confusing south african politics

'I did not have HIV,' Zuma tells rape trial

Zuma testimony sparks HIV fear

i'm confused at what the sense of outrage is directed at in this case. the only really objectionable aspect seems to the possibility that he raped the woman. but i get the sense that there is outrage because he had sex with an HIV+ woman. granted he had unprotected sex with her but that is thier personal choice to make. you can disagree with an action like that and even condemn him for it but it's not a legal matter because he knew her status, she wasn't hiding it from him so couldn't fun afoul of the 'deadly weapon' charge.

one other thing that is disconcerting is this quote from Zuma:
QUOTE
He told the court that her appearance also played a role.

"Normally she would be wearing pants. One the day in question, she was wearing a skirt and her legs were exposed," he said. "That gave me an indication that she was expecting me to be of some assistance to her."
/QUOTE

um....this just seems more than a little sexist and oddly also islamic, with that whole idea that women should be completely covered because the least sight of thier skin will drive a man mad with lust.