Just After Bullying Magaya-Victims, Jackie Ngarande Complains Over Own Bullying
7 February 2025
In a world where social media has become a powerful tool for both advocacy and deception, public figures often find themselves entangled in the contradictions of their own narratives. One such case is that of socialite Jackie Ngarande, whose recent post lamenting past bullying exposes a glaring hypocrisy in her public persona.
Just hours ago, Ngarande took to social media to recount how, seven years ago, a popular male comedian bullied her relentlessly on social media. She claims to have suffered emotional distress from his words and, even today, thinking about it makes her cry. This plea for sympathy portrays her as a victim of cyberbullying, seeking justice and emotional validation from her followers.
Yet, in a stark contradiction, a recent post from January 31st reveals her public support for Prophet Walter Magaya, a religious figure who has been repeatedly accused of sexually exploiting and manipulating women under the guise of spiritual leadership. Magaya has faced multiple allegations, including cases where vulnerable women claim to have been abused and silenced. Instead of standing with victims of abuse—women who have suffered under far graver circumstances than online bullying—Ngarande chooses to defend the powerful, disregarding the plight of those who have suffered real harm.
Selective Victimhood: Why Does Ngarande Only Care When It Affects Her?
Ngarande’s attempt to reignite sympathy for her past experiences rings hollow when compared to her wilful ignorance of the suffering of other women. If she truly understood the pain of being harassed and belittled, why would she turn a blind eye to those making allegations against Magaya? The very same principles of justice, fairness, and accountability that she seeks in her personal experiences should apply across the board, yet she conveniently picks and chooses when to be a champion of justice.
Public Sympathy vs. Genuine Advocacy
What is clear from this duplicitous behavior is that Jackie Ngarande only raises her voice when it personally benefits her. She wants her pain acknowledged but refuses to extend the same support to women whose experiences with oppression and abuse are far worse. Instead of being a true advocate for fairness and justice, she aligns herself with powerful figures for social or financial gain—a classic case of selective morality.
The Bigger Issue: Silence in the Face of Power
Ngarande’s double standards reflect a wider issue in society, where public figures choose their battles based on self-interest rather than principle. If bullying and abuse truly matter to her, she should be consistent in her stance—not only when it suits her victim narrative. Her silence on real, tangible injustices against women—while weaponizing her past social media spats for attention—undermines the real fight against gender-based abuse and cyberbullying.
Jackie Ngarande has a choice: Does she stand for all victims, or just herself? Until she reconciles this contradiction, her credibility as an advocate against harassment remains deeply flawed.