It all started with a post.
Click here to read the trigger.
Click here to read my response.
Chibuike, in an attempt to support the struggle for gender equality, came up with a post that highlighted a major difference between men and women, and based on that difference, concluded that gender equality is the right way to go, regardless of that difference. Accurate I may say, except that that wasn’t what his post said.
You see Chibuike’s post did not reflect the mindset of a person who stands for gender equality. What transpired from the post was the image of this male supremacist who thought of gender equality as something that men had to grant onto women. The tone of his entire post reeked of chauvinism and condescension.
The moment I read the title of his post, I knew I was in for something tragic. Then I saw a reference he made to Serena Williams and to how she had come to terms with the fact that it didn’t make sense to make one unique tennis tournament where women and men played against each other because male tennis players by the virtue of their sex were on an average stronger and faster than their female counterparts.
He then proceeded to say that when Serena made these declarations, she was attacked by feminists who claimed that she was being sexist and also belittling women; an attack that he couldn't prove.
Chibuike’s argument sounded logical, with a logical conclusion, but in reality it was flawed from the very beginning to the very end.
Most men and even some women, who identify as feminists, did not see how wrong that post was because Chibuike was smart enough to wrap his entire argument with a a dose of truth. It is true that men are on an average stronger and faster than women. It is also true that gender equality is the way to go. But did male domination happen by the virtue of their being the physically stronger and faster sex? And most importantly, is gender equality something men have to concede to women?
To highlight the fallacious nature of his argument, I mirrored his post and replaced gender equality with racial equality. I also wrapped my argument with some elements of truth and concluded that racial equality was something caucasians and Asians had to grant to black men because the former were the dominant races by the virtue of being to most intelligent amongst us.
Immediately some people read my write up they caught the fallacy in my argument and by consequence in the write up I had tried to mirror. But that wasn’t my actual objective.
My real objective was to point out the hypocrisy of the men who had agreed that Chibuike’s post was all layers of gold. And guess what? It worked. They said my write up was crap, which in fact was true, but they still argued that Chibuike’s write up was perfect.
There was a time I would have given men the benefit of doubt when it came to inequality of the sexes. There was a time I wouldn’t have argued that most of them didn’t even know that there was a discrimination going on since that’s how they had been used to all their lives. After all a fish doesn’t know it lives inside water since it has never set its tail on land. But are men like fish who have never set their tails on land? In this age of globalisation, when people travel around the world, when we have televisions, radios, the internet and we are constantly being updated about racial discrimination in foreign countries, religious genocides, sexual discrimination against queer people and abuse of disabled people, can men still say that they do not understand the concept of privilege?
The mistake I used to make was to think that a man who knows that he could be at the receiving end of a discrimination would know better than to treat women with that much disdain, but now I understand that human beings are vicious and that, if a man was made to feel like nothing by the virtue of his race or his sexual orientation, he might want to compensate for that lack of power by being cruel on those groups of people his own society has placed beneath him.
Men know that they are the privileged group in Nigeria. Chibuike knows that and he also knows that he is not privileged by the virtue of being physically stronger and faster than the average woman.
I won’t call Chibuike a misogynist because a misogynist believes that women are beneath men in all ramifications. But I will call Chibuike a chauvinist and that's because he still seeks gratification from knowing that he belongs to the physically stronger and faster sex and wants women to acknowledge that.
Chibuike wants to tell people why gender equality is the right way to go.
Chibuike mentions two areas in which men are better than women.
Chibuike mentions a famous woman who agrees with his point.
Chibuike then concludes that, yes gender equality is the way to go but that women should always have it in mind that men are somewhat better than women.
Does Chibuike know that there are areas in which women are better than men? Of course, he does.
Why didn’t Chibuike mention them in this post to balance his argument? Because that wouldn’t have made his conclusion logical.
And what was Chibuike’s conclusion? He concluded that gender equality is a social construct.
What is a social construct? As the expression suggests, social construct means something which requires the intervention of humans to actualize, so something artificial.
If gender equality is a social construct, does that mean that gender inequality is natural?
According to Chibuike, it is and the reason is because men are naturally stronger and faster than women.
Now we get to the crux of the matter.
Did men become the dominating sex just by the virtue of being stronger and faster? The answer is no.
Men did not become the dominating sex just by being faster and stronger. Men became the dominating sex by systematically alienating women from positions of power which consisted of stripping them of economical and political relevance.
If all it took was strength and speed to dominate, humans wouldn’t exist today, much less be the dominating species on Earth.
Humans are so weak and slow compared to other animals that they would have died out if they had not relied on their ability to think, communicate with other humans and build things. We have our physiology and opposable thumbs to thank for our existence. Think of what dolphins could build if they had human hands.
And if humans as a species could succeed in doing this, why couldn’t women also succeed in overturning patriarchy since they also possess intelligence, the ability to speak and to build things?
Just because women are physically weaker, doesn’t mean that women are coward. There is a big difference between physical weakness and cowardice. Human beings are not cowards. Women are not cowards. So, the strength and speed of men would never have been sufficient to relegate them to the background. What men did required more efforts than that.
A woman’s biggest ability is unfortunately also her biggest weakness: pregnancy.
All men had to do was take advantage of this period of a woman’s life and limit her entire existence to that.
Pregnancy is a wonderful experience. Being able to conceive, carry and give birth to another life is something extraordinary. Other female animals do this but we are humans. We are evolved. We can speak and we can be suave with words.
“Little girl, would you love to fall in love someday and be with that person for the rest of your life?” Yes, I do.
“Little girl, would you like to have children with that person, someday?” Yes, I would love to.
“Would you love your new family to live a good life?” Yes, I would.
“We are humans, we are basic, we survive by farming, we need people to work on our farms, so you and your loved one need to have as many children as possible. Do you think you can do that?” Yes, I do.
And that was how they gave women a purpose. And the rest became history.
The first step women took to bridge the gap between the sexes was to claim back their political power, so they fought for their right to vote.
The second step women took to bridge the gap between the sexes was to claim back their financial power, so they fought for their right to work and to get paid decent wages.
The third step women took to bridge the gap between the sexes was to fight for their right to be educated because better education meant better understanding of politics, access to better job opportunities and better financial status.
In this modern age, women are fighting their fourth fight to bridge the gap between the sexes and that is the fight for their reproductive rights. Women want to break away from the reproductive chain.
So it’s not about how strong or fast men are. It never was. And women are not waiting on men to give them anything. The only time women ever needed anything from men was at the very beginning when they fought for their right to vote because men alone could make that decision since men alone were in the parliament.
After that first victory, women only needed other women to understand and join the fight.
So no, gender equality is not a social construct because men had to make efforts to convince women to renounce their power in order for them to become the dominating sex.
Gender inequality is the real social construct and now it is being deconstructed through feminism. What men are witnessing is not a deviation from the natural, it is a return to our original setting, in which men and women worked together to advance as a species.
If you think I am not being factual, just think of racial inequality and tell me that white people did not make efforts to become the dominating race. Tell me that white people did not strip black people of economical and political power. Tell me that white people did not rely on manipulation and cunningness to subjugate black people.
Tell me this and I will concede that every inequality we are experiencing today is natural and that we just we have to rely on the benevolence of the people at the top of our hierarchy to be treated with dignity.
Tell me and I will stop being a feminist.
Click here to read the trigger.
Click here to read my response.
Chibuike, in an attempt to support the struggle for gender equality, came up with a post that highlighted a major difference between men and women, and based on that difference, concluded that gender equality is the right way to go, regardless of that difference. Accurate I may say, except that that wasn’t what his post said.
You see Chibuike’s post did not reflect the mindset of a person who stands for gender equality. What transpired from the post was the image of this male supremacist who thought of gender equality as something that men had to grant onto women. The tone of his entire post reeked of chauvinism and condescension.
The moment I read the title of his post, I knew I was in for something tragic. Then I saw a reference he made to Serena Williams and to how she had come to terms with the fact that it didn’t make sense to make one unique tennis tournament where women and men played against each other because male tennis players by the virtue of their sex were on an average stronger and faster than their female counterparts.
He then proceeded to say that when Serena made these declarations, she was attacked by feminists who claimed that she was being sexist and also belittling women; an attack that he couldn't prove.
Chibuike’s argument sounded logical, with a logical conclusion, but in reality it was flawed from the very beginning to the very end.
Most men and even some women, who identify as feminists, did not see how wrong that post was because Chibuike was smart enough to wrap his entire argument with a a dose of truth. It is true that men are on an average stronger and faster than women. It is also true that gender equality is the way to go. But did male domination happen by the virtue of their being the physically stronger and faster sex? And most importantly, is gender equality something men have to concede to women?
To highlight the fallacious nature of his argument, I mirrored his post and replaced gender equality with racial equality. I also wrapped my argument with some elements of truth and concluded that racial equality was something caucasians and Asians had to grant to black men because the former were the dominant races by the virtue of being to most intelligent amongst us.
Immediately some people read my write up they caught the fallacy in my argument and by consequence in the write up I had tried to mirror. But that wasn’t my actual objective.
My real objective was to point out the hypocrisy of the men who had agreed that Chibuike’s post was all layers of gold. And guess what? It worked. They said my write up was crap, which in fact was true, but they still argued that Chibuike’s write up was perfect.
There was a time I would have given men the benefit of doubt when it came to inequality of the sexes. There was a time I wouldn’t have argued that most of them didn’t even know that there was a discrimination going on since that’s how they had been used to all their lives. After all a fish doesn’t know it lives inside water since it has never set its tail on land. But are men like fish who have never set their tails on land? In this age of globalisation, when people travel around the world, when we have televisions, radios, the internet and we are constantly being updated about racial discrimination in foreign countries, religious genocides, sexual discrimination against queer people and abuse of disabled people, can men still say that they do not understand the concept of privilege?
The mistake I used to make was to think that a man who knows that he could be at the receiving end of a discrimination would know better than to treat women with that much disdain, but now I understand that human beings are vicious and that, if a man was made to feel like nothing by the virtue of his race or his sexual orientation, he might want to compensate for that lack of power by being cruel on those groups of people his own society has placed beneath him.
Men know that they are the privileged group in Nigeria. Chibuike knows that and he also knows that he is not privileged by the virtue of being physically stronger and faster than the average woman.
I won’t call Chibuike a misogynist because a misogynist believes that women are beneath men in all ramifications. But I will call Chibuike a chauvinist and that's because he still seeks gratification from knowing that he belongs to the physically stronger and faster sex and wants women to acknowledge that.
Chibuike wants to tell people why gender equality is the right way to go.
Chibuike mentions two areas in which men are better than women.
Chibuike mentions a famous woman who agrees with his point.
Chibuike then concludes that, yes gender equality is the way to go but that women should always have it in mind that men are somewhat better than women.
Does Chibuike know that there are areas in which women are better than men? Of course, he does.
Why didn’t Chibuike mention them in this post to balance his argument? Because that wouldn’t have made his conclusion logical.
And what was Chibuike’s conclusion? He concluded that gender equality is a social construct.
What is a social construct? As the expression suggests, social construct means something which requires the intervention of humans to actualize, so something artificial.
If gender equality is a social construct, does that mean that gender inequality is natural?
According to Chibuike, it is and the reason is because men are naturally stronger and faster than women.
Now we get to the crux of the matter.
Did men become the dominating sex just by the virtue of being stronger and faster? The answer is no.
Men did not become the dominating sex just by being faster and stronger. Men became the dominating sex by systematically alienating women from positions of power which consisted of stripping them of economical and political relevance.
If all it took was strength and speed to dominate, humans wouldn’t exist today, much less be the dominating species on Earth.
Humans are so weak and slow compared to other animals that they would have died out if they had not relied on their ability to think, communicate with other humans and build things. We have our physiology and opposable thumbs to thank for our existence. Think of what dolphins could build if they had human hands.
And if humans as a species could succeed in doing this, why couldn’t women also succeed in overturning patriarchy since they also possess intelligence, the ability to speak and to build things?
Just because women are physically weaker, doesn’t mean that women are coward. There is a big difference between physical weakness and cowardice. Human beings are not cowards. Women are not cowards. So, the strength and speed of men would never have been sufficient to relegate them to the background. What men did required more efforts than that.
A woman’s biggest ability is unfortunately also her biggest weakness: pregnancy.
All men had to do was take advantage of this period of a woman’s life and limit her entire existence to that.
Pregnancy is a wonderful experience. Being able to conceive, carry and give birth to another life is something extraordinary. Other female animals do this but we are humans. We are evolved. We can speak and we can be suave with words.
“Little girl, would you love to fall in love someday and be with that person for the rest of your life?” Yes, I do.
“Little girl, would you like to have children with that person, someday?” Yes, I would love to.
“Would you love your new family to live a good life?” Yes, I would.
“We are humans, we are basic, we survive by farming, we need people to work on our farms, so you and your loved one need to have as many children as possible. Do you think you can do that?” Yes, I do.
And that was how they gave women a purpose. And the rest became history.
The first step women took to bridge the gap between the sexes was to claim back their political power, so they fought for their right to vote.
The second step women took to bridge the gap between the sexes was to claim back their financial power, so they fought for their right to work and to get paid decent wages.
The third step women took to bridge the gap between the sexes was to fight for their right to be educated because better education meant better understanding of politics, access to better job opportunities and better financial status.
In this modern age, women are fighting their fourth fight to bridge the gap between the sexes and that is the fight for their reproductive rights. Women want to break away from the reproductive chain.
So it’s not about how strong or fast men are. It never was. And women are not waiting on men to give them anything. The only time women ever needed anything from men was at the very beginning when they fought for their right to vote because men alone could make that decision since men alone were in the parliament.
After that first victory, women only needed other women to understand and join the fight.
So no, gender equality is not a social construct because men had to make efforts to convince women to renounce their power in order for them to become the dominating sex.
Gender inequality is the real social construct and now it is being deconstructed through feminism. What men are witnessing is not a deviation from the natural, it is a return to our original setting, in which men and women worked together to advance as a species.
If you think I am not being factual, just think of racial inequality and tell me that white people did not make efforts to become the dominating race. Tell me that white people did not strip black people of economical and political power. Tell me that white people did not rely on manipulation and cunningness to subjugate black people.
Tell me this and I will concede that every inequality we are experiencing today is natural and that we just we have to rely on the benevolence of the people at the top of our hierarchy to be treated with dignity.
Tell me and I will stop being a feminist.
No comments:
Post a Comment