Helen and the several dwarfs

Once upon a time (not so long ago) in a land (we sometimes wish) was far away, a woman called Helen wandered into a forest (more like a jungle) and discovered seven men who were dwarfed by a number of problems. This was the start of what would be a traumatic four years for poor Helen, who herself was suffering already from democraticellusion, backtrackingquickly and a number of other ailments.

The first man, sir shower-alot, had created much enthusiasm for himself largely by playing on the dreams of the masses that they would one day be able to have an ego like his. He had a number of wives, girlfriends and assorted other womanly 'possessions' with whom he had his way, when he wanted and how he wanted. He also had a superpower which allowed him to remove the traces of disease and illness, simply by showering. His power was so strong that he didn't even mention anything about protex or dettol but was able to use regular showers for these purposes.

The second man, sir foot-in-the mouth, also had created a great deal of energy around him. Sadly for him though, this energy was not always positive, but this did not stop him from enjoying his position as general chatterbox and know-little. He was dwarfed by his lack of knowledge, and desire to use the anger of others to fuel his own energy. He said what he thought, even when what he thought was not at all sensible or useful.

The third man, sir i'm-the-boss-not-you, created many problems for Helen. He refused to share any of the jungle resources with her, until she did exactly what the dwarf colony wanted - even if she had very good reasons not to. He often used his role of jungle king to communicated the messages of the dwarf colony to her, and sadly to the world beyond the jungle. He was dwarfed by his inability to share.

The fourth man, sir inandoutof-jail, also had magical powers. This man, through surrounding himself with other men who had superpowers (like sir shower-alot), was able to move through physical barriers, like jail cells. The combined power of his and other superpowers allowed him to fly above things (even the law). However, sir inandoutof-jail was only holidaying in the jungle, because he actually had a house somewhere else, and was a bit shaky from the jungle noises. He was dwarfed by charges.

Upon meeting these men, Helen was slightly alarmed. She wondered about how the jungle was run, and how she too would become part of the leadership of the jungle. She thought very long and hard about this question. Despite not wanting to act badly, she came to a conclusion.

If its monkey business that runs the jungle, she just had to act like one of the monkeys herself. And if it is male monkeys who run the jungle, best she surround herself with some of her own monkeys from her land.

Rape and you

Last night I watched a harrowing documentary on rape in the DRC.

In it literally hundreds of women were shown who had been raped by soldiers, by rebels, by boys and by 'men'. They had been raped by bodies, with guns, with anything that these 'men' could find. The women formed groups together to talk about their rapes, and the hospitals were filled with new women each day who had new stories to tell. Their voices grew from whispers to shouts as they told them. They spoke in french, which I understood, and in local dialects, which I didn't. But even when I didn't understand their language their voices cracked with emotions that I could feel.

The producer and a local assistant managed to interview some of the men in both the rebel groups and the army. They had all raped, were proud to list the numbers and explained their rapes in terms of a magic potion that they took, which required rape to work. The laughed at each others reasons. One man, about 25, said that if someone wanted to rape his mother, and he knew it was for the good of the congo.

Where do I start? I am not sure if all the education in the world could help me to begin to formulate a plan to help these women or to change things there. I was frustrated at my own inability to do anything, and all I wanted was to embrace those women and show that there is love for them, and not only hatred. The sheer scale of the problem and the smallness of my reach made me literally shake.

So what can we do? What can each individual person do?

I'm trying to help by talking about it in this space, and through the work that I do. What are you doing?

Where are the women Helen?

Helen Zille, leader of the DA and Western Cape premier, has chosen a women-free (herself the exception), pale-male cabinet. Needless to say, I am a bit disappointed.

One of the most difficult thing that I have found working with teams of women, is that their belief that other women are their competition rather than their allies often stunts women's own efforts at achieving success. Whilst I respect that Zille wants the best team, she should be more aware of the detrimental effect that such an unconstitutional cabinet has on aspiring young girls and women.

If she herself wants to remain a credible leader, she should pay respect to the constitutional requirements and laws of South Africa - after all, she is always first to criticise others for ignoring them.

(Mis)lead?

A dinner conversation sparked the question 'where are the real leaders' globally at this time? The conversation began with a discussion of Jacob Zuma and revolved around the table's disappointment with his inability to publicly denounce violence against women, and with his weak commitment to rejecting corruption. As conversations about Zuma tend to do, this one turned to allegations of conspiracy against him, Julius Malema's big mouth, and other (the list is too long) flaws in the current system that have left many South Africans quaking in their crocs at the thought of our new president.

The question was asked - but who else is there to lead SA? Would any of the other public figures be fit to do a better job than master machine gun? There was a brief (that's all we needed) discussion, but the results weren't that promising. Of all the public figures we talked about, there wasn't one who stood out as exception. Yes there are those, like Helen Zille, who have impacted much more proactively than current ANC leaders. There are others like Patricia De Lille who have stood up for what they believed in and for democratic rights. But which of these, or any others, are people that you look at and say - 'there is nobody else I'd rather vote for', or 'I have so much confidence in this person', or even just 'I think they can do it'. Thus the conversation ended in despondency.

Obama had American hopes at unprecedented levels. Americans and International spectators really believe that he can make change in their lives. They believe that he is someone who has his head and heart in the right place, and who will deliver on his promises. So far, it looks as if their predictions are right.

Can there really only be one Obama? Where are our African shining stars? Where are the leaders who we feel proud of, and who incite us to feel pride in ourselves and our countries? Perhaps the South African masses felt this about Zuma. He is arguably South Africa's most popular political figure. But many women, and many of the SA middle classes, feel as though their hope for an equal future has been stolen from them.

I went home and thought about my own class at University, and of other students my age who were politically involved on campus. I can identify people in those groups who could be equally dangerous to democratic values, or equally to make the decisions that need to be made. But I can also identify some real potential for fearless, committed leaders who will make change here if they decide to stay.

How sad that I will have to wait more than twice as long as I've already lived for these people to get a chance at president, party leader or MP.

Perhaps South Africa's problem then is that it does not engage with these young minds enough? Rigorous arguments and discussion of political theory and political practice are happening every day in our country, and perhaps we need to extend these discussions to the upper echelons rather than allow them to dictate the demise of our open democracy to us.

In fact, not perhaps, we do.

Say What???

Julius Malema, ANC jester, yesterday described Helen Zille, Western Cape premier and head of the D.A., as a 'racist little girl'. Oh my days.

I have had enough of stomaching the ridiculous, aggressive, violence inciting rubbish that Julius Malema has to spit out at any opportunity. Can anyone describe a time when he has said something positive, constructive or dare I say, useful?

I returned from the UK after a 3 month holiday in February. It was interesting being over there because you hear nearly no news about South Africa, save for a blip now and then about Mandela. But since the exit of Mbeki and the hasty rise of Zuma and Malema, SA has been in the news more and more frequently. The sad thing is that the bulletins about SA are usually followed by a deep sigh, head shake and/or a nervous cough. Western news sources have no means to understand how our highest powered figures cannot get a sentence out without being offensive.

So how do they get away with it? Every time? While at the same time feeling it within their right to retaliate when ever someone has 2c to contribute about him. Zuma is even suing British newspaper the guardian because they said he had been convicted of corruption, rather than he was allegedly corrupt. Bollocks to that!

We may have freedom of speech, but when do we as voters and SA citizens have a right to say 'shut the f*** up'. Does anyone remember their mum's saying 'if you don't have anything useful to say, don't say anything at all'? I do. There are millions of South Africans who have positive, useful, ubuntu-esque things to say every day. Can we stop giving publicity to comic-figures and give some to the clever people? Please!

Gay abandon(ment)...

Burundi, like South Africa, has a constitution that protects human rights. Part of this protection of human rights is the protection of people's right to practise their cultural beliefs. This is often easier said than done. Western-based conceptions of human rights often differ from local-based beliefs about rights and when these two conceptions clash it becomes difficult to judge which one takes precedence.

The Burundian government passed a law this week criminalising homosexuality. Any consensual sexual activity between two people of the same sex is punishable by two to three years in prison. President Nkurunziza described homosexuality as a 'curse'. Despite these deep seated beliefs that the president felt no shame in voicing publicly, the document was signed in secret with many human rights group unaware that it had even been drafted until after the fact. Governmental bodies relied on their 'culture' and 'customs' to legitimate the introduction of this law. It is described by Human Rights Watch as a 'disappointing step backward'.

This legitimation of human rights violations in the name of culture seems like an obvious move to slip out of the realm of criticism on the part of the leadership. Who is legitimately able to criticise culture? It is created as an a-historical, unchallengeable 'thing' that does not allow for negotiation and 'has always been so'. That is exactly the beauty of this move for governments and human rights naysayers. They can rely on something unquestionable to allow them to make statements that are politically incorrect (at the best of times) and violence inciting (at the worst of times), and cannot face any criticism for it because it is itself politically incorrect, at least in South Africa, to criticise or question another person's culture openly. So we are left biting our tongues in the hopes that someone will do something about it.

Here at home we have had no shortage of similar dangerous statements made by various political figures. For example, in the rape trial of Jacob Zuma, misogyny was the word of the day. He suggested that because of his status as a 'Zulu' boy, he was culturally expected to have sex with a woman who sat with her legs uncrossed. It was culturally rude not to have sex with a woman who so 'obviously' was 'ready' for it. Similarly he stated that as a young Zulu boy, if a gay person stood in front of him he would knock him down. He called gay people a 'disgrace'. Another prominent figure Manto Tshabalala-Msimang encouraged people to use 'cultural' remedies rather than anti-retroviral medicine when HIV positive.

Similarly, human rights are presented as inaliable, non-contingent and certain. Another universal worldview that perhaps doesn't fit into the lives of most people. They ensures that everyone is legally the same - a difficult goal to implement in a world where so few people are the same, and so few governments want to treat them that way. Like human rights, 'culture' exists and is perpetuated in the minds and beliefs of ordinary people. It is through their behaviour and actions that it is presented to us - intangible - with very real effects.

But the critical thing is that culture did not arise out of nothing. It has been moulded and sculpted by the powerful until it has met their needs and ends. It has been used as a story backdrop to ensure that people are caught up in the magic and unity of it, often without questioning the dangers it poses. Standardly 'othered' groups often remain othered by 'culture' and by legitimating fictions that seek to present it as unquestionable. When someone says that it is his cultural right to do something to another person it moves the debate about the rightness or wrongness of that action out of the sphere of logic or negotiation. The debate is ended and the winner takes it all.

So what can the ordinary person do when faced with trends of leadership that suggests disrespect and disregard, for the rights of homosexual people? How can each of us negotiate with the powerful and help them choose the right way to reshape culture for a more positive future?

My suggestion - talk. The most frustrating thing about about the Burundian case is the secrecy under which the whole thing has taken place. If your culture is something that you are proud of, then be proud, explain to others how it works and how you feel you are a part of it. More importantly, allow others to do the same.

When the time comes to make a choice between limiting others or freeing them, perhaps we can only hope that our governments will mimic our efforts, take a step back, and listen.

Footnote: For those of you interested in this story, or who want to make your voice heard to reject human rights abuses like this, please visit the human rights watch website - its incredibly proactive and useful.