Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
08 June 2023 | Story Siyanda Magayana | Photo Supplied
Sivuyisiwe Magayana
Siyanda Magayana, Senior Officer: Gender Equality and Anti-Discrimination Office, Unit for Institutional Change and Social Justice, University of the Free State

 


Opinion article by Siyanda Magayana, Senior Officer: Gender Equality and Anti-Discrimination Office, Unit for Institutional Change and Social Justice, University of the Free State

 

The anti-homosexuality legislation and what is means

The Ugandan president has enacted a law that makes it even more illegal for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI+) people to be who they identify as. The Anti-Homosexuality Act, among other things, increases the already-criminalised life sentence for consensual same-sex between consenting adults and adds the death penalty for what is known as “aggravated homosexuality”. Additionally, it criminalises activities that supposedly support homosexuality and homosexuals, and carries a potential 20-year prison term. The act also explicitly states that it aims “to protect the traditional family” in Uganda, a traditional African nation, which criminalises and forbids same-sex couples, parents, and other individuals from starting families and having children. This conveys the notion that African LGBTQ+ persons, specifically in Uganda, have no place in the families, communities, and other parts of society to which they belong. It also merely challenges LGBTQ+ Africans’ African identities as it erases their existence in the country altogether. Therefore, as activists, decision-makers, researchers, and residents of all parts of Africa, we should think about what this means for LGBT people in our communities. We should think about the impact of this law on LGBTQ+ people’s feelings of agency, right to life, right to make their own decisions, and sense of belonging.

The dangers of equating homosexual “acts” to sexual abuse

The anti-homosexuality legislation in Uganda mentions “... protecting children and youth who are made vulnerable to sexual abuse through homosexuality and related acts”. A statement such as this one is factually incorrect and is based on a misconception, implying that homosexuality and/or homosexual people are largely the perpetrators of sexual abuse and violence because of their acts. This viewpoint is flawed and misleading because sexual abuse can occur in any context, regardless of sexual orientation. For instance, some studies have revealed that many sexual offenders in our societies appear to identify as heterosexual.1 One other research study found that no offenders were classified as homosexual and that more than three-quarters (78%) of offenders were solely heterosexual in their relationships.2 Similarly, other studies argue that a child’s risk of being molested by his or her relative’s heterosexual partner is over 100 times greater than by someone who may be identified as gay, lesbian, or bisexual,3 while another recent analysis finds that there is no evidence to suggest that individuals with same-sex attraction are more likely to abuse children than heterosexual persons.4

Therefore, equating and pinning of homosexuality to sexual abuse is a deeply problematic and false narrative that can have severe consequences for LGBTQ+ individuals. It is important to recognise that being homosexual or engaging in same-sex relationships does not in itself make individuals more likely to be perpetrators or victims of sexual abuse. This view perpetuates harmful stereotypes and misconceptions about sexual orientation, which can further fuel discrimination and violence against LGBTQ+ individuals in our communities. It also contributes to the stigmatisation and marginalisation of LGBTQ+ individuals, creating an environment where LGBTQ+ individuals are at higher risk of experiencing violence, discrimination, and social exclusion. By falsely portraying homosexuality as a form of abuse, these narratives further entrench homophobia and reinforce negative attitudes towards the LGBTQ+ community in the African continent.

Anti-homosexuality legislation and similar legislation in other countries often use the language of protecting children and combating sexual abuse to justify their discriminatory policies. By linking homosexuality to sexual abuse, proponents of such legislations aim to demonise and criminalise same-sex relationships, portraying them as inherently harmful or predatory. However, it is important to understand that homosexuality is not synonymous with sexual abuse. Sexual orientation is a natural and fundamental aspect of human diversity, and being gay, lesbian, or bisexual or other does not imply any wrongdoing or harm. Consensual same-sex relationships are no different from consensual opposite-sex relationships in terms of the rights and dignity they deserve.

The impact of this legislation on LGBTQ+ individuals in and beyond Uganda

The impact of this legislation on LGBTQ+ individuals in African communities, not just in Uganda, is significant. The legislation fuels existing prejudices and stigmatisation against LGBTQ+ individuals, leading to increased discrimination, violence, and harassment. For instance, many LGBTQ+ individuals are already faced with heightened risks to their safety and well-being, including corrective rape, physical attacks, social ostracism, and even the threat of mob violence in both our rural and urban areas.

Such law has broader implications that go far beyond the borders and communities of Uganda. This law will set a precedent for other African countries that were already hostile towards LGBTQ+ rights, reinforcing a negative environment for LGBTQ+ individuals across the continent. Anti-LGBTQ+ sentiments and laws are prevalent in various African nations, and therefore, Uganda’s law to criminalise homosexuality contributes to a regional climate of homophobia and discrimination. More than anything, the law further silences and erases the voices and existence of LGBTQ+ bodies in African communities and increases the justification of and vulnerability to corrective rape and killings. Many will be displaced, killed, excluded, and erased from our communities.


 

1 Groth, A. Nicholas and H. Jean Birnbaum. (1978). “Adult sexual orientation and attraction to underage persons.” Archives of Sexual Behavior. 7(3):175-181.

2 Groth, A. Nicholas and H. Jean Birnbaum. (1978). “Adult sexual orientation and attraction to underage persons.” Archives of Sexual Behavior. 7(3):175-181.

3 Carole Jenny, Thomas A. Roesler, and Kimberly L. Poyer. 1994. “Are Children at Risk for Sexual Abuse by Homosexuals?,” Pediatrics 94 (1): 41–44

4 Barth, J., Bermetz, L., Heim. 2013. The current prevalence of child sexual abuse worldwide: a systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Public Health 58, pp. 469–483.

 


 

News Archive

Wag-’n-Bietjie dominates for sixth consecutive year
2016-01-22

Description: First-year athletics Roosmaryn Tags: First-year athletics, Roosmaryn

The First-year Athletics event was a celebration of colour and fun. Besides the athletics on and around the track at Pellies Park on the Bloemfontein Campus, the first-years encouraged their different residences with great enthusiasm.
Photo: Johan Roux

Six out of six.

This is the proud record Wag-’n-Bietjie can boast of after the residence walked away with the women's athletics trophy for the sixth year in a row during the University of the Free State's first-year athletics meeting.

This year's men's winner, Vishuis, attained a hat trick on 20 January 2016 at Pellies Park on the Bloemfontein Campus when the residence was once again named as the athletics champion. Vishuis also won in 2014 and 2015.

What makes Wag-’n-Bietjie's triumph even more remarkable is the fact that the residence ran the fastest, jumped and threw the farthest in eight out of the past nine years. Marjolein won in 2010.

Sonnedou was second, with Roosmaryn and Soetdoring collectively the third women's residences. In the men's division, Legatum and Armentum were second and third respectively.

Sonnedou has the best spirit

The event, a celebration of colour and fun, was characterised by groups of singing first-years yelling their lungs out. The UFS Student Representative Council judges the winners of the different Spirit trophies.

Sonnedou was the overall winner of the Spirit trophy – something even more important than the action on and around the track for some residences.

Sonnedou was named the winner in the division for women's residences, after which the residence was also crowned as overall winner. Welwitschia and Vergeet-My-Nie were second and third respectively in the women's division.

In the men's division, Armentum, who continued singing even when it was raining later in the evening, was the well-deserved winner of the Spirit trophy. Villa Bravado was second with Tswelopele third.

Conlaurês won the Spirit trophy for Co-ed residences, with Imperium and Kagiso second and third respectively.

Wayde a special guest

The Kovsie athlete, Wayde van Niekerk, who also participated in the first-year athletics meeting in his day, was a special guest.

The 400 m athlete, who will represent South Africa at the 2016 Olympics in Rio de Janeiro, was presented to the first-years during the official welcoming ceremony.

Van Niekerk is still the Kovsie record holder in some events, including the 200 m and the 400 m, as well as the 4 x 100 m team relay event.

Team and individual results for the event.

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