There is this meme on social media that talks of how men lie and how it is possible Eve did not even eat the fruit at the garden of Eden and probably Adam did and lied about it considering it is him with left over evidence of an Adam’s apple down his throat.
The other day a local TV station ran a story of Wangu Wa Makeri and turns out all I was taught about her is pure lies. Turns out she was a firm leader and not that she actually sat on men’s back. She would not be intimidated and was hell bent to do what she thought was right, something that did not rub well with many men.
This is not the history me and most people read about her. If anything, we grew up ridiculing her methods and being told not to be like her, a woman should be humble. It is also such narratives that have left women struggling in their positions of power and further cementing the theory that women are not leaders. When she is bold and firm on her decisions, she is a Wangu wa Makeri in the office, “anakalia watu sana”. If a man exhibited the same qualities, he is seen to be a good one.
The story goes on to tell on how men in the village decided to oust her and other women who at that time seemed empowered. The village men got all the women pregnant at the same time and that is how they got their power back. A theory that has made getting pregnant like being subdued by a man. One that is not helping in our push for equality. It is the same theory that makes people say, ‘she was careless’ and that’s how she got pregnant. Is it such a sin to get pregnant? Is to get pregnant to loss power?
This particular story got me questioning all my history classes. Got me wondering, in the passing down of our history, how much is true and how much is made up? Are these books we read biased towards certain angles? How impartial were the writers? How much was left out?
It is these partial truths that in the long run alter all history. I assume when Wangu stepped down and a man took over from her, theories began to make rounds about her and the half-truths seemingly won the day seeing it is what most people know about her.
Efforts to keep her name in history have been minimal so far thanks to the bad history we read about her. I mean, why would we want to remember a dictator who sat on men’s back? People who know her however say she did much for the village including helping with setting up of churches. She was a good leader, but this we were never told as someone somewhere who did not like her decided to tell an alternative narrative about her.
The other day a local TV station ran a story of Wangu Wa Makeri and turns out all I was taught about her is pure lies. Turns out she was a firm leader and not that she actually sat on men’s back. She would not be intimidated and was hell bent to do what she thought was right, something that did not rub well with many men.
This is not the history me and most people read about her. If anything, we grew up ridiculing her methods and being told not to be like her, a woman should be humble. It is also such narratives that have left women struggling in their positions of power and further cementing the theory that women are not leaders. When she is bold and firm on her decisions, she is a Wangu wa Makeri in the office, “anakalia watu sana”. If a man exhibited the same qualities, he is seen to be a good one.
The story goes on to tell on how men in the village decided to oust her and other women who at that time seemed empowered. The village men got all the women pregnant at the same time and that is how they got their power back. A theory that has made getting pregnant like being subdued by a man. One that is not helping in our push for equality. It is the same theory that makes people say, ‘she was careless’ and that’s how she got pregnant. Is it such a sin to get pregnant? Is to get pregnant to loss power?
This particular story got me questioning all my history classes. Got me wondering, in the passing down of our history, how much is true and how much is made up? Are these books we read biased towards certain angles? How impartial were the writers? How much was left out?
It is these partial truths that in the long run alter all history. I assume when Wangu stepped down and a man took over from her, theories began to make rounds about her and the half-truths seemingly won the day seeing it is what most people know about her.
Efforts to keep her name in history have been minimal so far thanks to the bad history we read about her. I mean, why would we want to remember a dictator who sat on men’s back? People who know her however say she did much for the village including helping with setting up of churches. She was a good leader, but this we were never told as someone somewhere who did not like her decided to tell an alternative narrative about her.
Comments
Post a Comment