Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
08 February 2022 | Story Nombulelo Shange | Photo Andre Damons
Romantic love is important and revolutionary and a crucial rebellion when done in a way that is genuine and does not cause pain, writes Nombulelo Shange, Lecturer in the Department of Sociology at the UFS, and Chairperson of the University of the Free State Women’s Forum.

Opinion article by Nombulelo Shange, Lecturer in the Department of Sociology at the University of the Free State and Chairperson of the University of the Free State Women’s Forum.


Twenty-first-century dating is a nightmare; trying to find the perfect partner can feel like an extreme sport that will literally end you. Dating apps such as Grindr, Bumble, and Tinder are supposed to make finding a partner easier in the stressful modern world, but they add a deeper layer of complexity that turns unsuspecting lovestruck users into sacrificial lambs when they enter the sea of serial cheaters and broken people who flood the apps. All of this is a giant mess that has been made worse by the COVID-19 pandemic, where going out on a date can be a death sentence. 

 

But even with that said, romantic love is important and revolutionary and a crucial rebellion when done in a way that is genuine and does not cause pain. Considering an interpersonal phenomenon such as love as revolutionary is unusual, but when you consider historical events that politicised love and still have an impact on the ways we live today, one realises that love is one of the most important, relatively accessible acts of rebellion needed to undo some of the injustices of the past. The beauty of love is that it is more within our reach as individuals, compared to other grander revolutionary actions such as free education and land expropriation, which require mass action from citizens or big policy shifts and action from structures such as the state, judiciary, and even the profit-driven private sector. Love as a revolution does not rely as heavily on the slow bureaucracies of institutions, which are unwilling to adequately address injustices. Love just requires individuals to make an active choice to be together and to care for each other in ways that empower the individual and the collective. But as ‘easy’ as it sounds, many struggle to find it, and even those who have it struggle to enjoy the transformation that should come with the bond that love should create. I want to argue that this is in part because of the historical politicisation of love, which has not been unlearned even though we enjoy relatively more freedoms today; instead, this politicisation of love has in some ways become ‘cultural norms’ that we blindly and unquestioningly follow, even to our own detriment.

Love and Patriarchal Culture

Discourse on love and family tends to not enjoy as much prominence in macro-institutions such as economies or states. But understanding micro-phenomena such as family, love, and relationships is important for knowing how macro-institutions work and to make sense of social life. This is in part because the socialisation we receive from our families has the potential to influence how we interact with macrostructures as active agents who influence and can be influenced by structures. Even our leaders and the decisions they make are greatly influenced by their family and community socialisation. Discourse on family started to gain dominance in the 1960s through the rise of radical feminism, which popularised slogans such as ‘the personal is political’ as a way of challenging family values, and particularly the nuclear family structure that perpetuated the oppression and at times abuse of women and children in the family, because domestic issues were not considered public concern. 

But even with this rise, discourse on love and family is still largely lacking or only confined to psychological and feminist discourse. Feminist scholar and American professor, the late Bell Hooks, is one scholar who tries to make sense of social life in relation to love, highlighting its importance and the challenges linked to it. In her 2004 book, The Will to Change: Men, Masculinity and Love, Hooks says: 

Every female wants to be loved by a male. Every woman wants to love and be loved by the males in her life. Whether gay or straight, bisexual or celibate, she wants to feel the love of father, grandfather, uncle, brother, or male friend. If she is heterosexual, she wants the love of a male partner. We live in a culture where emotionally starved, deprived females are desperately seeking male love.

She later highlights the reason for the desperation and deprivation of male love. Women and girls are taught to believe that male love and attention are more important than the love of women, while men are taught that love is a weakness. An idea that even very young children are exposed to in fairy tales, where princesses and girls are constantly seeking approval from withholding or absent fathers or need a prince saviour. Men who show genuine love to their mothers, brothers, sisters, friends, or partners risk their masculinity, because part of being ‘truly manly’ is withholding love. 

Historically Politicised Love

Hook’s analysis of love helps us to understand some of the dynamics of how the nuclear family exists, even as it marginalises women. Women are often willing to perform free labour in the home, partly because they are seeking the love they are deprived of. This labour allows their husbands, brothers, and fathers to be productive at work and reaffirms their manliness. The invisible labour performed by women in the home is what allows the workplace to exist unencumbered. In South Africa and much of the African context, this exploitation did not just happen along gender lines, it was racial too. The building of capitalism on the continent rested on the dismantling of African families and the destruction of black love. Your worth was only based on your usefulness as a servant or slave, and how you could strengthen Western structures, from family to economy or state. African men were torn from their families and sent to work in fields and mines, while black women were isolated from their children in order to raise those of white women. Even sex, an important expression of love and pleasure and a way to build families, was used as a repressive tool. It was used for ‘breeding’ slaves to be sold. Rape was used as punishment to correct defiance. Homosexual and interracial love was unthinkable and illegal because it threatened the heteronormative, Western dominance status quo.

Love as Revolutionary Action

Love is important, because it offers abstract and emotional needs such as companionship, caring, and happiness, which can spill over to other parts of life, making us better individuals. Love can also be a lifesaving, poverty-eradicating tool that creates healthier, stronger communities. The cost of living globally is becoming higher and is leading to a shrinking middle class. Having someone to share the load, a home, and resources with, means we can undo some of the challenges that push us into poverty or financial difficulty. You can improve your quality of life and come a step closer to accessing rights and a lifestyle that you might never have been able to achieve alone. For women and people of colour, love is an even more important revolutionary action, since it was never intended for us to receive because of the fear that it would disrupt the status quo that rested on our oppression. When we play the games we play, when we hurt each other instead of forming meaningful connections, we take ourselves back to the state of love deprivation that Hook talks about. This is harmful even to men, especially black men, because to live life fearful of love is to live a life of emptiness that maintains the colonial shackles that were designed for you. 

News Archive

FF Plus court case against UFS withdrawn
2007-10-23

The University of the Free State (UFS) is pleased to announce that a Supreme Court application to have the racial integration of its student residences set aside has been withdrawn unconditionally by the Freedom Front Plus (FF+). The political party has offered to pay the assessed costs of the UFS.

The Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS, Prof. Frederick Fourie, welcomed this decision by the FF+, saying all energy should now be focused on making a success of this very important nation-building initiative in the student residences. “We have been convinced all the time that we had followed a fair and inclusive consultation process which led to a thorough and well-considered decision by the Council,” he said.

The decision to integrate student residences as from January 2008 was approved by the UFS Council on 8 June 2007. This last decision was confirmed by the Council – which is the highest decision making body at the UFS -  on 14 September 2007 with an overwhelming majority, with only one vote against.

“There is now no legal obstacle to student participation in the work being done to implement Council’s decision. In fact I want to urge all students in our residences to play an active role in implementing Council’s decision,” he said.

According to Prof. Fourie much work has been done in preparation for the intake of first-years into the residences in January 2008.

Since the initial decision of 8 June 2007, the Vice-Rector: Student Affairs, Dr Ezekiel Moraka, has been leading a team of staff members and student representatives who are doing work in various sub-task teams.

“One of the main reasons for working in this way through sub-task teams, is to ensure the widest possible participation of the affected students in the implementation of the Council’s decision,” said Prof. Fourie.

These sub-task teams are working on aspects of residence life in order to make the racial integration of residences as successful as possible. These aspects of residence life include, among others:
 

  • governance structures
  • traditions and character of residences
  • diversity education and training
  • security
  • placement and recruitment

“This list is not exhaustive, but merely to illustrate the kinds of areas being looked into. I would like to encourage all students in residences to make an input into the work of these sub-task teams through the primes, the Student Representative Council (SRC) or through the offices of the Dean or the Deputy Dean of Student Affairs.

“We have already begun to implement an interpreting service at the house meetings of three ladies residences, namely Emily Hobhouse, Roosmaryn and Vergeet-my-nie. From next year this service will be extended to other residences on the Main Campus,” said Prof. Fourie.  

“In the light of withdrawal of the court case, I am appealing to all students in our residences, to join hands with fellow students and with management in creating a campus of respect and appreciation for all languages, cultures and backgrounds,” he said.

“We want our students to assist the UFS in successfully managing the rich diversity on this campus, particularly in its student residences, and in so doing become an example to South Africa of a truly non-racial, multi-cultural and multi-lingual campus, where students are appropriately educated for the workplace,” Prof. Fourie said.


Media release issued by:        
Lacea Loader
Assistant Director: Media Liaison  
Tel:  051 401 2584
Cell:  083 645 2454
E-mail:  loaderl.stg@ufs.ac.za

23 October 2007

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