Folarin ‘Falz’ Falana is a staple of Nigerian pop culture, weaving ideas through originality, discussing relevant socio-political issues with heaving table shaking, comic skits, criticizing corruption and vices at all levels, and making music a tool for socio-political activism in line with what the greatest musician in Nigerian history, Fela Anikulapo-Kuti gained notoriety for in his heydays.
Over the past seven years that Falz has grown
and matured as an artist, from the guy who made, 'Jessica' and ‘High
Class’, he has taken on pedophilia, prostitution, troubled adolescence,
perils of success, rape, Internet fraud, materialistic pastors, pervert
uncles and other noteworthy discussions in a world where public figures
are afraid to shake tables.
On his last album 27', he made the standout song, ‘Child of the World,’
about the worrying outcomes of a focused girl, raped by a family member
she trusts. The experience and trauma then morphed into promiscuity and
life-altering contact with HIV — and there, Falz started getting
criticisms online.
Feminism in itself, as an instrument
of social justice and advocacy, in its pure form is a needed tool to cut
down entrenched patriarchy and promote the rights of women.
Criticism vs. Falz
When the visuals for ‘Child of the World'
dropped, in the thick of conversations around rape, consent and tacit
permission to rapists through victim shaming, critics neglected the
entire positive conversations that Falz evoked in his music and pivoted
the narrative in how he shames ‘runs girls’ and engages in other forms
of ‘slut-shaming.’
First, who is a runs girl and what is slut-shaming?
A ‘runs girl’ is Nigerian lingo for a
transactional sex practitioner that does not stay in a brothel or
inhabits any form of red light zone. She is usually a high-class escort,
sometimes, a courtesan to uber-rich Nigerian men — or aristos — and makes a good living in the hustle.
Slut-shaming,
on the other hand, is premised on the idea of patriarchy limiting the
sexual expression and sexual liberalism of a modern woman. Slut-shaming
is the act of ‘policing’ a woman’s body - especially when that critic
condones a man sleeping around in a roundhouse of hypocrisy.
After the era of the issue rumbling on Twitter, Falz was finally confronted on the issue at the listening party for his new album, “Moral Instruction,”
and he duly responded with a criticism of buyers of sex with a quip on
his joint effort, ‘Regards To Your Mumsy’ with rapper, Ajebutter22 which
addressed pedophilia, predatory sex hunting and aristos and then
finished with the unequivocal statement, “I hate transactional sex” to a warm applause.
Sadly, it is a misfire from critics. Falz not only has a right to his opinion, but he is also relatively right.
First, we understand critics, but their argument does not hold water
The argument is that prostitution is a
legitimate hustle because everyone has a right to their body. Should we
encourage people to accept transactional sex as a hustle because it
pays?
Critics also claim that men who patronize sex
workers; should be called out, great point. They’re as complicit in the
act as the sex workers in the ‘oldest profession in the world,’ but does
that critique of the patronage of prostitution validate prostitution?
No.
Why
are we unified in our voices against other vices and condemn them while
some people want to legitimize prostitution with the concept of free
will, abusing that fundamental tenet of ‘free will’ to feminism for
selfish and hypocritical ends?
Corruption is as old as time, but time is still no validation for corruption — a vice will forever be a vice.
So what is transactional sex?
A sexual relationship where consideration — in form of money, chattel or gift — is given in direct exchange for that sex.
We also need to clarify what these critics
want; to call transactional sex a legitimate hustle or to also call out
the buyers of sex? It seems a combination of both, depending on whom
you’re arguing with and what they subscribe to.
So, for tribe allegiance, they have to vilify
any man that criticizes any woman on any premise, even though that
criticism is pointless — as it is in this case.
Unknown to these critics, legitimizing transactional sex promotes cheating
That said, how is it that most of these
critics rightly complain and criticize sexually irresponsible and
philandering men all day, calling mega-shots on the scum mantra
but are also the same persons who want to protect the sexual
proclivities of a woman under the heading, ‘it’s her body.’ Isn’t that
double standard that feminism is trying to abolish?
As explained above, ‘runs’ is a core part of
transactional sex and sex in this context is mostly bought by married,
uber-rich Nigerian men. If these critics hate cheating, and they say
transactional sex is good, they are trying to say it’s okay for single
women to sleep with other people’s husbands while we only blame the
buyers of sex and let the sellers of sex go — that’s just partializing
and double standard.
You cannot reap the benefits of a
wrong — patriarchy — you root against. Asides that, both the cheater and
the person whom a cheater cheats with are animals and critics must
understand that.
Yes, we should also shame the patronage of transactional sex, hence the scum mantra but it goes both ways.
Critics also miss the perils of prostitution
As things stand, prostitution is illegal in a
lot of territories and Nigeria is one of them. Corruption and
exploitation are also ingrained in the human fabric. Some of these sex
workers do these things because they feel they are too far gone or
because they feel out of options with on survival means.
On a daily, corrupt law enforcement officers
take advantage of them. Rapists take advantage of them, they get abused,
shamed, robbed, assaulted and cursed. It’s sad that critics seem to
only have a problem with a man criticizing a woman than holistically
understanding the concept of transactional sex.
Mention how they are taken advantage of by
pimps and madams and if these critics are truly concerned they would be
more concerned about this.
Asides that, Falz is entitled to his opinion
From the foregoing, it has been
established — at least slightly — why transactional sex will continue to
be viewed with judgment and continued to be shamed, even if it becomes
legal. It then becomes necessary that Falz is entitled to whatever
opinion he has on transactional sex.
Critics going on rants and tirades are no
better from people they criticize for hating feminism. You cannot hate
people for having dissenting opinions on issues like this — they are
borderline. The point of these critics on transactional sex is likely to
be more problematic than the problem of shaming itself.
What is our hope as a people if our children
start ascribing to prostitution as a legitimate hustle even if they
become discovered exhibitionists who enjoy sex after they come of age?
We need to be careful what we abuse.
If truly the outrage is to stop cheating then why the advocacy for transactional sex?
No comments:
We have Zero Tolerance to Spam. Chessy Comments and Comments with Links will be deleted immediately upon our review.
Post a Comment