Feminism has often been misunderstood to mean misandry (the hate of men). Misandry is not such a common word as it was only recently included in contemporary use of English. In this analysis, Chika Mefor-Nwachukwu takes a good look at the often-misconceived theory of feminism.
During one of her interviews on feminism, renowned novelist and writer Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, advised young feminists not to “use feminism to justify your wickedness.” That admonition from Chimamanda, an acclaimed feminist, couldn’t have come at a better time than at the very time she handed it down – a time when the wave of misperception on the subject of feminism was getting stronger and spreading very fast.
“One doesn’t need to look too far to notice that there is currently a widespread erroneous notion about feminism – a notion that feminism is all about seizing the imaginary power that men possess and with which they have perpetually undermined and oppressed the female folks, and using it to also oppress them (the male folks).” Those were the words of Stanley Ogaranya, a general psychologist who prides in being called the ‘most vocal male feminist.’
Chimamanda in the same interview, went on to opine that a vast majority of those who go with the ‘feminist’ appellation are just nasty, bitter and rude, and are undeserving of the title. She further averred that the people she had earlier referred to, know next to nothing about feminism and have done a great disservice to the noble ideology.
While feminism is a way of thinking and an ideological advancement that seeks to promote gender equality and eliminate the chauvinistic bias that exists against women, misandry on the flip side, is the outright hate for men (in the same way misogyny is the hate for women). And opinion holders have continued to stress the difference between these two subjects, even though there appears to be a vehement refusal by some ideologists to divorce the two. There is a school of thought that insists that misandry is a fundamental part of feminism – that feminism cannot thrive without a deep-seethed hatred for masculinity and anything that it represents. These ideologists are averse to what they call ‘patriarchy.’ They define patriarchy as a system that bestows all the rights, powers and deference on the male gender, to the detriment and chagrin of the female gender. But this point of thought was opposed by Nwadume Maximillian, a clinical psychologist and a public affairs analyst, who thinks that the male folks did not receive any of the rights and benefits that they enjoy on a platter of gold, but that they earned all of it as a result of their resolve to achieve and acquire.
As the social media has become the most powerful tool of influence in the 21st century, promoters of diverse agenda have clung to it for the propagation of their ideologies and beliefs, and this reflects in the kind of opinions and views that people put out on the social media platforms. Prosper Ohayaga, a social affairs commentator, has this to say about the influence of social media on the spread of ideas.
“Surfing through the social media space (Twitter, Facebook, Instagram etc.), one would clearly notice that there are now more ‘feminists’ whose only reason for being on social media is to propagate and spread their ‘hate for men’ ideology. And it is quite unfortunate that the negative trend is garnering momentum as more women appear to be joining the bandwagon of misandrists.”
Then, a renowned social lawyer who also feels that the hate for men which is fast becoming a norm among ‘feminists,’ might escalate to the point where men become an endangered species and lose their right to live freely,has this to say.
“From the look of things, a time will soon come when men would be hounded about for doing nothing wrong, and be stripped of their fundamental rights to live freely, if this fierce trend of misandry is not nipped in the bud.” That was Barr. Laz Chikwe’s heartfelt submission. He also has genuine fears that misandry might soon take the place of feminism if people (particularly women) are not given proper orientation on the subject of feminism.
Ene Bello, an active Twitter user, once came up with a point of order on the misrepresentation and misinterpretation of feminism. “Today, we have ‘unapologetic feminists’ and ‘unrepentant feminists,’ and I ask, does a feminist need to be unrepentant or unapologetic?” she queried. Then she went on to expatiate on her point of thought. “I sincerely do not think that a feminist needs to repent from being that, or that one needs to be apologetic for being a feminist. I believe that feminism is a very positive ideology that does not put its adherents in a position that requires them to be apologetic or repentant.”
Ene’s opinion on feminism simply implies that people who are proponents of the feminism ideology are champions of a worthy cause and should neither feel sorry for being pro-feminist nor feel the need to change their mind-set. According to Ene, those who feel the urge to address themselves as ‘unrepentant’ or ‘unapologetic’ feminists probably think that there is a negative undertone to feminism in the same manner that homosexual practice is widely presumed to be absolutely negative.
Ene’s observation was corroborated by Chimamanda’s TED Talk speech of 2012 titled “We should all be feminists,” which lent credence to the call for the inclusiveness of feminism. In that speech, the renowned writer emphasized the need to quash the gender stereotype which limits women’s freedom to be whatever they desire and aspire to be. She queried the rationale behind consigning the female child to the kitchen and giving her male counterpart the carte-blanche to do whatever he deemed fit. She wondered why parents would often shy away from teaching their male children how to do domestic chores, particularly cooking, when such basic skills could benefit them in no small measure. She then concluded by stressing that feminism shouldn’t be an affair for women alone since its goal is to make it possible for gender equality to become the new normal.
In a similar development, Hafsat Okunola, a strong advocate for feminism and a Civil Society leader, took her own prognosis of the gender discourse to the point of questioning and challenging the conventional practice of putting women down or in the most, allowing them to only play second fiddle. She strongly opined that gender disparity should be jettisoned to give way for a more inclusive society. She further stressed the rudiments of feminism which according to her, derives from the ‘quest and pursuit for a better world.’
“How can we talk of real developments when some people are not allowed to make inputs? Why should we think that our world is perfect when gender bias is so rife that it stinks in the air? Why should a person be relegated just because of their biological formation? We can do better as humans by eliminating these traits of segregation that have continued to set us back and hamper our advancement,” stressed Hafsat.
And to put matters in proper perspective, renowned Indian academic and advocate for women inclusiveness, Dr. Medha Kotwal Lele, stated during one of her pro-feminist speeches that “Feminism is a very liberating idea. It is asking for equality. Equality between men and women. Equality of rights and entitlements. Equality in our gender roles inside and outside the house.
“Feminists are asking for equality for all men and women across all social divisions, racial divisions, divisions created by colour, by faith, by religion, in fact, feminism is asking for a just and equitable society.” Medha’s views are shared by a large number of opinion-holders who believe that the relegation of women is about the gravest injustice ever perpetrated in the history of humanity.
While the advocates for gender equality and women inclusiveness will not tone down on their call for a change of status quo, male chauvinists and advocates of patriarchy are asking why gender equality should be accepted when the male folks are more productive and physically stronger than their female counterparts. Darasimi Adeduntan, an opinion holder, is of the view that women can never be equal to their male counterparts because of the natural differences that exist between the two sexes. He opines that for the fact that men are built to be more cerebral and physically stronger than women, they are clearly more disposed to leading and exerting more influence than the members of the opposite sex who according to him, “are not inclined to achieving the feats that men are capable of.”
Then, there are also the cynical opinion holders who have agreed that gender equality could be accepted, but under certain conditions which include the equal sharing of responsibilities between the two sexes; that the woman will contribute the same quota as her man, to the running of the home and to other financial responsibilities. The cynics are also of the opinion that the female folks would have to engage in activities that require physical strength like their male counterparts, for gender equality to be accepted and adopted. But feminists have also challenged the cynical reasoning with the allusion that gender equality has no link with the use of physical strength in getting work done.
And, there is also the religious aspect to all of the arguments which strictly stipulates that the man can never be equal with the woman who was created to serve his purposes. Dr. Godswill Esele, a clergyman, is of the opinion that God did not create the two genders to be equal. He stated further that woman was created to fulfil the man’s needs and desires and to help him actualize his goals, and not to rub shoulders with him. He added that any doctrine or ideology that does not adhere to the biblical standards on gender should be discarded.
Then, from Islamic perspective, much can’t be said as there aren’t any know Islamic laws that place the woman at par with the man. This fact reflects in the culture of Islamic culture which bestows on the man the headship of his family, and allows him the rights to decide for his wife how to live, though there are few cases where women under the circumstances in view, hold out their opinions and act at will.
Now, there also those who consider the feminism ideology as laden with hypocrisy. Their perception stems from what they consider as ‘feminists’ selectiveness’ which they define as the tendency of feminists to stay mum over some issues, particularly the ones that do not affect them directly, and cry blue murder when their interests are tampered with. They are always quick to point to the social malaises bedevilling Northern Nigeria as some of the issues that ought to attract the attention and condemnation of feminists. Obinna Akachukwu, a social affairs commentator, has this to say about feminism: the
“I often say that feminism is a game of interests. The people who come all out to attack men on social media and cry blue murder when unverified cases of rape are spewed up on the internet, have all seen the injustices been meted out at young girls in Northern Nigeria, but have decided to keep mute. Why can’t they challenge such injustices? But you see them coming out to brandish their fangs on social media whenever issues that don’t amount to anything are brought up. They should change their approach. They should learn to deal with the real issues. That’s how we can be convinced that they are for real.”
Chimamanda’s words on the true essence of feminism couldn’t have said it concluded this better. “Feminism is a positive thing that is only been misunderstood by those who do not understand its tenets.” By that expression, feminism has been clearly identified as the most potent way of putting everyone in the spotlight, not just the female folks. Essentially, it must not be misunderstood to mean the hate for men or masculinity. It is very far from that. Feminism, according to Chimamanda is to accept that there is a problem with gender as it is today, and take a decisive actions to fix it.
