Psychosocial experiences, challenges, and coping strategies of Xhosa women during ulwaluko
Makupula Mahlodi Monica Rebecca
What the paper says
The involvement of Xhosa women in traditional male circumcision, or ulwaluko , is restricted by numerous taboos that prevent women from acquiring knowledge and participating in decision-making regarding the practice. This is despite women playing significant roles as amazibazana – mothers of initiates – who support the survival and continuation of the ritual in their households and communities. The study was underpinned by the Afrocentric perspective to explore the challenges and coping strategies of Xhosa women during ulwaluko . An explorative and descriptive research design using Jonathan Smith’s interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) was adopted as a qualitative research methodology. A purposive sampling approach was employed to recruit eight participants, all of whom were the biological mothers of initiates. Eligibility required that these women had ensured compliance with the medical, cultural and legal protocols governing their sons’ traditional circumcision. Data were gathered using semi-structured interviews. The findings revealed that the women experienced distress caused by fear of complications and a lack of communication about their sons’ health, which negatively affected their psychological well-being. To facilitate coping, all the participants displayed resilience by employing strategies such as prayer and communal female support systems. By centring Xhosa women’s voices, the study highlights their important role in ulwaluko and challenges the silencing imposed on them by patriarchal interpretations of the practice. In conclusion, this study advocates for involving women in cultural decision-making processes without compromising the cultural sanctity of ulwaluko.
1 citation
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.16 × 0.4 = 0.06 |
| M · momentum | 0.53 × 0.15 = 0.08 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.