Let women govern the country for just 365 days

In an attempt to get away from politics and the rapid pace of events in the country, I decided to watch one of Netflix’s comedy films, and my choice fell on Ladies First.

The film tells the story of a man who works as the director of a major corporation. The board forces him to have a woman join him in managing its programs, but he chooses a woman at random and treats her as though she were merely a decorative figurehead required by the funder, nothing more, ignoring every word she says. As punishment, he is transported to a parallel world ruled by women.

In my view, however, the film does not address the age-old dilemma that leads some men to regard women as unqualified or incapable of doing anything other than meeting their demands and serving them. It simply reverses the roles. In the parallel world, women behave exactly as men do, while men assume the roles traditionally assigned to women.

The men who have taken on women’s roles are shown searching for ways to seduce women instead of looking for what might make them more practical, rational, and persistent in pursuing their dream of reclaiming their positions and returning to their own world.

The film does not end with the men recognising the domineering way they have treated women. Neither the protagonist’s father, nor his sister and her husband, nor the protagonist himself, comes to understand what was wrong with his behaviour. The parallel world exists specifically as a punishment for the protagonist, while the other men who share it with him do not even realise that they, too, are being punished.

Nor does the film portray women as successful and persistent through their own identities, intellect, and experiences. Instead, they appear as though they are simply men in women’s bodies.

And this raises the question: what is the point of a woman having to put on a man’s clothes, figuratively speaking, in order to have a chance to compete and succeed? Why must she abandon herself, her femininity, and her own way of thinking in order to prove what she is capable of?

Then an idea came to me – one that some people will probably find strange and amusing.

One folk tale explaining the origin of the phrase “ladies first” claims that, during the Middle Ages, men would make women enter dangerous places first because they feared for their own lives in case something hazardous happened. To be frank, I am more inclined to believe this story than the others – not because I hate men, but because I believe in women’s capabilities.

So here is the idea: why don’t the men of our beloved country, Syria, leave this danger to us?

What would happen if they let us govern Syria for one year, for example?

I ask this in all seriousness, setting aside the previous experience of the Etilaf (the Syrian opposition coalition), where women were sometimes present because the funder demanded it, rather than because their presence reflected genuine recognition of their role.

So I return to the question: could there be a greater danger for women to be sent in first than leading a country sitting atop the burning embers of civil war and facing health, economic, and educational crises? Syria, which many activists have likened to an active minefield.

We, the women of this minefield, are offering to take it over for just one year.

What worse could happen than fuel prices rising and falling within a single month? Than a governor disregarding people’s lives for the sake of a media photo opportunity? Or a minister refusing to accept responsibility and shifting the blame onto everyone around him except himself?

What worse could happen than remnants of the old regime and political turncoats dominating the scene? Than soaring prices, falling incomes, congested streets, frequent road accidents, and the proliferation of weapons?

We could hardly be more disastrous than the disaster we are already living through. But we could change things for the better.

Throughout the years of the Syrian revolution and the war waged by the former regime against its own people, women in Syria were never absent from the scene. They managed households and communities in the absence of men who had become detainees, fugitives, or fighters. Women also led numerous solidarity and relief initiatives, participated in peacebuilding, and took part in all the various stages of the Syrian revolution: its high points and its setbacks.

So why are they being pushed aside now, just as the process of building the state begins? I believe that Syria needs the minds and expertise of all its sons and daughters. That includes women who have learned, through experience, what it means to preserve life amid destruction.

I am not exaggerating with this proposal, and I know many people will mock it. But let us live in a parallel world for 365 days.

Let the men in power take a vacation after the long war they have fought, and let women have the opportunity to govern a country emerging from one of the most difficult periods in its history.

And I am certain that many women would agree with me, and would be ready to offer this service to their country.