Latest News Archive

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

Dialogue sparks conversations on bathroom safety and inclusion

19 September 2025 | Story Tshepo Tsotetsi | Photo Tshepo Tsotetsi

During Women’s Month in August, the University of the Free State’s Unit for Institutional Change and Social Justice hosted a dialogue titled ‘How Safe Are You in the Bathroom?’. The event provided a platform for staff and students to reflect on safety, dignity, and inclusivity in one of the most ordinary yet contested spaces: public bathrooms.

Bathrooms are often spaces where fears, anxieties, and discrimination intersect. In South Africa, where gender-based violence remains alarmingly high, many cisgender women understandably see bathrooms as places of potential danger. At the same time, transgender and gender-diverse people frequently encounter exclusion and “quiet violence” when accessing these facilities, making bathrooms symbolic battlegrounds in broader debates about gender and safety.

Reimagining the bathroom

Chelepe Mocwana, Acting Director of the Unit, explained the motivation behind hosting the dialogue by drawing from everyday experience in his own office, where colleagues share a gender-neutral bathroom. “It made us think deeply about how people negotiate safety and comfort in these spaces. Following our benchmarking visit to the University of Pretoria, we realised the importance of engaging our own community, especially students, because they are the key stakeholders. We wanted to ask them directly: How safe do you feel in the bathroom?”

Mocwana stressed that inclusivity at the university must be grounded in equity and social justice, not just policy. “Transformation requires the active participation of both staff and students. Everyone must understand the anti-discrimination policies and the offices responsible for transformation. Our intention with this dialogue was not only to talk but also to raise questions, challenge assumptions, and embed social justice into the daily life of the university. Inclusivity must be something that everyone can feel and practise.”

Building on this, Dimakatso Mokoaqatsa, Assistant Researcher in the Unit and coordinator of the event, reminded the audience that bathrooms are “seemingly an everyday place that somewhat goes unnoticed. Everyone goes in and out of the bathroom every day. But most people don’t think about safety – the safety of the minorities, those discriminated against and denied the chance to be themselves in these spaces.”

Sharing her lived experience, Katleho Mabula, a transgender woman and student, reflected on the uncertainty she faces outside the university. “I only feel safe on campus,” she said, recalling how she was once expelled from a nightclub because of her identity. “My experiences as a transgender woman are nerve-racking, because I don’t know what to expect. Today, they might treat me right. Tomorrow, I can get kicked out or even killed.”

Kgomotso Sekonyane, a student leader, noted the paradox of bathrooms as both refuge and risk. “Growing up, my primary answer to what I’d do if intruders broke into our home was always to lock myself in the bathroom. For many of us, the bathroom is really a safe haven,” she said. She urged the audience to reimagine bathrooms as “microcosms of the constitutional promise”, citing Sections 9, 10 and 12 of the Constitution.

Building solidarity

Panelists emphasised that inclusivity requires more than symbolic gestures. Dr Dionne van Reenen, a lecturer in the UFS Centre for Gender and Africa Studies who previously worked in the Unit for Institutional Change and Social Justice and was involved in shaping the university’s early inclusive bathroom policies, highlighted that inclusive bathrooms were introduced at the university as far back as 2016. But, she added, progress must go beyond policy: “If you’re going to speak about solidarity, you need to pull everyone into conversation, policy, and action. Solidarity cannot coexist with irreconcilable differences of identity politics.”

Similarly, Brightness Mangolothi, Director of the Centre for Diversity, Inclusivity and Social Change at the Cape Peninsula University of Technology, stressed that inclusion must be intentional: “Solidarity can only take place when we are aware of others’ experiences. Sometimes people become oblivious because of the privileges they have. Inclusion is not a nice-to-have – it is a necessity, a right.” She added that the conversation should not be about designing bathrooms for marginalised groups but with them: “Nothing about us without us.”

Mokoaqatsa closed the discussion by echoing a reminder she had shared throughout: “I am not free while any woman is unfree, even when her shackles are different from my own.”

News Archive

Weideman focuses on misconceptions with regard to survival of Afrikaans

2006-05-19

From the left are Prof Magda Fourie (Vice-Rector: Academic Planning), Prof Gerhardt de Klerk (Dean: Faculty of the Humanities), George Weideman and Prof Bernard Odendaal (acting head of the UFS Department of Afrikaans and Dutch, German and French).
Photo (Stephen Collett):

Weideman focuses on misconceptions with regard to survival of Afrikaans

On the survival of a language a persistent and widespread misconception exists that a “language will survive as long as people speak the language”. This argument ignores the higher functions of a language and leaves no room for the personal and historic meaning of a language, said the writer George Weideman.

He delivered the D.F. Malherbe Memorial Lecture organised by the Department Afrikaans at the University of the Free State (UFS). Dr. Weideman is a retired lecturer and now full-time writer. In his lecture on the writer’s role and responsibility with regard to language, he also focused on the language debate at the University of Stellenbosch (US).

He said the “as-long-as-it-is spoken” misconception ignores the characteristics and growth of literature and other cultural phenomena. Constitutional protection is also not a guarantee. It will not stop a language of being reduced to a colloquial language in which the non-standard form will be elevated to the norm. A language only grows when it standard form is enriched by non-standard forms; not when its standard form withers. The growth or deterioration of a language is seen in the growth or decline in its use in higher functions. The less functions a language has, the smaller its chance to survive.

He said Afrikaans speaking people are credulous and have misplaced trust. It shows in their uncritical attitude with regard to the shifts in university policies, university management and teaching practices. Afrikaners have this credulity perhaps because they were spoilt by white supremacy, or because the political liberation process did not free them from a naïve and slavish trust in government.

If we accept that a university is a kind of barometer for the position of a language, then the institutionalised second placing of Afrikaans at most tertiary institutions is not a good sign for the language, he said.

An additional problem is the multiplying effect with, for instance, education students. If there is no need for Afrikaans in schools, there will also be no need for Afrikaans at universities, and visa versa.

The tolerance factor of Afrikaans speaking people is for some reasons remarkably high with regard to other languages – and more specifically English. With many Afrikaans speaking people in the post-apartheid era it can be ascribed to their guilt about Afrikaans. With some coloured and mostly black Afrikaans speaking people it can be ascribed to the continued rejection of Afrikaans because of its negative connotation with apartheid – even when Afrikaans is the home language of a large segment of the previously oppressed population.

He said no one disputes the fact that universities play a changing role in a transformed society. The principle of “friendliness” towards other languages does not apply the other way round. It is general knowledge that Afrikaans is, besides isiZulu and isiXhosa, the language most spoken by South Africans.

It is typical of an imperialistic approach that the campaigners for a language will be accused of emotional involvement, of sentimentality, of longing for bygone days, of an unwillingness to focus on the future, he said.

He said whoever ignores the emotional aspect of a language, knows nothing about a language. To ignore the emotional connection with a language, leads to another misconception: That the world will be a better place without conflict if the so-called “small languages” disappear because “nationalism” and “language nationalism” often move closely together. This is one of the main reasons why Afrikaans speaking people are still very passive with regard to the Anglicising process: They are not “immune” to the broad influence that promotes English.

It is left to those who use Afrikaans to fight for the language. This must not take place in isolation. Writers and publishers must find more ways to promote Afrikaans.

Some universities took the road to Anglicision: the US and University of Pretoria need to be referred to, while there is still a future for Afrikaans at the Northwest University and the UFS with its parallel-medium policies. Continued debate is necessary.

It is unpreventable that the protest over what is happening to Afrikaans and the broad Afrikaans speaking community must take on a stronger form, he said.

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