Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
24 February 2025 Photo Supplied
Siyanda Magayana
Siyanda Magayana, Senior Officer: Gender Equality and Anti-Discrimination Office, Unit for Institutional Change and Social Justice, UFS.

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 recent executive order by US President Donald Trump to defund and dismantle Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives is more than just a bureaucratic shift. It is a declaration of whose lives matter and whose do not. Removing DEI initiatives and policies, notably, those that centre on marginalised groups, racial minorities, and LGBTQI+ individuals does not erase their struggles and existence in our society. Instead, it exposes the entrenched unwillingness of power structures to validate and acknowledge these realities. The fact that some leaders feel they can simply ‘tick off’ or ‘untick’ human rights and social justice efforts from policy reveals just how expendable these communities are perceived to be.

We need to be clear, erasure at a systemic level does not translate to actual erasure. Marginalised people such as women, queer individuals, black and brown individuals, disabled people will continue to exist, resist, and demand their space, regardless of this order. The removal of systemic and/or institutional recognition and support does not make discrimination disappear. Instead, it amplifies their oppression by stripping away their right to exist, and legal protections that have been fought for, for decades. We cannot have one person deciding to erase the fight of numerous people in just a matter of weeks.

These policies and initiatives were primarily designed to address systemic inequalities and create spaces where historically marginalised groups could thrive. These initiatives of redress were not just for the benefit of the marginalised only, they were for everyone. Therefore, the dismantling of these initiatives will perpetuate and recreate unjust and unequal environments for all.

What is the impact for the Global South?

It is almost tempting to think that the dismantling of DEI initiatives in the US is an isolated issue with no direct impact on our realities in the Global South. However, that assumption is both naïve and dangerous. The ripple effects of regressive policies and initiatives in powerful nations often influences global attitudes, social narratives, and funding. The move by the US devalues global perceptions and the importance of having DEI initiatives in, and for other governments; and there is a possibility of these institutions disregarding and/or following suit in their own countries.

For black and other racially marginalised communities in the Global South, particularly in Africa, this is alarming. It needs us to ask the question, if major global powerful entities dismantle such initiatives and no longer prioritise DEI, what does it mean for marginalised groups and identities within our countries and communities? It reinforces the idea that the oppression of certain groups is not a crisis, but a norm. In the same way, it weakens the push for LGBTQI+ rights, gender equality and racial justice, which are already met with precarious conditions in many countries due to their colonial legacies, systematic inequalities, and conservative cultural norms.

Impact on the diversity of women

The dismantling of DEI policies and initiatives does not only, unfortunately, impact non-normative or those identifying outside of heteronormativity or the gender binary. It also disproportionately affects women, especially those who face intersecting forms of discrimination. For instance, for black women who are already navigating the dual burden of racism and sexism; the dismantling of DEI programmes translates to fewer systemic protections against workplace discrimination, less access to leadership roles, and diminished support for reproductive justice. This extends to women of all races, ethnicities, and backgrounds; no woman is exempt from this decision.

This is even more damaging for non-binary, and trans identities as it reinforces rigid gender norms that limit their autonomy, agency, and expression. It further signals a broader societal regression that undermines the existence and rights of these groups, as well as the progress made towards gender equality and sexual freedom for all.

Men, too, of all races, identities, and backgrounds are affected by the dismantling of DEI initiatives. For instance, black men are already subjected to systemic racism, and as a result of this they are vulnerable to losing economic opportunities and educational equity benefits as initiatives set up to address systemic inequalities. Similarly, the systems that deny trans rights enforce toxic masculinity, thus punishing and discriminating against anyone who deviates from heteropatriarchal and narrow gender norms. As such, white men, for instance, who identify outside of the gender binary and heteronormativity are equally going to be affected.

While it may appear that the dismantling of DEI policy exclusively affects trans individuals and those that identify outside of the gender binary, their removal sets a dangerous precedence for everyone, including cisgender men and women. The erasure of non-normative identities and systems that affirm and acknowledge them are not just about gender identity, but more about controlling how gender is expressed, who gets to belong, and who is deemed worthy of rights and dignity.

“Discrimination Does Not Know Your Postal Address”: Discrimination Against One is Discrimination Against All"

Prejudice can and does affect anyone, anywhere – therefore, it is a dangerous myth that we can selectively uphold human rights. That we can, for instance, advocate for black liberation while turning a blind eye to the struggles of queer, trans and other marginalised groups. That we can rightfully fight for gender equality while remaining silent when non-normative and gender diverse populations’ rights are erased. And similarly, that we can advocate for diversity but only when it is convenient, comfortable, and easy to digest.

It is high time we realise that discrimination is never just directed at a single group, but rather, it is about the broader systems of power we exist in that decide who gets to exist fully and who does not. If these initiatives and support for gender diversity and other minority groups are removed from policy and other critical institutions, then tomorrow, it could be you or any other entity that seemingly no longer fits within the acceptable limits of the norm and/ binary.

The erasure of DEI frameworks and rights of gender diverse persons in the US is not a problem isolated from ours as a collective, it is ours, too. It serves as a warning sign that marginalisation and discrimination is becoming more acceptable, normalised, and institutionalised.

Click to view documentClick here to see other Institutional experts.

News Archive

Two UFS architecture students won prestigious PG Bison 1.618 Competition
2017-10-26

 Description: Bison read more Tags: : Stephan Diedericks, Department of Architecture, Margaux Loubser, Kobus du Preez, Zack Wessels, PG Bison 1.168 Competition 

At the PG Bison 1.618 competition awards ceremony
in Rosebank, were from the left:
Camrin Plaatjes from the University of KwaZulu-Natal;
Stephan Diedericks, winner of the competition;
and Margaux Loubser,
the second-place winner. Both Stephan and
Margaux are studying Architecture at the UFS.
Photo: Supplied



Food that reaches its sell-by date in supermarkets is usually disposed of, but has not yet reached its best-before date.  What happens to this food?  According to Stephan Diedericks, the answer to this is for this food to be repurposed.

Not only does Stephan want to prevent the waste of food – in a world where food security is a challenge – but he also won the prestigious PG Bison 1.618 Competition with his entry in which he suggests that gourmet meals be prepared from food that has reached its sell-by date, and then be served in the Delta Recycletorium. 

Students introduced to park lands in urban areas
Diedericks is a student in the Department of Architecture at the University of the Free State (UFS). Second-place winner in this competition was Margaux Loubser, also a UFS student. Another UFS student, Dehan Kassimatis, was a finalist. They received their awards at a ceremony in Rosebank, Johannesburg, earlier this month. 

The competition, now in its 24th year, was created to recognise the future interior and industrial designers, architects, and key decision-makers in the South African construction industry. It is known not only for the prestige it offers its winners, but also for the tradition-defying brief given to the students each year.

According to lecturers Kobus du Preez and Zak Wessels, in the Department of Architecture, the competition introduced the students to parklands in urban areas. He quotes the competition brief: “Rural to urban migration with the development of commercial and residential property elevates the importance of parklands within cities, in creating a refuge from the hustle of daily life.  These areas are leveraged to encourage healthier living, community interaction and environmental awareness.”

Learning experience more important than prizes
The site that was the focus of the competition is the Environmental Centre, Delta Park Heritage Precinct in Johannesburg. Students needed to transform this old building into a vibrant gastronomic restaurant. “The theme and style of the restaurant was for the student to choose,” said Du Preez. 

Loubser called her restaurant Rooted – a wholefood restaurant.  She was influenced by the geometries of the original Art Deco building. Rooted articulates and integrates the space between nature and the building.  Similar to an Art Deco painting or poster, the landscape is abstracted into terraces which are used to grow vegetables organically.  Vertical green screens soften the divide between the building and its surroundings and it provides shade.

“Our students took their clues from the existing environment and integrated it with a single idea, an abstract concept, which impressed the judges,” Du Preez said. 

Although this is a competition that is well reported in the industry press, Du Preez and Wessels agree that the learning experience for students is much more important than winning the contest. The competition’s brief aligned well with the Department of Architecture’s learning content with its urban focus.

Jacques Steyn, a UFS architecture student, came third in the competition in 2015.

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