The women's movement should be like a tapestry, with identifiable and distinct colours, yet part of a distinct whole. The thread knitting this together would be an action plan and a commitment to completely overthrow patriarchy and all its manifestations, writes Thenjiwe Mtintso.
Fifty years ago, on 9 August 1956, the women of South Africa were galvanised into that great tide that saw a male racist chauvinist flee in front of their anger. We owe it to them to recognise, learn from and pay tribute to their historic actions that laid the foundation for the democracy we have achieved and the strides we have made on our determined march to gender equality.
However the best tribute we can pay to these heroines and the heroes is to defend the gains made and also in action, to change the lives of those who have yet to taste this freedom in real terms, the majority of whom are the black, poor, rural and working class women existing on the periphery of society. All of us should unite with them in action to make sure that in reality 'today is better than yesterday and tomorrow will be better than today'.
The people and the government of South Africa have put in place many policies, laws and institutions to ensure that women not only regain their dignity but are 'mistresses' of their own destinies. Papers have been written in praise of the achievements made in South Africa and in particular in the inclusion of women in decision-making spheres. Tempting as it is to analyse the gains and the gaps, this contribution is directed only at the current debate on the 'formation' of a 'South African women's movement'.
The story of 'forming' a Women's Movement in the current period dates back to the Malibongwe Conference in Amsterdam in 1989. In the glorious, long and arduous road to freedom, there have always been women's movements. If by a 'women's movement' we mean all women who recognise the need to mobilise and organise themselves at any level and engage in any form of struggle to better their lot, or fight against any form of discrimination against women, or engage in any form of struggle for the achievement of women's emancipation and gender equality, then there has been not one women's movement, but many.
The debate about forming a woman's movement should therefore not be taken to mean that there has never been one or that none currently exists. The debate should in fact be informed by these, their experiences, victories and challenges.
The debate and anticipated launch of the women's movement should help us to:
The debate about, and launch of, the South African Women's Movement should be the space we deliberately create to dialogue and strategise for further onslaughts against patriarchy, that abominable system, ideology and practice of domination of women by men that permeates all spheres of our lives.
Democracy is crucial for, and has contributed to, the road to gender equality in our country, including the improvement of the status and quality of life of women. It has also very importantly created the opportunity and a healthy environment for furthering the gender struggles. However it is not sufficient for dislodging patriarchy. We still have to do much more for the complete eradication and transformation of all power relations in society, across which runs the gender inequality thread. The whole society has to be mobilised into a strong and vibrant movement for transformation, at the centre of which should be women's movement driven by women, particularly the most marginalised poor, black and rural as well as working class women.
Patriarchy cannot be eradicated only by government, or one group or organisation. It needs all forces within society. Particularly because it coexists with, and survives even under, the most progressive political systems; because it is articulated in many diverse subtle and hidden or open and crude forms; because it is explained away in many logical-sounding ways ranging from the natural, biological to religious and cultural arguments; because one of its strongest bases is the family, the home, and among loved ones; and because it is the most complex and entrenched system embedded in, and permeating through, all spheres of life, it needs all forms of struggle - persuasion, contestation, compromise, pressure and confrontation.
The struggle against patriarchy is a 'struggle within the struggle'. The different forms and levels of engagement, organised or not, formal or otherwise, constitute the women's movements.
Women's struggles take different forms and occur in different localities determined by the diverse interests and needs. Some women, especially poor and black women, are mobilised in their communities and localities on needs that are so basic that they are taken for granted (like access to clean water). They thus struggle for elementary rights. Their needs are classified by some scholars as the practical gender needs (PGNs). The organised forms of these needs, interests and struggles include among others the stokvels, religious groups (such as umanyano and masingcwabanes) and many such locally based groups that focus on economic survival, self reliance, solidarity and support. Significantly, these women and their organisations do not link their situation to that of patriarchy. Feminism is a foreign word to many of them. They may perhaps not even have the tools of analysis to help them understand how things got to be how they are. They may even accept the biological, religious or cultural explanations of their place and role in society.
If women's struggles and organisations were to be presented in a continuum, the basic needs (PGNs) group, sometimes called the popular women's movement, would be at the one end. Towards the other end would be the strategic gender needs groups (SGNs). These include, but are not limited to, feminists (of many kinds) mainly concerned with the complete eradication of unequal power relations between men and women. Some of these look down upon the practical gender needs and struggles maintaining that these wittingly or unwittingly reinforce the socially defined but not natural role of women as being in the domestic sphere. Of significance with these is that they have many different and diverse theories to explain the root of and path to the eradication of patriarchy and how to change it. Most, though not all, tend to be scholars and academics, some of whom tend to research, theorise and avoid direct struggle beyond struggle through the intellect and pen (or more likely, computer).
At the other end of the continuum would be what some of us call the transformative group that is committed to a transformative agenda. These acknowledge and are directly and indirectly involved in the whole range of the struggles, from the practical through to the strategic needs, seeing each as a necessary building block for women's emancipation, gender equality and a competently transformed society that has eradicated all forms of inequality, oppression and discrimination. They use different strategies, tactics and participate in all kinds of organisations and struggles. They fight for access to water and access to decision-making bodies, use power to transform power and its instruments, and transform society and social relations.
In between the two extremes would be different formations focusing on practical gender needs, specific interests, demands and other gender struggles. These include the rural women with their specific demands about land; the working women with their struggles in the workplace; service, support and protection groups and organisations; lobbying, advocacy and non-governmental groups; skills, empowerment and training groups; women in the media; religious women's groups; research and many other groups, organisations and formations. In the same continuum are the women in politics, including those within the political parties and women's wings or leagues, bound by the policies of their parties but, in some instances, using the very party as a lever for resolving both the practical and strategic gender needs.
There are no borders between these groups and struggles. There is mobility, support and solidarity, and sometimes overlaps, among them. The strength of some of them lies in their formal networks and structures, though organisational independence is still maintained.
All of these strands have gone through highs and lows at different times and for different reasons. One of the highest moments in recent times was when we were galvanised into action by the perception of imminent exclusion of women and their rights in the new order. We formed the Women's National Coalition (WNC), which led to the adoption of the Women's Charter. We also championed the formation of the National Gender Machinery and subsequently the adoption of government's gender policy.
The WNC showed that whatever the challenges, women could, if mobilised and motivated across racial, ideological and political divides, find common ground. We were united around a common issue - the charter and, later on, the machinery. We had a fair share of challenges and problems. It is however not correct - as some of the current debates infer - to say that the WNC died or dissipated. The WNC was and is the sum total of the women and the organisations within it. We, and not a vague entity, killed it. It may have been necessary to do so or we did so unconsciously, but we have to take responsibility for its condition, objective conditions notwithstanding. This is critical for us as we move into the women's movement gear because we are the same drivers - the ANC Women's League (ANCWL), the Alliance and the broader Movement. We have to conclude the unfinished debate of whither the WNC for the women's movement to rise and be strong.
One of the lessons that will have to be learnt is the challenge of politics of access, inclusion and participation. When some of us moved into the state and its machinery we had to shift the sites to other battles. While this was very good, the unintended consequence was a temporary demobilisation and expectations of delivery from a state that has so many women. In some cases there was a sense of entitlement for us as women. In some cases the politics and advantages of access and inclusion prevailed with many acting as if the mere act of inclusion was transformation - the ultimate goal and not a step towards transformation.
Others grappled with how to use the state for transformation while simultaneously transforming it. Some academics withdrew into their offices and engaged the state from a distance. The political party sphere also began to dominate with many women tied down in their political parties and some even unable to negotiate, never mind fight, for the gender agenda. Yet others momentarily felt confused, shifting from politics of entitlement as women to outright demobilisation. The 'them' and 'us' mood temporarily disorganised us. We unfortunately did not effectively create space and time to reflect on the prevailing conjuncture and how to operate within it.
Nevertheless, the women's movement, in various forms, trudged on and many of the struggles were taken down to localities or sectors.
As we prepare for the formation of this movement, the lessons have to be brought to the fore for us to emerge stronger. This becomes critical as it determines how in this complex epoch we unite in action for the bigger goal of equal gender relations. What is the glue that will keep us together? The strength of any movement lies in its ability to link with others.
The women's movement should therefore include, but not be limited to, these networks and organisations. It should be the much-needed coordination, cooperation and collaboration point for solidarity and united action.
Some of the keywords that have to guide the women's movement are:
There should not be any space in our country that we have not occupied or in which our voice is not heard. This is why the organisations in their localities and sectors have to be strengthened even as we consolidate at the national level. The slogan of 'nothing about us without us' should be real, as there is absolutely nothing in our country that is not about us.
Diversity may open us to all sorts of competing calls for action. It is thus important that as we mobilise we do not fall into the trap of listing a long catalogue of grievances that ends up bogging us down as we try to prioritise.
One of the weaknesses we have had as the Alliance has been the poverty of gender theory. This makes us lurch from side to side as a rudderless ship on the seas of gender engagement. Some kind of theory emanating from our and other experiences would help us to have markers and pointers in our struggle. The documents of all the Alliance partners are unable to give this guide in a meaningful way. A women's movement does not necessarily evolve around a theory, but it needs a basic reference point beyond the slogans of engendering, mainstreaming, integrating gender, etc. South Africa as a whole is poorer for the limitation of the intellectual debate especially on these matters. Many women in South Africa have the practice, but that is not sufficient for the transformation agenda. Practice and experience needs to be continuously fortified by theory, while in turn enriching theory.
These are the pieces of the jigsaw that have to be put together to form the tapestry of one women's blanket - with identifiable and distinct colours and yet forming part of the whole. The thread knitting us together would be our action plan, unity in action and commitment to completely overthrow patriarchy and all its manifestations. We are ready, able and willing. Now is the time, our age of hope.
Thenjiwe Mtintso is a member of the ANC National Executive Committee.
[Contents]