Psychology of marriage, stigma, social responsibility

 Written by Blessed Adjekpagbon

(A Critical Opinion On Asare Konadu’s ‘A Woman In Her Prime’ And Two Other Novels)

NOTE: This is an original intellectual work of  Blessed Adjekpagbon

-------------------------------------------------------

The celebration of marriage or child birth by Africans and many folks in other parts of the world with great frenzy, and the pains many spinsters go through are clearly depicted in Asare Konadu’s novel titled “A Woman In Her Prime." It elicited this critical examination of Africans (illiterates and literates) and some Europeans worship of marriage and child birth as measures of classifying someone as a responsible person with great achievements and good character.

However, responsibility is a core value by living honorably to protect ones name, family identity and admitting errors or mistakes when they are caused by our imperfect nature as humans. 

Being responsible means when you are accountable for your behavior, and dependable when you are given things to do for organizational, societal and family etc, wellbeing. In this wise, how responsible is an average so-called responsible but corrupt married politician, as marriage is ‘monomaniacally’ and culturally used as yardstick for measuring someone’s responsibility in the Nigerian, African or global context?

Moreover, in one of the fields of social sciences such as Mass Communication, there is what is called Individual Differences Theory, which vividly defines how people act or behave selectively in the way they do things or their choice of personal interests in life. Therefore, some people may like to marry early, others would want to acquire higher education before marriage, while some may not want to marry or have children because of the stress involved in marriage and child(ren) rearing. Hence, there is a saying that: there are different strokes for different folks.

In this wise, if someone like Pokuwaa, the central character of “A Woman In Her Prime,” decides to marry ‘by-fire by-force' (by all means she could use to get a man to marry), in her extreme state of poverty, even if it is a man that cannot feed himself well, let alone taking good care of her, yet she wants to be counted as a responsible person because she was able to hook a never - do - well man in terms of taking proper care of himself, it is her own cup of tea. But, if someone decides to live a life devoid of stress of marriage and child birth, that does not make the person irresponsible as long as the person is not committing any crime against humanity. The question is, “Does marriage or child bearing make anybody a responsible person?”  It is a matter of the individual choices people make in life. In the African and some global cultures, there has been a very negative and unpalatable notion that when you are not married or if you don’t have a child, it means you are not yet fulfilled.

So, if someone has been married and does not have children due to reasons beyond his or her control, does that make the person a failure or an irresponsible person? The question is, “Who sets the standard of fulfillment for who?" In this vein, when a criminally minded person gets married, does that make him or her responsible person while using embezzled public funds to cater for his family?  You don’t have to be married before you can behave responsibly.  Being married or giving birth to children does not mean you are responsible too, unless you have been personally responsible from time as an individual, which you strive to maintain in your marriage. For if being married is your greatest achievement in life, so be it to you, but does that land you on the moon? Or just like in Buchi Emecheta’s sociological satirical novel titled "Joys of Motherhood" and Amma Darko's novel titled "Faceless,” that portray the stereotyping of single ladies as irresponsible or possessed by marine spirits, hence they are either single forever or barren.

There are various examples of the bad consequences experienced by some ladies who were pressurized by their parents, family members and friends to get married as soon as possible to any available man that came their way, because they were already getting older but still single. At last, some fell into the hands of some notorious men who made life a living - hell for them.

A very good reference is that of Pokuwaa's experiences in "A Woman ln Her Prime" storyline. She got married to two different men at different times, due to the pressure mounted on her by her mother, urging her to get married quickly to any man that came her way. But she later separated from them and returned to her mother, after making life horribly unbearable for her. 

Another reference point to support the fact that being married or breeding children does not automatically confer a sense of responsibility on all couples is that of  Maa Suru, one of the females among the major cluster of characters in Amma Darko's novel titled "Faceless". Maa Suru and Kpakpo's characters as couple (husband and wife living together), falls short of the responsible qualities expected of them, based on African and global cultural and societal standards. She accepted Kpakpo, a vagabond man into the cubicle she has been cordially managing with her kids when their father (her first lover) abandoned them for her. The coming of Kpakpo into  her peaceful relationship with her children was the beginning of the disasters that later befell the children. She is a shamelessly selfish woman who is only preoccupied with her insatiable libido for Kpakpo at the expense of her children's welfare. This scenario clearly shows that it is not all couples that are responsible, whether they are legally married or not. Neither Maa Suru nor her highly irresponsible vagabond lover whom she referred to as a second husband can be regarded as responsible on the basis of just breeding children.

Nevertheless, to pinpoint the fact that bearing many children like rats is not a mark of success in life is showcased in Buchi Emecheta's novel (Joys of Motherhood). Nnu Ego, the central female character in the novel's storyline suffered greatly, due to her efforts to earn societal respect as a married woman. After a seeming endless period of singleness, she got engaged to a man but was unable to bear a child for him and was later rejected. The stigma of rejection by her former husband and taunts from folks in her community as a single and barren lady, forced her into another equally frustrating marriage. Though she later had multiple children in her second marriage to prove to her mockers that she is not barren, she ended up as a sorrowful woman; because, none of her children cared for her after they became successful adults.

If the production of children like rats, cats and dogs through family planning or recklessly in or outside wedlock, is the greatest asset anybody can boast about like an average African archaic societal mindset, are children part of the acceptable collaterals by financial institutions such as banks if one wants to apply for a loan? These and other salient posers make some enlightened minds wonder why being married is seen as a mark of responsibility even by many learned people who ought to have known better, that it is an irrelevant yardstick for measuring or assessing personal success, sincerity and responsibility, because, most problems such as embezzlement of public funds, crises in many societies and sorrows in the world today emanates from some so-called responsible married folks in the seats of power. 

Responsibility is a question of individual discipline whether you are married or not. Marriage does not make you a responsible person if you are not already personally responsible before getting married. If marriage is what makes someone a responsible person, why are many married people engaged in various irresponsible things like a large number of African politicians flirting here and there and emptying their countries national treasury without thinking of the shame they would bring to their family and friends? It is commonly assumed by some people that being married makes people cautious and behaves responsibly. If true, why are many African leaders especially the orchestrated married politicians in Nigeria and some foreign countries still showing irresponsible behavior and don't resign from their political offices when found wanting?

In addition, is there any sociological study with empirical figures to show that all married folks are more responsible in character than every single (male or female) person? There are many irresponsible married people bringing shame to themselves and their relatives despite being married. This shows that responsibility is not a quality you earn because you are a married person, as some people erroneously think that all single people are irresponsible since they are still single. This is a very myopic sociocultural reasoning among a lot of folks over the years in various communities and societies in Nigeria, Africa and some other parts of the world.

Some folks also say if someone is married, he or she will keep behaving in a responsible manner because he/she will always remember that he/she has a family at home and would never like to do anything that could dent their image. So, they are likely to avoid engaging in crime, by running away from it. That is also a flat assumption. If not, where is the mark of responsibility when a so-called married man or woman goes to the market and steal to feed his/her cherished African children born like rats, without family planning, while hoping that God will come down and take care of them? What are the variable standards of measuring someone as a responsible person because he is married, when all the looting of especially Nigeria’s treasury and the bad image brought to the name of the country and Africa at large, were committed and are still being committed by the so-called responsible married politicians, killing the continent economically, socially and politically with the connivance of their ‘highly worshipped family values’ of their kith and kin? Where is the marriage - conferred responsibility when some parents have reportedly been selling their children in Nigeria in recent times for N50,000, less than the exchange rate or value of one thousand American dollar? As a matter of fact, no amount of money is worth any human live. 

Moreover, where lies the claim of being responsible by being married, when some married folks have reportedly been using their partners, parents, friends, religious members, or relatives for money rituals in various African countries?  Marriage makes you a responsible person indeed.

Some schools of thought also say it is irresponsible folks that usually have children out of wedlock, yet some of the stigmatized so-called irresponsible folks work hard to earn money to take good care of their children, while some self-righteous traditionally or church - wedded married ones act irresponsibly by neglecting the welfare of their own, and sometimes indulge in social vices to fend for them. For you to be considered as a responsible person, you must have personal discipline before and during marriage. Is it not better not to give birth to a child or children you cannot feed, than to produce a child or children in the name of being counted as married couples while you are engaging in crimes or promiscuity to feed them?  Why are divorces commonplace every day? Is it not partly due to irresponsible behavior by some formerly proud so-called responsibly married partners? 

For instance, the African mentality of putting pressure on single ladies especially, to marry at all cost, should stop. Is it not barbaric and stupid to force a lady to marry just any worthless man that comes her way, in order to categorize her as a responsible person? Being single does not make anybody irresponsible or a criminal. Marriage does not make anybody automatically responsible or reliable since evidences abound that the majority of calamities that have been happening in the world from the beginning of time, could be traced to a lot of married men and women antisocial character. Nonetheless, for a long time, we have also been seeing some riffraff impregnating some poor or reckless females here and there and calling themselves husbands and wives in various developing and some developed countries. But, many of the males are jobless and steals to feed themselves and their bed-mates (regarded as wives), and children. 

Many men call themselves "responsible married men," but are champions of getting drunk and disgracing their heavenly acclaimed marital vows that conferred the title of being responsible on them. They brag that they are responsible because they are married despite their antisocial behavior.  There are also some married women who engage in extra marital affairs yet they are tagged as "responsible ladies" while some responsible single ladies that are chaste are tagged "irresponsible" based on societal stereotyping. Is that not apriori stigmatization of single ladies?

If someone was not a responsible person before he/she got married, but his or her spouse makes her to become a responsible person, then he/she should be thanking God for making it possible for him or her to get a good spouse that is a positive behavioral change maker. Therefore, it is not marriage that ought to make someone act responsibly. There are uncountable married people worldwide, who are wife beaters, kidnappers, terrorists, husband / wives snatchers, etc, yet they are called responsible because they married.

The stigma of looking at single people as suspects likely to commit crime and run away especially from corporate organizations because of their marital status is shallow and outdated. Modern happenings have shown that many married politicians are the ones causing pains, sorrows and poverty to the citizenry in the society they operate. They are no longer scared of the bad reputation their actions can cause to their own families. If marriage is the god of good behavioral responsibility, why do we still have married but irresponsible, corrupt government officials and politicians embezzling Nigeria’s treasury to feed and protect their so-called cherished family values and image?

All the foregoing questions raised in this paper needs to be properly investigated by modern social scientists to arrive at some possible new theories and approaches of classifying someone as a responsible person whether he/she is married or not.  And, is someone responsible because he or she is married or chose to be responsible whether he/she is married or not?

From all the questions posed in this paper by me, l hereby propound four theories of sociological categorization of people in terms of  their marital status, such as; married and single persons and the tendency of committing crimes in any society they live in.

The first theory is "Responsible Criminality Theory" or "Responsible Criminal Theory." It has to do with the crimes committed by some married folks in human society, whereby they claim to be responsible persons because they are married, yet they don't act responsibly, by getting involved in some social vices like embezzlement of public or private funds, aiding and abetting terrorism, destroying the environment, causing any type of crises in their family or neighborhood or office etc. Their irresponsible behavior automatically show that even though they are married, they still display irresponsible manners, such as embezzling public funds, sponsoring political, economic, social, religious etc crises or confusion in their family or community or society they belong or at the international level. Many so-called African and global leaders and their followers fall into this category of criminal acts' group because they are married folks.

The second theory is what l refers to as "Singleness Criminality Theory" or "Singleness Criminal Theory." This theory is derived from an age long global assumption by many schools of thought who think or believe that, people who are still single or not yet married are likely to commit crimes without thinking twice because they have no spouse or children to think or worry about their welfare or safety or good image, before committing any type of crime. So, they are suspected to have the capability or prone to commit any crime and run away from where they reside than those who are married. Therefore, there has been a preference for people that are married to occupy some political offices and employed to work in various public and private institutions worldwide. However, most of the anti-human or anti-social crimes that have turned the world into the mess that we are today could be traced to people that are married but act in ways that no reasonable person will clap for.

The third one is "Marriage Conferred Responsibility Status Theory." This theory is concerned with the claim that a person is responsible because he or she is married and has children, and should be trusted or respected because of his or her marital status. Those who belong to this school of thought usually have a ridiculous belief that all or nearly all married persons are trustworthy and less likely to commit criminal acts or engage in any misconducts.

The fourth one is "Family Care Criminal Responsibility Theory," or "Family Care Criminal Theory.” This theory is related to both married and unmarried people. But it is more oriented towards the married ones. The theory found its roots in the excuses usually given by some married folks who say they were tempted to commit crimes in order to get money or any other item to fend for their family members that are either poor or sick. In Africa, the act of embezzling public funds to satisfy the needs or expectations of family members is very common. It is one of the major causes of corruption among the majority of public office holders in Nigeria. The horrible culprits are Nigerian politicians who empty government treasury into their personal accounts for the interest of their tenth yet to be born generation. 

                                                                                       END

Email: mudiagadje@gmail.com

            Whatsapp: +234 - 8059265333

 

 

 

POLITICS: BOOK REVIEW: Dirty games of legislative saints

 

Book:           Tenants of the House
Author:       Wale Okediran
Publisher:   Nelson Publishers Limited, Ibadan
Year:          2009
Reviewer:   Adjekpagbon Blessed Mudiaga

Award-winning writer, Wale Okediran’s sociopolitical satirical novel, "Tenants of the House," no doubt reveals the true nature of things that are going on in Nigeria's National House of Assembly. The book is rich with mixture of politics, romance and terrorism.  This requires urgent need of political, moral and educational renewal and rebirth if stakeholders in the polity are actually sincere in moving the country to greater heights.

The 306-page book made up of twenty-seven-chapter is loaded with intriguing base motives, do-or-die political philosophies and terrorist acts of some so-called law makers who can be better described as prostitutes and demons in saints clothing. The central character in the novel is Honourable Samuel Bakura who attempted to rectify many abnormalities he felt should not rear heads, let alone allowed to have field play on the floor of the Federal House of Representatives.  His efforts to sanitize the unbecoming attitude of some of his colleagues threw him into a series of unpalatable conflicts with them.

Writing from omnipresent (one person) point of view, the author, Okediran engages the reader in a James Bond-like detective and romantic exploration of scenes with microscopic details. He analyzes scenes with eloquent distillation. The opening chapter will certainly jolt a first time reader of the novel as it begins thus: I handled a gun for the first time, the day I saw one in Hon. Elizabeth Belo’s handbag. Lizzy and I, both representing Kaduna State, sat next close to each other in the chamber of the Federal House of Representatives. She had left her seat that day to converse with another member on the other side of the chamber and urgently needed a document from her handbag, so; she asked me to open the bag for her. My heart missed a beat. I swallowed hard. What? I thought; a gun here? You can never tell with women. But there it was, nestled comfortably in a crevice of Lizzy’s bag: no nonsense about it; it was the real thing: Honorable Bakura explains.

This is a true reflection of how various Nigerian politicians play politics. It is warfare. Only those who are daring most times have their say in moving motions, bills and bargains for the constituencies they represent. Imagine, Lizzy, a woman, carrying a gun in her handbag. As harmless as some ladies seems to look with their charming smiles, beautiful curvatures and enchanting nightingale’s voice, it is difficult to judge their 'internalities' from a distance or from mere assessment of their 'externalities.' This is perhaps what Okediran wants the reader to comprehend among other awful traits of female characters and human beings generally, throughout the novel.

If carrying a gun to such hallowed chamber is what could give Lizzy what she needed, then the definition of politics by Harold Lasswell who defined politics as a “system of who gets what, when and how,” has to be revisited. Does politics involve the use of dangerous arms and ammunition to cow co-house-members to submit to every demand made by others on the floor of the chamber? Is this the meaning of the “how” Lasswell imply in his description of politics? It is therefore, not surprising that Bakura was unable to sleep as he tossed and turned in bed recollecting the episode of the gun when he got home that night. No wonder there are still many unsolved mysteries of perceived political killings of some notable personalities in Nigeria from 1999 to date, such as the true killers of Engineer Funso Williams, former Justice Minister, Chief Bola Ige and a host of others, yet to be discovered.

The business of impeaching ‘Speakers’ of the chamber seems to be very important and lucrative to majority of the members instead of addressing issues that concern the electorate in various constituencies they represent. Precious time is wasted on frivolities while money exchanges hands in a do-or-die-greed syndrome of sharing “fertizer” (money), clearly captured in a market-women-quarrelling-style as the Wenike group and the Speaker’s group engaged each other in verbal caterwauls on the chamber’s floor.

Furthermore, still waxing explosively and unpretentiously like James Baldwin’s "Go Tell It On The Mountain," Okediran leaves no stone unturned as he enthralls the reader with some mischievous things some female politicians do with their bodies to win rival members to their camp. The salacious tendencies and coquettish scheming of Lizzy to win Bakura and some male members to her political camp, reminds the reader of Mrs. Duta with similar traits in Victor Okechukwu Anyaegbuna’s novel entitled "Unrequited Love." One of the fundamental issues Okediran uses the novel to highlight is the role being played by security agents such as the State Security Service and the Police in carrying out illegalities by politicians at different levels of government.  Among other issues raised through the intricate but smooth transitional plots of the story is that of uneducated, half-educated and educated-illiterates who find their ways into the National Assembly as learned members of the chambers.

Cases of certificate forgery as represented by “Torontoism” and “Chicagoism” in the past, comes to the fore in the portion where Bakura states that, “As the Speaker’s words came back to me, I started thinking deeply of my burden as a Honourable Member of the House of Representatives. Yes, the Speaker was right. Of all the members in the Wenike group, I was about the best educated. Who of our group knew about Clausewitz? Or Plato? Or Socrates? Education and political gangsterism do not go well together. And instead of my current alignment with political gangsterism, I should use my education and experience as a lawyer in a more positive way: promoting bills and policies, which would move the nation forward.”

The repercussion of accepting illegal money and having sexual relationship with dangerous political prostitutes aptly represented by Lizzy, a member of the chamber, is a clear warning to God-fearing individuals not to accept any of such Greek gifts, in order to save their integrity and serve their constituencies interest. Such suspenseful scenarios are the hallmark of Okediran’s systematic punctuations of intriguing political and romantic maneuvering style of writing. This makes the book a reader’s collection in the conglomerate of best sellers in the world. The author writes and paints sceneries in a James Hardly Chase investigative style that captivates the reader’s attention like iron to magnet.

Sociologically, the author also throws up what is called “Cultural Shock,” when Samuel Bakura fell in love with a pretty Fulani girl, Batejo. This aspect of the book depicts the saying “There are different strokes for different folks,” which also serves as a reminder of Cyprian Ekensi’s novel titled "The Burning Grass," where such Fulani marriage test also feature. It was the Sharo (flogging ceremony) Bakura failed to win and made him unable to marry Betejo, in Okediran’s "Tenants of the House." However, Bakura’s efforts to win his rival, Gidado in the competition for Batejo’s hand for marriage further remind the reader of Promise Okekwe’s poems titled "Pride" and "Waiting In The Cloud' in her collection titled "Naked Among these Hills." 

Okediran, the author, served as Member of the Federal House of Representatives, Abuja between 2003 and 2007.  He is a medical doctor by profession, before he joined politics.  In 1990, his poem, "Call to Worship," won a book prize of the American Poetry Association contest. His novel, 'The Rescue of Uncle Babs," won the 1998 ANA Prize for Children’s Literature while his book, 'Dreams Die at Twilight," was adjudged one of the 25 best books of the last 25 years in Nigeria by Spectrum Books Limited.  He has won several other awards. "Tenants of the House," is a joint winner of Wole Soyinka's prize for Literature in Africa. Therefore, the book is a good reading material for all neophyte politicians occupying any State House of Assembly and the Nigeria National Assembly. It is also recommended for the general public for the understanding of many hidden secrets going on in the corridors of power.

END