‘Bondswomen of Culture’: A gender critique of Bota reshupa and Kuhaza among the Ndau people of Chipinge, Zimbabwe

T. Muyambo
{"title":"‘Bondswomen of Culture’: A gender critique of Bota reshupa and Kuhaza among the Ndau people of Chipinge, Zimbabwe","authors":"T. Muyambo","doi":"10.15580/GJSS.2015.3.071515097","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Debates on Indigenous Knowledge Systems (hereafter IKS) are plenty and most scholarly works on IKS are couched from an Afro-centric perspective. The paper explores the significance of IKS or lack of it from a gender perspective. The general assumption that seems to be coming from academic works is that IKS are the panacea for world challenges, particularly in Africa. There is a tendency to romanticise IKS and gloss over some of their life-denying tenets. The question at hand is: To what extent are IKS sensitive to gender? The dearth of literature on this perspective calls for research and it is this gap that the paper fills in. The paper argues that not all IKS are worth the salt. There is need for what we may call ‘IKS hermeneutics’ 3 before IKS are embraced as both liberative and life affirming to humanity. Cultural hermeneutics informs the direction the study takes. The ‘deadly weapon of culture’ (Dube, 2003) as part of IKS views women as the ‘significant others’. The oppressive nature of such IKS are interrogated through critical discourse analysis of existing literature and in-depth interviews. It is prudent to admit that not all IKS are ‘safe space’ for most of African women and men alike. This, therefore, calls for the theory of ‘feminist cultural hermeneutics’.","PeriodicalId":145745,"journal":{"name":"Greener Journal of Social Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Greener Journal of Social Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15580/GJSS.2015.3.071515097","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Debates on Indigenous Knowledge Systems (hereafter IKS) are plenty and most scholarly works on IKS are couched from an Afro-centric perspective. The paper explores the significance of IKS or lack of it from a gender perspective. The general assumption that seems to be coming from academic works is that IKS are the panacea for world challenges, particularly in Africa. There is a tendency to romanticise IKS and gloss over some of their life-denying tenets. The question at hand is: To what extent are IKS sensitive to gender? The dearth of literature on this perspective calls for research and it is this gap that the paper fills in. The paper argues that not all IKS are worth the salt. There is need for what we may call ‘IKS hermeneutics’ 3 before IKS are embraced as both liberative and life affirming to humanity. Cultural hermeneutics informs the direction the study takes. The ‘deadly weapon of culture’ (Dube, 2003) as part of IKS views women as the ‘significant others’. The oppressive nature of such IKS are interrogated through critical discourse analysis of existing literature and in-depth interviews. It is prudent to admit that not all IKS are ‘safe space’ for most of African women and men alike. This, therefore, calls for the theory of ‘feminist cultural hermeneutics’.
“文化的女奴隶”:津巴布韦奇平格恩道人对Bota reshupa和Kuhaza的性别批判
关于土著知识系统(以下简称IKS)的争论很多,大多数关于IKS的学术著作都是从非洲中心的角度出发的。本文从性别的角度探讨了IKS的意义或缺失。似乎来自学术著作的普遍假设是,IKS是应对世界挑战的灵丹妙药,尤其是在非洲。有一种倾向是把英国人浪漫化,掩盖他们否定生命的信条。现在的问题是:英国人对性别有多敏感?这方面文献的缺乏需要研究,这篇论文填补了这一空白。这篇论文认为,并不是所有的IKS都值得付出代价。在IKS作为人类的解放和生命肯定被接受之前,我们需要所谓的“IKS解释学”。文化解释学决定了研究的方向。作为IKS的一部分,“文化的致命武器”(Dube, 2003)将女性视为“重要的他者”。通过对现有文献的批判性话语分析和深度访谈,对这些IKS的压迫性质进行了质疑。谨慎地承认,并不是所有的英国都是大多数非洲女性和男性的“安全空间”。因此,这需要“女性主义文化解释学”理论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信