Hard knocks
MISOGYNISTIC MEDIA
Muna Khan
Published August 24, 2025
DAWN
The writer is a journalism instructor.
THERE’S a lot that is wrong with the media but let’s take a moment to be grateful for the English press not having a sordid tabloid side to it. I’ve heard about acts like inappropriate images of Benazir Bhutto and Nusrat Bhutto being thrown from planes which, I’m told, weren’t widely reported in the English press. The Urdu press is another beast, and now social media is the new tabloid magazine. I’m grateful this paper’s website calls out all forms of misogyny against celebrities and politicians, but of course we have a long way to go.
Misogyny is so deeply ingrained that I’m always surprised when I hear women spew hatred at Malala Yousufzai, Sharmeen Obaid and Maryam Nawaz — this axis seems to get under everyone’s skin. Patriarchy has no gender as the feminist bell hooks [sic] wrote.
Tabloid culture is alive and well and flying the flag high for misogyny in the West. I was reminded of this while watching the newly released two episodes of The Twisted Tale of Amanda Knox. You may remember the story of the American student charged with the sexual assault and murder of her roommate Meredith Kercher in Italy in 2007.
She was convicted in 2007 and then acquitted in 2011 as was her boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito. They were retried in 2011 and convicted again before being acquitted by the supreme court a year later.
What is ‘reclaiming your story’ about?
Sollecito did not garner the kind of media frenzy Amanda did because — you guessed it — misogyny. Tabloids had a field day calling her ‘Foxy Knoxy’ and painting her as a sexual deviant. I watched the two episodes because I was curious as to why this story was being dredged up again. Hasn’t it all been written, televised, pod-casted, Vlogged, already?
It turns out that Amanda Knox is behind this project and wants to reclaim her story. She is one of the producers as is Monica Lewinsky, the former White House intern who nearly brought down Bill Clinton’s presidency. She too has been the subject of many documentaries and wants to reclaim her narrative, ie, recreate her ‘brand’.
What happens to other people’s perspective when you are reclaiming your story? Is it fair to Meredith and her family; is Amanda profiting from this terrible thing that happened to Kercher and also her? And, what is this ‘reclaiming your story’ about? I keep seeing this all over social media with influencer types telling you to change your narrative. Is it helpful — ie, stop playing the victim — or could it send you down a harmful path where you stay in a state of victimhood, unable to break a cycle of negativity?
Since I began teaching at university-level almost nine years ago, I’ve noticed two things: one, it’s someone else’s fault I’m late, unable to do the assignment, not interested in being here, etc. The second is the inability to apologise, which ties into holding oneself accountable. This, unfortunately, isn’t limited to students. A driver banging into your car will not say sorry, nor will the restaurant who serves you unhygienic food, and you can forget about that Vlogger selling you lies. You have to demand apologies now and you may not get them.
To return to Amanda Knox’s new show — she has every right to tell her story because she has always maintained her innocence and wants to clear her name. We learn as much about her naivete as we do about the Italian justice system’s desperation to pin the blame on someone, as well as how media framing can drive narratives. Perhaps the most brutal lesson was that ultimately Amanda had the money to make this TV series which I’m guessing Kercher’s family did not. Justice is not blind.
Reclaiming your narrative is a powerful tool in the context of marginalised voices whose stories rarely get told. I don’t really care that rich white women, wronged by their systems, are using it to set the record straight, but it is upsetting that theirs are the only stories that get the airtime they do. There’s a renewed interest in JFK Jr who is the subject of a documentary and docudrama, 26 years after his death.
Has Hollywood run out of stories? I know we love to depict women as damsels in distress but every now and again we try to break that mould.
Whose stories get told in Pakistan and whose voices are suppressed? Your first thought will likely go towards political parties currently out of favour. Let me remind you how when they were in power, they repressed voices. When they return — and we know they will shamelessly bend the knee — they will repress again. I’d love to see the cycle break but I doubt it will so I channel my energy watching bad TV shows. So you don’t have to.
X: LeadingLady
Published in Dawn, August 24th, 2025
THERE’S a lot that is wrong with the media but let’s take a moment to be grateful for the English press not having a sordid tabloid side to it. I’ve heard about acts like inappropriate images of Benazir Bhutto and Nusrat Bhutto being thrown from planes which, I’m told, weren’t widely reported in the English press. The Urdu press is another beast, and now social media is the new tabloid magazine. I’m grateful this paper’s website calls out all forms of misogyny against celebrities and politicians, but of course we have a long way to go.
Misogyny is so deeply ingrained that I’m always surprised when I hear women spew hatred at Malala Yousufzai, Sharmeen Obaid and Maryam Nawaz — this axis seems to get under everyone’s skin. Patriarchy has no gender as the feminist bell hooks [sic] wrote.
Tabloid culture is alive and well and flying the flag high for misogyny in the West. I was reminded of this while watching the newly released two episodes of The Twisted Tale of Amanda Knox. You may remember the story of the American student charged with the sexual assault and murder of her roommate Meredith Kercher in Italy in 2007.
She was convicted in 2007 and then acquitted in 2011 as was her boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito. They were retried in 2011 and convicted again before being acquitted by the supreme court a year later.
What is ‘reclaiming your story’ about?
Sollecito did not garner the kind of media frenzy Amanda did because — you guessed it — misogyny. Tabloids had a field day calling her ‘Foxy Knoxy’ and painting her as a sexual deviant. I watched the two episodes because I was curious as to why this story was being dredged up again. Hasn’t it all been written, televised, pod-casted, Vlogged, already?
It turns out that Amanda Knox is behind this project and wants to reclaim her story. She is one of the producers as is Monica Lewinsky, the former White House intern who nearly brought down Bill Clinton’s presidency. She too has been the subject of many documentaries and wants to reclaim her narrative, ie, recreate her ‘brand’.
What happens to other people’s perspective when you are reclaiming your story? Is it fair to Meredith and her family; is Amanda profiting from this terrible thing that happened to Kercher and also her? And, what is this ‘reclaiming your story’ about? I keep seeing this all over social media with influencer types telling you to change your narrative. Is it helpful — ie, stop playing the victim — or could it send you down a harmful path where you stay in a state of victimhood, unable to break a cycle of negativity?
Since I began teaching at university-level almost nine years ago, I’ve noticed two things: one, it’s someone else’s fault I’m late, unable to do the assignment, not interested in being here, etc. The second is the inability to apologise, which ties into holding oneself accountable. This, unfortunately, isn’t limited to students. A driver banging into your car will not say sorry, nor will the restaurant who serves you unhygienic food, and you can forget about that Vlogger selling you lies. You have to demand apologies now and you may not get them.
To return to Amanda Knox’s new show — she has every right to tell her story because she has always maintained her innocence and wants to clear her name. We learn as much about her naivete as we do about the Italian justice system’s desperation to pin the blame on someone, as well as how media framing can drive narratives. Perhaps the most brutal lesson was that ultimately Amanda had the money to make this TV series which I’m guessing Kercher’s family did not. Justice is not blind.
Reclaiming your narrative is a powerful tool in the context of marginalised voices whose stories rarely get told. I don’t really care that rich white women, wronged by their systems, are using it to set the record straight, but it is upsetting that theirs are the only stories that get the airtime they do. There’s a renewed interest in JFK Jr who is the subject of a documentary and docudrama, 26 years after his death.
Has Hollywood run out of stories? I know we love to depict women as damsels in distress but every now and again we try to break that mould.
Whose stories get told in Pakistan and whose voices are suppressed? Your first thought will likely go towards political parties currently out of favour. Let me remind you how when they were in power, they repressed voices. When they return — and we know they will shamelessly bend the knee — they will repress again. I’d love to see the cycle break but I doubt it will so I channel my energy watching bad TV shows. So you don’t have to.
X: LeadingLady
Published in Dawn, August 24th, 2025
Token feminism in development
WOMEN in Pakistan constitute 48.5 per cent of the population but face systemic disadvantages in education, healthcare and economic participation. To realise the country’s full potential, increasing women’s economic participation is critical.
Pakistan hit rock bottom in the World Economic Forum’s 2025 Global Gender Gap Index out of 148 countries, with 56.7pc gender parity; it has closed only 2.3pc of the gap since 2006. It ranks below Sudan, Chad, Iran, Guinea and Congo. In South Asia, Bangladesh holds the 24th position, demonstrating a far more favourable gender equality landscape. This is the second year in a row that Pakistan’s gender parity score has declined.
This alone is a damning indictment of the little progress made — despite millions being poured into gender equality initiatives by international development agencies. However, the deeper problem is not lack of funding, but the misuse of a noble narrative to justify wasteful development programming. It should lead to deep introspection about why gender equality efforts keep failing.
Take, for example, the Asian Development Bank’s (ADB) initiative with Pakistan’s National Transmission and Despatch Company to increase female participation in technical and leadership roles.
A $182,000 technical assistance grant — part of the broader Power Transmission Enhancement Investment Programme — was awarded to support ‘gender mainstreaming’ through drafting a workplace gender policy, training 20pc of female staff and auditing an internship programme. This reads more like an HR department’s annual plan than a serious development intervention. Any functional organisation with a competent HR team can perform such tasks.
So why is our ailing power sector the testing ground for gender experiments scripted in distant multilateral offices?
The broader problem is a development culture that rewards symbolism over substance.
This is not an isolated case. ADB partnered with the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) to develop a Women Entrepreneurs Finance Code under a Women-Inclusive Financial Sector Development Programme funded through a $5.5m grant and $150m loan.
In June 2025, another $350m loan was approved to support women’s access to finance and provide credit to women-led micro SMEs. The code, launched with fanfare, is merely a declaration of intent to close financing gaps by designating a leader to monitor data and introduce targets.
While gender-responsive finance is a valid policy goal, was this multimillion-dollar donor intervention truly necessary when the SBP already has the legal mandate, institutional capacity and technical expertise to design such policies? Or is this just donor funding chasing headlines, not solutions?
Has the central bank run out of ideas to promote financial inclusion, which it championed until a decade ago when the Economist Intelligence Unit rated Pakistan’s microfinance regulatory framework the best in the world in 2010 and 2011, and the third best in 2013 and 2014? Either way, such supply-driven initiatives only weaken state institutions.
ADB has been involved in Pakistan’s financial sector since 2000, when it launched a $150m microfinance sector development programme to provide financial services to the poor, especially women. The World Bank is also actively involved in gender empowerment projects, focusing on education, economic participation and access to finance.
In March this year, the World Bank approved a $102m loan to enhance access to microcredit and support the resilience of the microfinance sector. ADB and World Bank have extended loans for the same purpose for over 25 years. Similarly, bilateral donors continue to fund gender empowerment initiatives. The UK’s FCDO-owned Karandaaz also invests in profitable banks and established corporates to increase access to SME finance, including for women entrepreneurs.
This unneeded donor exuberance in Pakistan’s most profitable financial sector underscores a lack of interest in addressing core development challenges. These initiatives mainly advance the careers and networks of donor staff, consultants and local counterparts. There is clearly a problem when aid becomes a lucrative industry. It absolves the government of its responsibility to work for the welfare of its citizens. This aid addiction — fostered by international donors — has contributed to institutional decay, economic stagnation and insurmountable debt.
In fact, the actual outcomes of donor programmes implemented over the past decades show deteriorating trends. Pakistan’s credit-to-GDP ratio fell from 27pc in 2008 to 9pc in 2024 — the lowest among emerging countries. Credit remains concentrated in large corporates, with nearly 70pc allocated to manufacturing.
This reflects banks’ disconnect from the broader economy as well as the ineffectiveness of SBP regulation and donor involvement in the financial sector. More troubling is the steady decline in SMEs’ access to finance; their share of total private sector credit dropped from 17pc in the mid-2000s to just 6pc in 2024. The number of SME borrowers also declined from 185,000 in 2007 to 172,000 in 2024. Most financing is directed towards medium enterprises.
The broader problem is a development culture that rewards symbolism over substance. Pakistan’s addiction to foreign aid has fostered a policy environment where any externally funded programme is welcomed without scrutiny. Frivolous projects are designed to please donors, not solve real problems, reflecting waste and abuse. Whether in foreign-funded tax reforms, energy sector financial sustainability projects, or gender mainstreaming campaigns, the pattern is consistent: poor design, poor results.
Tragically, these projects are celebrated with MoUs, photo-ops, and social media hype, while the women they claim to empower remain invisible. This isn’t just inefficient — it’s unethical. Tokenism empowers donor staff, consultants and policymakers, not women; it reduces gender equality to a funding checkbox. Worse, they hide behind bizarre buzzwords like ‘gender-responsive climate finance’ or ‘gender-transformative value chains’ — jargon-masking emptiness.
We must not confuse real gender empowerment with bureaucratic parody. Genuine change means women’s access to education and healthcare, legal rights (especially inheritance), protection from violence, and more women in the workforce — not elite seminars, lavish launches, or pricey consultants churning out reports that nobody reads. Pakistan needs genuine reforms, not donor-driven theatre. And it is time we start calling out the phoney feminism that masquerades as development.
The writer is the author of The Shady Economics of International Aid. He is a former senior adviser of the IMF and ex-chief economist of the SBP.
dr.saeedahmed1@hotmail.com
Published in Dawn, August 22nd, 2025
Published August 22, 2025
DAWN
WOMEN in Pakistan constitute 48.5 per cent of the population but face systemic disadvantages in education, healthcare and economic participation. To realise the country’s full potential, increasing women’s economic participation is critical.
Pakistan hit rock bottom in the World Economic Forum’s 2025 Global Gender Gap Index out of 148 countries, with 56.7pc gender parity; it has closed only 2.3pc of the gap since 2006. It ranks below Sudan, Chad, Iran, Guinea and Congo. In South Asia, Bangladesh holds the 24th position, demonstrating a far more favourable gender equality landscape. This is the second year in a row that Pakistan’s gender parity score has declined.
This alone is a damning indictment of the little progress made — despite millions being poured into gender equality initiatives by international development agencies. However, the deeper problem is not lack of funding, but the misuse of a noble narrative to justify wasteful development programming. It should lead to deep introspection about why gender equality efforts keep failing.
Take, for example, the Asian Development Bank’s (ADB) initiative with Pakistan’s National Transmission and Despatch Company to increase female participation in technical and leadership roles.
A $182,000 technical assistance grant — part of the broader Power Transmission Enhancement Investment Programme — was awarded to support ‘gender mainstreaming’ through drafting a workplace gender policy, training 20pc of female staff and auditing an internship programme. This reads more like an HR department’s annual plan than a serious development intervention. Any functional organisation with a competent HR team can perform such tasks.
So why is our ailing power sector the testing ground for gender experiments scripted in distant multilateral offices?
The broader problem is a development culture that rewards symbolism over substance.
This is not an isolated case. ADB partnered with the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) to develop a Women Entrepreneurs Finance Code under a Women-Inclusive Financial Sector Development Programme funded through a $5.5m grant and $150m loan.
In June 2025, another $350m loan was approved to support women’s access to finance and provide credit to women-led micro SMEs. The code, launched with fanfare, is merely a declaration of intent to close financing gaps by designating a leader to monitor data and introduce targets.
While gender-responsive finance is a valid policy goal, was this multimillion-dollar donor intervention truly necessary when the SBP already has the legal mandate, institutional capacity and technical expertise to design such policies? Or is this just donor funding chasing headlines, not solutions?
Has the central bank run out of ideas to promote financial inclusion, which it championed until a decade ago when the Economist Intelligence Unit rated Pakistan’s microfinance regulatory framework the best in the world in 2010 and 2011, and the third best in 2013 and 2014? Either way, such supply-driven initiatives only weaken state institutions.
ADB has been involved in Pakistan’s financial sector since 2000, when it launched a $150m microfinance sector development programme to provide financial services to the poor, especially women. The World Bank is also actively involved in gender empowerment projects, focusing on education, economic participation and access to finance.
In March this year, the World Bank approved a $102m loan to enhance access to microcredit and support the resilience of the microfinance sector. ADB and World Bank have extended loans for the same purpose for over 25 years. Similarly, bilateral donors continue to fund gender empowerment initiatives. The UK’s FCDO-owned Karandaaz also invests in profitable banks and established corporates to increase access to SME finance, including for women entrepreneurs.
This unneeded donor exuberance in Pakistan’s most profitable financial sector underscores a lack of interest in addressing core development challenges. These initiatives mainly advance the careers and networks of donor staff, consultants and local counterparts. There is clearly a problem when aid becomes a lucrative industry. It absolves the government of its responsibility to work for the welfare of its citizens. This aid addiction — fostered by international donors — has contributed to institutional decay, economic stagnation and insurmountable debt.
In fact, the actual outcomes of donor programmes implemented over the past decades show deteriorating trends. Pakistan’s credit-to-GDP ratio fell from 27pc in 2008 to 9pc in 2024 — the lowest among emerging countries. Credit remains concentrated in large corporates, with nearly 70pc allocated to manufacturing.
This reflects banks’ disconnect from the broader economy as well as the ineffectiveness of SBP regulation and donor involvement in the financial sector. More troubling is the steady decline in SMEs’ access to finance; their share of total private sector credit dropped from 17pc in the mid-2000s to just 6pc in 2024. The number of SME borrowers also declined from 185,000 in 2007 to 172,000 in 2024. Most financing is directed towards medium enterprises.
The broader problem is a development culture that rewards symbolism over substance. Pakistan’s addiction to foreign aid has fostered a policy environment where any externally funded programme is welcomed without scrutiny. Frivolous projects are designed to please donors, not solve real problems, reflecting waste and abuse. Whether in foreign-funded tax reforms, energy sector financial sustainability projects, or gender mainstreaming campaigns, the pattern is consistent: poor design, poor results.
Tragically, these projects are celebrated with MoUs, photo-ops, and social media hype, while the women they claim to empower remain invisible. This isn’t just inefficient — it’s unethical. Tokenism empowers donor staff, consultants and policymakers, not women; it reduces gender equality to a funding checkbox. Worse, they hide behind bizarre buzzwords like ‘gender-responsive climate finance’ or ‘gender-transformative value chains’ — jargon-masking emptiness.
We must not confuse real gender empowerment with bureaucratic parody. Genuine change means women’s access to education and healthcare, legal rights (especially inheritance), protection from violence, and more women in the workforce — not elite seminars, lavish launches, or pricey consultants churning out reports that nobody reads. Pakistan needs genuine reforms, not donor-driven theatre. And it is time we start calling out the phoney feminism that masquerades as development.
The writer is the author of The Shady Economics of International Aid. He is a former senior adviser of the IMF and ex-chief economist of the SBP.
dr.saeedahmed1@hotmail.com
Published in Dawn, August 22nd, 2025
Olympic champion Imane Khelif denies ‘malicious’ claims of retirement
Reuters
Reuters
Published August 21, 2025
Olympic boxing champion Imane Khelif has denied claims made by her former manager that she has retired from the sport, saying she is still training regularly.
Algerian Khelif and Taiwan’s Lin Yu-ting were in the spotlight at the Paris Games last year over their eligibility after they had been disqualified from the 2023 World Championships by the IBA, which said sex chromosome tests had ruled them ineligible.
However, they competed in the women’s category in Paris after being cleared by the International Olympic Committee, with both winning gold medals in their weight classes.
Khelif has not competed since her win in Paris.
In an interview with French newspaper Nice-Matin on Wednesday, Khelif’s former manager Nasser Yesfah said she had “left the world of boxing”.
In a follow-up interview with the same newspaper hours later, Yesfah clarified he was only referring to Khelif’s boxing commitments in the city of Nice, where she was previously part of the Nice Azur club.
Khelif criticised Yesfah’s comments in a post on Facebook on Wednesday.
“It is based solely on statements made by a person who no longer represents me in any way, and whom I consider to have betrayed my trust and my country with his false and malicious statements,” Khelif wrote.
“I have never announced my retirement from boxing. I remain committed to my sporting career, training regularly and maintaining my physical fitness between Algeria and Qatar in preparation for upcoming events.
“The publication of such rumours is intended solely to disrupt and damage my sporting and professional career.”
Khelif had been due to compete in a World Boxing tournament in the Netherlands in June, but opted to skip it shortly after the governing body initially announced its plans to introduce sex testing for all boxers in its competitions.
World Boxing president Boris van der Vorst later apologised after Khelif was named in their announcement on mandatory sex testing, saying her privacy should have been protected.
Khelif, 26, has repeatedly said she was born a woman and has a long history in female boxing competitions. In March, she said she would defend her title at the 2028 Los Angeles Games.
Olympic boxing champion Imane Khelif has denied claims made by her former manager that she has retired from the sport, saying she is still training regularly.
Algerian Khelif and Taiwan’s Lin Yu-ting were in the spotlight at the Paris Games last year over their eligibility after they had been disqualified from the 2023 World Championships by the IBA, which said sex chromosome tests had ruled them ineligible.
However, they competed in the women’s category in Paris after being cleared by the International Olympic Committee, with both winning gold medals in their weight classes.
Khelif has not competed since her win in Paris.
In an interview with French newspaper Nice-Matin on Wednesday, Khelif’s former manager Nasser Yesfah said she had “left the world of boxing”.
In a follow-up interview with the same newspaper hours later, Yesfah clarified he was only referring to Khelif’s boxing commitments in the city of Nice, where she was previously part of the Nice Azur club.
Khelif criticised Yesfah’s comments in a post on Facebook on Wednesday.
“It is based solely on statements made by a person who no longer represents me in any way, and whom I consider to have betrayed my trust and my country with his false and malicious statements,” Khelif wrote.
“I have never announced my retirement from boxing. I remain committed to my sporting career, training regularly and maintaining my physical fitness between Algeria and Qatar in preparation for upcoming events.
“The publication of such rumours is intended solely to disrupt and damage my sporting and professional career.”
Khelif had been due to compete in a World Boxing tournament in the Netherlands in June, but opted to skip it shortly after the governing body initially announced its plans to introduce sex testing for all boxers in its competitions.
World Boxing president Boris van der Vorst later apologised after Khelif was named in their announcement on mandatory sex testing, saying her privacy should have been protected.
Khelif, 26, has repeatedly said she was born a woman and has a long history in female boxing competitions. In March, she said she would defend her title at the 2028 Los Angeles Games.
No comments:
Post a Comment