It’s never a dull moment with Rwandans on social media, but rightfully so. One of the hottest topics this week has been about who the head of the household in Rwanda is- or at least who it is supposed to be.

This was sparked by a feminist activist who posted that a public office called her on the phone only to ask her if it was her partner’s home they were calling.

Her point was that they should have addressed her as the head of the household, since it was her phone they called.

As expected, the ‘man’s glory’ was raised high by patriarchy sympathisers whose only two reasons were; 1. Creation (religious stipulations) and 2. Culture.

Things like "there is never going to be a time where men and women are equal” or "everyone has their own responsibilities” come very often.

Maybe it is long overdue to hold this conversation.

Rwanda’s Christian history started in the early 1900’s, but by 1990, almost all the Rwandan population was converted. This may have been a result of the dedication of the country to Christ by King Mutara III Rudahigwa in 1946.

He was the first royal to be baptised, and if he could, so would the rest of the population.

Many things had changed rapidly, including how marital relations worked. It is not until christianity that a husband is casually referred to as "umutware” (chief/lord) and a wife "umufasha” (helper). Although husbands were held in a higher regard in pre-colonial Rwanda, religion further undermined the position of women by introducing new power dynamic references, such as the Bible. Islam did just the same.

In a song by famed singer Shanel Nirere named ‘Ndabaza Sindega’, she explores the realities in ‘traditional’ Rwandan marriages today where actually, "responsibilities” of the "helper” would look more like those of a servant.

And looking at this fairly, it seems being a "chief” comes with certain privileges that are really irresponsibility in disguise. Being cooked for and fed, being dressed, not taking care of the kids, among others, and most importantly, not being asked or simply held accountable.

On the issue of "everyone has their responsibilities”, I wonder why the woman always ends up with the conventional unpaid care work, even when she does what would be called a man’s job, such as making money, protecting the family, and making decisions.

Household leader is traditionally defined by two things; earning money for the family and making decisions. In the Rwandan context today, women are increasingly breadwinners of their families and are responsible for making decisions for them.

So why are we still discussing if they should be called leaders of the very households they toil for? Just because they weren’t born with penises?

Why has the issue of household leadership become a gender issue, even in a country such as Rwanda, whose constitution explicitly says that both husband and wife are heads of the household?

The biggest issue that early feminists- even those in our country- fought for was for women’s rights to be written in the law.

As Rwandans, we are so lucky beyond measure to have this reference. Three decades ago, we couldn’t legally own land.

Today, women own bigger land than men. If we could defy "culture” like this, despite what life throws at us, I am sure we could pull off an insignificant title like "umukuru w’umuryango.”

Perhaps I should ask fellow women if we really are going to let the same system whose privileges are the source of our misery as a community be nurtured and encouraged, even when we have a choice to make things better.

Feminists have been accused over time of seeking superiority over men instead of equality, but if we are being realistic, how is it required to be equally addressed as the head of household being superior? This postfeminism attitude is actually hurting the movement and its benevolent agenda for our society, and specifically the family.

As for the women who choose to be "abafasha”, it is really your problem if our country has made such huge progress and given us more options to choose from other than being a man’s subordinate on the basis of their sex and you still choose to be just that. Just don’t expect or try to shame other women into bowing down to your level when they clearly chose to practise their rights.

So, yes, even public servants shouldn't assume that the husband is the sole head of the family. Even if you don’t believe it, just remember that; 1. It is not your family, so not your business, and 2.

If it happens to be your business, kindly refer to the Rwandan constitution that says that BOTH husband and wife are the head of the household.