Unteaching non-physical gender based violence in Higher Education

Cherith Sanger

Defining non-physical forms of gender based violence (GBV)

UN Women defines violence against women as ‘any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual, or mental harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life.’

GBV is an expression of unfair discrimination against women flowing from patriarchy and gender inequitable attitudes, social, economic and legal systems. Men’s use of violence against women (and men) is linked to learnt toxic masculinity flowing from harmful gender norms taught and promoted through society, culture and religion. Whilst gender non-conforming people and men are also be the victims of gender based violence, this article focuses on violence against women in particular.

GBV manifests in various forms which all adversely affect its victims psychologically, mentally, emotionally and in other ways. Often, physical and sexual forms of GBV are assumed to be the most serious forms of GBV by society and the various state-actors in the criminal justice system and other legal systems. This results in non-physical forms of GBV not being acknowledged or responded to in the way victims deserve and are entitled to legally.

Victims should not need to present with visible bruises and scars to prove an experience of GBV to be taken seriously and afforded legal protection and redress. The United Nations Population Fund acknowledges that victims of non-physical forms of GBV can suffer ‘anxiety, depression, suicidal thoughts or behaviors, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).’ One of the greatest concerns about non-physical forms of GBV is that it is normalised in families, society, workplaces and by state-actors. Non-physical forms of GBV is then dismissed and overlooked with victims suffering the impacts of these forms of GBV without support, treatment and redress.

Non-physical forms of GBV and the Law

From a human rights perspective, the use of all forms of GBV violates the human dignity of victims and their individual rights to freedom from all forms of violence as encapsulated in section 12 of the Bill of Rights of the Constitution. GBV disregards the victim’s self-worth and self- respect as a human being. Respect for human dignity is one of the core values of our Constitution and the right to human dignity in section 10 underpins all of the other rights in our Constitution which is supreme law in South Africa. The Constitution acknowledges our history of apartheid which denied black people, women and other marginalised groups’ the right to human dignity. In an effort to realise the fundamental human rights in the Constitution, several statutes were passed and amended with the coming into operation of the Constitution in order to give life to and with the aim of implementing the constitutional approach to freedom from violence and respect for human dignity.

South African law recognises and aims to provide legal protection and redress for all forms of GBV. The Domestic Violence Act 116 of 1998 (the DVA) recognises that domestic violence includes, amongst others, psychological, verbal, economic, emotional abuse and harassment. The DVA offers the possibility of victims obtaining protection orders against abusers, with whom they share a domestic relationship, compelling abusers to desist from performing further acts of such violence failing which, the abuser can be arrested and tried in a criminal court. The Protection from Harassment Act 17 of 2011 aims to provide similar legal protection and redress for victims subjected to violence by persons with whom they do not share a domestic relationship. Similarly, the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000 , amongst others, aims to prevent unfair discrimination on the ground of gender and specifically lists GBV as a form of unfair gender discrimination. The Act provides for remedies for victims of GBV ranging from a payment of damages to making opportunities available which the victim was denied. In criminal law, criminal offences such as crimen injuria, defamation and extortion offer recourse to victims of non-physical violence in the ambit of criminal law. Whist the law offers such avenues for redress for victims of non-physical forms of GBV, legal systems are not always easy for victims to access and navigate due to the intimidating nature of legal systems, fear of retaliation by abusers, poor performance and gender inequitable attitudes on the part of state-actors and poorly implemented systems and processes.

Addressing non-physical forms of GBV in the higher education context

The higher education context brings together youth and specialist tasked with equipping students with knowledge and preparation for the workplace. Addressing GBV is an important issue in the higher education context because students have the ability to change approaches and attitudes towards gender inequality in their intimate relationships, families, communities, in universities and the workplaces that will form part of after graduating. By omitting to identify and address gender inequality, patriarchy and toxic masculinities in its teaching, messaging and responses to GBV, higher education institutions normalise and reproduce GBV in all its forms.

Higher education institutions should approach gender inequality and toxic masculinities in a similar way to which it is presently approaching the Africanisation and Decolonisation of the curriculum. Higher education institutions need to unlearn, unteach and correct the construction and perpetuation of toxic masculinities and patriarchy in order to see a reduction is GBV. Due to the fact that that the historical and traditional basis of the curriculum often originates from patriarchal ideas and practices, students and lecturers should be critical of what is taught. Students need to be encouraged to engage with the curricular in critical and constructive ways with a view to eradicating the various manifestations of gender inequality, including GBV.

Students need to be taught about different forms of GBV, its causes and impact on victims including the non-physical forms of GBV which are often not acknowledged as violence. They need to be equipped with knowledge on how to respond to victims of GBV and where and how victims can obtain support and redress. Alternative ways to dealing with conflict should be encouraged through discussion and dialogue amongst students, lecturers and tutors. Gender and masculinities should be mainstreamed in the curriculum across faculties, it should not only be covered in gender studies modules and in selected modules in some faculties or lead by social justice champions. University resources must be designated for GBV services and support programmes for victims of GBV. All students and staff should be provided with easy to access information about campus based and external services and support for GBV victims.

The messages communicated to students through teaching and university media and communications must consistently respond to and seek to address GBV in all its forms. Lecturers must be open to questioning their own gender bias based on their personal experience and histories of gender privilege and oppression so that the curriculum that they teach is critical of indirect and direct forms of gender inequality. Gender equitable language and scenarios and examples need to be used in teaching and assessments to promote, challenge and normalise gender equality.

About the author

Cherith Sanger is a lecturer in the Department of Criminal Justice and Procedure at the University of the Western Cape. Cherith holds an LLB from the University of the Western Cape and an LLM with a specialisation in Public Interest Law and Policy in Gender, Health and Human Rights from the University of California, Los Angeles. She completed her LLM with a 3.86 GPA having passed with the 3rd highest GPA in her class. She obtained her LLM through the UCLA Law/Sonke Gender Justice Fellowship.

She was admitted as an attorney in the Cape High Court in 2007 and practiced at the then Deneys Reitz Attorneys till 2008. She then conducted impact litigation, legal advocacy and training in the area of women’s rights and gender equality whilst employed by the Women’s Legal Centre, Sonke Gender Justice and the Sex Workers Education and Advocacy Taskforce.