Sticks and Stones

I've let this blog lie fallow for quite some time. I write predominantly about South African politics and, while I am passionate about the subject and there has been a great deal going on in SA since my last post, I must admit I find it too depressing to write about. So I haven’t. But recently, an event occurred that was quite personal to me, made waves across our country and had nothing to do with the political landscape, and I felt compelled to write about it. So I dusted off the old keyboard, cracked my knuckles, and here we are.
Two writers whose work I enjoy- Montle Moroosi and Max Barashenkov were fired from FHM for commenting on a YouTube video. Barashenkov stated that white girls who “twerk” should undergo corrective rape. His colleague Montle agreed. This statement caused a furore across the country. South Africans, as they are wont to do, were up in arms, with everyone and their tannie having an opinion on the matter. So let me delve into this maelstrom and give my 2 cents.
Let me say up front that I find their comments sickening. They are indefensible, inappropriate and incredibly offensive. The fact that I know the girl that they were seemingly referring to made what they say that much more personal and real. The two deserve everything that comes their way. But, in my humble opinion, there is more to the story than that.
Anton Taylor, the guy who made the twerking video and who has since responded to their comments with another heartfelt, thought- provoking  video, is another writer who I thoroughly enjoy. I find his writing intelligent and extremely funny. I do not know Anton personally (I met him once at Rocking the Daisies, but the beers had been flowing since about 8:30 so it was a blur) but obviously know of him; we have many friends in common and I have heard all sorts of stories about him, as well as read a lot of his work. While I am in no way saying that anything Anton has ever said is comparable to what Max and Montle wrote, he is known for his provocative, at times chauvinistic comments towards women. That does not mean he has no right to his opinion on what the two numbskulls said, but he must realised that he cannot be portrayed as the upstanding white knight protecting women’s rights. He could argue he was joking, but then, couldn’t Max and Montle argue the same thing? But there my friends, is the rub.
Anton is not alone in this. We are all, especially men of my generation, guilty of making jokes that are perhaps in contrast to our beliefs. I like to think of myself as someone who is passionate about equality and anti any form of discrimination, be it based on sex, race, religion or sexuality. As Ben Harper so eloquently put it- “My choice is what I choose to do, and if it’s causing no harm it shouldn’t bother you. Your choice is who you choose to be, and if you’re causing no harm then you’re alright with me.” Granted, he was talking about smoking weed, but I think it still stands.
Despite those being my true feelings, I know I am guilty of making jokes or comments based on stereotypes. I've made gay jokes, black jokes, “chick” jokes and religious jokes, although none of those things is how I feel. Quite why we make jokes contrary to our own feeling is perhaps a topic for another column. What Moroosi and Barashenkov failed to realise is the power of the written word. If I was at a braai, and made the comments that they did, my friends would (hopefully) tell me I’d overstepped the line. I would then (hopefully) admit to my mistake, apologise, feel like a doos for a bit and move on. But if I made those comments on Facebook, no amount of apologising or explaining would ever convince people that they weren’t my true thoughts. Those words are out there, forever. Whether or not Montle and Max truly believe a white girl deserves corrective rape for twerking (which doesn't even make sense) is a moot point. It is how they will forever be viewed.
In this day and age of social media, where people share and overshare their thoughts, photos, daily routines, we fail to realise that everything we post adds up to the picture of  how others see us. We need to stop and think for a second before posting something that could be deemed offensive by some. “Think before you ink” as nobody younger than 45 says. While we are constantly striving to get more followers online, have more people see into our minds, we need to ask ourselves, what is it that we are showing them? Because, as two writers have recently found out, once you’ve hit enter, there are no take- backsies. 
Those are my thoughts. Take them or leave them. I just have one request. If you see Montle or Max in person, probably skulking around Mercury, remember to punch them in the willy and shout “You know why!”

Awulethe Umkhonto Wami- Bring me my Spear

Quick question. When do you think the above photo was taken? If you answered 1994 you are correct. Granted, it’s not that hard to work out that the photo is old. The fact that there’s a young white man with a dated hairstyle and an ANC t-shirt kind of gives the game away. Everyone knows white people stopped supporting the ANC years ago. So the picture must be old. That, or he’s a hipster.

What you probably didn’t guess is that the young man is none other than Brett Murray. Yes. Brett Murray. The man whose painting of Jacob Zuma with his schlong out has got the ruling party in a tizz, to put it very, very mildly. So, what’s going on here, you must be asking yourself. Why is a man who has been called a racist, colonialist enemy of the state who must be stoned to death, wearing an ANC shirt? That can’t be right. 

The thing is- Brett Murray is not a racist. Brett Murray is a satirical artist. He deals in satire. His job, if you will, is to point out the failings of the political establishment. He did this to the apartheid government, and he now does it to the ANC. There are no holy cows where he is concerned. His exhibition, Hail to the Thief II, is a brilliant exposé of the corruption and ineptude of the government. It is clever, thought-provoking and hard-hitting. And while the picture that has caused the furore that the country is now in- The Spear- is all of these things, it has another quality that perhaps Murray, and many white South Africans didn’t, and don’t, appreciate.

For three hundred years, blacks in South Africa were treated as sub-human. First they were sold into slavery, and then their lands were taken from them in bloody battles. Then the missionaries arrived to inflict, in my opinion, the greatest punishment of all. Native tribes were forced to give up the beliefs they had held for millennia. They had to give up their culture, their way of life, their family dynamic and were stripped of their souls. They were forced to accept Christianity. Those that didn’t, those that tried desperately to hold onto their culture, were ostracized and even murdered. And once the colonialists had stripped black people of all that they were, they left them with nothing in its place. The country moved on without them. They were treated as fourth class citizens, stereotyped as lazy, stupid and sex-obsessed. Basic human rights were denied to them, and they were forced to accept this or die.

Apartheid ended 20 years ago. Granted, in that time the ANC has done all they can to tarnish their image as the saviours of the country. But at the same time, white people must be very careful not to forget what they subjected black people to for the last 300 years. We must not be so arrogant and insensitive to think that in 20 years of democracy, the scars that we inflicted would have healed. The Truth and Reconciliation Committee may have been a start, but we cannot say that because a few people said sorry for what they did, everything is now ok. It’s not, and it won’t be for a long time.

So, where does The Spear fit into all of this? While Brett Murray is most definitely not a racist, and whilst The Spear is in reference to Zuma’s propensity to flaunt his sexuality, when black people say they are offended by this as it reminds them of past stereotypes, we cannot simply accuse them of “not getting it”. Murray did not set out to offend black people. He set out to emphasise the president’s lack of morality. Unfortunately, his painting has not had the effect that he intended. And we need to be sympathetic to the hurt it has caused, instead of merely brushing it off. We need to understand we people are coming from when they say how it has upset them. If not, we are just as guilty as any leader who dismisses an opinion because it is not his/her own. 

The reaction to the painting has had a racially polarising effect on the country and tensions are currently very high. When the dust eventually settles we will look back at this event as a turning point in our country. It is the citizens of this country who will decide which course our country will take. Will this event be the catalyst for real change and reconciliation in this country? Or will it be the moment when we reached a point of no return and our country was plunged into another period of absolute racial hatred and mistrust? 

Office Drama

I must admit that season 8 of the Office hasn’t been great. For one thing, Steve Carrel aka Michael Scott has left. We all knew that he, as a character, was irreplaceable.  Much like the UK version’s David Brent, he was the life and spirit of that show. But there are other, more subtle reasons that the show has slipped in the latest season. Allow me to explain.

Number one- Jim Halpert, for more reasons than one, deserved to be made manager. Professionally, he was better suited than Andy Bernard. Also, it would have been more realistic. While the cast and crew might have thought it would be “zany” to make Andy manager, it just comes across as too ridiculous. But most importantly, Jim would have been better from a comedic point of view. As funny as Ed Helms is, Bernard is funnier as a back-up character. Some of the best Office moments have been with Andy Bernard a central character, but he is essentially one-dimensional. Too much of him gets tiring. Also, the writers have tried to make him more like Michael Scott. Scott was unique, and too try and replicate him is a dumb move.

Number two- They started playing up the Kevin retardation factor too much. Can I see retardation? I don’t mean to be un-PC, I just think that is probably the only word that explains it properly. Dim witted? Is that better? Anyway, as a friend said, it was funny when Holly Flax thought he was slow, it  was a nice sub-plot, but the writers have taken it too far. Now, all of a sudden he is “retarded”. Unless your show is a 90’s sitcom, a completely mentally challenged character is never funny. He needs to go back to just being a bit dof. 

Basically, those are just two examples of a bigger problem. It’s like the show has decided to get sillier to keep ratings up, but all its doing is losing everything that made it The Office. It’s treading dangerously close to slapstick territory. 

Another problem is that some of the characters have stagnated. Ryan, Kelly, Angela need new storylines. Ryan joining corporate was a great move and added a new dimension to the show’s dynamic. Since he came back he hasn’t moved on from being a glorified intern. And, with the Michael/Ryan dynamic a thing of the past, he actually brings nothing to the show. The same can be said for Kelly and Angela. They are the same characters we’ve known from the beginning, and it’s getting boring watching them do nothing.

Having said all that, there have been a few great moments and new characters. James Spader’s character, Robert California, not only has the coolest name in the world, but is also shit funny. Its funnier because it’s James Spader, but he also brings a freshness to the show that it needed.

Will Ferrel, although controversial (when isn’t he?) was also a success is my opinion. I don’t know if was too busy to take it as a full time gig, or he thought he was too god-damned big a star for network television (um, Steve Carrel) but I wish he could have stayed on. And the name- D’Angelo Jemetrius Vickers? Come on. Better than Robert California? Possibly.

I also like Jim and Dwight Scrute’s dynamic, how its evolved but still hasn’t changed all that much. They have the epitome of a love/hate relationship, and definitely provide the bulk of the show’s laughs. Yet another reason we needed to see Jim in a more prominent role. 

Catherine Tate was another highlight of the season for me. She brought that almost Ricky Gervais-like humour to the show, and is definitely another person I’m sure we’d all like to see more of.

All in all, while there have definitely been some hilarious, pants-shittingly funny moments in the season (Jim faking his murder in Miami!), the fact is that these moments are becoming few and far between. This is The Office, and the genius of the actors will always provide laughs, but The Office, I’m afraid, may have reached the end of the road. It happens to all shows, and The Office had a longer and better run than most, but it needs to know when to call it a day. All shows, much like all great athletes, fail to see when the end is nigh, and carry on just long enough to tarnish their stellar records. So, The Office is dead, long live Modern Family?

Da Zille need to do better

Yesterday I was doing a small grocery shop at the Pick ‘n Pay by my house. I walked around, throwing what I needed into the basket, as well as a few things I saw on the way that caught my eye. I didn’t have a list, and I just grabbed whatever looked good. I got to the meat section and saw a young black woman with her two tiny kids. Her children were so damn cute and well behaved that I instantly fell in love with them, which was the biggest mistake I could ever make. Because then they broke my heart.

As I said, their mom was at the meat section, and I realised she had been staring at one packet for a really long time. Being a nosy bastard, I surreptitiously sneak peeked at what she was taking so long to buy. It was a packet of chuck. More specifically, two measly pieces of chuck that would never feed a family of four, not if there was a father, and definitely not if there were any other siblings. It cost R20, and I could see that she could not afford it. She was agonising over what to do, and so was I. I didn’t want to embarrass her by giving her the R20, but I also didn’t want to see her, and her children, suffer.  

I didn’t know anything about her back story, she may have been an absolute bitch and maybe her kids were so obedient because she beat them into submission. I don’t know. I highly doubt it, but even if that was the case, she didn’t deserve that. Nobody does.

Hers is just one tragedy amongst millions that occur in South Africa every day. This is real heartbreak of our young democracy. While the DA continues to attack the ANC for its service delivery, maybe they should think about getting their ship in order first. People in glass houses and all that shit. The DA wants to win the national election in 2017. If that’s the plan, then they really need to get their asses in gear and actually start providing meaningful services and job opportunities for the country’s poorest citizens. In politics, it’s very easy to attack another party for poor policy or failure to deliver. However, it becomes a lot harder to do this when the opposition is doing everything right. No more refugee gaffes on twitter (Helen Zille should actually think about giving up on twitter altogether. The “cool” factor it gives her is outweighed by all the negative publicity she creates herself by being arrogant and obstinate), no more open toilet sagas, no more TBWA tender corruption. Simply make the lives of the poor better, and the rest will take care of itself.

I cant think of a witty heading

Despite all my rantings on this very blog, I do actually think of myself as an optimist. Yes, we have many, many problems in the world today, but I think we often take for granted how good we have it nowadays, and there is actually no such thing as “the good old days”.

One of my greatest wishes in life is to time travel. When I was younger (three weeks ago) I would lie in bed for hours, wishing that I could travel to the old days, just to experience what life was like. It is no surprise that my favourite subject at school and varsity was history, and one of my most-loved past times is looking at old photos, particularly of places where I have lived- Botswana, Knysna, Cape Town- to see the fundamental differences that have occurred over time, to the landscape, the infrastructure, the clothing and long to spend just one day living in these times. But don’t get me wrong, as much as I would love to visit another period, I would never want to live in any time but now.

Nowadays, the world faces many challenges. Racism, xenophobia, sexism, religious fundamentalism, global warming, human trafficking, AIDS and widespread poverty are real issues that we are trying to deal with. And that is what sets us apart from “the good old days”. Think of any other period in time. They were seen as simpler times, because while they also had almost all of these issues, they weren’t seen as issues, but rather part and parcel of everyday life. Racism was rife, as was sexism and religious intolerance. People in the olden days never saw these as problems. There was no human conscience. There were certainly no laws prohibiting these atrocious behaviours, and anyone who stood up against them was ostracized and even arrested. Global warming was dismissed as a theory by a minority of crackpot scientists.  

I believe that the next step in humanity’s evolution is a cerebral rather than physical evolution, and that we are slowly gaining more morality each and every day. While governments may not be doing enough to help the world, many individuals are. Nowadays we have Greenpeace, PETA, Habitat for Humanity, Medicine sans Frontieres, Human Rights Watch and the like. There are also scientists working day and night to find cures to our many diseases such as AIDS, cancer and malaria, as well as solutions to global warming and famine. We have laws in place to prevent and punish many of the horrors that human beings like to inflict on each other. Human trafficking is illegal worldwide, as is slavery. There are laws in most countries that outlaw child labour, and same-sex marriage is now legal in several countries, including South Africa, Spain, Argentina and the Netherlands. Two weeks ago Barack Obama, the first black American president, also became the first sitting U.S president to come out in support of gay marriage.

Human beings are evolving. We are becoming more humane every day, and though we still have many problems to overcome, and it may seem like we never will, we are tackling these problems on a daily basis, slowly but surely. It is definitely a case of two steps forward and one step back, but we’re moving forward. Long may it continue.

Righteous, Dude

When looking at the world today, there’s often one feeling that I get, a thought that, when said aloud, sounds laughable and naïve. But somehow, I still can’t shake it. I know hardcore right-wingers might say it’s already happened, this thought of mine. And it is such: What if the hippies ruled the world?

Before you snort derisively in my face, I am not talking about the long haired, bell bottomed stoner who says “righteous” a lot of the time. Well, I am. But what I mean is, what if these young, goofy, annoyingly moral kids had actually grown up, instead of staying those goofball hipsters who are now grey-haired and creepy; they became responsible adults, took their liberal principles with them and moved into positions of power, with a say on how this world was run?

Think about it. Seriously. The hippies have been given a bad rep over time. Sure, they had themselves to blame for most of it. The outfits and grubbiness and stupid language and promiscuity may not have done any favours to their image, but the hippies changed the world. Woodstock changed the world.

The 60’s was one of the most important periods in time and that one decade has had more influence in modern culture than almost any other, barring perhaps the Industrial Revolution and maybe American Revolution. The hippies were the catalyst for the change, as much as being the symbol of that change. But thanks to cheesy 60’s dress up parties and the theme that never dies- “Flower Power”, the hippies have become caricatures of themselves, comic figures rather than a symbol of change.

These people were on to something. They marched for equality- racial, gender and socio-economic, an end to violence, eco-friendly attitudes and love among all. To all the hard-line Christian, Republican who claim to despise everything the liberal hippies stood for, are they not reminded of another long haired guy from the wearing robes and slops, preaching peace and love?

If the ideals these hippies stood for, if not the people themselves, had taken hold not only amongst the ordinary people of this world but among those who run it, from politicians to business tycoons, you have to admit, we would be in a better place.

I am not saying that some high-as-a-kite moron with a goatee, wearing a (faux) fur waistcoat and bell bottoms  strumming an out of tune guitar with eyes as red as the Devil’s dick should have been given the keys to the Oval Office, but some kid who marched in the Civil Rights marches, who read poetry, who studied history or philosophy, who travelled the world, who had gay friends throughout their life, surely this person as an adult would make a better leader than George W Bush? Come on!

The kids believed in a better world, and amongst each other, through drugs and music, they experienced this better world. Too bad they never rejoined the real world.

Cougars

This is going to veer off subject a bit, but I am really over the whole cougar thing. I mean, honestly, is this what we’ve come to as a society? A couple of (former) leading Hollywood ladies type a couple of young, B-Grade males and suddenly there is there is some sort of global phenomenon, with academic papers and books written on the subject.http://books.google.co.za/books?Like this work of literary brilliance

Seriously, so the fuck what if there these ladies date younger guys? Honestly, did female lib achieve nothing?  That is the most chauvinistic attitude I have ever come across.  And the most shocking aspect of all is that the worst offenders of this craziness is, of course, glossy women’s trash. That is not to say men’s magazines such FHM don’t catch on a bit later and turn the whole thing into a slutty shoot or cringe-worthy article or quiz.  The saddest part in all of this is that all these mags, in an ironic twist, hail the cougar phenomenon as some sort of victory for women’s lib, instead of it being the opposite. Even the term “cougars” is derogatory, making out the women to be no more than sexual “predators” going after their (financially) more vulnerable prey.

It’s not even a new thing for powerful women to date younger men. Catherine the Great had many younger lovers (some weren’t even of the equine persuasion) and Liz Hurley, Anaïs Nin, Mae West and even Aphrodite were sugar mommies back in the day. It is no new thing, and not some weird craze.

Look, I know there’s a whole bunch of crap that passes as “news” these days in the pages of Heat, You and the like, as well as on websites such TMZ and Perez Hilton etc. (Dont even get me started on the shit that E! Entertainment pushes onto us), some of which makes me REALLY question our place as the planets smartest creatures, but it must have been a particularly slow news day for even these publications to start talking about cougars as being a real thing.

I know I may sound like a conspiracy theorist when I say this, and even worse, a member of the ANC Youth League, but I strongly believe that a lot of what the media publishes as news is of their own creation. It doesn’t exist until they say it does. They create this crap so they can report on it.

My question is, now that Demi Moore, the woman who created all this cougar hype, and her “cub”- Ashton Kutcher- have called it quits, are the media now going to report that the craze is on the decline? That it has now been proven that relationships between older women and younger men cannot last, all because Ashton couldn’t keep his junk in his pants?

Kim Jong-Ils "other" son - the answer to all our prayers?

Kim Jong-nam, the half brother of newly anointed leader of North Korea- Kim Jong-sun and the son of the Deceased Leader himself, has been living in exile in Macau since 2001, has some wacky ideas about the future of his country, and about his father's legacy. And by wacky I mean different to what you'd expect from Kim Jong-Il's son. In other words, very normal, well though-out, sane ideas. Check out the article about a new book that has been released
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/01/25/kim-jong-nam-claims-north-korea-reformist-mantle.html

....

So, it has been brought to my attention that for some unapparent reason, none of my links are working. Will get on it asap

Justice is not blind

Justice Malala, despite having one of the worst Malmsbury brays ever, is someone whose opinions I can listen to for hours. The man knows what he is talking about. He is not one to shy away from attacking the ruling party, but he does it with such class that you almost feel he is taking pity on them, and you want to as well. Check out this article on the great Pixley Seme
http://www.timeslive.co.za/opinion/columnists/2012/01/23/anc-needs-another-seme