Sorry everyone: apparently I posted a link to the Spanish version of Stevens’ article. The link is now going to the English version. But you can still find the Spanish translation here, if you prefer it.
And here are some questions to consider in reading Stevens and Navarro together:
Marianismo… Discuss the evidence Stevens uses for her argument that marianismo/machismo is a defining historical framework women’s roles in Latin America. How does Stevens use “history” and “culture” to support her view of gender relations?
…and its critics: On what grounds have scholars challenged Stevens’ argument? Why was/is it nonetheless so influential among US academics? How have LA scholars used it differently? How does Navarro use history to argue against Stevens?