By Bagudu Mohammed
When the novelist, poet, and online influencer Hadiza Bagudu wrote her now widely discussed essay, “We Protect Our Girls but Neglect the Boys,” perhaps she was not blunt enough for the gravity of the moment. That, at least, was my immediate thought after reading the alarm recently raised by a man of God whose intervention arrived with shock, surprise, and an invitation to deep reflection. I found myself compelled to share his message, urging others to contribute their views, not merely to argue, but to search collectively for answers, conviction, and ultimately, a better society.
On X, Pastor Kingsley Okonkwo issued what he unmistakably framed as a warning. In his view, the gap between “quality women” and “quality men” is widening, and the shortage of men who can genuinely be described as solid, dependable, and ready for marriage is becoming alarming. He expressed concern that many women, despite their readiness, may struggle to find suitable partners, not for lack of desire, but for lack of options.
“Ladies and gentlemen, we have a crisis,” he wrote. He admitted he was open to correction, yet insisted that what he observes daily suggests a troubling imbalance. According to him, many men today cannot lead or sustain marriages with the kind of women this generation has produced. He went further to explain that Africa largely thrived on a cultural model of marriage in the past, one sustained by limited access to education for women, economic dependence, and wide age gaps that made submission easier. All of that, he noted, has changed. Women are now educated, economically active, and socially aware, yet many men have not evolved at the same pace. The result, he warned, is a tougher terrain for men and a shrinking pool of eligible partners for women.
Strip away the pastoral robe and the language of crisis, and Pastor Okonkwo’s message is not far removed from what Hadiza Bagudu had already articulated. If there is any difference, it lies in tone rather than substance; perhaps the pastor chose a dozen words where the writer chose twelve, or perhaps he was simply more daring, more direct, less cautious. In essence, both were pointing to the same unsettling possibility: that society may indeed be producing more good women than men, in numbers significant enough to resemble an epidemic, or as the pastor bluntly called it, a crisis.
Hadiza Bagudu, however, approached the issue from a different angle. She framed her argument as a moral and cultural failure rooted in how children are raised. Society, she observed, is rightly obsessed with protecting girls, monitoring where they go, what they wear, how they behave, and whom they associate with. Yet boys, in contrast, are often left to wander unguided under the dangerous excuse that “boys will be boys.” This neglect, she argued, comes at a devastating cost.
According to her, boys today are exposed to sexual content far too early through movies, games, social media, and sometimes even within the home. When such exposure happens to girls, it triggers outrage and intervention; when it happens to boys, it is dismissed as harmless or even humorous. This double standard quietly distorts their moral compass, normalizing inappropriate behavior long before they understand its consequences. Without boundaries, modesty, and intentional guidance, boys grow into men who harm themselves, others, and tragically, the very women society claims to protect.
She challenged the popular cliché that money is the root of all evil, insisting instead that the absence of morality is the true plague. A person with values, rich or poor, will contribute positively; without values, wealth only magnifies destruction. She warned that freedom without responsibility is dangerous, that a society which celebrates unrestrained liberty while abandoning accountability is sowing seeds of chaos. What we normalize, excuse, or laugh off, she insisted, eventually returns to us as violence, abuse, and broken homes.
Her conclusion was as simple as it was profound: protect the boys if you truly want to save society. A well-raised boy becomes a safe man; a safe man becomes a better husband, father, and citizen. Moral balance, she believed, can still be restored one child at a time.
Not everyone agreed. In response to Pastor Okonkwo’s post, a woman identified as Freda Zee offered a sharp rebuttal. She questioned whether the problem truly lay with men or whether society was overlooking a deficit of “quality women.” Drawing from personal experience, she argued that modern women’s economic independence has weakened submission, a virtue she believes is central to marital stability. In her view, feminism, properly understood, is not rebellion but strategy, knowing when to step back, respect one’s husband, and exercise influence from behind the scenes. She concluded firmly that quality men still exist, but that many women now want everything at once such as total freedom and total domestic authority, an impossible balance, she warned. She anticipated backlash, adding pointedly that married women would understand her position better.
Like Freda Zee, many men have also pointed accusing fingers at contemporary women, describing them as materialistic, greedy, and unwilling to commit, arguing that marriage today feels like closing one’s eyes and settling blindly. Yet, with due respect, these responses miss the heart of the matter.
Criminology has long established that men, globally, have a higher propensity for crime, influenced in part by biology, hormones such as testosterone, and social conditioning that rewards aggression and risk-taking. But beyond theory lies the harsh Nigerian reality. The overwhelming majority of those involved in banditry, terrorism, kidnapping, ritual killings, cybercrime, drug trafficking, armed robbery, political thuggery, domestic violence, and financial scams are men. Many of these men are already married, others aspiring to be.
Nigeria today grapples with a scale of insecurity that few places in the world can rival, and boys and men dominate its most dangerous expressions. On campuses and in communities, patterns are visible: young men flaunting sudden wealth, luxury cars, and suspicious lifestyles linked to cybercrime now euphemistically branded as “Yahoo.” Even anti-corruption agencies have had to remind the public that fraud is not hustle, nor is it a legitimate career path.
Drug abuse and addiction, overwhelmingly male-dominated, have fused with ritual killings, sports betting, cultism, and a culture that glorifies quick wealth while mocking discipline. Honest civil servants are derided as people whose “money missed the road,” while politicians known for reckless spending become role models. Hours are wasted in idle gossip and fantasies of sudden success, while hard work is scorned as foolishness.
This is not to deny the existence of women with questionable character, nor to pretend that girls are immune to crime. But evidence increasingly suggests that many girls drawn into cybercrime, cultism, trafficking, or political violence are often influenced, recruited, or coerced by men whose values are already broken.
In contrast, recent academic trends tell another story. Across Nigeria, more female students are graduating with first-class degrees, topping UTME results, and earning academic awards in growing numbers. At a graduation ceremony I attended at IMAN Academy in Bida months ago, over 90 percent of award recipients were girls. Focus, discipline, and character appear to be tilting in one direction.
Hadiza Bagudu’s concern, therefore, strikes at the core of the problem. Cultural vigilance is disproportionately directed at girls: their movements, clothing, time, and morality, while boys enjoy near-absolute freedom. Yet without equal attention to boys, girls cannot truly be protected. The rising cases of domestic violence, ritual victimization, marital betrayal, and abuse overwhelmingly claim women as victims. How many female bandits, kidnappers, or political thugs do we really know? Even in corruption scandals, it is often men who are indicted, with wives and families dragged into shame and trauma.
Infidelity, too, is quietly normalized for men through the casual endorsement of “side chicks,” while women are commanded to practice unquestioning submission. What we are witnessing is not merely individual failure but a systemic crisis, a pattern of laziness, misplaced priorities, distorted values, and flawed ideals among men, nurtured by a culture that grants them unchecked freedom while subjecting girls to constant scrutiny.
In such a society, it should not surprise us that we appear to be producing more quality girls than boys. Girls are shaped by discipline, fear of consequence, and moral surveillance; boys, by liberty without limits. Freedom, as history has repeatedly shown, corrupts when it is absolute. Until we confront this imbalance honestly, the question will continue to haunt us, not as an accusation, but as a warning we can no longer afford to ignore.
