Feminism They Call It: A Jumble of Thought

Feminism, they call it disdainfully, those who look at it from negative angle. In order to go along this line, I add a jumble of thought as it appears exactly from the title. I wished the piece initially to be purely my thoughts, ideas, feelings and experiences about the events surrounding women and men, for fair judgment. I also add “a jumble of thought” because the ground I stand might differ from yours.  

I’m neither an advocate of misogyny nor of misandry; but a little more of philogyny: a positive and kind attitude towards women. Misogyny is the hatred or dislike of women while misandry is the hatred for men. The friction of the two, according to many, is the driving force for a sort of homosexuality called gynophobia: the fear for women.

Sociologist Allan G. Johnson describes misogyny as “an attitude of hatred of females because they are females”, which constitutes the basis of their oppression in the society. An apt example of this is Pre-Islamic Arab where women were viewed as negation and shame and buried alive because they were females. It is a belief accompanied in patriarchal society where women are placed in subordinate positions with limited access to power and decision making position. Islam had made attempts to redeem women from this torture.

Some scholars share in Aristotle’s view to see a woman as an incomplete man and deformity. Nicholas Pappas, in the “Rutledge Philosophy, Guide To Plato”, says that Socrates described those who pleaded apology in court as “no better than women” on account of their cowardice. The ancient Greek believed that those who led an immoral life would be reincarnated as women. Some scholars have attributed that one of the failure of democracy is its attempt to promote sexual equality.

Jack Holland writes of the evidence of misogyny in The Old Testament in the story of The Fall of Man in The Book of Genesis as a myth that blames women for the suffering of man: The Original Sin.  Some misogynists have the belief that Islam has its own criticism of women in the 34^th verse of Annisa’i, although a Muslim scholar Taj Hashmi have discussed this in his book, “Islam and Misogyny: A Case Study of Bangladesh.”

Asra Nomani, in a Washington Post article, discussing Sura Annisa’i, says  “domestic violence against women is prevalent today in non-Muslim communities.” She further wrote that Islamic historians agree that the Holy prophet Muhammad (PBUH) never hit a woman. Professor Reza Aslan, University of Southern California, writing in “No god But God,” says “misogynistic interpretation of the Qur’an is persistently attached to Annisa’i 34 because commentary of the holy Qur’an has been exclusively domain of Muslim men.” 

Many western scholars such as Immanuel Kant, John Lucas, G W F Hegel, David Hume, Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Rene Descartes, Oswald Spengler, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Arthur Schopenhauer, Otto Weininger, Fredrick Nietzsche, and Sigmund Freud, etcetera, have been accused of misogyny.   

Comparing women as equal to men is absurd and ridiculous. When feminists call for equality, what comes first to my mind is to assume their much-needed call for fair and equal treatment. Literally, if we can assume a woman to be like a man, we will always end up proven wrong. Naturally, men can withstand harsher condition, able to absorb more difficulties and stress than women. In spite of this, it’s pretty possible to have some men much lazier than some women.

However, we can also state the opinion of Socrates who insists that men surpass women at any task both sexes undertake. Men are the successful version of what women aspire to become and have a natural feeling of awe and respect for men. For this, we have the widely circulated statement as ‘what man can do woman can do’ not the other way round.

To further accentuate this point, whenever a woman achieves certain success, people hurriedly say ‘wonderful,’ sounding extravagantly impressed and surprised, echoing the fact that her achievement is a rare feat among her sex while there is hardly such admiring comment when a man achieves a similar or even superior success. When a woman assumes a high political post or economic status, for example, people will exaggeratingly and proudly say ‘the first female to hold the post in the history of this country,’ while no such thing at all for a man.

Some women tend to believe that staying at home is just another form of confinement. Being at home in matrimony doesn’t mean closing you up in a prison as some people are trying to make us believe. It is showing care and compassion.  Women are delicate and precious, who deserve comfortable and unstressed condition. That belief of “if you see a woman in suffering, her man is at fault” is a constant reminder to us that we should always provide women with extra-care and facilitate their success. Whenever we see Ellen Johnson Sir-Leaf, Angela Merkel, Dilma Roussef or Margaret Thatcher, sobriquet the Iron Lady, or Deputy Director Avril Haines, we know that there are men: husband, father or colleague, aiding their attainments from behind the scene.

Women in my society should sigh a heavy relief they were not created in other cultures where they are seen as investment opportunities in her education, beauty and cosmetics so that when her marriage comes, her parents would look forward to making profit from her bride price. They also should be happy they are spared backbreaking tasks or live in other societies that hide under the auspices of liberty, freedom and equality to push them into competition with men who will then turn around and laugh when they fail. They can end up enmeshed in dilemma, till they get to realize a Hausa proverbial saying “ba’a kwacewa yaro garma.”

Women hardly appeared in the list of the early inventors. There wasn’t a woman ever conferred the status of knighthood, and even the feminine version of the word is yet to be known.  A Knight has always remained a male character, a symbol of power, might, and strength.

Common evidence that further differentiates female from being like male is that there is sharp gap between the numbers of male and female fighting as allied forces in foreign lands. The sum of females will certainly count to a chicken-feed. This implies that women are less powerful than men. Then, it can be understood that nature decreed that women can never match up with men in many respect.

I believe when people like me talk about women condition in society, we don’t practically and literally assume women to be men in terms of responsibility or strength. According to Aristotle, the female character will be inappropriate if she is too brave and clever and awkward and sinewy. All we mean is special care and assistance; women having access to education, economic, social and political opportunities to have a good life. Well, I can’t judge if women mean something different, something bigger, than this.

Scholars such as Katherine K. Young and Paul Nathan posit that, ideologically, the fervent call for feminism and the overriding focus on women is to prioritize girlish hierarchy which as a result may be a misandry, the hatred and prejudice for men. Then feminist call for equality is a subterfuge form for gynocentricism, the ideological practice and consciousness of asserting particular feministic point of view in which social issues, desires and needs are addressed and analyzed to the detriment of non-females.

Now after looking at the concept from the vintage point that sees feminism as a call for giving extra care to women, we shall also look at it from macho perspective.

Some male decry the idea of feminism, ignoring the idea of giving special attention and opportunities to females, to maintain the status quo. To my view, anti-feminism can to some extreme extent have some links with misogyny.

Hippocrates writing is his book “On Affection,” uses the surviving Greek word of the misogyny as (misogunia) ‘disaffection of women’ and (misanthropia) disaffection of humanity. He grouped the hatred of women with the hatred of humanity in general. In “humanity” lies my advocacy for feminism.

In terms of intelligence and brilliancy, women can do better what men do or some men fail to do. With the creation of modern tools by men, I say by men, (military arena and or computer industry is still man-dominated world), women can perform great things with the sleight of a hand from their tiny offices.

Women can assume some highest decision-making posts in the society. Yet, some interpretations of Islamic scriptures forbid this because women are too emotional, compassionate, indulgent and lenient.

Some people say women have ‘short and deficient sight and thinking.’ I don’t know if there is any difference between men’ and women’ brain. I keep wondering, looking at people’ heads, how they think and what are they thinking? Is women’ brain less powerful than men’? Has men’ brain have more cortex and processors than women’? Is this the reason men are always cleverer than women? Is this the reason men always outsmart women? Do other people think in line with my thought?

Although Allah says ‘‘Arrijalu qawwamuna alannisa’i’’ (men are the protectors and maintainers of women because God has made one of them, (man) to excel the other (woman). He also said ‘‘Inna akramakum indallahi atqakum’’ (surely the greatest among you in the sight of Allah is he or she who fears Allah the most). And all of ibadats (acts of worship) carries equal reward. Wrongdoings also carry uniform punishment irrespective of sexuality.

But some people are opportunists. They are using this advantage to commit crimes against women.  The society forced women for centuries to accept that they cannot be anything beyond the sources of pleasure for men. The unwritten law is that if you are a woman, you can be successful but not too much successful. Because the stenotype has been deeply ingrained, few women can think of slaughtering a ram for religious rituals during Sallah period, especially in this part of the world.

I always feel offended in the midst of married men by their vulgar language in their conversation about women. “Kai wannan fa akwai kaya”, to refer to her breasts, bucks and hips. The most important role given to women in the society is to spread their leg on the bed to give way for men through the shrub and mush into the kingdom of pleasure. In a society where marriage, sex and procreation are the major concerns, women have no important role than this. And that is why, often, girl child education is disrupted in favour of marriage. And later we come to blame government for inadequate female personnel in our hospitals and can brazenly find a face to protest against a male doctor treating our daughters.

I have been asking parents why they don’t want to allow their girl children to go to colleges. Their responses remain the same: “waywardness and deviant activities on campuses,” fearing their daughters might get involved in flirtatious affairs with their male friends.

Truth is, if they are fair to themselves and the society, why do they send their sons to go and destroy one’s daughter while protecting theirs. And if you say she will turn a wayward on the campus, I don’t know if all the prostitutes in the red-light enclave in around the town are graduates from BUK medicine faculty. I don’t even know if all the prostitutes have a certificate from FCE or Polytechnic hung above their beds as a testimony for their being professional service providers from the faculty of sex in our colleges. Do you want to mean that all those girls who are in or passed through the university are involving in premarital affairs?

Another injustice is that, on many occasions, there will be a situation where a family of a husband knows that their brother is promiscuous. But they will allow him to marry an innocent girl. While they would never allow their dissolute son to marry a girl alleged to be loose. 

Often there are instances where a husband might have been caught screwing up with other women but the matter would not be given any hoot and his helpless wife must stay in the marriage. And if she refuses, the whole society will gang up against her. The sky will certainly fall if it were the wife having an affair with other men. The whole people from the husband’s family will reach a consensus to divorce her.  

And one argument I have is that if you insist women pursuing western education are evil because they may turn out recalcitrant or deviant, then how much have you invested so far in her religious education?  Are you telling me that all female doctors in Gynecology and Obstetrics Units at Aminu Kano and Murtala Hospital respectively, female lecturers in universities, women judges in Shari’ah courts, women in Hisbah Board, are wayward and intractable and unfaithful to their husbands?

Mothers from my extended family often complained that their daughters are not married by affluent husbands like their rich sons are marrying in others daughters to come and enjoy in their wealth. They are envious. Here, all they want is the ratio to be at least fifty-fifty. They were baffled why the system would put them at the disadvantaged side.

I told them it is because they only allow their sons to pursue go for higher education and disallow their daughters; and that’s why their daughters as educationally backward are usually married off to the husbands less privileged than their sons.

You want your daughter to be the wife of somebody? “Those who read are rewarded with important positions in society.”

People don’t even bother to provide proper Islamic knowledge to women for the fear that once they know the truth, the end of injustice has come. A lady was forced to get into an arranged marriage to a husband whom her father was indebted. She has had her love already but her father insisted she must marry his choice as if he were the one to live in the marriage. She was helpless and couldn’t protest the decision. If she took the matter to the court, the society would curse her for suing her father. She got into the marriage and soon died of heart enlargement.

Although ignorance is never an Islamic teaching, but education is nothing in our society. Nothing in our society is seen as an achievement without marriage. Even a man, not a woman, who achieves great success in wealth or knowledge, yet unmarried, is still viewed as unfulfilled.

I’m not condemning the institution of marriage because it is the foundation of every society. But marriage is not a mandatory ibadat.  There are Muslim scholars who died unmarried, devoting their lives to the advancement of knowledge. The religion describes marriage as non-compulsory (Sunnah) and education as obligatory. Then why are we more of this Sunnah and averse to the obligatory?  We can do many other Sunnah simpler and less demanding than marriage. I do not see any importance in giving birth to drug addicts, thieves and beggars buzzing around beer taverns.

Despite the fact that it’s is men’s responsibility to take care of the woman, yet, some men continue to starve the girls by deliberately refusing to feed them and beat their wives and cheat on them. If a woman can only have her paradise under her husband’s feet, then where the husband could find his paradise? I think we are being presented with one side of the argument.

Women are always at the receiving end. Imagine how boys set rules and criteria for a woman they would marry: ‘tall, beautiful, light-skinned,’ as if it was the ladies who created themselves. Women are unwittingly coerced into unnatural life. For them to be light-skinned, they will have to use creams and lotion to pale their skin. There are many ways of contracting skin cancer; this one is one of them.

In terms of beauty, they only grew up and see themselves as what they are naturally. But if you ever allowed the society to define you and you feel that you are ‘beautiful’, then the danger sets in. You will begin to treat others with aplomb disdain. In the end, you will be the victim of your beauty when men began to chase after you.

Finally, is a suggestion?

I wish women will understand to not be fanatical. Camille Paglia argues that a close reading of the ancient text will reveal that men do not hate women but fear them and ready to serve them, like a Knight in his shining armour. Men can hate woman only in their plays but very fond of them in their beds. Men are fools like cock and hen, eating the stones and leaving the grains to win woman’s heart. Men are idiot gullible who are enslaved by women but rejoice in it. Men are of course living life and dying for women.

If particularly men will feel that women are also human beings and not just articles of pleasure, there will be a drastic reduction in marital and societal problems. If we assume that neither will exist without either, not one as a boss and the other as a servant, then also there will be a progression.