CSA&GCSA&G

Call for Applications: One-Year International Research and Advocacy Exchange

/in /by

The Centre for Sexualities, AIDS, and Gender (CSA&G) at the University of Pretoria seeks two (2) participants to join a one-year international exchange focused on countering anti-rights forces impacting historically marginalised communities. This exchange, hosted in partnership with the Norwegian Students’ and Academics’ International Assistance Fund (SAIH) in Norway and Colors Rainbow (CRB), a leading Myanmar LGBTIA+ organisation (currently based in Chiang MAI, Thailand), offers a unique opportunity to conduct impactful research and build advocacy skills within an international framework.

Funded by the Norwegian Agency for Exchange Cooperation (Norec), the CSA&G, SAIH and CRB are launching this exchange to empower participants through hands-on experience across three countries: South Africa, Norway, and Thailand. Participants will spend three months each in Pretoria, Oslo, and Chiang Mai, developing research and advocacy strategies that bolster the work of their host organisations.

Participation in this project constitutes a one-year paid commitment. All accommodation, travel, and activity costs will be covered by the project.

For more details on the project background, timeline and activities, see the project’s concept note here

Eligibility Requirements:

  • Must be a recent graduate of the University of Pretoria (within the last five years) and under the age of 35, or will have completed their studies by January 2025;
  • Have studied in a field relevant to the project e.g. gender studies, development studies, human rights, environmental studies;
  • Have a particular interest in or knowledge of authoritarianism, anti-gender and/or anti-environmentalism;
  • Availability to fully participate in the year-long program, including international travel;
  • Must have research experience and be familiar with quantitative or qualitative research methods;
  • Preference will be given to Just Leaders alumni who fit the above criteria.

To apply, please send your CV and a short letter of motivation to Pfarelo Matsila (pfarelo.matsila@up.ac.za) by midnight Monday 02nd December 2024. Please direct any questions about the project or application process to Pfarelo.

CSA&GCSA&G

Children and Corporal Punishment: A Brief Exploration of Physical Violence Against Children as a form of Discipline

/in /by

By: Chegofatso Maponya 

Section 12 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa asserts the right everyone in the country has to freedom and security of their person. This right includes (amongst others) the right to be free from all forms of violence from either public or private sources as well as the right not to be treated or punished in a cruel, inhumane or degrading way. This is an extremely important right, especially as it relates to children.

Children are a vulnerable group in society, who, to some extent or another, are susceptible to all types of abuse. Where violence is inflicted on a child, especially by an adult, it can be difficult for a child to defend themselves. This is almost always the case if the violence inflicted is hidden under the guise of discipline. Corporal punishment, as a form of discipline, has been evident across cultures throughout history. The prevalence of this form of discipline has resulted in abuse against children being justified and overlooked. This justification is done by most, if not all, the adults in a child’s life. From their parents to their grandparents to (in some cases) their teachers at school. However, the use of physical violence to punish or discipline a child can never, in my opinion, be justified. Surely, there are much more effective methods that do not involve violence that one can use to modify and rectify a child’s behaviour as well as their understanding of right and wrong.

There are alternative methods to physical punishment, these include requiring a child to sit on a chair and think about their bad behaviour as well as ways not to repeat the behaviour going forward (a time-out).[1] Additionally, a child could be disciplined by asking them to do “non abusive physical tasks” such as gardening and cleaning up messes they have made.[2] It is also effective to praise and acknowledge desired behaviour (positive reinforcement) while also making clear what is considered right and wrong so that the child may act accordingly.[3] Finally, by simply speaking with the child, the adult may better understand why the child acts in a particular way. In this way, children will also be more likely to open up to the parents and understand the reason why their behaviour is bad and thus be able to make positive change moving forward.

This position against corporal punishment was confirmed in the South African case S v Williams in 1995 by the Constitutional Court. The Court declared that the use of corporal punishment of juveniles is unconstitutional. For context, the corporal punishment, in this case, involved the use of a cane to whip or strike the intended victims. The Court’s ruling highlights the brutal and inhumane nature of this type of punishment; even in cases of those who society deems deserving of some form of punishment. Although the use of corporal punishment constituted a norm in South Africa, the Constitutional Court asserted that courts plays a role “in the promotion and development of a new culture founded on the recognition of human rights”.[4] The court continued to state “that old rules and practices can no longer be taken for granted; they must be subjected to constant re-assessment to bring them into line with the provisions of the Constitution”.[5] As a result, the court asserted that although cultural norms allow for corporal punishment, this cannot be the legal position because the provisions of the Constitution reign supreme. Despite this case, corporal punishment still remains common across South Africa in the home and in schools.[6] The use of physical violence to discipline a child is degrading and impacts the dignity of the victim. It also sends a message, in my opinion, that violence is an effective and legitimate way to fix a problem, which is not true.

According to research done by the United Nations, “one in four mothers and primary caregivers expressed that physical punishment is necessary to raise children”.[7] Additionally, UNICEF has asserted that “nearly 400 million children under 5…regularly endure psychological aggression or physical punishment at home”.[8] Such statistics show how widespread the issue is and how many children, globally, are subject of such cruel treatment. All this is done in the name of discipline; however, it is important to note the unfavourable psychological effects that this form of punishment has on a child. Studies have shown connections between “normative physical punishment and child aggression, delinquency and spousal assault in later life.”[9] The studies were mainly conducted in the United States of America and highlights that physical punishment was more likely to elicit aggression within children. Furthermore, the studies found that “a reduction in harsh discipline used by parents of boys at risk for antisocial behaviour was followed by significant reductions in their child’s aggression.”[10]

Other studies illustrated that there is “no evidence that physical punishment changed the original, unwanted behaviour”[11].  The physical punishment, essentially, results in an increase in aggression, antisocial behaviour, anxiety, depression, poor moral reasoning, an impaired “parent-child” relationship, low self-esteem in the child and potential substance abuse issues once an adult.[12] In addition to all these effects,  studies using brain scans have illustrated that “children who are physically punished are running the same brain circuitry as children who have been abused”.[13] All this shows the detrimental effect that corporal punishment has on a child. Children absorb information from their environment and act accordingly, consequently, when they are exposed to physical punishment it can increase aggression within them and cause many mental health issues that could have otherwise been avoided.

On the international stage, many countries have also placed a prohibition on the use of corporal punishment. Such countries include Sweden, Norway, Germany, Spain, Venezuela, Uruguay, Kenya, Zambia, Mauritius and many others.[14] Approximately, 67 countries have laws that fully prohibit the use of corporal punishment and 27 countries are committed to changing their laws to fully prohibit the practice.[15] This means approximately 93 countries globally agree, to some extent, that corporal punishment is inhumane and that people ought to be protected from it.

Ultimately, it is unfortunate that we live in a society that, throughout history and across cultures, resorts to such measures in bringing up children. As a result of such so-called discipline, the child’s rights are not respected by adults. Although the law, on paper, recognises the rights of the child in this regard, it is time for adults in society to do the same. The main way for change to occur is at an individual and community level. Adults must ensure that they do not use corporal punishment against their own children and that they hold those in their communities who use physical punishment accountable by reporting such cases to the police. Although change is present and strides have been made, there will always be room for improvement. Essentially, the goal is that children should be able to enjoy their rights as prescribed by the Constitution just as much as everyone else.

 

Footnotes

[1] A Busienei ‘Alternative Methods to Corporal Punishment and their Efficacy’ (2012) Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies 3 158.

[2] Busienei (n 1) 158.

[3] Busienei (n 1) 158.

[4] S v Williams and Others 1995 (3) SA 632.

[5] S v Williams (n 4) para 8.

[6] Stats SA ‘Corporal punishment still in schools despite ban’ (2023) https://www.statssa.gov.za/?p=16128#:~:text=Of%20those%20that%20reported%20experiencing,Children%20exposed%20to%20maltreatment%2C%202021. (Accessed 19 September 2024).

[7] UN News ‘400 million under-fives regularly experience violent discipline at home’ (11 June 2024) https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/06/1150921#:~:text=400%20million%20under%2Dfives%20regularly%20experience%20violent%20discipline%20at%20home,-11%20June%202024&text=Six%20in%20ten%20children%20under,according%20to%20new%20UNICEF%20estimates. (Accessed 19 September 2024)

[8] UNICEF ‘Violent discipline’ (June 2024)  https://data.unicef.org/topic/child-protection/violence/violent-discipline/ (accessed 19 September 2024).

[9] J Durrant & R Ensom ‘Physical punishment of children: lessons from 20 years of research’ (2012) CMAJ 1373.

[10] Durrant & Ensom (n 9) 1373.

[11] D Divecha ‘Hitting Children Leads to Trauma, Not Better Behavior’ (2022) https://www.developmentalscience.com/blog/2022/2/10/hitting-children-leads-to-trauma-not-better-behavior (accessed 19 September 2024).

[12] D Divecha (n 11).

[13] D Divecha (n 11).

[14] End Corporal Punishment ‘Progress” https://endcorporalpunishment.org/countdown/ (accessed 19 September 2024).

[15] End Corporal Punishment (n 14).

CSA&GCSA&G

Vulnerability and Protection: Revisiting Legal Definitions through Intersectionality and Sexual Citizenship

/in /by

By Pfarelo Brandy Matsila and Hulisani Khorombi

Introduction

The Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act 2021 represents a crucial advancement in South Africa’s legal framework. It designed to provide enhanced protection to individuals who are vulnerable to sexual exploitation and violence. This Act plays a critical role in addressing sexual offences, particularly for children, individuals with mental disabilities, and women under the age of 25 who are engaged in higher education or vocational training. It has been instrumental in ensuring that institutions such as educational facilities and workplaces are held accountable for safeguarding these populations.

The Act’s focus on protecting vulnerable groups is both timely and essential in a society where sexual violence remains a pervasive issue. By codifying protections for these groups, the Act acknowledges the importance of safeguarding bodily autonomy and addressing imbalances in power that can lead to exploitation. However, as valuable as the Act is, it is equally important to scrutinize the inclusivity and adequacy of its definitions—particularly the notion of “vulnerable persons.” When examined through the lenses of Intersectionality and Sexual Citizenship Theory, significant gaps emerge that call for a broader and more inclusive understanding of vulnerability.

The Importance of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act

The Act’s inclusion of specific protections for children, individuals with mental disabilities, and women under the age of 25 within education and vocational training environments is commendable. These groups have historically faced significant risks of sexual exploitation and harassment. The Act’s recognition of their vulnerability represents a forward-thinking attempt to provide legal safeguards where they are most needed.

Particularly important is the Act’s emphasis on higher education institutions and vocational training settings, where young women are often at risk due to imbalanced power dynamics, exposure to predatory behaviour, and lack of sufficient institutional accountability. These provisions aim to create safer environments for young women to pursue their education and careers without the constant fear of sexual harassment or violence.

Moreover, the Act is a vital step towards addressing the rights of persons with mental disabilities, who often lack the legal and social protections necessary to defend themselves against sexual violence. This inclusion strengthens the legal protections for individuals who are most at risk of exploitation due to their inability to give informed consent.

Critique: Gaps in the Definition of Vulnerability

While the Act makes substantial strides in protecting certain groups, its current definition of “vulnerable persons” is limited in several key areas. These limitations, when viewed through Intersectionality and Sexual Citizenship Theory, reveal the ways in which the legal framework overlooks important social and contextual factors that contribute to vulnerability.

1.      Women Under 25 Not in Education or Vocational Training

The Act identifies women under the age of 25 who are in higher education or vocational training as vulnerable, providing them with essential legal protections. However, women under 25 who do not fit into these categories—such as those who are unemployed, working in informal sectors, or in low-wage jobs—are excluded from this definition. This exclusion creates a narrow view of vulnerability that ignores the realities of many young women’s lives.

  • Sexual Citizenship Critique: Sexual citizenship, as described by Richardson (2000), involves the right to bodily autonomy and safety for all individuals, regardless of their institutional or employment status. Vulnerability should not be confined to educational or training environments. Women in precarious or informal work environments, or those who are unemployed, face significant risks of exploitation and harassment. The law’s failure to include these women leaves many vulnerable individuals unprotected.
  • Intersectionality Critique: Intersectionality emphasizes how multiple social identities—such as race, class, and gender—interact to create different experiences of oppression. A young woman of colour from an economically disadvantaged background, for example, may face heightened risks of sexual violence despite not being in education or vocational training. Ignoring these intersecting identities perpetuates a system of exclusion, leaving out those who are most in need of legal protection (Crenshaw, 1989).

2.      Infantilization of Women and Exclusion of Men

The Act’s focus on women under 25 reinforces a paternalistic narrative that women need protection solely because of their age. This focus can be seen as infantilizing, reducing women’s vulnerability to a matter of age and failing to recognize that women of all ages face risks of sexual exploitation. Furthermore, the exclusion of men from the definition of vulnerability is problematic, as it reinforces gendered stereotypes that position men as invulnerable to sexual harm.

  • Sexual Citizenship Critique: Sexual citizenship is based on the principle that all individuals, regardless of gender, have the right to bodily autonomy and protection from sexual violence. By excluding men from the definition of vulnerable persons, the Act denies male victims their right to protection. Male survivors of sexual violence, particularly those from marginalized communities such as men of colour or those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, are rendered invisible in the legal framework (Richardson, 2000).
  • Intersectionality Critique: Intersectionality underscores how men, too, can be vulnerable to sexual exploitation, particularly when other factors such as race, class, or disability come into play. For instance, a black man working in precarious labour conditions may experience intersecting forms of oppression that make him more vulnerable to exploitation. The law’s gendered approach to vulnerability fails to account for these intersections, perpetuating harmful stereotypes about masculinity and neglecting the experiences of male survivors (Crenshaw, 1989).

3.      Neglect of Economic and Social Disadvantages

The Act does not account for the ways in which economic disadvantage exacerbates vulnerability. People in precarious working conditions, particularly in informal sectors, are at increased risk of sexual exploitation. Yet, the Act focuses on institutional settings such as schools and training centers, neglecting individuals who are outside these environments but face similar or greater risks.

  • Sexual Citizenship Critique: Economic precarity is a significant factor in creating vulnerability. People who are economically disadvantaged, especially women working in informal sectors or low-wage jobs, often lack the social and legal protections available to those in more formalized settings. Sexual citizenship theory demands that the law recognize and address the vulnerabilities created by economic insecurity (Richardson, 2000).
  • Intersectionality Critique: The intersection of race, gender, and class compounds vulnerability for many individuals. A woman of colour in an informal labor setting may face exploitation due to both her economic status and her race, with limited recourse to legal protection. Ignoring the role of economic disadvantage in the legal definition of vulnerability disproportionately harms marginalized groups, leaving them without the protections they need (Crenshaw, 1989).

4.      Insufficient Attention to Race and Disability

The Act fails to adequately consider how race and disability interact with gender and age to create distinct forms of vulnerability. Although persons with mental disabilities are included in the definition of vulnerability, there is no explicit mention of individuals with physical or sensory disabilities, nor is there an acknowledgment of how race and ethnicity affect vulnerability to sexual exploitation.

  • Sexual Citizenship Critique: Vulnerability cannot be viewed in isolation from factors like race and disability. People with physical and sensory disabilities, as well as racial minorities, often experience increased vulnerability to sexual harm. Legal protections should reflect the diverse and intersectional nature of vulnerability to ensure that all individuals have the right to bodily autonomy and safety (Richardson, 2000).
  • Intersectionality Critique: Intersectionality reveals that individuals who are marginalized by both race and disability experience compounded vulnerabilities. For example, a black woman with a physical disability faces distinct risks of exploitation that differ from those faced by women without disabilities or from other racial backgrounds. Failing to address these intersecting identities means that the most vulnerable individuals remain unprotected by the law (Crenshaw, 1989).

Recommendations for a More Inclusive Definition of Vulnerability

To address these gaps, the Act’s definition of vulnerability should be revised to reflect a broader and more intersectional understanding of who is vulnerable to sexual harm. Key recommendations include:

  1. Expand Protections for Women: The law should extend its definition of vulnerability to include women under 25 who are not in education or vocational training, as well as women of all ages in precarious working conditions.
  2. Include Men and Non-Binary Individuals: Legal protections should be extended to men and non-binary individuals, acknowledging that vulnerability to sexual exploitation is not confined to women.
  3. Recognize Economic and Social Disadvantage: Vulnerability should be defined in relation to economic and social factors, particularly for individuals working in informal sectors or facing economic instability.
  4. Address Intersectional Vulnerabilities: The law must explicitly consider the ways in which race, disability, and class intersect to create heightened vulnerabilities for marginalized groups.

Conclusion

The Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act is a crucial step toward addressing sexual violence and exploitation in South Africa. However, the current definition of vulnerability is too narrow and fails to account for the complex and intersecting factors that shape individuals’ experiences of exploitation. By revisiting the definition of vulnerability through the lenses of Sexual Citizenship Theory and Intersectionality, we can ensure that legal protections are extended to all individuals who are at risk, regardless of their gender, age, or socioeconomic status.

References

Campus Violence statistics. Available at: https://rainn.org/statistics/campus-sexual-violence

Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory, and Antiracist Politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum.

Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act 13 of 2021. Available from: https://www.justice.gov.za/legislation/acts/2021-013.pdf

Lifting the veil on violence against children in South Africa. Available at: https://www.statssa.gov.za/?p=17023

Richardson, D. (2000). Constructing Sexual Citizenship: Theorizing Sexual Rights. Critical Social Policy, 20(1), 105–135.

CSA&G

The late Jerry Coovadia – a reflection

/in /by

On 4 October 2023 Professor Hoosen “Jerry” Coovadia, an icon and champion in the fight against AIDS in South Africa and the world, passed away at the age of 83. In this reflection, the founding director of the CSA&G, Mary Crewe, pays tribute to him.

Jerry and I worked together on the 2000 International AIDS conference and on the South African AIDS Conferences that followed. There were a number of things that were remarkable about Jerry Coovadia. He had the most wonderful sense of humour and told stories with flair and eloquence. He would express what he felt about people honestly and frankly. He never traded on his own excellence or ego and never embraced the popular view or bowed to various orthodoxies. He would disagree and argue and get passionate about his position but he was never vindictive or brutal and he never let these disagreements stand in the way of friendship and collegiality.

It was through others, rather than himself, that I learned of his activist history and of the immense stature he held as an activist.

He demanded excellence and evidence and never rushed to judgement. He could be obstinate and stubborn but would allow the best solutions to be found. He was delightful to work with on the Dira Sengwe board and conference committees, because he had a flair for the absurd and a way of seeing the world and people in it that brought out eccentricity and uniqueness. He did not fall for exaggerated rhetoric but expressed his concern about the absolute failure of the AIDS response in many ways and through the many influential positions he held.

I think it is absolutely true to say that through his activism and his AIDS work he saved many lives. It is also true that he inspired and influenced many others and it is this debt that I owe him; a way of looking at the world and at AIDS that shaped the way I thought about the epidemic and the responses to it and what could be achieved. Initially impatient with the idea of a social science response to AIDS, he later came to embrace it and use social science in his research work. He said that much of what he subsequently read about social research and society fascinated him and expanded his view of HIV and AIDS work. If he asked for an opinion or why a particular view or position was held, it would be certain that the next time we met he would have read around the issue, and thought about the ideas, and his responses were always filled with curiosity and the delight of expanding his knowledge.

I learned a great deal from Jerry – about HIV and AIDS, about activism, about intellectual engagement and about what it means to be critically and sceptically engaged with one’s work. I also enjoyed a real friendship and collegiality that was delightful.

It will be a privilege to keep this critical engagement alive in HIV and AIDS work and to remember him through collections in the UP AIDS Archive.

CSA&GCSA&G

Pretoria-Marburg Queer Conversations Part 2 Finale: Parenthood and Struggles among LGBTIQ+ Individuals Explored

/in /by

By Naledi Mpanza

On 22 June 2023 the Centre for Human Rights (CHR) and the Centre for Sexualities, AIDS, and Gender (CSA&G) at the University of Pretoria, in collaboration with the Center for Gender Studies and Feminist Futures (CGS) and the Center for Conflict Studies (CCS) at the Philipps-University Marburg, hosted the series finale of the Pretoria-Marburg Queer Conversations.

The conversation brought together experts and activists to discuss the theme of “Parenthood, parental perceptions, and struggles among LGBTIQ+ individuals” and was led by Dr Madeleine Muller, a Family Physician and co-founder of the East London Gender and Sexuality Alliance, and Landa Mabenge, a Doctoral scholar, author, and the first transgender man to successfully motivate a medical aid for the payment of his gender affirming surgeries in South Africa.

The expert speakers reflected on their academic, personal and political experiences regarding the topic, with Dr Muller starting off the conversation with a reflection on the challenges she faces as a parent to two queer children:

“Probably the only challenge that I am facing as a mom, and that my family is faced with, is the issue of prejudice. If we didn’t have prejudice in the world, we wouldn’t have this series, there wouldn’t be any issues within the queer community. There is no magic wand, unfortunately, for addressing prejudice, but understanding is usually a good start”.

Muller linked her comment to the broader question of ‘providing patient-centred care’, as well as the limitations that prejudice places on providing such care. She provided a biomedical framing of fear and prejudice; when we are in survival mode our sympathetic nervous system kicks in, leading to fast thinking, fast acting and jumping to conclusions, which leads to unfavourable outcomes. When we are in creative mode our higher order functioning allows us to think more carefully and thoughtfully, we are able to see the bigger picture. Muller thus distinguished between ‘street-view’ thinking which is instinctive and jumps to conclusions versus ‘balcony-view’ thinking which is empathic, generous and considered (and hence less judgemental).

Through personal illustrations from her eldest child, who is also queer, she unpacked the above. For example, some individuals will respond to positive social media posts on Pride with long, illogical, controlling and manipulative utterances that aren’t evidence-based, as a way to quell their fears about, and lack of knowledge on, the LGBTIQ+ community.

Muller spoke of ways to challenge stigma and discrimination and the power of support and allyship for trans youth. Her emphasis was on the role of parents in smoothing the way for their children by: creating safer environments, paying attention to pronouns, seeking affirming counselling, and not allowing negative external factors to overwhelm them. She encouraged parents of LGBTIQ+ children to seek affirmation and support from like-minded people, and from forums dedicated to providing a nurturing environment for families of LGBTIQ+ children.

Landa Mabenge weighed in on the lived reality and danger of families imposing hostile environments for trans and gender diverse persons, that may lead to self-harm and destructive practices. In a captivating presentation, Mabenge shared his experiences of growing up and navigating a cis-heteronormative, theocentric, and colonial world that often clashed with the appreciation of human life beyond sex characteristics and genitals.

He reflected on his early childhood experiences of being parented and how they have influenced his choices regarding parenthood or relationships with partners who are parents. He also emphasised the importance of a clear lexicon for LGBTQI+ individuals and their families to nurture identities safely and progressively, one that is not so far removed from the gender-neutral language that is common in many African languages such as isiXhosa.

Mabenge’s reflection brought forward the considerations of pronouns in African communities as well as black African spirituality, in conversations regarding pronouns and gender diversity. Many of these insights can be found in his book ‘Becoming Him’ which documents the painful journey of living with parents who did not affirm his being, but created a harmful environment compared to the warmer experience with his grandmother.

Both speakers emphasised the importance of creating environments where everyone feels seen, heard, and respected. Mabenge reiterated that,

“At the time I didn’t have the language, the only thing I had at my disposal were the people charged with my upbringing, which I felt and in hindsight realised sort of limited me to what is the physical or natal part of me, but the other parts  of my humanness, the fact that I was developing socially, spiritually, emotionally were silenced…people should not exist in silence, people should not exist in silos…we should dismantle barriers to unity and understanding”

Concluding, Muller called for the establishment of Gender and Sexuality Alliances which are open to everyone, to create safer spaces on campus and promote occupational health, including the provision of Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) as a tool for realising sexual and reproductive health and rights, as supported by the South African Constitution. As a doctoral scholar, Mabenge echoed the same and passionately expressed the need for gender-affirming practices and services in healthcare and higher education spaces, whilst calling on universities to initiate and support initiatives such as providing gender-neutral facilities and working across disciplines to advance inclusivity and decolonized curricula.

Both speakers highlighted the revolutionary Southern African HIV Clinicians Society Gender-Affirming Healthcare Guideline for South Africa as instrumental in realising affirming practices for Trans and Gender Diverse persons; and implored practitioners to approach these guidelines as a way of facilitating ubuntu and the Batho Pele principles, meaning ‘putting the people first’. These principles are promoted by the South African Constitution through the Equality Clause and policies such as the Alteration of Sex Description and Sex Status Act, 2003 (Act No. 49 of 2003) which prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender, and make provision for transgender people to align their legal status with their lived gender identity.

Mabenge and Muller are actively engaged in working across disciplines to develop undergraduate and postgraduate courses that promote understanding of gender identity, sexual orientation, and sexual health.

The Pretoria-Marburg Queer Conversations event provided a platform for critical reflection and dialogue on parenthood, parental perceptions, and struggles among LGBTIQ+ individuals. By shedding light on lived experiences and advocating for transformative change, the event aimed to foster inclusivity, respect, and recognition for all individuals.

The PMQC team appreciates the support of all the individuals who participated in bringing the conversations to life. For anyone who would like to view the recordings, they can be viewed here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TnkIoamyO8

CSA&GCSA&G

Africa and Europe together for scientific research: the University of Pretoria is among the key players of the new Clusters of Research Excellence

/in /by

The University of Pretoria, through the leadership of the ARUA Centre of Excellence in Sustainable Food Systems (ARUA-SFS) is the co-proposer of a new university partnership on sustainable systems for food production, triggered by the collaboration between the Guild of European Research-Intensive Universities (The Guild) and the African Research Universities Alliance (ARUA).

African and European universities join forces to tackle the major global challenges of today and tomorrow. The collaboration between the Guild of European Research-Intensive Universities (The Guild) and the African Research Universities Alliance (ARUA) has given rise to the Africa-Europe Clusters of Research Excellence (CoRE): a new model of university partnership that will pave the way for a new era of collaboration between Africa and Europe in the fields of research, innovation, and higher education.

One of the newly approved Clusters by the joint assembly of The Guild and ARUA will be focused on Sustainable Food Systems and will be coordinated by the University of Pretoria together with the University of Bologna. The project ranked first in the category of Innovation and Technology.

The Africa-Europe Clusters of Research Excellence are based on multilateralism and research excellence: each partnership brings together at least three African universities and two European universities to work on a thematic area of common interest, addressing the major scientific challenges through research and higher education that leverage the skills and excellence of the participating universities. These actions have a long-term perspective, spanning at least a decade, ensuring a balance between the resources and priorities of African and European universities, while focusing on the scientific education of the next generation of researchers.

“The announcement of a Cluster of Research Excellence in Sustainable Food Systems is a key opportunity for the ARUA Centre of Excellence in Sustainable Food Systems (ARUA-SFS) to join forces with strategic partners and work together on achieving development targets, in particular the elimination of hunger and malnutrition in our lifetime,” declares Frans Swanepoel, Interim Director of the ARUA-SFS hosted at the University of Pretoria. “The University is excited about the possibilities that the Cluster of Research Excellence brings for truly transformative research. The diversity of partners from across the two continents collectively escalates our potential for impact”, states Tawana Kupe, Vice-Chancellor and Principal of the University of Pretoria.

“Ensuring sustainable and safe food production is a globally prioritized issue that can only be addressed through interdisciplinary and international approaches. In this regard, the new Cluster of Research Excellence represents a game changer in bringing together the strengths of African and European academic institutions and leveraging their expertise and capacities,” declares Alberto Credi, Vice Rector for Research at the University of Bologna. “The University of Bologna is taking a further step towards a new approach to academic and scientific cooperation between Africa and Europe, based on sustainability, quality, equity, capacity building and scalability.”

The Cluster “Sustainable Food Systems” is proposed by a team of researchers coordinated by Professor Frans Swanepoel (ARUA-SFS Interim Director) along with Luca Fontanesi, Professor at the Department of Agri-Food Sciences and Technologies of the University of Bologna and Rector’s Delegate for Competitive Research Projects.

The collaboration includes 16 other partner universities, 8 of which are European (Bologna [Italy], Warwick, Leeds [United Kingdom], Ghent [Belgium], Göttingen, Hohenheim [Germany], Ljubljana [Slovenia], Montpellier [France]) and 8 are African (Pretoria, Western Cape, Johannesburg, Mpumalanga, Kwazulu-Natal [from South Africa], Nairobi [Kenya], Ghana, Makerere [Uganda], along with 2 non-academic partners (the Agricultural Research Council, South Africa and the Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network [FANRPAN]). The Cluster will address the challenges that food production systems will have to face along the transformation towards increasing sustainability. Building on the solid foundations of established partnerships and programs, extensive collaborative research and capacity building are envisaged, with a particular focus on early-career researchers involved in joint projects. The goal is to contribute substantially to the innovation of African and European food systems.

The University of Pretoria was also awarded a Cluster of Research Excellence in Health, Gender and Sexualities led by Pierre Brouard, Acting Director of the Centre for Sexualities, AIDS and Gender.

CSA&GCSA&G

Youth Day upon us, youth issues under the rug

/in /by

By Naledi Mpanza and Tshepi Raboroko

As Youth Day is upon us, it is crucial to reflect on the pressing issues, faced by young people, which often go unaddressed or unrecognised by those in power. This cannot be more obvious, in the higher education space, than through the #FeesMustFall movement. It ripened in chambers and spilled out into the streets when student concerns were not adequately addressed by university managements.

The movement gives us insight into how the exclusion of young people in policy and decision-making processes is not by chance, leads to mass rejection and challenges existing policies and practice. The #FeesMustFall movement also exposes how higher education institutions ‘swept under the rug’ the concerns of students until the start of the next academic year; relying on the mobile population that is the campus community, and on the loss of traction and institutional memory which keeps movements alive.

Almost everyone is familiar with #FeesMustFall. Whether through news coverage on SABC, the viral discussions on Twitter back in 2015, or the ongoing news stories about the arrests and legal battles involving student activists. There is no denying that this movement has garnered widespread attention over the past 8 years, however with perhaps insufficient reflection on what it meant to be an observer of, or participant in, the process.

Since the time of what is dubbed ‘the largest protests since apartheid’, learners who were in high school in 2015 have entered the higher education space and have faced the same barriers to accessing affordable higher education, accommodation, as well as access to technology and data, amongst many others. The profound impact of COVID-19 on university students revisited the concerns from #FeesMustFall and re-exposed the stark realities of unequal access to education.

Students faced challenges related to registration and tuition fees, access to the internet and data, as well as accommodation for conducive study.  For those in remote locations, accessing education became even more difficult. The financial burden on students and their families increased, with unemployed parents struggling to support their children’s education. The lack of fee breaks and financial assistance further deepened the disparities in educational opportunities, perpetuating cycles of poverty and inequality which had been experienced by young people for many years.

Talking through this, researchers Tshepi Raboroko and Naledi Mpanza reflected on their experience of what it meant to be a student and a learner respectively during the time of the #FeesMustFall movement. Our reflections give life to the concepts of intersectionality, institutional memory (and institutional amnesia) as well as the efforts to suppress youth voices and action. They also remind us of the persistent struggle for free quality education.

Tshepi reflects:

“My reflections on movement stem from a more sheltered point of view. I was in my 9th year of schooling during the 2015 protests and would hear about the movement in passing throughout the year. My grade mates and I knew very little about the movement and the lack of information around #FeesMustFall created an air of uneasiness on my school campus. I attended a boarding school for underprivileged girls and had no access to outside information unless I actively sought it out or it was a viral story. To further exacerbate our lack of knowledge, we were not allowed to watch TV during the week and social media, along with other websites, was blocked by the school’s IT department. This meant that we were relatively uninformed about what happened in the outside world. News about the movement started gaining momentum on campus when it caught traction in 2016, however the uncertainty around the matter did not disappear. The ‘air of uneasiness’ slowly changed to fear for our future education because the information that was being circulated did not favour students and we were left to wonder about what our university experiences would look like – if they would exist at all. The possibility of university exams not being written seemed increasingly imminent and we were left to wonder what that meant for us in a few years. Surprisingly, this did not prompt any research into the movement because it was seen as a problem for the future caused by problematic students wreaking havoc on varsity campuses. It failed to resonate with us and, as a result, like any other viral trend, dialogue around the movement slowly fizzled out and something else became the topic of conversation during the next meal. But #FeesMustFall never really left my mind and it came back to me in my 11th year and during COVID-19 again. It wasn’t until the introduction of free education by Jacob Zuma in my 11th year that I could finally close the metaphorical tab in my brain. Gone was the belief that #FeesMustFall could be detrimental to my future. Suddenly, #FeesMustFall was my saving grace. The consensus in my grade was that we no longer saw the movement in an unfavourable light because now it was the reason we could get a free education – we did all qualify for NSFAS [the National Student Financial Aid Scheme], after all. Those ‘violent’ demonstrations were now the reason we got a better chance of getting a job in future. The very same ‘dangerous protests’ were the reason we no longer had to start a step behind and had the opportunity to participate on a more equal playing field. I finally allowed myself to have hope in the future – that my efforts could amount to something. Upon further education and enlightenment, I have come to understand the importance of this movement more deeply. Even though #FeesMustFall was aimed at preventing the university fee increases and increasing government funding for universities, it helped spark conversation and discourse on other important issues such as the language of instruction at universities as well as sexual assault on campus. The movement did this while focussing heavily on the topics of class and race”.

Naledi reflects:

“I remember the excitement and angst of attending the planning sessions for strategizing the week’s protest agenda, identifying barricade locations and preparations for the protests…the demands and memoranda being read out loud and people adding their key areas to be addressed by the elected representatives. I clearly recall the journalism students covering the arbitrary arrests and working around the clock to publish tweets, Facebook posts and articles through their personal social accounts as well as in the Oppidan Press and Activate which were the official student newspapers at the University Still Known as Rhodes (USKAR, formerly the University Known as Rhodes – UCKAR). Everyone was retweeting that content. One memory that sticks with me is the bittersweet ‘SMS’ from university guilt-tripping us into stopping the shutdown because we’re affecting the economy of the town and our futures. What was interesting was how they did not share their response to the demands which included not making residence students pay extra for choosing not to go home during the shorter school breaks especially. The internet and WIFI shutdown initiated alongside a 7pm curfew to deter students from mobilising, was when I realised this was more about flexing power than heeding the student voice. I can’t even go into the emotion from when white students formed a wall to prevent the police from shooting teargas at the majority black protestors…and when during the lockdown with heavy police presence, the cops chased innocent black students into random residences and let white students roam freely. I won’t forget the support of the Sociology Department in suspending submissions and class attendance indefinitely and the changing of the curriculum to address Scholar-Activism and the history of student protests at Rhodes University. In a residence talk organised by the house committee of Helen Joseph House at USKAR in 2016, a staff member shared how the student-led #FMF movement managed to fast-track the work which the Office for Equity and Institutional Culture at The USKAR had been trying to do for many years”.

It goes without saying that the culture of exclusion (in tertiary spaces) is fostered by neo-liberalism, which begs for profits and creates resistance to shifting institutions towards a decolonial mandate. The process for pursuing and progressing in transforming higher education spaces requires a commitment to shedding lazy binaries and simplistic approaches, understanding differential privilege and access, and working with young people in order to find dynamic solutions to their struggles. Were (and are) universities challenging the status quo or perpetuating unequal access to education? we ask.

The #FeesMustFall movement sought to address inherent inequalities perpetuated by colonial systems which limited access to relevant opportunities such as acquiring a tertiary qualification. However, many will remember how protests were met with heavy-handed tactics and attempts to stifle dissent, rather than engaging in meaningful dialogue and implementing concrete reforms to address barriers to accessing education.

Student Representative Councils (SRC) observed how there was a lack of respect and accountability on the side of management, yet they would be asked to participate in events which universities could use for marketing purposes. On the one hand they were being asked to ‘be the student voice’, on the other they would be penalised for protesting.

There are still significant challenges resulting from the NSFAS cap on accommodation, which is not in line with the cost of housing for students, and we argue for greater consideration for the voice of students. Perhaps this means conversing with students and young people about possible solutions before the moment of crisis at the beginning of each year, or perhaps this means engaging in radical initiatives like changing the nature of a university as we know it today.

From these brief reflections we can see how #FeesMustFall was a layered experience, different for those on university campuses who were challenging the lack of transformation in higher education from those learners looking forward to entering tertiary institutions in a few years. Not much has changed and the limited accountability to young people points to what appears to be deliberate efforts to stifle youth agency and perpetuate the status quo of unequal access to education and opportunities, as well as the infantilization of their struggles and concerns. It is imperative for policymakers and society at large to listen to the voices of young people and act towards providing lasting solutions for the struggles raised every single year instead of ‘sweeping them under the rug’.

CSA&GCSA&G

Unpacking Hate Speech Targeting LGBTIQ+ Persons on Africa Day

/in /by

The second session of the 2023 Pretoria-Marburg Queer Conversations took place on Africa Day, 25 May, in a joint effort by the Centre for Human Rights (CHR) and the Centre for Sexualities, AIDS, and Gender (CSA&G) at the University of Pretoria, along with the Center for Gender Studies and Feminist Futures (CGS) and the Center for Conflict Studies (CCS) at the Philipps-University Marburg. These conversations have emerged from a shared interest in addressing LGBTIQ+ and queer identities among the participating centres.

Titled “Hate Speech Targeting LGBTIQ+ Persons,” the Zoom session, facilitated by Naledi Mpanza, featured insightful presentations by Khanyisile Phillips from Gender DynamiX (GDX) and Dr Kerry Frizelle, a senior lecturer at the Department of Education at the University of the Western Cape (UWC). The presenters skilfully delved into the theoretical and epistemological foundations of hatred against members of the LGBTIQ+ community as well as the lived realities and experiences which come with living in a cis- hetero-normative society.

Frizelle grounded the conversation in the Prevention and Combating of Hate Crimes and Hate Speech Bill, which has recently been passed by the National Assembly, by drawing from the works of Judith Butler, Sylvia Tamale, and Vygotsky’s theory of internalized language. This approach shed light on the ways in which hate speech manifests and impact on marginalised communities. It does this through the normalisation and internalisation of social and cultural norms which language carries, thereby challenging the phrase “sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me”.

Phillips led a practical exploration linking hate speech to hate crimes through highlighting the names of individuals who have fallen victim to hate crimes that arguably stem from the prevalence of hate speech. Notably, Phelokazi Mqathanya and Lonwabo Jack were remembered as tragic examples. Additionally, Phillips touched on the case of Vicky Momberg as a lens to examine the importance of intersectionality in our efforts to understand and confront discrimination, in supporting marginalised communities. Phillips’ examples highlighted the constitutionally protected Section 10 Right to Equality and existing resources such as the Equality Courts which provide recourse for addressing discrimination.

During the conversation, Frizelle emphasized the challenges of changing existing structures but emphasised their role in perpetuating certain narratives. Their poignant statement, “changing structures is hard, but structures hold narratives,” resonated with the audience, highlighting the significance of challenging the status quo. Moreover, Frizelle emphasised the need to decolonise our minds, urging us to seek out narratives from transgender and gender diverse individuals. Further, Phillips stressed the importance of critically analysing our actions and the practices of our institutions, by continuously striving for improvement and accountability in supporting and advocating for the rights of marginalised communities, including refugees and asylum seekers who highlight the intersectionality of human rights. To this, Phillips also shared how tools such as the Model Policy Framework are one step in the journey towards safer institutions that support and protect the rights of trans and gender diverse staff and students in the tertiary space.

Both speakers called upon us to confront our cultural baggage and address our internalised attitudes, which often contribute to discrimination and bias.

In essence, the conversation served as a platform for profound reflection and discussion on hate speech targeting LGBTIQ+ individuals. By exploring the theoretical underpinnings and sharing practical experiences, the presenters shed light on the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead. It is through such open dialogues that we can work towards a more inclusive and accepting society for all.

 

Kindly register for the next conversation happening on 22 June 2023 here: https://zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_G_VXv1caT26WLhtAx9_6Ow

 

CSA&GCSA&G

“Joy is bringing your full and apologetic self forward and knowing that you are not wrong to exist”- Bev Ditsie during the 1st 2023 Pretoria-Marburg Queer Conversations

/in /by

By Naledi Mpanza, Tamrin Slager & Alex Mailola

On April 27, 2023, The Pretoria-Marburg Queer Conversations team hosted Dr Bev Ditsie in an online webinar titled ‘Where is the joy? Portrayals and Depictions of LGBTIQ+ Persons‘. The event took place on Freedom Day, which falls during International Lesbian Week of Visibility, and was well-attended by colleagues and networks working with the affiliated Centres at the University of Pretoria and Phillips-Marburg University.

The conversations are hosted jointly by the Centre for Human Rights (CHR) and the Centre for Sexualities, AIDS, and Gender (CSA&G) at the University Pretoria, together with the Center for Gender Studies and Feminist Futures (CGS) and the Center for Conflict Studies (CCS) at the Philipps-University Marburg. This was the first conversation in the second year of the conversation series.

“I was a very happy kid that was allowed to be herself at home…I was also aware of the politics of borders, gender, race and the moulding of self”

Dr Bev Ditsie, popularly known for being the first African Lesbian to address the UN at the 4th World Conference on Women in Beijing 1995, rooted her conversation in personal anecdotes of growing up during apartheid, and her reflections on the strategic erasure of LBQ women throughout history. Ditsie’s presentation seamlessly portrayed an intersectional understanding of Freedom Day and the layered nature of existing in a society where human rights are constantly under threat in overt and insipid ways influenced by state actors and homophobic institutions of influence in different communities.

“I’m blessed to be one of the people that fought”

Touching on her activism for lesbian visibility on the global and local stage, Ditsie shared the joy and triumphs in the movement to recognise lesbian rights as human rights, exist alongside losses and bitter reminders of the denigration of the rights of LGBT persons. Sobering reminders of the joy within the struggle include the arrests following the disco attended by queer activists after the Beijing Conference, the banning of ‘Rafiki’, an award-winning Kenyan film about lesbian love, as well as the joy of the Coalition of African Lesbian’s granting of observer status by the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (African Commission) marred by the subsequent revocation.

“I catch my breath when I hear young people say it’s not their job to teach”

A lack of access to information and resources as well as positive representation and visibility of the queer community in society, were some of the considerations that Ditsie brought forward in sharing her concern for the growing aversion, by young people especially, to bringing people into the fold for learning and education about the lived realities of LGBTIQ+persons. Her concern stems from her experience with the pervasive and strategic anti-gender initiatives orchestrated by state actors and institutions of influence in different communities.

Ditsie’s conversation weaved stories of excitement and fear with those of love, loss and learning as a queer activist and filmmaker whose work resembles the same. Through curating the stories from within her community of fellow activists and changemakers, Ditsie reclaims and archives the history of lesbian women, thereby challenging the vacuum and creeping collective amnesia regarding the role of lesbians and queer people in the fight for human rights and freedoms. The participants of the conversations pitched in with reflections on her life work which highlights the rich history of lesbian activism and the intersectionality of race, class, gender, sexual orientation and location.

Ditsie concluded with a call for community principles and safer spaces, as ways of fostering self-care, which can be a way to resist and counter the hatred and anger targeted towards the LGBTIQ+ community.

“What brings me joy is finding safety in spaces, safety in community, joy is bringing your full and unapologetic self forward and knowing that ‘I am not wrong to exist, my existence is pre-ordained’”

The event served as a reminder that there is still much work to be done to ensure that all members of the LGBTIQ+ community can live in full joy and freedom.

You can read more about Bev Ditsie here: https://www.wakaagency.biz/southern-africa

Kindly register for the next conversation happening on 25 May here: https://zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_XWHRxsR8Si6UqEfzPpqA7g#/registration

For more information on the Pretoria-Marburg Conversations, please contact: Naledi Mpanza: naledi.mpanza@up.ac.za

 

Just LeadersCSA&G

Students take SAAW with a Bang!

/in /by

By the JUST Leaders 2023 Research Cohort[1]

From the 17-21 April the Centre for Sexualities AIDS and Gender, through the JUST Leaders programme, and the Transformation Office through its student cohort #SpeakOutUP commemorated Sexual Assault Awareness Month (SAAM) with a series of exciting and well-attended events and engagements under a week titled ‘Sexual Assault Awareness Week (SAAW): Addressing digital forms of sexual assault and harassment’ at the University of Pretoria’.

Sexual Assault Awareness Month (SAAM) is a time for international advocacy stakeholders to share tools for addressing sexual assault and harms in society. The University of Pretoria through its student volunteers used the teal blue ribbon commonly linked to SAAM as a symbol for solidarity, support and safety for survivors of sexual assault. The teal ribbon appeared on the cool merchandise, and the wall pledge that students and staff appended their handprints on. The wall pledge served as a commitment to creating awareness around sexual assault as well as a dedication to curbing the prevalence of digital forms of sexual assault and harassment on social media.

Students who participated in the wall pledge event shared how, “Signing the pledge is acknowledging the issues that plague our society and taking a stance against them, by being open to conversation, and refraining from perpetuating the problem that is sexual assault.”

 

 

The rest of the programme for the week included a workshop educating attendees on the harassment continuum, as well as information sessions and stalls for awareness on the theme for the week. Throughout the week and during all the events, students were reminded about the reporting procedures for sexual assault, including the availability of trainings for students and staff as preventative measures limiting incidents of sexual assault and harassment.

You can learn more about support and reporting processes at the University of Pretoria here:

https://www.up.ac.za/transformation/article/3087797/contact-us

 

For more future events, information and engagements follow @speakout_up and @JustleadersUP on social media.

 

[1] The 2023 Research Cohort comprises of: Onkgopotse Mokgale, Galaletsang Masemola, Mapuleng Hlalele, Sindile Timane, Tamrin Slager, Mmathapelo Bosoga, Tshepi Raboroko, Junior Aphane, Jay Grobler, Lelethu Mdepa, Mogau Sedibeng, Siyamthanda Njikela, Alda Deve and Mpumi Nkuna