It is a remarkable fact that contemporary social science be, or seems to be, unable to perceive a daily and forceful phenomenon: the different valuation that human societies assign to the "right to life", depending upon the gender of their members, and the decided (and surprising?) bias in favour of their female halves. This happens in factical, empirical ways; beyond any discursive or speculative issue, and generally contradicting the apparent cultural normative.
And nevertheless, it was as early as 1869 when Stuart Mill examined the "chivalry norm" regarding to social attitudes towards women, deploring its declination and admitting that it had offset, in important degree, the condition, disadvantageous in his opinion, of historical women. And even nowadays, we can read in monumental , and quite impartial and unbiased, Perrot and Duby`s "History of the Women in West " , that " the Woman, as a replica of Earth (and her fertility), acquires sacred character ".
An important sample of this phenomenon is the character of physically "untouchable" of women, e.g. in school games and in relation to their male mates, no matter age or physical force ; this precept, "a man never hits a woman", prematurely inculcated in minds of children and girls, constitutes certainly an essential " positive classic discrimination " , that probably is in the origin of possible generical masculine resentments , and of the "machismo" especially;
It appears so , e.g., in other " History of Women ", of Bonnie Anderson et al., on the basis of Nancy Chodorow's ideas. So, machismo seems to be like a part of a " masculine protest " that does not appear wholly arbitrary and unjustified, given the vital transcendency of this feminine privilege.
That fact seems to constitute the basic dimension of Female Sacralization, which appears real although it experiences, evidently, the natural, and usually limited, transgressions affecting any social norm. But in this case they are been judged, nowadays, with the lens of increase that implies the breaking of a taboo; this is verifiable in the social reaction (although it appears quite manipulated and artificial) regarding the murders of women, which constitute less than 10 % of the total of murders. And I must say that the one who writes rejects, vividly and hearthly, of course, women's murders; but this itself is also a proof of the depth of the taboo, and of the dogmatic and inquisitorial climate that has been created on the basis of it. So, any researcher on other varieties of murders "must" issue a "declaration of principles" on them; and it is symptomatic too the fact of proceeding these reflexions from a personal status of marginality and of being signed by pseudonym.In sum, all that subtle, but very powerful normative, results apparently in experiences too much quotidian , what impedes its perception and analysis on the part of the , in this aspect highly ideologized, formal science of our days. So, for sociology of today those essential rules seem not to exist, and no theoretical or empirical research developments are observed, derived from them.
Another " blind point " of perception? , epistemological regression ?; apparently yes, and more: a too flagrant contradiction with the dominant climates of opinion, and that reflects the degree of strength and ideological and academic absolutism that these can acquire (in 1870 Dostoiewski emphasized the dangerousness of the "semi-sciences"); and in a very special way, when these climates come to a tacit and paradoxical agreement with dominant interests, as hereinafter we are going to hypothesize.
Hence its fascinating - but ominous - aptitude to create, interpret and manipulate realities.
In such a subjective and generally conflictive topic, we can raise all that as an hypothesis, maybe valid for ours and other cultures of today, but, without universal validity ? : it seems that the norm of "chivalry" towards women, and even less their "sacralization", did not exist in any oriental society ; but if so, we can speculate if would it not be historically reflected in demographic phenomena, as a higher female mortality, which would had impeded the subsistence itself and historical continuity of those societies?
Other evidences in the same sense:
1) In the rare historical opportunities in which to human life a monetary value has been established (and in a free way, as product only of supply and demand factors), a higher one seems have been assigned to that of women. So, the price of female slaves, in every century in which slavery existed here, was consistently greater: 300 pesos for those in fertile age, against approximately 200-250 for a young and healthy male slave; and it should have reflected real differences regarding to the "appreciation" that was experiencing each category, and repercussed, too, in respective " quality of life ". It is necessary to say that there exist also historical examples that point at the opposite phenomenon, i.e., a greater price assigned to men, in the patterns of diferent old cultures, e.g., in cases of pecuniary compensations for loss of lives; but it would be exactly a case of " fixed" or artificial price ; our example points at free prices, where genuine "factical" forces and its inconsistencies with the normative are reflected . And everything seems to indicate that that circumstance has been really universal: when searching for the topic in Internet, there appear samples of this overvaluation of female slaves, in Korea, in ancient Spain, in British Egypt and in other historical scenaries
In the same way: in cases of war captives or hostages, the price of women seems to have been (ceteris paribus) historically higher than that of their masculine counterparts.
2) And the women's kidnapping, as social phenomenon, has been much more frequent than that of men, which in case of warlike defeats and unlike them, were often exterminated (cf. the other " History of the Women " of Bonnie Anderson et to., where the circumstance is commented, but without concluding anything of it). And the point should be pondered, on testing historically the level of respect for this fundamental human right: the right to life. In this way, it is necessary to question, to Stuart Mill and others that refer to the woman as a " slave of her husband ",if there is another case in which slave owners should sacrifice the life for their slaves, as it happened, e.g., in the shipwreck of the Titanic. It would not be the concept itself of " female slavery " a case of sharp semantic distortion, as it is the current appropriation and monopolización of such a concept as the Equality, in the contemporary name of " Department of idem " for ministeries and entities that, in a tacit way at least, conceal and trivialize the inequalities of greater transcendency?
It is curious the appropriation of that concept in Europe and North America; there is a vague familiarity with what experiences a political-geographical name : "America", which appears "granted" in monopoly there , becoming then exclusive and "elitized" and with greater universality as western culture has been expanding. The expression of an specifically Euro-North American perceptual-valorative bias ?, that as well as incide in ignoring the older and "real" America (the continent), and in pressing its inhabitants to denominate themselves, in an insane way, as "Latinos" (?), is perhaps influencing, too, in ignoring to million and millions of "unequal" males?.
3) That women be mostly in the richer sectors of the population, while men predominate among the poorest . Thus, in decile 10, that of the highest income , women seem to constitute between 54 to 55%.(Chile). This is congruent with the feminization of the richest counties in this country (as Vitacura, Las Condes, Providencia:, 55 % of female population) and the masculinization of the poorest (La Pintana, Cerro Navia, etc: 51% of masculine population; men are 49% all over the country) .But it is even more amazing, and almost scandalous to observe that this phenomenon apparently occurs ..in all over the world ! (see the respective percentages of masculinity in different counties, according their wealth or poverty , in different countries )
4) The so called " Missing white woman syndrome " (cf. Wikipedia), maybe a trace of an incipient formal recognition of this phenomenon; it refers to the major gravity and importance assigned to the loss of a female life in relation to a masculine one. Perhaps it could be renamed " Ingrid Betancourt syndrome"; it is exactly what we raise here. And it is necessary to take in account that in the same aspect there is clear discrimination of class: the life in danger of rich and powerful people provokes greater worry than that of their opposite ones; we can then conclude that, in this essential dimension (the right to the life), the high class is represented here by women.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario