The notion of female not part of the dictionary of the Royal Spanish Academy (RAE ). This helps to make its definition inaccurate, since it has different connotations according to the context and intention of the speaker.
It is important, first, not to confuse the female with the feminism . The movement and doctrine that defend the equal rights of women and men are called feminism. Feminism, therefore, does not seek a prevalence of women over men. That goal is usually marked as female.
It can be said, therefore, that the female is equivalent to machismo although in the opposite direction : drives the preponderance of the woman , while machismo privileges man. Neither feminism nor machismo bet on gender equality.
Thus understood, the feminism implies a negative discrimination to the detriment of man . The idea is also usually linked to the misandria , which is contempt for men. The female attempt to attack men through comments and actions.
It is important to keep in mind that machismo is part of a social system imposed since antiquity that reproduces in multiple fields. The female, on the other hand, is nothing more than an individual or minority position without real interference in the society . That is why the analogy between females and machismo can be useful to understand the concepts, but without forgetting the privileged position that man has enjoyed throughout history and still retains, beyond the advances of the last years.
In fact, there are those who argue that the term female was coined by sexists to discredit feminism and thus protect Benefits of the unequal system that has subordinate women.
As some people attached to the search for gender equality have pointed out on more than one occasion, talk about female as a phenomenon equivalent to machismo but "vice versa" is absurd, since in order for it to exist as such we should go back in the weather several centuries, probably millennia, until finding the first trace of machismo and then investing it, that is, submitting the man instead of the woman.
On the other hand, who would want to feel identified with a ideology or with a movement that is based on contempt? Is there really someone who proudly says "I am macho"? Well, probably there are no self-proclaimed females to much honor. And this reinforces the idea that these concepts are not labels of movements but of a reality, at least in the case of machismo, which is already part of our DNA and that we should remove once and for all.
No living being is inferior to another. There are clashes between carnivorous animals and their prey or their rivals, and in these cases wins who makes a greater display of skill, strength and cunning. But he wins with his own claws, with his own teeth, and often he doesn't leave the battle unharmed, which shortens his life by taking some food to his stomach. We humans never understand this Balance , and that's why we feel disgusted to see blood but we buy pieces of corpses in trays and then serve them in our homes.
The contempt we feel for animals is accepted with total normality: they belong to us, we can trade with them, make them, torture and kill them as we wish, all in pursuit of food that does not belong to us. Specism does not differ from machismo, since in both cases there is a false idea of superiority; if the females were a phenomenon real, therefore, probably would have also led to the subjugation of the other species.
