The Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) in November published “The First South African National Gender-based Violence Study, 2022”, the first survey of its kind on the prevalence of gender-based violence and femicide (GBVF) across SA. It outlines the prevalence of physical, sexual, emotional and economic violence, as well as psychological abuse such as controlling behaviour among male youths and adults 18 years and older, and examines the perpetration of violence by men against their female partners and the underlying role of gender norms in driving GBVF.
“The results provide new evidence and confirmation of the patterns of violence against women in the country, and the findings contribute to understanding the life course of victimisation and perpetration in SA,” says the HSRC, adding that the persistence of GBVF reflects the deeply ingrained societal norms and structures that serve to perpetuate male dominance and reinforce gender hierarchies in families and communities, “leading to female subordination, systemic inequalities, and violence against women”.
The number of female respondents who reported lifetime physical and/or sexual violence was 35.5%, translating to 7,847,438 women. Understandably, the findings were of great concern and pointed to poorly managed mental illness among perpetrators.
Predictably, deeply ingrained attitudes lay beneath the figures, as it was reported that 10.7% of SA men believed that a woman should tolerate violence to keep her family together, 8.3% believed that there were times when a woman deserved to be beaten and 30.6% believed that men should defend their reputation with force if they had to (for example, if they have been insulted).
In addition, most ever-partnered men (men who had been in a relationship or had sex) believed that a woman should obey her husband; a further 37.5% believed a man should have the final word in all family matters and 22.5% believed that a woman cannot refuse to have sex with her husband.
Apart from these beliefs and attitudes, however, there is a pressing problem that sets SA apart from developed countries: pervasive poverty and financial dependence, which make women more vulnerable to sexual predators. In his book Killer Stories, psychologist Brin Hodgskiss makes the disturbing point that the “possible victim pool” for predators is far larger in SA than in the US. “Sex workers in most countries across the world are extremely vulnerable … It is this vulnerability that attracts American serial killers to these victims. This will also be true in other countries where the large majority of citizens are not exceptionally fragile or easy targets, but it is not true in SA,” he writes.
His co-author, Nicole Engelbrecht, writes: “If predators seek out easy targets — the proverbial wounded antelopes — the vast majority of the SA herd is incapacitated in some way. Poverty, unemployment, lack of education and an overall pervading sense of desperation for survival under enormous strain result in a huge portion of our population being overwhelmingly vulnerable.”
Hodgskiss spent 15 years in policing, starting his career assisting the SA Police Service (SAPS) with profiling serial killers and expanding its database. This laid the basis for Killer Stories, for which he interviewed 10 serial murderers. A study that appeared in the 2015 issue of the Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, which focused on 54 solved murder series in SA, showed that just 8% of the victims were sex workers. In SA, he says, and many other countries with similar socioeconomic backdrops, “serial murderers do not have to go very far to find a wounded antelope, and they certainly don’t need to target sex workers specifically. Very simply, their possible victim pool is far larger.”
Stats SA backs up Hodgskiss’ assertion with figures on women’s economic vulnerability: “SA women have higher unemployment rates and higher levels of poverty [than men]. In both Q1: 2019 and Q1: 2020, more than four in every 10 young females (15-34) were not [engaged] in employment, education or training (NEET). Over 8.5-million (41.7%) out of 20.4-million young people aged 15-34 years were NEET. Nationally, 43% of children lived with mothers only, while one third (33.8%) lived with both parents. The prevalence of physical violence was greater among less-educated women than those with secondary education or higher.”
Stats SA says most cases of femicide are committed by partners or ex-partners and involve long-term abuse in the home, threats or intimidation, sexual violence or situations where women have less power or fewer resources than their partner.
Despite the government adopting the UN’s campaign for 16 Days of Activism for No Violence Against Women and Children in 1998, GBVF rates are increasing. The Commission for Gender Equality, which is proposing a GBV index, says that despite the National Strategic Plan adopted in 2020 to address the scourge, the number of reported cases continues to rise. “Between April 2022 and March 2023 alone, a staggering 53,498 sexual offences were reported to the [SAPS] … with rape accounting for 42,780 of these cases.”
But this is not the whole picture. The commission adds that most incidents of GBVF remain undocumented, underreported, and unaccounted for within national statistics. “This is despite reliable and credible data being the bedrock for policy formulation, planning, costing, implementation, evaluation and reviewing of programmes and policies.” It is hoped the GBV index will be a broad measure of the extent and nature of GBVF at all levels of society.
In a 2014 study, “Too Costly to Ignore — the Economic Impact of Gender-Based violence in SA”, KPMG reported that the female homicide rate in 2009 in SA was five times the global rate, with the national intimate partner violence homicide rate more than twice that in the US. Using a conservative estimate, KPMG said, GBVF cost SA between R28.4bn and R42.4bn a year, or 0.9%-1.3% of GDP.
Confronted by these stark facts, the question remains: what should SA do to reduce GBVF rates? Most organisations working in this area focus on education for men and boys.
Hodgskiss concurs with the HSRC study that there is a link between violence and mental illness, partly because men’s socialisation leads them to believe they should keep difficult emotions to themselves: “Men are bad at sharing their pain with their peers. [They are] bad at directly addressing the emotional issues that gnaw at them. Pretty bad at finding ways to tackle their inner demons without using violence against themselves or others.”
This is the sense he was left with after writing the book, with which he and Engelbrecht wanted to call attention to the importance of the stories the men told about themselves. “What can this tell us about how we might prevent violence against women? This tells us we need to tackle negative ideas that drive the behaviour. Ideas that can be summarised in nine words: ‘I am alone, I am helpless, I am violent.’”
He adds: “I am not excusing the behaviour of violent men. I am looking at possible causes and holding out the hopeful prospect that we men can be better friends to one another, and better educators of our sons. We need to educate boys about the destructive effects of loneliness. We need to show them how to find help and, as a state, we need to make sure the help is there. Finally, we need to create better stories about what it means to be a man. Stories that don’t constantly tell our boys that real men sort out problems with their fists; or that women are an enemy to be dominated; or that showing emotion is weak. Change those stories and we may just change the future.”
Cultural narratives rarely highlight men who nurture or uplift others, limiting boys’ understanding of healthy masculinity, he says.
Trying to change those narratives is Kabelo Chabalala, founder of the Young Men Movement (YMM) in rural Mpumalanga. “To effect meaningful change in men’s behaviour, it is essential that we address the root causes of toxic masculinity and patriarchal norms. This requires a multifaceted approach, encompassing raising awareness and educating men on gender equality, healthy relationships and emotional intelligence,” he says.
“We must encourage men to challenge and confront harmful traditional masculine norms, promoting positive male role models and mentors in the process. Creating safe spaces for men to express emotions and vulnerabilities is crucial. Community-based initiatives focusing on behavioural change have been instrumental in empowering men to become better versions of themselves, as evidenced by my work at YMM.”
However, funding is a struggle. “We wish we could get a donor to help us sustain the work we do, which is quite unique for rural communities. As things stand, we might close shop next year.” He spends 5%-20% of his salary running the organisation.
Chabalala also serves in a voluntary capacity as chief mentor at What About the Boys?, a national gender liberation movement aimed at creating a different definition of boyhood in which being sensitive, kind, respectful, accountable, expressive and nurturing are no longer framed as being weak or incompatible with being a man. The programme is designed to be preventive and is an evidence-based approach to influencing positive behavioural and societal changes in the long term, and has large sponsors such as Sasol, Spar and Absa.
Since its launch in 2022, the What About the Boys? programme has had a positive effect on the lives of about 60,000 young men in township and rural schools across the country, says MD Martin Sweet. The main tools are films aimed at the youth, the Good Men Guide workbooks, and providing mentorship and resources through its free online platform, Primestars Digital. About 35 private, public and civil organisations have come on board as donors and mentors.
Confirming the HSRC findings, Sweet says that before participating in the programme, 16% of boys agreed there were times when a woman deserved to be beaten; 30% believed it was OK for a man to hit his girlfriend or wife if she refused sex, and 74% thought a man should be able to have sex with his wife whenever he wanted. “Post-programme, these troubling beliefs decreased significantly.”
Chabalala believes government should strengthen laws protecting women and children and increase funding for GBVF prevention programmes and support services. In addition, “implementing national awareness campaigns that challenge harmful norms is vital, as is providing training for law enforcement, healthcare workers, and educators. Establishing specialist GBVF courts and improving justice for survivors is imperative, and integrating GBVF education into school curricula will help foster a culture of understanding and empathy. There is [the school subject] life orientation, for heaven’s sake. Collaboration between government, civil society and communities is crucial in this endeavour.”
Society can play a pivotal role through supporting survivors, providing resources and engaging men in GBVF conversations and accountability. “Fostering community-based initiatives and partnerships will help create a groundswell of change.”
But is changing belief systems enough to bring about a real, lasting change in behaviour? New research suggests it is not; after all, human beings often behave in ways that are contrary to their beliefs. Writing in The Evidence, a newsletter to raise awareness of gender inequality, Josephine Lethbridge cites a meta-study covering all previous global research on sexual violence prevention. Rates of sexual violence on US university campuses did not go down between 1985 and 2015, she says. Despite ongoing interventions, they have increased.
The theory behind the programmes could be inherently flawed: “For decades, social scientists have presumed that if you change people’s attitudes or ideas about sexual violence, then this will lead to a change in behaviour and therefore a drop in violence. And so the vast majority of sexual prevention programmes around the world have targeted the mind: what people think and believe about sexual violence, why it occurs, the kinds of people who perpetrate it and are victimised. One central target of such programmes are so-called ‘rape myths’, such as the ideas that ‘some women deserve to be raped’, or that ‘when women say no, they really mean yes’,” Lethbridge writes.
The interventions were successful in dispelling the rape myths, but a corresponding decrease in violence was not found. “Where there was any evidence of violence reduction, it was minuscule compared to the change in people’s ideas. The assumption that our thoughts are the primary cause of our behaviour has guided sexual violence reduction since the beginning of the field. But according to this new research, it doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.”
Elise Lopez, assistant director of the relationship violence programme at the University of Arizona, said she was not surprised by the results. “They demonstrated what I and many other researchers have grappled with over the years. If we’re putting millions of dollars into research and prevention programmes, why haven’t the numbers changed in over 30 years? Now we have concrete insight into why. When you identify a fundamental flaw, you can stop recreating the wheel and instead grasp the opportunity to create something new.”
Ana Gantman, assistant professor of psychology at Brooklyn College, who co-authored the study, concurred: “Psychologists know that there is a space between what we think, what we want, what we believe and what we actually do. For example: someone might have a desire to speak up if they hear a person making a sexist joke, but in the moment another desire to maintain social cohesion might prevail, or they simply might not know what to say.”
Lopez points out that you can educate people about the importance of eating healthily, exercising or getting enough sleep, but ultimately you have to change people’s self-confidence about engaging in healthy behaviour, give them the social support to do so, and consider the environment they’re living in.
In other words, improve women’s lives, and in this regard, physical space is crucial. As Gantman says: “Students tell us that often the only social spaces they have to go to when parties are over are their bedrooms.” She suggests that providing more neutral communal spaces might allow for other behaviour; “if a bed isn’t there, people are less likely to think about the possibility of sex”.
The researchers emphasised integrating sexual violence prevention education into general sexual health education. “I think if we were teaching people how to have happy, healthy, consensual, ideally mutually orgasmic sex, then maybe we would see less instances where people are in situations like heavy drinking, for example, that make sex riskier,” says Lopez.
In Kenya, unconditional cash transfers were shown to reduce sexual violence when given to women. And in Rhode Island, the US, reported rape offences fell by 30% when indoor sex work was decriminalised.
Hodgskiss agrees that changing men’s beliefs and behaviour is critical, but it needs to be accompanied by women’s empowerment. This is something that all of society, including corporates, can assist in. “We must give women what they need to defend themselves. My research into serial murder suggests the long-term best defence is money. Time and again, we saw serial murderers targeting women who were made vulnerable by lack of money. This wasn’t limited to women engaged in high-risk employment such as sex work. In SA, women seeking work were easily lured into risky situations. We need to encourage the economic empowerment of women and girls, and reject any narrative that claims women should earn less, or learn less, than men. Change those stories, and we may start changing the future for the boys and girls of this generation and the next.”
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.