Get more Mail & Guardian
Subscribe or Login

Beautiful girls don’t deserve to die, so who does?

BODY LANGUAGE

The recent highly publicised spate of kidnappings, sexual assaults and murders of women across the country has not only instilled fear but also highlighted the many problematic thoughts and feelings that we have about rape.

The case that stood out recently is that of Karabo Mokoena, who was allegedly brutally murdered by her boyfriend after suffering physical abuse. There was a striking unanimity in public comments about how beautiful she was and it seemed difficult for people to grasp why anyone would think to kill “someone so beautiful”.

The fact that her case received more attention than the other daily occurrences of violence against women can easily be attributed to how attractive she was and therefore seen to be better than other women who were not as beautiful, although they suffered the same fate.

It cannot be denied that we live in a society that places more value on those who are conventionally attractive than those who are not. So, naturally, the story elicited more sympathy from the public.

Three false assumptions are created about violence against women: beautiful women are at lower risk, “ugly” people deserve to be violated and violence against women rests on themselves. It skews the discussion about acts of violence against women and leaves no room to discuss the important issue of why men rape and how we make it stop.

It also distracts us from another point, that of analysing how beauty is constructed in patriarchy and, as a function of patriarchy, creates different dynamics in the objectification of women.

In an article on the catapult.co website, writer Jess Zimmerman directs us to something important: “Women’s beauty is seen as something separate from us, something we owe but never own. We are its stewards, not its beneficiaries. We tend it like a garden where we do not live.”

As women, we are required to be beautiful, not for ourselves but to be afforded value. It is our continual duty to maintain our looks. We are led to believe it is in our own best interests. But there’s a catch.

In this patriarchal system, it is men who decide what is beautiful and what is not. It is not based on one specific standard, but is a “gift” given to women to show they are worthy of specific attention.

It is not something you own, it is a privilege you are given that only lasts as long as it serves the giver. As women, we do not own our bodies, let alone our beauty.

The narrative about why Mokoena stayed with an abusive partner rested not only on the difficulty of leaving the relationship but also on the fact that, as a beautiful woman, she could have found a “better man” — once again feeding the violent beast that her beauty should have protected her from.

This is the reigning narrative when we speak of the MenAreTrash hashtag, that perhaps you just need to find a “better man”. That it is your fault, when bestowed this thing of beauty, to be so reckless as to find yourself with someone who is willing to abuse you.

Then the beauty you have been given has gone to waste.

The value placed on Karabo’s beauty can be seen as something separate from herself, her being. It did not humanise her; it further objectified her.

The ire in men’s responses to the violence enacted upon her were responses that centred on themselves. It was not that as a beautiful person she was taken, but that as a beautiful object she was no longer available for them to admire and own.

Police Minister Fikile Mbalula spoke at a recent event about Mokoena’s murder, ranting against her murderer for killing “such a beautiful girl, a yellow bone”.

Making men central to the narrative — focusing on losing a beautiful object rather than the brutality of the act — implies that perhaps the killer should have destroyed someone less valuable. But a thing nonetheless.

Lebo Mojapelo is an academic editor with Post Script and a literary scholar. She has a keen passion for feminist writing

Subscribe for R500/year

Thanks for enjoying the Mail & Guardian, we’re proud of our 36 year history, throughout which we have delivered to readers the most important, unbiased stories in South Africa. Good journalism costs, though, and right from our very first edition we’ve relied on reader subscriptions to protect our independence.

Digital subscribers get access to all of our award-winning journalism, including premium features, as well as exclusive events, newsletters, webinars and the cryptic crossword. Click here to find out how to join them and get a 57% discount in your first year.

Related stories

WELCOME TO YOUR M&G

If you’re reading this, you clearly have great taste

If you haven’t already, you can subscribe to the Mail & Guardian for less than the cost of a cup of coffee a week, and get more great reads.

Already a subscriber? Sign in here

Advertising

Subscribers only

ANC members take legal action over council selection disputes

Nine ANC members in the North West’s Greater Taung Municipality have sent a letter to the national list committee threatening to go to court should the ANC not respond to their demands.

Court judgment about alien fish is about more than trout...

Judge finds that public participation in democratic processes is not the exclusive preserve of the privileged few who have access to the internet and can read English

More top stories

Zondo asks court for state capture commission report deadline to...

The state capture commission report will not be ready by the end of September, and Zondo says he believes it will be in the public interest to grant an extension

Municipal employees to get a 3.5% increase after wage deal

The South African Local Government Association said a three-year wage deal had been agreed on the remuneration of municipal employees

South Africans in Afrobrometer survey think corruption is ‘worsening’

Most of the 1 600 participants in the study believe the government is doing an inefficient job in combating corruption, according to Afrobarometer

Court judgment about alien fish is about more than trout...

Judge finds that public participation in democratic processes is not the exclusive preserve of the privileged few who have access to the internet and can read English
Advertising

press releases

Loading latest Press Releases…
×