MBOMBELA – The feathers may not make the bird, but a dress dominated a sitting of the provincial legislature this week. While the EFF’s dress code of overalls and hard hats had been drawing attention, with the legislatures in Gauteng and the Eastern Cape rejecting the outfits, the point of contention in Mpumalanga in no way resembled the red outfits.
It was the official opposition in legislature, the DA who walked out of Tuesday’s sitting. It came about after speaker Ms Thandi Shongwe instructed DA MPL Ms Jane Sithole to cover up.
Members were discussing the strategy of the Department of Community Safety, Security and Liaison (DCSSL) in addressing the problem of drugs and prostitution around eMalahleni, when ANC MPL Mr Victor Windvoël called a point of order on Sithole’s dress. Shongwe ruled that the dress was too revealing to be worn in the house and not in line with the decorum of legislature.
DA MPL Mr Anthony Benadie called the comments sexist and when Sithole, the chief whip of the party in legislature, refused to put her scarf on, the party walked out.
She said Windvoël was implying that she was dressed like a prostitute, given the discussion in the house at the time. “It was the most shocking that she (the speaker) entertained it and agreed with him. I expected her to call him to order.”
Shongwe strongly disagreed. “Don’t put words into his mouth. That is her own interpretation. What you are raising was not even raised in the chamber. I would not allow a member to insult a woman. It is against the rules of the house to call each other names.”
She said Sithole was not properly dressed for the house as her shoulders were not covered by her clothing.
Shongwe, who also chaired the ANC Women’s League in Mpumalanga, said Sithole knew the rules. The speaker added that Sithole’s shoulders were initially covered with a scarf and she noticed this had been removed when Windvoël called a point of order.
Sithole explained that it was a sign of respect for a man to wear a jacket and a woman a shawl when standing to address the house, but that these garments were sometimes removed during other proceedings. “I strongly believe that the dress in question was proper for a sitting.”
“I was particularly offended that the reason was that it was a woman from the DA where the speaker had previously defended a woman from her own party. I am very disappointed by her as a woman.”
She intended to write to the Commission for Gender Equality to lodge a formal complaint.
Shongwe said, “She knows that she must dress appropriately, formally and properly for the house. The rules apply to all members of the house. She has never broken any rules before.”
Lowvelder asked readers whether they thought the dress was too revealing. Here is what some of you said.
• Barbara Kuhn: “Not at all – why would anyone think this dress is revealing?”
• Ronelle Marais Groep: “Seriously? Absolutely absurd! She looks very classy.”
• Mary Vorster: “No problem with this dress at all.”
• Angelique Smidt: “Where is there any revealing of any sort? Nothing wrong with her outfit.”
• Lorencha du Plessis: “You look great! Nothing is showing too much, back nor front.”
• Susan Strauss: “Why? She looks stunning.”
- Read about the resulting protest here.
