PUMLANI MAJAVU
Cape Town - Politics is a gendered sphere that continuously maintains and rewards patriarchy.
On the surface level, this is noticeable by the fact that all the political parties that are represented in the National Assembly are largely led by men.
It is usually the men who are considered to be the brains or the ideological anchors of these parties.
This is so because, as Wendy Brown points out in her 1988 book: “More than any other kind of human activity, politics has historically borne an explicitly masculine identity.”
Part of the history that Brown had in mind is the fact that people who are often considered the “classical” or key thinkers of politics such as Plato, and some of the men who are part of the “Enlightenment”, were all largely sexist.
These men mostly all held the view that women, white women, had no business being in politics for it was the sphere of white men.
The political rights and the idea of freedom that these men wrote and advocated for was for white men, as the supposedly quintessential human beings. In their minds, black women and men were not regarded as part of humanity, and white women were treated like people with no political rights.
The likes of Karl Marx were unhappy with the white class inequalities and hence went on to provide concepts about class politics, yet could not divorce themselves from the sexist idea that politics is the domain of and for men.
Some black nationalist liberation movements have also historically viewed the politics of liberation as a sphere for men.
Hence Steve Biko could talk about the “black man” being on his own when it comes to politics, and said nothing about black women.
The manhood-politics of Biko continue to be reflected in the fact that the ideology of Black Consciousness (BC) today continues to be articulated through the maleness of Biko.
Much like BC, liberalism continues to be articulated through the lens of white men. As many feminist thinkers have pointed out, patriarchy is accommodative, constantly renews itself, and does not always pronounce its presence.
The masculine identity of South African politics is also reflected in the fact that not a single party in the National Assembly is, first and foremost, feminist oriented. The absence of a primarily feminist political party reflects politics as an activity largely for men.
South African political parties constantly remind us that they are united in maintaining the country’s politics as a masculine activity for men. People within the governing party are happy to publicly utter sexist comments such as, “The ANC is not ready for a female president”, knowing that they will not be held accountable.
The leader of the main opposition referred to a woman he was once married to as “roadkill” and a “flat chicken”. And a high-profile member of the country’s third-biggest political party saw fit to tell the country that men “merely touching” a woman “is not harassment”. Of course, all three are men who are invested in their patriarchal political projects.
The masculine identity of our politics is also noticeable in student politics. For instance, the Fees Must Fall protest began as a legitimate student protest, but soon became a male-student protest.
Media and other patriarchy-affirming students all complicity saw men such as Mcebo Dlamini as leaders of the protest.
The women, on the other hand, were only seemingly noticed for the doeks they wore, rather than as people with thoughts and ideologies.
The focus on the doeks is part of the well-entrenched patriarchal lens of viewing women primarily as unthinking bodies. No one cared or talked about the pants or hats that the men were wearing.
The othering of women, as Simone de Beauvoir points out, has historically been built around the idea that a woman’s body is “a hindrance, a prison”.
It is also a body that men have historically claimed to have authority over.
The country’s political parties only embrace feminism on a part-time basis.
Dr Majavu teaches politics and international relations at North West University.
Cape Times