Loading summary
Transcript73 lines
- [00:18]
Said Husseini
You are listening to the AIAC podcast, which is Africa's a country's destination for commentary on current affairs both on the continent and elsewhere from an African and Left perspective. This week we are featuring another episode of the Nigerian Scam and this time we turn our attention to a scandal that has exposed the hollowness of Nigeria's commitment to gender equality. The suspension of Senator Natasha Akpoti Odoagan, one of only four women in the 109 member Senate, after she accused the Senate President of of sexual harassment. Her case has sparked outrage and debate not just because of what happened, but because of what it reveals a political system that continues to punish women for speaking out and a global industry of women's empowerment that often responds with silence. As Aisha Osori recently argued on the website, despite decades of donor funded programs for women's political leadership, the outcomes tend to be photo ops, buzzwords and workshops, not structural change in Nigeria. As Osori and our guest today both argue, women in politics are expected to draw power not from grassroots organizing or civic support, but from their proximity to powerful men. So what happened to the feminist tradition in Nigeria that once they're sold shoulder to shoulder with labour unions and student movements? How did a movement rooted in radical transformation become so tightly managed by donor logics and elite respectability? To explore these questions, your usual hosts, Said Husseini and Emeka Ugu speak with Comrade Hawa Mustafa, a feminist trade unionist and development economist whose political roots run deep in Nigeria's radical left. Together they reflect on the history of the women's movement, the fragmentation brought on by neoliberalism, and the tensions between liberal feminism and the politics of real transformation. Before you listen, make sure you're subscribed to the AIAC podcast. Wherever you listen to your podcasts, follow us on social media and above all, head over to africa as a country.com to check out new writing on politics and culture from a Pan African and Left perspective. Without further ado, here's Saeed, Emeka and Hawa.
- [03:20]
Emeka Ugu
Today's episode is a continuation of our recent series which has focused on the women's movement and contemporary feminist politics in Nigeria. If you're interested in these themes, be sure to check out the past two episodes where we explore these questions from a number of different angles. Today we're taking a deeper dive into the complex history, the present character and the future trajectory of Nigerian feminism. And we are very glad to be joined by a much respected and admired feminist and trade unionist who will share insights on the struggles and triumphs of women in Nigeria from the historical roots to today's struggle against blatant misogyny and political marginalization. So our interviewee is none other than Comrade AWA Mustafa, a development economist, social activist and researcher and policy analyst with the Nigerian Labor Congress, one of the central union federations in Nigeria. She was also one of the leaders of the generation of Nigerian student activists that instigated nothing short of a nationwide revolt against structural adjustment in the late 80s and early 90s. Comrade Howell, we are very glad that you could join us today. Thank you for making time.
- [04:30]
Hawa Mustafa
Welcome. I'm glad to be here too.
- [04:33]
Emeka Ugu
Excellent. No, we've been looking forward to talking to you for a while, so really great to have you. So, I mean, maybe begin. Can you tell us a bit about the history of the women's movement in Nigeria, especially during the military era? Our understanding is that women's and feminist movements, in addition to students and trade unions, played a central role in resisting structural adjustment programs and actually instigating the fall of the military dictatorship. So how did women come to occupy such a central place in radical struggle in Nigeria, from your perspective?
- [05:09]
Hawa Mustafa
Okay, I must say that if we're going to talk about the history of the women's struggle in Nigeria prior to the military era, there was something very strong that started or that occurred which gave women, you know, a lot of courage, a lot of presence and a lot of visibility to participate in the process of national development either in the area of politics, in the area of economy and all that. And that is to go back to pre independence, you know, colon colonial days struggle and then pre independence trouble. The role that women played, considering the social culture, the tradition you know, in place, you know, for Africans, for Nigerians at that moment was quite inspiring. And that role was documented as a history that was taught in schools and which was not just being taught for the purpose of knowledge. It was also inspiring, you know, so that experience of women, you talk about the Aba women's riots, what led to about women's riot, the successes, the EGBA women's riot, the whole family played, you know, colonialism pre independence, you know, the role that people like Haji Sawaba Gambo Sawaba played, Margaret Echo and so many other women like that that sometimes today their names are not being mentioned and you know, popularly like these other women, but the history, you know, teaching the history, the knowledge of the fact that women stood up at a time when women were being subjugated or even the society was going through systemic, systemic oppression was something that was inspiring to younger women, to women who also needed, who were also concerned with situations during their own era. So post independence, what we largely experienced was a military regime which was dictatorial, which was autocratic, which was oppressive and exploitative. And women in this, I mean, in this era found themselves suffering double oppression. Not just because they were women defined by culture of, by. By. By a gender that has defined their culture, by tradition, that has defined rules and expectations for them in the society, but additionally by a system, you know, that has also segregated people by class and was exploring, exploiting and, you know, oppressing people on the basis of that class. So women found themselves. So the military also was that class, you know, of a political group that also was oppressive, that was exploitative. And each time society suffer this level of, you know, this kind of exploitation or oppression, women usually had a double or multiple, you know, impact or became multiple victims of such oppression. So come back to the military era. Yes, there was this constriction of the, of the democratic space during the military era. And dividends. There was nothing like a democratic dividends. Social, social and political, you know, infrastructure and benefits were defined and controlled. And because of an existing patriarchal system, you know, that was very rife at that time, of course, still also very strongly present and much more so because of the know, economic system that was also very explosive, explo, oppressive and exploitative, which the military, you know, the military era was also seen as a kind of agent of, of global neoliberalism that was strongly emerging at that period. Women suffered, women were silenced at home, women were silenced in the public space. Women don't forget, even in the military, politically, there were even few men that were benefiting in military regime because the military was accommodating to men. But it was very gender biased. Women could not participate or become leaders in the military. And then for that, that mindset of patriarchy, that was what the military, because it was dominated by men, it was what the military was also using to even provide whatever kind of infrastructure and facilities that they were providing. So it was not about women, it was about people. And it was not so much about the benefit to the people. It was more of a benefit to that ruling class there. So there was a lot of agitation, societal agitation. And coming from post independence, the favor, you know, the spirit of activism was still very strong. And not only that, there was also the. At the global level, there was also the presence of, you know, the Cold war between the, the socialist block and the capitalist block. And the socialist block had a stronghold in the area of activism. So all this Propelled a lot of active engagement, you know, by the citizens against military regime. And the women's movements emerged then specifically, not just to engage the general exploitation and oppression of people, but more specifically to also engage even the patriarchy within this system that was also particularly, you know, targeting women. And so I think one particular women's movement that emerged during that period, particularly in 1982, was women in Nigeria. Women in Nigeria came at a time when there was a lot of this construction of the civic space by the military regime and a lot of silencing of the women's voices. Voices, in fact, women were not even being heard. Men were not even being seen. And then. And so when emerged in the. In 1982, and basically win emerged to confront as a feminist organization. It was formed with the aim of engaging policies and laws and practices that subjected women to double oppression as women and as a subordinate class. So addressing the military regime and as a. As a. As a group, as a class, and of course, addressing patriarchy as. As another ideology that was beyond just the military regime. So that was the major thing that came out in terms of women's movement then to confront this kind of exploitation. But there was also the women's group that was also. That emerged even before win. But I was like, not so much ideologically, not a rival to me, but then was also used by the states to kind of counter some of the, you know, feminist ideals of win. And that was the existence the National Council for Women's Society. At some point, the National Council for Women's Society was even attempting to get WIN under his wraps. But WIN was too strong because WIN was clearly a feminist socialist organization that was also not just a women's only organization, but women's led. So it was based on its own belief that the gender oppression is not just about patriarchy. It was also about class. And the issues of class is not just about a sex. It was not just about agenda. It's about the relations between men and women. It is about men. It is about women. So WIN on that, you know, became a membership organization for men and women. However, it allowed women to be in the core leadership. So you will never see a man in wind, for instance, emerging as the president, as a general secretary of WILL or as the. The national co. The president of will or even the other major positions. You know, men could take positions, lesser positions, like maybe assistant general secretary, assistant public relations secretary and so on and so forth, but most or all the major positions were left for women. So this is this nature of the. And then The WIN as a movement was not. It was deliberate and it made a conscious effort in terms of how it drew its. Its membership, because it was clearly a feminist and socialist. You know, unpretentiously, feminist was a socialist organization. It attracted only a kind of group of people. So at that time, the students, you know, movement was also very strong, you know, in terms of activism. And it was also the strength of the students, you know, movement was also significant, something that was also facilitated or propelled by the global, you know, by. By the socialist block or that. That was also influencing activism in particularly African countries. It was also coming up from the remnants of the activism of pre independence or post colonialism. So that was very strong. And then you also had the media. The media then was still remaining, you know, very strong. Also coming out of the history of the colonial struggle and post independence, then there was also the academia. And so all of this forged, you know, the way they came together to be part of win, to be part of the establishment of win. So WIN was a very strong movement, women's movement, in the. In that context, because across. It cut across different, you know, very radical groups within the society, but ultimately fighting for the same thing. And some of the benefits then was that, you know, most of the attempts to. To, you know, engage the military regime, then even at the end of the day, what culminated in the June 12 struggle, the women's movement was very. It was a very strong participant. It was very strong with. In terms of its relationship also with the trade unions. That's another thing. The trading day was also very vibrant, also. Also very active. And they were also a core part of that women's movement. Then there was also another thing that also helped to strengthen the women's movement. There was also this. The. The situation of apartheid in South Africa was also something. And the struggle of the Cuban people. Then these are also issues that added up, you know, to what the women's movement was engaging. And I must say that later, another thing that added to the strength and the visibility and maybe the gains of the women's movement. There was also the Beijing International, Beijing women's conference of 1995. I think that blowout, you know, of women's issues also help to further strengthen even local women's movements.
- [16:58]
Emeka Ugu
Interesting.
- [16:59]
Hawa Mustafa
During the military era. So this is the case, as far as the military era is concerned, that the women's movement had, you know, was engaging military errors and military regime as an aberration at the same time, was also engaging the issue of patriarchy that was within that group of Leadership and also holistically was also concerned about the issue of class oppression and class exploitation. So in law, if we talk about what that movement therefore benefited within that period is that whatever it is that the civil society, you know, can make, can lay claims to in terms of contributing to the removal of the military regime in Nigeria, I think the women's movement will also be counted in as playing a very key role. Whatever it is that we also talk about. Even how the outcome of Beijing, you know, was also enforced, you know, into our development policy, you know, decision making process was also something that was facilitated by the struggle of the women's movement there. So we did not just go to Beijing. I came back and automatically began to benefit from Beijing. It was also that Beijing became also, you know, the benefits of Beijing, at least locally, was also based on the struggle of the women's movement, the force, the strength of the women's movement within that period. So between the 80s, the 90s when we had the military regime, or 70s, 80s to the early 90s when we had the military regime, the women's movement had if at the social condition within that period, you know, coupled with the ideological, you know, strength, you know, within that period, globally and locally, even the spirit of Pan Africanism, the wave of Pan Africanism within that period, all of these things com combined, you know, to strengthen, to make the, the, the, the, the make it create a very big force of the. Of the women's movement in Nigeria. And the impact was that every gain, every little gain that we had putting the military out of government. Not only that, making the women's issue, you know, a development issue, making it come into the front border, making it something that people talk about even if we have not reached there, but at least in terms of raising awareness, making, creating the education and also, you know, forcing some little gains, at least recognition and the. That women's issues are development issues, women's issues are human rights issues, because that was also the term had the wave of the human rights, you know, issues coming up. And then the idea that human rights is not just about human rights if women's rights are not also included. Development is not development if women's issues are not also included. At that period, what we saw, you know, globally and locally was a redefinition of development, of human rights. And the redefinition of development also at that point meant that development was not just about. About economic growth. It was not just about counting the number of people that are getting an education or getting employment, but it was also about gendered development. It was also about how do you mainstream, you know, how, what, how, how are these policies are impacting on women differently from how they are impacting for, on men? And how is development being distributed in terms of gender distribution? How are women being recipients of development and then where, you know, so this mainstreaming of the gender issues in development policy, policy analysis, and also even our laws as they were coming up was something that can really be credited to the, to the, to the force of the women's movement around that period of the military era. Because like I said, it was not just about military, it was mostly about fighting for democracy.
- [21:16]
Emeka Ugu
Yeah, no, that's a really interesting background and a lot of insights in there that I actually had not encountered before and some that you know, I had encountered but I hadn't really understood in, in the same way. And I think, you know, the issue of women in Nigeria as one of the central organizations for mass women's movements, you definitely laid a strong emphasis on that. And that's quite interesting to understand, you know, as were the issue of double oppression which you highlighted, and the impact of the women's movement on the discourse around development through the 80s and 90s. But you know, I want to ask you a question now about the 2000s, about the return to electoral democracy and how that impacted on this background that you have laid out. And of course in the 90s we saw this return to democracy nominally right, the arrival of the civilian rulership. And at the same time, and you know, this, I should say apparently did not completely overturn the patriarchal political order that we had in the military period. Because evidently the civilian ruling class by and large is still quite male dominated and the kind of policy apparatus still appears to be, the benefits of the policy regime still appear to be quite concentrated within the patriarchal ruling class itself. So you know, I'm curious as to how you might assess why patriarchy remains so dominant in the civilian period. And then if I could add on a second question there, I'm curious about the organizational character of women's movements in this democratic period because what you were describing before sounded much more mass based, much more grounded in social movements and kind of embedded in a network of like minded organizations. You talk about students, ASU, academics and the wider trade union ecosystem. Whereas, I mean, correct me if I'm wrong here, but nowadays we tend to think of women's organizations in terms of NGOs, not those membership based organizations that you refer to. So I mean, is this characterization of the mainstream political system and the oppositional Social forces. Do you think this characterization is fair? And if so, why have we ended up in this kind of a situation under conditions of nominal democracy?
- [24:05]
Hawa Mustafa
Okay, so thank you very much. I think what the. The. The problem that has befallen the women's movement or the challenge of the women's movement, so to say today is. Cannot be divorced from the general challenges of people organizing around the world and more specifically the local content. And that this situation, these changes, is quite holistic. It's something quite deep. And it has been systematic in the way we got to where we are. The military regime, I believe the military regime, you see the period between independence, post independence and then the military regime, a lot of things were stagnated. The progress that we were making in terms of, you know, participatory development, active citizenship was truncated with the coming of the military regime while this was being done. Unfortunately, we have the issue of perestroika and Glasgows that kind of decimated, you know, or seemed to like, you know, water down the concept of socialism. And so. And then at the same time there was an implosion of neoliberal, you know, policies and programs that at some point a lot of things were coming up at the same time that created. Kept people's minds busy with engagements. At this point, people were. The struggle was not now about collective struggle for democracy or collective struggle for one country, but then the crisis at that point or the. The crisis that this whole. First of all the breakdown of the socialist up and then the crisis of the military takeover, dictatorship all over the place, the constriction of the democratic space, then the removal, the, the.
- [26:26]
Said Husseini
The.
- [26:27]
Hawa Mustafa
The. The introduction of all the fierce introduction, you know, I must say, very fierce and vicious introduction of neoliberal regime, you know, created a sense of now a struggle for the individual survival rather than collective survival. And that also had its own impact on the women's movement then as much as it had on different organizations. You know, so now with the struggle for individual survival, which was also. Which also had to do with the fact that the way the neoliberal system functioned was also based on some kind of divide and rule of the people. So we had those groups that were part of the movement were first of all attacked and decimated. We had the students union attacked and destroyed by neoliberal system in the sense that, you know, there was a lot of arrest, there was a lot of, you know, removal issue of the removal of subsidy, introduction of fees. And. And then there, at the same time, there was a lot of job retrenchment so even individuals as families, you know, you went home, you were confronted with a father who had just lost his job, who is very angry and a mother who has probably lost her space too in her job place. And then there's a lot of family, you know, issues and a child who needs to go now pay school fees at, in, in this school. So you have, you are not. If there was this impression of a lot of, you know, economic crisis that was the thing that we're observing then. And so this kind of decimated the different groups, the, the students union, you know, there were the crisis and series of arrests. People were now fighting for individual survival. Then you had us to. At the same time there was also attack on the academia who were also members of this movement. You know, the attack on the, on academia. At the same time attack on the media as well, you know, attack on organizations. Even NDA Nigerian Bar association was also a part of the women's movement at that time. There was also an attack on the judiciary, on the, on the bar. Sorry, you know, there was attack on the different organization, economic attack, you know, political attack by way of series of arrests and clamp down and prescription of your organizations and so on and so forth. So now people became, the organizations became disorganized and the individuals were now fighting for survival. This affected the movement. Now what was the outcome of this process? The outcome of this process was that now win has been weakened. The student union movement weakened. And then there was not an A, A, A, you know, a barrage of entry of funds that claims to want to help either to lessen poverty, to help in the working of women's liberation, youth development. And so if there were phones that specifically talked about youth development, it was not about the movement. It was for you to go and organize as youth use to assess these resources. Don't forget again, there were good jobs. It was, was a period of job, you know, of low employment. Then there are funds that claim to be for women's development, women's education, whatever. So now it's not about women's movement. In fact, some of these funders will clearly tell you that they were not funding movements, were seen as political, they were not funding political organizations. And so with this kind of weakening of the different organizations that made up of the, that made up of, that were made up of the movement, the movement itself kind of collapsed. And what you now had was because now there were resources that were coming for different specific thematic areas and targeting different groups, these different groups. Now you know, you know, you know, some different Groups now emerging from the movement to be able to access these funds. And this is what happened. So when with different, you had now different organizations. Look, some of the almost 80% of the women's organizations that are strong in Nigeria today emerged out of wind. They were with members. And some of the programs that they are even leading or that they are even working with were some of the programs that win as a movement was also engaging.
- [31:18]
Emeka Ugu
So that's, that's a story of fragmentation.
- [31:21]
Hawa Mustafa
Yeah. So with this segmentation, with this, you know. Yeah, segmentation of, of activities, you know, everybody now was looking for, to get some, some, some bits of the pie that was now in the offering. And then, so you have these L groups. Everybody now is working on different. You have girls empowerment, power initiative, you have women's rights advancements, whatever. You had a project and that all of this organizations were, their leaders, were people that emerged from the broader movement. Now there are projects, there are funds for this and everybody went into that. So, so after that. But of course the spirit of organizing as a movement did not leave these people. And the social condition that even warranted the existence of the movement in the first place was even becoming deeper. And so people even in their splinter group, in their segmented groups also saw the need to look, we needed to do things to also engage patriarchy, to also engage in laws and practices that were keeping women down, that were exposed, exploiting women, that were oppressing women. And so now it was not about women working with men at the beginning. So the groups will now say, okay, let's come together as different organizations now, different organizations of women. We are not now necessarily building movements because the way we built movements in the 80s and the 90s, it was a collection of people on the Semic area who responded, you know, and agreed on those issues in spite of having their own identity. But in this context, we are not having membership organizations for that matter. But today we are having organizations that are not membership organizations. So they are not building people membership based movement. Rather they are building organizational based movement. So, so you can have a so called movement that claims to have 200 members, but these members are organization, are organizations who do not control a particular people's constituency.
- [33:40]
Emeka Ugu
Right.
- [33:41]
Hawa Mustafa
And then what was the nature of their own agitation? What was the nature of their own sort engagement as that new form of emerging movement? The form of engagement was now it was mostly about engaging laws. The constitution, the law of women, girl child education, the law of women, girl child trafficking, the law of women and issues of marriage, the, you know, age of child, whether you have access to. To have to.
- [34:17]
Emeka Ugu
To.
- [34:17]
Hawa Mustafa
To. To use your husband's state of origin. This became reformist movement. Unlike the 80s where we had what was akin to a revolutionary women's movement, what we have at a later date, until dates, you know, that is more common, you know, that is more popular is reformist women's movement. That most of what the struggle or is about is about reforming laws, you know, making policies, engaging policies, making policies more. When we talk about participation, it is not necessarily about transformative trans participation. It is a trans participation that talks about, add them in, define whom they are, you know, a lot of kinds of concepts and, and the phrases that just started emerging. But of course, you know, coming from being led by the neoliberal, you know, system, I know, part of the whole global neoliberal agenda. Because even the words that are being used, the phrases that are being used are not necessarily what is leading to a transformative society, but rather a reformed society that looks at the law in a better way. By inclusion, by what we call diversity, you know, by what they call intersectionality. All kinds of phrases or words are coming up now, but it is not one that interrogates a system that creates this problem. So the system that creates the problem is not being interrogated. Unlike the movement of the past, particularly the wind movement, the current women's movement is not interrogating a system. It's not based on a refined ideology. If there is an ideology, it is at best a liberal ideology. So we have the feminist. The overwhelming ideology of the feminist movement today is based on a liberal ideology, liberal feminism. You know, the socialist, the concept of socialist feminism has, has really been watered down. So we are talking about reformist movements rather than, you know, revolutionary movement. We are talking about movements that want to change, you know, the face of the policy, the content of the policy, rather than a movement that wants to question, you know, even the policy itself, overhaul it and you know, transform it and make it, you know, people, people, people design, people oriented people implement, implemented policy. You and the kind of women's movement we have today, another thing that, it's quite elitist, you know, it's quite elitist. It's it's also, it also has this, this thing around, you know, connotation of gender activism and feminism in terms of organizational development now has also become a kind of. How do I put it now? Career, you know, so you have.
- [37:40]
Emeka Ugu
Right, yeah.
- [37:41]
Hawa Mustafa
So you have, you know, increasingly the feminist, so called feminist movement that is career, career based feminism.
- [37:53]
Emeka Ugu
Right.
- [37:53]
Hawa Mustafa
Gender based activism. Gender based you know, that it's. It's not just about, you know, the. The spirit of. Of. Of, you know, addressing the social condition that these issues, you know, have. Have generated. It's not about obtaining that. It's not about, you know, taking power away from a class to the. To. To. To the. To the class of the oppress. It's not about, you know, changing power relations, you know, between the classes. It's rather about shifting power. You know, it's. Which is different. You're not changing the power. You are not questioning power relations. Rather, you are only addressing how power can also be given, be distributed. You know, just leave a little bit of power, concede how you can concede some power, but not how you can, you know, change the power relations and make it not to be in the a. A class, you know, issue. And so we are not addressing class question. We are not address even. We are talking about policy and law in a very reformist kind of way. And then this is the face of the. Of. Of women's movement as we see it today. It's very elitist. Like I said. It's. It's very reformist. It's. It just speaks to the neoliberal agenda. It's also driven by neoliberal agenda, so to say, does not even question the neoliberal agenda. Rather, it engages neoliberal agenda and talks about how can we make it better. But the kind of movement we had in the past, I. I could remember women sometimes refuse to be part of National Women Council, like I said, because we saw the National Women Council as government, you know, agency. And we saw the government as. Not the government as a person, but the policy of the government, the system of that government then as what necessitated, you know, the formation of we. So we didn't see them as friends. We didn't see the government, the system then as a friendly system. We saw the system as an enemy system that we needed to engage, needed to overhaul, needed to remove, not to. Not to play with, you know, not to share a table with, but to remove from the table and take over the table. So it's. It's quite different from what we are seeing today. We are seeing the women's movement today, you know, hobbing in a way of, okay, let's get a seat. Let's get a seat there, and then we'll see how we fight. And then as much as. And then we all have seemed to have been consumed by this liberal reformist agenda of the new women's movement, new wave of women's movement. We are fighting for rights. But you can also not questioning, you know, the, the. The condition that have even seized your rights, you know, why your rights have been seized and that you don't have to fight for palliatives or fight for social protection, but also address the reason why men have to be so impoverished that the social protection that becomes necessary, you know.
- [41:14]
Unknown
Thank you, comrade.
- [41:16]
Hawa Mustafa
I don't know.
- [41:18]
Unknown
Thank you. Thank you very much, comrade. I mean I, I am sure you can go on, on and on. And it's interesting the remarks that, that you've made, you know, thus far, following side's questions. And for me what's interesting is that you mentioned, you know, the Girls Power Initiative in, in your response to the second question. And then as, as a way of introducing, you know, or giving a general background, you know, you also mentioned me. What strikes me is that you mentioned this initiatives as pointers to waves of. Of feminists organizing in Nigeria within timelines, you know. So yes, for me personally, I, I'm, you know, conversant with both these initiatives. Not so much the Girl Power Initiative which I have only just encountered in the last few months, in fact, as a result of the burial, you know, of the demise and burial of Comrade Ben Emma.
- [42:42]
Hawa Mustafa
Yeah.
- [42:43]
Unknown
Yes, so, so it's, yeah, so it's really interesting. And, and then the sense that I get is that, you know, the Girls Power Initiative is part of, part and parcel of the fabric of maybe not the entire Cross River State, but Calabar most especially. And, and, and yeah, so that, that for me, I, I want to, you know, as part of. Part of what you have been addressing, I want to ju. That this, this fragmentation that you speak about with what I, I think is, is a more recent phenomenon, you know, of online organizing around feminism within contemporary times that is around, you know, feminism and gender issues, you know, be them sexual and gender based violence, online bullying or you know, general misogyny. So yes, I guess that we see what you might call a manifestation of or that we saw what you might call a manifestation of this during the ansas with the role that, you know, a group called the Feminist Coalition plays or played rather. So I guess that my question to you is that what, what would you make of this new expressions of digital stroke real world feminisms. And then how might you compare this, you know, to the previously I. And I guess that this is a follow through on, you know, how you've already started to respond to this, you know, starting from win to project projects like Girl Power Initiative. So where would you place you know, organiz an organization like Feminist Coalition, within the broader context of this argument that you're already pushing for some of these organizations being already, you know, liberalized in that sense, you know, where they just. They're pushing for wanting a piece of, of the pie or just for creating more space for women within the structure as they already exist, rather than ending that structure as, you know, as used to be, you know, the case, you know, from. From way back.
- [45:02]
Hawa Mustafa
Okay, thank you. You know, we cannot, I mean, the only thing that is permanent itself is changed. We can't expect that. What. Even if the social condition remains the same, we cannot definitely expect that the way we organized 30, 40 years ago will remain the same way that we can organize today. We will not expect that the way we. The fact. And of course, even the facilities and even infrastructure that was available for organizing, I mean, some, some decades back have definitely also changed. So it is true that we will find different ways of organizing. But beyond the different ways of organizing, for me, is the issues around which we are organizing. Whether we are organizing on a digital platform or we are organizing on the ground, what's more important is the issues around the organizing. And that's why I say that the issues to me that I see now are more reformist, driven by neoliberal agenda. So what you see today, under whatever name, is propelled by a project that probably a neoliberal organization has decided this year. We want to do this. And that's the way you are doing it, without questioning fundamentals. It does not even give you the space to question fundamentals. Even if you have a space, you can even seize some space to question fundamental. We are so preoccupied and engrossed with being in our. In control of our little empires. And, and, and that is. And it's not to say that we are not making gains. It's not to say that things are not changing. But what we want to see, for me, the difference between the movement then and now is that the movement there, even if it did not achieve it, it did not get to that goal. You know, the focus there was on transforming, overhauling the system that creates this problem. Are not managing the system. Whether you are doing online organizing, whether you are doing girl power or women empowerment, you know, initiative by whatever you call this, youth empowerment, you are not doing it. You are doing something that is only being given because what neoliberalism does to you is that it takes a pound of flesh and gives you a rubs Vaseline over your. Your wound and with a very beautiful bandage and tells you that bandage looks so beautiful. So you get caused by the beauty of the bandage and you forget the fact that the pound of flesh that was taken away from you has diminished you as a person and has enriched the other person much more than what you are being given in place. And that is what we are seeing. So you get some little resources that says, do this. Yes, we make some gains, we lose some transformation. Because let me write, there has been some changes. There's a lot of awareness, which is good. And that awareness is gradually changing. Even social orientation, you know, the way we bring up our children, the way we think as individuals, even as men, is changing. As women, girls, it's changing. So that's fine, you know, and that you see this change, if you look at this social change, you see a lot of changes at the social space, you know, the social, social, cultural, you know, sphere that this change in social, cultural environment is not translating, is not making meaning in the political scene. So you are still having a class of people that are still holding strong to the political scene, and so they are dictating to you what does not destabilize their own system. They give to you, as much as you feel that, oh, there is something that has given, but that thing that has been given has not ruffled their own political system. So that system of oppression remains. And so for me, a feminist organizing by whichever way that does not question and tries to overhaul that system and rather just picks, you know, engages the system, takes from the system to do reform. When you do get power or get the power, whatever we girls empowerment or women empowerment, what do you do? Basically, the feminist movement currently, what do you do? You enlighten, you widen, you say, okay, you have the right to participate in politics, you have the right to employment. So employers want 35% action. What is it? We want 35% affirmative action. We want you to include, we want you to address women's issues. Hello. Fine. But this is in the short term, this, you continue to engage. We want a system that will, at some point will and give the woman enough power at the man, sufficient appreciation. Because when we talk about transformation within the women's movement, a feminist transformation of the sustainability society is not just about increasing women's number. How many women now are going to school? Beyond that, yes, good enough. How many women are having chairs in the parliamentary system? Very good enough. But beyond that, how is this number transforming the social orientation, you know, the power relations between men and women in terms of how you define social orientation, how you define even gender context of who Is a woman who is a man. How do you define the roles within the society? How do you define. How does the. How do these changes. You have women now in Parliament, we have one suffrage, you know, national suffrage. Since 1979 Nigeria or 1970s in Nigeria. Everybody. Everybody. There's no discrimination against who you can vote for and who can be voted over. But that is in the. On paper, but in terms of actual discrimination. Oh, now we want 35% affirmative, affirmative action seats for women in the, in the parliament. How does it transform, for me, how does it transform the, the. The. The fundamental problem of the social condition of women, oppression and exploitation? How does it address it? So that's why for me, you know, it's not the way we are organizing. Is the content of the organizing is the, is the, is the. Is what we focus on the outcome of the organizing and not outcome in terms of how many participants, not outcome in terms of number, you know, but outcome in terms of, you know, sustainability of a trans. Of changes, of a transformative change in power relations. You know, how do we ensure that when we are getting there, when the woman and the man, you know, when development is not just about inclusion, development is about equality in terms of power relations. That's very hard. That's something we are not talking about. You know, how this, how is, how are these our reforms going to lead to a situation where we see a. A world that is not a woman's world is not a man's world. It is a people's world with equal rights, equal understanding, you know, that we are all human beings that require equal kind of dignity, not. And that where whatever we do, you know, our religion, our culture does not ingrain in us certain biases, whether in the public space and in the private spaces, because again, some of the gains that we are making, you know, in terms of the feminist organizing is again, like I said, is in the legal process and the policy process and programming, which is again, largely in the public space. How are we changing the power relations in the private space where the care, you know, economy or the domestic economy is largely, you know, a, A woman's confine, you know, even the issues of relationships at home also defines your or your, your. Your ability or the extent you can go to, you know, outside your home. Honestly, for me, most of the things we are doing in organizing feminism, whether it is online, whether it is digital space, or is largely controlled. It's largely controlled by neoliberal system because it is funded, it is defined, it is constricted, it is within a Box. It does not allow you space to think, you know, radically, revolutionally outside the box. It only allows you to reform within a certain set.
- [54:50]
Unknown
I don't disagree with you.
- [54:52]
Hawa Mustafa
So. And I think we need to go beyond that. We are counting number if you want to go. What has changed? Oh, now more women are coming to going to school, more women that do more. And that is fine. That is really fine. I don't have any quarrel with that. But we need something more fundamental than that. We cannot continue a situation of class oppression and say that we are moving forward. Feminism is not just about women. The women's movement should not just be about women moving. It is also how the change in women's status also translates or at least impacts on the transformative, you know, journey that we are going for in the society. How does it translate? How do we make sure that when a woman is empowered financially, she is also empowered politically? And being empowered politically also means that conversely, when we do his and hers, that we are doing now, which is rightly, that the man is also empowered to understand and appreciate and help to sustain the empowerment of the woman. That when we are talking about power relations, you know, changing the power relations, we are talking about changing the power. We are. When we are talking about changing the 4 status of education, we are talking about changing, changing the power relations in terms of who even defines who goes to school and the content of the education. Who is. Who has the power of defining the policy? Who has the power of implementing the policy? You know, who has the power to even decide where you work, how you work, what's remuneration. Remuneration comes to you. Who has the power in deciding, you know, your placement in the society. Look at a recent development in attacha case. You know, you are educated. Let me leave it there. So for me, must always address our relation, even if it is on the contextual issue. If you are reforming in terms of number, how does this number translate into the power of the woman to wake up and decide? This is the policy that we want. Not for some people that are in the leadership that is offering ready male centric leadership, decide the policy and say we are adding women on. Who has the power of. Has the power of.
- [57:13]
Unknown
You seem to be, you seem to have some, some, some powers yourself. I mean, you, you, you're ready, you've gone ahead and you're going into what should have been or what is my next question, you know, is there any, any.
- [57:28]
Hawa Mustafa
Let me keep quiet now. Sorry. I talk. Don't hesitate. Not talking too much. I'm A trading. I'm a, I'm, I'm a loud activist, so I talk too much.
- [57:39]
Emeka Ugu
You're a perfect podcast guest for that reason.
- [57:41]
Unknown
Actually, I mean, I was going to say you, I mean that you. I mean, of course now it's clear that you are, you're aware of, you know, the recent scandal in the Nigerian Senate and, and this speaks to the point that you're making about, you know, political empowerment, you know, following. And this, this is the follow on from the suspension of Senator Natasha. Yeah. On, on the, on, on. On the strength of her alleging sexual assault against, you know, the person of the Senate president. What's his name again?
- [58:22]
Emeka Ugu
God's will.
- [58:23]
Unknown
Yeah. So I guess that you know, and, and like I said, you're already answering this question just so that they're more pointed. What do you, what would you make of, of this incident especially? I mean I'm, I'm interested. I'm curious, you know, what you, especially in the light of the grand ceiling that all politicians are equally corrupt, both male and female, and incompetent too. Now do you think this incident surrounding a member of political establishment, you know, can serve as some sort of rallying cry for deepening of feminist struggles within the context that you're already speaking of, you know, but much, much broadly in, in Nigeria? So yes, I, I'm a bit curious to how you frame, you know, what's, what's how. How you'd frame some of what you already said within, you know, the current situation, you know, or this, these events as they unfold.
- [59:27]
Hawa Mustafa
So for me, you know, the recent developments just for that but traces the fact that women's organizing, women's movements should not just look at reform of patriarchy, but it should also address class imbalance, power relations within the context of class in the country. When people talk about Natasha and five you and others belonging to the same class. But you can see how patriarchy has also worked against her. So two, two issues must go together for the woman. That's where she has done. I mean and that is for the woman who is claimed to belong to the same class with the men. But then they now use patriarchy as a power to weaken her, to destroy her, to do, to so called deal with her now. And that is why, that is the sense in which I see that our, our feminist or engagement must look beyond. We have four women in Parliament. Can we have more men in parliament? I think it a lot more than that. What kind of are you going to have in Parliament? I always ask some of My friends, this. It's not just to open the space. Open the space for who? Yeah, you know, what is this person coming with if you open this space more for women, is this. Are these women going to necessarily really defend the women's issues? No. We have four women in the National Assembly. Only one woman is attacked and she's standing on her own. The other three women have not come out in support. If there's anything they have even come out to put their hands off a matter because where they are coming from is a male dominated decision or influence. So the power they have within the house is not their own power, is the power of the, of the influence of the woman, even the Natasha herself. And because you tell that it's not just about. We need to overhaul the system. The psychological thinking around feminism, around patriarchy. Natasha had to rush to go and marry in 2022 because she claims before 2022 the, the, the, the, the. The political engagement she was having was being called all sorts of names. It is okay if a single man wants to contest. A single man, a pastor, whatever became a governor in, in Taraba state.
- [62:08]
Emeka Ugu
Is a governor Benway state, I think.
- [62:11]
Hawa Mustafa
Yeah, in Ben. Sorry, Ben. And that is normal. That is single to contest for polit. For political. You know, and she's a prostitute. She's useless. She's this. A beautiful woman like that. I don't know how to define the beautiful one. So these are fundamentals. So why do we just want to look at the number of women that come to participate and not also look at the character of the women that are coming to participate? Do we have an agenda for those women that are coming to the space? Who is controlling that agenda? Is Natasha there? The policies, I mean are these policies defined by her before anything came out? Now, whether defined by her relationship with an Apabio family relationship, was it defined by the support of her husband? A lot of positive things around the Natasha issue, get me right? I don't have anything against that. In fact, the drama she put in Kogi, if I didn't have anything against her, she got. Want a part of my heart for that drama. Women. That is what it says. It says, you know, whether it was her husband that supported her or not. Women too can be, can, can, can, can do it. You know, if you want to drive rough, we can also do rough. Want to play good, we can play good. So that statement I think says a lot and it's good enough. Then what is important is that. And are we also able to separate the issue from what Is probably the political. The issue from Natasha's case which people are silent about and just looking. I want to recall her. She did this. This. Oh, she wears the evidence. Sexual harassment every. In fact, the statistics show that one out of how many women is it five women or so will experience sexual hazaras men before the age of 50 in their lives. And that is the truth one way or the other silently. And usually these things are not out in the public are. Do women understand it? Even within the women's movement, I have seen a lot of division. Do we understand it in that context? So if we don't have. Understand critical issues of women that relates to power relations. Sexual harassment is all about power relations. Take it or leave it. The victim is weak. The perpetrator has a power over you. That is why he's able to succeed. The weakness does not necessarily mean that you are financially weak. The weakness is on the basis of your gender. That's why a woman. I'm a man already against me a power over you. I'm a man already. That maleness gives me a power over you. Your womanness is defined as weak. To that extent. My maleness gives me a power over you. I can do certain things. So what are we talking about? And then we are not defining it in that context. We are not increasing awareness in that context. We are not making it known in that context that even Natasha, in spite of her class, in spite of her financial and political weights can be. This can. Can. Could have been harassed and at the point it happened, did not have the courage to come out until certain circumstances came out. And she did not even have the courage. And they claim to even tell her husband because also she did not have the courage to slap the man that time. Because somebody like me, I would have turned around.
- [66:04]
Emeka Ugu
Fully supported.
- [66:05]
Hawa Mustafa
You know, says a lot. Says a lot about what we are talking about. Women in empowerment, women. She's politically empowered. Is she psychologically empowered? So for me, you know, this whole thing also she reveals a lot of work that we need to do in the. In the women's. In the space of women's movement organizing or reorganizing. Feminist organizing and reorganizing means that we need to let ourselves know the critical failings, the very powerful issues that keep women silent. The visibility is not strong enough. That I am even the governor of a state is not enough. But that. That salient but very powerful issue that demeans me as a woman because of agenda that has been defined for me. We need to. We need to address it. And that system that also encourages that, you can imagine if it was a system of. That recognizes equality, political, economic and social equality between the man and the woman. You will not a woman because you will not even come to the, to the chamber and be down on a woman because she's beautiful. So it is her problem. That's what a man said. Oh, she had, you know, how many husbands she had before she had this problem, this man. How many of the men have how many husbands who probes into their personal lives?
- [67:48]
Emeka Ugu
Yeah.
- [67:49]
Hawa Mustafa
So until we get there, when our empowerment for a woman goes beyond political seat and political visibility, economic power in terms of financing or employment position, to also psychological empowerment, to say that you recognize yourself and appreciate your dignity and that whatever it is, we also create a safe haven to give the woman comfort. That even if you are a secretary in a workplace, who knows how many girls that are working or young women that or any other women that are working with an acquabio or any other, you know, would have been so harassed and they are scared to come out either because the men they are married to will feel that, oh, is it the sort of thing you have been doing because there is not sufficient empowerment? And so I also like one strand of, you know, women's empowerment that is going on now. You know, come back relating to the Natasha thing. The he decide by side. You know, the understanding that empowering woman economically also means empowering man psychologically. Social orientation has to change. Political consciousness has to be deep for the woman and the man. When you are empowered economically, what do you do with the power? How does it transform your political consciousness or understand environment? You know, if you have a political power, how does it transform your understanding of the relations of, you know, relations of production, how they work, how they interact to create exploitation? How do you understand it so that when you are economically empowered, it doesn't just stop there. The sustainability, the transformation in that empowerment will lead you to question the relations of production and how they interact to even cause a situation where somebody would need empowerment. So the fundamental side by side, the empowerment of economic empowerment for a person like a, like a Natasha, is that also psychological? It's not enough that she's speaking loud. She's probably even lucky she has a husband that is giving her, that is supporting her. Yes, naturally she's strong, she has a voice, but she also much more comfortable because nobody is going to be calling her a prostitute. So that deep sense of demoralization is not there. And the man that is her husband is giving her certain support, which is good enough. Imagine a Natasha that is not married going through this situation.
- [70:44]
Emeka Ugu
Yeah.
- [70:45]
Hawa Mustafa
Imagine a Natasha that her husband is silent, nobody is hearing about, or he comes out to say I don't know or tells her, look, if you don't keep quiet, you're on your own, or within this situation quietly leaves the home for her. Imagine a situation like that. Would she remain. Yes. Would she remain as strong. Yeah. As she is now? No.
- [71:11]
Emeka Ugu
Yeah.
- [71:12]
Hawa Mustafa
Also imagine if the man was eating much stronger. Stronger. And he could tell her and she could have been able to converse with him. Do you know what this guy just did to me now? In fact, if she could even go the whole hog. Your people elected you, not a you the time he did that. Just turn around and give him a dirty slap and let's see what.
- [71:41]
Emeka Ugu
Comrade, I'm conscious of the fact that we've kept you for quite a while, so we had a few more questions prepared. But I think we'll probably just stick to one more before we let you go. I know it's the end of your day as well. I mean, it relates to where you were ending that previous comment. And I suppose it's about, one way to phrase it would be to say it's about the future of the feminist movement in Nigeria. And I guess, you know, not to force you into an optimistic position, but I suppose the question is, do you see any coherence emerging maybe as a result of this Natasha Senate scandal or other social developments, including the intensification of economic crisis in society? Do you see any kind of coherence emerging in how women are organizing in Nigeria? And I wonder also if you can reflect briefly on women in the labor movement, whether you're seeing any new trends emerge in the labor movement, Are there lessons that society can learn in terms of how the labor movement, how the position of women in the labor movement, or are we unfortunately left to take lessons from Nigerian banks who increasingly boast of more female CEOs? Just not to provoke you too much with that last comment, but I just, you know, more generally I'm curious about where you see this all going and whether there are any green shoots or kind of positive trends also emerging.
- [73:20]
Hawa Mustafa
Well, to be very candid with you based on this, I don't have issues with numbers. I just have issues with what the number goes, terms of transformation.
- [73:28]
Emeka Ugu
Yeah.
- [73:28]
Hawa Mustafa
So I don't have issue whether the whole banks are owned by women. It doesn't matter. But what, how does it, how does it lead to transformative change for women? Now, in case, in terms of what what is, I think what are lessons or what are the prospects, you know, based on what is happening recently for the general movement? I, I think I am, I am beginning to see something around some more courage, you know, to, to trend where people didn't want to talk. The issue of sexual harassment is usually something that we don't discuss it deeply enough and so we don't understand it deeply enough. The woman who is the victim is always the one to be, to be victimized and to be insulted and to be disparaged and everything. But I think what is happening now is gradually opening up a space for further discussion which also leads to more understanding. I have been in a few meetings, you know, since this Natasha case, where, you know, people are getting to learn more and understand deeper how this sexual harassment works with demeaning everything. You as a woman may have, you know, may have won or may have your success. You, you know, everything you may have achieved for so many years, how it can weaken you, how it can be demoralized you, how it can, you know, make. Create an indignity around you and therefore they end up messing you up. And so it's, we also, it's also bringing issue even on the other side, the question of being weaponization of sexual harassment. How do we also check it and what do we do? So that conversation I think is increasing, you know, with this Natasha case. And what I see coming up probably is that it will also help to impact on how women are also organizing for political empowerment. And it is also, yeah, in terms of even increasing numbers, you know, an increasing number with quality. Because we have also seen that out of four women, one woman is affected, three women are quiet. What is the purpose? Are these the kind of women that we want to fill up the space with? So now there's an increasing conversation of yes, we want more number, but what kind of number?
- [76:09]
Emeka Ugu
Yeah.
- [76:10]
Hawa Mustafa
So now and again, how do we protect the women that are there? The women's movement? I'm beginning to see people now trying to develop a link, a working partnership between the civil society or women's movement outside and the political actors within, which was something that was really not strong. You just waited until there's a problem, then you coming. But increasingly people are talking about if you support the women to get there, how do you also support them to remain there? So that conversation is very good, very useful and it is increasing and I think it will up for the future. Increasing education, increasing awareness, increase. Also bringing in the men to increase awareness amongst them and also create a safe haven for women to say these things without contradiction and be safe. I remain unmolested. Now, the issue of trade unions. I'm right here in the trade unions and I have no fear of saying that the trade unions like the Nigerian situation is that it's one of. It is at its. One of its weakest points politically. Yeah, it is at one of its weakest points because over the years the, the trade union was probably the. The. The last but the worst hits by neoliberal agenda.
- [77:45]
Emeka Ugu
Right.
- [77:46]
Hawa Mustafa
The last that the worst hits because the first to be he. Don't forget earlier I told you the students union, the women's movement, you know, to some extra large extent, you know, even the medical professional. We even had medical Nigerian Medical association as part of WIN there, you know. And so they hit that. It was not easy to hit the trade unions, but they tried to weaken them and but gradually it was a gradual process to where we are now. Where we are now politically. The trade union is not in a political position to even engage the national this issues.
- [78:33]
Emeka Ugu
Yeah.
- [78:35]
Hawa Mustafa
Concretely one, because they do not understand the, the level of patrons we have now do have been delinked from understanding the core purpose of their existence and the linkage between their. The reason for their existence or the mandate of their existence and the reality of the society.
- [79:00]
Emeka Ugu
Right.
- [79:01]
Hawa Mustafa
So if you are mandated, you know, if you are existing for collective bargaining to fight for minimum wage and you do not understand that fighting for minimum wage, what you get in that context is as a result of the character of leadership or rulership that you have and how they manage your economy or mismanage your economy because if they mismanage it, they will not be able to have money to build factories. The factories will die. There will be no job. Your membership will be. Will be reduced. You will be weakened. When you don't have resources to work with, they will start begin to lure you with all kinds of, you know, fanciful whatever resources just to keep your mouth shut. It is in that context that this is the general state of the trade union as it is today in Nigeria. And it is not. And it is a reflection of what the women in the trade unions are also. Are the trade union generally now different from the workers. The trade unions as organizations are so weak they do not have the political wherewithal to understand to link it and the courage to unknow how to engage or even engage the situation because they may know how to engage, but the courage to dare, you know, the consequences and engage is something that is absent now. The trade union Every sector, if the broad trade union is that weak now the segments of the trade union follow in that weakness. And with the women, particularly this talk with the thing we talk about patriarchy in the society, nevertheless that we trade unions are supposed to be fears, they are supposed to be loud, they're supposed to be strong, they're supposed to be fighting, have a strong fighting spirit. Therefore, any woman that is also women within the trade unions, also to replicate that kind of, that kind of view, the women in the trade union are as weak in terms of agenda and action past what the trade union as an organization itself has presented. And the patriarchy within the society is also a lot of huge impact on, from them. So because they are not organizing, because the leadership has the, the, has you, how do I put it now? Because the leadership has removed itself from the society, from the broad society not working there. We have trade union organizations today, but the trading movement itself is done, is gone. The trading organizations are weak. The trade union movement is even weaker. And so any other components within the trade union organization is as weak as the trade union organization itself. So the women's group within the trade unions are as weak as the trade unions themselves. Not because the workers are ignorant, not because the workers choose to be weak as individuals, but because the system within which they are operating is closed, is very patriarchal, is, has lost connection with the reality of the society and understanding of how it should reorganize and retake its space in the society. The women are ineffective. So right now, as I speak to you, even with this issue of Natasha going on, blah, blah, blah, the Women Trade Union Commission or the men in the trade union are just mute, as mute as the other three women in the national assembly that we are not hearing their voice because they have been kept by the patriarchal nature. Most of them. The leadership of the women, you know, they are, they, they don't win election. They are selected by the men. The men decide the policy, the men decide the agenda. You cannot talk, except you are given the rights to talk. You cannot engage except you are given the right to engage. And so there's the issue of patriarchal, you know, you know, problem or obstacle. Yeah, that's also making, that has weakened the women within the trade union. So I'm sorry to say the, the, the summary of it is that not even the women in the trade union have the current capacity to engage. But what we can do, and some of us are trying to do, is identify workers who are female. And already there are, there are workers who are female who are organizing under different platforms, not on that. So you find women workers who are strong, who understand the issues, who want to engage, who are part of the struggle, organizing under different platforms. You find them on that socialist workers league. You find them under different, you know, platforms. You find them on. Find them under even some women's organization, women's movement, but not under the platform of the trade union because the trading, the weakness of the trading structure and leadership does not give them the room and the space to come out. And they express themselves as a trade as women of the trade union under either NLC or TUC or comment.
- [84:38]
Emeka Ugu
Really grateful for that insight and those very critical but quite helpful perspectives on history, on the present and also on the future of the women's movement and the feminist movement in Nigeria. And you haven't shied away from calling issues as they are even when in some cases they are quite slumber analyses of the situation. But I think that it's best we proceed on that basis on an honest assessment of the limitations of our movement and of kind of pro people institutions more generally if we are to rebuild them. So I think that we owe you a huge debt of gratitude for the time you've taken to present this analysis and also for the clarity with which you've articulated these points. So once again, just to say a huge thank you and we're really grateful to have you and hope we can have you back again down the line to reflect on some of these issues with the trade unions, the women's movement and the history of Nigerian feminism also as. As the situation develops. So thanks once again for making time to join us.
- [85:51]
Hawa Mustafa
Thank you very much for having me. Don't bother. Don't worry. You can you have feel free please to edit some of these materials. Too much talk. Talk. I talk too much.
- [86:00]
Emeka Ugu
No problem. I mean so much of it was. Was gold. So it'll be very hard to know what. But as a matter of fact we might use a lot of it. All right.
- [86:09]
Hawa Mustafa
And I like the program you are doing. Thank you so very much for having me.
- [86:14]
Emeka Ugu
Really appreciate it.
- [86:15]
Hawa Mustafa
I hope you are still there. Have you disappeared?
- [86:17]
Emeka Ugu
No, I'm here.
- [86:18]
Unknown
I'm looking forward to. To Natasha slap above you.
- [86:30]
Emeka Ugu
We need. We need that to happen. I mean that's. That slap will. That slap will reawaken. Reawaken the social movement.
- [86:37]
Hawa Mustafa
I'm telling you honestly.
- [86:40]
Emeka Ugu
Anyway, thanks again.
- [86:43]
Hawa Mustafa
Take care.
- [86:44]
Emeka Ugu
Have a good evening.
- [86:45]
Hawa Mustafa
All right. Have a nice day. Bye.
- [86:47]
Emeka Ugu
All right.