Boyzzz Khumalo

Boyzzz Khumalo lives and breathes soccer. From an early age, he would wake up, play soccer, attend school, play soccer, and start the cycle all over again. Like many young boys from Soweto, South Africa, Boyzzz grew up dreaming of playing professional soccer. Boyzz, in particular, wanted to play overseas. He got his first chance in 1996 when he played in a tournament in Louisville, Kentucky. He was lucky enough to be one of the boys chosen to stay for a year in the United States with a host family, and was then offered by the host family to stay for the remainder of high school for three more years. He then attended college and played division one soccer the last two years, all while earning a Bachelors in recreational sport.

His first big opportunity came when he was able to play with Chicago fire, although Boyzzz stated in his interview with Peter Alegi that he truly fulfilled his dream when he was the first in his family to graduate in college.  He was able to play in the MLS, and said that the highest moment for him was being able to play against and with the amazing players that he did, who were the best in the country.

Boyzzz’s first goal in the MLS against  LA Galaxy while playing for DC United.

When playing with DC United, he received a hand injury from a keeper’s punt that broke his wrist. It became infected when the ink from the tattoo he had received just days prior to the injury on his arm leaked into the wound, and the doctors originally told him that they would amputate his arm. He kept his arm, but found this as a wake up call that it might be time to start a new chapter in his life.

Boyzzz is now a full time soccer coach and is one of the founders of the Umhlaba Vision Foundation. Umhlaba means ‘world’ in Zulu, and the organization gives back to the community of Soweto by helping kids to come to the United States to study and get a better education than they have the opportunity to back home. The Foundation currently focuses on young boys who play soccer, but in the future Boyzzz hopes to expand to include young women and other sports as well. How important do you feel it is to expand such a wonderful project to a wider range of sports and to women especially?

An important topic that Boyzzz touched on was the differences in learning style between the African youth and the youth in the United States when it comes to soccer. Due to the different living styles and suburban settings, there aren’t the pick up games in the streets that one would find in any town in Africa, and because of this, children in the United States are taught by coaches at a young age instead of teaching themselves and constantly practicing with their friends.  Also in the United States, there is a pay to play that leaves only the better off citizen’s children playing sports, and leaving the poorer as merely untapped potential. How might the United States go about changing this?

A final point I want to touch on involves what Boyzzz mentioned about education compared to soccer in Africa. He said that all the kids think about is soccer and all they live and breathe is soccer but soccer as a career will not happen for the majority of them and they end up having nothing to fall back on because not much emphasis was put on education. This is what makes the Umhlaba Vision Foundation so important. What else can be done to help put a greater emphasis on how important education is from an early age in Africa?

A few questions for Boyzzz as well that could be brought up:

What was it like leaving everything you knew to come here at such a young age and then deciding to stay for so long?

What are your plans next for the Umhlaba Vision Foundation?

You put a strong emphasis on how glad you were that you went on and got a higher education in the interview. Was that originally part of your plan coming here or did you plan on soccer only? If not, what exactly changed your mind that convinced you that education was important?

If you’d like to know more about Boyzzz, here is an interview asking about some of his favorite things.

Expectation vs. Reality: South Africa’s World Cup 2010

The opportunity to host the 2010 World Cup was greatly welcomed by the South Africans. Excitement was at an all time high. It was finally their opportunity to show the world what South Africa had become, how they were able to put apartheid behind them and build a new “Rainbow Nation”.

“The last time South Africans occupied a unified space with this degree of pleasure was when the entire country stood in line to vote in the first democratic election in 1994.” (Herwitz, 22)

The nation put aside their differences and worked to create the best presentation of South Africa possible for visitors from around the world, hoping to make their case for foreign investment (Herwitz, 29).  “If South Africa prior to the elections of 1994 was a country synonymous with white supremacy, crimes against humanity, ignorance, divisions, and intolerance, then the new South Africa strives to be associated with their opposites” (Vandernerwe, 201). 40 billion rand was spend on World Cup stadiums, new and upgraded airports, roads, and fan parks (Vandermerwe, 201). The event of the World Cup hosting went smoothly, with great coverage and great impressions on the rest of the world made by South Africa. However, it was soon realized after the World Cup that no ‘dream fix’ would follow, and the country would not have immediate payback for the billions spent on this one tournament (Herwitz, 29).

A picture capturing the enthusiastic and patriotic South African crowd during the World Cup in 2010.
commons.wikipedia.org

Shortly after the World Cup ended massive strikes shut down hospitals and schools (Herwitz, 29).  Many felt that the 40 billion rand spend on the world cup would have been better spent on improving schools, hospitals, and housing, and used to create sustainable jobs for the countries poorest (Vandermerwe, 207). When speaking about the Harry Gwala Stadium, Thabo Dladla said that “the ground was rebuilt with tax payers’ money, but ordinary people have not had the privilege to use it for football” (Reiners, 225). What was believed to finally unite the country only did so momentarily.

Once the World Cup ended so did the end of prejudices and enthusiasm. Rodney Reiners stated that “the World Cup brought us together for a brief moment. But it was superficial” (Reiners, 225). It was believed at the start that hosting the World Cup would only benefit South Africa, and make it a future vacation spot and great investment by the rest of the world. However, little changed for the South Africans besides and increased debt and a momentary feeling of unity and patriotism that quickly faded as the economy only worsened.

Money spent on creating extravagant places for World Cup visitors such as the stadiums and airports did not benefit the South Africans whose taxes paid for their creation. Instead of bettering the poorly adequate schools and hospitals in the poorer parts of the country, money was spent on hosting a tournament that brought no long lasting improvements to the country. Which would have been a better use of the 40 billion rand? The World Cup, which brought worldwide attention to South Africa, or on the economy, to better the country from within? Also, do you agree with Reiners’ statement that the unity the World Cup brought was only momentary and superficial?

Check out this pretty adorable yet ridiculous promo for the FIFA Soccer World Cup 2010 in South Africa. This video perfectly highlights the emphasis put on what the rest of the world believes as stereotypical “African things” by showing the landscape and animals. This shows how geared towards attracting and pleasing the outside world this event was.

 

 

“She? Or He?” The Invasive and Unanswerable Question in the Search for ‘Fair Play’

Sports have been divided throughout amateur and professional leagues into men’s and women’s teams to provide the competitors with ‘fair play’. However, the quest for fair play has led to the difficult question as to what constitutes as a male or female, for it has proven to be much more complex than a simple outward appearance.  Variations in genetic composition lead to many people being classified as transgender or intersex, which causes confusion as to what to classify them as, especially in the competitive world of sport, where the classification of a female with some male qualities could lead to an unfair advantage.  The way to determine the “femininity” of an athlete was done through femininity testing, which was first introduced by the IAAF in 1966 (Sullivan, 403).  Organizations such as the IAAF felt that it was their duty “first and foremost to guarantee the fairness and integrity of the competitions that are organized under its rules” (“IAAF, 2011”, Sullivan, 401).  However, this unattainable goal of fair play led to invasive and degrading femininity tests including testing of chromosomal sex, hormonal sex, and the sex of both the external and internal reproductive organs (Sullivan, 401).  The complications arose when one test result conflicted with the other, or previously cleared players became disqualified due to new test results.  This search for a classification by sports organizations gave them a dangerous power.  “The regulation of gender grants power to sports governing bodies to make decisions about what bodies should look like, and what standards those bodies must conform to, to participate in sanctioned events” (Sullivan, 401).

Many women who simply wished to compete were forced to undergo public scrutiny of their sexual orientation. One such case involved a track runner, Caster Semenya.  This Black South African Woman was gender tested repeatedly after claims were made that she could not possibly be a woman due to her appearance, physique, and talent.  After vastly improving her time her gender was questioned, and testing was done to decide if she would be allowed to compete against other women. This greatly angered the South African public, especially those who experienced apartheid, for it reminded them of how they used to be classified according to race, and then reclassified again and again.  One day you could be considered white and the next coloured, or black, all depending on the test done (Levy). This is similar to the gender testing and how it only greatly confused those it was being done on, and in a very public light. Many women that were disqualified had no previous knowledge of their biologically masculine traits, and had to come to terms with this in front of the world.

Caster Semenya proudly carrying the South African flag at the 2012 Olympics in London.
source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk

A final point I would like to touch on and discuss further in class on Thursday is the lack of gender testing for male athletic competitions.  What does this say about societies view of the male role? Sullivan touches on this topic in the article “Gender Verification and Gender Policies in Elite Sport: Eligibility and ‘Fair Play’” by stating that no male testing done showed the belief in male athletic superiority (Sullivan, 409).  No one feared of a woman disguising herself as a man and competing in a male competition, because it was not believed that she would be of any threat to the male competitors.  Also, the lack of concern involving female-to-male sex reassignment and how it would affect ‘fair play’ further supported that the popular belief was in female inferiority in sport (Sullivan, 409).  Why do you think it is that there was no male gender testing and do you agree with the belief that a female athlete wouldn’t be real competition for males? What does this say about societies view of gender roles?

Above is a video showing the blunt questioning of Caster Semenya’s gender by Associated Press in 2009 right after the broke the world record for the 800 meter in Berlin.

Cricket: An Escape from Apartheid

Apartheid arose in 1948 in South Africa when the National Party, representing the ethnic nationalist Afrikaners, won the election on the platform of racism and segregation (Unit 3 Essay, 1).  This was justified in the eyes of the Europeans occupying South Africa at the time, for “segregation was considered to be a liberal policy designed to guide childlike Africans to adult maturity” (Murray and Merrett, 25).  There was also economic reasoning behind apartheid.  Mines, factories, and farms had much higher profits when cheap black labor was used, and therefore a government that denied black Africans the vote was supported by white business owners (Unit 3 Essay, 2).  The 1950’s were known as “petty apartheid”, in which laws were passed similar to that of Jim Crow in the United States and segregation of public facilities took place.  Any non-whites, including black Africans, Indians, or those considered colored were removed from white townships and forced to live on the outskirts of cities and towns.  In fact, racially mixed neighborhoods were bulldozed to the ground (Unit 3 Essay, 2).  The education system for the black Africans was inferior to that provided for the white inhabitants, and was intended to produce “manual laborers and obedient subjects” (Unit 3 Essay, 3).  Apartheid was met with resistance, including many forms of non-violent protest.  However, this protest was often met with violent repression (Unit 4 Essay, 3).

The violent reaction to a peaceful protest by students against apartheid in Soweto on June 16th of 1976.
coopersangels.blogspot.com

Cricket became a sort of escape for those suffering from apartheid.  All races played cricket in South Africa, although it was still segregated (Murray and Merrett, 1).  Although cricket was used by the English to promote imperial ideology, “no sport had taken such deep root among the black people of South Africa as cricket” (Todd, “Caught Behind”, 8).  Upper-class black Africans were attracted to the game because they believed it presented an opportunity to absorb white culture, thus allowing them to prove to the English and Afrikaners that they could meet their standards of “civilization” and deserved the rights both politically and socially denied to them (Murray and Merrett, 9).  However, cricket did not just entice the black elites.  Black Africans, Indians, and coloreds of all social standings were drawn to it, for it provided an escape from the sufferings of apartheid.  “It was important for the victims to believe that something better existed, and many of them found the answer in cricket” (Oborne, 33).  Not only was cricket an escape, but the discipline and stress put on playing fair and following the rules brought about ideals that were denied to them in everyday life due to apartheid, but were granted to them in the game.  “Cricket was a game for gentlemen, and neither Basil D’Oliveira nor anyone who played black cricket in post-war South Africa ever forgot this.  For them it stood for fairness, decency, and self respect, all things that apartheid denied them” (Oborne, 33).  D’Oliveira was one of the best colored cricket players of his time, and was unable to demonstrate this during his prime due to apartheid.  Although he was eventually offered to play for a team in England, he was at that point in his late twenties, and was most likely robbed of his greatest moments and abilities being known due to apartheid.  D’Oliveira, like many other cricket players during his time, saw cricket as an escape as well.  Even during training with his team or alone, D’Oliveira would run to the top of Signal Hill.  This was not just done for the challenge and exercise, but for the view and the feeling that it brought him whenever he reached the top.  “Apartheid did not stretch to the top of Signal Hill, where Basil D’Oliveira felt he was just a citizen of the world” (Oborne, 36, 37).

This picture shows Signal Hill to the very left, and surrounding it the view that D’Oliveira and his teammates would have enjoyed at the top. Wikipedia.org

 

Pre-Colonial Sports in South Africa: Men and Women’s Roles

Stick Fighting

Stick fighting is a normal activity in male youth culture both today and in pre-colonial times.  It is a social activity that brings the community together, either as participants, coaches, or spectators.  This created a community environment as well as a hierarchy based on gender, ability, and experience.  Those with greater stick fighting abilities gained masculinity and a greater reputation as a fighter or warrior (Alegi, 11).  Those with more experience were respected and looked to for knowledge, and were generally the older stick fighters.  Finally, this emphasized the male dominance in war and physical strength in the community, since women were not allowed to participate in stick fighting.  Due to gender role based responsibilities, women began household work at an early age while men were given the more active roles such as cattle herding that allowed for more freedom (Alegi, 8).  This allowed the practice of stick fighting.  “When out herding the elder boys arranged contests, pairing off couples and forcing them to fight; the combats between individuals were constant” (Hunter, 9).  Would stick fighting have held any allure to women in pre-colonial times if they were allowed to practice and participate? Men partook for sport and fun but also for the prestige.  Stick fighting allowed for the demonstration of physical strength and cunning, and both admiration and respect from the community.  Men needed to be seen as strong warriors. Women’s main interest was to run a home and raise a family.  Stick fighting held no place in their priorities, and would not benefit them in any way to gain a husband or raise their children.

This video gives a brief history of stick fighting and the rules, and then shows a fight as well, demonstrating the community atmosphere during the fight.

Traditional Dancing

Dancing was and is still done in South Africa for many reasons, including entertainment, competition, and rituals at events such as weddings or funerals.  The purpose of the dance dictated the type of dancing done, and some required much more practice and coordination than others.  A sort of beat is usually kept and sometimes singing or chanting is involved as well.  This activity allowed for both men and women of varying ages to participate, depending on the event.  While stick fighting is for entertainment and hierarchy purposes, dancing is also a celebration.  Dancing, along with singing, is one of the few activities that women also partook in.  Dancing allowed people to “combine most successfully the education and integration of mind, body, emotion, and sensitivity, and the development of social consciousness and self-actualization” (Blacking, 7).  How is dancing different than stick fighting when it comes to the effect it had on the community?  It brought the community together in a different way, with everyone participating and having their own purpose in the performance or ritual.  South African dancing, according to American mission worker Childs, is “more than mere recreation” and that “It is doubtful whether the solidarity of any group of Ovimbundu can be firmly established or long maintained without the dance” (Blacking, 7).  Since dancing was also sometimes done for religious purposes, it brought the community together under a common belief system to worship.  Although women could be spectators at stick fighting, they were able to also be participants in dancing, and in fact, were the leading part in religious rituals.  This allowed both genders of the community to become involved together for a common purpose.

This video shows a short traditional South African dance with singing in which both men and women participate.