Subject: Re: On interracial relationships, or anything
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 1998 13:17:08 GMT

Alina Holgate (holgate@deakin.edu.au) wrote:

(( cuts for space ))

: Your statement that "African women have not been oppressed by African men
: for as long as anyone can remember" would make a cat laugh and it would
: have my Sesotho mother-in-law frothing at the mouth.  In her extensive
: work attempting to improve the basic conditions of life for South African
: women my venerable ma-in-law has fought not only the evil mind-set of the
: apartheid system but also the traditional beliefs of South African black
: males.  In fact one of her regrets about the new South African government
: is that, according to her, Sangoma's and other traditional male power-brokers
: have grown in influence to what she considers to be the detriment of the
: interests of South African women (and men).  She related to me, on a recent
: trip to Australia, how she was shouted down and not permitted to talk at a
: village meeting comprised mainly of Xhosa male elders because she is a
                            ^^^^^^
: divorced woman.  Having no husband meant that she had no claim to a
: legitimate social position and, having no man to speak for her, her views
: could not be heard.

I don't see the problem.  In traditional African society, the fundamental
societal unit is the family, not the individual.  The views of the
individual are represented by the head of family.  I notice in your
narrative the qualifier "mainly", which would imply that women are
not denied a right to speak merely because they are women.  If she
was not allowed to speak, perhaps it was because she was not a head
of family, and therefore ineligible to speak.  I do not go to the
Congress of the United States and expect to be seated, still less
to demand the right to speak.

: I don't know how you define oppression (though I'm sure you'd be able to tell
: me) but she certainly defines the idea that a woman cannot speak on her
: own behalf but must be represented by a male relative to be oppressive.  What
: would you say to her?  

I would say that I too would like to go to Congress and speak on
my own behalf, since the representative in my district clearly
does not speak for me.  But there are constitutional rules which
must be followed.  Prima facie, it would seem to me that the fact
that she was denied the opportunity to speak may have had less 
to do with the fact that she was a woman (some were allowed,
evidently) than that constitutionally she was ineligible.

: Would you say that any oppression of women by African
: males has no basis in traditional African culture but is simply due to the
: influence of Islam, Christianity or a Western mind-set?  Or would you have
: the gumption to tell her, an old African woman, that she is mistaken if she
: believes that African traditions are oppressive of women and that if she
: believes she has been oppressed by African traditions it is yet another
: example of a black buying into the false-consciousness of a European world-view?

I would tell her that substituting European value systems
for the traditional African ones is a bad trade.  Even for
women.  See another post of mine on the subject.

: ========================================= MODERATOR COMMENT
: MOD: Pushing it a bit

Yes.

Lord, spare us those who come saying they intend to do good,
but who always seem instead to do well... for themselves,
while wreaking havoc upon those they would save.

	 

Contents | Previous | Next