Student
unrests in Kenyan secondary schools date back to 1908, when the first student
strike was reported in Maseno boys’ school. But no school strike has questioned
the moral fabric of Kenyan society to the extent that strikes have in recent
years. During the 80s, the number of
disturbances in schools increased from 0.9% to 7.2%, with destruction of school
property being the most serious crime in Kenyan schools. Currently, however,
Kenyan secondary schools are faced with not only destruction of property, but
also mass rapes and murders never previously witnessed. (See table 1 at the end
of this paper). The major focus of this paper will be on the following three
secondary schools, namely, St. Kizito secondary school, Nyeri high school and
Kyanguli secondary school.
Of the
three cases of violence mentioned above, male students carried out all three
incidences of violence and yet issues of gender were not raised. The students
who committed these acts of violence were described as “other students”,
“colleagues” and “children”, but never as male students. Moreover, data on the
student violence generated by the Kenyan ministry of education, science and
technology was not desegregated in terms of gender. (See table 1) The gendered
politics of the boy’s actions were therefore kept out of the general accounts
of these acts of student violence. This amounts to a cultural silencing of
gender dynamics in individual conscious, behaviour and social relations.
In the
report by the Kenyan task force on student discipline and unrest, the
particular behaviour of adolescent male students was seen as one factor within
the nineteen factors surrounding student
disturbance and unrest in Kenyan schools. Although the adolescent male student
was mentioned in the light of their disrespect towards female teachers and
girls in mixed schools, particularly in certain communities, what is
interesting is that the task force observed that, “as the communities
appreciate the role played by the few of the girls who have benefited from
formal schooling, it was expected that some of these cultural practices would
gradually disappear”. This reveals how gendered behaviour is trivialized and
seen as incidental or insignificant.
Also of
interest here are the critical statements made by Kenyan opinion shapers
regarding the motives for the student violence that rocked the country. Nothing in their
accounts pointed to the responsibility of the adolescent male student for the
violence that proceeded. President Moi, for example, is on record as
having attributed the upsurge in violence in schools, especially where arson
attacks had occurred, to the influence of opposition parties that encouraged
civil disobedience to the government. A leading Kenyan psychiatrist, Dr. Frank
Njenga, also tended to displace the violence elsewhere when he said that
the motive of student violence lay in the Kenyan society, which has
institutionalized violence ranging from civil disorder to police violence. (See
ANB-BIA supplement, 2001). According to Oriang (2001), a
Nation columnist on gender issues, “someone” decided to sacrifice the 68
students at Kyanguli secondary school for a cause that remains as obscure today
as it did when the news first broke out on that day. While adolescent
behaviour clearly does reflect the standards of the society, and while certain
politicians may have exploited student unrest, what is noteworthy is the
avoidance on focusing on the male students themselves. The
failure to define or redefine school violence in terms of gender therefore
needs to be addressed.
To unravel
the connection between masculinity and student violence in this paper, I
will explore three major themes. First,
the paper discusses the gendered nature of violence. Secondly, it looks at the
relationship between power, violence and masculinity. Finally, it takes a look
at politics and masculinity. These three themes are traced from the three cases
of student violence in St. Kizito, Nyeri high and Kyanguli secondary schools in
Kenya respectively. In trying to illustrate these three complex cases of
violence, a brief synopsis of the events that transpired in relation to each
school will be presented based on a variety of documents such as the government
report on the task force on student discipline and unrest in secondary schools
coupled with collaborative press reports.
Champagne
(1999) indicates that even though the media is stigmatized for its inevitable
bias, journalism claims that there is nothing worse than silence; at the very
least, journalists pose social problems publicly and on occasion elicit
positive reactions from government offices. One promise that press reports hold
is that for a long time, the government of Kenya under President Moi rarely
released public documents prepared by government-funded taskforces. Here I am
thinking particularly, but not exclusively, of the report on the task force on
devil worshipping in schools and the report on the task force that investigated
the violence at St. Kizito secondary school. The use of press reports here is
therefore as difficult as it is necessary. I will reflect on the synopsis of
the violence that occurred in the schools mentioned in light of other pertinent
literature.
On 13th
July 1991, male students at St. Kizito mixed secondary school invaded the girls
dormitory and violently raped over 70 of them. In the melee that followed, 19
girls lost their lives. The fracas is said to have begun when the girls at the
school refused to join a strike planned by the boys. The St Kizito incident
caused public and international outrage, especially following the headteachers’
casual comment that the boys had never meant to hurt the girls but "only
wanted to rape". Some of the boys involved in the violence were taken to
court. The school was closed and an official at the education department of the
Kenya catholic secretariat said the church would focus more on single sex
secondary schools rather than mixed ones. (See Republic of Kenya, 2001;
Feminist Majority Foundation, 1991; East African Standard, 2003; Atemi, 2000)
In the
case of St. Kizito mixed secondary school, the rape of over 70 girls and the
subsequent death of 19 girls in the school indicated the entry of the most
shocking acts of sexual violence in Kenyan schools. St. Kizito
serves as a unique case study because the school accommodates both boys and
girls and reflects the gendered system of the broader society. In this context,
mixed secondary schools need to be seen as sites of structured inequalities
between boys and girls. That is why I want to focus urgently on the conditions in which mixed schools
reinforce sexual violence. As a student in a mixed primary school in Kenya, I
have encountered the “culture of silence” on matters pertaining to sexual
harassment. At the age of eleven, I was “naïve” enough to report to a female
teacher that I had received a note with sexually obscene language from a male
classmate, only to be punished by having to clean the boys’ toilets, so that
other girls would know that sexual harassment was a girl’s fault. Rather than
being encouraged and equipped to know and respond to sexual harassment, we
girls learnt to keep quiet about our male classmates sexual advances. The raping of over 70 girls at St. Kizito secondary
school is a terrifying indication of the consequences of silencing and
implicitly condoning the aggressive sexual behaviour of male students.
The
way rape is understood by the adult males as well as the adolescent male
student gives insight into the range of attitudes on sexual violence. The
headteacher of St. Kizito secondary school indicated that his boys meant
no harm but “only wanted to rape” the girls. He seemed to think that the
emotional and physical consequences of rape were not as severe as the deaths
that took place that night. (The death of the girls was caused by suffocation
from crowding in the dormitory as they tried to escape the sexual advances of
their male classmates). The students
indicated on their part that the boys, angered by the girls refusal to
participate in a school strike, sought to teach the girls a lesson or two. In
this context, rape seems to be an acceptable instrument of “persuasion”,
although it is obviously a vicious form of domination. Jukes’ (1994) explains
that the definition of rape varies according to the context in which it is
placed. In the male context, rape is a sexual act of a “normal male”
interpreting resistance in a self-serving way: “to expect resistance from women
and that indeed women want this resistance”. Whatever the definitions about
rape, the adolescent male student’s definition of rape had devastating
consequences for the girls at St. Kizito secondary school. It must be
acknowledged here that adult males in Kenya routinely use violence to
“discipline” women. For instance, Mitullah (1989) shows that violence against
women in Kenya normally arises from minor misunderstandings such as a woman
coming home late, not cooking in time, or a man not being welcomed home.
The
central element of in the sexual violence perpetrated by the boys at St. Kizito
secondary school is two-fold. Adolescent male student’s needed to control the
females, and secondly, experienced a feeling of impotence at losing that
control. The question remains why the boy students chose to use sexual
domination? Candib and Schmitt share in the difficulty of trying
to understand why sexual control by means of the penis is so important to men,
and want to apply the fear of impotence to men’s desire to control women’s
sexuality to understanding sexual domination. Such a view is based on the
premise that, for men, surrendering potency means losing control over sexuality
and inevitably their masculinity. This explains why men are prepared to pay a
high price for the power to exploit women sexually, emotionally, and
materially, as the rewards are ‘considerable’.
As Harry (1992:115) puts it, adolescent males, without
realizing it, are constantly mutually pressured to prove their commitment
to the male gender role. In the rather primitive eyes of the adolescent male,
sexual and violent acts are the two main means by which they can prove their
“commitment”. Violence, according to Owen (1996), thus needs to be understood
as a relatively accepted part of men’s lives. For men, violence is a
potentially less threatening experience, because violence itself is not
considered so alien and separate from the everyday male (especially young male)
life. When violence appears in women’s lives, it is almost always viewed as a
disruption, a negative occurrence.
These
perspectives raise a key question for the adolescent male students that engaged
in sexual violence at St. Kizito secondary school. With which masculinity does
the adolescent male student in Kenya ally with? Within the general concept of
masculinism the adolescent male student is groomed for a world of
proving his masculinity through domination and aggression. This includes
toughening the boys up to survive in a harsh world. Early
on, the boy child is influenced by his parents and later on his peers to
conform to male stereotyped expectations. Team sports and military service
continue to be widely valued as ways of turning boys into men, transforming
earlier defeats into ammunition. They provide the essential ingredients of
violent competition, the willingness to inflict pain on others in order to win,
and obedience to the “captain”. Independence, aggression, fearlessness,
leadership, tenacity, anger, stoicism, and triumph over defeat are the
psychological bricks and mortar of male gender roles, geared for powerful,
controlling adult positions. (See McLean, 2002; Blumen, 1984: 55-57)
The male
consciousness in Kenya conforms to the general concept of masculinism and is
aptly demonstrated in Kenyan cultural norms. For example, a quick comparison of
the vocabularies on gender in the Kikuyu language (my ethnic language)
reveals that the word for man—mundu-murume comes from the word urume,
which means “extremely courageous”. In contrast, the word mutumia
(woman) comes from the word tumia, which means to “use”. Thus men from
the Kikuyu ethnic community not only define themselves as the dominant
sex, but also in terms of the norm of seeing that women merely exist for their
use. In the voice of a Kenyan woman who recounts the advice she got
from her mother prior to marriage: “respect him (her husband) and do what he
wants” lest he demand back the ruracio (bride-price) that had been paid
(Davison, 1989). There is thus every reason to believe that the Kenyan
society has socialized the adolescent male students to think of girls not only
as subordinates, but also as their “instruments”.
Having
problematized the nature of masculinities in the Kenyan environment, it seems clear
that we can connect the Kenyan adolescent male student’s need for sexual
domination to the larger issues of socialization. The main
ingredient in masculinity is the male body masculinized by the double work of
inculcation, at once differentiating the sexes and imposing a specific set of
dispositions with regard to the social games that are held to be crucial to
society. (See Bourdieu and Wacquant, 1992:172) The
socialization of the adolescent male student in Kenya starts from the
recognition that patriarchy in Kenya is sustained by what Masingila (1997)
calls the African family concept of male leadership, and has since been
strengthened by the colonial systems of governance and the Judeo-Christian and
Islamic religious practices that largely shape the theory and practice of the
lives of Kenyans. The more we understand that the patriarchal culture in Kenya
is central to masculinism, the more sexual violence can be understood. If we
start with the notion that patriarchy and masculinity are issues interrelated
to socialization, then we can critically explore the power dynamics in sexual
violence. This means appreciating that aggression towards women
is deeply embedded in the socialization process of the Kenyan society.
It is also
worth noting that not all the boys at St. Kizito secondary school participated
in the sexual violence that also led to the death of their fellow female
students. It is not clear whether they resist or passively accept the Kenyan
masculinized image of men. What is clear, however, is that the Kenyan society
provides the entire
terrain of sexual violence by the adolescent male student through male
domination of women. As the Feminist Majority Foundation
(1991) put it, the adolescent male student finds legitimacy following
the way the Kenyan society subordinates women and girls. Through socialization,
the adolescent male student’s ideal is to be a man; but for him to be a man he
has to dominate. Therefore, socialization provides a good footing for
understanding sexual violence on the part of the adolescent male student, but
within the context of intersecting links to gender relations and power dynamics
in schools.
On 25th May
1999, male students in Nyeri high school locked the school
prefects in their cubicles while they were asleep, killing four of them by
pouring petrol on them and setting them on fire. The four students, Harrison
Munge, the school captain, former games captain Anthony Kariuki,
assistant dormitory captain Eric Kiarie, and library captain Paul
Musyoki, were badly burned by the petrol poured into their room as they
slept. All four later died in hospital. Three boy students were consequently
charged with the murder of the prefects. Two were acquitted for lack of evidence,
while the other was convicted and detained at the president’s mercy since he
was aged below 18 years at the time of the incident. The “Nation” team
established that the motive for the attack was not known, although sources at
the school said that the prefects had differed with some of the students prior
to the attack. (See Republic of Kenya, 2001; Githongo, 1999; Nation
Correspondent, 2001; Nation team, 1999)
The murder
of the four school prefects in 1999 by male students in Nyeri high school is no
less chilling than the violence that took place at St. Kizito secondary school.
Something was going on in this school deemed to be one of the best secondary
schools in central Kenya. It is reasonable to believe that an argument had
broken out between the prefects and the other boys prior to the grisly murders
of the four male prefects. In this case, I want to suggest that there were
stakes in this argument. In this space,
power seems a plausible stake. The history of prefect-student relationship may
be read as a power relationship whereby each group endeavors to exert its will
over the other through the use and control of resources. From their different
positions, both groups, aware of their “maleness”, play out these beliefs of
strength, aggression and control in search of personal respect and self-esteem
(Carter, 1996). The prefects in this case exercise public power while the other
boys use their private influence to bring down the power of the prefects.
I want to
explore this theme through looking at of Jean Baudrillard’s, The Spirit
of Terrorism. I want to use this article to bring out the issues on power
and violence. Baudrillard has achieved some notoriety as a theoretical
terrorist, a position he envisages as valid. I do not want to defend his
position, but rather use his ideas to shed light on the murders that were
committed by the boys at Nyeri high school. The Spirit of Terrorism is
about the hitting of the World Trade Center & New York by terrorists, an
event Baudrillard describes as the pure, absolute and "mother" of
events. Although he claims that we all unknowingly harbor a terrorist
imagination and dreams of destruction of any supreme power, these acts of
terror go much further than a hatred for the dominant global power by the
disinherited and the exploited, those who fell on the wrong side of global
order. Violence was initiated by the internal fragility of a global system that
concentrates power in only one network leading to its vulnerability. The West,
in its God-like position of divine power, and absolute moral legitimacy thus
becomes suicidal, and declares war on itself. Although terrorism is immoral, it
answers a system whose excess of power creates an unsolvable challenge. In this
article it is “they who did it, but we who wanted it” Baudrillard argues. It
tries to project the violence of the terrorists as not real but a symbolic act
of humbling a power by an adversary. Yet he claims that any violence would be
forgiven if the media did not broadcast it: "terrorism would be nothing without
the media".
Let's
suppose that we were to take Baudrillard at his word, first, the four prefects
who were killed at Nyeri high school would seem to embody dominant symbolic
power that the other boys did not have. Flowing from this one could argue that
the attack on the prefect body at Nyeri high school, was an attack on symbolic
power from the powerless position of the other boys, perhaps even having been
on the wrong side of the school laws. The school prefects in this case embodied
perfectly the orderliness of the school laws. If the school prefects were
oppressive and this is reflective of the entire school administration, then it
is inevitable that they were the objects of the violent attacks by the other
boy students. The power of the school prefects thus conspired in their own
destruction. It is sufficient to show that when a
school management is monopolized by power exclusion as opposed to power
sharing, what other way is there, than for the students to desire to reverse
the situation. If we add an additional premise that the prefect system
naturally oppresses other students particularly when prefects hold excessive
powers in schools, one might well conclude radically that the prefect system in
the schools needs to be abolished.
If the
event of murdering the prefects, themselves the embodiment of symbolic power,
was dishonorable, it answered a school administration system that was perhaps
dishonorable. The adolescent male student responds dishonorably to gain honor
in proportion to the degree that the school administration has dishonorably
apportioned upon the school prefect body monopoly of power. Thus, a
dishonorable school administration can be answered only through an equal or
superior dishonorable act. It is thus easy to understand why the boys would use
arson as a tool of destruction in support for their mission. Ultimately,
traditional masculine codes based on honour and war, usually resulting in death, are enacted by the adolescent male
student’s desire to humble the dominant patriarchal system in the school. Here
the concept of differential patriarchies is important: Kaufman (1994) suggests
that patriarchy exists as a system of hierarchies of power among different
groups of men and different masculinities and not only in men’s power over women.
Although
only a few boys were charged with the murders of their fellow students at Nyeri
high school secondary school, I wish to argue that, like the terrorists who hit
the American twin towers, they were the sacrificial lambs of a larger network
of boys that had each contributed to the act of violence either intellectually
or morally if not physically. It was as if it was “they who did it, but their
fellow students who wanted it”, as Baudrillard would say. The motivation for
the Nyeri high school prefect murders seems to be linked to achieving
honor. After all, there are other boys
in Kenyan schools who went on to use arson as a tactic against hegemonic powers
in their schools. Harris (1996) suggests that honor has been the most often
masculine good in the sense that the ability to kill, destroy, compel others to
subordinate themselves has been most often a power held by men. Men, for
example, are most often the symbols of a nation’s warriors, regardless of the
roles played by women. Clearly, one sees power and the image of male honor
serving as a high stake in the game of adolescent male student violence.
On 25th
March 2001,
68 students were burnt to death and scores injured by two students at
Kyanguli secondary school in Machakos district, 50 kilometers southeast of Nairobi. According
to the “Nation” team, the parents of the Kyanguli blaze victims screamed, broke
down in tears and fainted as the names of their loved ones were read out to
them. "Don't you know that I have no child remaining," cried Margaret
Njoki Paspao, mother to a Form 3 student, Joseph Solanka who was among
the dead. Because of the extent of the damage done to the students’ bodies, the
parents agreed to a mass burial of their children within the school compound.
The female magistrate handling the Kyanguli case is reported
to have said that the actions of the Kyanguli School principal and his deputy
were "not
those of prudent reasonable men exercising care," and sentenced them to eight
months in jail for negligence. In addition, two students Felix Mambo Ngumbao, 16, and Davies
Otieno Onyango, 17 were charged with the 67 counts of murder. Ngumbao
stood with his head bowed and fought back tears as the chief magistrate's clerk
took three minutes to read the names of the all the victims. Onyango
stared at the clerk without showing emotion. Students at Kyanguli
School believed
that the angry students set the blaze over the annulment of final exam results
and demands that they pay outstanding school fees. (See
Republic of Kenya, 2001; Nation team, 2001; Chepkemei, 2002; North County Times, 2001;
Africa News, 2001)
In the
previous cases of school violence, the causalities in terms of human life were
not as colossal as the Kyanguli case where two boys murdered 68 students, and
so this marked the apex of the reign of adolescent male student terror in
Kenyan secondary schools. A reading of the motive behind this act of violence
suggests that the students were angry at the school administration. Whether it
was a case of some students not receiving their O-level examination results as
a result of cheating in the national examination or whether it was the
subsequent demand by the principal that the students pay school fees amid this
crises, the insensitiveness of the school administration to the students
vulnerabilities was reason enough for the students to protest. The more the
school system fails to care for the individual needs and feelings of the
students, the more it must contend with resistance from the students. Granted
that the school administration had been warned by some of the boys about the
impending attack (a factor that was taken into consideration when the school
principal and his deputy were subsequently jailed for negligence following the
attack), it is clear that the school administration either found the boys
discontent unreasonable or hoped it would quietly fade away. Clearly, there was
no free flowing discussion about the issues that the student’s were
dissatisfied with. The boy’s rage was there. How do we make sense of the
violence that followed?
To answer
this question I find it useful to have recourse to Freire’s concept of
violence. In his book Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Freire speaks of how
violence is both initiated and counteracted. Freire understands violence as an
oppressive situation in which A objectively exploits B or hinders his pursuit
of self-affirmation as a responsible person. Never in history has violence been
initiated by the oppressed granted that they are the products of violence. For
the oppressors, however, it is always the oppressed that are disaffected, who
are ‘violent’, ‘wicked’, or ‘ferocious’ when they react to the violence of the
oppressors. Yet it is precisely in the response of the oppressed to the violence
of their oppressors that a gesture of love may be found. As the oppressors
dehumanize others and violate their rights, they themselves also become
dehumanized. As the oppressed, fighting to be human, take away the oppressors’
power to dominate and suppress, they restore to the oppressors the humanity
they had lost in the exercise of oppression. Freire points out that certain
attitudes in the education system mirror an oppressive society as a whole such
as “the teacher knows everything and the students know nothing” or “the teacher
disciplines and the students are disciplined”.
In one
sense, the school can be understood as just such a site of struggle between the
oppressors and the oppressed, and in which these agents struggle against one
another. Indeed, the school administration can be clarified as the oppressor,
with the power dynamic to impose its will on the students who ostensibly are
the oppressed. Power relationships are embedded in the school that assigns
power to the school administration, in this case, the principal, the teachers
and the prefects while the students are bound together in a system of
powerlessness particularly in an oppressive school system. Power in this case
is exerted through the use of rules and regulations that are sometimes enforced
brutally. The struggle at Kyanguli secondary school can be grounded on the
basis of this power relationship and the masculine picture where males have
been socialized to demand change aggressively.
The
inconsiderateness of the school administration that failed to listen or respond
to the student’s complaints is a genuine mark of violence, as Freire would say.
Such persistent exclusion of the students will, at the very least dehumanized
and violated the rights of the students but also dehumanized the school
administration. The male students, believing in their male power answered this
act of symbolic violence with deadly dehumanizing violence. Thus, the lack of
an appropriate mechanism for channeling their complaints perpetuates the
compelling force to resist using unorthodox means.
The
self-image of the adolescent male student as an oppressed and powerless
individual is a devastating blow in the light of the pervasive socialization
that the adolescent male student receives from his parents, teachers and other
forces of socialization. Having been groomed to react aggressively and
violently through socialization, the adolescent male student is caught in a
Catch 22 situation where he has to respond aggressively or passively and risk
being seen as ‘un-masculine’. Only then do the boys begin to organize their
line of attack on the calculated bases of their powerlessness. Student violence
in the schools should thus be viewed as the embodiment of a power struggle
where one of the stakes is the societal meaning attached to masculinity. Bourdieu (1994) suggests that a weapon
available to workers in a labor union strike are the values of masculinity and
combativeness which is also one way that the army ensnares the working classes
by exalting the male virtues of machismo and physical strength. There is
something to this view: the combat readiness of the masculinized adolescent
male student and the belief in male power that gives meaning to any struggle.
The violence that took place at Kyanguli secondary school thus rests on a
number of factors. The symbolic violence of the school administration, the
violence of the students and the masculine values and norms reinforced by the
social system upon the boys, which all combine to create the complex power
relationships among the members of the school.
This paper
has tried to convey the numerous problems, contradictions and questions
regarding the relationship between masculinity and student violence in Kenyan
secondary schools. This discussion is long overdue, given that student violence
in Kenya has long been viewed as gender-neutral. Tracing the adolescent male
student’s involvement in school violence is an effort to retrieve the neglected
aspect of masculinism in student violence in Kenya. The three cases of
adolescent male student violence reviewed were dissimilar in terms of the
nature and magnitude of the violence perpetrated. Three forms of masculinism
and violence were identified: gendered interactions and dynamics between male
and female students in mixed schools, power struggles among male students in
boys schools and the victimization of powerless male students in boys schools.
But how are these related?
It has
been argued in the paper that the sexual violence carried out by the adolescent
male student in the school might be read as a sign of an intricate enactment of
masculinity. The patriarchal order that sets males and females in place in the
Kenyan society creates a power matrix that finds expression in the act of
sexual violence. This has been particularly true with the respect to the male
definition given to rape in this context. It also becomes clear that the nature
of adolescent male student violence is grounded in the stakes of male honour,
respect and power. This is especially prevalent in cases where boys
aggressively destroy symbols of school power. The adolescent male student’s
vulnerability to subordination by fellow males and other symbols of power has
been demonstrated. It has also been suggested that an oppressive school power system
is vulnerable to its own logic of self-destruction and dehumanization, which
explains why the oppressed adolescent male student responds with dehumanized
violence.
For the
school administration system the challenge is to take a more accommodating view
towards student grievances and not to underestimate the power of masculinity in
the oppressed adolescent male student. For policy-makers, the mixed secondary
schools need to be defined as sites of gendered power struggles. For the
adolescent male student, tough times are ahead as he battles with the cost of
living up to the hard-line masculine image.
Future research needs to analyze in much more detail the connection
between comradeship and masculinities in relation to violence. This paper will
have served its purpose if it contributes to opening up intellectual space for
this endeavor.
References
Africa News. (2001) “Another
suspected arson attack on Kenya School", Africa News
Headlines, Wednesday, July 4, 2001
Www.namibian.com.na/2001/July1africa/01FD628FA.html
Atemi, J. O. (2000) “Why Violence
and Rape thrive in Schools”, The Daily Nation,
Monday, May 1, 2000.
Baudrillard, J. (2001) “The Spirit of Terrorism”, (Tr.
Rachel Bloul) Le Monde, 2/11/01
http://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0111/msg00083.html
Blumen, J. L. (1984) Gender
Roles and Power. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey:
Prentice- Hall, Inc. p. 95.
Bourdieu, P. (1993) Sociology
in Question. London: Sage Pub. p. 173.
Bourdieu, P. and L. Wacqaunt,
(1992) An Invitation to Sociology. Cambridge: Polity
Press, p.98
Carter, K (1996) “Masculinity in
Prison”. In J. Pilcher and A. Coffey (eds) Gender and
Qualitative Research Aldershot: Averbury, pp.13-18.
Champagne, P. (1999) “The View
from the Media”. In P. Bourdieu et al (eds) The
Weight of the World: Social Suffering in Contemporary Society.
Cambridge: Polity
Press in association with Blackwell Publishers Ltd. p. 54.
Chepkemei, P. (2002) “Court jails
Kyanguli teachers for Negligence”, The Daily
Nation, 30 January 2002 http://www.africaonline.com/site/Articles/1,3,45180.jsp
Davison, J. (1989) Voices of
Mutira: lives of Rural Gikuyu Women. Colorado: Lynne
Rienner Pub. Ltd., 1989.
East African Standard, “FAWE recognizes KCSE achievers” East African
Standard,
Saturday, March 1, 2003.
Feminist Majority Foundation,
(1991) “Education”. Feminist Chronicles,
http://www.feminist.org/research/chronicles/fc1991.html
Freire, P. Pedagogy of the
Oppressed Victoria: Penguin Books, pp. 31-33, and 46.
Githongo, J. “How to Spoil a Child: Give Him a Rod”, East
African Standard July 1 –
July 7, 1999
http://www.nationaudio.com/News/EastAfrican/280699/Opinion/Opinion2.html
Gray, J. G. “The Enduring Appeals of Battle”
Chap 3 pp. 45- 62. In May L., R.
Strikwerda and P.D.Hopkins, (eds) Rethinking Masculinity:
Philosophical
exploration in light of Feminism 2nd ed. Lanham: Rowman &
Littlefield Pub. Inc.,
pp.
47, 53-55.
Harris, L. (1996) “Honor, Emasculation and
Empowerment” chap 15 pp. 275-288. In L.
May,
R. Strikwerda and P. D. Hopkins, (eds) Rethinking Masculinity: Philosophical
explorations in light of Feminism 2nd ed. Lanham: Rowman &
Littlefield Pub. Inc. p.
280.
Harry, J. (1992) Conceptualizing anti-gay
violence in Herek, G. M and Berrill, K.T.
(eds),
Hate Crime: Confronting Violence against Lesbians and Gay Men, London:
Sage.
Pp. 113-122. Quoted in Owen J. (1996) “Childish things: Men, Ageing and
Violence”. Chap 4 pp. 61-76. In Pilcher J. and A. Coffey (eds), Gender
and
Qualitative Research. Aldershot: Avebury p. 69.
Jukes, A. (1993) Why Men hate
Women. London: Free Association Books Ltd. p. 7.
Kaufman, M. (1994) “Men, Feminism,
and Men’s Contradictory experiences of
Power”, Chap. 8, pp. 142-163. In H. Brod and M. Kaufman (eds) Theorizing
Masculinities Thousand Oaks: Sage Pub. pp.144 –145.
Masingila, M. (1993) “Patriarchy
and Women’s participation in Politics in Kenya.”
In M.C. Kabira. and M.
Masingila (eds) Towards Gender
Responsive
Politics. Nairobi: Collaborative center for Gender and
Development, 1997, pp. 1-2.
McLean, C. (2002)
“The Cost of Masculinity: Placing Men’s pain in the context of
Power”,
Mitullah, W. V. (1997) “Violence
against Women”, Paper Prepared for GHA
Conference on Conflict Resolution at Methodist Guest House, Nairobi, 27 - 28
March, 1997. http://payson.tulane.edu/conflict/Cs%20St/
Nation Correspondent, (2001)
“Principals summoned to Meeting”, Daily Nation,
Wednesday, March 28, 2001
http://www.nationaudio.com/News/DailyNation/28032001/News/News99.html
Nation Team, (2001) “Parents accept Mass Burial Plan”, Daily
Nation, News Saturday,
March 31, 2001.
http://www.nationaudio.com/News/DailyNation/31032001/News/News37.html
___________ (1999) “Another Nyeri
school fire victim dies”, Daily Nation, Friday,
May 28,1999.
http://www.nationaudio.com/News/DailyNation/280599/News/News0.html
North County Times, http://www.nctimes.net/news/2001/20010410/wwww.html
Oriang, L. “Kyanguli, a Day of
grief, a Day of shame”, Daily Nation, Wednesday, April
4, 2001.
Owen, J. (1996) “Childish things: Men, Ageing
and Violence”, Chap 4 pp. 63-76. In
Pilcher J. and A. Coffey (eds), Gender and Qualitative Research,
Aldershot: Avebury
pp.
64-65, 72.
Republic of Kenya (2001) Ministry
of Education, Science and Technology - Report of
the Task force on Student Discipline and Unrest in secondary Schools. Nairobi:
Jomo
Kenyatta Foundation.
Table 1:
Number of schools that experienced student unrest by province in the year
2000/2001
|
Province |
Existing number of secondary schools |
Number of schools that experienced student unrests |
Percentage of schools going on strike |
Gravity |
|
Central |
630 |
85 |
13.5 |
Violent and destructive |
|
Coast |
151 |
4 |
2.6 |
Destruction of school property |
|
Nyanza |
680 |
7 |
1.0 |
Destruction of school property |
|
Eastern |
626 |
76 |
12.4 |
Destruction of school property and loss of life |
|
Rift Valley |
625 |
50 |
8.0 |
Violent and destructive |
|
Western |
408 |
19 |
4.7 |
Minor destruction to school property |
|
Nairobi |
93 |
2 |
0.02 |
Minor damage to school property |
|
North Eastern |
21 |
7 |
33.3 |
Destruction of school property |
Source: Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, 2001.