Even before I became a mom, I thought that dads were shortchanged when it comes to paternity leave. The Husband's company policy is a generous 3 days; all of which come from his standard annual leave allowance.

The Husband took 2 weeks off from work and the day before he went back to work, I cried wondering how I'd survive alone with Squeak.

By now, you know that I suck at motherhood but it was about a lot more than caring alone for Squeak.

We fight for gender equality every day and every day we keep losing because of our social structures. Parental policies at government and corporate levels say that a woman's place is still to be at home to take care of the children and that a man does not have this responsibility.

But the truth is that child rearing is every bit a dad's desire as it is the mom's. The Husband was more excited than I was when we got news of OUR surprise pregnancy. He was involved throughout the health of OUR pregnancy from gynae visits to emergency hospital stays. He prepared for OUR baby's arrival by maxing out credit cards on baby items that we both researched and decided on. But when OUR baby was born, paternity leave policies dictated that time for dad to bond with the baby was not important. It was mom only that got time off from work to care for the newborn.

Bonding with a newborn is hard for dad. The baby only wants mom. Even though Squeak wasn't interested in anything but boobs, The Husband wanted to bond with him. And there are so many ways he did that and much more that he could have done if he was home for longer. I take on the majority of child rearing duties because he doesn't have the time to get involved enough to be as good at those tasks as I am.

Here are some of the reasons paternity leave is so important:
1. Childbirth is freakin hard man. The Husband took care of me. He changed diapers when I couldn't get out of my hospital bed, bathed Squeak when I couldn't bend from c-section recovery, and made sure I was fed when I was so busy with a baby that wanted to be with me all the time. 

2. I was so sleep deprived in the first few weeks. The Husband also woke up with every scream for a night feed but he went back to sleep easily while I stayed up to breastfeed. We didn't realise just how much this took a toll on him until he started struggling to stay awake for the first few weeks when he was back at work. So he also needed more time to adjust to life with a newborn.

3. Even science thinks dads should have enough paternity leave. Studies have shown that having dads around boosts moms levels of prolactin and oxytocin hormones which stimulates the production of breast milk and letdown. Sharing the tough days with a partner also keeps mommy depression at bay and there are so many benefits for the little ones too like increased vocabulary.

Not providing paternity leave sends the message that it isn't important for men to bond with their kids and that women become the default person for child rearing responsibilities and to take time off work delaying the progression of their careers. Equal parental leave is essential in promoting gender equality. Giving dads time off can help women earn more money in the long term and maintain their careers.

I think parental leave should be equally distributed across both genders. There are questions about how we can afford such a benefit. A quick uneducated perspective is to look at how income tax is being spent so that our corruption budget can be assigned for parental leave through, say, UIF. The private sector could get rewarded for promoting this in the same way that corporates get incentives for improving the country's BEE stats. And before anyone points out that having babies is not the government's problem; oh yes it is. More people of employable age equates to a larger workforce which is what drives our economy. Today's babies will dictate the next generation's economy.

I'd love to know what your thoughts are. Do you think paternity leave is important? How much time should dad be allowed to take? And who should carry the cost? 

My mother was our household’s sole breadwinner earning a grand total of R300…on a good week. She had a standard 6 education with limited skills and therefore couldn’t get a better paying job. She slaved 7 days a week for us and her dream was to someday have the ability to stop bearing that financial burden of raising her family all on her own.

Credit: http://www.dazeddigital.com/artsandculture/article/27121/1/south-african-student-protests-against-fees-go-global

I call my schooling disadvantaged. All South African bursars clearly didn’t agree with me. But how can a school, who churns out pupils for jobs in a supermarket, not be considered disadvantaged? The entire community knew that once you finish matric (with standard grade passes), you found a job and then you were sorted for life. We didn’t have much exposure to any other ambitions, like becoming an engineer, purely because we couldn’t afford it. It’s just something poor people didn’t do.

But I had my head buried in books throughout my childhood and through that exposure, I knew I deserved better and I was convinced that I would go to university. I kept my standards low and didn’t apply to UCT. I needed to be close to home so I could help financially and didn’t have to incur additional travel and accommodation costs. I qualified for an NSFAS loan at the University of Natal. My fees were covered so it was pretty much free while I studied. But getting my R3000 deposit in my first year was a mission that I eventually overcame with another loan…and then spent years avoiding paying it back.

So my fees were virtually free but it wasn’t enough. The transition from high school to university brought with it many more costs. I had a weekend job where I earned R120 on Saturday and Sunday to pay my R120 transport costs to get to university. Our tutorial tests finished too late for me to catch the last taxi home so I would leave my tests early because I didn’t have anyone with a car to fetch me. My weekends were spent working and I left tests early so my grades suffered. My semester breaks were spent working as a cashier in order to afford textbooks. I couldn’t live the lives my friends did cos I didn’t have the money to go out and have fun – I was socially excluded. The worst part of it all is that no one understood my struggles. My varsity friends had cars and spending money. My entire extended family had never even set foot in a university. My neighbours thought it would be easier on my family to just get a job.

And then there’s the cost of not working immediately after school. My mother was burdened with paying for food and electricity on her meagre salary. Everything else was considered a luxury – we defaulted on rent and lived life minimally. With my mother’s health ailing, it was 3 more years of daily slaving before I could theoretically get a job and help her out.

After I graduated, I shattered my mother’s dreams yet again. The only job I could secure was in Johannesburg – a city that no one I knew had even been to. Again, it was begging and borrowing to get money for a R2000 deposit on a commune where I lived.

It took 4 years for me to pay off my student loans and I still support my family in Durban. I literally started from scratch to be able to afford my current lifestyle and bring up the quality of living for my family. I still have no one who understands my struggles. My friends from university think I’m shallow for chasing money all these years but those friends have also had their parents help them out throughout their studies, and assist them with buying a car and house.

Sharing my story is my way of saying that I believe in the #FeesMustFall revolution but it doesn’t solve everything. Even with free education, the other costs that only the poor have are enough to prevent students from studying or pull them out of university.

Where do we stop with this revolution? We got the 0% increase but that still excludes so many. We need free education. But we also need good quality secondary education to prepare kids for university and open their eyes to the possibilities. We need the poor to be able to afford the basics of life like food, housing and transport. We need university deposits to be affordable too. How far will this revolution go? Achieving free education will be a milestone but even that will still exclude many in the pursuit of education. 

I’ve had countless discussions with people with money and they always say “money doesn’t buy happiness”. It’s something I’ve heard all my life and it’s definitely not a revelation. Of course money doesn’t buy you happiness! But the rich bemoan as if it’s the one thing that they can that they can complain about; that their lives aren’t filled with happiness because of money.

Basically, the argument is that even though the rich grew up with money, it doesn’t mean they had a happy childhood. And they’ve seen that poor people are much richer in terms of the friends and family that they have. This opinion piece is why I think their argument is flawed.

We all have our problems and while money does not solve all of them, it does make things easier. Here’s an example. Person A professes to have daddy issues because daddy was never around because he was too busy making more money. Person B also has daddy issues because daddy was never around because he was too busy working a menial job in order to put food on the table.

In both cases, they weren’t happy. But Person A got to be more technologically advanced, got a better education and got the advantage of a head start in life because of money. Person B followed in his parents’ paths in life and struggled to make ends meet. Yes, in both cases the individuals weren’t happy but didn’t money in this example make life just a little bit easier.

There are a lot of reasons for unhappiness: poor health, the inability to make ends meet, suffering of loved ones – these are things that afflict both the rich and the poor. Money solves these problems or makes them a little easier.

And granted there are sources of unhappiness that can’t be solved with money like the search for a soul mate or being in a job you hate. Again these things affect both the rich and the poor and money will probably be of little help here.

Then there’s the theory that poor people are rich in family who love each other. What bullshit! Not having money is extremely stressful. It’s the source of many fights between couples. When you need to make sure that the basics like food, healthcare and school fees are covered when you’re in a minimum wage job; it’s certainly not a happy place to be in. And even if you’re lucky enough to be surrounded by love and family, it still doesn’t mean you’re happy.

So to the rich people out there, the poor don’t have the upper hand at happiness. Let’s level the monetary playing field first and then we can all bemoan about how our money doesn’t make us happy. Don’t believe me? Get rid of all your money and prove me wrong. Go be happy.

This year, I noticed a huge marketing of the celebration of the Indian festival of colour, Holi, on social media. Traditionally, it is a cultural festival celebrated within the Indian community. So I was pleasantly surprised at the extension of the Holi One invitation to everyone. At last a sign of tolerance of cultural festivals – or so I thought.

For millennia, Holi has been celebrated in India to welcome in Spring. Prayers are performed at home or at a temple and then celebrations begin. The colours that Spring brings is symbolised in the fun and games. It’s all about setting free your inner child to happily throw around coloured powders and naughtily smear it on friends when they least expect it.

Based on the Hindu holy day, the Holi One festival, held in Cape Town earlier this month hailed 10 000 people all dressed in white to celebrate with music played by top DJs. Every hour, a countdown released a burst of coloured powder into the air. Revellers partied to the uplifting electronic music, whilst simultaneously getting higher with alcohol and whatever else…

Thinking back on Diwali, I had hoped both Hindus and non-Hindus would be more tolerant of each other so that the holy day could be observed and celebrated. A few months later, we have an abundance of acceptance of Holi from non-observers. Participation even!

I can’t help but wonder whether this acceptance isn’t the mark of a society changing its tolerance levels but rather of a society that is conveniently tolerant. The right to celebrate Holi isn’t publicly called into question as it was by many for Diwali. Probably because Holi One is fun – or rather deemed as tolerated fun. Even though it’s based on the Hindu festival of Holi and borrows many of its attributes, the Holi One festival is essentially one big party featuring many things that Holi is not.

When organising a festival that is meant to promote peace, love, happiness, tolerance and unity, one would think that the organisers would have involved the people where the concept is borrowed from. True religious tolerance would have steered the organisers to speak with Hindu people or perhaps even a body that represents them nationally like the Hindu Maha Sabha. Instead, the event was heavily promoted on social media for ticket sales without much of a thought of the people who have celebrated the festival for thousands of years. The result is unhappy Hindus who feel like their religious festivals are disrespected, tainted and commercialised.

A ridiculous analogy would be like organising a huge party on Ascension Day in Europe. We could celebrate with the release of helium balloons or fire lanterns every hour representing Jesus’ ascension into the heavens. Let’s bring on the best DJs, hottest electronica and hand out acid and various other psychedelics so that we can all get high for the occasion. 

We can’t protect every religious and cultural festival from being commercialised and stripped off its true meaning. With better management and consultation, perhaps a compromise could have been reached to avoid encroaching on something culturally sensitive.

There are many successful religious festivals that, although commercialised, still maintain their religious essence without disrespecting the religion such as the festivals for the Chinese New Year, Diwali and Christmas.

It’s Holi One this year. How would you feel when next year the party is Ramadaan One, Yom Kippur One or Easter One?

This is my favourite time of the year. I remember when I was little; all the kids were so excited about buying fireworks so that they were adequately prepared to celebrate Diwali. We’d light a few fireworks like the little Tom Thumbs in the days leading up to Diwali but we’d make sure we saved some for the big day.

Diwali is popularly known as the festival of lights. It commemorates the return of Lord Rama from a 14 year exile where he killed a demon king. On that moonless night, the people of Ayodhya lit clay lamps throughout the city to help Lord Rama find his way home. There isn’t much evidence to state whether fireworks were burnt during this time but over the years the use of fireworks during Diwali has become synonymous with celebrating the triumph of good over evil. Today, Diwali is still celebrated with a beautiful array of clay lamps decorated in and around every Hindu home and a magical fireworks display lights up the sky at night.

Growing up in an Indian area, everyone loved fireworks whether they were Hindu or not. Even the Christian and Muslim kids would buy fireworks and their parents would let them indulge in the neighbourhood’s Diwali festivities.

On Diwali everyone had their turn to light up the night whether they lit fireworks outside their own houses or with neighbours. If you didn’t have money to buy your own fireworks, your neighbours would welcome you into their celebrations. For the years when I was unable to celebrate, taking in the sights and sounds of the revelry while sitting at home was good enough for me.

There were hardly any dogs in my neighbourhood – just two; both braved the loud sounds and never seemed scared. Their owners were the loudest bunch too. I realise now that these two dogs were possibly the exception. Dogs can hear five times more acutely than humans and are thus more scared of the loud bangs. Some dog owners give their dogs calming drugs or sedatives and keep them in a safe, quiet and well lit room before going off to lighting their own fireworks.

In the days leading up to the Diwali, the SPCA has been campaigning to create awareness of the effects fireworks have on pets. The timing of one such poster was not well received by the president of the SA Hindu Maha Sabha. The poster contains a picture of a scared puppy and a tagline that says, “Your box of tricks…is our worst nightmare. Are fireworks necessary?” Many animals become scared of the sudden flashes of lights. Some fireworks, like the Indian King, serve no purpose other than to be ridiculously loud bangs. It’s deafening for most humans. The poor animals run away terrified of the noises and sometimes become disoriented or, even worse, end up lost or injured. Loud noises can also cause aggressive behaviour in animals. It is for these reason that I fully understand the SPCA’s concerns during this time of the year.

On the other hand, I also understand the SA Hindu Maha Sabha’s concerns around the SPCA poster. Being a minority, it’s easy to feel misunderstood. And when told that their age-old tradition of lighting fireworks can only occur in designated areas and not at home, it’s understandable that many feel like their religion is under attack. With much consideration for all parties affected, Diwali can still be celebrated for everyone to enjoy. All we need is some compromise and tolerance from everyone.

In Indian populated areas, like the one I grew up in, most residents are Hindu, don’t have pets and light their fireworks without complaints from their neighbours. It’s easy to enjoy Diwali when everyone around you is celebrating too.

There are Indian suburbs where most residents own pets. There are naturally fewer individuals who would want to light fireworks. For the minority who do want to celebrate with a bang, it seems only fair to limit their use of fireworks or to use them in designated areas in order to spare the animals from harm.

It’s important for Hindus to be considerate of their neighbours in suburbs where they are the minority It isn’t fair for one Hindu household to be loudly celebrating whilst disturbing the other households on their street. Loud fireworks don’t have their place there. To be considerate towards their neighbours, many Hindus living in the Northern suburbs of Johannesburg trek to Lenasia to celebrate Diwali.

Although, it is tradition to burn fireworks up to a week before Diwali, Hindus should really consider whether there is a need for it. There is an immense amount of harm that can be caused to animals by lighting up every day and it is selfish to expect pet owners to sedate their dogs for a week. Perhaps the use of the fireworks should be kept to the day of Diwali only as a further compromise.

Compromise is a two way street and it is not only Hindus that need to be considerate of their neighbours. The onus is on pet owners to ensure that their animals are kept safe during Diwali. If dog owners don’t consult with their neighbours before getting dogs whose loud barks disturb others, then it’s hardly considerate to expect your neighbours to keep their noise levels down for the sake of your dog.  As a pet owner, it is your responsibility to factor in all elements of the environment that may impact your pets. One of these factors may include a neighbourhood where loud fireworks are the norm on Diwali.

Whilst Hindus need to be considerate of their neighbours, they should not be accommodating religious and social intolerance. We live in a country with a multitude of diverse cultures with various celebratory events. As with all religions, Hindus have a right to celebrate their religious festivals. Diwali is celebrated on one night in South Africa. Embrace the celebrations and you can resume normality the next day.

We just need to be tolerant of each other. If you’re celebrating Diwali with fireworks, do it responsibly without harming animals. If you’re a pet owner, calm your pets down on the day. If we spare a thought on our effects on others, we’ll be able to celebrate Diwali much more smoothly.

I’m spending Diwali in Johannesburg this year. Since I won’t be able to celebrate at home, I will be going to a friend’s place where I’ll be sure to take along my colourful fireworks and not the loud ones.

I've always maintained that I hate cops. It's not because there's corruption in the police force.

It's because they generally do not have the physique to be able to run after robbers when you've just been mugged.

It's because their visible policing seems to be targeting ordinary citizens rather than hunting down rapists and murderers.

It's because when our police officers are patrolling, I feel fear that they will accuse me of some offence rather than make me feel safe.

The reason I hate cops the most today is because of this morning's incident when I was on my way from Sandton to Sunninghill at 4 in the morning. It's cold and dark and being a victim of crime myself, I tend to always err on the side of caution.

When I noticed the police car behind me, flashing their lights, indicating that I needed to stop, I decided that I was going to continue driving to my friend's complex and stop there when it was safe to do so, and then deal with what the cops wanted from me. Many media sources have previously mentioned that we are allowed to drive to a safe destination before stopping for police officers.

This just aggravated the police officers more and they started hooting for me to stop. I didn't know how else to indicate acknowledgement besides switching on my hazards and thereafter sticking my hand out of the window to indicate that I'm turning into the next road.

Eventually the cops just pulled in front of me forcing me to stop. An infuriated police officer got out of the car and grilled me. He yelled at me asking why I wouldn't stop.

I gave my reasons: I'm a girl driving alone in a city where crime is rife; and recently, two sisters were raped by police officers not far from where I was driving - in two separate incidents! I was going to stop when I felt it was safe to do so.

Instead of telling me why they stopped me, the cop continued to yell at me for five minutes telling me that if I am so scared, I should not be driving at night. Interestingly enough, they angrily told me that not stopping when a police officer requests it, is an admission of some guilt and they a liable to shoot at will if they deemed it appropriate! Eventually they drove off without even checking my licence.

And that right there is the reason I hate the police. Because I am more afraid for my safety when cops stop me than I am of being date raped. Because I cannot live my own life for fear of being stopped by cops. 

And so, whoever it is that makes our laws and enforces them, if girls driving alone at night can't continue driving to a safe place when we are asked to stop by the police, what are we supposed to do? Submit to being raped by them instead?

I am a South African of Indian origin and I grew up speaking English. One would ordinarily classify my mother tongue as English and refer to me as English speaking – after all, it’s my first language; therefore I would know how to speak it best, right?

It’s a bit more complicated than that. See, Indians arrived in South Africa only about 150 years ago. The only languages they spoke were the Indian languages from back home – the various dialects can be broken down to at least five major languages. As if communicating with each other in at least five different Indian languages wasn’t difficult enough, they quickly learnt that to live amongst the natives, they needed to speak Zulu; and to work for their white bosses, they needed to communicate in English, and thereafter, Afrikaans. It’s no wonder that 150 years later, Indian languages have been almost completely wiped out in South Africa.

Further to the language barriers, in 13 of those decades, Indians were viewed by the South African government as unworthy of proper education. Indians were renowned for building their own schools and universities albeit without the quality of education afforded to their white counterparts. Regardless of whether schools were government run or created by Indians, education was unfortunately of a sub-standard nature.

I am a first generation first language English speaker. Looking back on how I grew up, it comes as no surprise that my neighbourhood’s grasp of the English language was atrocious. If my neighbour’s parents were like mine, they didn’t even speak English growing up, education wasn’t considered a necessity and the English everyone spoke was picked up in the area they lived in. The formative years of Indian children’s lives were spent learning grammatically incorrect English from their family and friends. While these children were growing up, they were somehow expected, by the more educated South Africans, to have unlearnt they way they spoke English throughout their schooling career. All the while, they came back home from a majority Indian school and hung out with the same family and friends with whom they spoke to (in the same broken English) their entire lives. In comparison, white children whose mother tongues were English didn’t have this problem. They were already at an advantage.

With the progression of Indians to middle class, a noticeable rift had been created – one of which is the judgement passed on the Indians that don’t speak “good” English. The argument is sound – the correct way to speak is taught at school – so says those whose parents instil the importance of education and already bring their children up speaking “good” English at home. 

Indian townships still exist, with Indian parents who aren’t educated enough to help their children with their homework. The education system easily passes children to the next grade without sparing a thought as to how their lack of knowledge may affect them post school, and it doesn’t help that there are schools whose mission it is to provide teachers with jobs rather than educate children. These Indian townships that still exist are also founded on generations of the incorrectly spoken English.

I understand the need to expect the world to speak correct English. After all, I’ve always considered myself a writer and to be credible, writers need to write in perfect English especially when it is the language that your readership largely understands. I was also brought up in an Indian township where education wasn’t revered and the English language seemed butchered. Yet, my mother kept me from kids who were rough, the television was my babysitter and I read everything I could get my hands on. Naturally, my English was “good” and (call me a snob but) I would mentally get annoyed over other’s incorrect pronunciation and grammar.

In the greater scheme of things though, does it really matter how “good” your English is? If people are comfortable with the way they speak, and we are able to comprehend when they do, as inaccurate as it may be, shouldn’t we rather just let them be? Perhaps instead of judging, we should take a moment to understand that not everyone in South Africa had equal opportunities. I’ve long since learnt this and instead of cringing whenever I hear someone from Phoenix speak, I smile because it’s these very language imperfections that make up the South African Indian culture I am so proud to be part of.

Sick to my stomach. That’s how I feel every time I hear about a baby dumped. That’s how I feel when I see the photos. So I wait for the news to be over or I scroll down the page so I don’t have to see the graphic images. Graphic images that say more than the 30 second news inserts. Each of those images tell a tale of a cruel society where our most vulnerable are thrown away like a half eaten sandwich or yesterday’s newspaper. Those images and the emotions conjured up make me sick and then moments later, my mind’s preoccupied with another task and I forget. I forget until I hear another story of a baby dumped and then I feel sick again.

Imagine a world where condoms and contraceptives are free and available at your nearest clinic. If that doesn’t stop an unwanted pregnancy, abortion is safe and legal. If you’re pro-life, there are adoption agencies that can take care of your child when you deliver. If you change your mind once you see a precious child that you created, there’s government grants than can help you support your baby. We are living in this world and still our news reports hundreds of babies dumped in trash cans every year in South Africa.

As much as baby dumping is becoming increasingly common, it isn’t a new phenomenon. Literature is filled with tales of child abandonment and as romanticised as the fairy tales are, I can’t help but wonder whether it is simply a case of art imitating life. One of my favourite plays tells a tragic story of Oedipus Rex. Before he was even given a name, his parents ordered a servant to kill the newborn. The servant couldn’t bear to kill a little baby and instead left the child to die on a mountain top. 400 years before Christ, an act of baby dumping introduced a trilogy to entertain an audience in Dionysia.  

The reason for Oedipus’ dumping was because of superstition. I’m not sure what the reasons are today but it must leave women in a dire position to leave their babies in a toilet – the babies they carried for nine months and laboured to deliver.

Maybe she’s still a child and isn’t emotionally mature to understand the consequences of getting rid of a baby. Maybe she’s emotionally scarred from rape. Maybe her sugar daddy that financially helped her impoverished family disappeared. Maybe she’s afraid of shaming her family by having a child out of wedlock. Maybe she doesn’t know how to raise a child without support from the baby’s father. Maybe she’s HIV positive and wants to spare her child a slow painful death. Maybe she isn’t aware of the options available for an unwanted pregnancy. Maybe she has post-partum depression. Maybe she’s experienced all of this – not uncommon in a HIV- and poverty-stricken country with a failing education system where rape of girls is rife.

Despite his doomed fate, Oedipus was lucky to be found just as some babies are rescued from being buried alive. Sadly, not all babies are this fortunate as their lives end before it can even start.

Unicef’s Declaration of the Rights of the Child says that children have the right to love and understanding, preferably from parents and family, but from the government where these cannot help. It’s easy to blame the family for taking away a child’s right. If a mother is guilty of baby dumping, she faces charges of murder with imprisonment. Brilliant solutions for isolated incidents but the growing number of cases brought to media attention implies a national crisis. How is the government not guilty of not protecting children where there is no one to take care of them? And what is their punishment? Do they even feel sick to their stomachs like I do?

Government has done amazingly well to put measures in place to prevent unwanted pregnancies and take care of unwanted babies. Their approach now is Ah well. We tried. That’s not a valid excuse. Churchill said that you measure the degree of civilisation of a society by how it treats its weakest members. With that sentiment then, we are not civilised. There is no sense in playing in a global world, attaining economic freedom or even hosting the Olympics when our weakest members are drowned.

Unfortunately there isn’t a quick fix. It’ll come with developing our nation. We need to bring our people out of poverty so that they have access to educate themselves about available options. Rapists need to be put behind bars. Girl children need to be empowered so that they aren’t overpowered by men. Boys need to be taught about the consequences of their actions. Our churches, temples and mosques need to stop ostracising out-of-wedlock pregnancies and start embracing these women and helping them.

And while these may take a generation or more to overcome, we need to get fulltime nurses and social workers into schools now. We can’t turn a blind eye at the teen pregnancies. They are happening – to girls as young as 10. We need someone to talk to the kids at school and to follow up with girls who haven’t been to school in a few weeks. The best way to educate a nation is to start with our children. They need to keep hearing about preventing pregnancies and they need to be aware of their options in the event of an unwanted pregnancy. This may increase abortion rates. More unwanted kids will be put into homes. And that is a more humane problem to deal with than the barbaric acts of throwing babies in the bushes.

Oedipus Rex grew up to be a king and once said that with clear sight, he was blinded by his inadvertent crimes. Only once he became blind was he able to see the truth. We have clear sight but are we seeing our inadvertent crimes?

I found out about the Twitter Blanket Drive last year. #TBDZA was all over my Twitter timeline so I did my little bit for charity and bought a few blankets and dropped them off at the Crowne Plaza Hotel in Rosebank.

I was amazed at how many blankets were donated from a simple request started by @melanieminaar on Twitter. One tweet requesting that the South African twitter community donate blankets to those in need resulted in 700 blankets in 2010 and an impressive 2 700 blankets in 2011.

The power of social networks seems to just grow stronger. This year, volunteers have already come forth with their ideas on how to increase blanket donations and create drop-off points in various suburbs around the country to make it even easier to donate. There’s even a drop-off point in Zim.

If you want to get involved, visit www.twitterblanketdrive.co.za for more information on the drop-off points close to you. Also don’t forget to attend one of the National Tweetups on 26 May 2012 to meet some tweeps and appreciate the sheer number of blankets collected.

As for my bit for charity, for every new follower on my blog, I will donate a blanket to #TBDZA. So look at the right of the screen, see that Followers block, click on Join this site. It’s currently sitting at 8 followers. By 26 May, I will make my blanket donation that is at least equal to number of additional followers my humble blog has gained.

Oh and while #TBDZA makes charity seem fun and exciting, let’s not forget that one-third of our population lives in poverty. While winter may bring thoughts of snuggling under a blanket sipping hot chocolate, for many it is a time where keeping warm comes with a very real risk of asphyxiation and shack-fire deaths from the use of gas heaters in poorly ventilated homes. Donate as many blankets as you want to. We may not be able to rescue everyone off the cold streets but keeping as many people as warm as possible will make a difference in their lives.

When it’s cold, I find myself praying for those that don’t have a warm bed. This winter, you may be able to give a child the gift of sweet dreams.

It wasn’t the best idea but I had to do some grocery shopping on Christmas Eve. Whilst I was there, I mentally put together this list of dos and don’ts to help you when shopping on one of the busiest days of the year.

Don’t do it: If it is at all possible, please avoid the Christmas rush by shopping way before festive season. Stay at home and spend time with your family. It is also a lot less stressful to shop in the New Year.

Do take a trolley from the parking lot: A rookie mistake that I made. Once you realise that there are no trolleys inside the store, you have to wait for trolleys to come through and there’s people of all sorts pushing through trying to grab a trolley as if it is rations of food being handed out during times of war.

Once you’ve gotten your trolley, everyone’s eager to squeeze through the generally tiny entrance of the grocery store. This is not Zimbabwe. The groceries are not going to run out. So don’t push your trolley into other people like you’re playing bumper cars or go-carting. I had the unfortunate incident of a woman pushing the trolley hard into me. I turned around and shot a look at the unapologetic woman. She did it again and once again I stopped to turn around. It’s not like you don’t know that you just bumped your trolley into someone’s ass...hard! I stopped and let her through and then as I was walking behind her, I gave her a taste of her own medicine. Harsh, I know, but how else will people know that it hurts and they shouldn’t do it to other people? She turned around and I gushed a seemingly sincere apology.

Do take someone with you when shopping. Not only will it help to keep you sane trying to manoeuvre through half of Durban packed into one store, it also helps with shopping strategies. I decided to let my mum do the shopping while I pushed the trolley behind her – often stopping in some quiet corner while she brought various items to me.

Please understand your, um, body size in comparison to others. With 68% of South Africans considered overweight, I don’t care whether it’s your ass, tummy or boobs that’s large, don’t push people out of the way with your weight!

Do try to be considerate of others when weaving through the un-orderly shopping nightmare. Pushing a trolley is pretty much like driving a car, at certain intersections, some motorists have right of way. If there’s a car in front of you, you wait for them to go through busy traffic because squeezing on the side of them while only do you car damage when you’re brushing the side of your against theirs. If you can’t fit through a gap, don’t do it. In fact, if you haven’t passed your driver’s licence test, perhaps you shouldn’t use a trolley when shopping. Hand baskets were meant for you.

The store is not filled with shoppers alone. Merchandisers work while the store is open, packing and neatening up the shelves so you can find what you need when you need it. That being said, when merchandisers are pushing through those bulk trolleys filled high with many heavy products, do let them through. It’s dangerous to be running around in front of them and also says that you’re a selfish person who thinks that the store is open solely for your shopping pleasure.

Do smile at others especially when saying “excuse me” or “sorry” or well just generally smiling. Frowns do not a Christmas spirit make.

When I finally got to the queue for the till, the queue was blocking the pathway of people needing to walk past. Do be courteous. I kept pushing my trolley out of the way for people to walk through and pushed it back in the queue once I could. Unlike the woman behind me, when I had progressed closer to the till, who just decided that she was in a queue and that was that. That then meant, nice old me had to move out of the way so that people to squeeze through to the other side.

Then there’s the dreaded encounter with the face of Checkers - the cashier. Customer service is clearly not taught at Checkers or if they did the cashier would smile, be friendly and maybe not stand with a bored expression on her face whilst not telling me why she’s just standing there waiting. Do complain about customer service. Perhaps the training manager, Jayindree Reddy, was not the best person to complain to (read: incompetent) and she didn’t do much when she came to the till to assist. It is because we have the culture of accepting bad service that it still goes on. There are a lot of unemployed South Africans who need a job and will be willing to take on the duties involved in a customer facing job for the salary on offer.

That, ladies and gentlemen, wraps up my experience. Hopefully this will help you when you find yourself needing to do some last minute shopping over really busy periods.

A feminist friend once said, “Chivalry is an archaic notion. You can’t ask to be treated as equals but expect chivalrous behaviour.”

I, like most women today, fondly think of chivalry as sweet little romantic gestures that make us feel like we’re thoughtfully taken care of like having a door held open, offering to drive or carrying our heavy bags.

Traditionally, chivalry was a man’s show of respect for the weaker sex by showing that he can physically take care of her. This could range from pulling out a lady’s chair to fighting for her honour. In return, women paid back the chivalry by lovingly cooking a meal for him and keeping the house clean.

When women realised that they could do more than just what society dictated their gender roles to be, feminism was born. The very core of feminism is based on the ideology that gender roles constructed by society are sexist and unjust and should be done away with, allowing women to have the same rights as men and for both genders to be treated equally.

By definition, feminism and chivalry are on the opposite ends of a coin. You can’t ask for chivalrous behaviour when you believe that women should be treated exactly like men. Chivalry treats women better than men.

Every woman balances her views of chivalry and feminism on different scales:

• There’s the extreme feminist who believes that she can pay her own way and open her doors. Any chivalrous offer is often seen as an insult to her capabilities.
• Little Miss Princess, on the other hand, is used to being treated like a porcelain doll. She expects all the chivalry that’s on offer.
• And then there are the nonchalant girls who believe that chivalry does not have to be sacrificed for gender equality. They welcome and appreciate chivalrous gestures while at the same time demanding equal treatment. These women generally demand equality (and chivalry) when it’s convenient for them.

I am one of the nonchalant girls. It makes me weak at the knees to have a chivalrous man around to stop and help me change my tyre if they see me struggling to do it. I will think less of him if he refuses to help when I’ve asked for it. At the same time, I value having the option to climb all the way up the corporate ladder and challenge the old boys. A classic example of a woman who wants it all at her convenience: the kind man to help with manual labour and the opportunity to kick ass in a high powered work environment.  

Chivalry isn’t a natural behaviour for all men. It’s learned from parents, culture and environment. Some cultures teach chivalry to little boys which then become second nature to them. In other cultures chivalry as we know it doesn’t exist which doesn’t necessarily mean they don’t honour women. Even if all men learn chivalry, it is up to each man to be as chivalrous as he chooses and up to each woman to determine the level of chivalry she chooses to appreciate.

Ultimately, men and women were created differently - physically and psychological - with different needs. While I understand that gender roles were historically unfairly dictated by societal traditions, there are certain biological roles that are better suited based on these differences. Chivalry doesn’t have to contradict gender equality. Perhaps we need to introduce some equality within chivalry. If chivalry is just good manners then it shouldn’t be one sided. If you expect a man to pull out your chair, then you need to also be prepared to show some thoughtfulness to him in whatever way you chose. If women aren’t prepared to embrace that idea, then perhaps chivalry is an outdated practice that doesn’t have a place in today’s world.

Ever since I can remember, I loved watching the beauty pageants on TV. As a little girl, I dreamt of sashaying across the stage in a designer evening gown, wiping away my tears of joy after being crowned Miss South Africa. I wanted to be that beautiful ambassador who made a difference in the country.

Needless to say, I didn’t grow up to be a Miss South Africa contender but I do still like watching the magic of beauty pageants. I only discovered a few days before the pageant that I didn’t have the option to watch the show anymore.  SABC, South Africa’s publicly available television broadcaster, has lost the rights to broadcast the Miss South Africa pageant to the paid for DSTV channel, Mzansi Magic.

I haven’t heard of any outrage but I am not particularly happy about this. Until this year, Miss South Africa has been broadcasted on SABC which meant that every South African with a television set and decent broadcasting signal watched the declaration of the country’s most beautiful women. This didn’t include everyone as only about 50% of South African households had television sets until the turn of the century, but it still provided half of the nation with the opportunity to view the pageant. We watched as the first non-white women were crowned in 1992 and 1993, preparing the land for the birth of a rainbow nation in 1994. We watched as the women served their reign and inspired us with their much needed charity work. We watched as they participated in the Miss World and Miss Universe pageants and rooted for them.

With the introduction of DSTV, South Africa’s luxury television network, people have come to compare DSTV viewing to SABC. SABC television is far behind the entertainment provided by DSTV however SABC still provides viewing to the majority of South Africans.

Using the poor quality delivery of SABC, Mzansi Magic jumped on the bandwagon and was handed exclusive rights to air the Miss South Africa pageant. But who exactly will be watching the show? South Africa?

The demographics of those with possible access to DSTV would comprise of only the middle and upper class South Africans. That is less than 40% of the country. At last count 2.6 million people subscribed to DSTV which I would then estimate total viewership of 8 million. That’s 16% of South Africans. DSTV is a luxury commodity aimed at those who are willing to pay a premium to view better quality TV.

And for those who think that DSTV is affordable let me break it down for you. DSTV has thoughtfully put together a number of different packages to suit people’s needs and budgets. The cheapest package with Mzansi Magic included is DSTV Select for a mere R157 a month. Oh it’s more than just the monthly subscription fee; there is also the cost of a decoder, a satellite dish and, I imagine, a nice TV to view the clear digital images on to consider. As affordable as DSTV may seem, to 47% of the population who cannot afford R322 a month, it is not.

With the organisers moving Miss South Africa further away from the majority, a significant portion of the population will no longer be aware of the pageant and contestants entering won’t be from all corners of South Africa. We’ll never know if the queen crowned is indeed the fairest of the land. And with the blatant exclusion of 80% of South Africans from even watching the show, can we really title her with Miss “South Africa”.

 

I get it. Nivea’s trying to promote products that encourage male personal hygiene: clean shaven, neat haircut and a well groomed face. An effective ad to say that men no longer have that caveman look of wild hair or long unsightly beards; they look like they give a damn now.

Nivea released two “look like you give a damn” ads – one featuring a white man and another featuring a black man. Nivea intended on using these ads to target certain individuals to use their products. They want men to buy into their products and using models of different races allows guys of those racial groups to relate to the advert and thus be more willing to purchase their products.

Upon the release of this ad there was an uproar on Twitter and other social network platforms about the apparent racism in the ad targeted at the black man. The ad pictures a clean cut well dressed black male holding a mask of a black head with an afro and a beard - caveman style, standing in a position to throw away the mask. The tag line? Re-civilise yourself. When juxtaposed against the ad targeted at white people, there seems to be racist slant to the black ad, and this is purely based on the wording chosen for each. The Caucasian ad’s tag line, “Sin City isn’t an excuse to look like hell,” doesn’t quite have the racially slurred impact that “re-civilise yourself” has.

The definition of civilise is to rise from a barbaric to a civilised state. There are deeply rooted connotations with this word which stems from the view that black people are from the jungle and inherently uncivilised in comparison to their European counterparts.

I suppose Nivea could have gone further to include people of various ethnicities in the “re-civilise yourself” campaign. How about the mask of an Arab man with a beard, a woman in a burqa or an Indian man wearing a turban? Would we say then say that the majority of the Indian and Middle Eastern world is uncivilised? If you’re schooled in the Western ideals of the perception of civilisation, you’d probably view them as untidy and definitely not the kind of people you’d think the best revenue generating strategy would come from in a boardroom.

Civilisation isn’t necessarily the individuals that advanced first in the world but rather those who were able to conquer the world and impose their beliefs on the inhabitants. Historically, it was white colonialists calling the shots. With the end of slavery and apartheid, the black people that were favoured for jobs were the ones who looked more white. Straighter hair and lighter skin worked to their advantage and hence black people embraced this artificial look over the years. Skin bleaching and hair relaxing was popular even during the era of African slavery. In the pursuit of trying to fit in, black people inadvertently instilled a self-hate for their own appearance. So it’s out with the afro in the Nivea ad and out with the beard because that is not the civilised look of the 21^st century.

The meaning, to rise from a barbaric to a civilised state, would have one believe that anyone able to fit into civil society is deemed civilised. So criminals would examples of individuals considered barbaric – uncivilised – as they don’t fit into today’s civil society.

The make-up of today’s civil society is largely of Western influence and as a result, if you don’t fit in, you aren’t civilised. It’s no wonder that black people themselves want the white look. In fact, the ad was a brainchild of a black male. He created an image of a black man that would appeal to the target audience. The media constantly portrays black people in a way that makes it seem that they need to be more “white” to fit in.

What started out with black people disowning their natural physical features to be at an advantage to play in the Western world has now turned into people wanting the Western look for no reason other than they’ve been brainwashed into thinking that it looks good. With role models like Beyonce, women of colour chose to wear weaves instead of embracing their natural hair. People donning afros, braids, dreadlocks are portrayed in the media as unprofessional and unclean – not as successful people. The more Western (read white) you look, the more “civilised” you are.

Skin lightening is a dangerous craze all because lighter skin is seen as more beautiful. Sorisha Naidoo is a successful business woman, seemingly at the top of her game with everything she could ever want. She publicly lightens her skin and promotes that others do the same. Yes, black people do it to themselves. They want to look more white.

Take out the word “re-civilise” and products promoting a more Western look for black people will be scooped up off the shelves. The sub-conscious hatred of one’s natural looks and origins need to stop. And the only way it can is for the media to relook at their black target marketing.

Give us a dark skinned woman to play leading black roles in movies. Give us a high powered public figure in dreadlocks. Give us a magazine who won’t photoshop lighter complexions on our black models.

In Capitalist America, the country that dictates the behaviour of civil society, money talks. Realistically, James Cameron is not going to cast a dark skinned woman to be the female lead in his next movie. Box office ratings will struggle because black people themselves don’t want to see that. They are conditioned to believing light skin is beautiful.

Black CEO’s and members of parliament won’t grow an afro because they won’t be taken seriously in global markets.

Until money stops becoming the driving force in the world and governments care about their people more, the little black kids of tomorrow will grow up with an inferiority complex on the appearance they were born with. They will continue the trend of looking like they give a damn...trying so hard to fit into the Western mould.

Is Nivea racist? I don’t believe so. Surely though, Nivea needs to know that we are not happy with the literal message they send out, but more importantly we need them to understand that it’s deeper than just the ad. Should we boycott their products? Should we also boycott every other unequal type of image we see in the media today?

Picture this: you’re sipping a cocktail at a restaurant on Camps Bay catching up with a few friends over lunch. It’s a Tuesday and this is the perfect opportunity to give your tired feet a rest from this morning’s shopping. To end this beautiful summer’s day, you have rock climbing lined up for the afternoon.

Source

Now imagine that this life of leisure is yours. Every day, no stress about working in a job you don’t like. You have enough money to live comfortably. You have enough time to live life the way you want to. You have enough energy to explore what you’re passionate about. Just imagine…

Whoever said we have to work anyway? I don’t know how it all started but right now the average person works 5 days a week for 8 hours a day. Let’s quantify that a bit further. The average person works a nine-to-five. When you factor in time for traffic and preparing to get to work, it’s actually about a seven-to-six working day. That’s 11 hours a day!

The reward? 13 hours a day to squeeze in a decent amount of sleep as well as that life you yearn to live. Let’s not forget a whole 2 days of a weekend to recharge your batteries so you can get back to 11 hours on the grind for the next 5 days. It is torture that feels like a prison sentence.

Work is such an inconvenience to life. The sad reality however, is we have to work in order to be able to afford rent in a decent suburb, a roadworthy car and to live the lifestyle we’ve become accustomed to. I think we all want to be in a position where our salaries afford us the comfort of being able to have what we want, when we want it. But who said we need to give up the best part of our lives in order to achieve this? Is it just because that’s the way it’s always been done? There’s no other way to do it. Is there really no other way to do it?

Well what if there is? What if there is a person who could do your job for you, yet you get to take home the pay? That way the economy could still run like clockwork but you wouldn’t be busting your chops to make it work. The problem is finding resources who wouldn’t mind working so hard for nothing. I think we might just have those resources within our reach…

The government spends a lot of money on detention and rehabilitation facilities. Prisoners of all sorts of crimes are housed, fed and clothed. Some don’t even see the inside of prison wards because our jails are too full. The detained ones wile away their time doing whatever they can – some read, study or just do absolutely nothing. Essentially we take criminals off the street to make our world a safer place. Then we securely provide these prisoners with the necessities and let them live stress-free. The civilians out on the safer streets though, need to struggle everyday just to make ends meet. It sounds like we’re rewarding thieves and murderers and sentencing the law-abiding citizens to a working life of torture.

Well, what if the corporate world could leverage of the prisoners? Take the prisoners and put them in our jobs? Government already provides for them so corporates wouldn’t incur any additional costs. Transport these “resources” to the office every morning, force them to work for their crimes and send them back to jail in the evenings. At least we’re making up productive time for the good of the country.

Of course, the required skills to perform certain task will be an issue but most job functions don’t involve skills that can’t be easily taught. As it stands, companies put aside budgets to up-skill staff therefore they can easily afford to train prisoners. We are dealing with individuals that don’t care much for following rules but there are many ways to ensure performance – the exact same way prisoners are rewarded or reprimanded in prison. Good behaviour in jail gets time off their sentence just like good work performed leads to a similar time off from their sentences. Bad behaviour in jail yields certain punishments just like non-performance leads to the same prison punishments.

The corporate world will definitely need to tighten their security but that additional expense will come off budgets currently utilised for team buildings and socials that will no longer be necessary.

Companies can still meet their revenue targets without paying for labour so why not distribute the salaries to the good citizens? It can even be a government initiative to reward ordinary people with time and money to enjoy life.

Work will no longer just be an inconvenience to life and a necessary evil required in our capitalist society. It will be a mechanism to sentence prisoners while still adding to companies’ bottom lines which enable them to assist in raising the quality of life for all law abiding citizens. The shopping, Camps Bay lunch and a recreational afternoon on a work day don’t seem too far-fetched of an idea now, does it?

“You’re not voting? But you’re so opinionated about everything; why are you not voting? Well you do know that you can never complain about anything ever again, right? This is your chance to complain by voting.”

I tend to not get involved in politics. Mostly because I am highly opinionated and believe that our politicians are a bunch of idiots that don’t actually do much. It’s our constitutional right to choose to exercise a say in the running of the country. Lately my decision to remain neutral has come under scrutiny. Now in order to defend my decision, I had to learn a little bit about politics.

The local government election is where you vote for an individual to run your ward. So every individual (one from each political party) steps up and professes what he or she promises to do if elected. Seems simple enough doesn’t it? Wrong!

Apparently it’s not just about the person with the best promises winning your vote. You gotta also strategically align your vote to your party of preference. Don’t forgot that you need to vote on racial lines so if there’s only one councillor that is the same race as you then you’re sorted and you know who to vote for.

Now there are quite a few parties out there and you may be wondering who to vote for. According to the riveting 3^rd Degree show last night, I’ve discovered the following parties that exist:

ANC:      They come around every election time and build something in the impoverished areas. They do a substandard job and leave them worse off than before after they’ve gotten the much needed votes.

COPE:    This party formed itself two years ago and ever since has been slowly crumbling. Maybe that’s why they haven’t done anything for the community yet.

DA:         In light of the proposed Protection of Personal Information Act, they send out unsolicited SMSes to sway votes. When faced with mass anger about a breach of privacy, the head of the party becomes a nasty menopausal woman. Luckily, there’s Lindiwe Mazibuko, a woman still in her prime without the raging hormones. She’s an excellent speaker that redeems the party.

FF+:       I don’t remember anything about this party so clearly they don’t do much – not even talk when they have the airtime to do so.

IFP:        You only hear about them during election time and they’re in the news linked to outbreaks of violence between their supporters and the supporters of other parties.

I also did a bit of research into the candidates for my suburb, Sandown, which falls under ward 91. Now I don’t believe the candidates do much to sell themselves since I had to go searching for them. I only found one website that would list them – a community website called LookLocal:

• Andrew Stewart is a DA candidate and he says he’s been working with the police to enforce by-laws. His aim: to continue doing just that. I wonder how much the DA pays him to visit the police station once a year, tell a reporter about his avid interest in “by-laws” and then have no ambition in trying to do anything else. I’m pretty certain this is just a well paying job for him. Surely civil servants need to have a calling to selflessly serve the community?
• Hilda Masoma is an ANC candidate and her promise is to create sustainable jobs. Finally, someone who understands Sandown’s problems! Sandown is essentially Sandton Central and there are loads of uncouth people at every robot begging, selling or just intruding in your personal space. We all hate the fact that they are there. It’s unsafe and it’s annoying for us. For the people at the robot, it’s their unfortunate way of life. So big up to Hilda for wanting to create jobs for these people! So let’s see how she aims to do this. Well, Hilda thinks that we should hire people to clean our parks and toilets. :-/ Seriously!? That’s how she intends on solving the problems? Sandton Central has pretty good maintenance so how many jobs will she create to clean the forgotten toilets of ward 91? And who’s going pay them? Hilda? ANC? My income tax?
• Busisiwe Witness Hlongwane is an IFP candidate and her solution is simple: to improve basic human needs in impoverished areas. I like it! I suppose she’s going do this through wishful thinking?

There was also a list of other candidates and no write up on them. Clearly if a reporter found nothing good about them, then they aren’t worth reading up on. Also, surely if you want to win, you’ll market yourself? I don’t know if I can trust any candidate who isn’t interested in the elections they are running for. Will they be interested in doing the job once appointed?

According to my research, there’s three options: vote for Andrew who does something with by-laws, Hilda who believes that toilets are the solution to the high unemployment rate or Busisiwe who wants to dream about a better world. Based, on these options, you die hard fans of exercising your right to vote – pick one for me cos I can’t think of anyone worthy of running the ward.

I suppose I should go eeny, meeny, miny, mo instead of voicing my lack of a suitable candidate by refraining from voting? Because apparently, I don’t have a right to complain if I don’t vote to make a change. What change are these candidates going to bring? What good is my vote?

I pay taxes on everything. I pay tax which is used to fund public service. So the next time you, die hard fans of exercising your right to vote, tell me not to complain about public service delivery, I’d like a refund on my tax please. As a consumer, I reserve the right to complain especially when I don’t complain about paying more tax to subsidise those that aren’t. 

They call it corrective rape; forcing a lesbian to have intercourse with a man to cure her of the homosexuality disease.

South Africa constitutionally protects the human rights of gays and lesbians yet corrective rape and hate crimes against homosexuals occur every day. I guess it’s one thing to make gay and lesbian rights constitutional and another thing entirely to convince our communities that homosexuality isn’t a disease that needs curing.

So just what makes a group of men decide to “cure” a girl? A lot of it may be attributed to social conditioning, I guess. Being gay is still taboo and rare. Our religions say that it isn’t right. We’re brought up to believe that it is normal to only be attracted to the opposite sex. I suppose it’s then natural to think that being gay is wrong. But at which point does a man think that he should take it upon himself to show her what she’s missing out on so that she can turn straight? Does this man even understand that rape is wrong – whether it’s for correctional purposes or not? If we’re going to attribute the corrective rape to good intentions by people who just don’t know any better, then are we also going to assume that it is good intentions that lead these same men to believe that they deserve sex when they want it by raping women…because they just don’t know any better?

It’s normal to fear the unknown but in our society, homophobia has turned into intolerance often resulting in hate crimes. It’s not even about being scared of gay people or trying to turn a gay straight, there’s brutal attacks, sexual assault and ultimately murders all because of different sexual orientation. With reactions like this, do we really blame people for hiding their sexual preference? It’s also our own communities to blame for the teenage suicides linked to unaccepted sexual orientation.

Our communities are so intolerant about sexual preference. The question is: how do we remove this intolerance? We really need to educate our people about homosexuality – the science behind it and real life experiences from gay people; not what religion or society dictates. The more understanding we as a nation become, the easier it will be for people to come out of the closet. The more we talk about it, more gays and lesbians will be open without fear of reprisal. The more “normal” it becomes, the more tolerant we will be of homosexuals. And hopefully, then corrective rape will be laughed at as a thing of a past uncivilised generation.

The problem is: how do we start?

I hardly keep up with current affairs so imagine my confusion when I caught a clip on the local news of women dressed in burqas and niqabs. I immediately got on to Twitter to find out why these Muslim women were featured in the news.

I found out that on 11 April 2011, a law will come into effect in France banning the use of a burqa. The punishment will be a €150 fine or public service duty. Penalties for obligating a person to wear a burqa are also part of the law.



So a burqa is the loose outer garment that some Islamic women wear to cover their bodies and face. Now the Qur'an has many verses stating that women should dress modestly and only reveal their beauty to their husbands, immediate family and other women. With thousands of years of burqa use, the tradition of conservation dress is seen as being respectful and modest.

I’ve always been exposed to women dressed in niqab, purdah, abaya or burqa so it isn't unusual for me but I do understand the fear and concern of those not used to it. I imagine it would be the same feeling I'd get if people were walking around shopping malls in balaclavas.

It is these people that are not exposed to face coverings that have concluded that burqas symbolise oppression against women. Hence the French have passed this law saying that they will not tolerate female oppression in their country.

The problem is that the small minority of burqa wearing females that have made France their home will find it quite difficult to show their faces in public and likewise their men would feel uncomfortable allowing this. Perhaps six months isn't all it takes to wean off years of burqa use? And if the French are really concerned about female oppression, should they rather not tackle the problem of oppression instead of the alleged symbols?

 This clearly points to a discrimination against religion, tradition and culture but the old adage "when in Rome" comes to mind. In the Middle East, many countries require foreigners to conform to their rules such as forcing women to cover up. Why then should Arabs complain when they're forced to remove their covers to conform to rules of their new land?

Because it’s not the same thing! Forcing women to remove their burqas is similar to forcing a Western woman to remove her clothing so that she can parade in her underwear. It’s the same thing – it’s the level of comfort you’re used to and both types of women will feel the same humiliation.

No amount of complaining from me is going to prevent the law from taking effect. All I ask is that if we're going to ban burqas and niqabs with the excuse of eradicating oppression, then let us also ban a few other symbols of female oppression:

• women should not be allowed to wear bikinis in public as this oppresses women to be seen as sexual objects for the pleasure of men;
• we should ban the biblical verse that women should be submissive and obey and respect their husbands as the head of the households;
• remuneration in the corporate world should be equal across gender regardless of time spent on maternity leave – we wouldn’t want to oppress women for the gift of life; and
• Catholic religious clergy should be banned from refusing married women the use of contraception thereby harming their health and creating unwanted pregnancies.

What else do you think we should ban to free our women from oppression?