Op-Ed: Why Backlash Against Chris Brown’s South African Tour Matters

Violence against women and girls has been described by the World Health Organization as a global public health pandemic. While the prevalence of gender-based violence and femicide is significantly underreported in South Africa, almost half of the assaults against women were committed by someone close to them, with one in five women having experienced physical violence by a partner. The country’s intimate partner femicide rate is nearly five times the global average. In the local music industry, this crisis has become increasingly conspicuous and harder to ignore. Reported transgressions by problematic male acts frequently devolve into the same cycle: there’s public concern about a culture of gendered violence, the conversation stalls, and issues get swept under the rug. There have been occasional efforts at retribution for artists who are abusers, but not enough. While it may be tempting to frame this public dragging of an international artist as hypocritical or selective activism, this case provides an exclamation point on the immediate need for systemic change – could the people calling for the cancellation of Brown's shows help push South Africa’s entertainment industry into healthier territory?

This moment feels entirely consistent with Brown’s ethos — itself a sometimes irreconcilable value system. The laundry list of accused acts of violence against women trailing behind the singer reaches from 2009 to as recently as 2023. It is also the subject of a damning upcoming documentary by Quiet on Set producers, titled Chris Brown: A History of Violence. Still, Brown’s career has continued on its erratic course: he has remained incredibly divisive and commercially successful. The discourse surrounding him often feels hollow and unproductive. And years of criticism and attempts at redemption haven’t brought us much closer to knowing how men like Brown can substantively atone for misogynistic violence.

Public condemnation of the singer’s Johannesburg shows is not about calling out those who bought tickets. It’s about the much bigger issue that this could even happen. “In this case, the fact that he obtained a visa to our country and the looseness in our system to allow him the accessibility to us. Considering how dire this pandemic is in our country, it is distressing and disheartening, to say the least,” Women For Change wrote in their message to concert organizers, promoters, and the South African government. The group rightly points out that this is also a conversation about visa reciprocity and double standards – South African acts with similar criminal records would not be able to earn a U.S. visa – and that it’s time for the powers that be to draw a harder line when it comes to violence against women. South Africans rallying behind the #MuteChrisBrown campaign seem to be asking a simple question: What precedent does a Chris Brown show set about the country’s willingness to look past gendered abuse?

Women For Change is well on their way to reaching their target of 25,000 signatures. Whether this will lead to any restorative action on the part of South African organizers and authorities remains to be seen. But regardless of the outcome, the outrage is valid and will remain valid until the culture grows capable of absorbing criticism and enacting change. The idea that because there is not enough accountability for abusers at home, international artists with similar histories should therefore not be criticized is, of course, absurd. The relationship between artists and their audience should be a symbiotic one. As long as South Africans continue to embrace Brown in the cultural fold, a dissection of his actions and their social ramifications will remain important. If society and the music industry are still not ready to address this pandemic, then raising awareness is what’s needed most right now. The only thing we shouldn't do is nothing.