Discussing gender today means entering a sensitive field marked by symbolic, political, and cultural disputes. The term has ceased to be merely descriptive and has become deeply identity-based, loaded with meanings that vary across social and historical contexts. In this scenario, speaking about gender requires caution, as any position can quickly be labelled as sexist, conservative, radical feminist, or even reactionary.
Socialisation
At the same time, we are witnessing an accelerated transformation of social structures, particularly the family. In many African contexts, including Mozambique, the traditional family model, where parents once played clear roles in education and socialisation, is now under pressure. Indeed, increasing economic demands force many parents into long working hours, significantly reducing time spent with their children. As a result, part of socialisation is transferred to schools, to third parties, or increasingly to the digital space.
This shift is not neutral. Young people grow up exposed to multiple influences such as social media, global cultures, and often contradictory discourses, without consistent parental mediation. Thus, a fundamental question arises: to what extent do changes in family dynamics influence how gender is understood and experienced? This interpretation is supported by Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory, which highlights how different social systems shape individual behaviour and lived experience.
Patriarchy and capitalism
On the other hand, contemporary gender debates are largely structured around critiques of patriarchy. It is undeniable that this system has produced historical inequalities, particularly against women. However, its analysis requires nuance. Like any social structure, patriarchy has also organised social relations over generations; therefore, the problem does not lie only in its existence, but in the ways it has been, and continues to be, unevenly reproduced.
In this sense, the challenge is not necessarily to replace one system with another, but rather to reconfigure social relations in a more just way, without falling into an antagonistic logic between men and women. When the debate turns into competition rather than dialogue, the possibility of building balanced and sustainable solutions is lost.
Furthermore, the impact of capitalism on human relationships cannot be ignored. In a system where economic value often outweighs social value, affective relationships tend to become more fragile and, at times, utilitarian. Pressures for survival, social mobility, and consumption influence personal decisions, including romantic relationships, marriage, and parenthood. Consequently, this directly affects gender dynamics, creating new forms of interaction but also new tensions.
Gender-based violence
In Mozambique, these issues become even more urgent when linked to concrete problems. Data indicates that, on average, 72 women are sexually assaulted per day in the country; however, the vast majority of these crimes remain invisible to the judicial system and without proper accountability. Nevertheless, this invisibility is not limited to institutions. As a society, we often adopt the saying “in a quarrel between married couples, no one should interfere”, which contributes to collective silence and the normalisation of violence, a phenomenon that can be understood through Bandura’s social learning theory.
Similarly, more than 200,000 cases of gender-based violence were recorded in Mozambique between 2015 and 2024. According to the Observatory of Women, these figures include domestic violence involving both men and women, as well as victims across different age groups as children, adults, and the elderly, demonstrating that the problem cuts across the entire social structure.
In addition, at least 119 women were killed as a result of violence in 2024, a figure higher than the 98 cases recorded in 2023. In 2025, 18,365 cases of gender-based violence were recorded, of which 79.9% involved women and girls, including 40 homicides. These figures highlight not only persistence but also the increasing severity of extreme forms of violence, which can also be interpreted in light of Lorenz’s studies on aggression.
Nevertheless, limiting the debate solely to female victimisation may obscure other equally relevant dynamics. Issues such as infidelity, marital conflict, and psychological violence also affect men, although they often remain invisible due to social norms that discourage reporting and the expression of male vulnerability. This dimension is discussed by R. W. Connell, who analyses how models of masculinity shape behaviour and silence vulnerability.
Infidelity, in turn, emerges as a recurring element in the tensions of contemporary relationships. It is not merely an individual moral failure, but a phenomenon reflecting broader social transformations, including economic pressures and changing gender roles. Thus, both men and women become part of complex dynamics in which trust, power, and social expectations are constantly being reconfigured. These dynamics can be understood through Bowlby’s attachment theory, which explains how early relational experiences influence adult relationships.
Therefore, while recognising the structural seriousness of violence against women, it is equally necessary to broaden the perspective in order to understand other forms of conflict and suffering within relationships. Avoiding simplistic interpretations is essential to promote a more balanced and comprehensive analysis of gender issues in Mozambican society.
Conclusion
To finalize, it is important to emphasise that the central question may not be choosing between tradition and modernity, but rather finding ways to articulate values, responsibilities, and rights in a constantly changing context. Ultimately, this involves recognising both the progress and the challenges of the present, avoiding extreme positions and promoting a more constructive, inclusive, and socially responsible dialogue, as advocated by Rogers’ person-centered approach.
By Neque Alcino Antonio Francisco
