Growing up in the United States a sense of freedom and individuality was always prominently present. More so, millennials experienced being part of a shift in gender equality, witnessing the battles that have been fought in order to begin establishing an equal treatment for men and women. Despite the advances the United States has undergone, many countries seem to have stayed behind in this beneficial progression. Mexico, the United States’ southern border, is a prime example of where a social construct for masculinity, specifically what is identified as machismo, lives. By unwinding the importance of context within this ethical issue one can reveal the reasoning behind machismo being something natives see as “normal”. Thus, demonstrating that—through the eyes of ethical relativism machismo is a type of identity for Mexican culture. For terms of this paper, machismo will be defined as a, “socially constructed, learned, and reinforced set of behaviors comprising the content of male gender roles in Latino society” (Estrada 358). Breaking down the definition helps establish not only how many times a Latino is faced with this idea of an “ideal man”, but it also allows an outsider to comprehend the backbone of a Mexican culture. A great place to begin seeing the birth of a macho is in the film industry.
The 1940s and 1950s are known as the Golden Age for Mexican films, and thus consequently the time period in which many of the commemorated artists where born. Public figures like Pedro Infante, Jorge Negrete, Cantinflas, and many more served as a way to vividly portray the definition of what was thought to be un hombre. Although almost all story plots contain a hero, these Mexican films consistently presented these men as the one and only hero. Every ending contributing and celebrating the stereotypical definition of masculinity within the Mexican heritage. Some typical characteristics of these figures included being “bold, tough, competent, loyal, loving, and resourceful” (Macías-González 13). The Mexican audience quickly fell in love with these personalities and thus allowed this ideal of a macho hero become not only a form of entertainment, but also a sense of national pride. Thus, as stated by the definition, making the macho a socially constructed ideal created by the mass media in Mexico. Furthermore, it was through these beloved characters that the Hispanic culture began to establish their identity.
Young men began to see these figures and strived to be just like them in order to seemingly have their success. The popularity of these actors quickly rose and the Mexican cinema overflowed with valiant stories in a short time. Not only did men learn to project themselves through the actions of these figures, but the cinema also learned to listen to their audience. The dominant male role was no longer only portrayed in movies but also in novelas, soap operas, that took high popularity in the Mexican households. Even lyrics to songs began to contribute to how men should act and how women would correspond to this macho. Soon enough this gender fantasy was taken as a way to describe Mexican culture, which is where the problems began to arise. The “learned” aspect of machismo came as a ripple effect to the cinema’s creation of the macho. Politics became involved as society began to seek out these passion-full, violent men to defend their country.
A thread was woven between what was shown on TV and what the Mexican culture looked for in their reality. Hispanics began to define themselves as a society full of capable strong men that drove their people to freedom. Therefore, most all men who wanted to be noticed learned to enact these preconceived qualities of what un hombre was. The Mexican culture then centered their heritage around family with the head-of-household being specifically a man. Yet, paired with this competent man came a submissive woman. The macho man soon became known to “conquer women at his pleasure” without considering what the female felt or her personal desires (Basham 127). Contrasting the powerful stance of the man, the women became defined as a figure whose primary purpose was to live in the shadow of her husband. She was viewed as someone to stay at home and take care of the children. A young women’s virginity, which was to be guarded at all cost, became a man’s most prized possession, and something he acquired with marriage. A macho man and a submissive woman became the ideal home, as the man took care of the relationship with the outside world and the mother focused on the binding relationships within the family. To many this seemed as a significant power difference, and made them completely against the gender inequality.
People in Mexico however, specifically the women, felt that following every order their husband gave was honorable. If for some reason a household was not run like this, not only do the women get shunned, but also the men. In Mexico, a weak man is what is known as a cobarde, a coward. Up until today men who do not show the traits listed earlier, get labeled as such. Therefore, it is easier for them to be accused of being harsh with their wife from outsiders, before being ostracized by their society for being weak. Enacting on a machista’s characteristics is “the socially expected behavior for males in these societies” (Bashman 126). By trying to eradicate this way of living, there would also be a significant loss in the history and culture of Mexico. So much of its heritage has been centered around this strong belief, that trying to tell its people now that it is an incorrect way to live would be useless. Furthermore, it is important to understand that although there is a significant power difference within the genders, this lifestyle cannot be ruled as ethically incorrect. The concept of ethical relativism comes into play in order to explain just how this dominance is justified. Ethical relativism holds that the conflicting ethical judgements for a scenario can both be ruled correct, if the context is considered (Darwall 65).
That is to say that, depending on the specific context of a situation, in this case machismo, it can be morally justified to act a certain way because of the surroundings. Taking this scope on the subject, makes it unfair to say machismo is incorrect without first considering the history behind the subject at hand and its social context. If one were to judge Mexico off the standards the United States has for itself, what would be incorrect would not be the machismo, rather the unequal comparison of two very distinct cultures. The prominence of this male-dominated society and how it has been able to prevail through time can be placed ironically on women. A survey taken by 600 people on the streets of Mexico revealed that 61.2 percent of people believe that machismo is still the backbone of Mexican culture (NOTIMEX). Interestingly enough, many people attribute the spreading of this belief to what mothers teach their children at home. Mothers are the ones who stay at home and raise the children, thus instilling in their children the belief that their father is the superior person. Children grow up and then follow the same life-style, contributing to the cycle and cultivating the culture. Moreover, another study done with Latino couples demonstrated that a sense of machismo is sometimes even necessary to achieve marital satisfaction (Pardo 300).
Traditional values being shared help bind the family together in a deeper way and allow for the couple to feel like they are in harmony while raising their children. The idea that the man has to be the one to carry the house, can lead him to take extra care of his wife and children, making sure that he is always the one who provides. This is taken as a kind gesture by certain wives and they feel honored to be able to say that they do not have to work a day in their life. Once again contributing to how machismo is a sense of identity for people, and even brings them closer together in their household. Lastly, being a person that has had the opportunity to interact with both cultures her whole life, I felt it possible to interview people I know in Mexico. Rodrigo Rafael Camacho Aldaz, a 22-year-old who has lived in Mexico his entire life, was the person I chose. Rodrigo’s responses were in Spanish, but for terms of this paper I will only provide the translation. When asked whether or not machismo had a significant influence in Mexican culture Camacho replied by saying that it defiantly did. He expressed that he believed machismo played a big identity role for Mexico when it came down to specifically the revolution era. For Camacho, it was during this time that the macho man came about and began to form part of what Hispanics see today in their culture.
When asked whether he sees machismo in his everyday life, Camacho said that he feels that it has definitely decreased and is not as prominent as in the past, yet it still lives. Camacho concluded the interview by stating that much of what Mexico prides itself in indirectly centers around these macho views. All things considered, I believe it is easy to see that stripping away machismo would kill off a part of Mexico’s heritage. This was not only proven by the mass media produced in Mexico throughout all these years, but by random sampling, and opinions of those who have lived there their entire life. The ethics behind this way of living was directly connected to this sense of identity Mexico has with the subject at hand. As long as the context of machismo stays within Mexico, where the country’s identity depends so much on it, machismo is not ethically incorrect. 15.
