Back to Index

Of minis, mores and misogyny
Fungai Machirori
November 24, 2008

When South Africa-s King Goodwill Zwelithini reportedly asked his tribe-s young women to cover up their behinds at this year-s annual reed dance, the statement caused much uproar and dissent. As leader of a proud line of Zulus, many traditionalists viewed his request as a modernist agenda to dilute their culture and its accompanying practices.

The reed dance is performed annually by thousands of Zulu maidens in celebration of the girls- sexual purity. As part of the ritual, the young women parade before the king bare-breasted and adorned in short colourful beaded skirts. These skirts are designed to show flashes of flesh as the girls walk past - a happening that is not intended to create any sexual innuendo, but rather celebrate the beauty of the female body in its chaste and supple form.

But the king, now aged 60 and husband to six wives, sees the ceremony a little more differently these days. Addressing maidens present at this year-s reed dance, King Zwelithini reinforced his opposition to the current practice, stating that he was urging the young women to cover up in the natural interests of demonstrating respect for their elders. Traditionally, the young women involved in this ceremony do not wear any underwear beneath their beaded skirts. As such, any vigorous movements of their skirts can allow for more than just a peak at a portion of harmless flesh. It is this scenario that has apparently been the king-s greatest cause for concern.

As one reporter, who staunchly called for the practice to remain unchanged, observed: "After years of feasting his eyes the king now argues that nude buttocks could decrease the credibility of the reed dance and make the maidens vulnerable to exploitation . . . This order to cover up is an infringement of Zulu culture, which belongs to the people and not solely to the king."

Other commentators saw the move as being geared towards ending the observation of an important cultural practice, even stating that any modifications made to the practice would signify the beginning of the demise of the Zulu culture.

But if we were to relocate this argument and put these same young women in an urban environment - replacing the rustling beads of their traditional skirts with a figure-hugging micro-mini, would the defence of culture still apply? Probably not. Within the urban setting, wearing revealing clothing is usually frowned upon and those who choose to dress in this way are often labelled 'loose- or sexually provocative. The irony is that these urban women are often seen to be in breach of cultural codes which promote respectful behaviour, yet dressing in equally short garments is somehow justifiable within a traditional setting.

To prove this irony is the example of the sexual assault of a 25-year-old South African woman, earlier in the year, which led to widespread protests. The woman allegedly had her mini skirt torn off by a group of male taxi drivers and hawkers who proceeded to touch her private parts and douse her in alcohol. This brutal behaviour was apparently conducted to teach the young woman a lesson for wearing such provocative clothing. The backlash from outraged South African women was unforgettable with many of them - proudly clad in their own mini skirts - organising protest marches along Johannesburg-s streets to condemn the incident.

But like it or not, there is a general sentiment among men that women who wear revealing clothes - within the urban environment, at least - are looking for trouble. In other words, a woman should not look for sympathy if she is raped or abused while dressed in a mini skirt or tight jeans. She asked for it, so the thinking goes. In Uganda, the Ethics and Integrity Minister, Nsaba Buturo, is said to have called for the wearing of mini skirts to be declared an indecent act punishable under the national law. Buturo added that the wearing of mini-skirts was the cause of many road accidents as drivers concentrated more on the curves on the women than the curves on the roads.

What all this seems to suggest is that women, rather than men themselves, are responsible for male sexuality and responses. In other words, men use the defence of the sexually stimulating nature of the female form to justify their aggressive or even fatal responses to it. And so rather than men learning to control their sexual energies, women must be forced to perpetuate an age-old pattern in which they defer their social autonomy to the demands of a male-driven world. The remedy, therefore, to incidents of sexual crime, is for women to cover up their bodies and to avoid re-enacting the 'temptress- role played by Eve in the Biblical Garden of Eden.

The double standard - and point of ideological contestation - remains though the subjective application of the defence of culture, as and when it suits the environment. Why is a bare breasted woman in the rural plains of her traditional village celebrated by her male peers and regarded as reverent, while a woman similarly clad in the urban setting is heckled and ordered to "go and put on some real clothes"? Is it not high time that we accepted that with urbanisation and mass rural-to-urban migration, a new culture - adapted from traditional mores and values - has emerged? A woman should not have to live in fear of her body and the different ways that she chooses to celebrate it.

A mini skirt, they say, is like a good speech, or article, for that matter - long enough to cover the essential details, but short enough to keep you interested. Allow me to end here, in the hope that I have fulfilled these two criteria.

Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.

TOP