Features

‘My hope is necessary, but not enough’ teaching and learning Feminism at the University

Published

4 years ago

2022/10/25

By Aruni Samarakoon

Modern university education was introduced to Ceylon by the British colonisers in 1921 with the establishment of the Ceylon University College, which eventually developed into the public university system where academics and researchers could explore universal knowledge. In 1947, the very first University, the University of Ceylon, was established. Later, the Ceylon University Act No 01 of 1972 was to set up the institutional framework for the universities, which reflected and further entrenched colonial and patriarchal values in university curricula, and the administration system. The University culture originally shaped by the English-speaking elite white men was transferred to, and dynamically transformed, “native” intellectuals, hailing from the lower-middle class and rural peasantry.

Today, these “native” intellectuals, both Sinhala and Tamil, many of them with foreign postgraduate credentials, are the dominant group determining the scope of the teaching and learning culture at the Universities in Sri Lanka. Over 70 years, after Independence from British rule, Feminist thinking has largely been absent in teaching and learning at our universities, except in a section of social sciences and humanities curricula.

To what extent do Sri Lankan universities take the initiative to, or at least, support teaching and learning Feminism? This article explores the challenges of teaching and learning Feminism at Sri Lankan universities. It begins with a brief introduction to feminist thinking and is followed by a presentation of empirical data, from 2019, collected through ethnographic research, carried out at three universities in Sri Lanka, under two themes: Challenges in presenting Feminism as “New Knowledge” and “New Practices”; and hearing the “Voice” of Feminist scholars.

What is feminism?

Feminism is a terminology that derives from the French language; it means the subordination of women due to their sexuality; subordination of women to the politics of Patriarchy. Feminist schools have aligned with the main political streams such as Liberalism, which suggests reforms and Socialism, proposing radical changes to the patriarchal structure, to end the subordination of women in economic, political and social spheres.

The focus of First Wave Feminism was to promote gender inclusivity in politics, demanding voting rights and representation of women in governing institutions. However, the dimension of gender inclusivity in Liberal Feminist Discourse was criticised for failing to represent the Political aspirations of working-class women and women in non-white communities and immigrant women. The evidentiary support to this claim is that Emmeline Pankhurst’s (1858-1928) campaign “Deeds not Words” for voting rights did not include the voice of working-class women, immigrant women and non-white women in the UK.

The criticism of Liberal Feminism provoked a new school of thought, the Second Wave of Feminism, which was developed on the theory of socialism. The Second Wave Feminists proposed radical changes to the prevailing patriarchal structure that objectified women as sex-objects and demanded equal pay for women’s labour and women’s reproductive rights. Third wave Feminism is an extension of Second wave Feminism, though it foregrounds personal narratives and the intersecting forms of oppression that structure women’s subordination. It emphasises everyday politics. This is a fundamental reading of Feminist schools, and more recent Feminist literature, emerging from the global South, delves into other aspects such as representing Women’s Voice.

Feminism as “New Knowledge” and “New Practices”

Feminism aims to end suppression; stereotyping; hierarchies and to foster new knowledge and practices. However, Sri Lankan university scholars have failed to draw on feminist thinking to deconstruct “hierarchies and stereotypes” at the universities. For example, a senior colleague stereotyped Feminism as “a power against man” and as an “anti-man Discourse.” A department at a Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences has even removed the Gender Studies module from the undergraduate degree programme as it has no “market value”. Sri Lankan public universities are more open to marketable undergraduate courses due to the impact of neoliberal policies, which place more “value” on STEM education.

How has Feminist literature been used in teaching and learning at Sri Lankan universities? Who has the power to access this knowledge? Empirical data shows that reading Feminist literature and theories are confined to a “particular circle” at universities, who are fluent in English. Therefore, discussions on Feminism at the Universities are limited to that “particular circle”. One of the undergraduates, in my research sample, said that “discussions on Feminism occur when scholars have High-Tea at the Faculty room at the University”. This conversation indicates that discussions on feminism are confined to a particular class, mostly middle class, who can speak English, the colonial language. The class factor in this scenario has placed limits on undergraduates engaging in discussions on Feminism.

Are there spaces outside the classroom for students to discuss Feminism? The University Grants Commission has issued directives to establish a “Centre for Gender Equity and Equality” at every University in the country. Those centres could have offered a space to discuss Feminism, although they currently operate in the corners with little interaction with the undergraduates. “I have never found the Centre for Gender Equity and Equality at the University. What is that centre for and who runs it?” was a response from an undergraduate of a University in the Capital of the country. The undergraduates, in my sample, did not know how to find the centres, physically, at the universities, and encountered difficulties in contacting the person(s) in charge of the centres. In my view, these centres could follow the basic principles of Feminism, such as raising undergraduates’ political consciousness to end the subordination of women and produce new knowledge on Women’s Rights.

Hearing the voice of Feminist

scholars

I never underestimate the historical contribution of Feminist scholars at our universities to end the subordination of women; suppressions; stereotyping of women as “objects”. These scholars have raised their voice, calling for a new culture of equality and freedom at the universities. I remember a female Senior Professor, in Political Science, at the University of Peradeniya, sharing her narrative of being suppressed by male peers at her department. Those female scholars have fought with a rigid Patriarchal system for a long time.

Some Senior Feminist scholars have been subjected to verbal and sexual harassment by their peers, who were cronies of the top-administration of the Universities. These scholars are yet to receive justice and their “Her + Stories” are not discussed or considered a part of the history of Sri Lankan Universities. Why have these stories been hidden?

The Feminist scholars, I met in my ethnographic research, raised the question with me as to why women had to wear six-feet long sarees to work and how this attire was crucial for professionalism? A senior female colleague, who wore t-shirts and denim trousers to undergraduate lectures, made a heavy outcry at a University in the South. Imposing a dress code is symbolic of power and, in the case of women, it is symbolic of the power of Patriarchy.

These also voices stressed the need for “Freedom of expression,” which is limited at universities due to the hierarchies of rank, age, ethnicity, caste, class and gender. I would argue that these hierarchies have made a huge impact on the critical thinking of newly recruited academics. The latter tend to try to please their superiors rather than critically evaluate the policies at our universities. Unfortunately, these new recruits gradually become carriers of these hierarchies.

In conclusion, I state that “my hope is necessary but not enough ” as Paulo Freire mentions in his Pedagogy of Hope (1999). Kuppi is one of the spaces that I have hope to raise the voice of feminist scholars and be heard. I will be discussing this matter further, in my next Kuppi article.

(Aruni Samarakoon teaches at the Department of Public Policy, University of Ruhuna)

Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies

All News Advertisement

Features

‘The devil is in the details’ in West Asian peace

Published

6 hours ago

2026/06/18

Sahan Weerasooriya

President Donald Trump at the current G7 summit in France. Evelyn Hockstein/Getty Image

It is obviously too early for an outpouring of joy over the seeming cessation of hostilities between the main antagonists in West Asia. While the prospect of there being a measure of calm in the region is being welcomed by considerable sections of the international community, what is ‘on the table’ currently is only a Memorandum of Understanding between the US and Iran to give peace a chance. The hard part in the peace effort remains to be achieved.

In the Middle East of today we have one of the most complex conflicts to break out in modern international politics and the observer would be naive in the extreme to expect a facile and early closure to the tangle. Yet, for the sake of the world’s publics who have been hurting badly in the prolonged hostilities one could only hope that the US-Iran MoU that is expected to be signed by the sides on Friday would lead eventually to a substantive peace. The world’s thanks are due to Pakistan in this connection for its sustained support in the peace drive.

While the sides have agreed to a ceasing of hostilities in the most general terms and have reached accord on the facilitation of uninterrupted oil and gas supplies to the rest of the world, for instance, the ‘devil will prove to be in the details’ in an envisaged comprehensive peace settlement. It is these details that would make or break peace if the negotiations go on in earnest.

Nevertheless, the details would need to be worked out consensually in a spirit of compromise with an eye to the greater good of the world community. Realpolitik or a narrow focus on solely the national interest among the protagonists, for example, would need to give way to a measure of humanity that would encompass within it a consideration of the overall well being of the world. In other words, it is statesmanship that would crucially matter.

The next few weeks would establish whether humanists are ‘asking for far too much’ when they broach the questions at issue in these terms. Yet it is essentially self interest and national security considerations of the first importance that drove the conflict from even prior to February this year and these questions would need to be taken up and resolved to the satisfaction of the US and Iran in the main if some headway is to be made towards a durable settlement.

The nuclear issue would prove to be the proverbial Gordian Knot. From a realistic viewpoint, Iran could not be expected to be without a potential nuclear deterrent in the face of perceived nuclear threats emanating for it from the West and Israel. In the short term, Iran would need to possess this deterrent to a measure, within a mutually agreed international legal framework maybe, until wide agreement is reached on the nuclear tangle. Specifically, Iran’s immediate threat perceptions with regard to her nuclear-powered rivals would need to be defused during initial negotiations.

Ideally it is a world free of nuclear weapons that must be aimed at but since this goal cannot be achieved in the near or medium terms, unfolding negotiations would need to ensure Iran’s absolute security in a world of powers that continue to swear by the nuclear deterrent, if it is to give up the suspected latter capability.

However, it is to the degree to which the present nuclear powers divest themselves of this capability that Iran could be put at ease on this score. Accordingly, it is nothing short of a complete elimination of nuclear weapons from the world that could dissuade keenly security conscious states from developing nuclear weapons of their own with a mass destruction capability.

This is the number one dilemma the international community needs to grapple with going forward and it is to the extent to which it resolves it that a nuclear weapons free world could be envisaged. No doubt, an uphill challenge.

Compelling Israel to support the present negotiatory process constitutes another grueling challenge for the US. Currently the Iranian position essentially is that a Middle East peace is inseparable from a normalization of the security situation in Lebanon. That is, the present Israeli attacks on the Hezbollah presence in Lebanon must cease if a comprehensive peace is to be realized in West Asia.

However, Israel is showing no signs of drawing back from its attacks on Hezbollah strongholds in Lebanon since the security of the Israeli state is being seen as threatened by the militant group. Co-opting Israel into the negotiatory effort therefore would turn out to be a matter of paramount concern for the US.

Moreover, elements in the rightist administration in Israel are seeing the current peace efforts as a ‘sell out’ to the enemies of Israel. They would have none of it. It is left to be seen how the US would be managing these virtual storm centres in the diplomatic process that could very well bring down the overall purported peace drive.

A recent pronouncement by US Vice President J.D. Vance points to yet another problem area in the US’ current peace overtures. He said that, ‘Regional peace and stability includes stopping the funding of terrorist organizations.’ He was obviously referring to the support extended by Iran to Hezbollah when he mentioned ‘terrorist organizations’ but he has given fresh life to the age-old conundrum of ‘Who is a terrorist?’ by these words.

To the Netanyahu government the Hezbollah and other militant organizations fighting Israel are ‘terrorists’ but from the viewpoint of the Iranian regime they are ‘freedom fighters’. This seemingly insurmountable definitional issue would not only stubbornly bedevil the peace effort but could even figure in bringing about its collapse, unless judiciously handled.

Thus, it’s the thorny details that need to be watched to keep the West Asian peace process afloat, once it gets going in earnest. There is no doubt that US President Trump would be receiving a considerable amount of support from the G7 in this historic peace undertaking and his personal appeals to the grouping currently meeting in France for continuous support are likely to elicit a positive response from it.

Likewise, Trump would need to appeal to also the BRICS countries if almost total global support is to be garnered for the peace drive in West Asia. BRICS’ solidarity with the US and the West is likely to carry considerable weight with Iran and other Eastern actors who are key to a sustained peace drive in the Middle East.

Features

Sri Lanka’s elephant paradox: Govt. counts tourism dollars while playing a dangerous numbers game: Expert

Published

6 hours ago

2026/06/18

Sahan Weerasooriya

At a time when Sri Lanka is enjoying a resurgence in wildlife tourism, with elephants remaining the undisputed stars of the country’s national parks and one of its most marketable natural assets, elephant conservationist Supun Lahiru Prakash has sounded a stark warning: the nation is in danger of losing the very species that helps attract millions of tourism dollars while sustaining some of the island’s most important ecosystems.

Supun says repeated claims by authorities that Sri Lanka’s elephant population is increasing, despite the absence of a final survey report and amid continuing elephant deaths, risk creating a misleading narrative that could undermine conservation efforts and encourage retaliation against elephants.

According to Supun, the issue is not merely about numbers. It is about political priorities, scientific credibility and the future of one of Sri Lanka’s most iconic species.

“Repeatedly claiming that the elephant population is increasing appears to be an attempt to hide the Government’s inability to manage the rising annual elephant death rate and the complications of human-elephant conflict,” Supun said.

For decades, the Sri Lankan elephant has been a symbol of the country’s rich natural heritage. It is the centrepiece of wildlife tourism, drawing visitors from across the globe to national parks such as Yala, Udawalawe, Minneriya, Kaudulla and Wilpattu. International wildlife documentaries, tourism campaigns and social media promotions frequently place elephants at the heart of Sri Lanka’s nature tourism brand.

Yet, according to Supun, the country’s conservation policies do not reflect the value of the species.

“On one hand, the Government is enjoying increasing tourism revenue, and elephants remain one of Sri Lanka’s most important wildlife attractions. On the other hand, narratives are being promoted that could encourage retaliation against the very species that contributes significantly to the country’s tourism industry,” Supun said.

According to the First Countrywide National Survey of Elephants conducted in 2011, Sri Lanka had 5,879 elephants. However, official statistics show that 4,167 elephants died between 2012 and 2024.

Supun stressed that these figures represent only the deaths officially recorded by the Department of Wildlife Conservation.

“In a context where more than 70 percent of the country’s elephant population reported in 2011 has died within 13 years, it is difficult to accept claims that the population has increased,” Supun said.

The conservationist pointed out that elephants have the longest gestation period among land mammals and that scientific studies have reported increasing interbirth intervals among female elephants together with high calf mortality.

“When such biological realities are taken into consideration, claims of a dramatic increase in elephant numbers become difficult to understand,” Supun said.

Supun believes that repeated references to increasing elephant populations risk fuelling public hostility towards elephants, particularly among farming communities already affected by crop raids and property damage.

“Such claims can create the impression that elephant populations are exploding and thereby promote retaliation against elephants as well,” Supun said.

According to Supun, Sri Lanka’s elephant crisis cannot be understood solely through population estimates. The real issue lies in the country’s failure to address human-elephant conflict through long-term, science-based solutions.

Sri Lanka continues to record among the highest levels of human-elephant conflict in the world. Every year, hundreds of elephants and dozens of people lose their lives as competition for land and resources intensifies.

Despite the scale of the crisis, Supun says authorities continue to rely on strategies that have repeatedly failed.

Lahiru Prakash

These include driving elephants into protected areas, strengthening electric fences to confine them there and allocating additional manpower to maintain fencing systems.

Supun was also critical of several proposals that emerged from district-level discussions on conflict mitigation, including the sowing of paddy and corn using Air Force drones and the planting of fruit orchards within protected areas.

“Such proposals fail to address the real ecological and social dimensions of the conflict,” Supun said.

While welcoming reports that the Government intends appointing a national-level mechanism to tackle human-elephant conflict, Supun said the challenge required intervention at the highest level of government.

“Given the gravity, complexity and geographical spread of human-elephant conflict, appointing any committee other than a Presidential Task Force is not useful,” Supun said.

He argued that a Presidential Task Force chaired by either the President or the Secretary to the President would be better positioned to overcome the bureaucratic delays and institutional fragmentation that have hindered previous efforts.

Supun also stressed the urgent need to restore and protect elephant corridors and home ranges that allow elephants to move safely across landscapes.

He cited the Koholankala elephant corridor in Hambantota as one example where removing obstacles could help reduce conflict while improving habitat connectivity.

At the same time, Supun questioned policies that permit the allocation of forest lands in areas identified by environmental assessments as crucial elephant ranges and movement corridors.

“The opening of elephant corridors and the protection of elephant home ranges must be carried out scientifically and consistently if they are to succeed,” Supun said.

Beyond tourism, Supun emphasised the ecological importance of elephants.

“Elephants are ecosystem engineers. Through their feeding habits and movements, they help maintain habitats that support numerous other species. In many ways, they create safer and healthier environments for wildlife,” Supun said.

According to Supun, protecting elephants means protecting entire ecosystems and the biodiversity upon which Sri Lanka’s wildlife tourism industry depends.

“By protecting elephants, we are also protecting the biodiversity that makes Sri Lanka one of the world’s premier wildlife tourism destinations,” Supun said.

As Sri Lanka seeks to expand tourism earnings and strengthen its reputation as a wildlife destination, Supun believes the country faces a defining choice: continue with policies that have failed to stem elephant deaths and human-elephant conflict, or embrace a science-based conservation strategy that safeguards both people and wildlife.

Without a fundamental shift in policy and political will, Supun warned, Sri Lanka risks losing not only one of its most iconic species but also the ecological and economic benefits that elephants continue to provide.

“The suffering of both farmers and elephants will only intensify unless meaningful action replaces rhetoric,” Supun said.

By Ifham Nizam

Features

Top Model of the World 2026

Published

6 hours ago

2026/06/18

Sahan Weerasooriya

Back-to-back victory for Colombia

Katherine Castaño of Colombia claimed the Top Model of the World 2026 crown, securing a historic back-to-back victory for her country. Angelica Sanchez of Puerto Rico was named first runner-up, and Eunice Deza of the Philippines finished as second runner-up.

Katherine was crowned by outgoing titleholder Natalia Garizabal Vera of Colombia.

Several special category awards, and subsidiary titles, were also presented during the Top Model of the World 2026 pageant.

These awards recognised excellence in modelling, peer support, and regional representation.

Primary Subsidiary Titles

Sri Lanka’s Netalie Withanage: Top 16 at
the grand finale

Miss Globe 2026: Valentina Tabares (Ecuador) — Awarded to the contestant who perfectly balances fashion modelling with traditional beauty queen qualities.

Queen of Europe 2026: Mia Danielle Williams (United Kingdom) — Given to the highest-ranking candidate from a European nation.

Special Awards Recognition

Audience Iconic Award: Charly (Dominican Republic) — Won via the official public online vote, granting her a fast-track direct entry into the Top 6.

Exotic Model of the World: Angel Emeka (Nigeria) — Awarded for exceptional editorial presence and strong runway performance.

Best Body Award: Thailand — Voted directly by fellow contestants at the Flow Spectrum Hotel. The highest-ranking runners-up for this category included Zambia, South Africa, Colombia, and Ghana.

Angelica Sanchez (Puerto Rico): 1st Runner-up

Final Placement

Winner: Katherine Castaño (Colombia)

1st Runner-Up: Angelica Sanchez (Puerto Rico)

2nd Runner-Up: Eunice Deza (Philippines)

Top 6 Finalists: Included contestants from the Dominican Republic, Romania, and Germany.

The pageant, known for focusing on professional modelling careers over just beauty, brought together 36 models from around the globe for two weeks of runway, photoshoots, and cultural events.

Sri Lanka’s Netalie Withanage walked among 36 of the world’s best and powered her way into the Top 16 at the grand finale.