To wash or not to wash your man’s underwear?

It's amazing how unmarried ladies, especially feminists, always have more than enough advice for married women. A district in western Uganda held belated Women's Day celebrations the other day. The government Chief Whip, a woman, was chief guest at the event. In her speech she advised women, among other things; not to neglect their households in favour of work; to generally be organised; get involved in 'chama' savings schemes; educate the girl child just like the boys; contribute their income to household purchases and also, occasionally, wash their husband's socks and underwear.

Out of everything she said, local feminists have chosen to zero in on the underwear issue. They say a government Chief Whip has no business behaving like a conservative old aunt to teach wives how to keep husbands! The bra-burners say she is in support of the archaic and oppressive. They say men should invest the time they spend chasing 'side dishes' on helping their women with household chores. The feminists say women who neglect their households are not responsible for a man leaving. You get the drift.

In my humble opinion, and not having attended the function in order to hear the whole speech in its full context, I think the Chief Whip's remarks were not out of place, neither were they anti-woman. But then, what do I know? I am merely a married, working woman.

Gosh, a mastery of social media has clearly equipped these fresh-outta-college feminists to fight for my rights and speak on my behalf. The classic African-print-wearing, flamboyant hairstyle-toting, aggressive unmarried little girls who know all about what it actually takes to keep a home together. They say it is not about organisation or looking after your man. It is not about nurturing or sacrifice or division of roles and labour. Pray tell, what is it about? I'd love to know.

There are so many labels and the one of 'feminist' may not necessarily fit all. I believe in the inherent God-given rights of all human beings, even as I acknowledge our unique nature and capabilities. I'm afraid I cannot jump onto this increasingly elitist women's lib bandwagon.

Bra-burners should acknowledge that there are women in all walks of life. For one woman, liberation means the chance to send her daughter to school along with her sons. For another, emancipation means getting to decide how the money she earns is spent. To a third, equal rights means she gets to pay half the bill when a man takes her out for mojitos, cappuccinos and any other 'Os' they may consume. To another woman, liberation means the right to say no when culture demands that her genitals be sliced up to inhibit any future pleasure.

Why is the Chief Whip, and women with like upbringing and thinking, being shamed for sharing things that concern a huge chunk of the female population? She is sharing what she perceives as wisdom for working women who are trying to keep their homes together. Why must she be lumped together with the genital-mutilators in this fight for women's rights?

Some of us were raised by two parents in a home whose stability we were certain would only be rocked by the separation occasioned through death. And we want that for our children – we want to raise our daughters in a stable environment which contains the man we fathered them with. And we're willing to explore options to keep our homes stable, from Kegels to laundering underwear and socks. In any case, between laundry and seeing a therapist, laundry seems the more pocket-friendly option.

So perhaps some feminists need to stick to shouting at those in their niches, the ones who they can actually help. Leave the rest of us to tackle the weighty issues in our husbands' socks and pants.