Analytical Perspectives on Male Participation

Growing attention to the issues of masculinity, sexuality, and reproductive health, principally from the last decade of the 20th century, has produced some, though still insufficient academic and political reflection on males’ increased participation in reproductive processes, in particular the interruption of pregnancy. This mainly involves two aspects we would like to emphasize.

On the one hand, there has been the intervention of international agencies in the fields of population and health, particularly in the regulation of fertility, the prevention of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), and most dramatically in the HIV-AIDS pandemic, which was accompanied by a critical look at existing inequalities in various spheres of the lives of men and women. From this perspective, special attention must be paid to the family and conjugal environment, as well as to the design and implementation of public policies and social and health programs in these fields (Frye Helzner, 1996; Ortiz, 2001; Lerner and Szasz, 2003).

The International Conference on Population and Development (Cairo, 1994), the Fourth World Conference on Women (Beijing, 1995), and the World Summit on Social Development (Copenhagen, 1995) constitute landmarks in all that is related to reproduction, emphasizing and ratifying the need to delve into the role of males in order to promote gender equality and the shared responsibility of couples in this area. The following have been recognized as priority goals at these international forums: creating conditions for improving attention to reproductive-health resources, promoting the exercise of women’s and males’ sexual and reproductive rights, and guaranteeing access to appropriate gender-oriented information and services. The Cairo Conference’s Action Program placed emphasis on the male role in reproduction, including family planning and sexual health, in addition to confirming the importance of them assuming family responsibilities such as childcare and household chores. Likewise, the Platform for Action approved in Beijing stressed the central role males can play in women’s access to health services, to information and education programs on health matters, and women’s exercise of reproductive rights (UNFPA, 1995; PATH, 1997).

In Chapter IV of Cairo’s Action Program, entitled Gender Equality and Equity and Empowerment of Women, one section addresses “The Responsibilities and Participation of Men”. In this section, the following is clearly stated: “The objective is to promote gender equality in all spheres of life, including family and community life, and to promote and permit men to acquire responsibility in their social and familial roles” (§ 4.25). Similarly, the part of this section that recommends actions mentions the need and importance of “...participating in special efforts emphasizing the responsibility shared by males and to promote their active involvement in responsible parenthood, sexual and reproductive behavior including family planning and prenatal, maternal, and child health, prevention of sexually transmitted diseases including HIV/AIDS, and the prevention of unwanted and high-risk pregnancies” (§4.27) (Nations Unies, 1994).

As a result of the Cairo Conference, the reproductive health focus was stressed in the face of concerns and criticisms manifested since the 1980s ―mainly by social movements― concerning population policies and family planning programs directed toward fertility regulation. Among those raising these concerns, the women’s movement stands out, both in the international as well as the national environment, as well as in diverse academic spheres. This critical focus, as cited by Lerner and Szasz (2003), has had highly relevant and above all novel implications that pose challenges for the production and diffusion of scientific knowledge as well as in the public policy and social movement fields, in that it questions the excessive and nearly exclusive interest in fertility control in interventions targeting women. This focus has allowed the broadening of a narrow vision on reproductive behavior, sexuality, and reproductive rights, and has placed emphasis on the “...need to involve males, not only as actors intervening in decision-making or as the users of contraceptive methods for achieving greater gender equality, but also as individuals with rights and obligations in family formation, in sexuality, and in reproduction” and consequently in the interruption of unwanted or unplanned pregnancies. In addition, this focus has underscored a response to the needs and demands of varying and particular population gr0oups with regard to these issues.

On the other hand, as stated in Chapter 2, of this text “The Debate on Abortion”, the feminist movement and the contributions of feminist studies have been key elements not only in the debate on the consequences of the legal status of abortion in the lives of women and on actions for its depenalization, but also in efforts to guarantee women access to quality services in ending unwanted pregnancies. The contribution has also involved demonstrating the importance of incorporating the gender perspective into the reproduction field, as a concept or relational category, thereby highlighting the conditions of gender inequality and the power relationships between men and women within these spheres.

In her account of the distinct wellsprings of feminist thought, in particular in the Latin American region, Szasz (1998) approaches the implications of masculinity and the role of males in sexuality and reproduction. The author discusses the questioning of initial theoretical formulations centered on explanations of female subordination and male dominance, in which the male presence was reduced to areas such as aggression, oppression, and the objectification of women in traditional and patriarchal societies. According to the author, this vision implied reductionism of the gender-category concept, which referred to the notion of female subordination as a universal, uni-linear, and vertical process. As a result of such questioning, the author addresses the elements to be considered in the redefinition of the gender category. Among these elements, priority has been given to the social and cultural constructions that lend significance to sexuality and human reproduction by considering a diversity of spheres and power relationships between genders and distinct, socially assigned feminine and masculine identities and roles. The latter being considered as symbolic representations, norms, valuations, and culturally constructed practices, that are modified by historical situations, particular conditions, and the experiences of the individuals themselves.

It is in light of these formulations that diverse theoretical reflections and analytical axes concerning male involvement in the abortion issue have been proposed. These are closely related to issues of sexuality and reproduction. In this chapter, we limit ourselves to briefly describing certain principal academic outlines found in a significant proportion of the literature produced in Latin America on this subject.

Theoretical Perspectives and Various Analytical Axes

Several authors agree that in approaching the male role in abortion, it is important to consider dimensions such as the social, cultural, and ideological realms in which gender meanings are constructed, emphasizing masculine identities and roles and, in particular, power relationships between men and women. Concurring with Amuchástegui and Rivas (1993; Amuchástegui 1994), the significance of human reproduction is most consistently defined by traditional cultural, religious, and normative values. These relate to the masculine characteristics of sexual prowess, the ability to engender children ―especially male children― and dominance over women and children, in addition to successful competition with other males for women. Added to these are control over feminine sexuality, which passes from father to son, to the boyfriend, and to the husband, and control over women’s movements, which is handed down from the mother (as an agent of the father) to the mother-in-law (as an agent of the husband), and even to the son (as an agent of the absent father).

In this regard, Tolbert et al. (1994) consider that as societies modernize, the significance of gender is questioned or eroded in certain population sectors, although masculine power continues to permeate the lives of women. In societies in which traditional gender norms and roles are maintained, the male has dominion over decisions concerning fertility, including the use or non-use of contraception and the decision on whether a woman aborts or continues her pregnancy. This dominance is exerted either by means of a direct indication, an indirect or implicit warning, or the abandonment of the woman by her partner. Insofar as gender relationships between partners become more equitable, the empowerment of women to decide the fate of unwanted pregnancies increases, while the male’s power in this sphere diminishes.

In the face of such a situation, Faúndes and Barzelatto (2005) state (p. :218): “Women are human beings with the same rights as men, including the right to decide freely and responsibly concerning their sexuality, but societies have traditionally denied this equality and have accepted that males impose their sexual decisions on their female partners. This patriarchal culture is one of the main causes of unwanted pregnancies, and its passive acceptance is an obstacle to approaching the abortion problem. Thus, societies should promote greater gender equality in all of life’s spheres so that a greater balance of power between women and men will permit the former to decide when, with whom, and under which conditions her sexual life will develop. Respect for the right of women to exert effective control over their sexual lives should be an essential elem0ent of these measures”.

Other authors emphasize the tensions and conflicts in masculine identities in the face of roles imposed by the prevailing social and cultural norms and the private and individualized spheres and circumstances that lead to abortion. Alliaga-Bruch and Machicao Barbery (1995) hold that: “The abortion experience brings to the fore profound contradictions in the masculine identity. It confronts men with a socially unacceptable situation in which conflicts surface between culturally-assigned attributes and the subjective reactions that men experience in this context” (quoted p. 6 in GIRE, 2001).

Likewise Figueroa and Sánchez (2000) addressing the last argument they add that “ Males in a patriarchal society learn to function as the decision-making agent for both sexes; as males they should be strong, brave, capable, responsible, and should fulfill the role of provider: These attributes within the context of an abortion ― in which they perceived they have not participated in the abortion decision― places them in a situation in which abortion per se is an act of transgression by women, and one in which they experience fear, confusion, and impotence with respect to a manifested power of the woman to accept or reject the gestation process”. According to the authors, “Deciding whether to have an abortion represents for men and women an experience in which sexuality, the desire to be a father or mother, and freedom of choice over one’s own body are important components on which to base a decision”. The authors also emphasize that there is a contradiction in this process between the private confines (individual, family ones) and the confines of the social, religious, and moral norms that condemn such practice.

Figueroa and Sánchez also recognize the contributions of the feminist movement in the deconstruction of the above dimensions and the way in which they intertwine and exert an influence on the reproductive arena. Nevertheless, the authors argue that the discourse has centered on the feminization of reproductive rights, which in part has led to living the abortion experience and the abortion decision as a process of gender exclusion. Thus, they consider that in the interaction between men and women in these spheres, males are not recognized as subjects with rights but as subjects with reproductive privileges, reflecting the complexity of the interaction.

Similarly, Zamudio et al. (1999) affirm that neither the feminist tradition nor the gender perspective have driven the development of many studies on the masculine issue. They consider that such studies are scarce compared with those involving women. But, above all, they underscore the fact that frequently these feminist/gender studies contain sexist segregation interpretations that play down the importance of the male role.

On a similar note, Drenan (1998) indicates that males as well as women play a key role in reproductive health. Notwithstanding this, the author reminds us, greater male participation within these confines has been difficult. The most recent studies recognize that males play important roles in the decision-making process, and that in general they are more interested in the issue than is assumed. Understanding the balance of power between men and women is a key element in improving individual behavior in relation to reproductive health, which can also have an effect on phenomena such as unwanted pregnancies and their consequent terminations.

Guevara Ruiseñor (2000) argues that the virtual lack of research on the specific role of males in abortion has caused them to be regarded “… solely as victims or has victimized them without considering that there are points of agreement between the needs and demands of men and the needs and demands of women”. For the author, “Men’s experience with abortion forms part of institutional power relationships, a power that is even less visible because it occurs in two spaces considered feminine: that of reproduction and that of emotions”. The author adds that the way in which males respond to an unwanted pregnancy depends principally “...on the material and symbolic framework of the relationship in which this pregnancy occurs and the possibilities of the exercise of power offered to them, therefore a man can participate responsibly in one situation and act in a totally opposite manner in another” (quotes pp. 55-56 taken from GIRE, 2001).

The findings of these studies illustrate the different and varied positions and appraisals that men adopt towards their participation in the practice of contraception and abortion. On certain occasions, males can be the main decision-makers in these events. On others, they absent themselves and/or assume a total lack of commitment to the regulation of the couple’s fertility, considering the woman to be responsible for contraceptive use, that it is she who becomes pregnant, and that it is she to whom in the last analysis the decision to continue or interrupt her gestation falls. Nonetheless, the woman’s partner can also share in such a decision (GIRE, 2001).

For Tolbert et al. (1994), the array of modalities and possibilities for male participation varies according to the particularities of the social and temporal context. The prevailing social norms in each instance carry particular weight. While women tend to be assigned responsibility in the reproductive arena, the role of secondary actor is attributed to the male, the latter supporting, favoring, hampering, denying, or even being indifferent and detaching himself from his partner’s pregnancy. The variety of decisions made on abortion, the authors explain, are directly linked to the various gender-relationship models on which couple relationships are built. Similarly, they indicate that the greater the equality in these relationships, the greater the transparency in negotiations regarding reproduction and in particular, abortion.

According to Llovet and Ramos (2001), the presence of “significant others,” especially the women’s partner, in the decision-making process, is observed to depend on the influence exerted by the cultural ambit; thus, it does not demonstrate a univocal pattern: males participation “...can be active or passive, and the degree of involvement can vary according to the socio-cultural context, the familial organization, and the stage of the women’s life cycle” (p. 302). In the bibliography documented by the authors, situations are described in which males exert pressure and coercion to oblige women to interrupt their pregnancies. In other cases, males attempt to persuade their partners that the pregnancy should not come to term, or they remain indifferent and aloof from the woman’s decision-making process.

Similar evidence is found in a study carried out by GIRE (2001) in Mexico City. Testimony from young males confirms a variety of attitudes and male behaviors relating to unwanted pregnancy: the same person can even act differently depending on who his partner is or the moment in his life when the pregnancy occurs. Nevertheless, responsibility for the final decision on abortion falls, in general, to women, and the degree of male intervention varies, mainly in agreement with the degree of affective commitment man has to his partner.

From an anthropological perspective and based on interviews with males in an extremely poor urban neighborhood in a Uruguayan city, Rostagnol (2003) analyzes the practices and representations involved in contraceptive use and sexuality. The author notes that among the elements of the cultural context in which an individual’s life is lived and which give meaning to such practices and representations, the notion of temporality is key. This, the author explains, is characterized by a “need for immediacy”, implying living the moment and a certain inability to think in linear time that would allow for future projects or simply planning in different areas of life, including reproductive decisions. This vision is more common in men than in women because men are not accustomed to taking measures to prevent pregnancy. The author underscores the difficulty with which the male and female interviewees approached the theme of abortion, given its clandestine, illegal nature. For this reason, their testimonies can take on a “moralistic” connotation: both males and females declared that they were against abortion, but males stated that women should assume the burden and responsibility of the unborn child, either because she had enjoyed sex or because she had not acted correctly. The interviewees affirmed that many males appear not to take any interest in the theme, as they consider it to be a women’s issue, and there are few males who stated that they would agree to accompany their partners to the abortion. However, males more frequently cover or help defray the cost of the abortion.

A similar and very relevant argument, previously mentioned in Chapter 8, was developed by Zamudio et al. (1999), in the context of the so-called “culture of prevention”, which comprises the relationship between contraception and abortion. For the authors, the population finds it difficult to develop a culture of planning, in which prevention would be the everyday way of acting in the face of the precarious conditions shaping such a culture in developing countries. Such precariousness, they note, is due to “...the absence of clear, stable employment conditions, strong organizational structures, foreseeable rules of the game, strong and ample social security structures, and equal mechanisms of access and social participation”. In this way, the authors indicate that, in face of unemployment conditions, poorly paid work, and daily structural inequity, “...the population develops a sense of opportunity, a sense of the moment, a taste for chance, this ability permitting them to live the daily unforeseen and to cope with its risks” (p. 64). Other central dimensions that shape the culture and the lack of preventive conduct, in reference to male participation, include the following: a) conditions of inequality in power relationships between the sexes, masculine control or dominance over woman, limitations in inter-gender communication, male perceptions of the relationship between sexuality and reproduction, the vision of different partners concerning the couple’s relationship, and reaction mechanisms on encountering each other’s perspective; b) social views about health consequences of the use of modern contraceptive methods; and, c) women’s relationships to their own bodies and their self-esteem, as a condition that leads them to perform an abortion due to fears and problems derived form the use of more reliable contraceptive methods.

For Núñez and Palma (1990), the findings of research carried out in Mexico show that men and women appraise abortion differently. The differences, they state, are in part illustrated by the fact that males admit more readily that a woman has had an abortion, perhaps because males “...are not exposed to social rejection, do not harbor guilt feelings as women do, and are not persecuted by the law” (p. 32). According to data produced by a national survey administered in Mexico, in addition to the fact that males more frequently recognize pregnancies that end in abortion, they also openly declare being unaware of the number of pregnancies that their coital relationships have caused, or the results of these pregnancies.

Cáceres (1998) makes an identical statement in his study on sexual health dilemmas and strategies in middle- and lower-class adolescents and adults in Lima. The author demonstrates that abortion was the most frequent outcome of an unwanted pregnancy, among interviewed couples, with regard to pregnancies of which they were aware. The proportion of interviewees who declared their involvement in a pregnancy that had ended in abortion comprised 36% of male adolescents interviewed, whose ages ranged from 15 to 17 years, and 45% among young men aged between 20 and 29 years. On the other hand, the proportions provided by women were 18% for the first age range and 25% for the second. Conversely, in a Fachel-Leal and Fachel study (1998) conducted in Brazil the declaration of resorting to abortion in both sexes in general presented an equal distribution. In this study as well, a minimal proportion of possible masculine disinformation was observed.

On this same topic, the results of the study conducted by Zamudio et al. (1999) in Colombia show that in 22% of their abortions, the women interviewed did not inform their partners of a pregnancy or of an abortion. This behavior was found principally in the following cases: in unstable unions in which the woman is unsure whether she should inform the man of her pregnancy and therefore be tied to him through the child; when women are students (a situation in which the most frequent decision is to keep silent or to maintain a more reserve attitude); when women have made the decision to abort and do not wish to compromise the relationship with their partner because of her decision; and when a pregnancy was produced in a very deteriorated conjugal relationship which the woman has decided to leave. Finally, some women do not wish to permit interference in an issue that can deeply compromise their personal lives.

Salcedo sustains an analogous argument (1999). According to this author, it is possible that Colombian males often do not find out that their stable partners have made the decision to end a pregnancy, because of the expectation expressed by women that the male will refuse to recognize his responsibility or accept his participation in the decision to abort. In general, the author adds, males admitted their participation in aborted pregnancies that occurred within occasional relationships or relationships outside the established social order. For Figueroa and Sánchez (2004), this women expectation has been translated into a dual silence that is the result of the lack of a relational encounter between women and men, manifested in the fact that both refuse to converse on this situation in the presence of their partner.

Alluding to the particular case of male adolescents and young men, Palma and Quilodrán (1997) analyze the discourse of young men belonging to lower urban strata who are residents of a metropolitan region of Chile, with the objective of ascertaining the meaning and the effects and consequences of male options on adolescent pregnancy. The possibility of resorting to an abortion is not mentioned in explicit terms; rather, reference is made to “...doing something” in order to continue a life project or as the only escape from an extreme situation. For the authors, the young males’ responses associated with abortion reflect the way in which these individuals conceive life projects, in addition to whether they see their chosen trajectories as viable. Thus, the option to abort expresses an inability to imagine certain individual or shared life projects, which can be realized in the case of a pregnancy continuing to term.

Another analytical strategy for illustrating the influence of the environment on male perceptions, attitudes, and practices concerning abortion is found in opinion studies directed at distinct societal sectors. Various research projects have determined that more or less favorable male attitudes on abortion respond to legitimate legal, moral, and social representations and circumstances that are closely related with male identity. In these, it is also possible to note the way in which the cultural concept of abortion will largely determine the views on this practice, as illustrated by the author’s studies cited herein. (See also Chapter 2, which describes research that demonstrates masculine power in decision-making on abortion in the various institutional environments ―medical, judicial, religious, etc.― that are directly or indirectly involved in this process).

Faúndes and Barzelatto (2005) state that among health professionals ―who are mostly male―, conflicting cultural masculine identity-derived values tend to influence the performance of abortion. These values combine with and sometimes contradict the moral and ethical norms of medical personnel, as well as the legal status of abortion. This situation extends to the particular norms of other male actors, i.e., legislators, attorneys, and representatives of the hegemonic Catholic Church. These are actors who, on the other hand, have the “...authority to accuse, judge, and condemn women with abortion-associated complications” (p. 63).This attitudeis reflected in verbal abuse and stigmatized treatment of women, with little or no consideration of the male’s role in and responsibility for this practice. Additionally, as the authors affirm, an ambivalent and opposite attitude is observed in physicians when a person emotionally close to them ends a pregnancy. This turned out to manifest as “...the acceptance of very specific cases, and public recognition that abortion is a personal and social phenomenon not resolved by penalizing women who resort to it” (p. 104).

Based on a representative survey conducted at the Universidad de Campinas near São Paolo, Alves Duarte et al. (2002) analyze the perspective of males at the university (teaching staff, students, and administrative personnel) on abortion. It was found that more than half these men felt women had the right to abort and accepted this resource in the presence of legitimate legal grounds, such as risk to the woman’s life, rape-related pregnancy, or fetal deformation. This posture of greater openness regarding abortion was most common among male interviewees with higher educational attainment (of themselves and their partners), better social position and income level, and those without children. Fewer male interviewees expressed acceptance of women who opted to interrupt their pregnancies for reasons such as their emotional situation or their desire not to have a child. Among their conclusions, the authors reiterated the relevance of gender relationships in abortion-related decision-making. The study results suggest, as have other studies, that the greater the gender equilibrium in the relationship between a man and his partner, the greater the possibility of males perceiving themselves as joint protagonists in the abortion decision.

Another study on men’s and women’s opinions carried out in 1995 in the four Brazilian state capitals ―São Paulo, Bello Horizonte, Porto Alegre, and Recife― shows additional insights: 43% of the interviewees affirmed that males should participate in the decision on a possible abortion, and although the last word should belong to the woman, 66% of males and 57% of females declared that men should attempt to prevent the abortion (Comissão de Cidadania e Reprodução, 1995).

In a study conducted in Colombia, Mora and Villarreal (2000) found that male perception and opinion concerning abortion are very similar among those who stated that abortion is a bad practice but that personal circumstances justified abortion, and those who agreed that abortion was a personal decision and as such, an individual’s right (46% and 43%, respectively). Only a minority (11%) expressed frank rejection of ending a pregnancy. Empirical evidence and interviewees’ testimonies confirmed the predominant influence of the cultural outlook on the practice of abortion. For the majority of those interviewed, responsibility for prevention of pregnancy or of abortion lies in the “...hands of the woman, who are the most affected, those responsible for procreation or those who must assume this responsibility, it is her body, she is the one who bears the consequences”. According to the authors, this perception is indicative of the reproductive autonomy granted to women, although one possible effect of which may be to distance men or leave them to one side with regard to sexual and reproductive responsibility.

From a different perspective, some authors who examine the contradictions and complexities in couples’ interactions concerning their respective gender identities, hold that incorporating men and making them responsible in this terrain ―considered also as one of the few areas in which a great number of women have achieved a certain autonomy― may signify a usurpation of this achievement and, in the final analysis, further empower men while disempowering women (Barbosa, 1992, quoted in Zamberlin, 2000).

^ Top of page