Matilda Lasseko-Phooko, programme manager of the Women’s Rights Unit at UP’s Centre for Human Rights, questions whether campaigns and legal-based frameworks to end gender-based violence go far enough.

Efforts to end violence against women should aim to ensure that women are socially and culturally accepted as men’s equals. Initiatives that fail to do so may succeed in raising awareness of violence against women and its consequences but continue to treat the symptoms and not the disease.

Dismantling preconceived perceptions of the roles of men and women in society is how to get to the core of what causes violence against women.

The legal framework on gender equality is often well set out in legal provisions that bind duty bearers. The state and its representatives, institutions, and individuals as duty bearers would know where the line is drawn or can easily establish this. This notwithstanding, various incidents experienced by women demonstrate a mismatch between the social context within which the legal framework is intended to operate and the laws themselves.

A candid look at the social realities for many women calls into question the effectiveness of the legal framework on its own in addressing stereotypical presuppositions about men and women’s place in private life, which also manifests in public spaces. It is critical to address these issues in interventions.

The perception of women as being inferior to their male counterparts is generally accepted as the root of violence against women. 

Historical notions of a “woman’s place” are often carried through from a private environment into the public environment. Efforts at addressing violence against women must address gender inequality at this level. While the law prohibits gender discrimination and various forms of violence against women, for many, their daily existence requires a balancing act of negotiating within set margins.

These limits are drawn by, reinforced by and policed through historical notions of what is expected of a woman in terms of her social status and religious or cultural identity. Within these margins, illegal conduct by perpetrators of violence or other duty bearers is rationalised and justified.

Several scenarios reflect and reinforce gender inequality that arises from presuppositions about men and women’s behaviour in societies, and demonstrate a link with the persistence of violence against women. The gendered construction of men and women’s sexuality is generally seen as the root of the high rate of sexual violence. In this regard, social conditioning results in the perception that a “good” woman would not easily consent to sexual intercourse, and it is the role of the man to persuade her to engage in sexual activity with him. In effect, a “good” woman will never say yes to sex, even though she is consenting, and that her “no” actually means “yes”.  

In her book Women, Law and Human Rights, Fareda Banda described the idea of the universal wife: a woman who is obedient, does not challenge accepted gender roles and who, by extension, should endure a marriage in which she is subjected to domestic violence by her husband. Despite her professional achievements in the workplace, when in the private space of her home, a good wife must play the role of the universal wife by submitting to her husband and not being impertinent. Her professional role should be left at the office and certainly at the doorstep of the home. These traditional gender roles, which are primarily determined by referencing a women’s sexual and reproductive capacity, result in women remaining in inferior power positions and dependent upon men for status and resources.

Sexual harassment is a form of discrimination because it reflects or perpetuates gender stereotypes in the workplace. It enforces a set of gender standards that aim to feminise women and masculinise men. By its nature, sexual harassment creates an offensive and often intimidating work environment that undermines the dignity, privacy and integrity of the victim, and creates a barrier to equality in the workplace.

Addressing gender inequality as a root cause of violence against women requires a conscious decision to operate with a more acutely aware frame of mind in all interactions with women in private and public spaces. In this way, we are being called upon to be conscious of our personal, religious and culturally premised prejudices, social perceptions, and stereotypical views about women. Only by being aware of these traits and cognisant of the fact that we need to shift away from them, can there be an attempt at altering systematic gender inequalities that present as violence against women. This calls for initiatives to be driven at an individual level of response.

We should be interrogating our individual perceptions of the circumstances under which violence arises. For instance, which norms could be influencing our subjective perceptions of a wife’s right to refuse to have sex with her spouse; the sexual harassment of a co-worker who dresses provocatively, as perceived by a perpetrator; or the slap that puts a woman “in her place”?

Each of us needs to reflect on how social and cultural norms influence our subjective perceptions by asking the following questions: what messaging do we communicate, subliminal or otherwise, when confronted with instances of violence against women? What information is relevant for us to determine an abuser’s culpability? Does behaviour, characteristic or historical conduct speak to a victim’s credibility?

A suggested starting point is to interrogate our individual roles in reinforcing the social norms that keep violence against women within blurred lines. After all, such negative social norms can change.

At UP, we condemn gender-based violence in all its forms. We call on our staff and students to seek help by reporting incidents:

o Email [email protected]

o Call the UP Crisis line on 0800 006 428

o Send a WhatsApp on 012 420 8404