What happens to masculinity when violence permanently alters the body? Research by sociologist Helenard Louw among Black men in violent communities in Cape Town, South Africa, reveals how violence, identity, disability, and social inequality are deeply intertwined.
Louw’s research focuses on men who identify as ‘gangsters’ and have sustained a spinal cord injury due to interpersonal or gang violence. Through their personal stories, he examined how they experience their lives, masculinity, and identity both before and after their injury.
A key conclusion is that these men should not be viewed solely through the lens of crime or violence. They are simultaneously perpetrators, victims, fathers, sons, and survivors. Their stories demonstrate how complex social and historical circumstances can contribute to violence and how the consequences can subsequently alter a life forever.
Masculinity under pressure
Louw introduces the concept of ‘morphing masculinity’: masculinity as a constantly evolving process. For some men, strength, aggression, status, and the ability to protect themselves and others were key components of their concept of masculinity.
“A spinal cord injury can profoundly disrupt these taken-for-granted aspects. Physical strength and independence may diminish, while work, relationships, sexuality, and social status also change. Consequently, the men must rethink who they are and the role they play within their families and communities,” says Louw. This process of change is not linear; feelings of loss, anger, regret, responsibility, and hope can coexist.
Looking beyond the offense
Louw advocates for a broader perspective on violence. Rather than viewing violence solely as an individual problem, it is situated within the social and historical circumstances of marginalized communities.
This also has implications for how professionals interact with individuals involved in crime. According to the research, looking beyond the specific offense to consider a person’s life history and environment yields a more complete picture of the human being behind the behavior.
Moreover, these insights are relevant for young people who view aggression and violence as key attributes of masculinity. The experiences of the men studied reveal the profound consequences a violent life can entail, while also demonstrating that change remains possible.
Louw emphasizes that focusing on context does not absolve individuals of responsibility for violence. However, listening to these often-stigmatized voices can help foster a better understanding of violence and create space for change. In doing so, he not only makes a scholarly contribution to research on violence, masculinity, and disability but also poses a societal question: how can we continue to see people as human beings without losing sight of their actions or their responsibility?