Medium Article Review Part Six (TikTok Edition)

 The Tightrope Walk: How Colonial Laws Scripted Lobola and Judged the Single Mother

This is a visual interpretation that starkly illustrates the historical and systemic "tightrope" that has defined the social and legal landscape for many women. This image visualizes the "tightrope walk" of a Black woman navigating a dual system of control. She balances a child on her hip while walking a rope woven from traditional fibers and colonial legal parchment, symbolizing the distortion of practices like Lobola for systemic control. Caught between colonial bureaucrats and traditional authorities, she navigates a "double patriarchy" above an abyss of societal judgment and stigma. Her use of a broken spear for balance and her determined expression highlight the profound resilience required to survive these rigid, conflicting frameworks.

The article in focus is “Power Dynamics: Romantic Power (Part One).” I'm not sure if it is obvious, but if it isn't, I’m examining three systems that affect Black South African—mostly rural— black women: Culture, Religion, and Society. My first punchline is “Patriarchal Culture in Black Societies.” This refers to the patriarchy demanded and enforced by black men within the societies black women inhabit. I also aim to show how these women navigate the patriarchal norms within society. 

Previously, I dissected The Norm of the Man as the Head and Primary Economic Provider and The Norm of Patrilocality, supported by studies from Dr. Julia C. Wells, the South African Commission on Restitution of Land Rights, and Dr. Belinda Bozzoli’s concept of the “patriarchal belt.”

I wish Dr Belinda Bozzoli could see how I conceptualized the concept of the "patriarchal belt."

The focus now is a discussion on the last batch of complementary norms: The Norm of the Primacy of Lobola and The Tightrope Walk - so buckle up, buttercup, it's about to get real.

The Norm of the Primacy of Lobola

The norm is that a successful negotiation and payment of lobola (bride price) are seen as the fundamental steps that legitimize a union and the children born from it. (Our cultures, at least mine, also have a system to integrate children a woman may have had before marriage, which I’ll address in the Tightrope Walk). Thus, lobola creates a binding contract between two families.

This is a visual interpretation that illustrates the profound role of Lobola in creating social legitimacy, family connection, and a structured path for integration within the community. This image depicts Lobola as a "binding tapestry," a profound social contract that weaves together lives and lineages. At its center, a man and woman are joined by a golden thread of legitimacy, while children—including those integrated from before the union—are woven into the expanding family tree. Supported by a foundation of ethereal cattle representing the Lobola payment, the tapestry is a communal creation, with the hands of elders and the couple working in unison to validate and sustain this intergenerational connection.

While discussing the Pragmatic Realist Archetype, I mentioned that the minute a transactional nature is established in a relationship, the man immediately takes ownership of "property". My argument is that financial transaction in a relationship gives men power to control every aspect of her life, that they'd rather solicit these kinds of relationships, as that is the only way to gain power over the modern woman.

Being romantically involved with a black man is not just that; it is being involved with an individual who has abdicated their autonomy to patriarchy and has sworn to uphold it their entire life and to bring others to its folds: young boys to continue serving it, and women to bend their knee to it.

There is no difference here. The woman ceases to be herself and ceases to uphold her beliefs or the qualities she defines herself with. Now, she is expected to be everything the man deems crucial for the union, as, after all, he paid for his right to make any demand. This shift mirrors what anthropologist John L. Comaroff identified as the commodification of social relationships under colonial capitalism, where reciprocal bonds were recast as transactional contracts, fundamentally altering the social meaning of practices like lobola."

By now, you should be familiar with the Black Administration Act of 1927. If not, I’ll highlight one of its mechanisms here: it ensured women were perpetual minors, thus needing guidance from father to husband. While the fundamental objective of lobola was to unite families, this practice devolved into an insidious transaction. In essence, in-laws had a "legal framework that could facilitate the abuse of their brides because lobola was legally considered a transaction, under the rule of the Black Administration Act. And in the case of black human beings, history teaches us that this edges toward a logic of slave trading.

In this case of the Act's creation of 'legal minority' for black women provided a state-sanctioned framework that transformed lobola from a symbol of alliance into a receipt of purchase within the colonial legal system, a point critically analyzed by scholars like Mamphela Ramphele in her work on the politics of space."Here's my question: if the law declared women perpetual minors, then why marry women off? Now that I’ve said this, can you draw any similarities to attitudes normalized in lobola practices across our traditions?

To justify why I'd dare compare how lobola devolved into a transactional distortion of black people's institutions of marriage to slave trading, I'll say this: the Norm of the Primacy of Lobola was an attempt to make it palatable after years of distorting an otherwise divine, ancient practice. It was an attempt to salvage what was left of the institutions of African marriages. To those of us who look beyond the "hype," we can see that it was exactly trading, call a spade a spade, for crying out loud. 

There was a point where Black women refused to conform to patriarchally defined institutions of marriage. There was a point when women clocked that to be married meant to be abused and decided they did not want to participate in their own abuse anymore. This resistance is not merely anecdotal but is documented in court records and commissions of inquiry from the early 20th century, where women fled abusive marriages and challenged the absolute authority of husbands, illustrating a historical consciousness that predates modern feminism."

How Modern Women Navigate This Norm:

1. A Sense of Obligation and Debt: She may feel a profound obligation to her husband and his family because lobola was paid for her. This is often used to justify control over her labor, mobility, and decisions.

2. Navigating Between Families: She is often caught between the expectations of her husband’s family and her own family, who may now feel they have no right to interfere with how her new family treats her, despite her potential distress.

3. The Law vs. Practice Clash: While the Recognition of Customary Marriages Act of 1998 grants her equal status and personhood in the eyes of the state, the social perception of lobola as creating a transfer of authority still persists powerfully, creating a clash between law and practice. Here's a sociological observation: this dichotomy between de jure equality and de facto subordination is a classic feature of post-colonial societies, where progressive legislation is mediated by deeply internalized social norms, a phenomenon sociologist Pierre Bourdieu would attribute to the enduring power of the 'habitus'.

The Tightrope Walk.

This visual interpretation illustrates the profound psychological impact of living within a system that spiritualizes and polices female autonomy, transforming the home into a space of constant, internalized surveillance.

This image visualizes the "conservatorship culture" and internalized surveillance faced by South African rural women. A woman holding her child sees not herself, but a "Panoptical Male Connoisseur"—a composite of judgmental male faces—reflecting the internalized auditing of her own behavior. Surrounded by the translucent architecture of a panopticon prison and grounded by the historical "Black Administration Act of 1927," the scene captures the oppressive weight of a societal mindset that perpetually supervises female autonomy. The dramatic lighting and bar-like shadows emphasize an inescapable atmosphere of surveillance and the psychological pressure to conform to rigid social expectations.

This describes what a South African rural woman with a child who wants to date or marry goes through. It is a complex reality for a South African rural woman with a child who wants to date or marry.

This norm is a direct descendant of the Black Administration Act of 1927. From it, we can clearly define the “conservatorship culture” in our societies—it isn’t just legal guardianship but a societal mindset where women’s choices are perpetually supervised, especially regarding sexuality and motherhood. We can also link purity culture, as religions often frame female sexuality as something to be controlled, and single motherhood is seen as a failure of that control. Here is a psycho-social concept: This creates what feminist scholar Sandra Bartky termed a 'Panoptical Male Connoisseur' Within Consciousness, where the woman internalizes this surveillance, constantly auditing her own behavior against perceived social judgment.

This creates a restrictive landscape where a woman’s actions are scrutinized through a different, much harsher lens than that of a childless woman or a man in the same position. 

Here are the crucial norms single mothers must navigate:

1. The Norm of the “Good Mother” – Sacrifice Over:
   
   
   
   
   The expectation is that the primary—and often sole—acceptable identity for a mother is that of a caregiver. Her desires, including for romance and companionship, are expected to be secondary to the child’s well-being. Pursuing a personal life can be perceived as selfish, neglectful, and a betrayal of her maternal role. This constructs a monolithic maternal identity that pathologizes any expression of individual autonomy.
   
   I hope to hammer this particular nail in the coffin of childbirth for rural women and your women: "do not romanticize childbirth while in a position where you can easily be disadvantaged. That comfortable spot you’re in right now? When you get knocked off, you get knocked off. Normalize positioning yourself in a situation where you’ll have a safe landing—and not just with regards to pregnancy".
   
   This manifests as facing sharp criticism from your own family, and especially from in-laws (if you’ve broken up with the child’s father, or are widowed or divorced). You’ll be criticized for going out.
   
   
2. The Norm of Extended Family Oversight and Permission:
   
   
   
   
   The expectation is that her romantic life is not a private matter. It’s a family affair. She is expected to seek the permission or blessing of your senior family members, especially male relatives, before entering a new relationship.
   
   This systematically erodes the boundary between the private and the communal, making her intimacy a subject of public governance.
   It manifests as "gatekeeping". Male relatives may feel it is their duty to vet any potential suitor, interrogating his intentions and background. This is rationalized as "protecting" her and her child from unreliable men and ensuring the new partner is serious.
   
   Personally, I’ve been told they “don’t need a baby-making machine” (not that I wanted to be one, don't get me wrong). No big deal. It didn’t end there. My family planning booklets were closely monitored—a literal audit of my reproductive potential. I was not to go anywhere near a boy, as if I’d get pregnant just by breathing the same air as a guy.
   
   Her pursuit of love is never just about her own feelings; it’s a social negotiation where her worth, her motherhood, and her future are publicly debated and decided upon by a community that holds her to a much higher standard than it holds an unmarried man. The community has no business debating her life, but such norms are sanctioned and backed by notions such as "it takes a village to raise a child". There's nothing wrong with this, scratch that, there is something wrong with this norm; it is dehumanizing and blatantly dismisses a woman's intelligence just because she conceived a child without conforming to rigid norms and distorted perceptions of childbirth. 
   
   
3. The Norm of the Suitor’s Intentions Towards the Child
   
   
   
   
   A potential partner is not just dating her; he is potentially entering a relationship with her child. His willingness to provide for and accept the child is a central, and often the first, point of evaluation. This frames the child not just as a dependent but as a "litmus test" for the suitor’s moral economy and a component of the mother’s perceived value.
   
   It manifests as “The Package Deal Test.” Everyone watches how he interacts with the child. Is he generous? Does he show care? His failure to provide small gifts or money for the child’s upkeep would be a major red flag. These women juggle fulfilling their own emotional needs and ensuring the child’s safety. Every single mother’s fear is getting their child into situations where they’re rejected or not fully accepted by the man or his family, should the relationship lead to marriage. This is where the cultural system to integrate the child ("ku koka na rhanga") comes into play. Should the relationship lead to marriage, the man is also expected to symbolically “marry” the child.
   
   The most important thing to note when dating a woman with a child is that your motives will be suspected. You will not be trusted with the child’s safety, as many men have been vocal about their thoughts on women’s children, making them want to protect our kids not only from physical danger but from humiliation as well.
   
   I’ve personally normalized not mixing my child into my relationships. I’ve hidden people I’ve dated in the past, not asking for anything child-need-related, limiting topics on parenthood to talking as if kids are abstract—especially with guys who have no kids. Something sociologists call: A personal practice of segregation, it is a form of 'strategic invisibility,' a coping mechanism where marginalized individuals hide stigmatized parts of their identity to navigate hostile social terrains, a concept explored in Erving Goffman's work on stigma management.
   
   
4. The Norm of Lobola for the “Woman with a Child”
   
   
   
   
   
   Malovolo (lobola) is still expected, of course. Anakeni rhanga ri kokiwa na vana va rona. However, the fact that she has a child can be used to devalue her in the negotiation, with the man’s family potentially arguing for a reduced lobola. This can also be seen in the societal expectation for a woman to “lower her standards” when she has a child out of wedlock.
   
   Some men date these women because of the experience they have—specifically of being abandoned—to fulfill their hero complex, if anything, and because they expect these women to parent them. What other specimen is there other than the maternal one ostracized by society?
   
   The views can be contradictory yet stem from the same patriarchal mindset: some may wrongly view her as “damaged goods” or “used,” and thus less valuable, leading them to seek a discount. On the other hand, they may see her proven ability to bear children as a positive attribute, but this can feel reductive, valuing her primarily for her womb.
   
   This represents a patriarchal valuation paradox where her worth is simultaneously diminished by her sexual history and amplified by her proven fertility, reducing her to a functional reproductive body. 

In Summary, a rural Black South African mother who wants to date must walk a cultural tightrope where she must:

• Prove she is still a good mother while pursuing her own happiness.
• Seek family approval while trying to exercise personal choice.
• Find a man who is serious about her and her child.
• Navigate the economics of lobola from a perceived position of reduced social power.

How Do We Politicize These Challenges?

The Stigma of the “Devalued” Woman

The Historical Root can be traced to the colonial invention of “illegitimacy,” which created a strict moral hierarchy where a woman’s "worth" was tied to her marital status when bearing children. This was formally encoded in colonial 'illegitimacy' clauses that denied inheritance and social standing to children born outside state- or church-sanctioned marriages, forcibly imposing European bourgeois family models, as detailed in the work of historian Thomas McClendon.

The Modern Dating Impact: Today, this stigma manifests pervasively. A single mother is often perceived as “used goods” or “damaged” in the dating market. She may face:

    1. Judgment from Potential Partners:

Here’s the thing: most Black men don’t like kids, it's even worse is said kids aren't their biological children. So much so that they run away from their own children, flesh and blood? So, the best-case scenario for a single mother dating a man who’s not the father is that he’ll take care of the child, be present, and all that. But he’ll develop a complex where he’ll want outrageous rewards for what he has to offer—it’s about control more than understanding and caring. The worst-case scenario is that he’ll make the mother choose between him and the child, and, of course, the abuse. 

If we follow men’s logic regarding the value of women, we can draw parallels to men’s value: they have no value. If a woman loses her value when she sleeps with a man, has a child with a man, or is in close proximity with a man in a romantic sense, then from this logic, men think they can never add value; they can only take value. Arguing that a woman loses value when she has a child assumes the stance that getting into a new relationship will put her in a position where more of her value will be taken. So essentially, men need a vessel to draw value from; the less tampered with the vessel is, the better. This reflects a zero-sum gender economy where female agency and experience are construed as depletion rather than accumulation.  

But these narratives they hold so dearly—borne out of colonial and apartheid laws— shows that patriarchy has lazy participants who uncritically adopt damaging ideologies. 

    2. Social Shaming:

It’s not just in dating. Single mothers are labeled promiscuous or as having poor judgment if misfortune befalls their attempts at romance. These narratives tend to overlook the myriad reasons for single motherhood and are used to justify the need to control women’s sexual agency. I’ll repeat it for those who didn’t get it the first time: the Black Administration Act didn’t just exist on paper. It left loopholes for the religious doctrine of purity and “illegitimacy” to fill. While not a civil law, this doctrine is a powerful social and religious construct that illustrates a woman’s lived experience, standing at the intersection of three powerful systems: 

·        A legal history that denied her adulthood. 

·        A customary system that defines her by male guardianship. 

·        A religious doctrine that blames her for its own failure.

This is the "tripartite system of control" that engineered the modern conservative Black community’s gender norms. Social engineering is real and calculative—as the word implies, it is engineering, after all. Do yourself a favor and stay informed.

Of course, I had to grace you with this picture of me before embarking on a 10 km game walk 😁.
Thank you so much for reading, you're a star ★✴✹✬⭐✭