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

CR Swart Memorial Lecture: Mr Cecil le Fleur

2006-08-08

Khoe and San call for government to speed up policy dialogue with indigenous communities

Mr Cecil le Fleur, leader of the National Khoe-San Consultative Conference and member of the executive management of the National Khoe-San Council, has called for a national policy on indigenous peoples to protect the human rights and special needs of indigenous people in South Africa.

Mr Le Fleur delivered the 38th CR Swart Memorial Lecture on the Khoe and San at the University of the Free State (UFS). He commended the UFS for its serious approach to the Khoe and San and for initiating initiatives such as a research project on the Griqua in which various aspects linked to language, -culture, -history, - leadership, their role in the South African community (past and present) and the conservation of their historical cultural heritages will be covered.

“The policy dialogue with indigenous communities initiated by government in 1999 and supported by the International Labour Organisation (ILO), has been exceedingly slow, owing to political and bureaucratic problems,” said Mr Le Fleur.

According to Mr Le Fleur the slow pace is also impacting negatively on the United Nations’ efforts to expand the international standards and mechanisms for human rights so as to include the special needs of indigenous peoples.

“The successful adoption of a South African policy would probably have a major impact on the human rights culture of Africa and, more specifically, on the UN system,” he said.

“South Africa has a powerful moral authority internationally and is willing to use this authority in multilateral forums. At this stage, however, South Africa’s Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) may not take an official position on UN instruments and declarations pertaining to indigenous issues, until the Cabinet has resolved its own domestic policy position,” he said.

According to Mr le Fleur it therefore came as a great surprise when the DFA brought out a positive vote in the UN for the adoption of the "Draft Declaration on the Rights of indigenous Peoples" in June this year, even before the completion of the policy process.

Policy consolidation in South Africa is the primary key to creating a new policy climate in Africa in order to protect the rights of indigenous peoples. “The existing constitution of the Republic of South Africa is one of the most liberal on the continent, and embraces the concept of redress of past discrimination. It already includes a clause (Section 6) making provision for the protection of language rights for Khoe and San peoples - the fist peoples of southern Africa,” he said.

“If South Africa can effectively integrate this ‘third generation’ of collective rights within an existing democratic constitution, this will send a clear message to Africa and the world that indigenous rights are a necessary component of human and civil rights in modern democracies,” he said.

Mr Le Fleur proposed an institutional framework based on set principles that would satisfy the needs and aspirations of the Griqua and other first indigenous peoples in South Africa. “The proposed framework was based on the notion of vulnerability as a result of colonialism and apartheid, which stripped us of our indigenous identity, cultural identity and pride as people. This injustice can hardly be addressed within the existing mechanisms provided by the current text of the Constitution,” he said.

Mr Le Fleur also proposed that the principles of unique first-nation status, as recognised in international law, should be applied in the construction of the framework of the constitutional accommodation for the Khoe and San.

Mr Le Fleur further proposed that the Khoe and San’s indigenous status in constitutional terms must be separate from the constitutional acknowledgement of their status as a cultural community, as envisaged in sections 185 and 186 of the Constitution of 1996.

According to Mr Le Fleur, the suggested mechanism should make provision for structures such as:

A statutory representative council for First Indigenous Peoples of South Africa at a national level;
a separate Joint Standing Committee on Indigenous and Traditional Affairs, in both the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces on which the Khoe and San can be represented;
a representative structure for the Khoe and San in the legislature of each relevant province; and
ex officio membership in the relevant structures of local government.

Media release
Issued by: Lacea Loader
Media Representative
Tel: (051) 401-2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl.stg@mail.uovs.ac.za
24 August 2006

- Full lecture
- Photo gallery

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