Africa
Report details conversion therapy impact on LGBTQ South Africans
Country’s lawmakers urged to ban discredited practice
So-called conversion therapy is something which is still widely practiced across South Africa, impacting the well-being of the LGBTQ community in the process.
Families, schools, religious sects and peer groups over the years have been used to try and convert those that identify as part of the LGBTQ community to conform to the heterosexual narrative which is promoted as “homogeneous.” Access-Chapter 2, a South African NGO, in a recent study found conversion therapy is proving to be more harmful towards the society and it could pose serious repercussions in the future if nothing is done to address it.
“The LGBTQIA+ community has historically been a site of erasure, silencing and marginalization in many of our communities. This erasure has been normalized over the history of civilization, particularly in the context of Africa, where most countries still criminalize same-sex desiring. Through this study we see a problematic trajectory regarding this erasure even in contemporary South African societies,” reads the study.
The study notes 50 percent respondents “have reported to have been forced to convert by their families, while 43 percent (of respondents) had a session with a religious representative or institution as intervention by parents, families, or communities.”
“Despite the visible efforts to call out the practices of conversion by LGBTQIA+ pressure groups, these practices are still prevalent. The impact is even more detrimental, with most of our participants directly having experienced discrimination, prejudice, homophobia, transphobia or stigma in the hands of their families, churches, psychosocial service providers, schools, and the rest of the community,” it reads.
A total of 303 respondents participated in an online survey, and the study’s findings were shared with a variety of LGBTQ civil society organizations and on social media platforms.
The respondents came from nine provinces: 149 from Gauteng, nine from Mpumalanga, 36 from Free State, 24 from North-West, two from Northern Cape, seven from KwaZulu-Natal, 42 from Eastern Cape, 28 from Western Cape and 14 from Limpopo. Seven respondents identified themselves as White, while five identified as Colored and 209 identified as Black African.
A total of 144 respondents identified as lesbian, while 91 described themselves as gay. Twenty-five respondents identified themselves as bisexual and 31 said they are heterosexual. 183 respondents described themselves as Christian, while 74 said they practice a traditional African religion. Forty respondents said they do not associate with any religion, while one said they are Hindu and one described themselves as Muslim.
“Parents are the main perpetrators of conversion practices and initiators of external sources to fix individuals whose sexual orientation does not align with heterosexuality,” notes the study. “Parents maintain that same-sex sexual and romantic desires is not inborn and therefore engage in efforts to change their child’s sexual orientation or gender identity. Some seek professional therapies or religious interventions for a child’s same-sex sexual orientation or non-heterosexual gender identity while other consider traditional remedies. The study raised distinct ethical concerns concerning appropriate consent because parents and authority figures would exert pressure over minors.”
“Despite parental reliance of religion to fix the non-normative sexual orientation and gender expressions, churches outside the request of the family continue to police gender expressions. Participants reported that they were constantly harassed because of the manner of dressing, expression of identity and attractions that did not align with their gender assigned at birth,” it adds. “They could not be open about their romantic partners and LGBTQIA+ friendships. Community members from the same religious organizations would report members who are seen with LGBTQIA+ individuals, and their religious and spiritual standing would instantly be questioned. Participants who pointed out that they had a particular spiritual gift be it singing in the worship team, praying for others or an usher was recalled from such positions as their lifestyles were deemed demonic.”
The study further notes many respondents experienced “engagement with professional psychological services that subjected them to conversion practices.”
“Those who were subjected to psychological services were forced by parents to attend. They reported that parents claimed that it was normal to experience a phase of confusion about sexual orientation and non-normative gender identity and that therapy could help. Participants also reported how therapist appeared to be under pressure to have them fixed as these services are costly. Those who attended therapeutic interventions were subjected to the confusion narrative and at one stage were desperate to be healed from it,” it says. “Families also sought help from traditional healers.”
The study’s respondents reported “they had to be immersed in rivers and dams to be cleansed while others were fed with potions that would enable the release of the demonic spirit.”
“The traditional practices would continue at home with frequent follow up consultations at traditional practitioners,” it says. “While participants were aware that the focus was to heal them from their abnormal sexual orientation, they were not always aware of what substances they were given. Participants were also subjected to violence such as beatings and slaps while undergoing healing processes with traditional healers. They reported that they were put under spells and were not fully aware of all things they were subjected to.”
“Participants, particularly lesbian-identifying individuals, also reported how they live in fear as they are continuously subjected to threats of rape and even killings. As a result, many Lesbian couples cannot embrace their true self and cannot openly and in a safe way express public affection. Participants mentioned the common practice and spades of LGBTQIA+ murders in South Africa and how it forces them to live a hidden lifestyle.”
The study, which is a notable breakthrough in the research for conceptualizing conversion therapy in the context of South Africa and also the first official evidence of the harmfulness of conversion practices across the country, further highlighted on the impact of the conversion therapies, recommendations and on how to avert the despicable acts.
“Participants in this study showed that there are various psychosocial effects on LGBTQIA+ people who were subjected to conversion practices. Social factors such as discrimination, prejudice, homophobia, transphobia and stigma can create hostile and stressful social environments for LGBTQIA+ people,” it notes. “It left individuals experiencing social rejection and feeling forced to hide their identity. In some instances, individuals also adopted unhealthy coping processes and their mental health negatively impacted. Some of the impacts of conversion practices on mental health include depression, social anxiety, substance abuse, thoughts and attempts of suicide, an altered body image as well as other mental health issues. Individuals also experienced shame, guilt, hopelessness, helplessness, increased self-hatred and social withdrawal. Conversion practices are also known too often lead to severe emotional damage.
Participants who experienced conversion while at school mentioned that learning was affected to the point that some dropped out of school. Others indicated risky behaviors such as unprotected sex to develop a sense of belonging while some indulged in excessive alcohol drinking. These experiences left participants vulnerable even in their young adult developments.”
The study also found those who undergo conversion therapy are at higher risk of depression and anxiety and are more likely to die by suicide.
“This study could not identify a single participant that could confirm that conversion therapy has been effective,” it reads.
The study further notes that despite the fact South Africa has “one of the most progressive Constitutions and LGBTQIA+-inclusive legislation in the world, the social reality depicts the complete opposite.”
“Religious, cultural, professional and social scripts still uphold, produce and perpetuate compulsory heteronormativity hence, conversion practices could pass as normal and acceptable in all domains,” it reads. “Conversion practices emanates directly from privileging heterosexuality as the norm and natural. All other forms of expression are deemed unacceptable, sinful and un-African. This is despite the Constitution that affirms and protects diverse sexual orientations, sex and gender expressions.”
“We therefore, call on legislation that would place an urgent ban on conversion practices in the South African context,” said Access-Chapter 2. “Professional institutions such as the medical and psychological fraternity should be educated about the damaging effects of conversion practices. This form of education should form part of in-service and pre-service training. All civil society organizations should be empowered to support individuals who have been subjected to conversion practices. Supported services for recipients of conversion practices should be widely published to create awareness of interventions, care and support.”
Daniel Itai is the Washington Blade’s Africa Correspondent.
Iran and Egypt on Friday faced off during the World Cup’s “Pride Match” in Seattle.
Iran is among the handful of countries in which consensual same-sex sexual relations remain punishable by death. Discrimination and persecution based on sexual orientation and gender identity is commonplace in Egypt.
Friday’s match coincided with Pride weekend in Seattle. The Egyptian Football Association and the Football Federation Islamic Republic of Iran both objected to playing in the “Pride Match.”
Egypt and Iran tied 1-1.
FIFA, for its part, allowed Pride flags inside the stadium during the match.
“The FIFA World Cup 2026 is an inclusive event that welcomes people from all backgrounds,” a FIFA spokesperson told the Washington Blade in a statement. “Fans of all sexual orientations and gender identities are welcome at matches and events. General statements of human rights, including rainbow flags and other flags representing sexual orientation and gender identity, are permitted under the FIFA World Cup 2026™ Stadium Code of Conduct and may be displayed inside stadiums provided they are used in a manner consistent with the code.”
Human Rights Watch welcomed FIFA’s decision to allow Pride flags inside the stadium. Outright International, a global LGBTQ and intersex rights group, distributed Pride flags in Seattle on Friday, which was Pride Match Day.
“Visibility matters,” said Outright International Executive Director Maria Sjödin. “Pride is now being celebrated in more than 100 countries, including this weekend in Seattle. For many LGBTIQ people, seeing a Pride flag in public is a reminder that they are not alone, and that their rights and dignity are recognized.”
FIFA President Gianni Infantino earlier this year told Die Weltwoche, a Swiss magazine, that “there will be no ‘Pride Match’ at the (FIFA) World Cup.”
“There will be a FIFA World Cup match in Seattle, and on the same day, events organized by external organizations will be taking place in the city,” said Infantino. “But that has nothing to do with the match itself.”
Peter Tatchell, a long-time LGBTQ activist from the U.K. who is director of the Peter Tatchell Foundation, was among those who traveled to Seattle for Friday’s match. Tatchell accused FIFA of not vetting World Cup teams — specifically Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Ghana, Senegal, Qatar, Tunisia, Morocco, Iraq, Uzbekistan, and Algeria — over whether they would allow gay players.
“FIFA is protecting LGBT+ visibility in the stands while failing to protect LGBT+ players on the pitch,” said Tatchell.
South Africa
White House to end PEPFAR funding for South Africa
State Department says country failed to respond to 2025 executive order demands
The Trump-Vance administration will end PEPFAR funding for South Africa.
A State Department spokesperson on Wednesday told the Washington Blade the State Department “will begin a phased drawdown of PEPFAR programming in South Africa, with most programs ending by Sept. 30, 2026, and critical personnel support continuing through March 31, 2027.”
Semafor last week reported South Africa has received more than $8 billion in PEPFAR funding since President George W. Bush created the program to combat the global HIV/AIDS pandemic in 2003.
President Donald Trump on Feb. 7, 2025, issued an executive order that addressed what it described as “egregious actions of the Republic of South Africa.” The State Department spokesperson with whom the Blade spoke noted the directive included five specific requests:
• South African government provides exemptions or alternatives for U.S. companies to Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment laws and other race-based mandates.
• Senior government officials (e.g., president, deputy president, or minister of justice) unequivocally condemn all race-based incitement to violence, including the “Kill the Boer” song, more frequently.
• The South African government prevents the implementation of measures that would allow expropriation without fair compensation and due process under the Expropriation Act of 2024.
• South African Police Service designates rural crime a “priority crime” and increases resources dedicated to high-crime rural areas.
• South Africa refrains from actions that would significantly interfere with the implementation of the refugee program, within the confines of South African law.
“The United States communicated to the government of the Republic of South Africa multiple times at many levels that PEPFAR funding was likely to be terminated in the absence of progress on the five asks,” said the State Department spokesperson.
The State Department spokesperson further noted South Africa is “one of the largest economies in sub-Saharan Africa” and “has funded the vast majority of its own HIV response, estimated at 76 percent of the total, including procurement of all treatment commodities.”
“South Africa will continue to be supported by the Global Fund, including for the introduction and scale up of lenacapavir through Global Fund Resources,” the spokesperson told the Blade.
Lenacapavir is groundbreaking HIV prevention drug that users inject twice a year. Eswatini, which borders South Africa, is among the African countries that have received doses of the drug through PEPFAR.
HIV/AIDS service organizations in the U.S. and around the world have sharply criticized the Trump-Vance administration over plans to not fully fund PEPFAR and to cut domestic HIV/AIDS funding.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio shortly after the current White House took office issued a waiver that allowed PEPFAR and other “life-saving humanitarian assistance” programs to continue to operate during a freeze on nearly all U.S. foreign aid spending. HIV/AIDS service providers around the world with whom the Blade has spoken say PEPFAR cuts and the loss of funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development, which officially closed on July 1, 2025, has severely impacted their work.
Africa
African leaders once again trade African family values for American family values
Anti-LGBTQ conference backed by US-based groups took place this month in Ghana
At the moment, some religious and political leaders in Africa are pushing for a charter on family values, lobbying lawmakers, African state institutions, and the African Union to formally adopt it. In the past number of years, they have been holding conferences across Africa with the support and funding of Western religious donors who, in their own countries, are definitely perceived as racist, hateful, and against women. Most recently, they convened the African Regional Interparliamentary Conference on Family Values and Sovereignty in Accra, Ghana. All this raises critical questions about foreign influence and agendas. At this critical time, when Africa faces so many problems, why do people insist on pushing an agenda that is neither ours nor relevant to our prosperity?
The African leaders who claim to protect African family values and sovereignty, unsurprisingly, exhibit traits similar to those of the historical enslavers and similar collaborators. Contrary to what they claim as “pushing back against foreign influence on the African family” and the infamous sovereignty claims, it has been proven that these leaders are directly linked and backed by the conservative “foreign” groups, including the U.S.-based hate organization, Family Watch International, which is closely linked to the anti-rights authors of Trump’s Project 2025, Heritage Foundation; and the Netherlands-based Christian nationalist organization, Christian Council International, another group closely linked to organizations supporting the Trump administration and its continued hate-based policies and atrocities. One might even argue that they serve these groups, their mandates, and their Western agenda, instead of what they want African people to believe: that they are doing this for the good and prosperity of Africa and its sovereignty. The truth, however, is that their so-called African values, culture, traditions, etcetera, could not be further removed from true African cultural values but instead mimic those outlined in America’s Project 2025. Meanwhile, the very same people who are pushing for these family values under Project 2025 are the very same people pushing for the exploitation of Africa’s natural resources, without any care for the impact their actions have on African people and their livelihoods. Adopting their policies verbatim in Africa and claiming them as our own could easily be seen as counterintuitive and self-betrayal.
Africa’s rich history of family, diversity, womanhood, and matriarchy is too beautiful to erase. Africans, especially women and girls, deserve to know about the likes of Queen Modjadji of the Balobedu people, a fierce leader who is traditionally believed to have rainmaking abilities and notably a distinctively matriarchal dynasty where the reign is passed down from woman to woman, from mother to daughter; or Queen Nzinga of modern-day Angola, who led an army that resisted and fought against the Portuguese colonizers. Queer folks and African spiritualists alike deserve to know how women and gender diverse persons held some of the highest spiritual positions in society, like Mbuya Nehanda of Zimbabwe, who was a deeply respected spirit medium and a leader of the resistance against early colonial rule in Zimbabwe, and the transgender priests, the respected agule and okule, female-to-male and male-to-female shamans of the Lugbara, now the Democratic Republic of Congo and Uganda, who led spiritual ceremonies. Even though the mudoko dako of the Langi people in Uganda were known to have been assigned male at birth, they were recognized as a distinct gender that was allowed to marry men. Africans must also know about woman-to-woman marriages that existed in pre-colonial Africa, which, according to research and oral histories, were recognised and served various purposes, from economic and social functions to lineage preservation. Similar practices include those from the Bapedi and Balobedu cultures, ngwetsi ya lapa, which still exists today, where a woman is married into a family or household to raise an heir for the family or to continue the family name, not necessarily the lineage.
As well-intentioned as it may appear, evidence suggests that the African leaders’ draft charter, because of its existing ties to Western ultraconservative partnerships, is neither original nor in good faith. The pace at which they have been moving and their true subsequent agenda should indisputably be questioned and criticised. Regardless of the inclusion of desirable language and terms such as minerals sovereignty and the Ubuntu philosophy, beneath the surface, the charter does not truly reflect these concepts. The charter, instead, does a disservice to African people by misrepresenting Africa’s diversity and disregarding its history as it relates to the diversity of families. The West has no business drafting or helping draft African legislation, especially if the whole of Africa is at risk of their negative impact. One would think the common goal would be to address bread-and-butter issues, such as poverty, unemployment, diseases, and health, to name but a few, instead of pushing the distractive agenda of those responsible for robbing Africa in the first place. No single group is the sole custodian of African knowledge. Africa belongs to all of us, with our diverse families and values, which cannot be defined through a single, narrow lens and are instead very individual issues that will differ from family to family.
Daniel Digashu is a consultant at the Southern Africa Litigation Center (SALC). SALC promotes and advances human rights and the rule of law in Southern Africa, primarily through strategic litigation and capacity-strengthening support to lawyers and grassroots organizations.
Actually, I’m gay and I’m queer. It matters
Centenares de personas participan en la Marcha del Orgullo en la capital salvadoreña
Delaware approves amendment protecting same-sex marriage
ACLU says trans athletes ruling is narrower than many believe
Gay US couple among four people found dead in Mexico mass grave
Iran, Egypt play in World Cup ‘Pride Match’
PHOTOS: Frederick Pride Parade
D.C. has a chance to lead on equitable transit through AVs
Carla Hall goes from ‘Top Chef’ to the stage
