Within just a single year, unprecedented in the history of Ghana, Parliament witnessed some scuffles and fist fights on different occasions.
Surprisingly, those engaged in these acts in the House were all men.
Would the scenario be any different t if women had larger constituents in the House and were at the hem of debates and discussions?
Using gender as a case study can provide some level of knowledge into some of the unfortunate happenings the country had seen recently.
Over the years, there have been calls for more women empowerment and involvement in the political discourse in Ghana.
Some non-governmental organisations have dedicated most of their activities to that end, providing assistance to women to give themselves as candidates for parliamentary elections in some constituencies.
Aggression
Though there might be good reasons behind these affirmative efforts, its gendered implication is deeper than appears on the surface. There is a widely held view that men are inherently more aggressive gender and women more peaceful.
There is no way the act of aggression and violence displayed by Members of Parliament(MPs) on the floor of the House can be justified, let alone conclude that such behaviour is biologically or culturally driven.
After all, those involved are all males and Parliament itself is a male-dominated institution.
Men and women come with different biological and cultural makeups which can make each of them react differently to a given situation.
However, it is important for all of us to note that in humanity, the most striking biological capacity is flexibility.
Till we get female-dominated Parliament, tolerance should be the guiding principle to all male MPs when tempers are high in the chamber.
blogpay
Total Comments: 0