BUNMI AROYEWUN
On Tuesday, December 2, 2014, Jibril Sado wrote
a rejoinder to an article published in The PUNCH,
titled, How to treat a n*ked woman. The write-up
was a response to an earlier one written on
November 27, 2014 by Abimbola Adelakun.
Adelakun who took her inspiration from some
women and men in faraway Kenya that
“protested a culture that strips a woman – to
enhance her dignity and protect the sanctity of
their society” had in the write-up surrendered to
all values that are antithetical to Africa, elevated
even the strange modern culture that is hunting
the West and condemned African culture as a
myth that never existed.
In her words, “It never fails to amuse how some
folk paralyse themselves with nostalgia of an
Africa that probably never existed… Today, a
number of the values people attribute to
traditional African values are Victorian ideals,
prompted by colonial incursion into their
societies.”
The writer also blamed “shame” about n*dity or
being “n*ked” on social conditioning, quoting a
misleading anthropological account by Alfred B.
Ellis – first published in 1894 and “some other
accounts” that debunk myths of sUxual
puritanism – where people have s*x only for
procreation.
But Jibril Sado in an attempt to exonerate women
from taking responsibility through their
subscription to lewd culture that prompted men
to prowl on them blamed the African and
Arabian worlds for s*xual harassments of
women. He also holds the puritan culture
responsible for allowing such other issues like the
Kenyan woman harassment to thrive.
The article keeps one wondering if Sado had the
slightest understanding of the implication of his
assertion as he failed to convincingly prove to his
readers the particular aspects of the African and
Arabian social systems that encourage abuse and
disrespect of the women folk.
Contrary to his assertion on the
inappropriateness of the African and Arabian
culture, the modern day culture (not only
Western) which has been imported from different
climates and region, is leading the womenfolk
towards annihilation both in substance and
figure. There are various interpretations of what
defines a sophisticated woman, all of which defies
the true essence of her existence and impacts
negatively on her natural purpose.
The woman these days dominates discussions in
many fora: seminars, symposiums and academic
gatherings. She is discussed in various media
outfits: both print and broadcast; online
publications and tabloids. Some of the discussions
often steer up quite a lot of arguments, debates
and in fact inspires further studies which I
suppose is because of her uniqueness.
The woman has also occupied an interesting
position in the hearts of many in these past few
weeks; thanks to the United Nations day tagged:
the International Day for the Rejection of
Violence Against Women.
Writing about the uniqueness of the woman can
be very moving and amusing. Thanks to the
woman, for without her, the future of man is
insecure. Thus, the woman, with her overbearing
presence in the society, deserves to occupy the
most conceivable elevated and honourable
position!
Every man is required by the law of nature to
respect the emotions and position of every
woman in his life simply because he wouldn’t
find himself in any meaningful relationship and
the associated nomenclatures; be it a father,
brother, son or even in-law, except for the
consequential relevance and presence of a
woman’s figure in his life.
Violence against any female s*x, be it a child,
adolescent, spinster, married, widowed or aged, is
therefore a despicable act, not only towards the
individual but the general public. Violence, be it
s*xual or physical certainly cannot be excused
away on any justifiable reason. Such appalling
actions towards the female folk, who according to
some scholars, are the stronger of the two s*xes
(in terms of life expectancy) should never be
tolerated on the very vulnerable member of a
society.
Having said that, it must be stated unequivocally
that for every right, there is a corresponding duty
or obligation. We all might have read or heard
recently in the media, series of reports on the
notorious ill-famed paedophiles who could not
seek legal and upright means of satisfying their
canal desires than to seek and wrongly trap the
innocence of our female minors. How on earth
and why in all sense of decency will anyone who
calls himself a man with females in his family
and lineage enjoy inflicting indelible stigma and
harrowing pains in the life of an innocent minor,
all in the name of gratifying ill-fated s*xual urge?
It is either we have become more incognisant of
the rampaging effects of this act on our decaying
society, engendered by our negligence of good
moral practices on the mental health of people,
or we are simply not paying attention to the
consequences of licentiousness and promiscuity
on the society at large.
We seem to always want to emulate everything
from the West without a reason to look back and
sieve the grains from the chaff, the reverberation
of which is ripping the society apart.
It is obvious that every man who gratifies his
sexual urges from a minor doesn’t have the fire
of his animalistic passion lit by that minor, as
women, we therefore must be very cautious of
any of our actions that may spur potentially
rapacious men on, for one innocent, defenceless
child out there might be the one to pay the price
for our careless actions.
For crying out loud, why are women usually the
object often depicted as representing seduction
and s*xual themes? Why do we (women) allow
ourselves to be subjugated by the society by
dressing and dancing dishonourably on TV when
the men dress corporately even at beaches? Why
do we use ourselves as s*xual appeal for men
who eventually go away with all the benefits and
the profits of the promos? Why do we sell our
humanity and indeed our womanhood cheaply?
And why do women activists and civil society
groups keep criminal silence with none of them
embarking on a campaign for the restoration of
women values and dignity?
As women, we owe ourselves the duty to protect
ourselves and our future generation from being
constantly reduced to agents of entertainment.
This is depicted in the portrayals of women in
the various media as objects of sexual ignition.
For example, in a game of American football or
rugby, the men are usually well clad in their
sport suits leaving no part of the skin bare, but
the reverse is the case in the female version. This
is also reflected in athletics, long tennis, wrestling
and a host of other sports worldwide.
The question that now arises is: Who is more
deserving of a decent and protective sports suit
than the women? What social benefits are there
in exposing so much, all in the name of a game?
Our major problem is our inability to make
judgments based on the unfolding natural laws
which, if distorted, continue to impact negatively
on the structure of the society. Men and women
play complementary roles in the society. That is
the way of the natural laws, which are in
themselves inherent. Deviation from this is
usually detrimental, which explains the alarming
rate of s*xual perversion in different garbs.
Paradoxically, Sado advanced security reasons for
supporting legislative actions against outfits that
cover every inch of the body, but he
inadvertently contradicted the very essence of his
write-up, which is to show his solidarity for the
female folk.
Sado must understand that women who wear
apparels that conceal all parts of their body
simply do so on the basis of their religious beliefs
and under the protection of the constitution and
universal laws. Curiosity of a prying eye to know
the personality behind the cloak cannot diminish
this fundamental human right.
For men, who endlessly blame the women folk
for their uncontrollable sensual feelings and
assault, why not take to discipline. Lower your
gaze, refrain from lustful gazes and shun places
and sites that engender those feelings which
eventually stimulate the animal instinct and
incite you to anti-social behaviours!
Ms. Aroyewun wrote in from Lagos.
No comments:
Post a Comment