The gendered nature of homosexuality amongst the miners
Due to the scarcity of women in the Witwatersrand Gold Mines, the value of sex was not seen in means of reproduction anymore, and other forms of sexuality “took a new validity and legitimacy” (Harries, 1990:332). Consequently, according to Harries (1990), sex roles were constructed amongst men, through some specific cultural or symbolic behaviour, instead of focusing on the anatomical and biological differences.
The scarcity of women and the abundance of young adolescent males in the mines, also led to the creation of a new institution: the bukhontxana, or mine marriages between older miners (nunas) playing the role of the mine husband and adolescent boys (nkhontxanas) playing the role of mine wives. These “mine wives” were then expected to perform domestic tasks, perceived as being strictly female tasks. In this sense, just like this nunas would exert female subordination and assert their domination over women, they would do the same to their nkhontxanas, who become social wives and social women.
These wives had to mask their masculinity, wear women’s attire, strong perfumes and dance suggestively, just like women would, and would consequently also be considered as having a lower social status than their husbands. By ritually inverting the gender of nkhontxanas in such a way, the nunas, “negatively reinforced their masculinity” (Harries, 1990:331). By doing so, nunas reassert their power with their masculine identities accentuated by their opposition with the feminity of the “mine wives”. Dances such as the ones mentioned above furthermore displayed the marginality and powerlessness or the “wives”, subordinated to their husbands. Because of their marginality and powerlessness as social women, nkhontxanas are thus reduced in status. The female role of the “mine wives” is furthermore reinforced during sexual intercourse with their husbands. Indeed, “as semen was associated with virility and life passages” (Harries, 1990:331), husbands would consequently give semen and have the active role; while wives would passively receive it, just as men and women would outside the mines. Mine wives are consequently living the same female subordination than women would and as such are at the bottom of the social hierarchy created in the mines. Nunas hold the power. By creating and sustaining these gender distinctions in a society without women, men therefore reinforce a set of power relations that “ensured their continued dominance over women at home” (Harries, 1990:333).
Nkhontxana learning to be real men as "homosexuals"
Semen as said above is associated with “virility and life passages” (Harries, 1990:332), hence the fact that by ingesting it, nkhontxanas are one step closer to manhood, and gain masculinity and virility from the sexual intercourse. Becoming a nkhontxana is thus part of a transition to malehood. Furthermore, through the establishment of a close relationship with his nuna, the successful adult man, the adolescent boy gradually detaches from the strong bond he had with his mother and is incorporated in a community of men. Although their status as social wives are a symbol of their female role in their relationship with their husbands, this inversion of the “normal”, represented by the way the wife acts is a border created for “initiates to become husbands, and hence men” (Harries, 1990:331). Once the boy felt adult, masculine and wealthy enough, he is released from his marriage and asked to find his own mine wife and become a mine husband, or the symbol of the accomplished successful man. By becoming mine wives, adolescent boys consequently earn the bride wealth needed to become a husband and adult man both at home and in the mine compound.
The contribution of bukhontxana to a hierarchical heterosexual and its paradox
As argued by Harries, “bukhontxana was a channel for the acquisition of status and power” (Harries, 1990:331). By marrying a mine wife, you consequently gain status as “a man’s maturity... was demonstrated by acquiring a boy” (Harries, 1990:332). In this way, this form of “institutionalised homosexuality” performs the same function in the compound society as heterosexual marriages did outside the compound, by reinforcing gender identity and more specifically masculinities and the assertion over women. Furthermore, one might say that in addition to exerting power upon women at home, these men were able to exert power over boys/men considered as social wives, which contributed to giving them even more status and recognition in the hierarchical heterosexuality than if they were just subordinating women. As summarised my Harries, creating and sustaining such gender distinctions in a world without women thus reinforced “the set of power relations that ensured their continued dominance over women at home” (Harries, 1990:333).
Finally, the relationship between nunas and nkhontxanas is not to be understood as “homosexuality” in a Western understanding of the notion, it enabled men to become more virile and masculine and be perceived as successful males. Thus, according to Harries (1990) far from reflecting some form of ambiguity in sexual identity, the institution of bukhontxana taught boys the principles of masculine identity and by reproducing this male superiority, it served to strengthen male identity at a time when “men’s extended absence from rural areas was making women increasingly powerful at home” (Harries, 1990:328). These relationships were to only happen between a nuna and his nkhontxana and the age and status differentiation between the two of them is crucial. Coming from a society where masturbation and sodomy are highly discouraged as they do not lead to pregnancies, and the symbolic importance given to semen and its association with virility and a rite of passage, these relationships are to be understood between a social woman (who is in a transition phase to become a full, complete man) and a man and not between two men. It is thus understandable that by giving such importance to semen and the masculine identity attached to it, these relationships contribute to accentuate female subordination and give more status and power to men.
Reference Harries, P. (1990). Symbols and Sexuality: Culture and Identity on the Early Witwatersrand Gold Mines. Gender & History, 2(3), pp.318-336.