Prof Catriona Macleod's comments

Prof Catriona Macleod is a distinguished professor of psychology and SARChI Chair of Critical Studies in Sexualities and Reproduction at Rhodes University. We talked to her about the state of student activism at Rhodes post the April 2016 protests.

Grocott's Mail:

Recommendations from the Sexual Violence Task Team report were presented to the Rhodes Senate and Council. Grocott’s understands that a sub-committee was set up to assess these recommendations and report back to Council? What were some of the points of disagreement between the SVTT report and the committee? Which policy was finally adopted by Council? We have a copy of the student sexual offences policy, but we assume there is a more comprehensive, overarching policy for the university?

Catriona Macleod:

The Sexual Violence

Task Team (SVTT) report was handed to the University in December 2016. The report was then inspected by a committee set up by the Vice-Chancellor. Senate recommended further engagement between the SVTT and this committee.

After lengthy discussions, all of the SVTT recommendations were accepted by Senate and Council, bar two, which required further deliberation. I have seen the Student Sexual Offences Policy, but no larger or overarching policy. The Harassment Officer may know more about this.

GM:

The #RUReferenceList protests were not only a significant moment for RU, but they were arguably also a significant moment in the national fight against GBV. What do you think is the legacy of the protests both at RU and nationally? Have we moved forward in the struggle against GBV at Rhodes – and the country – since 2016? If so, how? If not, why?

Macleod:

Yes, indeed, the #RUReferencelist protests were very significant. However, it was interesting to note how these protests failed to get national traction in other higher education spaces. There were other protests, but nowhere near the level of disruption seen on this campus. This is in contrast to the #Feesmustfall protests. The question is, why? It is not because there are higher levels of sexual violence at Rhodes but instead because RU was (is) ahead of its time in terms of feminist pedagogy, which includes understanding the nuances of, and the silencing caused by rape culture.

Because of its high level of media and social media coverage, the #RUReferencelist protests formed part of (many other) advocacy and activist voices in highlighting the issue nationally, which eventually led to the publication of the National Strategic Plan on Gender-based Violence and Femicide. What was important and different from other initiatives is that it highlighted sexual violence on higher education campuses and led to an in-depth investigation in the form of the SVTT report (this report has been lauded as exemplary in higher education responses). [See Macleod’s article on contestations around the SVTT report.

GM:

What do you think of how RU handled the protests and the prosecution of students? What are your views on the battle between Yolanda Dyantyi and RU and the recent SCA ruling?

Macleod:

A group of staff members opposed the interdict taken out by management in the days following the start of the protests. I was one of them. This opposition was important in establishing the right to non-violent but disruptive protests. This paper speaks to this judgement. I have not followed the case of Yolanda Dyantyi with great attention.