• The risk with genderising cases is losing the individuality and uniqueness of each case
I had an interesting conversation with my husband this evening. He told me about a book called Why women deserve less. So in his argument, he used the title to make his point on why some women deserve less or nothing. “Which women?” I asked.
I asked him if he ever considered these toxic masculine ideologies as practices that could be applied to his mother, sisters and daughters? You see, the toxic masculine ideologies spread by the likes of Andrew Tate or the Amerixes and the Andrew Kibes of Kenya always miss the glaring fact that ‘women’, as discussed by them, include their mothers, their sisters and their daughters.
In a gender discussion, men often clump women into one group: the untrustworthy, gold-digging replaceable types. To them, I pose this question: Are your ideologies as applicable to your mothers as they are to the women you so publicly loathe?
A wife is somebody’s mother and somebody’s daughter, a mother is also a wife, so for those who spread their corrupted ideas to young minds, I ask this: “Are you comfortable with your father treating your mother the way you treat the women you date?”
She is not only the stereotype you assign here but the pillar that ultimately lifts society. If we labelled all women as one type, then wouldn’t our mothers and sisters become victims of it? How many of us would go to war if someone ever disrespected our honoured mothers?
You see, it’s easy to overlook the value of women in society because of a few bad eggs and vice versa. This is not a pro-women article or an opposing statement to the Tates of this world. This is merely a reminder that in situations of crime, especially, we need to remove the confrontation on gender issues while discussing sombre crimes committed against women.
The recent cases of increased femicide have shown us that there is almost zero sympathy towards victims of gender-based violent crimes. When women are attacked and murdered, they are labelled “loose” and “immoral” and presumed to have done something to justify the outcome. When men are used and cheated on by women to the point of suicide or mental breakdown, they are called simps.
With the several cases of women being brutally murdered by the opposite gender, the discussion on gender-based violence must be had. However, this should not take away from examining individual cases within their parameters. We owe it to all victims to have their stories heard and have justice prevail for each and every one of them.
The danger with grouping such cases on the basis of gender is losing the essence of the individuality and uniqueness of each case. Not every woman who died at the hands of a man did something to ‘incite’ the rage of the said man.
We need to be cautious in our discussions of gender and stay away from blame. It’s easy to say things like “that’s how women are” or “all men are dogs”. Gender discussions should be based more on security measures and safety practices for all groups. What we should focus on in such troubling times are the victims and the call to justice.
When a person commits murder or violent acts on another, then we can no longer judge him on his gender or identity. The only thing we should be concerned with is that the person is a criminal who robbed a fellow citizen of a life.