Gender Expression in Tango

Unlike in the United States, where overt gender expression is often viewed as politically incorrect, in Argentina it is celebrated as a vital part of cultural identity—evident in many aspects of life, and especially in dance.*

Take chacarera, for example. The man proudly displays his masculinity, as if to say, “Look how strong and brave I am!” The woman, in turn, expresses her femininity with grace, as if asking, “Don’t you admire my softness and beauty?”

This open and expressive display of gender is also deeply woven into the fabric of their tango.

For Argentinians, male strength and female beauty are not controversial—they are admired qualities that men and women bring to their interactions with one another. Masculinity and femininity are gender traits shaped over millions of years of evolution—a natural development that has enabled humans to flourish. Though opposite and different, men and women are naturally interdependent and complementary. From their union arise children, families, communities, and the moral fabric that binds society: love, cooperation, role distinction, teamwork, accommodation, agreeableness, yielding, and compromise. Society’s stability and harmony are grounded in this attraction between the sexes. Gender expression, then, is not a sign of inequality or oppression, as some feminists claim. Rather, it is a unifying force that strengthens bonds between the sexes and sustains social cohesion.

Feminist ideology tends to frame men and women as isolated individuals with conflicting interests, but overlooks the deeper unity in which each sex depends on and completes the other (see Tango and Interdepence between the Sexes). The feminist assertion that “the history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations on the part of man towards woman” is a sweeping generalization that distorts the complexity of human history.

That history is not a chronicle of gender hostility. Every man is a son to a mother and a brother to a sister, just as every woman is a daughter to a father and a sister to a brother—bound together by natural love and loyalty. In fact, many human societies were matriarchal long before written history began. Love and emotional connection between the sexes have been a consistent presence throughout history. While gender inequality certainly exists, it is more closely tied to socioeconomic structures than to gender itself (see Mammonism). The solution does not lie in rejecting gender roles, erasing gender differences, fostering animosity, or masculinizing women. Nor does it lie in reversing roles, promoting women's independence and emancipation from the family, or encouraging women's sexual self-reliance through the advocacy of lesbianism and same-sex marriage. Utopian attempts to reconstruct society along radical ideological lines have consistently failed, often with disastrous consequences. Such efforts are in conflict with human nature (see Tango and Gender Issues).

As John Gray writes in On Human Happiness: “If we want to achieve the perfect degree of human nature, or at least come close to it, then all rules and regulations of mankind should be adapted to human nature. Because experience proves that we cannot use rules and regulations to bind human nature without destroying happiness. The attempt to obey rules that contradict human nature is the main source of human suffering. Any effort to promote human wellness will fail without radical reform in this respect.”

True gender equality and harmony can only be achieved by acknowledging and embracing gender differences and the roles and expressions that arise from them—as well as the love and cooperation they naturally inspire. This view contrasts sharply with modern ideologies grounded in individualism, feminism, and antagonistic power struggles.

Tango offers a living example of how this principle works in practice. “Tango is based on the idea that men and women are interdependent rather than independent, that masculinity and femininity complement each other rather than create inequality between the sexes, that being a masculine male and a feminine female is attractive, beneficial, and desirable, that the harmony of the two genders is achieved through mutual respect, submission, accommodation, and cooperation rather than antagonism, animosity, confrontation, and power struggle, and that love triumphs over hostility. While individualism and feminism focus on the individuality and independence of individuals or sexes, tango emphasizes the oneness and harmony of their union. It calls for friendliness, submission, humility, adaptability, cooperation, agreeableness, and yielding. Tango demonstrates that the two sexes can form a harmonious relationship by adhering to these values. Despite the challenges tango faces in the West, it continues to positively influence our lives. Unless we adopt these values, we cannot fully enjoy the dance or the relationship between the sexes (see Femininity and Feminism in Tango (II)).”

Gender expression is also central to tango because tango is inherently a heterosexual dance. Its essence lies in contrast and complementarity, with each gender contributing something unique and vital. Tango music itself reflects this duality: its rhythm is masculine—grounded, strong, steady, and forceful—while its melody is feminine—lyrical, emotional, expressive, and beautiful. These contrasting elements interact fluidly, just like the dancers. In this metaphor, the man and woman are like different instruments: the bandoneon and the violin, the drumbeat and the melody, reason and emotion. Each is essential and irreplaceable; only together do they create the full expression of tango (see The Characteristics of Classic Tango). Attempts to neutralize or de-gender tango—whether by flattening its roles or redefining it as a genderless or same-sex experience—diminish its vitality. Without gender distinction and expression, tango loses its emotional depth, energy, and poetic soul.

______________________________________

*I was dancing at Club Gricel when suddenly my partner let out a cry—she had been struck by someone on the floor. Before I could process what had happened, the man from the couple who collided with us said something reproachful to me, like a male goose defending his mate. Perhaps I was at fault, so I apologized and we moved on. Later, as I was leaving the venue, that same man approached me. He shook my hand and apologized—saying it had actually been his mistake. He had needed to appear virile in front of his woman, but in private he owned up to his error. I was touched by his sincerity, and I had no problem forgiving him for being manly.