Within societies, one’s position, whether male or female, on the social and economic ladder determines access to resources, and hence well-being. Moreover, across nations there is a great deal of evidence which suggests that countries with higher levels of economic development, industrialization and urbanization are more likely to experience greater gender equality. With an increased economic growth, there is a likelihood that gender equality will also increase . There is no denying the fact that legal structures and rules discriminate against women and need to be changed.
However, the political economy
of legal systems ensures that archaic and 
discriminatory
legal practices are maintained indefinitely .The economic and class composition
of society, protecting a particular configuration of property rights, warrants
a particular legal structure . More often than not, a change in these property
rights’ structures create change in legal structures. As such to expect
that substantial legal reforms will take place in society without a transformation
of social, economic, property and political rights is a little simplicity.
Moreover, even when the laws do exist, social and economic structures intervene.
For example, gender equality in the legal right to own property does not
guarantee gender equality in actual ownership, nor does ownership continue
to disregard laws, with many discriminatory and illegal practices being
sanctified by religion. Such values and norms which create and justify
gender bias against women are the least likely to undergo change via direct
intervention. Ancient traditions and customs survive even major economic
transformations and epochs because they are so ingrained in the social
and cultural fabric of society.
To challenge and question what are often defined as religion guidelines is perceived as betrayal of one’s religion, community and culture. When gender inequality is caused by values, norms, customs and religion, the process of change is made even more difficult and complicated. If religion or customs are responsible for, say, the seclusion or exclusion of women from the public and hence economic domain, no attempt to increase women’s involvement in public sphere will end the resulting gender bias, unless the foundations of the discriminatory practices are uprooted. Within existing social, economic and property structures this will be quite unlikely. We fail to understand about legal rights of Pakistani Muslim women. There is a silence on the right of divorcing one’s husband. Not referring to khula, but referring to women’s right to say to her husband, "I divorce you," and annul the marriage in the same manner as a man does. This was one of the basic rights of woman in the Hashimite clan, to which the Holy Prophet (PBUH) himself belonged.This is a legal right granted by the government of Pakistan under the Muslim Family Law Ordinance, 1961.
Keeping in view the society’s general ignorance of this issue, one becomes quite convinced that there is a need for speaking more about it. Fortunately, the issue was given importance by those who drafted the Muslim family law ordinance; 1976 Hence; question number 18 in every nikahnama today asks explicitly : "Has the right of divorce been delegated to the woman? If so; under what conditions? " If you are married ; you have probably seen this question in your own nikahnama. If not, just look into it. It is there . The irony is that most of people do not know about it. And those who do, are often intimidated by other. This question number 18 is infect is a safety measure, and it should be valued for that. With the passage of time feminists and women’s group have been striving for strategies to reduce gender inequality. They demand more equality and gender control over their lives, and devise opportunities and insist of policies that will improve their well- being and absolute as well as relatives status. But these initiatives must not be restricted to women alone. Just as much as women equality and greater control over their lives, So do the men; all classes. But just as poorer women suffer from a greater lack of control over their lives, so do poorer man. Thus, if control is dependent on income wealth, class or location in the social matrix, it is unlikely that this control will be achieved with addressing the material conditions which affect the extent of control. Not all women are equal and hence to speak about the problems of ‘women’ comply with the extensive differentiation between different classes of women who are affected differently by discrimination. Furthermore, the same structural differentiation in society affects men of the poorer classes equally. In fact, there may be more similarities between men and women of similar society and economic backgrounds than between member of same gender with significantly different social and economic positions. The dominant thinking, addressing the issue of gender, ignores the social and economic format of differentiation, as well as the similarities between the two genders. There can be no denying the numerous examples successful in greater equality for women at micro level. But to effectively change the positions of women in the economic and social matrix, and to increase and improve their status, what need to be dealt whit are the structures which cause the inequalities in the first place, be those economic or spiritual. Since men too are victims, though certainly to a lesser degree, of the structures of society, there is also a need of incorporate men and their role in changing the inequitable system distributes resources inequitably. Higher morbidity and mortality rates, poor health, low level of education and literacy, and a few opportunities for gainful employment are among those factors which restrict the development fulfillment of the potential of women. By any yardstick, the position of women is far worse then that of men.
The situation is different when you meet a women’s group activist whose perception is not only very vague on the issue, but to same extent, reactionary. Whenever the gender issue takes the paradigm of national stature, we face a reactionary attitude from both the sides for and against the gender equality. Any women’s activist worth her salt will waste no time in proclaiming that almost all women on earth are under man’s subjugation; ‘man who is innately aggressive, a cheat, a bully and a crook’. However, there are several men who ask, "Why are we made to feel guilty about the crimes which, in all probability , we won’t commit? It is a common notion that as women are dependent on men, they have to be modest and sky and have to seek their approval before doing anything. The men are expected to be the breadwinners, the protectors and the guardians of their respective households. These responsibilities put a heavy mental load and worry on men. And still, they are not supposed to let their tensions show by crying or complaining. And when they do not indulge in either of these things, they are accused of being insensitive. But you will realize how frustrating and emotionally draining it can be when you do not have an outlet. This is exactly what has caused the suicide rate among men to be four times higher than what it is among women . Grievances are not being addressed in this way . Instead, the chasm between the sexes continues to grow. Women, too, loose by this type of stereotyping. When they are depicted as innocent, they become less and less human and more and more mythical.
