4.1 What is the nature and pattern of the abuse of girls in each of these schools?
4.2 To what extent are the perceptions of abuse held by teachers, pupils and other educational personnel at variance with our definition (as given in section 1.1)?
4.3 Who are the abusers, what are their characteristics and their reasons for abusing girls?
4.4 Who are the abused, their characteristics and the consequences of the abuse?
4.5 What is the relationship between the victim and the abuser?
4.6 In what ways does the school environment condone or encourage abuse?
4.7 In what ways do the schools seek to prevent or address explicitly the incidence of abuse?
4.8 What redress is currently practised by the educational and/or judicial system against acts of abuse?
This study examined the incidence of schoolgirl abuse by boys, teachers and older men (mostly 'sugar daddies') in and around four schools in one region of Zimbabwe. We did not investigate the abuse of boys, although we know that physical abuse of boys is commonplace both at school (as corporal punishment and bullying) and at home (as physical violence and sometimes sexual abuse). Nor did we investigate whether any of the boys interviewed were being sexually abused by male teachers at the school, nor whether any female teachers in the schools had made sexual advances to male pupils, as this was not part of our study.16
By linking the abuse of girls in school to that in the home and community, it was clear that their abuse is part of the wider mistreatment and exploitation of females and is a direct consequence of the low status accorded women in a highly gendered society. Zimbabwe is not exceptional in this respect.
This section discusses the main findings of the study, using a slightly modified form of the original research questions to organise the analysis.
As the above analysis has shown, abuse took a number of forms, covering for the purpose of this study physical non-sexual abuse (corporal punishment) and sexual abuse.
Physical abuse as corporal punishment was practised on a daily basis by almost all teachers in the three mixed schools, against the directive of the Ministry of Education, and by two of the head teachers (one male, one female). It was administered regularly to girls as well as boys despite the Ministry directive that girls should not be caned. Beatings took the form of hitting with a thick stick or a strap (frequently an old car fan belt), a blackboard eraser or the hand. Beatings were administered to the palm of the pupil's hand, the knuckles or finger tips, the back, legs or buttocks. Pupils were also slapped on the face and on the back of the neck. In one school, girls reported that the teacher would also pull out tufts of their hair and place it on their desks in front of them; for that reason they kept their hair very short.
The interviews revealed that most teachers, parents and pupils did not see corporal punishment as abuse unless it was excessive. However, both the girls and the boys felt extremely bitter about the physical punishments meted out on them regularly, especially for small offences.
Sexual abuse in the schools took a number of forms:
· verbal abuse, e.g. teachers or boys using sexually explicit language designed to embarrass, demean or humiliate girls, in the classroom, the school grounds and the sports fields, outside the school gates and on the way to and from school; it was also used to some extent between girls (and between boys)Many of the incidents of a sexual nature reported by the girls formed a continuous and institutionalised harassment which, because it exploited the difference of power between the perpetrator and the victim, has to be regarded as abusive behaviour. Even where it was of a relatively mild form, the fact that nobody sought to control and punish it meant that it had the potential to rapidly become serious abuse. For example, a teacher who is attracted by a girl can clearly exploit his position of power to force her to have sex with him by threatening to beat her for faults in class (to avoid being beaten was one reason given by girls as to why a girl might enter a sexual relationship with a teacher) or to fail her in her exams (although it was not clear to what extent this happened, girls were aware of the possibility). A boy can pick on a girl who has annoyed him by organising his gang to assault her physically (we heard of a few occurrences of boys, singly or in gangs, hitting girls).· physical abuse of a sexual nature, e.g. an older boy, teacher or other male adult touching a girl in an unsolicited act, molesting or assaulting a girl, or making inappropriate sexual advances17
· emotional abuse, e.g. a boy, teacher or other male adult intentionally leading a girl into an emotionally dependent relationship under false pretences (usually promising to marry her) to suit his own ends
· psychological abuse, e.g. a boy threatening to wait for a girl after school to beat her up or to rape her if she turned him down, a teacher leading a girl to believe he might retaliate if he is turned down.
In the three mixed schools, the type and pattern of sexual abuse was similar, as explained in the previous sections. However, abuse by boys seemed to be greater in the peri-urban school, with much evidence of general bullying, of younger boys as well as of younger girls by older boys. Boys would threaten and intimidate girls on a daily basis by going into the classrooms of the younger pupils during break time, accosting them in the corridors and grounds, trying to touch them on the breasts or buttocks, waiting for them in gangs after school and behaving and speaking in class in a manner intended to demean or humiliate them. If they wished to 'punish' a girl, they could wait for her after school hours outside the school gates or corner her during sports, when there was less surveillance from teachers, or take advantage of teachers being in the staff room to hit her. Pupils and teachers alike saw such behaviour as an inevitable and 'natural' part of daily life, and as it was regarded as routine, nobody sought to change it. For girls in the single-sex school, there was the possibility of abusive behaviour by boys from the nearby all-boys' school (as well as by sugar daddies and male strangers).
As for sexual abuse by teachers in the mixed schools,
there was plenty of evidence of male teachers exploiting their position of
authority and failing in their duty of care by propositioning girls for sex.
Although some of this evidence was circumstantial, it came from different
sources and was sufficient to confirm that in all three mixed schools some
teachers were having sexual relations with girls while propositioning others on
a wide scale. It was not clear how many there might be in each school. In one of
the mixed schools, girls named three teachers who had propositioned them and
were known to have affairs with schoolgirls while the boys named two teachers
whom they suspected of having affairs; in another, girls named four teachers
propositioned girls and boys named eight teachers whom they
suspected of having affairs. Some teachers were said to be 'notorious' for this.
In the third mixed school, two teachers were named by girls, one of whom had
made a girl pregnant the previous year (he was no longer there) and in the
single-sex school one teacher was named. Even if the number engaging in abuse of
this nature is only two or three per school, this would indicate that the
practice was very common.
Also not clear was the extent to which a teacher might have used force to coerce a girl into a relationship, especially as there was evidence that some girls encouraged advances by teachers. A teacher had plenty of opportunities to make such advances, as we have seen. Some made them on the sports field, where they were not observed by other teachers. Others used suggestive language openly during lessons, where such behaviour was considered routine. Other strategies used by teachers were: asking a girl to stay behind after class, to come to his office or to carry his books. A girl would find it difficult to ignore such an instruction. Some heads of department had their own offices and most teachers had a small 'base room', often at one end of the classroom, where they kept books and materials. It was therefore possible even during class for a teacher to see a girl on her own in the base room. More opportunities were available after school hours, especially for teachers who lived in teacher housing, as was the case with Schools A and B. Teachers who live in town are in a hurry to leave at the end of the day, even the school head, so nobody notices whether pupils or teachers remain. A pupil may remain at school totally unsupervised, or if questioned may claim to be attending an after-school club. Only the janitor is there to lock up. As the girls in the rural schools also pointed out, there are plenty of shady paths and maize fields where pupils and teachers can go, largely unobserved.
Male pupils and teachers crowding in on girls' private space, trying to get close to them so as to touch them provocatively, speaking to them in sexually explicit and insulting terms, as well as male pupils threatening them and beating them up are manifestations of the school as a site of sexual violence for girls. Verbal abuse by teachers was another manifestation of such violence. There was some evidence that it was used more frequently towards girls and was specifically designed to denigrate and humiliate the female sex.
Another manifestation of school-based violence was of course the prevalence of corporal punishment in the three mixed schools, despite its being banned. All but four girls in the sample (and all but two of the boys, both of whom were in Form 1) from these schools had been beaten at least once by a teacher (Appendix 2, table 6). Some had been beaten 20 or more times. Interestingly, in School B nine female teachers as compared to three male teachers were named by girls as having beaten them. Overall, the pupils thought male teachers beat the most and boys were beaten most often, but there was still a significant number of girls who thought female teachers gave beatings in equal measure and that girls were beaten as much as boys. 14 girls thought female teachers beat more (table 6). In the all-girls' school, where the ban on corporal punishment was strictly enforced, some girls had been heavily beaten at primary school. It was also obvious that bullying of a less explicitly sexual nature took place and was directed at both girls and boys. Examples were cited of pupils being teased because of their appearance or because they stammered; names being written on toilet walls; younger boys (and in some cases younger girls in the all-girls' school) being made to 'fag' and run errands for older boys (or girls). However, this study was unable to research this aspect.
Abuse in schools reflected abuse and violence in the home. It was likely that a number of girls had experienced sexual abuse by relatives or neighbours. There were two or possibly three cases of girls in the sample who had either been raped or were at great risk of being raped (and they were offered counselling by the researchers). One girl was made to sleep in the same room as male workers, two of whom had tried to have sex with her, as had also an uncle who was visiting. Another girl was living with an aunt who was clearly a prostitute; together with her cousin, she was required to arrange visiting times for the aunt's clients and to tell arriving clients when the aunt was 'busy'. The girl had woken up one morning to find one of the aunt's clients in her bed. One girl who was ill-treated at home said she had attempted suicide. Several girls referred to other girls they knew (one a Form 1 girl in the school) who had been raped, sometimes by male relatives.
Other forms of abuse in the home were beatings, excessive domestic labour demands, neglect (lack of love, attention and respect), verbal abuse consisting of insulting comments and expletives intended to humiliate the girl, usually by fathers but sometimes also by mothers. Some girls were beaten by mothers as well as fathers, or by a relative.
It was disturbing to find that such ill-treatment at home was widespread. In some cases, this had encouraged girls to consider taking a boyfriend at school so as to gain protection, support, or the love and attention they did not find at home. To such girls, marriage would appear as the only long-term solution. Hence, one consequence of ill-treatment and abuse at home was that girls might be more responsive to some boys' or adult men's attention than they would otherwise have been, and hence vulnerable to exploitation.
Outside the home, in the proximity of the school, girls were exposed to harassment and abuse in public places, e.g. at bus stops and in market places, on the road to and from school, near the home and while travelling on public transport. It is important to note that girls in the all-girls' school were not protected from such forms of abuse; indeed, the location of the school in the town centre made them particularly at risk.
The 17 teachers were given a checklist often items and invited to identify those which they classified as abuse (see Appendix 4). They all classified situations in which male teachers, male pupils and men outside the school demanded sexual favours or physical intimacy of girls as abusive. Likewise, bullying, verbal abuse, expressing negative attitudes about girls' behaviour, intelligence and commitment to study, threats from male teachers whose sexual advances are rejected by a girl were all classified as abuse. However, there were mixed opinions as to whether corporal punishment constituted abuse. 13 teachers said they agreed with its use as a form of discipline and 12 teachers thought it only counted as abuse if given in excess. Making girls clean a classroom or do additional chores in the school was also not considered abuse but an acceptable form of 'socialisation' into adult roles. Both boys and girls in Zimbabwean schools are required to carry out such manual tasks according to a roster, although girls reported that some boys tried to get them to do it in their place.
Girls were also able to identify many types of abuse in their school, as shown in the spider diagram below. However, what constituted abuse was not always clearcut. In the family context, the girls were much clearer about this, so that sexual advances by a male relative, beating and other ill-treatment by a parent or relative, excessive domestic duties and extreme neglect were all forms of abuse. However, they were less clear about this in the school context. With regard to corporal punishment, although they were bitter about the beatings they received, 43 girls (38%) thought it was acceptable, at least if given in moderation and for a justifiable reason (table 6). More importantly, the girls' attitude towards sexual advances by male teachers and pupils was ambivalent. They understood that a male relative propositioning them was wrong, they were far less certain about a teacher. They clearly regarded attempts by male teachers to touch and fondle them and their use of insulting or sexually explicit language as forms of abuse. However, they were less certain about a teacher's attempt to form what they might perceive as a serious relationship. The fact that the teacher might be misleading the girl with false promises was not recognised by all the girls. And, while almost all expressed their disapproval of girls having relationships with teachers, it seemed that a very small number of girls did respond positively and may even initiate the advance. This indicated that there was a desire, at least among a few girls, to be associated closely with a teacher, especially the popular ones and those who appeared eligible for marriage. One of the researchers witnessed an occasion when a male teacher (one of those accused by the girls interviewed most frequently of making advances to them) was approaching a group of 4-5 girls and spread out his arms as if to hug them; they responded positively by giggling and smiling.
Girls' perceptions of abuse (combined groups) School A
When girls expressed their disapproval, it was not necessarily for moral reasons; some complained that the chosen girl had an unfair advantage over others, received more attention from the teacher in class and possibly higher scores for class work and school exams. They disliked the teacher showing favouritism unless it related to them. It was therefore not at all evident that every girl would refuse the teacher's advances if the offer was attractive. And for their part, the male teachers no doubt enjoyed being the centre of attention, even though they also feigned disapproval. One teacher stated that some teachers are popular 'for the wrong reasons'.
In the same way, with regard to boys, there was an indication that girls only disapproved of boys' behaviour in so far as they themselves were not interested in them. If a girl was attracted by a boy, she would not necessarily see his aggressive behaviour as abusive, rather as 'normal' for a boy and flattering to herself. Therefore, their perception of abuse was relative to their own feelings in the circumstances.
The boys, for their part, condemned the male teachers in the severest terms for having affairs with girls. They said they should be dismissed and never allowed to teach again; they could show no respect for such teachers. However, like the girls, they did not appear to condemn the teachers' behaviour on moral or ethical grounds, but rather because they saw it as unfair competition. Whereas they would categorise the teachers' behaviour as abusive (an abuse of power and position), they did not see their own behaviour towards girls, even when forcing themselves on the girls' attention and threatening them, in the same light because they considered themselves entitled to behave like this. The girls were their peers, the same age and often in the same class, and as such were the boys' 'property' not the teachers'. This attitude of 'buying' or 'owning' a girl is influenced by the continuing custom in Zimbabwe of lobola (brideprice), whereby the prospective husband or his family makes a payment to the girl's family as a symbol of bonding between the two families and in recognition of the fact that her family is losing her through the marriage.
As for the head teachers of the mixed schools, they knew that teachers were administering illegal beatings but they appeared to do little either in terms of warning them or reporting them to the authorities. The heads all said they occasionally reprimanded a teacher who administered excessive beatings but none tried to stop it completely. Indeed, two of the heads administered beatings and/or punishments themselves on a regular basis. This would suggest that they supported the use of corporal punishment and did not see it as abuse. They also knew, or suspected, that sexual abuse by teachers was going on (or had gone on in the past). However, they had no strategy to address it. The head of one rural school laid all the blame on the teachers for having lax morals and being unprofessional in their conduct, but he did not address the issue with the teaching staff directly. Rather, he spoke to the pupils at assembly and warned them against improper behaviour by teachers. In the interview, he also talked of the futility of trying to discipline a teacher because of the lengthy bureaucratic procedures required; most head teachers did not bother. In contrast, the head of the peri-urban school chose to blame everything on the community, on the fact that the pupils came from rough, broken or uneducated families, with parents who failed to control their children and bring them up properly. It was only the (female) head of the second rural school who appeared to be trying to do something through regular staff development sessions (by emphasising to student teachers and new teachers the consequences of having affairs with girls) and by encouraging parents to come to the school to talk about their children, and to communicate better with them.
As for parents, there was some general recognition that sexual abuse by teachers existed in schools, but few had specific details. Some had heard of incidents in other schools and expressed their extreme disapproval. However, as already mentioned, parents might even encourage girls to form a liaison, with the hope that the teacher will marry her and, if a teacher gets a girl pregnant, the parents may ask the school not to make a complaint because they are arranging for him to marry the girl. Parents interviewed also blamed the situation on lack of discipline in the school (with several advocating more corporal punishment), the high turnover of teachers and the lack of senior experienced teachers staying with the same school over an extended period.
Perceptions of abuse in the school were therefore not clear cut and not as easy to define as in a domestic setting. Moderate corporal punishment was approved of by 38% of girls (table 6) and 76% of teachers (13 out of 17). Although not asked, some parents were clearly in favour and even thought the school should beat pupils more. Boys, also not asked, generally expressed disapproval of harsh punishments. As for girls, their attitude towards sexual advances by boys and male teachers was sometimes ambivalent, and they appeared to take as 'natural' the aggressive behaviour they experienced from both, although they spoke bitterly about it. Teachers and heads all recognised that boys sometimes assaulted girls and that male teachers had affairs with girls but nothing much appeared to be done to address either issue. Instead, blame for the problem was placed on the girl ('she was asking for it', 'she should have known better'), on the parents ('they should control their children better') on the community (broken families, prostitution etc) and on poverty (which makes girls vulnerable to sexual advances).
As already indicated, abusers were male teachers, female teachers (in terms of physical and verbal abuse), older boys in the school and male adults and adolescents outside the school. There was no consensus on the characteristics of abusers among those asked. Some teachers and heads characterised teachers who made sexual advances to girls as young and often married; others said they were older men. Student teachers were said to be particularly guilty, and there was some evidence to support this.18 Others were of the opinion that teachers having affairs with girls were those with personal problems e.g. excessive drinking or marital breakdown. It might also be possible to speculate that those with a particular disregard for authority and accepted norms of behaviour were more inclined to behave in this way. It was interesting that teachers who were named as frequently meting out beatings were also those who were well known for making sexual advances to schoolgirls.
As for physical abuse, although the overall impression was that male teachers used corporal punishment more than female teachers, in one of the rural schools boys were of the opinion that married female teachers beat more than male - perhaps, they said, because they imagined that they were taking revenge on their husbands! At the same time, there was some evidence that female teachers relied more on verbal abuse, perhaps, as was suggested, because they were frightened of beating boys. There was also some evidence that teachers used verbal abuse on girls more than on boys (perhaps being aware that beating girls was banned).
When asked to comment on the type of male pupil who might abuse girls either physically or sexually, the teachers suggested that they were often from troubled, poor or abusive family backgrounds, or from families where there was a lack of control and where they were given too much freedom at an early age. Some thought boys who drank beer and smoked dagga, and those who missed lessons were particularly guilty. However, the majority of the teachers thought that any man or boy (or, in one teacher's opinion, woman) is a potential abuser.
As already indicated, abuse in school is a reflection of abuse in the home. The research revealed that a number of girls were ill-treated in the home, and a few were possibly being sexually abused. Girls cited examples of mothers as well as fathers and other relatives beating them and shouting verbal abuse at them. The increased pressure on households when children have to be taken in by members of the extended family as a result of the death of parents from AIDS-related illnesses has made ill-treatment more common. In addition to being made to work long hours in the home (to earn their keep), such children may be given less food or pocket money than other children in the household. Some of the girls interviewed were being abused emotionally and psychologically, being denied attention and affection, and made to feel unwanted. One girl was told repeatedly by her cousins that she was costing them money, she should leave and 'find out who her father was'. In some cases where the parent sent money for the girl's upkeep, she might be deliberately made aware of the fact that not all of this was being spent on her.
There was strong evidence to suggest that those who come from poor families were more vulnerable to abuse. Girls as well as boys (the latter with much condemnation) confirmed that girls were interested in adult men mainly for money, and this might be because their families were unable to provide them with school fees and other necessities. The data gathered on the girls' home background revealed that a significant number did not get sufficient support in the form of money for bus fares, uniforms, books etc. 54 girls in the total sample of 112 (48%) considered that not all their school needs, including pocket money, were being met. 29 girls (26%) said that they regularly went hungry. A few girls were clearly worried that their parents or guardians were not always able to pay their fees and they were sent home until they could pay, although this was not as widespread a problem as anticipated. Where girls lived at some distance (some as much as 15 kilometres away) and did not have money for bus fares, they were obliged to solicit lifts from car and truck drivers, which increased their chances of being assaulted or raped.
It was also the case that incidents of sexual harassment and assault by men and adolescent boys appeared to be worse for girls attending the rural and peri-urban schools, these being located in areas where poverty was high. However, poverty was not the only factor. Peer pressure combined with poverty to make girls vulnerable to abuse. The school reproduced the materialistic world that the girls found outside by allowing the sale of snacks, sweets and drinks from the school tuck shop during break times and there were vendors selling iced lollies, nuts and fruit outside the school gates. Pocket money was very important to the girls for this reason. Those who were able to afford such items were admired or envied. Where families were poor, girls might be tempted to look for money from older boys, male teachers or sugar daddies. As one girl wrote:
My parents refuse to give me pocket money. I see other pupils buying food at break time like crackers, drinks and so on. But I think some of them have boyfriends. Myself, I don't want to have a boyfriend but I don't have enough pocket money.The opportunity of finding a man to provide a comfortable lifestyle, even outside marriage, could be very attractive to a girl. Increasingly, the tradition of polygamous marriage in Zimbabwe and elsewhere in Africa is being replaced by a more informal arrangement whereby a man has a single marriage partner but also a girlfriend (sometimes more than one), often in a semi-permanent arrangement whereby he would provide her with accommodation and maintenance, especially if she has a child by him. In such a situation, a girl may say she is married although this is not legally the case. Hence, even if a girl knows a man to be already married, this does not exclude him from being viewed as a prospective partner.
Potential and actual abusers in the less socio-economically advantaged areas also played on girls' ignorance of sexual matters and their rights. In the town, and in middle class families in particular, girls were better informed from watching TV and films. They were more worldly: as one teacher said wryly 'If they offer sex for money, at least they insist on a decent price', whereas girls in the rural and slum areas were reputedly paid as little as 5-10 pence for sex, or just given some food.
It was perhaps surprising that, in the girls' school where the intake was overwhelmingly middle class and girls' opportunities for a career and an affluent lifestyle were greater, the number of girls reported to have sugar daddies was high, higher than elsewhere. Apparently, there was status in being seen in smart clothes in town with a man, especially in a car. Great importance was attached to 'having a date'. It is difficult to draw a clear boundary between a 'boyfriend' and a 'sugar daddy' (especially as social convention usually favours the male being older than his female partner), but, according to the girls interviewed, these men were often much older. Some girls went into town at lunchtime or brought clothes to change into after school (which was not allowed). It would appear therefore that the desire to impress one's peers, to be grown up, to have fun is also influential in attracting girls to older men. As some girls said, even well off girls want more. Parents and teachers alike lamented girls' interest in material possessions and the attitude that what the family provided was no longer enough.
One can also say that abuse of girls was greater where they were not living with both biological parents. The break up of the traditional family was a quite striking feature of the background data, with over half the sample of 112 girls (64 girls) interviewed not living with both biological parents, and over half of these (29 girls) not living with either parent, but with other relatives, e.g. an uncle and/or aunt, a sister or a grandparent. Reasons for the break up of the family included: death of one or both parent (in many cases from AIDS related illness)19, divorce or separation, migration of one parent (usually the father) to the town to seek work, and sometimes the placement of a child with relatives so that he/she could attend a nearby secondary school. Two of the school heads reported that some girls lived alone in rented rooms and some adolescents were heads of household. Girls were clearly more vulnerable than boys when families break up, as it is easier for boys to find casual work and they are less at risk of sexual abuse.
The research revealed a strong link between abuse and poverty. Poverty makes girls more vulnerable to sexual exploitation than boys because like adult women they are financially dependent on men. The girls in the less privileged schools know the opportunity of obtaining a well paid and secure job are slim and see their best chance for securing a comfortable future in finding a man to support them. Where there are greater economic opportunities for women, their sexual exploitation is likely to be less. However, the research revealed that other factors come into play in exposing girls to sexual abuse, in particular peer pressure and the desire to be seen as grown up and having fun.
As for the consequences of the abuse, sexual and non-sexual,
it was clear that girls were troubled and frightened by the violent behaviour of
boys and as a result did not find the school environment a conducive and secure
one to study in. However, boys' aggressive behaviour in the school did not in
itself cause girls to drop out. Rather it encouraged them to look for boyfriends
elsewhere, which might lead them to drop out. If the boyfriend was unemployed or
casually employed, or if he was an older man, he might want the girl to stay
with him or do domestic work in the house. Irregular attendance would affect her
academic performance adversely and she might then drop
out. Therefore, the fact that the school environment is not
conducive to the formation of relationships between boys and girls has an impact
on girls' performance and attendance. Contrary to what one might expect,
encouraging mature relationships within the school, whether sexual or not, might
then lead to increased participation and achievement by girls, and possibly also
by boys, as they would be able to help each other with their studies and would
be more likely to attend regularly.
In terms of abuse by teachers, girls were also troubled by the excessive use of corporal punishment, which might encourage some to form a sexual liaison with a teacher so as to avoid being beaten. For others, the risk of sexual advances from male teachers made them participate less in class for fear of being singled out for the teacher's attention. At the same time, girls who were favoured by teachers generated resentment among others. Teachers' unacceptable behaviour towards girls also provided a negative role model to boys and encouraged them to behave in a like manner.
The relationship of abuser to victim is primarily one of male power and female subordination, male aggression and female passivity. As already stated, abuse was clearly related to the low socio-economic status of women and girls in Zimbabwean society. Here, as in much of Africa, females are considered the property of males and are expected to serve and obey them. The boys in the school were fulfilling the role into which they were being socialised by aggressively demanding the girls' attention and sexual favours, and being ready to pay for them. Money played an important part in demonstrations of male sexuality: boys gave small gifts of money to girls or bought them snacks, in an attempt to bribe them into a sexual liaison. However, while being condemned for their interest in money, the girls were also anticipating their future role as adult women in a society which teaches them to look to men for physical, financial and moral support. Adult men, whether male teachers or sugar daddies, also knew that they could buy sexual favours in this way and took advantage of the poverty which drove some girls to accept money and gifts. Not surprisingly given the prevailing power relationship, there was very limited evidence of female teachers having affairs with male pupils, or of girls giving money and gifts to boys.
The low social status accorded women and girls was manifest not only in the contemptuous attitude of those boys interviewed towards girls but also in the low self-esteem of the girls themselves. When asked whom they would blame if a girl got pregnant, Appendix 2, table 3 reveals that two-thirds of the total sample of girls would blame the girl for getting pregnant, whereas only a quarter would blame both the boy and girl. And, most significantly, whereas seven boys out of the sample of 59 thought the boy was responsible (a very low figure in itself), none of the girls would hold the boy responsible. Hence, girls would attribute greater blame to themselves than the boys would (66% of the boys would blame the girl as opposed to 68% of the girls). Through their socialisation, girls had come to see themselves as responsible for their own problems and mistakes because of their sex. Girls who dropped out of school, or were expelled, as a result of pregnancy had brought this misfortune upon themselves.
As for boys, as stated above, the majority would not surprisingly lay the blame exclusively on the girl for getting pregnant, with only 13 boys (22 percent) considering that blame should be shared equally (table 3). 'She should have known better', 'she has the final say in sex', 'she has the power to say no', 'she had allowed it to happen', 'she has behaved badly' were typical responses. Some even claimed that the girl would have planned it or tricked the boy into having sex, and therefore was solely to blame.
Blaming the girl rather than the boy was also the view of teachers and parents, with four out of 17 teachers (Appendix 2, table 4) and 12 out of 37 parents (table 5) blaming the girl alone. None would blame the boy and, in the case of a teacher getting a girl pregnant, only nine teachers (barely half) would blame the teacher while eight thought the girl would be equally to blame (table 4). This suggests that there was limited awareness or acknowledgement among teachers of the exploitative nature of teachers' sexual relationships with girls in the school. Interestingly, a number of parents/guardians (all women) would spread the blame more widely across the female sex by holding the mother responsible (table 5). This reinforces the view that the female sex views itself as flawed, weak and to blame for the failings of women as a whole, whereas there is a general reluctant to blame males.
Not surprisingly, therefore, girls also tended to accept male aggression as their fate. It was striking that very few girls took direct action when harassed or physically assaulted by schoolboys or men; this was partly from fear of further violence and reprisals but also from resignation, an acceptance that this was how things were, and a desire not to draw attention to oneself.
Abuse was both condoned and encouraged by the co-educational schools and the Ministry in that little punitive or disciplinary action appears to be taken, either against boys who harass and assault girls, or against teachers who administer corporal punishment regularly or make sexual advances to girls. Yet corporal punishment was banned in almost all circumstances, as explained at the beginning of this report. As for sexual abuse, it would only be if a girl became pregnant by a teacher and this came to light (e.g. the parents complained) that an official report might be submitted by the school head to the regional Ministry and disciplinary action taken. We heard of a few cases of teachers who were dismissed from a school because a girl had become pregnant; however, it was not clear whether any had also been expelled from the teaching profession or whether they were merely transferred to another school.
The school culture is one in which teachers tend to protect each other so that any misbehaviour does not come to the attention of the school head. Teachers either choose to ignore what is going on or like to think that the teacher is only joking with girls and not engaging in any serious sexual advances. Female teachers seem particularly guilty of choosing to turn a blind eye. Even if a teacher reports an incident to a senior teacher or head of department, he/she will be reluctant to take the matter further because of the cumbersome process of having to put the complaint in writing and, in the event of a criminal investigation, of giving evidence in court; a senior teacher will prefer to give an informal warning to a teacher who is misbehaving rather than report it to the head. In the schools studied, it appeared to make no difference whether the head was male or female.20
The school allows male pupils to assault girls physically and verbally if they do not get what they want, while male teachers can use their superior position to take advantage of them sexually. It is significant that teachers would use corporal punishment liberally in class against pupils they consider to be misbehaving but would only rarely punish boys for assaulting girls outside the classroom. By default, therefore, the school presents male aggression as something normal and to be expected. This is perhaps not surprising given that the pattern of male behaviour at school is little different from that found in the home and wider society.
Furthermore, by projecting the teacher as a figure of authority and respect who should not be questioned by either parents or pupils, the school is guilty of helping to perpetuate abusive behaviour. For girls, this means that they are expected not to question inappropriate behaviour by male teachers on two accounts: firstly, the latter are in a position of authority in the school and secondly they are male. The fact that many girls have an ambiguous attitude towards male teachers' sexual advances further ensures that they will not openly question this behaviour.
There was clearly a lack of trust by girls in their teachers and few appeared to seek advice from them. The frequent use of beatings and abusive language, male teachers' inappropriate behaviour which goes unchecked, the suspicion that teachers gossip in the staff room about pupils (including laughing about complaints made by girls against teachers) and the suspicion that some teachers are guilty of favouritism (usually male teachers towards certain girls) in awarding grades, did not encourage positive sentiments towards teachers. None of the sample had reported incidents with male teachers to another teacher or to the head and only two had reported incidents with boys to a teacher. Most girls said that they did not trust their teachers, that the teachers were not interested in helping them, that they did not know what was going on and, even if they did, they would only think the girl was 'asking for it' if she was to complain. They thought teachers viewed girls as behaving provocatively towards boys and therefore being at fault. This attitude reflected that prevalent in the home, where wife-beating was common, males were given preferential treatment and girls more frequently blamed. As already noted, the female sex is usually to blame for personal difficulties.
In the all-girls' school, the teachers were less guilty of
condoning abusive behaviour, in large part because the opportunity for it to
flourish was not there. However, verbal abuse by teachers was apparently
widespread. Teachers did not administer corporal punishment because they knew
they could be disciplined, and being an elite school, they would not want to
risk their posts. They also knew that parents (better educated and informed than
elsewhere) would be quick to make an official complaint if they found that their
child had been beaten. Although there were several cases of teachers having been
reported for sexual harassment or the use of sexually suggestive language
towards girls, it appeared to be relatively rare. Teachers appointed to such a
school by
the Ministry would be those with good reputations and higher
qualifications, the 'cream' of the profession - not least because Ministry
officials would be likely to send their own daughters there. At the same time,
it should be recognised that the opportunities for girls to meet male teachers
outside the school was greater than in the other schools, because of the
proximity of the school to the town centre and night clubs, discos, restaurants,
cinemas etc. Several teachers did suggest that male teachers propositioned girls
away from the school premises. However, a teacher engaging in an affair with a
schoolgirl would have to be very secretive for fear of being found out and
transferred.
As already indicated, there was little evidence of schools taking matters of abuse seriously, with few cases of teachers being disciplined or dismissed as a result of sexual liaisons with schoolgirls. The introduction of Guidance and Counselling as a compulsory subject in all schools, and the Education for Living programme (supposedly taught by head teachers through assemblies and staff development sessions) are attempts to provide pupils with information about issues around sexuality, sexual and reproductive health, puberty, marriage and the development of personal relationships. The role of the Guidance and Counselling teacher is not only to teach lessons on the subject but also to provide advice to pupils with personal problems and to refer any serious matters to the head of Guidance and Counselling and where appropriate to the head teacher. However, all teaching staff interviewed agreed that the system did not work well and the three heads of Guidance and Counselling interviewed confirmed that few pupils approached them with personal problems.
There were a number of reasons for this. The selection of the head of Guidance and Counselling did not necessarily result in an appropriate person being appointed, and the criteria for the post were not clear. Such personnel were supposed to receive training from the Ministry but in reality many had not been trained. Heads of Guidance and Counselling did not necessarily know who the Ministry officer responsible for the subject was, nor whether there was a syllabus and materials. Copies of pupil books for Forms 1-4 called Think About It! an action AIDS programme, prepared with the assistance of UNICEF, were available but there was little evidence of them being used except in School D, and there only with Forms 1 and 2. In one of the mixed schools, there was no teacher in charge of the subject and limited teaching of it. Teachers were often chosen to teach the subject not because they were competent or had been trained, but because they did not have a full workload in other subjects. This resulted in many teachers teaching the subject without any guidance or preparation; in School A, 17 teachers out of 30 were teaching Guidance and Counselling and nine out of 24 in School B. Without adequate training and materials, they are likely to teach it in a boring and theoretical way, so that pupils are unable to relate the contents of the lesson to their own experiences and lives in an instructive way. There was also evidence that some teachers did not bother teaching these lessons, or else used the time allocated to teach other (examinable) subjects. The fact that this is not an examinable subject means that it is not taken seriously.
Ironically, evidence that the system is not working well is to be found in the willingness with which girls and boys volunteered to be interviewed for this research. It was striking that both were very keen to talk to the researchers and some girls would beg to be interviewed a second or a third time. Many girls approached the researchers outside the interviewing schedule seeking advice on personal problems, e.g. on how to react to boys' proposals, whether they should give in to their boyfriend's demands for sex, how to deal with menstrual problems and how to behave with boys generally. Many were alarmingly ignorant of sexual matters and matters relating to female puberty. In two cases, it was clear that the girls had sexually transmitted diseases which had not been treated. This indicated that there was a clear need for information and for counselling for these girls. At the same time, many boys expressed depressingly negative and biased opinions about girls, an issue which also needs to be addressed if Zimbabwe is to become an equitable society.
In terms of positive strategies already taken up, in all the schools studied there were afternoon clubs intended to tackle topics of personal relevance to the pupils, such as the Anti-AIDS Club and the Scripture Union which would teach about ethics, values and family life. (Other clubs were for sports, choir and gardening). In one school, the head teacher had initiated meetings with parents and had sought to tackle issues of inappropriate teacher behaviour through staff development sessions and had invited police and health officers to come to the school to speak to pupils about drug abuse and HIV/AIDS. However, limited interest by teachers and a poor grasp of appropriate teaching methods to pass on messages about sexuality and sexual health to pupils undermined whatever official initiatives had been launched.
The law allows for a teacher to be dismissed for 'improper association' even if the girl is over the legal age of consent (16 years). In practice, not much is done, as school heads are reluctant to report such cases for the range of reasons detailed above. The central Ministry of Education has the power to dismiss teachers under Article 38 of the Education Act. If a school files a complaint, the regional Ministry should conduct an investigation and hold a hearing; their findings will then be forwarded to the Ministry in Harare which may decide to investigate further or request additional evidence. The decision to take action lies with the central Ministry: this could result in the teacher being charged, which might involve demotion or a salary cut for a certain period, or in dismissal. Cases of alleged rape or schoolgirl pregnancy involving a teacher would usually result in a criminal prosecution, in which case the regional police would pursue the court case and the Ministry decide on how to deal with the teacher professionally. There are currently more criminal prosecutions than before, but these are mainly of head teachers. Evidence of abusing teachers is hard to secure, as has been explained above. It does appear, however, that a stronger line is starting to be taken and more dismissals resulting.
As for intimidation and assault of girls by boys, this is another feature of the violent climate of the school and little appears to be done to address it. Lack of evidence is the usual excuse given. Moreover, a girl who becomes pregnant by a boy in the school must bear all the consequences; she will be expelled, will probably be unable to pick up her education again later and will be shunned by her family and friends, while the boy may continue with his studies as if nothing has happened, even though he may be guilty of under-age sex with a girl. In terms of equity and human rights, this is a flagrant injustice.
The same applies to the illegal use of corporal punishment. Little action is taken except where excessive beating results in injury, in which case it could lead to a criminal prosecution. The fact that the majority of teachers and head teachers administer it regularly in the belief that it is necessary to maintain discipline, and that some parents at least endorse its use (and use it frequently in the home), makes it very difficult to stamp out. The policy that it should only be used on boys is also controversial, as it is regarded by many as discriminatory.
FOOTNOTES
16 However, we did receive detailed information from one boy about a married female teacher in his school making sexual advances to a Sixth Form boy in another school. The researcher also knew of two cases where volunteer female teachers from overseas had had affairs with Form 4 boys in local schools - and in one case she had married the boy and had three children.17 No incidents of rape were reported in these schools, although girls knew of several incidents in the locality and several rape victims were reported to be pupils in the schools
18 The fact that they were often only a few years older than the girls in the upper forms of the school might encourage them to see schoolgirls as an appropriate object of their attention.
19 A survey of 300 Form 1 students carried out recently in School C revealed that 11 students had lost both parents, 35 had lost their father and 11 their mothers. Thus 19% of the sample had lost one or both parents. It is likely that the majority of deaths were AIDS-related.
20 For this reason, we have not revealed which schools were headed by women and which by men. This has allowed us to better protect the identities of the schools chosen as case studies.
