Homophobia and misogyny are kin

By his own admission, deputy minister of higher education Mduduzi Manana acted criminally last weekend when he assaulted a woman at a club in northern Johannesburg. Yet for days afterwards, and as I am writing this column, he remains in his job and free to roam the streets.

That is despicable. Several aspects of this violent misogynistic episode, and how it has played out publicly, show us yet again that South Africa is no place for women.

One eyewitness confessed that many of the bystanders, himself included, didn’t come to the rescue of the woman in the first few minutes of the attack. This is quite a chilling, but unsurprising, confession. It means, first, that the attack was sustained, which must have been terrifying for the woman, not knowing when and how it might end. Both photographic and video evidence corroborate this.

Second, the initial inaction of staff and bystanders shows us just how routine and normal violence against women is in South Africa. We are not motivated to stop violence. We are, rather, desensitised to it. Violence has been naturalised.

Tracy Chapman, in a classic track about domestic violence, sings the macabre truth that “The police always come late/ If they come at all/ And when they arrive/ They say they can’t interfere/ With domestic affairs/ Between a man and his wife”.

Public violence often leads to similar attitudes from criminal law enforcement agencies and from bystanders. A woman is neither safe in her home nor is she safe outside it. She is clearly not safe in a nightclub either. We witness public violence and then we look away, reducing it to a private domestic affair, we have no social responsibility to respond to.

We are thus complicit in the violence against women with our inaction and silence. We create a public space that is safe for perpetrators to prey on their victims, secure in the knowledge that consequences for criminality are rare.

We throw the safety net around the criminal and leave their victim exposed to brutality. That is a shameful mark of our indecency.

Our violence is also layered. In a statement from the deputy minister subsequent to the attack, he refers to an “extreme provocation”, but does not explain the provocation.

There are at least two accounts of what had preceded the attack. One version suggests there was a heated debate about who the next president of the ANC should be. The second account, not incompatible with the first, suggests the deputy minister was labelled as “gay”.

It is a manifestation of violent and toxic masculinity if you assault your interlocutor in a debate. It is homophobic to respond violently to being labelled gay. In fact, the moment the assault happened, it became irrelevant what conversation had preceded it, because the response was evidently grossly disproportionate both in law and ethically speaking.

The deputy minister’s apology is rendered meaningless once he tries to smuggle a justification into the non-apology. He also reinscribes his homophobia into the statement by describing being called gay an “extreme provocation”. That gives him a false legal ruse to have a right to respond to provocation.

It doesn’t work, I’m afraid. The Constitutional Court has been clear that one cannot claim to have been defamed if someone calls you gay. This applies to other aspects of the law too: being called gay isn’t the same as someone poking your ribs with a weapon, an act that reasonably may result in a proportionate response to such actual provocation.

We shouldn’t fall for the hasty description of an “extreme provocation”. So what drives this violent homophobia?

It’s not surprising that homophobia is a close relative of misogyny. We are told and taught lies about what it means to be “a man”.

These lies include the following: A man cannot have sex with another man. A man cannot cry. A man cannot be vulnerable. A man cannot emote. A man cannot be effeminate. A man cannot lose an argument.

These lies, if we think them through, in effect send boys and men the message that any behaviour deemed to be typical of how women might act (itself a problematic construct) is bad. Women are weak, so the messaging goes, and therefore any associations with these stereotypes about women become a source of shame in men and can occasion aggression in defence of one’s “manhood”.

Being called gay, in that context, amounts to being called a woman, a girl, a sissie. In a society with toxic masculinities in gay abandon this becomes the ultimate slur.

This hatred of all things feminine is so potent in men that even men who are not heterosexual can be and often are misogynistic. In some gay men, for example, shame and self-stigma find expression in violence against others.

That is also why one cannot assume that a homophobe is not gay. Gay men can also be homophobic precisely because gay men can also hate women and therefore can also hate an aspect of themselves that society associates with “acting like a woman”. That is the glue that binds homophobia and misogyny.

We urgently need to open up productive conversations about how to recover the humanity of boys and men so that we can find healthier ways of being in the world and eliminate toxic masculinity from the domestic and the public space. The deputy minister of higher education is not an exception. He typifies patriarchy.

Subscribe to the M&G

These are unprecedented times, and the role of media to tell and record the story of South Africa as it develops is more important than ever.

The Mail & Guardian is a proud news publisher with roots stretching back 35 years, and we’ve survived right from day one thanks to the support of readers who value fiercely independent journalism that is beholden to no-one. To help us continue for another 35 future years with the same proud values, please consider taking out a subscription.

Eusebius Mckaiser
Eusebius McKaiser
Eusebius McKaiser is a political and social analyst at the Wits Centre for Ethics. He is also a popular radio talk show host, a top international debate coach, a master of ceremonies and a public speaker of note. He loves nothing more than a good argument, having been both former National South African Debate Champion and the 2011 World Masters Debate Champion. His analytic articles and columns have been widely published in South African newspapers and the New York Times. McKaiser has studied law and philosophy. He taught philosophy in South Africa and England.

Related stories


Subscribers only

Medical aids blame external costs as fees increase beyond inflation

Medical aid is becoming more of a luxury for many South Africans, and it’s not about to get any better

Mahikeng compounds its mess

The ailing town that wasted R2-billion appoints a municipal manager rated ‘basic’, the lowest level

More top stories

FUL mulls legal options regarding Hlophe’s presence at interviews for...

Premier Alan Winde and the Cape Bar Council asked that the interviews be postponed pending a decision on Hlophe’s fate but the JSC declined

Cape Town fire update: Mop-up operations underway, students receive local...

Clean-up operations and repairs to infrastructure are being initiated, while the full extent of the damage wrought by the fire is still being assessed

Bird flu outbreak puts poultry industry in jeopardy

Avian flu has been confirmed on two farms in Gauteng and one in North West

Absa chief executive resigns due to differences with board on...

Activist group warns of a ‘culling trend’ affecting black professionals in top positions

press releases

Loading latest Press Releases…