By Tswelopele Makoe
IT WAS not long ago when the University of Cape Town vice-chancellor, Mamokgethi Phakeng, was unceremoniously suspended following allegations of bullying and mismanagement.
This is eerily comparable to the latest treatment of Unisa’s principal and vice-chancellor, Professor Puleng LenkaBula, who has been pummelled with theatrical accusations of misgovernance following the release of a report by an independent assessor.
The Unisa report, initiated by Higher Education Minister Blade Nzimande, not only outlined the challenges that have been grappled with at this national institution, but further advised that the management and the council of the university be “relieved of their duties” and that Unisa be placed under administration.
The report was preceded by a news story alleging that the vice-chancellor of Unisa spent R285 000 on curtains and R8 000 for training on how to use a vacuum cleaner, amongst other arbitrary quotes and contestable claims.
The sad reality is, in my view, when a news story becomes about an educational institution’s household items, instead of about the fundamental cornerstones of that institution – the academics and students.
In our current climate, higher education is struggling to address our economic needs. There are countless graduates who have been actively seeking out employment, to no avail. There are numerous economic challenges that are faced in these institutions, particularly by students, but this is oftentimes removed from our national media, and replaced with dubious claims of household relations.
I find that claims against LenkaBula attempt to cast women as homemakers, shopping addicts, and economically reckless. I also contend that this emphasis on “curtains” is sending the age-old misogynistic message that women belong in the home, and not at the forefront of society’s leadership.
Attacks on LenkaBula and Phakeng are a microcosm of the constant targeting of women in leadership, a historical feature of society’s subjugation of women. Socially, culturally, politically, and institutionally, women are often seen as mouthpieces for patriarchy.
What this negative narrative about women leaders highlights is the ever-present tendency to undermine women in in just about every senior position they occupy. The feeble attack on the LenkaBula is purely seeking to deter women in general from aspiring to hold transformative positions of power.
The underscoring feature of this saga is the revelation that even in higher education, women are not immune to being sidelined and ostracised.
The fact is historically, and contemporarily, women in leadership have been stifled. Be they women in religious leadership, the military, sports or any other vocation, women are evidently undermined.
In a consistent theme of undermining women in leadership, Phakeng was called a “bully” because she dared to be assertive. Those who know LenkaBula well will attest to her character as decisive and transformative.
The attack on her persona is the camouflaged onslaught on her competency. In a male-dominated society if you’re a woman who is authoritative, self-assured, and determined in your vision, the evil that is patriarchy will be sure to attack and belittle you.
The goals and aspirations of women are very often removed from the prospects of society. Instead, inaccurate, misogynistic sentiments that seek to understate the power of women are repeatedly amplified by our national media.
At the height of Covid-19, Phakeng and LenkaBula were some of the visible national leaders who kept the higher education ship afloat, and with aplomb.
It is an indictment in our post-apartheid society that such leaders are not being revered for their capability, but instead they are being hounded out of their positions.
The Independent Assessor’s report on Unisa raises nothing new. He instead highlights the challenges that precede the inception of the current leadership and have been publicly raised by prior reports.
I worry that there appears to be a low level of public support for institutions such as Unisa, our national treasure. There is more so less support for black women who undertake leadership roles in our society, and it is time to avidly interrogate the reason for this. Gender, class, and race intersect at the core of this matter. Women leaders are way too often attacked simply for being who they are – women.
Although we live in a country with the best Constitution in the world, we are far from actualising its sentiments in reality. Our society remains deeply unequal. Black women in particular face a double discrimination, where they are not only subjugated as women, but also as black people. In leadership, this is more so evident, where women are rarely given meaningful responsibilities, and when they do, they are systematically de-legitimised.
Ultimately, the undermining of women in leadership is rooted in gendered stereotypes about women as caretakers, homemakers, and second-class citizens. Womanhood, even girlhood, is at the centre of this narrative. Instead of their capabilities, their intellect, and their transformative nature, this narrative seeks to diminish an intellectually and institutionally powerful woman. Let’s face it, patriarchal misogynistic men are exceedingly scared of powerful women, hence they consistently seek to sabotage their standing in society.
Women in leadership face an immeasurable number of challenges, not only to their position, but also their reputation. Not only is gender-based harassment a key feature of daily life for women in leadership, but it is also a feature that they are expected to quieten in order to not be seen as problematic.
On the other hand, countless men in leadership positions have been proven to partake in corruption, sexual harassment, and predatory behaviour, with absolutely no consequences, and certainly little to no media attention. In the case of women, whether the accusations are imagined or not, it is amplified to the point of disintegration.
The striking danger of this societal tendency is that women in leadership are pacified and repressed. This sends a message into society that women should not be in leadership positions and remanded to the home. It sends a message that women should refrain from seeking out leadership positions, from using their intellect, and from daring to be powerful and meaningful members of society.
Leadership roles where men have always dominated, women are always repressed. This means that women are not represented in the spaces that they occupy. This means that women who aspire to leadership are ultimately intentionally discouraged from doing so.
In our society, we cannot claim to be progressive or transformative whilst actively excluding women. We have an ethical obligation to empower the youth, and to lead by example, and this cannot be done if a sector of society is blatantly repressed.
What is clear is that our society still requires an exorbitant amount of transformative work. We cannot live in a world where women will always fear being attacked, physically, personally, and professionally.
Even in the digital contemporary age, we still live with the sentiments of a 15th century society, where women weren’t even allowed to go to school, where women were seen for their homemaking abilities rather than their intellectual capacity.
Ironically, all of these misogynistic men that desperately seek to suppress women, were raised by often single mothers, who sacrificed tremendously and worked tirelessly to shape them into purposeful members of society. These are the same men who are strenuously attacking and undermining women, who are tyrannising women, and who are purposefully crushing their aspirations of a free and fair future.
When we see the attacks on women leadership, we need to read between the lines, and recognise that there is a war being waged on women. Transformation has no place where stereotypes consistently seek to stifle others.
There may be countless instances of women being mitigated and outright silenced, but it would be an injustice to our society to allow this silencing to be normalised. When it comes to the sentiment that women are meant for the home, and for the pleasure of men, we are setting a dangerous precedent – that women cannot be people of substance.
What is clear through the Unisa story in particular is that education is viewed still as a boys’ club. It’s an eerie reminder that women do not belong. It’s a disheartening sentiment that is a clear turn-off for women who aspire to leadership roles in society.
However, despite the institution, the organisation, or the social space, women need to hammer down on those that seek to remove them from their rightfully earned positions and condemn those that seek to remove them based on misogynistic, outdated ideas about who they should be.
Women are powerful beyond measure, and no amount of onslaught will ever change that. As strikingly spoken by Zora Neale Hurston: “If you’re silent about your pain, they’ll kill you and say you enjoyed it.”
*Makoe is an MA (Ethics) student at the Desmond Tutu Centre for Religion and Social Justice at UWC. The views expressed are her own. She is also a gender activist.