South African President Jacob Zuma has released a statement stating that he deeply regrets the pain he caused his nation after fathering a child with a woman who is not one of his three wives. Zuma’s apology came after mounting pressure from party members to acknowledge his wrongdoing and the media have commented that Zuma’s extra-marital affair did not help national efforts to promote safe sex, a charge Zuma dismissed as “mischievous.”
I happen to agree with the media and believe that Zuma is flat-out embarrassing his countrymen. As South Africa’s leader, Zuma needs to take his position seriously and understand that in addition to his role as President he is also a role model to 49 million people. When I initially heard that Zuma fathered a child out-of-wedlock I didn’t believe the charges. There always seems to be some sort of controversy surrounding Zuma–usually involving sex–and so I believed the sound-bites I read where he dismissed the claims.
But if he, or the ANC, thought that this was a private matter, they’re deluded. If the President has enough time on his hands–in the run-up to hosting the World Cup, amongst many other priorities–to father a child with a woman who is not one of his three wives, then he needs more work or is simply not doing his job. Either way, South Africans have a right to know what their President is up to and to be concerned. And while Zuma is a practicing polygamist, (something I just learned 10 minutes ago…) which means that he can marry an unlimited number of women, does it mean he can father an unlimited number of children with women that he is not married to?
South Africans should not rush to excuse the behavior of a grown man who is supposed to be thinking about the future of his country, not thinking of ways to plant his seed to progress the future of his blood line.
The first gay couple to marry in Malawi face a humiliating medical examination aimed at proving they have had sexual relations, it emerged today.
Tiwonge Chimbalanga and Steven Monjeza could be sentenced to 14 years in prison if found guilty of “unnatural practices between males”.
Gay rights campaigners reacted angrily to the men’s treatment and warned that a renewed trend of homophobia was sweeping Africa.
The excerpt quoted above from a Guardian article makes me angry for completely different reasons than this article from the New York Times about American evangelical pastors influencing the Anti-Homosexual Bill of 2009 which would result in the death penalty for Ugandan individuals convicted of being homosexual. I can sum up my opinion on the Times article by saying it’s outrageous and despicable.
But the Guardian article made me angry because 1) I don’t know why the author of the article used the word renewed to describe homophobia in Africa and 1) I don’t know what kind-of statement Chimbalanga and Monjeza were trying to make by committing an illegal act in a homophobic nation.
Homophobia is the norm in most African nations . It’s outlawed in 38 of 53 nations.* Any sense of increased homophobia in Africa simply means that the Western media is covering the issue more not that it has actually increased. In Cameroon, for instance, homosexuality is illegal and the penalty is imprisonment of less than 10 years. In Ethiopia, the subject is “taboo” ie. it doesn’t exist and/or shouldn’t be talked about.
Which brings me to the second qualm about this article. There is no gay marriage movement in Malawi, and if there is, I think that there are other, far more grave issues to be dealt with first. The reason that gay marriage is a trendy hot topic, and failing to find widespread support in the United States, is that there are other issues (the economy, terrorism, health care, education, crime, social security, etc) that affect all Americans and deserve to be addressed first. If the issue has not garnered unanimous/majority support in a Western nation, why would African individuals try to champion for gay marriage in Malawi–one of the world’s least developed countries–when the nation needs to address issues like health, infrastructure, and general development?
Not to say that individuals shouldn’t stand up for their rights, or that these two Malawian men should go to prison, that criminalizing homosexuality is okay, or that Chimbalanga and Monjeza should undergo an examination to verify their homosexuality, because I don’t support any of that, but I think that Chimbalanga and Monjeza were ridiculous to expect anything more than jail time for committing an illegal act. It’s one thing to champion a cause by educating individuals and another to champion a cause by breaking the law in a hostile nation. If the climate is not right for gay marriage in New York than it’s not right for gay marriage in Malawi. I don’t believe that the climate is right in most African nations. The issue is premature in the US and completely irrelevant to the day-to-day needs of most Africans.
*”Male to Male Relationships” are legal in Guinea-Bissau, Burkina Faso, Cote D’Ivoire, Mali, Benin, Niger, Chad, Central African Republic, DR Congo, Congo, Gabon, Equitorial Guinea, Rwanda, Madagascar, South Africa. // Source
While many of the photos contained in this New York Times photo feature are US centric, some of the most provocative images were snapped in some of the least exposed areas of the world.
The discovery of a “gorilla strain” of HIV, known as Simian Immunodeficiency Virus (SIV), in a Cameroonian woman residing in Paris, France has scientists and researchers cautoining that HIV could be evolving.
“Countries around us with fewer resources, both human and financial, are able to achieve more,” said Dr. Quarraisha Abdool Karim, the first director of South Africa’s national AIDS program in the mid-1990s under President Nelson Mandela. “I wish I understood why South Africa, which has an enviable amount of resources, is not able to respond to the epidemic the way Botswana and Kenya have.”
- Excerpt from an article in today’s New York Times about the growing number of male Africans having circumcisions in an effort to reduce the chances of contracting HIV.
Yet, South Africa, despite knowledge of the positive benefits of circumcision, has been lagging (again) in offering services to its citizens. Why?
Hasn’t previous international ridicule over ignorant and ancient health policies taught the South African government anything? Besides the point, if the government is purposefully ignoring international opinion, they should have learned to stop ignoring science and fact. I’m quite confused about why Africa’s economic powerhouse still holds so firmly to traditional and superstitious beliefs. What sort-of logic is involved in being skeptical, or flat-out rejecting, medical advancements (particularly ones which have been tested in neighboring countries AND have been successful?
