Girls’ toilet in Africa – discrimination! Part 1

When the Transport Workers Union (TWU) of New York workers finally returned to work and ended three-day mass transit strike in New York city that had largely paralyzed the city, many news media understandably reported the news in the cover page. But other news shared the front page (internet edition) of the New York Times on 23 December. The news? Toilet in Africa. And how it negatively affects women’s status in Africa.

Even though we get more and more accustomed to the blending of hard news and advocacy article in the New York Times, this one comes across a bit overboard. It is becoming increasingly hard to know if we are reading the respectable (once) newspaper or Feminist Africa e-news (I made this one up). With all the important news that impact millions of people in the world, New York Times would choose the issue of girl toilet in African schools.

But if we look more closely at the background, the intent of this feminist advocacy stunt will become clear. Feminists put emphasis and considerable efforts in the development of Africa, because they view Africa as an experimental ground for constructing matriarch modern society, or building true feminist utopia, build and run by women, where all the concerns of women and girls come first. Other parts of the world, including Europe, could become feminist utopia if they could continue affirmative action, gender quota and demonization and ghettorization of men and boys at current pace, but the prospect is not certain, and you cannot say that the modern society was built by women. Feminists could hijack the government and rewrite the history to their liking, but the truth is that the modern society in those regions was not built by women.

But Africa could be a different story. Africa, as you all know, is a continent with very low level of development, which means human and social capitals are very underdeveloped. Basic social and economic structure is there, but underdeveloped and weak, men who mostly occupy important positions and run the countries also may not be as competent and as professional as their western counterparts. It would be relatively easy to construct a matriarch society in such underdeveloped society. For example, while it would require considerable efforts and resources to unseat male legislatures in the developed world and replace with women, it would be far easier to do so in Africa. You can plant a western educated and trained professional woman, who rose to senior positions in international organization through gender quota to a country reeling from long years of civil war and pit against an uneducated man who didn’t benefit from such western feminine favoritism, and with infusion of lots of cash and electoral assistance by constellation of international feminist NGOs, you can have the first elected women president in Africa (Liberia). Or you can exploit the post-conflict turmoil and a total lack of political structure, appoint yourselves to be some of the drafters of new constitution, make gender quota in national legislature essential part of the constitution, and there you have the legislature with the world’s highest female representation (Rwanda). ( I guess it would provide another ammunition for Scandinavian feminists).