Showing posts with label Africa. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Africa. Show all posts

Friday, March 15, 2013

Penis Snatching on the Rise in Africa

Africa’s Genital-Stealing Crime Wave Hits the Countryside - All part of an illicit and lucrative trade in organs. 
By Louisa Lombard | Pacific Standard 

March 14, 2013 | Elaborate greetings are the norm, I’ve found, when one enters a Central African village. So it was a surprise when I noticed that many people weren’t shaking hands the morning I arrived in Tiringoulou, a town of about 2,000 people in one of the remotest corners of the Central African Republic, in March 2010. I soon found out the reason: the day before, a traveler passing through town on a Sudanese merchant truck had, with a simple handshake, removed two men’s penises.

As best I could reconstruct from witness accounts, the stranger had stopped to purchase a cup of tea at the market. After handing over his money, he clasped the vendor’s hand. The tea seller felt an electric tingling course through his body and immediately sensed that his penis had shrunk to a size smaller than that of a baby’s. His yells quickly drew a crowd. Somehow in the fray a second man fell victim as well.

Hearing all this, I was less shocked than intrigued. As an anthropologist who studies the region, I was familiar with the problem of penis snatching. What surprised me was that the phenomenon—or, depending on your perspective, the rumor—had made it as far as Tiringoulou.

Reports of genital theft have spread like an epidemic across West and Central Africa over the past two decades, in tandem with what appears to be a general resurgence of witchcraft on the continent. Anthropologists have explained this rise as a response to an increasingly mystifying and capricious global economy. Which is to say that when the workings of capital are as genuinely obscure as they are in today’s Africa, proceeding behind a veil of complexity and corruption, rumors of “occult economies”—often involving a trade in human organs—offer a less mystifying explanation for the radical disparities in wealth on display.

That said, genital theft is neither new nor confined to Africa. Similar panics afflicted Central Europe in the 15th and 16th centuries. (Malleus Maleficarum  a book-length jeremiad against the dangers of witchcraft from 1486, includes a discussion of sorceresses who “take away male members” and keep them in birds’ nests.) And in 1967, an outbreak of koro—the belief that the penis is retracting into the body—overwhelmed hospitals in Singapore.

In Africa today, scholars who study penis snatching understand it mainly as an urban phenomenon—an extreme expression of the anxieties that pervade a city when villagers become urbanites en masse, living among throngs of unfamiliar people. That’s because most cases have been reported in crowded spots like Lagos, in Nigeria, and Douala, in Cameroon. But here I was in Tiringoulou—a dusty, peanut-growing hamlet so small and poor it barely has a market. If penis snatching had previously been a city dweller’s fear, now it seemed that not even the remotest places would be spared.

But spared from what, exactly?

It’s fair to say there are victims on both sides of the penis-snatching equation.

Shortly after the disturbance in the Tiringoulou market, members of the armed rebel group that governs the town arrested the traveler and subjected him to a harsh interrogation—for his own protection, they told me later. Had they left him to the mob, the town’s women would have torn the stranger limb from limb, they reasoned. But the protection, such as it was, did not last long: the supposed thief was executed by gunshot later that day. (Aware that international law frowns on summary execution, the rebel commander who oversaw the execution relayed a different version of events: he said the thief had mysteriously vanished from his holding cell.)

As for the men whose penises were stolen, several eyewitnesses assured me that the appendages did indeed shrink dramatically. I can’t offer such an intimate eyewitness account myself, but I did visit one of the men at his home, and he clearly seemed to be suffering. He lay propped on one elbow, slack and listless in loose sweatpants, on a woven mat in the shade outside his house. A handful of friends kept him company. Over cups of sweet tea, I asked them about how they understood the recent events.

Penis snatching, they said, was a means of supplying an illicit and lucrative trade in organs. Cameroonians and Nigerians—people from places “where they have multistory buildings”—were seen as particularly well versed in the business. “You see how advanced Cameroon is?” someone said. “It’s because they are so strong in commerce of all kinds, including in genitals and scalps.” The stolen organs, my companions said, are sold to occult healers for use in ceremonies, or else they are quickly fenced back to victims of penis snatching for a price. But the real money was to be made in Europe. One man who had spent some time living in Cameroon said he had heard of a woman there who was nabbed by airport security while trying to smuggle several penises to the Continent inside a baguette.

I asked the town doctor what he thought. Could he help the victims? He shook his head slowly—as if trying to gauge how much I believed about the whole affair—and then responded, “Western medicine is no match for this magic. It is a mysterious thing.”

Mysterious indeed. But perhaps no more so than certain afflictions that are less strange to us in the West. If penis stealing seems beyond-the-pale weird, consider what people in Tiringoulou might think upon hearing of Americans who starve themselves near to death because their reflection in the mirror convinces them they are fat. 

Tuesday, October 2, 2012

Unsurvivable - The Newest Thermonuclear War Threat taking place NOW

Obama's deployment of a major portion of the U.S. thermonuclear capabilities in multiple theaters threatening both Russia and China is basically daring them to respond in kind. If they do, that's it, game over. We are as close to nuclear annihilation as we've ever been, and we cheer for our demise so loud, we drown out any cries of dissent.


Saturday, July 17, 2010

The Problem with Design...

...Imperialism or Thinking Too Small? 
ALEX STEFFEN, 15 JUL 10

Bruce Nussbaum has stirred up a fierce debate with his new article Is Humanitarian Design the New Imperialism?. Nussbaum criticizes groups like Project H, Acumen Fundand Architecture for Humanity for being perhaps naive about the post-colonial landscape they face in Asia and Africa:
Is the new humanitarian design coming out of the U.S. and Europe being perceived through post-colonial eyes as colonialism? Are the American and European designers presuming too much in their attempt to do good?
What's more, Nussbaum says, we ought to be focusing our efforts closer to home: "And finally, one last question: why are we only doing humanitarian design in Asia and Africa and not Native American reservations or rural areas, where standards of education, water and health match the very worst overseas?"

Of course, Emily Pilloton of Project H has shot right back, saying it is Nussbaum himself who is out of touch with the younger generation of humanitarian designers, designers who are well-aware of the cultural and political landscapes in which they're working, and are in fact increasingly focused on problems closer to home:
It is only through this local engagement and shared investment that the humanitarian design process shines. It is through this personal connection to place and people that the human qualities of design rise to the top of the priority list, through which our clients are no longer beneficiaries, but experts and co-designers right there with us. In his infamous address titled “To Hell With Good Intentions,” Ivan Illich puts this beautifully: 'If you have any sense of responsibility at all, stay with your riots here at home...You will know what you are doing, why you are doing it, and how to communicate with those to whom you speak. And you will know when you fail. If you insist on working with the poor, if this is your vocation, then at least work among the poor who can tell you to go to hell.' We all have to learn how to be citizens again: citizens first, and designers second. Citizenship is inherently local, defined by our connection and commitment to the places we best know and most love.
In the last few days, there have been different takes on this debate from leading thinkers likeCameron Sinclair, Susan Szenasy and Robert Fabricant. Now, I have conflicts of interest all over the place here -- Emily and Cameron are friends, I've sat on a panel and shared ideas with Susan, and Worldchanging's discussing a project with Frog Design -- so I'm not going to take sides, but I find the conversation extremely encouraging.

That said, some things are missing here, I think. In particular, the whole discussion has glanced over two critical realities: the scope, scale and speed of the planetary crisis we face, and the profoundly unequal distribution of access that exists to tools of innovation globally. I don't have time to write a proper essay today, but I'd like to share a few thoughts.

Most of us in the Global North are out of touch with the scope, scale and speed of the problems we face. We live in a global civilization that can measure its life expectancy in decades if it continues to operate as it does today. We know that we're straying beyond a series of non-negotiable ecological boundaries (the most obvious being the concentration of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere). The predicted consequences are profound in a way that's difficult to fully grasp, but could well involve the complete collapse of large portions of human society and almost unimaginable suffering and destruction.

"This is not a small probability of a rather unattractive outcome," as Lord Stern, former Chief Economist of the World Bank, reminds us. "This is a big probability of a very bad outcome.”

This planetary sustainability crisis is impossible to tackle unless the Global North redesigns its own prosperity to be at least carbon neutral (and probably actually  carbon negative) by 2050. Because it takes time for innovations to spread and become universal, that 2050 goal, in turn, means innovating many of our urban land use, transportation and energy systems (as well as the products and services we use) to be  carbon neutral by 2030. Zero impact is the only rational goal,  and we need to be working towards it right now.

In addition, between two and four billion young people are expected to raise themselves into the global middle class in the Global South over the next 40 years, and billions more poorer people will have to find stable systems of survival in a rapidly changing world. The new global middle class can only adopt a bright green, climate-responsible model of prosperity if such a model is available when they need it. That forces us to confront a second planetary reality: the international distribution of problem-solving resources is profoundly unfair.

A gigantic imbalance in capacities and resources exists between the Global North and Global South. This is, obviously, not to argue that Southern designers, engineers and entrepreneurs are less capable (or less innovative) than their Northern counterparts. If anything, the evidence points to the opposite conclusion.

But in Northerners' desires to avoid the pitfalls of cultural imperialism and the failed model of top-down aid (and, let's be honest, to be seen to be down with other cultures), we go whistling past the mountainous reality of power inequality in our global society, and the extent to which, in a knowledge economy, that power is about the ability to generate and deploy ideas.

The Global North has the vast majority of the world's finest universities, libraries and broadband connections. It has the lion's share of the best-trained designers and professional innovators: there are probably more top-level product designers in New York than in all of India; probably more top-flight software engineers in the Bay Area than in all of Africa. That's not even getting into corporate R+D labs, incubators, fellowships, internships and all the other capacity that spins off the design, technology and engineering industries: almost all of which are in the developed world.

What's more, we know that innovation sparks from clusters of talented people in close proximity -- from scenius-- but it catches fire when exposed to capital, subjected to debate (in magazines, at conferences, on campuses) and connected to networks of other equally talented professionals in other fields. Most of those clusters are in the Global North; the remainder are in places (like Sao Paolo and Shanghai) that are already approaching "developed" status. Hotbeds, conferences and venture capital are not fairly distributed around the Earth.

It's a harsh reality that the vast bulk of the world's ability to solve system-scale problems is concentrated in wealthy countries. If a bright green model of prosperity is going to be invented in time for billions of young people to adopt it, big chunks of it will have to come from the Global North and be spread through partnerships between the North and South.

Obviously, complexities abound. Some of the world's most innovative thinking is happening on "the edges" of the wealthy world, in newly emerging economies. The Global North often stifles innovation with outdated codes and regulation. Many designers in New York or London may mot have the foggiest clue what on-the-ground challenges present themselves in the cities of the Global South, and so lack the ability to design solutions at home that will have a broader value. Many people cannot afford to participate in the major capitalist forms of innovation diffusion. Furthermore, flowing innovations to the bottom billion is wrought with difficulties. Some nations suffer from a hipness invisibility (what some have called the Ninja Gap), which makes them unable to draw even the most modest notice from folks in a position to help them solve problems. Finally, the ability of experts operating in ignorance of context to screw a system or place up beyond recognition should never be underestimated.

Yet, yet, yet... the reality is that we inherited a broken future, and designing a better one is going to take the whole-hearted participation of hundreds of thousands of creative, innovative people in the cities of the Global North. It's going to take grappling with remaking our own cities and systems into sustainably prosperous forms -- and doing it with an eye to global realities, the need for innovation diffusion and the cultural minefields involved. It's ultimately going to take redesigning (or at least reconsidering) pretty much everything about the way our cities work.

So, perhaps it's worth shifting the debate a little to discuss the obligations of not just humanitarian designers, but all designers to design responsibly? Maybe presumption is less the problem than a lack of planetary thinking.