In recent times it has become fashionable for some women to ascribe to themselves the title “feminist”. “I am a feminist”, they say. The reverse of this phenomenon is rather paradoxical; because it is deemed politically incorrect for a man to speak of “masculinity” in the open. In fact, it has become a fatal pursuit for a man to assert his masculinity in any affair concerning his relationship with a woman. My mother taught me masculinity. She made me understand that merely coming into the world with a phallus did not compensate enough for my manhood. Manhood, in her view, was more of a social definition than a biological disposition. Manhood will earn me my right of place in this world. While the young girls in the house had the perpetual license to cry the entire journey to the hospital, a mere whimper or twitch by me after the needle will break open the flood gates to chastisements…“be a man!.” Although the feminist movement has a somewhat secluded history in Ghana, I think that the September 1995 Beijing Conference on Women gave it a somewhat vogue impetus. The rhetoric of Ghanaian women, especially those of the academic fraternity, assumed radical posturing after the conference. At the time, the feeling was that the modern woman had found her voice. The more extreme of them courted the delight of rebelling against the more quotidian chores of cooking, doing the laundry and cleaning the dishes after the meal. To their mind, the continual practice of these duties legitimized the cultural subjugation of women. Could that be true? My mother graduated from University with first class honors and she still cooks the meal. She does the laundry, and walks the proudest woman on earth. She’s never felt inferior to any human being let alone the man she’s been in love with for 35 years. Is she by these deeds subverting the feminist agenda? Yes I think. Because unlike her so-called latter-day feminist brigades, she’d rather celebrate the achievement of women in the pursuit of equality, than feign defeat and weakness. She's refused to adopt the rhetoric of victimization, suggesting that women can never succeed on their own, and crusade for preferential programs for women. Let’s face it; women have gradually overcome the legal and cultural barriers to equal opportunity in the free world. In several instances, well over half of all BAs and MAs are earned by women, and “the working woman” phenomenon has become the rule rather than the exception. Women are becoming physicians, lawyers, CEOs, and scientists and are founding their own businesses in record numbers. In countries like America, the liberal feminist war cry has impacted immensely on the public psychology. It has led to massive reformations in laws, education, divorce settlements and Child Welfare. These examples stand as glowing testimonies to the growth of humanity; how far we have come as a people. But these events must be understood within a geo-cultural setting. Unlike Ghana, the extended family system in the Americas and in most parts of Europe is not nearly as strong. For example, I have heard of how many American couples get married by a pastor and later call home to announce the event, often to cheers and pleasantries from relatives. And this is considered normal. Can you imagine that happening here? This will certainly be considered sacrilegious and grossly disrespectful when applied within the Ghanaian experience. If examined within the cultural framework, one will discover that the family element in such an affair is given secondary consideration because the system makes adequate provisions for the consequences of such a union thereafter. Of instances where the radical feminists have pushed beyond sensible balance, there have been some unfavourable repercussions. I saw for example in America, that it had become the practice for men to use women as childbearing instruments. They call them “baby mothers”. Men in the Black communities in particular would rather pay child-support and other welfare taxes than stay in a marriage with women who would exact stiffer “gender related” penalties in the event of a divorce. I am curious about the subtle link between the absence of the male figure in the home to the indiscipline and crime ratios there. Do Ghanaian women want this? In Britain for example, marriage has become an expensive endeavor among young men because of the legal risks associated to it, courtesy feminist advocacy. Marriage ratios have declined and divorce rates are soaring. Radical feminism has made it more difficult for man and woman to find common-ground. I can’t help but think that, many a Ghanaian feminist have blindly adopted the radical feminist symbols of the West. They mimic Western styles advocacy and copy the intended objectives in an uncritical manner. The analysis accompanying their rhetoric seems to stem more from bitter experiences, insecurity (often a seething distrust of, or resentment for men usually relating to abuse, etc), loose revolutionary fervor with ill-considered implications. It appears that an open and fair acknowledgment of what women have accomplished would mark the end of their existence. The gap between the “elite” feminists and the women on whose behalf they claim to speak couldn’t be more starkly portrayed as was the case in Mali last year. The vast majority of women there challenged the saneness of the feminist course in the matter of polygamy and went on demonstrations in the streets to call them to order. Also in the USA, radical feminists called for full implementation of the Equal Representation Act. The implication of that would have been that women soldiers in the U.S Army will be made to fight on the battle fronts of U.S wars. Again, the masses of women questioned the logic of the feminist course and brought it to naught. Radical Feminism needs to respect womanhood. Christine Stolba argues that even though women’s opportunities are now equal, women’s and men’s choices are not always the same. Ironically, the achievement of women’s equality poses a serious dilemma for contemporary feminists, who do not want to acknowledge that some of women’s choices, such as studying literature rather than maths, or leaving the work force to raise children, or even working part-time, lead to fewer women in top jobs. The flaw in contemporary feminist thinking is its insistence that anything less than statistical parity with men in any field--or even on college sports teams--is proof of discrimination against women. Radical Feminism needs soul-searching. It must properly define its role in human progress and social harmony. Man and Woman are not the same. The attempt to make them one and the same in entirety is a futile enterprise. They vary physiology and by biological chemistry. Also, the argument that one by nature is inherently evil, inferior or has a higher propensity relative to the attributes fore-mentioned, to me is null. Nature has endowed both kind of our species with unique qualities which impose special obligations on them, to perform most optimally under the exigencies of childbearing, warfare and so on. This is not original knowledge as it is common-place in almost all African Cultures, and forms the foundation of its norms, values and mores. These qualities are complementary as both species need each other to reach their fullest potential. We are presented with the choice of harnessing the immense opportunities these complementary forces present us with, or meddle in the needless superiority battles which have become the patented brand of radical and separatist feminists and others down the long driven aisle. Author: Sedem Ofori (Producer, Frontpage, SMS)