Thursday, May 02, 2024

Men With Female Names: A Yoke Around Gikuyu Men’s Necks?

Image courtesy of https://openart.ai/


Lately, we have had a healthy dose of debate on the uniquely Gikuyu phenomena of naming children after their mothers. On social and mainstream media, prominent voices of influencers and public discourse commentators have lent an opinionated voice to the matter.

Some have explained the matter, others have ridiculed the children, especially adult males, some have sought the cover of history and popular culture manifested in the community's pride carried by men's "love" of being associated with their mothers. It is almost made to look like all Gikuyu males love to be associated and identified with their mothers.

The truth of the matter is that this emanates from the high prevalence of single parents (read women) in the community. This can be traced to a seven-year period of the so called State of Emergency (October 20th, 1952 to January 12th, 1960) when the social and cultural fabric that held and still holds many other communities was violated systematically by the colonial government. The community has since been broken, traumatised, demasculinized and feminised; hence the universal entitlement and herd-mentality masked as tribal superiority and nationalism the community suffers todate. There are many other Kenyan communities with single female parents but rarely do you ever hear of their children named after their mothers. Have you heard of Kevin Mueni? Brian Nkirote? John Nekesa?

It may seem like the government's agents tasked with persons registration have a different brief for Central Kenya. The birth certificate is very clear that a child's male and female parents are necessary, and space is available for their names. What is the purpose of tying a man's future to his mother and not his family name. Every child belongs to a lineage and specifically a clan. There is no child without a father; whether he is acknowledged, present and wanted, or not.

Some have argued that in the cases of divorce (which existed even before colonialism came to our shores), a maternal uncle was expected to fill in the cultural role of a father by mentoring his sister's son. In culture there was no void. Why not name the boys after their grandfathers, uncles, or clan names? If the purpose of a third name along with the family's origin (sub-location, division, district/county) is traceability, in 2024 we have technology associated with mobile telephony that can do that easily and cheaply without perpetuating indignity on a whole generation.

Whereas the local Chief could trace any citizen originating from his area, by the family name in the 1960s; rural-urban migration has since happened and for generations many families no longer associate with their ancestral or original homes. Infact searching or tracking the lineage of a Joseph Kamau Wanjiru whose current abode is Githurai, Kahawa Sukari or Lavington is akin to a needle in a haystack.

Female names in Gikuyu are limited to slightly more than the nine mythical daughters of Gikuyu and Mumbi. Male Gikuyu names on the other hand are plenty, colourful, sobriquet, anecdotal, territorial, fame-associated, event-associated, career-associated, descriptive monikers and easily traceable.

Think of Mukuhi, Muirù, Muriu, Mwerù, Ritho, Kaniaru, Njogu, Wachira, Mùtutho, Mùnene, Kòru, Mìgwi, Itotià, Chotara, Igana, Mwariama, Mugo, Munyua, Murìmi, Murìithi, Muthomi, Gitaù, Mùriùki, Ndege, Kairù, Mùkabi, Mùikamba, and so on.

Traditionally women had no fixed abode and could be married far and away from her relatives. It was an abomination to marry blood relatives in Gikuyu traditions. If indeed the government's requirement was for purposes of tracing lineage in case of an accident or a lottery win; the insistence on a mother's name lies flat on its face!

The colonial government needed every adult to be well known and easily traceable to a geographical location and family pedigree and hence all the details necessary then, including a thumb print. It was a humiliating political endeavour along with the Hut Tax and denying male labour access to their families while in forced employment. Robin P. Williams says, "Once you can name something, you’re conscious of it. You have power over it. You’re in control. You own it". If you name it, you own it.

Kipande, later a passbook was first introduced in 1915; worn on the neck by all Gìkùyù males like a dog leash. The tradition of humiliating the Gikuyu males continues unabated almost a century later. It is not enough that you cannot enter a building, get a service, be medically treated, withdraw your own money from a bank, be recognised as a human being and citizen without an ID; but we creatively find one more way to humiliate a Gìkùyù man by adding his mother's name to his identity!

According to Elvis Ondieki, the British abolished the need to walk around with an identity card in 1951. Identity cards were first issued to women in 1979/1980. Maybe before that only school and birth registration existed in government registers and not in a wallet-size document.

Is it not time we gave back these Gìkùyù men their dignity? Is it not time to stop de-emasculating the community's male adults. Is it not enough that the alcohol related pandemic , broken and dysfunctional families already plague the Gìkùyù community without loading them with an identity crisis. Is it not time to re-masculate and build back the communal and family blocks that is the traditional and accepted role of men as leaders and heads of their nuclear units. Is it not time to return the river to it's original course.

Is it not time for a leader or leaders to rise up and point the direction towards amending our laws and divorce them from the original colonial intent of humiliating and subjugating a people. Is it not time for a single MP in parliament to take up this healing assignment. Is it not time for the so-called elders to do more than slaughter goats and wear earth-coloured tunics in the name of kìama kìa mà (council of elders)? Is not time for them to use their influence and lobby their legislators to correct this psychological wrong that Gìkùyù men carry around their already burdened necks?

Who will give back the boys their dignity.

No comments: