I was catching up on some reading the other day, looking at a Guardian newspaper from August. At first I thought, what’s the point? This will be news I’ve already read in other places. To compensate, I started from the back with book reviews and culture-related articles since those are not so time sensitive. It didn’t take long for me to become engrossed.

As I worked toward the front of the newspaper, the old news ended up interesting. I got to an article titled Impasse for Zimbabwe. The article was full of words like negotiations, suspended, no closer to resolution, sticking points, concessions, refuses to cede, cling to power. I read the article twice. The analysis was excellent. Made me really think about the power-sharing deal signed on September 15. How it was all a big to do for nothing. That ZANU-PF never had one iota of intention to honor what they signed off on.

Wait a second. How is this journalist writing about the September 15 power-sharing deal in August? I must have read the date on the cover wrong, I thought. This must be a current Guardian I’m reading. I checked and double-checked. Stared at the cover, which said August 15-22, 2008. It must have been my peaceful, have faith nature that was tripping me up. I was really, genuinely, truly confused, felt like I was in some sort of time warp. As if the Guardian is actually a science fiction publication with writers who analyze the future before it’s the present. Maybe these futuristic journalists also drive cool bubble-shaped rocket cars. And have digital tape recording devices in their brains.

But no. Sadly, I was in a different kind of time warp. The continuous and painful repetition of denying Zimbabweans a democratically elected government. What was going down pre power-sharing deal is exactly the same as what’s going down post power-sharing deal. In fact, so entirely word-for-word the same, makes me wonder if there are journalists who just cut and paste their material.

The postal service is pretty much kaput in Zimbabwe. Only very occasionally will I find something in my post box. Saturday was one of those days. I retrieved a City of Harare bill from the cobwebs.

The billing date: 31st August 2008
The due date for payment: 12th September 2008
Date received: 25th October 2008
Amount due: 28097538481133 (no spaces)

Hmmmm.

The bill cites services such as refuse removal – ha, ha, when last did that happen? Like a year ago.

Apparently we have a new Mayor.

Yahooooo. Anyone out there?

Inflation is one of those things I just can’t keep track of any more. Steve Hanke at the Cato Institute reckoned it was around 52 trillion – but that was over 10 days ago. Last week our office got a shock when the Old Mutual Implied Rate went from around USD1 = ZWD 3 billion on Wednesday to 28 billion on Thursday 163 billion on Friday. Granted, as they say on their website, “The Old Mutual Implied Rate (OMIR) is a broad unofficial proxy for the value of the Zimbabwe Dollar to the US$ based on the relative values of shares on the London and Zimbabwe Stock Exchanges.” I don’t know anyone who’s actually doing transfers at that rate. So on Saturday, when a friend of mine asked me what the transfer rate to the US was, I could honestly say, “somewhere between 250 million and 163 billion.” But this short video – shown recently at the Zimbabwe International Film Festival – sums up inflation better than any figure I’ve seen so far.

I met a woman recently who described the situation in Zimbabwe as “a long silent scream”. Zimbabwe is dying, and it’s dying silently. We need to derive confidence and courage from the WOZA women and their direct action in confronting the Mugabe regime on the crisis in Zimbabwe. More NGOs, more pressure groups, more people, more politicians need to get out of the queues, the boardrooms, offices and hotels: we need to take our outrage to the streets. Enough is enough.

An excerpt from The New York Poem by Sam Hamill reminds us that we can’t give up:

. . . a mute sadness settles in,
like dust, for the long, long haul. But if
I do not get up and sing,
if I do not get up and dance again,
the savages will win . . .

The latest news update from WOZA about Jenni Williams and Magodonga Mahlangu’s continued detention:

Magistrate Charity Maphosa, who was due to rule on the bail application of WOZA leaders, Jenni Williams and Magodonga Mahlangu, today at 11.15am, was ‘forced’ to attend a workshop instead, delaying her judgement until Monday 27th October.

Williams and Mahlangu remain in Mlondolozi Female Prison where conditions are terrible. Cells are overcrowded and full of lice, food is extremely limited. Prisoners receive only a small amount of sadza (maize) with green vegetable cooked in water – no salt or any other form of nutrition. The lack of salt is particularly worrying given the extreme heat being experienced at the moment. Prison guards also routinely insult inmates.

As expected they were not in court as prison authorities had no transport to bring them to court. As on Tuesday however, the courtroom was full of state agents and WOZA members who had walked to town (some for up to 15km) to provide solidarity to Williams and Mahlangu.

On arriving at court, the defence lawyer, Kossam Ncube, was informed that Magistrate Maphosa was not available and that another magistrate would deliver her verdict. Instead Magistrate Sophie Matimba delayed the ruling until Monday at 11.15am.

Williams and Mahlangu were arrested over a week ago. Bail applications are usually heard on an urgent basis.

It is clear that the state aims to continue its harassment of these women human rights defenders; the actions of a regime so terrified of its own people that it has to imprison them.

SADC is meeting in Harare on Monday to discuss Zimbabwe’s future whilst human rights defenders languish in prison for calling for food aid. WOZA continues to urge its friends in the region and internationally to condemn this persecution of women who are simply determined to provide a better future for themselves and their children. Justice delayed is justice denied.

Recently I heard a polished and thoughtful presentation about concurrent heterosexual sexual partnerships given by a PSI research officer. From what I understood, PSI completed a series of interviews and focus group discussions to delve into findings from a 2006 survey indicating that in Zimbabwe 33% of men and 29% of women have more than one regular sexual partner . A few things during the presentation commanded my attention.

First, the title was precise. Particularly inclusion of heterosexual in the title seemed precision that’s rare in Zimbabwe, yet important. I’m used to this specificity; I expect researchers to state what type of relationships they are referencing – same sex or opposite sex. I expect this more in terms of clarity and less in terms of an advocacy statement. But in Zimbabwe, it’s a bit more of a statement. Inclusion of heterosexual in a title is an important (tacit) acknowledgement that same sex sexual relationships exist in Zimbabwe.

Second, the attention to detail. And on the topic of sex, no less! One problem with the phrase Concurrent Sexual Partnerships (CSPs) is that it’s evasive, allows dancing around the heart of the matter. There exists vagueness, as if additional sexual partners are out there in the ether. Cast as misbehaving others, temptresses and tempters seen as not real. Truth be told, there’s no ether. Men and women have sex outside marriage with real people (33% of the men do it and 29% of the women). PSI’s research explores this ether. Who exactly do husbands and wives have sex with? What do husbands and wives say about these relationships? Such an exploration is not just about withholding moral judgment. It’s about looking at the detail and PSI’s research cleverly does this. The research examines Male-Led CSPs, such as: 1) wife + commercial sex worker; 2) wife + small house; 3) wife + widowed/divorced; and 4) wife + young girl. As well as Female-Led CSPs, such as: 1) husband + garden boy; 2) husband + boyfriend; and 3) husband + sugar daddy.

As the presenter elaborated on Male-Led CSPs, the (female) panelists listened. As did the audience (nearly all women). When the (male) presenter spoke about Female-Led CSPs things changed. There was scepticism and ruffled feathers in the air. As if there was a giant roar from the largely female crowd: No! You must know that it’s only men who have sex outside marriage. But no worries. Mr. Wellington Mushayi was a cool cucumber. Let his data speak. These are the people men have sex with outside marriage (33% of all men do it). These are the people women have sex with outside marriage (29% of all women do it). No moral judgment, only facts and details because this data importantly looks equally at why men and women make the choices they do. Understanding these choices is a crucial element in, among other things, working to reduce sexually-transmitted infections and improving sexual health.

Finally, a comment from a man in the audience caught my attention. Because it was one of the most ridiculous comments I’ve heard. He said: Men’s behavior is never abnormal except in the presence of women. What the H-E-double toothpicks is that about!? As if it’s the fault of women, who/what men choose to pursue and do. Ok maybe I could go with his point in the sense that men face pressure to spread their semen and sex has transactional aspects. But I don’t think a meaningful path to lessen these dynamics is about blame, particularly blame which polarizes. Seems to me it’s a self-reflective path. A path to instill confidence to understand and think responsibly about one sexual relationship. And/or multiple sexual relationships. Nothing wrong with having them, just make sure it’s mutual, that the playing field is level, and it’s what you want.

It was an excellent presentation. The research methodology aptly treats men and women equally. And the resulting data will be an important part of developing honest understandings concerning sexual relationships in Zimbabwe. What dynamics surround sex. What people feel and experience. And what this all means.