After the death of the Motswako hip hop musician Jabulani Tsambo, also known as HHP, the function of lobolo in customary marriage gained increased attention following the legal battle between his family and Lerato Sengadi.
The family argued it did not recognise Kganyago as his widow because it did not pay lobolo to her family.
Sengadi turned to the courts to prove she was HHP’s customary wife.
Judge Ratha Mokgoatlheng ruled in Sengadi’s favour, stating the couple had met all necessary requirements under the Customary Marriages Act 120 of 1998, which include the payment of lobolo and a celebration.
Lobolo refers to the matrimonial process which includes the trading of wealth from the groom to his intended bride’s family. The function and relevance in contemporary society has had much discussion across social and public media as well as academic spaces. Even with ongoing challenges to the practice, lobolo remains a significant part of the matrimonial practice for many black South Africans.
Despite the inclusion of women in the processes of lobolo, it remains a male-dominated practice.
The death of musician Jabulani Tsambo (HHP), and the consequent family issue over his marriage, has put lobolo in the limelight. Picture: Supplied.
The focus on the patriarchal and capitalist nature of the custom has made it almost impossible to speak of lobolo from a feminist perspective as anything other than oppressive to women.
I contest this. Also, discussions on lobolo negotiations are often about the bride, in public discourse and in academic writing, with little discussion about the groom.
Feminist academics, in particular, have tended to focus their research on lobolo around femininities with little discussion about masculinities.
On August 30, the Research Unit on Men and Masculinities at Unisa, in collaboration with the Violence, Injury and Peace Research Unit of the SA Medical Research Council, held a round-table discussion regarding lobolo and feminist marriage.
The aim of was to look at lobolo through feminist lenses in order to critically engage with issues of femininities and masculinities and how these come to be, and are negotiated, through participation in lobolo.
A dominant point raised in the discussion was that the process has changed and has become more about money and not about uniting families as it is claimed.
It was added that the view of lobolo as trading of wealth was influenced partly by looking at black cultures through the prism of white cultures.
It was noted that there are, for example, negative stereotypes of African peoples’ ways of life, which seek to discredit African ways of living, including matrimonial practices.
The reduction of lobolo to a monetary transaction was said to take away from its the cultural significance.
Some participants said it was never meant to be for the bride’s family to do as they wished, but rather to be used by the couple to pay for the nuptials and set up their matrimonial home.
As the organiser of the discussion, I hoped that the discussions would serve as a springboard for a more deliberate discussion about masculinities within lobolo.
Unfortunately, this was not the case, and the dominant voices made it about women and femininities.
While lobolo negotiations seem to be about women and discuss “the coming together of two families”, these negotiations are also a platform for negotiations and enactments of African masculinities.
It is considered a “game” between two families played by abakhongi (negotiators), ubabazala (the father-in-law) and umkwenyane (the groom).
It is true that what is often negotiated by these men is the femininity of the bride. And at the same time, they are enacting their manhood.
Traditionally, lobolo was based on a father’s social position. For example, a “commoner’s” daughter was supposed to fetch 11 head of cattle compared with anything between 44 and110 for women of royal descent.
It should be noted that this codification was instituted by British colonist Theophilus Shepstone.
Contemporary negotiations have moved from being explicitly about the father, to an appearance of a focus on the women’s attributes such as virginity, education, domestication, inhlonipho (good manners) and so on.
These points of negotiation indicate how the women was raised, meaning whether or not she was raised in a “good home”. An assumption is that a good home is one headed by a “good father”. Therefore, the idea of lobolo as a token of appreciation towards the family for raising their daughter well still seems centred on fatherhood.
This is the first of two prominent narratives of lobolo.
Writer, Refiloe Makama. Picture: Supplied
The second speaks of lobolo as reward, applicable mainly to single mothers. It seems when a woman raised by a single mother turns out to be worthy of marriage, lobolo becomes a reward that is bestowed upon the mother.
Because male-headed households are considered the ideal, the removal of a father figure reconfigures the token from being one of gratitude to being one of reward.
While this may appear to be noble in nature, it positions men who pay as custodians of reward.
Following the increased attention on lobolo through the media, I have found that whenever this topic is covered on radio stations such as Ukhozi FM, Metro FM, 702 and SAfm, the conversation on these platforms (as it is during lobolo negotiations) is often dominated by men.
While some men call in high praise of lobolo, there is always a healthy number of men who call in to voice their they opinion against.
What has been a pleasing turn every time I listen to some of these public discussions, is that often arguments for and against are about what effect lobolo has on men.
For some, lobolo is a gateway to “doing the right thing” and, for others, it acts as an obstacle to marriage.
Due to the high cost, many men are finding it hard to pay lobolo, and as a result marriage, and to some extent families, remain inaccessible.
* Refiloe Makama, is a PhD candidate and researcher at the University of South Africa, Institute of Social and Health Services. Her research interests are in gender, men and masculinities, African psychologies and narrative methodologies. This piece is written in her personal capacity.
** The views expressed here are not necessarily those of Independent Newspapers.