Feminists give men too much credit

Dr Sylvia Tamale holding a copy of African Sexualities: A Reader

Dr Sylvia Tamale, Dean of Law at Makerere University believes that on a continent where there are more serious issues like governance to address – we have a big problem when a state preoccupies itself with dictating how we should have sex and with whom we have it. Dr Tamale was addressing a group of women that comprised of journalists, human rights activists, gender activists and feminists in a discussion on Sex, Gender and Sexuality hosted by GALZ recently.

Dr Tamale touched on sexualities and noted that people engaged in same sex relationships are widely castigated on the African continent. Some countries go as far as effectuating morals legislation that illegalizes such ‘Western’ practices. She highlighted that society has long dictated what is or isn’t normal despite sometimes the ‘freaks of nature’ that point out otherwise. She said that for instance, while one in seven babies are born with ambiguous genitalia worldwide; society goes out of its way to re-assign a sex for them to make them fit into one of those two neat little boxes of either male or female. Ironically, society then wonders why a lot of those kids grow up feeling trapped in the wrong bodies.

If a woman is in love with another woman; what business is it of yours? What does it take away from you, she challenged. Good questions.
Dr Tamale however also believes that there is a direct link between women’s sexuality and their subordinate positions in society. Men, she said, maintain dominance through reinforcing patriarchal societies in which they own and control resources, passing them on further to other men (sons). Through the capitalist system, they maintain patriarchy by subordinating women in the home where they are expected to provide cheap & unpaid for labour. The patriarchal state then maintains this arrangement through tools like the law, religion and culture to control women’s sexuality. For instance, it is not by accident that sellers of sex are called ‘prostitutes’ and persecuted, but the buyers of sex – who are mostly men, remain untouched. Or worse, she said that women’s clitorises (sic) have about 8000 pleasurable nerve endings while men’s organs have only half of that. How do the men in some societies seek to control that? By aiming straight at the heart and power of women’s sexuality and chopping the damn things off!

While I generally agree with Dr Tamale’s offerings, I believe that feminists give men too much credit. I know a lot of men who are surprised and feel honoured to be put on undeserved pedestals where they are made out as possessing such high levels of intelligence, calculation and connivance that have enabled them to sustain such a systematic conspiracy over decades.

Trying to establish the link in this ‘super conspiracy’ is hard, and can only be grist for academic discourse where it can be better digested. However, oppression of women comes on many fronts, including from fellow women themselves. Some women limit themselves, in their mindsets, and masquerading as victims of oppression – have remained entrenched in the hysteria of readymade reasons for all their failures – “because we are women!” With the advent of the 21st century came so many opportunities for women and success is out there for the taking. Whilst we pre-occupy ourselves with trying to dismantle men’s conspiracy theories both real and imagined, the opposite sex is busy developing themselves with productive occupation.

With people like Dr Tamale, feminism has become such a fundamentalism that it is small wonder why female human rights activists strain to dissociate themselves from this predatory dogma that sees nothing but evil in the opposite sex. She reminded so much of eccentric gender activism gladiators like Thoko Matshe and her infamous “I don’t do men, except in the bedroom” line.

Over the years, women have started to slowly take over the world and more and more, powerful women like Condoleeza Rice, Hilary Clinton, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf and recently, Christine Lagarde have proven that anatomy has nothing to do with it. Hell, in Zimbabwe we have a ‘new phenomenon’ of women raping men.

But then again, if Tamale was referring to the ‘oppressed’ women in conservative rural areas; I cannot imagine that the woman down in Mutorashanga can even begin to understand or care that she is being systematically subjugated in order to sustain both patriarchy and capitalism; which begs the question, which women are we talking about?

A hallmark of bad journalism

I recently just read one of the Sunday Mail features with great revulsion. The headline screamed: Gays and lesbians on the loose. Apart from thinking that there was nothing new in the tired story, I thought, what kind of a heading is that. Mention of ‘on the loose’, like how you’d describe animals that escaped from a zoo. The entire article lacked even the pretense of fairness and smacked of a desperate journalist who did not have a diary item for the week and went for the usual easy cheap shot – a jab at the ‘gays’ that always succeeds in generating a lot of interest and renewed albeit uncalled for attention to the minority group.

The article basically sought to establish how ready Zimbabweans were to accept homosexuals and also discuss the fact that this is a hotly contested issue at this point while the country waits – with bated breath – for a new constitution. The likes of Dr Vimbai Chivaura (UZ) and Takudzwa Gutu (MSU) – labeled as social commentator and social expert (whatever that is) respectively – were interviewed and gave such crass and unjustifiably homophobic remarks you’d wonder why the journalist chose university personnel as sources in the first place. According to Chivaura, homosexuality is unAfrican (yeah, we’ve heard that before) and there is “need for a law which completely wipes it out from the face of the Zimbabwean cultural landscape”.

The social expert on the other hand believes that the rise in the number of children involved in homosexuality is as a result of them being exposed to ‘rabidly pro-gay foreign media’. These experts not only speak of homosexuality like it’s an epidemic – they also believe it is a foreign import and despite the fact that we have whole communities of gay people; it is ‘unAfrican’.

Apart from the usual and to be expected comments from the ‘social experts’, the article is a demonstration of what constitutes bad journalism and is not only an embarrassment to the media fraternity, but goes against the grain of what we are trying to achieve as a nation – responsible, balanced media freedom that recognizes democracy and lives its tenets. You get the feeling that oh, here is a problem, but what is the solution? You also get the urge to say STOP, wait a minute, these are human beings we are talking about here right? Surely legislation is not going to stop homosexuals from feeling the way they do?

Whether Zimbabwe is ready or not to accept homosexuality is inconsequential to the minority rights question. One gentleman commented on the GALZ website that: “when dealing with issues concerning minority rights (homosexuals) it’s not about what the majority thinks, because it is rare for the majority to think of any good out of a minority…homosexuals are a permanent minority group and can never secure legislation in their favor. Their rights are better protected by the courts in its jurisprudence. If we really claim to have democracy, then these rights should be enshrined in the new constitution as democracy entails accepting differences amongst ourselves so that we are equal on the application of law…” I couldn’t agree more.

On the part of the media, I think nothing is more tragic – or more common than unjustifiable homophobia, especially coming from a national paper. Evidently, their unbalanced editorial policy with regards to homosexuality is caused by ignorance or avoidance of the real facts. A bit of tolerance will go a long way in avoiding the terrible effects of sexual prejudices which demean millions of people who permit themselves to become entangled in foolish argument over this subject, thereby poisoning their own minds and closing the door to reason.

Intolerance – according to Napoleon Hill – closes the book of Knowledge and writes on the cover, “Finis! I have learned it all!” Intolerance makes enemies of those who should be friends. It destroys opportunity and fills the mind with doubt, mistrust, prejudice and indeed litters the world with crass self- claimed social experts! We demand responsible, factual and balanced journalism if the fraternity is going to retain any semblance of respect.