The dispute concerning the pride flag at Bishops school has moved beyond the school grounds and messaging groups, attracting the attention of the wider public. Figures involved in this dispute include The Kiffness, who has about 1.8 million followers on Instagram, Renaldo Gouws with nearly 100,000 followers on X, Anton Taylor (about 151,000 followers on Instagram), and Drew Birch (@drew_birch).
The most obvious trigger for this story is The Kiffness' comment on a Bishops school Instagram post, where Taylor wrote: 'Hatred and cowardice always hide their face. I put my name and face behind what I stand for.' The Kiffness responded to this post, stating that since Bishopscollegeza is a private Anglican school, demanding it fly this flag is like asking a vegan restaurant to serve a double burger with bacon and cheese.
He continued, replying to other commentators, that the 2024 alumni group and members of SRF had sent an open letter requesting that the flag not be used. Furthermore, The Kiffness contrasted the age of the pride flag (48 years) with the age of the Bible (3400 years).
Taylor clearly did not approve of The Kiffness' intervention in his comments. He contacted him via WhatsApp, asking why he was interfering with his Instagram comments, noting that despite The Kiffness' 'crazy statements' on social media, he had always remained silent, and asked about the reasons for his participation on social media, having a personal contact number with him.
Five minutes later, The Kiffness sent a voice message lasting 2 minutes and 56 seconds. In it, he told Taylor that he did not object to Taylor publicly responding to opinions that he himself published. He emphasized that public platforms should allow people to see different points of view, and concluded by telling Taylor that he could share this voice message with whomever he wished.
Taylor had previously been involved in political intrigues among Bishops alumni. In 2019, TimesLIVE reported that he was the deputy chairman of ODU when the issue of expressing distrust in his administration was discussed, and Taylor emotionally appealed to alumni via Facebook, urging them to support the committee.
However, this past incident does not define the current conflict but explains why the transition of the dispute from internal structure to public space seems familiar. The situation was amplified by Renaldo Gouws, a former Member of Parliament, who brought the dispute to a broader public arena by posting the Alumni Committee's letter on X and framing the struggle as a reasonable demand turned into a 'culture war bonfire.'
In his typical manner, @Anton_Taylor, dubbed the 'awakened snowman,' decided to turn a reasonable request into an end-of-the-world scenario. He also accused everyone who disagreed with his position of homophobia, secrecy, and ignorance, threatening them with 'exposure.'
Bishops alumni are making a rather reasonable demand of the school: 'What is the school's policy regarding the flying of flags associated with any ideology?' They conclude by stating that people like @Anton_Taylor seek attention at all costs, and if 'burning down the house' is necessary for that, they will do it. For him, subscribers, likes, and coverage matter more than the reasons.
Drew Birch supported the 'men in @bishopscollegeza and @bishops_old_boys' for 'courage in confronting the crowd,' mentioning Taylor. In a second post, Birch addressed the 'Christian brothers who abandoned their God,' quoting Isaiah 5:20 and Leviticus 18:22. The Kiffness also commented on this post, repeating the analogy of the vegan restaurant.
It is important to note that the Alumni Committee's letter asks the Bishops Council to provide clear written policy regarding flags, rather than demanding the exclusion of gay people from the moral universe, despite how the internet has portrayed this dispute. The ODC letter states that Bishops should only fly three official flags in an official capacity: the South African flag, the Bishops flag, and the St George's flag. The letter also seeks to separate this request from hostility towards gay and lesbian people in the Bishops community.
ODC confirmed to 2oceansvibe that a younger committee was elected this year, and some new members were recent Bishops students who personally reviewed this letter and vote. When the time came to hold this event again, they raised the issue once more, requesting written policy from the Council on behalf of the students who initiated the letter and vote.
In his voice message, The Kiffness stated that, being a 'product of a private Anglican school,' he believes such institutions should 'adhere to their values.' He argues that schools should avoid political or social movements because they polarize students. His stance then becomes harsher: he applies this to gender identity, stating that he would not want his son to attend a school that teaches that it is normal for a boy to identify as a girl or, even stranger, as a cat. He added that this 'does not mean I hate trans or gay people,' but that faith compels him to see 'things as they are.'
Thus, the flagpole dispute inevitably transitions into a broader discourse on sexuality, gender, faith, and who has the right to define the character of an Anglican school. What started as a student vote now includes The Kiffness, Anton Taylor, Renaldo Gouws, and numerous screenshots, posts, and arguments on social media, with the vote itself becoming the quietest part of the story.
In the context of South Africa's evolving society, a conflict between tradition and inclusivity principles is being discussed regarding whether the Pride flag should be displayed at Bishops College for several days a year.
Bishops College, like much of South Africa, faces another contentious issue that seems impossible to resolve. The school uses three flags: the national flag, the school flag, and a third flag that rotates between the St George's flag and various flags reflecting issues that Bishops believes should prompt boys to think.
In 2021, the Bishops Pride club was established, an initiative proposed by the graduating class of 2020 as part of a memorandum presented to the school during the Black Lives Matter protests. The college and school leadership immediately supported this initiative.
However, in subsequent years, the Student Representative Forum (SRF) voted against raising the Pride flag. Despite numerous votes against the flag and letters requesting action from the school, Bishops continues to fly it two days a year during Pride Week. As expected, many who disapprove of the flag feel unheard.
This year, a group of Old Delvers (ODs) approached the school asking for a neutral policy regarding flags, specifically highlighting the Pride flag as controversial and thus a serious impediment to unity within the Bishops community. A week later, Rob Hersov, a Bishops parent, published an open letter on the topic in BizCommunity, advocating for organizational neutrality at Bishops.
As a father at Bishops, initially hearing the proposed solution regarding the controversy surrounding the Pride flag, the author of the letter felt disgust and anger. Like any concerned parent supporting pride, he voiced his opinion in a group chat for fathers. To his surprise, he encountered a mixed reaction: one faction supported the Pride flag (the Progressives Team), while the other advocated for no flags at all (the Unity Team).
The Unity Team promotes the idea of organizational neutrality, citing a global Pew Research Center survey which showed that only 55% of South Africans accept homosexuality, arguing that flying the Pride flag falsely represents the collective opinion of the community. Their argument is based on social consensus and conflict avoidance.
The Progressives Team advocates for the explicit inclusion of LGBTQ+ members, given that these individuals have historically faced bullying and marginalization at Bishops and similar schools. By actively and publicly marking Bishops with the Pride flag, the school signals to the boys that they are safe. All their arguments are primarily based on protecting the homosexual minority, which has historically been vulnerable.
South Africa previously dealt with similar statistics accompanied by the discomfort felt by the Unity Team. In 1991, when the author was seven years old, he was forbidden from calling his favorite snack by its actual name—[N-word] ball. He was told to call it a 'black candy,' which seemed like unnecessary complication to him. In 1995, during the famous Rugby World Cup, one year after the adoption of the new South African flag, the author recalls people carrying the old South African flag to matches. For some, it was rebellion; for others, it was simply heritage, and criticizing it seemed like an attack on innocent things.
Thirty years later, all of the above is difficult to understand. What seemed trivial then now appears as an expression of human dignity. It is hard to believe that we ever tried to protect a [N-word] ball or a flag representing the 'Bad Old Days.' This is what causes discomfort in the Unity Team versus Progressives Team saga. Part of what we are proud of or consider trivial can one day seem unthinkable. We do not know if the Pride flag will become the new flag of 1994 or the one to be reviewed next. 'Unity' is timeless, but 'Progress' demands constant discomfort, reevaluation, and, in most cases, final acceptance.
From a marketing perspective, the Unity Team was associated with being branded by the pride movement without consent. Nevertheless, although the flag sparked internal debate from the start, over six years it attracted little external attention, and it cannot be proven that it caused Bishops any legal reputational damage.
In a country whose Constitution enjoys international respect for protecting gay rights, news that the school will stop flying the Pride flag for any reason would be sensational. Even a strong statement from Bishops about 'organizational neutrality' would be interpreted through the lens of toxic masculinity, as Anton Taylor has already done in his Instagram post. The author believes that removing the flag would create significant reputational risk for Bishops.
He argues that any strategist would advise keeping the flag. If the message of the Pride flag is that 'you have nothing to hide,' then removing that message after six years tells the boy that it was directed in the opposite direction. The Unity Team does not mean that it should imply 'you should be ashamed,' but one cannot remove a symbol without implying its opposite.
Similarly, 'it would be bad to stop' is not equivalent to 'it is right to continue,' but of the two possible paths, only one can worsen the situation. Beyond the concerns of the Unity Team, there are international examples of successful resolution to this situation. Eton, perhaps the world's most prestigious boys' school, supports an established society for its gays and lesbians with an annual pride symposium fully supported by the headmaster. Students at Westminster School also run a Pride Society. Furthermore, the Pride Society notes that the school 'does not always feel' welcoming to young queer boys. Many such schools have chosen this path rather than being forced into it.
The acceptance of gay men in England has progressed from 'fiercely contested' to 'unremarkable' in the most traditional schools. And this progress happened very quickly, far beyond schools. Back in the 60s, being gay in England was illegal, with discretionary sentences ranging from two years to life imprisonment. The most famous case was Alan Turing in 1952, who brilliantly cracked the code of the Nazi Enigma machine, tipping the war in the West's favor. Britain, while grateful for Alan's contribution, could not ignore his relationship with a man and condemned him for gross indecency, sentencing him to a suspended sentence conditional on chemical castration. Queen Elizabeth pardoned him in 2013—a year after his centenary and 59 years after his suicide.
We have come a long way from chemical castration both internationally and at home. However, not everything is perfect. While the Progressives Team expects the arc to bend and the resistors to lose, the Unity Team expects that once this journey begins, there is no end. For most of the time, both are right. Now that gay rights are normalized, the question has changed. Instead of 'Am I gay?' boys and girls now ask: 'Am I a boy?' And the cycle continues.
Neighboring Anglican boys' schools, St Andrew's and St John's, have also begun flying this flag. The director of St Andrew's, Tom Hamilton, addressed the same issue in a letter to his community back in 2003, concluding with Desmond Tutu—a former visitor to Bishops—on the note that 'there are no strangers. Everyone is welcome... men, women, gays, heterosexuals, everyone, everyone, everyone. We all belong to this family, this human family.'
Bishops, like most schools, has flown flags for various causes for years. In its July bulletin, the Bishops director listed the flags currently flown on that rotating third pole, at the appropriate times: '16 Days of Activism,' 'Africa Day,' 'Anti-Racism,' 'Springbok,' 'Breast Cancer Awareness,' 'Gender-Based Violence,' 'International Day of Persons with Disabilities,' 'Movember,' 'Pride,' 'World AIDS Day,' 'World Mental Health Day.' Over these years, among all these flags, no principle of institutional neutrality has been found. No letters. No petitions. No appeals.
Bishops has flown flags opposing racism, gender-based violence, and even breast cancer, and the community lived under all this without a management crisis. If the objection truly related to the institution's stance on controversial issues, the anti-racism flag should have caused such a dispute long ago. On constitutional grounds, this is an identical case.
Some may argue that homosexuality is a different matter, but being gay is not a choice, nor is it a habit that a school can encourage or suppress. A study by Hanna, published in the journal Science in 2019, was the largest in history on this matter, covering nearly half a million people. It did not find a single 'gay gene' but confirmed that sexual orientation is shaped by multiple interacting genes alongside other biological factors, none of which are chosen by a person. This is not a marginal finding. The American Psychological Association asserts that sexual orientation is not a choice that can be changed at will, and is likely the result of a complex interplay of biological, cognitive, and environmental factors formed in early life. Homosexuality cannot be predicted, taught, or refuted in anyone. A boy does not decide to be gay the way he decides to be left-handed, tall, or black.
The reason the author brings this up is that the Unity Team claims that flying the Pride flag is taking a position as if 'gay' is something to believe or not to believe. Being gay is an unchosen fact about a person, present in every population that has ever existed, in any country, regardless of whether that country celebrated it or imprisoned people for it.
In all boys' schools in South Africa, few issues are as controversial as race and sexuality. In 2023, a shocking incident of internal racial discrimination occurred at Rondebosch Boys High School (300 meters from Bishops). A Stonewall's UK School Report showed that approximately two-thirds of LGBTQ students experienced homophobic bullying, and homophobic language ('that's so gay,' 'you are so gay') is almost ubiquitous in schools. Surveys in the style of US GLSEN report similar high rates of homophobic remarks.
This is why our Constitution includes sexual orientation in the equality clause alongside race. Both race and sexual orientation have been used for millennia as grounds for treating a person unfavorably. Thus, the Pride flag does not take sides. It tells the boy that what he did not choose, and for which he might be punished elsewhere, is not something he needs to hide here. He can be proud of who he is, regardless of anything.
The fact that only 55% of South Africans accept homosexuality means we are far from living and breathing the Constitution, not that we should stop openly defending a minority carrying this genetic expression. If we went back to the 1900s, we would see similar or worse acceptance rates for Black people. And what a tragedy it would be today if everyone maintained neutrality.
A serious conflict has arisen at Bishops Diocesan College in Cape Town regarding the flying of the Pride flag. The Old Diocesan Committee (ODC) sent a letter to the school board demanding that the use of the Pride flag cease and that flagpoles be limited to three official flags: the South African flag, the Bishops flag, and the St George's flag.
According to the committee, which made the decision by a majority vote (10 for and one abstention), only the three specified flags should be used for official purposes. The ODC stated that these three flags belong to everyone and do not require community members to take sides. It noted that many other world flags, regardless of the significance of their causes, prompt the school to take a position on a controversial issue, and their presence or absence is interpreted as a statement.
The committee emphasized that by opening such a door, the school is not closing it forever, but commits to constantly deciding which causes are represented by the flags and which are not, and defending this choice to a community that will never fully agree.
The ODC clarified that the issue specifically relates to the Pride flag, which the school raises in June during Pride Month. Although the ODC's letter welcomes 'every gay and lesbian person,' the committee believes that the school's care for its members is best expressed not through a flag.
The committee wrote that the message boys should receive—'you are welcome, you are safe, you are ours'—should come directly from the school's own voice and conduct, and this will be stronger than a flag hanging next to the question, 'Whose flag will be next?'
Furthermore, the ODC demanded that if the school board decides to use flags other than the three official ones, a full written flag policy must be published for the entire Bishops community. This policy must clearly state the principle by which the school decides which flags are flown and apply this principle uniformly to all flags, including Palestinian and Israeli, Ukrainian, Taiwanese, Tibetan, and others, and specify the days when its own flags are flown. The ODC concluded that a policy that can simply be formulated and consistently applied can be defended, whereas one that cannot will be disputed in the community year after year, flag by flag.
However, Anton Taylor, a Bishops alumnus and South African comedian, spoke out against the ODC. Taylor previously served on the ODC from the 2009/10 to 2019/20 academic year. He told IOL that these flags have been flying for years, and the Pride flag is raised only two days a year, and that the ODC is trying to create a problem that does not exist to target gay students.
Taylor also publicly distanced himself from the ODC and its views on his Instagram, noting that the committee sent a letter to the entire OD community—thousands of people—on their behalf, and committee members actively promoted their stance in WhatsApp groups, called people, and even involved 'Bishops friends' to support their idea.
Despite the principal's comments, the boys at the school were already bearing the weight of this dispute. In his video, Taylor called the current committee shameful and stated that they are targeting the gay community. Since then, Taylor has severed ties with the committee but retained his love for the school.
In response, the school principal, Tony Ryler, informed parents in a letter that the third flag will continue to alternate with flags dedicated to various occasions, including Africa Day, 16 Days of Activism, cancer awareness, Movember, the Bokke flag, World AIDS Day, and the Pride flag. He explained that he views this flag as a symbol of inclusion.
Parents, alumni, staff, and friends of Bishops, united under the name 'Supporting A Progressive Bishops,' supported Ryler's view. They stated that they believe Bishops belongs to everyone in its community and that the school can serve as an example in the wider life of the country.
A group that received over 300 signatures from the Bishops community in response to the ODC's letter stated that flying the Pride flag is just a small gesture. They emphasized that it is a simple gesture signifying that members of the Bishops LGBTQ+ community, especially boys under the school's care, feel as welcome, valued, and safe here as any other person.
This group referenced the South African Constitution and noted that the school is an Anglican foundation patronized by the Archbishop of Cape Town. They reminded that St George's Cathedral, where the Archbishop resides, has flown the Pride flag since the mid-1990s, about thirty years ago. The group also cited the words of Archbishop Tutu, who fought against homophobia with the same passion he fought against apartheid, stating that he could not 'worship a God who is homophobic.'
The group added that this flag, described as 'close to home,' speaks to the dignity and care for its own children, and a school existing to inspire people should let every person know that they matter. They concluded by stating that they respect the School Board's right to fly flags, but write to emphasize that the broad and diverse community of people who care about Bishops hopes the school will continue this quiet sign of welcome.
