Gender advocacy as a concept is as old as modernity itself. A period considered by many as “Age of Reason” and “Enlightenment”.
To this end, historical perspectives and other cultural phenomena like existential questions, fashion, as well as societal experience and demands have continued to define human roles, gender dynamics, impacted human culture, institutions and even political expediency.
This has also affected in greater measure, philosophical and aesthetical thought process, intellectual currents and other social individualism associated with secularisation, liberalisation and industrial inter-human relations which specifically endorsed the call for gender inference.
To localise these curves, issues such as widowhood, marriage, inheritance and other prejudices alongside certain influenced culture, economic capacity, roles, experiences and environments have to a very large extent considered as serious limitations and anti-women advancement in Nigeria.
This has led to the prevailing belief in our society, particularly on the part of gender equality campaigners who felt that in their effort to regulate the culturally patriarchal world, including the dictate of religion and traditions, the principle of gender equality must be attained either through legislation, political intimidation or forceful influence.
These complex and often contradictory thoughts were further exacerbated by the recent rejection of the demand for special seat and percentage affirmation for women in the Nigerian National Assembly as well as the agitations to expand the scope of citizenship, especially in favour of the female gender in the political and economic management system.
Other advocating elements include the demand to provide for affirmative action for women in political party administration, indigenization and the last but not the least, instituted women quota in the federal and state executive councils.
Anchored on the above agenda, civil societies, individual and majority of women have at several platforms, re-echoed their voices, calling for equal opportunities in inheritance, citizenship, education, health, political and economic equality in all ramifications.
They further intensified the demands for political and administrative executive charge, thereby making the agitation for gender equality an institutional drive.
In this regard, it is very imperative to emphasise that forceful demand for equality in every sense, especially for matters that have been delineated by nature, can create immutable resistance, eternal criticism and even brood conflict. This is due to the fact that for two opposite states to be equal, its factors must be equal in strand, structure, physiognomy and strength.
This is important in the sense that, whatever is not the same in terms of structure, endowment, origin and orientation can never be truly the same or equal. Political enlightenment and its associated evolution, as we may want to believe, cannot successfully eradicate or dissuade the truism that man and woman in terms of gender, have different earthly destinies, build-ups and assignments.
In other words, GENDER from the perspective of creation is classified and permanently graded. It can never be equal, no matter how humanity tries to equate them through socio-economic empowerment, thinking and political legislation.
To be very emphatic, it is imperative to emphasise that rather than agitate for impractical assumption of gender equality, which invariably is a practical mirage; gender on its own can easily fail the theory of sameness and equality due to the fact that giving you an advantage simply because you are a woman is in itself, discriminatory.
To make it near practical, it would be better to replace gender in this context with the word ‘human’ to be able to accommodate and treat equally, every human being, including other visible and vocal minorities such as gay and homosexual adherents and many more. This is because human equality is considered more encompassing in the areas of the legal and democratic application of rights, freedom and evolutionary principles.
To navigate these complexities, America in 1776 for example, with all her sophistication in modern civilisation, cultured the self-evident, that “all men are created equal” essentially by potentially unlimited sovereign power. In the case of the French in 1789, they resonated with the natural fact that “Men are born free and remain equal in rights”, rather than equal in gender.
This aptly emphasised the fact that even when everybody as a group could be equal in terms of rights, treatment, responsibilities and privilege, they can never be truly equal in terms of gender or otherwise, simply because, the complex and globalised world is hierarchical, ordered, comparative, competitive and strongly rests on the platform of ability, capacity, merit, performance and diverse stratification, such as seniority and other inherent possibilities.
For example, the closest people on earth are those privileged to have come to the world through multiple births or identical twins. Even when in a state of being born equal, the process of such birth has never committed people to a strong normative principle of equality. Even when they are born almost at the same time; there is the recognition of a marked difference in their essence, which aptly implies the fact that they can never be the same or equal. This alone dismisses the value of equality or stresses the emptiness of its commonality. To this end, they can only be genealogically identical, but marked individuality with their different strength, weakness, character and the likes.
For the purpose of the biological differences between men and women for instance, it behoves everybody to know and understand that certain gender behaviours, definitions, attitudes and responsibilities are simply in our nature. Therefore, gender in its true characterization can never be equal except for deliberate assumption, sentiment and self-seeking colouration.
While it is generally believed that the female gender is equally important in the divinely ordered classification and needs to be treated equally, some other persons also believe that gender-specific expectations are important and very necessary because each gender has its jobs to fulfil for the society to function naturally.
Therefore, even if any country or Nigeria by chance have the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and all the 36 State governors as female gender; and even the majority of the National Assembly members as women, it will not only entrenched the importance of the female gender in the society and but also enhance the preference of choice. It will also help to intellectualise the capacity of the individuals to be effective just as it will further evolve collective orientation, mutual existence and improved competences.
In this wise, occupation of offices, economic empowerment, favourable disposition of women, affirmation and political management do not and will not in any way equalise the generality of every gender. In Nigeria for example, every spoils of political office, irrespective of its occupant, needs not be discriminatory on the basis of gender. And that is very important.
Article 2 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights, specifically highlighted the need to provide the “enjoyment of the rights and freedoms recognized and guaranteed in its present Charter without distinction of any kind such as race, ethnic group, colour, sex (gender), language, religion, political or any other opinion, national and social origin, fortune, birth or any status”. It emphasised strongly that individuals shall be equal before the law and shall be entitled to equal protection of the law. And this is what is universally obtainable in the current global system.
This did not suggest in any way that other gender should be blackmailed politically or forcefully legislated out of their rights simply because they are different from the female gender. So long as interest and desire continue to exist, man and woman will continue to indicate and seek for it. And to a large extent, they should be provided and protected by law, as well as the democratic platform to contest, compete and occupy. Nobody should be lawfully or otherwise deprived simply because he/she is a man or woman respectively, hence the global and complex recognition of the essence of dynamism of sexual freedom and equal value of respect.
In the case of Angela Merkel, the immediate past Chancellor of Germany, Margaret Thatcher and Theresa May, both ex-Prime Ministers of Britain, Queen Idia the great of Benin Kingdom, Indira Ghandi and Corazin Aquino and the very recent Ngozi Okonjo Iweala of Nigeria, not any one of them was enthrone by forceful legislation, simply because they were women. Their human exploits were not equally dependent on any affirmation to leap to the forefront of history. These icons were individually enabled by providence, capacity, competence and hard work. Why should Nigeria then swim against such a tide in this regard and at this time?
The Nigerian Constitution and other allied regulations have graciously made provision in favour of the ‘human beings’ in terms of rights, protection and equal platforms. This is eloquent in the right to protection, education, health, competence, capacity and economic providence.
We must recognise the fact that in every evolving culture that have attempted to perfect socialisation and beliefs, roles as well as opportunities and societal platform; gender stratification has been accepted to be naturally induced, owing to the fact that humanity is predicated on innate preferences and are considered to be subdivided into male, female and neutral.
To be able to make collective progress in this regard, it is important to say that every gender, whether male, female or the neutrals should collectively fight and emphasised on the effective implementation of the enable rules, regulations and all extant democratic provisions that guarantee equal treatments for every gender, rights, freedom and liberty of every human being.
This alone, will certainly create substantial semblance of collective progress rather than trying to introduce or advocate for discriminatory gender demands that will provoke equal resistance and proportionate agitations on the other end.
Ironically, the world in itself is hierarchical and ordered, just as certain human demands are divinely inherent. To forcefully make the gender – such as male, female, neutral and even transgender equal in every sense, without recourse to certain values, competence, capacity and societal demand, based on the universal law of rights, freedom and liberty will unjustly attract wider gulf, chaos and more conflict in the recognition of mutual interdependence in the pursuit of individual rights.
This is because sex or gender is supposed to highlight innate behaviours, personal identifications and other physiognomy that are bestowed by nature; rather than physical determination to aggressively disorientate what God has so carefully and ultimately design for the world to live on.
In sum therefore, any attempt to ultimately disregard and undermined the evolved inherent rights, freedom and protection of any persons or gender by any institution, political office holders, communities and individuals should be vehemently resisted and consequently sanctioned by effective judicial provisions and natural justice to serve as deterrents in the society.
