Here in Latin America, you often hear about machismo, or chauvinism. It's one of those rare discussions where I tend to listen a lot, and contribute little, since my position both as a foreigner and a male put me in the "learner" category. So, I'm not about to write a big analysis of machismo in Santa Cruz. I do, however, notice that there is a strong, explicit use of female sexuality in advertising here. The other day on the bus, though, I also thought about how it's funny that they still give preference to women (often pregnant or elderly) for the best seats on the bus. Perhaps there are some mixed messages there, but again, I'm not the best analyst.

While it may not be a perfect analogy, it really got me thinking about the good and bad in every system. Sometimes, we try to point at a good characteristic to justify a corrupt or oppressive system. It's like justifying slavery, because the slave owners took good care of their slaves, so they were better off. Or saying at least the wage-slaves in the factory have enough to buy rice at the end of the day. Or that at least corporate power results in big donations to charities. Or at least the man buys nice things for the woman he treats like an object.

These are all nice benefits. But in the end, no amount of perks can justify something that strips people of their dignity. This is another reason why I disagree with (among other things) the idea that the generosity of those who have should be the solution for those who are denied.