This piece concludes a series that has sought to unravel some of the issues raised during the current debate on gender equality. The positive feedback and support from both men and women following the publication of the first part has been overwhelming and encouraging, signaling the fact that Bahamians understand what is at stake. It also confirms that our people know that which is right and are committed to fairness and equality.
The public discourse over the last few weeks has left many confused as to the actual topic in focus. This is because certain interest groups and persons have turned a simple discussion about granting Bahamian women the same rights as Bahamian men as well as gender equality for certain men into any and every thing including a performing arts theater, a court of law, a religious but not spiritual seminar and a forum for voicing concerns over illegal migration or homophobia or foreign persons. We conclude this two-part series by looking at the real issue(s) in this debate.
Distractions and irrelevant additions
One of the things we have mastered over the years is the art of adding irrelevant points to a debate. While the motivation for introducing distractions to public discourse include ignorance, a confused state of mind and a genuine concern, in some cases the underlying objective is to create mischief.
It is a well-known fact that in interpreting the law, the judiciary will often consider the provisions of the law and the intention of Parliament in promulgating a piece of legislation. The prime minister, attorney general, Constitutional Commission and other parliamentarians have clearly stated that the proposed amendments to our constitution to provide for gender equality will not change the definition of marriage under the relevant laws and will not allow for same-sex marriage in The Bahamas.
Dispelling the same-sex marriage bogeyman
In the event that this is not sufficient or there remains any doubt, reference needs to be made to the document that is the subject of the debate - the constitution. Article 26 of the constitution provides that "no law shall make any provision which is discriminatory either of itself or in its effect, except under prescribed circumstances which include laws with respect to adoption, marriage, divorce, burial, devolution of property on death or other matters of personal law." In essence, unless this specific provision is altered, marriage will continue to be defined as a union between a man and a woman. Section 21 (1) of the Matrimonial Causes Act, Chapter 125 clearly states that a marriage shall be void if the parties are not respectively male and female.
Was this just aimed at further complicating the discussion or is it designed to invoke the emotions of Bahamians? If the commentators have genuine concerns as true Bahamians, they should just propose alternative wording which removes the ambiguity they felt existed in the draft bills, rather than make this an issue for controversy. The saying is ever so true that if a person is not a part of the solution, he or she is a part of the problem. We are seeking solutions, not just persons that specialize in highlighting problems. Now that the Constitutional Commission has decided to revise the wording of bills numbers two and for to address the genuine concerns of the Bahamian people, it is hoped that we will be able to put this matter to rest and continue with the education of our people.
An alternative to the proposed changes
An interesting proposal has also emerged in this debate and that is, rather than changing the constitution to give Bahamian women the same rights as Bahamian men, the constitution should be revised to take away the privileges which Bahamian men have enjoyed for four decades with a view to putting all of us in the same position. This proposal is flawed in that it ignores international standards and does not compensate Bahamian men and women for the 41 years of injustice and discrimination.
Additionally, the proposal begs the question as to where the inventors of this new solution have been hitherto. Were they so busy developing this plan aimed at righting the wrong of gender inequality for all these years? Could it be that their creativity and brilliance was aroused as soon as it became apparent that the government is seeking to address this issue? The logical conclusion seems to be that they have found their religion and voice at a strategic and convenient time to question why men were given these rights in the first place. Hence, rather than give the Bahamian woman what is rightfully hers, they have taken the view that Bahamians should no longer have this right if women want the same rights.
That being said, if the goal is to bring about true gender equality, an additional question should be posed to the populace at the referendum. The question should seek the views of Bahamians on whether the exclusive rights granted to men and denied to women in our constitution should be revoked to promote equality. In essence, the questions should be phrased such that the outcome is either an expansion of all constitutional rights to all Bahamians including women or reduction of existing rights given to men to put all Bahamians, regardless of gender on equal footing.
The government and the debate
It is important that the quality of the debate is maintained at a high level and we remain civil to one another in spite of differing views. We must not allow the discussion to deteriorate in depth and substance such that we lose sight of the ultimate objective of the current proposals. Our political leaders, the religious community, civic organizations, professional bodies and the media must play their part and be responsible in the dissemination of accurate information to the general public.
The government, for its part, should ensure that the education process is comprehensive and effective in enlightening the populace and allaying any fears or concerns. More importantly, the government should be open to constructive criticisms, genuine concerns and reasonable proposals for amendments to the draft bills aimed at providing clarity on the issues. The government should also engage and enlist the support of non-governmental organizations and other stakeholders to pass its message along.
Conclusion
And so this piece concludes where it started; is the opposition to granting Bahamian women equal rights justified? It is apparent that the battle here is based on ideologies, complexes and loyalty to the status quo. Are we really progressive as a people or do we just delight in opposing any and everything? Are our Bahamian brothers secure enough to support an initiative that grants their Bahamian sisters equality? Do Bahamians trust Bahamian women to be patriotic and protect our cherished country and citizenship? If all the concerns are addressed and clarity provided, will we still vote against gender equality?
Once we have addressed the unclear aspects of the proposed bills, can we now move forward to have a sensible debate on gender equality in The Bahamas? If all the issues considered in this two part series have been ironed out, what stands in our way as Bahamians from doing that which is right? Is there an underlying issue or philosophy behind the opposition by some to gender equality in The Bahamas? This writer submits that those who oppose the principle of gender equality and equal rights for Bahamian women in particular have the mindset that Bahamian women are no more than chattel or property. These individuals believe that we, the Bahamian women, are inferior to men and lesser human beings than our male counterparts.
In the final analysis, the Bahamian women and the new generation of Bahamians will be watching and listening. It is said that action speaks louder than words. It is not enough to say with mere words that you support equal rights for women; you must prove it by your actions. In the words of the late Maya Angelou, we "will forget what you said and what you did, but we will never forget how you made us (the Bahamian women) feel" in our own country.
o Arinthia S. Komolafe is an attorney-at-law. Comments on this article can be directed to a.s.komolafe510@gmail.com.

Click here to read more at The Nassau Guardian