Becoming ‘Fully a Boy’: Ukufikisana and the Construction of Masculinities in a South African Urban Township High School

Introduction

Ukufikisana is a common thing in our school, and it is usually at the start of the year [when you experience it]. New boys in the school are the targets of ukufikisana. You are not fully a boy in this school until you experience ukufikisana. (14-year-old Mshana, Grade 8)

Globally, 32 percent of learners report experiencing interpersonal violence at school, compared to 48.2 percent of learners in sub-Saharan Africa (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO] 2019). While both boys and girls are equally likely to experience school violence, boys are more likely to have social encounters that result in physical fights and being physically attacked (UNESCO 2019, 26). In South Africa, research indicates that boys and young men are disproportionately represented not only as perpetrators but also as victims of interpersonal violence (Ratele 2013). Scholars have linked the many forms of violence that circulate in South African urban townships to broader socio-historical and structural inequalities, which are also central to the crisis of gender violence (Jewkes and Morrell 2018). Understandably, researchers have further argued that schools in urban townships are often embedded in, and thus mirror, their broader communities’ social and material realities (Ngidi and Moletsane 2023). In line with this, literature mainly focuses on and problematizes the links between violence, aggression and schoolboy masculinities (Gibbs et al. 2020; Hamlall and Morrell 2012). This scholarship highlights the profound implications that these overlapping structural inequalities have for producing violence among boys and men, thus prompting a growing focus on the forms of violence and masculinities that circulate among schoolboys in South African schools (Bhana et al. 2021; Mayeza and Bhana 2021a).

While there has been an increase in studies exploring violence and masculinities (Bhana and Mayeza 2019; Ngidi and Moletsane 2018), critical masculinities scholars in South Africa have cautioned against pathologizing boys and young men and, instead, call for more complex readings of violence and young masculinities in urban townships (Langa 2020; Ngidi 2023). From this perspective, all forms of violence among young men in school settings should be understood as gendered, sexualized and deeply intertwined with the social and material realities of the local context (Bhana et al. 2021). These dynamics are reflected in the opening excerpt above, in which Mshana ¹ describes a locally recognized form of violence commonly deployed among schoolboys at Okuhle High School (not its real name) ² . Through describing the practice of ukufikisana, Mshana traces a local form of violence which he asserts is a common and routine aspect of becoming “fully a boy” at his school. Ukufikisana is an isiZulu term extracted from the expression ukufikisana emandleni ³ , which translates to ‘testing each other’s [physical] power’ and is often used in the context of adolescent boys and young men engaging in physical fights to prove their masculine prowess. However, while Mshana seems to criticize the way ‘new boys’ are targeted through ukufikisana, he also seems to commend how the violence produces particular masculinities. Therefore, among boys and young men in the urban townships in South Africa, ukufikisana indexes the testing of one another’s prowess and mental resolve as a way of situating each other within intersecting hierarchies of power.

Research on youth violence in high-risk inner-city American neighbourhoods and schools has identified practices such as ‘hazing’ and ‘punking’ as strategies of aggression that (re)produce social hierarchies among boys and young men (Phillips 2007). Being ‘punked’ involves public acts of physical and verbal aggression among schoolboys, which are meant to humiliate and shame the victim (Phillips 2007), while ‘hazing’ humiliates and harms new learners as they enter new social school environments (Nuwer 2015). Increasingly, research has warned of the profoundly harmful outcomes of these practices in school settings, especially when they are targeted towards new or marginalized learners (Nuwer 2015; Phillips 2007; UNESCO 2019). While resemblances may certainly be inferred between hazing, punking and ukufikisana, scholars located in the global South have called for more complex and situated readings of boys’ and men’s entanglement with violence (Boonzaier et al. 2020; Ratele 2013). In particular, South African scholars have argued for nuanced understandings of violence that situate manifestations of aggression within the complex interplay of historical and social structures of power (Mayeza and Bhana 2021b). These practices of violence and aggression are not only key to the production of social and gender hierarchies among learners, but they further reinforce harmful masculinities among schoolboys.

This paper, therefore, undertakes a complex reading of ukufikisana to generate a situated understanding of the intersecting forces that inform the occurrence of violence among boys in South African township schools. Although research has effectively highlighted that schoolboys are often vulnerable to profoundly distressing experiences that hinder them from showing their vulnerability (Collins 2013), the gendered nature of school violence has been overemphasized, while its embodiment has been routinely overlooked (Horton 2019). Thus, we present a qualitative case study that centres on the narratives of 14 schoolboys to examine the practice of ukufikisana in one South African high school. The paper contributes to the study of African schoolboy masculinities by paying attention to how ukufikisana shapes, reproduces and reinforces domination and subordination among boys in a high school located in a township.

Boys, Violence and Masculinities in South African Schools

Research suggests that in South African schools, violence and the use of force are embedded in the everyday realities of boys’ social lives (Bhana et al. 2021; Mayeza and Bhana 2021a). Boys solidify their alignment with dominant masculinities by policing each other’s gender performances, often through acts of bullying and intimidation. For instance, boys who are seen to be deviating from normative heteromasculine performances, such as those who are effeminate or openly identify as gay, are often marginalized and victimized by their peers (Langa 2020; Msibi 2012). This reinforces notions that idealise ‘real boys’ as aggressive, heterosexual and physically dominant, while those who do not conform to these standards are labeled ‘soft’ and subjected to ridicule and violence (Moosa 2021; Morris and Perry 2017). Violence, therefore, becomes a central tool through which boys assert their social position, particularly in the context of marginalized schools, where defending one’s status often necessitates physical confrontation (Langa 2020). These dynamics are further complicated by sociocultural discourses surrounding masculinity, such as ukufikisana, which shape how boys understand and perform violence in relation to power and gender (Mayeza and Bhana 2021a).

Within the South African context, schoolboys are often socialized into dominant forms of masculinity that emphasize physical strength, aggression, and the subordination of others (Govender 2021; Morrell et al. 2013). These processes are neither static nor monolithic, as the construction of masculinities within schools is dynamic and subject to negotiation and contestation. In this regard, schoolboys negotiate social scripts that frame performances of masculinities, which are in constant flux and are relationally shaped through interactions with peers, teachers and broader social discourses (Bartholomaeus 2013; Bhana and Mayeza 2019; Mayeza and Bhana 2021a, 2021b; Moosa 2021). In particular, questions regarding how certain boys assume dominant social roles while others occupy subordinate positions remain crucial to understanding the reproduction of masculine hierarchies and practices of violence in school settings. This paper seeks to explore one critical aspect of these processes, focusing specifically on the ways in which power and gender are negotiated through violence among schoolboys in a South African township.

Although violent practices may be integral to how boys are incorporated into idealised and dominant masculine subjectivities in post-apartheid South Africa (Govender 2021; Morrell et al. 2013), it is important not to overdetermine the link between all forms of violence and boys (Mayeza and Bhana 2021b). Moreover, it is important to establish how particular schoolboys’ masculinities are entangled with particular forms of violence or social practices that leverage violence in school contexts. Boys’ use of violence and practices of dominance should not be taken for granted. Therefore, while initiation practices are more commonly associated with schools in historically privileged contexts in South Africa, similar practices are also pervasive in township schools, albeit with different forms and degrees of visibility. For example, Collins’ (2013) study of bullying at a prestigious South African high school found that initiation rituals, involving physical and emotional humiliation, were not only accepted but seen as key to building character and toughness. Similarly, Cowen (2020) documented abusive initiation practices at Parktown Boys High School in upmarket Johannesburg, where senior students subjected new boys to degrading and violent acts, such as forced nudity and public humiliation, all under the guise of ‘toughening them up’. These ritualised practices of violence, while set in different socioeconomic contexts, illustrate the centrality of violence in school settings and the profound ways that these shape boys’ masculine identities and relationships with violence. The normalization of such violence reflects broader societal attitudes that valorize masculinity constructed through domination, aggression, and humiliation, reinforcing hegemonic gender norms across various school settings.

Despite the disparate educational environments in South Africa, it seems violence remains a key feature in the experiences of boys across suburban and township schools – violence and intimidation are linked to how schoolboy masculinities are negotiated (Bhana et al. 2021). In both contexts, schoolboys contend with deeply ingrained cultural discourses about what it means to be a ‘real man,’ and violence becomes a tool for asserting this identity. These initiation practices and violent behaviours not only reflect boys’ socialization into gendered subjectivities but also reinforce hierarchical power structures and gender dynamics. However, Ratele (2013) has pointed out the irony inherent in these performances of violence: what is often presented as fearless toughness may mask deep vulnerability to further violence, particularly structural and ontological forms of violence. Such insights challenge the simplistic notion that violence is merely a marker of power and strength and instead suggest that violence, far from being an unequivocal expression of control, may also signify profound insecurity and exposure to harm. Furthermore, this ambivalence with violence also warrants a rethinking of boys’ relationship with violence in school settings.

These complexities highlight the need for a more nuanced understanding of how boys simultaneously embody roles as both perpetrators and victims of violence (Bhana et al. 2021). It is crucial to examine not only how boys use violence to assert masculine authority but also how they may be trapped in a cycle of violence that undermines their own well-being and perpetuates wider social harm. Such insights call for critical approaches that move beyond reductive readings of masculinities as simply violent and, instead, explore the ways in which boys’ engagement with violence is shaped by intersecting discourses of power, gender and social vulnerability.

Understanding Schoolboy Masculinities in the Context of Violence

The social construction of masculinities in South Africa has been a point of focus for over two decades (Morrell 1998; Shefer and Ratele 2023), following the centrality of the hegemonic masculinity framework in critical masculinities scholarship (Connell 2005, 2020). From this perspective, masculinities may be understood as practices that are shaped through social actions and can vary depending on the gender dynamics within a specific social context (Connell and Messerschmidt 2005). In line with this, scholars have conceptualized hegemonic masculinities as attitudes and practices among men that involve the domination of women, children, and other (ed) men who are often constructed as subordinate (Jewkes et al. 2015). Indeed, this critical framing apprehends masculinities as plural, contextual, mutable and relationally located in hierarchies of domination, in which hegemonic masculinities can exact dominance on girls, women and other non-hegemonic masculinities. That is, there are multiple patterns of masculinity in line with diverse institutional and cultural contexts, and these intersecting dimensions determine access to power and authority (Connell and Messerschmidt 2005). In line with the framing of masculinities as diverse, plural and in flux, it follows that becoming a ‘real man/boy’ is gained in ascendancy through force, violence, intimidation, and persuasion (Connell and Messerschmidt 2005). Therefore, we draw on this framing of masculinities to examine the nature of relations and interactions between a group of South African schoolboys who have unequal access to power and privilege associated with ways of ‘doing’ masculinities.

We focus specifically on ukufikisana as one significant aspect of the many processes that contribute to the socialization of schoolboys into dominant and subordinate masculinities in school. Paying attention to ukufikisana is important because masculinities are contextual and contingent. In KwaZulu-Natal, the province where our research is based, boys and young men are influenced by cultural discourses about becoming men (Bhana et al. 2021). Therefore, ukufikisana is not just a form of violence or aggression; it is a culturally inflected practice and, thus, produces relational subjectivities. In this paper, we work with the mundane daily occurrences (Roberts 2018) and performances of school masculinities and thus trace the daily circulations of ukufikisana. We are not only focusing on the ‘spectacularized’ violence of hegemonic masculinities (Shefer and Ratele 2023). In addition, we are interested in how gendered and embodied violence circulates in the lives of boys at a high school in a South African township. These forms of violence are localized and are under-theorized and sometimes simplistically subsumed under the Western (global North) purview of bullying. Thus, nuanced African-located conceptualizations of these will better inform understandings in ways that will have local resonance. We, therefore, approach the analysis through a theoretical lens of masculinity based on African conceptions of reality. Following Mfecane (2018), we examine township schoolboy masculinities as both socially constructed and shaped by hidden aspects of identity, as reflected in traditional African perspectives.

Methodology

The setting for this study is a co-educational school named Okuhle High School, located in Inanda—a Black, resource-constrained township in the eThekwini Municipality of the KwaZulu-Natal province, South Africa. Inanda is characterized by concentrated poverty, high unemployment, social isolation, low-income households, and high rates of violence and crime, all of which are a legacy of apartheid-era socio-racial segregation and the neglect of Black South Africans. It is frequently listed among South Africa’s most violent communities, with consistently high rates of contact crimes, including rape and murder (South African Police Services 2023).

This study engaged 14 adolescent boys aged 14–17 years from Grades 8–10, recruited through convenience sampling as part of a larger photovoice study exploring learners’ perspectives on violence in and around their school. A Life Orientation ⁴ teacher ⁵ identified participants who were available, interested, and willing to participate. Using photovoice, participants were prompted to photographically depict what violence looked like in their school environment. Working in pairs, the boys captured images, discussed their significance, and added descriptive captions. This process culminated in the participants presenting their visual artefacts in group sessions, where we engaged them in questions and discussions to deepen the analysis.

The data analysed in this paper stem from two focus group discussions (FGDs), prompted by a photograph that illustrated ukufikisana among boys at the school. Recognising ukufikisana as a novel and significant concept introduced by the participants, the FGDs aimed to explore their perspectives on its meaning and role in the school context. Conducted in isiZulu (the local language of Inanda), the FGDs were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and translated into English. To ensure fidelity to participants’ intended meaning, member-checking was conducted, and the first author reviewed the transcripts multiple times to confirm the accuracy of translations.

Thematic analysis, guided by Braun and Clarke’s (2006) six-step approach, was employed to analyse the data. First, the first author immersed himself in the data through repeated readings of the transcripts. Initial codes were then generated by identifying recurring ideas and patterns, such as references to violence, masculinity, and power. These codes were iteratively grouped into potential themes, which were refined through discussions within the research team. For example, themes such as “initiating power dynamics” and “violence as masculine performance” were defined and named to capture the essence of the participants’ narratives. Finally, these themes were synthesised to inform the arguments presented in this paper, linking the findings to broader theoretical frameworks on masculinities and violence. By employing Braun and Clarke’s thematic analysis within this context, this study offers an in-depth, nuanced exploration of ukufikisana, revealing how it intersects with local masculinities, violence, and power dynamics.

To minimise risk, ethical protocols were strictly adhered to. Written permissions were obtained from key gatekeepers, including the University of KwaZulu-Natal Humanities and Social Sciences Research Ethics Committee, the KwaZulu-Natal Department of Education, and the school’s management team. Parents/caregivers provided written consent, and participants gave assent. Participants were informed of their voluntary participation and their right to withdraw at any time. A local social worker was available to provide psychosocial support for participants who experienced distress during the study. Pseudonyms have been used throughout to protect the identity of participants and the school.

Findings

In the context of this study, senior boys drew on ukufikisana as a local social discourse that they rendered and embodied in their performance of high school masculinities. Seniority within the school was largely defined by grade level, with older boys in Grades 10 to 12 typically occupying positions of dominance. In contrast, junior boys, primarily those in Grade 8, were marked by their newness to the school environment and lack of social standing, making them the primary targets of ukufikisana. This hierarchy allowed senior boys to assert their authority through ritualized acts of violence, while junior boys were expected to submit, solidifying their subordinate positions. Increasingly, researchers have noted that learners in the urban townships of South Africa have a good command of English and often code-switch in their daily conversations and expressions (Ndimande-Hlongwa and Ndebele 2014). This linguistic fluency enabled the participants to frame their experiences of ukufikisana in relation to the concept of bullying. However, the nuanced practices of ukufikisana offered a culturally specific lens that illuminated how schoolboys negotiate violence and masculinities in this context. The ‘license’ to enact ukufikisana appeared to be informally granted to senior boys by virtue of their grade level, physical maturity, and alignment with hegemonic masculine ideals. These dynamics highlighted the deeply entrenched power relations that validated the practice as a means of asserting and reinforcing the social order within the school. Three broad themes emerged in relation to ukufikisana, providing further insight into the hierarchical and gendered negotiations of violence and masculinities, which we expand on in the sections below.

‘Ukufikisana Occurs in This School’: Junior Boys’ Experiences of Violence and Vulnerability

In this section, we focus on junior boys’ experiences of ukufikisana and how they encounter the violence enforced by senior boys. For the younger participants, the practice of ukufikisana first emerged in a photovoice workshop as one of the representational forms of violence experienced by learners inside Okuhle High School. However, unlike other forms that typically featured girls as victims of violence, the participants also offered a different narrative. To illustrate the presence and impact of ukufikisana, one group captured the power dynamics as shown in Figure 1. The staged image shows a senior boy as he attempts to stab a junior boy using a sharp object while the junior boy defends himself. As we probed further, the following discussion ensued:

Researcher: Could you guys describe this image to me?

Wonder (14 years old, Grade 8): Our photo, as you see, has a senior boy efikisa (initiating) a Grade 8 boy. We took the picture to show that ukufikisana occurs in this school.

Researcher: So, are you saying that younger boys are victims of ukufikisana?

Boys (collectively): Yes!

Researcher: Have you ever witnessed this? In what form does it occur?

Sibonelo (16 years old, Grade 10): Most of the Grade 8 boys experience it because they are still new to the school.

Bafana (15 years old, Grade 9): Yes, boys from Grade 8 usually experience this. They are taught to respect older boys.

Nkanyiso (14 years old, Grade 8): We seriously have a problem with older boys who do it to us.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

Senior boy attempts to stab a junior boy.

This exchange reveals how ukufikisana operates as a gendered performance of power, sustaining hierarchies and enforcing norms of masculinity within the school context. Unlike senior boys, who normalize and even valorize the violence of ukufikisana, junior boys emphasize its impact, portraying themselves as vulnerable to the violence inherent in this initiation practice. Here, ukufikisana is not merely described as a ritual but critiqued as a mechanism of domination reproducing broader patterns of structural violence (Bhana et al. 2021; Jewkes and Morrell 2018). The junior boys’ voices provide insight into the embeddedness of ukufikisana within Okuhle High, where the practice is both a known and inevitable experience. This aligns with Ratele’s (2013) observation that hegemonic masculinities are sustained through the normalization of violence in contexts marked by structural inequalities. The group’s acknowledgement that “ukufikisana occurs in this school” highlights its institutionalization and the complicity of school authorities in overlooking such practices. This complicity effectively silences junior boys, rendering them powerless in the face of threats and intimidation. The narratives also shed light on the multidimensional nature of ukufikisana. Unlike in the previous section, where senior boys framed it as a demonstration of leadership, junior boys described it as a source of fear, humiliation, and vulnerability. Wonder’s description illustrates this point:

[The senior] boy wants to stab the young boy as part of ukufikisana. He is using a sharp stick to intimidate the Grade 8 boy so that he can gain [the Grade 8 boy’s] respect. (14-year-old Wonder, Grade 8)

By framing violence as both direct (physical harm) and indirect (psychological anticipation of harm), Wonder’s account echoes findings by Bhana et al. (2021), who argue that masculinities in schools are performed through everyday negotiations of power that are deeply gendered and embodied. Wonder’s description of weaponized everyday objects and hostile school spaces also resonates with Connell’s (2005) assertion that hegemonic masculinities are upheld through the occupation and control of physical and social space. Similarly, the accounts of Mshana and Ncane demonstrate the pervasiveness and multifaceted nature of this violence:

[Senior boys] do it even in our classrooms and corridors. They don’t listen when we try to stop them; they just threaten to beat us. So, we keep quiet. But it is worse in the toilets, that’s why I don’t go there no matter how pressed I am. (14-year-old Mshana, Grade 8).

They first fondled my buttocks and inserted a pencil in my buttocks […] they do it even in our classrooms and corridors, not just in the toilet. They didn’t stop when I asked them to stop. I was scared of them. So, I just kept quiet and let them do whatever they wanted until they finished. (14-year-old Ncane, Grade 8)

These accounts highlight how junior boys experience both physical and sexual violence, highlighting the interplay between gender and power in the enactment of ukufikisana. As Collins (2013) suggests, hegemonic masculinities place schoolboys at risk of significant emotional and physical harm while denying them avenues for expressing distress. This is evident in the fear and silence that characterize the boys’ responses to violence. In addition, junior boys’ experiences challenge the assumption that school violence is confined to peripheral spaces like toilets. Instead, their narratives reveal how senior boys extend their dominance into classrooms and corridors, effectively broadening the spatial parameters of violence. This finding expands on other research (see, e.g., Moosa 2021; Ngidi and Moletsane 2023), which situates school violence as concentrated in ‘hidden’ spaces but overlooks how power dynamics enable its normalization in otherwise neutral spaces. Bafana’s account further illustrates the long-term impact of ukufikisana:

Yea hey, I experienced ukufikisana… I came to the school this year to start Grade 9 (transferred from another school), and I experienced it in the toilets. To the point that I don’t come anywhere near the toilets or the tap behind the school. If I need to use the toilet, I always ask an older boy to accompany me because uhlale ufikiswa nje (you are constantly initiated) in the school. (15-year-old Bafana, Grade 9)

For junior boys like Bafana, ukufikisana is not a one-time event but a recurring and embodied experience that fundamentally shapes how he navigates the school environment. The need for protective strategies, such as seeking older boys’ accompaniment, reflects the profound psychological toll of this violence. These findings align with Bhana’s (2012) argument that school violence is deeply embedded in gendered power relations, making it difficult for victims to assert agency or challenge dominant norms. Overall, the experiences of junior boys reveal how ukufikisana operates as both a mechanism of subordination and a site for negotiating masculinities. The narratives underscore the cyclical nature of violence, where the powerless are socialized into systems of domination that they may later perpetuate. This dynamic highlights the urgent need for gender-transformative interventions that address not only the immediate impacts of ukufikisana but also the broader structural and cultural conditions that sustain it.

Discussion

This study has examined ukufikisana as a significant practice contributing to the socialisation of schoolboys into dominant and subordinate masculinities within Okuhle, a high school situated in a high-risk and violent township in South Africa. As the participants’ narratives reveal, ukufikisana functions as a form of ritualized violence deeply intertwined with the performance of masculinity. It serves as a means for boys to test and assert their physical and mental resilience, establishing their status as “real boys” within the school’s hierarchical social order (Langa 2020). This practice reflects how power, respect, and gendered identity are negotiated in a context where masculinity is continuously constructed and reinforced through violence and aggression (Connell 2005; Jewkes and Morrell 2018).

Far from being a simple act of school-based bullying, ukufikisana is a culturally embedded practice rooted in hegemonic masculinities that thrive on hierarchical relationships. Senior boys leverage this practice to claim dominance, relegating junior boys to positions of subordination, often described as “puppets.” This dynamic mirrors broader patriarchal structures within township communities, where violence is both a means of asserting control and a mechanism for navigating complex social relationships (Mayeza and Bhana 2021a). The findings thus highlight how ukufikisana operates as a mutually constitutive process of violence and masculinity, shaping the social and gendered landscape of the school.

Critically, the study highlights the duality of ukufikisana: it perpetuates cycles of harm for both perpetrators and victims. Junior boys, targeted for their perceived vulnerability, endure physical and psychological violence that not only enforces their subordination but also ingrains an understanding of masculinity as tied to dominance and aggression. Conversely, senior boys, while exercising temporary power, are constrained by the expectation to perform hegemonic masculinity, leaving limited space for alternative, non-violent identities (Langa 2020). This duality speaks to the urgent need for addressing the structural and cultural foundations that sustain these harmful practices.

To disrupt ukufikisana, gender-transformative and non-violent interventions are essential. First, schools must adopt educational programmes that critically engage boys and educators in discussions about the harmful impacts of rigid gender norms and power hierarchies. Drawing on Jewkes et al. (2015), these programmes could include workshops on healthy relationships and respect, emphasising alternative forms of leadership that do not rely on violence. Peer mentorship initiatives, where senior boys model non-violent behaviours and mentor juniors, could redefine leadership within the school context. For instance, peer mentorship programmes can create spaces where senior boys model positive, non-violent forms of leadership, thereby redefining what it means to be a “leader” within the school. Additionally, embedding psychosocial support systems within the school is essential. Counselling services and safe reporting mechanisms for victims of violence can mitigate the immediate harm caused by ukufikisana while challenging its normalization. Schools should also work with community stakeholders to address the broader socio-economic conditions that shape these violent practices, drawing on interventions that have successfully reduced gender-based violence in similar contexts (Bhana et al. 2021).

Ultimately, disrupting the cycle of ukufikisana requires shifting the cultural narratives that equate masculinity with dominance and violence. By fostering an environment that values equality, respect, and collaboration, schools like Okuhle High can challenge entrenched hierarchies and cultivate a generation of boys who reject violence as a marker of masculinity. This study contributes to the broader discourse on young masculinities by illuminating the intricate ways in which practices like ukufikisana reflect and perpetuate gendered power dynamics, offering pathways toward systemic change.

Conclusion

This study examines ukufikisana as a socially entrenched initiation practice that reproduces hegemonic masculinities among schoolboys in a South African township school. Through narratives from senior and junior boys, ukufikisana emerges as more than mere schoolyard bullying; it is a culturally embedded ritual that enforces hierarchical gendered power relations. Senior boys assert dominance through physical, emotional, and sexual violence, while junior boys endure subordination, shaping their perceptions of masculinity. These findings highlight the complex interplay between localized practices, structural violence, and broader socio-economic conditions, situating ukufikisana within the continuum of gendered violence in South African schools. This study sheds light on the urgent need for transformative interventions that challenge rigid masculinities and dismantle the normalization of violence as a pathway to male identity. Schools must adopt holistic strategies—integrating gender-sensitive education, psychosocial support, and peer-led mentorship—to foster non-violent expressions of masculinity. By addressing the socio-cultural underpinnings of practices like ukufikisana, educators and policymakers can begin to disrupt cycles of violence and cultivate equitable, inclusive school environments. The findings contribute to scholarship on masculinities by offering a nuanced lens on how localized gender dynamics shape boys’ experiences, presenting pathways for addressing the systemic roots of harmful masculinities.