In South Africa, the issue of gender equity, both in society and in agrarian relations, is founded on settler colonialism perpetuated through race, class, sexism, and patriarchy, among many other forms of discrimination and exclusion. Apartheid ideology based on patriarchy and misogyny justified systemic oppression and also promoted sexism and erasure of the LGBTQ+ community. Agrarian relationships between men and women are characterized by the gender order, and entrenched through institutional arrangements. For agrarian relations mired in gender inequality and sexism, a feminist approach to agrarian reforms is justified. It will challenge many years of patriarchy and misogyny in agrarian relations. A feminist approach sheds light on the complexity and tangled nature of the identities of queer, transgender, and nonconforming identified people and addresses those challenges. It is also a means of political expression, highlighting the discrimination that historically excluded and marginalised people face. It focuses on patriarchal institutions and practices that merited to be abolished and dismantled. A feminist approach is more urgent for facing a powerful state and established private interests.

During my research, I spoke to women and the LGBTQ+ community who talk of being marginalised as they no longer fit the traditional prototype of the gender paradigm. An LGBTQ+ community activist, for example, explained that social transformation is not helped by ignoring sexism but is aided by encouraging more women to get into agriculture and dismantling gender stereotypes. The activist highlighted the multiple challenges encountered by women, which they thought were also central to questions about transgender rights and the LGBTQ+ community and a fundamental part of the social fabric. This view was echoed by a gender activist who thinks that gender paradigm approaches in agrarian reforms reveal the extent to which policymakers have an inadequate understanding of issues related to sexism and regressive programmes towards women, trans-gender, and the LGBTQ+ community. Overall, women and the LGBTQ+ community are continuously marginalized through societal institutional and structural arrangements based on age, class, ethnicity, and race. There was a general sentiment amongst respondents that, in an era founded on equality of all sexes, state institutions and corporate investments should be aligned in implementing gender-responsive policies and programmes to support women in their diverse roles and empower them to assimilate their economic, political, and social experiences. In addition, a feminist approach can provide the clarity and focus for a successful democratic challenge to the current embracement of capitalism as free-market consensus becomes more entrenched. A respondent who self-identifies as she/he, tells me that: “the gender order in a patriarchal society is the overall subordination of women and dominance of men”. Adding, I think it has been an oversight of the equality movement to make this a women's issue and not a societal issue.

Although purporting to offer transformative policies enhancing gender equity, policymakers do not necessarily empower women nor dismantle gendered practices beyond programmes. In various meetings I attended, there are growing calls to make gendered policy less sexist. Genders and sexualities are confusingly conflated, and gender and sexual identity are fluid issues. The consistency in the position of several activists I spoke to during my research is striking. It draws attention to thecountry’s continued gender inequalities and widespread sexual discrimination. Given the relatedness of misogyny and capitalist patriarchy, sex and gender should be included in all policies and programmes. However, there are several explanations for the ongoing inequalities. It is a challenge originating from neoliberal capitalism, which is also linked, in various ways, to the erosion of democracy and exclusions. Inequality unavoidably leads to socio-economic and political inequality, albeit to varying levels across class race, gender, sex, and age. With feminist approaches, in general, being loaded and contentious, eradicating all forms of discrimination in agrarian reforms necessitates action across society, corporations, civil society formations, and academics.

South Africa’s experiences show that opportunities for males and females in agriculture are rooted in historic inequality based on sexism, racism, and classism. Relics of the historic institutional and structural problems pre-exist. Influences like race, class, and gender (as well as ethnicity, sexuality, and age) impact policies and programmes governing male and female empowerment and development in agriculture, as in all other societal contexts. My finding highlights, not only the complex apartheid legacy, but also, that policies, programmes, and practices do not align with the democratic values of an inclusive and non-discriminatory, non-racial, and non-sexist secular society. Reinforcing that, is the state’s acceptance of free-market capitalism that allows corporate agriculture’s financial monopoly, and even supports industrial agriculture with discriminatory labour, gender, and women’s rights violation, to function. I concur that in a feminist approach, the state has a huge role to play in advancing policies, and programmes that support the interest of women, the LGBTQ+ community, and other minority groups, as well as restructuring institutions to create a favorable environment to advance their interests. The State should critically and practically deal with the values and ideas, which underpin the concept of equal citizenship.

Zakes Hlatswayo is a former doctoral student in the Human Economy Programme at the Centre for the Advancement of Scholarship, who was funded by the Oppenheimer Memorial Trust between 2019 and 2023.