Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

#WomensMonth: women's economic empowerment is a human right, not a crisis management allowance

11 August 2023 | Story Prof Pearl Sithole | Photo Supplied

Opinion article by Prof Pearl Sithole, Social Scientist and Vice-Principal: Academic and Research on the Qwaqwa Campus, University of the Free State.

It is August and I want to bury my head in the sand to avoid being part of what is turning out to be a condescending South African ritual against women – ‘speak justice in August, and practise injustices for the rest of the year’. The requests to feminists to rise up and give talks to dignify yet another August with sophisticated speak about quite a simple moral matter – women are as human as men. The ritual is tiring and it is creating despondency. How difficult can it be to switch to action on equality and fairness towards women as human beings too? How difficult can it be to be fair? How difficult can it be to see that while the unfairness is structural and cultural, it is social will and moral agency that is called into test? And how difficult is it to realise that in fact not attending to this matter of social justice is keeping all the other architecture of inequalities and unfairness intact?

August in South Africa is used to pour out pity in the name of physical gender-based violence (GBV) and other social strains women experience – pity poured out by people who are in positions of power with voices that merely acknowledge what needs to be done. The same voices will then go to various corners where they practise professional GBV, and thus endorsing women as ‘secondary beings’ used to shoulder a patriarchal and capitalist societal agenda.

Economic empowerment of women

This year the focus is economic empowerment of women. In a government blog published in March 2023 that was written partly to cast a celebratory tone for International Women’s Day, the President could not resist twinning economic empowerment with the potential to escape GBV:

“The economic empowerment of women is an important pillar of our struggle to end gender-based violence and femicide. We have recognised that unequal access to resources and economic opportunity makes it more difficult for women to escape situations of abuse and violence.”

Clearly this is a much-needed spanner in the works to escape GBV. But the fact is that this society still laments a wage gap and pleads for narrowing gender economic differences in order to escape GBV, speaks volumes about the kind of society South Africa is. The institutional culture that sees women as secondary, almost like pets, must be given reprieve from violence even if it takes ‘giving them some economic empowerment’. The lack of transparency on pay scales across work categories; no women ever in certain leadership positions; and more women being unemployed – are not cited as a violation in themselves. Basically, South Africa is an abusive society to women that avoids the mirror by pretending to attend to physical violence through relaxing the rest of the violations.

Yet the more tokenistic the talk on inequalities every August and thus the endorsement of structural and cultural injustices, the firmer the country proclaims its affinity with inequality. If the maxim “actions speak louder than words” has been promulgated as useful with regards to socialisation and bringing up decent human beings, the current generation of leaders has failed dismally to use it in terms of political and social will to fight injustices.

Instead they have exercised a practical display that men are the superior species and that women must take charge of the menial affairs of society in daily life. The uproar against physical GBV masks the major omissions on the kind of society South Africa is while it continues to modernise gender inequalities:

Leadership is a male affair, with the top and resource-management positions exclusively male through history. The Presidency is a male affair, as well as the portfolios of Economic Development and Finance.
The business sector also continues to have higher pay grades for men and not for women.
In sport, women’s teams are paid less, with public scrounging just to lull the complaints for every major event.
Committees can recommend women into positions and authorities can exercise the right not to endorse those recommendations.
Institutions, including civil society, can legitimise their existence over the concept of social justice and sustain glaring imbalances on gender in leadership positions.
Funders continue to have gender and racial leadership preferences in agencies they fund – the rest of the profiles being the subject of never-ending training on funding proposals.
Intersectionality of identity becomes visibly toxic when certain members of ‘the inferior groups’ are given a special place on the ladder within the unequal society – like the conspicuous place of white women in the property sector, and the convenient tallying of all women to generate a good transformation profile for institutions.

Society has modernised inequality

In essence society has modernised inequality – and highlights ‘shallow permits’ as women’s rights achievements. South Africa may shout shallow things like: ‘our women can be car drivers’ and ‘women feature in the Constitution’, but the total lived experience of women at all levels of society leaves little to be desired. Men continue to hover over the prerogative to place women or ‘allow’ them in spaces where it makes strategic support to their own positions or to make institutions look good in terms of quotas.

In professional spaces in South Africa it is not uncommon to see very capable women doing menial tasks designed to hand over professional products for men to shine in leadership. It is almost like the domestication of professional spaces through importing culture and religion – to underpin institutional chauvinism. And yet policies and strategies make a clear and tacit association of culture and religion only with society out there. Beside gender mainstreaming, which is largely grounded on mere inclusion of women, the damaging role of culture and religion on professional relationships is not on the radar of attention within institutions. Thus, a country can marginalise women’s national teams on the issue of remuneration at the back of what is cited as “the best constitution in the world”, and still talk about the importance of women every August.

The most disappointing stakeholders in all this are the women’s political formations. In the context of South Africa, ageism within these formations is a huge factor. Those senior women are kingmakers of note. They believe in women as living to support men and are afraid to rock the boat for their own placement in professional peripheral positions. It would be interesting to hear them articulate their status of bondage and why it has been sustained.

For now, one thing is clear: just like other hegemonies that used ideology and culture to root themselves (i.e. imperialism, capitalism and racial inequalities), patriarchy is not going to disintegrate just because those it serves have suddenly developed a conscience and realise they are not ‘better beings’. Agency, advocacy, and political will are key in fighting for justice. No piece of paper implements itself, not even the Constitution.

News Archive

Questions about racial integration in residences answered

2007-07-31

Answers to frequently asked questions about the racial integration of student residences at the UFS

1. Why does the UFS want to change the current situation in the student residences?

There are many reasons why a new approach to placement in the student residences is necessary. However, the main reason is of an educational nature. As a university, the UFS should create an environment in its residences where students can learn to appreciate and respect the rich diversity that is on offer at the university. A university accommodates students from many different backgrounds in terms of race, language, religion, economic status, culture and other aspects. If a student can learn to appreciate the value in this rich diversity at university, he or she will also be able to appreciate the value of this diversity in the workplace and broader society.

The current situation of predominantly white and predominantly black residences has not been able to cultivate such an appreciation for diversity and respect for one another as human beings, and will not equip students with the knowledge and skills required to manage diversity.

Besides this, there are many other areas of life in the residences that need attention. For one, we need to urgently establish a human rights culture in the residences so that the rights of all students can be respected. We need to address the abuse of alcohol, provide disabled students with their rightful place, and last but not least, really entrench a culture of learning in student residences.

Let us make the residences places we can be proud of – places of learning, of diversity, of respect; places of growth and development. This is the ideal we should all strive to achieve.

2. Why does the management want to force us to integrate?

It is a false argument to debate the issue in terms of “force”. Any decision by a University, or any other organisation, regarding matters of policy, rules and regulations implies a restriction on the choice of an individual and an obligation to comply. What we should focus on is whether this decision of the Council is in the best interests of our students.

The management of the university believes that it has a responsibility to give students the best education possible, not only in terms of what you learn in the lecture rooms, but especially in the residences as well. The residences can be very powerful places of learning about matters of great importance, both academic and non-academic.

The parallel-medium language policy separates students into largely white/Afrikaans and black/English classes. Efforts are being made to bridge this divide in the classroom, but we can also try to eliminate it in the residences.

The university is committed to building a new culture for the entire institution that is based on values and principles – such as an academic culture, non-racialism, respect for human rights and diversity – among staff and students.

In the context of student residences, the application of these values and principles still allows substantial room for the voluntary exercising of choice by individuals as well as by Residence Committees, notably with regard to the placement of students (they can still place 50 percent of first-year students), as well as the determination of the future character and traditions of a diverse residence.

Furthermore, students can still choose their residences (subject to availability of places), can choose a roommate, and so forth.

3. What about freedom of association?

The rights we enjoy in a democracy must be balanced against other rights, as well as the laws of the country. This means that the right to freedom of association must be balanced against laws that make it illegal to discriminate against other people on the basis of race, language or religion, for instance.

Freedom of association pertains to the right of individuals to form voluntary organisations such as clubs or private boarding houses, or their right to join or not join existing organisations. You exercise that right when you decide to become a student of the UFS, and again when you choose to live in one of its residences.

However, once you have decided to join an organisation voluntarily, you cannot subsequently demand that that organisation should provide a “club” or residence to your liking where, for instance, you only associate with your choice of co-members. You must accept the policies of that organisation.

In any case, how would that right of yours be balanced against the right of another individual who wishes to associate with a different set of co-members? (For instance – what about the freedom of a student to associate with students NOT from his own background, but indeed from another language, cultural, racial or economic background?)

The constitutional right to freedom of association can, in any case, not be used to exclude or discriminate on the basis of race or religion (Section 18 of the Bill of Rights).

Besides, the new policy guidelines will still make provision for freedom of association. This right can be exercised freely within a diverse residence with regard to friendships, joint academic work, socialising, sport, etc.

4. Will residences not lose their traditions?

The University appreciates that there are many valuable elements of tradition in residences. However, we must bear in mind that the traditions and character of student residences have evolved and changed over time, and they will continue to evolve and to change. In addition, we do not need to accept all aspects of residence life purely on the basis of tradition, including the unacceptably high level of alcohol abuse and unsavoury, humiliating and discriminatory orientation practices. The new approach to integrated residences provides the opportunity to retain the positive aspects of the current traditions and character, but also to develop new traditions and give residences a new character.

We can now establish a tradition and a character for each residence that are reconcilable with the values of the University as a place of scholarship and are aligned with the human rights approach of our country’s Constitution, the laws of our country and the strengths and diversity of the students in a particular residence.

5. Have students been involved in this process? Is there a role for them to play after the decision has been taken by the Council of the UFS?

In the first semester of 2007, during two rounds of consultations, the primes, SRC and student organisations were consulted about the proposed new placement policy to increase diversity in residences. Some residences also made written submissions on the matter (such as Madelief, Soetdoring, Wag-'n-bietjie, Vergeet-my-nie, Emily Hobhouse). Other residences requested and were granted more time, but did not make any submissions in the end (such as Reitz and Armentum).

Management also had several meetings with the above-mentioned structures to hear first-hand from students their concerns and solutions regarding possible challenges presented by integration in residences.

During these interactions, several excellent ideas and proposals were put forward by students. These views had a definite impact on the eventual proposal that was taken to the University Council, in particular regarding the minimum level of diversity (30%) in junior residences and the fact that residences still want to have a say in the placement of students, rather than the placement decision being left in the hands of Management alone (hence the 50% placement portion of residences). Management values the effort that was put into the process by the primes and residence committees, and thanks them for their contributions.

However, it should be stressed that consultation should not be understood as a process of negotiation, nor does it imply that consensus must be reached. What it means is that Management must take a considered decision after hearing the views of stakeholders.

Management would like students to continue to provide input and ideas regarding the implementation details of the policy guidelines. Task teams have been established and students will be informed about how they can interact with the task teams on an ongoing basis.

6. But integration in the residences was tried in the past (in the late 1990s), and then it failed. Why will it work now?

Yes, the University of the Free State did integrate its residences as far back as 1993, and for a few years it worked. The UFS did it at that time and is now doing so again, because it is the right thing to do. Yet it is important to understand why the previous attempt at racial integration in residences was not successful.

Firstly, both black and white students were much polarised because of the apartheid past. Secondly, there was insufficient management support for students in the residences, the student leaders generally as well as residence heads, in terms of dealing with diversity and related issues. Thirdly, the institutional culture of the UFS and the residences in particular was not addressed as part of broader transformation and integration in residences, whereas it is now being addressed.

In addition, the current decision to integrate residences has the benefit of being implemented after several more years of integration in schooling, sport, workplaces and other aspects of life.

This decision is also based on Management’s commitment to give all the possible support it can to this process.

This is a very important initiative that the UFS is undertaking. Management, in co-operation with students, must ensure that it succeeds. Integrated residences that produce high-quality graduates equipped to deal with the challenges of the workplace and our society is a worthwhile ideal we should all strive to achieve.

If you would like to make a proposal regarding the implementation and practical aspects of the new policy, please send it to the following email address: rector@ufs.ac.za

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

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