Neomachistas: 7 characteristics to recognize them

Thanks to initiatives in favor of feminism, today women in many countries can enjoy conditions of equality that would have been inconceivable decades ago.

Nevertheless, machismo continues to be deeply rooted in all types of cultures and societies, which means that many prejudices and ideas that lead to the undervaluation of women still weigh. In Western countries, open and traditionally publicly vindicated machismo has largely disappeared, but there is still a remnant: the neomachism and, particularly, people with neo-macho attitudes.

What is a neomachista?

A neomachista is, in short, a person who believes in the inferiority of women, or that these deserve less the appellation of "human beings" than men, but that it tries to make this system of ideas is disguised. In other words, neo-machista people reproduce to a greater or lesser degree the ideas linked to machismo, but reformulating certain assumptions and arguments so that they are more subtle.

Neo-machismo, like machismo, is not based on hatred of women, as it does where there is misogyny. It is based, plain and simple, on

the contempt and defense of the idea that being a woman always implies having less value as a person with interests, motivations and own criteria. Neo-machistas will express these ideas indirectly, avoiding certain acts and phrases that are considered politically incorrect by the majority of the population.

Recommended reading: "Psychology of sexism: 5 macho ideas that exist today"

Characteristics of neomachism

That is why recognizing a neo-macho is not as simple as doing the same with someone clearly macho. However, that does not mean that it is not impossible to do so.

Below I propose some basic characteristics that the neo-machista can present, no longer to criminalize people prone to fall into these attitudes, but to be able to take into account that these ideas are still alive although it may not seem so to simple view.

1. Systematic condescension

One of the great paradoxes of neo-machismo is that can be expressed through apparently advantageous treatment of women. But it is not a friendly treatment based on individual affection towards a person who turns out to be a woman, but is based on in the idea that women have the social status of children who, due to their low maturity, should be protected and guided in their her life.

In this sense, a very present attitude in neo-machismo is to treat almost all women, in a systematic, as if they were little more responsible for their lives and their personal decisions than a child or girl.

2. The elegant defense of traditional values

The neo-machista people do not explicitly defend the legitimacy of the power of the man over the woman or the domination by force of the first over the second, but Yes, they can show longing for the traditional values ​​on which decades ago this type of behavior was based. For example, they can show a romantic vision of the lover who protects her lover from her dangers and at the same time controls her so that she does not become the possession of another man. The ideal of a pure woman who only lives for her partner can also be claimed in a more or less veiled way, which implies that women who do not conform to this stereotype are impure.

It is a defense of traditional values ​​that tries to be associated with the elegant and the good manners, the morally correct and "the natural". In this way, the neomachist denies the possibility of questioning these ideas and beliefs by relying on a dogmatism based on what has been done for centuries.

3. Recurring comments about the physique of women

The neo-macho people, regardless of their sex, tend to comment more on women's physique than men's appearance.

These can be phrases that fit the theme of a conversation that was in progress or they can be isolated comments, and may be directed at the woman who is being talked about or at other people. The fact is that since the neo-machismo, the appearance of women takes on special importance, as it is related to the reproductive value of women.

4. Constant references to the reproductive role of women

An important part of the work on gender studies and feminist anthropology point out the link that exists in the West between women and the domestic environment. Traditionally, in European societies, the role of women has been confined to the domestic while that man, in addition to ruling his home, has unlimited access to the public sphere of society. Thus, the idea has been proposed that if the male role is that of producer of goods and services that will allow the family to be provided, the woman has traditionally dealt with reproduction.

Thus, while the role of man cannot be reduced to just one of his attributes, that of women could be reduced to the parts of her body that have a direct role in reproduction and upbringing. Although in Western countries the sphere of women is no longer only domestic (the number of university students and qualified professionals has grown a lot), remnants of this value system remain in the form of neo-machismo where it is taken for granted, for example, that the destiny of every woman is being a mother, or where it is assumed that a woman's professional or financial success is tied to her ability to attract mens.

5. Continual references to feminine nature

Whether the differences between men and women are caused by culture and education or genetic inheritance is a subject of intense debate in scientific circles and there is no clear answer. However, neo-macho people will show a bias towards the position that all gender roles associated with the feminine are produced by biological differences. that cannot be avoided and that largely determine the behavior of both sexes, although today this radical and deterministic stance has little or no basis.

Of course, the supposedly "natural" female behavior that is defended from the neo-machismo is more related to submission and housework and simpler than those of men, traditionally in charge of making the most important decisions and of ruling over the rest of the family members.

6. Criticisms of female leadership

Seeing women in high positions or in positions associated with great decision-making power does not fit well with the traditional feminine ideal. Therefore, people prone to fall into the neo-machismo show great sensitivity to errors or perceived negative characteristics that these women may show, however insignificant they are.

The very fact of being a woman with high responsibility can be a reason for criticism if it is understood that she only does her job "to be able to command." This bias will not exist when evaluating the work of male leaders.

7. Compliments are always welcome

From the conservative perspective of a neo-macho person, women always appreciate compliments if they are elegant and inspired enough.

Of course, this is not the case, since if it were true it would be drastically reducing the level of complexity of the psyche of women. Nevertheless, in neo-machismo there is more emphasis on the way in which the mentality of women can fit with the stereotypes of the feminine that the ability of these people to think and act freed from these bonds.

Side note: criticism of feminism

There are political motivations that lead to trying to relate the criticisms of feminism (or even the use of words like "Feminazi") with machismo.

However, this could only be substantiated if, as feminism, we simply understand the vindication of the idea that men and women have the same value as human beings. The problem, and what makes someone who criticizes feminism not have to present the typical characteristics of someone who holds macho ideas and beliefs, is that feminism does not have to stick to this loose definition, especially since it is understood that there is not just one feminism but several.

The new feminisms are a set of social movements and theories that fight for the recognition of women as human beings and / or for making them have the same rights and possibilities as women mens. There is no common goal in these movements or a single way of understanding the inequality between sexes and genders, and many feminisms have totally opposite points to each other. The only thing that all new feminisms have in common is that:

1. They point out how insufficient it is to base equality between the sexes in the use of laws that do not discriminate against women.

2. They challenge the traditional belief and value system of the West when it comes to love relationships, marriage, or gender roles. Part of the battle waged by the new feminisms is cultural.

People who reproduce neo-macho ways of thinking have reason to try to discredit all feminisms on the basis of the second of the characteristics shared by all the new feminisms, which is the one that goes against the essentially macho idea that women are predestined to fulfill a role of subordination.

In these criticisms there will be no place for the nuances that feminisms exist, and everything that can be related to feminism as a unit will be negatively pointed out, because as a set of political and social movements it can threaten the traditional value system.

Some limitations

However, this point, as a defining characteristic of people who reproduce a neo-macho way of thinking and acting, has an important limitation: it is not It is easy to know if the criticisms of feminisms as a whole are based on the second characteristic shared by these currents of thought, or if they attack only the first.

Non-conservative or macho people could make very elaborate and solid criticisms based simply on the assumption of the overreach of the new feminisms.

Conclusions

This small list of characteristics is not one that allows to identify people prone to neo-machismo in a matter of seconds.

Machismo does not consist of the repetition of stereotypical phrases and actions, but rather is expressed depending on the specific context in which the person is found. That is why to see if these indicators fit someone's behavior, it is necessary to take into account several factors and assess the existence of alternative explanations.

Bibliographic references:

• Brescoll, V. L. (2012). Who takes the floor and why: Gender, power, and volubility in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly. 56 (4), pp. 622 – 641.

• Molina Petit, C. (1994). Feminist dialectic of the Enlightenment. Barcelona: Anthropos.