Rights of ‘passage’ and contested land use: Gendered conflict over urban space during ritual performance in South Africa Thembela Kepe a, b, * , Gillian McGregor b , Philippa Irvine b a Department of Geography, University of Toronto,1265 Military Trail, Toronto, ON, Canada M1C 1A4 b Geography Department, Rhodes University, P O Box 94, Grahamstown 6140, South Africa article info Article history: Available online 13 January 2015 Keywords: Contested urban space GIS Ritual male circumcision Gender South Africa abstract Ritual male circumcision (ulwaluko), a rite of passage from boyhood to manhood among amaXhosa people, requires a period of seclusion away from human settlements. In urban areas of the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa, municipalities often allow use of sections of the commonage area on the outskirts of the townships for initiates to erect temporary shelters, heal from the surgery, and ‘learn’ how to be men. This cultural practice is protected by the country's Constitution. However, the cultural practice requires that women be forbidden from the spaces used for the ritual, thus restricting their Constitu- tional right to freedom of movement, and limiting their livelihood options. Urban sprawl has exacerbated these spatial tensions by placing increased pressure on the ritual spaces. Using the city of Grahamstown, we explore the tension between different constitutional rights that manifest during the ritual. GIS is used to map the pressure that population growth and subsequent urban sprawl is putting on these ritual sites. Semi-structured interviews are used with a sample of male and female participants who have vested interests in these spaces. Interviews reveal strong and entrenched opinions of men and women about which rights matter the most. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Introduction When South Africa's post-apartheid Constitution was adopted in 1996 it was widely seen as pragmatic and accommodating of various constituencies in the country. Most significantly, the Constitution enshrined numerous rights that were previously de- nied, marginalized or neglected for certain segments of society during apartheid. Thus, the newly enshrined rights included, for example, equitable access to land for various purposes (Section 25 [5]); the right to practice one's culture without discrimination (Sections 30 and 31); freedom of movement (Section 21 [1]) and the right not to be discriminated against, based on gender (Section 9 [3]), among others. Over the last two decades, however, there have been numerous critiques of the Constitution; with analysts point- ing to potential tensions, as well as outright contradictions in it. For example, Ntsebeza (2005), in his book Democracy Compromised, has been critical of the Constitution for enshrining both democracy, as well as the right of unelected, hereditary traditional authorities to have jurisdiction over people in certain parts of the country. Similarly, Walker (2013) has pointed to the tension between the principles of gender equality and some cultural rights that are protected under the Constitution. She argues that some cultural practices threaten, and often violate, the rights of women (e.g. in the case of land tenure rights). Some of the tensions within the Constitution, not least those relating to the right to practice one's culture, are potentially exacerbated by social, economic and spatial factors in South Africa's changing society. Take the example of ritual male circumcision, a cultural practice that is entrenched among amaXhosa people of the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa, and that is protected by the Constitution (Sections 30 and 31). The spaces in which this ritual takes place, and how it is performed, present interesting spatial and gender tensions within the Consti- tution, that bring to the fore, the tensions inherent in it. Before discussing these tensions, which are the focus of this paper, the cultural practice of ritual male circumcision needs to be briefly explained. Ritual male circumcision is a subject of debate. To a large extent the debate on the subject revolves around the merits of the proce- dure for health purposes, the potential risk it carries for the males, its potential to infringe on human rights and its cultural significance for * Corresponding author. Department of Geography, University of Toronto, 1265 Military Trail, Toronto, ON, Canada M1C 1A4. E-mail address: kepe@utsc.utoronto.ca (T. Kepe). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Applied Geography journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apgeog http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2014.12.021 0143-6228/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Applied Geography 57 (2015) 91e99