Emilia Berenyi
Moffett, H. (2006). ‘These Women, They Force Us to Rape Them’: Rape as Narrative of Social Control in Post-Apartheid South Africa. Journal of Southern African Studies, 32(1), 129-144.
‘… a woman is described as ‘asking for it’ because she has asserted her own will, moved around on her own, and so on.’ (Moffett, 2006, p.138)
Summary
Moffett (2006) has uncovered the South African reality of a ‘gender-based civil war’, targeting women by the means of rape. This maintains the patriarchal status quo of men’s dominance over women, in every area of life. Even though, the race-based apartheid has been replaced by a gender-based social hierarchy – maintained through not racial, but sexual means –, the apartheid has links to the current situation in justifying subordination. It has escalated to the extent that female children have now also become targets. Yet, the ‘post-’apartheid society is only seen through the lens of race, not gender.
The paper urges us to find the way to demolishing the patriarchies of the world, starting for autonomy- and freedom-related rights, rather than equality in politics.
Link to Fredman (2016)
Although, Moffett (2006) provides a good understanding of the new post-apartheid nature of patriarchy, – that is now based on gender, not race, – a solution remains missing. Fredman’s (2016) work offers a beyond-formal way to equality. Through his four-dimensional tool, looking at the issue described by Moffett (2006), South Africa could assess whether an institution, a policy, a law or a practice is the key to change. Both authors recognise gender as a key to understanding problems, such as rape (Moffett, 2006; Fredman, 2016). First, to redress the inequality of women, policies must address and focus on this group, that is being disadvantaged. Agreeing with Moffett (2006), this should go beyond socio-economics, to power-relations and dominance – as rape maintains the dominance of men (Fredman, 2016, pp. 728-730).
Second, for Fredman (2016), dignity (one of the three layers of substantive equality), to ‘redress humiliation’, must be replaced by ‘recognition’, in order to move from the individual- to the social collective understanding of the issue. In the South African case: rape against female members of the society. Recognition would shape women’s identity, moving away from being the ‘woman forcing men to rape her’ (Moffett, 2006), by addressing gender as a social construct (Fredman, 2016, pp.730-731). This would be particularly key in South Africa, where gender is not part of discussions about rape (Moffett, 2006, p.135).
Third, social inclusion and political voice, provided to women, is also important (Fredman, 2016, pp.731-732). Yet, in South Africa, it shifted gender-based inequalities form the public to the private sphere (Moffett, 2006, pp.141-142). Political restructuring, including emancipation, might risk increase in rape (Moffett, 2006, p.131), so this might not be a solution.
Finally, substantive equality should accommodate the difference (between men and women), while guiding structural change. Rather than trying to erase gender-differences (e.g., equalising the rape of women with that of men), the social structure allowing it should be shaped (e.g., changing men’s attitude about women walking alone) (Fredman, 2016, pp.632-734).
Therefore, Fredman’s (2016) work, 10 years on, is an excellent follow up and guide to resolving the issues uncovered by Moffett’s (2006).
500 words
References
Fredman, S. (2016). Substantive equality revisited. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 14(3), 712–738. https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mow043
Moffett, H. (2006). ‘These Women, They Force Us to Rape Them’: Rape as Narrative of Social Control in Post-Apartheid South Africa. Journal of Southern African Studies, 32(1), 129-144. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057070500493845
Comments
Post a Comment