Connect with us

Feature/OPED

A Day With The Gày Community

Published

on

By Reuben Abati

I was invited to deliver the keynote address at this year’s special event on ‘Human Rights, Sèxuality and the Law’, an annual symposium organized to promote awareness on issues relating to the plight of the Lèsbian, Gày, Bisèxual, Trànsgender, Queer and/or Intersèx (LGBTQI) Community in Nigeria. When this was announced on social media by the organizers, The Initiative For Equal Rights (TIERS) and @YNaija, hell practically broke loose within the LGBTQI community.

I was dismissed as a wrong choice, and the organizers were accused of being insensitive to the feelings of the community. A broad-based protest was launched on twitter and there were essays on the subject on NoStringsNG.com (the online media advocacy platform for LGBTQI issues in Nigeria), with the most scathing objection written by Bisi Alimi, the Nigerian-born, London-based gày rights activist. Bisi Alimi described me as a “homōphobe.” He said the invitation extended to me was an abuse of TIERS, and he was offended that a group he had helped to co-found would offer its platform to an “oppressor.”

Following a pre-event twitter chat with me on the subject, co-ordinated by @YNaija, the attacks got even more aggressive. Someone wrote that having Reuben Abati as Keynote Speaker was like inviting the “KKK to an NACCP event.” An article written by Kritzmoritz and published by KitoDiaries.com (another Nigerian LGBTQI blog) was titled “Of TIERS, Reuben Abati and all that angst.”

The anonymous author reflected the sentiments of the gày community in the following words: “Let me get this out of the way from the onset so we are clear. I don’t like Mr Reuben Abati. Over the past five years, I have come to view him as a rather unpleasant human being…” Another commentator, Mandy in a piece titled “There is no engaging with a keynote Speaker” took the additional step of launching an online petition and called for signatures to “drop Reuben Abati” because in his or her view: “you cannot invite the person who killed me to come apologize at my funeral; things are not done that way.”

My offence is that I had participated in a discussion of the Same Sèx Marriage (Prohibition) Act 2014 shortly after President Goodluck Jonathan signed it into law. Alimi, in particular, was on an Al-Jazeera panel with me. He argued that I exhibited homōphobia, defending the law. The complaints by the gày community were so loud and their objection to the possibility of my being allowed to invade “their space” was so trenchant. I called the organizers to ask if they were considering a change of mind about their choice of Keynote Speaker. Their answer was in the negative.

On December 14, I participated in what turned out to be a lively, engaging, open and inclusive symposium on Human Rights, Sèxuality and The Law. I did not see any reason to beat about the bush. I opened my address with a response to Alimi and the critics. The labels used to describe me do not fit me. I am neither a homōphobe nor an extremist. My views are liberal and I consider the rights of every man to be ontological, interdependent and indivisible. These rights are well-covered in all the major nine documents on International Human Rights, including the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (1948) and its 30 articles, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (1965), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966) and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (1979). Nigeria is a signatory to majority of these conventions, protocols and covenants as well as the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (1981). Chapters Two and Four of the Nigerian Constitution, 1999, expressly uphold these rights.

The enactment of certain legislations such as – The Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules 2009, HIV/AIDS (Anti-Discrimination) Act, 2014, Violence Against Persons (Prohibition) Act, 2015, the National Human Rights Commission Act, 2015, the Prohibition Against Domestic Violence Law No 15 of Lagos State, 2007, Gender Based Violation Prohibition Law of Ekiti State, 2011, Trafficking in Persons (Prohibition) Law Enforcement and Administration Act, 2003, the Legal Aid Act, 2011 and the Child Rights Act, 2003 – also point to considerable advancements in human rights legislation in Nigeria since 1999. Human rights are important. They are indeed matters of urgent and high priority because they are at the core of the idea of our humanity. They are indispensable vehicles for achieving peace, stability, justice and development in the world. Every human being is entitled to these rights; to devalue the right of any person is to violate that person’s right to dignity and justice.

Nigeria in spite of acknowledged advancements remains a nightmare where human rights are concerned. The failure of institutional mechanisms and the absence of political will to translate constitutional rights into effective human rights realities have resulted in what is clearly a governance and accountability crisis. The average Nigerian suffers the after-effects in various ways: poverty, lack of access to justice, violence, kidnappings, police brutality, extortion, wanton resort to self-help by both state and non-state actors, and a general regime of lawlessness reminiscent of the brutal days of military rule. Political leaders and state officials are so powerful that they have no regard for the people. They choose when it is convenient for them to respect court orders.

There is a disconnect between Nigeria’s international human rights obligations and what it does at home, creating conflicts and tensions in the implementation of human rights law. Nigeria is a member, for example, of the ECOWAS Community Court of Justice, but the government routinely ignores the rulings of this strategic regional court. Non-state actors are emboldened by the negligence of state actors to take the law into their hands, as seen in the conflict between Corporate Responsibility and Human Rights in Nigeria. Nigeria is a member of the International Labour Organization, the enabling principles of which are covered in the Labour Act, 2004, but with the unemployment crisis in the country, employers of labour trample on the rights of workers at will. The non-justiciability of the social, economic, cultural and group human rights goals in Chapter Two of the Nigerian Constitution further compounds the nightmare.

It is within this overall context of the human rights situation in Nigeria, that the issue of sèxuality is to be located. Section 15 (2) of the 1999 Constitution talks about national integration without discrimination on the grounds of sèx, among others. Section 17 states that the social order is founded on the ideals of “freedom, equality and justice”, while Section 17(3) says state policy shall be directed towards “all citizens, without discrimination on any group whatsoever”, a goal that had earlier been covered also in Section 14(2)(b). Section 42 further upholds every Nigerian’s right to freedom from discrimination. Whereas the Constitution talks about sèx, and not sèxuality or gender orientation, the principle of equality before the law and the right to be human is without exemption of any persons or groups. Article 2 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights indeed says sèx should be taken to include sèxual orientation and gender.

Minority groups are often targets of violence in Nigeria – apart from ethnic and religious minorities, women, children, the girl-child and the physically challenged, perhaps the most targeted and the most violated in recent times are members of the LGBTQI community. Gàys in Nigeria have found themselves in a hostile society. There have been reported cases of persons with suspected LGBTQI orientation being subjected to various forms of violence: kidnapping, extortion, ràpe, assault, inhuman and degrading treatment, denial of access to justice and curtailment of their fundamental rights. The state looks the other way, the rest of society says serves them right.

There is no plan or structure in place for protecting gày persons in Nigeria from outright violation even by the police and the state. Section 214 of the Criminal Code criminalizes “any person who has carnal knowledge of any person against the order of nature”. Section 217 thereof frowns at “gross indecency”. Similarly, Sections 284 and 405-408 of the Penal Code, and the Sharia Law in 12 states of the North make homosèxuality a punishable felony. Public hostility towards the LGBTQI is widespread. It is risky to reveal sèxual orientation in Nigeria. No political party or politician has formally endorsed LGBTQI rights in Nigeria.

The Same Sèx Marriage (Prohibition) Act 2014, which is a particular source of anxiety and the target of protest by the Nigerian and global LGBTQI community, establishes a legal basis for formal discrimination on the grounds of sèxuality. This law forbids any form of gày marriage, or civil union (sections 1-3), the registration of gày clubs, societies and organisations or the holding of gày meetings (section 4(1)) and the display of amorous relationship between two persons of the same sèx in Nigeria (section 4(2). Anybody who enters into a same sèx marriage contract or runs a gày club or association or group or is seen to be aiding and abetting homosèxuality is considered guilty of a felony. The punishment ranges from 10 to 14 years (section 5). Although the SSMPA deals with marriage or civil union, it is a much stronger law than the Criminal and Penal Codes and the Sharia on gày issues. It is a law fraught with ambiguities, which devalue the gày person’s rights to privacy, dignity of the human person, freedoms of expression and freedom from discrimination.

But it remains a popular law with the majority of Nigerians who rely on culture and traditional values, public morality as defined in Section 45 (1) of the 1999 Constitution, and the fact that Nigeria being a sovereign nation should be free to make its own laws and not subject itself to Western notions of sèxuality. Research findings accordingly indicate that more than 95 percent of the Nigerian population considers homosèxuality a sin. Religion and culture remain major barriers to human rights expression as seen in the case of Christians quoting such anti-gày Scriptural passages as Leviticus 18:22, 20:23, the poor fortunes of the Child Rights Act in spite of its ratification by 26 out of 36 states, constructive and continuing gender discrimination, and the disgraceful politicking over the Gender Equality and Prohibition of Violence Against Women Bill, 2016 which has now been reduced pathetically, at second reading, to a bill on violence and sèxual abuse.

There are specific posers to be raised in relation to the SSMPA 2014. One, culture to the extent of its dynamism should evolve, and must not be erected into a given barrier to human rights expression. Two, human rights and sovereignty should not be antithetical. Three, who should determine what is right and wrong? Is there an objective universal morality in a world of diverse beliefs and practices? And is morality necessarily as determined by the majority? Can the majority possibly be wrong in a democracy?

Where sèxuality is concerned, the insistence on basic rights can only be a continuous and inclusive struggle. The debate can only continue to evolve as society itself evolves. The irreducible minimum lies in the need by state and non-state actors to continue to make efforts to dismantle barriers and extend the frontiers of how human rights are respected, protected and fulfilled. Gày persons in Nigeria are subjected to police brutality and assault, targeted killings, hate crime, and sundry forms of discrimination. Their relatives are stigmatized. The jungle justice that is imposed on the community is outside the province of the law. Enforcing the law as it is, until it is amended, revised, or repealed, should be within the province of the rule of law, not the jungle. The right of all persons to freedom, justice and equality should be considered sacrosanct. Any law, which contradicts this principle, in its operation or expression, is to the extent of its inconsistency, questionable.

The more memorable aspect of the 2016 symposium on Human Rights, Sèxuality and the Law, attended by both gày and non-gày persons, was the interactive session where further issues were raised and interrogated. One fellow stood up and insisted that I needed to apologise to the LGBTQI community for views I had expressed in the past. My response was that when I defended the SSMPA publicly in 2014, I was doing my duty as the Official Presidential Spokesperson. In that capacity, it was part of my responsibility to explain and promote government policies and decisions. A spokesman’s loyalty is to country, state, government and principal; he or she is essentially a Vuvuzela. Besides, the SSMPA is not a law about my personal views but the values and the choice of the majority of Nigerians. What people do with their private lives is their business as free human beings without interpreting freedom as absolute, however, but as a guarantee for the equality of all persons.

Someone else wanted to know why President Jonathan considered it expedient and urgent to sign a bill that was first proposed in 2006 into law. The chronology is that the National Assembly rejected the bill in 2007. It was passed by the Senate on Nov 29, 2011, by the House of Representatives on May 30, 2013 and signed into law on January 13, 2014. If President Jonathan had withheld assent, the National Assembly could have exercised its power of veto override. What is required, in all of this, to be honest, is not ex post facto hand-wringing and blame games, but continued advocacy and awareness building. Incidentally, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights has called on the Nigerian Government to consider a revision of the SSMPA given the manner in which it is being exploited to violate fundamental human rights. A day may well come when this would happen in line with the Yogyakarta Principles on sèxual orientation and gender identity, as has been experienced in Mozambique, Nepal and Nicaragua.

A lady stood up and added: “Dr Abati, it is important that you realise you are in our space. This is a very sensitive space and community. My husband is your very good friend, but I still think you owe this community an apology because even when doing your job as a government official, there are certain things you should not say.” I thought I already answered that question. Another lady intervened: “Hi, Dr Abati, I am made to understand you don’t believe we exist in Nigeria. Well, now you know we do. I am a citizen. I work in this country. I pay my taxes. My name is Pamela. And I am a Lèsbian.” I have never said any such dumb thing as to insist that the LGBTQI community does not exist either in Nigeria or elsewhere in Africa. Having read Bernadine Evaristo and other writers on the subject, I have a clear understanding.

I left the symposium with two special gifts. The 2016 Human Rights Violations Report Based on Real or Perceived Sèxual Orientation and Gender Identity in Nigeria, a 61-page publication by TIERS Nigeria which was formally presented at the occasion and “Tell Me Where I Can Be Safe”: The Impact of Nigeria’s Same Sèx Marriage (Prohibition) Act, a 108-page publication by Human Rights Watch. Both publications provide detailed and up-to-date information including statistics and the impact of the law with regard to the status of the LGBTQI community in Nigeria, focusing mainly on human rights violations on the grounds of sèxual orientation and gender identity. I recommend both publications for general reading and for the benefit of those seeking answers on the subject under review.

Sitting by my side during the interactive sessions was Olumide, the gifted and resourceful activist who runs TIERSNigeria. We reviewed the comments as they flowed forth from the participants in the room. What is clear is that there is a vibrant LGBTQI community in Nigeria led by internationally exposed, media-savvy and knowledgeable young men and women who are determined to insist on their fundamental human rights and their right to be who they want to be. They are aggrieved. They are organized. They have set up platforms for self-expression including the use of technology, publications, movies (re: Hell or High Water, November 2016), the media and other social networking opportunities. Their voice is likely to grow louder as they become more organized. For how much longer can they be ignored?

As the event drew to a close, the microphone got to a young fellow who incoherent at first, still managed to deliver his punch-line killer: “Please, I don’t understand what people are saying. They are saying they are liberal, or that we need to unlearn certain things. Liberal, about what? When you say you are liberal, it is like you are patronizing us. Can you talk about rice when you have not even tasted it?” Yes, I think. One of the privileges of intellection is the right to talk robustly and nineteen to the dozen about rice, without ever tasting it.

Modupe Gbadeyanka is a fast-rising journalist with Business Post Nigeria. Her passion for journalism is amazing. She is willing to learn more with a view to becoming one of the best pen-pushers in Nigeria. Her role models are the duo of CNN's Richard Quest and Christiane Amanpour.

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Feature/OPED

Nigeria’s Olodo Uprising: An Assault on Critical Thinking

Published

on

olodo uprising

By Prince Charles Dickson, PhD

A sheep was passing and saw a lion crying inside a cage, trapped and helpless. The lion begged the sheep to rescue him, promising not to kill or eat it. The sheep refused at first, knowing fully well that a lion does not become a vegetarian because of captivity. But after much persuasion, emotional blackmail, and the sheep’s own gullibility, it opened the cage.

Now the lion was very hungry, having stayed in the cage for days without food. It quickly pounced on the sheep and was about to kill and eat it, but the sheep reminded him of his promise.

They were still arguing when other animals came passing. They sought to know what had happened. Both the lion and the sheep narrated their sides of the story, but because of fear, convenience, and a desperate need to gain favour in the lion’s eyes, all the animals took sides with the lion, except the tortoise, who claimed not to understand the whole scenario.

The tortoise asked the lion to show them where exactly he was before the sheep rescued him. The lion pointed at the cage.

The tortoise asked again, “Were you inside or outside when the sheep arrived?”

The lion replied, “I was inside.”

The tortoise then said, “Okay, enter and let us see how difficult it could be inside, because I am not getting the whole scenario.”

The lion entered, and immediately, the tortoise locked the cage. The lion was trapped again.

That story is not just folklore. It is a national diagnosis.

Nigeria today is full of trapped lions, gullible sheep, frightened animals, and very few tortoises. We have many people with opinions, but few with discernment. Many with certificates, but few with comprehension. Many with titles, but few with thought. Many who can quote policy, scripture, law, and ideology, but cannot ask the simple question that prevents disaster: “Wait first, how did we get here?”

That question is the beginning of critical thinking. Sadly, it is becoming an endangered species.

The easiest and most attractive national pastime remains buck-passing, especially with the bunch of leaders we have, some of whom can hardly peel a banana or wash an already white handkerchief. Not many of us want to take responsibility for anything, from personal life to family life, from community life to national life. The blame is always on the system, as if the system descended from the sky and imposed itself on innocent citizens.

We do not need to create demons out of our leaders because, in too many instances, they have behaved like ready-made specimens of public demons. So, we hang our sins on them, sometimes appropriately, sometimes lazily. Unfortunately, their behaviour has made it easy for the critics to descend on them. They shout loudly, lie casually, perform empathy only when cameras are present, and govern as though the people are background noise in their private banquet.

But there is a deeper tragedy. The lion is not our only problem. The sheep, too, must be examined. The other animals must be questioned. Even the silence of the forest must stand trial.

This is where the Olodo Syndrome enters.

In Nigerian street language, “Olodo” is often used to describe a dull person, someone slow to understand, someone who fails where basic reasoning should have saved them. But in this essay, Olodo is not merely the person who did not go to school. No. Nigeria has produced a more sophisticated creature: the educated olodo. The certificated illiterate. The graduate who cannot reason beyond slogans. The public officer who mistakes grammar for intelligence. The citizen who forwards nonsense with confidence. The analyst who mistakes noise for insight. The leader who confuses movement with progress. The voter who sells tomorrow for rice today, then spends four years complaining that the pot is empty.

Olodo, therefore, is not the absence of schooling. It is the failure of judgment.

It is what happens when a nation rewards mediocrity and punishes thought. It is what happens when people who ask serious questions are labelled troublesome, while those who clap for madness are called loyal. It is what happens when dumb, crazy things move the needle, while wisdom is treated like an old man coughing in the corner. It is what happens when unintelligent people do not merely exist, but are celebrated, promoted, defended, and installed as gatekeepers over those who still dare to think.

This is Nigeria’s Olodo Uprising.

It is an uprising not of the poor against the rich, nor of the uneducated against the educated. It is an uprising of shallow thinking against depth. An assault on memory, logic, accountability, and consequence. It is the national habit of refusing to connect action to outcome. We open the cage, release the lion, and then begin a prayer meeting when the lion remembers its appetite.

We talk, write, and discuss the Nigerian myth with a sense of fatalism. “This is Nigeria,” we say, as if that phrase is both an explanation and an excuse. If everyone thought as much about justice and fairness, life would be better. I am a critic, yes, but I am also a critic’s critic. I remain an unrepentant believer that one of the ways to keep the government on its toes is to keep harping on its flaws so that it can improve. But criticism without self-examination becomes entertainment. It becomes pepper soup politics, the kind we enjoy at drinking joints, suya spots, WhatsApp groups, and television studios where every table has a parliament and every loud voice is mistaken for a constitution.

Often, I say I believe the things I write are important for our nation, as they are for other nations. But when it appears to me that Nigerians, especially those in authority, do not react to these issues as people in other lands do, I repeat them in new essays to remind old readers and recruit new ones to participate in the continuing dialogue.

Because repetition, sometimes, is not a lack of creativity. It is the burden of memory in a country addicted to forgetting.

Sadly, this is Nigeria, where nothing works, and no one cares. When it works, it is often because someone’s interest is about to be served or is already being served, not because the people’s interest has suddenly become sacred. We talk about our institutions despairingly. Our leaders do not watch network news except when their faces will appear at their sons’ or daughters’ weddings, birthdays, burials, thanksgiving services, or self-sponsored ceremonies of public praise. They do not need newspapers anymore because too many pages are already full of their lies, paid adverts, and noisy banters dressed as governance.

A country that destroys thinking will eventually be governed by instinct.

That is why the Olodo Syndrome is dangerous. It not only makes people ignorant. It makes them confidently ignorant. It gives stupidity a microphone and asks wisdom to apply for permission to speak. It converts public debate into shouting contests. It turns leadership recruitment into ethnic arithmetic, religious panic, stomach infrastructure, and emotional blackmail. It makes citizens defend their oppressors because the oppressor speaks their language, attends their church, worships in their mosque, comes from their zone, or once gave them transport money.

This is how the other animals sided with the lion.

Not because the lion was right. They knew he was wrong. But fear is a powerful editor of truth. Hunger is a wicked lawyer. Proximity to power is a dangerous intoxicant. In Nigeria, many people do not support injustice because they are confused. They support it because they are calculating. They are asking themselves, “What if the lion remembers me tomorrow? What if I need a favour? What if I condemn him now and he becomes minister, governor, chairman, commissioner, vice chancellor, senator, president?”

So, they betray the sheep.

Government bashing remains a national pastime, and every drinking joint and suya spot has a sitting parliament with an expert on every issue. But we forget that no matter the input, if the politicians and actors on our national scene have questionable lives both at personal and domestic levels, nothing will change. The best government policy cannot change the individual when the policies themselves are formulated on a bad foundation by people with warped thinking.

A corrupt mind cannot midwife a clean system.

When a witch proclaims her presence, and an invalid does not make away, he must have money for sacrifices at home. Nigeria has been warned too many times. We have seen the witch. We have heard the announcement. Yet we remain seated, arguing about who invited her, who offended her, which village she came from, and whether her witchcraft is constitutionally recognised.

This is not merely a leadership failure. It is civic laziness. It is moral cowardice. It is intellectual surrender.

The tortoise in the story represents the rare citizen who does not join the chorus. The one who pauses the noise. The one who asks for sequence, evidence, context, motive, and consequence. The tortoise is not the loudest animal. It is not the strongest. It does not roar. It does not bleat. It thinks.

That is what Nigeria needs now: more tortoises.

Not slow people, but thoughtful people. Not cowards hiding under shells, but citizens who understand that speed without thought is national self-harm. We need people who can ask leaders: Where were you before power? What did you promise? What have you done? Who benefits? Who pays? What happens tomorrow? We need teachers who teach children to question, not merely to cram. We need voters who examine character before currency. We need religious leaders who produce conscience, not crowds. We need journalists who investigate, not decorate. We need institutions that reward competence over loyalty, substance over noise, and courage over convenience.

Because the lion will always be hungry again.

That is the part Nigeria refuses to learn. Appeasing bad leadership does not end its appetite. Excusing mediocrity does not transform it into excellence. Rewarding foolishness does not make it wise. If we allow the lion to eat the sheep today because we are afraid, hungry, tribal, religiously sentimental, or politically invested, we have not solved the hunger problem. We have only postponed our own turn.

In amazement, the other animals asked the tortoise, “why” and the tortoise replied. “If we allow him to eat the sheep today, he will still go hungry tomorrow, and we don’t know what will be eaten tomorrow—May Nigeria win.

Continue Reading

Feature/OPED

Stocks vs Forex: Which is Better for Beginners in 2026?

Published

on

Stocks vs Forex

By Onah Ishioma Adaeze

As a beginner, choosing between stocks and forex for your investment goals in 2026 can feel overwhelming. Before investing your hard-earned money, it is important to understand how both markets work.

While both markets present investors with opportunities to grow their wealth, they also differ in terms of volatility, liquidity, market hours, and leverage. Stocks involve owning portions of a company, while forex has to do with trading a base currency against a quote currency.

In this article, we will be going through the basics of stocks and forex, pointing out their differences, and helping you decide which asset better suits your investment journey in 2026.

What is Stock Trading?

When it comes to stock trading, you are buying shares of a company, which makes you a shareholder of that company. As a shareholder, you may be entitled to receive dividends whenever the company decides to pay dividends.

As for those companies that do not pay dividends, there are other benefits a shareholder may enjoy, like being called upon to attend shareholder meetings and having voting rights on certain company matters.

On a global scale, over $100 trillion worth of shares are traded annually. Also, the rising popularity of AI companies and technological innovations continues to drive investor participation and market growth.

If you’re an investor looking to buy and hold capital assets, then stock trading is definitely for you, as it allows for short-term, medium-term and long-term investment goals.

When you buy shares of a company and the company performs well, your shares increase in value. Another benefit of stock trading is access to index funds and ETFs.

These funds consist of companies that are grouped under an index. They are carefully selected and monitored under the fund, sparing the investor the stress of actively tracking the fund.

They can be a way of building a long-term, diversified portfolio, and some of these funds may pay dividends.

What is Forex Trading?

Forex trading has to do with buying one currency and selling another. With a pair like USD/JPY, USD is the base currency being bought against JPY, which is the quote currency.

In order to execute a trade in the forex market, you have to analyse and make predictions based on price movement, as well as pay attention to what’s going on in the global news scene.

The forex market runs twenty-four hours every weekday, with over $9 trillion traded in the market every day. Being the largest financial market in the world, there is very high liquidity.

Forex trading involves buying one currency against another, making predictions based on price movements on the forex charts. Price moves based on the activities of large institutions like hedge funds, big banks, the government, etc.

The forex market runs 24 hours a day, every weekday, with global forex turnover reaching $9 trillion per day in the BIS 2025 survey. Being the largest financial market in the world, there is very high volatility and price fluctuations.

At the same time, there is high liquidity in the market, which means that currency pairs can easily be bought and sold without hassle. Highly liquid instruments that are traded regularly include: EUR/USD, USD/JPY, GBP/USD, and gold (XAU/USD).

As a retail trader, knowing when to enter and exit the market is important. As easy as it is to make profits from price fluctuations, it is also very easy to lose money if the market moves against you. This is why it is important to set stop losses and take profits. This helps manage your trading capital.

Major Differences Between Stocks and Forex

While investing in stocks and forex can yield great capital gains, there are lots of ways in which they differ.

As a beginner, stock trading provides opportunities for long-term investments, ensuring slow but consistent returns for wealth building. But if you are looking for an active, short-term style of investment, then forex trading is for you, as it allows you to enter and exit the market within a shorter time frame.

Which is Better in 2026?

Choosing an asset to invest in all boils down to personal preference. At the same time, if you are not averse to risk, nor opposed to asset diversification, then it’s okay to invest in both.

For beginner investors in 2026, stock trading is easier to understand and get into, especially because of mutual funds, index funds and ETFs. With those funds, you don’t have to be an expert to start investing. You can just buy a fund that suits your needs and hold it over a long period of time.

If you are an investor who enjoys technical analysis, highly volatile and liquid markets, as well as trading under short time frames, then forex trading is the right pick for you.

Conclusion 

You do not need to put all your eggs in one basket. There are investors who invest in both stocks and forex simultaneously. When starting out, you can start investing in stocks while learning forex. Take calculated risks and do not invest above your means. Diversify your investments and remember, when starting out, you should prioritise acquiring knowledge over profits.

Onah Ishioma Adaeze is a finance writer who is passionate about simplifying complex concepts into easily digestible pieces. Her hobbies are reading and watching anime

Continue Reading

Feature/OPED

Building 234 Solutions: A Response to Everyday Workforce Challenges

Published

on

Owoloye Emmanuel 234 Solutions

By Owoloye Emmanuel

Every business starts with a problem. For us, that problem was hiding in plain sight.

Across organisations, we kept seeing HR professionals, payroll teams, and business leaders spend significant time navigating processes that should be simpler. Employee records sat across multiple systems, payroll processes required manual intervention, and routine workforce tasks often became more complicated than they needed to be.

As businesses grow, workforce operations naturally become more complex. Yet many organisations still rely on disconnected tools and workflows that create unnecessary friction for both employers and employees.

The consequence is more than operational inefficiency. HR teams spend valuable time managing systems instead of supporting people. Business leaders struggle to access timely workforce insights, while employees experience delays in processes that should be seamless.

These weren’t isolated challenges. They were recurring realities across workplaces, regardless of industry or size.

That observation led us to a simple question: what if workforce management could be easier?

What if HR, payroll, and workforce operations could work together within a single, connected experience?

That question became the foundation for 234 Solutions.

We are building 234 Solutions with a clear belief that workplace technology should reduce complexity, not add to it. Our goal is to help organisations spend less time navigating processes and more time focusing on productivity, growth, and people.

As we prepare for launch, our focus remains simple: building practical solutions for real workplace challenges and helping organisations create better experiences for the people who power them every day.

Owoloye Emmanuel is the founder of 234 Solutions

Continue Reading

Trending