The Other Side of the Patriarchal Coin
Tags: Patriarchy, Social Justice, Essay, Feminism, Gender Equality

The Other Side of the Patriarchal Coin

Feminism: /ˈfɛmɪnɪz(ə)m/

(Noun) A social theory and political movement which argues that legal and social restrictions on women should be removed to bring about the equality of the sexes.

Simple, right? Why then has it become so confusing and complicated?

Recently, I came to the realisation that, like every social and political topic, there are a few schools of thought in feminism.

There is one which tries to achieve equality by tearing men down. Apparently, to achieve equality is to subject men to the same prejudice suffered by women. There is another which thinks gender equality can be achieved by focusing on the silliest elements of patriarchy. There is that which aims to exploit the idea gender equality in order to get what they do not deserve. There is also that which represents everything feminism is truly about.

Despite the different approaches, there is one thing they all agree on — women have been restricted all their lives. Their voices have been drowned in the sea of patriarchy. Women are victims.

Feminism is the movement that seeks to destroy the patriarchal system.

Patriarchy: /ˈpeɪtrɪɑːki/

(Noun) social organization marked by the supremacy of the father in the clan or family, the legal dependence of wives and children, and the reckoning of descent and inheritance in the male line.

With the above, it’s easy to conclude that in a patriarchal system, men have it good, and women do not, but digging deeper, you’ll find that the men have it just as rough as the women.

To be a woman in the aforementioned system is to be subject to the man, to be the subordinate by reason of your sex. The woman is the helper. That is a lot of suppression.

To be a man in the same system is to be a stoic entity, the epitome of strength and the sacrificial lamb. The man is the head. That’s a lot of responsibility.

But is that all there is to it?

Is patriarchy the beast that besets gender equality?

Where I come from (Nigeria), a woman is usually likened to a flower. She’s valuable, not to be mishandled, and that’s why everything is done is done to make her valuable enough by cultural standards — a good housekeeper, reserved, sweet, a virgin, etc.

A man, on the other hand, is trained to be the authority. He is outspoken, the one who brings home the bacon, and he must be tough.

There are no grey areas. If a man is caught getting involved in what is deemed a woman’s activity, he is “not a man”. That is the most emasculating phrase used in this society.

As much the woman is depicted as the victim, we need to understand that men also fall victim to the system.

A story was told of a woman who was so fond of her son and only child, that she never let him out of her sight. This irked her mother-in-law who felt the boy would grow up effeminate. A family meeting was held to that effect, and the child was taken away from his mother to stay with his grandmother because “the groom’s family doesn’t host suitors”.

When we talk about feminism, we talk about the restrictions on women. How about the restrictions on men?

The patriarchal system is a system that respects men and values women.

In a patriarchal system, the man is expendable.

Why is it that when in danger, the woman has to be protected, even if it at the man’s expense? In a shooting, he has to be the shield. It’s not like he likes the idea of being shot at. He isn’t immune to death either, but it’s expected of him. It is the right thing to do.

During the World War I, men were being pressured into joining the army.

A White Feather was given to men who were not enlisted in the army as a mark of cowardice. For fear of being branded a coward, a lot of them enlisted for the army disregarding the fact they were unfit.

Social emasculation is something men are at risk of. They can’t be caught doing anything unmanly. But a woman doesn’t face as much pressure. Homosexual women don’t face as much discrimination as homosexual men. A woman is allowed to be emotional, but a man can’t even cry lest the society questions his masculinity.

And what about social responsibilities in a relationship?

Why should he have to hold the door for the woman. Did she break her arm? When it’s cold, does he really have to sacrifice the warmth of his coat, so his woman won’t freeze. Why didn’t she bring a coat along? For every anniversary, he does the spending. Doesn’t he deserved to be spoiled too?

If we are fighting for gender equality, why are women still so reluctant to take up some of these responsibilities?

Why can’t they take a man out on a date? Hold the door while he goes in?

As much we like to deny it, we enjoy these little manifestations of patriarchy, and we refuse to let go of them or even reciprocate them.

Men are the like the queen in a chess game — the most powerful piece on the board, but expendable nevertheless. The essence of its power lies in the safety of the King, who in the patriarchal system, is the woman. The king might be limited, but it is the most important piece.

A woman is adored; a man, respected.

If we are going to truly achieve gender equality, we should be willing to give as much as we expect. If we want to be respected, we should learn to appreciate and value men. Otherwise, we should count all joy when men decide to stop treating us a delicate.