on the services and operations of support groups, more as impediments than as enablers. More crucially to the approach of this research, this analysis has shown that the dominant patriarchal constructs of the state underpin its hegemonic relations with agencies for transformation. Such relations serve to explain the pervasive culture of gender oppression in the country and pose challenges for feminist interventions.
services. I have attempted to examine this by collecting information from many sources linked directly and indirectly to the support services. Information from each source has been examined and interpreted separately and then as a collective as they (sources) are interlinked and intersect with each other. This is commensurate with Kelly’s analysis of interpretation of text in order to obtain a more informed understanding of situations (1999: 406 - 407).
The findings from all the sources (police statistics, questionnaires from the public as well as from support groups/centres and their clients) have all indicated a need for support groups. Notwithstanding the gaps in their provisioning, especially with advocacy, it was found that the support given to women impacted on their lives positively. This is evident in the responses from both women who had received support and the support groups themselves. However I have found disparities in the services provided at the different centres. These disparities I allude to are not confined to for example, the differing resources available at the different centres or the modus operandi of the centres, but also in their communication and interaction with external parties of which I saw myself as one.
I have also examined the articulation between the state’s mandate and its implementation at local level through the services provided by the support groups. I have found the mitigating factor for the limitations in the services is the failure of the state to deliver on its mandate, as that was the recurrent pattern of feedback provided from the various sources. Inadequacies at the national level translate into failures and limited delivery at local level. As this has been the common theme throughout the findings of this research, the assertion I make, is supported by Kelly’s description of thematic development : “as a kind of pattern-finding process where we identify a
‘type’ of occurrence by virtue of it being perceived as an underlying ‘common form’
found in different contexts. Thus, a theme or discourse can be said to exist …within and across situations” (1999: 412). I have shown, through the citing of various examples, that since the country’s transition to democracy, intermittent attention has been accorded to women’s issues and to their support on state platforms.
The various examples cited in the introduction of this thesis have shown also that whilst the state has intermittently acknowledged failures and shortcomings in this
regard, little has seemed to have changed since the transition to democracy in the context of women’s empowerment at grass-roots level. These sporadic public acknowledgements by the State seems to be a construct of power through language, as articulation without subsequent action does not impact on support groups at a fundamental level (Foucault in Fillingham 1993: 12). The findings of this research also support this argument. Thus it would seem that the power wielded by the State in the public domain directly constructs support groups and their identities (Foucault in McHoul and Grace 1993: 4).
Mvimbi’s examination of the efficacy of the state’s National Gender Machinery in advancing gender equality (2009), further confirms my assertion. She concludes that the state’s Gender Machinery, specifically, The OSW, has failed in its mandate (2009:
200). This articulates with the findings of this research as is indicated in some of the responses of both women and groups:
Government is not providing enough support groups. Many support groups must be formed because there are many women out there who have needs but no one is able to meet their needs. (response of woman who had not attended a support group)
Five of the eight women who had attended support groups indicated ‘NO’ to the question, “Do you feel that the State is doing enough to support Support groups for women?”
78% of the 119 women who had not attended support groups indicated ‘NO’ to the question, “Do you feel that the State is doing enough to support Support groups for women?”
Responses from groups:
The State is doing very little to address women’s issues.
The government needs to create more awareness about domestic violence.
The State helps heterosexual members from one political group (my words used to replace the name of the group) only.
In South Africa women’s issues are not prioritised by our government.
All nine groups had also indicated ‘NO’ to the question, “Do you feel that the State is doing enough to support Support groups for women?”
Thus the theme of state failure has been a dominant one since the country’s transition to democracy and its promise to uplift and transform the lives of women. In making reference to the findings of this research, I therefore construct a final argument here as to why I believe that the state has failed women and support groups and why, despite claims to the contrary, it does have the capacity to deliver, should it undertake a conscious and concerted effort to do so.
The construction of the support groups’ identities is located within a dialectical relationship with the state. However the latter and its gender machinery are not absolved from responsibility for the challenges experienced at local level. The State together with its agencies has formulated frameworks to drive gender equality initiatives, yet it fails despite its own formulations. Even though women occupy spaces at the top levels of government, therein seems to be the root-cause of the failure. While it is be expected of these women at top levels of government to vociferously further the interests of gender equality and empowerment that does not appear to be so. A culture of arbitrary appointment of people (women) to critical positions is dominant. Qualifying criteria including crucial skills as well as genuine commitment to the cause of gender issues are lacking in many instances, with
‘activist’ experience (being active in the anti-apartheid struggle) being the dominant selection criterion. Hassim’s observation supports this assertion: “Many appointments to the Commission on Gender Equality (CGE) have been based on party loyalties rather than on experience within the women’s movement” (2006: 224). She expounds further on the tensions within the state: “In the administration gender equality concerns have fallen hostage to a range of institutional hierarchies and systemic obstacles that are hard to deal with from outside the bureaucracy. These create tension
for those feminists who entered the state on the assumption that it would be a site of strategic intervention. Pregs Govender resigned from her parliamentary seat in 2002 as she could not reconcile her position in parliament with its constraints and her vision for transformation” (ibid: 262). Thus the roles of many women in strategic positions are questionable in terms of the conflicting stances they adopt. Many seem to put personal interests and pursuits above genuine commitment to gender issues and as such, support the dominant male discourse even when it contradicts the gender cause.
Ramphele cites the example of a junior woman employee at Parliament who lodged a case of sexual harassment against a senior member of the ruling party in 2007 (2008:
307). The junior employee struggled to garner support for her case in Parliament even though 42% of parliamentarians were women, including the Speaker and Deputy Speaker. She finally managed to take her case forward with the support of an ordinary member of parliament. Ramphele is critical of such stances of women leaders:
“Women leaders who fail to be transformative agents are undermining the cause of gender equality. Women leaders delay transformation when they fail to enlarge the circle of successful women, thus undermining the definition of leadership as male”
(ibid: 310). Such reactionary stances of women indicate the internalising of identities created for them by the patriarchal environment in which they operate; that although they hold senior and influential positions, they continue to perpetuate dominant male discourse by their apparent collusion with their male counterparts. Ramphele also questions the state’s ability to articulate its mandate through what she refers, as
‘human and intellectual capacity’ (ibid: 156). Reference is made to these cases as I believe that such situations and stances have has far-reaching implications for support groups at the local level.
Often the lack of progress on the ground and slow transformation by government is attributed to the country’s ‘young democracy.’ The delays in the judicial system, poor delivery in the social system, lack of resources in the legal and security services which translate into the most vulnerable members of society being further marginalised and victimised, are rationalised by reference to the young democracy and that transformative initiatives takes time. Hence the lack of advocacy and support around critical issues such as support groups for women, as an integral part of gender advocacy is justified.
Yet contradictions abound, especially with regards to organisational capacity within certain time constraints. In May 2012 the country was drawn into debate and division over ‘The Spear’ issue49. An artwork which was claimed to portray Jacob Zuma (The artist did not publicly confirm or deny the assumption that the picture was of Zuma;
conclusion as to the subject of the depiction was made on the basis of the title of the painting- Spear of the nation) displayed at a gallery in Johannesburg, was posted on the website of a national newspaper. Reaction to the painting being displayed on both public platforms drew reactions of consternation from members of the ruling party.
This reaction from the latter catapulted the issue into the public domain within days of the painting being displayed, with public marches being staged and the issue being discussed and debated in the media. Only a week after the story broke, the ruling party was able to secure a court hearing on the matter. On the day of the hearing a public march was staged and supporting members had access to the court proceedings via live televised transmission onto a big screen outside the court. The proceedings were also broadcast live on national television.
I make reference to this case as I believe that such situations contradict the state’s contention that gender transformative initiatives take time. I believe that the state does have the capacity to act constructively if it sees fit to do so. The speedy response by the state and members of the ruling party to the The Spear issue therefore raises questions about the state’s commitment to addressing issues such as gender inequality. Hassim’s criticism of the state seems to answer such questions: “The state does not simply reflect gender inequalities; its practices play a decisive role in constituting them” (2006: 240).
The general advocacy of the state on gender issues influences and shapes public constructs of gender issues. Therefore, it may be argued that the urgency around these issues and specifically around support groups is not seen as pervasive and encompassing. Discourse around this is selectively grounded within complexities such as personal interests and pursuits, financial gain and global image versus delivery at local level. However this research has shown that support groups resist state
49The City Press, 20 May 2012
constructs and formulate their own discourses and identities, rendering them agents of transformation as cited by Meer (2010: 37) of one woman attending a support group:
“I’m proud to tell other women that when you come to support group (sic) you won’t only acquire skills but empower and educate women on human rights. We all need to live in dignity and enjoy the benefits of the freedom we fought for”.
Support groups are thus courageously undertaking the work officially required of the state; and instead of “remaining prisoners of our history, they become agents of its making” (Ramphele 2008: 311). However, whilst the ability of women and support groups to resist oppressive situations and claim power within their isolated enclaves is admirable, it is my belief that final responsibility to provide effective support systems in the quest to deal with gender inequality and oppression of women at a fundamental level is vested in the state and its various machinery. Whilst arguments in this research have shown that the state is failing in its social responsibility, Pringle suggests that support groups can position themselves strategically in relation to the state in order to create and benefit from opportunities arising from those relationships (in Philips 1998: 204)
Another significant finding was the lack of general mainstream advocacy by support groups which resulted in many women not being aware of their existences or services.
Generally, I found that the seeming lack of public concern and interest in gender issues, as evidenced in the dearth of responses received to the newspaper advertisements as well as the radio stations stances to my request to air this issue, underpins, as well as, corresponds with the lack of public knowledge. The absence of influential structures such as the media, from mainstream advocacy strategies, reinforced by situations such as the Jacob Zuma rape trial, alluded to earlier, both undermine initiatives by women’s groups, as well as perpetuate gender inequalities.
However, it seems that some support groups and women act as subversive agents of transformation as well as indicated in the some of the responses and reception I received at some centres, together with the assertions of women such as Govender and Ramphele, cited earlier.
hooks, a foremost proponent of Black feminism has always articulated the contradictions contained in mainstream feminism when it homogenises women and
assumes similar experiences of women, Black or White. She maintains that differences are always contained in different women’s experiences. However, she contends that differences permeate the global stage, not least within gender politics (1989: 20). She argues that as much as there are differences between strong and weak, domination and dominated, powerful and powerless, women too are complicit in domination, as victims or perpetrators (ibid). In examining the domination of and exploitation of women, she challenges all of us to look at our capacity to dominate and to exploit within our personal spaces. That capacity to dominate can serve as a common point of connection and facilitator of mobilised collective action against gender oppression. She acknowledges differences amongst women, but cautions against using those differences as rigid moulds to define women: “While acknowledgement of the complex nature of woman’s status is a significant corrective, it must be a starting point…. Recognition of the interconnectedness of sex, race and class highlights the diversity of experience, compelling redefinition of the terms for unity. If women do not share ‘common oppression, what then can serve as a basis for our coming together?” Such an articulation has significance for support groups. I have briefly examined earlier how intersecting identities converge at the groups and the need to have these intersectionalities interrogated in order to mediate most effective interventions. However, I concur with hooks that these differences should not be used to separate women and the support groups but rather serve as a starting point for mobilising.
I have earlier on alluded to the level of consciousness within different groups. hooks contends that everyone has some understanding-whether consciously or not- of what feminism is and that understanding can serve as a ‘basis for solidarity’ (ibid: 23). She strongly advocates the mutual engagements of women and groups as starting points for solidarity and mobilisation, by engaging each other about their differences and in so doing can expose other differences and commonalities (ibid). The use of narrative therapy as explained in chapter two, in such contexts can facilitate meaningful engagement and interaction. hooks articulates the importance of groups and mutual engagement and how their interventions can transcend that of basic services to act as agents of contestation and transformation: “Small groups remain an important place for education for critical consciousness… for communicating feminist thinking… and individuals do not need to be equally literate or literate at all because the information
is primarily shared through conversation… The individual commitment (when small groups of people come together) provides a space for critical feedback which strengthens our efforts to change.. Working collectively to confront difference, to expand our awareness of sex, race and class as interlocking systems of domination, of the ways we reinforce and perpetuate these structures, is the context in which we learn the true meaning of solidarity. Only when we confront the realities of sex, race and class, the ways they divide us, make us different, stand us in opposition, and work to reconcile and resolve these issues will we be able to participate in the making of feminist revolution, in the transformation of the world” (ibid: 24-25). These assertions challenge support groups to rethink how they operate, and contain significant implications for their collective identities as agents of transformation.
Notwithstanding these challenges confronting support groups for women (in Pietermaritzburg), this research and its findings have attempted to show how the latter are constructs of the exercising of social power (Weedon 1997: 20) as well as how through the provision of their services, they (the support groups) are attempting to transform social relations (ibid) and also resisting the imposition of power by the State through its apparent unresponsive stance (Foucault in Simons 1995: 82).
The arguments presented in this thesis, augmented by the findings are underpinned by reflexive and interpretative approaches of poststructuralist methodology. It is intended that the findings and the narrative analysis hereof are sufficient to hold the constructs presented of all the aims undertaken, as is asserted by Kellehear (1993: 25): For poststructuralist writers, ‘research’ is a reading of the world and the task is always persuasion rather than proving.”
CHAPTER SIX -putting the pieces together
CONCLUSION
I need a quiet backwater and a sense of living as though I am barely alive on the earth, treading a small, careful pathway through life.50
6.1 FOREWORD
Bessie Head’s words are captivating not just for the emotions evoked in those words, but more so because they resonate with this research. Conducting this research has enriched me on many levels. The journey of growth and discovery has not been confined to academic discourse but extended to my subjective self as well. Having undertaken research in this complex field and having been given windows of opportunity and privilege to see the lives of so many other women through (personal and impersonal) feedback and observation, I feel that I need to step back and quietly reflect upon that research journey undertaken, whilst at the same time experiencing trepidation at how my construction of those women’s lives may be perceived. On reflecting on the support groups as well, it sometimes seems that they too are treading a ‘careful pathway.’ Thus in this final chapter, I summarise my research process, findings and analysis of the latter. I refer again to interpretative theory within which to locate my closing analysis. My analysis is largely constituted of interpretation of the feedback received from women and centres. I am thus guided by the interpretative theoretical framework which has permeated this qualitative research.
In this research I have used inductive reasoning (Walliman 2005: 160), inferred meaning through observation from an outside perspective (‘distanciation’) (Kelly 1999: 402), constructed meaning through emergent themes and patterns (ibid 411- 414) and assumed many roles in order to construct meaning though what contexts and texts represented for me (Denzin and Lincoln 2003: 5, 8).
Before implications for future research are provided, I discuss briefly, the various challenges I experienced during this research. Thereafter I offer a brief personal
50 Head 1982: 77