Scenes from a Mexican Battlefield

The Catholic Church and
conservative politicians have
launched aggressive local and
national campaigns for “family
values” and sexual abstinence,
and against condom use. This
offensive has shaped the
embattled debates and activism
around sexual politics in Mexico.
Activists in Mexico nstrate in of the U.S. ssy during ational AIDS 1993. The heads “Silence th.”
As part of his package of reforms to modernize Mexico, former President Carlos Salinas de Gortari approved an amendment in 1992 to Article 130 of the Constitution to strengthen freedom of religion. The primary beneficiary was the Catholic Church, whose public presence is now legally protected by the Constitution. Despite the official separation of church and state that has existed in Mexico since 1917, the Church has always been a powerful player in Mexican politics, especially where sexuality is con- cerned. But these reforms represent an important recon- figuration of the political arena to the extent that they institutionalize the Church’s role as an overt and inde-
Marta Lamas is an anthropologist in the Gender Studies Program at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM). She is director of the journal, debate feminista, and of the Information Group for Reproductive Choice (GIRE), an NGO based in Mexico
City.
Translated from the Spanish by Mark Fried.
pendent political force in Mexican society.
The Church now has legal access to the
media, which it has used to disseminate its
positions on a wide array of social issues. Its
leaders have also joined forces with conserv-
ative political leaders, particularly from the
National Action Party (PAN), and launched
aggressive local and national campaigns for
“family values” and sexual abstinence, and against con-
dom use. This offensive of reactionary forces has had
powerful effects on the political landscape and has
largely shaped the embattled debates and activism
around Mexican sexual politics in recent years.
As far as sexuality in Mexico is concerned, the twen-
tieth century did not begin until the 1970s. 1 This at least
partially explains why the explicit and implicit rules
about sexuality stink of the nineteenth century, and why
the discussions about modern sexual identities and prac-
tices are so backwards. The Catholic Church has played
a crucial role in keeping the debate on sexual politics in
its pre-modern state. From 1917 to 1992, the Church had
no legal status in Mexico. The liberal and socialist cur-
rents within the Mexican Revolution led to anti-clerical
laws that went far beyond establishing the separation of
church and state. The lay legislation enshrined in the
1917 Constitution dramatically circumscribed the pres-
ence of the Catholic Church in the public arena. These
laws were vehemently rejected by both the Vatican and
VOL XXXI, No 4 JAN/FEB 1998 17REPORT ON SEXUAL POLITICS
the Mexican Church hierarchy, prompting “La
Cristada,” a peasant uprising instigated by the bishops
between 1926 and 1929. The civil war came to an end
with an agreement that guaranteed the flexible applica-
tion of the anti-clerical statutes. The “nonaggression
pact” signed in 1929 and consolidated over the next
decade ensured a margin of “tolerance” for the Church
and allowed, for example, the opening of private
schools for religious education. In many ways, through
these agreements the state also handed the regulation of
daily life over to the Church, including everything
related to the family and sexuality. 2
This explains why all local and federal battles over
sexuality have focused on the same
issue-whether to affirm or question tra-
ditional Catholic morality. A woman exar These battles have been anti-abortion /
fought on many fields, a ture inside a cd
result not only of Mexico’s in Tuxt/a Gutih Me cultural diversity but of its
uneven socio-economic development. Al-
though the Church has always enjoyed a
substantive role in Mexican society, its
constitutionally mandated marginality
contributed to a certain moderation of its
public presence. Nuns and priests could
not walk the streets in habits and collars,
for example, and the Church was prohib-
ited from holding assets. Most impor-
tantly, its public statements and actions
had to be controlled and measured.
During its period of “illegality.” the
Catholic Church never stopped making statements or
pressuring the government. But today it enjoys the free-
dom to move beyond rhetoric to active public cam-
paigns that border on intimidation and blackmail. Over
the past few years, members of the hierarchy have made
statements on sexual issues that are irresponsible and
ignorant, even criminal. Most recently, the Primate
Archbishop of Mexico, Norberto Rivera, declared dur-
ing a mass in the cathedral that condoms were harmful
to one’s health and ought to carry an explicit warning
like cigarettes and alcohol. 3 The Salinas reforms have
empowered the Church to launch prime-time mass-
media campaigns about anything with which it takes
offense. It does so, moreover, not only from the pulpits
and confessionals as was always the case, but in con-
junction with important businessmen and the owners of
television stations, newspapers and radio stations.
The political and economic power of Catholic groups
to promote a sexist and homophobic agenda is worri-
some. Arrogantly asserting itself as the only moral rep-
resentative of Mexican society, the Catholic hierarchy
uses its influence and economic power to promote its
sexual policies via the religious organizations of the
wealthy, like Opus Dei, the Legionaries of Christ and
the Knights of Columbus. It also exerts pressures
through the organizations it controls, like the National
Parent Association or the National Pro-Life Committee.
Especially dangerous is the influence of the hierarchy’s
business allies in the Opus Dei, whose members use
their economic clout to influence the media. For exam-
ple, Domecq distillery and the Bimbo bread company
threatened to pull their advertisements if television sta-
tions aired a public-service announcement of the
National AIDS Council (CONASIDA) in which Lucia
M6ndez, a prominent national actress, appeared promot-
ing condom use. The owner of Bimbo made the same
threat to Channel 40 if they broadcast the accusations of
child molesting against Marcial Maciel, founder and
leader of the Legionaries of Christ.
f the Church’s offensive since the 1991 reforms has
been spectacular, so has the government’s retreat.
The best example is the Secretariat of Public
Education (SEP), which is in charge of providing rudi-
mentary sexual education in the public schools. SEP has
been the target of an aggressive campaign waged pri-
marily in the media. A book on sex education for ado-
lescents and for training high-school teachers set off a
storm of accusations. What irritated conservatives was
that the book recognized that sexual values depend on
the norms that are accepted within a given society-
arguing, in effect, that there is nothing “natural” about
dominant views of sexuality. Another problem was that
it spoke clearly and directly about the consequences of
sexual relations and mentioned both birth and abortion
as possible outcomes of pregnancy. This was interpreted
as promoting abortion, and the National Parents
NACLIA REPORT ON THE AMERICAS 18REPORT ON SEXUAL POLITICS
Association, an affiliate of the Ibero-American Parents
Association, denounced SEP for “inciting young people
into licentious behavior.”
The headlines were ferocious. “Parent organizations
demand removal of books that incite licentious behavior
and harm Mexican morals,” proclaimed El Heraldo. 4
“Leaders of parent organizations criticize the inclusion
Homophobia
and sexism tinge
much of Mexican
intellectual
production,
distorting political
discourse and
impeding the
construction of a
rigorous intellectual
foundation for
nondiscriminatory
policies.
of images inappropriate
for children that border
on the most vulgar
pornography,” screamed
La Jornada. 5 And
Excelsior stated, “SEP
distributes a book that
borders on pornogra-
phy.” 6 Although the
authors of the book re-
sponded some days
later, their statements
were relegated to letters
to the editor section, and
did not have the impact
of the original news sto-
ries. The SEP itself, fol-
lowing the ostrich-like
policies so common to
the governing Insti-
tutional Revolutionary
Party (PRI), chose to
remain silent, revealing
its cowardly reluctance
to confront the Catholic hierarchy.
The Parents Association took aim at sex-education
programs, and pressed for the “expulsion” of the
Mexican Foundation for Family Planning, a Planned
Parenthood-type organization, from certain states. They
achieved just that in San Luis Potosi in June, 1992, and
managed to scare other states into abandoning their sex-
education programs. The government’s response gave
aid and comfort to these reactionary views. Fear of con-
fronting the Church has also led the government to
excuse statements from the Vatican’s official representa-
tive that would have sent any other diplomat packing.
When the Papal nuncio, Justo Mullor, spoke out against
public education last October, the Ministers of the
Interior and of Foreign Relations were quick to forgive
him. They were not so generous a few weeks earlier
when Canadian ambassador Marc Perron made compar-
atively mild statements against corruption, which led to
his resignation. 7
Amidst these intimidation tactics, there is a notable
absence of public figures who are willing to confront the
sexism and homophobia of the Church and its allies.
This is in part a product of the intellectual backwardness
that characterizes discussions of sexuality. But it is also
a reflection of the state of intellectual debate in Mexico.
More than 15 years have passed since the first gender
research and study programs were established in
Mexico, but serious engagement with feminist thought
remains scarce in academic circles. Despite a recent
flowering of critical thinking seeped in post-structuralist
perpectives, few on the Mexican intellectual circuit have
any interest in feminist or gay thought. The body and
sexuality are accorded relevance as subjects of reflec-
tion and research, but there is little academic work on
lesbianism or homosexuality, nor is there any sort of
engagement with queer theory. Several major research
projects have been structured on the mistaken assump-
tion of the “natural” heterosexuality of those being stud-
ied. The consequences of this heterosexist bias can be
seen in the content of university curricula, including
graduate studies, and in the homophobia that tinges
much of Mexican intellectual production. Such homo-
phobia and sexism, in turn, distort political discourse,
impeding the construction of a rigorous intellectual
foundation for nondiscriminatory sexual policies.
Public challenges to the government’s policies have
come from feminist and gay activist groups, some intel-
lectuals and a handful of media figures. Worthy of men-
tion here are Carlos Monsiviis, the most important cul-
tural critic on Mexican sexuality, feminist commentators
like Ver6nica Ortiz, who has a weekly TV program on
sexuality, and Patricia Kelly, who runs a radio show on
the same topic. A well-known gay actor, Tito
Vasconcelos, also has an alternative program on the
radio station of the Secretariat of Public Education
where the gay population can express its concerns. In
terms of political visibility, however, the response has
been weak. A few gay groups have managed to achieve
a public presence, but only through their AIDS-related
work. 8 Their struggle against homophobia has been
largely ignored. Ongoing raids against gays, and the evi-
dent lack of interest in the murders of transvestites and
prostitutes are clear expressions of the government’s
approach. The absence of a gay movement with eco-
nomic power and a strong political presence creates the
circumstances in which savage homophobic repression
can continue with impunity. The left-wing Party of the
Democratic Revolution (PRD), which recently won the
mayoral seat in Mexico City, has been relatively absent
from public campaigns against sexism and homophobia.
Sexual politics is still seen as a secondary issue, below
the serious problems of poverty, misery and disempow-
erment. Although some notables have taken progressive
stances, most PRD representatives remain backwards
machos.
The situation is also compounded by the lack of
activism among gay youth. According to Monsivdis,
VOL XXXI, No 4 JAN/FEB 1998 19REPORT ON SEXUAL POLITICS
many young homosexuals in Mexico City have found a
certain degree of acceptance by adopting a “gay” iden-
tity, suggesting that the semantic impact of the word “gay” creates a social space of tolerance. To be gay is to
become part of an international movement, moving from
a problem-ridden condition to an extravagant but “mod-
ern” lifestyle. This appears to dissolve prejudice, which
in turn erodes the motivations for activism. Many urban
gays are not interested in thinking about the absence of a
rights-based culture, and much less in taking action to
change the situation. Some reject activism because they
associate it with sectarian gay-liberation groups or with
leftist politics. Others simply want to live their lives and
not be bothered by politics.
Compared to gay groups, the feminist movement
appears well established. Yet despite the mobilizations
of the 1970s-which made feminists a political force to
be reckoned with-the movement has not created a
political alternative for most Mexican women. The pop-
ular women’s movements that grew out of the 1985
earthquake, on the other hand, did become a vehicle of
participation for many. But the demands that mobilized
these women steered clear of sexual questions, despite
the fact that they are the ones who suffer most from sex-
ual double standards, the lack of sex education, and the
criminalization of abortion. The few middle-class femi-
nists groups that have taken progressive stances on sex-
uality have often been stigmatized as “libertines” for
doing so. In fact, feminists have defended the freedom
of sexual choice since 1976, when the Feminist
Women’s Coalition was created. But homophobia is
rampant among many feminists, and is especially visi-
ble in the movement’s constant battle to keep itself from
being identified with lesbianism.
he growing interference of the Church in the pub-
lic arena has gone hand in hand with the electoral
victories of the PAN in several states. With a
pseudo-democratic rhetoric that denounces the corrup-
tion and authoritarianism of the ruling party, the PAN
has won municipal and gubernatorial races in several
states. Soon after its first triumphs, PAN governments
launched moralizing initiatives in various states. In
Chihuahua, for example, the PAN reformed the state
Constitution to defend life “from the moment of con-
ception.” In other states, party officials that are allied
with the Catholic hierarchy have supported arbitrary
actions such as prohibiting state employees from wear-
ing mini-skirts in Jalisco, shutting down a photography
exhibit of nudes in Aguascalientes, and striking the
name of Juurez, the president who decreed the separa-
tion of church and state, from a street in the state of
Mexico. In Guanajuato, at the request of the bishop, the
mayor blocked a conference on abortion by Catholics
for a Free Choice and the Information Group for
Reproductive Choice (GIRE). If these initiatives
weren’t so dangerous, they would be comical.
As such sexist and homophobic initiatives have
spread, many citizens have come to associate the PAN
with out-dated authoritarian moralizing. 9 In the 1997
elections for mayor of Mexico City, the openly anti-
condom and anti-abortion PAN candidate, Castillo
Peraza, dragged his party to defeat. One of his mistakes
was to write an insidious article against condom use,
arguing that latex pollutes the environment.10 While it is
safe to presume that the more offices PAN wins, the
more absurd policies we will see, it is equally probable
that Mexicans will reject moralistic restrictions from a
Church and a political party that are increasingly out of
touch with their needs and desires.
The growing distance
between these conservative
sectors and average Mexi-
cans was revealed in the
aftermath of the Fourth
World Conference on Wo-
men in Beijing in 1995. The
PAN and the Mexican
Bishops launched a smear
campaign against the gov-
ernment for signing the
final Beijing Accords, and
attempted to frighten people
with lies. They claimed that
the government had em-
braced the decriminaliza-
tion of abortion, that it had
endorsed homosexual and
lesbian families and their
right to adoption, that it
called for banning the word
“mother,” and that it had
commited itself to promot-
ing the use of contracep-
Mass culture may
counter the
puritanism of
political and
religious elites,
but it directs
people away from
political activity.
Pleasure, rather
than politics,
becomes the
desired way to
spend free time.
tives from the age of 11 without parental consent. To
combat these alleged horrors, the Bishops Conference
called on the Catholic community of the archdiocese of
Mexico to make a pilgrimage to the Basilica of the
Virgin of Guadalupe “for life and the family.”” Despite
the power of these lies, however, the pilgrimage did not
attract the expected crowds.
This incident reflected changing public attitudes
about sexuality and the fact that many Mexicans have
more liberal and tolerant views than the conservative
groups who govern them. These changes are the result
of “the cultural internationalization of the country, the
rise in secondary and university education, general sec-
ularization built on tolerance, and the dissemenation of
NACIA REPORT ON THE AMERICASREPORT ON SEXUAL POLITICS
feminist principles.” 1 2 The
international culture industry,
for example, has wrought sig-
nificant changes in the value
systems of Mexicans, espe-
cially among the poorer sec-
tors of society. Images from
popular music as well as from
U.S. films and televisions
programs have eroded tradi-
tional prohibitions by provid-
ing new perspectives on the
worlds of sexuality and repro-
duction. Some of these con-
tradict traditional values and
encourage more open and less
guilt-ridden sex lives for both
women and men,
gay and straight. A young cp
Yet despite the march to dec fact that con- nalize abortic
sumer culture Mexico
provides a
tremendous counterweight to
the recent onslaughts of puritanical rhetoric, it very
often reinforces the existing sexism and homophobia in
society. What is more, while the influence of mass cul-
ture may counter the puritanism of political and reli-
gious elites, it generally directs people away from polit-
ical activity. Pleasure, rather than politics, becomes the
desired way to spend free time. This is clearly visible
among youth in Mexico City, where the impact of New
Age culture is widespread and where rock music pro-
vides an important cultural space for sensory and exis-
tential release. 1 3
Despite the obstructions put up by the Catholic
Church and its political allies, respect for sexual diver-
sity is slowly gaining ground, at least among certain
generational and progressive groups. A notable example
are the Zapatistas. The philosophy of the Zapatista
Army of National Liberation (EZLN) revolves around
the ideal that “everything should be shared evenly.” This
has opened possibilities for apparently freer sexual
behavior such as marriage and divorce by mutual agree-
ment and the undermining of traditional sex roles
among combatants as women reach positions of author-
ity. 1 4 And while no other political figure has openly
acknowledged the legitimacy of the struggle for sexual
diversity, Subcomandante Marcos offered public con-
gratulations to Patria Jim6nez, a PRD congresswoman,
for defending lesbian and gay rights.15 The absence of
sex education and government campaigns against the
spread of HIV are clear indicators that the political elite
sees sexuality as high-risk political terrain.
When Mexicans seek sexual
freedom, they confront the vast
difference between their desires
and the reality of the country.
New perspectives on sexuality
have broadened the horizons of
love, relationships and family,
but the absence of sex educa-
tion and legal abortion, and the
difficulties in obtaining con-
doms and other contraceptive
methods impede the free exer-
cise of sexual and reproductive
rights.16 Unwanted pregnancies
result not only in hundreds of
thousands of abortions each
year, but also in thousands of
unwanted children. These ba-
bies, once welcomed as old-age
insurance, are increasingly per-
ceived as punishment in a soci-
ety that offers no support in the
difficult task of child-rearing.
There is growing awareness
that public participation and legislative representation
will be needed to overcome these barriers. People’s
desire for democratization at the local and national
level is and will remain an important factor in facilitat-
ing discussion about sexual and reproductive rights.
The collective work of feminist and gay groups who
labor to contain the conservative tide is crucial in this
struggle. This includes organizations like Catholics for
a Free Choice, the Mexico City Women’s Health
Network, GIRE, Sor Juana’s Closet, Letter S and the
Gay Cultural Circle. Outside Mexico City, other groups
are active, such as Patlatonalli in Guadalajara, Embrace
in Monterrey, Fight in Tijuana, the Rosario Castellanos
Women’s Center in Oaxaca and the San Crist6bal
Women’s Group in Chiapas. A new political group
called DIVERSA is attempting to implement a rain-
bow-coalition model to promote the defense of sexual
diversity, which it sees as a political means to achieve
full citizenship and democracy. These efforts to ques-
tion the infallibility of Church authorities and the usu-
ally willful blindness of government and party officials
have posed fundamental challenges to obsolete under-
standings of sexuality. But if sexual rights are to
become part of the aspirations of Mexican women and
men for full citizenship, they must be formulated polit-
ically and placed on the public agenda of political par-
ties and the government. If Mexicans are to fully and
freely exercise their rights to reproductive choice and
sexual freedom, values themselves must also be
assigned new meanings.
Scenes from a Mexican Battlefield 1. Carlos Monsivais, personal communication, October 20, 1997. 2. Carlos Monsivdis, personal communication, October 20, 1997. 3. Statement reprinted by La Jornada (Mexico City), August 25, 1997. 4. El Heraldo (Mexico City), February 11, 1994. 5. La Jornada (Mexico City), February 11, 1994. 6. Excelsior (Mexico City), February 11, 1994. 7. See Proceso, No. 1093 (October 12, 1997), pp. 22-29. 8. The monthly supplement, “Letra S,” published by La Jornada, has provided extensive coverage of these organizations. 9. See the weekly column, “Por mi madre bohemios,” by Carlos Monsivais and Alejandro Brito in La Jornada. 10. Castillo Peraza, “Reflexiones condoecol6gicas,” Proceso (March 20, 1997). 11. Statement No. 95/33 (September 26, 1995). 12. Carlos Monsivbis, “De c6mo un dia amaneci6 Pro Vida con la novedad de vivir en una sociedad laica,” debate feminista, No. 3 (September 1991). 13. Carlos Monsivais, personal communication, October 20, 1997. 14. See Guiomar Rovira, Mujeres de maiz (Mexico City: Era, 1997). 15. Patria Jimenez, personal communication, April 6, 1997. 16. In some cities, such as Guadalajara, conservative pharmacy own- ers refuse to sell condoms because they are prohibited by the Catholic Church.