The Many Wives of Jacob Zuma

Why the South African president's polygamy is about more than womanizing.

BY MIRIAM KOKTVEDGAARD ZEITZEN | MARCH 12, 2010

When news recently came out that Jacob Zuma, South Africa's president, had fathered a child out of wedlock, observers abroad were amused or nonplussed. This is, of course, a man who has had five wives over his lifetime, currently has three with one fiancée in the wings, and has fathered 12 children officially, with seven more previously rumored or confirmed in various sorts of relationships; a man who, on trial in 2006 for raping the HIV-positive daughter of one of his ANC comrades, claimed that it was OK he didn't use a condom because he took a shower afterward. So what was the big deal now?

In fact, however, many South Africans are appalled. And they're not just upset about the adultery itself, which is not more socially acceptable in polygamous societies than in monogamous ones, or the fact that he hasn't married the mother of his child. Instead, South Africans are asking themselves: How can a modern president practice polygamy in the first place? Isn't polygamy an archaic, patriarchic institution? Shouldn't economic progress, women's emancipation, and modernity have eradicated it?

The answer is more complicated: Actually, modernity has entrenched polygamy. Zuma may seem like a throwback, but in a sense he's really a model of a modern, married politician.

More than being about companionship or sex, polygamy is about money and status. Across the world, the practice has traditionally been the privilege of those who could afford to marry and maintain many wives and children. Practicing polygamy is a public sign that you have more resources -- economic, political, and personal -- than the average man. Marriage has always been used to build alliances between families and groups; this is even truer for polygamy, with its broad possibilities for connection. Like a fancy job or a big house, polygamy both creates status and derives from it. And gaining various kinds of statuses is still what drives men (and women) to polygamy in Africa today. Even in many of Africa's affluent urban centers, polygamy is on the rise as more men can afford more wives, and they benefit from the prestige and power that this status confers (though, as I discuss in my recent book on polygamy, numbers are hard to come by).  

In modern times, polygamy offers some more subtle markers of power and status, given its connection to traditional culture. It's no accident that Zuma defends polygamy as "my culture"; for Zuma, practicing polygamy marks him clearly as a Zulu and connects him to pre-colonial African traditions, giving him an identity that could otherwise be lost in a globalized, Westernized blur.

Part of this, of course, is sincere, and part of this is what politicians everywhere do: deploying culture as an appeal to potential supporters. Zuma's polygamy plays well in rural areas, where supporters essentially lead traditional lives.

For Zuma, it has certainly paid off: Among Zulus, there has rarely been a leader more beloved. Particularly in a post-apartheid, multiethnic setting like South Africa, where cultural identities are constantly being tested and negotiated, polygamy is a key part of Zuma's political persona -- and hence, his power.

RAJESH JANTILAL/AFP/Getty Images

 

Miriam Koktvedgaard Zeitzen is assistant professor at the University of Copenhagen and author of Polygamy: A Cross-Cultural Anaylsis.

NORBOOSE

7:54 PM ET

March 13, 2010

I dont think large scale polygamy can work in a modern society

Obviously, polygamy can easily be found among tiny numbers of extremely powerful men, but I just dont think the demographics would work out if applied the way it used to be. In premodern societies, men who were merely the rough equivalent of upper-middle class could have multiple wives. This was not only possible but likely beneficial to a premodern society, as a lot more men died before reaching adulthood than women. Men commonly fought to the death over what we would consider triffles. A minor accident while working could easily be a death sentence. Mens roles made them more likely to encounter dangerous animals, poisons, or environmental hazards. Constant low intensity warfare roamed the world. The survivability of military combat was really low (Im talking Germans in WW2 low). In many societies, particularly Neolithic ones, around 25% of men would simply be murdered. Nowadays, the number of adult men and adult women, even in third world warzones, are much closer to even. Thats why just dont think its demographically feasible for polygamy to be widely practiced outside of the very top echelons of a society anymore.

 

CLYTEMNESTRA

9:34 PM ET

March 13, 2010

Women's rights ARE "human rights"

Apartheid should have taught South Africans the evils of treating people as second-class citizens. Why can they not recognize that polygamy treats women as second-class citizens? (I've never read about Zulu women having multiple husbands.)

And why is it that the rest of the world objects vocally when unequal treatment is based on race or religion, but doesn't seem to care when it's based on gender?

 

NORBOOSE

10:54 AM ET

March 14, 2010

Sad Truth

In many premodern societies polygamy was practiced by powerful women, it was less common for several reasons (see first post for a major reason).

Sadly, gender equality is less clear cut than other characteristics people are born with (lets be honest, in most societies the religion your born into is the one you will die in). Equality in general terms means "the same". Even the freest of societies have some gender distinctions, likely for the better. You can tell a third world man "that man from far away that looks different than you, hes the same as you, just born into a different situation" and that argument is understandable to him. It still works, though not quite as well, with religion. However, when you say "that woman is the same as you" he thinks you are either insulting him, speaking in some substanceless spiritual terms, or insane. The fact that there are actually some real functional differences between men and women is why its hard to get people from medevilly hierarchal societies to understand the need for legal and general social equality. I agree with you, Im justanswering the question. Oh, by the way, nice mythology reference.

 

THOUGHTFORFOOD

4:43 AM ET

March 15, 2010

However one may attempt to

However one may attempt to justify it, Zuma is still applying an anachronistic principle to ends that benefit no one but himself and a small group of cronies - not his country, not Africa, nor the world.

Of course criticising traditional cultures that do harm others is not de rigueur today!

Zuma (and his party) are slipping down the dictatorial slide; stifling opposition, labeling any critics as "subvertors of the state", seeing government as their "right to rule" and not a duty to the electorate.

They are able to accomplish far more effectively by invoking culture as a defense; transparency is a colonial legacy, apparently, and contrary to their cultural mores.

Is it no wonder Africa (and South Africa especially) has such an exploding HIV rate and shocking rape statistics, thanks to this patriarchal anachronism!

 

ROSS MCLEMAN

8:03 AM ET

March 15, 2010

It may work better than the western system

Traditional african polyamy may do nothing to promote womans rights, but might be better in many ways than what we practise in the west. First wives become "senior" wives, a position denoting some recognition and respect in traditional societies. Too often in the west, when a man reaches a position of wealth and power he "trades in" his current wife for a younger, more glamorous model to display as a trophy, despite the years of hardship and support the first wife may have provided on the way to the top. Neither way is necessarily good, but it is glib to simply assume the western practise is superior.

 

NORBOOSE

10:19 AM ET

March 15, 2010

Monogamy isnt western

The development of monogamy as the norm is universal. In some societies, polygamy developed as a status symbol. Regardless of culture, any modernized nation must be overwhelmingly monogamous, simply because the male and female populations are roughly equal, unlike in premodern times, when adult women signifficantly outnumbered adult men.

 

ROOTEDCOSMOPOLITAN

7:33 PM ET

March 15, 2010

what's the big deal?

Both Presidents Obasanjo of Nigeria and Kufour of Ghana were polygamists as well as fundamentalist Christians who attended the US Congressional Prayer Breakfasts. A friend who is an Oba in the Yoruba area of Nigeria is rebuilding the palace to accommodate his multiple wives, an idea which seemed to me counter-intuitive to say the least.

It does not work well in urban life, which is why in Nigeria and Ghana most men prefer mistresses rather than additional wives, and do not have children outside of the monogamous marriage.

Most of my West African friends and age mates, men and women, are products of polygamous marriages, however, and I fail to see any particular problems in their characters traceable to their polygamous upbringings. Really, cultural relativism in the West can be tiresome, but raising issues like this never fails to remind me how silly alternative points of view can be. In my experience, polygamy is much less damaging to children than home schooling, with its exaggerated relationships between parents and children.

 

LHG

12:06 PM ET

March 17, 2010

President Zuma, his culture & modernity?

Ms Miriam Zeitzen seems to confuse modern politics with polygamy....President Zuma modern? Is his attitude towards women & sexuality modern? If Ms Zeitzen had looked further than her tower, perhaps she would see that although President Zuma may very well appeal to the masses through his culture, she may well remember it is a Zulu one, and one which does not tolerate lesbians, gay men nor treating women as equals. Whilst Polygamy maybe a different issue - I agree with certain comments regarding that its not a big deal between consenting adults and I do not think that it necessarily "degrades" women per se - it does not indicate any modernism on his part. By this, I do not mean to say that culture or traditions/customs etc are conversely "old fashioned,' or irrelevant but that South Africa has a serious problem here with melding traditional culture with international human rights norms and gender equality as they may well work against each other. President Zuma's popularist appeal as a Zulu was and is strategic: he was put in to replace ex President Mbeki. His marriages may well be tactical business alliances akin to European Royal marriages, but that does not mean that Ms Zeitzen can claim that President Zuma, an African and a Zulu, is "modern" through his polygamy. Her article is ashamedly simplistic, adds no further value to the pool of information on President Zuma and his relation to his nation, and makes a mockery of a situation that is as complex as it is challenging.