The Clash Over Virginity Testing in South Africa

Critics of virginity testing argue that the tradition is discriminatory, and the methods have no scientific basis. After the commission’s ruling on the bursary, the group Lawyers for Human Rights commended the decision in a statement, saying “the scheme entrenches gender inequality by holding girls to a different sexual responsibility and standard than boys, and rewarding conformation with a harmful stereotype entirely unrelated to academic potential and the right to education, under the guise of public health considerations.”

Much of the debate centers on different interpretations of South Africa’s constitution. While the document specifically protects cultural rights, it also states that that protection doesn’t override the Bill of Rights, which prohibits discrimination and violence against women and girls.

Cultural activists angered by the CGE ruling say the uThukela district bursary maintains and encourages tradition in line with the constitution. “It is virginity testing and it’s a cultural right, and the constitution is very clear that the state must promote cultural rights,” said Thoko Mkhwanazi-Xaluva, chairwoman of the CRL Rights Commission, speaking to eNews Africa. “So the municipality said, ‘How do we promote virginity inspection?’ And they decided, ‘Let’s encourage [girls] even further by giving them a bursary.’”

At this year’s Reed Dance ceremony in September, Zulu king Zwelithini accused the CGE of fishing for media attention and said the ruling was considered a declaration of war on the Zulu kingdom and its culture. When he asked the gathering of over 30,000 girls whether they had been forced to attend the ceremony, they responded with a resounding “No.”

Khayelihle Zuma, a 17-year-old student based in Durban, has been taking part in the Reed Dance since she was 10. She says at first she was scared, because she didn’t know what the virginity testing would entail. But she has since grown to appreciate the ceremony and what it stands for.

“I am proud that I get to take part in something that is a part of my culture and to bring pride to my family as a maiden, instead of going out to parties at night like other girls my age,” she says.

The CGE report noted that the two bursary recipients who had agreed to speak to the commission were adamant that, “they did not view virginity testing as an invasion of privacy or an abrogation of their right to dignity.” But it also pointed out that both girls had “a limited understanding of the Bill of Rights in the Constitution.”

Sindiso Dube (not her real name) says the young ages of the girls who take part in virginity testing, along with their lack of knowledge about their constitutional rights, leaves them open to manipulation and violation.

The 33-year-old mother of two says that when she was 17, her family forced her to undergo a virginity test after she was expelled from boarding school for breaking curfew. She found the experience “degrading,” she says, but felt she could not go against her family’s wishes.

“At that age, it’s difficult to stand up for yourself and I felt violated in the worst way possible,” she says. “But as my family had threatened to send me off to live with my grandmother if I failed the test, I felt I had to comply.”