Separation of the world of women from the world of men

In this section, Caldwell et al. refer to the ‘dual sex system’ “characterized by sep­arate women’s traditional political organizations, and even by queens of women” (Caldwell et al. 1989:203)—a point generally highlighted particularly by feminist authors (e. g. Okonjo 1976; Amadiume 1987, 1997). I find it very important to be aware of this possibility, in some African societies, of separate hierarchies for men and women as a contrast to Western political (and economic) systems, where women must fit themselves into a male mould if they want to rise to power. As an observation of daily life, I also see the separation of the world of women from the world of men as a quite fitting description, in Mozambique maybe even more in the patrilineal South than in the matrilineal North, partly because many men in the South are labour migrants, whereas in the North they tend to be peasants. But on the whole, in the countryside, women often spend time with women and men with men, in work, leisure and at central ritual occasions. For Caldwell et al. all of this is intended as evidence for lack of male control of women (in marriage) and thus for the disastrous lack of female chastity. Separation of the world of women from the world of men also means: women out of control (by men). This is actu­ally what they write: “Such separation [of the male/female spheres] renders extra­marital sexual relations easier for both men and women” (Caldwell et al. 1989:203). They seem to have censored themselves on this point, writing ‘for both men and women’. It is evident, however, that it is the women’s extramarital re­lations that are the issue of concern. That men are promiscuous is nothing new, and even a fact of ‘Eurasian’ civilization. What makes ‘African sexuality’ African (in the Caldwell interpretation) is that women are promiscuous as well!