Sakaria Johannes
There was a time in our communities when a boy who complained about hardship, heartbreak or responsibility would be told: “I didimika owulumenhu” (loosely translated as “Try to be strong, you are a man.”)
That expression captured an old understanding of masculinity: a man must endure, provide, protect and remain strong, often without asking for support.
But Namibia has changed. We now speak loudly and rightly about gender equality, women’s empowerment, equal opportunities and the protection of women’s rights.
Yet an important question remains: where does the Namibian man fit into this evolving understanding of equality?
The recent increase in Social Security maternity benefits provides an opportunity to ask this question.
The Social Security Commission’s maternity programme provides financial protection to qualifying mothers during maternity leave, while the Labour Act provides female employees who meet the requirements with at least 12 weeks of maternity leave.
These protections are important. Pregnancy and childbirth involve biological realities that men do not experience, and protecting mothers should not be presented as an injustice to men.
But gender equality must also ask another question: what protection and recognition does the father receive?
Namibia currently has no comparable statutory paternity-leave entitlement in the Labour Act.
The law specifically provides for maternity leave, while other forms of leave, such as compassionate leave, are treated separately.
This creates a contradiction in our modern understanding of fatherhood. We tell men that they must be responsible fathers, emotionally present, involved in childcare and active in the upbringing of their children.
But when a child is born, the law does not provide fathers with an equivalent statutory period to participate in those first crucial days of parenthood.
Is this gender equality in practice, or equality mainly in theory?
There is also a cultural dimension that Namibia cannot ignore. Among many Ovawambo-speaking communities, there is an expression: “Okaana oka kwawo nayina” — roughly, a child is of the mother’s side or family.
The saying reflects an important historical understanding of family and kinship. But in a modern Namibia that speaks about gender equality, we must ask a difficult question:
Is Social Security also following this narrative — consciously or unconsciously?
If the mother is institutionally recognised as the primary recipient of maternity protection while the father has no statutory paternity leave, are we unintentionally reinforcing the old idea that the child and caregiving belong primarily to the mother, while the father remains primarily the provider?
This is not an argument against maternity benefits. It is an argument for completing the conversation.
Women’s empowerment should not be understood as a threat to men.
Namibia continues to confront genuine gender inequalities affecting women. Empowering women is therefore an important part of building a fair society.
But empowerment should not mean that men’s responsibilities and challenges become invisible.
If we want fathers to be more involved in raising their children, our institutions must make that involvement possible.
A father should not have to choose between keeping his job and being present during the birth and early development of his child.
There is also a danger in maintaining outdated expectations of masculinity while claiming to be a modern gender-equal society.
We tell women that they can be professionals, leaders, mothers and providers. That is progress. But can we also tell men that they can be providers, fathers, caregivers and emotionally present parents?
Can a man take time to care for his newborn without being considered less committed to his employer?
Can a father ask for support without being told, “I didimika owulumenhu”?
Strength should not mean suffering in silence.
A man can be strong and still need support. A father can be responsible and still need time with his newborn.
There is nothing unmanly about changing a baby’s nappy, attending a clinic appointment or staying home to care for a child.
Indeed, perhaps one of the most important changes Namibia needs is a new definition of responsible masculinity.
The debate should therefore not be about whether men or women receive more benefits. It should be about whether our laws and institutions recognise the responsibilities of both parents.
Maternity protection can remain strong while Namibia considers meaningful statutory paternity leave. Social Security can protect mothers while policymakers explore mechanisms that also recognise fathers’ caregiving responsibilities.
Gender equality should not become a competition between men and women. Equality should mean that both are seen.
If we genuinely want men to become more involved fathers, we cannot continue telling them to be emotionally strong providers while simultaneously expecting them to perform the responsibilities of modern fatherhood without institutional support.
Namibia has made important progress in advancing women’s rights. The next step should not be to reverse that progress, but to broaden it. The question is therefore not whether we should empower women.
The question is whether we are prepared to build a society where empowering women does not require ignoring men.
Perhaps it is time to move beyond “I didimika owulumenhu”and say something different to the next generation: “You are a man. Be strong — but be present. Be responsible — but do not carry everything alone.”
That may be a more practical understanding of gender equality: not women against men, but women and men sharing responsibility for the family and the future of Namibia.
*Sakaria Johannes is a political science, history and sociology scholar. He can be reached at sackyuutsi@gmail.com
