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] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~