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

Successful conviction on edible oil adulteration
2009-03-28

A successful conviction in the South African food industry for selling diluted olive oil under the guise of virgin olive oil was handed down in the Special Commercial Crimes Court in Durban this week.

Salvatore Pollizi, owner of the company Ital Distributors, pleaded guilty in terms of Section 105A of the Crime Prosecuting Act to selling fake virgin olive oil under the names of Antico Frantoio and Ulivo.

He was sentenced to a fine of R250 000 or three years’ imprisonment, of which R130 000 or 18 months imprisonment is suspended for five years, on condition that he is not found guilty of fraud or theft or an attempt to commit such crimes during the period of suspension.

The offence was committed in 2001 when the scandal involving olive oil being mixed with a cheaper edible oil and being sold as the more expensive virgin olive oil was uncovered by scientists from the University of the Free State (UFS) in Bloemfontein, in collaboration with Mr Guido Costas, The Olive Growers’ Association, AgriInspec and the South African Police Services.

According to Prof. Lodewyk Kock, Head of the South African Fryer Oil Initiative (SAFOI) that is based at the UFS, the conviction is to his knowledge the first successful conviction of this kind in the South African food industry.

Prof. Kock said, “The court’s decision on Monday, 23 March 2009 is good news to our country and sends out a dire warning to all fraudsters in the food industry.”

He attributed the successful conviction to the active and enthusiastic participation by Advocate Joanna Bromley-Gans from the Special Commercial Crime Unit (SCCU) in Durban, Captain Pragasen Govender from the Serious Economic Offences Unit (SEOU) in Pretoria and the team from SAFOI.

Prof. Kock said that in 2003 some of the prominent members of the edible oil industry took responsibility for the authenticity of their own oils by appointing outside laboratories for routine monitoring.

In some cases a seal of approval from such laboratories is displayed on the monitored oil containers. This is an attempt to inform oil distributors, shop buyers and consumers that these oils have been monitored by an outside laboratory for authenticity.

This “policing” has been supported by major role players in the fast-food sector like Nando’s, Spur, Captain Dorego’s, King Pie Holdings, etc. and various oil distributors like Felda Bridge Africa, Willowton Oil & Cake Mills, Refill Oils, etc.

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
27 March 2009




 

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