The recent fad during discourses about infidelity between married and unmarried partners, is the 'Cheat Back' syndrome.
A single or married woman believes cheating on her partner is an easier way to pay back for the man's misdemeanor.
Women have been cheating on their spouses from Adam.
This isn't new.
And they were not killed for cheating. Even in the Bible days, Jesus cut them some slack.
The difference between the mentality of the women then and the ones now, is that the women then were smarter.
They cheat and move. They are purposeful about their decision. The women were not given to gross irresponsibility.
Today, women want to stay married to the man they find boring while sleeping around. Is this graceful?
Worse still, is the common belief about the consequences of cheating for women.
It is ridiculous to find that some African traditions still claim that a married
woman who cheats on her husband will be recompensed with death or delusion.
Fallacy.
What these wives do not know is that they are married to very diabolic men.
What many see as a communal curse is actually a vindictive husband going out of his way to cast a spell on his wife, when he realizes she is sleeping with another partner.
Just think about this, dear ...
The same community that accepts the children birthed by a wife and fathered by another man because her husband is impotent, will now strike another wife with madness?
The same community that looks the other way when a married woman gets bored with her husband, locates a willing man and moves in with him while refunding the dowry the former man paid, will kill another wife in a separate instance?
The same community that allows a wife married to a mentally or genetically-challenged male, to relate sexually with his kinsman to produce children, will send thunder after another wife in another family?
In each of the three instances above, is there a ceremony at any time, that releases each of the justified 'unfaithful' wives from the curse?
In effect, the communal curse is partial, or has commonsense? It is selective in its efficacy?
No.
The husbands create these scenarios.
Don't be deceived.
These men create the monsters attributed to the communities.
Again, be constructive with this understanding ...
Would an American or European woman married to a man from such a community encounter these curses should she philander?
Or the curse is potent only when a Nigerian woman is involved?
Many African traditional cultures afford women the emotional liberty to mingle.
Some cultures call this 'agiri'. And this is officially acceptable in the community.
Back to Ekwefi once more, she slept with Okonkwo while still married to Anene, under Umuofia native law and custom.
She abandoned the number one position in Anene's world to be number two in Okonkwo's world, by her choice.
By implication, she was comfortable 'snatching' another woman's husband. I mean, these issues have always been underlying marital discourses in our culture.
Despite Ekwefi's slightly 'unpopular' marital position, she remained relevant in Okonkwo's household, and never was she jeered at or pronounced a 'husband-snatcher', 'Onyeoshi-amu', or 'Ashawo' by any member of Umuofia community.
But note this: there was a willing man for Ekwefi.
A man who was not just ready to loosen the end of her wrapper, but marry her.
Ekwefi was smart to understand that she needed to stay out of a marriage that she deemed boring. That was never an issue in her culture.
So ...
Cheating back is not the issue; it is doing it the right way. It is being honourable to leave a relationship where excitement is no longer being served.
And at the same time, being able to face the shame of being rejected by the man she cheats with. That's actually the tragedy.
Otherwise, wives have always cheated and the African traditional society always condoned it, as far as she chose right ...
So that her bridal wealth is refunded in full.
(To be continued...)
Ifedimma Onwugbufor is an author, trained teacher, screenwriter, ghostwriter, and technical communicator.
Comments
Post a Comment