Mihlali Ndamase is a social media influencer, content creator and beauty YouTuber. She has gained a significant following online for her content and lifestyle vlogs.
However, her personal life has recently made headlines due to her relationship with Leeroy Sidambe. In an emotional YouTube open letter instalment, Ndamase detailed a toxic relationship, defined by physical altercation and verbal harm.
The open letter notes some level of contribution and accountability to the relationship by Ndamase – while subtly making gender-based violence (GBV) allegations against Sidambe.
Ndamase, a self-proclaimed businesswoman with a relatively privileged socioeconomic status, should guard against appropriately claiming GBV as a justification for exposing her partner, whom she acknowledges she was in a toxic relationship with.
She very much could be a victim of domestic violence, more specifically intimate partner violence (IPV). This distinction is crucial because misusing the term GBV dilutes its significance and obscures the root causes of this violence.
GBV is not a catchphrase to be exploited for attention or sympathy. It represents a complex, deeply ingrained phenomenon where institutional, systemic, cultural, economic and social failures intersect to perpetuate the vulnerability of women to violence.
By accurately understanding and applying the label of GBV, we can spark a proactive public discourse that addresses the underlying factors driving these violations. This clarity enables us to identify the primary responsibility for prevention and remediation, ensuring that our efforts target the systemic and structural failures that enable GBV, instead of using the term to settle scores in troubled interpersonal relationships.
The nuanced understanding of GBV in the context of Ndamase's situation is crucial because it enables her to pursue constructive recourse, rather than misattributing the issue or relying on misguided solutions. Recognising the toxic patterns of violence in her relationship as IPV rather than GBV allows for a more targeted approach.
IPV, driven by mutual toxic patterns, requires a response that prioritises psychological intervention rather than primarily criminal justice system interventions. This distinction is vital because it acknowledges that the relationship dynamics are complex and both parties may be contributing to the toxicity.
By seeking psychological intervention, individually and domestically, Ndamase can gain a deeper understanding of the relationship's dynamics. This approach may enable accurate relational diagnosis by identifying the specific issues driving the toxicity.
Such an approach makes room for empowered decision-making that is rooted in accountability and healing.
American writer, professor, philosopher and intersectional feminist Audre Lorde puts it well when she says: “Self-reflection and accountability are acts of love for oneself and others. In toxic relationships, they are the tools we must use to dismantle the harm we’ve allowed to grow.”
In this way, people healing from toxic relationships recognise that leaving these relationships does not make them victims, instead they are responsible people who choose to dismantle violence.
By acknowledging the nuances of IPV and GBV in Ndamase's situation, we can promote a more constructive and supportive response, one that prioritises psychological intervention, personal growth and relational healing over misguided or heavy-handed solutions.
- Mahlangu is a community activist at Not In My Name International. She writes in her personal capacity.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.