This post is un-African

Source: Masterfile.com

 

While I was away someone invented the afronometer and put mostly men in charge of it. And there is one peculiar thing about the afronometer: when it comes to making progress towards treating women with dignity and allowing them to exercise rights that were previously denied, it is rarely ever on the women’s side.

I have met with the afronometer when someone is arguing about the un-'Africanness' of gay rights, which is another debate altogether. Most times the afronometer is thrust forcefully upon me during discourse about why some things about the way women are treated need to change. As soon as I open my mouth to make a case for progress, someone somewhere, usually a man, blurts out: But that is so un-African!

Source: Africanholocaust.com

So I was not surprised to read an article on the Marriage Bill where a lawyer from the East Africa Law Society, no less, was quoted as having said that lawyers needed to advise Members of Parliament against the Bill because it is, wait for it, un-African. Never mind that he did not explain what was so un-African about it, or perhaps the reporter was only too happy to have gotten the perfect quote out of him, that he did not bother to put him to task to explain what about the Bill fails to measure up to the African standard. Other leaders, among them Kakamega senator Bonny Khalwale called on parliament to africanise the Bill.

What is African? How African are the clothes that you wear, the products that you use, your education, your religion,  your gods and so forth? If you were to examine every little thing about your life and culture, how much African would your afronometer find in it, or is 'Africanness' the convenient card we pull out to stand in the way of change that our minds have refused to process? A lot has changed since the origin of the African man.

Source: Superstock.com

We have adopted some cultures and assimilated them into ours, discarded some and retained others, and by so doing we have shown that culture is not a static phenomenon. It is dynamic -- constantly changing with the times. We pick some, drop some and get on our way. That is why our views on marriage and the place of men and women in it are being reviewed to be in sync with the realities of this time. In any case, I would say that the Marriage Bill has recognised  what some men would call African culture fully, by officially embracing polygamy. But the clause that would have men’s boxers in a twist is probably the part where they have to get the consent of their first and other wives before bringing in new wives, and other such ‘un-African’ measures, whereas before they could do whatever they pleased without seeking anyone’s consent. The only men who should be running scared about the Marriage Bill are those whose treat women without decency, respect and dignity. Those who have been treating women with dignity, know that the Bill is just a physical reminder of what they have known to be right all along. 

And for those whose argument against the Bill is its 'Africanness' or lack of it: to say that something is un-African is a fallacy. If anyone has a problem with a law, a custom or anything else, he should state why that thing is a problem and argue out his case instead of hiding behind 'Africanness' only when it suits him.

Read a copy of the Marriage Bill, 2013 here, so that you can make an informed and objective contribution to the Legal and Justice Affairs parliamentary committee as it holds it's public hearings on the Bill around the country, this August: http://goo.gl/E6WKGZ