Who is Annalie Botes?

There seems to be a rule that when one says something, especially if it is a view or an opinion, then one has to be right. I am not even sure what being right would be in that context but I will not dare unzip that wet suit. So I say something like “Swazi women are the most beautiful”. Yeah, yeah it is all positive and shit but what informs the observation? Is it my visit to the “reed-dance” festival; or is it a result of some study of “beautiful” women? I bet you my overdraft that the garden variety response to this opinion would probably be something along the lines of “okay that’s your view or taste or whatever other let’s agree to disagree expression or even agree”. I bet you that no one will call me a tribalist or racist (should they discover that I am actually white).

Now, what happens if I say “Swazi women have big bums and they steal other people’s husbands and to top it all, they have an insatiable sex drive”? Before you answer, let us consider the current brouhaha about Annelie Botes.

It is reported that Annelie does not like black people, doesn’t understand them and that she fears them. Is also reported that Annelie believes that black people are angry because of their incompetence; and that black people are responsible for the violent crime in South Africa. She is apparently waiting for her husband to go on pension so that they can both emigrate to England where her children are already living. I am intrigued by this but I will leave it at that because I am not the one who will have to deal with black people in England or the yobs for that matter.

The question for me is why is Annelie taking so much flak for her pretty much kak believes? She is probably wrong about a myriad of other things. I have not had an opportunity to read any of her books so I don’t have an insight of her other believes and fears. I don’t know the woman from the proverbial Eve. She probably believes that all black men have large penises too. So, she probably looks at black men with trepidation or relish, I don’t know. The thing is that Annelie looked around and formulated the views she expressed based on her observations. Moreso, she formulated views about which she can do nothing but pack for the land of Harry Potter.

Ok granted, she is wrong. So what? At least she is not wrong like Alan Greenspan whose error cost people their fucking homes. Fundamentally, Annelie does not hold views that are radically different from your garden variety white South African. She’s just not smart enough. The tricky thing about being wrong is that at that moment of wrongness, you are right, so I can’t even fault die ou tannie. I think that the poor tannie is taking so much flak from the sophisticated whites and the angry blacks because she is so easy. Just wait and soon she will be hauled before the equality court for hate speech or something similar to such crimes. She’s getting flak for the same reasons that motivate reporters to pursue people with strange eating habits. So what if I want to eat raw fish off the floor? Why is that anybody’s business? I will tell you why – it is because the real stories are just too damn hard.

Black people (whatever that means) do not need protection from statements that are naïve and stupid just like the Swazi women do not need protection from equally naïve albeit lustful statements. That Annelie is wrong does not make anybody else right, especially the commentators who jumped to repudiate if not crucify her. There seems to be undue fascination and interest in irrelevant nonsense. In the face of the untold amount of investment in whiteness, it is disingenuous to protest when whiteness seeks to express its supremacy, however clumsily it does it.

The story of Annalie Botes is not a story. It is a red-herring, a non-issue. It is as irrelevant as Gareth Cliff’s views on the mating habits of the Killarney Golf Club Egyptian geese.