As someone who is very vocal about being a feminist and someone who teaches feminist studies, I would get tagged on Facebook posts meant to ‘trigger’ my reaction on a DAILY basis. Thankfully, I unfollowed the worst offenders and used the security options to limit who can tag me on posts. Still, I am acquainted with people who send me things directly either to make their argument “see what is wrong with that you people’s feminism?” Or to genuinely ask “what do you think about this?” The latter are few and far between. A while ago, I came across a post by writer Chika Unigwe which struck me. I cannot find the exact tweet, so to paraphrase her: “I do not owe anyone knowledge on social media. Unless you are a student in my classroom, it is not my responsibility to educate you”. The statement might seem outright arrogant and elitist. After all, those who don’t share knowledge are just being selfish right? Nope, that’s not right at all. The statement is not grounded in the refusal to share knowledge, but rather in the refusal of the obligation too often forced on those who are conscious, those who are marginalized and oppressed to do the FREE and emotionally-draining work of educating those who partake in oppressing them. Audre Lorde puts it best in her collection entitled Sister Outsider: Essays and Speeches: Black and Third World people are expected to educate white people as to our humanity. Women are expected to educate men. Lesbians and gay men are expected to educate the heterosexual world. The oppressors maintain their position and evade their responsibility for their own actions. There is a constant drain of energy which might be better used in redefining ourselves and devising realistic scenarios for altering the present and constructing the future. Too often, those who request explanations from believers and advocates of a certain cause- whether that is believing in Christianity of advocating for feminism or protesting Anglophone marginalization- do so from the position of “I already know I’m right, but I want to have fun” or “my knowledge is superior, I dare you to prove me wrong”. As such, explaining anything becomes a sort of thesis defense. Imagine it: having to regularly defend that you are just as human and deserving of equal opportunities, equal rights, and just treatment. That is what feminists have to do online nearly every damn day. And this is because most people don’t know what feminism is. They don’t want to. We all have the ability and resources to educate ourselves, and if one’s curiosity is genuine they would put in the work, and look for reliable sources rather than jump the wagon and preach based on social media posts often taken out of contexts. And that is just it, a lot of the curiosity is not genuine so they don’t put in the work. They ‘just share’ what suits their own pre-conceptions. So why- unless you’re paid for it- would anyone want to engage in educating them? God knows I’m tired of it and after this blog post- where I’ll be sharing my perspective and details on an ongoing campaign that can serve as a resource for the genuinely curious- I’m resigning from it. Last year, I was interviewed by Toridey on a variety of issues, feminism among them. Please see the video below: This year, my organization Better Breed Cameroon is running a #WomensMonth2020 campaign on all our social media to shed light on women whose contribution to nation-building has been undervalued, women whose sacrifices and abuse has been given inadequate attention and the general status of gender issues in Cameroon that speaks to just why we need feminism. See below release for details: From now henceforth, this post will serve as my response to any requests for free explanations. I hope you enjoyed it and I hope those who need to educate themselves! As always, your comments are welcome!
A Woman’s Might and Yet Her Plight
I was helping a friend’s daughter with her homework the other day, and she all of nine years was defining the word apartheid. I had the notebook, with the teacher’s definition on it which this little girl is expected to memorize and reproduce, whether she understands it or not! (let me not get into that just yet). Well as was to be expected the little darling forgot some words, the latter part of the definition which linked it to South Africa. But what she stated “Apartheid refers to a discriminatory system which gives privileges to and allows the minority to control the majority…” Now lets not concentrate on whether or not this definition is correct text-book wise but it gives the idea, and it gave me an idea too, that apartheid as per that definition was not secluded to South African and still prevails. It could even be said, the original apartheid was men’s control of women- and it still goes on. If genetics is understood we see that with the crossing of the female XX chromosome and the male XY there is a 2:1 likelihood of having a girl than a boy. IF this serves, women have ALWAYS outnumbered men. Why then does this ever increasing majority remain the underprivileged, plight-stricken and pitied image we see every day? A befitting issue to ponder on don’t you think? Looking back at that definition let me support the claim that gender inequality was the original apartheid. It has already been biologically proven that women have and probably always will be the majority, now about privileges? From culture to culture men have through norms and values of their time reserved certain things from themselves, be it the right to eat eggs, to wear trousers, to drive, to vote, to marry more than one spouse, to flirt- without being scorned-, the right to education, a particular type of education, and the right to be religiously ordained. These privileges prevail, some hold strong till date. Gender inequality is a universally accepted fact and some people would say it is rightly so “men and women can never be the same” they say; they only expressing their ignorance. Equality does not mean sameness; we can never be and shouldn’t even try to be the same, yet we should agree that a kilogram in feathers and a kilogram of rocks though so different are still equal in weight. So if it is agreed that discriminatory system exists as a result of gender inequality, and also that though women have always surpassed men in numbers, the men enjoy privileges by this system, then fitting the definition above, women have been victims of an apartheid for ages. That proven; a modern mind would wonder why? I mean we are of a time when we have heard enough of women’s feats to know that women are not “weak” The feminist movement has done enough to show just how much women toil and extol their might. What a man can do a woman can do better is a modern day idiom extolling a woman’s might. They feed the masses care for the elderly, the sick, they carry heavy burdens emotionally, psychologically and physically, she can endure where a man cannot- we have been told this. We have been convinced that woman is indeed mighty. Yet ironically no matter how mighty woman is she has yet to overcome her apartheid, despite the majority she holds, despite her endurance (or perhaps because of it) she has yet to free herself. She is still pitied, with e quarters of the poorest of the poor being women, with ever increasing reports of sexual abuse, violence and are still denied privileges entrance into holy orders, say in state policies, even a right to wear certain clothes and drive in some countries. Why I wonder, despite the woman’s might is such discrimination, suffering and abuse her plight? Here’s a theory: one can only be as strong as their mind. As such women can never be that strong. Our minds you see are controlled by men. From the way we dress, to the jobs we should do in one way or the other, indirectly or directly, men control us. Now someone may say here that I’m tooting the feminist horn and women have come far from the old days, I would agree yet say that is limiting, I am doing that and more. Feminist may say women are controlled by men as to the opportunities given, but the thing is feminist themselves have begun being controlled by men in the opportunities they are hunting for. In the quest for equality some have veered off to seek to prove sameness that they too can be “men” and thus imitating them we fall indirectly to the old trap of following the path set by men being what they are rather than what they want us to be, yes, but still not being who we are meant to be. Our society from time immemorial has called on the female to be attractive to the male, whether it is by being able to cook and run a home as in the olden days or look like a playboy pin-up as is today, women have been reared with the idea that they are only as good as men think they are. You are only sexy enough if when you pass a guy lets out a wolf whistle. And you are only brainy enough if you can outsmart the guys in your class as well. It goes to prove the saying that when you belong to a minority you have to be better in order to have the right to be equal. Women are further reared with the idea of what would be ladylike, what they should or should not do, we have so ingrained these ideas in us that though today you may not hear a man say that is unladylike, or that is not, we have