• Against the eternal reign of Patriarchy. Is it an all-male conspiracy?

    An intentional introspection coupled with a vigorous, unwavering search through ancient text in all forums, reinforces the notion that males are considerably dominant, whichever way you choose to define dominance, over their female counterparts. Following this assertion, a feminist could rightly but speculatively argue that the writers of most, if not all ancient text, were biased and intended to depict this incessant male dominance so as to intentionally bastardize souls of humanity so that they subdue the presence of the female species in all forums.

    My rebuttal response would be first to ask the feminists why the females could not, or did not start the chain of dominance by subduing their male counterparts and secondly to assert that whether the ancient texts are woven in mythology or not is immaterial. The notion that it is natural for males to dominate would still remain from the fact that the minds of whoever wrote the ancient texts depicted a great deal of desire for male dominance. The myth-laden ancient text (assuming we look at ancient texts as mythical), clearly show the writer writing out loud, their desire for male dominance.

    This endemic, human desire to portray male dominance does not leave out the fact that even a supreme being, God, has been portrayed to be a male figure in some common religious text. It is ineffectual for the skeptics of religion to argue otherwise because the point will still remain that whoever wrote some of the common religious text, whether mythical or not, had a predilection to masculinize God. So, it is in this preference for a masculine representation of God that the mystery of male dominance would lie.

    These retrospective accounts of our patriarchal origin bring me to a subtle conclusion that the mystery of male dominance lies in this profound desire, in males, as we have unraveled, both contemporary and ancient, to be supreme figures.

    The instinct of male dominance is eternally woven in the Y chromosome (a male sex chromosome), so the feminists’ naive attempts to counter this genetic predisposition of the human race is not only bound in futility but also a parochial pursuit. Why am I saying the feminists’ attempts are naive? It’s because the prevailing rhetoric of these activists is imbued with ad hominem rants of equality but not objective ones. Their rants often fail to bridge the subtle chasm between “equality” and “sameness” as the two phenomena, if not often interchanged, are both often not understood.

    The disorienting implications of this interchange between equal and same is what is manifesting as the rampant divorce rates, rapidly budding feminists’ groups and outlandish ideas such as affirmative action. This brings me to what is the way out of this budding society of ours that is increasingly laden with derailing feminists’ ideologies.

    Why man’s best friend is a dog but woman’s best friend is a diamond. We are different!

    Whether women and men are equal is a moral and political question but whether they are the same is a scientific one. Much as it is important that we are equal, it is more important to understand that we are not the same. Men and women are not better than, smarter than the other but simply and profoundly different. That’s why generally, man’s best friend is a dog and woman’s best friend is a diamond. However, it is important to note that there are anomalies in this general trend where some women have masculine characteristics as some men have feminine ones. Their significance to the matter of feminism is pretty little, so I’ll leave that discussion out.

    It is further more important for feminists to understand this subtle difference between “same” and “equal” because it is from this misunderstanding that a Pandora’s box of broken marriages hence families has been opened.

    We are equal, implying we should have equal access to opportunities and social services. This is what feminists should be championing instead of fore-fronting their naive, egoistic agendas largely inspired by earning money from support groups and forging a livelihood. In fact, most feminists, especially the women, are betraying their female counterparts by using this naive and impassioned activism to steer their personal agendas which is a clear indication of humanity’s innate inclination to selfishness.

    I agree that there is a wide chasm between women and access to social services, especially in Africa and that some African men are mischievous and irresponsible, but I cannot agree that a formidable way out of this predicament is for women to radically alienate from their male counterparts as though the females were fighting an all-male conspiracy.

    I can comfortably argue that the way out ultimately lies in, and starts from families. I’m neither claiming to be an expert in marriage nor am I married but from my experiential wisdom on this earth, I would say that it is incumbent on the husband and wife and or guardians (in case of orphaned children and divorced couples) in a home to display equality to their children through actions that break the relic of prejudice that females are inferior. They should however carefully balance this breakage of prejudice with counteractive activities that display to their children that females are different from males. This is tackling the problem of gender inequality head on and from the source, since family is the basic and fundamental unit of society. This way, we are poised to see a paradigm shift in societal notions regarding gender inequality whereby everyone will know their position and role in society hence breeding harmony. Are you ready for harmony?