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

School of Medicine not closing
2009-10-22

There is no immediate threat that the University of the Free State’s (UFS) School of Medicine will be closing.

This was confirmed by Prof. Gert van Zyl, Head of the UFS’s School of Medicine and acting Dean of the Faculty of Health Science, following media reports that Prof. Andries Stulting has indicated in a meeting with other medical schools and parliamentary standing committee members that the School will have to close due to the serious problems in the health sector.

“This discussion should be seen in context. Prof. Stulting, in his capacity as acting Head of the School of Medicine, and on behalf of the School and the Faculty, sent a proactive warning to the Free State Health Department, the Member of the Executive Committee and the Premier of the Free State regarding the long-term consequences of the health crisis. This statement was not interpreted correctly. Everything that Prof. Stulting said has already been included in the position statement that the School released in May 2009. What is urgent, though, is that the problems that were identified at especially Pelonomi Hospital in May this year were still not addressed,” said Prof. Van Zyl.

According to Prof. Van Zyl, problems at Pelonomi Hospital include not enough beds, lack of funding for the health sector in the Free State and in some instances problems with filling vacant positions.

“Some of these problems have already been addressed by the Free State Department of Health. Our training platform includes not only Pelonomi Hospital, but also Universitas Hospital, National Hospital, the Free State Psychiatric Complex and several clinics in the Bloemfontein area. This means that there are other facilities available that function in order to provide appropriate training to undergraduate students. Therefore, training is not in immediate danger and the School will definitely not be closing,” he said.

“New first-year students will start their studies in 2010 and I can assure you that there will be adequate training opportunities to take in and train students. However, we do struggle with a bigger intake as requested by Government. I want to put Prof. Stulting’s remark in context: He referred to postgraduate students and therefore the specialists who are in training,” said Prof. Van Zyl.

According to Prof. Van Zyl the specialists in training is a problem that was discussed with the Free State Health Department – with specific reference to less time in operating theatres and the number of beds at Pelonomi Hospital. “We are of the opinion that, should the Department address this problem as a matter of urgency, there will be no long-term damage to the training of these specialists in training. These are the students that Prof. Stulting was referring to,” he said.

The School received more than 1 500 applications for undergraduate studies in 2010 – all of these applications met the minimum selection requirements for the 140 available places. “Our current undergraduate students are therefore not influenced and they will continue to receive the quality training for which the School is renowned,” he said.

Prof. Jonathan Jansen, Rector and Vice-chancellor of the UFS, is aware of this and he satisfied himself as to the situation when he visited the hospitals in Bloemfontein on Friday, 9 October 2009. The national Minister of Higher Education and Training, Dr Blade Nzimande, was also informed of the School’s concerns when he visited the UFS in September 2009.

Media Release
Issued by: Lacea Loader
Deputy Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl.stg@mail.uovs.ac.za  

22 October 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