Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
17 November 2020 | Story Nombulelo Shange | Photo Pixabay
Two black women made history recently, but while celebrating these women, we have done a disservice to them. Maybe without intending to we have tokenised them, focusing more on the fact that they are black women, instead of on their remarkable career achievements and victories.

History has been made globally and here at home. In the US, Kamala Harris became the first black woman to become vice president, while locally we celebrate the appointment of Prof Puleng LenkaBula’s appointment as the first black female Vice-Chancellor of the largest university in Africa, the University of South Africa (Unisa). When both announcements were made, I was personally filled with hope and joy that transformation is possible and we are all living witnesses to it. But while celebrating these women in the media, in our communities, within academia and social media, we have done a disservice to them. Maybe without intending to we have tokenised them, focusing more on the fact that they are black women, instead of on their remarkable career achievements and victories that have built them up to the powerful roles they hold today.

Representation is important for young black girls

Listen, I am not saying we must not celebrate when black women make it into leadership positions. They have to be celebrated because representation is so important for young black girls who are often told by the world that they are not important or will never amount to anything great. We have to celebrate them as black women because they often have to work 10 times harder to get half the recognition. And this is the point that I am making. These women and many others before them who were/are “firsts” in their fields have worked much harder than male or white predecessors. They have had to work harder while also fighting the patriarchal whiteness woven into our systems and workplaces.

The systems constantly find new and creative ways to negate black womanist labour and achievements, while trying to keep black women at the same level. Many of us in these situations feel powerless and give up and become content with “just getting by”. Or we end up skipping from job to job, often to find the new environment is more toxic than the last. So when black women are successful in battling these aggressions while making remarkable strides in their careers we have a responsibility to celebrate their accomplishments and list their endless achievements in the same way we do for men. This is also important because often when women and people of colour occupy positions of power, there is often the assumption that they are purely “transformation” or “BBBEE” hires and are/were not the most suitable candidate for the position.

Celebrate her work and scholarly contribution

So I want to take this opportunity to move beyond celebrating Prof Puleng, the black woman, I want to celebrate her work and scholarly contribution. I have followed and admired her work, especially her scholarly contribution and leadership style. In her role as Deputy Vice-Chancellor responsible for Institutional Change, Student Affairs, and engaged scholarship at the University of the Free State (UFS), she has demonstrated the kind of leadership that encourages critical dialogue. She fights for the empowerment of all, while pushing the door open for others who are marginalised by violent epistemology that often limits the involvement of black people, women, LGBT+ and disabled groups and individuals in higher education.

Prof Puleng encourages young people to transform the spaces they find themselves in, while advancing themselves in their work and intellectual engagement. There are many instances where she has done this for junior colleagues and even students, but one example that comes to mind is the August 2019 Universities in Dialogues engagement. The dialogue was hosted at the University of Pretoria, with the UFS, University of Cape Town and the University of Witwatersrand Skyping the debate and making contributions on the motion; “South Africa requires a feminist government to advance gender equity and equality across all sectors of society.” What really showed me she is a leader who not only cares for the discourse, but for people, was her insistence that we still work together beyond the engagement. As busy as she was, she pushed us to continue the discussion, meeting in her offices to write reflections on the process and share with them with stakeholders we identified as important within UFS and externally. We had long debates amongst ourselves long after the dialogue, where she motivated us to make sense of this topic and how it links to our lived experiences, using the existing contributions by feminist scholars like Bell Hooks, Amina Mama, Audre Lorde, Mercy Oduyoye, and many others to help us analyse and build on our own theorising.

When it comes to her own strong scholarly contributions, she is too shy to recommend her own work as an important resource to draw from when we navigate systems. But within her scholarly contributions, she disrupts the status quo in similar ways to how she has created disruption by becoming Unisa’s first black female vice-chancellor. Her contributions are disruptive because she intentionally cites black theorists and writers, not just because they are black, but because their contributions are the most important for the African context. She did this knowing that it could potentially have a negative impact on her career, as the academy will always question; “where are the founding fathers?” when scholarly work does not represent the works of white men writing centuries ago about their European contexts. Instead of trying to squeeze African experiences and challenges into western boxes, she draws from far more capable African scholars.

Black women fought to get in

She also disrupts predetermined academic categorisations that confine scholars to their respective disciplines. She realises that life does not exist in the predetermined vacuum that academia creates. Life has complex intersecting systems that influence each other and people. This is how society should be researched and analysed, with the intersecting complexities in mind. This is reflected in many of her contributions. One example is “Beyond Anthropocentricity – Botho/Ubuntu and the Quest for Economic and Ecological Justice in Africa”. This paper cuts across multiple disciplines, including ecological justice, the economy and the African humanist philosophy of botho.

Globally she has also made her mark. She has worked as a visiting Professor at the University of Toronto and Emmanuel College. She has also acted as a consultant for global movements such as the World Communion of Reformed churches, the World Council of Churches and the Council for World Mission, which are at the forefront of progressive thinking about ecological, economic and gender issues.

This piece could easily turn into a thesis if I had to list and discuss all of Prof Puleng’s accomplishments. So, as we celebrate Prof Puleng the black woman, let us also remember to celebrate her journey, battles, victories and even losses. Let us also do this for other black women who will break the glass ceiling to transform places which will also want to be celebrated for finally allowing black women in, when the truth is that black women fought to get in and their institutional efforts are long overdue. 

Opinion article by Nombulelo Shange, Lecturer in the Department of Sociology, University of the Free State  

News Archive

Bloemfontein's quality of tap water compares very favourably with bottled water
2009-08-04

The quality of the drinking water of five suburbs in Bloemfontein is at least as good as or better than bottled water. This is the result of a standard and chemical bacterial analysis done by the University of the Free State’s (UFS) Centre for Environmental Management in collaboration with the Institute for Groundwater Studies (IGS).

Five samples were taken from tap water sources in the suburbs of Universitas, Brandwag, Bain’s Vlei, Langenhoven Park and Bayswater and 15 samples were taken of different brands of still and unflavoured bottled water. The samples were analysed at the laboratory of the IGS, while the interpretation of the analysis was done by the Centre for Environmental Management.

“We wanted to evaluate the difference in quality for human consumption between tap water and that of the different brands of bottled water,” said Prof. Maitland Seaman, Head of the Centre for Environmental Management.

“With the exception of two samples produced by multinational companies at their plants in South Africa, the different brands of bottled water used for the study were produced by South African companies, including a local small-scale Bloemfontein producer,” said Prof. Seaman.

According to the labels, the sources of the water vary from pure spring water, to partial reverse osmosis (as an aid to standardise salt, i.e. mineral, content), to only reverse osmosis (to remove salts). (Reverse osmosis is a process in which water is forced under pressure through a pipe with minute pores through which water passes but no – or very low concentrations of – salts pass.)

According to Prof. Seaman, the analysis revealed some interesting findings, such as:

• It is generally accepted that drinking water should have an acceptable level of salt content, as the body needs salts. Most mineral contents were relatively higher in the tap water samples than the bottled water samples and were very much within the acceptable range of drinkable water quality. One of the bottled samples, however, had a very low mineral content, as the water was produced by reverse osmosis, as stated on the bottle. While reverse osmosis is used by various producers, most producers use it as an aid, not as a single method to remove nearly all the salts. Drinking only such water over a prolonged period may probably have a negative effect on the human physiology.

• The pH values of the tap water samples (8,12–8,40) were found to be slightly higher (slightly alkaline), like in all south-eastern Free State rivers (from where the water is sourced) than the pH of most of the bottled water samples, most of which are sourced and/or treated in other areas. Two brands of bottled water were found to have relatively low pH levels (both 4,5, i.e. acidic) as indicated on their bottles and as confirmed by the IGS analysis. The health implication of this range of pH is not significant.

• The analysis showed differences in the mineral content given on the labels of most of the water bottles compared to that found by IGS analysis. The possibility of seasonal fluctuation in content, depending on various factors, is expected and most of the bottling companies also indicate this on their labels. What was a rather interesting finding was that two pairs of bottled water brands claimed exactly the same mineral content but appeared under different brand names and were also priced differently. In each case, one of the pair was a well-known house brand, and the other obviously the original producer. In one of these paired cases, the house brand stated that the water was spring water, while the other (identical) “original” brand stated that it was spring water treated by reverse osmosis and oxygen-enriched.

• Nitrate (NO3) levels were uniformly low except in one bottled sample, suggesting a low (non-threatening) level of organic pollution in the source water. Otherwise, none of the water showed any sign of pollution.

• The bacterial analysis confirmed the absence of any traces of coliforms or E.coli in any of the samples, as was also indicated by the bottling companies. This is very reassuring. What is not known is how all these waters were sterilised, which could be anything from irradiation to chlorine or ozone treatment.

• The price of the different brands of bottled water, each containing 500 ml of still water, ranged between R3,99 and R8,99, with R5,03 being the average price. A comparison between the least expensive and the most expensive bottles of water indicated no significant difference in quality. In fact, discrepancies were observed in the most expensive bottle in that the amount of Calcium (Ca) claimed to be present in it was found to be significantly different from what the analysis indicated (29,6 mg/l versus 0,92 mg/l). The alkalinity (CaCO3 mg/l) indicated on the bottle was also found to differ considerably (83 mg/l versus 9,4 mg/l). The concentration of Total Dissolved Salts (TDS) was not given on the product.

“The preference for bottled water as compared to Bloemfontein’s tap water from a qualitative perspective as well as the price discrepancy is unjustifiable. The environmental footprint of bottled water is also large. Sourcing, treating, bottling, packaging and transporting, to mention but a few of the steps involved in the processing of bottled water, entail a huge carbon footprint, as well as a large water footprint, because it also requires water for treating and rinsing to process bottled water,” said Prof. Seaman.

Media Release
Lacea Loader
Deputy Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl.stg@ufs.ac.za  
3 August 2009

 

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept