President Jacob Zuma has been called all sorts of names of late for making the choice to enjoy the privilege of being a polygamist which his culture permits, which the South African constitution does not criminalize and which the women he is married to have accepted much to public outrage.

While I have strong personal feelings against polygamy, I notice that during the hullabaloo that ensured – none of Zuma’s wives voiced dissent, none of them took to the streets in protest over their husband’s perpetual marriages, engagements and never-ending wooing.

It was to me, a case of the media crying louder than the bereaved – for if indeed there are any who are harmed or aggrieved by how Zuma conducts his love-life; surely it would be the women he has married, promised to marry and those he has fathered children with – all of whom have remained silent. The silence, presumably, of those who are in acquiescence.

But then people are entitled to their opinions, moreso if the opinions they wish to voice regard those who are in positions of power, who find themselves accountable to the public and whose private lives play out in the public domain as Zuma’s life has.

Now the British media called him a ‘buffoon’ who also happened to be ‘over-sexed’. Now to my way of thinking, buffoon is not high on the scale as far as insults go – in fact it is really nothing compared to some of the colorful invectives that have gone Zuma’s way.

Inadvertently, this insult has done more to turn the tide of public opinion in favor of Zuma, primarily because it was uttered by a white man, who happens to be non-African and whose contemptuous view of Zuma’s polygamous status has riled the afrocentric and pan-africanist sensibilities of some of us.

Though it may sound clichéd, Zuma’s conduct has a cultural premise – an African culture, which (whatever its flaws and imperfections may be) is our proud heritage and an integral part of our ethos as a people, as continent and as a race.

Where I come from, when we fight or disagree – we are allowed to do so without pulling punches knowing that what binds us is greater than what would divide us. I have often found that the only thing that quenches a family feud is the intrusion of an outsider, one who would presume to appoint themselves as the judge and proceed to proffer unsolicited advice or opinions on what is an internal affair.

And that British man has managed to raise my hackles by his superciliousness and the nauseating superiority complex that informs his interpretation of African customs, specifically polygamy.

Had he desired to make an informed judgment of President Zuma’s lifestyle, he would have done so within the confines of the African customs and culture that permits him to be a polygamist.

Anyone, particularly a non-African, would do well to show the appropriate level of humility that is reflective of his or her limited experience and knowledge of African mores when they make the choice to hazard an opinion. Logic dictates that it be so.

Voltaire once stated, I do not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. It is in the same vein that I am compelled to leap to Zuma’s defense; for while I (as an African) do not agree with how he chooses to conduct his life (and find polygamy to be unpalatable) I defend without qualms his right to marry many women as our culture permits and in the same breathe I would be duty-bound to defend the right of all his wives to be married to their one polygamous husband.

It is a personal choice they have made and whatever the consequences – it is not my place to hurl insults at them because I happen not to agree with the decisions grown, mature and adult women have made in picking a life partner.

So much for the gospel of tolerance that the has been preached by the West with advent of fighting for gay rights the world over and here is one who would scorn a man for marrying three women and find it palatable that two men ‘jump’ each other’s bones?

Whatever; that snide remark however goes beyond the issue of Zuma because really the issue is polygamy and polygamy is an African issue and surely any disparaging comment made about it reflects on the African people whose culture makes it permissible?

A buffoon, is he? What does that make the rest of us, I wonder? Or would someone care to explain how that remark has nothing to do with the rest of us; sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, aunts and cousins of polygamists – let me guess – we’re just a family of African ‘buffoons’.

Zimbabwe civic organisations ZimRights and Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR) recently issued a joint statement drawing attention to the rising repression directed at human rights defenders in this country.

The statement says that various members of the ZimRights board have received threatening text messages.

ZimRights and ZLHR also said:  “We urge the inclusive government and particularly the co-Home Affairs Ministers and the Police Commissioner-General to unequivocally guarantee the safety of all these human rights defenders and to assure them of their security pending full investigations into the alleged threats.”

Here are some of the text messages:

Nunurai Jena, ZimRights Regional Chairperson for Mashonaland West received a message saying, “If we give you a task to ask your ZimRights colleagues to slow down and forget about the constitution making process will you do that or else…? Just comply.”

Chitungwiza regional chairperson, Netsai Kaitano’s message read, “Chipositori nekodzero, kana matongerwo enyika zvinopindirana papi? (How are apostolic faith and rights or politics linked?) Have you forgotten the pain of those beatings. Bidi and Tsunga are gone, Pelagia, Ok, Phulu and Tshuma won’t be there anymore, when we will come for you.”

Jabulisa Tshuma, the organisation’s treasurer’s message said, “Mr Treasurer Tshuma, who are your sponsors? You are all over the country. Are you turning ZimRights into a political party? What is the motive of your donors?”

Please get in touch with ZimRights and send them a message of solidarity.

And while these abuses take place under the Government of National Unity, the MDC is responsible for them. Email the MDC on mdc.internationalrelations@gmail.com and ask them to demand a full investigation.

The constitution making process is underway and it is up to you and me to make sure it addresses issues that are going to benefit generations to come. So when the COPAC people come your way be sure to express your views without fear and tell it like it is.

To all the women in this country I have a few tips I got from the Deputy Minister of Justice herself. And by the way men can also take part in asking for these things because all of us are part of the solution. She says if women asked for these 12 things to be included in the constitution then we are sure to make a difference in the Zimbabwe.

So listen up and get ideas on how to change things around in this country.

1. We must ask for a constitution that has an equality clause
2. We want equal citizenship to men
3. The constitution should make sure that women have the right to the security of her person. That sexually based violence should not be tolerated. We must have zero tolerance for any type of violence
4. In the new constitution women must not be discriminated against because of their sexual orientation or the colour of their skin or anything else for that matter. No discrimination of any sort
5. We must have a constitution that subjugates customary law to human rights
6. Women should have economical, social, cultural and environmental rights
7. The constitution must have a clause that addresses a gender sensitive electoral judiciary system and a quarter of the decision-making bodies
8. Rights of children because children directly affect women and children are directly affected by women
9. There should be a gender and equal opportunities commission
10. Whatever treaties and human rights protocols that we have signed up to should be applied straight into law
11. Public finance provision must include gender budgeting

So there you have it. You know what the elders say “Okulumi ‘ndlebe ngowakho-akuruma nzeve ndewako” (forewarned is forearmed).

Have you ever heard the type of poetry that gives you goosebumps and sends you unexpectedly into a trance; the type where you just have to laugh in disbelief that anyone could come up with such lilting lyrics and resounding imagery?

I just had that experience at the ‘House of Hunger’ poetry slam – the competition where young poets and spoken word artists take to the microphone to show off their skills.

One participant, who calls himself Mugmumopus, stands before the crowd and recites a satirical poem about politicians and their many hypocrisies:

“I am a vegetarian, but meat is what I like eating in the dark,” he says, ploughing into the many double standards that political leaders offer.

Another poet tells so vividly about listening to some jazz on a kombi ride into town, how the bass beat elevates him into another world where he’s dreaming awake. As he recites the words, his eyes are shut and he wears a smile of ecstasy. You can’t help but get swept up in his dream.

Lazarus, the eventual winner, tells us in the opening line of his piece that he doesn’t write poetry but that rather, he recites notations of God’s thoughts. Everyone buzzes in anxious wait for the rest of his poem.

This is the South African edition of the ‘House of Hunger’ poetry slam, held every last Saturday of the month in Johannesburg. According to the slam coordinator, Linda Gabriel, the competition began in September, taking its name and philosophy from the ‘House of Hunger’ poetry slam that has been running at the Book Café in Harare, Zimbabwe for many years.

But looking at the astounding quality that the South African edition has to offer, it is almost too depressing to mention the deplorable state that the Zimbabwean version of the contest is now in.

I had the opportunity to be in Harare at the beginning of February to witness this sad state for myself.

Imagine a poet coming before an audience to recite a Valentine’s Day poem from his hardcover exercise book and stating the following:

“Valentine’s Day is a day commemorated on 14 February every year; It is a day when lovers exchange gifts of flowers and chocolates…”

That is NOT poetry, but rather a boring oration on the facts of things.

Another poet came to the microphone to deliver a nauseating piece in which every line had to end in ‘-tion’, so that we had ‘nations’ using Ambi ‘lotion’; we had ‘interpretations’ of ‘colonisation’ and ‘privatisation’, and every other such line that you can think of. The poem would have been clever if it had made more sense. But sadly, it was all a jumble of hopeless words.

Dambudzo Marechera, the poet and writer, after whose acclaimed novel the slam is named, must be turning in his grave.

I say this because I know what quality the Zimbabwe ‘House of Hunger’ slam has offered in the past.

At the height of the nation’s political turmoil, the ‘House of Hunger’ became literally that – a house where hungry souls converged to feed each other with words of anger and encouragement; a symbol of protest where performers such as Godobori, Comrade Fatso and Outspoken held the crowds in awe with their incisive thoughts and clever rhymes.

I will never forget one poem by the spoken word artist known as Upmost in which he described getting off the kombi from the city centre to Borrowdale because the conductor had decided to charge whatever fare he wanted.

A solitary figure, he chose to get off and walk the long journey home because he wasn’t prepared to feed into the system of greed that had heightened the anarchy and strife in Zimbabwe.

Today, none of those poets still perform at the slam.

And no one expects that they should have to. A new crop of poets and spoken word artists should have sprung up to carry on the mantle.

But sadly, it seems the new crop didn’t receive the all-important nutrients to ensure a useful harvest.

Instead, they are completely clueless about what makes good delivery of poetry. Elocution, emotion and entertainment are all seriously lacking.

For the sake of the future of poetry in Zimbabwe, I hope that those with the experience and expertise begin to sow back to the youth of our nation. It is only that way that we can sustain art initiatives and be sure that young people comprehend the great reverence with which the arts must be approached.

I am raising my hand up. I hope you’ll join me so that together, we can do something for the sake of the future.

From The Economist:

A the relative optimism of last year, the situation in Zimbabwe is deteriorating badly. South African-mediated talks between ZANU-PF, the party of President Robert Mugabe, and the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), led by the prime minister, Morgan Tsvangirai, which are aimed at shoring up their shaky power-sharing pact, have broken down, maybe irretrievably. This leaves the one-year-old “government of national unity” as good as dead. Schools, hospitals, courts and other state services have been brought to a halt by striking civil servants. Meanwhile, all new investment projects have been put on hold following the promulgation of “indigenisation” rules obliging companies worth more than $500,000 to cede a 51% stake to black Zimbabweans—or face up to five years in jail.

Harare, the capital, is abuzz with talk of a snap general election, possibly as early as April. Jacob Zuma, South Africa’s president, is understood to have convinced Mr Tsvangirai to abandon all his demands in his negotiations with Mr Mugabe save those essential for ensuring a fair democratic poll. With ZANU-PF blocking every MDC attempt at reform, Mr Zuma appears to agree that the unity government has become a sham. He is determined that no trouble on South Africa’s northern border should upset his country’s hosting of the football World Cup in June and July.

Some argue that the unity government has made a bit of progress over the past year. They point to the huge improvement in the economic situation, with a 4.7% expansion of GDP last year, the first growth in a decade, as well as the reopening of schools and hospitals. Although all this is true, it has more to do with the replacement of Zimbabwe’s worthless currency by the dollar, which happened before the unity government was set up, than anything the government itself has done.

Apart from the economy, the situation on the ground has barely changed at all, with Mr Mugabe holding on to the reins of real power. White-owned farms continue to be invaded. Human-rights and MDC activists are still being beaten up and arrested. MDC provincial governors have still not been allowed to take up their posts. Mr Mugabe continues to control the security forces. The affable Mr Tsvangirai has borne all the sleights and humiliations with astonishing calm. But even he appears to have run out of patience. The only way forward, he now says, is to agree on a “road map” to a fresh election.

If genuinely free, the MDC would be sure to win this hands down. Polls suggest that support for ZANU-PF, in power for the past 30 years, has shrunk to less than 20%. But there are fears that, without the planned new democratic constitution or independent electoral commission in place, there would be a return to the violence that marked the latest elections—unless the Southern African Development Community, a fairly spineless 15-member regional group, is prepared to take tough measures. Those should include, some argue, sending in troops if necessary.

Last night I watched an interview with Sir Ian McKellen, the celebrated British actor, on Hard Talk, one of the BBC’s most popular programmes. Ian said that he only “came out” when he was 49 because there was so much violence and bigotry surrounding the issue of homosexuality. His advice to young gay people is to come out as soon as possible because being open and honest about who you are will, more often than not, enhance your life.

I was curious about the amount of time the interviewer spent on Ian’s sexuality rather than other aspects of life, like his career, his beliefs and his general experience of the world. Gay people are so much more than their sexual orientation. Why is it that gay people are peppered with questions about their sexual orientation when heterosexuals are not? When did you ever see Meryl Streep being questioned about what made her straight or how being straight impacts on her life?

Just today I got an unsolicited email from an organisation in Zimbabwe selling a product. Their product is a “a publication containing behaviour statistics of a teenage behaviour survey conducted in 2009 in all major towns of Zimbabwe”. The survey was compiled based on ten questions. One of the questions reads as follows:

10.   Are there any promiscuous sexual activities, homosexuals, drug addicts amongst the Zimbabwean youths?

I just wrote to the authors of the report saying that I’m a lesbian and that I find it unacceptable that they lump homosexuality with promiscuous sexual activities and drug addiction. Of course I should clarify that I see nothing wrong with safe promiscuous activity and safe drug use. But the agenda behind their inclusion of homosexuality along with addiction and promiscuity, is sinister in my view. Perhaps I’m wrong but I sense a witch hunt of young gay people with a view to fixing them or punishing them.

Yes, some Zimbabwean youth are gay – I was young once! It’s about time that people realised that the expression of sexuality is not confined to heterosexuality. We have an organisation called Gays and Lesbians of Zimbabwe (GALZ) in Zimbabwe that has a broad and diverse membership of gays and lesbians.

Our communities should be embracing diversity and making it safe for young people to express their true selves.

If you have the time and energy to question the motivation behind surveying homosexual activity please write to them at info@thebehaviourreport.com