Ikhide, you're funny. But are you sure you're responding to my position? Or Farooq's? I haven't read anything here that remotely endorses the type of patriarchal tyranny you eloquently describe. What Farooq and I are critiquing is a tendency in liberal feminist circles to rail against the traditional institution of marriage as a touchstone for their self-affirming discourses and for their rhetoric of self-liberation. The bashing of traditional marriage, gender roles, and motherhood are now part of the rhetorical and literary repertoire of the likes of Adichie. I reject the orthodoxy of a romantic, unchanging African patriachal order in the name of culture and traditions. But I also reject the lazy orthodox liberal feminist position of scapegoating traditional marital norms that are willfully embraced by discerning adults. Why do these people feel a need to anchor their critique of the excesses of patriarchy and gender inequality on a snide, condescending dismissal of marriage, motherhood, and domesticity? That's my question. To each his/her own. You said it yourself. I'd say to the Adichies of this world: why not practice what suits you and critique discourses and societal institutions that are not receptive to your choice while allowing grown folks to do what they please even if you think in your haughty mind that they are throwing their lives away at the altar of patriarchal hegemony? Did you read what Adichie wrote about her married, mothering friends? That's offensive in its omnipotent, condescending sanctimony. The problem lies in the idea that we're so transcendental in our thinking about gender that we can pass judgment on folks who submit themselves to gender configurations that depart from what we consider humane, liberating, or progressive. The lack of self-reflexivity in these liberal feminist discourses is what we're critiquing. Stock liberal positions do not fly with me, sorry. They are overly reductive. I can mention other arenas in which the stock positions of Western liberal discourse runs into real problems when transposed on African conditions. Have you listened to the standard liberal narratives on climate change and Africa?
By the way, the lack of self-reflexivity also afflicts patriarchal discourses on the African side. The response of the Nigerian journalist that Adichie quotes at the end of her piece encapsulates this malaise. The fellow uttered a classic sexist line in response to her retort that journalists would not ask a male author when they would get married. His response? "But you're not a man." The guy is so socialized into the patriarchal order that he is incapable of acknowledging Adichie's offense at his question or the fact that the premise of his question and response is irredeemably sexist. The journalist's discourse, like the patriarchal discourses in our country, is almost pathetic in its haughty self-assurance, and in its myopia and insularity. But I feel strongly that Adichie and other people who subscribe to her kind of feminist arrogance ( which thrives on lecturing those who go into marital and other gendered arrangements that violate the orthodox feminist position) are afflicted with the same lack of self-reflexivity and myopia. They consider their choice superior to that of African/Nigerian women who want to invest their time, energy, and patience in marriage and its burdens. And, like that journalist that Adichie quotes, they are so entrenched and so haughty in their conviction that they don't even realize that they're being condescending towards their fellow Nigerian/African women who choose the traditional path of getting married, having kids, nurturing a home, and putting up with the burdens and pains that come with them. In life every decision has consequences and sacrifices. Marriage and domesticity are no exceptions. You seem to want to focus on the extremes, abuses, and on the offensive patriarchal norms in Nigerian society. No sane person would support those. But it should be okay to mock women who make choices outside of your liberal (or liberating) convictions as a foil for critiquing the excesses and oppressions of patriarchy.
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 6:05 PM, Ikhide <xokigbo@yahoo.com> wrote:--Farooq, Ebe.I am a bit surprised at your dismissive approaches to Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie's piece. She has intervened thoughtfully in a conversation that has been going on in the literary world since even before the days of Buchi Emecheta. It is about the changing power dynamics in relationships as traditional roles have changed over tume. In the patriarchy that is today's Nigeria. attitudes about women and children are ossified even as roles and the world, btw, have changed. It is a very oppressive backward attitude, that I must add is not really that indigenous to Nigeria. Men, aided by submissive women have held on to paternalistic, oppressive roles even where it is inappropriate. The result has been catastrophic in the cities, for instance where I grew up watching men holding on to abusive polygamous arrangements in face-me I face you hovels ("one-bedroom apartments to use the term extremely loosely housing a man and his many wives. If you think I am lying, go to the barracks and see for yourself). Our men wish to eat their cake and have it. If your wife goes to work and does 16 hours a day and you go to work and do 8 hours a day, why are you waiting for her to come home and do the damn cooking? What is "African" about that? It is called cheating, my friend. Adichie was single, is married, and like all of us, has encountered what passes for marriage in Nigeria, up close and personal. She is not knocking the institution; she is saying show some respect.Nigerian women are routinely treated extremely poorly in Nigeria, and I am not generalizing. The laws of the land are worthless because who are you going to run to, if not to the same assholes that beat you up in the first place. It is nice that Ms. Staples wishes to glamorize the institution of marriage in "Africa." but I have news for her; marriage in Nigeria is not all that it is cracked up to be. Nollywood is a crude exaggeration of what passes for life in Nigeria but there is truth in the atrocious acting. Women and children are treated like second-class citizens in Nigeria and no amount of defensiveness will change that. Go and read the harrowing book by Olusegun Obasanjo's wife, 'Bitter-Sweet: My Life with Obasanjo' published by Diamond Publications Ltd. Obasanjo is a cave man and an asshole. Any woman that reads that book will be turned off by the notion of ever getting married. Certainly not to the likes of Obasanjo, and he is not an outlier in that blasted country. I was there two Septembers ago and I was appalled by the treatment being meted out to women and children, especially in the crowded cities. In the rural areas where men and women still have defined roles, life is much better for women, but it is still not life in a cruise ship. It is a man's world, especially in the land of my birth. Too bad.
As a father of two daughters, the day will never come when I will ask them, em, when are you getting married? My prayer is for their happiness and you know what, sometimes it is better to be alone than to be lonely. In this day and age what is the big deal about being married? The answer is this: To each, his or her own. Relationships are personal and private and to hell with what tradition and society demand.The thing that really amuses me and saddens me sometimes is the notion that because you are a walking tripod with something between your legs, you are automatically smarter than a women. Only Providence knows how much we have lost because we insist on doing it our way WITHOUT any input from our female partners. You all know what I am talking about, LOL! I have two daughters, and I am going to spend everything I have on them so that they can be productive citizens of the world. I am not bringing them up so that some jerk can yell: "Ominira! Where is my eba???" Go and get it your damn self ;-)I shall be back folks, let me go and put some water on the fire. Madam is coming back from work. She likes her eba hot ;-) I wonder if the Merlot is a good bottle....- Ikhide
From: Farooq A. Kperogi <farooqkperogi@gmail.com>
To: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com
Sent: Wed, December 15, 2010 9:45:35 AM
Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie
You are absolutely correct, Moses. I never understood La Vonda's intervention as an endorsement of gender inequality or as a denunciation of the quest for gender equality in Nigeria or anywhere else, as some people here seem to have done.I understand her as inviting Chimamanda to:1. think of what is often called "feminism's unfinished business" in the West, particularly the consequences of feminism's uncritical, unreflective celebration and adoption for the now much-maligned institution of marriage, motherhood, and the moral imperatives of reproductive futurism among women whose socio-historical experiences don't necessarily lend themselves to some of the impulses that actuate the more radical, misandrist constructs of so-called radical feminism.2. realize that the innocuous patriarchal self-esteem (or, if you like, superbia) she ridicules in Nigerian men (such as the husband who insists on paying the family's rent even when the wife is economically better off) is actually now so scarce a cultural commodity in black America that it is highly prized by many black American women who have gained most of what Chimamanda seems to want for Nigeria women but who have lost the old-fashioned chivalry and "male responsibility" that was part of the bedrock of stable families in black America.3. be conscious of the fact that her angst is mere vain, petit-bourgeois indulgence which, though perfectly legitimate, occludes the concerns of swaths of ordinary women who would not mind having husbands that are actually responsible and "culturally sensitive" enough to provide for their families, who are as unconcerned as the ordinary man about who becomes a governor, etc.--Although the point can be made that these thoughts are inspired by an instinctual capitulation to hegemonic patriarchal cultural narratives, they should not be silenced by "progressive" discursive tyranny. There is not just one way to appropriate our social reality.Farooq
1 Park Place South
Suite 817C
Atlanta, GA, USA.
30303
Cell: (+1) 404-573-9697
Blog: www.farooqkperogi.blogspot.com
"The nice thing about pessimism is that you are constantly being either proven right or pleasantly surprised." G. F. Will
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Moses Ebe Ochonu <meochonu@gmail.com> wrote:
LaVonda, thank you jare for standing up for marriage! Marriage is sometimes over-vilified by those who wish to make a case for the virtues of single womanhood or malehood and by those who seek to rightly make the point that marriage should not define a person's worth or identity. My problem is that, like Adichie did in her piece, they get overly defensive about it and make marriage seem like an antiquated marker of a simple, unremarkable life. Some of them even seem to want to make you apologize for being married. Adichie was out of line talking about her married friends in such a condescending manner. Their choice and all that comes with it is no less valid, sophisticated, and self-affirming than the choice that Adichie has made (so far): not to subject herself to the demands and obsequies of marriage.
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Emeagwali, Gloria (History) <emeagwali@mail.ccsu.edu> wrote:
--You have tilted the discussion slightly but this one is a good read. The initial discussion seemed to be about gender equality and the alleged negative contributions
of that quest to drug/alcohol addiction, singlehood, loneliness, unhappiness etc.
This one is about mainstream white feminist discourse vs what is sometimes dubbed 'womanist' discourse.
Cool.
GE
From: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com [mailto:usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Lavonda Staples
Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2010 2:03 PM
To: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie
Dr. Gloria,
I am not arguing against anything. I'm trying to point out that the writing/opinions offered by Ms. Adichie are nearly the exact same verbiage espoused during the period leading up to failed attempts at an Equal Rights Amendment in the late 1960's and early 1970's. The rights and privileges, fulfillment of the United States Constitution, sought by those women were not aligned with the needs of common women. The forerunners of that movement, the most vocal and the most seen (i.e. Gloria Steinem) were White, privileged, and very far removed from the daily lives of women of color. There was no component which dealt with rights for Latina women who were at that time heavily involved in hand labour in sweat shops, agricultural labor in the Armerican west and southwest, or their access to medical and educational facilities. Concurrently, there was little attention paid to childcare for the increasing numbers of Black women who would go through the experience of motherhood either alone or with the help of an urban matriarchal system. Additionally, Black Americans faced the freedoms given by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 with agricultural and industrial skills. This was truly unfortunate as the advance into the techonological age had already been noted by the American president, Dwight D. Eisenhower (in his "Military Industrial Complex" speech) nearly 10 years prior. Added to that the chaos which marked the transition from the Civil Rights Era to the Black Power Movement and the rising action of the economic crisis which would soon engulf all Americans without regard to race or gender. The rhetoric of the women's movement was exceedingly injurious to Black families as the needs of White women really had nothing in common with the needs of Black and Hispanic women or families. Even up to 1974, Black women were waging fights for simple school houses in their communities (see, "Silver Rights" by Betty Curry - re: education in Sunflower County, Drew, MS). Black women bought into a debate which was not to their advantage. As late as 1974 Black men were still fighting for recognition within the AFL-CIO, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, and the UAW (see, "Race, Reform and Rebellion..." by Manning Marable - re: A. Phillip Randolp and Bayard Rustin as paid voices against the causes of Black men in the UAW).
The problem with asking for gender equality between Black Americans at that time is that there was no racial or economic parity. So the tenets of feminism could not be applied and acted as a wedge between Black men and Black women. Until circa 1964, Blacks married and stayed married at higher rates or equal with Whites. The raison d'etre was survival as a community and, in the microcosm, as a family. The White feminist argument, at best, is a selfish individualistic argument (it's my turn, it's all about me, I need to be fulfilled, etc. and on and on). The arguments and debates from Hispanic and Black women was ALWAYS family centered, education as a route for improvement for family, medical access to improve pre-natal, neo-natal, and maternal care, safe and affordable childcare so that the FAMILY could prosper through working more hours or simply working outside of the home. Contemporarily, the authorship of White feminists STILL shows a clear line of demarcation with the very history of minority women. In the last ten years there have been titles such as, "The Second Shift," "The Sandwich Generation." Minority women have ALWAYS worked outside the home or had to pursue labor at home to gain extra funds. Minority women have ALWAYS taken care of parents out of respect and duty to the family system. So how in the world does White feminist rhetoric have any real world utilty to African, African American, and Latinas? It doesn't!
Ms. Adichie, in that short article, was talking very "white." She was speaking as if she had no knowledge of the situation in which her sisters live within. I stand on what I said just like John Henry - like a man who will not be moved: her statements as a celebrated, educated, woman of privilege reflect very little, if any real-world knowledge. They are dangerous to the point of sedition. And she does not demonstrate, not even in the modicum, a working knowledge of the immediate fight of every day needs of women. An immediate need of women in Lagos or Los Angeles, is not to become governor or even mayor. In my opinion, just one voice in six billion, she might listen to the proverb regarding putting out the fire on herself before she puts out the fire on the child. "Herself" might be a collection of needs which include healthcare and education and "the child" in this case, is her associates' political desires.
It ain't what you want it to be - sometimes it is what it is.
La Vonda R. Staples
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Emeagwali, Gloria (History) <emeagwali@mail.ccsu.edu> wrote:
Lavonda,
That someone should be arguing against equality, whether in terms of gender,
racial or ethnic equality, in the 21st century, is shocking.
Gloria Emeagwali
www.ccsu.edu/afstudy/archive.html
www.africahistory.net
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
--La Vonda R. Staples
Adjunct Professor, Department of Social Sciences
Community College of the District of Columbia
314-570-6483
"It is the duty of all who have been fortunate to receive an education to assist others in the same pursuit."
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
--
There is enough in the world for everyone's need but not for everyone's greed.
---Mohandas Gandhi
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.comYou received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
--
There is enough in the world for everyone's need but not for everyone's greed.
---Mohandas Gandhi
--
There is enough in the world for everyone's need but not for everyone's greed.
---Mohandas Gandhi
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
No comments:
Post a Comment