{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026485325697924122, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002863278453829635, 'mean_word_length': 5.502325581395349, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
“In Our Culture”—How Debates about Zimbabwe's Domestic Violence Law Became a “Culture Struggle”

This article analyses a debate about the political definition of “culture” and “tradition” in Zimbabwe, sparked by the introduction of domestic violence legislation in 2006. The debate is analysed against the back-drop of the Zimbabwean government's nationalist identity politics, rhetorically dubbed the “Third Chimurenga”, in which insiders and outsiders of the nation are depicted via a cultural and historical discourse of indigenous authenticity. The relations of gender and power which are inherent to this political discourse are analysed as functioning through the formulation of discourses of marriage, Christianity, and “tradition”, which are the contested elements in the debates. The article concludes that the nationalist discourses of the government were maintained as the discursive framework within which the debates about the legislation could take place. And while those who opposed the law saw it as an attack on patriarchal powers, the law can from an analytical point of view also be seen to transfer patriarchal authority from the private sphere to the authorities. Furthermore, the debates over the definition of Zimbabwe's “culture” and “tradition” are seen as part of a contingent process of cultural and political change, which the Zimbabwean women's movement is engaged in.