What’s the difference between a notice outside a public toilet that states:
“Whites Only” during the apartheid years, and the phrase: “Seeking clean, honest, Caucasian housemate” in a public advertisement for shared accommodation decades later?

I’ll tell you. There is none.

By Jenna-Lee Joseph (pseudonym)

The process of searching for a place to stay in the upmarket Northern Suburbs of Johannesburg has been an incredibly frustrating one for me. Due to the expense, I can only consider house or apartment sharing. When I emailed a response to an advert I found on Gumtree, the lessor called back and sounded very enthusiastic. He and his girlfriend (with whom I would be sharing the flat) arranged a viewing for that evening. The place seemed ideal and I was excited at the prospects. The next morning I emailed a copy of my ID and asked when I could move in. He replied:

“Unfortunately, we have decided to let the room to a second person who viewed it, as he is someone who has friends in common and we can therefore do a more in-depth background check. This is not to say that we doubt your background in any way, it’s just for peace of mind as my girlfriend will generally be home alone with the person.”

Absurd. That’s what the idea is, that I, a skinny, 24-year-old female am in any way more threatening to an athletic 30-something woman (a professional female jockey, might I add) than this mystery man. Of course, the lessor has every right to turn me down – but all he needed to say was, ‘Sorry, the place is no longer available.’ The uncalled-for reference to my background and insinuations conferred by his use of the term ‘peace of mind’ raises the question: on what did he base his judgement of me as untrustworthy? I couldn’t help but think: perhaps my English name and clear English accent over the phone mislead him into expecting someone fairer of skin.

Desperate, I found myself later that night again searching online for a place closer to work.

Ad after ad, my hopes would be raised, only to be dashed when a short, discriminatory line would instantly disqualify me. One woman said, “I am looking for a White Female/Male … to share my home with me and my two loving dogs … a home environment where you just be yourself … I am a very trusting person and like to have a good laugh, and do make every effort to make my tenant feel at home.” Clearly, her gracious ‘trust’, however vast she claims it to be, extends no further than her own race.

My aggravation started to build. And then, I stumbled upon this gem: “We are a friendly open minded international family of 4 grown-ups… We are outgoing and love people, so you have no loneliness if you wish… Brush up on your languages: we speak… English, Bulgarian, German and a little Afrikaans… Sorry, but only a white tenant needs to reply.”

That was the last straw. I was very near tempted to call the lessor up at 2 am to demand, “Do you even realise the glaring incongruity, the gross hypocrisy, in the terms ‘friendly – open-minded – we love people’, and then to add in bold, underlined words, ’only a white tenant’?! Are your minds just ‘open’ enough to consider Europeans as people?!”

The hurt and outrage bubbled up inside me. Discrimination now, be it blatant or thinly veiled under politeness or political correctness, is just as degrading, humiliating and dehumanising as it was back in 1976. Of course, it would be naïve to think that even a quarter century of democracy would transform underlying racial intolerance.

But what has changed is this: The law.

At first, I thought that such outright prejudice, while frowned upon in more liberal circles, still fell under the defensive mantle of free speech. I was wrong. It’s not just distasteful, it’s downright illegal! The briefest of Google searches brings up page after page of information about the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act, also referred to as the Equality Act.

The Equality Act makes provision for the prevention and prohibition of unfair discrimination

 “which directly or indirectly:

1. imposes burdens, obligations or disadvantages on; or
2. withholds benefits, opportunities or advantages from;

any person on one or more of the grounds of discrimination.”

With regards to accommodation (residential or business), the Equality Act clearly states that all prospective tenants must be treated equally; one may not refuse to offer premises to a person owing solely to their race. The government has hailed this Act, which aims at eradicating “systemic discrimination and inequalities … brought about by colonialism, the apartheid system and patriarchy,” as one of the most significant bills.

Section 13 of the Act states that it is not up to an accuser to prove guilt, but up to a defendant to prove innocence. What this means is that, if you were to charge someone for discrimination under its terms, your charge would be presumed to be true until and unless it is disproved.

All Magistrates’ Courts serve as Equality Courts in all 9 provinces. The service is completely free and the Government encourages people to report discrimination. What we shouldn’t do, when we come across such blatant and unjustified prejudice, is ignore it.

Not standing against and raising consciousness about an issue that violates the Constitution and the dignity of other races perpetuates the blind, hypocritical and mistrustful racial discrimination that divides us as South Africans.

As Jewish theologian and philosopher Abraham Heschel said: Racism is man’s gravest threat to man – the maximum of hatred for a minimum of reason.