Poncea, Pokemones, Poncea!
by Guest Contributor Marisol LeBron, originally published at Post Pomo Nuyorican Homo
Last week The New York Times reported on the Chilean youth parties known as Poncea Parties (a.k.a. lets make out and dry hump on the dance floor parties). The New York Times is surprisingly late uncovering the Poncea Parties. Even the less cool Newsweek covered the Poncea phenomenon in March! Come on NY Times, step up your journalistic game!
There has been a lot of recent American media coverage about the about this Chilean youth subculture and their (often public) sexual exploration (despite the NY Times’ late discovery). Drawing inspiration from anime, the young Chileans refer to themselves as “Pokemones” and don piercings and flat ironed asymmetrical haircuts. Mostly the American coverage is scandalized to the point of careless reporting.
While the sexual repression of the Pinnochet dictatorship is mentioned in passing as a cause for this sexual awakening and experimentation, the focus seems to be on the perceived sexual deviance of the youth. They are not monogamous, same-sex hook-ups are commonplace, and they are actively breaking down the boundaries between public and private that dictate sexual normativity. I think the American media coverage through coded language is pointing the finger at stereotypical beliefs about Latin American licentiousness and queerness (and please believe they threw in the fact that the kids were grinding to reggaeton) as reasons for the youth’s “bad behavior.” Cast into a national phenomenon, the media has ignored important issues of race and class in participation in the poncea parties. For instance, who has the ability, economically and otherwise, to actually partake in these activities? Whose bodies aren’t policed and survailed? Even if its deemed naughty by the mainstream, it is still dictated by issues of access so not acknowledging that is careless journalism.
Also, by isolating this particular issue of “deviant” youth sex to a Chilean context the American media doesn’t have to face the fact that similar sexual activity happens regularly in schools and suburbs across the U.S. (remember the whole oral sex bracelets a few years ago?). By focusing on youth sexuality and the need for effective sexual education “over there,” we excuse ourselves from doing the work around youth sexuality and education that needs to happen here.
I’m not condoning 14 year-olds giving each other blowjobs on bus benches in Santiago (because that just seems unsanitary), but I am advocating for a more complex analysis of the issues behind these parties. I’m looking for more than “Chile’s disaffected ‘Pokemones’ don’t care much about politics. They’re too busy having sex.”
It’s just not that simple – so stop the simplistic journalism.
*tip of the fitted cap to Guanabee
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of
DEAF FEMINIST PUNK!! wrote:
I wouldn’t worry too much about it. the U.S media LOVES, LOVES, LOVES to make a big scandal out of any so-called “youth movement” that barely exists.
Case in Point #1: the Jenkem popularity with teens in Florida trying poo-infested drugs. It turned out to be a hoax.
Case in Point#: the Gloucester teen pregnancy pact involving 17 pregnant teens. That was a hoax, too.
*yawn*
Posted 29 Sep 2008 at 9:49 am ¶
KuriusJurge612 wrote:
I think the US MEdia is stoking the “see what happens to your kids when outside influences com in. etc.” fire again.
Posted 29 Sep 2008 at 10:54 am ¶
DivergentDana wrote:
Ah, moral panic in the air. Tell me someone else noticed how the guy they quoted just had to speculate that the girls involved lacked equal agency because….. well, they just do!
Posted 29 Sep 2008 at 10:56 am ¶
DEAF FEMINIST PUNK!! wrote:
ANNNNDDD
Case in Point #3: London’s Daily Mirror (or maybe it was the Sun) claimed that the emo movement (emo kids suck, btw) is a dangerous suicidal cult, which is hilarious as fuck, but totally untrue.
Posted 29 Sep 2008 at 12:10 pm ¶
Fatemeh wrote:
I think you have a great analysis here.
I also have to agree a little with DFP: when reporting on any youth movements anywhere, most MSM outlets don’t look for anything deeper than sex.
Posted 29 Sep 2008 at 12:40 pm ¶
Asada wrote:
I dont understand how pinochet was a dictator. I just went online and could not find anything that necesarily damned the man as bad ( okay I went on Wikipedia-but still). Can someone please explain Chilean politics, I heard they were a stand out nation in SOuth America. Im confused.
Honestly, I would rather kids dry hump and kiss than pass around sexual diseases. Sex witouth the sorry is better.
Posted 29 Sep 2008 at 12:56 pm ¶
Ampersand wrote:
This isn’t an important point at all, but I wanted to point out that the sex bracelets seem to be an urban myth.
Posted 29 Sep 2008 at 1:21 pm ¶
Ailurophile wrote:
I also remember the story about teens allegedly having sex parties, and hooking up left, right and center; according to reliable (peer reviewed, academic) research, FEWER teens are having sex and MORE are using protection.
As DFP pointed out, the media just loves the lurid.
Posted 29 Sep 2008 at 1:40 pm ¶
ieishah wrote:
these sound like the jamaican basement parties i used to go to in bedstuy when i was a teenager. where’s the news here?
Posted 29 Sep 2008 at 6:24 pm ¶
Marisol LeBron wrote:
Asada,
Pinochet is one of the most brutal figures in recent Latin American history. He “disappeared” thousands (approx 3600 to be precise) and detained countless others who opposed his military dictatorship. He abused human rights with complete disregard for international law and any concept of humanity. He is more than “bad,” and he was most definitely a dictator.
Check out this NY Times report:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/11/world/americas/11pinochet.html
Posted 29 Sep 2008 at 7:24 pm ¶
Phrone wrote:
@Asada: That comment was like a slap in the face. My father left Chile because of Pinochet. His government was involved in many human rights abuses, including the conversion of a major soccer field into a site for torture and murder. This site seems to be a pretty good summary: http://www.remember-chile.org.uk/index.htm Also, I understand that you want more information, but saying “can someone please explain chilean politics to me?” totally ignores that Chile is a complicated country with a long history that cannot be easily summarized into a single blog response.
–
As for the actual article itself, and yeah, the media loves to grab its attention on stories involving sex, particularly when it involves teenagers. No real journalism needed.
Posted 29 Sep 2008 at 7:28 pm ¶
Lauren O wrote:
Chilean youth parties known as Poncea Parties (a.k.a. lets make out and dry hump on the dance floor parties)
Oh you mean every youth party ever?
Posted 29 Sep 2008 at 8:51 pm ¶
lxy wrote:
Don’t forget Pinochet was brought to power by the Land of the Free, the USA. And his predecessor Salvador Allende was democratically elected before being violently overthrown by the Chilean military on another Sept 11th … in 1973.
In short, this was just another coup d’etat, Made in the USA–like many “regime changes” that America has engaged in for over a century to this very day.
The Chile Coup – The US Hand
http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/mexico/usa/chile_1973.html
Posted 30 Sep 2008 at 5:50 am ¶
Karen wrote:
@ Ampersand
I’m am not sure if it’s totally false. I know back at that time a lot of people knew the “meanings” and people were trying to snap them. But I am not sure if people acted on them. Just on the most innocent ones, like hug and kiss. Possibly lapdance too. But with the things going on a my middle school, people didn’t need those bracelets to be having sex.
Posted 30 Sep 2008 at 7:11 am ¶
DEAF FEMINIST PUNK!! wrote:
I’m not a history expert, but even I know who Pinochet was. Your comment was a huge insult to many peopel who were victims of Pinochet’s brutal regime. Damn.
Posted 30 Sep 2008 at 9:33 am ¶
chicano fag wrote:
now its quite rare that my ears perk up on racialicious because someone has written a racist article, and in fact i liked this article. but this line:
“I’m not condoning 14 year-olds giving each other blowjobs on bus benches in Santiago (because that just seems unsanitary),”
caught my attention. maybe i misunderstood. maybe you think blowjobs on any bus bench is unsanitary. maybe you think public sex is unsanitary. maybe you think blowjobs are unsanitary. maybe you think 14 year olds are unsanitary.
regardless. it seems to imply that there is something particularly dirty about Santiago. and i’m not so into it. furthermore, even if this had nothing to do with Chile, is our world really so sexually liberated that you need to condemn young public-sex? maybe you wouldn’t promote it but not condoning it implies shunning it. and as a latino who enjoyed sex at 14 and public sex even now – the line was just counter-revolutionary.
love love love
cf
Posted 30 Sep 2008 at 9:41 am ¶
Minotaar wrote:
I didnt know the Gloucester sex ring thing was a hoax. Can you post a link, DFP?
Posted 30 Sep 2008 at 10:48 am ¶
unusualmusic wrote:
@Asada
The Shock Doctrine, by Naomi Klein, gives a rather good overview as to why Pinochet was such a disgusting person (to say nothing of the US’s substantial role in causing the whole mess). Its a bit disingenuous of you to google, read only one article on Wikipedia, and stop right there in your research. I am sure google returned more links than that, it would have been better for you to spend some more time digging into those links, rather than requesting that other people educate you on this painful topic with such a lack of tact.
RE: The article, when or when will teen sex cease to be sensationalized in this manner?
*eyeroll*
Posted 30 Sep 2008 at 10:51 am ¶
lunanoire wrote:
dude,
in public, i think it’s best for a person to keep his/her bodily fluids to yourself (tears, sweat, sneezing, coughing, phlegm, semen, vaginal secretions, etc.). i will also do my part
Posted 30 Sep 2008 at 11:09 am ¶
Jess wrote:
@chicano fag
I think Marisol was kidding. Public sex is nice once in a while, (at least for some folks), and I haven’t been to Santiago, but I wouldn’t be having sex on a bus bench here in New York. I mean. they are pretty nasty in some stations. (And man, the benches in the west 168th street station are pretty awful).
@asada
I can only conclude you are
a) really, really young — you really must have no memory of the 70s and 80s at all
b) not reading wikipedia carefully — or at all.
c) both
d) deliberately trying to get people angry
Even a cursory search of teh Intertubes would lead you to such information. I’ll cut you slack is you were born in 1990 or later, maybe. I’ll cut you some slack if you were so uninterested in the world around you that when you saw the reference to the Pinochet dictatorship you just figured it was some time out of mind reference — I’ve knows some teens to do that. I can’t expect everyone to be into that kind of stuff.
But I will call you out if you pull the ignorance card again. My family also knew people opposing the Pinochet regime. They were some of the bravest people I knew of. And what you said was at best a sign of scary ignorance. At worst, a sign of a lack of intellectual curiosity that makes me weep.
As to the story of the Poncea parties and all that, I remember a great comment from the Onion AV Club writer who said the movies that talk about teen sex pathologies (Kids, Thirteen, et. al. even all the way back to Blackboard Jungle) aren’t made because we worry about kids having sex with each other. We are worried about them having sex with us. That fear of desire on the part of adolescents fuels all kinds of idiocy and makes me wonder if anyone who writes this blots out all memory of being 17.
Posted 30 Sep 2008 at 11:15 am ¶
Maegan la Mala Ortiz wrote:
I wrote on this topic way back in March when there was a wave of physical, violent attacks on Pokemones in Chile and following the Newsweek article. http://vivirlatino.com/2008/03/20/urban-female-youth-culture-in-chile-pelolais-vs-pokemones-it-is-about-the-politics-bobos.php
Posted 30 Sep 2008 at 12:22 pm ¶
Asada wrote:
I am young, I was BORN in the 80’s which is why I have no idea who pinochette was and of course history classes don’t cover the details.
@ Phrone : THe website is better . Wikipedia has a rather sanitized version of his history!
Posted 30 Sep 2008 at 1:35 pm ¶
Allison wrote:
I attended my sr. prom about 2.5 years ago, in my nice quiet Chicago suburb. And I got my freak ON, baby! I think it’s really stupid for any American journalist to try and point out things happening in another country as being insanely provacative, especially when the same stuff is happening here.
Posted 30 Sep 2008 at 8:18 pm ¶
kika wrote:
@ Asada – A friend is currently writing a book on Chilean historical memory in the US and found that almost every high school American history book actually does cover Pinochet and even the U.S.’s role in the coup, however briefly (even though it doesn’t cover any of the other US-supported coups in Latin America – interesting, no?). So it IS in the books.
Next weekend is Chilean Solidarity Weekend in New York City, when we will be remembering friends and family members who were killed as well as honoring the Chileans and Americans who fought for justice and democracy. Like Phrone said, that comment really hurt, especially at this point in time. But at least I’m glad you’ve asked and now you know.
Posted 30 Sep 2008 at 8:45 pm ¶
Marisol LeBron wrote:
Chicano Fag,
1) I think you read too much into what was a joke about ,and not a condemnation of public sex, particularly queer public sex. In fact, in the post i talk about the fact that these kids are radical precisely because they shatter the public/private binary in a very visible and a very queer way.
2)No I do not think teenagers are unsanitary, i think that was actually a bit far for you to go since I never made any suggestion of that.
3)No, I do not think Santiago is dirty, but I do think that I would not like my bare ass on a bus bench in any city although I might engage in public sex if the mood strikes me. Call it a personal preference or even prudish if you want, but trust me its not racist or anti- public sex, those are the very things I am interrogating here.
Posted 30 Sep 2008 at 8:51 pm ¶
jerkygirl wrote:
Hmm. . .first thing I thought when I read this was “jeez, have these people never been to a RAVE???” This is not shocking news, really it’s not. Teenagers are teenagers, no matter where they’re from. Maybe they’re just doing it now because they’re no longer afraid of being arrested and jailed for life for it.
Posted 30 Sep 2008 at 9:59 pm ¶
aviator wrote:
I grew up with an extremely warped view of Pinochet. My father is Chilean, and his entire family absolutely worships the man. My grandmother even has a portrait of him in her living room, adorned with a plaque that says “Siempre, 11 de septiembre de 1973” (the day Pinochet took power). They pretty much look the other way when it comes to all the atrocities he committed. It’s weird hearing your own family say great things about a man who’s going to be remembered throughout history as a brutal dictator.
Posted 01 Oct 2008 at 12:39 am ¶
DivergentDana wrote:
“I dont understand how pinochet was a dictator. I just went online and could not find anything that necesarily damned the man as bad ( okay I went on Wikipedia-but still).”
Now, I’m confused. I went to Wikipedia suspecting that perhaps they were in the midst of an edit war concerning the Pinochet article where pro-Pinochet folks were desperately attempting to downplay his atrocities, but the current manifestation of the article was pretty clear, especially under the “Supression of Opposition” heading.
Posted 01 Oct 2008 at 9:04 am ¶
eff wrote:
Asada – I’m probably a lot younger than many of the readers of this site, but I still wouldn’t consider that a valid excuse. Depending on what year you were born I could be anywhere from 5 to 14 years your junior, but even I know a bit about Pinochet and he has never been discussed in any of my classes, nor has he ever been mentioned in any of my textbooks.
Posted 01 Oct 2008 at 9:13 pm ¶
beka wrote:
@eff
I know I’m jumping in and all, and if you’re in the lower teens bracket then I’m about the same age; never been exposed to US history, not in class or anything, but I’ll second you and say that if I were gonna raise the point that “maybe he wasn’t a dictator?” there’s Google, which’d throw up a lot more links than just Wikipedia. Which makes me think that it wasn’t so innocent a comment either, and pleading innocent isn’t that good an excuse.
Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 12:01 pm ¶