âToward New Masculinitiesâ from Beyond Machismo - Aida Hurtado and Mrinal Sinha
When thinking about masculinity In Latino America the first thing that pops into my mind is the machismo in rural areas and sometimes in the city. For me, even though I have never visited my country, I have heard multiple stories from my mother who had been raised there, specifically in the rural areas. Her father was highly sexist man who thought men were the dominate sex and anything that when against that was completely wrong. Within the article they make reference to a Mexican philosopher named Octavio Paz who wrote about machismo in his words he stated that machismo is,
â âManliness is judged according to oneâ So when reading this article made realize that Latin men arenât completely raised to believe these thoughts invulnerability to enemy arms or the impacts of the outside worldâ Machistas, according to Paz, âmust never show weakness nor emotion because such blunders could crack the machismo mask, an opening which enemies would exploit. Yo the extent that a man opens up and shows emotion or weakness, he becomes less of a man,.., Paz identifies a second dimension of machismo: âthe adroit wielding of power, usually physical in nature, to dominate womenâ, and sometimes other men .Machismo involves men displaying a hyper masculinity that thrives on power and domination and that is threatened by weakness. Within the paradigm of machismo, women conceived as the opposite of men are disdained, considered weak, and subjected to domination and abuse, Similarly, weak heterosexual and homosexuals are perceived as being more like women than men , as parodies of what men should be, and are therefore also subject to abuse...The third dimension of machismo is a disdain of intellectual endeavors, because the acquisition of knowledge negates the physicality of domination.â
Hurtado and Sinha gather a data from a group of 36 men that identified as feminist, from the three main questions asked beingÂ
What does the word âmanhoodâ mean to you?
Who do you admire as a man?
The majority of the participants mentioned a father or family figure in their life, this arises that both race and social class were main factors, being Latino and belonging in the working class is already a disadvantage. Instead of the participants saying anything about the thing Paz mention in his theory about machismo. For manhood they spoke about the maturity of a man and the responsibility he had to have for his family, nothing ales matters. Most of the participants admired their father whom they noticed did everything to protect their family and provide for them. The majority stated that the reason as to why they admired their father or a family member was because they saw the sacrifice they made, they completely forgot about themselves and contributed for the well being of their family, this to them is what a true man is to them,
âMy fatherâs story, my father is my hero. And thereâs no other way to go around it but saying it. He was the second oldest of eleven children. And his father was killed when he was twelve, murdered... He dropped out of school in the sixth grade and began to work so he could help his mother support the family. And when was sixteen, he left the household because he felt himself more as a burden and that he could help her more by immigrating to the United States and getting a job here. So thatâs what he did.. He was alone here in the states..when he was only sixteen.â
This new study gave revelation that the stereotypical Latin man isn't so machista after all and so both Hurtado and Sinha came up with a new dimension of manhood,
Positive ethical positioning
Rejection of hegemonic masculinity
The overall summary of relational engagements is that the male stops thinking about themselves and think of others specifically their family. For positive ethical positioning the male ahs to be ethical meaning that must be human instead of either being a man or woman, gender plays no role they just have respect for others. Finally, rejection of hegemonic masculinity stands for rejecting the standards that are set for men in this case the hegemonic masculinity.
I realized that this was completely true and the first person I and thought of was my father, as clichĂ© as it may sound my father falls into these characteristics, I will not say that he is completely is perfect but he is constantly learning to be open minded to the new changes society is facing and had made sure to not completely shut out the progress being made. He deeply cares about the family, at times working overtime to make ends meet, I never seen him taking a break when I was younger. He would be sleeping when I left for school and come back home around one in the morning tired, by then I would be sleeping but during winter break we would catch him at work, coming back on the train around 1. He always tries to think about the right ways to do thing instead of looking at what he can gain from it, that the ethical positioning. And finally he is trying to reject hegemonic masculinity, for example my grandfather had claimed that was was the reason for me attending college since I am a women. I was bound to get married, so whatâs the point. My father decided that he would support me on my decision to attend college and help me in anyway he could. He isnât perfect sometimes he says some sexist things and I try to correct him saying how it completely is wrong and we have multiple conversations but I least I know that he is trying and that is all that matters to me, because he is making an effort to notice how the social construct also has a hold of him as it does me.
