ON the same day that Susan Sithole died (“Pain is wearing my husband’s face”, (M&G December 1 to 7), Human Rights Watch, the New York-based international human rights monitoring group, published a 130-page report, Violence Against Women in South Africa: The State Response to Domestic Violence and Rape.
The tragic story of Susan Sithole serves to illustrate the report’s conclusions relating to the inadequate response of the criminal justice system to violence against women. In too many cases recorded by Human Rights Watch, police have come to a home in response to an emergency call, only to tell a woman that she must sort out her own problems and the police cannot intervene in a private matter. In too many cases, prosecutors (male and female) have encouraged women to drop charges against their abusive husbands because “it’s the first time and he’s said he’s sorry”. In too many cases, men have escaped any consequences for their violent acts because magistrates have refused to believe women complaining of assault at the hands of their partners. In too many cases, women have later died.
The Reconstruction and Development Programme promises that the government will “focus on the reconstruction of the family and community life by prioritising and responding to the needs of … women and children who have been victims of domestic and other forms of violence”. The new government has indeed taken important steps to begin to address this commitment, including undertaking the process of ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. Interdicts under the Prevention of Family Violence Act, introduced in 1993, have also opened an important new channel of relief to some women. The case of Susan Sithole, however, illustrates tragically that high-level policy commitments and new legal remedies are not enough if police and court officials on the ground are not trained to respond to domestic violence as a serious issue of public concern and not a “private” matter.
Moreover, the focus of the criminal justice system on the perpetrator leaves a large part of the problem unaddressed. Women who are abused need shelters to go to, with their children if necessary. They need free health care, counselling and protection from further attack by men who have abused them in the past — better protection than that currently afforded by the Prevention of Family Violence Act. Men who abuse their partners also need interventions that address the reasons that made them violent — and magistrates need sentencing options that include such therapy. — Bronwen Manby, Pretoria
Love, hate, Gevisser
WHEN the Mail & Guardian introduced Mark Gevisser’s profiles to people, we welcomed it as yet another perspective on the news, by a person who explains events by focusing on the people who intersect with those events.
No one supposes that Gevisser’s views on a person are meant to be the final judgment on that person — they add a different texture to our understanding of current events. It is reductive to assume that readers are meant to agree with, or like, some of the comments he makes; in this type of interview readers can expect to disagree strongly with the way he characterises people.
The issue is this: it is completely irrelevant to discuss whether we “liked” or “agreed” with a columnist who is specifically expressing an understanding of people through his and their interaction. It shows a poor understanding of the way the personal interview works, and it flies in the face of freedom of expression. But this is the stated and unstated point of the letters attacking him, ranging from personal abuse of his person, to comments about the judgment of the M&G in employing
M&G readers have spent much of the last 10 years dealing with information content on the last days of a ruthless police state. The issues then were clear, and the division between right and wrong were manifest. Now that things have changed, this lack of ambiguity doesn’t support the development of a culture of free speech in a new democracy. Gevisser’s profiles are one more step towards the development of a mature and vigorous debate about the people and issues that are shaping our lives. — Gill and Jo Noero, Parkview, Johannesburg
n EXTREME, unmeasured criticism usually says more about the criticiser than it does about his subject. Those few vicious words that Ian Phimister spat out (Letters, M&G November 24 to 30) expose a very sad small spiritedness. Not very becoming when an academic of supposed repute lets his own primal reactions to another’s physiognomy get in the way of his making any coherent point whatsoever.
Or is it masking other feelings that he does not dare to confront? Probably, but who cares! Let him find a good therapist, because no matter how pasty he imagines Mark Gevisser’s features to be, they are not going to double up as a punch bag for this hammed up Iago’s prosaic vitriol. — Catherine Garson,
Blowing up stereotypes
HOW dare you discriminate against women by using damaging stereotypes to sell your product! Take a look at the cartoon which accompanies Leon Perlman’s article entitled “Offices on the move” (Business Mail, November 17 to 23). Had your cartoonist depicted the bosses as women and the blow-up secretary as male, a point might have been made against sexist stereotyping in the corridors of power, but this cartoon is blatantly adhering to sexist stereotypes, and therefore entrenching
While I realise that some people find it rather difficult to tread the line between social responsibility and excessive, politically correct non-life, one cannot mistake the intent behind this cartoon.
I can only hope that one day the democratic revolution will extend its influence as far as issues of gender sensitivity, and that this will result in high-powered blackballing of organisations and institutions which employ sexist standards. — Carmen Anderson, Cowies
SHELL’S spokesmen assure us that the indigenous people of the Niger delta and their environment, and not the military dictatorship, will benefit from multinational oil development. If so, Shell should be allowed to go ahead unhindered, as this will make it a world first. — Barry Evans, Suva,
I REFER to former State President PW Botha’s recent threat about what he calls “the tiger in the Afrikaner”. Of course, this is not the first time that the threat is made in political circles.
I hope that when PW talks of “the tiger in the Afrikaner” he is not speaking for the entire Afrikaner nation. It is difficult to see how the Afrikaner nation can take up arms on behalf of alleged criminal suspects unless there is a belief that the KwaMakhutha killings had something to do with the promotion of the Afrikaner interest. But I doubt that this is the case.
The problem with “the tiger” is that when it is given the opportunity to talk, it squanders it and instead prefers to urinate on the floor of the World Trade Centre after breaking glass and punching negotiators in the face. This does not take our country anywhere.
The trials of the former minister and the generals must go on, tiger or no tiger in the wilderness. — Suka Sambe, Ezakheni
THE former National Party bosses and their surrogates who were involved in acts of violation of human rights are arrogantly demanding amnesty. They do so without remorse and comparing uncomparables.
Surely one involved in the act of struggling for a just cause cannot be compared with one who was engaged in inhuman acts, like De Kock’s episodes at Vlakplaas.
If the tiger is getting more dangerous to the public, of course the only safe place to keep it will be the cage. — Wilson B Ngcayiya, Orlando West
THE press is a whore, but she’s a tart with a heart of gold. She helps us out and sometimes saves the day. We love her, we hate her, we never ignore her. The fact that she lives off the biggest sugar-daddy in town is just a fact. Putting her in a state-regulated whorehouse will only take the life out of her fun. Sugar-daddy will sneak in round the back.
Bruce Cohen, Noam Chomsky and their ilk are just plumb wrong about the press. They should work off their earnest boyishness in more useful ways. — Dominic Tweedie, Lombardy East, Johannesburg