Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
19 November 2021 | Story Nontombi Velelo | Photo Supplied
Nontombi Velelo is a PhD candidate and Lecturer in the Department of Sociology at the University of the Free State (UFS).

Current reports related to gender reflect and emphasise the negative impact of gender on society — especially the negative impact of men and masculinity in society. Studies are conducted to understand the root(s) and triggers of men’s social conduct/misconduct. Without a doubt, men are often guilty of causing some of the social ills. However, we often do not acknowledge and recognise the pressures and challenges that society presents to men. In most instances, the focus in reporting is on their conduct/misconduct. Less attention is given to interrogating and reflecting on how masculine notions are formed and subsequently practised, and the influence of social settings on these processes. 

It is worth pointing out that masculinity is not a static entity – it is flexible, evolving, and adapts to different contexts. However, there is a struggle between upholding the traditional practices of masculinity and the desire for modern and liberal practices of masculinity. The concept of ‘traditional’ masculinity is frequently used when investigating the construction and practices of masculinity. This concept is often understood as the opposite of the modern representation of masculinity. Yet, it refers to what is considered to make a man a ‘real’ man – attributes such as independence, self-sufficiency, heterosexuality, physical toughness, and emotional restrictedness. These attributes highlight the ideas of masculinity embedded in traditional ideology, rules, and norms. We often expect men to possess these attributes, particularly independence, self-sufficiency, and emotional restrictedness. Without a doubt, these expectations present challenges for men. Men are less likely to express their feelings – they are also not expected to express their emotions. Besides, men are not as expressive as women and the signs of mental illness are not the same as those in women. Though we expect men to man-up and demonstrate strength when confronted with challenges, we are not aware of the damage this may cause to their mental and emotional well-being. According to the World Health Organisation (2021), South African men are more than four times more likely to commit suicide than women. Of more than 6 000 cases of suicide, 5 138 were men, which translates to 21,8 per 100 000. This indicates the need to unlearn the damaging expectations of gender. 

Men’s socio-economic and socio-political positions influence how they view and practise their masculinity. Though Statistics South Africa (2021) reported that 32,4% of men are unemployed (compared to 36,8% of unemployed women), South African men living in poverty find themselves in a stressful climate, as they are unable to live up to their and others’ ideas of ‘successful masculinity’. To a large extent, men are still expected to assume the role of financial provider. Failure to adhere to these expectations may result in one’s masculine traits not being recognised or acknowledged. In some cases, men are considered ‘less of a man’ since they cannot fulfil the expectation of financial provision. This, subsequently, affects their interaction and relationships with other men, women, and children. 

Apart from the societal expectations, we need to pay attention to the socialisation process within the family. A family is a training ground where members are trained and taught about desirable and undesirable behaviour and expectations of others. Within the family structure, men and women are socialised to internalise and accept toxic gender roles – one being the use of violence. Violent behaviour is often associated with normal ‘boyish’ behaviour; therefore, it is perceived to be expected of a boy child to resort to violence. It is expected of a boy child to retaliate/fight back when facing conflict. Consequently, violence is viewed as a measure to correct behaviour associated with disobedience or challenging masculine authority. The Mail & Guardian reported in 2020 that one in five women in South Africa experienced violence at a partner’s hands. South Africa has witnessed an increase in gang rapes, most of the first-time rape offenders being teenage boys (SafeSpace, 2021). Teenage boys are not only members of society but also members of the family. This does not imply that parents are responsible for the acts of their children. However, it demonstrates the need to interrogate and challenge the socialisation process as far as gender roles and expectations are concerned. Regardless of the mentioned challenges associated with masculinity, there are individual men in society who have invested efforts to transform the masculine scripts and to cultivate positive male attributes. These are men who strive to be good citizens, husbands, fathers, brothers, and uncles. Unfortunately, the efforts invested by these individual men tend to be disregarded in society, since the focus is always on unpacking and reflecting the toxic actions and attributes of men. 

Commemoration of International Men’s Day

International Men’s Day commemorates the positive contribution of men to their world, families, and communities. The day aims to create awareness around the well-being of men. As we celebrate this day, it is important to recognise and acknowledge male pain. Society often disregards male pain and focuses on male privilege.

Furthermore, recognising ways in which men are hurt by rigid gender roles and expectations and social settings where these roles and expectations are practised, does not imply disregard for the struggle and oppression of women. With the 2021 slogan being ‘Better relations between men and women’, I am reminded of the third wave of feminist scholars who pointed out that society is experiencing a crisis embedded in patriarchal masculinity rather than masculinity itself. There is a need to sensitise men and women to the dangers of patriarchy, particularly for men. It is also important to encourage men to construct their own identities that are different from those prescribed by patriarchy. Although most men might not be oppressed by sexism in ways similar to women, we need to pay much closer attention to how men suffer the consequences of sexism. It is worth recognising that men do not derive the common benefits from sexist oppression, since they do not hold a common social position. It is important to acknowledge the role of individual men in changing the masculine narrative. May we recognise such individuals in our homes, workplaces, and communities. There is a need to unlearn the damaging patriarchal expectations of gender.

News Archive

SA universities are becoming the battlegrounds for political gain
2010-11-02

Prof. Kalie Strydom.

No worthwhile contribution can be made to higher education excellence if you do not understand and acknowledge the devastating, but unfortunately unavoidable role of party politics in the system and universities of higher education and training (HET).

This statement was made by Prof. Kalie Strydom during his valedictory lecture made on the Main Campus of the University of the Free State (UFS) in Bloemfontein recently.

Prof. Strydom, who was awarded an Honorary Doctorate by the UFS in 2010, presented a lecture on the theme: The Long Walk to Higher Education and Training Excellence: The Struggle of Comrades and Racists. He provided perspectives on politics in higher education and training (HET) and shared different examples explaining the meaning of excellence in HET in relation to politics.

“At the HET systems level I was fortunate to participate in the deliberations in the early nineties to prepare policy perspectives that could be used by the ANC in HET policy making after the 1994 elections.  At these deliberations one of the important issues discussed was the typical educational and training pyramid recognised in many countries, to establish and maintain successful education and training. The educational pyramid in successful countries was compared to the SA “inverted” pyramid that had already originated during apartheid for all races, but unfortunately exploded during the 16 years of democracy to a dangerous situation of 3 million out-of school and post-school youth with very few education and training opportunities,” he said.

In his lecture, Prof. Strydom answered questions like: Why could we as higher educationists not persuade the new democratically elected government to create a successful education and training pyramid with a strong intermediate college sector in the nineties?  What was the politics like in the early and late nineties about disallowing the acceptance of the successful pyramid of education and training?  Why do we only now in the latest DHET strategic planning 2010–2015 have this successful pyramid as a basis for policymaking and planning?

At an institutional level he explained the role of politics by referring to the Reitz incident at the UFS and the infamous Soudien report on racism in higher education in South Africa highlighting explosive racial situations in our universities and the country.  “To understand this situation we need to acknowledge that we are battling with complex biases influencing the racial situation,” he said.

“White and black, staff and students at our universities are constantly battling with the legacy of the past which is being used, abused and conveniently forgotten, as well as critical events that white and black experience every day of their lives, feeding polarisation of extreme views while eroding common ground.  Examples vary from the indoctrination and prejudice that is continued within most homes, churches and schools; mass media full of murder, rape, corruption; political parties skewing difficult issues for indiscrete political gain; to frustrating non-delivery in almost all spheres of life which frustrates and irritates everyone, all feeding racial stereo typing and prejudice,” said Prof. Strydom.

A South African philosopher, Prof. Willie Esterhuyse, recently used the metaphor of an “Elephant in our lounge” to describe the syndrome of racism that is part of the lives of white and black South Africans in very different ways. He indicated that all of us are aware of the elephant, but we choose not to talk about it, an attitude described by Ruth Frankenberg as ‘colour evasiveness’, which denies the nature and scope of the problem.

Constructs related to race are so contentious that most stakeholders and role-players are unwilling to confront the meanings that they assign to very prominent dimensions of their experience; neither does management at the institutions have enough staff (higher educationists?) with the competencies to interrogate these meanings, or generate shared meanings amongst staff and students (common ground).  A good example that could be compared with “the elephant in our lounge” remark is the recent paper of Prof. Jonathan Jansen, Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS on race categorisation in education and training.

According to Prof. Strydom, universities in South Africa are increasingly becoming the battlegrounds for political gain which creates a polarised atmosphere on campuses and crowds out the moderate middle ground, thereby subverting the role and function of the university as an institution within a specific context, interpreted globally and locally. 

Striving for excellence, mostly free from the negative influences of politics, in HET, from the point of view of the higher educationist, is that we should, through comparative literature review and research, re-conceptualise the university as an institution in a specific context.  This entails carefully considering environment and the positioning of the university leading to a specific institutional culture and recognising the fact that institutional cultures are complicated by many subcultures in academe (faculties) and student life (residences/new generations of commuter students).

Another way forward in striving for excellence, mostly free from politics, is to ensure that we understand the complexities of governing a university better.  D.W. Leslie (2003) mentions formidable tasks related to governance influenced by politics:

  • Balancing legitimacy and effectiveness.
  • Leading along two dimensions: getting work done and engaging people.
  • Differentiating between formal university structures and the functions of universities as they adapt and evolve.
  • Bridging the divergence between cultural and operational imperatives of the bureaucratic and professional sides of the university.

Prof. Strydom concluded by stating that it is possible to continue with an almost never ending list of important themes in HE studies adding perspectives on why it is so easy to misuse universities for politics instead of recognising our responsibility to carefully consider contributions to transformation in such an immensely complicated institution as the university within a higher education and training system. 

Media Release
Issued by: Lacea Loader
Director: Strategic Communication (acting)
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl@ufs.ac.za
29 October 2010

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