Friday, 28 September 2018

My Mother, My Doctor

It is a Friday, once again and once again we are fed with an article from the Richie Online bowl. Throughout the course of the week, I have been thinking about drafting something about the event of the week, the Lake of Stars festival. The thoughts were disturbed by the significant political events in the country. Compelling as those were, they were superseded by issues to do with my own health.

I woke up on a Thursday morning with a headache and general body pains. Nsanawu umachita kutsina zosowetsa mtendere zija and that was in addition to the sore throat and runny nose I had. I forced myself out of bed to take a shower in a bid to gather some strength and start to punch holes through my to-do list. Everything started well and I managed to do almost all the things I had on my list. In the late afternoon, however things changed for the worse. I increasingly grew weak and I could hardly do anything beyond lifting the bottle of water that was on the bedside. I got worried that I might be having malaria.

The thought of the possibility of malaria was not a far-fetched one. Mandala, the area I live in is plagued by the worst mosquitoes I have ever seen. To keep them at bay, I use an insecticide treated net (often retiring early to bed to seek refuge in it) and either an insecticide coil or spray. The interesting thing, however, is that I still wake up with some bad skin reactions from mosquito bites. Having had a fair dose of the mosquito bites, I thought that might as well have been malaria and that led into a chain reaction of thoughts of memories and thoughts about my previous malaria and pseudo-malaria attacks.

In the days before I moved out of my parents’ home, illnesses like the one I had on this particular Thursday used to be dealt with a dose of Novidar SP straight from the shop. That was the first resort before turning to the hospital. Do not get me wrong. In our family we go to the hospital a lot, but even before that, my mum always made sure that we had used the means at our disposal to sort things out.

When I advanced into the clinical years at the College of Medicine, I began to disagree with my mum’s methods. Being “educated” had made me realize that not every fever could be attributed to malaria and we would get into heated debates when it came to such illnesses. On one occasion, I had a fever and upon going to the hospital I tested negative for malaria. I was given some antibiotics with the presumption that I had a bacterial infection. My mum was not impressed and she insisted that I get some antimalarial medication on top of the antibiotics I received. I protested and I stuck to the antibiotics. Two days later, I was well up and running.

The situation would repeat itself a couple of years later after my graduation from the College of Medicine. By this time, I had happily moved out and was living comfortably in some guest wing on the opposite side of the city. I had woken up well only to start feeling funny on one fateful Saturday. It was probably nothing, I thought. Towards the end of the day, things were not too good and I had to miss one of my favorite activities; choir practice for the coming Sunday. Long story short, the illness progressed and I missed work on the next Monday. When I went to seek medical attention, I was tested for malaria and the test came out negative. Another course of strong antibiotics was given and I was on my way home. When I called my mum to tell her I wasn’t feeling well, we reignited the debate on how I needed to get antimalarial medication. Owing it to the past experience, I strongly opposed the view. Antibiotics were the remedy for me and after a day on them I was able to drag myself to work to sort out my fellow patients on Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital’s Ward 4A.

The funny thing was that after knocking off on this particular day things got worse. It was more of a rebound attack of fever and general body pains. I was forced to go back to the hospital for a repeat malaria test. Bingo! Malaria positive. By the time I was getting home to start the antimalarials, things were so bad I felt like I was on my way to meet my maker. Out of parental instincts, my dad came in to see me and he immediately decided that I go home for closer observation. A bumpy ride later, I found myself worse and requiring admission at Mlambe Mission Hospital..

Recounting the last experience, I find myself wondering as to which one I should trust more; my medical doctor instincts or the parental instincts. Her Excellency had figured out that I had malaria even before the famous Malaria Rapid Diagnostic Test could tell. I was left trusting this test while harboring the parasites which were slowly dragging me towards my end but somehow this wonderful woman sensed what was going on from the opposite end of town.

I remembered the time when we got into a conversation about getting over the counter medications for my nieces. At this particular point, I was telling her that it was not a good practice to keep getting medications from the shops for the little ones with the better option being going to the hospital and getting a thorough checkup. That was to be the last time I ever said that because I was silenced with some strong words. “Inutu munapulumukira zomwezi. Pano mwaphunzira ndiye mukufuna muyambe kuchuluka nzeru?” She won, and since then I have let her do her thing. When I am in my parental home, I will just resign to my place of being the last born child my parents have, I decided. Izi za udokotala tidzipangira moyendamu and I don’t give any health related advice without being asked to.

Perhaps there is something special about parents and their children’s health, I keep thinking. I can’t help but wonder who I will trust the next time I get a negative malaria test; the test kit or my mother, my doctor.

Moral of the narrative? Osamapanga makani ndi makolo.

Friday, 21 September 2018

Demonstrations; but for what?

It is a wonderful sunny day in Blantyre and there can never be a better day for writing and reading. Contrary to the other Fridays when I wake up with many ideas punching each other for space on the blog, I woke up with absolutely no idea of what I was going to feed to my readers today. That changed when I opened my Whatsapp, which has of late been a good source of article worthy posts and discussions. So… What did we see on Whatsapp today? A picture of people demonstrating against the DPP led government in Zomba, of course.

Prior to the sight of this picture, I came across a Facebook post indicating people’s intentions to demonstrate against the government. I am not too sure as to the reasons that were cited as the trigger to the demonstrations as the post was just about the schedule and the routes people were to take on the way to deliver the petitions to the respective places of delivery in the country’s major cities (if we are allowed to call them that). The organizers? Civil societies, of course. My recent religious following of MBC news tells me that these were organized by a civil society called Human Rights Defenders Coalition or something that sounds like that. I am told that in the light of the demonstrations, our listening government extended an invitation to a round table discussion to the CSO in question. We are not too sure about how constructive the invitation was but it did not get a nod from what top government gurus want to make us believe. Interesting, not so?

When the picture of the demonstrators was shared on some professional forum, others gave a thumb up (emoji) and commended the bravery of those who took it to the streets; highlighting the importance of doing something about the challenges we face as Malawians. One critical member, however, posed a question which hardly attracted any convincing answers: To what and whose benefit do these demonstrations work? If this was a Facebook post, I would have left it right there and asked people to comment. This, however, is Richie Online so I will continue and share a bit of sense on what I think actually goes on.

To begin with, the demonstrations we have had in the recent past have had no palpable positive impact on the issues in question. People have organized and staged demonstrations in a bid to fix the governance and economic issues in the country but the only changes we have seen were the vandalism of property, loss of lives and a chronic worsening of the issues “concerned citizens” demonstrate against. In my own view, if demonstrations have proven anything in our setting then it is just that demonstrations do not work when it comes to bringing positive change when it comes to government related issues. My opinion, eti? My belief that demonstrations hardly (if they) work amplifies the question of whose benefit they work to, considering the number of demonstrations we have had following the sad events of that 20th of July.
The first answer to this question would just be that there might be a number of people who are process oriented (as opposed to outcome oriented) who just want to do something about the status quo without projecting the potential effect of their actions or lack of thereof. Organizers of demonstrations may simply organize the activities and lead demonstrations while they know that nothing will happen or without foreknowledge that their grievances will fall on deaf ears.

Considering the former situation, people may use flaws in the governance system and demonstrations just to make noise and seek attention or they may be doing it for their own interest and in a bid to advance their own agenda. On the other hand, some may have too much faith in which case they may think that delivering a petition while wearing a red t-shirt to the office of some city council may stop nepotism and plunder of government resources by some gurus. I personally do not subscribe to that thought process.

On another note, a certain DPP enthusiast offered an alternative explanation on Facebook. In his post, he explained how the organizers of the demonstrations received money from some funders for organizing the demonstrations. He also explained how honoring the invitation to the discussions by the government would mean cancelling the demonstrations and thus returning the money that was sourced for the demonstrations. In the blue blooded man’s words, the money had already been divided among the organizers who had already used it thus cancelling the demonstrations was not an option. Solution? Not showing up for the round table discussion and going on with the demonstrations, of course.

While some might question the view that some CSOs cash in on the demonstrations, I personally believe that it is not a far-fetched idea. People with interests in our governance systems may be willing to advance their own agenda through the organizations who in turn get significant amounts of money for organizing some ill-conceived demonstrations with no tangible perceived benefits. While this may not be true for all organizations and civil rights activists, it is surely more than true for a few bad apples out here.

Going back to the question of what benefit and to whose benefit demonstrations work, I am convinced that the question was asked in a bid to tell us that the demonstrations were useless and that some people were blindly demonstrating without the knowledge that they might have been advancing someone else’s agenda. I am interested in knowing the impact of the latest demonstrations (which had the leader of opposition in attendance). On the other hand, I feel like we need to look to other effective alternatives of sorting out the governance and economic woes.

Demonstrations have failed miserably. If you are really convinced that it is the blue coating that is messing the governance and economy for you, then you surely have an alternative come next year. Otherwise, work hard and make your own money while pretending that everything else is moving smoothly out there.

Friday, 14 September 2018

The Evolution of the In-law


Greetings. I really can’t say this is much of an awesome Friday. Prior to writing this article, I was barricaded on some cubicle in some office space in an area I think is the hottest place on the planet earth; trying to make ends meet. Paja ndalama ili pa minga. Either way.  I managed to survive the day and think of getting fingers on the keypad for this article.

Business for today? Yeah. Let’s get on with it. Today we will talk about an important person called an in-law. Mlamu.

The general idea of man-woman (or boy-girl relationships, now that we are factoring your immaturity and everything else) is that it is generally a two-human show. Culture, however, decided to add a spice to the mix and the in-law was invented. What that basically means is that I need to have some kind of relationship and defined limits of interaction with the siblings of the person I end up dating (or marrying) or the one who marries my siblings (the latter sounds more relatable for me). Interesting, right? Probably. What I find more interesting, however, is the evolution of the in law and how the definitions of the thing have over time deviated from the original.

I have not had much time to study the interactions between in laws in the western context so I am not too sure as to what people do with their in laws that side. My observation from life in the village where I grew up and from local literature (fictional or otherwise) made me realize that an in-law is that one person with who you are sort of mandated to be connected with to a certain extent. Although there is a difference between patrilineal and matrilineal tribes on the same, both cultures generally emphasize on keeping a distance between in-laws. That is for a good reason, I guess. Here is a person who has married your sibling or to whose sibling you are married. You need to be open enough so that you can discuss issues to do with the welfare of the families but at the same time you have to be closed up enough to avoid talking about things the other is not supposed to hear. There is also an interesting difference  between the interaction depending on whether the in-law is of the same gender.
The traditional sense of the in-law generally used to apply to the setting of marriage. Over time, we have seen it trickle down to serious relationships and now to casual relationships. Along the same lines, the concept has also metastasized from blood relationships where it was originally confined to strong friendships. Now that is what we call the evolution of the in-law and if you thought these facts are useless, you need to think again. Ndikukamba makamaka kwa amene musanakwatire inu.

Let us put things in the relationships context. In the early days, there used to be some sort of fear for the person you were dating or hoping for. Amatha kukukupa khofi ndithu regardless of the age difference. We (by we I mean boys) used to avoid the paths they used frequently, the pitches they played their football on and the video showrooms they went to. Over time, however, that has changed a lot. People approach their in-laws with friendly gestures without fear and it is not a strange thing to see social media and physical interactions between azilamu. I observed and experienced a fair share of all this and I am of the idea that the dilution of the traditional connotations of chilamu is the way to go; as long as the people in question are the relatives of the spouse. That brings us to the second element of the evolution. That being said, there is need for distance especially when the in-law is from the opposite “species”. Kuopa ngozi.

As I already pointed out, the concept of the in-law used to be bound by blood and marriage. Over years, people have loosened the definition of the word to accommodate friends of a spouse. The interesting thing about this is that it has brought in a different dimension to relationships. While  we may think that this is a loose use of the concept of "in-lawship", zilamu izizi are usually functional and they significantly contribute to the relationship; positively or otherwise.

Those of you who are in relationships can agree with me that you have a couple of friends on your  spouse crawling all over your Whatsapp and Instagram; taking screenshots and reposting things at will. At times, they can be very helpful as they can provide information that can help you plan things and throw in pleasant surprises. Eeetu. We all need that someone we can ask shoe sizes and favorite things from in the early days. These ones also prove to be the best mediators whenever there are conflicts. Well. Sometimes.

All I have said seems to be good. So why are we bothering with this article? Here is the reason. While the modern version of the in-law might be good and constructive, the evil version of the same might end your happiness or even your life.

In the modern day where people have multiple concurrent relationships your in law can either be your protector or the catalyst for your end. While some would reason with their sister or brother and guide them away from the promiscuous tendencies, some will be the ones that will shield their own while giving you the image that you are the only one in play. Some of you might be guilty of this sin of calling each one of your friend’s six spouses “alamu athu”. Mukapsa. And then there are these in laws that always come as a gang. When your guy is coming over for dinner he always brings a pack of 3 other wolves who are gunning for your mgaiwa. When you want to take your girl out, there are always those side-kicks of hers who want to come along and chop your money. Azilamu mupole moto. Sometimes we should let people be and not let them suffer in the name of chilamu; when we in fact know that our buddy is not serious with the person in question. Ndanena ndanena.

Having said that, I think the whole idea of having functional in-laws is good whether you apply it in the loose or strict sense. I particularly love it when me and my cousins interact with the men who married our sisters over beverages. The level of respect and the distance between us is just in nicely balanced proportions. I might be guilty of entertaining azilamu opanda tsogolo but that is the life we should all try to deviate from. Pena azichimwene ndi azichemwali tend to put us in difficult situations. I also like how some in-laws like to orchestrate and fuel non-existent relationships and try to rescue relationships when they are at the verge of collapsing. The in-law has evolved over time and has the capability of being either useful or harmful. Bikheyafu.

Lastly, mlamu ndi mtolo wa nzimbe. Whatever that means.



Friday, 7 September 2018

Religion and Reaction

It is another wonderful Friday,  isn't  it?  Well. I think it is.

While it remains sad that last week we did not have an article,  I must admit that I was relieved to note that no single soul enquired about the thing.  That was nice.  No guilt whatsoever. Prior to that missed article,  however I had promised to give my readers something about the comments by some blue zealots.  Yeah.  That thing about the age of the Pope and more importantly the reaction it triggered.

If you haven't been living under some sort of huge rock or in the stone age,  you might have heard the audio or watched the video clips of some DPP official (Deputy Director of Youth,  I think) who in his defence for Prof Mutharika's fresh bid for presidency amidst  calls for him to step down due to old age, decided to compare the Malawi  leader to the leader  of the Catholic church. His argument was that the Pope is very old and in fact older than APM,  thus warranting the president another mandate. His age is optimal,  in other words. To spice the remarks up,  they good man even went on to call out one senior party official who is a Catholic before voicing out his views.

The week following the rally saw the audio and video clips of the speech become the subject of discussion in the social media,  and more so on my favorite Whatsapp. Being a Catholic faithful  myself,  I got to see them reaction as it unfolded  in the various church Whatsapp  groups and status updates of fellow staunch Catholics who were outraged by the fact that a politician called out to their leader. Fair point,  right? Maybe not.

An interesting angle to the discussion came up when the same issue was debated on a rather neutral forum.  This is one professional forum  where discussions on politics and religion are tolerated thus the story found a niche for discussion. While most sympathized and sided with the Catholics on the issue and condemned the blue zealot in question, a small sect pointed out that the whole issue had been blown out of proportion and that people needed to swallow a chill pill and get the issue over with. Some even pointed out that people (including the offended Catholics ) needed to stop playing double standards over issues as they had earlier joined the bandwagon in trivializing the issue  of the "dancing Dorica" a couple of weeks earlier.

The dancing Dorica. This was a Mighty BeForward Wanderers supporter who came to the stadium dressed in the full suit of the Seventh  Day Adventist women's  guild kit for a game.  The issue triggered some reaction  from the SDA faithful but others jumped to the defence of the guy saying that Adventists needed to swallow a chill pill over the matter.  Some even produced a picture of an Argentine supporter who showed  up to the stadium in a papal attire, a thing that went without incident. I will leave you to decide whether that was a relatable comparison.

Back on the Whatsapp  group,  I found myself miserably failing to resist the urge to comment. My view?  Both issues (ya Dorika  komanso  ya a papa) were greatly overreacted to. Ana a Ekelezia  ndi Mipesa all needed chill pills.

My first (and probably only) argument is that these people needed to know who they were dealing with.  I think that would have  probably helped with the situation.  With due respect  to the fact that religion is a sensitive issue,  we should have considered the fact that the very people who we accused of trivializing  our religious regalia and leaders do not share the perceived seriousness of religion.  Perhaps that could be the only explanation especially  in the dancing Dorcas scenario.  As for the political slur, all of us who have seen the DPP rise from the ground up know what sort of party it is; full of zealots who are ready to do and say anything to please their political masters and gain favors from above. Such people would do anything from insulting political opponents to responding to prayers and taking a swipe at a religious leader wasn't  something that was too far out of reach. We all could have used a little application of this knowledge.

The other thing we should have thought before reacting is that of whether the reaction was proportion to the damaged caused; if there was any. I am not too sure about how highly the Dorcas "kit" is regarded among Adventist  faithfuls but one thing I have learnt from the papal age saga  is how far Catholics are willing to go to defend the image of their leader. On the other hand,  I found myself asking people how they thought the Holy Father would have reacted if the news had gotten him first  hand. I  personally  do not think that he would have written long articles explaining how wrong it is to compare his age to that of a secular leader who is seeking reelection.  I might be wrong but I think the Pontif would have let this one slide and prepared yet another unrelated homily for delivery through that famous window  of his facing the St Peter's Square. My point is just that I thinkpeople were mounting a serious defence  for something that didn't  need any defending whatsoever.

Having said what  I said about the reaction,  I have to point out that people  need to draw lines between religion and everything else considering the sensitivity that surrounds religion. We might joke about some things without offending each other but issues to do with religion seem to haven't some heightened  effect when it comes to offending people. Perhaps it's  time our politicians learnt which lines to cross and which ones to tread along.  Here is one politician who went on the podium and gave strong opinions  without knowledge  of how papal succession goes and how they control for age in the same.

 Along the same lines,  football issues should remain football issues and replica jerseys which are the most suitable attire for football should be the thing of choice when it comes to football events. Zinazi zingatiyambitsire civil war.

By the way... There was a special program  on the Catholic broadcaster, Radio Maria in response to the whole thing of the age "insult" directed at the Pope.  There were a lot of issues raised but the one I loved was that politicians need to know what to comment on and what not to avoid shooting themselves  in the foot. Whether we needed a special program for the issue is another  issue that is subject to debate.

All in all, let us all learn to tame our tongues and excitement  while mastering the art of keeping our reactions in check.