Quote of the week

It is clear that no legitimate objective is advanced by excluding domestic workers from COIDA.  If anything, their exclusion has a significant stigmatising effect which entrenches patterns of disadvantage based on race, sex and gender…. In considering those who are most vulnerable or most in need, a court should take cognisance of those who fall at the intersection of compounded vulnerabilities due to intersecting oppression based on race, sex, gender, class and other grounds.  To allow this form of state-sanctioned inequity goes against the values of our newly constituted society namely human dignity, the achievement of equality and ubuntu.  To exclude this category of individuals from the social security scheme established by COIDA is manifestly unreasonable.

Victor AJ
Mahlangu and Another v Minister of Labour and Others (CCT306/19) [2020] ZACC 24 (19 November 2020)
30 May 2007

Male prostitute now claim info on Juan Uys

A reader alerts me to the fact that the SA male prostitute site now claims that information will shortly appear about the “gay activist” Juan Uys. This move comes shortly after many people – including myself – began to argue that this “male prostitute” was none other than serial trickster Juan Uys/Neil Watson.

It seems pretty obvious that if the male prostitute was not Juan Uys, he would have been happy for others to think that he was. By claiming that Juan Uys will also be one of his “victims”, he is really trying to claim that he is not Juan Uys. Which suggests very strongly that he is but that he wants us to think different.

SHARE:     
BACK TO TOP
2015 Constitutionally Speaking | website created by Idea in a Forest