From the Macho to the Non-Macho

Analising the data gathered in the article titled "The Meanings of the Macho" by Matthew C. Gutmann, and seeing it through the 'eyes' of the symbolic anthropology theory, it can be said and seen that, as Geertz proposes it, being a Macho is something not necessarily present inside people's head but something present in the society itself in the form of public symbols. It is interesting to see how people determine what is normal and strange or what is good or wrong in terms of what their peers do or even in terms of what their ancestors did or thought was correct.

But since culture is not a learned behavior from this point of view, it is possible to change and adopt new patterns and a modified (or even different) culture. This is how we can see a certain evolution, and how change can be explained. With this in mind, we arrive at the topic of women having jobs (at the same time of their husbands), or, in some cases, of woman working outside their home instead of their husbands; and their husbands taking care of the household.

Though it could be said that these changes are only natural due to the times we are living in, it is necessary to put ourselves in the place, space, time and culture of these people to understand what their explanation of 'por necesidad' means. What they usually say is that they started caring after the house because their wives found a job that gave them the money they needed to continue living. It is important to notice that this response could be a reaction to the question itself and all that lies behind it, such as social customs and prejudices, and that there could be other real meanings and answers to this particular question. It is also interesting to see how this social phenomena shapes a new identity for the Mexican male, that is totally different from the one that existed in the past. The Mexical male can now be less 'bruto' more soft towards his wife and children. He can also participate more actively in raising the children and get to have a different place in the family structure.

All this could eventually lead to an equality of gender, or even an equality in different roles inside the house and also in parenthood. Considering this it is interesting also to see how men are now classifying themselves not only as a macho or as someone subjugated to the woman but rather as 'non-macho', a label that shows equality and also neutrality among men. To conclude, it must be noted that this is an ongoing process that is nowhere near to be finished, because people are always changing, and also because one of the aims of Symbolic Anthropology is to see how people try to figure out the world they live in, which is, just as human beings are, constantly changing.

A common feature of chilean society: 'Sacar verdad por mentira'

A thick description, as opposed to a thin description, tries to go beyond a simple gesture or a simple act. The main difference would be how deep into that single occurrence we decide to go.

In Chilean society we usually have this practice informally called ‘sacar verdad por mentira’. This practice involves only a statement, which may look innocent, but beware, here could be someone trying to ‘sacarte verdad por mentira’. It is typical of any speaker to make statements. Even more than that, it is natural and almost obvious of any speaker to make use of statements to communicate and not only to state facts. But in ‘sacar verdad por mentira’ we have a total different use of a normal statement.

To illustrate how this work, I will picture an imaginary, yet common, situation that could happen to anyone. Let’s suppose there was a meeting. Only old friends from high school were invited, you couldn’t go, but you heard from Person C that someone cried the whole party and so, the event was ruined because everyone felt uncomfortable. You are person B, you do not really know the fact, because you weren’t there, and Person C might know the fact, but maybe it is not a reliable source. So you go to person A, which was at the meeting and knows everything that happened. You want to know the truth, but of course, you can’t go and tell him or her, someone told me that this person would not stop crying and etc. What do you do? You want to be polite, but at the same time you are dying to know: Le sacas verdad por mentira.

You go to person A and say to him or her: “It’s a shame I could not go, you had such a wonderful time, everyone was so happy about the meeting”. You know this is not true, of course, and Person A knows it too, so she or he would reply “What are you talking about? It was such a disastrous night, this person wouldn’t stop crying and we felt so uncomfortable, it was horrible!” And so, there you have your truth. You gain it by means of lying, but not exactly. You were not lying since you weren’t trying to deceive the other person.

This phenomenon is really common among Chilean society (or at least, the part of society I have been brought up in and the part I have been able to look at). My theory is also based in the fact that almost everyone knows the name of this practice (as it was mentioned before, ‘sacar verdad por mentira’) and by the fact that almost everyone tries not to be caught in such common trap.

Self-education: is it possible to go against what is stablished and decide for oneself?

Mr. Benjamin Franklin in his diaries wrote about how he decided to re-educate himself regarding his behaviour towards virtue and what is good or wrong. If we think about it carefully, it is not something rare at all, (how many times have WE wanted to change completely or do something different for the sake of improving our lives?) but is it possible at all?

Franklin himself tells how he was brought up as Presbyterian and how he was educated as such. He did believe in certain things, such as the existence of God and the immortality of the soul, but there were other things in which he did not believe at all. He never went to service on Sundays because he preferred to study, this being the first sign of his will to do things differently.

Education plays an important role in this situation not only because through it Franklin received the foundantions for his latter re-education, but also because it is something external to the individual (in the words of Mr. Durkheim) and as such, would qualify as a social fact. " A social fact is a way or acting or thinking that has a coercive power on the individual", points out Durkheim, and we can see this in Benjamin Franklin's case very well. He decided to break free from certain points, certain social facts, of his earlier education, and though it is possible to struggle free, it is never easy. It is possible to think of this struggle as something violent (even, physically violent) but this is not the exact case. The struggle of Benjamin Franklin was rather a private and non physical one, more importantly, because he was struggling against his own customs and his own self. He created a new method to re-educate himself in terms of behaviour, and in terms of what he thought was good and bad. He then decided that it was not only about something being good or doing good, but it was more related to something being virtous. He then wrote a list containing twelve virtues (adding a 13rd in the end) and decided to master them all.
If we see all this as a social fact, it would be interesting to point out that he broke free from one social fact to adopt another. It is true that this new way of behaving was created by himself, but as it was said earlier, his former education served as the foundation for what he would latter believe. The question proposed was if it was really and truly possible to go against what is stablished, and the truth is that up to some point it is, but there will always be a part of ourselves that remains tied to the social (and moral) facts passed on to us through education. Even when creating a new 'system' for our use only we are creating something using bits and pieces of already existent thoughts, doctrines, etc.

Self-education is possible, but complete isolation is not. Deciding for oneself is possible also, and though living out of the system is possible, it is almost inimaginable in these days.