The Innate Desire to Infantilise Women
I try to avoid online debates on gender and feminism. In fact, I avoid online arguments in general, period.
Why? Because I am someone who enjoys drama as an innocent bystander, or rather, in the voice of Roddy, voiced by Hugh Jackman in Flushed Away, ‘a Millicent Bystander.’
However, in the past few days, I found myself in the middle of a Twitter debate that brought some vile people to my TL. I have since muted the tweet I made on the issue; whoever engages it now is only having a conversation with themselves.
Nonetheless, I keep thinking about the topic of the debate. On the surface, it looks like the typical traditional vs modern wife debate with the word ‘submission’ being thrown around, but really, it’s about the innate desire by patriarchal people to infantilise women.
So, here’s a brief breakdown of what sparked the argument:
A woman talked about how her husband did not ‘permit’ her to attend an event she wanted to go to, despite informing him about it many days before. She said she was so hurt that she cried but had no choice but to listen to her husband.
The truth is, this woman’s story is not new or even surprising. In a way, I have had my own experience with this situation. My father would get upset that he did not permit us to do something even if he was informed about it before we did it. My mother’s permission was never enough.
In our society, women are not enough. A man must validate our thoughts and actions; a father, a husband and where these are unavailable, then a brother or even an uncle.
Women are expected to always defer to the ‘higher authority of men’. We are treated like humans who can’t think or act for ourselves. We must be at the mercy of men, and if you have a contrary opinion to that as an ‘unmarried woman’, you are immediately dismissed, and as a ‘married woman’, you are labelled a lousy wife.
Unmarried women aren’t even supposed to have thoughts. I was telling a friend some months back how I felt about polygamy. I’m not against polygamy as long as the parties involved, particularly the women, consent to it and know from the beginning the kind of marriage they are entering into. However, it’s not something I will condone. I do not want a polygamous relationship.
To this, my friend told me that I never know what may happen in the future and that I may change my mind. I looked at him and laughed, but it wasn’t funny because what he was telling me was that my opinion on that issue didn’t count. After all, I am unmarried.
When single women talk about the things they want in their lives and from their relationships, and if those things do not conform to patriarchal standards, they get the infamous response, ‘when you get married, you will see.’
See what? Suffering and choicelessness? Is that the definition of a happy marriage?
They always say that a woman has no religion; she does what her father does and then later what her husband does.
The implication is that a woman’s life before marriage is meaningless. Her being, existence, and worth are all attached to the man she marries. We tell men to lead and women to submit.
Unfortunately, this is the life most women have been conditioned to want. And for this one woman who cried because her husband refused to give her permission to go out, there are several other women like her conditioned to a life where their voices will always be smaller than their husbands’, but they will flex it like it’s something to be proud of. I wish more women understood the difference between mutual compromise and emotional abuse so that they will always keep their standards high and never settle.
Because it is unlikely for this situation to change anytime soon, I can only wrap up this article by wishing more women meaningful friendships, knowledge, exposure, privilege, and, most importantly, support to reject a life that neither suits nor favours them. I also pray for more women to have partners who don’t infantilise them but see them as full human beings, respect their autonomy, and treat them with love and respect.
