VIII
Assimilation of Scientific Discourses
Given the complexity inherent within the sexual discourses of Science, arising as they do from any number of disciplinary contexts, it would scarcely be feasible for us to attempt to make sense of all of them in this chapter. Rather, we will focus instead upon that which is most relevant to the work at hand, namely the discourses that fall under the rubric of „reproductive health’4.
As one might imagine, the latter is heavily influenced by the biomedical model, in which „problems’, be they an over-abundance of teenage pregnancies or the spread of STDs, can be corrected through the application of the appropriate „cure’. Prescribed by physicians, nurses or social workers, these cures generally take the form of education and prevention campaigns, in which „scientific’ information is mobilized in the fight against diseases (or, in the case of pregnancy, „irresponsible’ behaviour) and the conditions which facilitate their propagation.
However, before we set out to explore the impact of reproductive health discourses upon CostaRica’s young people, we must first provide some background information. As was made clear in Chapter 2 above, the country’s indigenous population is estimated to have been between 20,000 and 30,000 at the time of first contact with the Spanish colonizers. Needless to say, disease brought from Europe would soon take its toll, and by 1611 this figure is believed to have dropped to 15,000, and it would take close to a century before it returned to its pre-contact level (Thiel 1977). In more recent times of course this rate of growth has accelerated considerably, with the population climbing from 300,000 to 800,000 in the 50 years between 1900 and 1950, and to well over 3 million in the early 1990s (CELADE 1990).
However one wishes to account for this surge in Costa Rica's population, especially in the post-World War II era, there can be little doubt that state-led industrialization and „modernization’ were key contributing factors. In short, this was a period when vaccination campaigns, combined with improved living conditions and access to primary medical care conspired to slash the country’s mortality rate in a dramatic fashion, from a rate of 25 per 1,000 in the 1940s, to less than ten per 1,000 in the 1960s (AD,C 1987).
While much of the ensuing growth was initially absorbed by the countryside, it was not long before the latter’s carrying-capacity was reached, prompting ever-larger numbers of people to relocate from their rural homes to urban areas. To the extent that the nascent industrial sector was unable to provide jobs for the new arrivals, over-population became a growing concern for state officials, whose response included the creation of a National Programme for Family Planning and Sex Education in 1968 (since renamed the Reproductive Health Programme).
Needless to say, it was at this moment that family planning moved from the private realm to that of the public, and became a legitimate object for state intervention. With support provided by a number of agencies, including the Ministry of Health, the Costa Rican Social Security Fund and various non-governmental organizations, the Programme gave women access to a range of contraceptive options, as well as providing them with information on the benefits of birth spacing and means of avoiding unwanted pregnancies. Without wishing to downplay the degree of opposition to the Programme's objectives, it was clearly successful in promoting widespread contraceptive use, as is attested to by the fact that Costa Rican women are now more likely to be users of contraceptives than their counterparts anywhere else in Latin America (CCSS 1994).
However, if state actors achieved their declared aim of reining in an unsustainably high birth rate, their interventions also served to achieve another, perhaps less welcome, end, namely that of exposing Costa Rican society to a plethora of new discourses related to sex, sexuality and reproductive health. In short, not only were technical advances in these areas widely discussed in the mainstream media, but the country became immersed in a series of debates over the morality of such practices as contraceptive use, abortion and sterilization. As one might imagine, religious groups took the lead in denouncing any hint of liberalization in these areas, and there can be little doubt that their opposition explains, at least in part, the continuing illegality of abortion and sterilization in all cases except those where the patient’s own health is at risk.
Moreover, once matters of sex and sexuality had entered the public sphere, the terms of debate soon broadened to encompass other contentious issues as well, adolescent sexual practices most notable among them. Quite simply, this was the time when experts 'discovered' the dangers inherent in young people's sexual impulses, with the case of teenage pregnancy cited as a key example. That is to say, not was there deemed to be a physical risk to mother and child, but their emotional and psychological well-being was thought to be in a high degree of danger as well.
Of course, this is part of a larger movement, reflective of broad socio-economic changes taking place in the country as a whole, away from the notion of 'youth' and towards that of 'adolescence'. How so? In short, while there had previously been little differentiation between adulthood and youthfulness -after all, this was the time when most people got married, had children (in the case of women) or became apprenticed to a trade (in the case of men) adolescence was increasingly portrayed as the stage in one's life when one prepared oneself for the burdens of adulthood. Thus, it was understood above all to be a waiting period, meant to instill in young people a greater preoccupation with their future as wage-earners, consumers and parents. Needless to say, 'waiting' in this context also referred to sexual initiation, with the country's opinion-leaders adopting the position that, if individuals were not yet ready to set out on a career and life of their own, how could they be trusted to engage in 'responsible' sex?
Still, despite the proliferation of messages regarding the importance of a (relatively) care-free adolescence to individuals' personal development, it is clear that not all young people are able to enjoy this stage in their life to an equal degree. Poorer families, with fewer resources, simply do not have the luxury of keeping children at home who do not contribute substantively to the social reproduction of the household, just as they cannot afford to send them to university or provide them with the means of embarking upon a profitable career trajectory.
Be this as it may, there can be little doubt that all Costa Rican youth were touched, to a greater or lesser degree, by this new understanding of adolescent sexuality. Beginning in the 1960s, state actors, in association with non-governmental organizations, launched a series of health programmes in the country's secondary schools, at the same time that dominant discourses became increasingly strident in their condemnation of youthful sexual activity. Moreover, as part of this process, parents were expected to control and monitor their children's activities, all the while implanting in them the capacity to exercise self-control over their impulses and urges.
While one might argue that school-based sex education was meant to provide further reinforcement to these latter messages, the Ministry of Education's efforts in this regard were effectively undermined by vocal criticism on the part of Church authorities, who were strongly opposed to any move which weakened their grip on the moral instruction of the young. As one might imagine, the ensuing debate was both raucous and emotive, as well as progressively broad-based. Should family planning methods be discussed with boys, girls or both sexes? What about sexual intercourse? Abortion? Homosexuality? Masturbation? What forms of contraceptives are legitimate? Should birth spacing be recommended or not?
Obviously, there are no simple answers to these questions, yet even as religious discourse structured and circumscribed the terms of debate, other, competing discourses were entering the fray. One of these was of course Science, which proposed its own, wholly secular perspective on sex and sexuality. Another was the street, which offered young people the chance to learn about sex in an environment that was far removed from the disapproving gaze of authority figures.
However, in the 1980s a new ingredient was introduced into the debate: HIV/AIDS. In short, not only did its spread to Costa Rica arouse widespread fear and consternation among the population at large, but it also forced state actors, among others, to come to terms with the fact that many adolescents were sexually active, and hence at risk of contracting the virus. Moreover, its arrival also had another significant effect, namely that of mobilizing the gay community against homophobic claims that the disease amounted to divine punishment for perverse behaviour, in the process making it very difficult to deny the existence of homosexuality in the country, or to pretend that Costa Rica was a model for all its neighbours in the field of human rights.
This latter point is especially significant when considered alongside the fact that the government's initial response to HIV/AIDS in 1985 included measures that actively discriminated against sexual minorities, as though infection were the product of identity rather than practice (Madrigal and Schifter 1990). However, under pressure from donor countries and international organizations, state agencies were cajoled into removing overtly homophobic elements from their AIDS programmes. While this is not to suggest that these programmes ceased to be guided by a conservative ideology -amply attested to by the emphasis placed upon abstinence and monogamy as the prevention strategies of choice -the government began to recognize the value in a harm reduction approach. Motivated by fears of an epidemic of disastrous proportions, state agencies began to distribute information on the proper use of condoms, along with other ways that individuals at high risk of infection might protect themselves.
Indeed, it is precisely in this context that HIV/AIDS created the conditions necessary for frank discussion of a host of sex-related subjects that had previously been out of bounds as far as polite society and the mainstream media were concerned. Thus, in spite of the alarmist tone adopted by some, there can be little doubt that the public in general was exposed to positions and perspectives (for example, in the area of sexual orientation) that, ten years previously, would never have been allowed to see the light of day. In similar fashion, once state managers had decided to take an active role in AIDS prevention and education, it became increasingly difficult for them to sanction the dissemination of certain messages (eg. always practice safe sex) while arbitrarily silencing others (eg. women have the same right to sexual fulfilment as men).
However, given the extent to which the Church remains a potent political force in Costa Rica, the government has been loathe to risk alienating it altogether. Instead, one might argue that the two have reached an unofficial understanding, whereby 'illegitimate' practices are tolerated so long as they are not publicized. Female sterilization is a case in point. Denounced by the Church hierarchy as sinful and unacceptable, it is the contraceptive of choice for Costa Rican couples (Madrigal 1994), and is widely available to women in hospitals throughout the country.
Scientific discourses and young people
Regardless of the state's motives in promoting a 'scientific' understanding of sex and sexuality, it is clear that young people have assimilated the latter in the same way that they internalize any other discourse: accept that which is expedient and reject the rest. Indeed, there is little reason to believe that the young people who took part in this study are even aware of the basic tenets of scientific thought. If they were, one presumes that they would be willing to modify their perspective in the face of countervailing evidence. As it stands, however, their support for scientific postulates is limited to those instances where these validate already-held positions and beliefs.
For example, in some of the focus groups we called into question young people's view of the origins of homosexuality by informing them that there is no scientific basis to the belief that most gay or lesbian individuals are born into dysfunctional families. While Villa del Mar youth, who generally subscribe to an essentialist understanding of homosexuality in any case, were entirely willing to accept the veracity of this claim, those from Villa del Sol rejected it out of hand, since it was inconsistent with their belief that being gay is the result of environmental factors.
Needless to say, this in turn supports the view that young people's assimilation of scientific discourses is fractured along lines of class and gender, with the latter acting in a fashion reminiscent of 'barriers' or 'filters'. How they do so, and the effects they produce are among the issues which will be addressed in detail in the paragraphs that follow.
Male discourses in Villa del Sol
As has been suggested in previous chapters, young men in Villa del Sol were among the most likely of all research participants to espouse rational-scientific discourses, and the least likely to have internalized religious ones. Of course, in this connection it is useful to recall that Villa del Sol is a relatively wealthy community, and hence its members have access to monetary, educational and psychological resources that are quite simply unavailable to their counterparts in Villa del Mar.
Needless to say, these resources, together with the social and educational mobility with which they are associated, have served Villa del Sol's young men well, giving them self-confidence in their reasoning skills and shielding them from the physical dangers that are all too prevalent on the streets in Villa del Mar. While this in turn has made them that much more likely to listen to and act upon 'scientific' advice in the area of AIDS or STD prevention, it has also prompted them to emphasize rational thought at the expense of emotions and intuition.
This perspective is evident in their view of the differences between men and women. Making liberal use of Freudian categories and explanations, male participants from Villa del Sol see the sexes as the product of contrasting processes of psychological development, which serve to create adult men and women whose minds are at once opposing yet complementary. Given this view, it does not matter that women are now engaging in activities that were once seen as exclusively male (eg. attending university), since their femineity is understood to rest elsewhere, for example in their way of thinking and interacting with others.
Of course, it bears emphasis that young men do not necessarily subscribe to this 'scientific' explanation of gender differences because it has been judged to be the most logical or reasonable. Rather, they do so, at least in part, because it offers them a stable world-view and justification for the status quo.
Interestingly, male participants' self-interest is also discernable in their defence of government-sponsored family planning programmes, which they justify through reference to a range of economic arguments. In short, not only did they suggest that large families amounted to a serious financial drain on household resources, but they alluded to the dangers of overly-rapid population growth as well. For example, consider the following statements made by Carlos and Alexandro, respectively:
Before having a child, you have to plan, you have to know how much money you're going to spend, how many children you're going to have, and when you have them, what you're going to do.
You have to wait two years to have another child, you have to use contraceptive methods like condoms, the pill and all that shit. Doctors must have some reason for telling us to use them.
Moreover, young men were also supportive of safe sexual practices, invoking social and individual responsibility as reasons why one should always use a condom when having sex. As Aaron put it,
once my sister brought a brochure explaining about condoms and I think that if I hadn't read it I wouldn't know how to use it. I liked it a lot and it helped me learn how to use it. It's a way of planning and preventing health problems, diseases, and pregnancies.
Indeed, despite the fact that not all participants had actually worn a condom, the vast majority were in favour of their use, with individuals offering numerous reasons for their stance, ranging from 'the idea appeals to me' to 'I must protect myself.' Also noteworthy in this regard is the fact that many of the young men suggested that both partners should take responsibility for STD prevention, and that it is not simply up to the woman to convince her reluctant mate to wear a condom in spite of himself.
However, by the same token it is clear that cultural barriers to widespread condom use continue to exist in Villa del Sol. That is to say, even though they appear to be readily available in local stores and pharmacies, the majority of participants indicated that they would be too embarrassed to buy them in their community.
Turning to questions related to the spread of HIV/AIDS, our interview and focus group sessions provided ample evidence in support of the view that prevention messages disseminated through the mass media are having an impact upon Costa Rican youth. Thus, young men in Villa del Sol showed themselves to be quite knowledgeable regarding modes of transmission and means of reducing the risk of exposure. To cite Carlos,
We are told [by the mass media] to use condoms, that sportsmen are infected ... and about prevention campaigns. All these things gradually make you learn.
In short, there was widespread awareness among participants that it is a disease caused by a virus (in some cases explicit mention was made of HIV), that there is no cure and that it is almost always fatal. Moreover, most were also aware that sexual intercourse was the principal means of transmission, and that everyone, whether gay, straight or bisexual, is equally at risk.
Additionally, it is clear that the young men interviewed knew how to protect themselves. Condoms were cited in this regard, as were monogamy and abstinence. Indeed, one might argue that Alexandro's response is typical of the participants more generally:
AIDS is one of the things that leads me to abstinence, because I'm scared. I'm scared to meet a person who wants to have sex that very night because just as that person is easy with me, she could have been just as easy with anybody else who had AIDS. That's why I won't have a sexual life with someone I don't know real well, that's why I avoid the heat of the moment, I try to handle the situation, so I don't lose control.
However, in some cases male participants have taken their faith in Science's power to protect them AIDS a step too far. On the one hand, this is evident from the views expressed by certain individuals that there are pills or vaccines available to counter the spread of STDs, including AIDS. On the other, a number of young men said that they were afraid of becoming infected through kissing or contaminated cutlery, having heard that HIV resides in any and all bodily fluids.
As for masturbation, there was broad consensus among the male participants that it is a harmless, albeit pleasurable pursuit. Thus, there was little support for the Church's position that it is sinful, with most indicating that the practice is 'normal' or 'commonplace'. Indeed, some went so far as to argue that it is a bodily need. As Carlos put it, 'masturbating is like taking a bath, it's a normal part of everyday life.'
Even among the minority who were opposed to masturbation, their reasons were grounded less in religious dogma, and more in their own sense of logic and reason. Thus, while some argued that 'one isn't giving love to anybody', others said that they do not do it because 'women were invented to have sex with.'
Moreover, young men's understanding of homosexuality was similarly cloaked in the trappings of science and reason. Drawing heavily upon psychoanalytical theories of sexual orientation, participants deemed it to be the product of an 'abnormal' childhood or adolescence. Thus, while Santiago suggested that it was the fault of parents who did not give their children the appropriate cues early in life, others, such as Ivan, argued that it stems from having only sisters. In still other cases, alternative explanations were proposed, such as the view that homosexuality could be traced to incidents of rape or sexual abuse as a young child.
Of course, the mere fact that young men in Villa del Sol understand sexual orientation to be rooted in environmental rather than genetic factors does not make them any more tolerant of homosexuality in their midst. Indeed, one might go so far as to argue their perspective has made them even more intolerant of gays and lesbians, since they are fearful that homosexuality is 'contagious' and that individuals can be 'converted' to it. Should confirmation of this claim be required, one need only consider statements by individuals like Jorge, who said that 'everyone can do as they like, homosexual, heterosexual, whatever, as long as it doesn't affect me or other people.'
Significantly, the issue of virginity elicited a similar response among male research participants. That is to say, most equated it with a state of mind or particular psychological orientation; by contrast, relatively little emphasis was placed upon the sex act itself. Of course, such a view of virginity has led young men in Villa del Sol to attach greater importance to it than their counterparts in Villa del Mar, where it is only seen as noteworthy in relation to women, since they are thought to be the only ones who undergo a discernable physical change in the wake of their first sexual encounter (ie. they lose their hymen).
Given this perspective, it is nor particularly surprising that male participants in Villa del Sol were generally supportive of the view that men -as well as women -should abstain from sex prior to marriage. In Santiago's words,
because there are many venereal diseases, you have to reserve yourself for the person you love, because if you don't, later on you will feel emotionally discouraged and get very depressed.
However, be this as it may, it is clear that male participants placed greater stock on women's virginity than their own, with Aaron in particular stating that, 'if a woman has sexual intercourse she's no longer pure. She must be chaste, less experienced, have higher moral standards and values.' Meanwhile, others suggested that, even though it is preferable for men to remain celibate until their wedding night, they are often under strong pressure to have sex, if only to fulfill the 'macho' expectations of the society in which they live.
Finally, it should be noted that there was a high degree of sensitivity among participants that they are adolescents, and that this is the stage in their lives when they are prepared for the responsibilities of adulthood. To cite Aaron, 'this is when you try new things and gain the experience necessary to be an adult.' Needless to say, this perspective is typical of the vast majority of male participants who hailed from middle-and upper-class family backgrounds, who saw their teenage years as a time for study, travel and enjoyment.
Male discourses in Villa del Mar
We have already suggested that religion has a very important role to play in the day-to-day lives of Villa del Mar community members. Lacking access to educational and financial resources, individuals invoke the power of God as a means of saving them from problems such as poverty and illness. Moreover, greater significance is also attached to one's physical strength, since it is the latter that allows one to defend one's interests or get one of the few available jobs in the construction or fishing sectors.
However, this is not to imply that scientific discourses are absent from Villa del Mar, as young people here are no less exposed to messages disseminated by the mass media as their counterparts in Villa del Sol. Still, they are more likely to accept and internalize those discourses which accord most closely with their own realities and interests. As one might imagine, it is precisely for this reason that Villa del Mar's young men draw so heavily upon essentialism in accounting for existing gender roles and relations. In short, they believe that men's superiority is grounded in their physical strength and aggressiveness, just as women's domination can be justified through reference to the latter's weakness and submissiveness. Moreover, as was made clear at the beginning of this chapter, a similar understanding pervades these individuals' reading of sexual orientation. Quite simply, homosexuality is thought to be grounded in ones's genes, and manifests itself through an unnatural femininity in the case of gay men, and an unaccountable masculinity in the case of lesbians.
Moreover, one might argue that the emphasis placed by young men upon the body and physical processes is equally discernable in other aspects of their thinking on sex and sexuality. For example, among those who supported birth control measures, most argued that their importance lay in the fact that they ensured that no family member went hungry. Of course, others rejected family planning methods out of hand, chiefly on religious grounds. As Isidro put it, 'the family exists to have children, as many children as possible.'
Meanwhile, the use of condoms appears to be broadly supported by male participants in Villa del Mar, in theory if not in practice. That is to say, despite widespread awareness among the latter that condoms help prevent unwanted pregnancies and reduce the risk of STD infection, many went on to admit that they often do not use one. Although several reasons were cited for this failure to do so, by far the most common explanation was that it reduced sensitivity, thereby taking away from the pleasure associated with the sex act. Needless to say, this perspective lends further credence to our argument that Villa del Mar youth see sex primarily as a physical experience rather than a psychological one.
Still, this is not to suggest that reduced pleasure is the only reason why young males often refrain from wearing a condom. On the one hand, many felt that it was up to their female partners to ensure that one was used, since women are the ones who run the risk of becoming pregnant. On the other, several individuals indicated that they found it difficult to gain access to condoms, since there are no large supermarkets in the town, and many smaller stores simply do not stock them.
As for AIDS, although male participants clearly have a basic understanding of its dangers, this awareness is undermined by the fact that many have fallen prey to myths and misinformation concerning the disease. Moreover, one might argue that participants had little sense that they were personally at risk of contracting the virus, a finding that stands in sharp contrast to Villa del Sol, where several individuals indicated that their fear of AIDS had made them decide to abstain from sex altogether. Needless to say, the relatively carefree attitude prevalent in Villa del Mar can be explained by the presence of far more immediate concerns in the minds of young people there, among them poverty, crime and drugs. In the words of several young men whom we interviewed, 'everybody has to die of something.'
Moreover, participants' understanding of the causes of the disease was generally quite weak. In short, not only was there little awareness of the link between AIDS and HIV, but few appeared to realize that the disease almost always ends in death. Participants' knowledge of the key modes of transmission was stronger, though even here misconceptions existed, with several individuals suggesting that one could become infected through the exchange of saliva.
Meanwhile, in terms of prevention, condom use was the only method cited. No one could think of alternative strategies that might be used to reduce the risk of infection, including abstinence and masturbation. However, in spite of this, participants did show themselves to be sensitive to the fact that AIDS is a disease that can strike anyone, regardless of sexual orientation. As Mainor put it,
I think that at this time, everybody's at risk, because before it was thought that this was mostly a homosexual and lesbian disease, but I think that we should all be better informed so as not to suffer what other people are suffering.
Turning to the question of masturbation, it is obvious that this is a far more contentious issue in Villa del Mar than it is in Villa del Sol. While several participants did express support for the practice, for reasons similar to those identified by their middle-class counterparts (ie. it is a biological 'need'), many were strongly opposed, having assimilated religious views on the matter. Yet, even in these cases, it should be noted that the decision not to masturbate is made less on the basis that it is a sinful or wicked pastime, and more because of fears of subsequent punishment. Thus, whereas Louis and Lenin believe that the practice brings about physical or mental illness, Mainor suggested that others can tell when he has been masturbating:
People talk ... friends and adults see you on the street and tell you, 'you've been jerking off, haven't you? You better stop because you know it's bad for you.' Maybe they're just kidding, but I think they're right in a way.
Along similar lines, it is clear that young men have assimilated the Church's position on premarital celibacy as well, particularly for women. However, as with other issues, stress is laid upon the physical dimensions of virginity, with the presence or absence of a hymen being the key determinant of one's status. Of course, many go on to argue that, since men have no hymen to lose, virginity is simply not an issue for them, a perspective espoused by Lenin in our interview with him: 'a man can do anything he wants, but a woman, she's the one you'd like to get a virgin.'
Finally, with regard to participants' understanding of adolescence, the vast majority adopted a strict chronological defin