One would likely get dismissed for suggesting that African parents ‘spoil their kids’ as much if not more than their Western counterparts. I’ve said as much on occasion and gotten reactions like: “How can you even think that? No, we are very strict; our kids don’t talk back and won’t engage is bold displays of PDA etc. Of course we don’t spoil kids”. To us, what make kids spoiled is their “laziness”. As an uncle tried to illustrate how spoiled American kids are he said “they’ve never had to carry water on their heads nor do they know how to cook… only take out here and there… those ones don’t even know how to wash their clothes? They’re spoiled”.That’s how I grew up understanding what being spoiled is. Basically someone who had every basic need supplied and someone who can’t handle/won’t do menial work.I would like to note that this definition of spoiled is straight out of “suffer mentality”. A by-product of colonialism and unhealed trauma. Because why else would we herald the doing of menial workthe as epitome of being hardworking when the reason we do those things on our own is born more out of lack than choice? But we’ll discuss that on a different day. Let’s stick to how African parents are spoiling their own kids, because there’s more than one way to spoil a child. If you know me, you know youth work is my heart-work. I work with young people regularly and regard youth development- the changing of young minds and investing in their capacities as the most sustainable form of development. My experience as a youth-worker and teacher have inspired me to write time and time again about how the way we are raising and educating young Cameroonians is at the root of many of our problems. But it’s worth repeating in a different manner, so in this piece, I want to argue that the way we are raising children sets them up for failure and that the only way to survive and thrive in the same society requires rebelling at some point of your life. To support this argument, I’m using examples from my work with young people and my own life. Recently, in a group, I’m a part of, the discussion turned to the laziness of young Cameroonians. This person who used ‘laziness’ in the way my uncle had once used ‘laziness’ to refer to American kids said of our own: “They can’t do google searches, they want to be spoon-fed all info, why would a university graduate not be able to put a CV together. Why don’t they know how to use their email? They are lazy…”I contradicted them in the group. I said not quite. Young Cameroonians aren’t lazy. They are often hardworking at what you valued while raising them; such as whether or not they know how to cook Koki well and how they serve as their parents’ assistants with most of them babysitting their younger siblings since the age of seven (7). They bend down, unlike the Aje-butta children. So, I insisted, they are hardworking- hard being the operative word. And I continued; acknowledging that what the complainer is criticizing is how our youth lack intuitive soft skills, why they lack individuality, creativity and the capacity to think out of the box. Well, I said, that is because you raised them to fit into the box, to aspire after the belonging in the box and remote possibility of at some point being at the top but in the box. We were raised not to question; it was rude to ask why I was to call someone I am not related to “uncle” or “aunty”. For young women, it was unladylike to fraternize with men and we came to associate being outgoing with being “cheap”. We were to be home immediately after school, no extracurricular activities- except the extracurricular activities were picking stones from rice to be cooked in the evening or learning how to bake and braid hair like a good girl; the boys maybe got to play football. We were raised in houses that have ‘adult parlours’ and children parlours’ – a generational gap obvious within our own homes; yet, now as a graduate networking skills are valued and the majority of those raised as such can barely engage in constructive conversations with senior colleagues and partners in professional spaces. We can bemoan the fact that our young people are not enterprising and proactive enough, that they require direction for everything and have gone through school just memorizing without applying what they learned; but in doing so we likewise must acknowledge the role of how we raised them- with a lack of freedom of expression, restriction on their authentic being and more which led to this dependency. We must acknowledge how our thinking kids should listen but not be heard contributes to their current inability to self-lead… We must ask ourselves: how many kids know the details of their parents’ jobs, how often did kids see their parents read or hear them talk about their work to understand what they do?” And what did we really expect when kids go on school holidays only to be shuffled to ‘holiday classes’ to prepare for the next academic year? No extracurricular even on vacation, just preparing them to be better conformists. An example… In 2021 I led the organizing of a workshop for adolescent activists (though their ages ranged from 16-22) in Yaoundé. Participants were to come from all over the country and have their parents sign consent forms. Several couldn’t make it to the fully-funded opportunity because how dare I think of having a 16-year-old take the bus from Bamenda to come lodge at a Catholic rest house in Yaoundé for 3 days and it would mean missing a day of school. Those who could make it are those who could already advocate for themselves or those who had no strict parents or those who lied/omitted the
Of Poems & My Writing Journey…
Today, I’m thinking of the fact that writing no longer comes easy to me. I no longer feel as excited about penning down my thoughts as I once did. I published my first book in 2010- a poetry collection- and I thought I would be writing steadily since then. I imagined I would have published more fiction and poetry collections by now. But over a decade later, I have written a great deal- more what I have to than what I want to… and the next book is going to likely be an academic monograph. I’ve changed as a writer. The wounds I have felt as a person have healed but left scars on my writing hand that make it hard to write; experiences have both sharpened my writing voice as well as left me less driven to share it. Today as I struggle to think of what to write, and who I am as a writer, I think of my poetry. The very first things I wrote were poems. Poetry- the exercise of expressing the most feeling/thought in the least amount of words possible… using imagery-infused words to paint the canvas of the readers’ heart with empathy… it is poetry that has best evidenced my being a writer over the years, and it is with poetry that I attempt to explain why I am struggling to write, struggling to believe in my writing again today.
An Antithesis of Popular “Inspirational” adages
One of my vivid childhood memories is of the day I learned the importance of knowing and understanding what you’re saying/singing. I was roughly ten years old and singing the infamous chorus of Lady Marmalade (remix with Missy, Mya, Pink, etc. of course) when my uncle nearly knocked down the bathroom door demanding I come outside and sing those raunchy lyrics to his face. As I did, I realized I didn’t quite know what I was singing. The song just sounded nice. Since then, I’ve been a stickler for comprehending and appreciating the lyrics as much – if not more- than the melody.Years later, I’m beginning to apply that same idea to the seemingly ‘motivational’ or ‘didactic’ quotes we were raised with and continue to throw around these days – especially framed in graphics and shared on social media. I have found that too many of these statements that ‘sound nice’ are products of bias, instruments of harmful socialization that reinforce unhealthy thinking and lie at the root of a lot of toxic behaviour.In this post, I’ll be flipping the script on five common adages and offering an antithesis of them. It’s fine if you cannot say something nice, but do be honest.If you’re like me, you were raised on the adage, “if you can’t say something nice, say nothing at all”. This indoctrination may sound like a good one on the surface, but as we grow older we realize just how hypocritical forced and momentary niceness really is. Please note, as others have, the difference between niceness and kindness. While being ‘nice’ [which is defined as “pleasing, agreeable, delightful”] may require one to be silent in if one cannot be polite and agreeable; being kind [which comes from the heart] will require that one be honest rather than silent. Niceness is something we’ve been taught we owe society with the indoctrination of such an adage; adhering to such indoctrination speaks of a level of social conformity, and people-pleasing. As we grow to understand that temporarily pleasing people, acting agreeable, going against ourselves and being dishonest about what we think and feel is not ‘moral’ at all, such statements are exposed as harmful. Do not be addicted to bettering yourselfSome year ago, I came across one of those ‘inspirational’ memes that said “Be addicted to bettering yourself”. I loved it. I made it my header on Facebook. It reflected what I believed; that I should be striving to know better, do better, be better… because in so many ways I am not enough. And therein lies the problem with this adage. The perpetual question for improvement is rooted in discontent. This is not to say, we shouldn’t strive for better versions of ourselves- of course, we should. But “addicted”? Addiction refers to control, something else controlling you. Your idealized version- the idea you have of what “a better you” would be; that is what is controlling you when you’re addicted to bettering yourself. Your fear of not being enough, your inability to love yourself in a ‘less than ideal’ state. That is what ‘being addicted to bettering yourself’ speaks of. It has taken me therapy and a lot of self-work to recognize this, it’s not an adage which can be rejected as harmful socialization easily, because ‘bettering’ oneself is a good thing right? Yet, we must ask: what exactly is the ‘better version’ we’re addicted to achieving, and for what reason is it ‘better’ who declared it so? We must ask this to be sure that we’re not addicted to a version of us we feel will be more acceptable, welcomed and pleasing to others… See how this phrase ends up feeding behaviour that is toxic to ourselves? What doesn’t kill you can weaken your spirit?If you’re a fan of Kelly Clarkson’s music, you’ve most definitely sang along to the popular adage “What doesn’t kill you makes you stronger” from her hit song Stronger. I tend to hear this phrase used in response to someone narrating how they barely survived something, or how they are not sure they will survive what is to come. The phrase comes from an aphorism of the 19th-century German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche and is generally used as an affirmation of resilience. So why do we need to drop it? Because resilience doesn’t always equate to strength. Having survived doesn’t always mean you won, survival is not living and we want to live. Fully live. What doesn’t kill us and what we survive often takes a piece of us, such as; our innocence and/or faith, our immunity to further infection, and even our capacity to feel/care. What doesn’t kill you, can still kill a vital part of your being. In fact, the strongest people are killed by the constant survival of what is thrown at them, they die by the process of weathering- whittled down with every battle survived. Let us not gloss over and abet their slow death with affirmations of resilience. Who they are at their worse is not more valid than who they are at their best.I only recently came to understand how problematic it is when we believe that who/what our friends and loved ones are/do under the worst circumstances represents who they really are. The idea that the version of people you see in the worst of circumstances is their ‘true self’ is passed on through adages like “a drunken man’s words are a sober man’s thoughts” or another that goes “what is said in anger is truth”. These statements make sense at first thought. After all, a drunk person is less inhibited as a result of alcohol and thus drunk people do tend to speak their minds more liberally whether that means being more vulnerably or with less indoctrinated ‘niceness’.Yet, what people fail to factor in is that we humans can lie to ourselves as well; under the influence of alcohol and anger not only are our inhibitions lifted but also our ability for rational thinking is also affected.
An Interview with Myself on Depression: Episode 1
Mental health is gaining traction, more people are speaking up which is great. Getting therapy is becoming normalized (at least via Western media)- also great. But as with most things, “trending” comes along with distortion and confusion and a lot of ignorance. Between November 2020 and April 2022 I have struggled with recurring episodes of severe depression to the point that I can say my great achievement of the last 17 months has been surviving. I promised that if I survive it I’ll tell the tale because I think one of the hardest things is explaining to our family/friends what depression is. Especially when they expect/assume you to be okay. Because loving someone with a mental health problem is hard… yourself included. And because we cannot truly ‘normalize’ and properly address what we do not understand. But writing about experiencing mental health issues is hard. Mostly because writing it out means thinking about it and it is easier to escape. For instance, I have been wanting to write about my emotional eating forever. Hoping that writing would bring some sort of healing, that if I express it, it could be diagnosed understood, and I could be fixed. But I haven’t been able to; writing requires you to think/feel what you want to express and what I want to express is the fact that I eat to cope with hard emotions. Hence writing would be evoking the hard emotions making you want to eat more. I’ve regularly ended up self-soothing with food while writing/thinking of writing about self-soothing with food. So this has taken forever… That is why I’m trying this strategy: an interview with myself. Responding to questions directly, The interview format is kind of like using 2nd person. The topic is still hard, but the use of delimited question help so that feelings don’t flood all at once. You can think of it as a test you’re answering and not a baring of yourself So over a set of instalments which I’ll put on my blog under the category of #DemystifyingMentalHealth, I’ll share interviews on different aspects of mental health issues and wellness. Hopefully, it helps someone. Most of the questions I have responded to in this episode are from my friend Ettamba; if you have questions you’d like me to answer, drop them in the comment section and I’ll consider them for the next segment **** On Depression (Questions from Ettamba) When you say you have depression what do you mean and how was it different from being sad? It’s taken me a while to understand depression as a condition, specifically clinical depression as a disease which is different from sadness. And even longer for me to acknowledge it as a thing given that it’s not adequately acknowledged among Cameroonians… and sometimes I still falter over whether I’m ‘claiming negativity’ as some Christians and ‘toxic positivity’ people put it… In 2018 when I first decided to really seek help understanding what this is. I went to my university’s health centre and scheduled a session with a psychologist and asked them to test me so I can see/have an actual diagnosis. I wanted something like an x-ray to show a broken mind and explain why I was not okay… I needed something to explain that this was not a passing feeling of sadness but something much deeper rooted and that my helplessness in the face of it wasn’t made up. The psychologist explained depression in this way: everyone has hormones which affect how they feel and the balance or imbalance of those hormones means you are generally starting off from one of three points- She drew lines on a piece of paper to explain this… Very happy —————————————————————————————————– Neutral ———————————————————————————————————— Very sad ———————————————————————————————————– Non-clinically depressed people were those who mostly start off at the neutral line, so when they get sad, they can fall below the neutral line when things are bad, but not so much they are at nothing. Likewise, it’s easier for them to go up to happy zones because they’re starting off midway. But clinically depressed people, she explained start off below the neutral line. It is harder for them to go into the happy zone- it takes more effort… and it is easier for them to go down to the low point because they’re already below neutral… I like her explanation and it stayed with me. However, I must say the most accurate explanation of what depression is- for me- how it differs from just sadness was found in Harry Potter. Yes, I know how that sounds. But still, Harry Potter (book 3, in particular) has the best non-medical, for-the-average-person explanation of depression I’ve read. In it, Harry is having a horrible reaction to Dementors which one can see as vectors of depression. As he is more sensitive to Dementors he wonders if it’s because he’s weaker than his peers; the following is a conversation from that book that captures it: “… I suppose they [Dementors] were the reason you fell?” “Yes,” said Harry. He hesitated, and then the question he had to ask burst from him before he could stop himself. “Why? Why do they affect me like that? Am I just —?” “It has nothing to do with weakness,” said Professor Lupin sharply, as though he had read Harry’s mind. “The Dementors affect you worse than the others because there are horrors in your past that the others don’t have…” “…Dementors are among the foulest creatures that walk this earth… they drain peace, hope, and happiness out of the air around them. Get too near a Dementor and every good feeling, every happy memory will be sucked out of you…You’ll be left with nothing but the worst experiences of your life. And the worst that happened to you, Harry, is enough to make anyone fall off their broom. You have nothing to feel ashamed of.” Replace Dementors with depression or triggers of depression and you’ll get it. People with clinical
Five Things That are Marketed as Feminist but are NOT!
These days feminism is a buzzword. On one hand, nearly everyone has some dastardly opinions on feminists even if they can’t clearly define what feminism is. On the other hand, every other product, event or even phrasing is marketed as if it were “women empowering” or “feminist”. For those who know what feminism is, the whole thing is pretty annoying. I’ve written about the former problem- the misconceptions around what feminism is- and that is why I’m no longer correcting people when they say nonsense like “I’m not for feminist, I’m more of an equalist”. But I have never before addressed the latter problem; the over-marketing of the wrong things as “feminist” and the way that ruins the work of the movement. So today I want to focus on that. I’ll be presenting some five common phrases/notions/happenings that are marketed as feminist but are NOT. 1. GirlDad You’ve probably seen #GirlDad here or there under some new dad’s post. The hashtag has been pushed as an impactful statement; the men using it are articulating their pride in being a father to a daughter in a world where daughters have not been valued as much as sons are. #GirlDad has also been used to articulate the belief that being a father to a daughter is a different experience; you often hear men saying “having a daughter helped me appreciate/respect women”. In so doing men reveal how they become more sensitive to the inequalities and dangers faced by the female gender when they have a daughter. So what is wrong with this supposedly impactful statement, and why is it a clear example of something which has been wrongly branded as feminist? Simple answer: it is being used in the wrong way. While the initial motive of the hashtag #GirldDad (promoting pride in having daughters) is laudable, the hashtag has unfortunately been used to reinforce stereotypes that some things are “girl things” and others are “boy things” (same problem with the #BoyMom hashtag) and this is anything but feminist. Being a girl dad on social media has been presented as being a father who is overprotective “because he has daughters to guard” (interestingly from members of his own gender), a father who does stereotypically girly things, and a father who is suddenly more sensitive to the inequalities and dangers faced by the female gender because he has a daughter. There is a fine line between emphasizing the equal value of daughters and making one gender more ‘special’ than the other and the #GirlDad hashtag often crosses it. Also, one should not need to have a daughter to recognize the equal value of girls and women to boys and men, so parading that is anything but feminist. Perhaps the most annoying thing about the hashtag is how capitalism has used it to now market stereotypically “girly” things to men “don’t you want to be a girl dad, buy this unicorn hat and prove it”. 2. “Split the costs 50/50, match his game” Contrary to popular belief, splitting the bill 50/50 is NOT FEMINIST. Hear me out, I know some anti-feminists will be vexed by this one. Feminism is used to refer to the belief (and the movement which acts on that belief) that men and women should have equal rights, opportunities, responsibilities and fair treatment. Read that again and see the word SHOULD. This- gender equality- is what we believe and advocate SHOULD be. Gender equality is the desired state where the “rights, responsibilities and opportunities of individuals will not depend on whether they are born male or female” (Warth and Koparanova, 2012). That is the desired state, the state we’re advocating for; it is the goal but it is not the current reality, NOT YET. We are still in a state of prevalent gender inequalities. Now, Gender equity refers to the efforts being made to reverse gender inequalities and ensure fairness between men and women so that the desired state of gender equality will one day be realized. We practice gender equity because we recognize that social norms and power structures have historically (and continue to) impact the lives and opportunities available to men and women differently and ensure imbalance and inequalities. We practice gender equity by enforcing measures to compensate for the historical disadvantages one gender has faced (and continues to face) to create a more levelled playing field. In sum, equity leads to equality. Without equity, there cannot be equality. Hence, until things are equitable, until the situation where men and women both have equal rights, access to work, same pay, same responsibilities as parents, same expectations of them in our society etc. we can’t be doing anything 50/50/ UNTIL THEN, there can be NO EQUALITY. To ask someone who is earning less, and being demanded more to split 50/50 is NOT FEMINIST. What that means, is you are asking them to act as if they were in the desired state when they are not. This issue is regularly used to gaslight feminists with statements like “don’t you people want equality?” Unfortunately, there are too many who trip on their tongues when faced with this question because their understanding of feminism and feminist thought is shallow. The feminist goal is fairness; so if women expect to receive more financial support from men in a society that historically and continuously favours men with higher pay, better work opportunities, and less domestic responsibility, then that expectation is not unfair, it is their way of being “compensated” for the “traditional” role they are forced to play (and that compensation is not enough, to be honest). This ‘compensation’ may look like bias against men/for women to those who are less aware of their privilege. To that, I say: educate yourself. 3. “A Beauty with brains” First of all, I forgive myself for once believing this was a compliment and smiling at being described as such. Most who use the “beauty with brains” phrase as a compliment have something alike to those who used #girldad;
Was it even love?
You may be familiar with the philosophical riddle that goes “if a tree falls in the forest and there was no one to hear it, did it even fall”? That question which is typically used to question the value of the unperceived came to mind tonight as I considered how best to write this post and share a lesson I learned last year about relationships, and how conditioning within a capitalist society has warped perception of them- particularly perceptions of romantic love. You see, that riddle can be rephrased in a hundred different ways: “If I saw a celebrity without taking a photo with/of them did I even see a celebrity?” “If I worked out without my fitness tracker to record the evidence, did I even work out?” “If I learned something new about the earth, or history, or space… or picked up a new skill, but can’t use that knowledge to get employed or progress in some socio-economic manner… then is that knowledge even worthwhile?’ And finally… If I had a relationship, whether a beautiful affair or a strong sisterly bond that took me to new places, exposed me to new ideas, preoccupied my days, and softened life… but that relationship ended in three months, or after 3 years… Then was it even love? The tree in the forest question can be recognized as a riddle, but the above questions? Well, I have asked myself at least two in a non-rhetorical manner. People say we’re in a “picture’s-or a-didn’t-happen generation”. It’s more like we’ve been conditioned in a “productive or it is not worth it” society. Our knowledge is only deemed valuable if it can be used to produce income (in fact, we’re told to monetize our hobbies), exercising is only appreciated if we have the before and after photos to show off our “gains”, and similarly, love is only worth talking about if it lasted forever. But that’s the capitalism talking. Although it is harder to recognize it; dismissing the value of a relationship because it didn’t end with happy ever after is just as silly as the other capitalist metrics of love… the cost/size of one’s engagement ring, amount of their dowry, the extravagance of their wedding, etc. This particular metric of longevity is silly because it is built on the capitalist deception that success is an end rather than a meanwhile. Whereas there is truly no end in life; it’s literally (overwhelmingly) one thing after the next. So even ‘happy ever after’ likely had its own ups and downs. The lesson I learned about love, and myself was that I have been doing a great disservice to myself with this “must-be productive/lasting” perception. Just like when our parent’s made the decision to buy the ugly but more durable school shoes over the fancy ones we liked; or when they would tell us to wait for the “right occasion” to wear the pretty dress we received as a birthday gift… so too I often find myself deciding not to go on a date because “this won’t go anywhere”. I, just as they were, have been trying to maximize the use of a commodity (although love shouldn’t be that), and invest in only that which would last. I envy those who have learned to live in the moment so much that they know it is enough is all the date did was introduce you to a new restaurant, a new artist, and broadened your views. Because life is short. I’m not sure I’ll be one of those people anytime soon but I admire them. Still, I have changed to some extent. I no longer consider that friendship or affair that ended as a failure. I can now appreciate it for what it was; a lovely, life-enriching experience. Because it is enough if all that love did was hold you on the nights you needed to be held; it is more than enough that the friend you now barely interact with once helped you apply for the opportunity that launched your career. And because of this, Tennyson’s famed words “better to have loved and lost than to never have loved at all” ring true. In fact, some lost relationships are likely far more valuable than some family relationships which will indeed last forever, under the compulsion of kinship. You not only do a disservice to yourself when you define your relationships in a productive manner but equally to those who relate with you; because it is such a perspective that justifies our erasing them from our memories because they didn’t live up to all we wanted them to. It is our thinking that everything has to “go somewhere”, and people we’re with must be constantly ‘adding’ to us (just as the institutions we work for require) that has us claiming to ‘cut off’ people with every New Year. But we (like the institutions we work for) must realize that everything has seasons; people too, relationships too. And the end of a season should not define the entire experience/person, just like the whole year can’t be summed up by the bad rainy season. Because prior to that there were days so beautiful you shared food and wine outside with friends. So if (like me) you must measure; measure by the memorable moments, what they made you feel, and how they grew you to who and what you are today. Remind yourself of all that person’s presence in your life gave you before it came to an end. Perhaps you needed that brief love to take you out of your comfort zone, to help you unlock a hidden passion, to expose you to something you’d been blind to. Perhaps it was meant to be and meant to end. So whether it lasted for a week, or three months, it happened; it filled you up, supported you, and served a purpose in your life while it did. Love happened. Just like the tree which fell in the forest, it happened. And
Want to have a successful year? How are you defining success?
What if I told you, there’s a way to guarantee you have a successful 2022? Well, I can; because a successful year all depends on how you define success. Here’s a definition I recommend.