On Tuesday, December 2, 2014, Jibril Sado wrote a rejoinder to an article published in The PUNCH, titled, How to treat a naked 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 naked– 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 nudity or being “naked” on social conditioning, quoting a misleading anthropological account by Alfred B. Ellis – first published in 1894 and “some other accounts” that debunk myths of sexual puritanism – where people have sex only for procreation.
But 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 sexual 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 sex, 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 sexual 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 sexes (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 sexual 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 sexual themes? Why do we 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 sexual 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 sexual 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.