Culturally women enjoyed place of power and prais

WATHINT’UMFAZI; wathint’imbokotho! You strike a woman; you strike a grinding stone.

So goes the slogan and the name of South African women’s formation since 1913 (when women like Charlotte Maxeke led the way in establishing the ANC Women’s League), especially remembered during this month of August – Women’s Month.

It is a month paradoxically named after Augustus, the first Roman Emperor of 27BC. No wonder, therefore, there is a lot of reflection on women’s rights, achievements and obligations.

As a left-handed, (therefore not a right-minded) person, I choose to be unorthodox and look at how women were treated and respected in traditional societies.

Concomitant with the current view – a correct view – that women’s rights are throttled, I pause to ask, and answer, the question: how well respected were they and what  rights did they have before?

I proffer that women were highly respected in traditional communities. What disturbed the apple pie was colonisation and consequent industrialisation.

Don’t think  I want to follow the beaten track of blaming everything on apartheid. Oh no! I am not going that route. The point is that industrialisation, with all its undeniable benefits, also came at a cost. That cost was the failure of tradition to move with the times.

For example, consider how oppressive it would seem in today’s industrialised world to see a husband on a journey, leading his wife, followed by their children all laden with heavy baggage, whilst he is only carrying a stick!

Yet in nomadic societies that was perfectly normal (and possibly still is) as the husband was leading the way with no luggage so that his hands would be free to fight an advancing predator.

He also had to reconnoitre in order to direct the family away from dangerous animals.

I remember, as a little boy, how we were schooled by the elders to always walk against the wind so that our scent would not be conveyed to predators; how we were warned not to look up into the trees when going through a forest so that our eyes would not meet with the eyes of wildlife, like snakes or baboons. Tradition also required that the husband sleeps closest to the door – to protect his precious wife and family.

Indeed so respected was a woman that upon marriage she would be called by her clan name. Thus you would get MaFaku, Hlamba ngobubende . Another would be MaFikizolo, Fika sele kophulwe and so on.

So Guybon Sinxo’s UNojayiti Wam is a relatively new, and perhaps oppressive, development where a newlywed woman is given a new name like NoCollege or  NoManage, as if she were a calf.

Respect for woman went so far as to avoid the seemingly rude term of umfazi kaMadiba (Madiba’s wife)  to the far more respectful umkaMadiba (Madiba’s wife).  This brings us to the current ukuthwala custom where a rustic (indlavini) will waylay an unwilling girl and abduct her.

What we see today  is largely a perversion of tradition.

It is correctly heavily condemned and criminalised – as was the case in the pre-industrialisation period.

Lest I appear unnecessarily defensive of my culture, consider this proposition – a princess is abducted by a commoner; a wealthy man’s daughter is abducted by a pauper. Heavens will fall. The truth is, in the olden days an arrangement would be reached for the fiancée to be “abducted” to avoid a public wedding – always unaffordable for some families.

And in this marriage a mother always played an initially pivotal role, in that her daughter would report to her the suitor and in turn, she would report and intercede on her behalf  to her husband; just as a boy always reports to his father his marriage plans.

In the context of stable and settled family life, even  intonjana (a coming-of-age ceremony) erroneously referred to as “female circumcision”, was always the sole preserve of women.

Until today no man quite knows what happens in the initiation hut – in exactly the same way women do not know what happens in the circumcision huts (emabhomeni). .

On the issue of pregnancy, should it unfortunately happen that a girl falls pregnant before marriage; again it is the women who are first to know. In traditional societies they were perfectly entitled and indemnified should they usurp a heifer from the trespasser’s herd as inkomo yenquthu (a beast for breaking virginity).

If men attempted to do the same there would be a faction war.

On the issue of factional fighting, women had the role of applying mercy sans frontiers.

If the rustics’ league from one locality clashed with those of another at an event, such as a wedding, as one rustic fell a woman would run to lie on him.

This was because in African law, it is a serious criminal offence to deliver a blow thereafter, as you might injure that woman. This level of respect for women began at the cradle and continued to the grave.

Another instance when women traditionally have a “higher” role than men is when a baby is born. Women have more access and are privy to more information. As a child is born in a traditional birth ward (ifuku), only the women are allowed in until 10 days after the baby’s birth. Men will only be told whether the baby is a boy or a girl. Finished and klaar!

Presumably, it is during this period that the traditional DNA is rehearsed to seek consensus on whether the child belongs to the household – and men have to accept the verdict!

Talking of consanguinity (blood lines), whereas you can call your only brother umninawa wam,  you will refer to your only sister in the plural, udadewethu (our sister) to indicate greater respect.

What of Adam Smith’s Wealth of the Nations in traditional affairs? Here, women have their music too. While men had their cattle, sheep and goats as livestock, women had their pigs, fowls and eggs.

In agricultural produce, pumpkins, watermelons, gourds and beans belonged to women.

Not very long ago, I went to bury my “daughter” in African culture or “niece” in English culture at Mount Ayliff.

I noticed one man, who through his quality traditional attire and his stud stallion, was evidently a man of means. I went over to share a conversation with him.

He has six wives. Each has her own homestead. Perplexed at how he managed six wives when I can’t manage one, I delved deeply to find his secret.

He told me that he had once burnt his fingers by beating one of his wives. They all cried and ran home.

Naively, I presumed they had a common home until he told me he had to send a beast as penalty to each home.

He had learnt his lesson.

And in case you think polygamy itself is oppressive, there was a time in history when even polyandry (a woman having more than one husband) was allowed!

Professor Mncedisi Jordan  has taught and supervised accountancy students at both Fort Hare and Walter Sisulu universities.  He now researches indigenous cultures