Saiks,
I shall be waiting for your response. Point out the contradictions and story
telling. My second response will follow as I can accept that I wrote this in
a rush.I have not touch the other side of the history. Waiting for your
response.
Thanks for our long suffering people.
>From: saikss <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: The Gambia and related-issues mailing list
><[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: AFRICAN GENDER QUESTION IN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
>Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 23:14:24 +0200
>
>Sir,
>
>I have just been reading your article and I will come with a more detail
>reply
>but to be very frank yours is just full of contradictions and misquoting.A
>historical perspective is not the same as story telling.
>
>For Freedom
>Saiks
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >===== Original Message From The Gambia and related-issues mailing list
><[log in to unmask]> =====
> > AFRICAN GENDER QUESTION
> > In historical perspectives
> >
> >
> >
> >As promised that I will get back to you on the question of women
>oppression
> >in Africa – RE March 8 greetings – Friday, 8/03/02, here is my respond to
> >your arguments regarding this issue.
> >
> >I am finding it difficult to understand your argument on this issue and I
> >would appreciate if you can advance your theories for the purpose of
> >clarity. Your argument on the question of women oppression in Africa is
>too
> >general and universal in concept. It’s the universality of this issue
>that I
> >have problems with and therefore disagreed with you. I am fully aware of
>the
> >historical contribution of women in our various African societies and
>their
> >present depravations in all aspects as well. I have no problem with your
> >sincerity on this fundamental issue, but our failure to put things in
> >historical perspective always exposes our shallowness in dealing with
> >issues.
> >
> >Your assertion that “women have used songs and story telling instead of
>the
> >modern forms of women organizations and demonstrations is an effort to
>trace
> >the historical development of the Gambian women,” is an apolitical
>assertion
> >of historical realities. I don’t know on what facts you have based your
> >assertions, but I would appreciate if you can check your venomous
>rhetoric
> >properly before releasing them without substance.
> >
> >You have portrayed Gambian women as static and passive beings rather than
> >forces who are engaged in a struggle for justice and equality. To state
>that
> >they have used songs and story telling to trace their historical
> >contribution in our societies is too patronizing. Our women don’t have to
> >“trace” their historical contributions to Gambian or African historical
> >development; they are reclaiming it by right as part and parcel of the
>Pan
> >African struggle for justice and development.
> >
> >You have also stated that you are of the “opinion that Lang Binta Samateh
>is
> >not significant to the status of women.” If that is the case, why are we
> >discussing the historical contribution of women in The Gambia or Africa
> >today? It is just like saying that an African name is not significant to
>an
> >African or black person named Benjamin or Yousupha. Or saying that there
>is
> >no significance for us to speak and write in our language. The
>significance
> >of this statement is a manifestation of how disempowered African women
>are
> >today. It is very significant with regard to the historical contribution
>of
> >women in African societies. Take note of it because the historical
>reasons
> >will be shown later.
> >
> >Finally, before moving further, I would like to point out that your
>theories
> >on this issue is too shallow and simplistic. One thing you failed to
>realize
> >is that human history is a catalogue of unequal developments and for that
> >matter; societies did not emerged uniformly to follow the same pattern of
> >development. There were fundamental differences in structures, worldviews
>or
> >philosophy and production relations among others. What therefore happened
>in
> >one human patch or society in a remote corner of the world, does not
> >necessarily mean that it was a universal reality and applicable to all
>other
> >human societies. This idea of universality came into force as a result of
> >European conquest and cultural hegemony over non- European societies.
>Take
> >note of universality, I shall come back to it. Now let’s go back to the
>main
> >issue and discuss the historical contribution of African women and the
> >evolution of male oppression in Africa. I shall do my best and put it in
> >historical perspective as requested by N’dey Jorbateh. Bear patience and
>any
> >error is solely mine.
> >
> >We cannot deal with the present day African realities without the
>knowledge
> >of the past. To deal with the genda issues or the question of the
>condition
> >of present day African women, we should not deal with it in isolation of
> >their historical past. Classical history of the ancient
>Ethiopian/Egyptian
> >civilization in Africa will be incomplete without the historical
> >contribution of African women. Similarly, the history of later African
> >civilizations or empires will be useless without the contribution of
>African
> >women. Africa’s historical pride in the world is the history of African
> >women. All known African civilizations would have failed without the
>dynamic
> >contribution of African women.
> >
> > The recorded involvement of African women in state/public
> >affairs dated back to the beginning of our past civilizations. To fully
> >understand it, we have to go back to 10 - 12 thousand years ago. The
>first
> >prime minister in human political history in the world was in fact an
> >African woman called Nebet, 3100 BC to 2345 BC. She emerged at the period
> >referred to as the first five dynasties of the Ethiopian/Egyptian
> >civilization. Egypt by then was just a mere region of ancient Ethiopia.
> >
> > Nebet was the best-known personality of her time. She was
>second
> >in command to king Pepi the first of the Ethiopian/Egyptian civilization.
> >Nebet’s strength was her knowledge of military science and strategies in
> >defending Egypt from all invaders. It is stated that without her skills
>in
> >military strategies, Egypt would have collapsed earlier than expected.
>That
> >was why she was revered throughout the ancient world. There were other
>women
> >contributors of that period whether as queens or being in the center of
> >state/public affairs such as Peribson, Khasexham, Imohotep, Zoser,
>Sneferu,
> >Khufu and Khafre. Through their contributions, the pace was set for some
>of
> >the most amazing achievements the ancient world has ever witnessed. The
> >great African scholar of Senegal, Cheik Anta Diop, said that this period
>he
> >termed as the old kingdom, collapsed due to internal contradictions, the
> >conflict between the rulers and the peasants. However, there was
>continuity
> >since there were no external factors involved in its demise and it led to
> >the emergence of the second period.
> >
> > The middle Kingdom, according to Diop, was from 2300 BC to
>1370
> >BC and covered the periods from the sixth to the twentieth dynasties. It
>was
> >also the period of reconstruction from the ashes of the old kingdom and
> >bitter lessons were learnt as well. The main features of the second
>kingdom
> >was the evolution of administrative centralization, merit selection of
>men
> >and women to occupy administrative posts, land distributions and
>protection
> >of the rights to own property for economic purposes, the right to
>criticize
> >those in position for accountability, the freedom for citizens to move
>and
> >work wherever they pleased within the kingdom and the freedom of
>expression
> >and the system of information gathering. This system was introduced for
>the
> >first time in human history and the ancient Greeks later named it as the
> >process of democratization. The Greeks never liked the idea, because they
> >never accepted the equality of the woman to man. To them the man was
> >superior. Within all these developments, included the contributions of
>such
> >women as the Queen of Sheba, Queen Tiye among others. (See the names of
> >African women rulers attached).
> >
> > The third period of this great African civilization, again,
>Diop
> >dated it to 1090 BC to 661 BC., the twentieth to the twenty-fifth
>dynasties.
> >It was a difficult period as Egypt has already spent 300 years of her
> >existence fighting against coalition of invaders from the Indo-European
> >world. The African Sudanese king, Piankhi, ended up sending an African
>army
> >in a Pan African spirit to defend the beacon of African civilization and
> >defeated the invaders. Egypt never recovered from that attack as an
> >independent entity and the decline of the 25th dynasty began by 661 BC.
>The
> >Queen at the time, Cleopatra, committed suicide rather than betray
>Africans
> >to the Roman invaders.
> >
> > The worldview of Africans from the classical period to the
>era
> >of the Arab and European interventions of the 7th century AD onwards into
> >Africa was centered on the sacredness of the woman, as manifested in
> >production relations. This worldview enhanced the internal dynamic and
> >independent development of African societies.
> >
> > To understand the worldview of pre-colonial Africa, one need
>to
> >understand the values African women have been deprived of in the past.
>The
> >emergence of the philosophy behind the essence of “orisis” and “Isis” in
> >classical Ethiopian/Egyptian civilization was the beginning of Africa’s
> >matriarchal societies. The “orisis” and “isis” were the god and goddess
>of
> >fertility and manifestation that two opposite forces must relate in order
>to
> >continue the process of life on equal terms. The same philosophy can be
>seen
> >today in Nigeria, the new yam annual festival to celebrate new life. Or
> >among the Manding speaking people of West Africa, which includes the
> >Mandingoe, Mende, Mossi, Bambara, Dioula, Malinke, Vai, Kpelle, Konja and
> >sousou, in their annual seasonal harvest of products,“Musukoto” (old
>woman)
> >and “Kekoto” (old man) symbolizing the production of new life. The
> >significance of this worldview was the understanding of the difference
> >between societies that were matriarchal and those that were patriarchal.
> >That is the difference we need to understand for the sake of clarity.
> >
> > To start with patriarchal societies, which dominated the
> >cultural foundation of the Indo-European world, women were barred or
> >restricted to participate in the public affairs of the society. The
>economic
> >role or contribution of women was limited. They were handed the burden of
> >child bearing or rearing and reduced to follow the man wherever he moves.
> >Since she has little economic value to the man or in terms of economic
> >production, no use at all, it was she who has to leave her clan to join
>that
> >of her husband. In some cases, she has to pay (dowry) for the man to
>marry
> >her. The husband being the main economic force and decision maker in the
> >affairs of the clan, he owned property and the family was part of his
> >property. When a woman joins her husband’s clan in marriage, she has to
> >automatically negate everything of her own being, including her family
>name
> >and disappeared forever by taking the husband’s family name and become
>part
> >of his property to produce children that will inherit the property when
>he
> >(husband) died. In such societies, only male children will inherit late
> >father’s property. This trend of European social patriarchal order and
> >domination continued to this era.
> >
> > In the matriarchal societies as experienced in pre-colonial
> >Africa, it was the opposite with regard to male/female relationship.
> >African societies have been characterized by strong matriarchy. The lack
>of
> >restriction or barring of women to participate in the public affairs of
>the
> >society was the cultural foundation of Africans. The historical evidence
>is
> >still available for us to see in the number of women rulers and warriors
>in
> >pre-colonial Africa. These women were rulers and warriors in their own
>right
> >as accorded to any one in the society. In many cases, a man cannot even
> >become a king without the endorsement of women. Similarly, ordinary women
> >without any link to royalty can excel on merits.
> >
> >This situation has given opportunity to women and men to participate in
>the
> >development of society in areas such as agriculture, making of tools,
> >science, technology, architecture arts, crafts and the invention of
>writing
> >such as the Akafa writing, of which women slaves carried secretly with
>them
> >to the plantations in the Dutch West Indies and used it as a means of
> >communication among slaves to organize rebellions for freedom. In a
>similar
> >way, women contributed to the formations of states and commerce. They
>also
> >contributed in the specialization of labour in iron smelting,
>manufacture,
> >mining, medicine, blacksmiths, goldsmiths, diviners, brick masons, as
> >carpenters, weavers, shoemakers and potters. In many instances they had
>more
> >advanced skills to produce commodities that their men used to exchange at
> >the market or “Luumo” {pre-industrial forms of stock markets developed in
> >many other societies).
> >
> >Similar developments in African history showed that women were not
>excluded
> >in public affairs as devalued objects. They contributed significantly in
>the
> >history of state formations. Read the history of the development of
>states
> >such as the Sudan, Guinea, North and East African states, Ghana, Manding,
> >Mwene Mutapa, among others, you will find that the question of the
> >oppression of women in toady’s Africa has an external factor in its
>origin.
> >I will come back to that later.
> >
> >Now let us turn to the next chapter regarding the oppression of women in
> >Africa and place it in its historical context. One of the main the
>reasons
> >since the classical period that led outside forces to attack the
>continent
> >were to destroy the influence of African women in public affairs. The
> >history of the male Indo-European is a history of power, control and
> >ownership. (When I say Indo-European, I am referring to Europe and Middle
> >Eastern continents that were in contact with Africa since the earliest
> >times.) Indo-European states viewed African matriarchal society as a
> >dangerous signal to the security of the male dominated societies. Their
> >women were already domesticated and Africa was sending a bad message to
> >them. Even the great Arab traveler and chronicler, Ibn Battuta, was
>appalled
> >in 1352 to see how African women were free to become leaders To
>understand
> >this reality, one needs to know the history of the economic modes of
> >production in Indo-European civilizations.
> >
> >Both Karl Marx and Frederick Engels stated in their work on “the origin
>of
> >the family, private property and the state,” that the exploitation and
> >oppression of women has its origins in the emergence and development of a
> >society stratified along class lines. They went on to assert that the
> >inequalities inherent in such a society could in the final analysis be
> >traced to the socio-economic formation prevalent at a particular period.
> >They therefore gave examples of the European modes of production as
> >primitive communal society, slave, feudal and capitalist societies.
> >According to them only the primitive communal society was classless.
> >
> >According to Engels, in the primitive communal society, men and women
>were
> >equal as there was in existence a division of labour between them: women
> >managed the household and the rearing of children, men procured the food
>and
> >the implements required. As a result of this social order, everything was
> >owned in common by the community as a whole. That “this situation changed
> >with the emergence of different classes in society more or less
>coinciding
> >with the domestication of animals and the breeding of herds” therefore
> >reduced the women to be domesticated too (Italics mine). Engels further
> >stated, “This developed a hitherto unsuspected surplus of wealth and
>created
> >entirely new social relationships.” The social changes therefore altered
> >the relationship between men and women in human history. The man
>according
> >to Engels became the dominant force as a result of his physical ability
>to
> >capture animals. The women in this new social setting lost her public
> >character and became a private property of the dominant man.
> >
> >Both Marx and Engels believed that their observations on the question of
>the
> >oppression of women was a universal reality and applicable to all human
> >societies. The observations of these two great European thinkers were
> >problematic and seriously debatable in relation to Africa. The
> >universalisation of this theory was born out of the idea of European
> >superiority over non-Europeans and therefore all human developments
>should
> >seen through the eyes of the European social evolution (Eurocentricism).
> >Within the context of European social and economic history (patriarchy),
> >they were right, but with regard to the African social and economic
>history
> >(matriarchy), these great thinkers were wrong. African modes of
>production
> >did not follow the same path as that of Europe and secondly, feudalism
>never
> >existed in Africa.
> >
> >Marx and Engels were writing at a time when Europeans have already
>ravaged
> >and dismantled African societies through slavery and on the verge of
> >colonizing the African continent. History is the point for us to clarify
> >this obscurity that has affected and reduced the thinking of so-called
> >progressive movements in Africa to mechanical thinking. The best way to
> >start my disagreement is to bring back the great African thinker, Cheik
>Anta
> >Diop, into the picture.
> >
> >Diop (Cultural unity of Black Africa) critically analysed the modes of
> >production between the North (Europe/Asia) and South (sub-Saharan
> >Africa/Melanesia/pre-Columbus America) from antiquity to the emergence of
> >Europe as a dominant force in global affairs. He questioned the theory of
>a
> >universal transition from matriarchy to patriarchy and proved that Marx
>and
> >Engels were not clear with the history of the South. Both men highly
>relied
> >on the works of European anthropologists who conducted research in
> >non-European societies. These European anthropologists were imbued with
>the
> >hot air of European cultural superiority. They were dealing with Africans
>as
> >primitive and backward peoples who have no history. Therefore any history
> >they may have made must be seen through the European experience. This was
> >why Diop concluded that their works were inadequate with regard to the
> >cultural foundation of Africa’s matriarchal evolution.
> >
> >African women were not oppressed through out history as it is being
> >propagated today for other reasons that I am not ready to deal with here.
>If
> >African women were oppressed or domesticated throughout history, how come
> >there were more women rulers in Africa than in any human society? Diop
> >answered that matriarchy existed on a continent – wide scale. He cited
> >evidence of this from Zimbabwe, Ghana, Congo, Bostwana, among others:
>“Women
> >took part in public life and had the right to vote, decision making, they
> >could become queens through merits and enjoyed legal status equal to that
>of
> >men.” It’s not surprising that the first society to be ruled by a woman
>was
> >in Africa, Queen Hatshepsut, 1500 BC, Ethiopia.
> >
> >Let us qualify this observation to advance the argument further. Diop
> >examined the matriarchal system in Africa very seriously. The difference
> >between the matriarchal system and the patriarchal system was in the
>culture
> >of the value or devalue of woman in a given society. In the matriarchal
> >society, the child does not inherit from the father but from his maternal
> >uncle (the reason why uncles were important in African culture). The
> >political rights also were transmitted through the mother. The husband
> >therefore was considered as a stranger to his wife’s family, a concept
> >totally opposed to that of the Indo-European patriarchal system.
> >
> >In addition, in the African matriarchal system, the mother occupied a
>highly
> >revered position and anything that related to her was sacred, including
>her
> >bed, which male children were not even allowed to sit or sleep. In
>Africa,
> >this was evident of the respect accorded to the woman. It was believed
>that
> >how a person conducts himself towards his mother will determine or not
>how
> >he will lead a happy or settled life. In fact in The Gambia, there was a
> >time a boy can insult one’s father and escape in tact, but insult
>someone’s
> >mother was an invitation to a fight or a broken nose.
> >
> >Further more, throughout the African continent, the woman retains her
>family
> >name or clan name, which supersedes the nuclear family. From one’s family
>or
> >clan name one can trace several generations of ancestors, family history
>and
> >past achievements of one’s family. Among all the African peoples, there
>was
> >no equivalent title for “Mrs. Brown” because she married to a “Mr.
>Brown.” A
> >woman retained her family name or clan name throughout marriage and for
>the
> >rest of her life. Ties with her family remained strong. A woman also has
> >right to be referred to in the naming of her child- such as “Lang Binta”
> >(meaning Binta, mother of Lang).
> >
> >To properly assess the question of women oppression in present day
>Africa,
> >we must search for the historical roots. The question is that if women
>were
> >once sacred in African history, how were they dispossessed? If they were
> >once equaled to African men, how did the African men domesticate them?
> >Marx’s and Engels’s argument on the oppression of women would not help
>us,
> >as both failed to show even in the European context, the transition of a
> >specific society from matriarchal society to patriarchal society. In
>Africa,
> >the transition from matriarchal society to patriarchal society happened
> >because of external factors and not due to any internal factor or
> >contradictions as some suggested. This should be the premise where any
> >question of the oppression of women in Africa must begin. Otherwise the
> >African man oppressed by finance capital (imperialism) will be solely
>blamed
> >as the sole oppressor of the African woman. The external factors were
> >slavery and colonization.
> >
> >The slave trade was the most destructive period that has undermined
>Africa’s
> >internal dynamic and independent path to development. This period started
> >the dehumanization of the African woman. The nations that raided Africa
>to
> >capture slaves came with ready-made minds that they were capturing
>beasts,
> >not human beings. They also came with the mind of a male chauvinist who
> >considered women as nothing but objects of pleasure. That was how they
> >viewed the women they left in their homelands. These chauvinistic believe
> >were in fact sometimes disguised, as religious believes.
> >
> >Both the Arabs and Europeans (Indo-Europeans) were responsible for this
> >barbaric destruction by uprooting Africans from their motherland to other
> >lands to be used as beast. Arab slave trade started first on the East
>coast
> >of Africa. Arabs were not only dealing in slavery, but also taking
>African
> >women as sex objects. When they no longer needed them, they were killed
>or
> >sold to another Arab male for the same purpose. The European slavery
>played
> >the same role in Africa by shipping Africans to other parts of the world
>to
> >work on plantations that were to serve the interest of European
>industrial
> >development and the process of Africa’s underdevelopment. The historical
> >fact with regard to slavery was that it has commodified the Africans and
> >enhanced the profit and capital accumulation of European powers and made
>it
> >possible for them to invest in the development of science and technology
>and
> >transformed Europe and U.S.A to economic giants they are today.
> >
> >The most devastating and savage attack that would finally destroy the
> >physical well-being of African states and the psychological
> >dislocation of the African mind was slavery. The most despicable features
>of
> >this trade were also the destruction of the self – esteem of many
>Africans.
> >Infact, since the collapse of ancient Egypt, Arabs were kidnapping
>African
> >Abyssinian women and using them as concubines, a trend which continued
>even
> >during the period of the Prophets and still continuing today against
>Black
> >African women in many Arab countries and in Africa in places like Sudan
>and
> >Mauritania. I do not want to waste my time here on slavery. Much has been
> >said about it already. The significance of it here is that it was one of
>the
> >factors that contributed to the oppression of African women. It was the
> >beginning of the erosion of the value and dignity of the African woman in
>a
> >very inhuman and humiliating fashion.
> >
> >The second factor was colonization. The system of European domination
>over
> >Africans. It was a reality of post slavery in Africa when Europeans
>decided
> >to physically divide Africa among themselves as they wish without
> >consultation. By the early twentieth century, colonial empires were
> >associated with ideas of national greatness, pride, competitiveness and
>the
> >survival of the fittest in the world of power and exploitation. The
> >“natives” were to be civilized by the Europeans and for that matter; vast
> >areas of Asia and Africa were forcefully occupied. The objectives however
> >were different as the main reason of occupying vast areas of Africa and
>Asia
> >was to exploit their raw materials and other resources, including human
> >resources, for the benefit of metropolitan or European states.
> >
> >Through colonization or the physical domination of Africans, European
>laws
> >were imposed on them. European culture was introduced and everything that
> >was associated with Africa was portrayed as backward, primitive,
>uncivilized
> >and barbaric. African religion and African gods were considered to be
> >“pagan” believes or “haram” by people who have no understanding of the
> >African environment. This was the beginning of the control of the African
> >mind by foreign intruders, whether Arab or European.
> >
> >If slavery contributed to the dismantling of African matriarchal
>societies,
> >colonization was to reorganize and remolded the old structures into
> >something different to suit their interest in order to further disempower
> >African women. After dividing Africa among themselves at the Berlin
> >conference in 1884-1885, each newly created artificial African state was
> >also internally divided by grouping communities into districts, divisions
> >and regions, to make or render tax collectors and colonial officers to
> >enforce and monitor colonial policies. This form of colonial practice has
> >allowed them either to rule directly or indirectly, depending on the
>nature
> >of colonization.
> >
> >Through this process, social relationships among Africans were also
> >artificially created to render us dependent and stagnant in history.
>This
> >is why the so-called “traditions” in Africa today are by no means the
>true
> >image of pre-colonial African traditions. In the pre-colonial African
> >traditions, men and women were equal in participating in the affairs of
>the
> >society and women oppression and torturing of women were virtually
>unknown.
> >Further more, in pre-colonial Africa, kinship relationship was a
> >manifestation or expression of production relations as demonstrated in
>the
> >matriarchal period of the continent.
> >
> >What introduced the oppression of women in Africa was the Western
>colonial
> >economic penetration into Africa, which has destroyed pre-colonial
>African
> >societies and transformed African traditional societies. In the process
>they
> >reduced the work and function of African women in society as the
>producers
> >of cheap labour force to serve the profit interest of Western
>imperialism.
> >That is, colonial forces needed laobour in the mines and the cash crop
> >plantations of the colonized states and male laobour force was preferred.
> >African societies were forcefully changed from matriarchal societies to
> >patriarchal societies as experienced in the Indo-European world. African
> >societies were no longer to serve the interest and development of
>Africans,
> >but the interest of the economic demands of the Western world, which
>reality
> >is still killing us today.
> >
> >Profit making in any situation required human labour. Under colonialism,
>the
> >recruitment of labour was usually through force. African male labour was
> >needed for the construction of structures that were to make the removal
>of
> >raw materials from Africa to the Western world easier. To serve that
> >purpose, docks, roads, railways, wharves, mines and plantations spread
>all
> >over the colonies. At the same time taxes were introduced by the colonial
> >forces as a strategy to recruit labour through force payment of taxes.
> >Africans were longer in control of their own flesh, but alienated from
>their
> >land and their own flesh. They have to work to earn cash in order to pay
> >taxes and feed their families.
> >
> >This tendency caused adult African men in the 1920s to migrate and
>shifting
> >from village to the towns, from country to country or from Africa to
>Europe
> >to sell cheap labour in search of cash. These movements of labour was
>either
> >as a result of colonial compulsion as seen in the case of colonial Upper
> >volta (Burkinafaso), or voluntary migration as seen in the Senegalese
> >migrants of St. Louise, who settled in the Banjul area to work as
>labourers
> >in the construction of colonial wharves. That was what brought the Joof,
> >Taal, Njai, Jon, Jeng, Faye, Secka, Sallah, Nyang and N’dure surnames in
>the
> >colonial settlement of Bathurst (Banjul). The labour force that remained
>in
> >the rural communities was tied to the land to produce cash crops for the
> >colonial economy. In The Gambian case, men were to produce groundnuts for
> >the colonial market and women were to produce rice to feed the men to
> >survive as a labour force. Those who can not stand the burden abandoned
>the
> >land and migrated to the towns and became labourers. Thus, surnames such
>as
> >Jaiteh, Kamara, Ceesay, Samateh, Fatty, Dibba, Conteh, Saidy, Barrow and
> >Marong appeared in the settlement of colonial Bathurst. It was very late
>in
> >the 1940s and 1950s, before rural migrants who settled in the Banjul area
> >were allowed to bring their wives to join them, thanks to the
>anti-colonial
> >campaigns of the late Rev. J.C. Faye and Edward Frances Small.
> >
> >These movements of the male African labour has its own consequences in
>the
> >communities they migrated from, as women were left with the burden of
>child
> >bearing and rearing which paved the way for the domestication of the once
> >noble, mighty and gallant African women. This reality happened as
>observed
> >by the late A.M. Babu of Tanzania, because Africans were no longer
>consuming
> >what they produce and consuming what they were not producing. What this
> >indicated was a double barrel reality: African women were reduced to be
> >dependent on men who earned wages and the African colonies reduced to be
> >dependent on European finance capital (imperialism).
> >
> >To ensure that women were put in their “proper” place, the colonial
>system
> >stereotyped them as being lazy, weak and conservative and therefore men
>must
> >become heads of households since they were the breadwinners through
>earning
> >wages. As a result, colonial laws were enacted in ordinances to
>discourage
> >women migration. This has left the men in some cases to become seasonal
> >migrants as seen in The Gambia, to come to the towns after rainy seasons
>to
> >work as labourers or petty traders and returned to the colonies (rural
> >areas) for the next rainy season to produce cash crops. In the mining
>areas
> >in other colonies, it was to keep the men to and from the mining zones to
> >their villages and empowering them to earn wages to keep the women at
>home.
> >
> >This process imposed on the African environment and the women again can
>not
> >have taken place without an ideology. The ideology the colonial forces
> >re-enforced were that of Islam and Christianity, two foreign religions
>that
> >has undermined African societies to paved way for slavery was also useful
>to
> >further push African women behind the back of African men. Western form
>of
> >Christianity came into Africa later than Islam, a religion introduced in
> >West Africa around the tenth century AD. It was at that period that the
> >Arabic influences that the practice of children adopting the father’s
> >surname rather than the maternal name was introduced. Both religions also
> >contributed to the erosion of the African women longstanding tradition of
> >freedom and contribution to the scientific development of African
>societies
> >prior to slavery and colonization. The circumstances leading to this
>erosion
> >was the believe that women need protection and they must be covered from
> >head to toe, for being a particular man’s property and not to be viewed
>by
> >other men.
> >
> >African women however resisted against slavery as well as against
> >colonization through out the continent, but let us pay attention to the
> >forms of resistance adopted under colonialism in response to their
> >disempowerment. The forms of African women resistance as observed by M.R.
> >Cutrufelli (Roots of oppression) is important to mention in this
>discourse.
> >According to Cutrufelli, the African women resistance was against certain
> >form of colonial industrialization in Africa rather than being culturally
> >conservative. The status of a “wife” rather than equal partners in
>marriage
> >as known in pre-colonial Africa, has been undermined negatively by the
> >introduction of new modes of colonial production which deprived the women
>of
> >their own means of survival.
> >
> >She cited the case of colonized Nigerian women as an example, against the
> >introduction of oil mills and their effort with little success to prevent
> >it. The introduction of oil mills definitely improved the quantity and
> >quality of palm oil and the wage level of men. At the same time it has
> >deprived the women of work and resources of their own and increased their
> >dependence on men. Before the introduction of oil mills, women used to
> >prepare oil and give it to their men to sell for the wellbeing of the
> >community. Similar incidents occurred in many colonial parts of Africa.
> >
> >In the 1920s, while the great Gambian Pan Africanist, Edward Frances
>Small,
> >was leading Gambian workers strike against colonial oppression, Nigerian
> >women also took to the streets of Lagos, to protest against taxation (the
> >Aba riots) on their palm products. They cut down telegraph wires,
>attacked
> >the European banks, destroyed European shops, attacked the prisons and
> >released the African prisoners and beat Africans who were collaborating
>with
> >the colonial forces. Many were shot and killed by colonial African
>soldiers.
> > In The Gambia of the 1940s, similar situation forced women to also
>marched
> >to the colonial Governor’s residence (State House) to protest against
> >poverty and deprivation (Bread & Butter riots). The protest also was
> >attributed to the introduction of the oil mill at “Sarro,” (This need to
>be
> >studied). The colonial field force seriously battered them in the
>compound
> >of the State House.
> >
> >Other forms of resistance included sorcery, magic, witchcraft and even
>the
> >formation by women of independent African religions and churches to
>empower
> >African women. These attempts were not backward as seen by men, but
>dynamic
> >against colonization and male oppression in the colonized societies.
> >
> >Sorcery was a form of expressing suffering and hatred of African men
> >collaborating with the European colonial forces. Witchcraft was a source
>of
> >cohesion and strength of women practicing it. Africans are still afraid
>of
> >witches isn’t it? African men will avoid any woman considered to be a
>witch.
> >In the Banjul of the 1920s to the late 1970s, Hardington Street was
>popular
> >for being the street of witches. The reason was due to the self-assertion
>of
> >women against maltreatment. In some cases in the Banjul area, in a
>compound
> >where women achieved academically and led independent life even in
>marriage,
> >their mothers or grand mothers were considered to be witches. Among the
>Luo
> >people of colonial East Africa, women deprived of their rights to land or
> >other means of survival, will resort to witchcraft or methods of sorcery
>to
> >fight men in order to gain their freedom from oppressive marriages. Magic
> >was another source of strength to women. Women who have learned the
>secrets
> >of magic can assert themselves to society that they have right to their
>own
> >life and be feared. Which African man will marry a woman who can turn you
> >into a dog? To destroy these believe system of women, men adopted more
>and
> >more forms of physical violence to subdue women or became more religious
> >than the colonialist became, in order to control their minds. All these
> >internal contradictions between the African man and woman, benefits
> >colonialism, as it has polarized African societies further.
> >
> >In the era of the struggle for independence from colonialism in the mid
> >1950s to the 1960s, the forces that were at the fore front of the
>struggle
> >against colonialism, had no clear objectives or programs that was geared
> >towards resolving the women question or gender issues. The forces of the
> >independence struggle were divided into two camps: The progressives (led
>by
> >the great Kwame Krumah of Ghana) and those serving the interest of former
> >colonial masters (led by the former President Tubman of Liberia). Both
>camps
> >had one thing in common and that was their lack of clarity on the
>question
> >of women oppression. The only forces that even attempted to discuss the
> >issue of women oppression in the process of their struggle were the
> >Liberation fighters of Angola, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Guinea Bissau,
>Algeria
> >and the Anti- Apartheid movements in Azania (South Africa).
> >
> >Another common factor in both camps was that of the combative spirit of
> >African women in the struggle against European colonization. The women
> >anti-colonial struggle was a two-sided battle within the struggle for
> >independence. They were struggling to free Africa from colonialism at the
> >same time struggling for clearly defined objectives to deal with specific
> >conditions, such as their domestication and deprivation socially,
> >politically and economically. As a result, women groups emerged to work
> >within political parties or Liberation movements through out colonial
>Africa
> >and they had a leading woman figure to organize and mobilize women for
>the
> >battle. Women were even at the forefront the of the Liberation movements
>in
> >the settler colonial states that were waging wars to be free.
> >
> >The women question for that matter has taken the nationalist tradition to
> >struggle against colonialism, in the process, to also change their
> >conditions in a future free Africa. Both attempts failed partly due to
>the
> >nature of the leadership of women groups within these parties or
>movements
> >and partly due to the betrayals of the leadership of post independent
> >African states, because it has never been part of the nationalist agenda
> >towards independence.
> >
> >The contradictions within these women groups born out of the nationalist
> >revolution of the anti- colonial period was their failure to study the
> >nature of the leadership based on their historical experience as women.
>In
> >many cases, the women leadership (mostly educated) shared the same petty
> >bourgeois tendencies of the leadership of the male dominated political
> >parties who were not sincere to the masses of the oppressed peoples’ of
> >Africa. Prior to independence, the nationalism of the leadership was a
>force
> >determined to gain independence. After independence, the sense of
> >nationalism died and commitment to national development was mortgaged to
>the
> >interest of the former colonial masters, and a system of Neo- colonialism
> >emerged (new forms of colonization) that is still ravaging the hell out
>of
> >our people today in all aspects. The reigns of white power was handed to
> >African stooges who have no interest to national development, much more
>the
> >question of a just society. The reality was that post independent Africa
> >failed to produce the calibre of bourgeois nationalist leadership
>committed
> >to national development as the type of leadership Asian countries
>produced,
> >such as in Malaysia, Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea, Hongkong, among
>others.
> >In Africa, Western Governments with the collaboration of Africans
>eliminated
> >all genuine leaders who were sincere and committed to the progress and
> >development of Africa. The last among them was Thomas Sankara of
> >Burkinafaso, who more than any post independent leader of Africa did more
>in
> >resolving the question of women oppression with clear intentions than any
> >one.
> >
> >The other aspect of the contradictions within the women groups was that
>they
> >made demands that reflected the oppression of African women in terms of
> >programs to be dealt by the parties they allied with in a very
> >uncompromising manner, but the principles of those demands were
>compromised
> >even before independence was attained. The dilemma confronting the
>various
> >women groups was the internalization of men oppression since the foreign
> >intruders succeeded in dismantling the pre-colonial matriarchal
>societies.
> >The blunt truth was that their confidence was a bit dented. They feared
>to
> >make demands that would be seen as too progressive by the “comrades” in
>the
> >progressive nationalist camp and by the “brothers” in the petty bourgeois
> >nationalist camp.
> >
> >The worst part of these dilemma African women confronted was their lack
>of
> >knowledge of the historical evolution of women within the African
>historical
> >context and how it related to outside interventions. The thinking was too
> >alienated from the historical realities of Africa and as a result, they
> >failed to produce any concrete demand they can defend on historical
> >evidences of their experience. They therefore made demands, which has no
> >critical assessment of their situation and the ideology they used as a
>tool
> >to assess their condition was a product of a different historical
>experience
> >far removed from the African realities. The problem with that confusion
>was
> >the inadequate explanation of women oppression that has not existed in
>the
> >continent prior to slavery and colonization. African women therefore
>failed
> >to produce a model of women struggle for liberation and became dependent
>on
> >western feminist models. Cultural alienation hindered their programs and
>to
> >this day, African societies are not properly addressing the fundamental
> >question. Unless it is seriously dealt with in our struggle to
>development,
> >African development will be hindered.
> >
> >
> >Attached is the list of names great African women that Africans are not
>even
> >talking about. We must celebrate their achievements.
> >
> >
> > GREAT AFRICAN WOMEN CONTRIBUTORS
> >
> >1) Ahmose Nofretari- Mother of divinity and ruler of Egypt – 5000
>years
>ago.
> >2) Hatsheput, Ruler of Egypt - 15th Century BC. She sent African
>navigators
> >to sail to the southern part of Europe when Europeans where still living
>in
> >an underdeveloped world.
> >3) Queen Tiye – Ruled from ancient Egypt to present day Sudan 4000
>years
> >ago.
> >4) The Candace – Women rulers of the ancient Kush Kingdom – 3rd
>Century
>BC.
> >5) Queen Makeda, Ruler of Ethiopia & Egypt (She was known as the
>queen
>of
> >Sheba in the Bible)
> >6) Daurama – Queen of the Hausa Kingdoms in West Africa.
> >7) The warrior Queen Yennenga of the Mossi kingdom – 1132 BC.
> >8) Sonkolon Konteh of Mali, the mother of Sundiatta Keita.
> >9) Aminata Kruballi of the Kabbu empire.
> >10) Aminatou of Zaria, the warrior queen of the Hausa people.
> >11) Queen Heleni of Ethiopia & Egypt and defender of Africa –14th
>Century
> >AD. She sent her army to defend African states attacked by muslim or
> >portuguese invaders.
> >12) Queen Ngola Zinga of present day Angola – 1581 AD to 1663 AD.
>Great
> >warrior and Pan Africanist. She even called for African unity in her day
> >before her sudden death in 1663.
> >13) Queen Mentowah of Ethiopia – 1732 AD.
> >14) Queen Kimpa Vita of Congo – 1706 AD. Led bitter wars against
>European
> >invaders and Arab slave traders in the East and Central Africa.
> >15) Queen Awura Poku of Sikassou in modern day Ivory Coast – 1742
>AD.
> >16) Queen Sunkari Touray of Mali who led wars against Arab invasion
>and
> >Islamisation of her people.
> >17) Queen Nandi of the Zulu Kingdom (Zaka Zulu’s mother)
> >18) Queen Tata Ajeche of present day Benin. She rose from slavery to
> >royalty.
> >19) Queen Modjadi the first of ancient Zimbabwe – 1800 AD –1850 AD.
> >20) Queen Ronavalona the first of Madagasgar – 1828 AD to 1861 AD.
>She
>led
> >many wars against European and Arab invasions and defended the East
>African
> >coast against Arab slavery and European colonization. She outlawed Arab
>or
> >European names in her Kingdom for her people not to betray Africa to
>foreign
> >invaders.
> >21) Ndateh Yaala of Walo/Ndarr (St. Louise). She was the last Queen
>of
>Walo
> >or Ndarr. She bitterly fought French colonizers for long to defend her
> >Kingdom. The French at the end sent new weapons and 15,000 soldiers to
> >defeat her. On January 25th, 1885, Walo was ravaged and destroyed and on
> >January 31st, 1885, Captain Louis – Leon Faidherbe defeated the great
>Ndateh
> >Yaala and she fled to Kajorr where she died in exile in the 1900s.
> >22) Queen Nongqawuse of South Africa. Like Ndateh Yaala, led a
>serious
> >resistance against European invasion in 1853 AD and almost succeeded in
> >unifying the whole of Southern Africa. As usual, she was betrayed.
> >23) Queen Sarrounnia of Nigeria. Led a serious resistance against
> >colonization in 1890s before she was finally defeated.
> >24) Queen Naga of Benin. - She was the ruler who led her people to
>rebel
> >against the 1885 Berlin conference, which finally divided Africa among
> >different colonial rulers. She never surrendered.
> >25) Queen Manta Tisi of South Africa. - In 1853 led a serious
>rebellion
> >against European invasion and colonialism.
> >26) Queen Bethel of Ethiopia. – In 1889, fought and defended Ethiopia
> >against European invasion and protected Ethiopia against colonization.
> >27) Queen Ranavalona the 3rd. – She was the last woman ruler of
>Madagasgar.
> >In the 1890s, she led her people to war rather than surrender to French
> >colonization before being defeated in the mid 1890s.
> >28) Queen Waganne Faye of Sine Saloum. She led her people against
>French
> >colonization at a difficult time in the 1870s. This was a period when
> >Senegal was invaded by two competing forces: The French and the Arabs
>from
> >the North Africa. Lat Jorr was fighting against the French and Waganne
>Faye
> >was fighting around the Sine-Saloum area and into The Gambia.
> >29) Mma Ntatisie of South Africa – 1781 AD to 1835AD.
> >30) Queen Nehanda of Zimbabwe (the last woman ruler). She led a
>liberation
> >war against the British in1862 for a long period before she was captured
>and
> >executed in 1898.
> >31) The great Yaa Asante waa of Ghana (1840 –1921). She led a serious
>of
> >liberation war against the British in the 1890s for a long period, before
> >being captured and exiled by the British.
> >32) Alison Sitoyee Jatta of Senegal. In the 1940s waged and led one
>of
>the
> >most fiercely guerrilla warfare against French colonization in West
>Africa.
> >33) Queen Cleopatra of ancient Egypt - 69BC to 30BC. She was the last
>Queen
> >of ancient Egypt before the Romans finally conquered it. Cleopatra
>committed
> >suicide rather than sell Africa to foreign invaders.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >_________________________________________________________________
> >Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
> >
> >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
>Web
>interface
> >at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
> >To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
> >[log in to unmask]
> >
> >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
>Web interface
>at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
>To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
>[log in to unmask]
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
