South Africa needs more than a five-point plan to prevent violence
Violence against women is more likely to be reduced if violence among boys and among men is not accepted as normal and inevitable.
Published on 07 October 2026 in
ISS Today
By
Chandré Gould
Senior Research Fellow, Justice and Violence Prevention, ISS
The 9 September murder of Elizabeth Moselakgomo and subsequent revelations that at least 10 women’s bodies were found in Ekurhuleni, east of Johannesburg, between 15 July and 28 September, have focused attention on gender-based violence and femicide in South Africa.
On 29 September, President Cyril Ramaphosa presented a five-point plan to reduce the risk of violence against women in public spaces and resolve bottlenecks in the criminal justice system to deal with existing cases. He also stressed the importance of preventing violence. However, the plan is silent on what prevention looks like and how it will be resourced.
Preventing violence against women is, and must be, a national priority. The good news is that doing so can also prevent other forms of violence. A comprehensive violence prevention strategy would acknowledge that South Africa will be better able to reduce violence against women if violence among boys and among men is not accepted as normal and inevitable.
To break entrenched cycles of violence, South Africa must treat all forms of violence as unacceptable – including men’s use of violence against other men. The country must prevent children of all genders from being exposed to violence, particularly in the home, and respond with care and attention when this happens.
Intimate partner violence is a primary mechanism through which violence is transferred from one generation to the next. When children experience and are exposed to violence in their home, they are more likely to become perpetrators and victims of violence later in life, establishing patterns that are hard to break. And exposure to intimate partner violence predicts criminal behaviour.
The way boys and men treat each other is part of the environment that produces violence against women
Addressing harmful beliefs and norms about masculinity and violence would address men’s violence against both women and men.
Risk factors for the use of violence include not finishing school, not having the skills to solve conflicts without violence, having poor emotional regulation, poor mental health, and substance abuse. The fact that men overwhelmingly perpetrate violence suggests that many of these factors are more prevalent among men than women.
A holistic strategy is needed to address the problem – one that inculcates non-violent gender-equitable norms for children, supports parents and caregivers through gender-transformative parenting programmes, and builds children’s and adults’ skills to resolve conflict peacefully. It should support good emotional regulation for parents and children and include the physical safety elements mentioned by Ramaphosa, such as improving street lighting.
International evidence suggests that for women to be safe, children and men must be safe too. The 2019 United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime global homicide report found that countries with high female homicide rates also tended to have much higher rates of homicide against men.
This is also reflected in South Africa’s national and provincial data. National figures show that more than four out of every five murders in South Africa involve male victims. A 2023 analysis of South African post-mortem data found that the provinces with the highest male homicide rates also ranked highest for female homicide.
Addressing harmful beliefs about masculinity and violence would address men’s violence against both women and men
This means that there is a strong correlation between the violence experienced by women and men. And indeed, the evidence suggests that where there are high levels of violence against adults, children are likely to be victimised at a higher rate too. This sets society up for entrenched cycles of violence intergenerationally.
The attention on gender-based violence is necessary and important. But focusing on only one kind of violence is likely to be less successful than focusing on the common causes of all forms of interpersonal violence.
Rather than just adding men and children to an existing gender-based violence and femicide framework, attention should be paid to how violence is reproduced in relationships, institutions, generations and social settings. And we must be consistent in our rejection of violence as a society.
For centuries, men’s bodies have been viewed as legitimate targets in the context of war, women’s bodies have been used as the ‘spoils’ of war, and children have been collateral damage. These histories are relevant because they demand that we pay attention to how, when and for whom violence is accepted and normal.
Gang violence, robbery and vigilantism take a significant toll on male lives, but the most common circumstances in which men are murdered are in disputes. Police data describes these disputes as ‘arguments’, ‘misunderstandings’, ‘retaliation’, ‘revenge’, or ‘road rage’.
Much violence is linked to arguments, at the heart of which is shame, honour and a show of masculine strength
Much violence is linked to arguments, at the heart of which is shame, honour and a performance of masculine strength. This means that men are not being equipped with the awareness and skill to resolve conflict without violence – or that violence is seen by many men as a ‘necessary’ show of strength.
This is important for preventing gender-based violence and femicide because ideas about strength, vulnerability, respect and the legitimate use of violence are also produced and reinforced in relationships between women and men.
Violence against men is therefore relevant, not only because men are victims of violence in large numbers, but also because the way boys and men are permitted, and expected, to treat each other is part of the environment that produces violence against women. This must be addressed in a sustained prevention strategy.
Current policies and strategies are ineffective because they lack sound implementation mechanisms and funding. A clear, resourced plan to reduce violence must work with existing capacity and build on the strengths of state and non-state interventions.
An integrated prevention strategy requires greater clarity about how interventions relate to one another, which risk and protective factors they seek to change, and how change in one part of the system may affect violence elsewhere.
This could move South Africa from a collection of responses to different manifestations of violence towards a more coherent prevention architecture that delivers safety for all.
For permission to re-publish ISS Today articles, please email us. In South Africa, News24 has exclusive rights to republish ISS Today articles. In Nigeria, Premium Times has exclusive rights to republish ISS Today articles.
