Chimamanda will lead women to ‘hell’
Who made Chimamanda Adichie the supremo of feminism? Who made her the feminist papal? How did she become the feminist potentate?
By asking Hilary Clinton, former US presidential candidate, why her Twitter bio starts with “wife’, Chimamanda has not only intruded into the personal business of Clinton, but also scorned a key principle of feminism – “choice”.
Besides other leanings, feminism entails freedom of choice. A woman is at liberty to be anything she wants to be – doctor, lawyer, housewife or mother. The right to choose is principal, and this should not be prejudiced.
Setting straightjacket standards and rules, which Chimamanda’s brand of feminism promotes, will result in a second captivity – by matriarchal she-lords.
Notable feminists of the first and second waves such as Betty Friedan, author of ‘The Feminine Mystique’, emphasised the essence of “choice” in their works; that a woman can be a housewife or a career person if she chooses to. The key word here is “chooses”.
The imposition of personal foibles on the feminist struggle gives it a blemished complexion. The result of this is the ridiculing of women who choose to be mothers or housewives by their so-called “woke” peers.
As a matter of fact, Chimamanda’s brand of feminism makes a caricature of the movement’s goal – equality of gender. How? Chimamanda’s virulent feminism, by default, teaches all women are not equal – the housewife is less of a woman and in shackles, while the stiletto-wearing career woman is the archetypal vanquisher of the demonic patriarchal order.
In all, it is still “woke” if a woman chooses “wife” as her title. It is all a matter of choice. Personally, I believe “father” is an esteemed title. Nursing my six-year-old son from infancy has been the most rewarding duty for me. Yes, I am a father first.
In conclusion, Chimamanda’s feminism is already leading some women to the hell of confusion, bitterness and misandry. Feminism should be defined by all women in different stations, according to their realities and choice, not by some self-installed matriarchal potentates.
Fredrick is a father, husband, journalist and media entrepreneur
He can be reached on Twitter: @FredrickNwabufo, Facebook: Fredrick Nwabufo
Great piece; timely guidance for womenfolk!
Choice but they are still marginalized in society,
You’ve committed lot of fallacies in this article using big words to distract from your message and seem more educated, but in reality you are just spilling out patriarchal propaganda.
Excuse me sir. Chimamanda did not hold a gun to Mrs. Hillary’s head and ask her to change her bio. She simply asked a question and I see nothing wrong with that. Since when is it a bad thing to voice an opinion? Or since when did voicing opinion now become tantamount to being a matriarchal ruler?
I’m extremely surprised that The Cable agrees to publish your entry.
Anyone who read the ENTIRE interview with a slight sense of understanding will realize that Chimamanda’s point was not to reduce the importance of being a wife or mother.
Hillary’s answer was the icing on the cake- she answered brilliantly and cleared the air.
If Hillary, the woman who was asked, did not take offence but rather answered with wisdom, why do other people now seem it fit for them to keep carrying the matter on their heads, like as if they were the ones who were asked the question?
why should she ask such question at first place?
Doesn’t she know that Hillary Clinton is Clinton’s wife?
I still wonder if it had become a sin for a woman to use “wife” I. her bio data.
mtcheewww.