Sunday, March 21, 2010

Honor as Justification for Discrimination

Throughout history (not exclusive to Spanish or Spanish-American history), honor or the promotion and protection thereof has served as a justification for discriminatory policies and attitudes, particularly concerning sexual and marital relations. However, as discussed in Patricia Seed’s To Love, Honor, and Obey in Colonial Mexico, this conception of honor has evolved over time, reflecting changing values and power structures and challenges.

The mutual conception of honor – moral and social – degraded in stages. The moral conception of honor tied to sexual behavior quickly due to the frequent violation of the traditional model (specifically that, a model à not reflecting the common achieved). These frequent violations of the model, though still discouraged, could not be tied to severe punishment, especially when considering other conception of honor – the social conception. The social conception of honor was related to an attribute reserved to the upper class to wealth more generally, and even this later some encouraged to be broadened, though still of course to the exclusion of others. The distinctions of social class were family and economic situation, which proved to be a source of tension within the upper class, but both groups hoped to exclude the lower classes and “keep clean” the race from the “darker” classes.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of this is the role of gender and race in determining the degree of permissibility of interracial relations. White men could have sexual relations with “dark” women with little chastisement, if any, but marriage to one was for some time deemed unacceptable. This attitude reflects society’s view of dark women as subservient, sexual objects rather than those intended for marital consumption. At the same time, as the Church later sought to legitimize these relationships further, the Church encouraged marriages between white men and dark women with whom they had previously had sexual relations; however, when white women intended to marry dark men, they met with intense and severe opposition by the Church and society.

I wish I could say I were surprised or indignant at this display of patriarchy to “protect and control the woman’s sexuality” – but I am honestly amused by the depth of the double standard.
To the Africans in the Mexican community, on the other hand, honor seems to be much simpler and much less subject to the whims of the ruling class. Honor reflects an ability to sustain one’s family – such as through economic power – not through family connections or skin color.

2 comments:

  1. I find your analysis interesting, but I have a problem with the moral relativism. You chastise the Spanish for having an approach to honor, but then go ahead and approach the African/Mexican communities as superior, even though they assign honor arbitrarily as well. Though by no means am I advocating for sexual repression, but a society need mores and taboos to function. If there is no moral standard then society and culture have no standard and fall apart.

    ReplyDelete
  2. My language may have suggested that I subscribe to the African/Mexican approach to honor as you decribe it, but I do not necessarily consider one superior to the other - I simply wished to point out the differences, perhaps as a product of their relative socio-economic positions in society.

    ReplyDelete