South Africa: Umshini Wam painting À“ sad end to Women’s Month

Johannesburg, 29 August – As South Africa concludes the month of August, which celebrates women, the nation has been painfully reminded of the symbols of patriarchy and masculinity through the painting of President Jacob Zuma in traditional attire with exposed genitals. In addition, we are all shocked and questioning the role of artists just like the media in demystifying patriarchy and all processes that affirm it.

The painting in question, valued at about US$9000, is titled Umshini Wam (weapon of mass destruction) and is part of an exhibition called “Our Fathers” currently underway at AVA Gallery in Cape Town, South Africa.

According to the painter Ayanda Mabulu, “the painting depicting Jacob Zuma is a respectful one. He is clothed in his culture. He is clothed in his manhood. Only a Eurocentric viewpoint would see him as naked. He is not naked; I did not paint him with an uncircumcised penis. This is a metaphor that shows he is not a boy; he is a man, an elder, a father, a leader.”

The painting has received heavy criticism from many corners of society with the ANC Spokesperson, Keith Khoza telling the Mail and Guardian newspaper that, “any portrayal of President Zuma in this way is disrespectful. It makes a mockery of the president’s office, his status as a father and a husband, and an absolute abuse of the arts.”

In the first instance, Mabulu argues that his painting is a dedication to the miners who died in the Lonmin tragedy. He points out that he stripped the president of his suit and tie and painted him wearing traditional attire so that he could bring him closer to the ordinary people who still live in ‘matchboxes’ 18 years after democracy.

While the work of art itself is a way of Mabulu exercising his right to free expression and articulating the ills of the South African society, the artist misses the point and about his bigger role in society. He explained that he is disappointed with the current leadership and is telling them to listen to the plight of their “children”, the citizens.

Thus the artist has chosen to speak to a few, the leaders of the country at the expense of the majority, in particular South African women who constitute more than 52% of the population. This 52% is suffering gender inequalities that are created by the patriarchal system that regards men as superior beings compared to women.

Of concern is the way the artist titles the painting Umshini Wam, weapon of mass destruction. The title Umshini Wam has become more of a Zuma label, as it is the president who popularized the liberation song during his campaign for Presidency. In this instance, the circumcised penis is then labeled Umshini wam, a symbol of manhood and a weapon that in traditional African society is used to discipline women. Yet, incidences of gender based violence in particular rape is prevalent in South Africa.

Most African men boast about how sex conditions a woman to respect a man. Lately, “corrective rape” incidences targeted at women of a different sexual orientation have been on the rise in the country. The intention of the perpetrator is to “correct” the sexual orientation and turn them into hetero. If understood this way, the painting reinforces the traditional symbol of a penis and can fuel cases of gender-based violence.

Research carried out by Gender Links and the South African Medical Research Council (MRC) in 2011 on gender based violence titled The War at Home found out that over half the women of Gauteng in South Africa (51.3%) have experienced some form of violence in their lifetime and 75.5% of men in the same admit to perpetrating some form of violence against women. The question is, does the painting assist in the fight to halve levels of gender based violence in South Africa by 2015 in line with the provisions of the 2008 SADC Protocol on Gender and Development?

The artist argues that he painted the president with a circumcised penis, a metaphor that shows that he is not a boy but a man. These comments perpetuate masculinity and patriarchy which gender advocates are fighting.

Circumcision is used as a symbol to depict manhood and power. The Xhosas are well known as an ethnic group that strictly regards circumcision as a rite of passage for boys into manhood. In the Zulu culture (President Zuma is Zulu), circumcision is not a mandatory rite.

The notion of manhood needs to be understood in its entirety. In the African culture, circumcision is a mark of strength, the ability to stand the cut of the knife when removing the foreskin and the pain of the wound. This defines a traditional “man”, who in turn becomes a father, a “keeper”, a “provider” and a “protector” of the vulnerable among other things. Thus for the artist, the painting not only depicts a traditional man but a “real man” and a leader. This notion presupposes that “real men” are masculine and are identified by their scars.

However, Mabulu’s assumptions of manhood and fatherhood based on his explanation of the use of a circumcised penis in his painting miss on the finite qualities of manhood and fatherhood that modern societies have proved as critical. Today, fatherhood does not mean the ability to father a child, but to also provide love, care and material requirements for their families.

Circumcision has also evolved and found new meaning in society so much that there is an option to do it in hospitals. Men are encouraged to get circumcised for health benefits including reducing the chances of HIV infection or sexually transmitted diseases. Again, this is problematic.

There has been so much hype around circumcision. Yet, we know that sexual decisions are based on power and circumcision only reduces the chances of infection. This implies that women are not completely protected. Arguably, the female condom that to a greater extent can give women a certain degree of power to make sexual decisions never gained such popularity.

Circumcision is based on power and it needs to be demystified by such players as the media, artists, poets and musicians. In the words of Stephen Garan’anga, a Zimbabwean mixed media artist, “art is also synthetic, its influence on the new social order will be constructive” and assist in securing a balanced living between women and men.

Artists like Mabulu should accept the dynamic role that they play in society. While they should criticise governments, business people, multinational companies and denounce corruption among other things, they should also understand the need to redress inequalities between women and men. Art must be used to denounce patriarchal values that subject men to believing that if they are not circumcised, then they are not man enough. But it can only come from artists who understand the value of promoting gender and representation.

Saeanna Chingamuka is Editor and Jabulani Sithole is the Knowledge and Learning Manager at Gender Links. This article is part of the Gender Links Opinion and Commentary Service, bringing you fresh views on everyday news.