Hivos’ role in LGBT emancipation in southern

Africa 1995 – 2006

Synthesis Report

Sarita Ranchod & Sonja Boezak October 2007

Acknowledgements

To all the people who gave of their time to in-person meetings, telephone and email conversations, to responding to the various surveys and questionnaires, and arranging and facilitating meetings, thank you. This work would have been impossible without your generosity. Thank you to Myrna and Jocelyn Vywers for making time to tirelessly tally the results of the written questionnaires. Working with an organisation such as Hivos for whom transparency and reflective interest in the value of its work – shown particularly in the engagement with the meanings and implications of this study – is part of its policy framework, and a deeper indication of the operationalisation of its humanist foundations has been insightful and inspiring. It was a rare pleasure to work with an organisation so deeply absorbed in the content of its work. Throughout the process of this research we were aware of the profound value of being told intimate, sometimes funny, often painful, always moving stories that consistently highlighted human capacity for growth and compassion. Thank you to all who so generously shared their stories with us. Our lives have been enriched by each encounter. The task of being entrusted to retell each story in the context of a country, or of the southern African region more broadly has been an honour and privilege, and we hope this report does them justice in some small way. To Karel Chambille for his valuable comments in the restructuring of this report, and for patient encouragement to see the journey through to this point, thank you.

Contents Acronyms .................................................................................................................................................. i Word List ................................................................................................................................................iv Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................1 1. Introduction..........................................................................................................................................5 2. Analytical Framework and Methodology ............................................................................................7

2.1 Evaluation and Research Questions ...............................................................................................7 2.2 Core Concepts ................................................................................................................................7

2.2.1 Emancipation...........................................................................................................................7 2.2.2 Effectiveness ...........................................................................................................................8 2.2.3 Reach.......................................................................................................................................8 2.2.4 Relevance ................................................................................................................................8 2.2.5 Note on LGBT-related concepts..............................................................................................8

2.3 Elaborating on the Concepts ..........................................................................................................9 2.3.1 Emancipation: Dimension of People and Society...................................................................9 2.3.2 Emancipation: Dimension of Organisations..........................................................................10

2.4 Scope............................................................................................................................................12 2.5 Data Collection.............................................................................................................................12

2.5.1 Sources of Information..........................................................................................................12 2.5.2 Tools for Sourcing Information.............................................................................................15

2.6 History and Limitations of the Process ........................................................................................21 2.6.1 Field visits .............................................................................................................................22 2.6.2 Language ...............................................................................................................................22 2.6.3 Online Surveys ......................................................................................................................23

3. Support to LGBT emancipation in southern Africa ...........................................................................24 3.1 Hivos’ LGBT Policy ....................................................................................................................24 3.2 Hivos’ Efforts: policy in practice .................................................................................................24

4. Findings and Conclusions ..................................................................................................................29 4.1 Changes........................................................................................................................................29

4.1.1 Changes at the level of LGBT individuals ............................................................................29 4.1.2 Changes at the Level of Society: Attitudes and Opinions.....................................................40 4.1.3 Changes at the Level of Society: Policies and Legislation....................................................51

4.2 Efforts of Hivos-supported LGBT Organisations ........................................................................53 4.2.1 Effectiveness at achieving objectives....................................................................................53 4.2.2 Reach of Hivos-supported LGBT organisations ...................................................................58 4.2.3 Relevance of organisational objectives for LGBT emancipation..........................................63

4.3 Effectiveness and relevance of Hivos’ interventions ...................................................................63 4.3.1 Direct support to LGBT organisations ..................................................................................63 4.3.2 Support for networking and knowledge-sharing ...................................................................64 4.3.3 Partner human rights and women’s organisations.................................................................65

4.4 Links between LGBT organisations and changes described........................................................66 4.4.1 LGBT Individuals .................................................................................................................66 4.4.2 Changes in Legislation ..........................................................................................................69

4.5 Effectiveness and Relevance of Hivos’ Interventions..................................................................70 4.6 Conclusion....................................................................................................................................70

5. Recommendations ..............................................................................................................................72 5.1 LGBT People ...............................................................................................................................72 5.2 Society: Attitudes & Opinions .....................................................................................................72

5.2.1 Culture and Religion .............................................................................................................73 5.2.2 Media.....................................................................................................................................75

5.3 LGBT Partner Organisations........................................................................................................76 5.3.1. Staff Capacity.......................................................................................................................76

5.3.2 Appropriate Remuneration....................................................................................................76 5.3.3 Governance Structures ..........................................................................................................76 5.3.4 Staff Development.................................................................................................................77 5.3.5 Management Styles ...............................................................................................................77 5.3.6 Self-evaluation ......................................................................................................................77

5.4 Hivos ............................................................................................................................................78 5.4.1 Direct Support .......................................................................................................................78 5.4.2 Indirect support .....................................................................................................................78

Annex 1: Sources of Information ...........................................................................................................80 Annex 2: Terms of Reference ................................................................................................................90 Annex 3: Co-financing funds spent on LGBT emancipation in Southern Africa ................................111 Annex 4: Audience Profiles .................................................................................................................112

OiA Satellite Festival-goers Profile .............................................................................................112 OiA Main Festival-goers Profile ..................................................................................................113 GALA Users Group Profile..........................................................................................................114 Behind the Mask Target Group Profile ........................................................................................115 OUT Membership Profile.............................................................................................................116 Durban Centre Target Group Profile............................................................................................117 Triangle Service Recipient Profile ...............................................................................................118 GALZ Membership Profile ..........................................................................................................119 TRP Membership Profile .............................................................................................................120 Legabibo Membership Profile......................................................................................................121

Annex 5: Comparison of Organisational Ratings.................................................................................122 Annex 6: Evaluation Team...................................................................................................................126

i

Acronyms AIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome

AIM Agencia de Informacao de Mocambique/Mozambique Information Agency

ARSRC African Regional Sexuality Resource Centre

AWID Association for Women in Development

AWLHP African Women’s Life History Project

AU African Union

BBC British Broadcasting Corporation

Bonela Botswana Network on Ethics Law and HIV/AIDS

BtM Behind the Mask

CAL Coalition of African Lesbians

CEDEP Centre for the Development of People (Malawi)

CMD Community Media for Development (South Africa)

CSO Civil Society Organisation

DAC Development Assistance Community

DeafSA Organisation catering for the needs of deaf people in South Africa

DVD Digital Video Disk

FEW Forum for the Empowerment of Women (South Africa)

GALZ Gays and Lesbians of Zimbabwe

GCWL Global Centre for Women’s Leadership

GP General Practitioner (medical doctor)

HIVOS Humanist Institute for Development Co-operation

HIV Human Immuno Virus

HIV+ HIV positive

HO Hivos Head Office (The Hague)

HR Human Rights

HRW Human Rights Watch

IASSCS International Association for the Study of Sexuality, Culture and Society

ii

ICTs Information Communication Technologies

IGLHRC International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission

ILGA International Lesbian and Gay Association

JTP Journalist Training Programme (BtM)

JWG Joint Working Group (South Africa)

KZN KwaZulu Natal

LAC Legal Assistance Centre (Namibia)

Legabibo Lesbians Gays Bisexuals of Botswana

Legatra Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender People of Zambia

LGBT Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender

LGBTI Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender and Intersex

MP Member of Parliament

MSM Men who have Sex with Men

Nampa Namibian Press Agency

NANGOF Namibian National NGO Forum

NCGLE National Coalition for Gay and Lesbian Equality (South Africa)

NICRO National Institute for Crime Prevention and Reintegration of Offenders (South

Africa)

NiZA Netherlands Institute for Southern Africa

NSHR National Society for Human Rights (Namibia)

OiA Out in Africa (South Africa)

OSI Open Society Institute

OSISA Open Society Institute for Southern Africa

PE Programme Evaluation

PGLN Pietermaritzburg Gay and Lesbian Network (South Africa)

PO Programme Officer

RO Hivos Regional Office (Harare)

SABC South African Broadcasting Corporation

SADC Southern African Development Community

SWAPO South West African People’s Organisation (Namibia)

iii

SYL SWAPO Youth League (Namibia)

TRP The Rainbow Project (Namibia)

UK United Kingdom

UKZN University of KwaZulu-Natal (South Africa)

UNISA University of South Africa

URL Uniform Resource Locator

US United States (of America)

VCT Voluntary Counselling and Testing

WCAR World Conference against Racism and Other Forms of Xenophobia

WCGL Women’s Centre for Global Leadership

WLSA Women in Law Southern Africa

WSW Women who have Sex with Women

ZIBF Zimbabwe International Book Fair

ZIMT Zambian Independent Monitoring Trust

iv

Word List1 Baster: Racial identity marker claimed and used by people of mixed African and European ancestry with light skin colour. What might be termed ‘coloured’ in South Africa is termed ‘baster’ in Namibia. Many Namibian ‘basters’ take offence to being called ‘coloured’, perceiving ‘baster’ to be higher up in the racial hierarchy than ‘coloured’. ‘Baster’ literally translated means ‘bastard’/’cross-breed’. (Namibia) While some people take offence to the term as a pejorative, others proudly claim it.2 bisexual/bi: A person who is emotionally, physically and sexually attracted to both men and women. black: As used in this research refers to all people of colour, except where specified otherwise butch: Masculine in physique; more often used in reference to women than men ‘coloured’: Under Apartheid, the term ‘coloured’ was used as part of a racial hierarchy and classification system that determined access to resources such as education and housing. The term ‘black’ in apartheid racial classification did not include people labelled ‘coloured’ or ‘Indian’. Liberation movements used the term ‘black’ or ‘Black’ to refer to all people of colour. ‘Coloured’ referred to people of colour who might have mixed ancestry of African, Asian and/or European descent. In the post-apartheid era, some people classified as ‘coloured’ under Apartheid have re-claimed that identity for themselves, while others find it offensive, preferring to label themselves as ‘black’ or ‘Black’. coming out/being outed: Making sexual identity/orientation known. ‘corrective rape’: Men raping lesbians or women they perceive to be lesbian, to ‘fix’ or ‘correct’ their sexual orientation which they believe to be wrong and/or a perversion. Corrective rape often takes place in the context of gang-rape, where multiple men rape one woman with the intention that the woman involved will learn what it is like to be a ‘real’ (heterosexual) woman. dyke: Lesbian; pejoratively used by non-LGBT people, but (re)claimed as identity label by lesbians. femme: Feminine in physique and appearance; often used in reference to males, but also used to refer to feminine lesbians. gay: Synonym for homosexual, in this study used to refer to both females and males attracted to the same sex. heterosexual: People who are emotionally, physically and sexually attracted to people of the opposite sex. homosexual: A person attracted primarily to people of the same sex as themselves. incubikile: isiNdebele word for anyone who is handicapped or deformed (‘post-Colonial’ term) used to refer to homosexuals. intersex/ual: Having the full or partial anatomical make-up of both female and male with underdeveloped or ambiguous genitalia,(previously termed hermaphrodite). 1 We wish to acknowledge having drawn on some definitions used by IGLHRC and HRW (2003) in More than a

Name and the (South African) Joint Working Group publication, An ABC of LGBTI: A Resource Guide for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex People.

2 In the context of this research, many people of colour in Namibia self-identified as ‘baster’. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baster for further detail.

v

isitabane: isiNdebele word for homosexual; literally translates as ‘transsexual’: having two sexual identities; usually derogatory. isikesane: isiNdebele word used to refer to homosexuals. lesbian: A female person attracted primarily to other females. matric: Short for matriculation; old South African equivalent of Grade 12, the final year of high school. moffie:3: Homosexual male, but also specifically used to refer to transgender and effeminate males. Derogatorily used by non-LGBT people in the past and present, but (re)claimed as identity label by gay and transgender men referring to themselves. omashenge: Oshivambo word for homosexuals and ‘one who is taken from behind’. outing someone: Revealing someone’s sexual orientation that they wish to keep secret or private. queen: Term used in some southern African contexts to refer to effeminate men, often a self-identification. resourced: in terms of education, class position, economics, access to financial and non-financial resources including land, home-ownership/permanent dwelling, inheritance. sangoma: Traditional healer. secondary abuse: Refers to public service providers such as, responses of police when violent attacks are reported by LGBT people, suggesting that the attack was deserved by virtue of being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender, or a refusal to take the crime seriously or undertake any investigations because the victim was ‘asking for it’ because of their sexual orientation. Similarly, nurses and other health care workers refusing to provide health care services to LGBTs, or deliberately ‘out’ them in their communities. sexual orientation: Describing whether a person is sexually attracted to the same or opposite sex. sitabane: seSotho: hermaphrodite, used colloquially to refer to homosexuals. straight: Heterosexual. tomboy: A girl considered boyish or masculine in behaviour, manner or/and dress. township: Created as part of the 1960 Group Areas Act (South Africa) that created separate, segregated areas for various black people divided by what the Apartheid state-machinery termed ‘population groups’. Separate townships were created for ‘blacks, ‘coloureds’ and ‘Indians’. Also found in Namibia and Zimbabwe. transgender: One whose gender identity differs from their sex at birth, or those with male and female personalities in the way they express aspects of their gender.

3 In SA slang, the word ‘moffie’ covers a range of inter-related senses, including ‘male homosexual’, ‘effeminate male’ and ‘transvestite’. In its most widespread usage, it refers to the first category, but it’s more specific meaning of ‘transvestite’ is also found in the Cape ‘coloured’ community. Derogatory implication, but recent reappropriation by homosexuals and transvestites in referring to themselves. Shaun de Waal, Etymological note: On ‘moffie’ in Defiant Desire, 1994

vi

uPhekeyakhe: isiXhosa word meaning “the one who cooks his own pot/meals”, usually refers to men who have never had a female partner. Such men may or may not be homosexual. under-resourced: Limited or no access to education; no, or limited access to economic power and opportunities; unemployed, lack of employment possibilities due to limited employable skills; in low-paid employment, struggling to make ends meet. xingili/ungqingili: Homosexual; usually derogatory isiZulu.

1

Executive Summary Hivos, the Humanist Institute for Development Co-operation, is a secular organisation whose core activities comprise of providing financial and political support to local NGOs in the global South. Hivos also actively facilitates networking, lobbying and information sharing between and among development-related organisations.

Since the mid-1990s Hivos has supported a number of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) organisations in Africa, Asia, and Latin America as part of its human rights programme. This support was to further the aim of LGBT emancipation, i.e. for LGBT people to have equal access to resources, to express themselves freely as LGBT, and to participate in decision-making processes that determine their lives. The purpose of this Programme Evaluation (PE) is to evaluate Hivos’ support to LGBT organisations and projects in the southern Africa region in answer to the question: To what degree have Hivos’ interventions in the period 1995 – 2005 contributed to LGBT emancipation in southern Africa? The southern African countries where Hivos has been active in this regard are Botswana, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Through the use of various data collection and analysis tools this PE highlights the strength and effectiveness and efforts of Hivos-supported LGBT organisations to date, while identifying lessons for future interventions toward LGBT emancipation. The evaluation also makes explicit the diversity of both LGBT people and organisations receiving Hivos’ support, and the significance of this support for efforts towards the ultimate goal of LGBT emancipation. Analytical Framework and Methodology In order to find an answer to the central research question and to determine what kinds of changes occurred in terms of LGBT emancipation during the ten year period, the evaluation focused on change at four dimensions of emancipation: 1. LGBT people; 2. Society’s attitudes towards LGBT people; 3. Society’s structures (laws and policies) affecting LGBT people; and the 4. Effectiveness of Hivos-supported LGBT organisations. Key Findings and Conclusions From the review process the answer to the central research question is that Hivos’ strategic and financial interventions have indeed contributed (to varying degrees depending on individual contexts) significantly to shifts toward LGBT emancipation at all four emancipation levels, most notably:

LGBT People

� Significant and meaningful positive change in the individual lives of LGBT people: this shift toward emancipation was the most powerful, positive and measurable difference in terms of changes towards emancipation. An overwhelming majority of personal testimonies from LGBT people revealed significantly increased senses of well-being and self-esteem; increased levels of self-confidence; useful and valued skills developed; decreased feelings of isolation; increased senses of safety; access to much-needed safe spaces, access to quality support and services offered by skilled personnel, through Hivos-supported LGBT organisations in Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe. As constitutive part of LGBT emancipation, supporting the agency of LGBT people contributes to strengthening other kinds of free agency (such as political representation and participating in decision-making processes).

2

Society: attitudes and opinions

� Pockets of media reportage that have moved away from sensationalist coverage of LGBT issues towards more normalised, and sympathetic coverage most clearly in South Africa (led by elite, policy-influential media) and Namibia, with some positive signs also noted in Botswana, Malawi and Mozambique;

� Increased media space for LGBT issues as a result of some LGBT organisations’ having developed positive and strategic relations with media organisations and practitioners (Botswana, Malawi, Namibia, South Africa);

� Greater visibility of LGBT people in South Africa, Namibia and Botswana; and

� Increased space for LGBT expression through film-making, photographic exhibitions and theatrical endeavours including in mainstream spaces (South Africa and Namibia);

Society: structures and policies

� The significant changes in legal reform in favour of the rights of LGBT people in South Africa (having secured protection from discrimination based on sexual orientation in the country’s Constitution, to LGBT people now having the right to form legally binding civil unions) and the effects of this legal reform on the possibilities for LGBT rights in neighbouring countries given the influential position of South Africa in the southern African region;

LGBT Organisations

� Increased awareness of LGBT issues in broader human rights contexts in Botswana, Namibia, South Africa, and in the period 1995 – 2000, in Zimbabwe; initial signs towards the same in Mozambique and Malawi in 2006;

� Growing resources and knowledge on LGBT life4 in the region;

� The continued existence of GALZ in Zimbabwe, and its capacity to provide services and support to its members, despite its repressive political context;

� Public education work being well-received with ongoing requests to up-scale such work to reach broader audiences in South Africa with requests coming from government departments such as the Department of Education;

� New LGBT organisations have come into being where there were previously none, with Hivos’ support;

� Spaces created as a result of Hivos’ prompting and encouraging, to begin speaking about LGBT rights in Mozambique where previously it had been considered taboo;

� Greater participation and representation of LGBT people in decision-making spaces that affect their lives (Legabibo on HIV/AIDS; OUT and GALA through government departments such as health and education).

Taking into account factors that influence these positives, the unfreedoms that limit LGBT emancipation can be summed up as:

• Socio-economic and political insecurity;

• Substantive unfreedoms relating to political participation and access to services; and

• Limitations on civil rights (such as the right to marry, inheritance: equality under the law)

4 This includes TRP’s annual LGBT photographic exhibition, GALA’s research, documenting and public

education work, and research commissioned in South Africa through the Joint Working Group on levels of safety, experiences of police and public healthcare services, and levels of empowerment in LGBT communities carried out in Gauteng, the Western Cape and KwaZulu Natal.

3

All of these forms of marginalisation are often based on ‘cultural’ reasons including religion and tradition. Concerns that weigh down the other side of the emancipation scale are areas that have remained unchanged, or worrying shifts towards greater marginalisation in the twelve-year period:

LGBT People

� Pervasive high levels of fear of discriminatory treatment by society-at-large and public service-providers in particular was common across country contexts. Homophobic responses from public service providers included refusal of treatment or service provision and making sexual orientation known in contexts where such information increases the vulnerability to attack or victimisation of LGBT people. Homophobic responses by society-at-large ranges from evictions to violent attack including gang-rape and murder.

� In a context of illegality and intolerance, there are high levels of secrecy about same-sex orientation linked to real fears of being ‘outed’ and the negative ramifications of being ‘outed’ in contexts of stigma.

� Less resourced LGBT people and those who look visibly different are most vulnerable to attack, whether taking the form of rape, name-calling or murder.

All of the above limit the well-being and freedoms of LGBT people and their access to resources. Living lives free of fear and discrimination and enjoying equal treatment and rights, particularly for less-resourced LGBT people remains a longer-term ideal in the southern African context.

Society: attitudes and structures

� Zambia: the disbanding of Legatra, and its members going underground, seeking asylum or exile because of state-sponsored, generalised homophobia and ongoing fears of being outed;

� Recurring expressions of homophobia by certain political, religious and community leaders in all of the countries covered in this study;

� Violence against and harassment of visibly LGBT people in under-resourced public spaces;

� An apparent backlash and conservatism as a result of raising gender issues, for example, the implications of Botswana’s penal code having been extended to include both men and women, for LGBT people; and

� Increasingly regular and brutal, homophobic violence targeted at lesbians in under-resourced areas in South Africa and Namibia.

Key Recommendations In the context of ongoing homophobia in all of the countries covered in this PE, the next step towards LGBT emancipation in southern Africa necessitates a focus on proactively shifting public attitudes from homophobic ignorance to greater social acceptance and understanding of LGBT people and their rights. This homophobia is, in many cases (often indirectly; sometimes unintentionally) sanctioned by religious and political leaders’ intolerance and practised by public service providers in their refusal to follow up crimes against LGBT people, or provide health treatment to LGBT people, in contexts that recognise the human rights of all citizens on paper. 1. LGBT people

Given many LGBT beneficiaries’ lack of social mobility in the forms of education and income, it is recommended that LGBT organisations facilitate access to employable skills training of under-resourced LGBT beneficiaries towards economic independence. Gays and Lesbians of Zimbabwe’s (GALZ) successful experiences in this area would be beneficial to exploring the feasibility and adaptability of its model for other contexts.

4

2. Social Attitudes

To actively facilitate shifts to greater social tolerance of LGBT people, the following strategies are recommended: • Targeting mainstream media for increased ‘normalising’ LGBT-related media content, located

within the context of broader human rights, women’s rights, HIV/AIDS struggles, pointing to the vulnerabilities and challenges facing broader society, LGBT people included, emphasising that LGBT people face similar challenges as the rest of society, towards greater social integration of LGBT people, as opposed to continued social exclusion.

• Strategic interventions that engage in constructive dialogue with religious leaders and communities towards acceptance and understanding, using the discourse of inclusion. Documenting and sharing TRP’s strategic interventions in dialogic engagement would allow other LGBT organisations to explore the adaptability of the TRP model for their contexts.

• Efforts to document ethnographies of same-sex practices in pre-colonial Africa need to enter the southern Africa public sphere in plain language, using mainstream media strategically for these realities to become public knowledge. Such studies have largely been limited to the sphere of academic research where they have not translated into broad-based public knowledge of a history of African same-sex traditions and customs. Circulating such knowledges in accessible forms in the public sphere, using mainstream media as an entry point, begins to strip the authority of notions of same-sexuality as un-African towards social dialogue on indigenous homosexualities, towards greater social acceptance of LGBT people in southern Africa.

3. LGBT organisations

While organisations rated well in terms of effectiveness, the following areas need strengthening: • Organisations with small staff teams (TRP and the Durban Centre in particular) and large

workloads are overstretched in terms of matching organisational needs and workloads with appropriate staffing. Organisations that have high workloads and few staff have little opportunity to reflect on progress and successes, or new strategies needed to deal with challenges ahead. More structured opportunities for organisational reflection to recognise work well done, identify gaps, engage with challenges and plan future strategies and interventions would be of benefit;

• Staff development has tended to fall to the bottom of the priority list in organisations with few staff and much to do. Investing in ongoing and appropriate staff development will lead to more effective and stable organisations, a longer-term investment in the organisation and the people who make sure that the organisation functions effectively;

• LGBT organisations do important and meaningful work that has a positive, life-enhancing effect on beneficiaries. Organisations often lack the skills to effectively document their work, a capacity gap that risks creating the impression that the organisation does not ‘do’ anything, or that the organisation does nothing well. Organisations across the board need to develop context-appropriate capacity to document and share their work and experiences in creative ways that could include audio-visual mediums that utilise and incorporate the rich oral traditions of southern Africa. Hivos could play a facilitating role in this regard;

• In the context of ongoing homophobia of different forms in the southern Africa region, organisations need to sharpen their strategic media/communications and public education skills to enable up-scaled strategic engagement with society-at-large towards promoting greater acceptance of homosexuality as African reality.

• Sharing experiences of organisations that have had successes at advocacy and lobbying endeavours, if documented for learning and exchange would strengthen the communications capacity of other organisations.

4. Hivos

• Increasing and shifting support to less-resourced LGBT organisations in South Africa that successfully reach and serve more marginalised LGBT people is needed.

• A strategy for ongoing, more significant financial support to Legabibo to consolidate and grow the positive results that the grouping has achieved to date. Similarly for LAMBDA and CEDEP.

5

• Moral and political support, much valued by organisations that received such support in earlier years, is missed and much-needed in organisations. Hivos is encouraged to find ways of reintroducing this approach in its relationship with partner LGBT organisations.

• Sustained financial support for evaluations, reviews and strategic planning processes that assist organisations to focus on key interventions in contexts of great need and competing priorities is needed to improve the effectiveness of LGBT partners.

• Support for improving the capacity of LGBT organisations to better document their work; • Research on public attitudes on LGBT people and issues in the region would better inform

organisations of the prevalent attitudes they need to engage with. This would also provide a ‘baseline’ of attitudes, useful for measuring the effectiveness of attitude-change interventions in the region over time.

• CEDEP in Malawi and LAMBDA in Mozambique have both undertaken public attitude studies. Documenting their experiences, approaches and strategies to undertaking such exercises would contribute to increased learning through knowledge-sharing and exchange between organisations. Documenting the experiences and strategies of partner organisations for learning and exchanging among LGBT organisations should be considered and could take the form of a Hivos-initiated plain language, ‘good practice’ toolkit that highlights the successful work of Hivos LGBT partners in southern Africa, focusing on strategies and experiences to date, in efforts to encourage pro-active South-South knowledge-sharing and knowledge exchange.

1. Introduction Hivos, the Humanist Institute for Development Co-operation, as a secular organisation with humanist values, wants to contribute to a free, fair and sustainable world where all citizens have equal access to resources, opportunities and markets and can participate actively and equally in decision-making processes that determine their lives, their society and their future. Hivos’ central commitment is therefore to poor and marginalised people in the global South. Hivos’ core activities comprise of providing financial and political support to local NGOs that share its goals in the global South. Hivos also actively facilitates networking, lobbying and information sharing between and among development-related organisations. Since the mid-1990s Hivos has supported a number of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) organisations in Africa, Asia, and Latin America as part of its human rights programme. This support was to further the aim of LGBT emancipation, i.e. for LGBT people to have equal access to rights, to express themselves freely as LGBT, and to participate in decision-making processes that determine their lives. This Programme Evaluation (PE) focuses on Hivos’ support to LGBT organisations and projects in southern Africa. It also serves as a record of Hivos’ support to LGBT emancipatory projects in the southern African geographic region in South Africa, Zimbabwe, Namibia, Botswana, Zambia, Malawi and Mozambique.

The central focus of this PE is the question: To what degree have Hivos’ interventions in the period 1995 – 2006 contributed to LGBT emancipation in southern Africa?

Given the socio-political contexts in the countries in southern Africa where Hivos has been active in this regard, the answer to the question is one with mixed and varied answers; that on the whole reflect clear developments in the direction of emancipation. One of the unintended, marginalising consequences of highlighting LGBT issues in the public arena – which has lead to a positive increase in the number of LGBT people coming out – is a violent backlash against black lesbians in under-resourced areas, particularly in South Africa.

6

This PE considers the progress made toward LGBT emancipation in southern Africa as well as unintended positive and negative consequences of the public pursuit of emancipation, and presents some direction in addressing gaps in certain areas and recommendations on how to deal with the perceived backlash. Chapter 2 presents the central question and its breakdown into five research questions. This chapter presents the methods used to find answers to these questions, providing the rationale for why particular methods were deemed appropriate. The central concepts – particularly that of ‘emancipation’ – used in the evaluation are also described in this chapter. Hivos’ portfolio over the period is graphically illustrated, and the process of collecting and analysing data is presented.

Chapter 3 focuses on Hivos’ LGBT policy and the operationalisation of this policy in how the organisation has directed its support.

In Chapter 4 each of the research questions is answered systematically, leading up to the overall conclusion based on findings in the region as a whole.

The recommendations made in Chapter 5 are concentrated around those areas highlighted as challenges or signs that reflect moves away from LGBT emancipation, or strategies for further utilising strengths.

7

2. Analytical Framework and Methodology

2.1 Evaluation and Research Questions The question to be answered by this evaluation is: To what degree did Hivos’ interventions in the period 1995 – 2006 contribute to LGBT emancipation in southern Africa?

This question was expanded into five research questions; the answers of which will return us to the central question. The research questions are:

1. Changes

1.1. What measurable changes regarding LGBT emancipation have occurred in the 7 countries of southern Africa in the period 1995-2006?

1.2. To what extent can these changes be assessed as a ‘development towards LGBT emancipation’?

2. Efforts of LGBT organisations

2.1. How effective were the Hivos-supported LGBT organisations and projects in achieving their stated objectives?

2.2. What was the reach of these Hivos supported LGBT organisations and projects? 2.3. How relevant are/were the objectives of these organisations for LGBT emancipation?

3. Efforts of Hivos

3.1. To what extent did Hivos’ direct support to its LGBT partner organisations contribute to their effectiveness?

3.2. To what extent did Hivos’ other interventions (indirect support like targeting human rights and women’s organisations) contribute to the effectiveness of the LGBT partner organisations?

4. Can the effects of the Hivos supported LGBT organisations plausibly be connected with the overall changes analysed in question 1?

5. Considering the answers to the above questions (1 to 4), what can be concluded about the effectiveness and relevance of Hivos’ interventions?

2.2 Core Concepts

2.2.1 Emancipation

“Emancipation” is the central concept in this evaluation. An initial workshop in Harare with Hivos RO staff, LGBT resource persons and Hivos’ country consultants from Mozambique, South Africa and Zambia, and an analysis of Hivos policy and project documents provided the frameworks for describing the concept of emancipation. Hivos’ policy documents do not explicitly define the organisation’s interpretation of the concept ‘emancipation’. From a review of the organisation’s policy documents it was deduced that emancipation refers to the right to be treated fairly, without discrimination (including having fair and equal access to services and resources; safety of person), to have the freedom to choose one’s life-course and forms of expression without being forced or coerced, and the right to participate in and/or be represented in public affairs that determine one’s life.

8

Broadly, the notion of emancipation is connected to the concepts of “access”, “representation”, and “participation in decision making,”5 and as such relates to interactions between social actors.

The four dimensions of social interaction relevant to LGBT emancipation have been divided as: 1. LGBT people, 2. LGBT organisations, 3. Society: attitudes vis-à-vis LGBT people, and 4. Society: structural arrangements regarding LGBT people (viz. legislation and policies that

affect the lives of LGBT people).

2.2.2 Effectiveness

Effectiveness refers to the extent to which organisations’ interventions achieve/d their objectives towards LGBT emancipation, as well as organisations’ ability to function satisfactorily in terms of mobilising their human and financial resources to implement their activities.

2.2.3 Reach

Reach refers to (the numbers – quantitative; and profiles – qualitative – of) LGBT target audiences, as well as other stakeholders included or affected by the interventions of an organisation.

2.2.4 Relevance

The DAC glossary defines relevance as “the extent to which the objectives of a development intervention are consistent with beneficiaries’ requirements/country needs/global priorities/partners’ and donors’ policies… Retrospectively the question of relevance often becomes a question as to whether the objectives of an intervention or its design are still appropriate given changed circumstances.”

2.2.5 Note on LGBT-related concepts

The terms ‘lesbian’, ‘gay’, ‘bisexual’ and ‘transgender’ are used (and often adapted) by LGBT organisations and individuals in the region studied. While these terms are derived from ‘non-African’ language, theorising and perspectives, and as such do not necessarily reflect the specific contexts or content of the experiences and expressions of sexual identities in southern Africa, for the purpose of this report, these terms are used.

The concepts sexual identity or sexual orientation are used in this evaluation report to refer to identifying as lesbian, gay or bisexual, i.e. being emotionally and/or physically attracted (orientated) to members of the same sex (as with lesbian women, and gay men), and (as with bisexuals) sexual attraction to both one’s own and the opposite sex.

The term ‘transgender’ is viewed as a gender identity or expression, a psychological sense of self, i.e. referring to having a gender identity different from one’s sex at birth, as when a male person, for example, in physical appearance, mannerisms and roles conveys qualities associated with females and presents himself as female, or, when a female person presents herself as male in appearance and exhibits male-associated behaviour. This gender identity does not per se define sexual identity. A transgender person can identify as homo-, hetero- or bisexual.

Many of the LGBT organisations included in the study have begun adding an ‘I’ to the acronym (LGBTI) that defines their focus or target groups, thus extending their focus to include intersexuals, a term that refers to people who have both male and female biological sex organs, (people previously termed ‘hermaphrodites’). Where the terms lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender refer to sexual identities, the concept ‘intersexual’ more accurately describes a third group in the category of biological sex, as in ‘male’, ‘female’ and (the third sex) ‘intersexual’. 5 As used in Hivos general policy document Civil Voices on a Global Stage that articulates the organisation’s

focus on the “need for a voice of the poor and marginalised people in decision-making processes that determine their lives and opportunities” (Civil Voices on a Global Stage, 2004:7).

9

While many LGBT organisations speak of “LGBTI rights”, no out intersexuals were encountered through any of the Hivos-supported LGBT organisations visited. It became apparent that organisations included the ‘I’ with neither clear understanding of, nor personal knowledge or experience of any intersexuals. This study therefore makes no further mention of intersexuality in this context.

2.3 Elaborating on the Concepts Because social change involves behavioural change (particularly changes in how social actors relate to each other), this evaluation contemplated the locations at which change occurred in terms of the four dimensions of emancipation mentioned above. These dimensions form the framework for evaluating Hivos’ interventions towards LGBT emancipation.

Hivos’ broad objective regarding emancipation could be understood by evoking a scale whose one extreme reflects a positive measure of emancipation that could include enhanced freedoms, equality, inclusion, participation, visibility, and tolerance, while the other end of the scale reflects a negative marginalisation that could include exclusion, unfair discrimination, inequality, invisibility, and violence against LGBT people.

This process of and towards LGBT emancipation is an interaction between two sides of the same coin: • The side of “LGBT people” (both individual LGBT people and LGBT-organisations), as well

as, • The side of “Society” vis-à-vis LGBT people (in terms of attitudes, opinions and media

representations, institutional or structural arrangements, legislation and policies). Signs of measurable changes that occurred and were visible at the levels of individual LGBT people, LGBT organisations, society’s attitudes and society’s structural arrangements were looked for and evaluated in terms of LGBT emancipation.

2.3.1 Emancipation: Dimension of People and Society

For the dimension of LGBT individuals , the following key factors guided the evaluation: • LGBT peoples’ rights of access to health and other social services • Security of person, (in the context of this report, relating to self-esteem, well-being, sense of safety • Freedom of expression and association, i.e. ‘normalisation’ of LGBT people in the public

sphere/positive visibility of LGBT people • Increased participation and representation of LGBT people in public affairs that govern their lives • Safety in public spaces, increase/decrease of abuse/violence against LGBT people Changes in the society dimension were measured by: a. Changes in attitudes and opinions • Increased/decreased knowledge and understanding of LGBT people and issues • Reports of ‘normality’ of LGBT people by the general public/increased or decreased stigma and

discrimination against LGBT people • LGBT people reporting an increased/decreased ability to self-express as a result of their social

contexts • Public visibility of LGBT people • Public visibility of LGBT people in leadership positions • Respect for/tolerance of LGBT people in the public sphere • How media represent LGBT people and issues b. Policies and legislation (institutional/structural arrangements) • Equality before the law • Protection and benefit of the law

10

2.3.2 Emancipation: Dimension of Organisations

LGBT organisations constitute both a ‘means towards’ as well as a dimension of emancipation, recognising that – certainly in hostile environments – the fact of organisational existence, organisation building and strengthening, can be indicators of emancipation. As such, the existence of LGBT organisations are both a constitutive part of emancipation, while at the same time contributing to the strengthening of different kinds of emancipation. This is further contextualised by the social and political environments within which organisations operate.

The assessment of LGBT organisations was guided by considering internal organisational strength and external networking and alliance-building performance. Guiding factors for evaluating internal organisational strength were: • Ability to formally register/organise (particularly in hostile environments) • Ability to implement/achieve stated objectives • Effectiveness, including:

• Continued existence; successful fundraising; ability to mobilise and manage financial resources;

• Succession plans; ability to retain and attract skilled staff; • Appropriate staff skills development; developing new levels/layers of leadership; • The dispersal of skills and capacities throughout the organisation.

These factors were used as indicators of the effects of the efforts of LGBT organisations that serve LGBT people in one way or another, i.e. directly: through the provision of services to LGBT people; indirectly: through lobbying and advocacy efforts.

At the level of external networking and alliance-building, changes relating to strategic partnerships, networking and exchanging with other LGBT and non-LGBT organisations were key considerations.

Central to the activities of LGBT organisations and the effects of their work in the lives of LGBT people and society at large, Hivos’ efforts are evaluated as the backdrop against which to view these changes, in particular in relation to the provision of: a. Direct support b. Indirect support, through:

• Raising LGBT issues, and encouraging non-LGBT partners to take up LGBT issues; • The facilitation of networking and exchanges.

2.3.2.1 Relevance: Connecting partner organisations to LGBT emancipation

This evaluation concerns itself with the retrospective question of relevance, measuring the interventions of LGBT organisations in relation to the goal of LGBT emancipation. Organisations were categorised according to the degree to which they focus on each emancipation dimension: a – LGBT people, c – public attitudes and d – structural and institutional arrangements of society, and, as stated in the DAC definition earlier, “whether the objectives of an intervention or its design are still appropriate given changed circumstances.” By virtue of their existence, all organisations are already engaged in the process of dimension b – organisation building.

2.3.2.2 Effectiveness

In order to rate the effectiveness of organisations, an effectiveness system allowing for the scoring of organisations was generated. The emancipation dimensions were expanded into categories of activity to which scores were allocated for the actual performance of an organisation, as opposed to its capacity to perform.

11

Effectiveness Rating Scale

8 – highly effective: skilful and creative use of resources to achieve objectives; positive performance with related positive results 7 – very effective: skilled use of resources to achieve objectives; positive performance with positive linked results. 6 – reasonably effective: practical use of resources to achieve objectives; signs of positive performance with related positive results. 5 – moderately effective: average use of resources to achieve objectives; signs of positive performance with positive results. 4 – satisfactorily effective: modest use of resources to achieve objectives; acceptable signs of positive performance. 3 – functionally effective: ad hoc use of resources; some signs of positive performance. 2 – functionally ineffective: disjointed and limited use of available resources; few signs of positive operational performance. 1 – ineffective: inadequate/incompetent use of resources; little sign of positive operational performance. 0 – poor: stagnant; no sign of positive operational performance. Categories of organisational activity: LGBT people a. The organisation reaches its target audience. b. The organisation keeps (statistical) records of LGBT members/ beneficiaries/users of services. c. Activities reflect an understanding of the (changing needs of the) target audience. d. Reaches the most marginalised of LGBT people. e. Increased number of LGBT people participating in organisational activities or accessing services. f. Activities have enhanced skills/have a positive effect on the lives of members/

beneficiaries/clients. Internal organisation building a. The organisation has clearly defined objectives. b. The organisation develops clear strategies to achieve objectives. c. The organisation implements its strategies. d. The organisation matches plans/strategies with outputs or goals. e. The organisation has the required staff capacity to implement its activities. f. Financial resources are effectively mobilised and managed for organisational activities. g. Appropriate remuneration packages retain and attract skilled staff. h. Appropriate and operational governance structures. i. Staff development plans are in place for new layers of leadership. j. Management styles that build staff morale and strengthen performance are practiced. k. The organisation is involved in a process of self-evaluation, which feeds into plans, strategies and

activities, and reinvents itself as the context demands. External alliance building a. Participates in joint activities with other LGBT organisations/proactively works to build strategic

alliances. b. Participates in joint activities with other human rights organisations. c. Initiates strategic links with other organisations. Activities toward social attitude change a. Implements a clear strategy for ‘normalising’ LGBT people in public sphere. b. Promotes positive visibility of LGBT people. c. Positive shifts in how other (human rights) organisations view LGBT issues. Activities toward institutional/structural change a. Changes in policy and legislation as a result of lobbying and advocacy efforts.

12

2.4 Scope Unlike other programme evaluations where only a sample of organisations are usually selected for evaluation, it was decided that Hivos’ entire LGBT portfolio for the period and region would be included in the study to get a clear (and comparable) sense of change over the period. All Hivos’ conscious efforts toward LGBT emancipation in the southern African countries South Africa, Zimbabwe, Namibia, Botswana, Mozambique, Malawi and Zambia are considered (For detail, see Chapter 3).

2.5 Data Collection

2.5.1 Sources of Information

In order to answer the 5 research questions, relevant information was gathered from a range of sources, including people and documents. The data gathered from these sources represents LGBT people, society’s attitudes and structures, LGBT organisations, their (sometimes potential) partners, and Hivos.

In addition to including all organisations that formed part of this Hivos portfolio during the 1995 – 2006 period, using a range of different sources allowed for triangulation of information. (For the complete list of sources and resources, see Annex 1).

The team worked at establishing demonstrable verifications of the findings presented in this report. Verification did not always occur in the same area for each of the organisations or country contexts.

By triangulating the information from documents gathered and reviewed, interviews with various stakeholders (including staff, LGBT beneficiaries/members/clients, LGBT and non-LGBT partners, other members of society, and Hivos staff), and the media study, the evaluation team was led to findings on the reach, effectiveness and relevance of interventions for the goal of LGBT emancipation.

The following two tables illustrate which tools have been employed to source information per emancipation dimension and per country.

13

Table 1: Sources of information for emancipation di mensions Source of Information

LGBT people

Society Organisation building

Attitudes Structures Externally Internally LGBT people ● ●

LGBT organisations (staff & board)

● ● ● ● ●

Non-LGBT people/general public

● ●

Media practitioners ● ● ●

Media reports ● ● ● ●

Video material ● ●

Organisational evaluations, reports & publications

● ● ● ● ●

Existing LGBT research

● ● ● ● ●

Policy and legal documents

● ● ●

Hivos staff ● ● ● ●

Hivos trip reports ● ● ●

Hivos policy documents

● ● ●

Hivos organisational assessments

● ● ●

Human rights organisations

● ● ● ●

Women’s organisations

● ● ●

Other donors ● ●

Church representatives

● ●

Independent researchers

● ● ● ● ●

General public ● ● ●

Other key informants ● ● ● ●

14

Table 2: Sources per country SA6 Zim Nam Bots Moz Mal Zam

Written Materials

Hivos policy documents7

x x x x x x x

Hivos trip reports × × × × × ×

Hivos organisational assessments

x x x x x

Organisational evaluations & reports

x x x x

Existing LGBT research

x x x

Media content x x x x x x x

Video material x x

Legislation x x x x x x x

People LGBT people x x x x x x x

LGBT Organisational staff

x x x x x x

LGBT organisation – board members

x x x

Media practitioners

x x x

Human rights organisations

x x x x x x

Women’s/gender organisations

x x x x

Other donors x x x x

Church representatives

x x x

Independent researchers

x x x

General public x x x x x x x

Hivos staff x x x x x x x

2.5.1.1 People

LGBT people: beneficiaries were reached through LGBT organisations and further-flung LGBT people were reached through existing in/formal networks and events that Hivos LGBT partners were involved in. LGBT people from all of the seven countries were interviewed.8 Organisational staff of LGBT organisations: all relevant programme staff were interviewed during field visits. LGBT organisation board members were accessed through LGBT organisations and a minimum of two were interviewed per organisation.

6 It is important to bear in mind that the figures for South Africa are high for three reasons: 1. the total number of

organisations supported (7 of a total of 11); 2. the subsequent numbers of people reached; 3. the total amount spent.

7 Hivos policy documents are relevant for all organisations. 8 The names of a number of LGBT informants have been changed to protect their identities. Unless otherwise

stated, those of out LGBT people have not been changed, along with those of non-LGBT key informants.

15

Media practitioners: journalists who have publicised LGBT issues in South Africa, Zimbabwe and Namibia and those who have shown a resistance to publicising LGBT issues were approached, based on findings of the media study. Human rights organisations: partner organisations of the LGBT organisations studied and Hivos partners, as well as other key human rights organisations were interviewed. Women’s/gender organisations: these included partner organisations of the LGBT organisations studied, and of Hivos, as well as other key women’s/gender organisations. Other donors: funding agencies (other than Hivos) that have funded/are funding/or are considering funding LGBT projects or programmes in the southern African region were interviewed. Clergy were accessed through networks and LGBT people and organisations. As with human rights and women’s organisations, this group included both sympathetic and unsympathetic religious representatives. Researchers who have done studies on LGBT life in some of the countries included in the study were interviewed. Members of the general public were surveyed to get a sense of general attitudes to LGBT life and issues. Emails were circulated through various networks to direct people to the public attitudes online survey (see 2.5.2.6. b. below). Hivos staff: interviews were conducted with relevant staff at Hivos Head Office (HO) in The Hague; and programme staff at Hivos Regional Office (RO) in Harare.

2.5.1.2 Written Materials

• Hivos policy documents9 • Hivos trip reports • Hivos organisational assessments • LGBT organisational evaluations and reports • LGBT organisational research documents • Existing LGBT research • Media content • Legislation

2.5.1.3 Other

• LGBT video material that included documentaries and short films were sourced from the Gay and Lesbian Library housed at GALA and the Out in Africa film archive.

2.5.2 Tools for Sourcing Information

2.5.2.1 Document Study

The overall purposes of the document study were to: • understand Hivos’ LGBT policy in action; • consider Hivos’ application of its LGBT policy and map out the southern African portfolio; • understand the contexts, roles, objectives, activities and capacities of LGBT partner organisations

in relation to Hivos’ interventions; • track Hivos’ LGBT-related activities from 1995 to 2006. The document study consisted of the following kinds of materials: 9 The particular documents are listed in Annex 1: Sources of Information.

16

• Research about LGBT life to ascertain a progression line of notable events during the period 1995 - 2006: empirical and desk-based research studies; journal articles; Gay and Lesbian Archives (GALA) video and print files. Archival material from 1993 onwards was reviewed in order to inform the context in which Hivos’ LGBT programme started.

• Correspondence between and among LGBT and human rights organisations during specific periods (e.g. Zimbabwe 1995 ban on GALZ, statements by Hivos and other organisations; strategic planning of TRP).

• Project plans, proposals, Hivos organisational assessments, organisational evaluations, reports: a review of Hivos’ guiding policies; partner organisation project documents, plans, proposals, reports; Hivos internal trip reports; organisational and project evaluations were reviewed to analyse intentions and plans against results and outcomes.

• Relevant archival materials (including legislation and policy documents) and published research, sourced from GALA and other researchers, were used to understand the social contexts over the period in the seven countries studied.

• Newspaper articles: articles archived at GALA, BtM, online newspaper sites, and from LGBT organisations for all of the countries in the study for the period 1995 – 2006 were gathered. While articles about South Africa, Zimbabwe and Namibia were available for the whole period, as well as – in the case of South Africa – earlier decades, this was not the case for the other countries. As with the research reports, newspaper articles for 1993 and 1994 were drawn on to inform the background context at the beginning of the period under study.

The media content analysis component of the document study was used to track country and region-specific shifts and changes in the discourse around LGBT emancipation over the period, regarding policy and institutional changes in terms of LGBT rights, attitudes toward LGBT people, the representation of LGBT people and signs of LGBT participation in the public sphere. This aspect of the desk study provided the opportunity to consider the nature of media coverage of LGBT issues in these countries, and the presence, participation and profiles of partner organisations in raising or supporting such debate in the public sphere.

2.5.2.2 Observations/field visits

Early discussions with LGBT informants and a preliminary workshop (with Hivos staff, Hivos country consultants and two members of GALZ) in Harare in February 2006 provided a basis for the analytical framework of this PE. It was made clear that because of the secretive and silenced nature of LGBT movements and people in many of the countries to be studied, signs of change would be most markedly sourced through personal life stories and experiences of LGBT people themselves.

This focus on the experiences of individuals necessitated space and time for intensive individual interviews and focus group discussions.

Field visits to Zimbabwe, Namibia, Botswana and South Africa made it possible to assess the contexts within which LGBT organisations operated, engaged with their communities and other target audiences, including other civil society organisations.10 During these visits interviews were held with key informants (that included policy makers, activists, donors, clergy, media, women’s, gender, human rights and HIV/AIDS organisations) to more clearly sketch a picture of the specific realities that determined possibilities towards or away from LGBT emancipation in each context.

Field visits consisted of the following elements: • Individual interviews with key programme staff; • Focus group discussions and individual interviews with LGBT beneficiaries/members or clients of

organisations; • Individual interviews with governing board members of LGBT organisations;

10 ‘Community’ is used here to refer to both the membership/beneficiaries of organisations, and the immediate

locale of organisations.

17

• Visits to outlying satellite and support groups facilitated by organisations; • Observations of material resources, activities of organisations, interpersonal interactions within

organisations, organisational processes; • Interviews with other funders; • HIV/AIDS, women’s, gender and general human rights organisations; • Key informants, both connected with and unconnected with LGBT organisations (non-LGBT

partners, mainstream and community media, (un)sympathetic others, community leaders like clergy, teachers).

2.5.2.3 Interviews

Interviews with LGBT members/beneficiaries/clients of organisations were held face-to-face either individually or in the form of focus group discussions and structured around open-ended questions in order to illicit in-depth responses about people’s experiences, perceptions, knowledge, feelings and opinions. Similarly, interviews were conducted with: • relevant Hivos staff; • relevant staff and volunteers of LGBT organisations/groups; • board members of LGBT organisations; • media workers; • key informants (activists, policy makers, academics, public servants, clergy); • human rights, women’s, HIV/AIDS organisations, and • other donors. This tool yielded verbatim quotations from which inferences were drawn to elucidate conclusions and information from other sources of information. Interviews garnered first-hand experiences, and allowed the researchers to observe the extent to which individuals and groups were shaped by their local contexts. A total of 310 people were interviewed face to face.11

a. Focus group discussions

Focus groups were held with LGBT beneficiaries/clients/members of Hivos-supported LGBT organisations. Each focus group followed a similar format. Participants responded to a range of questions related to their experiences, needs, and perceptions. A total of 216 LGBT people took part in 16 focus groups. Findings from focus groups are based upon recurring themes related to the research questions.

b. Telephonic interviews

Telephonic interviews were conducted with LGBT people in Malawi, Mozambique and Zambia, as well as other key informants who could not be interviewed face-to-face. 28 telephonic interviews were conducted.

2.5.2.4 Surveys

a. LGBT Beneficiaries/Clients/Members

As a means of sourcing information on the make-up of the target audiences of LGBT organisations, a written questionnaire was developed and circulated to LGBT people through Hivos-supported LGBT organisations in the region. The primary objective of using the questionnaire was to ensure that the experiences and insights of members and beneficiaries who would not be reached during the field visits were included.

11 This figure includes the 216 people who participated in focus groups and the 94 individuals interviewed face-

to-face.

18

Out in Africa (OiA), being a film festival, and not having members or beneficiaries in the same way as other LGBT organisations, disseminated an online electronic version of the paper-based beneficiaries questionnaire through their website. The online link was also emailed to OiA’s electronic database of film festival goers. This yielded 253 online responses.

Behind the Mask (BtM), an ICT initiative, also mailed the online link to their database, resulting in 13 responses. 7 respondents who use GALA’s facilities, 10 respondents from OUT, and 31 respondents using Triangle’s services responded to the online version of the beneficiary questionnaire. A total of 314 online LGBT beneficiary responses were received – a much higher response rate than envisaged – requiring unplanned-for time and resources to analyse the wealth of data gathered.

OiA circulated the paper beneficiaries questionnaire at three of their satellite gay and lesbian film festivals, (targeted at under-resourced LGBT people) that took place outside of metropolitan areas. Responses were gathered from the small town of Ermelo and the towns of Kimberley and Pietermaritzburg in this way. This meant that the voices and experiences of 255 LGBT people outside of the main cities like Johannesburg and Cape Town were included, thereby enriching and diversifying the range of perspectives and realities in the responses gathered.

36 written beneficiaries questionnaires were also returned from GALZ, 26 from The Rainbow Project (TRP), 9 from Legabibo, 43 from GALA, 46 from Triangle and 21 from the Durban Centre.

On the assumption that this tool would yield in the region of 70 responses, the amount of time budgeted for analysis did not match the 436 written responses received in total from organisations during the field visits.12

b. Public Attitudes Survey

An embargoed 1995 study on public attitudes to homosexuality in South Africa, uncovered during information-gathering in the GALA archive, prompted the design of a second experimental questionnaire to get an initial sense of public attitudes to homosexuality in the southern African region.

As a non-central adjunct to interviews, this public attitudes survey was posted online13 and the URL was disseminated to non-LGBT organisations (independently, and through Hivos-supported organisations, various key informants and other networks).

The intention of this survey was to reach those both sympathetic and unsympathetic to LGBT rights issues to get a sense of prevailing attitudes. This online survey yielded 532 responses.

12 OUT did not disseminate (or return) any questionnaires completed by beneficiaries/members/clients. 13 Taking into account the limitations of who does and does not have online access. See 2.6.3 below

19

Information about Tool applied SA Zim Nam Bots Moz Mal Zam Knowledge, experience and operationalisation of LGBT policy; History of interventions & related challenges and successes (relevance, effectiveness, reach)

Individual interviews: Hivos staff ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Organisation building; alliance building (reach, effectiveness)

Individual interviews: staff of LGBT organisations/groups

● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Organisation building; alliance building (effectiveness)

Individual interviews: board members of LGBT organisation

● ● ●

LGBT people; social attitudes towards LGBT people (reach) Quality of services of LGBT organisation (effectiveness)

Focus group interviews ● ● ● ●

LGBT people; social attitudes towards LGBT people (reach) Quality and relevance of services of LGBT organisation (effectiveness)

Individual interviews: LGBT beneficiaries/clients/members

● ● ● ● ● ●

Reach; social attitudes; effectiveness of LGBT organisation

Individual interviews: media organisations ● ● ●

Social attitudes toward LGBT people; Policy & legislation regarding LGBT people

Individual interviews: key informants (activists, policy makers, academics, public servants, clergy)

● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Links with LGBT organisations and non-LGBT organisations; alliance building (effectiveness; reach)

Interviews: human rights, women’s, HIV/AIDS orgs

● ● ● ● ●

LGBT organisation (effectiveness; reach) Individual interviews: other donors ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Context Material resources (adequacy of physical space, equipment, in-house data resources); Interpersonal relations/management styles; Organisational processes; Interactions with TAs; Interactions with community of location

Observations/field visits ● ● ● ●

Demographics on LGBT beneficiaries (reach); Needs of LGBT beneficiaries; Gaps regarding LGBT beneficiary needs; Social attitudes towards LGBT people; (effectiveness of LGBT organisation; reach; relevance)

Questionnaire 1: LGBT beneficiaries – online

● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Attitudes towards LGBT people Questionnaire 2: General public – online

● ● ● ● ● ● ●

GALA archive; organisational press clippings files, BtM archive Track country changes of discourses around LGBT emancipation; Presence of LGBT organisation/s; Social attitudes toward LGBT people (reach, effectiveness, attitudes)

Media content ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Context: social attitudes; Quality of materials (reach, social attitudes, effectiveness of organisation

Archival documents: research, correspondence, media statements

● ● ● ● ●

Compare intentions against outputs and outcomes (reach, effectiveness)

Desk study: project plans, proposals, Hivos organisational assessments, organisational evaluations, reports

● ● ● ● ● ● ●

20

Focus Groups

Individual Interviews

Telephone & Email

Interviews

Public Attitudes Online Survey

Beneficiaries Online Survey

Beneficiaries Written Survey

TOTALS

OiA - 6 - - 253 255 514 NCGLE - 3 - - - - 3 GALA 24 10 - - 7 43 84 BtM - 6 - - 13 - 19 OUT 19 6 - - 10 - 35 Durban Centre 23 5 - - - 21 49 Triangle 37 7 - - 31 46 121 FEW14 15 5 - - - - 20

PMB 19 3 - - - - 22

SA Country Context

- 29 3 389 - - 421

GALZ 24 5 - - - 36 65 Zimbabwe Country Context

- 10 2 41 - - 53

TRP 27 5 - - - 26 58 Sister Namibia 11 2 - - 13

Namibia Country Context

- 9 1 66 - - 76

Legabibo 17 2 - - - 9 28 Botswana Country Context

- 5 1 29 - - 35

Zambia Country Context

- - 3 - - - 3

LAMBDA - - 5 - - - 5 Mozambique Country Context

- 3 4 - - - 7

CEDEP - - 3 - - - 3 Malawi Country Context

- - 6 7 - - 13

TOTALS 216 121 28 532 314 436 1647

14 Although supported indirectly under the Hivos-Synergos capacity-building Programmem, focus group

sessions and individual interviews were held at The Forum for the Empowerment of Women (FEW), and the Pietermaritzburg Network of Gays and Lesbians, both South African LGBT organisations.

Each tool yielded the following returns: Focus groups – 216 Individual face-to-face interviews – 121 Telephone and email interviews – 28 Public attitudes online survey – 532 LGBT beneficiaries online survey – 314 LGBT beneficiaries written survey – 436 Total: 1647

21

2.6 History and Limitations of the Process The following route of activities was traced by the evaluation: 1. Preliminary discussions and a workshop in Harare, including all Hivos RO programme staff,

resource persons from GALZ, and Hivos’ country consultants provided guidelines for the analytical framework (February 2006);

2. Drafting and preliminary testing of the analytical framework (March 2006); 3. Initial interviews with key Hivos HO staff, and ex-staff (March – May 2006); 4. Agreement on the analytical framework and core concepts (May 2006); 5. Information-gathering visit to GALA (June 2006); 6. Information-gathering of research materials and relevant Hivos documents (June – July 2006); 7. Drafting and testing of data collection tools (June – July 2006); 8. Desk study of collected documents (June – August 2006); 9. Disseminating LGBT beneficiary survey questionnaires to LGBT organisations (August 2006); 10. Setting up electronic versions of LGBT beneficiary and public attitudes survey questionnaires;

advising LGBT and non-LGBT networks of the online surveys (August 2006); 11. Focus group planning and design (August 2006); 12. Field visits and interviews (August – December 2006):

12.1 Zimbabwe: Gays and Lesbians of Zimbabwe (GALZ), focus groups, media, clergy, human rights organisations, women’s organisations, key informant interviews (26 August – 7 September 2006);

12.2 Namibia: The Rainbow Project (TRP), focus groups, media, clergy, human rights organisations, women’s organisations, key informant interviews (11 – 16 September 2006);

12.3 Botswana: Lesbians Gays and Bisexuals of Botswana (Legabibo), human rights organisations, HIV/AIDS key informants (19 – 22 September 2006);

12.4 Reading of focus group transcripts and determining themes for analysis (26 September – 6 October 2006);

12.5 Preliminary analysis of written questionnaires returned from GALZ, TRP and Legabibo (26 September – 6 October 2006);

12.6 Preliminary categorisation of key terms from interviews (26 September – 6 October 2006); 12.7 South Africa: Gay and Lesbian Archives (GALA), Forum for the Empowerment of Women

(FEW), Behind the Mask (BtM), OUT, Pietermaritzburg Network of Gays and Lesbians (Pmb Network), Durban Lesbian and Gay Community Health Centre (Durban Centre), Out in Africa (OiA), Triangle Project, focus groups, media, clergy, human rights organisations, women’s organisations, HIV/AIDS organisations, key informant interviews (13 October – 21 November 2006);

12.8 Telephonic and email interviews: Malawi, Mozambique and Zambia LGBT groups, other key informants (23 November – 15 December 2006);

13. Analysing samples of questionnaires (December 2006); 14. Analysing field data (December 2006 – January 2007); 15. Writing first draft report and conducting follow-up telephonic and email interviews (January

2007); 16. Writing first draft report (submitted 31 January 2007); 17. Presentations of findings and feedback discussions of first draft report at Hivos The Hague and

Harare (12 – 20 February 2007); 18. Analysing all remaining questionnaires and field data (February – March 2007); 19. Writing second draft report (March – April 2007, submitted May 2007); 20. Relevant sections of the report circulated to partner LGBT organisations and Hivos staff for

comment and feedback (May 2007; comments returned end July 2007); 21. Integrating comments and feedback into final report (September 2007); 22. Completion of final report: October 2007. This study considers the entire population of southern African LGBT organisations and initiatives supported by Hivos during the period 1995 – 2006 in all seven countries, resulting in a dense collection of analysable qualitative and quantitative data from LGBT people and organisations, general

22

human rights and women’s organisations (to better understand the contexts and linkages between LGBT and other civil society and social justice organisations), media organisations, and interviews with LGBT aligned and non-aligned individuals. The estimated four weeks allocated for the document study proved to be grossly underestimated. Field visits were set to begin by mid-July 2006, and the occurrences of the Gay Games, the Out Games and the Toronto World HIV/AIDS Conference meant that the majority of LGBT leaders were away during that time, delaying the start of the field visits by five weeks, providing necessary additional time for undertaking the desk study.

Despite the additional time, the sheer volume of materials gathered – not foreseen during the planning phase – presented the challenge of doing it justice within the time available.

2.6.1 Field visits

Initially, field data collection was to start with a pilot case study of Zimbabwe to test the data collection tools and analytical framework for appropriateness. With the delay in starting the field visits (as a result of organisational leaders’ participation in the international events mentioned above) the plan to conduct a pilot study was shelved, and field visits to Zimbabwe, Namibia, Botswana and South Africa were instead conducted consecutively between late August and late November 2006.

The numbers of board members and key informants interviewed varied in the seven countries. Because the bulk of Hivos interventions were directed at South Africa, Zimbabwe, Namibia and, to a much lesser degree, Botswana, these countries were visited, with the higher number of interviews and focus groups in South Africa based on the fact that 7 out of the 11 organisations supported by Hivos were in that country.

In the cases of Mozambique, Malawi and Zambia, where incipient steps had been taken, telephonic and electronic interviews were conducted. In Malawi and Zambia – because of the fears of individuals of being discovered to be, or associated with LGBT people – in some cases, interviews were conducted with LGBT informants who preferred to remain anonymous to the researchers.

2.6.2 Language

Interviews were conducted almost entirely in English with the exceptions of Namibia and parts of South Africa, where Afrikaans (Namibia) was used, isiZulu (Durban Centre, South Africa), and isiXhosa (Triangle, South Africa). The Afrikaans interviews were conducted directly (i.e. without an intermediary like an interpreter), and statements were recorded as such and translated into English for this report.

For those focus groups in Cape Town and Durban that were conducted in isiXhosa and isiZulu an interpreter was used to translate questions and answers, and English translations of answers were used for this report.

The interview with GALA’s deaf programme coordinator – a deaf man himself – was facilitated by a sign language interpreter.

Because of the need for translators and interpreters, the focus group sessions in Cape Town and Durban, and the interview with GALA’s deaf programme coordinator took longer, and additional time was spent to make arrangements with and for interpreters.

Media Study

Media articles were sourced from GALA and BtM’s extensive media archives, through other online archives, and from press clippings from LGBT organisations.

23

Articles from Mozambique were available only in Portuguese. English summaries of a sample of articles were done by a Mozambican translator. While this meant that direct quotes were not possible, the summaries provided sufficient information for analysis. South African articles far outweighed articles about/from the other countries, and it was decided to draw on a random selection of articles for the South Africa analysis as it was beyond the scope of this evaluation to analyse all of the articles available.

2.6.3 Online Surveys

a. General Public

The decision to use electronic online questionnaires to gauge public attitudes to LGBT people, rights and issues, stemmed from the desire to cross-validate contextual information sourced from individual and focus group interviews, with external informants who were not linked to LGBT groupings. The online medium was chosen because this adjunct research was not budgeted for, and the online medium presented an opportunity to gather some initial perspectives from members of the public, despite its access limitations. It was assumed that because of the relative anonymity of the online medium, respondents would respond more honestly than they would in person. The 532 completed general public attitudes questionnaires – a number far exceeding estimations – took considerably more time than anticipated to analyse. The majority of general public online responses came from South Africa (67%), reflecting the structural and economic realities of South Africa in relation to the other countries of southern Africa, that in this case reveals itself in terms of who has easy online access and who does not. Recognising the realities of expensive, often unstable internet connections that could hamper other southern Africans’ ability to complete the questionnaire in detail, and the fact that the elitist nature of the tool would, in particular, exclude many women (68% of those who participated in the online public attitude survey were male), care was taken to attempt to balance this skewed reality, while bearing in mind that this tool played an adjunct role in the data collection process.

b. LGBT People

For LGBT people like those attending the main OiA film festivals, the written survey was posted online, since physical access to festival goers was only possible through film festivals, or via email databases. The link to the online version of the LGBT beneficiaries questionnaire was distributed to OiA’s database of festival goers and to other LGBT organisations and groups to reach some of those beneficiaries that would not be reached directly. The unexpected resultant 314 responses to the online questionnaire took a considerable amount of unbudgeted time to analyse.

24

3. Support to LGBT emancipation in southern Africa

3.1 Hivos’ LGBT Policy As a secular organisation grounded in humanist principles, Hivos works to contribute to a free, fair and sustainable world in which all citizens have equal access to resources, opportunities and markets, and one in which they can actively participate in decision-making processes that determine their lives, society and future.

In this Hivos has two core activities – funding, and political support to civil society organisations and initiatives that share its goals – around which a number of themes are clustered. These themes are: • Financial Services & Enterprise Development, • Sustainable Production, • Arts & Culture, • ICT, Media & Knowledge Sharing, • Gender, Women & Development, • HIV/AIDS, and • Human Rights & Democratisation. Located in the human rights policy of the organisation – which identifies a need for attention to the human rights of vulnerable and marginalised groups in society – Hivos’ work includes deliberate support to those discriminated against on the basis of their sexual orientation.

The Hivos Human Rights policy document formally states its commitment to LGBT emancipation, and further stipulates those areas of LGBT emancipation that are of particular concern to Hivos:

All people have the right to choose a sexual orientation without being stigmatised. In addition to the right to non-discrimination, specific concerns of GLBT people are the right to health and other social services, to security of person, to freedoms of expression and association, and to participate/be represented in public affairs. (bold text added) The 1999 Memorandum on Policy Implementation for Gay and Lesbian Emancipation in the South makes it clear that Hivos’ main objective in this area is “…to promote the emancipation of homosexual15 men and women in the South.”

It is against this background that the central question of this evaluation is posed: To what degree did Hivos’ interventions in the period 1995 – 2006 contribute to LGBT emancipation in southern Africa?

3.2 Hivos’ Efforts: policy in practice In translating its LGBT policy into practice, Hivos identified the following four key areas of activity: • To focus on identifying the sphere of influence/potential of the gay/lesbian movement in the

South; • To promote and support organisation building, network development and communication of/

between organisations/activists; • To raise awareness among general human rights organisations to take up LGBT issues; • To be proactive in supporting processes towards LGBT emancipation.

15 In the context of this report ‘homosexual’ is understood to refer to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender

people as a group.

25

In order to work toward achieving the kinds of emancipation envisioned in its policies, at an institutional level, Hivos has committed to providing core support to identified LGBT organisations and projects, support for activities that strengthen networking, lobbying and knowledge sharing at international, regional and national levels, and allocating a targeted 2% of available Co-financing funds to LGBT emancipation (by 2001).16

When Hivos’ LGBT policy was defined in 1999, spending targets were set with the aim of committing 2% of available co-financing funds to LGBT emancipation endeavours. For the period 1996-2004 the percentage effectively spent on LGBT emancipation activities was 1.8% (in southern Africa). In 2001, 2.2% of funds administered by the Harare RO were spent on LGBT emancipation activities, and for the year 2004 it amounted to 2.3% counting only funds administered by the Harare office.17 (For a detailed breakdown of funds disbursed, see Annex 3).

Given Hivos’ principal activities of funding and political support to civil society organisations and initiatives that share its goals, Hivos’ main activity in relation to LGBT organisations has been financial support in contexts where it was often the only or the first donor to support such work. Through its leadership, Hivos support to LGBT organisations and networks has often opened the way for other donors to recognise discrimination against sexual minorities as human rights issues, and to join in supporting LGBT emancipatory agendas.

An important aspect of Hivos support, particularly in contexts where heads of state and other political (and religious) leaders have spread homophobia in the public sphere – such as in the cases of Zimbabwe, Namibia and Zambia – has been (in addition to financial support) providing political and moral support to LGBT emancipatory efforts. In contexts where movements or informal groupings were recognising the need to move towards more formalised organisations, Hivos has played an advisory support role with the objective of strengthening existing and new organisations to more effectively carry out their stated objectives.

Encouraging general human rights organisations to lobby and advocate for the protection of LGBT rights as human rights was identified as a policy strategy for Hivos to pro-actively promote LGBT emancipation as part of rights-based agendas with existing and new programme partners. This area of work has had mixed results based on contextual realities that have made it either possible or impossible to lobby and advocate for rights-based approaches to LGBT emancipation. In some cases such as in South Africa and Namibia, human and women’s rights organisation already saw the need to engage with LGBT rights issues as human rights issues, making it unnecessary for Hivos to lobby such partners. In other contexts, such as in Zimbabwe and Zambia, some Hivos non-LGBT partners expressed reluctance to engage in LGBT issues citing contextual socio-cultural and political discomforts among others.

While Hivos’ LGBT policy was initiated by staff that recognised the discrimination sexual minorities faced in many life-defining contexts, the policy, over time has come to be firmly rooted within Hivos’ work towards the goal of a world in which all citizens have the same rights and freedoms in determining their life agendas. Institutionalising its LGBT emancipation policy internally has taken various forms, including, for example, the Harare Regional Office (RO) staff recruitment processes that specifically explore what level of priority LGBT emancipatory agendas would receive (in the context of several worthy initiatives competing for the same resources) when potential staff are being recruited. Internalising and embedding its LGBT policy has not been an uncontested process, and at Hivos’ Harare RO, when LGBT issues were first raised during the mid-nineties within the context of 16 This target was met by 2001, by which time 2.2% of RO funds had been spent in support of LGBT

emancipation. 17 For some RO staff the cultural context vs. work policy creates personal conflicts and challenges between

existing, lived cultural frameworks and Hivos’ LGBT policy to some extent limiting the depth of engagement with LGBT organisations.

26

Zimbabwe and South Africa, arguments for the support of LGBT issues initially met with resistance from local staff, creating tensions between local and international staff, in this case with international staff18 (some of whom were same-sex oriented) coming from contexts within which LGBT rights were understood as human rights issues, and local staff reflecting discomforts about the appropriateness of LGBT rights activism in African contexts, citing religious, political and cultural reasons. An ongoing and deliberate process of dialogue about the LGBT policy, lead by the two regional directors at the Harare RO who served over the time period covering the scope of this PE, has resulted in staff engaging more openly with LGBT issues, recognising the importance of supporting the human rights of sexual minorities as marginalised group. The socio-cultural contexts in which staff find themselves in the Zimbabwean context, are however, still resistant to the idea of LGBT rights. This has had the effect of creating internal personal conflicts between existing cultural frameworks and Hivos’ LGBT policy for some local staff.

The LGBT organisations supported by Hivos engage at different levels and have different priorities in terms of the emancipation dimensions discussed in Chapter 2. Having a clear sense of where the activities of LGBT organisations are targeted makes it possible to begin to create causal links between activities and their outcomes, as well as identifying any gaps that require proactive responses.

The following table presents the emancipation dimensions weighted according to the priority area or main activities of each organisation. A, B, C and D represent the priority levels at which emancipation dimensions are located for an organisation.

A – main priority B – next level of activity/priority C – indirect activity D – not engaged in by the organisation While priority levels have been assigned to each organisation in terms of its prioritising of internal organisational building, each of the LGBT organisations are de facto involved in internal organisational building. When it comes to measuring the effectiveness of organisations, this emancipation dimension is included for all organisations, followed by activities directed at particular emancipation dimensions.

Table 4: Priorities of LGBT organisations Organisation/Project LGBT People Society Organisation

building

Attitudes Structures External Internal

Out in Africa (ZA) A A D B C

NCGLE (ZA) B B A B C

GALA (ZA) A B C A B

BtM (ZA) A B D A B

OUT (ZA) A B B B C

Triangle Project (ZA) A B C C B

Durban LGBT Centre (ZA) A B C B C

GALZ (Zimbabwe) A B C C C

The Rainbow Project (Namibia) A B C B C

LeGaBiBo (Botswana) A B C C C

CEDEP (Malawi) B A C C C

LAMBDA (Mozambique) A B C D B

Secondary support19 D D D A A

18 Ex-staff who worked at the Harare office at this time noted that supporters of the LGBT policy being Dutch

nationals served to assert the notion that LGBT rights agendas were a ‘Western’ issue, not an African one. 19 This refers to the South Africa capacity-building programme that Hivos, Atlantic Philanthropies and Synergos

27

This table illustrates that only one of the organisations supported by Hivos had the direct objective of targeting the institutional structures of society as their primary focus. Overall, the main focus of the emancipation activities of organisations is at the level of LGBT individuals, with a secondary focus on working toward attitude change in society at large. Given high levels of homophobia in these country contexts, a focus on LGBT people and attitude change is understandable.

Hivos’ support to LGBT organisations in the southern African region amounts to a total of 11 organisations and 1 regional initiative, the Coalition of African Lesbians (CAL). As part of its commitment to strengthening networking and communications between activists and organisations, Hivos provided support to the ILGA conference held in Johannesburg in 1999, and the conference of the International Association for the Study of Sexuality and Culture (IASSC), the Sex and Secrecy Conference in Johannesburg in 2003.

Recognising that internal and external organisational capacity-building among South African LGBT organisations needed strengthening, Hivos currently provides support through a capacity-building initiative for South African LGBT organisations via a partnership arrangement with two other funders, Atlantic Philanthropies (AP) and Synergos.

Funding and other support to partner LGBT organisations have centred on South Africa, Zimbabwe and Namibia. In these contexts, support has taken the form of financial, political and moral support towards organisation-building, in earlier years, assisting transitions from movements to establishing institutions. Hivos’ activities in Botswana, Mozambique, Malawi and Zambia are considerably different to those in the three other countries, having taken the form of regularly raising the awareness of LGBT issues among human rights organisations, and attempts to elicit debate on LGBT rights and identify potential LGBT groups and organisations sympathetic to LGBT issues. In Malawi and Mozambique the results of these activities began to bear fruit in 2006.

The following map is a visual representation of Hivos’ southern Africa portfolio.20

are supporting in partnership.

20 The National Coalition for Gay and Lesbian Equality (NCGLE) was operational between 1995 and 2000.

28

Map 1: Hivos’ Portfolio in southern Africa

Country LGBT Initiative Years supported Amounts in €

South Africa Out in Africa 1994, 2001, 2004 – 2006 187 000

NCGLE 1995 – 2000 342 000

GALA 1996 – 2005 292 000

Behind the Mask 1999 – 2005 223 000

OUT 2000 – 2006 270 000

Durban Centre 2005 – 2006 45 000

Triangle Project 2005 – 2006 100 000

Zimbabwe GALZ 1996 – 2006 737 00021

Namibia The Rainbow Project 1997, 1999 – 2005 286 000

Botswana Legabibo 2005 11 000

Zambia Legatra 1999 9 000

Mozambique LAMBDA 2006 10 000

Malawi CEDEP 2006 10 000

Regional Initiatives

All Africa Exchange Programme (via GALZ)

2000 32 000

All Africa Symposium (via GALZ)

2003 70 000

Women’s Life History Project (via GALA)

2003 – 2004 52 000

Coalition for Africa Lesbians (via TRP 2004)

2004, 2006 165 000

Total 2 842 000

21 In southern Africa, GALZ has been the largest single recipient of Hivos’ financial support to the LGBT sector.

29

4. Findings and Conclusions The central question of this evaluation: ‘To what degree did Hivos’ interventions in the period 1995 to 2006 contribute to LGBT emancipation in southern Africa?’ is discussed and answered here, with reference to the five research questions.

4.1 Changes

• What measurable changes regarding LGBT emancipation have occurred in the 7 countries of southern Africa in the period 1995 – 2006?

• To what extent can these changes be assessed as a ‘development towards LGBT emancipation’?

4.1.1 Changes at the level of LGBT individuals

4.1.1.1 LGBT peoples’ rights of access to social services

Across the board, a pervasive fear governs the lives of individual LGBT people, particularly if they are less resourced in terms of their economic position. Fear of discrimination that could be manifested by physical attack, or exposure of their sexual orientation in contexts where it was not safe to be ‘out’ were commonly noted across countries regardless of the il/legality of homosexuality. LGBT people who had attempted to or had made use of public services claim to have experienced secondary victimisation in some form from police, legal and healthcare workers. Negative experiences, and significantly, fear of negative responses, have often meant that LGBT people choose not to access public services, or report crimes against them, except for those who have the option to hide their sexual orientation, for fear of harassment, being outed or being refused access to services because of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, thereby limiting their freedoms to access social services and their overall human and citizen rights to equality. LGBT people who have been violated or raped, for example, often choose not to report incidences to police, for fear of the additional trauma of being blamed for being raped, or being told they deserved being raped because of their ‘unnatural’ sexual orientations.22 South African research undertaken by Polders and Wells (2006) found that experiences of and choices to report hate crimes were raced, gendered and classed, revealing differential consequences of black and white same-sex oriented women’s choices to report crimes against them, with 41% of black women choosing not to report hate crimes for fear of the implications of their sexual orientations being disclosed to police, compared with 21% of white women not reporting hate crimes for the same reason (quoted in Potgieter, 2006). This finding, that fear and discrimination are raced, classed and gendered, was also borne out in interviews, focus group discussions and in the findings of the surveys conducted as part of this study. In a television programme focusing on homophobic attacks, a lesbian, speaking of her experience of dealing with South African police said: “Policemen forget that they are police and become priests instead of handling the case. They give lesbian women sermons on homosexuality.”23 A South African study, undertaken by OUT in 2004 showed that 6% of LGBT people who make use of public health services had been refused treatment, with transgenders having the highest likelihood of refusal. In cases of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) – where sexual orientation was evident from

22 Informants in interviews and various surveys conducted among South African LGBT people about choices to

and experiences of reporting crimes against them found that while anti-gay hate crimes are prevalent, the majority of LGBT people choose not to report crimes against them for fear of their sexual orientation being revealed, and the subsequent secondary threats and repercussions that would follow from disclosure of sexual identity. (Studies by OUT LGBT Well-being, 2004 and by Reid and Dirsuweit, 2006).

23 http://www.few.org.za/News/murder_and_rape_for_wrong_reasons.htm

30

the nature of the illness, LGBT people preferred not to access public health services. Interviews and surveys conducted as part of this PE indicated that many LGBT people – as is often the case with those who suspect they might be HIV positive – fear reprisal and often do not seek healthcare, not wanting to expose themselves to negative responses that include discriminatory treatment. When we attempted to quantify discriminatory experiences at public health services in focus group discussions, there was less evidence of direct personal experiences, with high levels of fear based on the negative experiences of others discouraging LGBT people from attempting to access public services at all. This indicates a high level of fear of the possibility of discriminatory experiences, although on average, only 3% of respondents had had such direct experiences when seeking healthcare. This finding led to the conclusion that this fear is based on the power of the negative experiences of the 3% who had had abusive experiences with public healthcare workers. Probing revealed that negative experiences relate to healthcare workers’ assumption of their heterosexuality (i.e. erasing the possibility of coming out in this situation); negative consequences as a result of being unable to choose to hide their sexual identity in hostile contexts; and negative experiences as a result of divulging their sexual orientations on the assumption that this would be in confidence. The first two kinds of negative experiences cause psychological trauma, while the third adds an additional degree of physical threat when healthcare workers make sexual orientation information public to the broader (often homophobic) community in which the LGBT person and health care worker find themselves. The fact that many LGBT people are afraid of making their sexual orientation known for fear of being outed, and, or for fear of secondary abuse24, however, is indicative of the repressive social climate in which LGBT people find themselves in southern Africa. In response, organisations like Gays and Lesbians of Zimbabwe (GALZ), OUT, Triangle, and The Rainbow Project (TRP)25 provide access to certain healthcare and counselling services to their target audiences. Where LGBT organisations provide services that are also available publicly, LGBT people prefer to make use of LGBT organisations’ service provision as there are no fears associated with accessing services in spaces where their rights and dignity are respected. Fear of disclosure, of verbal or physical threat or attack, and of ostracisation plays a restrictive, freedom-limiting role in LGBT peoples’ ability to access social services. This is further influenced by dynamics of class and race.26

4.1.1.2 Security of person27

4.1.1.2.1 Self-esteem

The social worlds of all LGBT people encountered in this study are initially shaped by heterosexual frameworks that set them apart: home spaces and those of the larger community making demands in terms of behaviour and appearance that speak to a ‘compulsory’ (or, for some, assumed) heterosexuality. Feeling an outsider in these communities, LGBT people often feel isolated and alien in the world spaces they occupy, and often this internal struggle is what either drives them to coming out, or attempting to find a way of ‘overcoming’ their difference through self-harming practices.

Individual interviews and focus groups with LGBT people revealed a certain level of self-abuse as an attempted coping strategy as a result of being ostracised, attacked and because of personal struggles 24 Secondary abuse refers to responses from, for example, police officers to whom attacks are reported, and who

then refuse to take the reports of LGBT people seriously, or blame the LGBT person because LGBT people ‘ask for it’ or ‘deserve it’ for being different; or health care workers who either condemn or refuse to assist LGBT people.

25 In recent years TRP has stopped providing health services from its offices. 26 As is illustrated below in “Sense of safety”, LGBT people from economically stressed, low income, low

mobility (through gainful employment and, or education) communities are more vulnerable to and at higher risk of abuse and violence than those in more economically resourced communities.

27 Security of person in this context includes self-esteem, self-harming practices, senses of well-being, freedom to disclose sexual orientation, levels of victimisation, socio-economic position, senses of safety and feelings of vulnerability.

31

with coming to terms with homosexuality when family, culture and religion function within a heterosexual matrix.

For many young LGBT people, the experience of silence, particularly in their families, where they often feel unable to speak about their experiences as LGBT person, means the negating of a fundamental part of who they are, an experience of profound ‘unfreedom.’

For many of the young LGBT people interviewed who are economically dependent on their families, the struggle towards self-acceptance was complicated by tensions of denial and unacceptability within themselves as a result of their silencing family and community contexts, making the struggle towards self and community acceptance difficult in the context of economic dependence. As was revealed through personal growth stories (as a result of being involved with an LGBT organisation), coming to an understanding and acceptance of themselves within the context of systemic oppression allows LGBT people to develop a personal and political consciousness that helps to relieve the fear and anxiety of victimisation and stigma, increasing levels of self-esteem. The empowering nature of this shift towards self-acceptance is particularly notable in LGBT people who are economically independent, and have related freedoms to come to an acceptance of themselves.

Economic independence was seen to play an enabling role in LGBT people’s ability to cultivate a strong, positive sense of self, despite contextual realities of compulsory heterosexuality.

Table 5: Self-harm 28

Botswana Zimbabwe Namibia South Africa29

n30 = 973 28 65 58 822

Never attempted self-harm

86% 88% 68% 71%

Drugs 14% 3% 9% 7%

Starving - 3% - 4%

Cutting - - - 1%

Alcohol 14% 6% 18% 11%

From these statistics the following emerge: • The majority of LGBT people (an average of 78%) have not attempted to harm themselves as a

result of struggling to come to terms with their sexual orientation. • Marked differences between OiA satellite festival respondents in South Africa who had never

attempted self-harm and those in Zimbabwe, could be ascribed to differences in terms of feeling part of a group, or feeling more isolated in the absence of a support group. OiA’s satellite film festivalgoers are dispersed across three different towns in different geographical areas. The film festival, for LGBT people in such contexts is one of very few opportunities to be in the company of a critical mass of other LGBT people. This isolation, as opposed to being part of a more ‘permanent’ and ongoing group, as in the case of members of GALZ and Legabibo, highlights the positive power that being a part of a grouping can have on the self-esteem of LGBT people.

• Drug abuse was highest at 14% for Batswana respondents, the majority of whom were students in the city of Gaborone, away from home, in situations where experimentation is part of student life more broadly. A similar number of Triangle respondents were students and young people who –

28 The totals in this table do not add to 100% because respondents were not limited to responding to one category

of self-abuse only. 29 Note: all percentages for South Africa in the tables that follow are measures of central tendency. Given the

differences between the population sizes of the organisations, a weighted average was considered, but since the margin of error would be insignificant, the average was calculated by adding the values in the data set and then dividing by the number of organisations (6).

30 These population sizes are based on sources relating to each organisation (focus groups, individual interviews, beneficiaries surveys).

32

through their association with others in similar situations – are more likely to experiment with drugs, than those in groups where age (as with GALA) and access to resources play a stronger defining role.

• While the percentage of LGBT people who have abused alcohol as a means of dealing with their sexual identities averages at 12% , during focus group discussions respondents from all groups and country-contexts attested to regular alcohol binges and to using alcohol as means of escape, though very few regarded this as a form of self-harm. GALA users who admitted to alcohol abuse were more able to recognise bingeing and alcohol-escapism as self-abuse, whereas for many less-resourced black respondents, alcohol consumption was often connected to social status (i.e. as sign of having the financial means to expend on alcohol), and with the ubiquity of alcohol in social life. Widespread levels of alcoholism in many resource-poor southern African communities made it difficult for respondents to distinguish between alcohol abuse and ‘normal’ or ‘responsible’ alcohol consumption.

While unable to escape the realities of the heterosexual matrix, LGBT people who felt part of a larger (LGBT) whole, through groupings, organisations or networks have a stronger sense of self than those who feel isolated in addition to lacking social mobility in terms of economic independence and education levels that open up employment options. Economic independence and feeling part of a group were therefore found to have a positive effect on LGBT peoples’ self-esteem, decreased senses of isolation and greater levels of self-acceptance.

4.1.1.2.2 Well-being

The question ‘Am I able to be who I am?’ provides a framework in which to understand well-being, and, as such, is linked with vulnerabilities related to self-expression and association, i.e. the more people are able to freely express themselves and associate openly (without threat, fear or violation), the greater their sense of well-being. 4.1.1.2.2.1 Out to family and friends Table 6: Out to Family & Friends Zimbabwe Namibia Botswana South Africa31

n=973 65 58 28 822

Family & friends know 41% 95% 71% 79%

Family & friends don’t know 34% - 29% 15%

Don’t know if they know 25% 5% - 4%

TOTAL 100 100 100 98

The high percentage of the study population out to friends and family in Namibia speaks of an LGBT group with a high level of well-being, i.e. able to be themselves. Most Namibian respondents had participated in TRP’s work that in recent years focused on building the leadership capacity of LGBT people, initially focusing on issues of well-being and self-acceptance. Namibian respondents indicated that as long as LGBT people did not ‘flaunt’ their sexual identities (i.e. as visibly different), they were more easily tolerated, indicating limits on free expression through careful self-policing of physical appearance. Others indicated that when their immediate families were aware of their sexual orientation, and were relatively accepting, these family members often indicated acceptance on the condition that LGBT people kept their sexual orientation a secret from their broader communities, churches and extended families. Similar sentiments were expressed by respondents in Botswana, Zimbabwe and South Africa, making it clear that family ‘acceptance’ comes at a price, being secrecy and silence.

31 All of the figures presented for South Africa as country are averages, and as such, do not add to 100%.

33

That the discourse around homosexuality was so public in Namibia, along with public support from human rights organisations and some media, has – in part – played a public education role, making it possible for many LGBT people to come out, despite firmly held views in the broader society that homosexuality is un-African. When looking at the figures for Botswana and South Africa, it would be easy to assume a similarity in context and demographics. It is in the disaggregation of South African data (by organisation) that a more valid similarity is revealed. A 27% difference between BtM respondents and respondents from Durban who are out to their families, can be explained by the demographic differences and their implications on these groups: Table 7: Living Standards Measure: Income Zimbabwe Namibia Botswana South Africa

n = 973 65 58 28 822

No income 29% 28% 8%

Students 9%

26% 29% 20%

<€200 /month 32% 35% 0 10%

between €200 and €749/ month

11% 34% 43% 21%

between €750 and €999/ month

0 5% 0 10%

Income >€1000/ month

0 0 0 25%

TOTAL32 81 100 100 94

South African respondents from Triangle, GALA and BtM were more resourced (in terms of income and education) than those from Durban and OiA’s satellite film festival. Batswana respondents were largely middle-class students attending the University of Botswana (UNIBO), which, when compared to the relatively large student populations of Durban, OiA, Triangle and GALA revealed a class difference between student populations. Students at UNIBO were more mobile in terms of income. This was also true to a lesser extent for students from Triangle and GALA while the resource-lacking structural realities of Durban students were very different: many lived far from their educational institution; 41% were tenants, 47% lived in an urban township, located some distance from the city, a group that was reliant on costly public transport. More resourced respondents – those living in urban suburbs, in their own homes, who were in permanent employment, with higher levels of education, and their own means of transport, such as those from Triangle, GALA and BtM – were more able to come out to family and friends. Those who were more economically dependent (students or unemployed persons) living with parents or family, in less-resourced areas, with few economic prospects due to limited employable skills, such as those attending the OiA satellite festival and Durban Centre beneficiaries (the two least resourced groups among South African respondents) – were significantly constrained by the heterosexist conventions of their communities. Coming out for less-resourced LGBT people is an entirely more risky exercise than for resourced LGBT people, because losses in terms of physical security (homes and financial support), not ignoring the emotional effects of family and community eviction, would leave them destitute.

32 Where the totals in all the tables that follow do not add to 100% it is because of questions having been left

unanswered by respondents, or, as in the case of South Africa (OiA and GALA), where an average was calculated from different sets of respondents.

34

Zimbabweans, for whom the political, cultural and religious discourses about being homosexual have been fraught with negativity and threats, have largely chosen to remain closeted. While many LGBT people’s families knew about their sexual identities, for Durban, the percentage of those who were not out to their friends and family, was relatively high at 41%, a reflection of cultural proscriptions that make being gay and Zulu33 in KwaZulu-Natal difficult. The parallel with respondents from Zimbabwe becomes clear when highlighting, in addition to cultural factors, levels of mobility (based on economic position and levels of education). While ostracisation was a defining fear of young LGBT people (between 17 and 25), especially for young women in Zimbabwe, the percentage of people who had actually been ostracised was between 5% (GALA) and 29% (Legabibo). This finding again reveals the freedom-limiting power of fear. For those – like the Batswana student population – who are economically dependent on their families, this figure is relatively high, comparable to the 23% of Namibian respondents who had been ostracised by their families. The threat, or reality of being cast out has less of a hold over LGBT people who are economically independent, or for those on whom families rely for financial support. This is illustrated in the low 5% of GALA users. TRP, Legabibo and Durban beneficiaries reveal higher levels of ostracisation suggesting that LGBT people choosing to come out in such contexts risk a great deal in doing so, in the contexts of not only hostile family responses, but also hostile community responses. Table 8: Victimisation 34 Zimbabwe Namibia Botswana South Africa

n = 973 65 58 28 822

Ostracised 9% 23% 29% 14%

Physically assaulted

13% 14% 29% 7%

Threatened verbally

28% 45% 43% 27%

Raped 0 9% 0 3%

Threatened physically

16% 23% 14% 5%

Never been victimised

47% 27% 43% 44%

A particularly notable figure is the percentage of LGBT people who had never been victimised. At the low end are Triangle at 21% and TRP at 27%; with Durban at 35%, Legabibo at 43% and GALZ at 47% in the mid-range. BtM and GALA had the highest percentages of LGBT people who had never been victimised, at 57% and 58% respectively, revealing the connection between socio-economic position and vulnerability. In the cases of BtM and GALA, respondents are resourced in terms of education (53% of GALA respondents have university degrees; 72% of BtM respondents have same) and income (38% of GALA and 43% of BtM respondents earn more than €1 000 per month). Similarly, TRP and Triangle demographics correspond in terms of education (TRP – 45% and Triangle 43% have completed high school) while the 39% of Triangle respondents who earn between €200 and €749 per month compares well with the 32% of TRP members in the same position. The distinguishing factor between TRP and Triangle is that 15% of Triangle respondents earn upwards of €1 000 per month, a figure that has no correspondence with TRP respondents.

33 See ‘Being Zulu and Gay’, M&G, 17 October 2006 34 The totals in this table do not add to 100% because respondents were not limited to choosing one category

only.

35

Similarities also exist in the middle category in terms of education: between Durban – 41% and GALZ – 38%; and Legabibo – 29% and OiA – 20% respondents having been to technical college, with variants in terms of income: 30% of Durban respondents earned between €200 and €749 per month, with 11% of GALZ respondents, 9% of OiA respondents and 43% of Legabibo respondents in the same income bracket. Resourced and educated LGBT interviewees who had come to accept their sexual identities felt more able to express their identities than those who were closeted and living in repressive environments. Middle class LGBT people who had some post-school tertiary education, lived in suburbs and had their own means of transport, were more easily able to come out because they did not have to deal with homophobic public spaces that are particularly unsafe for poorer LGBT people. 4.1.1.2.2.2 Out to colleagues Table 9: Out to Colleagues

Zimbabwe Namibia Botswana South Africa

n = 973 65 58 28 822

Colleagues know 41% 91% 86% 68%

Colleagues don’t know 34% 5% 14% 12%

Don’t know if colleagues know 22% 4% 0 17%

TOTAL 97 100 100 97

A correlation exists between levels of education, economic position and sense of self, and therefore victimisation. Those with little education from or in low resource areas (like townships, as opposed to suburbs), appear to be more vulnerable and at higher risk of being victimised. Add to that low income, limited education, and economic dependence, and the risk of victimisation appears to increase. When including gender dimensions, those at highest risk are young lesbians and female transgenders in townships, whose chances of victimisation or abuse are only reduced if their sexual identities are not known (unlikely in the context of visible difference) or if they were presumed to be heterosexual, not looking visibly different to others of their gender. The exposure and vulnerability of out LGBT people in Zimbabwe is apparent in the low percentage of those who were out at work. In the other countries, those who were out at their places of work had relatively secure positions, and were already out to their families. The majority (58%) of Batswana LGBT people interviewed were students at university in Botswana’s capital city, Gaborone. For the students and other migrants to the city, coming out at a place which, for 43% of respondents, was far away from home, was considerably easier than doing so in their homes in non-metropolitan parts of the country. This experience was mirrored by respondents in other country contexts. Considering legislative protection of LGBT people in South Africa, the average number of South African LGBT people out to colleagues is relatively low, highlighting a vulnerability to being out despite legal protection. 53% of Durban LGBT people are out to their colleagues, 63% of those from Triangle, and an average of 63% of those attending OiA satellite festivals. In the case of GALA, 74% of respondents were out to their colleagues – the most likely reason for the higher percentage of GALA respondents being out is that many of those surveyed were already in positions of relative power (educated) and economic independence. In South Africa, where LGBT issues have received considerable attention during the last 10 years, coupled with more LGBT people coming out (because a. homosexuality and homosexual acts are no longer criminalised; and b. their rights as LGBT people are constitutionally protected), from media coverage of the last six years, two issues come to the fore: violence against lesbians in townships is on the increase; and the nature of violent attacks has become more brutal (see 4.1.2.5 Media Coverage below).

36

In an environment of fear and victimisation, linked with cultural practices that attempt to stifle homosexuality, it is true for respondents in Zambia and Malawi, that “the majority of LGBT people are in the closet, and refuse to be associated with the LGBT movement for fear of victimisation in their homes, schools, colleges or places of work, once they are identified as homosexuals.”35

4.1.1.2.3 Sense of safety

While fear and safety are closely linked, the relationship between the two is reflective of a sense of self against the realities of external events. Here ‘sense of safety’ refers to physical and emotional safety and fears related to LGBT people feeling vulnerable to being outed, and associated homophobic acts, including verbal abuse and threats, ‘mild’ physical abuse and physical threats (such as hair-pulling and shoving), exclusion, secondary abuse, ‘corrective rape’ and murder. In South Africa where documented reports of homophobic attacks include corrective rape36, secondary abuse37 and murder, LGBT people’s sense of safety has to be seen in the context of socio-economic mobility. Respondents were asked whether their sense of safety had changed during the past five to ten years and to give reasons for such changes. Table 10: Sense of Safety

Zimbabwe Namibia Botswana South Africa n = 973 65 58 28 822 Safer than 5 – 10 years ago 53% 68% 57% 41% More vulnerable than 5 – 10 years ago 6% 9% - 11% No difference in sense of safety 31% 14% 43% 29% TOTAL 90 91 100 81

4.1.1.2.3.1 Safer The majority of LGBT respondents expressed a positive change in their senses of safety: feeling safer now than they did 5 or 10 years ago. The reasons for this shift towards greater safety related to a stronger sense of self, a greater acceptance of their sexual identities, a better understanding of their human rights, and knowing it was legal to be homosexual (in the case of South Africa), as a result of participation in the activities of Hivos-supported LGBT organisations or groupings. Accessing services or participating in the activities of LGBT organisations enabled beneficiaries to feel part of a community, in turn positively affecting individuals’ senses of safety. In this sense, safety was an internalised experience, not so much linked to degrees of homophobia in the public sphere but more to do with an understanding of rights and levels of self-acceptance and confidence. 59% of LGBT respondents to the questionnaire for LGBT beneficiaries/members in Zimbabwe, Namibia and Botswana indicated feeling safer than they did 5 to 10 years ago as a result of personal growth and understanding themselves better. In South Africa it was notable that only 15% of those who made use of GALA archives (a group that is the most resourced in terms of living standards measures, including education) feel safer than they did 5 to 10 years ago, putting the average for GALA respondents (both archives and library users) at 30%.

35 ILGA Report. 2000. Zambia Chapter. Also quoted in The Midweek Sun (Botswana), 7 September 2005 36 “Corrective rape” refers to specific ‘treatments’ of ‘cure’ by rape, sometimes initiated by families to be enacted

on their lesbian family member, especially if she is young (usually between 17 and 25) in order to ‘cure’ or ‘correct’ her unacceptable sexual orientation.

37 OUT in collaboration with the University of South Africa (UNISA) Centre for Applied Psychology has pioneered research into issues of secondary abuse, by researching LGBT people’s experiences of accessing public health care and using police services to report crimes against them. Through the Joint Working Group (JWG) this research has been successfully rolled out to include similar research undertaken in Cape Town and Durban.

37

This lower percentage could be understood in a context of ever growing inequalities of wealth and poverty in South Africa, and the related violent crime that has a direct bearing on resourced peoples’ senses of safety. For the other three South African organisations, the figure is clustered around 45% of respondents feeling safer than before. Senses of safety were directly linked to beneficiaries’ participation in the work of Hivos-supported LGBT organisations or groupings. 4.1.1.2.3.2 No change in sense of safety 27% of respondents from Zimbabwe, Namibia and Botswana indicated no change in their sense of safety, while 6% felt less safe as a result of increasing levels or threats of violence in their social contexts. Those whose sense of safety had not changed and who had never felt particularly threatened physically, were neither effeminate men, nor masculine women, and some chose to protect themselves in hostile contexts by avoiding speaking to or being seen associating with ‘visibly homosexual’ people. 4.1.1.2.3.3 Increased vulnerability In Malawi, Zambia and Zimbabwe where many LGBT respondents are not open about their sexual identities, fear is related to being outed as LGBT within a context of illegality and fear, and the possible repercussions of being discovered to be LGBT. In the Zambian case, Numwa (2000) notes that during attempts by the state to stamp out the formation of homosexual groups, a number of men were arrested, accused of being homosexual, to make an example of them, attracting much public attention, with cases eventually being thrown out of court for lack of evidence. In contrast to violent crimes against LGBT people in South Africa, LGBT people from Zimbabwe, Namibia and Botswana have more often experienced threats of violence, verbal abuse, and, in the case of Zimbabwe, evictions, as a homophobic response to their sexual orientations becoming known. In South Africa, those who felt more vulnerable cited the general increase of aggression and violence in society-as-a-whole as reason, and in half the cases this was compounded by fear of a backlash against LGBT people in response to increased LGBT visibility. For South African lesbians, fears of increasing violence against them were expressed across economic positions and levels of education. South African visible LGBT people from under-resourced38 backgrounds are more exposed to possible attack because they make use of and are visible in unsafe public spaces; reliant on public means of transport, walking on the streets to and from taxi ranks and drop-off points to and from their homes in townships often controlled by gangs, or made unsafe because young men with little mobility and heightened senses of emasculation due to limited opportunities, use violence or abuse as means of exercising power. Those LGBT people who are ‘insulated’ by resources like personal vehicles and living behind high walls or in gated communities in suburbia are less likely to be targets for homophobic violence. South African respondents from more affluent economic groups who indicated feeling less safe felt this way because of a pervasive sense of increasing threats to safety as the gap between poverty and wealth continues to deepen and widen. Affluent LGBT people were therefore vulnerable to generalised crime and violence as affluent people with visible material wealth, and did not fear crimes on the basis of sexual orientation. To the costs and benefits of disclosing sexual identity, another layer of vulnerability is added when coming out in a hostile environment: fears of exposure in repressive communities is based on the reality of homophobic responses that are more violent in South Africa than in other southern African countries.39

38 Referring to limited access to education, employment, skills development opportunities, economic

opportunities, security of habitat, and class positions. 39 While it may well be dependent on disaggregated data, there have been no reports of murders of LGBT people

in any of the other countries aside from South Africa. Rape had been alluded to, but never explicitly

38

Less resourced LGBT people, also affected by generalised violence and crimes, living in crime and violence-ridden areas where more public gender-based violence is endemic, felt an additional layer of vulnerability to homophobic crimes as visible soft targets for violence. Despite the relatively low percentage of rapes from the written questionnaires (5%), reports of rapes and violent attempted rapes of lesbians were common in all interviews and focus group discussions with lesbians in South Africa (particularly in, though not limited to the provinces of KwaZulu-Natal and Gauteng), as well as in Namibia. In other countries, crimes against LGBT people took less brutal forms. A number of lesbian women interviewed in Morgan and Wieringa’s study (2005:317), across a range of southern African countries, had been sexually abused in childhood, and raped several times in their lives. Many had become pregnant and bore children, or contracted HIV/AIDS as a result of being raped. Rapes took violent forms and often involved gang-rape. Physical violence against lesbian women was noted in far higher numbers in South Africa than anywhere else, with signs that the phenomenon of “corrective rape” was a growing violent response to lesbian visibility and expressions of lesbian sexuality. Given the fact that lesbians are particularly targeted for “corrective rape”, sometimes even organised by their families, and are often forced into compulsory heterosexual marriages in order to hide or ‘heal’ these ‘unfortunate’ sexual identities, secrecy and silence around expressions of homosexual identities serve as a protection in the context of fear. High levels of fear have a direct impact on the kinds of conduct lesbian women feel safe enough to enact in public spaces, curtailing their free expression and movement.

4.1.1.3 Visibility in the public sphere

LGBT people are more visible than ten years ago, in South Africa, Zimbabwe, Namibia and Botswana, and according to some key informants, in Mozambique too, despite hostility towards LGBT people in these countries. In South Africa, under-resourced black lesbians are less visible than their counterparts who are educated, out and live in middle-class urban settings, given that the visibility of LGBT people in under-resourced areas increases vulnerability to violence. Respondents in focus groups noted that in South Africa there has been an increase of gay roles in locally produced television series, reflecting a shift towards greater ‘ordinariness’ as opposed to difference and otherness. While still fulfilling stereotypical gay roles, such as, for example, the male hairdresser, caterer, make-up consultant, florist or wedding planner, there are some shifts to including LGBT people – mostly gay men – in roles of business executives. Between 41% (Durban) and 74% (GALA) of respondents indicated knowing a gay man in a leadership position, with figures for known lesbians in leadership positions between 22% (GALZ) and 47% (GALA). The increased visibility of LGBT people, particularly gay men, has played a role in others coming out. The slower signs of lesbian visibility relate to socio-cultural influences (see 4.1.2.2 below). When, in 1997, a ‘Human Rights for All’ march took place peacefully on the streets of Windhoek (with banners like come and arrest me, here to stay, and I love my lesbian mommies), the march included members of TRP as well as other human rights organisations,40 centrally locating LGBT

mentioned during interviews with respondents from countries other than Namibia and South Africa where rates of rape were high. In South Africa and Namibia some respondents had been raped several times in their lives, including being raped by family members. It was easier for respondents to speak about being raped in focus groups, than it was for those who submitted written surveys.

40 Including Sister Namibia, the National Society for Human Rights and the Legal Assistance Centre, all Hivos partner organisations.

39

rights as human rights in Namibia, also marking the beginning of greater visibility and international support for LGBT people in Namibia. Attempts at greater LGBT visibility in Zambia were quickly stamped out by state-forces.

4.1.1.4 Increased participation and representation

With an increase of LGBT people in the public sphere – in particular in South Africa where the public processes around the Civil Union Act41 received much media attention – representation of LGBT people is on the increase in the public sphere (through LGBT organisations). As a direct result of participating in the activities of an LGBT organisation, LGBT people feel more able to publicly participate in broader social and political processes that affect them, irrespective of whether such processes are linked to their status as LGBT people or not. LGBT people in the South African town of Pietermaritzburg have been proactive at strategically embedding LGBT people as responsible citizens who participate and initiate environmental actions like cleaning up local rivers or public recreation parks, as well as getting involved in charity activities as active and responsible citizens, resulting in a high media profile. Such activities in Pietermaritzburg in particular, have contributed to normalising the presence of LGBT people (assisted by positive media relations between the LGBT group and media in its locale). Gay white men have a long history of occupying media space in South Africa, particularly in the cultural sphere as satirists, film critics, artists, dancers and television presenters. Encouraged by public figures – mostly men – who are open about their homosexuality, more LGBT people are coming out. Increased participation and representation of LGBT people in political or social processes that affect their lives is largely dependent upon LGBT people in public positions coming out. In South Africa, Supreme Court of Appeal judge, Edwin Cameron was often hailed as a hero, particularly to young gay men in interviews. Legabibo in Botswana has been effective at carving out space in which to participate in public policy and decision-making spaces relating to HIV/AIDS in particular (discussed in the Botswana chapter). OUT and GALA’s public education and mainstreaming work with South African government departments has meant that LGBT organisations are being invited to participate in public-policy and decision-making spaces that LGBT organisations had not previously had access to. In addition, the work of the Joint Working Group around the same-sex marriage campaign ensured high level visibility of LGBT groups resulting in participation and engagement in a range of discussions and debates in civil society. The NCGLE’s formative work in securing the ‘same-sex clause in South Africa’s democratic constitution through pro-active participation and representation in policy and law-making spaces set the scene for current engagement of LGBT interest groups in policy and decision-making spaces in South Africa.

4.1.1.5 Capacity to self-express

We have been living in peace all these years. Now you want to give us a label that will set us apart, make us different? That will stir trouble!42

In a number of focus groups in various parts of South Africa and in Namibia, with black lesbian women, we were told that in their experiences of growing up, many of these women did not know anything about homosexuality, but knew that they were attracted to others of their sex. In making sense of their sexual difference, understanding that only men or boys could be attracted to girls and

41 The Civil Union Act was passed in South Africa in December 2006, legalising marriage between same-sex

partners. See South Africa chapter. 42 Quotation from two women living in a village in the north of Namibia, in response to a visit from TRP, when

the organisation requested they come out, to encourage other LGBT people. This quotation has been paraphrased from the Oshivambo.

40

women, many of these women took on male/masculine identities and personas in the only way they knew of to make sense of their same-sex attraction. What others might consider to be transgender (female to male) sexual identities, these informants considered themselves to be either lesbian men (once they heard of the existence of a concept like lesbian), or simply lesbian. ‘Transgender’ was not a significant self-identifier in such groups or in any other groups covered in this PE. The Morgan and Wieringa study found that many same-sex oriented women interviewed preferred not to label themselves. At The Rainbow Project (TRP) in Namibia, at least 40% of those who make use of TRP’s services, feel uncomfortable with being labelled lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender, and also feel uncomfortable with the ‘Men who have Sex with Men’ and ‘Women who have Sex with Women’ terminologies (from an email correspondence with TRP Director, Ian Swartz, April 2007). This extends to other countries in this study, where interviewees do not self-identify with the LGBT labels, often preferring not to be labelled at all, or choosing their own labels such as ‘Queen’ in the case of Zimbabwe. The notion of ‘coming out’ entails both the sense of belonging to a group (i.e. no longer feeling isolated/alone), and an ‘othering’ that sets LGBT people apart in terms of the language of identity. As such this othering requires an acceptance and understanding of the label LGBT. Visibly LGBT people interviewed in this PE are marked from the outset, and therefore the choice to come out is made for them by virtue of assumptions based on their appearance. The question of coming out as LGBT is a question of strategic uncertainty in contexts where the connotations of the words ‘lesbian’, ‘gay’, ‘bisexual’ and ‘transgender’ are negative and unacceptable, because of interpretations that limit their understanding to acts of sexual intimacy. Respondents noted that they felt more able to express their sexual difference in urban areas than in rural areas or outlying towns, due to perceived higher levels of acceptance or indifference in cities. This was particularly the case for respondents from Botswana, Namibia and Mozambique. Of course those who were not out felt unable to express themselves as LGBT. In South Africa and Namibia there was space for the assertion of male-female expressions of transgender sexual identity in the form of stereotypes of the gay male hairdresser for example, that was an accepted part of society. Capacity to self-express was limited by fear, vulnerability, violence or the threat of violence, and the potential negative consequences of same-sex visibility.

4.1.2 Changes at the Level of Society: Attitudes and Opinions

4.1.2.1 Knowledge and Understanding of LGBT People and Issues

The history of homophobia in Africa is considerably younger than the history of same-sex relationships. Colonial rule brought with it Christianity, which, along with missionaries, brought homophobia to societies that had previously not only accepted same-sex relationships, but where they had been institutionalised, including in the form of marriages between members of the same sex, or one woman taking a series of wives, and words canonising these practices in vernacular African languages; societies where same-sex partners lived openly and freely. Imposing the morals and beliefs of the coloniser on these societies led to an internalisation of this external perspective. Having come to see themselves through the eye of the coloniser – a perspective that created the bind between ‘civilised’ and ‘savage’ behaviour – and understanding the connotations of being ‘savage’, it was natural to not only accept this view, but to begin preaching it, siding with the ‘civilised,’ in the process making talk of sexuality taboo. From within this perspective, denying homosexual practices within African cultures became a means of securing the new position of ‘civilised’. This position and denial of those histories or practices of Africanness that could be interpreted as ‘savage’ (such as overt sexuality and the words and language used to describe it) includes overtly

41

sexual connotations associated with the words ‘lesbian,’ ‘gay’ and ‘bisexual.’ The implications of these words limited people to their sexual function only, and therefore could not sit comfortably in societies that had begun to see themselves from the perspective of the ‘civilised’. Where pre-colonial words like the isiNdebele word uphekeyakhe, for example, makes no reference to sexuality or the sexual relationships such a person may or may not have, referring more to the social function of such a person (in this case “one who cooks for himself”), the ‘new’ words of the coloniser – ‘lesbian’, ‘gay’, ‘bisexual’ and ‘transgender’ – turned the asexual man who cooks for himself (i.e. without the help of a woman) into a being with an overtly sexual function who only desires and is sexually intimate with other men. Where the ‘old’ words implied an acceptance, that people were simply being themselves; the words of the coloniser harked back to practices that had now become problematic in the context of ‘civilisation.’ The appropriation of the ‘new’ language also brought with it the intentions of the coloniser for whom – in penal laws still in force in all countries in this PE except South Africa – homosexual acts were “against the order of nature.” It was therefore not surprising that many non-LGBT informants to this PE seemed unable or unwilling to speak the words ‘homosexual’, ‘gay’, or ‘lesbian’ and where they did, it was mostly to point out that they “had never met such a person”, or “someone like that”. This was found in the region as a whole (with the notable exception of South Africa), and can be interpreted as a cultural reticence to publicly make reference to sexual activity on the one hand, and on the other – a response that more strongly resonated from many southern African cultural quarters (LGBT and non-LGBT alike) – a discomfort with the terms themselves because of the sexual connotations associated with them. In South Africa, a study commissioned by the AIDS Law Project and the Sexuality Social and Legal Reform Project at the Centre for Applied Legal Studies of the University of the Witwatersrand in 1995 revealed that the majority of South Africans were not in favour of gay and lesbian equality. 43 64% of the public surveyed were opposed to giving LGBT people who live together permanently the same rights as married people. An even larger number of people were opposed to giving LGBT people the right to adopt children, although a clear majority opposed employment discrimination against LGBT people. These findings correspond to the discomforts associated with sexual intimacy (and condoning or legitimising it through marriage; and ‘exposing’ children to a home space where homosexual intimacy is practised), and the broader acceptance and recognition of workplace rights. LGBT people, like everyone else, had the need and right to work, but asking for public sanction of their sex lives was seen as going too far. The findings of that study, initially intended to be used as a lobbying tool for the inclusion of sexual orientation rights in the South African Constitution, were embargoed, for fear that the findings, if made public, could provide ammunition to undermine the lobby. Unlike the 1995 experience in South Africa, in 2006 LDH – a Hivos human rights partner in Mozambique – released initial findings of public attitudes research undertaken among 700 people between the ages of 18 and 56 from four different parts of Mozambique. The study revealed that young people in Mozambique were far more tolerant of gay rights than could have been assumed, and 80% of those surveyed said they had gay friends, already indicating a normalisation and broader acceptance of LGBT people. In South Africa, Zimbabwe, Namibia, Malawi and Botswana many LGBT people attempt to give in to family and community pressures by going through the charade of a heterosexual marriage while (often) continuing their long-term same-sex relationships. Within these socio-cultural constraints, many LGBT people spoke of a greater open-mindedness in society “as long as you behaved yourself,”

43 The survey involved a national sample of 2163 respondents, from all races and regions, and was conducted by

the Human Sciences Research Council in 1995. See Charney, C. 1995.

42

i.e. refrained from public displays of affection that could be deemed sexual. Public displays of affection outside the home or the frameworks of a family unit were frowned upon in general, because issues of sexuality – of whatever kind – are considered private and the explicit sexual connotations of the terms lesbian, gay and bisexual, meant that even mentioning LGBT people is tantamount to talking about sex in these contexts. This finding is corroborated in the book Tommy Boys, Lesbian Men, Ancestral Wives (eds. Morgan and Wieringa 2005), where women, across various African contexts, engaged in same-sex practices were frequently involved in heterosexual relationships. Morgan and Wieringa refer to this practice as a “same-sex heterosexual continuum”, that in part account for low levels of lesbian visibility. The tensions between colonial interpretations of sexuality and African cultural histories and practices as these relate to LGBT issues, play an ongoing role in broader societal knowledge and understanding of LGBT issues. The difficulties of acceptance among 45% of interviews with non-LGBT informants came largely from those who lived in and came from communities where this tension is most deeply unresolved. Non-LGBT respondents who were sympathetic and accepting of LGBT people, were largely from more liberal backgrounds and had LGBT friends. Those non-LGBT people were also urbanised and largely under the age of 50.

4.1.2.2 Stigma and Discrimination: public declarations of homophobia

Shifts between 1995 and 2006 include national public debates on LGBT issues in all of the seven countries, with state homophobia peaking in Zimbabwe, Namibia, Botswana and Zambia between 1995 and 2000, although continuing intermittently beyond this period. The beginning of the 1995 – 2006 period saw public expressions of homophobia from Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe, followed closely by then Namibian President, Sam Nujoma, at a time when South African LGBT activists were lobbying for the inclusion of the ‘sexual orientation clause’ that would explicitly protect citizens from discrimination based on sexual orientation in the post-apartheid Constitution of South Africa.44 The public onslaught against homosexuality came at a time when the political discourses in Namibia and Zimbabwe were reflecting a particular kind of ‘return to Africa’, that included selective public ‘reminders’ of African traditions, values or norms juxtaposed with the repressive colonial histories of these countries. This ‘return’ to an idealised Africa permitted the labelling of (certain) things ‘Western’ – in this context, ‘Western’ being a pejorative, belonging to the oppressive colonial past that had been overcome – and the need to weed out any remnants of this past. In the same way as how Christian religious frameworks became embedded in African societies remaining uninterrogated, homosexuality fell into the dirty colonial bathwater which had to be thrown out as part of the civilising mission. The selective identification of things ‘Western’ as ‘alien’ and therefore ‘un-African’, while at the same time aspiring to other things ‘Western’ (perceived as crucial signs of sophistication and success, such as imported luxury jets and cars, cellular telephones, imported designer clothing) and aspiring to ‘Western’ notions of social and economic development, remains

44 The book, More than a name: State-Sponsored Homophobia and its Consequences in southern Africa (2003)

by Human Rights Watch (HRW) and IGLHRC examines in some detail the phenomenon of state-sponsored homophobia in Zimbabwe, Namibia, Zambia and Botswana and the challenges of translating South Africa’s constitutional protections into meaningful, lived reality for that country’s LGBT citizens, particularly those most discriminated against by apartheid and its legacies. The chapters on Zimbabwe, Namibia, Zambia and Botswana trace the processes towards state-sponsored homophobia in those countries, documenting and analysing the institutionalisation of state-sponsored homophobia and how they have echoed and reinforced each other across borders and time, particularly in the “homosexuality is unAfrican”, “homosexuality is foreign”, “homosexuality is an evil and a disease spread by the West” rhetoric (2003:1,2).

43

uninterrogated in public media and society. 45 The absence of public debate and analysis of these paradoxes allows these fallacies to continue unchecked, particularly in the minds of those for whom the influential opinion of political leaders is seen and understood as truth. The peaking state homophobic campaign in Zimbabwe and Namibia in the mid to late nineties provided the opportunity for LGBT organisations (GALZ and TRP) to begin public rights-based campaigns that led to many women’s and general human rights organisations internationally and locally coming out in support of and expressing solidarity with LGBT people’s human rights in those countries, among them, Hivos. In 1998 attempts made to organise LGBT Zambians into a formalised group, known as Legatra, to be hosted by the Zambian Independent Monitoring Trust (ZIMT), were met with high level political hostility communicated through that nation’s media. Then Zambian President, Frederick Chiluba, echoed the discourse of Mugabe and Nujoma, labelling homosexuality ‘un-African’ and importantly – having declared Zambia a Christian nation – ‘un-Christian’. The state-controlled Registrar of Companies refused to register Legatra as an organisation, and several strongly worded statements from Zambia’s Vice-President, Home Affairs Minister, Legal Affairs Minister and other Ministers of state, communicated the state’s position on homosexuality, threatening that anyone associated with spearheading such an organisation would be arrested and jailed, and anyone “agitating” for homosexual practices would be arrested for criminal acts or conspiring to commit criminal acts.46 The second half of the period under study – 2000 to 2006 – witnessed fewer public expressions of homophobia in Namibia, Zimbabwe and Zambia – in the cases of Zimbabwe and Zambia, perhaps due to the retreat of LGBT groups from the public sphere. State homophobia in Namibia continued occasionally over this period, offset by strong independent media, human rights and women’s organisations’ rejecting state homophobia based on the country’s founding human rights-based Constitution. By 2000, a retreat from overt homophobia from political leaders in Zimbabwe and Namibia was evident by their relative silence on these issues, while in Botswana, at the launch of its 2000 UN Human Development Report, Botswana’s President, Festus Mogae, publicly expressed tolerance of LGBT people when he said: “Don’t be judgemental on homosexuals.” But the selective memory of certain members of state was revealed when, in 2006, Botswana’s Assistant Minister of Labour and Home Affairs, Olifant Mfa (during an interview with The Botswana Gazette47) on homosexuality said: It is barbaric, whether you argue it from the perspective of religion or culture… I think we should tackle it from the cultural perspective – it has not been heard of in our culture. At the same time as Mfa’s move toward the marginalisation of LGBT people in Botswana, a similar trend was picked up in South Africa when the campaign for same sex marriage peaked with public hearings in 2006, when MPs and community leaders had the opportunity to publicly vent their homophobia throughout the country. Homophobic campaigns embarked on by leaders in Zimbabwe, Namibia, Zambia and Botswana, citing ‘tradition’, law and religion marked out the parameters for speaking or thinking about LGBT issues at 45 From a letter to the editor in The Namibian newspaper of 31 January 1997, responding to homophobic

utterances by Namibia’s then President, Sam Nujoma, of homosexuality being ‘un-African’ and ‘European’ and therefore in need of elimination, by pointing out the double-standards evident in the Presidency’s favouring of Lear Jets and Mercedes Benz’s as means-of-transport-of-choice, that, unlike homosexuality, do indeed originate in Europe, but are considered desirable, acceptable, and certainly not in need of elimination.

46 Media coverage including articles and editorials in various Zambian newspapers including The Post, 14 September 1998, The Post, 17 September 1998, The Post, 21 September 1998, The Post, 23 September 1998, the Sunday Times of Zambia, 20 September 1998, The Sunday Mail, 27 September 1998.

47 Botswana Gazette, 24 – 30 May 2006: 3, Homosexuality is rubbish

44

a public level, an echo of which was heard in South Africa during the 2006 public hearings, reflecting the fact that legal reform as process stands separate to lived reality, and, more importantly, that legal gains can be eroded by verbalising discourses of un-Africanness – the effects of which becomes evident in violent attacks of vulnerable LGBT people. On a more positive note, the Malawian Minister of Health, discussing strategies to curb the HIV pandemic at a meeting of SADC Ministers of Health, in 2006, called for the decriminalising of homosexuality in SADC countries, a hopeful sign of potential changes to come.

4.1.2.3 Culture and Religion

While various kinds of African traditional religious systems had been practiced for centuries before the coming of Christianity, as with socially accepted norms, these have either been adapted to match Christianity, or have been practiced alongside Christianity, complementing the latter. The explicit condemnation of (male) homosexuality in the Christian tradition has provided a further argument to support homophobia. The ‘sinfulness’ of homosexuality and discourses of LGBT life being ‘un-African’ have been spread effectively through church structures. While no specific statistical study was made of LGBT people from religious homes or backgrounds, the high percentage48 of such people who are beneficiaries/clients/members of LGBT groups, suggests that coming to terms with their sexuality in a context of significant religious teaching, was difficult and stressful for their psycho-social well-being. As is illustrated in examples from country contexts (chapters 5 – 11), religious intolerance, combined with a lack of understanding of LGBT people, further fuel homophobia and homophobic violence. Changes have however taken place in Namibia – where TRP has had success in involving church leaders in a process of dialogue about homosexuality – and in South Africa, where the Dutch Reformed Church (lobbied by OUT) as entity, came out in support of the Civil Union Bill in 2006. Prior to this, support from the Anglican Archbishop Tutu (in support of the inclusion of the sexual orientation clause in the Constitution of South Africa) had leant additional credence to the cause of LGBT emancipation. And the coming out of senior members of the Anglican clergy has meant LGBT organisations have support in the form of religious patrons, despite the fact that the Anglican Church still stands divided on whether a liberal stance toward homosexuality is appropriate. In 1998 a resolution was passed by the Anglican Communion49 stating that homosexual acts are “incompatible with Scripture”50 in addition to a statement declaring that this policy would not be the final word and that research would continue. As an expression of moral authority, these resolutions carry considerable weight in churches and diocese. Where, in Botswana, an Anglican bishop of the Church of the Province of Central Africa had been vociferous in calling for moderation regarding the church’s attitude toward homosexuality – urging churches to instead focus on social problems like poverty and HIV/AIDS – the tensions of acceptance from priests in his diocese have called for his removal as Dean, based on the bishop not considering Batswana culture in his condoning of homosexuality, which, it is feared, could change the church’s conservative position on homosexuality.

48 An estimation from focus group and individual interviews is in the region of 45 - 65%, depending on the social

context. For example, 70% of women interviewed through FEW came from homes where one or both parents were either lay ministers, deacons, elders or active in another facet of church life. In Namibia, the figure is estimated at around 50%; and in more liberal, ‘westernised’ contexts, the estimations are considerably lower.

49 The Anglican Communion is a world-wide affiliation of Anglican Churches. 50 At the 1998 periodical assembly of bishops of the Anglican Communion, this resolution was passed by a vote

of 526-70. While these assemblies (Lambeth Conferences) have no constitutional powers, the conference represents the “mind of the Communion” on such issues such as women’s ordination and homosexual behaviour.

45

The Province of Central Africa includes Botswana, Malawi, Zambia and Zimbabwe, and stands opposed to the liberal stance of the Anglican Church of Southern Africa (both toward homosexuality and the ordaining of women), which includes Angola, Lesotho, Mozambique, Namibia, Saint Helena, South Africa and Swaziland. The Anglican Communion is currently divided in its stance on homosexual practice, including the consecration of same-sex unions – a debate that is indicating potential rifts in the Communion. Where, in Namibia and South Africa, churches and church groups through dialogue have gradually begun to show an openness to speaking and learning about LGBT issues, the broader fluidity of cultural norms shaped by context and political leadership reveals possibilities for shifting from homophobia to acceptance. The influence of the Church of the Province of Central Africa in stance and attitude towards homosexuality over parishioners and broader society cannot be overlooked. Given the strength of the anti-homosexuality lobby, the Anglican Churches of Kenya and Nigeria (and the proposed split from the Anglican Communion), may have a broader negative influence over the Central African Church and its attitude towards homosexuality.

4.1.2.4 Public Visibility of LGBT People

Kathy, a lesbian respondent in Zimbabwe, recalled her childhood experience of 30 years ago, when she “knew lots of gay people, drag queens and the like in my community, but never any women. I know there were lesbian women, but they were shy, they stayed at home, they had their own social groups.” While respondents to the online OiA survey included lesbians above the age of 50,51 of the 132 lesbians interviewed, only 6 were between the ages of 45 and 55. Most members and beneficiaries of all organisations surveyed fell into the under thirty age group, followed by those between 30 and 35.52 The absence of a critical mass of older women reached through organisations points to either: a. the choice of many lesbian women in these contexts to not live outwardly lesbian lives, choosing to keep their sexual orientation to the confines of the domestic sphere, and/or b. discomfort relating to the label LGBT noted across most contexts, with older women in same-sex relationships not self-identifying as lesbian and/or c. not having an interest in becoming involved in the work of LGBT organisations. While more older men participate in the activities of organisations than older women, across sexes, participation of older LGBT people in South African LGBT organisations is low. While a number of South African LGBT organisations are headed by women, across country contexts homosexual men remain more visible in the public sphere than women in the time-period of this PE. 4.1.2.5 Safety in Public Spaces There is a difference between how safe LGBT people feel versus the reality of actual events. Violence against lesbians, along with fears of violence expressed by lesbian respondents, reflects a high level of intolerance of lesbians and transgenders. In all of the countries, LGBT people whose sexual identities cannot be hidden (such as butch women or femme men and cross-dressers), are at the highest risk of verbal and violent physical attack. In South Africa, butch lesbians in townships – who through their appearance and being, challenge accepted gender norms of what women are meant to be and look like – are increasingly the targets of violent attacks that include gang-rape, aimed at correcting their subversive appearance and behaviour, to turn them into ‘real’ women.

51 Of the 260 online respondents, 97 were female, 10 of whom between the ages of 45 and 60. From the same

survey, 13 men were between the ages of 45 and 70. 52 For detail on target groups, see Annex 4: Target Audience Profiles.

46

LGBT people who are not visibly different (such as feminine women and masculine men) are at least risk of homophobic violence or abuse, although violence is not precluded if the sexual orientation of a feminine woman or a masculine man is publicly known in their communities. An average of 57% of LGBT respondents across countries had experienced victimisation in some form or another as a direct result of their sexual identity. 22% of BtM respondents and 45% of TRP respondents had been threatened verbally. This kind of abuse occurred predominantly on the street (see Victimisation table above).53 The Forum for the Empowerment of Women (FEW)54 an organisation for black lesbians from townships in and around Johannesburg, launched a campaign in 2003 to track hate crimes perpetrated against lesbians.55 During the first year of the campaign FEW recorded the rapes, assaults and abuse of 33 black lesbians in Johannesburg and surrounding townships, between the ages of 16 and 35. Of the women who were subjected to hate crimes, 24 of the 33 were described as butch women who had been attacked in townships. 56 In 2004, known rape hate crimes reported to local police stations around Johannesburg were of lesbians under the age of 24, brutally raped by men who were not strangers to them in black townships surrounding Johannesburg. Since then known incidents have included an attack of a lesbian during the annual Johannesburg Pride with a broken bottle while she was on the FEW float, recurrent violent beatings of lesbians in townships, the murder of a young black lesbian in a Cape Town township, beaten with golf clubs, stoned and stabbed to death in front of her home by a gang of men, and the double murder in July 2007 of two black lesbian activists from a Johannesburg township. In all of the cases, including the most recent, no prosecutions had been made, a sign to attackers and potential attackers that they can and will literally get away with murder. Where respondents from the other countries relayed stories of victimisation on the street, in the form of name-calling and threats, with a small percentage of transgender men telling of physical abuse,57 South African respondents listed severe physical attacks against them. The fact of South Africa’s violent history, and increasing levels of violent crime in South Africa, provide a partial explanation. Increasing economic and social stressors add another reason, though the indication from research done by FEW is that problems often lie more centrally in social (often familial) intolerance of homosexuality, where the abusers are known to the survivors, in some cases being daughter, sister, cousin or niece of the perpetrator, where liberal laws protecting LGBT people do not automatically translate into tolerance or acceptance of homosexuality in society.

4.1.2.6 Media Representations of LGBT People and Issues

The power of media, particularly in reflecting how society views itself and in influencing public opinion, is a key consideration in how LGBT-related stories have been covered, and for possibilities of

53 In focus groups, participants noted higher levels of abuse and victimisation than in the paper surveys, which

could be attributed to participants feeling more confident to speak than to write in contexts of strong oral traditions, and a greater confidence to speak than to write in English which was generally not the first language of beneficiaries.

54 A Hivos partner reached through the capacity-building programme with Atlantic Philanthropies. See Chapter 5, JWG.

55 The campaign, titled The Rose has Thorns, involves victim support; community interventions; lobbying and advocacy for anti-hate crimes legislation and a more effective response from the criminal justice system; research; and service provider training.

56 Attempts to gather total reported rapes or other forms of homophobic violence against lesbians by year from FEW was not successful. As such, these figures reflect information that the researchers were able to access, and do not claim to be comprehensive by any means.

57 One respondent in Botswana who had been beaten, was a Somali refugee who had come out to others in the refugee camp he was in. The other male respondent who had been physically abused and raped was a Namibian male – female transgender.

47

greater acceptance by the populace. Media plays a significant role in communicating ‘truths’, values and norms in the ways in which stories are told. Findings on media coverage of LGBT issues have been clustered around four themes: • Knowledge of LGBT life and experience; • Cultural and religious influences; • Sensationalist coverage; • The power of the media to effect or influence change.

4.1.2.6.1 Knowledge of LGBT life

The majority of media reports on LGBT-related issues are presented from an ‘othering’ perspective of LGBT people, which does not facilitate a broad understanding of LGBT people, but rather serves to further distance LGBT people from broader society. This is borne out in the publicising of repetitive homophobic slurs by public figures. Assumptions about hyper-sexed realities in which LGBT people supposedly operate, serve to alienate and other, rather than include. This kind of coverage lends itself to misinterpretation, especially given the belief that the terms lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender are fundamentally about sexual acts rather than having genetic or physiological bases. Some media coverage reflected an insensitivity and concomitant lack of understanding in reporting LGBT stories. Reporting on the murder of a young lesbian in a Cape Town township, the Sunday Times,58 a widely read weekly South African newspaper, published a photograph of three of the woman’s friends, unconsciously exposing them to harm, outing them to their families, communities and the general public, giving evidence of a lack of consideration and understanding of the crime itself, and the potential repercussions of outing vulnerable people. Because of many LGBT people’s fears of exposure and its associated implications, untruths and negative stereotyping presented in the media often goes unchecked by LGBT people, as is true in the particularly repressive case of Zambia where the media have free reign. In South Africa, with legal backing, it is considerably easier for LGBT people (often under the banner of an LGBT organisation) to refute untruths and challenge media on the nature of coverage of LGBT people and issues. Proactive LGBT organisations that make strategic and regular use of mainstream media have increased LGBT visibility in South Africa and Namibia and have played an important role in bringing LGBT people in from the obscurity of exclusion in the media. In South African media – the most progressive among the countries in terms of coverage of LGBT issues – media coverage in the form of news and portrayals in entertainment (including soap operas) has – since 2005 – begun to include black African LGBT people, reflecting both an acceptance of the existence of LGBT people and somewhat of a normalisation of LGBT life within broader society, while still clinging onto stereotypical portrayals of LGBT people. In the other countries, particularly Zimbabwe, Malawi and Zambia, state-owned media in particular have played a key role in keeping LGBT life obscure and hidden, and when included, representing homosexuality as a threat to be eliminated.

4.1.2.6.2 Cultural influences and fear of breaking taboos

Journalists, like other citizens, come from, and subscribe to certain cultural systems that provide lenses through which to look at, understand and evaluate reality and experience. In Zimbabwe and Zambia in particular – and historically, all of the 7 countries – these cultural influences delegate LGBT life and people to the peripheral realms of unacceptability. Media content is often focused on the ‘unnaturalness’ and the ‘immorality’ of homosexuality, linking homosexuality to bestiality, describing it as a ‘psycho-sexual disturbance’ with powerful church groupings calling for the banning of any organisations supportive of homosexuality.

58 http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/News/0,,2-7-1442_1885993,00.html (22/02/2006)

48

In this way giving media space to influential leaders from various parts of society to make homophobic statements continues to feed the idea of homosexuality being other and abnormal, constantly reasserting certain ‘traditional’ and religious attitudes towards homosexuality in the minds of the media consuming public. Strong negative cultural attitudes toward LGBT people influence what can be said about LGBT people, and more: what can be thought about LGBT people. This kind of silencing is more of an internalisation than an external awareness and adherence to cultural or political laws that define what one can and cannot speak about in public, and has revealed itself particularly in those media – notably in Zambia, Malawi (in the past) and Zimbabwe – that have kept their distance from publishing anything on LGBT people, unless it came from the mouths of political or religious leaders. In this regard, state positions have largely influenced what journalists cover and what they don’t, and the understanding of which boundaries can and cannot be pushed. In Zimbabwe and Namibia, where political leaders had made their opinions on homosexuality quite clear, state media have toed the line, with more progressive, independent media in Namibia attempting to present more balanced perspectives on homosexuality. The fear of challenging taboos, of thinking differently (as opposed to homophobic intolerance of LGBT people) about LGBT people and life can result in unspoken censorship – as was the case in Namibian broadcast media that chose not to air a story of police brutality against gay men – for fear of the leader of state’s response, thereby keeping police brutality towards LGBT people in the margins and out of the public sphere. The cultural factors that have kept LGBT people closeted are evident also in media reticence to raise the taboo subject, and by a disinclination to contradict socially accepted values in reference to LGBT people. In all of the countries studied, coverage of LGBT stories was initially largely repetitious of the homophobia expressed by public figures. In the case of Zambia, with no space for alternative views, bigotry has continued unchecked; a situation that has provided further reason for Zambian LGBT people to remain firmly closeted.

4.1.2.6.3 Sensationalist coverage

While sensationalism should by and large be evaluated within the understanding of media as profit-driven entity, the consistent coverage of LGBT issues in sensational and stereotypical ways offers insight into media perceptions of LGBT life as entertainment (with sales value). This in part explains why media coverage of violence against LGBT people is so limited. In South Africa, where violence against lesbians and transgenders is on the increase, media coverage has been slow to pick up on this violent trend. Media report on some cases of violence, but largely violence against LGBT people receives little coverage, unless the option of sensationalism exists. Poor, black, lesbian women are simply not very newsworthy. In South Africa, reports of violent deaths of lesbians – as a result of their sexual identities – have appeared in disproportionally short reports in less prominent parts of print media. With the recent efforts of LGBT organisations to draw media attention to these crimes, mainstream media have begun to pay more attention to these trends, and by mid-2006, a positive shift towards greater media attention was discernable. While media sensationalism is prevalent in coverage of LGBT issues in South Africa – often expressed in the choice of particularly sensational headlines that make mention of sexual orientation in a way that it is never mentioned when coverage concerns heterosexuals – this is gradually reducing in more policy-influential media such as the Mail & Guardian (M&G), Business Day and the Sunday

49

Independent. These elite media, read by decision-makers, policy-makers and other influential people, often set the tone and lead trends in reportage that other media follow. Observing their practices regarding coverage of LGBT people and issues is therefore strategic. Gradual shifts in how these media report on LGBT issues are evident over the ten year period, reflecting signs of a greater integration and ‘normalisation’ of LGBT issues. The legal recognition and protection of LGBT rights had to some extent facilitated the beginnings of a normalisation of coverage of LGBT issues in influential South African media. While the tendency to reflect certain stereotypes in headlines and images persists, with images of drag queens and cross-dressers remaining a favourite way of representing LGBT people, South Africa’s tabloid newspapers, whose readership expect sensation, continue to cover all issues – LGBT included – sensationally. The M&G’s extensive and consistent coverage of the annual OiA gay and lesbian film festival in its culture pages reflects signs of an integrating, celebratory normalisation of gay life in South Africa. Other South African media have followed the lead of the M&G, dedicating significant column space, particularly in the arts and culture pages of newspapers to the annual film festival. Similar examples from Namibia, Botswana, Malawi and Mozambique indicate that there are pockets of balanced, and sometimes sympathetic coverage, that encourages debate about what informs homophobia in these countries. This reflects signs of a shift away from generalised media homophobia towards some openness to debate homosexuality in many southern African countries. This is clearly evidenced in Malawi’s pro-LGBT lobby organisation, the Centre for the Development of People (CEDEP), securing media space in 2006 in local newspapers to provide alternative, human-rights based coverage of homosexuality. In Mozambique, well-respected journalists have begun making use of the media space available to them to write and speak in favour of gay rights, and certain Batswana newspapers have, in 2006, agreed to giving space to sponsored columns59 that are dedicated to LGBT issues to raise awareness of the existence of native LGBT people in these countries. Zambia and Zimbabwean media reflect more consistently sensationalist, often hysterical coverage than other countries, or complete silence on LGBT issues.

4.1.2.6.4 The power of the media to effect change

The power of the media to communicate information is enhanced by the fact that audiences and readers assume that media presents ‘truths’. The absence of measures that evaluate the truth, relevance or appropriateness of statements made in or by the media – especially in societies that put the truth of media information at the level of ‘indisputable’ – serves to entrench either the negative or positive values presented by the media in broader society. From the public attitudes survey, respondents who felt homosexuality was a disease or un-African, indicated that media coverage made them feel all the more that LGBT people were not normal. During interviews where such sentiments were expressed, the power of media choices in how information is presented reveal media power in imparting ‘truths,’ in turn affecting how people perceive the world around them. Thus, in contexts where media reflect anti-gay sentiments, it is likely to influence its readers, listeners or viewers, in this direction, whereas when media reflect LGBT people in society as ordinary people, media consumers start to view LGBT people as ‘normal’. This finding points to an opportunity for LGBT organisations to strategically use mainstream and other media for shifting public opinion of LGBT people.

59 Hivos provided micro-fund support to Bonela to enable Legabibo to run a series of columns on LGBT issues in

select Batswana media.

50

In this regard, the amount of media coverage, coupled with the opinions of other, more general human rights organisations, plays a strategic role in influencing public attitudes. In Namibia, in addition to TRP’s responses to state expressions of homophobia, debates and challenges to homophobia came from other human rights and women’s organisations, so opening the possibility of broader social change in the direction of tolerance or acceptance. Initial positive signs of such a trend are discernable in Malawi. South Africa, where the amount of media coverage relating to LGBT issues is based on both a long history and the strong influence of legal reforms, illustrates this point, in relation to consumers of more progressive media – a group that is resourced and educated. In South Africa the process of consistently raising LGBT issues within human rights frameworks, aided the process of change and acceptance of the existence of indigenous LGBT people. In Mozambique, where literacy levels are low, and the majority of the reading public cannot afford to buy print media due to the high levels of unemployment, the power of the media to influence its public lies in radio; a tool that was well-utilised during the period leading up to the first conference on homosexuality held in that country in 2006. In Zambia and Zimbabwe, subsequent to peaks in media coverage on LGBT issues linked to homophobic expressions by political leadership, there has been a relative silence on coverage of LGBT issues, except in the case of Zimbabwe, regarding the annual ZIBF and GALZ’s annual attempts to participate in it and the ensuing attempts to destroy the GALZ stand, or to stop GALZ from setting up its stand. In all of the countries that have state-owned media, such media reflects the views of the political leadership that often means silence on these issues unless a leader makes homophobic comments. In general, independent media in southern Africa appear to be more receptive to fair coverage of LGBT issues than state-owned media. This is starkly illustrated in Namibia where state-owned media have an unspoken ban on coverage of LGBT issues, while independent media continue to cover LGBT issues in less biased ways. Notably public debate on LGBT people’s human rights, and a spotlight on discriminatory laws and policies that had previously not entered the public discourse, have begun to appear in media reports through the efforts of organisations in Malawi and Botswana. The shift from entirely homophobic and sensationalist reporting on LGBT life and issues to more balanced and fair coverage applies most to South Africa, in part because the country has had a longer history of public discourse on homosexuality and because LGBT visibility has made it less of a novelty to report in a sensationalist fashion. In the public opinion survey, on the question as to change in perspectives brought about by the media, 26% indicated that the media had played a role in their coming to understand LGBT people better; and 27% had come to see LGBT people as ordinary people through consuming media.60 In all of these instances, letters to the editor columns have, as a result, reflected a rush of responses from regular readers of newspapers giving media space to coverage of LGBT issues, encouraging more open debate on homosexuality and homophobia. Offended letter writers most often invoked Christianity, un-Africanness, mental illness, depravity, unnaturalness, sinfulness, foreign ‘Western’ ways and the moral wrongness of homosexuality in their objections.

60 It is important to mention again that the majority of respondents to this survey fits into the category of those

who have a high level of personal mobility in terms of living standards measures like education and income, as well as being racially dominated by white respondents.

51

Given the heightened responses to publicising LGBT issues – initially negative – in all countries, followed by sensation, and a slow move toward inclusion and balance, Zambian media seem to suggest a need to protect the country’s African integrity, something that could only be preserved to the exclusion of LGBT people. While it is outside the frameworks of this study, similar closing of rank patterns have been evident in Uganda, Kenya and Nigeria where in recent times homosexuality has been more actively stifled under the rubric of protecting African values and norms. When a similar line was followed in Namibia, it was the persistent presentation of alternatives by both progressive media and general human rights organisations that caused a shift to more balanced public views of LGBT life and rights.

4.1.3 Changes at the Level of Society: Policies and Legislation

In the region as a whole, two legal precedents were set on opposing ends of the spectrum towards and away from LGBT emancipation during the period covered by this PE: the 1996 successful inclusion of the ‘sexual orientation clause’ in the Constitution of South Africa, making it the first country in the world to protect citizens from discrimination based on sexual orientation at a constitutional level (and the resultant overturning of a wide range of legislation deemed unconstitutional in South Africa), and the 1998 ‘gender-inclusive’ amendment to Botswana’s penal code to extend the sections on “carnal knowledge against the order of nature,” or “consenting to another person performing such an act on oneself” to include women, where it had previously – as is still the case in the other countries in this study – only applied to men. All of the countries that form part of this study, except for South Africa, have penal codes or other pieces of legislation in place that date back to the colonial era. Most of these codes do not mention homosexuality explicitly, but make reference to ‘unnatural acts’ or ‘crimes against the order of nature’. In the countries that have penal codes in place, human rights lawyers61 and activists argue that it is not homosexuality per se (i.e. homosexual lifestyles and relationships) that is criminalised, but homosexual sexual acts between two people that are criminalised. It would therefore follow that homosexual people should be able to live together, and express affection for each other without any fear of legal censure. They should also be able to associate with each other through organisations, groupings and social events and be able to access services (healthcare, education) and resources from the state, like other citizens. This is, however, not the case. From the perspectives of the state and judiciaries in these countries, homosexuality per se appears to be understood to be criminalised. It is for this reason that the Registrar for Companies in both Botswana and Zambia have refused to register LGBT organisations in those countries, as it is their understanding that homosexuality is a criminal offence, and they make no distinction between homosexual sexual acts and living homosexual lifestyles. While these constraints have in a few cases lead to arrests and the threatened penalty of imprisonment if discovered, these laws are less strictly enforced than public expressions of homophobia from political leaders would have us believe. According to Numwa (ILGA Africa Report, 2000), many Zambian gay men were arrested following attempts to launch Legatra and charged under the Penal code of Zambia, though after a great deal of publicity, the cases were usually dropped or settled out of court. The courts throw many of these cases out of court for lack of evidence and usually the parties concerned agree on terms of payment after one has taken the other to court. It was during this time – despite findings that the South African public was largely homophobic – that at least 35 pieces of legislation found to be contradictory to the the country’s Constitution62 were overturned, setting legal precedents that would open the way to full equality before the law.

61 In Namibia and Botswana in particular, human rights lawyers have been proactive at ensuring their alternative

interpretations of laws circulate in the public sphere. The new Malawian organisation, CEDEP is doing similar work, using local media to circulate alternative views in the public sphere.

62 Enabling, amongst others, LGBT people the right to adopt children and the right of foreign partners of LGBT

52

A 2001 ruling by Namibia’s Supreme Court overturned an earlier High Court judgement to grant permanent residence to Liz Frank, based on her long term relationship with her Namibian woman partner. The Supreme Court judgement drew on homophobic statements by Nujoma and Ekanjo as indications of the dominant values of the country, concluding that the trend in the country was to move away from guaranteeing equality based on sexual orientation. This judgement set a precedent for not recognising same-sex relationships as equal to heterosexual relationships, arguing that Namibia’s Constitution made no reference to such protection.63 A Botswana High Court ruling echoed a similar sentiment after a constitutional challenge to its sodomy laws following the arrest of a gay Motswana man found guilty of contravening the country’s Penal Code. Legal counsel for the gay man challenged the constitutionality of its Penal Code, but the judgement found that the Penal Code was not unconstitutional, and that it was necessary to “prevent harm to public morality,” finding that public morality supersedes rights to privacy. Botswana’s Penal Code was subsequently extended to apply to women’s same relations in order to be ‘gender sensitive’. By the end of 2006 the Civil Union Act, recognising same-sex life partnerships, was passed into law in South Africa, concluding the period of this PE on a positive and hopeful legal note. With South Africa’s dominance in the southern African region, the possibility of South Africa setting precedents on sexual orientation has the potential to either positively or negatively affect the stances of its neighbours, depending on how they view South Africa’s dominance in the region and its position on homosexuality. While it may not be imminent, the fact that initial steps have been taken in Malawi and Mozambique, to opening up the debate around legal reform, along with ongoing efforts from human rights organisations in Botswana, the space created by such discussion marks possibilities for positive change in the direction of emancipation. If compared with the trajectory of LGBT efforts in Zambia, then the paths chosen by Malawian and Mozambican groups have been extremely well received, with clear space for constructive engagement and hopeful signs for a future where all citizens rights are protected equally. Despite the negative legal precedents in Botswana and Namibia, the fact that LGBT groupings continue to lobby and advocate for their rights, and are able to continue operating (to different degrees), marks out space for change. In Zambia signs toward legal or social change in favour of LGBT rights are not discernable over the time period covered in this study. Findings a) The section above details the range of changes that have occurred towards LGBT emancipation in the countries studied over the period covered by this PE. The levels and extent of change has differed significantly from context to context, depending on legality of homosexuality and levels of homophobia. While LGBT people generally prefer to avoid accessing public services, the fact that some LGBT organisations provide certain services has meant that LGBT people in homophobic contexts are able to access services through organisations. As a result of their participation in the work of LGBT organisations, the vast majority of LGBT informants noted higher levels of security of person, a significant and life-enhancing positive change. In general there is greater visibility of LGBT people in the public sphere, but this differs from context to context. According to Zambian informants, there is certainly no visibility of LGBT people in the public sphere. Over this time period a number of LGBT organisations have started up, including in Mozambique and Malawi where there had previously been no known LGBT groupings. These developments are positive indicators of change towards LGBT emancipation. The continued existence of GALZ in Zimbabwe, despite a harshly repressive political context also counts as a positive sign towards LGBT emancipation. In Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Malawi there is increased

citizens to reside in South Africa.

63 With the support of the Legal Assistance Centre (a Hivos partner), Frank was eventually granted permanent residence based on her professional expertise (Frank, December 2001).

53

levels of LGBT participation and representation in public policy and decision-making spaces. In all contexts self-expression is limited due to widespread homophobia and concomitant fear on the part of LGBT people. In all contexts LGBT people who are visibly different (and less resourced) are vulnerable to attack and other forms of discrimination thereby limiting the freedoms of LGBT people to fully express themselves. In all contexts there are high levels of stigma and discrimination regarding homosexuality with culture and religion often used to justify homophobia. Visibly different LGBT people are not safe in public spaces and are vulnerable to attack that could range from name-calling to gang-rape and murder. In some contexts media representations have begun to shift towards greater normalisation while in others there are unspoken bans placed on media coverage of LGBT issues. There have been some shifts at policy and legislation level; on the positive side in South Africa and on the negative end, in Botswana. Despite this, LGBT groupings in Botswana and Malawi have started to participate in and access policy-making spaces to represent LGBT interests. b) At the positive end of changes towards LGBT emancipation have been the constitutional protections from discrimination in South Africa and the repealing of laws that are contrary to these sentiments. Other positive developments include significant changes at the personal and individual levels, human rights and women’s rights organisations’ support in certain spaces, greater media normalisation in some contexts, greater participation, representation and visibility of LGBT people in decision-making and policy-influential spaces in some contexts, but significant challenges remain. Homophobia remains widespread and appears to be taking increasingly brutal forms; culture and religion continue to be used to justify homophobia; certain civil society groupings remain hostile to LGBT emancipatory efforts; leaders of state in some contexts continue to define the discourse (negatively) regarding homosexuality; high levels of stigma and vulnerability persist with visibly different and less resourced LGBT people most vulnerable to attack.. Among LGBT people across country contexts there are high levels of fear of being ‘outed’ and the negative consequences flowing from being ‘outed’. Across the board fear, secrecy and silence largely define LGBT life in homophobic contexts. While there are clear indications towards LGBT emancipation, clear challenges remain.

4.2 Efforts of Hivos-supported LGBT Organisations

• How effective were the Hivos-supported LGBT organisations and projects in achieving their stated objectives?

• What was the reach of these Hivos supported LGBT organisations and projects? • How relevant are/were the objectives of these organisations for LGBT emancipation?

4.2.1 Effectiveness at achieving objectives

4.2.1.1 Ability to organise

Since 1994, when OiA first approached Hivos for support to its annual lesbian and gay film festival, LGBT organisations in South Africa have increased in number, and now include religious and student LGBT groups. In Zimbabwe and Namibia, the fact of GALZ and TRP’s continued legal existence indicates levels of tolerance of their existence despite state homophobia. TRP’s expansion as well as the presence of vocal human rights organisations and discourses in Namibia, suggest relative freedom to organise and associate. In Botswana, Legabibo has not been able to formally register, but the group continues to meet and function effectively through a hosting human rights organisation without any recent threat from the state or general public. In Malawi and Mozambique attempts to organise have been surprisingly well received given cultural and religious conservatism. The incumbent groups, CEDEP and LAMBDA both initiated in 2006, have chosen visible and proactive approaches to marking out space for LGBT rights discussion in society which have been largely positively received.

54

In Zambia, however, the LGBT group Legatra was disbanded shortly after it formed, with state responses to LGBT organising being so negatively received that possibilities for organising for LGBT rights in Zambia appear to be impossible at this time. The fact of growth in number and the continued existence of LGBT organisations and groups in southern Africa point to two phenomena: 1. more LGBT people are formally organising in order to work toward realising their rights and rising from the homophobia that characterises their social and political realities; and 2. a certain level of political space has been created within the constraints of socio-political frameworks, indicating a positive measure of movement towards LGBT emancipation.

4.2.1.2 Internal strength to perform

4.2.1.2.1 Ability to reach target audience

All of the organisations in this study have as their first target audience LGBT people, followed by a range of secondary audiences that include government and legislators, public service providers like educators and health care workers, researchers, media and the general public. All the countries other than South Africa have one LGBT group or organisation. In South Africa, the existence of several LGBT organisations is indicative of the plurality of its civil society, the varied needs of LGBT people throughout South Africa, and a high level of legal freedom to organise and associate as part of the country’s post-apartheid democratic culture. LGBT organisations with a clearly defined focus and carefully defined objectives that reflect an understanding of the needs of their target audiences such as Legabibo, BtM, OiA, NCGLE and GALA have been more successful at effectively reaching and serving target audiences than those organisations with broad foci and a wide variety of activities. LGBT groups, recognising the diverse needs of their target audiences have sometimes attempted to address all of these needs, to the detriment of organisational effectiveness. The tendency to want to serve all of the needs of target audiences often takes place in contexts of great need. In Namibia TRP has had to grapple with this challenge. For some organisations, the desire to be or do everything for their target audiences has meant a loss of focus and getting locked into cycles of unsustainable work overload. The NCGLE’s demise and reconstitution into the Equality Project involved these organisations attempting to serve too broad a range of members’ and target audiences’ needs, resulting in a lack of sustainability. TRP went through a difficult period of overstretching itself, and, following a strategic review process in 2003, was meant to refocus itself in purpose and related activities. At the time of the field visit TRP appeared to be struggling to implement its decisions taken as a result of the 2003 review.64 Organisations attempt to keep records of those who make use of their services, all of which indicate steady annual increases in numbers of people reached across organisations. While all organisations have LGBT people in general as target audiences, most have had difficulties with including women in their activities. This suggests either:

1) an inability to attract lesbian participation because services offered do not speak to the needs of lesbians, or

2) reservations on the part of lesbians to get involved in LGBT activities for risk of being outed in view of negative socio-cultural attitudes and responses to lesbians, or,

3) women in same-sex relationships who do not self-identify as lesbians, and as a result have no

64 TRP, having recognised a gap regarding staff development, has more consciously begun to address staff

development needs. In follow-up conversations with TRP’s director, the researchers were advised that the organisation had gone through an audit at the beginning of 2007 that involved a narrowing of focus, clear implementation plans for each project, and a revisiting of staff positions.

55

interest in participating in the work of an LGBT organisation. The two new organisations, CEDEP in Malawi, and LAMBDA in Mozambique have to date found it difficult to include women in their reach. Organisations such as GALZ, TRP, OUT and Triangle have had similar challenges in reaching women, with GALZ and TRP’s efforts reflecting sizeable improvement in including women at all levels. TRP, GALZ, GALA, the Durban Centre, Triangle and OiA have activities that reach beyond their urban bases, including LGBT people from smaller towns and rural areas in their reach. Legabibo’s plans reflect a similar commitment to reach LGBT people beyond Gaborone.

4.2.1.2.2 Ability to mobilise and manage (human and financial) resources

The ability of organisations to implement activities is dependent on leadership style, staff capacity, mobilising and managing human and financial resources, and the ability to attract and retain staff – all of which contribute to organisations’ effectiveness. All the organisations evaluated are reliant on donor funding, and most are unlikely to become completely sustainable in the sense of generating enough income aside from donor funding to cover operational costs, because of the nature of their work and the target groups served. All organisations showed an ability to manage financial resources, though attracting funding from a wider range of sources is a priority if organisations are to continue functioning, particularly for those organisations heavily reliant on the support of one or two donors. TRP, OUT, GALZ and Triangle have been particularly successful at mobilising and managing funds from a diverse range of sources, reaching an impressive level of budgetary stability. All of the staff of the organisations assessed are committed to the objectives of their organisations and the broader goal of LGBT emancipation, although organisations (with the exception of GALZ, OUT and Triangle) suffer the pressures of large workloads and small staff complements, which often leave staff feeling overstretched and pressured. Workload pressures have meant that organisations often remain in the ‘to do’ mode, with little time for reflection on the effectiveness of implementation strategies, staff and organisational development needs and capacity gaps. Staff development strategies are lacking in the majority of organisations, often in the contexts of heavy workloads and small staff teams. Overstretched staff results in staff development moving lower down the list of priorities when there is always a great deal of implementation work to be done. As a result, skills development is not pro-actively practiced, and the question of succession often remains unanswered, with new levels of leadership not being actively developed, and many organisations relying on the leadership of one (often) charismatic director The majority of directors of organisations have been with organisations from their inception including OUT, GALZ, TRP, OiA, and the Durban Centre, reflecting positive staff stability at leadership level, although staff turnover at other levels are high in some cases. Succession strategies are an area of general weakness, lacking in the majority of organisations. A number of the South African organisations have struggled to diversify at senior leadership levels in the context of South Africa’s transformation imperatives and organisations’ own transformation agendas. Triangle has a clear staff development strategy that includes coaching potential leadership to take on management level responsibilities. OUT, through its entry-level learnership programme aims to diversify the make-up of the organisation by recruiting two out-of-school black youth to be trained on-the-job every three years with the intention of them moving into staff positions at the end of the learnership period. TRP has committed to paying greater attention to staff development needs after this was identified as an area of weakness.

56

During interviews with programme staff – some of whom had left their organisations during the period of writing this report – reasons offered for high levels of staff turnover included: 65 • More competitive salaries elsewhere, • Overwhelming workload, and • Internal organisational politics. Increasing competition between the private sector, government and NGOs to attract appropriately skilled staff means that NGOs can lose potential candidates to other sectors if they cannot match or better salaries offered elsewhere. The salary scales of the eight formally registered Hivos-supported LGBT organisations visited for this study – BtM, GALA, Triangle, OUT, OiA, GALZ, TRP and the Durban Centre – range from very modest (i.e. least competitive) to moderate (i.e. reasonably fair), to the higher end of salaries that are more comparable to other sectors. At the high end of the scale are TRP, GALZ, OUT and Triangle, broadly comparable with those offered for similarly skilled staff in other sectors. Salaries at BtM, OiA and GALA fall into the mid-range of moderately fair, while salaries at the Durban Centre are at the lowest end, not comparable to salaries earned in other sectors including NGOs. While salary competitiveness is one reason for staff turnover, this has to be seen in the contexts of workload, organisational politics and the broader social context in which organisations function. If an organisation that does not have particularly high salaries has staff stability, this suggests a conducive work environment, effective management and staff commitment to what they do that goes beyond earning an income. Whereas salaries at OiA, GALA and BtM are moderate, they enjoy staff stability in a context where, if staff chose to, they could move on to higher paid jobs. At a societal level, the visibility of LGBT organisations and the fact of working at an LGBT organisation could expose some candidates to homophobia, especially if they come from hostile communities. This factor further influences who an organisation is able to attract, and the size of the pool of potential candidates. Upon further investigation into why some organisations that pay competitive salaries have high levels of staff turnover, the internal organisational politics and power relations that have made it difficult for staff to stay in an organisation relate to differences in cultures of approach, difficulties in managing diversity in a way that fosters inclusion, and a lack of flexibility to experiment with alternative approaches and knowledges. Attracting and retaining skilled staff requires leadership that encourages and builds on the strengths of individual staff, and, while this has been relatively fluid in women-run organisations (BtM, Durban, OiA, Triangle and GALA) where staff commitment levels are high, the same cannot be said for all organisations. Taking advantage of all regional and international networking and exchange opportunities has meant that some directors have prioritised such activities over internal organisation-building, resulting in spending, during 2006 in particular, a large chunk of the year away from home organisations. These prolonged absences placed strain on organisations and impacted on organisational performance, especially where effective strategies for filling gaps were not in place, and staff skills and leadership development activities were put on hold or left undeveloped. Engaging and sharing strategies across borders forms an important part of organisational and personal development, particularly when balanced with prioritising internal organisational strengthening. Organisations that have been successful at adapting to changed social contexts, including the needs of new target audiences, such as GALA, BtM and OiA, are proving tenacious at working to address homophobia in the public sphere in creative ways, a positive sign of organisational adaptability and effectiveness.

65 In a few cases staff have been relieved of their positions because of financial indiscretions. Directors offered

more competitive salaries and workloads as reasons why staff have left.

57

4.2.1.3 External networking and alliance-building

4.2.1.3.1 Strategic alliances between LGBT organisations

LGBT organisations in the region are aware of each other and efforts are made to work together on matters of joint interest. This holds true across borders, especially for GALZ and TRP where there are no other LGBT organisations in their respective countries, and BtM who has ongoing skills-building and information sharing relationships with a range of LGBT organisations throughout the African continent. Similarly, GALA has, in recent years extended its archive holdings and networks to include a greater diversity of African knowledge and information in order to better serve as an African LGBT repository and resource beyond the borders of its country location. OiA and GALA make effective use of the networks of other LGBT organisations to better reach audiences in South Africa and the southern Africa region more broadly. Both GALA and OiA use other Africa-wide networks such as the Coalition of African Lesbians, and LGBT groupings with whom they have had dealings in the past to circulate the video suitcase66 (OiA), and publications (GALA). In South Africa, the Joint Working Group (JWG) – a loose affiliation of LGBT organisations from around the country – facilitates working together, particularly on public lobbying and advocacy strategies and applied research.

4.2.1.3.2 Links with Human Rights and Women’s Organisations

The majority of human rights and women’s organisations surveyed, are aware of an/the LGBT organisation in their urban region or country. Legabibo, for example, has developed positive relationships with human rights and HIV/AIDS organisations in Botswana. In Namibia and South Africa LGBT organisations enjoy positive relationships with women’s, HIV/AIDS and human rights organisations. Some of these organisations, many of them Hivos partners such as Sister Namibia, the National Society for Human Rights (Namibia), Legal Assistance Centre (Namibia), Women’sNet (South Africa), Agenda Feminist Media Project (South Africa) and GenderLinks (South Africa) include LGBT issues in their work. In South Africa this is rarely as a result of lobbying from an LGBT organisation or Hivos, but more often stems from understanding LGBT rights as human and women’s rights. Human rights and women’s organisations in Zimbabwe showed resistance and reticence to engage with LGBT issues as a result of the political climate in that country. Padare, a Hivos-supported men’s forum in Zimbabwe expressed willingness to collaborate with GALZ, making use of their community networks to discuss homosexuality among men in villages and towns. Zambian human rights and women’s organisations displayed a stark resistance to engaging with LGBT issues. In Mozambique, through LDH, as a result of Hivos’ encouragement – space has been created to begin a process of alliance-building with human rights and women’s organisations. In Malawi, a Hivos human rights partner, the Malawi Human Rights Resource Centre, have made submissions to the state regarding changes to the country’s constitution, including a clause against discrimination based on sexual orientation. This, as a result of no proactive lobbying from LGBT groups or Hivos. In the region more broadly, as well as internationally, tensions are emerging with some women’s organisations reluctant to include lesbian issues in women’s rights agendas for fear of risking what

66 OiA makes available a ‘video suitcase’ to LGBT groupings inside and outside South Africa where their film

festival does not physically reach. The video suitcase quite literally contains a selection of films shown at the festival provided at no cost to LGBT organisations and groupings to arrange local screenings.

58

gains have been made in addressing gender inequalities by engaging in contentious issues like lesbian rights. These tensions seem to stem from a fear that women’s activism – in order to strengthen its position in patriarchal society – needs to find more points of connection and integration with male counterparts, instead of the (assumed) greater distancing that the inclusion of lesbian issues would bring, and the possibility of then losing ground and support.

4.2.1.3.3 Strategic links with other organisations

LGBT organisations in South Africa, Namibia, Botswana, Mozambique and Malawi, to different degrees, have developed or are developing strategic links with some media organisations, creating opportunities for greater media engagement with LGBT issues. This is not the case in Zimbabwe and Zambia.

4.2.1.4 Activities toward broader social change

Organisations have different priority areas (see Priority table in Chapter 3) and in the 1995 to 2006 period, only one (NCGLE) had explicitly named structural social change as priority area. While broader social change is not named as explicit priority, a number of organisations’ activities have indirectly contributed to change beyond individual LGBT people. In Namibia, TRP’s ongoing strategy of dialogue with churches has opened the possibility for increased acceptance of LGBT people in some church congregations. Pressuring the Namibian and Zimbabwean heads of state to halt expressions of state homophobia, using supportive civil society groups, international pressure, and by challenging in-country human rights rhetoric that includes ratifying international human rights conventions, have proven to be effective in reducing vocal state homophobia in these contexts, confirming the importance of solidarity networks and alliances across borders for securing positive change. The lobbying efforts of the South African NCGLE provide a study in effective strategising that resulted in significant, positive LGBT law reform. Beginning with lobbying at a political level during negotiations between the apartheid state and liberation movements, using the discourse of freedom from discrimination and respect for the human rights and dignity of all its citizens, secured this change in the country’s founding democratic constitution.

4.2.2 Reach of Hivos-supported LGBT organisations

Significant demographic shifts have taken place in the membership and beneficiaries of LGBT organisations in the last ten years with organisations reaching increasing numbers of LGBT people seeking out LGBT organisations, including target audiences outside of the main cities. In general organisations have become more inclusive of LGBT people from less resourced areas a result of larger social developments. In South Africa it was the struggle for freedom from apartheid; in Namibia and Zimbabwe it was the homophobic statements of the country’s political leaders that drew out gay people from different social and economic backgrounds and prompted them to join LGBT organisations and take political positions on utterances that affected their human rights. This shift in demographics resulted in organisations being challenged to rethink their priorities in order to meet the needs expressed by their new target audiences, beneficiaries and members. Whereas, for GALZ, OUT and Triangle, organisations initially served as informal social clubs for a majority white middle-class male group, the shedding of its identity as social club has meant a loss of the earlier membership, and a re-evaluation of the organisational approaches and priorities in relation to the needs of the new beneficiaries. For the Out in Africa film festival, also historically attended by resourced groups, this has meant initiating a satellite festival that travels to underserved areas, specifically targeting historically disadvantaged groups at no cost, and making a percentage of main festival tickets freely available and providing transport for historically disadvantaged groups to the main festival.

59

In Zimbabwe, Namibia and Botswana, the current demographic profiles of target audiences are representative of the racial and economic realities in the country, although in Zimbabwe and Namibia the inclusion of a greater number of less-resourced members coincided with a significant withdrawal of white middle-class members/participants. In this section, demographic breakdown of people reached by LGBT organisations has been divided into sex, age, sexual identity, racial identity, and living standards measures (education, income and habitat). The purpose of this is to provide a clearer insight into LGBT people reached by Hivos-supported LGBT organisations.

4.2.2.1 Sex

Increasing the numbers of women beneficiaries of Hivos-supported LGBT organisations has been an ongoing challenge as influential organisations such as GALZ, TRP, OUT and Triangle have struggled to include and increase women’s participation in their work, having started out as largely male groupings. New groups in Malawi and Mozambique are also struggling to include women. The figures relating to sex below indicate the strides made by organisations to include women’s participation from a base of overwhelming majorities of male members/clients and beneficiaries. While there is certainly space to improve on women’s participation, the figures below reveal the fruits of strategic efforts to include women’s participation, particularly in Namibia and Zimbabwe. Table 11: Target Audiences – Sex

GALZ TRP Legabibo OiA GALA BtM OUT67 Durban Triangle

n = 973 65 58 28 514 84 19 35 49 121

Male 67% 55% 55% 54% 55% 56% 60% 50% 70%

Female 33% 45% 45% 46% 45% 44% 40% 50% 30%

TOTAL 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

GALA’s figures reflect users of its library and users of its archives. Whereas the ratio of male:female archive users is 1:1, the library reflects 61% male and 39% female users. GALA figures do not include beneficiaries reached through its extensive outreach and public education work that effectively reaches historically disadvantaged groups in both urban and rural areas of South Africa.

4.2.2.2 Racial identities68

The majority of beneficiaries of the Hivos-supported LGBT organisations are black Africans, reflective of the demographics of the seven countries. The politics of ‘Colouredness’ (as term depicting mixed race) as opposed to ‘Blackness’ is complex and contested, and is dealt with to some extent in the glossary at the beginning of this study. While we had a preference to include all people of colour as ‘black’, it was decided to allow beneficiaries the option to self-identify because of the contested nature of these racialised terms. These identities also enabled an evaluation of historically white South

67 OUT did not circulate the written survey to its beneficiaries, nor provide information that could be used to

analyse their beneficiaries in the same way other organisations did as per written survey. These tables are therefore based on responses from online respondents, and in-person interviews and focus groups with members and volunteers who had been involved in their now defunct township offices, Black African youth. We did not have the opportunity to meet with beneficiaries of in-office psycho-social and health services. Because of only meeting with youth from the township offices, the age, race and gender breakdowns for OUT are not reflective of OUT as a whole, but of their township youth activities.

68 Racial categories used are as people self-identified, and are used to track efforts of organisations to transform and foster greater inclusion, by reaching historically marginalised groups.

60

African organisations’ attempts to diversify their beneficiaries to include historically disadvantaged groups. Table 12: Target Audiences – Racial Identities

GALZ TRP Legabibo OiA GALA BtM OUT Durban Triangle

n = 973 65 58 28 514 84 19 35 49 121

Indian 3% 5% - 1% - - - 2% -

Coloured 2% 21% - 13% 4% 3% <1% 1% 26%

Black 92% 73% 100% 36% 34% 74% 82% 88% 35%

White 3% 1 - 54% 72% 23% 17% 6% 33% Other - - - - - - - 3% 6% TOTAL 100 100 100 104 110 100 100 100 97

4.2.2.3 Age

The majority of beneficiaries of Hivos-supported LGBT organisations fall within the 17 to 30 age bracket. 86% of Legabibo, 84% of Durban Centre, 82% of OUT, 78% of TRP, 75% of GALZ and 72% of BtM target audiences fall into this age range. Outside of metropolitan centres there are limited recreational activities for young people, and even fewer spaces for young LGBT people to gather. More than one third of OiA satellite film festival audiences fall within the 17 – 20 age group revealing that the festival is successfully reaching young LGBT people outside South Africa’s main centres. 25% of GALZ beneficiaries fall within the 17 to 20 age group. Table 13 below provides a more detailed age disaggregation of organisations’ target audiences and beneficiaries.

4.2.2.3.1 Older LGBT people

In Zimbabwe and Namibia, older LGBT people noted that it had proven difficult to attract and include significant numbers of older people in organisations’ activities. In Zimbabwe, older LGBT people tended to be those who had been involved with the organisation for a long time, for whom the organisation had played an important role. Compared with other organisations, GALA, through its library services, has successfully attracted a considerable number of LGBT people over the age of 30 (52%). Triangle (South Africa’s oldest existing LGBT organisation) has succeeded in retaining clients who had been using its services over a long period. 46% of Triangle’s beneficiaries were over 30. The organisation also had success with retaining older members as active volunteers within the organisation who assisted with telephone-counselling, in-office aromatherapy massage services, and filling in on reception and administrative duties. Older clients of Triangle tended to be white. These older clients, similar to those interviewed at GALZ, chose to remain associated with Triangle as a form of gratitude for the important role that Triangle had played in their lives, and wished to “give back” something to the organisation. 41% of the OiA film festival total audiences are over 30. The satellite festival attracts largely under 30s.

61

Table 13: Target Audiences – Age

GALZ TRP Legabibo OiA GALA BtM OUT Durban Triangle

n = 973 65 58 28 514 84 19 35 49 121

17 – 20 yrs 25% 9% 14% 19% 11% 14% 36% 18% 4%

21 – 25 yrs 34% 55% 43% 22% 16% 29% 30% 60% 30%

26 – 30 yrs 16% 14% 29% 18% 21% 29% 16% 6% 20%

31 – 35 yrs 19% 14% - 20% 12% 14% 14% 11% 15%

36 – 40 yrs 3% 6% 14% 9% 24% 12% 3% 5% 10% 41 – 60 yrs 3% 2% - 12% 16% 2% 1% - 21% TOTAL 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

4.2.2.4 Education69 The majority of respondents across the countries surveyed had completed some high school education. In total, 40% of all respondents had some high school education as their highest level of education. 31% of respondents across all of the countries surveyed had some level of college education, with 11% of respondents having completed some level of post-graduate education. Table 14: Target Audiences – Education

GALZ TRP Legabibo OiA GALA BtM OUT Durban Triangle

n = 973 65 58 28 514 84 19 35 49 121

primary school - 5% - ↓1% - - - - 3%

high school 53% 45% 28% 33% 32% 14% 38% 35% 43%

college/tech 38% 27% 29% 19% 13% 14% 22% 41% 24%

undergrad degree

8% 5% 29% 16% 23% 24% 21% 6% 15%

postgraduate degree

1% 14% 14% 26% 30% 48% 19% 12% 15%

no formal education/ other

- - - - 2% - - 6% -

TOTAL 100 96 100 95 100 100 100 100 100

69 The survey requested respondents to identify their highest level of education. It did not specify whether

respondents had attained the qualifications of their highest level of education. It should therefore be borne in mind that a respondent who said high school was their highest level of education may not have completed high school or received school-leaving status.

62

4.2.2.7 Habitat

Table 15: Target Audiences – Habitat

GALZ TRP Legabibo OiA70

GALA BtM OUT Durban Triangle

n = 973 65 58 28 514 84 19 35 49 121 own home 25% 23% 14% 25% 50% 38% 5% 18% 22% tenant 22% 27% 14% 14% 19% 52% 12% 41% 33% with parents/family

50% 45% 43% 40% 28% 8% 63% 35% 26%

shared accommodation

3% - 29% 8% 3% 2% 8% 6% 20%

city township 22% 59% 14% 40% 35% 29% 64% 47% 24% rural township - 9% 14% 12% - - 2% 12% 2% city centre 16% 9% 29% 24% 20% 16% 1% 18% 22% rural area (village/farm)

- - 29% 2% - - - 6% -

urban suburb 63% 23% 14% 19% 42% 29% 5% 18% 50% For South Africa, the significant percentages of those living in city townships come from the OUT township group, OiA satellite festivals at 50% and Durban at 47%, reflecting under-resourced, black beneficiary profiles. No GALA respondents indicated living in a rural township, while 28% of those attending the OiA satellite festival in Pietermaritzburg came from rural townships. The majority of those living in urban suburbs come from GALA and Triangle, at 49% and 50% respectively. The figures of 18% and 11% from Durban and OiA concur with the theory that those with higher income levels can afford to live in suburbs and that OUT’s township group, the Durban Centre and OiA satellite festivals attract people from a lower education and income bracket.

4.2.2.8 Outreach efforts

In South Africa, a concerted effort is being made by historically resourced organisations – that have been perceived to serve the needs of more affluent, middle class LGBT people – to reach out and include LGBT people from communities that have been marginalised and disadvantaged by historical, structural inequalities. In some cases, including OUT and Triangle, township satellite offices have been experimented with, and have been closed again, often found to be unsustainable in structure, approach or management style. For Triangle, closing its township outreach office has meant a shift to hosting regular safe-space meetings for LGBT people in under-resourced areas. At the time of the visit to OUT, it was in the process of shutting down its township satellite offices following an evaluation of their work and a decision to refocus. In Namibia, TRP have, in the last two years, increasingly shifted the focus of their work to reaching LGBT people outside of the capital city, Windhoek, establishing a satellite office in Oshakati, in northern Namibia, in order to better reach LGBT people based in the north of the country. GALZ, through its affinity groups in various parts of Zimbabwe was attempting to reach LGBT people outside of Harare.

70 Total figures reflect audiences at main festivals and satellite festivals. Separate detailed profiles for the satellite

and main festivals at the end of this document provide for a comparative reading of the vastly different audiences at the OiA main and satellite festivals.

63

4.2.3 Relevance of organisational objectives for LGBT emancipation

The activities of LGBT organisations in various ways and at different levels all speak to the project of LGBT emancipation, and, as such, are vital to the target audiences they serve (see Chapter 3, Table 4: Priorities of LGBT organisations). These activities range from those targeted at the psycho-social well-being of LGBT people themselves, and include advocacy and lobbying (in direct and traditional ways, as well as more indirect, subtler approaches) for LGBT rights. Given social attitudes, high levels of fear and secrecy surrounding sexual identities that affect on individual freedoms, exclusionist social structures and the effects of homophobia more broadly (on both LGBT people, and societies more generally) focusing attention on improving the circumstances of sexual minorities remains relevant and necessary, despite, and sometimes because of changes in the region during the period 1995 – 2006. Findings: a) All Hivos supported organisations were effective at achieving their objectives, most significantly regarding providing safe spaces and services to LGBT people and facilitating participation and representation of LGBT people and issues in decision-making spaces. Organisations have been particularly effective at facilitating change at the level of LGBT individuals with higher self-esteem, well-being, senses of safety and decreased isolation noted in all contexts where groups were active. Certain objectives have been easier to achieve than others, with societal (attitudes and opinions) and institutional (policy and legal) change being the most difficult kinds of change to effect, requiring long-term, sustained efforts. Having said that, change at these levels has also occurred in certain country contexts. b) All organisations have gradually diversified their reach, whether to include broader geographic areas, or greater gender, age, race and class parity. For organisations that historically serviced more privileged LGBT people, deliberate outreach efforts to be more inclusive have proven successful to varying degrees. Similarly, historically male organisations have succeeded to different degrees at including women’s participation. c) The objectives of all Hivos-supported LGBT organisations are directly relevant to the objectives of LGBT emancipation. See Table 4 for a detailed breakdown of the focus of individual organisations.

4.3 Effectiveness and relevance of Hivos’ interventions

• To what extent did Hivos’ direct support to its LGBT partner organisations contribute to their effectiveness?

• To what extent did Hivos’ other interventions (indirect support like targeting human rights and women’s organisations) contribute to the effectiveness of the LGBT partner organisations?

As mentioned in chapter 3, Hivos’ interventions toward LGBT emancipation include:

• a focus on identifying the sphere of influence/potential of the gay/lesbian movement in the South;

• promotion of and support for organisation building, network development and communication between organisations/activists;

• raising awareness among general human rights organisations to take up LGBT issues; • pro-active support for processes and activities towards LGBT emancipation.

Hivos’ early support to southern African LGBT organisations met with initial resistance in the cultural context of the Zimbabwe RO. Interviews with current staff at the Harare RO indicated that there was a clear understanding of the organisation’s LGBT policy, grounded in an understanding of human rights, while for some there may be conflicts between this policy and socio-cultural beliefs that determine how that knowledge is internalised.

4.3.1 Direct support to LGBT organisations

When, by the mid-to-late 90s, it had become clear that LGBT emancipatory projects needed support in contexts of growing state and religious homophobia, Hivos extended its LGBT portfolio, supporting a

64

range of initiatives throughout the global South. Direct financial support from Hivos has played a key role in LGBT organisations’ abilities to carry out stated objectives, and in whom organisations are able to reach, both in terms of target audiences and potential allies. Initial relationships with LGBT groups included providing crucial moral and political support and advice aimed to strengthen organisations, and proved – as was revealed during interviews with directors of LGBT organisations – invaluable in strengthening organisational development capacities. Hivos’ first funding support to LGBT emancipation in southern Africa went to OiA in 1994, a choice that became, following Mugabe’s homophobic statements at the1995 opening of the Zimbabwean International Book Fair, Hivos policy, to support LGBT emancipatory initiatives to defend the rights of sexual minorities. Hivos was the first development cooperation organisation to explicitly fund LGBT efforts in southern Africa and pioneered developing a policy with regards to sexual minorities, leading the way among development organisations, to be followed later by others. Towards the end of the period covered in this PE an increasing number of development agencies started to express interest in supporting LGBT organisations. In supporting LGBT organisations and projects in southern Africa, Hivos’ efforts were not evenly spread among the countries. While the policy calls for a proactive approach, implementation has depended on (im)possibilities in every country to which Hivos could respond. Three countries attracted the bulk of financial support allocated for LGBT emancipation work: South Africa, Zimbabwe and Namibia. In Zimbabwe and Namibia, all funds went to one organisation each, while in South Africa, funds were distributed to several organisations. As a single entity, GALZ has received the largest share of funds of any one LGBT organisation supported by Hivos in southern Africa. Efforts were made by Hivos towards Zambia, Mozambique and Botswana, through human rights organisations. In Malawi – where Hivos started to work more recently (1999) – incipient efforts have been made and an LGBT group, CEDEP, is receiving micro-funding support. A Mozambican group, LAMBDA, is also receiving initial micro-funding support. With the number of LGBT organisations in Hivos’ southern Africa portfolio increasing, its LGBT portfolio was part of the responsibility of a human rights programme officer at the regional office in Harare. In increasing the number of initiatives supported, the relationship began to shift to that of a more detached funder. The growth and shift of the LGBT portfolio came to mean that the assessment of proposals for support depended on the capacity and commitment of the incumbent human rights programme officer. The extent to which Hivos support has contributed to the goal of LGBT emancipation is evident in its direct financial support to organisations over the eleven-year period – peaking in 2004 with 4.2% of the total Co-financing funds having been dedicated to LGBT emancipation – an amount in excess of the target of allocating 2% of Co-financing funds to LGBT emancipation by 2001, thus contributing to the effectiveness of LGBT organisations (see Annex 3). While financial support was crucial in enabling organisations and groups to carry out their activities, organisations pointed out that moral and political support was a valued aspect of Hivos support. Support to LGBT work has largely occurred via its human rights programme, but in some cases support occurs outside of the human rights programme. A case in point is Behind the Mask, supported through Hivos’ ICT and Media programme. Through its pro-active approach to supporting LGBT emancipatory initiatives, throughout the time period of this PE, Hivos has led the way in channelling support to LGBT emancipatory work.

4.3.2 Support for networking and knowledge-sharing

Hivos has promoted and supported organisation building, network development and communication of and between LGBT organisations and activists through supporting specific regional and international events. These include the hosting of the 1999 International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA) conference in Johannesburg, GALA’s African Women’s Life History Project that led to the formation

65

of what is now the Coalition of African Lesbians (CAL) and support to BtM’s regional training activities. Hivos has also been proactive at ensuring southern African LGBT participation in international networking and conference contexts like international ILGA conferences, HIV/AIDS conferences, Gay Games and the Out Games. This has enabled southern African LGBT voices to be heard internationally, and southern African LGBT organisations to be active in international spaces providing opportunities for understanding LGBT rights issues in a global context, and for inserting African perspectives in global LGBT spaces. As part of its commitment to knowledge-sharing, recognising the limited documented knowledge of same-sex practices on the African continent, Hivos supported a research effort that culminated in research skills training of African same-sex women activists towards the publication of a book, ‘Tommy Boys, Lesbian Men and Ancestral Wives’ on female same-sex practices in a select number of African countries.

4.3.3 Partner human rights and women’s organisations

A key Hivos activity with regard to LGBT emancipation involves encouraging general human rights organisations to lobby and advocate for the protection of LGBT rights as human rights. Hivos trip reports reveal that its programme officers have been agitating for LGBT rights within women’s and general human rights organisations since at least 1997. They also reflect Hivos’ attempts to identify possible supporters of LGBT work through human rights partners. The positive results of this intervention – human rights organisations including or supporting LGBT issues, particularly in Botswana, Namibia and Mozambique – have prepared the way for strategic solidarity partnerships between LGBT organisations and human rights organisations, and the opportunity for LGBT issues to become part of broader human rights agendas. This approach has the potential for having a broader influence over a larger part of society in terms of public education and the sensitisation of social service and education facilities in their encounters with LGBT people.

Finding: a) Hivos’ direct support to its LGBT partner organisations has enabled them to operate effectively. Hivos support has meant access to the resources and capacities required for organisations to implement their activities and reach their target audiences. The work of all Hivos-supported LGBT organisations considered in this PE is directly related to the goal of LGBT emancipation in southern Africa. Finding b) In the cases of South Africa and Namibia, and to some extent, Botswana, women’s rights and human rights organisations saw for themselves and acted on their understanding of LGBT rights as human rights having the effect of contributing to the effectiveness of LGBT organisations. In Mozambique, Hivos’ ongoing advocacy efforts over a ten-year period with human rights partners has had the positive effect of pro-active support for LGBT initiatives since 2006. While Hivos made similar attempts in Zambia, the local context proved to not be conducive to human rights and women’s rights organisations supporting LGBT rights. Zimbabwe revealed a similar situation where non-LGBT groups were hesitant or unwilling to work with LGBT initiatives. This could be attributed to an ongoing repressive political climate that has instilled fear amongst the populace to go against the opinions of the head of state. There is scope for greater pro-activity and advocacy on the part of Hivos to encourage its civil society partners in Malawi, Zimbabwe and Zambia to see LGBT rights as human rights.

66

4.4 Links between LGBT organisations and changes described Can the effects of the Hivos supported LGBT organisations plausibly be connected with the overall changes analysed in question 1?

The findings gathered from focus groups, individual interviews, paper and online surveys are used here to qualify and quantify shifts towards and away from LGBT emancipation, considering changes that have occurred in the lives of LGBT people as a result of the work of Hivos-supported LGBT organisations.71

4.4.1 LGBT Individuals

LGBT people across country and organisational contexts testified to the significant decrease in isolation and alienation they felt after discovering and participating in the activities of LGBT organisations as places to meet other people like themselves. The physical spaces where organisations are based are often the only safe spaces for LGBT people to gather. Having a safe space in which to feel comfortable impacts greatly on the well-being of LGBT people who have no other space in which they feel entirely safe. It is at this level, where the lives of individual LGBT people have been directly changed, that the most telling shifts have occurred on the scale towards emancipation. For all of those surveyed in Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe, changes at the following levels as a direct result of the work of the LGBT organisations are particularly significant: • Higher self-esteem and self-confidence • Greater sense of well-being • Greater sense of safety Services targeted at the level of ‘security of person’, i.e. those aimed at increased self-esteem, confidence, and an increased a sense of well-being and safety, have a high retention rate and could extend the retention of interventions aimed at skills development. Because these activities have brought about a change at these fundamental levels of individual development, LGBT people could confidently speak about the significant changes in themselves and in how they have begun to subsequently interact with the worlds in which they find themselves.

4.4.1.1 Higher self-esteem

All the LGBT organisations offer personal skills-oriented workshops and discussion groups in one form or another. For participating LGBT people, these workshops have meant: � Increased skills and understanding: An average of 82% of all LGBT people surveyed indicated that

the skills and understanding gained from the services of LGBT organisations are of practical relevance and value to their lives.

� Increased confidence: 78% of respondents indicated feeling more confident about themselves as a result of the services and activities of an LGBT organisation.

� Improved sense of self: The self-esteem and sense of well-being of 81% of beneficiaries have increased, allowing them to feel more able to engage actively, as opposed to being a passive victim of broader society.

� Many attested to feeling less isolated and alone for having met other LGBT people through the organisation.

In every focus group and interview with LGBT people, repeated refrains such as: “I found my voice,” or: “I am now able to speak” (about being homosexual), reflected the significant positive changes towards emancipation at the level of LGBT people, resulting directly from the work of LGBT organisations.

71 These changes are discussed more fully in the country chapters where the work of the Hivos-supported LGBT

organisations and initiatives are examined more closely.

67

4.4.1.1.1 Increased confidence

Table 16: Target Audiences – Confidence

GALZ TRP Legabibo OiA GALA BtM OUT Durban Triangle n = 973 65 58 28 514 84 19 35 49 121

88% 91% 100% 81% 67% 69% 65% 94% 85%

In addition to the surveys, 95 – 100% of LGBT people interviewed individually and in focus groups in all organisational and country contexts indicated that as a result of the services they had received and activities that they had participated in through LGBT organisations, their self-confidence had increased significantly. An often-heard maxim was: I felt alone. I didn’t know there were other people like me. Now, knowing there are others like me gives me strength. The fact of knowing that there were other LGBT people, being able to interact with them, and participating in workshops and discussion groups of LGBT organisations has enabled individual LGBT people to speak up in spaces where they had previously felt unable. It is at the level of individual LGBT people that the highest levels of positive change has been recorded, as a result of Hivos’ support to organisations working towards the objective of LGBT emancipation. Table 17: Target Audiences – Less Isolated

Zimbabwe Namibia Botswana OiA GALA BtM OUT Durban Triangle n = 973 65 58 28 514 84 19 35 49 121

59% 73% 86% 68% 62% 43% 58% 41% 70% Legabibo’s work in Botswana has been particularly empowering for its active members. As a result of its work, LGBT people in Botswana have opportunities to regularly meet up, hold discussions, and engage in training and retreat sessions. Legabibo’s work has gone a long way to connect and link up LGBT people based in Gaborone, using available media spaces strategically. Respondents who had felt entirely isolated before finding out about Legabibo’s existence felt that they had found a safe space to be themselves and discuss issues affecting them, made new friends who face similar challenges as themselves, resulting in a significantly decreased sense of isolation. For its roles in decreasing senses of isolation, 70% of Triangle and 62 % of GALA respondents felt participating in these organisations’ activities meant they felt less isolated. 41% of respondents from the Durban Centre, and 47% of respondents from OiA’s satellite festival, indicated that they felt less isolated as a result of the work of these two organisations. The fact that Durban and OiA figures are lower than those for other organisations speaks to the realities of respondents from these areas who feel isolated because of cultural and other social limitations to their self-expression. The OiA respondents do not come from the main centres of South Africa, are largely economically dependent on their families. The OiA satellite festival provides them with one opportunity each year to gather and be exposed to LGBT representations, images, voices, while also providing an opportunity to socialise with other LGBT people. That 54% of OiA satellite respondents live with their parents or other family, are from low-resourced areas, and are not highly educated makes it all the more difficult to come out as being LGBT outside of South Africa’s main centres, leading to high levels of isolation among LGBT people outside of cities. Through interactions with other LGBT people at LGBT organisations, many LGBT people reported coming to an acceptance of themselves. For LGBT people in Namibia in particular, the work of The Rainbow Project (TRP) in shifting discussions of homosexuality from debate to dialogue had a direct effect on LGBT people’s engagement with others that impacts on increased self-confidence.

68

Where previously there was a sense that the rest of society should accommodate LGBT people, that they were owed respect, and that they should demand their rights, through the work of TRP, LGBT people are finding ways to turn passive aggression into active engagement, learning to understand themselves, their rights, and engaging with heterosexual society from a strategic perspective that enables listening and exchanging at a personal level. The importance of shifting from a sense of isolation to a sense of belonging has significant effects on individual LGBT people’s senses of emotional and psychological well-being. That LGBT organisations provide members, clients and beneficiaries with the space to find themselves, and a space where they feel they belong, makes a notable difference at the level of individual LGBT people, resulting in greater confidence, a sense of affirmation and enhanced self-esteem as a result of that affirmation.

4.4.1.1.2 Higher self-esteem

Table 18: Target Audiences – Increased Self-esteem

GALZ TRP Legabibo OiA GALA BtM OUT Durban Triangle n = 973 65 58 28 514 84 19 35 49 121 88% 77% 100% 69% 72% 72% 71% 88% 80% The activities of OiA and GALA focus more on presenting knowledge and information to audiences/readers/viewers/listeners (films, books, plays, exhibitions, comics) than working directly with individuals to effect individual change. This approach requires LGBT people to work through and come to an understanding of themselves by themselves, having been exposed to affirming content through films that more closely reflect their lifestyles or aspirations than mainstream heterosexual films; plays that speak directly to their own issues and interests, experiences or fears, and photographic exhibitions that reflect both the positive and negative aspects of real LGBT lives in their contexts. That the work of such organisations has had a positive effect on the self-esteem of audiences and beneficiaries reveals that self-esteem and affirmation happens in a variety of ways, including through media that reflects LGBT people’s realities and diversities. In the cases of these organisations (GALZ, Durban, Triangle), respondents were able to consider and link specific organisational activities they had participated in that had played a significant role in increasing their senses of self-esteem.

4.4.1.2 Greater sense of well-being

All respondents indicated a sense of relief upon discovering not only that they were not alone in their difference, but that there was a place to go to in order to meet and interact with other LGBT people. The effect that the latter had on the well-being of these respondents is reflected in the following table, highlighting an increased sense of well-being as a result of skills acquired through the LGBT organisation. Table 19: Target Audiences – Increased Well-being

GALZ TRP Legabibo OiA GALA BtM OUT Durban Triangle n = 973 65 58 28 514 84 19 35 49 121

94% 100% 100% 81% 97% 71% 68% 29% 89% The low percentage of Durban respondents indicating that their skills and understanding had increased could be attributed to the fact that Durban respondents, mostly Zulu-speaking, with limited English language skills, did not have assistance in completing the written questionnaire that was only available in English.

69

In focus groups in Durban, a Zulu-English interpreter was present, and focus group respondents rated the Durban Centre’s effects on their well-being much more positively than the written surveys suggest (confirming the effects of language challenges as a limitation in the written responses).72 Being/Coming Out While it may not be possible to claim that the percentages of respondents who indicated being out to their families and colleagues are as a direct result of the work of an LGBT organisation, LGBT people spoke of feeling able to come to terms with their sexual identities as a result of an LGBT organisation. For those who are able to choose whether they reveal their sexual identities or not, organisations were pivotal in terms of consciously coming out. For many LGBT people positive reactions to disclosure of their sexual identities within the safety of an LGBT organisation provided support and confidence and allowed them to better cope with and in broader society. It was also in this context that many LGBT people spoke of their surprise at non-LGBT peoples’ acceptance of them after they had come to accept themselves, when evidence or assumptions had pointed to withholding of disclosure being a safer option in certain hostile contexts. Because of the public nature of the discourse around homosexuality in Namibia as a result of state homophobia putting LGBT issues on the national agenda, and rights-based responses to state homophobia led by TRP, the public nature of TRP’s existence, the LGBT rights lobby and the dialogic approaches to its work, has meant that the overwhelming majority of its beneficiaries feel safe enough to come out to friends and family in Namibia. The number of those who are out to colleagues concurs with the figure for those who have higher levels of self-esteem and confidence as a result of the work of TRP.

4.4.1.3 Greater sense of safety

The existence and services of an LGBT organisation influenced LGBT people in South Africa and Botswana to feel safer in public than they did 5 to 10 years ago, as they felt they now had a voice and were represented by their LGBT organisation, confident that if anything negative happened to them, their organisation would protect and represent them (again reducing their levels of isolation, and having a strong sense of belonging that impacted on their security of person and well-being). This, despite high levels of violence in some of the areas in which they lived. This finding reveals that reasons for increased senses of safety are complex, not only linked to effective policing, and creating safer public environments, but also to esteem-building work at the level of individual LGBT people, facilitated by LGBT organisations. In all four countries, those who indicated feeling safer than they did 5 to 10 years ago cited the following key reasons, which are closely linked to senses of self-worth, confidence and feeling less isolated as a result of the work of an LGBT organisation: • Because I now know that I am not alone; I now have people to turn to. • I understand what my sexuality means without fear of being victimised. I openly live as a gay man

and understand my rights as a human being, and as a gay person. • I feel safer because I now know how to behave in front of homophobic people.

4.4.2 Changes in Legislation

In South Africa, the only country in the study where the constitutional rights of LGBT people are protected in the same way as that of other citizens, these gains could be ascribed to the intense work on the part of the NCGLE. Legislative change includes the overturning of more than 35 pieces of legislation found to be inconsistent with the constitutive rights protecting LGBT people from negative discrimination. 72 Respondents from OiA satellite festivals, for whom English language forms also proved challenging, were

assisted by volunteers.

70

Finding: Based on the above findings regarding the effects of Hivos-supported organisations and overall changes noted, there is indeed a plausible connection between the work of organisations and changes occurring, most significantly at the level of individual LGBT people in southern Africa. Important inroads at societal and institutional levels are also noteworthy and directly link to Hivos’ support to the work of specific LGBT organisations.

4.5 Effectiveness and Relevance of Hivos’ Interventions Considering the answers to the above questions (1 to 4), what can be concluded about the effectiveness and relevance of Hivos’ interventions?

In South Africa, Zimbabwe and Namibia, formal LGBT organisations exist and provide members and beneficiaries with vital support and services that contribute to the empowerment of individual LGBT people, building their self-esteem, self-confidence and creating the space for self-acceptance and affirmation of their identities and freedoms. The 16 LGBT organisations, networks and regional initiatives in southern Africa that have received Hivos support during the twelve years have contributed to positive shifts regarding LGBT people, most visibly, support to the South African NCGLE that successfully lobbied for the inclusion of protection from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in the country’s post-apartheid constitution; the ongoing significant occupation of public space through organisations such as OiA; the provision of spaces where LGBT people can gather and interact safely through organisations like GALZ and TRP; the provision of services to LGBT people without the threat of discrimination, offered by organisations such as the Durban Centre, OUT, GALZ and Triangle. Further positive signs come from the resuscitated and energised Legabibo in Botswana, and the formation of LAMBDA in Mozambique and CEDEP in Malawi. The strategic interventions implemented through LGBT organisations speak to and are relevant to emancipation as it has been defined in this study: the right to be treated fairly, without discrimination; the freedom to choose and live out one’s life-course; the right to participate in and/or be represented in public affairs. With Hivos’ support, LGBT organisations have achieved a high level of positive change directly relevant to enhancing the rights and freedoms of LGBT people.

4.6 Conclusion Thus, returning to the central question of this research: To what degree have Hivos’ interventions in the period 1995 – 2006 contributed to LGBT emancipation in southern Africa? Hivos’ support to LGBT emancipation initiatives in southern Africa has been integral to enabling LGBT and human rights organisations to forward LGBT emancipation in the seven countries between 1995 and 2006. At the four emancipation dimensions Hivos’ interventions over the period have contributed to LGBT emancipation in the region in the following ways:

1. LGBT organisations: reaching their target audiences, with increasing numbers; diversifying how organisations reach targeted LGBT people, extending to or attempting to include those most marginalised; providing fundamental psycho-social support and other services to LGBT people; representing LGBT people and facilitating their participation in decision-making spaces; strengthened links between organisations and strategic partnership relations with non-LGBT organisations; showing an ability to implement and achieve their objectives.

2. LGBT people: accessing meaningful, quality-of-life-enhancing support and services from LGBT organisations at the fundamental levels of psycho-social well-being; improved access to a range of quality services including health and legal advice; an increasing ability to express themselves as individuals in society; significantly increased levels of self-esteem, self-confidence, self-acceptance; significantly reduced feelings of isolation.

71

3. Societal attitudes: some evidence of positive and normalising coverage of LGBT issues in mainstream media, increased visibility of LGBT people in public spaces; LGBT organisations increasingly participating in policy-making spaces. These comments do not apply to Zambia and Zimbabwe.

4. Social structures: the greatest success story at this level comes from South Africa where the NCGLE was able to create positive structural change at constitutional level as well as other legislation towards full legal equality of LGBT people in South Africa; incremental policy openings created by LGBT organisations.

Given the realities in which LGBT people find themselves, the following are key factors that, in spite of the positive steps achieved towards LGBT emancipation, necessitate sustaining and increasing support for current emancipation interventions:

- extensive homophobia in the region: the continued discrimination and marginalising of LGBT people; and

- taking advantage of windows of opportunity that reveal (initial) shifts that have taken place in social attitudes, and in certain policy-influential spaces that suggest small and hopeful signs of space opening up towards longer term positive change especially in Botswana, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, and. South Africa.

In addition, the following three factors indicate the need for new and strategically targeted interventions:

- extensive homophobia in the region and the lack of social mobility of many LGBT people; - the backlash against LGBT people; - violence against lesbians in under-resourced areas.

Given the range of shifts toward LGBT emancipation, it is clear that while there is evidence of pockets of positive shifts in public attitudes, the pursuit of tolerance and acceptance of sexual difference at an integrated societal level remains a fundamental and ongoing challenge for lasting social change.

72

5. Recommendations In this chapter conclusions drawn from the study are presented with corresponding recommendations for possible strategies to further strengthen achievements in relation to the four emancipation dimensions. As the focal subject of this evaluation, recommendations are offered to Hivos and not the organisations studied, although the organisations are included in the recommendations that follow. If freedom is seen as both the end and means of development, effective social development programmes work using whatever little freedom exists as tool to strengthen existing freedoms and to agitate for further freedoms. The recommendations that follow are principally made with this in mind.

5.1 LGBT People Because economic dependence and low social mobility are factors that negatively affect the safety and psycho-social well-being of LGBT people, particularly in hostile contexts, it is important to address these as underlying contributors to LGBT people’s vulnerability to expressions of homophobia. Given that most of the LGBT people reached through LGBT organisations are economically dependent on their families for survival, an intervention that facilitates growth in personal development (as organisations have been doing in relation to self-esteem, confidence and well-being) is appropriate. In order for such interventions to be translated into greater self-reliance, facilitating access to skills development (as opposed to introducing such programmes in-house for organisations not geared towards this kind of activity) that can lead to employment and economic independence becomes imperative, not only as survival mechanism, but also in increasing social mobility. GALZ’s Skills for Life programme, BtM’s journalism training and earlier ICT skills-development courses, OUT’s learnerships and OiA’s film-making workshops speak to this imperative and are appropriate to the cultures and capacities of these organisations. GALZ’s innovative interventions in this area warrant documentation for other organisations to explore the feasibility and adaptability of its model for other contexts.

5.2 Society: Attitudes & Opinions Greater society limits the rights of LGBT people to be treated fairly and without discrimination, impinging upon their freedom to choose and live out their life-courses, and limiting their levels of participation and representation in public affairs. The continuation of homophobia points to a need for ‘tolerance education’ by exposing broader society to LGBT life and issues towards greater understanding and acceptance. In response, broad-based public education and awareness-raising activities that provide alternatives to homophobic expressions and ongoing stigmas and prejudices against LGBT people and LGBT life in the region are vital. It is equally important that these strategies speak directly to the contextual realities of the region, focused around the values of respect, tolerance and the valuing of diversity. In order to appropriately target and design ‘tolerance education programmes’, research that specifically investigates public attitudes towards and knowledge of homosexuality in southern Africa (similar to the research undertaken in South Africa in 1995, in Mozambique in 2006 and in Malawi in 2007) should inform strategies, particularly in identifying where possible opportunities exist for creating meaningful change. Conducting large-scale research into public attitudes towards LGBT people and issues will also provide a baseline against which to measure and track changes over time.

73

Existing research has revealed the following key issues and areas of concern as they relate to homophobia and homophobic responses to LGBT people: • Political leaders embedding homophobia in state responses thereby influencing public attitudes; • An apparent backlash and conservatism as a result of raising the profile of LGBT issues; • The use of ‘culture’ and ‘tradition’ as bases for homophobia; • The use of church and religion to further marginalise LGBT people; • Homophobic attitudes of civil servants in providing social services; • The use of media as public platform for spreading homophobia. Research from Mozambique, and research undertaken as part of this PE reveals that having a friend who is homosexual facilitates much higher levels of acceptance of homosexuality; that non-LGBT people with more access to and higher levels of education are likely to be more tolerant; that LGBT people find it easier to come out in urban areas (away from family and community) than rural areas, but that urban townships are less accepting of homosexuality than hoped for (in Botswana, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe); and that LGBT people who are ‘visibly gay’ are at greater risk of being on the receiving end of homophobic abuse. Considering strategies that have been most successful in facilitating change the following organisational approaches stand out:

1. NCGLE: ‘quiet diplomacy’ as high-level lobbying strategy 2. TRP: dialogue over debate 3. OiA: effective and extensive use of mainstream media 4. GALA: creative integration of LGBT issues into broader human rights concerns; creative

awareness and ‘normalising’ public education strategies 5. BtM: strategic use of ICTs

In operationalising these strategies, three potential vehicles for context-appropriate attitude change stand out:

a. culture and religion; b. public education and c. media.

5.2.1 Culture and Religion

5.2.1.1 Dialoguing with Religious Authorities

The influence of the church and religion on people’s attitudes in the southern African region is enormous, making churches and religious groupings vehicles of strategic influence. While these have often been used to preach a marginalising and excluding conservatism, the potential exists to counter and present (alternative) expressions of religious faith that are inclusive and accepting of homosexuality. The tools of “liberation theology” as ways of thinking clearly about religious faith and the practise of that faith in building a just world present opportunities for ways forward. Here, TRP’s religious programme is a case in point. Targeting clergy, TRP’s approach of engaging in dialogue (versus debate) has yielded positive responses from clergy and congregants. Having realised that defensiveness and blame resulted in antagonising and defensive responses from church leaders and parishioners, who would then pull the mantle of their religion closer as shield against the ‘immorality’ of homosexuality, TRP shifted its approach to dialogue, i.e. an open, respectful and frank interchange and discussion with the aim of mutual understanding; as such, a long-term intervention.73

73 Madelene Isaacks, the Religious Programme Coordinator at TRP had started out by going to a gathering (that

included pastors) to present generic information on LGBT people, and found that what they wanted was to know about her as lesbian. Telling her personal story without presenting herself as outsider to the church and without arguing about the right or wrong of homosexuality, opened the space for her audience to engage with her as person. Her personal story also made it possible for them to open up about their own children being

74

In this regard, the role of religion, particularly Christianity and syncretic Christianity and African Indigenous Belief Systems, in powerfully influencing public attitudes warrants further investigation. The power of religious authorities to sway public attitudes towards LGBT people among parishioners (LGBT people included) is enormous, and as a strategic intervention, working with and understanding the positions of various religious denominations has the potential for a beneficial effect on public discourses around LGBT emancipation. It is therefore recommended that Hivos facilitates or supports a programme of strategic engagement between southern African LGBT organisations and religious institutions, both nationally and regionally. This would involve a long-term, sustained intervention, working with the languages and practise of human rights and plurality and that of religious belief and practise.

5.2.1.2 ‘Quiet Diplomacy’ as Strategy for Change

The success of identifying unifying discourses against discrimination was illustrated by the South African NCGLE’s effective use of the language of inclusion and rights, at a time when the frameworks for drafting the country’s post-apartheid Constitution were those of inclusion and equality. Despite the fact that public attitudes at the time reflected a negative stance towards LGBT people, the NCGLE succeeded in arguing for the rights of LGBT people as part of the broader human rights agenda – under the inclusive banner of equality – as a deliberate effort to break from South Africa’s apartheid history of arbitrary discrimination. The NCGLE strategy was also built on personal relationships with influential and political leaders, revealing the central importance of well-placed strategic allies, an applied understanding of the language of law, and the shared experience of the pain of exclusion and discrimination under apartheid. The deliberate decision to limit media engagement and to not engage in public debate was based on the knowledge, based on public attitudes research that a public strategy risked eliciting negative responses that would do the lobby damage. Given that all of the countries in the study have democratic political systems – at least on paper – the opportunity exists for taking full advantage of the political opportunities presented by democracy, which, in its structure, makes allowance for change. With what intensity and vigour these opportunities are seized or strategically utilised, depends on a range of factors and capabilities, such as, in organisations: 1. adequate understanding of the (potential) tools of democracy 2. activist strategies, such as lobbying and advocacy skills, and media literacy.

5.2.1.3 Asserting Homosexuality as African in the pubic sphere

Countries included in this study had gained independence from their colonial masters, often through protracted struggles for freedom from colonial rule. As a result, the unifying discourses of ‘African authenticity’ when under (foreign) attack are well-known. Under colonialism and apartheid, the maxim “never again” became a strong rallying tool against efforts to impose oppressive external rule. In the same way as anti-apartheid discourses presented the NCGLE with the opportunity of inserting LGBT rights into the language of unity and anti-discrimination, an opening exists for a similar strategic lobby to include discrimination against LGBT people as part of the negative remnants of colonialism that need to be quashed in order for free African expressions of self to be fully realised. Documented ethnographies of same-sex practices in pre-colonial Africa need to be inserted into the southern Africa public sphere in plain language, using mainstream media strategically and creatively for these realities to become public knowledge. Circulating such knowledges in accessible forms in the public sphere, using mainstream media as entry point, begins to strip the authority of notions of same-

homosexual, and coming to a better understanding, as opposed to stonewalling when faced with the depersonalised concept of homosexuality.

75

sexuality as un-African towards social dialogue on indigenous homosexualities, for greater acceptance of LGBT people in southern Africa. In order to implement such a strategy, key influential allies (including political and religious leaders and sympathetic journalists) would need to be identified and mobilised by LGBT and human rights organisations to occupy media space.74 Hivos is encouraged to promote strategic conversations of this nature with partner organisations in women’s, human rights and HIV/AIDS organisations, to play a pro-active role in identifying willing supporters, towards broader-based in-country and regional movements for LGBT emancipation.

5.2.2 Media

In the majority of interviews with non-LGBT people outside South Africa, the main response was that LGBT people were simply not known to them. Given the fact that those who know LGBT people are considerably more open and accepting of LGBT people and rights, personal knowledge of LGBT people could be created through effective use of media. Mainstream media presents at least two opportunities for the general public to get to know LGBT people in ‘normalising’ ways: 1. fictionalised representations that include LGBT people and present them with the same concerns,

fears and joys as heterosexual others (as, for example, the inclusion of LGBT characters in local soap operas in South Africa) towards integration;

2. presenting real stories of LGBT people in the broader contexts of facing the same challenges as their fellow heterosexual citizens.

OiA has displayed an ability to effectively mobilise media space positively to highlight the film festival and the reasons for its importance. Other organisations and groups – like Legabibo in Botswana, CEDEP in Malawi, and LAMBDA in Mozambique – have also used media spaces effectively and strategically to raise LGBT issues. Organisations are encouraged to become more media savvy, to use available media spaces to tell more personalised stories – whether anonymously or not. Increasing LGBT presence in the media in a normalising way, by presenting the commonalities of LGBT and heterosexual life as a starting point, begins to utilise the discourse of equality and inclusion in a more integrated way. For this strategy to be effective, LGBT organisations would need the capacity to lobby media for space, and to be able to communicate clearly. Improving their ability to strategically make use of available media spaces could start with sharing the experiences of those organisations that have already built impressive relations with local media, documenting their strategies and approaches for the benefit of improving the sector’s capacity to effectively use media spaces creatively. It is therefore recommended that Hivos provides support for media training for LGBT organisations in:

1. how to use the media to tell LGBT stories; 2. how to develop an effective organisational or sectoral media strategy; 3. how to use ICTs as media advocacy tools.

74 A positive example is that of a well-respected and influential Mozambican journalist who in 2006 used his regular radio programme and newspaper column to draw parallels between Mozambique’s struggle for freedom with Mozambican LGBT peoples’ efforts towards emancipation. The journalist, in this case was not lobbied or mobilised by any LGBT group, rather, expressing his opinions. Such independent, influential allies should be identified and mobilised as part of strategic media-based efforts towards promoting acceptance and ultimately, emancipation.

76

In South Africa some initial steps have been taken via the capacity-building programme in partnership with AP and Synergos. It is however recommended that training be cognisant of the needs of individual organisations throughout the region, dealing not only with practical skills training, but also focusing on how to use media strategically and effectively (particularly in hostile contexts) to achieve objectives.

5.3 LGBT Partner Organisations While it was found that organisations on the whole rate between 5 and 8 on internal organisational strength (i.e. from moderately effective to highly effective), there are weaknesses in the areas of Organisational Development relating to staff-capacity-to-workload-ratios, the need for appropriate remuneration packages, appropriate and operational governance structures, staff development, management styles, and organisations’ ability to re-assess and realign their plans, strategies and activities to their ever-changing contextual realities. Bearing in mind that judgments of effectiveness are outcomes of a stream of interactions and impressions that may change, the strategic goal of organisational effectiveness relies not only on performance monitoring and evaluation, but more centrally in developing and sustaining skills and competencies, encouraging staff participation and innovation, promoting an enabling workplace ethos, and delivering relevant and quality services, quality outcomes and effective communications.

5.3.1. Staff Capacity

LGBT organisations’ staff were found to be committed and skilled, albeit overworked and overstretched in some cases, indicating a gap in staff-to-workload-ratios that need to be addressed. With the exception of BtM and Triangle where staff size and responsibilities were well balanced, and OUT and GALZ where staff to workload ratios were over-capacitated in terms of staff size, workloads outweighed capacity. Hivos is encouraged to provide considered guidelines and feedback in identifying such gaps and with strategic possibilities in how to address them.

5.3.2 Appropriate Remuneration

Low remuneration packages combined with signs of overworked staff influence organisations’ ability to attract and retain skilled staff. There is a clear need for some organisations such as the Durban Centre to review remuneration packages to make them more competitive in comparison with similar NGOs.

5.3.3 Governance Structures

Governance structures such as boards, where functional, were found to play a supportive role – although some were not being utilised optimally. There is scope for organisations to work harder at matching board representation with their needs and objectives. In South Africa in particular, there is scope for greater diversity in board composition as these relate to the racial and gender imperatives of the country’s transformation processes. This is particularly important for organisations that, as part of their transformation efforts, are attempting to:

a. reach more diverse target audiences (from having started out as largely white, male and middle class groupings);

b. recruit and retain quality candidates that better reflect contextual realities, particularly at senior management and leadership levels.

Organisations are therefore encouraged to establish boards that provide support and reflect the appropriate skills and strategic diversity in terms of networks and experiences needed to provide strategic direction to organisations.

77

5.3.4 Staff Development

Organisations were found to leave the development of new layers of leadership as their last area of priority. While it is true that organisations are most often caught up in daily functioning, this aspect of organisational development is central to organisational effectiveness. Focusing on staff development based on organisational needs and introducing specific training courses in areas of skills gaps or weakness would contribute to improving the functioning and overall health of organisations. Training courses in documenting, media and communications planning and strategising, and effective use of information communication technologies (ICTs) would be an asset, in addition to enhancing the skill sets of organisations. Face-to-face training could be complemented with e-learning systems, reducing the need to travel. A factor that plays a role in fostering healthy organisational cultures, both internally and externally, is that of representation and participation in networking, training and exchange opportunities. Where the face of an organisation is associated with only one or two individuals – more often than not, such as is often true of TRP, GALZ and OUT, there is scope to ensure a more deliberate, equitable participation of staff in such activities, as staff development tool and greater diversity of participation in different spaces.

5.3.5 Management Styles

Effective leadership is one of the main catalysts for effective organisational performance, and an organisation’s ability to learn (from itself and others). Leadership styles that enable reflection are important for supporting organisational development, and the ability of staff to perform optimally. Where leadership styles reflect an inability to adapt or a penchant for micro-managing, staff ability to perform to the best of their abilities is hampered, often resulting in rapid staff-turnover and less stable organisations. It is recommended that the ability of directors to effectively manage organisations is enhanced with specific capacity-building sessions that bring them together to share experiences and learn new strategies.

5.3.6 Self-evaluation

a. Strategic Evaluation

Although many organisations seem to neglect this aspect of organisational development in the context of focusing on deliverables and service provision, it is a process that plays a key role in planning for and achieving deliverables. It is recommended that organisations engage in ongoing cyclical processes that enable reflection on the appropriateness and effectiveness of organisational interventions, as well as reflection on organisational learning processes and needs. Such initiatives would assist organisations to identify windows of opportunity, blockages, strengths and weaknesses, along with resource needs in terms of people and time, to inform future direction and action. For organisations that struggle to do this internally, the assistance of external facilitation would be beneficial with Hivos’ support and making such processes a condition for financial support.

b. Documenting

Documenting goes hand-in-hand with an organisation’s ability to reflect and learn. Organisations were, with the exception of a few (such as GALA, BtM and OiA), found to be limited in their capacity to document their interventions and experiences well, including documenting strategies employed, the

78

results (quantitatively and qualitatively) and lessons learnt from these strategies. As with evaluations, this affects organisations’ ability to design future interventions based on lessons learnt. Organisations are encouraged to better document their work, using context and culture-appropriate tools. Audio-visual documenting tools (such as digital story-telling) as opposed to written tools have been found to work effectively in southern African contexts as a result of strong oral traditions. It is recommended that Hivos support organisations to be trained or facilitated through documenting approaches that speak to organisational cultures and realities. Such training could be linked with the proposed regional media and communications strategy training mentioned above.

5.4 Hivos

5.4.1 Direct Support

1. In South Africa, where a range of LGBT organisations is in existence, Hivos is challenged to direct support to groups that are reaching LGBT people who have been further marginalised through other social factors, such as black lesbians from under-resourced areas, LGBT people in rural areas, and LGBT people with little social mobility.

Vulnerable LGBT people – through organisations that have effectively succeeded in including these groups in their activities – would benefit greatly from financial and strategic support from Hivos. Diversifying support to LGBT groups that reach these LGBT people would also open up the range of good practices among LGBT organisations, particularly since reaching under-resourced LGBT people (lesbians in particular) has been a challenge for many established and new organisations.

2. Less capacitated and newer organisations need support in developing organisational capacity and

strength. Shifting funding foci from the more resourced and capacitated organisations (in South Africa, such as OUT and Triangle) that have successfully diversified and stabilised their funding bases, to the financial and capacity-building support of less resourced organisations such as the Durban Centre and organisations that Hivos currently reaches through its LGBT capacity-building partnership, is therefore a strong recommendation for Hivos action.

Where the JWG in South Africa has been identified as channel for capacity-building, given the range (and continued socio-political tensions) of organisations’ different capacity needs within this group, more targeted capacity-building or mentoring support to individual organisations is recommended.

3. In response to older Hivos partner organisations having ascribed a high value to Hivos’ initial LGBT interventions that included important conversations on strategic approaches, Hivos is encouraged to recommit to engagements where the financial imperative is supported by being available as sounding-board, especially given the organisation’s unparalleled global experience in the area of LGBT emancipation.

5.4.2 Indirect support

1. A Good Practice Toolkit with case studies that draw on the innovations, effective strategies, tactics and lessons learnt from LGBT organisations supported by Hivos in the southern African region, would serve as a valuable learning resource to strengthen experience-based knowledge-sharing and exchange for incumbent and older organisations alike. Such a resource would include, for example, GALZ’s experiences of its Skills for Life programme, TRP’s dialogic approach, OiA’s effective use of mainstream media, GALA’s creative documenting and public education strategies, OUT’s research and public education work, BtM’s strategic use of ICTs, and LAMBDA’s approaches to undertaking in-country public attitudes research.

79

2. The lessons from many civil society organisations that have been using ICTs successfully in programme activities for documenting and information-sharing would be of value to LGBT organisations. Hivos has the capacity and experience to play a particularly strategic role in this regard, given its experiences and innovations in the effective uses of ICTs in southern and East Africa through its Information, Media and Communications programme. Hivos’ policy to promote and support organisation-building, develop networks and communications between organisations and activists presents an opportunity to harness ICTs to link these policy points.

Notwithstanding access limitations, ICTs present opportunities for virtual organising in repressive country contexts. In both Zambia and Mozambique, informal LGBT groupings have taken advantage of the relative anonymity of ICTs to create virtual communities of support in the absence of being able to physically organise and mobilise. Supporting LGBT ICT projects in hostile country contexts provides a realistic way of sharing and exchanging information to support efforts towards emancipation, while limiting the risks of the organisers being outed and the negative repercussions that would follow. ICTs present a means of networking and sharing without necessarily leaving one’s office, as well as the possibility of including more staff in networking and information-sharing activities through, for example, video conferencing or using Skype. Links and opportunities for learning can be created through using ICTs optimally (such as list servs, discussion group spaces, knowledge-sharing platforms and digital storytelling). Not all organisations were using ICTs optimally, and there is significant scope for improving organisations’ communication and networking capacities using ICTs effectively. An LGBT ICT strategy for the region, drawing on Hivos’ previous experience in the area of strategic ICT use, will help to improve knowledge sharing and to some extent alleviate the necessity of frequent international travel for networking purposes.

3. Hivos is in the unique position of having provided support to LGBT work in the region for at least twelve years. Documenting Hivos’ experiences as a pioneer supporter of the sector, and the experiences of those within the sector provides the opportunity: • To support local, documented knowledge production in the region; • To develop creative, and accessible resources (e.g. through the production of a DVD and/or

the publication of an accessible book) – that documents individual stories, experiences, lessons learnt – that could be used as strategic tools to garner greater support from non-LGBT organisations and funding partners;75

• For documented endorsement for future Hivos policy-making in this area; • To acquire a reference point against which to measure future progress; • Of creating a strategic learning resource for incipient and established LGBT organising.

Hivos’ position as cross-sectoral donor also presents the opportunity to connect the concerns of various kinds of member organisations and donor partners to allow for greater collaboration, strategy and information-sharing, and the exchange of ideas and innovations in reaching the goals of a just and equitable society. Given the need for additional, sustained and intensified support, it is recommended that Hivos increase its allocated spend of co-financing funds, specifically in targeting less-resourced organisations.

75 The need for localised (African) and accessible LGBT knowledge sources can in part be addressed by

encouraging organisations to systematically document and record their work and lessons learnt.

80

Annex 1: Sources of Information

African Caucus at ILGA: Statement. July 2006. ILGA 23rd World Conference, Geneva.

Amadiume, I. 2006. Sexuality, African Religio-Cultural Traditions and Modernity: Expanding the Lens. http://www.arsrc.org/downloads/amadiume.pdf

Amnesty International Country Report, Zambia. 2000

Boezak, S. 2005. Absent Voices, Missed Opportunities. Department of Journalism and Media Studies, Rhodes University. Charney, C. 1995. Between Ignorance and Tolerance: South African Public Attitudes on Issues Concerning Gays, Lesbians, and AIDS. Unpublished report, AIDS Law Project, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. Archival source: AM2784 Kevan Botha Collection; Gay and Lesbian Archives of South Africa, Historical Papers; UWL.

Cock, J. Engendering gay and lesbian rights: The Equality Clause in the South African Constitution, in Sex and Politics in South Africa, N. Hoad, K. Martin, G. Reid (eds), 2005, Double Storey Books, Cape Town. Dirsuweit, T. in Ballard, R, Habib, A, and Valodia, I. (eds) 2006. Voices of Protest: Social Movements in South Africa, The Problem of Identities – The Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersexual Social Movement in South Africa, University of KwaZulu Natal Press, Pietermaritzburg. De Waal, S. & Manion, A. 2006. PRIDE: Protest & Celebration, Jacana Media, Johannesburg.

Distiller, N. 2005. Another Story: the (im)possibility of lesbian desire in Agenda, African Feminisms, Vol. 2.2 Sexuality & Body Image, No.63, Durban, pp 44 – 57.

Dlamini, B. 2006. Homosexuality in the African Context, in Agenda, African Feminisms, Vol. 2.3, Homosexuality, pp 128 – 136.

Feinstein, Adam. 1997. World Press Freedom Review. IPI Report, 66 GALA. 2006. Out in the Media? Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices of the Media towards Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex Issues and Stories, Gay & Lesbian Archive/Community Media for Development. GALZ. 2001. World Conference Against Racism. Human Rights Violations Against Sexual Minorities in Zimbabwe

Gevisser, M. & Cameron, E. (eds.) 1994. Defiant Desire – gay & lesbian lives in South Africa, Ravan Press, Johannesburg.

Goddard, K. Zimbabwe in ILGA Africa 2000 Report: Homosexuality in Africa: The situation of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) people in Africa. http://www.afrol.com/archive/documents/ilga_2000.htm

Herek, G.M. 1990. The Context of Anti-Gay Violence: Notes on Cultural and Psychological Heterosexism, in Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 5(3), pp 316 - 333

81

Hivos Press Statement on GALZ participation at the ZIBF, 1 August 1995

Hoad, N., Martin, K. & Reid, G.(eds.) 2005. Sex & Politics in South Africa, Double Storey Press, Cape Town.

Human Rights Watch/IGLHRC, 2003. More than a Name – State-sponsored homophobia & its consequences in southern Africa, New York.

ILGA World Legal Survey 2006

Isaacks, M. 2005. I don’t force my feelings for other women, my feelings have to force me”: same-sexuality amongst Ovambo women in Namibia in Morgan, R. and Wieringa, S. (eds.) Tommy Boys, Lesbian Men and Ancestral Wives: Female same-sex practices in Africa, Jacana Media, Johannesburg.

Jara, M. 1998. Gay and Lesbian Rights Forcing Change in South Africa. Southern Africa Report, Vol. 13, No 3, May 1998, p.31

Joint Working Group, 2004. Levels of Empowerment among Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender People in Gauteng, South Africa.

Joint Working Group, 2005. An ABC of LGBT: A resource guide for lesbian, gay, bisexual, Transgender and Intersex people.

Joint Working Group, 2006. Levels of Empowerment among Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender People in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.

Joint Working Group. 2006. Parliamentary Submission: Civil union Bill, 29 September

Joint Working Group. 2006. Letter to the Speaker of Parliament and the Deputy Minister of Home Affairs, October 16

Kendall, J. When a woman loves a woman in Lesotho in Murray, Stephen and Roscoe, Hill (eds.) Boy-Wives and Female Husbands: Studies in African Homosexualities.

Khaxas, E. (ed.) 2005. Between Yesterday & Tomorrow – Writings by Namibian Women, Women’s Leadership Centre, Windhoek.

Khaxas, E. 2005. I am a pet goat, I will not be slaughtered: female masculinity and femme strength amongst the Damara in Namibia in Morgan, R. and Wieringa, S. (eds.) Tommy Boys, Lesbian Men and Ancestral Wives: Female same-sex practices in Africa, Jacana Media, Johannesburg.

Leclerc-Madlala and Kearney, 2006. South Africa in Sexuality in the Media: Emerging Issues in Africa. Research on Africa’s Print Media, African Research Centre for the Study of Sexuality and Culture (ARSRC), Lagos

Lewis, D. (2003) Editorial: Changing Cultures, in Feminist Africa, 2: Changing Cultures, African Gender Institute, University of Cape Town

Lorde, A. 1984 Sister Outsider: Essays & Speeches, Crossing Press, Berkely.

Maja-Pearce, A. 1992. The Press in Central Africa. Index on Censorship, 4(21): 26-30. Mama, A, Pereira, C, Manuh, T. 2006. Editorial: Sexual Cultures in Feminist Africa 5: Sexual Cultures, African Gender Institute, University of Cape Town

82

Morgan, R. and Wieringa, S. (eds.) 2005. Tommy Boys, Lesbian Men and Ancestral Wives: Female same-sex practices in Africa, Jacana Media, Johannesburg.

Msimang, S.2002. Introduction: African Feminisms 2: reflections on politics made personal in Agenda, No.54, 2002, pp 3 – 15

Narayan, U. 1997. Dis/locating Cultures: Identities, Traditions and Third World Feminisms, Routledge, London.

National Coalition for Gay and Lesbian Equality. 1998. Recognise Our Relationships/Equal Right to Marry Campaign. Workshop Report.

National Society for Human Rights Annual Report, 2000, Windhoek

Nkabinde, N. with Morgan, R. This has happened since ancient times... it’s something that you are born with;: ancestral wives among same-sex sangomas in South Africa, in Agenda, African Feminisms, Vol. 2.3, Homosexuality, No.67 pp 9 – 19

Nkoli, S. Speech at Pride, Johannesburg, 1990, (GALA file: AM 2623)

Numwa, R. Zambia. Africa ILGA Report, 2000. Ottosson, D. 2006. With the government in our bedrooms – a survey on the laws over the world prohibiting consenting adult homosexual acts, ILGA. Potgieter, C. 2006. The Imagined Future for Gays & Lesbians in South Africa: Is this it? Guest editorial in Agenda, African Feminisms, Vol. 2.3, Homosexuality, No.67, pp 4 – 8 Reddy, V. 2006. Decriminalisation of homosexuality in post-apartheid South Africa, in Agenda, African Feminisms, Vol.2.3, Homosexuality, No.67, pp146 – 157 Reid, R. & Disuweit, T. 2002. Understanding Systemic Violence: Homophobic Attacks in Johannesburg and its Surrounds in Urban Forum Special Issue: Safety, Fear of Crime and Social Exclusion, July-September, Vol.13, No. 3, 2002, pp 99 – 126 Rothschild, C. 2003. Namibia: The more out we are, the more public support we get in Written Out: How Sexuality is Used to Attack Women’s Organising, Long, S. (ed), IGLHRC and CWGL, New Jersey and San Francisco. Sen, A. 1999. Development as Freedom. Oxford University Press. Ssewakiryanga, R. That Beijing Thing!: challenging transnational feminisms in Kampala, Uganda in African Feminisms 2 Agenda, Vol. 2 African Feminisms 2, No.54, 2002, pp 16 – 30 Theron, A. and Bezuidenhout, C. 1995. Anti-Gay Hate Crimes: Need for police involvement to curb violence committed against gays, South African Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation, Seminar 2. Wells, H. & Polder, L. 2006. Anti-gay hate crimes in South Africa: prevalence, reporting practices, and experiences of the police in Agenda, African Feminisms, Vol.2.3, Homosexuality, No.67

83

Newspaper Articles

Botswana

Botswana president: Don’t be judgemental on homosexuals at http://www.mask.org.za from Mmegi Monitor.

Ditshwanelo discusses rights of homosexuals, Botswana Daily News, October 5, 1995. Kebonye Seretse.

Gays’ rights must be respected, Sunday Tribune, September 3, 1995. Joseph Balise.

Gays take cautious steps to come out in Africa, April 24, 2006, Stephanie Nolen. http://www.mask.org.za/article.php?cat=botswana&id=1029

Gays and lesbians join hands with Ditshwanelo, Botswana Gazette, May 13, 1998. Outsa Mokone.

Sodom and Gomorrah: Churches warn against decriminalisation of homosexuality, Midweek Sun, May 27, 1998

Malawi

Gays are a thorny issue in Malawi, African Information Agency, GALA press file on Malawi. 1998

Malawi Human Rights Resources Centre (MHRRC) proposes legalisation of homosexuality to Malai Law Commission, Daily News, 28 January 2005

Women journalists and mothers in the Mangochi district attempt to stop sex trade between foreign male tourists and their sons, Pan African News Agency, 11 November 1999

Mozambique

Emilio Manhique’s column in support of gay rights, Diario de Mocambique, Agencia de Informacao de Mocambique, 4 July 2006

First national seminar on homosexuality, www.allafrica.com, 12 October 2006

Gay rights raised in Mozambique, Agencia de Informacao de Mocambique/Agence France Presse, 11 July 2006

Mozambique conference on homosexuality, www.allafrica.com, 12 October 2006

Salane Muchanga, Mozambique discovers its gay minority, www.afrol.com/articles/22322 Agencia de Informacao de Mocambique, 1 November 2006

Sisters, 15 July 2003 www.mask.org.za/SECTIONS/ArtsAndCulture/ac_new/photography/mozambique.htm

Sisters photo exhibition, Zambeze, 24 July 2003.

Namibia

Alpheus comes out on gay issue, The Namibian, 29 January 1997

Gay-bashing likened to ‘cancer of racism’, The Namibian, 22 March 2001, Werner Menges

Gay rights dealt blow, The Namibian, March 6, 2001, Werner Menges

Government planning to criminalise gays, The Namibian, 9 November 1995, Christof Maletsky

84

Homosexuality is like cancer or AIDS scourge, New Era, 5-11 October 1995, Fred Mwilima

Homosexuality is a mental disorder, (three part article) The Namibian, 10, 17, 24 November 1995, Helmut Angula

Implications of Namibia’s ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in 1994, The Namibian, 5 January 2001

Jerry in new anti-gay rant, The Namibian, 2 October 2000

Minister elaborates on anti-gay stance, The Nambian, 3 November 2000, Max Hamata

Namibian government cuts advertising support to newspapers unsympathetic to it, Afrol News, 27 August 2002

Nujoma blasts gays, Windhoek Advertiser, 12 December 1996, Erhard Gunzel

Nujoma targets imperialism, gays, The Namibian, 19 August 2002, Maggi Barnard

Opinion on Sexual Orientation and Human Rights: Legal Assistance Centre, The Namibian, 5 January 2001

Remove this ‘homophobic’ Minister, The Namibian, 9 September 2005

Round up Gays, urges Nujoma, The Namibian, 2 April 2001

Sister Namibia Wants President to Apologise, The Namibian, 17 January 1997, Lucienne Field

SWAPO women call for separation of gender and homosexuality issues, Dakar News Agency, 9 October 1999

SWC unleashes salvo at Women’s Manifesto, The Namibian, 10 June 1999, Francis Zoagub

To Come Out, or Not To? The Weekender (insert in The Namibian), 29 June 2001, Hugh Ellis

South Africa

ACDP opposes same-sex marriage, Mail & Guardian http://www.mg.co.za/articlePage.aspx?articleid=238569&area=/breaking_news/breaking_news__national/

We dare not erase ‘race’ from debate, Mail & Guardian, Comment, May 11-17, 2007, Adam Haupt

Being Gay and Zulu, Mail & Guardian, 17 October, 2006, Niren Tolsi

Corrective rape makes you an African woman, independent online, 7 November 2003, Yolanda Mufebwa

Slow coming out for black lesbians, The Star, 20 November 1997, Glenda Daniels

Hating girls who love girls, This Day, 9 October 2003, Gail Smith

JWG Response to passing of Civil Union Act, 14 November 2006, http://www.iglhrc.org/site/iglhrc/section.php?detail=697&id=5

Murder of young lesbian Cape Town woman, Sunday Times, 22 February 2006

85

South African police statistics on rape for the year 2003/4 http://web.amnesty.org/report2005/zaf_summary-eng

South Africa’s gays give media failing grade, [‘Out in the Media’, GALA, 2006] 29 January 2007, Nosimilo Ndlovu

Women’s rights activists: on rape, levels of reporting www.csvr.org.za/artrapem.htm

Africa: Political Governance on Homosexuality - Why the Coalition of African Lesbians (CAL), Fikile Vilakazi, 5 April 2007 http://allafrica.com/stories/200704051006.html

Black gays the target of hate crimes, IRIN NEWS, 7 December 2006

South Africa Gay Marriage Bill Becomes Law www.365gay.com/Newscon06/11/113006safmar.htm

The Bermuda Triangle of African homophobia, 27 March 2001, A Simo www.thegully.com/essays/africa/010327gay_na.html

Zambia

Another gay surfaces, Post, 24 August 1998, Dickson Jere

Are donors gay? Times of Zambia, 22 October 1998, K Phiri

Arrest ZIMT officials, Times of Zambia, 22 October 1998

Clamp-down on gays begins: Police pursue homos, Post, 19 October 1998, Kelvin Shimo

Chiluba blasts gays, Times of Zambia, 19 October 1988

Cry our beloved Zambia: homosexuality is an evil act, National Mirror, 1 – 7 November 1998, Clive Kawana

Gay activists to be arrested, Post, 23 September 1998, Amos Malupenga

Gay promoters face arrest, Daily Mail, 4 September 1998, Dickson Kaminda

Homo Party? Not here! Sunday Times of Zambia, 6 September 1998, Vincent Zulu and Victor Chitafu

I’m 25, gay, with 33 sex partners, Post, 14 July 1998, Goodson Machona

Just chatting: homos, lesbians, go to hell! Zambia Daily Mail, 19 September 1998, Wam Kwaleyla

KK defends homos: the issue has ‘come to stay’, Post, 12 October 1998, Goodson Machona

Madondo speaks out on gays, Times of Zambia, 18 September 1998

Letters to the editor, Post, 14 September 1998

Letters to the editor, Post, 17 September 1998

Letters to the editor, Post, 21 September 1998

Letters to the editor, Sunday Times of Zambia, 20 September 1998

Letters to the editor, Sunday Mail, 27 September 1998

86

You will be arrested, gay lobbyists warned, Times of Zambia, 23 September 1998

Zambia issues warning on gay associations, Herald, Harare, 5 September 1998

Zulu defends homosexual, Post, 15 July 1998

Zimbabwe

Ban them from Book Fair, The Herald, 24 July 1996

Censors board bans GALZ from Fair: End of the road…, The Herald, 30 July 1996

Family of gay activist won’t allow him to attend funeral, The Daily News, 13 November 1999

GALZ banned from Fair, The Herald, 1 August 1996

Gay rights activist dies, The Daily News, 12 November 1999

Gays want rights in new democratic constitution, The Zimbabwe Mirror, 8 October 1999

Group banned from fair, The Herald, 29 July 1995

In my Judgement – The President, gays and diplomacy, Sunday Gazette, 10 December 1995

Mugabe to Root out Gays, Daily Standard, 2 July 2002, Walter Marwizi

Of homosexuality and human rights: No rights for sodomists and perverts – Mugabe, The Reporter, 18-24 August 1995

Scuffles break out at demo against GALZ, Sunday Mail, 28 July 1996, Vivian Maravanyika

We’ll raze down GALZ stand at the Book Fair, The Herald, 23 July 1996

Legislation Constitution of the Republic of Botswana, 30 September 1966

Constitution of the Republic of Malawi, 18 May 1994

Constitution of the Republic of Namibia, ratified 9 February 1990

Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 10 December 1996

Group Areas Act of 1960, South Africa

Immorality Amendment Bill, 1967 (GALA, File AM 2656)

Malawi penal code 7:01, Laws of Malawi

Mozambique penal code of 1886, Article 71

Penal Code Act Chapter 87 of the Laws of Zambia, 1995 Edition Volume 7 1995 (Revised)

Section 164 on ‘Unnatural Offences’ in Botswana Penal Code

Zimbabwe’s criminal law Codification and Reform Act, chapter 9:23, Act 23/2004 (effective July 8, 2006)

87

Archival Material Sourced from GALA afrol News, email to Bart Luirink, 27 August 2001. File: Namibia

Behind the Mask, email from Graeme Reid, subject line: Urgency motion on treatment of lesbians and gays in Namibia to be debated in European Parliament, 4 April 2001. File: Namibia

Frank, Liz. A personal story. 13 December 2001. File: Namibia

Swartz, Ian. Briefing, 20 February 2001. File: The Rainbow Project.

2001. SABC Special Assignment: He is my President

2001. Ditsie, B.P. And Newman, N. Simon and I - documentary

OiA Short Films Possessed by Demons, by Nokhuthula Dladla, 2005, Out in Africa

Ndim Ndim, by Martha Qumba, 2005, Out in Africa

I have two, by John Moletse, 2005, Out in Africa

Hivos Documents

Policy Documents

Civil Voices on a Global Stage

Human Rights

Gender, Women and Development

HIV/AIDS

Memorandum Policy LGBT emancipation

Other documents

Results-Based Management

Hivos trip reports

Hivos organisational assessments

IOB evaluation report

88

People

The Netherlands

Christiaan Ernsten Frans Mom Ireen Dubel Jan Vossen Madeleine Maurick Margreet Tamme Hansma

Hivos RO – Harare

Andrew Nongogo Corina Straatsma Lucia Mandengenda Overson Chiyaka Petronella Maturure Sarah Musungwa Soneni Ncube Stephen Matinanga

Hivos Country Consultants

Inez Hackenberg – Mozambique Jon Campbell – South Africa Grace Kanyanga – Zambia

LGBT organisations

Behind the Mask

Damon Bolden Mashilo Mnisi, Editor Mphumi Mathabela, Webmaster Nathateng, Senior Reporter Thuli Madi, Director Wendy Landau, Link Project

Durban Centre

Busangokwakhe Dlamini, Counsellor Evashnee Naidu, Legal Officer Nomvuyo , Head Researcher and Advocacy Officer Nonhlanhla Mkhize, Director Truman, Interest Group Facilitator

GALA

Anthony Manion, Archivist Busi Kheswa Harry Ntombela John Moketsi Marius Coetzee Paul Mokgethi Ruth Morgan, Director

GALZ

Chesterfield Samba, Office Manager Fadzai Muparutsa, Gender Programme Officer Keith Goddard, Director

Millicent Tanhira, Information Officer Samuel Matsikure, Health Officer

Legabibo

Monica Tabengwa, Coordinator Prisca Mogapi, Bonela intern, Legabibo

Out in Africa

Carol Jackson Louis Swanepoel Maureen Levenberg Nodi Murphy, Director Sharon Jackson Theresa Raizenberg

OUT

Dawie Nel, Director Fikile Vilakazi, Advocacy Officer Jay Matlou, learner Melanie Judge, Programmes Manager Sebastiaan Matroos, Sexual Health Manager Steve Letsike, learner

The Rainbow Project

Carol Millward Gina Tibinyane, resource centre volunteer Ian Swartz, Director Linda Bauman Madelene Isaacks

Triangle Project

Asanda Fanti, Outreach Dawn Betteridge, Director Mabhuti Makangeli, Outreach Marlow Valentine, Community Outreach/Public Education & Training Tracy Smith, Volunteer Coordination Vista Kalipa, Media

Key Informants

Botswana

Alice Mogwe, Director, Ditshwanelo Andrew, Ditshwanelo Christine Stegling, Director, Bonela Dipuo, HIV/AIDS Coordinator, Ditshwanelo Oteng, Activism & Information Assistant, Ditshwanelo

Malawi

Daveson Nyadani, Director CEDEP

Mozambique

Danilo da Silva, LIGA/LDH Ditte Haarløv Johnsen Edda van den Bergh Collier, Consultant Terezinha da Silva, FORUM MULHER Board Chair, WLSA Coordinator

89

Namibia

Andrew Harris, NANGOF Anna Nicodemus, NBC Dorkas Phillemon, National Society for Human Rights Elizabeth Khaxas, Director, Women’s Leadership Centre Itayi Duve, Ibis Liz Frank, Director, Sister Namibia Lynita Conradie, Legal Assistance Centre Marinda Steyn, One Africa Broadcasting Corporation Sandra, Katutura Community Radio

South Africa

Anthony Walthausen, Pietermaritzburg Lesbian and Gay Network Bronwynne Pereira, Foundation for Human Rights Carol Cooper, GALA library Carrie Shelver, POWA (Chair of FEW Board) Davida Ngozwana, incoming chair, OUT, Government: Department of Trade and Industry Debra Schultz, Director of Programmes, Network Women’s Programme, OSISA Derek Wilson, Arts Editor, The Argus Desiree Lewis, Department of Women’s and Gender Studies, UWC Dolar Vasani, independent consultant Donna Smith, CEO, FEW Janine Moolman, Media Manager, Women’sNet Jean September, Director, Cape Town, Arts and Governance, British Council Joel Nana, Fellow at BtM (Cameroon) Karen Kraan, Schorer Karen Rutter, OiA short film maker Kent Klindera, Engender Health Lerato Legoabe, Girl’sNet Coordinator Lisa Holland, OiA short film maker Martha Qumba, OiA short film maker Mary Hames, Gender Equity Unit, University of the Western Cape Miriam Asmal, Swiss Pro Helvetia Natasha Primo, Director, Women’sNet Nazmah Achmat Nokhuthula Dladla, OiA short film maker Nomonde Mbusi, theatre consultant Nozipho Ngcobo, Pietermaritzburg Lesbian and Gay Network

Prudence Mabele, Director Positive Women’s Network Rob Minnie, teacher Robert Cameron Ellis, outgoing chair of board, OUT Rowan Smith, Dean St George’s Cathedral, Diocese of Cape Town, Anglican Church Sally-Jean Shackleton, Deputy Director, Women’sNet Sandra Gordon, CEO, The Media Sechan Pillay, National Lottery Sheryl Ozinsky, CEO, Cape Town Routes Sudeshan Reddy, UN Information Centre Thabo Mashiane, Deputy Chief Education Specialist, Psychological Services, Gauteng Department of Education Tonya Graham, Communications Media for Development Vasu Reddy, HSRC Yvette Abrahams, Institute for Historical Research Zakhele Mbete, Activate Chair Zanele Muholi, Photographer Zintombizethu Matebeni, Researcher, Wits Zodwa Shongwe, Producer, Windybrow Theatre

Zambia

Muchimba Sils, Consultant Ndanji, AfricanVeil

Zimbabwe

Bella Matambanadzo, OSISA Bev Clark, Creative Director, Kubatana Brenda Burrell, Technical Director, Kubatana Dorothy Adebanjo, Director, ZWRCN Eddie, Padare Ednah Bhala, Director, Musasa Project Hope Chigudu, Independent consultant Regis Munyaradzi Mtutu, Director, Padare Men’s Forum on Gender Sylvia Chirawu, WLSA Walter Marwizi, journalist, The Standard

Numbers of LGBT people

Botswana: 17 Malawi: 3 Mozambique: 5 Namibia: 27 South Africa: 147 Zambia: 2 Zimbabwe: 25

90

Annex 2: Terms of Reference 1. Introduction

1. 1. Hivos

Hivos is a secular Dutch development organisation. In 1968 a number of people and

organisations involved in the humanist movement in the Netherlands established the Hivos

Foundation. Until then religious organisations played a dominant role in Dutch development co-

operation. Hivos chose to base its policy on humanist principles: personal responsibility for one’s

actions, the right to self-determination for each individual, pluralism and tolerance in society.

Hivos works to contribute to a free, fair and sustainable world, in which women and men have

equal access to resources, opportunities and markets, so that they can actively participate in

decision-making processes that determine their lives, society and future. Hivos commits itself to

poor and marginalised people and their organisations in the South and East. Hivos’ core activities

are funding and political support to civil society organisations and initiatives with shared goals,

networking, lobbying, and knowledge sharing at international as well as national level. The main

activity is financial support and advice to local NGOs. Hivos does not implement projects or

programmes itself. The local NGOs supported, carry out various activities at different levels of

society and play a role in the development of their societies. Hivos always looks for partners that

are willing to point the way, are not dogmatic and welcome innovation.

Hivos takes an institutional approach in supporting organisations. This entails support to the

organisation as a whole: organisational and policy development, management, financial control,

internal democracy and public accountability.

Hivos is currently active in seven sectors: 1) Financial Services & Enterprise Development, 2)

Sustainable Production, 3) Arts & Culture, 4) ICT, Media & Knowlegde Sharing, 5) Gender,

Women & Development, 6) hiv/Aids and 7) Human rights & Democratisation.

The largest part of Hivos’ budget is funded through the Co-Financing Programme of the Dutch

Ministry for Development Co-operation. The Co-Financing Programme is part of the national

budget for development co-operation and is open to Dutch development organisations working

towards poverty alleviation and civil society building.

Hivos operates from its head office in The Hague (The Netherlands) and four Regional Offices in

Harare (Zimbabwe), Bangalore (India), San Jose (Costa Rica) and Jakarta (Indonesia).

1. 2. Hivos and LGBT Emancipation;

Since the mid 1990s, Hivos has supported a number of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual

organisations in Africa, Asia, and Latin America as part of its human rights programme.

-General human rights policy

Hivos’ policy document on Human Rights (1996) lists a number of “specific human rights”, the

promotion of which qualifies for Hivos’ support. This includes support to people who are

discriminated on the basis of their sexual orientation. The 2002 update of the Human Rights

policy document reconfirms this choice:

“All people have the right to choose a sexual orientation without being stigmatized. In

addition to the right to non-discrimination, specific concerns of GLBT people are the right

to health and other social services, to security of person, to freedoms of expression and

association, and to participate/be represented in public affairs. Hivos encourages lobby

and advocacy for the rights of GLBT people by general human rights organizations, and

supports co-operation between national and international membership organizations. In

91

some countries, partner organizations still have to be identified. Further information is

contained in the Hivos Memorandum on Policy Implementation Gay and Lesbian

Emancipation of 1999.”

-Policy Memorandum on Gay & Lesbian Emancipation in the South

This 1999 memorandum “Policy implementation Gay and Lesbian Emancipation in the South”

provides more background and operational choices for support in this area.

It points out:

-the potential & significance of this “minority” group in the process of strengthening

social movements for democratization & emancipation in the broad sense,

-the promotion of the emancipation process caused by the questioning of sexual taboos &

power relations inherent in the championing of sexual freedom & rights,

-the secular & non dogmatic character of this emancipation process which is very much in

tune with Hivos’ humanist principles.

And states that the main objective of Hivos in this area is:

“…to promote the emancipation of homosexual men and women in the South.

To achieve this it is necessary to bring about greater support in society for homosexual

emancipation in the national and regional contexts. Guarantees for the recognition and

application of fundamental human rights, including sexual rights, are of prime importance

here.”

In implementing this policy Hivos will:

-focus on identification of the sphere of influence/potential of the gay/lesbian movement

in the south,

-promote & support organization building, network development and communication of/

between organizations/activists,

-promote awareness among general human rights organizations

-be proactive

and

-allocate 2% of available Cofinancing Funds (by 2001) to this policy area.

2. Programme Evaluation(PE): Justification, background and context

In the framework of the dutch Cofinancing Programme 2003-2006, five Cofinancing

organizations(CFOs: Cordaid, Hivos, Icco, Novib and Plan Netherlands) have agreed with the

Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs to implement a series of Programme Evaluations to assess the

effectiveness of their activities. A Programme Evaluation assesses a set of related activities &

programmes (geographically, thematically or both), which distinguishes it from what is normally

referred to as a ‘project evaluation’, which only looks at one single project, programme or

organization.

The series of Programme Evaluations includes both joint Programme Evaluations, with more than

one Cofinancing organization participating and individual Programme Evaluations, carried out on

behalf of one single CFO.

All Programme Evaluations are submitted to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and their quality is

assessed by the independent Evaluation Unit of this Ministry (IOB), using a standard assessment

framework.

This present evaluation is one of Hivos individual Programme Evaluations (PE). The thematic area

of LGBT emancipation is unique among the CFOs, and Hivos would like to develop this niche

area further.

The geographical coverage of this evaluation will be Southern Africa, which is the area under

responsibility of Hivos’ Regional Office based in Harare, Zimbabwe. It includes the following 7

92

countries: Zimbabwe, South Africa, Namibia, Botswana, Zambia, Mozambique and Malawi.

As a whole, the region Southern Africa achieved the target that was set by the 1999

memorandum (see above): in 2001 2.2% of funds were spent on LGBT emancipation

activities. For the period 1996-2004 the percentage was 1.8, and for the year 2004 it

amounted to 2.3 (only counting funds administered by the Harare office).

It is important to note that Hivos’ efforts were not evenly spread among the countries of the

region. Even if the policy calls for a pro-active approach, implementation depends on

(im)possibilities in every country, to which Hivos can respond. These are not evenly spread.

Three countries have attracted the bulk of funds allocated for LGBT emancipation: South

Africa, Zimbabwe and Namibia. This notwithstanding, efforts have been made by Hivos

towards Zambia, Mozambique and Botswana. In Malawi –where Hivos started to work in only

more recently- only very incipient efforts have been made by Hivos.

3. Evaluation Purpose, Objectives and Research Questions

3.1. Purpose of the programme evaluation

Hivos will use the findings of this programme evaluation:

-To show and account for the results of its efforts to promote LGBT emancipation,

-To critically review these efforts,

-To inspire future policy development & implementation.

3.2 Objective: Problem statement The evaluation must answer the following overall question:

To what degree) have Hivos’ interventions in the period 1995 –2005 contributed to LGBT

emancipation in Southern Africa?

The evaluation will focus on the Outcome-level of results, i.e. will go beyond the output-level, but

will not attempt to make statements on the impact-level of results

3.3 Research Questions

In order to answer this overall question, the evaluation will approach it from two sides:

-From “above” i.e. from the “changes” that have occurred: analyzing changes regarding LGBT,

and asking whether the period in question (1995-2005) shows a trend towards “emancipation”

(esp. research questions 1.1. /1.2.)

-From “below” i.e. from the “efforts”, analyzing the efforts of Hivos partner organizations/ Hivos

efforts in terms of their effectiveness (esp. research questions 2.1. /2.2, 3.1. /3.2.)

The overall evaluation question will be answered by explicitly answering the following research

questions 1- 5:

1. Changes

1.1 What measurable changes regarding LGBT have occurred in -the 7 countries of- Southern

Africa in the period 1995-2005?

1.2 To what extent can these changes –if any- be assessed as a “development towards LGBT

emancipation”?

2. Efforts of LGBT organisations

2.1 How effective were the Hivos supported LGBT organizations & projects in achieving their

stated objectives ?

2.2 What was the reach of these Hivos supported LGBT organizations & projects?

2.3. How relevant are/were these objectives voor LGBT emancipation ?

3. Efforts of Hivos

93

3.1 To what extent did Hivos’ direct support to its LGBT partner organizations contribute to their

effectiveness?

3.2 To what extent did Hivos’ other interventions (indirect support like targeting human rights &

women’s organizations) contribute to the effectiveness of the LGBT partner organizations

4. Can the effects of the Hivos supported LGBT organizations plausibly be connected with the

overall changes analyzed in question 1?

5. Considering the answers to Q.1-4, what can be concluded about the effectiveness and

relevance of Hivos’ interventions?

3.4. “Emancipation” and other concepts used

3.4.1. “Emancipation” is the central concept in this evaluation. The evaluators –during phase 1-

have elaborated and operationalised this concept, using various inputs (a.o. a workshop in Harare

in February 2006 with Hivos RO staff, Hivos policy documents, project documents), arriving at

the following:

- At a very general level, the notion of “emancipation” is connected to the concepts of “access”,

“representation”, “participation in decision making”, as used in Hivos general policy document

“Civil Voices on a Global Stage”,

- The process of & towards “LGBT emancipation” is an interaction between two sides of the

same coin:

- The side of “LGBTs” ( both individual LGBTs as well as LGBT-organizations) as well as,

- The side of “Society” vis-à-vis LGBTs (in terms of attitudes & opinions as well as in terms

of institutional arrangements, legislation & policies).

In other words “emancipation” should occur & be visible at the level of individual LGBTs, LGBT

organizations, Society’s attitudes and Society’s arrangements.

Using these distinctions, the researchers have developed a limited number of indicators for

“emancipation” at these various levels (see Annex 2).

In their totality they will allow the assessment of the broad range of project/organisational

activities supported by Hivos.

A logical consequence of this conceptualisation is the fact that “LGBT organisations” constitute

both a “means towards” as well as “a level of ” emancipation. This does not suggest that the

“mean” becomes an “end” in itself, but it recognizes that – certainly in hostile environments- the

fact of organisation building & strengthening is in itself an indicator of emancipation.

3.4.2. Other concepts used are taken from the DAC Glossary of Key Terms in Evaluation and

Results Based Management:

Results

The output, outcome or impact of a development intervention

Output:

The products, capital goods and services that result from a development intervention

Outcome:

The likely or achieved short-term and medium-term effects of an intervention’s outputs.

Impact:

Positive and negative, primary and secondary long-term effects produced by a development

intervention, directly or indirectly, intended or unintended

94

Reach

The beneficiaries and other stakeholders of a development intervention. (in qualitative and

quantative terms)

Effectiveness is to be understood as:

The extent to which the development intervention’s objectives were achieved, or are expected to

be achieved, taking into account their relative importance.

3.5. Scope of the Evaluation

The totality of Hivos’ support interventions towards the LGBT sector in the Southern African

region during the period 1995 to 2005 will be evaluated, considering the time period during

which an organisation received support, the nature of the support, the particular target groups

that were to benefit from support, the financial contribution made and outputs and outcomes

(results) of this support.

Apart from (financial) support to partner organizations, this includes Hivos efforts at:

• strategic identification of the sphere of influence/potential of the LGBT movement in the

South,

• promotion of and support for organisation building, network development and

communication of/between LGBT organisations/activists,

• promotion of awareness of LGBT issues among general human rights organisations,

• how proactive Hivos has been in identifying partner organisations in this sector

4. Evaluation methodology Phase 2: Data Collection & Analysis

Data for this evaluation will be collected through desk-study and field study.

4.1. Desk study

The desk-study will include the following components:

4.1.1. Literature Review

A review of relevant archival materials and published research will be used to inform and

contextualise the study. This review will also include legislation and policy in the countries under

study.

4.1. 2. Media Content Analysis

A content analysis will be conducted of selected media including policy-influential media in the

cities where Hivos LGBT programme partners are based. Evidence gathered from existing media

and public intellectual research will also be drawn on, with:

• the primary objective of tracking country and region-specific shifts and changes in the

discourse around LGBT emancipation over the ten year period under review, regarding

access, representation and participation; and with

• the secondary objective of evaluating the quality and quantity of media coverage of LGBT

issues in these countries’ media; and the presence, participation and profiles of partner

organisations in raising or supporting such debate in the public sphere.

4.1.3. File Study of documents, to be found at Hivos and/or at Partner organisations.

An extensive file study will be conducted of project documents, plans, proposals, Hivos

organisational assessments of proposals and project evaluations, with a view to critically

analysing and rating intentions and plans against actual outputs and outcomes within Hivos’

LGBT policy framework.

4.2. Field study

On the basis of the desk study, preliminary discussions with key informants, and the February

workshop in Harare, questionnaires, interview guides and observation record forms will be

developed that speak to the measurable indicators (see Annex 2), for the collection of analysable

field data. Field data will be collected through:

95

4.2.1. Interviews with key informants (face-to-face, telephonic, email questionnaires)

These include:

• key informants and activists within the Southern African LGBT sector (including Hivos

partners and non-partners). In the case of implementing organisations, the researchers will

interview programme and project staff, beneficiaries of services, as well as members of

governance structures.

• opinion leaders including public intellectuals, researchers and media practitioners whose

views and actions impact upon debates and discussion in the public sphere.

• Hivos staff. The efforts, experiences and insights of Hivos staff (at the Harare Regional Office

and at The Hague) involved in facilitating and implementing partnership relations with LGBT

organisations over the ten-year period in Southern Africa are formative to this PE.

• Other Hivos partners in Southern Africa such as women’s organisations and human rights

organisations will be interviewed to assess their perspectives and engagement on progress

towards LGBT emancipation, as well as to garner the extent to which (and potential for

greater) interconnections, networking, collaboration, alliances and support exists between

Hivos partners in often seemingly disparate programme areas.

• Other human rights, women’s/gender and LGBT organisations that have had an impact on

LGBT emancipation in the terms described above, will also be interviewed as a means of

coming closer to establishing a (causal) link between Hivos and the achieved results.

Based on previous experience conducting similar research and evaluative assignments in the

same geographical context, the researchers have found that face-to-face and telephonic

interviews yield a greater depth of data and perspective than by primarily utilising email

questionnaires and relying on key informants to complete and return questionnaires (as English is

often not the first language of many respondents).

A strong recommendation from participants in the consultative workshop in Harare was that

because of the very specific nature of the sector under evaluation – the secrecy and silence for

fear of hate crimes against publicly claiming or expressing LGBT identities; the discrimination and

stigma associated with the lives of LGBT people in the Southern African context – the strongest

indicators of change would lie at the level of personal testimonies and stories accessed through

one-on-one interviews with relevant people. Workshop participants emphasised the need for and

power of anecdotal approaches to be employed when looking for ‘signs of change’ in this

particular sector due to the significant vulnerabilities faced by organisations and individuals.

This recommendation justifies the need to conduct as many one-on-one interviews as possible to

enable the researchers to measure specific change based on the experiences of individuals in

their life-worlds. In addition, the approach of personal interviews creates greater space for

communicating in confidence and building trust – essential aspects to gathering quality, relevant

and reliable data.

4.2.2. Field visits in Zimbabwe, Botswana, Namibia and South Africa

The researchers will undertake a series of site visits to Hivos LGBT partner organisations with the

following objectives:

• To map out progress/successful steps taken towards LGBT emancipation in Southern

Africa from the perspectives of partners, and to establish the nature of existing

challenges and limitations to realising greater LGBT emancipation in the region;

• To observe and understand the physical and material realities of organisations and their

work within their specific and diverse socio-cultural, political and economic contexts;

• To gain first-hand insight into the reality of operations and activities on the ground in

terms of goals and reach (e.g. to what extent target groups make use of the range of

available services provided to LGBT people; and to what extent the most marginalised are

reached through outreach services);

• To include the views and experiences of people who in various ways through their work

and activism are at the forefront of challenging taboos and making social change happen;

96

• To understand from partner organisations how they measure change and the effects and

outcomes of their work;

• To gain insight into organisations’ efforts to include LGBT persons from the most

marginalised groupings in their societies as part of their core staff, leadership and

governance structures;

• To include the views and experiences of people who in various ways through their work

and activism are at the forefront of challenging taboos and making social change

happen;

• To compare the successes (or not) of Hivos-supported LGBT organisations with

organisations not supported by Hivos;

• To consider what (if any) strategic opportunities exist for further support by Hivos.

4.3. Results Analysis

The team will critically triangulate information gathered from the desk study, field data and the

media content analysis. The team’s analysis will thus be based on points of view and evidence to

support these through independent research (gathered through interviews and other data

gathering methods from Hivos and non-Hivos partner women’s organisations, Human Rights

organisations, LGBT organisations, LGBT people; analysis of existing research, media content

analysis, views of opinion leaders, relevant legislation, institutions such as churches and police

services, and Hivos). Through this assessment, the team will select the evidence it will use to

support analysis and conclusions about the relevance and effectiveness of Hivos and its partners

in efforts towards LGBT emancipation in the Southern African region.

5. Evaluation team

The evaluation team will consist of:

Sarita Ranchod

Sonja Boezak

6. Time Frame and Work Plan Phase 2

Phase 2 starts on June 12th, 2006 and will end on November 30th, 2006.

This phase will include the following moments of feedback from Hivos:

-End of June: on the concrete data collection plan

-November 17th – 24th: on the Draft Final Report.

For details see Annex 4

7. Budget

The Budget for the whole evaluation amounts to max. Euro 77,500, with the following division:

-Phase 1 : Euro 11,782.- (spent)

-Phase 2 : Euro 65,718.- (budget)

8. Expected products Phase 2

- Report: Phase 2 will lead to one report, according to the specifications of Annex 3. The report

will also comply with the requirements following from the IOB framework (see Annex 5)

- Workshop: A Draft of this report will be discussed in a workshop in November in the Hivos

Regional Office in Harare.

9. Hivos staff involved in the evaluation

9.1. Responsible within Hivos for this evaluation:

-Corina Straatsma: Director, Regional Office Zimbabwe,

97

-Karel Chambille, Policy officer Programme Evaluations, Audit and Evaluation department

Headoffice, lead. 9.2. Other Hivos staff involved

Regional Office, Zimbabwe -Andrew Nongogo, programme officer Human Rights

-Petronella Maturure, programme officer Gender, Women & Development

-Soneni Ncube, programme officer Sustainable Production

-Jon Campbell, consultant South Africa

- Grace Manyonga, consultant Zambia

- Inez Hackenberg, consultant Moçambique

Head office, the Hague, Netherlands:

-Teyo van der Schoot: programme Manager Human rights

-Ireen Dubel: programme manager Gender, Women & Development

-Tamme Hansma: programme officer Human Rights

-Margreet van Doodewaard: programme officer ICT & Media

98

Evaluation Scope: Hivos’ activities for LGBT Emancipation

Country Year Project/Organisation Activity/Nature of Support Target Groups Objectives Outcomes

Botswana 1998 – 2004/5

Ditshwanelo – LeGaBiBo Project initiated by a Human Rights organisation that promotes minority rights in Botswana. Hivos supports Ditshwanelo as Human Rights organisation.

minority groups; LGBTs

To promote the rights of minorities in Botswana, where the punishment for homosexuality is jail time for seven years.

Still actively working with one LGBT group

2005 Bonela – LeGaBiBo Support for retreat workshops & newspaper editorials, as part of their Human Rights activities.

General public; LGBTs

To provide effective legal, ethical & HR responses to public health of LGBTIs To strengthen participation of LGBTIs in policy fora Lobbying & advocating for LGBTI rights Public awareness on LGBTI issues; seminars on discriminatory access to healthcare for ‘non-heterosexuals’ as a result of the legal, cultural & social context; start public dialogue on LGBT rights

Homophobic statements by national leaders have kept individual membership anonymous.

Malawi 2005 Initial exploratory discussions with Human Rights partners. No LGBT-specific partnerships forged at this time.

Moçambique 2005 Workshop on GLBT sexuality; initial discussions & a concept paper presented to Human Rights partners

Hivos partners & interested participants

To address issues of human sexuality considered as taboo due to traditional and/or religious beliefs; greater

Workshop postponed; initial discussions held; awaiting outline &

99

Country Year Project/Organisation Activity/Nature of Support Target Groups Objectives Outcomes

openness on LGBT rights; support for incipient LGBT movement

budget from Liga (HR organisation) – though partners expressed surprise at the suggestion of including LGBT issues in their programmes

Namibia 1999 The Rainbow Project (TRP) Core funding LGBTs in Windhoek

Lobbying & advocating for the rights of LGBTs; networking with other HR organisations in Namibia; information dissemination

Promoting Equal Rights for Gays & Lesbians in Namibia

2000 – Sister Namibia Funded by Hivos under its human rights programme. Sister Namibia is a women’s rights organisation that lobbies for the rights of lesbians as part of their programme of activities

Women, girls, lesbians in Namibia

Lobby and campaign for the rights of lesbians; research on the lived realities of lesbian women

Promoting the rights of lesbians in Namibia; decrease in the prevalence of public hate speech against sexual minorities; contributed to the book Tommy Boys, Lesbian Men and Ancestral Wives; presented research at the Sex and Secrecy Conference

2000 – 2003

The Rainbow Project Institutionalisation of TRP with reference to capacity-building to deliver services and to strengthen TRP’s lobbying & advocacy role.

LGBTs in Namibia & Africa-wide; general public

To provide information and services; challenge homophobia; to empower LGBTs; lobbying for human

Visibility of LGBT community; contribution to LGBT emancipation

100

Country Year Project/Organisation Activity/Nature of Support Target Groups Objectives Outcomes

Support towards visibility of TRP as advocate for LGBT rights. Encouragement/facilitation of links with other LGBT organisations in the region; Support for review of organisational structure to improve the lines of accountability & transparency in the organisation

rights; visibility; promotion of sexual diversity & tolerance

2004 African Lesbian Alliance (hosted by TRP)

Capacity-building: strategic planning; feminism, rights, information sharing; training of trainers; Hivos facilitating exchange of experience between CAL and lesbians in Asia & Latin America

Lesbian women in Africa

LGBT Human rights; capacity-building; gender parity in broader LGBT movement

Coalition of African Lesbians launched in 2005 – from African Lesbian Alliance

2005 Coalition of African Lesbians Capacity-building workshops; launch of book on African lesbian life stories

Lesbians in Africa

Visibility; strengthening collaboration between African lesbians on the continent; highlight human rights of lesbians; increase pool of lesbian leaders; linkages between women’s organisations & lesbian groups

Alliance formalised in 2005; 2 leadership institutes held; 2 workshops held; book launch proposed for 2008 Lesbian Festival

South Africa 1995 – 1999

National Coalition for Gay & Lesbian Equality (NCGLE)

Lobbying & advocacy; training & leadership development

LGBTs; government; legislatures; general public

To bring about the empowerment of LGBTs to utilise legislation in defence of human rights; elimination of legal discrimination; dignity, equality & justice for LGBTs; empowerment of LGBTs

Successful lobbying & advocacy of LGBT rights; enshrinement of freedom of sexual orientation in the Constitution

1996 – Gay & Lesbian Archives Collection, recording & preservation LGBTs; To collect information & Creation of a

101

Country Year Project/Organisation Activity/Nature of Support Target Groups Objectives Outcomes

2005 (GALA) of materials from research & gay & lesbian organisational material; media, artefacts & court records; life histories; social history workshops

academics; researchers; general public

popularise gay & lesbian history & experience

recorded history of LGBT life; creation of an information resource; only such resource on the African continent; publication of the book Tommy boys, Lesbian Men and Ancestral Wives, to which six LGBT organisations contributed

1997 - Develop Gay & Lesbian Fund - support follow-up initiatives from Constitutional process: gender/gays & lesbians/TRC

1998 Discuss pending proposal for Gay & Lesbian Fund with Embassy in Pretoria

1999 Pending G & L Fund – to liaise with Interfund on wider network of G & L organisations

2000 – 2005

Behind the Mask (initial support through GALA until 2003)

Application of ICTs as means to monitor & lobby for LGBT rights; continuation & expansion of portal; outreach; information exchange

LGBTs in Africa; media; researchers; global LGBT community; civil journalists in Africa; government institutions; students

Destigmatisation of LGBTs; support for LGBT communities; create a prime resource of LGBT issues in Africa; strategic use of ICTs to demystify LGBTs in Africa; monitoring violations of human rights of LGBTs in Africa; increase understanding of & increase support for

Strong information portal; prime resource of LGBT issues in Africa; utilised widely; contributes to struggle for freedom of sexual orientation & against homophobic

102

Country Year Project/Organisation Activity/Nature of Support Target Groups Objectives Outcomes

LGBT rights prejudice; other LGBT organisations in Africa contribute to portal

1994, 2001, 2004 – 2005

Out in Africa: Gay & Lesbian Film Festival

Film festival addressing discrimination against LGBTs; support for cultural expression; outreach programme; information sharing

LGBTs; general public in South Africa; outreach to non-urban centres

To visibilise LGBTs; ensure recognition of LGBTs; challenge stereotyping; promote LGBT human rights through high profile media; highlight issues of identity; outreach beyond cineastes; to create debate & publicity about LGBT issues; to affirm inclusion; broaden the notion of ‘community’; engender tolerance & understanding of difference

Promotes equality by showing films that inform & entertain & confront discrimination against LGBTs; empowering LGBTs through visibility & representation; well-attended festival with quantifiable media coverage; increased LGBT visibility in the public sphere

2000 – 2005

OUT (previously supported through Interfund, from 2003 directly from Hivos)

Core funding Research Promotion of linkages with women’s organisations to deal with gender & other power relations

LGBTs in greater Tshwane (Pretoria) area, with special focus on black lesbians & gays

To promote LGBT identity, equality, a sense of community & physical & mental health. To mainstream LGBT issues into development agenda; lobby relevant ministries on health needs of LGBTs

Attempts to mainstream LGBT issues into national development processes through lobbying; provision of information on rights to members; direct support to LGBTs; forged strategic links with other LGBTs organisations; receives direct

103

Country Year Project/Organisation Activity/Nature of Support Target Groups Objectives Outcomes

funding from government

2003 University of the Witwatersrand Institute for Social & Economic Research (WISER) & GALA

Women’s research; Sex & Secrecy Conference

NGOs, LGBTs, Women’s rights organisations, researchers on sexualities/identity; scholars

To stimulate new ethnographies and theoretical insights on sexuality and secrecy from a range of disciplines from diverse social contexts; To highlight female same-sex relationships & practices; to collect, analyse & present personal narratives from Africa; to enhance the quality of existing NGOs/research organisations through training & networking between NGOs in and outside the region

Results of research presented at conference; African Lesbian Alliance founded – network of lesbian women in Africa

2004 – 2005

African Women’s Life History Project – GALA

Book on life stories of women’s same sex practices to be distributed to women in African Lesbian Alliance; capacity-building of lesbian network

Lesbians in Africa

Training of young African lesbians to collect, analyse & present personal narratives; to publish book on findings

Training conducted & findings presented at Sex & Secrecy conference; formation of African Lesbian Alliance; phase 2:publication & dissemination of book (proposed for 2008)

2005 Capacity-building Programme (with Atlantic Philanthropies)

Capacity-building workshops for 8 South African LGBT organisations

LGBT organisations

To build LGBT organisational capacity, address issues of sustainability and resource mobilisation & provide a mechanism for ongoing monitoring of organisations

2 workshops held; higher level of cooperation, cohesion & strategy sharing amongst

104

Country Year Project/Organisation Activity/Nature of Support Target Groups Objectives Outcomes supported; outreach; start of national LGBT movement

different participating groups

2005 Triangle Project Health & development services to LGBTs (as a result of homophobia); outreach; core funding

LGBTs, marginalised LGBTs, families & groups in the Western Cape

Empowering targeted LGBTs through health & development services; building pride & capacity; clinical & psycho-social services; public education & training; advocacy; outreach & research around homophobia; building self-esteem of LGBTs

Provide services dealing with the effects of homophobia on LGBTs & their families; work across sectors; distribution of best practice models to sexuality & health organisations

2005 Durban Lesbian & Gay Community Health Centre

A project of the KZN Coalition for Gay & Lesbian Equality

Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender communities of Durban and KwaZulu-Natal

To empower the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender communities by providing services, support and training to enable them to claim their rights to equality, dignity and freedom

Provides a safe and secure space for LGBTs

Zambia 1999 Efforts to identify LGBT organisations dealing with rights issues through consultation with other LGBT organisations in the region; Development of contacts in Zambia regarding G & L rights & HIV/AIDS

To raise the visibility of LGBT issues in Zambian society

1999 Legatra The association was funded through a formally registered organisation that showed an interest in supporting LGBT issues. (support

LGBTs To stimulate debate on LGBT issues; to show that LGBTs are African; to create a safe space for discussion;

Group disbanded in 1999, due to: 1. suspicion of inappropriate

105

Country Year Project/Organisation Activity/Nature of Support Target Groups Objectives Outcomes

through Micro-fund) production of newsletters dealing with LGBT issues

handling of funds by the host organisation; 2. threats on the physical safety of the leader of Legatra, who fled the country and sought political asylum in South Africa. 3. threats by ministers of state to arrest anyone spearheading LGBT issues or organisations.

Zimbabwe 1996 – 2005

GALZ Core funding; training in counselling; all aspects of project

LGBTs; PLWHA; general public

Service provision: counselling, training, safer sexual practices, support to PLWHAs, legal aid, cultural research on same-sex behaviour in Zimbabwe; skills clinic; lobbying for the recognition of sexual rights as human rights

Providing a safe space for LGBTs; facilitating skills building for LGBTs; continued highlighting of LGBT rights

2000 GALZ: African Exchange Programme

Funding of all aspects of project LGBT organisations in Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Namibia & Zimbabwe

Exchange programme between East African & Southern African organisations supported by Hivos: to identify strategies for tackling stigmas against sexual minorities; compilation

Information sharing; building an African LGBT network

106

Country Year Project/Organisation Activity/Nature of Support Target Groups Objectives Outcomes

of a report/campaign guide

2003 All Africa Symposium – GALZ, TRP & Behind the Mask:

Funding for symposium LGBT organisations/groups

To highlight the rights of LGBTs; build a network of LGBT groups in the region; capacity-building; to ‘break the silence’ around LGBT issues; to open dialogue & develop a framework for coordination; to assist LGBT groups to organise through forming organisations; develop plans to demystify same sex relations in Africa

Capacity-building; strengthening cooperation between LGBT groups in the region

Other Activities 1998 – 1999

Gay Games Clarify criteria for requests of support to participate

Facilitate & support publication of life stories of L & G personalities in Southern Africa to be presented during the Gay Games

LGBTs globally International networking, sharing of experiences

1999 ILGA - ILGA Conference, South Africa (September) – funds for international secretariat - encourage women’s participation

LGBT organisations; individuals

The equality of LGBTs & their liberation from discrimination; providing information; international campaigns; supporting LGBT movements; lobbying international organisations & organising world LGBT conference every 2 years

Conference held in Johannesburg: reached broad group of LGBTs with special attention to lesbian women & developing countries, networking & information sharing opportunity

1998 C&M/AI Video initiative Support through ideas & linkages

107

Country Year Project/Organisation Activity/Nature of Support Target Groups Objectives Outcomes

the C&M/AI initiative to produce a TV documentary (for Dutch TV) on Ls & Gs in the South; promote the use of the documentary in video-form

1999 Raise debate with reference to lesbians in LGBT organisations

To ensure women’s participation & representation

2004 Symposium: AIDS & MSM 30 international MSM experts from the South share concerns & findings with a Dutch audience

LGBTs globally Hivos’ achievements in this area over 15 years; what should Hivos expect to achieve over the next 15 years?

Sharing experience

108

The concept of LGBT Emancipation 1. Hivos-funded LGBT organisations:

Project/ Organisational Outcomes /Outputs

Indicator Measure Tools Source of Information

Target audiences make use of services

Numbers/disaggregated data of target audience (TA)

File study Organisational records

Hivos RO Organisation/staff

Increase in number of LGBTs using services

Higher numbers of LGBTs using services

File study Organisational records Interviews

Organisation/ Staff TAs

Number of LGBTs reached File study Organisational records

Organisation

Reach

Inclusion of most marginalised of TA/outreach efforts/disaggregated data of TAs

Organisational records Observation of TAs

Orgs Staff TAs

TA rating of quality of services

Questionnaire for TAs

TAs

Organisation has the capacity to provide quality services

Observation Questionnaire for TA

Site visits Orgs TAs

Skills improvement of TA (rating of usability/usefulness of skills acquired)

Questionnaire for TA

TAs

Service provision (incl. health, legal/rights, counselling, skills training, entertainment, safe space provision)

Quality

Self-esteem, well-being, confidence & safety of TA (TA reports an increase in these)

Guided interview/ questionnaire for TA

TAs

Changes in policy /legislation

Legislative change as result of lobbying efforts of organisation

Desk study Interviews

Research/Policy documents/ Legislation Key informants

Organisational visibility in the media/knowledge of organisation by opinion leaders/govt/general public

Organisational records Interviews Desk study

Orgs Key informants in govt/opinion leaders Media Non-LGBT partners General public

Lobbying & Advocacy

Strength/ability of org/ movement to effect change

Numbers of members/TA Organisational records Interviews

Orgs TAs

109

Links with other LGBT organisations (strength of networking, info-sharing & exchanging within the sector/increased collective action; LGBTs report feeling less isolated)

Interviews Organisational records

Hivos RO LGBT- Orgs (non-Hivos partners incl.) TAs

Links with other organisations, i.e. women’s/HR orgs taking up LGBT issues (strength of networking, info-sharing & exchanging across sectors)

Organisational records Interviews

Hivos RO Orgs Non-LGBT partners

LGBT orgs form a foundation for (increased) social change [based on TA & orgs’ public voice exercising an influence on attitudes, incl. links with others]

Interviews Desk study

TAs General public Non-LGBT organisations

Ability to sustain (effective fundraising)

Organisational records Interviews

Orgs Hivos RO

Ability to match plans with outputs/outcomes

Organisational records Interviews

Orgs Hivos RO TAs

Ability of org to implement/achieve its objectives

Quality of implementation (e.g. TA indicates usefulness/value)

Desk study Interviews

Organisational partners TAs

Sustainability Continued existence/successful fundraising/ability to mobilise resources and support/management of resources

Desk study Interviews Organisational records

Orgs, their partners Hivos RO

Staff skills development; developing new levels/layers of leadership

Interviews Organisational records

Orgs

Organisational strength/ Ability to organise/ continued existence

Succession plans/ability to retain skilled staff

Dispersal of skills & capacities throughout org

Interviews Observation

Orgs

110

2. Society: Social Change (attitudes toward

LGBTs)

Indicator Measure Tools Source of Information

Public visibility of LGBTs

‘Normalisation’ of LGBTs in public sphere/positive visibility of LGBTs

Interviews Observation Media study

TAs of LGBT orgs General public Media representations

Respect for/tolerance of LGBTs in public sphere

Safety of LGBTs in public spaces

Observation Desk study Interviews

Orgs Media representations General public TAs

LGBTs report an increased ability to self-express

Safety of LGBTs in public spaces/decrease of abuse of LGBTs

Interviews Observation & media study

LGBTs in general Media

Freedom of expression, association

Increased knowledge & understanding of LGBTs

Reports of ‘normality’ of LGBTs by general public

Interviews/ survey

General public Media

Leaders who are known to be LGBT

Desk study Interviews

Media General public

Leadership and Agency of LGBTs

Public visibility of LGBTs in leadership positions Visibility of lesbian

leadership Observation Desk study Interviews

Media Orgs

111

Annex 3: Co-financing funds spent on LGBT emancipation in Southern Africa Amounts in Euros x 1000

Organisation 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Out in Africa 6 29 52 75 25 187

NCGLE 23 68 68 79 79 25 342

GALA 23 34 34 25 48 20 48 10 50 292

BtM 20 39 23 23 40 58 20 223

OUT 10 61 24 35 40 60 40 270

Durban Centre 15 30 45

Triangle 50 50 100

GALZ 45 59 91 59 91 52 45 115 90 30 60 737

TRP 4 34 34 34 30 30 60 60 286

Legabibo 11

Legatra 9 9

LAMBDA 10 10

CEDEP 10 10

Africa Exchange Programme 32 32

All Africa Symposium 70 70

African Women’s Life History 17 35 52

Coalition of African Lesbians 115 50 165

Total Co-financing funds spent on LGBT in region

6 23 136 165 170 235 256 247 142 355 460 360 275 2842

Total Co-financing funds spent in region

9979 8949 9811 10292 10888 10819 10055

% LGBT emancipation 2.6% 2.8% 1.4% 3.4% 4.2% 3.3% 2.7%

112

Annex 4: Audience Profiles

OiA Satellite Festival-goers Profile

Size of sample: 255 (written questionnaires) Note: The figures below are sample means based on the total number of returned questionnaires from the satellite festivals held in Ermelo, Kimberley and Pietermaritzburg. With the exception of the figures for Age Brackets, Biological Sex and Sexual identity, these figures therefore reflect a measure of central tendency, rather than exact results. Age brackets 17 – 20: 36% 21 – 25: 30% 26 – 30: 16% 31 – 35: 14% 36 – 50: 4% Biological sex Male: 48% Female: 52%

Sexual identity Lesbian: 40% Gay: 40% Bisexual: 5% Transgender: 2% Heterosexual: 4% Masculine male: 20% Feminine male: 22% Masculine female: 21% Feminine female: 23%

Living Standard Measures a. Education Primary school: 1% High school: 62% College/technical institution: 20% University degree: 5% b. Income bracket Student: 21% No income: 31% < €200/month: 12% €200 – 1 000/month: 6%

Got to know of OiA’s existence From a friend/relative: 76% Media: 8% Newsletter/pamphlet: 4% Internet: 4% Discussion group: 5% Period of attending film festival <1 year: 47% 1 – 2 years: 19% 2 – 5 years: 9% 5 – 7 years: 4% 7 – 10 years: 9%

Well-being a. Out about sexual identity Family knows: 67% Family doesn’t know: 8% Don’t know if family knows: 7% Colleagues know: 62% Colleagues don’t know: 13% Don’t know if colleagues know: 8% b. HIV status Positive: 4% Negative: 33% Not been tested: 27% c. Sense of safety Safer: 44% More vulnerable: 15% No change: 17% d. Victimisation Ostracised: 11% Physically assaulted: 5% Threatened verbally: 15% Raped: 7% Threatened physically: 3% Never been victimised: 43 %

e. Self-abuse Harmful drugs: 2% Starving: 2% Blade/knife: 3% Alcohol: 11% Never attempted harm: 61% Know of an LGBT person in a leadership position Lesbian: 30% Gay: 47% Bisexual: 10% Transgender: 6%

113

OiA Main Festival-goers Profile

Size of sample: 253 (online questionnaires) Age brackets 17 – 20: 1% 21 – 25: 13% 26 – 30: 19% 31 – 35: 27% 36 – 45: 21% 46 – 59: 17% 60 – 70: 2% Biological sex Male: 60% Female: 40%

Sexual identity Lesbian: 25% Gay: 59% Bisexual: 8% Transgender: 3% Heterosexual: 5% Masculine male: 56% Feminine male: 4% Masculine female: 4% Feminine female: 35% Other: 1%

Living Standard Measures a. Education Primary school: 0% High school: 4% College/technical institution: 18% Undergraduate degree: 27% Postgraduate degree: 51% b. Income bracket Student: 4% No income: 1% < €200/month: 3% €200 – 1 000/month: 24% >€1 000/month: 68%

Got to know of OiA’s existence From a friend/relative: 26% Media: 42% Newsletter/pamphlet: 19% Internet: 13% Period of attending film festival <1 year: 6% 1 – 2 years: 16% 2 – 5 years: 46% 5 – 7 years: 12% 7 – 10 years: 13% >10 years: 7%

Well-being a. Out about sexual identity Family knows: 90% Family doesn’t know: 10% Colleagues know: 75% Colleagues don’t know: 13% Don’t know if colleagues know: 12% b. HIV status Positive: 5% Negative: 90% Not been tested: 5% c. Sense of safety Safer: 36% More vulnerable: 12% No change: 52% d. Victimisation Ostracised: 11% Physically assaulted: 2% Threatened verbally: 18% Raped: 0% Threatened physically: 5% Never been victimised: 64%

e. Self-abuse Harmful drugs: 2% Starving: 2% Blade/knife: 2% Alcohol: 4% Never attempted harm: 90% Know of an LGBT person in a leadership position Lesbian: 24% Gay: 63% Transgender: 6% Don’t know any: 7%

114

GALA Users Group Profile

Size of sample: 84 Age brackets 17 – 20: 11% 21 – 25: 16% 26 – 30: 21% 31 – 35: 12% 36 – 45: 26% 46 – 70: 14% Biological sex Male: 55% Female: 45%

Sexual identity Lesbian: 42% Gay: 45% Bisexual: 6% Other: 6% Masculine male: 40% Feminine male: 8% Masculine female: 5% Feminine female: 29% ‘Mixed’ feminine/masculine: 8% Unspecified other: 8%

Living Standard Measures a. Education High school: 32% College/technical institution: 13% Undergraduate degree: 23% Postgraduate degree: 30% Other: 2% b. Income bracket Student: 20% Unemployed: 2% < €200/month: 2% €200 – 749/month: 18% €750 – 999/month: 18% >€1 000/month: 38% Other: 2%

Got to know of GALA’s existence From a friend/relative: 55% Media: 19% Newsletter/pamphlet: 13% Internet: 13% Services accessed through GALA Archives: 32% Library: 68% Length of time that services have been used <1 year: 41% 1 – 2 years: 13% 2 – 5 years: 29% 5 – 7 years: 14% Unanswered: 3%

Well-being a. Out about sexual identity Family knows: 76% Family doesn’t know: 11% Don’t know if family knows: 13% Colleagues know: 79% Colleagues don’t know: 14% Don’t know if colleagues know: 7% b. HIV status Positive: 10% Negative: 68% Not been tested: 21% c. Sense of safety Safer: 31% More vulnerable: 11% No change: 48% Unanswered: 10% d. Victimisation76 Ostracised: 5% Physically assaulted: 8% Threatened verbally: 26% Raped: 2% Threatened physically: 5% Never been victimised: 58%

e. Self-abuse Harmful drugs: 5% Cutting: 5% Starving: 0% Alcohol: 24% Never attempted harm: 64% Unanswered: 2% Know of an LGBT person in a leadership position Lesbian: 47% Gay: 75% Bisexual: 24% Transgender: 10% No: 4%

76 Respondents could choose as many options as appropriate to them. The total here therefore does not add

to 100.

115

Behind the Mask Target Group Profile

Size of sample: 19 online respondents Age brackets 17 – 20: 14% 21 – 25: 29% 26 – 30: 29% 31 – 35: 14% 36 – 45: 14% Biological sex Male: 56% Female: 44%

Sexual identity Lesbian: 29% Gay: 57% Bisexual: 14% Masculine male: 58% Feminine male: 0% Masculine female: 0% Feminine female: 14% Female other: 28%

Living Standard Measures a. Education High school: 14% College/technical institution: 14% Undergraduate degree: 24% Postgraduate degree: 48% b. Income bracket Student: 7% No income: 0% < €200/month: 7% €200 – 749/month: 29% €750 – 999/month: 14% >€1 000/month: 43%

Got to know of BtM’s existence From a friend/relative: 29% Media: 29% Newsletter/pamphlet: 14% Internet: 29% Length of time that services have been used <1 year: 14% 1 – 2 years: 28% 2 – 5 years: 58% 5 – 7 years: 0% >10 years: 0%

Well-being a. Out about sexual identity Family knows: 86% Family doesn’t know: 14% Don’t know if family knows: 0% Colleagues know: 81% Colleagues don’t know: 10% Don’t know if colleagues know: 9% b. HIV status Positive: 7% Negative: 86% Not been tested: 7% c. Sense of safety Safer: 42% More vulnerable: 14% No change: 44% d. Victimisation Ostracised: 14% Physically assaulted: 0% Threatened verbally: 22% Raped: 0% Threatened physically: 7% Never been victimised: 57% e. Self-abuse Harmful drugs: 4% Starving: 3% Cutting: 3% Alcohol: 9% Never attempted harm: 81%

Know of an LGBT person in a leadership position Lesbian: 29% Gay: 57% Bisexual: 14%

116

OUT Membership Profile

Size of sample: 35 Age brackets 17 – 20: 36% 21 – 25: 30% 26 – 30: 16% 31 – 35: 14% 36 – 50: 4% Biological sex Male: 60% Female: 40%

Sexual identity Lesbian: 40% Gay: 40% Bisexual: 0% Transgender: 20% Masculine male: 60% Feminine male: 0% Masculine female: 0% Feminine female: 40%

Living Standard Measures a. Education High school: 38% College/technical institution: 22% Undergraduate degree: 21% Postgraduate degree: 19% b. Income bracket Student: 21% < €200/month: 22% €200 – 1 000/month: 39% >€1 000/month: 18%

Got to know of OUT’s existence From a friend/relative: 41% Media: 39% Internet: 20% Period of visiting OUT <1 year: 19% 1 – 2 years: 0% 2 – 5 years: 21% 5 – 7 years: 40% 7 – 10 years: 20%

Well-being a. Out about sexual identity Family knows: 100% Colleagues know: 62% Colleagues don’t know: 0% Don’t know if colleagues know: 38% b. HIV status Positive: 0% Negative: 58% Not been tested: 42% c. Sense of safety Safer: 44% More vulnerable: 15% No change: 17% d. Victimisation Ostracised: 21% Threatened verbally: 39% Never been victimised: 40%

e. Self-abuse Harmful drugs: 22% Never attempted harm: 78% Know of an LGBT person in a leadership position Lesbian: 42% Gay: 58%

117

Durban Centre Target Group Profile

Size of sample: 49 Age brackets 17 – 20: 18% 21 – 25: 60% 26 – 30: 6% 31 – 35: 11% 36 – 40: 5% Biological sex Male: 50% Female: 50%

Sexual identity Lesbian: 35% Gay: 26% Bisexual: 12% Transgender: 18% Heterosexual: 6% Unanswered: 3% Masculine male: 29% Feminine male: 25% Masculine female: 18% Feminine female: 24% Unanswered: 4%

Living Standard Measures a. Education High school: 35% College/technical institution: 41% Undergraduate degree: 6% Postgraduate degree: 12% No formal education: 6% b. Income bracket Student: 35% No income: 12% < €200/month: 12% €200 – 749/month: 18% >€1000/month: 1% Unanswered: 18%

Got to know of the Centre’s existence From a friend/relative: 77% Media: 11% Newsletter/pamphlet: 12% Services accessed through Centre Workshops: 14% Resources/information: 12% Counselling: 29% Legal services: 9% HIV/AIDS information: 6% Discussion groups: 21% Unanswered: 9% Length of time that services have been used <1 year: 46% 1 – 2 years: 18% 2 – 5 years: 6% 5 – 7 years: 6% 7 – 10years: 6% Unanswered: 17%

Well-being a. Out about sexual identity Family knows: 59% Family doesn’t know: 41% Colleagues know: 53% Colleagues don’t know: 12% Don’t know if colleagues know: 29% b. HIV status Positive: 6% Negative: 47% Not been tested: 47% c. Sense of safety Safer: 41% More vulnerable: 6% No change: 29% Unanswered: 24% d. Victimisation Ostracised: 18% Physically assaulted: 18% Threatened verbally: 24% Threatened physically: 6% Never been victimised: 35% Unanswered: 3%

e. Self-abuse Starving: 12% Alcohol: 6% Never attempted harm: 64% Unanswered: 18% Know of an LGBT person in a leadership position Lesbian: 29% Gay: 41% Bisexual: 12% Transgender: 18%

118

Triangle Service Recipient Profile

Size of sample: 121 Age brackets 17 – 20: 4% 21 – 25: 30% 26 – 30: 20% 31 – 35: 15% 36 – 40: 10% 41 – 45: 11% 46 – 70: 10% Biological sex Male: 70% Female: 30%

Sexual identity Lesbian: 22% Gay: 65% Bisexual: 9% Heterosexual: 4% Masculine male: 48% Feminine male: 11% Masculine female: 7% Feminine female: 17% ‘Mixed’ feminine/masculine: 9% Unspecified ‘other’: 6% Unanswered: 2%

Living Standard Measures a. Education Primary school: 3% High school: 43 % College/technical institution: 24% Undergraduate degree: 15% Postgraduate degree: 15% b. Income bracket Student: 25% No income: 17% < €200/month: 9% €200 – 749/month: 26% €750 – 999/month: 4% > €1 000/month: 15% Unanswered: 4%

Got to know of Triangle’s existence From a friend/relative: 62% Media: 17% Newsletter/pamphlet: 15% Internet: 6% Services accessed through Triangle Social: 7% Counselling: 37% Library/ resource centre: 34% Health services: 4% HIV/AIDS information: 6% Unanswered: 5% Length of time that services have been used <1 year: 32% 1 – 2 years: 32% 2 – 5 years: 13% 5 – 7 years: 7% 7 – 1 years: 4% >10 years: 4% Unanswered: 8%

Well-being a. Out about sexual identity Family knows: 76% Family doesn’t know: 13% Don’t know if family knows: 7% Unanswered: 4% Colleagues know: 63% Colleagues don’t know: 22% Don’t know if colleagues know: 7% Unanswered: 9% b. HIV status Positive: 17% Negative: 63% Not been tested: 13% Unanswered: 7% c. Sense of safety Safer: 48% More vulnerable: 4% No change: 43% Unanswered: 4% d. Victimisation Ostracised: 15% Physically assaulted: 11% Threatened verbally: 35% Raped: 9% Threatened physically: 9% Never been victimised: 21%

e. Self-abuse Harmful drugs: 11% Starving: 2% Blade/knife: 2% Alcohol: 17% Never attempted harm: 64% Unanswered: 4% Know of an LGBT person in a leadership position Lesbian: 35% Gay: 61% Bisexual: 4% Transgender: 2% Intersexual: 2%

119

GALZ Membership Profile

Size of sample: 65 Age brackets 17 – 20: 25% 21 – 25: 34% 26 – 30: 16% 31 – 35: 19% 36 – 45: 6% Biological sex Male: 66% Female: 34%

Sexual identity Lesbian: 13% Gay: 66% Bisexual: 16% Unanswered: 5% Masculine male: 31% Feminine male: 47% Masculine female: 5% Feminine female: 10% ‘Mixed’ feminine/masculine: 5% Unanswered: 2%

Living Standard Measures a. Education High school: 53% College/technical institution: 38% Undergraduate degree: 8% Postgraduate degree: 1% b. Income bracket No income: 29% Unemployed: 9% < €200/month: 32% €200 – 749/month: 11% Unanswered: 19%

Got to know of GALZ’ existence From a friend/relative: 61% Negative media & GALZ responses: 31% Telephone directory: 6% Services accessed through GALZ* Social: 56% Skills for life: 38% Counselling: 44% Drop-in centre: 19% Health centre: 22% Legal services: 6% HIV/AIDS information: 19% Discussion groups: 13% Length of time that services have been used <1 year: 22% 1 – 2 years: 25% 2 – 5 years: 19% 5 – 7 years: 19% >10 years: 16%

Well-being a. Out about sexual identity Family knows: 41% Family doesn’t know: 34% Don’t know if family knows: 25% The same figures hold for colleagues & friends b. HIV status Positive: 3% Negative: 18% Not been tested: 38% Unanswered: 3% c. Sense of safety Safer: 53% More vulnerable: 6% No change: 31% Unanswered: 9% d. Victimisation Ostracised: 9% Physically assaulted: 13% Threatened verbally: 28% Raped: 0% Threatened physically: 16% Never been victimised: 47% Unanswered: 3%

e. Self-abuse Harmful drugs: 3% Starving: 3% Alcohol: 6% Never attempted harm: 88% Unanswered: 3% Know of an LGBT person in a leadership position Lesbian: 22% Gay: 63% Bisexual: 6% Transgender: 3% No: 19%

120

TRP Membership Profile

Size of sample: 58 Age brackets 17 – 20: 9% 21 – 25: 55% 26 – 30: 14% 31 – 35: 14% 36 – 45: 8% Biological sex Male: 55% Female: 45%

Sexual identity Lesbian: 36% Gay: 45% Bisexual: 5% Transgender: 5% Heterosexual: 5% Other: 5% Masculine male: 18% Feminine male: 27% Masculine female: 27% Feminine female: 14%

Living Standard Measures a. Education Primary school: 5% High school: 45% College/technical institution: 27% University degree: 19% b. Income bracket No income: 27% < €200/month: 36% €200 – 850/month: 43%

Got to know of TRP's existence From a friend/relative: 59% Media: 23% Newsletter/pamphlet: 9% Internet: 9% Discussion group: 14% Services accessed through TRP* Social: 10% Skills for life: 36% Library/resource centre: 68% HIV/AIDS info: 5% Discussion groups: 9% Length of time that services have been used <1 year: 9% 1 – 2 years: 27% 2 – 5 years: 18% 5 – 7 years: 27% 7 – 10 years: 18%

Well-being a. Out about sexual identity Family & friends know: 95% Family & friends don’t know: 5% Colleagues know: 91% Colleagues don't know: 9% b. HIV status Positive: 9% Negative: 64% Not been tested: 27% c. Sense of safety Safer: 68% More vulnerable: 9% No change: 14% Unanswered: 9% d. Victimisation Ostracised/cast out: 23% Physically assaulted: 14% Threatened verbally: 45% Raped: 9% Threatened physically: 23% Never been victimised: 27% Unanswered: 5% e. Self-abuse Harmful drugs: 9% Alcohol77: 18% Never attempted harm: 68% Unanswered: 9%

Know of an LGBT person in a leadership position Lesbian: 45% Gay: 50% Bisexual: 9% Transgender: 5%

77 While many respondents in all focus groups attested to regular alcohol binges, and to using alcohol as

means of escape, because of the ubiquity of alcohol consumption, very few informants regarded this as a form of self-abuse.

121

Legabibo Membership Profile

Size of sample: 28 Age brackets 17 – 20: 9% 21 – 25: 55% 26 – 30: 14% 31 – 35: 14% 36 – 45: 9% Biological sex Male: 43% Female: 57%

Sexual identity Lesbian: 43% Gay: 57% Masculine male: 29% Feminine male: 29% Masculine female: 14% Feminine female: 14% ‘Mixed’ feminine/masculine: 0% Unanswered: 0%

Living Standard Measures a. Education High school: 29% College/technical institution: 29% University degree: 43% b. Income bracket No income: 29% Student: 29% Unemployed: 9% 200 – 749/month: 43%

Got to know of Legabibo's existence From a friend/relative: 71% Media: 14% Newsletter/pamphlet: 14% Discussion group: 14% Services accessed through Legabibo* Social: 14% Skills for life: 57% Counselling: 43% Library/resource centre: 14% Legal Services: 14% Length of time that services have been used <1 year: 29% 1 – 2 years: 57% 7 – 10 years: 14%

Well-being a. Out about sexual identity Family & friends know: 71% Family & friends don’t know: 29% Colleagues know: 86% Colleagues don't know: 14% b. HIV status Negative: 86% Not been tested: 14% c. Sense of safety Safer: 57% No change: 43% d. Victimisation Ostracised/cast out: 29% Physically assaulted: 29% Threatened verbally: 43% Raped: 0% Threatened physically: 14% Never been victimised: 43% e. Self-abuse Harmful drugs: 14% Alcohol78: 14% Never attempted harm: 86%

Know of an LGBT person in a leadership position Lesbian: 43% Gay: 57% Bisexual: 14%

78 While many respondents attested to regular alcohol binges in all focus groups, and to using alcohol as

means of escape, because of the ubiquity of alcohol consumption, very few informants in all country contexts regarded this as a form of self-abuse.

122

Annex 5: Comparison of Organisational Ratings Emancipation Dimension: LGBT people Effectiveness Category

OiA NCGLE GALA BtM OUT Durban Triangle GALZ TRP

The organisation reaches its target audience.

8 8 7 7 6 7 6 6 6

Keeps (statistical) records of LGBT members/ beneficiaries/users of services.

8 8 8 8 5 6 7 6 7

Activities reflect an understanding of the target audience

7 8 8 8 5 7 6 8 6

Reaches the most marginalised of LGBT people

7 7 7 6 5 7 6 6 6

Increase in number of LGBT people in activities

8 7 7 7 6 6 7 6 6

Emancipation Dimension: Internal Organisational Str ength Effectiveness Category OiA NCGLE GALA BtM OUT Durban Triangle GALZ TRP Clearly defined objectives 8 8 8 8 7 8 7 6 6

Develops clear strategies to achieve 8 8 8 8 6 7 8 6 6

123

objectives

Implements strategies developed 8 8 3

8 8 7 7 8 5 7

Plans/strategies are matched with outcomes and outputs

8 8 8 8 7 7 8 6 6

Organisation has the required staff capacity to implement its activities

7 8 6 7 7 6 8 8 5

Financial resources are effectively mobilised and managed for organisational activities

7 5 7 7 7 6 8 8 8

Appropriate remuneration packages are in place to retain and attract skilled staff

5 n/a 5 6 8 4 8 7 7

Appropriate and operational governance structures

7 n/a 7 7 6 6 6 6 4

Staff development plans are in place for new layers of leadership

6 n/a 5 6 5 5 6 4 5

Management styles that build staff morale and strengthen performance are practiced

8 n/a 7 8 5 6 5 5 6

Involved in a process of self-evaluation, which feeds into plans, strategies and activities, and reinvents itself as the context demands

6 n/a 6 6 6 5 7 4 6

124

Emancipation Dimension: External Alliance Building Effectiveness Category

OiA NCGLE GALA BtM OUT Durban Triangle GALZ TRP

Participates in joint activities with other LGBT organisations/ proactively works to build strategic alliances

8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8

Participates in joint activities with other human rights organisations

7 8 8 8 8 8 8 4 8

Initiates strategic links with other organisations

8 8 8 8 8 8 8 6 8

125

Emancipation Dimension: Social Attitude Change Effectiveness Category

OiA NCGLE GALA BtM OUT Durban Triangle GALZ TRP

Implements a clear strategy for ‘normalising’ LGBT people in public sphere

8 8 8 6 7 7 6 4 7

Promotes positive visibility of LGBT people

8 8 8 7 7 8 7 5 8

Positive shifts in how other (HR) organisations view LGBT issues

7 7 7 7 7 8 7 4 8

Emancipation Dimension: Social Structural Change Effectiveness Category

OiA NCGLE GALA BtM OUT Durban Triangle GALZ TRP

Changes in policy and legislation as a result of lobbying and advocacy

n/a 8 7 n/a 7 7 6 3 5

126

Annex 6: Evaluation Team Sarita Ranchod is a development research and evaluation practitioner based in South Africa. With an overarching interest in issues of social change, her areas of experience include gender, diversity and sexuality; strategic communications, media and advocacy; HIV/AIDS and using Information Communications Technologies for Development (ICT4D). She has participated in the development of gender evaluation methodologies and tools, has led research into gender and broadcasting at policy, institutional and content levels; coordinated a SADC-wide study on gender and mining, worked on local and global strategic communications initiatives and campaigns and is developing accessible learning resources for East and southern African HIV/AIDS organisations wishing to use ICTs and other media effectively.

Sonja Boezak has worked as a researcher for academic, research and development institutions, and as policy analyst and programmes developer in the fields of gender, diversity, ICTs for development, media and HIV/AIDS. In recent years she has focused her attentions on evaluative research, particularly in East and southern Africa. She has managed global and Africa-wide research and collaboration projects on gender and women’s rights, and has led academic research into how ICTs are being used in various policy-influential African media newsrooms. She has published on gender, HIV/AIDS, media and technology for development and has edited a book on South African women in politics.

As a team, Sarita Ranchod & Sonja Boezak have been collaborating professionally for eight years, with a specific joint interest in integrated approaches to social development and working toward finding creative solutions for positive change.