Wonderful, not only do we have to find out over and over again that our President has no clue what constitutes morally acceptable behaviour, but we now also discover that our Minister of Arts & Culture doesn’t have any. And is homophobic too.
Lulu Xingwana’s department gave R300 000 towards a Innovative Women exhibition, and the exhibition has toured the country, returning now to Constitution Hill where she was to open the exhibition. Sadly she never go to read her speech - after taking one glance at the work of prominent artist, and lesbian activist, she referred to it as pornographic, spoke to her aides, and then left in a huff. And believe me, our politicians are very good at leaving in a huff. I’d say Prima Donna, but then they don’t have the same grace of Opera singers.
The offending pictures were as far from Robert Mapplethorpe as you could imagine: -
Obviously I’m in no position to decide what is offensive and what is not. A statement she released later stated
“Our mandate is to promote social cohesion and nation building. I left the exhibition because it expressed the very opposite of this.
“It was immoral, offensive and going against nation-building.”
“Minister Xingwana was also concerned that there were children present at the event and that children should not be exposed to some of the images on exhibit.”
We live in a society (and I’m specifically referring to South Africa here), where young children are being exposed to rape, and worse, in their neighbourhoods and even in their homes. Rape and child abuse are far worse than the sight of two women embracing, instead we are left with a bitter taste realising that this dear minister is shamefully homophobic – what disturbed her more was not the site of naked flesh, but the knowledge that these photographs were taken by a lesbian, and therefore the embraces suddenly became something more in her twisted mind.
Immoral, offensive and against nation building? I challenge you to look at both the images above and point out exactly how they are immoral and how they could go against nation building. I concede that the one image may well be offensive to some, but that is all
She clearly would have preferred the works to have been censored, or not shown at all, and this in a country which supposedly has the most liberal constitution. Alas, the liberal minded individuals who put that great document together have been replaced by narrow minded idiots (sorry, is there a better word?) not fit for the office they hold.

