By Dr Michelina Andreucci

IN some communities, meat from the thigh is reserved for women.
The testicles and bull’s hooves were given to the head of the village or homestead and his male entourage of uncles and married men.
The consumption of these cuts, or parts, are all said to increase male fertility and ensure the regeneration of the clan.
The cultural carving and sharing of a chicken emphasised how astute it was and how integrated it was with the girl-child.
Gender differences were reflected in the culinary traditions of a community.
Some cuts of meat are reserved for women, others men and others for children.
This consideration demands that butchery skills be developed so that appropriate cuts are expertly separated and given to the appropriate persons.
In the culinary traditions of the Shona domestic politics of meat, men generally slaughter the animal while women do the preparation.
The accepted standard of carving meat recognised the role of each member of the family and their hierarchy in the familial unit.
The back and loin were given to the oldest wife to share with the other wives in the family unit.
The innards (intestine, stomach and colon) were well cleaned, scrapped, washed and smoked before being stewed, braised or roasted on open coals.
In Ndebele societies,the small intestines and casings are not eaten by children but are eaten primarily by both male and female elders and historically enjoyed by Princess Sidambe Khumalo of AmaNdebele royalty.
Princess Sidambe dipped the casings in blood and roasted them. Alternatively she would soak the small intestines in blood until they dried into mass.
She would then cut a portion, cook it and eat it.
Another royal dish that Princess Sidambe loved was isidlwadlwa; this was gravy added to the ground sorghum – uhayezi/umhluzi and small pieces of isibindi — meat in a clay pot.
It was eaten by spooning small amounts in the hand and using a tongue to lick the sumptuous meal.
Women and children did not partake of impundu; the finger-like portion of the liver.
Since one does not surrender their ancestors to neighbours; for this reason a neighbour was never served the side of a carcass that had the spear hole that killed it.
Similarly, where a beast was slaughtered for spiritual reasons, the horned skull was placed on the front thatched roof of the kitchen hut.
The number of skulls was a measure of spirituality; the more skulls there were, the stronger that particular family’s link with its ancestral spirits.
The skulls of beasts slaughtered for household consumption were not placed on the kitchen hut roof.
A goat is slaughtered for spiritual cleansing – kusungira, when a daughter is pregnant or given birth.
As proof of his generational capability, the father eats the testicles and the mother is given the back for bearing the child;
Shona meat protocol exemplified how women were in charge of natural resources.
The Shona axiom: ‘The pheasant that comes my way must be shared’, means to share what you have.
Thus the back is for the father, who also gets to eat the head.
The children eat the feet and sometimes the thighs; the breast, the part with the most meat goes to the senior woman.
Even the act of slaughtering a beast involves a long protocol of consent from the elders, chief, owner and their relatives and minor beneficiaries and those connected.
Having worked in the hospitality industry, Zimbabwean state diplomatic events and international sports events for over two decades, I was made keenly aware of how Zimbabwean culture was internationally accessible and espoused all the faculties of international best practices.
Some of the socio-political and cultural misunderstandings of the past are still to be resolved in our post-independence dialogue.
In order to implement the agricultural Command Livestock Programme, while its gains are ultimately for the sustenance, African empowerment and economic beneficiation, it would be insensitive to ignore cultural and heritage systems that pertain to breeding and management and to indigenous cultural dictates.
The Zimbabwean brand of hunhu/ubuntu effortlessly bridges the gulf between cultures, where sometimes languages are not fully understood.
It is at times such as these that one wonders why we have to, at all times, look to the West for examples of international best practices when we should be recognising, acknowledging and instigating the merits of our own culture (hunhu hwedu).
African hospitality far surpasses international best practices because of the single, simple matrix which espouses: Umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu/Munhu, munhu navanhu/A person is a person because of other people.
This basic philosophy of African hospitality and its embodiment of human acceptance and tolerance make us the hospitable people that our tourism uses to advertise the country; international best practices and Zimbabwean hunhu/ubuntu.
Dr Michelina Rudo Andreucci is a Zimbabwean-Italian researcher, industrial design consultant lecturer and specialist hospitality interior decorator. She is a published author in her field.
For views and comments, email: linamanucci@gmail.com