I must admit that I was never a fan of ANC Youth League President Julius Malema. I used to criticise many of his statements, both in private and in ANC circles. When I hear of another Malema dilemma, I tend to ask myself, “Oh God, what has he done now again?”
But I really fail to understand what the current debacle is about. According to news reports, the Sonke Gender advocacy group has taken Malema to the equality court for saying that:
“When a woman doesn’t enjoy it [sex], she leaves early in the morning. Those who had a nice time will wait until the sun comes out, request breakfast and ask for taxi money. In the morning, the lady requested breakfast and taxi money. You can’t ask for money from somebody who raped you.”
Malema has admitted to making this statement at the time when President Zuma was accused of rape.
Now this blog is not about whether Zuma was innocent or guilty. I am trying to convey my utter dismay and confusion about why Malema is ostracised for the statement. Let’s examine the statement.
Firstly, Malema is clarifying what he understands of an actual rape incident. And here, I have to agree. A woman who was raped would try to get away from her rapist at the soonest opportunity. And seeing that she had ample opportunity to leave, why didn’t she? Instead, she stayed until the next morning.
Secondly, I would think that a woman just raped would be cold towards and wary of her attacker. Well, would a raped woman still ask her attacker for breakfast and taxi money? Or anything else, for that matter?
And the clincher to me, which Sonke and others seem to have conveniently forgotten, is that this was not part of the Zuma statement alone. In fact, the president just admitted what the woman said in her statement before the court. She was the one who told police originally that she went to bed after the “rape” and got up the next morning and requested breakfast and taxi money. From Zuma, not his guards, or the household staff, but from Zuma himself!
In my opinion, either a deranged woman or someone who had blissful consensual sex.
I fail to understand what Malema has done wrong here. Nothing in the quoted statement, the preceding part or the latter part of the statement suggests anything derogatory towards women in general, rape victims in particular. What Malema was commenting on, was the fact that the actions of the woman following the “rape” is highly inconsistent with what we understand about these situations. And though neither I nor Malema have ever been subjected to this horrible atrocity of rape, it is surely understandable that we would have doubts about the conduct of someone when there is no precedent for her behaviour.
Malema has become a good friend of the media. While the ANC and President Zuma have done a lot to ensure a more positive image of the party and government, Malema gives the media a lot of ammunition to shoot the ANC with. But surely, we are allowed to do that, if the occasion asks for it, or the opportunity presents itself. But to use these types of tactic is simply not on. He made a statement, honestly and innocently in my opinion and for that he is now made the biggest crook in history. Come on, please.
Shareef, I think you should do your research before you publish anything, you have very little knowledge on the subject you are dealing with hence your argument is feeble and painfully disturbing. I am just appalled…
My understanding is that Zuma mentored this woman, and he violated that trust. It is not about taxi money, it is about responibility. A truely great leader, robust in his honesty and forthcomingness, one must say. Makes us all want to wash our hands. How many ways must a woman hear rape defined. Taxi! Malema is a bad joke on the South African people.
The point is not whether he was proven innocent or guilty. The point is that statements like that make it seem as though we could have judged his innocence or guilt before the trial based on the survivor’s actions.
Which we couldn’t, shouldn’t and shouldn’t encourage others to do.
Are are those defending baby Julius for real??
Consider this: Did Zuma give her breakfast and pay for the taxi hoping she would keep her mouth shut?
Rape will never be eradicated if there are statements like these that we hear. Insensitive as they are, coming out of men who are to protect women and the same men who will use anything to defend themselves. None of these men have experienced being a woman before. So they must just shut up.
No one can tell you how you should behave after this odeal. Who would risk at night after experiencing rape and leave. As such, she was coming to terms with the act itself with a lot of mixed emotions going on her mind.
Most women don’t even report rape because few people will believe what she says, they just keep quiet and live with it. The truth is, there is rape and as women we are subjected to it as long as we live. Dealing with it is a separate issue.
Those who have never experienced it or had anyone in their family or friends experiencing rape, should just shut up.
In as much as some women would let their perpetrators rape them because of cirtain circumstances, for example, a rape occured whilst someone is pointing a gun on you. What would one do under those circumstances?
Those weak men should just admit that they are not confident and try to prove certain points to women.
Maybe you should do some research before writing, your piece is factually incorrect and reveals your ignorance when it comes to a sensitive matter like rape. Fortunately this is the first and last time I’ll read a post written by you.
Have you ever sat down and talked to someone who has been raped? Have you ever heard the self-doubt that they express? “Did it really happen?”, “was i to blame?”, “am i over reacting”. You seriously need to re-concider what constitutes rape and how people ‘should’ react after it has happened. I fear that when you really start to question what is rape, many of us would start to feel more than a little guilty about how we have responded to claims of rape or worse still our own actions. There is nothing inoccent about his statements or yours for that matter. Being complicit in a crime carries the same penalty.
Julius is doing a good job for an organisation that does not appear to have any particular function, except getting headlines. Although…where did they get all the money from to have an investment company ?
Be careful of laughing at the youngsters!
Does Malema believe in what he says or he just says it to cause controvesy? I wonder…
Malema is right Im sick and tired with women who said they are raped while they are not…i think law should act against them.
To re-iterate what Alto and Mark Kerruish have said: The judge very specifically stated that because he could not find absolute proof of rape he had no choice but to ‘presume’ innocence. He went further, to advice Kwezi that she was free to seek a retrial.
How about some legal opinion on how the rape trial would have proceeded if it had not been concluded with undue haste and, instead, been tried under the new Sexual Offenses Act that was passed barely a month after the conclusion of the trial. I understand that evidence relating to Kwezi’s lesbian status would have counted under the new legislation. I also understand that presumption of innocence would not have been an option either. Would JZ have gotton off so easily under the new act?
Rape, or no rape, the facts stand that JZ incestuously bedded a woman who regarded him as her father. Moreover, she’s a self-confessed lesbian. Worse, despite having unprotected sex with her while knowing her HIV+ status, JZ went on to father 2 more children with 2 different women within a year of committing adultery (is it called multiple-adultery when you are a polygamist?)
@Steve Makweng,
What Blankenberg does for a living: he’s a parliamentary secretary for the ANC caucus. Does that explain this ridiculous article?
I felt really sick when I read this crap. This man has no compassion and humanity whatsoever. The sheer bloody audacity to write an article like this is mindboggling.
TL should not have allowed it.
@mandla
I would rather have a few men falsy accused of rape than a majority of rapists going free. Infortunately the later is the norm.
It is one thing for MalEnema to spout his nonsense, but really it gets very sad when a supposedly responsible journalist endorses it.
At a time when South Africa is trying to make it’s self 2010 ready there should be due diligence paid to the image overseas. I heard well suited and booted gentlemen talking in the City yesterday (London) and they viewed the rantings of the Zuma clique in a similar light to the radio propaganda that preceded the Rwandan massacres. They felt that it was only a very naive South African that would believe that Zuma actually ran the country as it was only the poorly phrased and racially contentious statements of the ANCYL and Cosatu crazies that surfaced in the media. These statements seem to endorse the right of Malenemites to disposess their adversaries using any legal or illegal method that they see fit. When a major publication endorses this kak they do serious damage. One would ask who pays the salaries of the writers: The subscribers or the Government.