Lately the debate about women’s rights has been taken to greater heights than ever before. It is historically evident that women have been oppressed mainly on the basis of their physical weakness, which was mistakenly assumed to overlap also to mental capacity. As a result they have been treated as mere observers in a male dominated world. Or as mere commodities; for example, a young girl could be exchanged for food or cattle. People with wealth ended up having many wives, some as young as their grand daughters.
Giving birth to a boy child has been regarded as enlarging the family, whereas giving birth to a girl child is seen as enriching the family through cattle, food or any form of wealth that would come out of lobola. Even the terminology speaks for itself, “Mukomana anoroora, musikana” meaning that the act is not reciprocal. Rather the boy child is the object whereas the girl is the subject. Just like the relationship between a boy and the ball in the sentence, “The boy kicks the ball.”
Today’s world drives us to a new dispensation – that of equality. A free world for all. How can this be valid where marriage demands payment from one side of the pair? In my view payment of lobola removes that balance which we strive to achieve in a relationship. Despite the amount of noise made about human rights, women are literally reduced to mere commodities and given a monetary value. One pays that much for an educated woman, the other pays that much more for a moneyed women and so on. Yes it is our culture, but is it not the same culture, that we should blame for its ills of disregarding women? If it is merely a cultural token, why does it differ depending on the social status of who is getting married? In as much as we are moving out of the era of unbalanced oppression towards women, our approach lacks practicality as we still hang on to cultural practices that can promulgate inequality right from the first day that people are married.
And from the women’s side, many are convinced that payment has to be made to their family before they are married. I once asked a lady if she would agree to exchange vows without any payment made. In response she asked me why I wanted to be ‘given” a wife for free. To me she reduced herself to a mere commodity rather than an equal partner.
My argument here is simple. Lobola payments minimise the gender equality we want to achieve when people enter their marriage without a balance. When the wife is ill treated, she is slow to take any action because someone paid for her. Even her parents will look at the matter considering that they received something from the Mukwasha. With lobola in place, and pressure to be equal, I foresee a time when men will not be committed to a relationship. Rather they go the “hit and run” way where they impregnate and go free again with no responsibility and no risk.
