"The City at the Centre of Gender Relations Transformation"

• Programme Director
• Honourable Speaker of Buffalo City, Cllr Luleka Simon
• Honourable Speaker of the ADM, Cllr Mlondleni
• Mayoral Committee member responsible for special programmes, Cllr Andile Ntoni and other Mayoral Committee members
• Councillors
• Director-General of the Province, Dr Sibongile Mutwa
• Buffalo City management and staff
• Representatives of service-providers (Umhlaba Development Services)
• Ladies and Gentlemen

I must say that it was very encouraging to me to see the theme for today's event was "The City at the Centre of Gender Relations Transformation." I am encouraged because I take it as a vision for the city and the municipality – a statement of intent – even though it is fair to say that it is not in every respect a present reality.

I don't think any of us would be so bold as to claim that Buffalo City has done all that it could have done over the past few years to mainstream gender relations, to make gender equity and equality a central value of our society and the municipality itself. And I don't think anybody could reasonably argue that we have achieved all of our goals in terms of transforming the dynamics of gender relations in our institutions and our communities.

In the same way that defeating the deep-rooted poison of racism in our world is a long-term challenge; in the same way that our battle against poverty and underdevelopment in our country cannot be won over a decade of democracy; so also, we know that the fight for gender equity, equality and cultural transformation is not going to be won through passing a political decree. It is going to be a battle for our generation.

The harsh truth for many of us is that we continue to encounter on a daily basis – whether at home or at work, in our factories and institutions, even in our political parties – values and attitudes that contradict the fundamental founding values enshrined in the Bill of Rights (Chapter 2) of our Constitution. If I go to section 9 of the Constitution, I read about the right to equality:

• Section 9(3) – The state may not unfairly discriminate directly or indirectly against anyone on one or more grounds, including race, gender, sex, pregnancy, marital status, ethnic or social origin, colour, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, language and birth.
• Section 9(4) – No person may unfairly discriminate directly or indirectly against anyone on one or more grounds in terms of subsection (3).
• Sections 10 to 12 then go on to enshrine the right to human dignity, the right to life, and the right to freedom and security of the person.

Of course, there are many commentators who have made the observation that we have one of the best constitutions in the world, but if the right of a woman to personal safety and security, to bodily integrity, to personal dignity – if these rights are not respected and reflected practically in the actual values of society, and if they cannot be enforced when they are practically undermined by individuals who may have contrary values or tendencies, then in fact the Constitution lacks the stature that it deserves.

It remains a challenge for us that the Constitution as the supreme law needs to be given more practical effect both through the organs of state becoming more effective, but also through the transformation of our attitudes and value-systems.

What is interesting to me when I read section 9 of the Bill of Rights is that there is a distinction between one's sex and one's gender. Let me read it again: unfair discrimination is outlawed on the basis of "race, gender, sex, pregnancy, marital status…" and so on.

When we refer to one's sex, of course, we are talking about the biological uniqueness that makes you a male or a female, whereas when we refer to gender we are talking more about a concept that is socially constructed – the product of society's expectations of a girl or a boy.

Our culture passes down from generation to generation the gender roles that make us good men or good women, good fathers or mothers. Women are expected to behave in certain ways – to be more submissive, to take more responsibility for domestic work, to dress in a particular way. If a woman asserts her opinions, she is regarded often in a negative light, whereas if a man asserts his opinions, he is a natural leader. A woman must fetch wood and water, a woman must hoe and weed the fields, a woman must cook the meal and wash the pots.

These social, economic or cultural roles and behaviour-patterns are not products of nature that are unchangeable and universal. But in every culture gender relations are dynamic – they change with time – because society is dynamic, and values change.

There was a time when European society tolerated the slave trade and in fact co-operated consciously in the capture and sale of human beings as commodities.

Less than a hundred years ago in both Britain and the United States, women were not permitted to vote at all, meaning they could not participate meaningfully in political life. The logic of some who argued then for the status quo, Madame Speaker, was that if a woman was permitted to participate in political debate, there would be disorder and chaos, because women were by their nature prone to emotional outbursts. It was only in the 1920s that legislation was passed extending the franchise to women in both countries.

The very fact that gender relations are dynamic means that we do not have to accept that the conventional wisdoms that our grandparents passed down to us must necessarily apply equally in a new and freer society. Because our society one hundred years ago was characterised by patriarchy, does not mean that I must accept that that is the natural and unchangeable order of things.

I read in my Bible the warning that we should not put new wine into old wineskins, because they will burst. We need to put new wine into new wineskins. To me this parable is very apt because our Constitution says, "You are equal … no matter your race or gender of sex or marital status or ethnicity or language or religion or any other factor, you have an absolute right not to be subjected to unfair discrimination by the state or any other person." This is the new wine that is the gift of our founding fathers.

But if that is the new wine, how do we keep it? We have a responsibility to create new wineskins in our own lives and within our own spheres of influence, to challenge the stereotypes of the past that were premised on unfair discrimination, to look one another in the eye and claim our rights as human equals.

We need to say "no" to unequal power relations based on sex or gender; we need to rid ourselves of our internalised sense of victimhood that can say, "I deserve to be beaten, because I am not a perfect wife."

We need to claim our legitimate voice in our political life, in the economy, in our churches, in our schools, in our institutions of state. We need to challenge the stereotypes that say that a female has different intellectual abilities to a male, and therefore a woman is not as well-suited to a career in science or technology.

We need to challenge the status quo in which women tend to occupy lower levels in organisational hierarchies compared to their male colleagues, that they are paid less on average for the same work, and that the work environment makes it very difficult for them to be mothers and professionals at the same time.

We need also to reject the notion that the transformation of gender relations is a matter that is primarily a terrain of struggle for women, rather than a challenge to men and women together.

In the same way that apartheid, in a very real sense, was a system that dehumanised both black and white, and the end of apartheid freed both black and white to be more fully human, so too the transformation of gender relations to reflect the spirit and letter of our Constitution will free both women and men to a new and more liberated identity as partners and equals. Our identity is enriched through the identity of the other, as we know from an old African proverb: Umntu ngumntu ngabantu.

I am very proud that under the leadership of our political champion of special programmes, Mayoral Committee member Councillor Andile Ntoni, we have taken decisive steps as Buffalo City Municipality to put in place a gender policy and strategy that is the necessary first step in Buffalo City becoming the leader that it aspires to be in gender relations transformation.

I have listened carefully to the presentation by the service-providers, and I must give credit to all concerned for the effort that has gone into preparing this document. It is inspiring to hear that we are setting specific goals for ourselves over the next three to four years, because we would be making a grave mistake if we thought that a good policy and strategy is an end in itself, and that we can now rest on our laurels and claim some sort of credit for achieving this milestone of transformation.

As I have said earlier, good policy is like new wine – and I will be even more proud when Buffalo City becomes justly known as a place where we implement our policies and our strategies, where our attitudes and personal and institutional relations reflect our theoretical commitments to the values of equality, dignity and mutual respect. Then indeed, we will be able boldly to make the claim that we are a city at the forefront of the struggle to transform gender relations in our country.

I know that all of us are here because we are committed to this cause, and together with our male colleagues in Buffalo City led by Councillor Ntoni as the political champion, together with our partners in other spheres of government, we are willing to renew our pledge to build a new and transformed Buffalo City and a new administration. Our community will hold us to this pledge, and we cannot afford to fail them.

I thank you.

Email this article to a friend