July 13th, 2007
After finishing our tours of the schools, Mr. Mjaka invited us interns into the ZMRC office for some tea and snacks. We talked about our backgrounds and general skills we could bring to our host organizations. I highlighted my background and interest in communications, Caitlin talked about studying physics and supporting math and physics initiatives especially amongst girls, and Rebecca mentioned her interest in strengthening initiatives in women’s empowerment and rights - buzz words the organizations we visited including ZMRC had announced proudly by the exclusively male executive staff (the females were busy serving tea and biscuits). A deafening silence fell over the table, as if Rebecca offended the host by introducing taboo subject. To break the ice I asked about Mr. Mjaka’s family and whether he had any children. “Six” he proclaimed, “from my two wives”. Caitlin and Rebecca exchanged glances, clearly unimpressed. I smiled politely and congratulated him on being a proud father, knowing the importance children possess in Tanzanian culture.
After finishing our visit we left ZMRC and walked towards the food market along Stone Town’s main thoroughfare that parallels the sea. Our conversation returned to Mr. Mjaka and his wives. “Congratulating him [on having many children] condones polygamy”. I was being scolded for making my comment. Now do not get me wrong. I am opposed to the idea of polygamy and view it to be somewhat archaic. However, I don’t believe that congratulating a man on siring many children from a polygamous relationship necessarily condones it. I’m merely recognizing the cultural significance of having children, which in Tanzania is very important, regardless of whom they come from. Condoning polygamy would be congratulating him on having many wives, which did not happen.
Am I wrong for not challenging our host for practicing something that conflicts with my values and norms? No, because I did not come to Tanzania to pick fights with the locals and transform their culture into a mould that suits my style. Doing so would establish antagonistic relations with people I’d have to work with closely, and would make accomplishing my assignments that much more difficult. Perhaps in a different capacity I would have introduced my opinions, but in the capacity of an intern, I choose my battles carefully, since careless arguments risk souring personal relationships with my colleagues, associates, and work.
But maybe I’m wrong? Is it selfish to not be confrontational for the sake of getting work done? Should it be the role of relatively inexperienced youth interns to challenge the norms of their host organization and country by speaking publicly against them? Can Westerners truly speak with moral authority on the issue of gender equality? What do you think?
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I don't see how you can do much more than just ignore it. I mean, before getting into an argument, one should always have an objective. What would the objective be? Make him feel bad? Make him divorce one of his wives (which would almost certainly be a bad thing)?
The only valiant objective would be to explain the values of monogamy to others in the room at the time. To me, doing so at the expense of Mr. Mjaka's honour is dirty. What's more, it could be completely unproductive: he has authority and you do not, so his point of view will carry that much more weight.
Plus, doesn't the polygamy come straight from religious teachings? (Disclaimer: I know nothing about religion in Zanzibar.) If you wanted to tackle the issue, you would need a huge amount of information at your fingertips: statistics about HIV, for instance. You would also need to find and talk to the most open-minded people in communities. Really, it sounds to me like a full-time job.
I've posted a response too long-winded to put in a comment. The entry actually prompted a post on feminism in general, not polygamy specifically, but I tried to answer some of the questions at the end of your post. Here's the link to my response: http://zanzibar-caitlin.blogspot.com/2007/07/response-to-polygamy-on-island.html
p.s. I wanted to point out in my defence that the debate we were having after our discussion with Mr. Mjaka hinged on a misunderstanding: Kent said he congratulates people on having many children, but I understood that he congratulates people on having many children and many wives. While I'm not opposed to the former, I am opposed to the latter, since it implicitly condones polygamy, to which I am unambiguously opposed.
Sorry to dominate your comments here Kent, but the link didn't work the first time. I'm trying again: Click here for my response.
Followed here from Caitlin`s blog, sup...
Adam; Polygamy of up to 4 wives is technically allowed in the Koran `If you can love and support the women equally` Which is actually a theological issue, since it is considered pretty much impossible to love more than one women equally, a great many jurisprudents declare it forbidden.
Plus, if you are at all interested in the sexual aspects, you are apparently supposed to be able to satisfy (see `love`) all four women sexually, adding to the weight since a great many learned jurisprudents of islam consider this (in their expert opinion) impossible. I`ll take their word for it.
I am not in favour of Polygamy, but I am not in favour of it being illegal in places like Canada. Particularly since women and their children who do find themselves in polygamous relationships (which still occur regardless of what the state says) find no legal protection for them or their children if they attempt to leave the relationship, since the state does not recognize it. I find it ironic that feminists support keeping polygamy illegal implicitly support this kind of legal inequality for women.
Just because something is legal doesn`t make it socially condoned, suicide is a great example.
Not going to comment on Polygamy there, just talking about my experiences here.
Again, not to condone the practice, but having known someone very well who was muslim (although, again, not pro polygamy)he stated that there was a rather practical purpose around it. In 'the olden days', in times of war when many of the men were dying leaving many widows with children and no livelihoods (as after the death, the husbands funds are past to male relatives rather than wives) it was considered to be rather "charitable" to take on, and support, many wives. The young unmarried men who died in war also left a large proportion of the female population without males to marry. I guess in those circumstances being one of many wives would seem better than being destitute and alone. Ah the crusades... good times...
I think that two issues are getting confused here. In the case of Tanzania (presuming its similar to that here in Kenya) a man is allowed multiple female partners, but a woman is not allowed multiple male partners. The first issue is polygamy/polyandry (having more than one wife/husband) the second is gender equality. Personally, the issue of multiple partners is not one that 'we' should care about. The issue of gender equality - of the double standard that men are allowed something women are not - is where I think the concern lies. I have dealt with this issue by simply asking questions and letting people think about it. "Why is it wrong for women but not men?" rather than coming down on one side or the other of the multiple partners fence.
This comment is about a year late but Kristen is wrong. Polyandry is legal here in Tanzania though few or no women decide to practice. In fact on our marriage license we have a choice and can check multiple wives or multiple husbands off a list. This is just an FYI
Post a Comment