The Tribune

By DR IAN BETHEL BENNET

IN traditional societies, men are often said to be the head of the house, the head of the woman, the leaders in society and the pillars of the community.

They are taught to fight their way through challenges and to challenge authority. They are also saddled with having to provide for their families, their own children as well as their parents, aunts, uncles, cousins and grandparents.

Yet we currently allow men to be less educated than women, in fact, we encourage lower male education than female. We do not give them the skills to be able to generate a sustainable living, yet we expect them to do so; when they cannot provide in the manner society deems is necessary, they are criticised and emasculated.

Studies show that we poorly prepare young men for the world because we do not give them the information they really need to succeed, yet we demand success of them.

We continue to perpetuate the myth of the male breadwinner because it sounds good, it fits with the way we want to see things and it makes us seem like good Christians.

At the same time, we diminish women’s worth. We seem to wish to reduce our women to the role of lesser mortal as Judaic and Sharia law do.

We think nothing of casting out demons in the guise of women, and promote males who are less prepared and less stable. They are far more likely to succumb to the pressures of stress and peer pressure, because their mechanisms of dealing with the same, their ability to create a self-image that is whole and depends on its own desire to follow laws and regulations, is undermined by the pressures around them.

In the meantime, other societies where males are dominant seem to prepare their men for those positions. Of course, this has its shortcomings, but they do not exclude the majority of their men from education and good training.

Good training means teaching them civic responsibility. They are taught to be good people, good men and responsible citizens. They learn from the Koran and Mosaic Law, but their communities also take time to educate them in being responsible and good human beings, albeit among themselves and with their own communities under their laws.

Locally, however, members of the community and leaders tend to take a less orthodox approach to training men. They teach men or tell men that it is not important for them to be educated, it is not important for them to be good people. A good male is a man who can beat the piss out of all those who stand in his way. A good man is a man who can undermine, lead through deceit and steal and kill, but is unable to reason, control his urges or relate to the world around him with any kind of empathy. Instead, he is quick to anger, fast to explode, eager to show is erection and unable to sustain beyond that.

This is what we want to see around us.

It is a shame when Members of Parliament argue that men should not be held responsible for their ‘nature’.

They can perform their masculinity wherever they wish, dropping their seed indiscriminately without any worry about looking after the weeds that emerge. And weeds they indeed become as we discriminate against them, too. It is hard for seeds dropped on hostile ground to become anything other than weeds. Why is it that our leaders are so backward in their thoughts and their actions that they encourage the same sins they throw rocks at?

How can they lead a country yet promote absolute irresponsibility? Is that simply a ploy for them to maintain control?

How can any male in authority encourage children, young males and older males to spread their seed as they wish and fear no recourse, hold no paternity?

We have simply gone back to the idea that when my cock loose, tie your hen. Women are ultimately the only people in society who offer any responsibility for their homes and families.

Can we not think before we speak? Sharia law may posit that women are less than men, as do Judaic teachings, but where is the progress in a 21st century, enlightened community when the male leaders argue that men must be men but only when it comes to spreading their seed and that women should always be kept in a subservient position yet provide all the dollars to feed the family?

What an odd sort of patriarchy we encourage: patriarchy without education or responsibility. What kind of traditional society is this?