Why are there so many women politicians in South Asia?

[Simfan34]

I always assumed it related to the strength of political dynasties and their corresponding ability to appoint family members as leaders regardless of prevailing social attitudes- hence why all have had female heads of government- but reflecting on women like Jayalalitha and Mayawati who belong to no dynasty, it clearly can't be just that. So why is this so, in a region not associated with particularly progressive views on the role of women in society?

[Famous Mortimer]

Jayalalitha and Mayawati both got their start as mistresses of male politicians.

[moderatevoter]

With a lot of prominent women, such as Benazir Bhutto in Pakistan and Indira Gandhi in India, it was definitely the dynastic factor.

The Bhutto family history is kind of interesting. After Zia overthrew Bhutto's government, his two sons went into exile and started Al-Zulfiqar, a militant group which hijacked Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) planes, etc. After Zia mysteriously died, Murtaza Bhutto challenged his sister to take their father's mantel at the top of the Pakistan People's Party (PPP) -- with a major sticking point being the tactics they were willing to use. However, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto had wanted Benazir to "inherit" the party all along. Murtaza Bhutto was frequently a thorn in his sister and his brother-in-law's side -- and we all know how that turned out.

Of course, clerics and some within the military tried to undermine Bhutto when she was Prime Minister, and many suggested she make her husband Prime Minister instead. So not everyone was willing to accept a female head of government.

In the Pakistani Parliament, 70 seats are reserved for women and religious minorities, and more women are getting elected in their own right to seats. However, a lot of these women come from wealthy or prominent families (even if it's not purely the dynasty factor).

I wouldn't say that Pakistan and Bangladesh have particularly progressive views on the role of women in society, but I'd also argue that both are more liberal than Saudi Arabia and other Islamic countries, for example.

[politicus]

I wouldn't say that Pakistan and Bangladesh have particularly progressive views on the role of women in society, but I'd also argue that both are more liberal than Saudi Arabia and other Islamic countries, for example.

http://www.indiatimes.com/news/world/pakistan-is-the-second-worst-country-in-the-world-for-women-228698.html

[jaichind]

Jayalalitha and Mayawati both got their start as mistresses of male politicians.

True for Jayalalitha.   But CM of WB Mamata Banerjee mostly made it on her own and Mayawati's power base mostly overshadowed Kanshi Ram by the mid 1990s.  Also the weather Mayawati was Kanshi Ram's mistress is still under dispute. 

I tend to think women had made if further in South Asian politics exactly because of the relatively lower status of women in society.  It makes them less threatening to the existing social structure and could double as way to capture the women vote.   So the dynastic women politician are perfect for this situation where they can cement the old political and social blocs of their father or husbands,  not be a threat to the existing social order, and bring in the women vote all at the same time.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Family thing.