be killing their sisters or will they stop even though they share the same set of beliefs as Qandeel’s brother.
