Factors influencing masculinity ideology among Latino men

Journal of Men's Studies, The, Spring, 2009 by Pedro A. Saez, Adonaid Casado, Jav C. Wade

Masculinity ideology is defined as the "endorsement and internalization of cultural belief systems about masculinity and the male gender, rooted in the structural relationship between the two sexes" (Pleck, Sonenstein, & Ku, 1993, p. 88). Masculinity ideology is thought to arise through a process of gender role socialization whereby young boys (as well as girls) internalize cultural norms and expectations about male-appropriate behavior from families, peer groups, and society. These internalized gender role norms serve as a means by which men organize and process information about themselves and the external world (Spence, 1993). So defined, the construct of masculinity ideology reflects a social constructionist perspective on gender, which holds that there is no one "true" masculinity but rather there are many "masculinities" that vary according to the social context (Levant, Richmond, Majors, Inclan, Rossello, & Heesacker, 2003).

Within this diversity of masculinities, researchers have pointed to a particular kind of masculinity ideology rooted in traditional and non-egalitarian societies, referred to as traditional masculinity ideology. A traditional masculinity ideology serves to uphold patriarchal codes by requiring that males adopt dominant and aggressive behaviors and function in the public sphere, while requiring that females adopt adaptive and nurturing behaviors and function in the private sphere of the family (Levant, 1996). More specifically, Levant, Hirsch, Celentano, Cozza, Hill, and MacEachern (1992) defined traditional masculinity ideology in terms of the following seven dimensions: the requirement to avoid all things feminine; the injunction to restrict one's emotional life; the emphasis on toughness and aggression; the injunction to be self-reliant; the emphasis on achieving status above all else; non-relational, objectifying attitudes toward sexuality; and fear and hatred of homosexuals.

Recent studies have investigated various demographic and cultural variables associated with adherence to a traditional masculinity ideology. The literature on masculinity ideology and Latino men, though as yet limited and inconclusive, has presented some evidence to support speculation that Latino men may endorse more traditionally masculine gender roles than European American men. One recent study found that Latino men endorsed higher degrees of traditional masculinity ideology than did European Americans and African Americans (Abreu, Goodyear, Campos, & Newcomb, 2000). Due to limited research in this area, researchers have suggested that further studies investigate traditional masculinity ideology in Hispanic and other ethnic minority men (Abreu et al.; Pleck, Sonenstein, & Ku, 1994).

While the research on cross-cultural differences in traditional masculinity ideology is sparse, there is ample literature on Latino masculinity, almost all of which invariably addresses the construct of "machismo." The term machismo owes primarily from the social and psychological literature on Mexican males (Diaz, 1966; Diaz-Guerrero, 1955; Paz, 1961; Penalosa, 1968) and it has long been used synonymously with Latino male identity (De La Cancela, 1986; Mirande, 1997). However, past efforts to understand machismo have not arrived at a consensus description or definition of the term. Some conceptions of machismo emphasize exaggerated forms of male gender role behaviors such as heavy drinking, toughness, aggressiveness, risk taking, and virility (Boulding, 1990; Mosher, 1991), while alternative definitions for machismo have been proposed that endorse machismo as a culturally valued and desirable ideal of courage, honor, virility, physical strength, and as representing a protector, provider, and authority figure (Abreu et al., 2000; Christensen, 1975; Lazur & Majors, 1995; Mirande, 1997). Despite the varying conceptions of machismo, some authors have suggested that within psychological literature, there has been a tendency to focus only on the negative characteristics of machismo (e.g., aggressiveness, chauvinism, hypermasculinity, sexism; see Arciniega, Anderson, Tovar-Blank, & Tracey, 2008; Torres, Solberg, & Carlstrom, 2002).

Recent research on Latino masculinity has proposed a multidimensional view of machismo, which embraces both positive and negative qualities associated with the construct (Arciniega et al., 2008; Torres, Solberg, & Carlstrom, 2002). In one study, Arciniega and his colleagues developed a bi-dimensional measure of machismo. Their research supported a two-dimensional characterization of machismo, which included "traditional machismo" (described as aggressive, sexist, chauvinistic, and hypermasculine attitudes and behaviors), and "caballerismo" (referring to nurturance, family-centeredness, and chivalrousness). In another study, Torres, Solberg, and Carlstrom (2002) provided for a more inclusive and multidimensional perspective of machismo and identified five separate identity dimensions within Latino masculinity: contemporary masculinity, machismo, traditional machismo, conflicted/compassionate machismo, and contemporary machismo. Nevertheless, even the most inclusive definitions of machismo seem to suggest that some aspects of machismo are congruent with Levant's conception of a traditional masculinity ideology.