‘The line between mentorship and gatekeeping is drawn not by intention, but by access.’
November 09, (THEWILL) — In African civil society, development, media, academia and even activism, mentorship is celebrated as a core value. Elders are expected to support the next generation, experienced professionals are called to pass on knowledge, and intergenerational solidarity is often viewed as a marker of progress. But scratch the surface of many ‘progressive’ spaces, and a more complicated picture emerges.
What we call mentorship sometimes functions as gatekeeping: a system where access, opportunities and visibility are filtered through unspoken hierarchies. In such spaces, younger or emerging voices are not just guided, they are managed. They are allowed to grow, but only within boundaries set by those already in power.
This article unpacks how mentorship and gatekeeping often blur in African progressive spaces. It explores how well-meaning guidance can sometimes morph into control, why this dynamic persists and how we might reimagine mentorship that empowers rather than contains.
Mentorship in Theory vs. Mentorship in Practice
In theory, mentorship is a relationship of support: someone more experienced walks alongside a less experienced person, offering knowledge, feedback, and access. It is based on generosity and mutual respect.
In practice, however, mentorship often becomes transactional, hierarchical or territorial – especially in sectors where funding, recognition and access are limited.
Across Africa, younger professionals in civil society and development often find themselves dependent on “mentors” for referrals, introductions or legitimacy. This dependence is not inherently problematic. What becomes concerning is when the relationship becomes a bottleneck.
Examples include:
- Public endorsements tied to loyalty, rather than merit.
- Opportunities passed only to protégés, not to the broader field.
- Silence expected on controversial topics, to maintain favour.
- Visibility granted on the condition of alignment, not autonomy.
The Language of Care as a Tool of Control
Gatekeeping often wears the clothes of mentorship. Advice is framed as care. Caution is offered in the language of ‘protecting your future.’ But beneath this, there is sometimes fear – fear that emerging voices may challenge existing reputations, shift narratives, or build new coalitions.
This dynamic is especially visible in elite-led African spaces where a small group of individuals control access to donors, media and policymaking forums.
In such circles:
- ‘Wait your turn; becomes a form of relational containment.
- ‘Don’t speak too strongly’ becomes a way of pre-empting dissent.
- ‘You are not ready’ masks anxiety about being outshone.
Why This Happens: Scarcity, Ego, and Reputation
To understand the gatekeeping impulse, we must understand the conditions in which it thrives.
Scarcity of Opportunity
In many African countries, there are limited platforms for thought leadership, restricted access to influential networks and a small pool of donor attention. In such environments, those who have secured influence may guard it tightly.
Mentorship becomes selective. Instead of nurturing an ecosystem, mentors may invest in a few trusted individuals who reflect their own thinking or strategies. Others are left outside.
Ego Protection
As progressive circles grow more competitive, some senior figures begin to conflate their identity with their role. To be challenged, even respectfully, feels like a personal threat.
Thus, mentoring relationships are used to maintain influence, rather than build successors.
This is particularly visible in feminist, youth advocacy, and media spaces, where strong voices emerge quickly and demand new kinds of leadership.
Brand Preservation
In donor-facing environments, some ‘mentors’ are also brand ambassadors. Their identity is intertwined with visibility, funding and representation. Supporting new voices who might disagree or disrupt the brand narrative feels risky.
As a result, mentorship becomes a form of brand management, not talent development.
The Impact on Young and Emerging Leaders
The consequences of gatekeeping disguised as mentorship are serious:
- Stifled innovation: Emerging leaders may censor themselves to stay in favour.
- Burnout and exit: Talented individuals leave sectors altogether due to lack of
recognition. - Replicated power structures: Tomorrow’s leaders model today’s flawed systems.
- Distrust within movements: Younger activists grow cynical about intergenerational
solidarity.
A young policy researcher in East Africa once said, “I was told I was promising, but every time I challenged a framework, I was called arrogant. Eventually I realised I was being shaped, not supported.”
This is not mentorship. It is containment.
Reimagining Mentorship in African Spaces
So, what does mentorship without gatekeeping look like?
Shared Power, Not Just Shared Wisdom
Mentors must recognise that knowledge-sharing is not enough. They must be willing to share access, visibility, and decision-making power.
Ask: Can this person succeed without needing my permission?
Support that Centres Autonomy
Good mentorship supports difference. It allows the mentee to find their own voice, not simply echo the mentor’s views.
Ask: Am I offering advice that expands their path, or narrows it?
Accountability Without Ego
Mentors must be open to being challenged. Respect should be mutual, not hierarchical. If disagreement feels like betrayal, something is wrong.
Ask: Would I support this person even if they disagreed with me publicly?
Mentorship as Movement-Building
In truly progressive circles, mentorship should not be about managing individuals but growing ecosystems. This means building cultures where many people are nurtured, not just a few protégés.
Ask: How many people around me are thriving, not just surviving?
From Gatekeepers to Gardeners
In every generation, we are given a choice: To be gatekeepers or to be gardeners.
Gatekeepers guard doors and demand loyalty. Gardeners till the soil, create conditions for growth and celebrate when others blossom beyond them.
African progressive spaces need fewer gatekeepers and more gardeners. Mentorship must not be another word for control. It must be a commitment to growth, humility and the shared future we say we are working towards.
If we truly believe in justice, equity and transformation, then we must practise those values in our relationships, not just our rhetoric.
The question is simple: Are we mentoring for liberation or for legacy?
***Written by Aramide Abe.
Aramide Abe is a networking expert and a professional in international development. She is the convener of an African business leader network – Naija Startups. Follow arams on Twitter, Website – www.aramide.ng
