In the past 10 days, there have been three cases of sexual relationships that revealed aspects of our Nigerian character — the tendency to side with the man and punish the woman. First, there was Habiba Inusa, a nursing mother who was recently remanded in prison for adultery. Inusa had participated in the mass wedding programme periodically organised by the Kano State Government and Hisbah (the state’s religious police). Inusa was delivered of a baby the day after the wedding, a scandal that combines sexual impropriety with deceit. Inusa soon learnt that hell hath no fury like a husband-for-a-day because the man threw her out of his home. The conned mass wedding organisers seized the meagre wedding gifts bestowed on her.The austere puritanism of the Hisbah lacked either human empathy or reflectivity, and probably never stopped to consider that a woman desperate enough to tell such a short-lived lie to hide the shame of her pregnancy within a legal union deserves some understanding. If we rewind the chain of events in this woman’s life, we will see how society, religion, culture, and patriarchy have victimised her at every turn. For instance, if there were enforceable laws on child support in Kano, it would have been unnecessary for Inusa to try to pass the responsibility of a late-term pregnancy to another man. If religious-suffused Kano itself does not overemphasise marriage as a supposed cure to sexual immorality, Inusa would not have had to legitimise her child through a union with another man. Inusa is not a criminal, she is a victim of poverty, oppressive religiosity, gender disparity, and state-regulated morality.
Second was the case of Ekemini Ekerette
(aka Kemen), a participant in the Big Brother Naija Reality Show series
who was recently disqualified for groping a sleeping woman. Apparently,
Kemen missed the memos on the imperative of seeking people’s consent
before performing sexual acts on their body. Kemen’s disqualification is
an important statement on the ethics of sexual relationships. Since he
was kicked out, I have seen people produce one inane reason or the other
to insist he did not deserve his punishment.
The most shocking instance of tacit
support for Kemen, for me, came from the Speaker of the Akwa Ibom House
of Assembly, Luke Onofiok, who jumped into the fray on behalf of his
kinsman. Onofiok’s social media rant expressed his disappointment that
their son lost his celebrity status and fan following in the wake of his
disqualification. I do not think it mattered to Onofiok that Kemen
overstepped his bounds when he groped a sleeping woman, or that such
malfeasance carries a penalty for a reason. He seemed more interested in
what Kemen had lost.
Onofiok could not even wait for Kemen
himself to apologise for what he did and ask for forgiveness. Instead,
the Speaker’s complaint was that those who had previously celebrated
Kemen were now in a hurry to crucify him for his “mistakes”! It is
rather disingenuous of Onofiok to refer to sexual misdemeanour as a
mistake because Kemen was not a child who inadvertently fell on top of a
sleeping woman. He crossed a line and he did so on live TV. Onofiok
could have used Kemen’s disqualification as a teachable moment for
others who needed to be educated on the basics of sexual consent.
Onofiok’s defence of his kinsman was not
just irritating for its seeming amorality but for the added fact that
he did not spare a word for the woman whose body was violated. Onofiok
claimed he did not know what Kemen had done wrong but that simply cannot
be true. I am more inclined to believe he simply did not want to
acknowledge Kemen’s wrong so he would not have to condemn it. Instead,
he would be able to focus on the more “urgent” task of philosophising
about the self-righteousness of Kemen’s criticisers. Onofiok ended up
religionising Kemen’s transgression and his choice of words (such as
“mistakes” and “temptations”) says a lot about what one needs to know
about Onofiok, his attitude towards sexual assault, and his priorities
as a Speaker of his state legislature.
Third in the string of sexual misdeeds
is the case of Apostle Johnson Suleman, the founder of Omega Fire
Ministries. The man of God is being accused by a certain Stephanie Otobo
of impregnating her and using the police to harass her. Now, I am
proceeding cautiously on this story because its narratives are still
unfolding but already I am appalled by the commentary of Nigerians who
have almost refused to listen to the
accuser’s side of her story. Almost everywhere you turn, the woman has
been disparaged and called objectionable names by the usual “touch not
my anointed” crowd who will defend a pastor against God himself.
I understand that Apostle Suleman
currently has a reputation of a hero because of his criticisms of his
state governor, Mallam Nasir el-Rufai, (whom he once prophesied would
die). Both men have tussled on the issue of Southern Kaduna killings and
acts of violence by rampaging Fulani herdsmen. A sexual scandal could
not have come at a more fortuitous time for the cleric who can now claim
to be a victim of some grand conspiracy designed by a vengeful
government.
Apostle Suleman can make all the ad
hominem attacks on Otobo’s looks, and even claim that it is the state
government that wants to ruin him, but he cannot run away from the fact
that the images of his naked torso on his accuser’s computer look
suspicious. He can argue that the pictures were doctored but he will
need the services of a graphics expert to prove that it is possible for
anyone to photoshop that lecherous look on his face in those
photographs. His wife’s defence of him is touching but she is simply not
a credible witness of her husband’s virtues. There are many other wives
who would do what she did either because they are in denial or they
want to protect their self-interest.
While sexual indiscretion by a pastor is
ideally a matter between him and his God, it is important that as a
society we cultivate an attitude of moral responsibility for our pastors
as much as our politicians. We cannot complain about the ime almost refused to listen to the
accuser’s side of her story. Almost everywhere you turn, the woman has
been disparaged and called objectionable names by the usual “touch not
my anointed” crowd who will defend a pastor against God himself.
I understand that Apostle Suleman
currently has a reputation of a hero because of his criticisms of his
state governor, Mallam Nasir el-Rufai, (whom he once prophesied would
die). Both men have tussled on the issue of Southern Kaduna killings and
acts of violence by rampaging Fulani herdsmen. A sexual scandal could
not have come at a more fortuitous time for the cleric who can now claim
to be a victim of some grand conspiracy designed by a vengeful
government.
Apostle Suleman can make all the ad
hominem attacks on Otobo’s looks, and even claim that it is the state
government that wants to ruin him, but he cannot run away from the fact
that the images of his naked torso on his accuser’s computer look
suspicious. He can argue that the pictures were doctored but he will
need the services of a graphics expert to prove that it is possible for
anyone to photoshop that lecherous look on his face in those
photographs. His wife’s defence of him is touching but she is simply not
a credible witness of her husband’s virtues. There are many other wives
who would do what she did either because they are in denial or they
want to protect their self-interest.
While sexual indiscretion by a pastor is
ideally a matter between him and his God, it is important that as a
society we cultivate an attitude of moral responsibility for our pastors
as much as our politicians. We cannot complain about the immorality.Any
man who can make such an admission on the altar of God is a thug and
we should not be quick to put it past him that he could impregnate a
woman and send the police to harass her!
No comments:
Post a Comment