Deconstructing "Marianismo"

Cross posted from my rh Reality Check Blog

A short documentary about Latinas living with HIV created and directed by a young filmmaker in Houston was screened at the Museum of Fine Arts, Houston. What fascinates me about this film by Erica Fletcher is her area of focus, which is “cultural factors that affect the disproportionate spread of HIV among Latina women living in Houston.” It is from this idea of “cultural factors” that she named her film “Marianismo.” Ahh, that phrase “cultural factors” is really loaded when applied to Latinos.

Fletcher, a 19-year-old college student, did a survey of research and literature about Latinas and HIV transmission and infection. What fascinates, and saddens me at the same time, is that when I was an undergrad like Erica, back in the early 1990s, my research on HIV infection/transmission and birth control options among Latinas living in the US was heavily laced with “cultural factors” among Latinos. Everything from “machismo” (the expectation of masculinity, which I have long argued Latinos do NOT have a monopoly on, machismo is in every culture), “familialismo” (a value of the family), “simpatia” (a value of having smooth and non-confrontational exchanges/relationships) and of course “Marianismo” (the expectation of femininity for Latinas). I’m disappointed that nothing has changed in the research in over 15 years about Latinas and sexual health and HIV infections and transmission.

I admit that when I found these “cultural values” I ate them up too! That’s what you are trained to do as an undergrad at a research institution: see peer-reviewed journals as valuable and useful versus examining them with a critical eye (which I learned in graduate school). I wrote papers and even my first book, discussing these “cultural values” and how they affect Latinos living in the US. What I didn’t realize until earlier this decade was that many of these “cultural values” have been ascribed to us by outsiders. These outsiders are often anthropologists or sociologists who “observe” communities and spaces of which they may not always be a member. Fletcher said “A lot of times there is that huge fear in anthropology or sociology when one is doing research of not wanting to peg people into a certain role.” Yup, that sounds about right.

I then began to realize how many of these foreign ideas and “cultural values” that were applied to us (many of them stemming from a legacy of colonization, specifically “Marianismo”) were internalized by Latinos. When I read Latino researchers discussions around Latino sexuality, they too often engaged with “cultural values” found among us. It was rare to find a Latino doing research and/or publishing on the topic to challenge these “cultural values” that were assigned to us.

Instead of debunking all of these “cultural values,” as that can take a very long time, I’d like to tease out part of what Fletcher said in an interview: “There is so much of the Latino culture that is diverse” yet that is often not what we hear in the research or media. I want to deconstruct “Marianismo” for a moment and encourage a dialogue about this specific “cultural value.”

Historically, “Marianismo” was a term coined for the expectation of femininity for Latinas that is connected to Catholicism (enter colonization via religion). The term refers directly to the Virgin Mary (hence the term Maria-nismo), who was considered selfless, enduring sacrifice for the family, being “pure,” and thus spiritually stronger than Latino men. The problem that first arises, for me at least, is that this is connected to a specific religious belief and value system. It is a hasty generalization to assume that all Latinos are Catholic. We are not. Please believe this--we have a diverse range of belief systems as a community--something about which I wrote earlier this week. Assuming all Latinos are Catholic is a disservice and a stereotype.

Another issue for me is that this is one of the only “cultural value” connected to religion. After all, Latino males are not expected to be like Jesus via “machismo.” However, I recognize that some can make an argument that this may be true, especially if we realize that Latino men have stated that they define masculinity as bringing honor to the family, and being responsible. Read more about machismo by Chicana feminist Maxine Baca Zinn’s early work on Chicano families in the late 1970s and 1980s. She was one of the few who spoke out against these assigned “cultural values.”

Another issue about the term “Marianismo” is that if it does exist for some Latinas, it is a result/reaction/outcome of colonization by various empires (Spanish and Portuguese come to mind, but historically several countries in the Americas have been colonized by various other empires). Often people forget how engrained we are generations after colonization has “ended” (I don’t think it really has for many countries, including my own Puerto Rico) yet these “cultural values” remind us of this history. I also see these “cultural values” as a new form of colonization. Maintaining that what was originally forced upon communities remains. This scares me. Accessible texts that I have found useful about this idea and fact include: Americas: The changing Face of Latin America & the Caribbean, and Latino USA: A Cartoon History.

The final point I want to make about “Marianismo” is that there is a connection to remaining a “virgin” (no oral, anal or vaginal sex) until marriage. This idea perpetuates aspects of “machismo” where a Latina is to learn about sex and sexuality via her male partner. It is also very heterosexist as there is no room for anyone to identify as anything other than heterosexual. Thus, this “cultural value” is problematic on numerous levels.

I would love to see the film Fletcher created. I’d also love to begin to see more research that moves us away from assuming these static “cultural values” and creates conversations about actual activities and behaviors that people engage in versus focusing on assumed “values” Latinos have and thus not being very effective. How about we not assume these “cultural values” exist within a community until that community can confirm or deny them without our prompting them. If we do not take a different approach we will end up with the same problematic and ineffective programs for Latino youth based on research that identifies our youth as “risk takers” yet doesn’t actually identify the real risks.

Sexual Risk Takers Get An Ethnic Identity, Or Do They?

Cross-posted from my Media Justice Column

Last week the internets were a blaze with a particular story about the “sexual risk taking” of Latino youth. Surprisingly, or not so, most of the people in the sexual science field who shared the story either via email or on twitter had nothing to say about the article. I found that interesting because I have a lot to say about this topic! The articles that have been written reference a piece of literature titled “Sexuality and Sexual Risk Behaviors Among Latino Adolescents and Young Adults” written by Marcela Raffaelli and Maria I. Iturbide.

Both researchers are academics with a focus on sexuality and Latino communities. Marcela Raffaelli’s biography can be read here and from what I can tell Maria I. Iturbide may still be a graduate student working with Marcela Raffaelli. I have to say that I think if this is the case, this is great to have an advisor agree to publish with a student; this is rare in graduate school (usually we do bibliography and research and get an thank you at the end of the article)!

I share a few of my initial thoughts on Love Isn’t Enough (LIE) (formally Anti-Racist Parent) yet wanted to go more in depth with my ideas and thoughts about the literature and findings. There are a few areas that stand out to me and these include the date of publication, how Latino is defined, how Whiteness and Blackness is defined, gender discussions, cultural values, and issues of consent.

As I wrote on LIE about the date of research:

The first thing that came to mind was the date of publication. The text this article was published in was 2009. That means that some of the research was conducted a while ago, if not a decade ago. Many of the citations that are used and some of the longitudinal statistics are from data that was collected over 5 years ago.

The date of publications is important, because, as you can imagine, if you are writing a research paper for school it takes a while. Imagine if you had to wait for funding from an organization or the government to approve, and agree to have you perform the work so that you can get paid to do it. That’s often what happens in academic research publishing. However, some publications are created because specific funds have been set aside for such work. Regardless, this type of work and research does not happen over night, or even in a few months. Examining data alone can take months.

This publication being included in this book in 2009 and using data, which may have been collected almost 5 years ago, tells us a few things. First, what many of us have known all along was confirmed years ago. Second, we’ve known about this topic and these findings for some time but not much has changed with regards to funding and program evaluation and development. Third, if we have had this data and information for years, why hasn’t there been a shift or a good amount of proactive efforts to respond to the multiple issues that are present? These topics lead me to then ask the question: are Latinos even a priority in the sexual science field?

As the US “celebrated” Black History Month in February, many conversations were going on about the diversity of the continent of Africa. It was not until the 21st Century that many academics, scholars, and researchers realized this difference and began to incorporate it into the analysis of people who were/are descendents of African slaves in the US. Why have we yet to come to this understanding about people who are identified as “Latino”? For all over the world? I’ve shared that I struggle with being identified as a part of a group simply because we share a similar history of exploration, conquest, and colonization when in reality that is almost all we have in common. This is one of the challenges with the term “Latino.”

Many people have heard me share that I was not raised in a “Latino” home but in a Puerto Rican home, a Caribbean one that has very specific rituals, values, traditions, and expectations. For this reason I find more similarities with people who are also from the Caribbean versus people who are from some countries in Central and South America. Why is that you ask? Because, surprise! We are different. I’d also like to mention that the term “Latino,” and how it has been constructed and used, leads me to wonder if people who have a history of colonization by non-Spanish empires are included. Folks often forget that countries such as Belize, Brazil, Suriname, and Guyana are also parts of Central and South America. Are they considered “Latino” in the way the term is used in the US? I have my own answer to that question, yet think it is still important to put out there for discussion.

As a result, the research allows youth to self identify as “Latino” yet does not give information on how that identity is constructed, or how inclusive or exclusive youth are guided to gain clarification. There is also no discussion of race among Latinos that I have seen in this publication. My impression is that “Latino” is being used as both a racial and ethnic identity, which, hopefully from my last several articles on Blackness among Latinos, you realize is not always accurate or inclusive.

For example, when data is used such as “Latinos are less likely to have sex than Blacks but more than Whites” does that represent LatiNegr@s or Latinos who racially identify as White as well? See where I’m coming from? Still with me?

I completely agree with the authors regarding a need to examine “Latinos” as subgroups (i.e. ethnicities such as Cuban, Puerto Rican, Dominican, etc.). This also forces researchers and program developers/evaluators to recognize the privileges and unique challenges that many specific ethnic groups experience being identified as “Latino.” The article discussed differences between ethnic groups and that is real. I can’t begin to explain to you how real it is, especially for im/migrant youth and families. Even the ways that people arrive or were born into the US differ, and those must be recognized as a part of socialization.

There are two things I’m so tired of reading about when discussing Latino sexuality: acculturation/assimilation, and specific cultural norms. This article addressed some aspects of acculturation/assimilation, which many people have very strong feelings and thoughts about , including yours truly. Yet, research has shown that when Latino youth are raised to embrace all aspects of their cultural and national identity (that’s their Latinidad and US specific experiences) they are happier, healthier and less likely to do “bad things.” Why hasn’t this data fit into a discussion on Latino Sexuality, yet? Oh, is it because I have yet to write it? Ok, I’ll work on that!

The topic of cultural norms and values always makes me roll my eyes because it’s the same thing I’ve read decades ago when I was in high school! I will admit that when I wrote my first publication Si Podemos! Yes We Can! Helping Latino Youth Prevent Pregnancy (here’s an article from that publication) on pregnancy prevention efforts targeting Latino youth one of my main issues was the topic of racial and ethnic diversity as well as cultural beliefs and values. The literature at the time was filled with the terms “machismo,” “familialism,” and “marianismo.” I too implemented the same approach that many authors have when discussing sexuality among Latinos: assuming these ideologies are norms and values within a community BEFORE the community can confirm or deny.

I remember when I first got my hands on the book Erotic Journey’s: Mexican Immigrants And Their Sex Lives by Gloria González-López, which focuses on using feminist ethnography and research methods to get the testimonios of heterosexual Mexican Immigrant couples. This was revolutionary! It still is as there is nothing similar at this moment that uses these approaches to talk to/with heterosexual Latinos (if you know of some PLEASE let me know!). One of the things I really loved about González-López’s work is that she did not introduce the term “machismo” (the expectation for Latino men) at all and only used it after one or more of her participants used it first.

Often people think Latinos have a monopoly on the concept of “machismo,” but as I’ve written in the past, that can be found in every community and culture. I also have shared that my experience with “machsimo” in my family is nothing like what you read about in the literature. I had something similar to a “stay at home dad” during my early adolescence as my mother had the full time job. I was also raised in an agnostic home so the idea of “marianismo” (expectations for Latinas, connected to representing the virgin Mary/enduring sacrifice hence the name) was foreign to me. I know I’m not the only one. So creating a program or approaching Latino youth with these two ideas in mind will result in a loss of an opportunity.

Other lost opportunities in this piece was an inclusion, or even an attempt to recognize, Latino youth who identify as something other than heterosexual. There was also a very rigid discussion of “gender” that fits too nicely into a gender binary that ignores transgender men and women and people who identify as gender queer. Then again, who knows if researchers consider any activity outside of a heterosexual encounter to also be categorized as “risky.” Ugh! This makes my head and heart hurt!

Finally, I’m incredibly disturbed that the ideas of “sexual risk taking” are assumed/normalized to be read as consensual encounters. This is not always the case. There are some levels of coercion for some youth (not only females, but males and gender queer people too), as well as sexual assault and rape. Yet there is no discussion in regards to safety when it comes to protection of such encounters. This not only disturbs me, but it saddens me as well. Why can’t we talk about safety for Latinas and all women of Color in the same way we talk about it for White women? Why can’t we talk about it and include gender queer and transgender people?

Some exciting pieces of information from this article include: Latino mothers desire to have an open conversation with their daughters about sex and sexuality, oh, but then that “marianismo” issue gets in the way. Unfortunately, we don’t know if that’s what all Latino mothers think and believe, or if they can’t find time to talk to their children because they work two jobs or work a job that consumes their time as many high paying corporate jobs do, or because they don’t speak English as a first language and don’t know the terminology to use, or that they don’t ever have privacy to discuss such topics because they live in a multi-generational home, or because their daughter is so involved in school and extra-curricular activities they assume everything is ok (perhaps the original article cited answers these questions). There are also some good things about increase condom usage among Latino males who are more “acculturated” to US society and norms. Perhaps this is connected to the patriarchal society in which we still live that grants more privileges to men in general.

What more can I say? Homies, we got work to do! But I’m glad that those of you reading this are down for doing this work!