As I was leafing through today's El Mercurio, I came across an editorial piece entitled "¿Donde estudiaste?" or "Where did you study?" After reading the one-page article, I actually felt PLEASED (of all things!) because the author reflected what I have thought all along about this ridiculous question:

1. Discriminatory by defacto, this question seems to have little-to-no socially relevant objective.
   
2. Those who pose the question want nothing more than to tell YOU where THEY went to school because in their mind, something about the school is better than yours
3. There is no Eton-equivalent in Chile (sorry, Grange and Nido) so there is no justification for such a mundane question
4. In the end, most, if not all of us, are pretty much run-of-the-mill and no amount of English words in your school's name will change that

But I guess what I should do is take a step back to clarify that here in Chile, perhaps in Latin America as a whole even, the question "where did you study" does not automatically mean "From which university did you graduate?" or "Where did you attend college?" Rather, this question literally means "Where did you go from Kindergarten to 12th grade?"

The author of this article goes as far as to claim that said question is usually third or fourth in a conversation between adults who are meeting for the first time, usually following suit shortly after "What's your name," "What do you do," "Are you married/have kids?"

When I moved to Chile, this issue came up in various conversations with different groups of people. At first I found it hard to believe that anyone would care where one went to school 20, 30, even 40 years ago especially in light of the fact that most real-world experience is obtained later in life, in college and post-college. Perhaps this is why I find it more relevant to be asked where I attended college and what it is I studied there. My personal experience here in Chile has been that people don't ask me this question once they find out that I didn't grow up here. But it has been the case that I'm asked where my husband went to school. (After the snide "What do you care" crosses my mind) I answer that he grew up in the northern part of Chile and didn't move to Santiago until he was 11 and then, he attended a Catholic school in Macul (a middle/working class district of Santiago). The answer is met with "Oh" and followed by "I went to Santiago College" or "I went to Nido." At which point I make it a point not to ooooh and ahhh over said statement.

When considering where G and I would send our future kids to school here in Santiago, we discussed three fundamental factors for selection: 1) the school needs to be fully - and I do mean 100% fully - bilingual (English and Spanish), 2) the school must not be psycho heavy on religion (Catholic schools are OUT OF THE QUESTION in a dominantly Catholic society), 3) the school must have a curriculum that promotes individuality, adventure, exploration, teamwork and curiosity (in other words, I want innovative, forward thinking education. Not something that's stuck in the dark ages.) Given the above criteria - things that are FUNDAMENTAL to us - are the chances high that our kids will go to the Granges, Nidos and Santiago Colleges of this world? Maybe. Unless I found another school that will prove to support our criteria for our kids' education, it may very well be the usual suspects as contenders. Regardless, I'm not bound to any brand name school in Santiago, I'm bound to the three points above. Unfortunately (or fortunately) every adult I've met who attended one of the brand name schools of Santiago speaks pretty fluent English. Even the kids I've met who currently attend these schools are already on the road to said fluency. The fact of the matter is that in my case, English is my first language and as such, it remains a priority for me to make sure it's always spoken to a good extent in my home. Sadly, the options are limited in Santiago.

This brings me back to the author's last point of the article where he states that the answer to the infamous question does not grace the person answering with some kind of admirable quality or attribute. After all, they didn't decide where to go to school - their parents decided that FOR them. If the person did happen to attend one of the brand name schools, does that mean that the parents are worthy of all the merit? I think it depends. If they carefully looked through all possible schools that combined their fundamental educational goals for their children, and then opted for what turned-out-to-be a brand name school, then yes. If said decision was based more on status and keeping up with the Joneses, allowing the family to use the child's school as another indicator of the family's wealth (such as the car and the house), then no.

Taking that into consideration, when someone in Chile asks you where you went to school, what if they're really asking "how much money did your family have while you were growing up?" Which actually equates to asking for the family's financial statement prior to engaging someone in conversation, interviewing them for a position or, generally speaking, deciding their worth as a human being.

Labels: annie's, Everyday life, observations of culture, Santiago

I don't consider myself to be a stepmom in any sort of way, even though I guess that yeah, the fact of the matter IS that I'm technically a stepmom, given that my husband has children from his previous marriage. But the whole idea behind the term "stepmom" is so cliché, I get nauseous at the mere thought of it. Just thinking of the typical image of the woman who has no children of her own, all of a sudden trying to be a mom, just makes me think of Baroness Schraeder playing ball with the Von Trapp kids (yes, one more of the million references to the movie "The Sound of Music" - so sue me.)

I won't get into detailed specifics of the dynamics between my husband and his ex, nor will I get into exact specifics of my role either. Suffice it to say that the mother of my husband's kids (also known as "b*tch face" in my small circle of me, myself and I) is equatable to a fascist dictator (according to me) and even if she isn't physically with us on the weekends the kids do spend time in our home, trust me, she's nevertheless omnipresent.

In the beginning of this journey, I was rather accepting of the separation and distinction made between their mom, their dad, them and me. G lived a separate life, according to me back then, when they were around. While he made plans with them with hope of including me, I always politely declined, hiding behind the excuse "no, no, this is YOUR time with them." Literally there would be weekends when we'd barely see each other and barely had conversations. A combination of demanding kids and impatient Wife #2 didn't make for easily accessible family time for G. Back then, the ex was more of a b*tch face than I can honesty say she is now - mostly due to the fact that she apparently has a significant other to now love/torture and has withdrawn from loving/torturing my husband - so it was much easier to draw a clear line between "that's you guys" and this is me. In correlated events, as the fascist mother of the kids has (presumably) been diverted by the sweet smell of love with someone else, she's become less of a presence in our home with the kids here and less of a bother and anchor around the neck when the kids aren't here.

As time marched on, as love blossomed for b.f., and as I spent more time with the kids, I got past seeing them as the "offspring" of a "mad love affair" between my husband and his ex. (The reality is that the term "mad" applies but not "love" nor does "affair") and began seeing them as just them. Two kids with their own personalities. I remove the thought of their mom from our time spent together because it angers me to see how she holds the noose above their heads and how she must be so invasive, that the kids think twice about any move they make with me. It's a little more seamless now but nonetheless apparent and it's just sickening to think that a mother is that controlling. And to circle back to my first thought, this is the main reason I don't feel like I'm a stepmom. The iron hand of the law has far reaches into the minds of its subjects and as such, there is no room for a third party to: 1) educate or offer insight 2) offer alternate thinking 3) lead by example. There is only room for a third party to offer fun. When I choose and when circumstances allow for it, that's all I'm really, truly a part of - something fun (whether that be introducing them to Beyonce and Black Eyed Peas, introducing them to Monopoly, playing Wii or watching - you guessed it - "The Sound of Music.")

Unfortunately there are times, like today, when I'm reminded how in reality, there IS a clear line dividing us. Sadly, when that division is apparent, I'm the cheese that stands alone. For some reason or another, the kids' school doesn't do their dieciocho celebrations in September when all the other schools do them. They do them in October. Specifically today. In traditional fashion, by class, kids dance typical Chilean dances in full costume for the parents of the entire student body. G, accompanied by his mother, took his kids and I'm of course, left behind. It's an unspoken rule that shouts from the top of the Andes Mountains: I'm not to be involved or included in these types of things. It doesn't help that the kids' mom is actually a teacher at the school they attend but I'm pretty sure that even if she didn't work there, I'd still have to stay behind the invisible line that divides "his family" from "our family." I don't think it will ever change. In fact, a close friend of mine who married into a similar situation finally stood her ground when the youngest of her husband's sons graduated HIGH SCHOOL! From the time she met his son at the age of 6, she'd missed every single school event, every single performance, every important soccer game. Clearly forced to watch from behind the line. I give her props for standing her ground on his high school graduation. As she clearly stated "Si no le gusta que este, mala suerte." (If she doesn't like that I'm here, too bad.)

At what point does it really, truly become a blended family, I wonder? It's obviously not when the stepmom decides and it could very well be difficult for the kids in between to decide. Does that only leave the option for the first marriage to decide? Can we discuss how unfair that sounds for the now-wife? Then I wonder if it's about the ex-wife deciding because she happens to hold the reins. Or does the husband decide that it's ok to include his wife, opting to literally show the ex that she can go straight to hell if she disagrees? I'm at a loss.

G argues that I wouldn't want to go to their show anyway. True, I'd find it boring as most kid shows are to me. That doesn't mean it wouldn't be cute or, at the very least, entertaining to see their pint-sized selves dance typical Chilean dances. However it's not an option for me either way. Which is the reason I'm sitting on this side of the dividing line, writing a blog, waiting for my dog's trainer to arrive.

Labels: Everyday life, kids, Tangents

Have any of you seen the movie "She's Having a Baby?" It's a random John Hughes movie that in typical JH style, speaks eloquent words of wisdom on coming of age. Except this coming of age movie is more about the coming of age into full-fledged, real adulthood, with marriage, mortgages, careers and babies, as opposed to his typical teenage passage à l'âge adulte films like "Sixteen Candles" and "Ferris Bueller's Day Off." The reviews I took a gander at speak of this film as being an "essay" by John Hughes and his most "serious" film ever."

Yeah it's serious but very typical John Hughes and as usual, there were certain parts of the movie that again spoke to me and reminded me just how relatable the main character's sentiments are to my own. It's a crossfire between emotion and finding (or maintaining) your true self. Last night as I was watching it, G sleeping next to me, two particular ideas from the following quote resonated with me:


It's been quite difficult for me to adjust to living here in Chile and accept what my life now looks like compared to what it looked like when I was back home. What's been most difficult has been the uncertainty about my future, especially my career. I have this familiar paranoia that continues to walk around with me in that I can't decide if my inability to adjust is something about ME or if the circumstances I willingly chose to be a part of are making it difficult to progress.

Only two ideas from the lines above are ones that make me think:

What is it that I see in other women here that makes me think my reality is so grossly different from theirs? In fact, I've spoken to many of them who have told me that they too had a difficult time adjusting to living in Chile at first, and when they hear me complain or see me wanting to bang my head against the wall over the idiosyncrasy of the Chilean culture, I know I'm generally preaching to the choir. There's nothing I'm currently going through, or have gone through in the last 14 months, that they have not also experienced and ultimately accepted or overcome. In fact, even this past Friday as we were all out celebrating a Gringa friend's birthday, I was sitting there talking to the birthday girl and she said to me, "Do you ever look around and think 'wait, what am I doing here? How and when did I end up living in Chile?'" Um, yes, that notions sounds vaguely familiar to me. But it got me thinking: she, like other gringa friends, have been here much longer than I have, yet for the most part, if not completely, they live happy lives here. But even so, just as my friend made me realize with her rhetorical question, they too must stop every once and a while and think, "how did I get here?"

The devil's advocate in me (or the pessimistic, masochistic side of me - your choice) then remembers that most of the women I'm friends with here aren't really, truly here for the long-term. Eventually, as their plans unfold, they'll make their way back home, husbands in tow. They'll carry with them the adventure they had of living in another country, surviving and excelling in said country (in this case, Chile of course) and all the bad memories and experiences of adapting will become examples, anecdotes or memories of how living abroad shaped their current and/or future plans and selves. I compare that to my reality and realize, I don't have that luxury. I made the decision to leave everything I've ever known, everything that ever meant anything to me, every last memory and experience I was ever a part of, and start my life literally ALL OVER AGAIN, in a foreign country. And the thing is, there is no going back. At least, not in a way that I would willingly choose.

And in my head I wonder, over and over again, would Chile seem so difficult if I knew that at some point down the line, I'd be back home again, better than ever because I'd be with my husband, the person I adore most in this world? I don't have the answer, nor can I pretend to know what it's like for others...but from this perspective I think that would be an important secret to embracing life in a different country. I don't know what it's like for my friends here, what it's been like or what other people experience here and I'm not saying that what I write here is the truth. Really, it's just a thought.

As for point #2 above, I began to really, truly analyze: what makes my life so uncomfortable here that I am so far removed from accepting who I am and where I am now that I live here? I still can't put a name on it but I can describe it as this: I feel like I'm redoing the period of my life post-college graduation, when I had no idea where I was going, what would become of me or why it seemed that my peers had their sh*t together and I didn't. In short, I feel like I'm experiencing my quarter-life crisis all over again, meanwhile I'm actually heading into my mid-30s! Wikipedia lists a variety of characteristics of this social and cultural phenomenon we know as the quarter-life crisis and you can see them all here. However in my case, I can call out the following as relevant:

* confronting their own mortality [i.e. realizing that I'm not getting any younger and I have a list of accomplishments that seem to just be sitting there, not transforming themselves into reality.]
* insecurity regarding the fact that their actions are meaningless [This might have more to do with a certain quest I'm on that so far, has proved fruitless. Also, school.]
* insecurity regarding present accomplishments
* disappointment with one's job
* nostalgia for university, college, high school or elementary school life [except in my case it's the life I left back in California]
* tendency to hold stronger opinions [fighting the power here really makes me quite obnoxious. And it's not like I'm happy with being that way.]
* loss of closeness to high school and college friends [missing one of my good friend's wedding this past weekend and not even KNOWING my best friend's boyfriend = sucks.]
* financially-rooted stress [as I've gotten older, I have more financial responsibilities and I'm still not at the point of being able to save for, say, a home? Plus school and the final wedding payments have killed me in the last few months.]
* desire to have children [or the simple to desire to be at a place in my life where it's a viable and intelligent option to start a family. Guess who's not getting any younger?]
* a sense that everyone is, somehow, doing better than oneself
* frustration with social skills [it's not that I'm awkward - I don't think - but I do tend to have my weirdo moments in everyday Chilean encounters.]

I remember feeling many of these things and more, immediately after college. Then my career and life began to take shape and one by one, these sentiments became irrelevant. Of course, 10 points were replaced by ONE HUGE point, that being: "Waaaaaaaaaa! I want someone to love!! Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaa I'll never find THE ONE!" And the like. Now I have the latter fantastically filled but upon moving to Chile, all of the points above made their way back into my life (como Pedro por su casa) at a time when I had completely forgotten ever feeling that way at all! Of course I wouldn't trade what I have in my personal life right now - the fulfillment I have with the person I've chosen to live my life with and the relationship we have together - for more time in California, not in a million years. I accept Round 2 of the quarter-life crisis because I figure, I survived it once before (and alone at that). After all, now, I should be better equipped to give all the points above a good kick in the b*lls anyway. At some point soon, I'll have hurdled it all and I'll look back, wave goodbye and say "thanks for playing."

...Geez. Had I known that my seemingly innocent choice over which DVD to watch prior to falling asleep last night would spark such an existential crisis (and consequently, a ridiculously long blog post) I would have opted for "Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure" instead ...

Labels: Everyday life, surviving, Tangents

Sometimes the things that my classmates and teachers talk about surprise me and not at all in a negative way. Rather, I'm enlightened and many times struck by a ray of hope for the evolution of the average Chilean. Meaning my classmates and teachers seem to be, in my experience, not your everyday average Chileans and definitely not the Chileans that perhaps our parents once were (or still are.) Though there are many times when they talk about things I have no clue on (mainly knowledge one would have if he/she grew up here), there are other times when they talk about things I never expected, offering insight and opinions that shed some light on the changing profile of young executives in this country.

This was the case yesterday in class when we began deviating from the topic of the day. To offer a quick background, we were discussing how a company can be more than just a company but a brand in and of itself. The main requirement for this, in short, is to make sure that your internal client, i.e. employees, are happy. Happy employees will feel an affinity to the company's brand. I was enjoying the discussion when all of a sudden the professor, a man between 45-50, professional and educated both here and in Spain, says to the class "Officially and on record, it's been shown that Chile is the least productive country in regards to time management of employees and efficiency in the workplace."


Did my Chilean professor just say that in front of my Chilean peers and classmates?

Granted it's something I've experienced, seen, heard about and witnessed in the past six years I've worked with Latin Americans but never in a million years did I expect to hear that from a Chilean in a room with other Chileans. Even more so, I never expected the majority of the Chilean classmates I have to actually AGREE with the statement.

What ensued was a series of examples and reasons as to WHY, from their perspective, Chileans weren't productive. Words and phrases thrown out were (note that this was discussed in a general sense, in the "we" context, in the context of the work/labor force and delivered by Chileans. I.e. the foreigners, including myself, did not offer opinions):

1. Chileans, as a general group, are lazy.
2. Chileans lack motivation.
3. Chileans lack good leadership.
4. Chileans lack education.
5. Even college graduates are unprofessional.
6. Chileans are unreliable.
7. There are fewer opportunities in Chile.
   

Other examples where offered but what I found to be more interesting were the anecdotes that followed each example of why Chileans were unproductive and inefficient in the workplace. For instance, one classmate shared with us that when it was time for her yearly review, her supervisor told her that she was "too anxious" because she consistently followed up with people on to-do's and next steps. She stated that she had to be that way because following up once, twice and up to four times didn't automatically make things happen. And for being proactive, she was labeled as "anxious" by her superior.

Another example (given by a classmate) is how Chileans will work until 7 or 8 p.m. when in comparison, Brazilians (in her example) will work until 6 pm. If she's talking to a distributor for her company in Brazil and the line is disconnected, she stated that the Brazilians immediately call back. Whereas it was her experience that the same incident will happen with a Chilean and the Chilean will not only NOT return the call, but when she tries to call, the line rings and rings or it goes straight to voicemail. Upon locating the same Chilean distributor another day, the Chilean distributor will proclaim "Oh, I thought you were going to call ME back." I did. "Oh yeah but it was 6:30 pm, I left of course." In the middle of our pending phone conversation? Yes.

My contribution to the discussion did not involve bashing how Chileans work nor did it involve criticizing Chileans in any way. In fact, I offered this morsel of insight, valuable or not: I stated that in the U.S. most people learn proper business conduct and etiquette from the companies that hire them. We can study the most "random" things in college (English Literature, History, Anthropology, etc) and still find ourselves working in a financial firm, venture capital, branding or consumer products company. The point being that in the U.S., GENERALLY, we are taught the proper business culture when already in that culture. And I stated that from what I observed, Chileans were more preoccupied with making sure that one is the proper Ingeniero Comercial with the adequate amount of excel and economics and marketing courses necessary but with no aspect of how to properly function inside an organization.

I thought about it too. When I started my current job, I had zero experience in licensing. I had worked at a software company during the dot.com craze of the late 90s and when I was laid off due to lack of funding, I worked at a private wealth management firm. I was hired at my current company because I had the college education, I had the basic, fundamental skills needed and I had the drive and knowledge to learn a new business. Further, I had NO experience working with Japanese businesses nor did I have any idea how to conduct myself in a meeting or in negotiations with the Japanese. In fact, given that I was hired to work on the international side of the business, I didn't have any idea how to do business with ANYONE who wasn't American! Obviously it took a few months, but I learned all of that and I feel that I have even come to excel in some aspects of it. In the same situation, a Chilean company will try to find a candidate with the exact same business experience (or at least 80% of what's required for the position) because to them, that's what's fundamental - past experience doing the exact same thing. But does that mean they're hiring the most efficient person out there? Someone who may help increase productivity? If what our professor told us yesterday is true, then I think Chilean companies need to rethink how they do their hiring. That is, if they care about having productive employees.

The best example given yesterday (in my opinion) was by the women who work at Lider, one of the major supermarket/hipermarket chains here in Chile. Lider is now owned by Walmart and as such, we were given a top-line example of how the business culture at Lider changed when Walmart came with their team to implement the new procedures and spark the Walmart culture of "Save Money. Live Better." Though we weren't offered major specifics, the examples offered clearly demonstrated how Walmart, with its American business culture, spent time observing how corporate and retail Lider worked and implemented changes that would increase productivity and efficiency across the board. It's a work-in-progress we were told, but already changes were apparent.

Then I got to thinking of the comment thrown out about professionalism and how many Chilean executives and professionals lack this fundamental quality in the workplace. I recalled stories I've heard about (mainly) women who go into their bosses offices here, only to sit down and literally start bawling. I've heard this more than once, with different women in different companies for different reasons. Regardless of the reason, I'm always taken aback by this. What kind of executive allows her superiors, even her peers, to see her break down in the office? Whether right or wrong, to do so only promotes the quick labeling of her (us) as weak or fragile and not someone who can carry a burden of responsibility. The UBER female in me wants to ask these women "Helllooooooo did you not see the episode of Sex and the City when Samantha and Charlotte talked about the effects of crying the workplace? Do I need to do a PSA about this for all those out there who feel the overwhelming need to bawl and ruin the reputation of the rest of us?" Because I would if I could. This is just one example of the unprofessional nature of some executives here in Chile, but I can add to the mix those who take their half hour cigarette breaks, those who go out for 2+ hour lunches, those women who abuse their maternity leave and tack on days that become weeks that turn into months outside the office because their baby spits up milk or whatever lame excuse is used...

I can't say that the United States is the most productive or most efficient business capital of the world, nor can I attest that our workers don't slack off. I've seen many who do, hiding behind the guise of a Senior This-or-That title and taking credit for work done by those working under them. I've seen those who stroll into work at 10 am and leave at 4 pm everyday. And I've seen those who sit at their computers watching YouTube all day long instead of working.

But in light of the fact that I live in Chile now, I wonder, if what our professor told us is true, what's the real reason behind it? Further, how can it be changed?

Labels: Everyday life, marketing, Masters program, observations of culture

For those who are unfamiliar with the letters GWP, they stand for "gift with purchase" and as it sounds, it's usually a little trinket a buyer receives after buying something else. Usually, but not always, a company will do this type of promotion jointly with another company and together, they each have the opportunity to promote their product/brand. The best part is that the consumer generally wins because the GWPs tend to come with items one is already going to buy or is already willing to buy.

Lider, a (former) Chilean hipermarket purchased by the monster known as Walmart, is not one of my favorite places in the world and I rarely go there for my grocery needs. This is due in part to my great distaste for all things Walmart in general and also because Lider, as a place in existence to satisfy grocery needs, doesn't speak to me at all. In fact, all it really says to me is "Andrea turn around and go to Jumbo."

There's one exception: the Lider Express located on Bilbao and Pedro de Valdivia, a few blocks from our apartment in Providencia. I won't lie. This Lider Express has gotten us out of jams many a times and it's the only Lider I've stepped foot in and actually purchased something since I moved here. That was the case this evening when G and I noted we didn't have a single tomato in our apartment (crucial part of our weekly diet) or anything that could accompany the chicken we were thinking of bbq-ing for dinner. Enter Lider Express to save the day.

As we walked in, G said to me "Did you see their promotion?" What promotion? "If you spend $15,000 pesos (about US$30) you get a free Chilean Recipes Cookbook." Cool.

I didn't think much of it until G went to claim the GWP with our receipt of over $15,000 pesos spent. But once I saw it, I swooooooned!! Give or take, 42 glossy pages of the yummiest of Chilean recipes I could ever lay my hands on FOR FREE (kind of.) Everything from Chilean drinks, to Chilean seafood recipes, soups, casseroles and desserts. Hello, 7th Heaven!

Labels: Everyday life, marketing

I rarely listen to the radio here in Chile but I saw a billboard advertisement about a radio station that plays classic rock so I tuned in yesterday when I headed to the gym. I encountered good music but what really struck my fancy was a public service announcement (PSA) by a government agency here in Chile called SERNAM (Servicio Nacional de la Mujer or the National Association for Women, to loosely translate.) I, of course, only heard the audio version of this PSA but upon searching the SERNAM website, I found the video which contains the same message I heard yesterday. You can refer to the 30 second spot below:



Even for those of you who don't understand Spanish, it's clear that you see a man sitting on a stool who eventually begins turning into a caveman. Why is this happening? No it's not a GEICO commercial ... The reason for this is because the narrator of the commercial is asking the man "Felipe, what do you do?" and Felipe answers that he works. The narrator then asks "And do you have kids?" And Felipe answers "Yes, but my wife watches them." The spot continues with the narrator asking the same series of questions and each time Felipe answers the equivalent of "Me work, wife stay at home with kids" he starts turning more and more into a caveman, until eventually he's just grunting, pounding his chest and saying "me work!" The spot then concludes with the word "Evolucionemos" (let's evolve) and the narrator communicates that Chile needs men AND women sharing responsibilities (termed "co-responsabilidad" in the campaign) both inside the home and at work. We see Felipe and his lovely wife locking hands as the narrator tells us that we should make a pact to "grow together in a better country."

What can I say? I LOVE it! I love it because it's addressing something that is so outrageously prevalent in many societies, though it's something that needed addressing, oh, yesterday. The United Nations reports that though more and more women are now part of the labor force of many countries, "when hours in paid and unpaid work are combined, women tend to have longer working hours per week than men, and less time for leisure or sleep." On the flip side, the report states that men may work as many hours or more in a day, but that said work is most often paid work. In short, the norm is that home management and keeping is not ultimately a shared responsibility among supposed partners. Of course Chile is the rule, not the exception as we can tell from a report done by Channel 13 in Chile as the journalist took to the streets to ask men and women how much sharing is really taking place when it comes to the home.



Sadly enough (but truthful) most men and their wives will agree that the husband or male partner "occasionally helps" or just "helps" but it's a far cry from actually SHARING responsibility. Really, it's kind of sad that the first man interviewed in the video above can't, for the life of him, give an answer and so he looks at his wife/partner for help with the question of shared responsibility. She laughs and answers, "Sometimes he sweeps the balcony." Whoop-dee-doo!! That lady has got herself a gem!

So what's my reality when it comes to this? G is an exception to the norm. Though our reality is peppered with other variables that could very well explain why things are more shared in our home: he was a single-parent when his kids were 8 months & 4 years old, thus he had to handle many things pertaining to running his home and taking care of his kids every other weekend. Also contributing is the fact that we're fortunate enough to have a nana come once a week, which ultimately reduces the amount of cleaning and upkeep either of us have to do around here. Of course we can factor in that we don't have kids together and his kids don't live full-time in the house, though trust me our dog certainly makes up for it with his fair share of strewing toys about, shedding and generally being messy and slobbery (such is the case with bulldogs.) So yes, in our home I'd say it's 40-60 and I say this ONLY because I generally do the cooking and generally do the grocery shopping alone. But then again, he's the one who waters the plants and takes the initiative to do laundry when the nana isn't here. I do neither of those two things - ever. In any case, personally we are lucky to be an exception because really, whatever I do, he can do and whatever I don't do he definitely does.

But I have to commend SERNAM for starting this campaign. I'm all about sharing responsibilities because there is no reason that anyone in the house should be held responsible for the majority of the work. It's also quite unfair to women (what else is new) that we spend more time working - period, when combining paid and unpaid work. I like that they chose to make their point using a little comedy. In addition, I would imagine that being portrayed as a caveman is something that no man likes. I assume, with all of their ingrained competitiveness, that if they are shown in a manner to be the antithesis of evolving, they'll at least look at themselves and think "Hey now, I'm better than a caveman." I just hope that this campaign also evolves because I imagine that many men, namely the older generations but perhaps the younger ones alike, probably don't really get the difference between "helping out" and "sharing responsibility." After all, it seems that even the wife filmed above was ok with the husband merely sweeping the balcony every so often.

And of course, that's the other side of the battle. As long as women are accepting of this behavior and attitude, as long as women are ok with a little help here, a little help there, then the notion of shared responsibility will be lost and contained to a few reels of PSA's stocked away in a library of film.

But we're on the right path with this campaign and personally, I'm kind of digging SERNAM for making the right to a balanced and fair life for all, men and women, enough of a priority so as to spend some dollars on communication to the masses.

Labels: Everyday life, how it should be

I think my fellow expat friend was on to something when she wrote her post about her struggle to figure out what to do with her name following her marriage to a Chilean this year. You see, as she explained quite eloquently in her post, Chileans have a certain way of viewing the last name game and it's basically this: first name, middle name, father's last name, mother's last name. This is the case for every single person born in Chile and this is the case for men, women and children, alike. There are a few exceptions, such as, for example, when the father has completely disappeared and the mother chooses to give her child both her last names (which technically speaking would make Chileans think that the child was actually her mother's sibling and of course, eyebrows would be raised.) Women don't take their husband's name after marriage and are forever known by the name they were born with, regardless of marital status. This is the antithesis of what we know in the States because many women choose to either keep their last names or adopt their husband's last name once married and if you live abroad, this options somehow becomes obsolete. At least, this is what we're faced with here in Chile.

My issue with the name dilemma here in Chile is not quite the same as my friend's and it has more to do with Chilean society and their obsession with last names. Although perhaps outwardly Chileans will argue that classism and discrimination based on one's last name no longer plays a major role in opportunities for advancement here in Chile, incognito, it really does. How do I know this? Besides the reliable source that is my husband and his experience with the matter, I have many other reliable sources who have given me their input based on experiences in college, experiences in the work force, their personal experiences as decisions makers within their companies, experiences in their social life and so on. As much as I wanted to believe that such a reality was no longer the case in this age of globalism AND considering that there are many expats who live in Chile, the reality is that sadly, last names matter. They matter just as much as where you live in Santiago and where you went to school (and I'm not talking school as in which you university you attended. Rather, I'm speaking of where you went to KINDERGARTEN. Believe it or not, these factors also still matter in Chile).

I'd like to take this opportunity to clarify that not all of these variables are important 100% of the time. For instance, there may very well be many examples of how someone who lives in Puente Alto (a lower to lower-middle class neighborhood in Santiago), went to a mediocre school, achieved the best grades possible, attended a prestigious university, such as Universidad de Chile, based on their own personal merit and consequently landed a great job where he/she moved up the ranks and is now a decision maker at a very good company. I totally believe that happens and I'm HAPPY it's possible. On the flip side, just because the aforementioned is possible, is BY NO MEANS an indication that the opposite doesn't happen. Meaning, without seeing a face, without knowing a background, without even bothering to type the word GOOGLE in the browser to find out more, someone may very well look at G's last name, coupled with my last name and completely disregard our future children for a number of things (including entrance into a good school.) I totally believe that happens based on REAL examples and it's worrisome.

I'm not gonna lie. G's paternal last name and my paternal last name are bad. I say this not because the actual, physical spelling of either name is phonetically equivalent to the word shmagina (God forbid), but because they are so blah, so common, so ORDINARY, and so typical, I truly believe it will be a disadvantage to our future children (hey, I didn't make the societal rules here in Chile, but I'm here and I need to plan for them). Seriously. You might call me crazy or think I'm exaggerating but what I'm telling you is based on the social sphere we find ourselves circulating in more and more and this stuff REALLY matters (in this circle)! So what am I going to do? Fight the power my entire life? With the last name equivalents of Smith and Jones, G and I are seriously considering putting our second last names as our children's last names, IF ONLY, the proposed new law that is circulating in the congress-equivalent would JUST PASS. After all, if I have two last names that identify me as, well, ME, shouldn't I have the option to give my future kids one of those two last names? Why does the government get to decide what I get to name my future kids? Truth be told, G's second last name might secure our future kids a senate seat and why should we have to give up that option just because the government tells us that we HAVE to give each kid the grandfather's last name? Needless to say (in case you can't tell) I'm irate over the matter. If being born in Chile means you get two last names, my thought is that of those two last names, one should be able to choose which of the last names you give your children. Plain and simple. It's not like I'm suggesting Chile adopt the practice of allowing anyone to give their kids ANY last name imaginable! (Imagine if that were the case, what roll call would be like at school: "Manchester United? Here! San Francisco Forty Niners? Here! Lan Chile? She's absent. Ok, thanks.") If given the option to choose one of your two last names to pass on, I totally agree that all the kids should share that same pattern of last names so that you don't have a family of five, all with different last names. I get that consistency and the ability to trace your roots back to the time of the Spanish Inquisition makes sense to some.

In short, I hope this law finds its way to passage. I'd really, really like to give my kids last names other than the paternal ones G and I unfortunately have. Again, nothing is wrong with the names themselves, but everything is wrong with what Chilean society will do or not do, how it will react or not react, based solely on these last names as they are. I have two last names and I should have the right to pass on whichever one I choose. Why the h*ll does the government of Chile get to decide this? And why the h*ll do I have to give credit to and pass on ONLY the paternal one?

What century are we living in, Chilean government? Get with the program and lighten the h*ll up.

Labels: appalled, Everyday life, how it should be

When I tell people that I work from home the usual response is "Wow, you're so lucky. I wish I had that gig." Or something of that nature.

True, working from home definitely has its high points. I don't HAVE to wake up early, I don't deal with rush hour traffic (and in Santiago it's awful), I get to hang out with my dog all day long, even while I work and I never have to deal with sharing bathrooms with coworkers (and the discomfort and too-much-information THAT entails.) Among other things, of course.

I admit that when I told my company that I was moving to Chile, their response was better than what I had expected. "Work for us down in Chile." Sweet! After all, my position with them requires me to manage the Latin American region so the fact that I was moving to Chile (where we also have partners) made more sense than if I were moving to, say, The Netherlands. It definitely allowed me to cross one thing off the "to-do" list upon arrival, which was "find a job and a way to earn a living so you don't end up living in a van down by the river."*

However, as awesome as working from home can be, when you move to a new country, working from home actually TAKES AWAY the much needed social connections you are forced to have with coworkers when you work outside your home. Since I didn't have that on arrival, it took me much longer to make friends and, a year later and still working from home, I have friends of course but I'm sure I'd have a few more if I worked outside. Further, they'd probably be Chilean, something that's definitely lacking in the friend department for me right now.

In any case, I could go on and on detailing the pros and the cons of working from home, especially when throwing the fact that I'm new to the country into the mix. But, don't pictures speak louder than words? I was on Facebook last night and saw that a former colleague of mine in the U.S. posted a comic strip that accurately describes (visually, since it's what we all like) the good and the bad of working from home. I have to share it because, at least in my case, it's oh-so-true. Sweetly adorable, chocolate covered truth ... Check it out here. (Thanks to the creator of The Oatmeal comic strip for this and to my former coworker for sharing it on FB.)

Labels: Everyday life

I'm sure that expats everywhere have those days when you all of sudden TRULY wonder just what the hell you're doing in your host country. Any backwards, freaky, scary or frustrating experience can trigger it and though I have days when I am pretty convinced everyone in this country has got it all wrong, last Wednesday I hit a limit with Chile and was about one online purchase away from hopping the first one-way flight back to SFO, bulldog in tow (naturally).

I'll spare you the details and play-by-play's of what happened that consequently pushed me over the edge, but suffice it to say that it entailed Chileans and their oh-so-wonderful ways behind the wheel and on the road. I made detailed references to some examples of their bad habits back in June but on Wednesday it was so bad, so rude, so frustrating and so unfair that I couldn't imagine living another day in this country, with these people who apparently go out of their way to make you feel bad. Mind you, this is how it felt on Wednesday when it was literally happening just like that: some guy going out of his way to make me feel bad for something that wasn't my fault. Do people like him really exist out there and why is it that I have to have the misfortune of crossing paths with them? To make matters worse, it would seem that about 85% of the men in this country are convinced that women are hands down horrible drivers. So you can imagine my horror, my raw, irrational frustration with this guy who not only wanted to make me feel bad but who also went wild insulting my gender!

Of course there are all kinds of drivers and the term "bad driver" is also really relative. I happen to think that someone who manages to maneuver around cars in order to cross a recently-turned-red light is a pretty bad driver. Maybe some idiot guy would think that's a "capo" (capable) driver. Po-tay-toe, Po-tah-toe. Back home I happened to think anyone could fall into the bad driver category: me, you, women, men, African Americans, Chinese, Japanese, Indian, Malaysian, Greek, Jews, Italians - and so on. I was an equal opportunity labeler of bad drivers and gave no regard to sex, religion, race or political party. The problem in Chile then is that it's SUCH A HOMOGENEOUS country they can only categorize and label based on sex: man = good driver; woman = bad driver. This annoying belief which happens to be embedded into the psyche of the general male population here is what truly had me at the point of packing my bags less than a week ago.

When I lived back home, I remember meeting expats from Chile who had relocated in California because of jobs, schools or in general, in an attempt to better themselves one way or another. Many of them found California, the Bay Area, to be really backwards. Gringos were considered "cold" and "too busy" to bother with each other. We were the type who seemed to only care about money and our jobs and didn't take time to be with family or with our neighbors. Many were surprised to realize that they would never really know if they had neighbors in their U.S. apartment buildings or not. They were also taken aback by how restrictive California seemed: last call at bars at 1:30 a.m., no smoking anywhere and don't even THINK about littering or jay walking or a ticket would surely slap you silly across the face (in fact, my mom got a ticket for jay walking once, after having lived there more than 20 years). "Que cuaticos son los gringos!" or basically that we make mountains out of mole hills and dramatize even the smallest of things. So we were square, workaholics who didn't like to really party, who cared more about our environment (and dogs) than we did about forming bonds with the newly arrived Chileans who were calling California their home. In fact, I remember many Chileans I had met going back home to Chile only to later find out from one of their family members that he or she "just couldn't adapt to the U.S. way of life."

Aside from the horrible way Chileans drive and the despicable view on women drivers, my problem with Chile is that I don't quite get their priorities. What makes them work? What's really important (and of course I mean besides faith and family because I realize that's a given here.) In the Bay Area I can tell you it's about being the most successful, the healthiest, the most giving and socially conscious you can be, the customer is (almost) always right ... all that and of course vacations are a big deal to Californians too, whether fancy or simple camping. Many other things are important but these are some examples. What's a big deal here in Chile? ... it's so bizarre what people will truly give you a hard time about and THAT'S what makes living here so hard sometimes.

Why is it that at Starbucks they make a fuss about giving you a sleeve for your coffee, stating that only customers who order drinks "extra hot" are entitled to said sleeve? What part of their brains makes saying "no" to a customer whose hand is burning such a priority? And what part of their brains justifies offering a whole cup to put under the original cup as the solution? Don't they know that a cup is much more expensive to the company than the sleeve? What's the priority there? Who are they making the priority? Why spend the 15 minutes arguing about this when handing a sleeve is all it would take to make the customer happy and to get him out of the employee's face STAT?

Why is it that when I run on the path designated for bikes (for all of a few seconds so I can run around others who are in the way of my regular path), twice already I've had people yell at me to get off since it's "for bikes only." Why do they care? Since when are rules so respected here that I need to get yelled at repeatedly for making my way around those who are going a tad slower than me?

Are Chilean societal priorities like restricción vehicular? [In Santiago there is a system known as “restricción vehicular” where private vehicles may not be driven on certain days, defined by the final digit of their license plates. Failure to comply with this restriction is punishable by fines.] See, if I had the legend to when certain things are enforced and when they are disregarded here, I would probably have less and less "F-U Chile, I'm peacing out" moments. In fact, it would make adapting here a much smoother process for expats like me and trust me, it would make us less "weird" to everyone else. If cars have a legend that tells them when they can and can't be driven depending on the day of the week, I'm sure we can come up with something similar so that I can go about my daily life in a much more relaxed manner.

Here's what I'm envisioning as regular, daily enforced priorities:

Labels: Everyday life, how it should be

I was once convinced that the weirdest or most awkward of cab encounters were contained strictly to the island of Manhattan. The normal cab experience in New York involves the word "no" yelled sternly from the driver himself in response to one's query if he happens to be going Uptown. In general, they never seem to be going in the direction you need to go. And there's always a split second of analysis on their part, as they determine whether it's worth their while to carry you from Point A to Point B (it rarely seems to be and in the rare instance that they determine it IS, they act as if they're doing you the biggest favor in the world.)

A few years ago I was once in a cab with a Japanese coworker of mine, during her first trip to the Big Apple. It was winter and it was snowing and because of this, it was naturally 90 degrees inside the cab. Meanwhile, she and I looked like the kid in "A Christmas Story" with the amount of clothing and layers we had on as defense against the storm outside - in short, we were shvitz-ing. She got hot, she rolled down the window. She realized it was down too much, she put it back up. She accidentally kept the button pressed too much so she adjusted it again so it was just right. What did the cab driver do? YELL AT HER to "stop playing with the window." Of course I sat up in her defense but it was too late. She was appalled that anyone would speak to someone else like that (after all, she's from Japan, the country of polite). My poor coworker never recovered from that NYC cabbie experience.

On a different trip, I was in the car with a Muslim driver from Iraq at a time when the sun was beginning to set. We were driving into the city from the airport and he realized he would soon need to participate in "Salah" the formal prayer of Islam, done by Muslims at various times of the day. The sunset one was fast approaching, so he whipped out his dinner (packed by his wife, he told me) and proceeded to eat prior to dropping me off and heading to prayer. Except, being the polite man that he seemed to be, he couldn't bear eating in front of me and not SHARING. And that he did. I don't know what I ate precisely but it was both weird and intriguing and definitely the first time I had tried Iraqi food. In NYC. In a cab. From foil wrapping.

Given all of the above (and trust me there are other similar stories), you can imagine that it seemed really, really unlikely to me that I'd ever find a city where cab drivers were just as rude, weird or awkward. Be that as it may, Santiago is quickly securing its spot at the top of the "Cities With the Weirdest Cab Drivers" list.

One time, post a fluke night out dancing (we weren't feeling it), me, G, a gringa friend and her boyfriend, attempted to hail a cab at Providencia with Pedro de Valdivia to take us about 4 blocks in the cold, dark night. Though the cab driver was going in that direction, after we all piled in, he told us to get out because he felt we were "abusing" the right to take the cab because of the "short" distance. Did I mention he was going DOWN THAT STREET and would pass right by where we needed to get out? Hello??? Do the cab drivers NOT care about making money - not to go out of his way, but down the same street? I was floored - not only because of his logic but because of how truly appalled he seemed by the mere notion of driving us four blocks in the direction he was already going. Needless to say, we walked the four blocks, all the while my gringa friend and I bashed the cab driver, Chile and the world in general - we were so pissed. (For the record, G thoroughly believed we were overreacting and when I stated it was "the principle" he asked me why the gringas always fight "on principle." Aaaaaahhhh!!)

Then there was the time I took a cab to the U.S. Embassy to pick up my new U.S. Passport. An exciting trip for me because I had just become a citizen and thus, was about to retrieve the proper documentation stating just that. As it turned out, the cab driver was a die hard Communist.

[I get into the cab.]
Me: "The U.S. Embassy please. It's on Andres Bello, please take XYZ route."

Cabbie: (as he drives onward) "The U.S. Embassy? Why would you want to go there? That place should be destroyed. The U.S. is the devil."

Me:[in my head "sweet. now is not a good time to tell him about that citizenship accomplishment."] "Oh yeah? Well you know, sometimes certain documents are required from them, so that's why I'm going."

Cabbie: (groveling) "Those damn Americans think they own the world! I'm not surprised you have to do all this crazy running around to get your business done. They don't make anything easy and like to flex their muscles to the whole world."

Me: (smile plastered on my face) "uh huh. Yeah well I need something from them to travel. What are you gonna do? It is what it is."

Cabbie: "I'd like to travel to Cuba ..."

Me: "Oh, do you have family there?" (recalling that I had read somewhere once that many Cubans have come to Chile to seek better opportunities for themselves and their families.)

Cabbie: "No, it's just one of my lifetime dreams. Now there's a wonderful country and a man who has the right idea, that Castro, God love him." (pause) (sigh) "Yeah, one of my lifelong dreams is to go there and I'm going to do it! Before I die, I will go there. And you know, those Americans, you have no idea how many times they've tried to destroy the Cubans. I know why too - the resources. The Americans want to get their grimy hands on all the valuable resources anyone might have - they're so greedy they can't stand to see others have valuable resources!" (cabbie is now adamant.)

Me: (noticing the Cuban flag on his windshield) "Uh huh... yeah I read that Cuba has really nice beaches."

And so on and so on. He would rant and pound his fist against the Americans, all the while singing songs of praise for Cuba and Castro. In response, I would talk about their beaches and ask about the food and the rum. Perhaps I should have defended my fellow Americans but I ask you: alone in a cab, on your way to get your U.S. Passport, with a ranting Communist at the wheel, what would you have done? I rest my case.

Then last night, I was in a cab and the driver was a pleasant man in his late 60s or early 70s. He gets to talking to me about the woman who was in the cab before me, a "beautiful, striking" woman about 50, who was married to a former military man (so she told the cab driver.) The cabbie says to me, "Do you know that she was in the cab for 20 minutes and during that time her husband called her 5 times? FIVE TIMES!" Apparently the woman had guests invited to her house at 8pm and her husband was freaking out - to the point of stalking her and calling her names - because at ten minutes to 6pm, she still hadn't arrived at home. Long story short, the cab driver proceeds to tell me 1) what a jerk her husband was 2) how men should treat women delicately and 3) how he himself still "makes love" to his wife and enjoys her as he always has in the past 30 years that they've been together. Um, what? Scratch record, stop the music. Then he proceeded to inform me that on some nights, she will put on an apron - not to initiate "lovemaking" - and "serve" him a pisco sour as if they were in a restaurant. Likewise, on some nights, he'll play the waiter, placing a dish towel across his arm, and serving HER a pisco sour. Again, not as a signal that "lovemaking" time is about to begin, lest anyone be confused.

By then we had arrived at my apartment so I didn't have time to ask him to differentiate the "yes to lovemaking" cues from the "no to lovemaking" cues that he and his wife had established. I got that the waiter/waitress role-playing game fell into the "no to lovemaking" realm, but what if, say, one day she forgot to put on her left earring? Is that in the "yes" or "no" realm? ....
I guess we'll never know.

The moral of my blog post is this: if you find yourself in a situation where you have to take a cab in Santiago, don't bother bringing your iPod. The cab drivers are just as likely to talk to you as if you aren't trying to ignore them and you'll find yourself hearing about the intimate details of their sex life OR about how Karl Marx was definitely on to something. My suggestion? Try to steer the conversation towards a topic so shocking, they'll be the ones asking their friends why all the weirdo passengers choose their cab for their transportation needs.

I've decided that my outrageous story from now on will be that my lover, the goat, broke up with me and ran off with the neighbor girl.

Labels: Everyday life, Santiago

Hey, did you guys know that for the next ten days it's USA week at your local Jumbo? I, for one, did not get the memo from the U.S. Embassy here in Santiago and it's a good thing that we subscribe to "El Mercurio" (Chile's leading newspaper) on the weekends, otherwise, how would I have known?? Thankfully, upon opening today's paper, the following circular slipped out, alerting me to the fact that between July 8 - 18, it's USA Week at Jumbo.



Obviously my curiosity was piqued and so I took a gander.

Now, maybe I'm alone when I say this, but I'm always happy when I go to my local Jumbo and see products I recognize from back home. Simple things like Snickers bars or Top Ramen soup make me really happy. It's nice to see brands and logos I know and love in a sea of those that I can't tell you much about. I know that Campbell's is "Mmmm, mmm, good" but not sure what Maggi soups are ... as a result, I don't get the same cozy, warm fuzzy feeling about Maggi as I do about Campbell's soups. This goes for all brands in Chile - since I didn't grow up here, they mean nothing to me on a personal level. Therefore I'm a marketers nightmare -OR- I'm a consumer a marketer disregards completely because I'm a lost cause. How can a consumer associate feelings with particular brands if they did not grow up seeing these brands and the publicity around them?

Which is why, from a marketing point of view, I have to commend Jumbo for reaching out to the American population that is constantly expanding here in Santiago. Even the cover of this circular speaks to us because an African American woman (or perhaps AA decent) is depicted on the cover - something we Americans completely regard as natural even though the majority of the people who live in the U.S. are not of African American decent. In all areas of marketing in the U.S. it's important for companies and brands to make sure to be "equal opportunity" and to do the best they can to depict the melting pot that is the population at large in the 50 States. [Of course one can argue that if a company or brand fails to do this in their promotions, they can be targeted as "racist" and well, that would be a PR nightmare for any business.] In general, Chilean advertising never depicts people of darker color. First because Chileans don't associate with that and further, don't aspire to that (perhaps the main reason why most models in advertisements are blonde) and second, Chileans are pretty homogeneous in their looks and simply put, there aren't many dark skinned people walking around the country. Therefore, I'm concluding that this woman was used on the cover to specifically speak to Americans in Santiago.

On a similar note, perhaps it's that Jumbo is advertising to those who aspire to all things American. After all, this country definitely looks north for trends and success stories, so why not harness that attention and promote food from the U.S.? Whatever the motivation for this focus on our food, the bottom line is that somehow, with someone, this promotion must mean mad money to Jumbo.

So what's being advertised in the circular?

"Productos Exclusivos" (exclusive products) for the most part and many of them brands I don't even recognize! I realized that perhaps the reason for this is because Jumbo (or Cencosud, owners of the Jumbo supermarket chains) have an exclusive agreement with Food Export Association of the Midwest USA, a non-profit organization that promotes the export of food and agricultural products from the midwestern region of the United States. That probably explains why the peanut butter being advertised is "Algood" and the maple syrup is "Shur Fine." I'm from California, so my main thought is "where's the Jiffy and the Aunt Jemima?" I've never been to the Midwest so can't attest anything about these brands, but one thing's for sure: beggars can't be choosers and I'd much rather have the choice between chunky and creamy peanut butter versus no peanut butter at all. Even if that means consuming Kmart's Blue Light Special private label or whatever unknown brands are being imported. Call me crazy.

But that's the key thing to keep in mind, right? Beggars (as in me) can't be choosers. I'm in a strange land with strange food and labels (most yummy though, I will admit) and if I can find pancake mix, cranberry juice (trust me, it's no picnic trying to find cranberry anything here) or root beer, I'll disregard the relatively unknown label in lieu of having a small slice of home in my Chilean refrigerator.

In any case, hats off to Jumbo for embracing their American population and those who favor all things American. Yeah USA Week is a little late since 4th of July was LAST weekend but hey, I'll take it. Plus it helps promote the food that's manufactured and grown there. That's a nice thought considering how much food we import ourselves from Chile and Mexico. So, thank you Jumbo. I may not be changing my shopping habits all that much, but I'm happy to see some peanut butter and Ocean's Spray cranberry juice all up in here:



Some good ol' American style stuffing:



But find it really, really funny that on the page advertising American sodas, A&W Root Beer (#4) is promoted as "Cerveza sin alcohol Root Beer." Or non-alcoholic beer Root Beer.


I guess it's better to be safe than sorry. We wouldn't want people purchasing the root beer and thinking they can get a buzz off drinking several cans of it. That would be false advertising for those who don't get that the "beer" doesn't really mean beer. Oh Chile... don't ever be so funny and fabulous in your advertising!

Labels: Everyday life, expats, Jumbo

I'm noticing this odd phenomenon about social classes here in Chile. There is a weird obsession over them that reaches every corner of this country. Further, there seems to be a constant need to identify which class people fall into.

...or maybe it's because I'm studying Marketing and for all types of reasons, marketers need to segment the population at large...Ok, I won't discard that this might be the reason why figuring out where people are "located" in the social class hierarchy seems to be a national past time for those who immediately surround me.

There are several factors that determine what socioeconomic class people fall under here in Chile and one of those factors in Santiago is the "comuna" or neighborhood you live in. Note the map below for a quick glimpse of the comunas that make up Santiago:



I first became aware of this chasm between classes when I visited some cousins in Chile for a three-month period back in 1998. My cousins, aunt and uncle live in a three bedroom house in Puente Alto. I didn't personally see anything "different" about them or how they lived since they had all the things I had at home ... in fact, I'd argue that they lived far better than we did back then because they certainly always had a good amount of food readily available for a quick asado (bbq). They had cars, tvs, phones, mircowaves, fridges, etc, etc. It wasn't until THEY said to me "Vamos a ir al barrio alto" that I even had a notion that a "higher neighborhood" (as in upper class neighborhood) even existed in such a manner that it had it's own nickname. See, to them, going past the Ñuñoa neighborhood is like venturing into a completely different country. Anything from the Providencia neighborhood and on, is mostly foreign to them. In fact, a couple of weeks after the earthquake, another cousin of mine who happens to live beyond Providencia, mentioned that she had gone to the mall, Parque Arauco, for a one-time job and she was FLOORED that people were shopping and eating out. She literally said "It's like another world up there." Up there being the Las Condes neighborhood.

Aside from neighborhoods, another factor in determining what class you fall into are what the Census calls "Good" (or "Bienes.") Does the family or household have a tv, a land line, a refrigerator, a car, a microwave, a shower (yes, you read that correctly. They want to know if you have a shower)? There are about 10-15 items that are considered to be basic and depending on whether a family has them or not, helps determine where in the social class spectrum they will ultimately fall. The higher class will obviously have 100% of all items, in multiple quantities, whereas a lower class household may have certain things, but definitely not 100% of them.

Finally, another important factor that helps determine where a household falls is the level of education reached by the head (or heads) of household. Those in the upper sections of the spectrum will have totaled an average of AT LEAST 16.2 years of schooling and most have certainly graduated college and further, hold a Graduate degree from a known institution.

So then, how are classes "classified?" Not in the typical fashion we hear about in the U.S. - Upper Class, Upper Middle Class, Middle Class, Lower Middle Class, Upper Lower Class, etc, etc until you get to the standard Lower Class title. In Chile, each class has a letter or series of letters assigned to them as follows:

ABC1: These are college graduates who hold executive level jobs or otherwise "prestigious" jobs. Likewise, these individuals hold powerful positions within their companies and they live in the best and most exclusive neighborhoods of Santiago. Their monthly income is calculated at about $3.5 million pesos (about USD$7000) a month or more. These individuals make up about 10% of Santiago's population. They own two or more cars, all or most luxury makes and models, and the cars are less than 5 years old. Usually the "AB" segement is grouped together with the C1 segment because the AB alone would only make up about 2.5% of the population (incidentally, this segment alone would be quite difficult to analyze since they are the ones who will have most of their "goods" completely guarded and all info on them would be heavily shrouded.)

C2: This is considered to be the "most typical" middle class of the city and make up less than 20% of the population of Santiago. They tend to live in more traditional neighborhoods of the city, sometimes further away from the downtown areas and with clean, well maintained homes,streets and sidewalks. The heads of households are generally also college graduates with executive-type jobs or are heads of departments in their companies. Their income is an average $1 million pesos a month (about US#2,000) and they own at least one car (sometimes two). Unfortunately in this group, savings is not a reality for the most part.

C3: Middle class noted mainly for its simplicity. This group tends to live amongst the C1 group and the D group, typically found in the more traditional, sometimes older neighborhoods of Santiago. Socially speaking an interesting point about this group is that in their neighborhoods, one can note an elevated level of domestic activity on the streets (i.e. housewives sweeping, children playing, etc). This group is said to make up 25% of the population of Santiago. The average household income is $600 thousand pesos (about US$1,200) and they tend to not have cars but might instead own very old, handed down trucks. Only 10% of this group has a land line in their homes.

D: This is the lower class group that makes up approximately a reported 35% of the population of Santiago. They have an average monthly income of $300 thousand pesos (about US$600) and they tend to live in smaller, older, mainly deteriorated homes. It's reported that these households rely on only one revenue earning member. That being said, because there are so many individuals who fall in this category, they are notable for business purposes as they are a force as consumers due to amount of people in this group. Those in this group tend to not have steady jobs but rather will work seasonal or non-contractual jobs (i.e. parking lot attendants). They live in very populated ares of the city, generally on streets that don't necessarily contain pavement.

E: This group is considered to be at almost poverty, if not poverty, level and they make up 10% of the population in Santiago. Their average household income is $90 thousand pesos (about US$180) and this income is either very sporadic income or money granted to them by the government. This group cannot afford to cover the most basic of necessities and generally rely on third party assistance (i.e. the government in many cases). Due to their lack of purchasing power, unfortunately they are rarely regarded in consumer studies.

Why did I feel the need to write about this? First of all, on a selfish note, I really needed to understand how consumers are segmented in Chile. For obvious reasons, businesses and companies in general, focus on the ABC1 and C2 groups mostly because of their purchasing power. After all, these are the people who have the money to spend on goods and services. Logical of course.

I also wanted to understand, in depth, how one group differs from another because Chile really is a segmented culture. In fact, this study I explored done by AIM (Chilean Association of Market Studies) in 2008 contains 38 pages of information. Information that is so detailed, it even tells you how each group DECORATES THEIR HOMES!! Crazy.

I think that Chileans segment themselves and they do this because this is how it's been all their lives. This is certainly not known as the "land of opportunity" and I wonder how many D class individuals ever make it to the sphere of ABC1 or even C2! Is that even possible here? I take a look at my own family members (ones I wouldn't even dare classify!) and wonder why they never go out in other areas of the city, why they don't have friends who live in other areas and why they only move around in their neighborhoods. The same goes for those who live in Las Condes and beyond - do they ever go to Puente Alto to have a beer or a quick bite to eat? My guess is no.

It's interesting how my graduate studies have made me look at people and wonder how their socioeconomic class, as dictated by Chile and themselves personally, makes them tick and motivates them one way or another.

Is it possible to make leaps and bounds in such a segmented culture (and city)? Discuss.

Sources: AIM Chile, Novomerc Study, CERC.

Labels: Everyday life, Santiago

I'm more analytical than I give myself credit for and in the recent weeks I've been analyzing my current state of affairs as my one-year anniversary of arriving in Chile is quickly approaching.

I think my feelings on the matter can best be described by the original trailer to the movie "Lost In Translation." I'll give you a minute or so to check it out below.



Incidentally, I've been to Tokyo and aside from being FABULOUS it really IS how it's depicted in the movie. The thing being that the movie is focused on two different (or similar) reactions to that environment.

Anyway, the case in point isn't about Tokyo but about my identity crisis in this new chapter of my life. For as long as I can remember, this was the trailer to me:

"Andrea who is originally from Chile, works in anime and is on a mission from God to find THE ONE. Andrea fills her time and space with reading historical fiction and US Weeklys, hanging out with friends, traveling for work and engaging in spontaneous bouts of physical activity otherwise known as cardio excercise. She likes to dabble in drinking wine and playing computer games and is a big fan of greek yogurt. She owns more jeans than she has time to wear and looks forward to baseball season so she can watch games in the sun with her friends (using the term 'watch' loosely). She routinely hosts movie nights and girls' night at her cute, albeit small, apartment. Her cooking skills cover a variety of salads, mostly consisting of lettuce and avocado, with a generous gob of minced Dungeness crab. Andrea has questionable opinions towards all things Mormon and all things ordinary."

This little paragraph pretty much summed up who I was for a big part of my life and in comparison, my life now looks NOTHING like said points mentioned above.

The trailer for "Lost in Translation" stated in the beginning "Bob is lost." In this case:
"Andrea is lost as she begins to come to terms with what it means to live her life in another country. Andrea is new to being a wife and suddenly finds herself in charge of a home where two, sometimes four people dwell. She owns a dog who recently chewed up one of her two pairs of high heeled black boots - she is the master disciplinarian. She's also balancing her career working remotely for a company based abroad, all the while managing her humbling grades in Graduate School. All this grouped with trying to cement bonds and friendships with other women living the Expat life as well. Andrea spends the majority of her days completely alone, reaching out to the world via social online mediums, something she never did before back home. Old Andrea - meet new Andrea."

I'm learning about being a wife, a "dueña de casa" (verbatim, "owner of a home" which has more do with running and creating a home vs fiscally owning a home), being a pet owner, doing my job well but knowing that eventually I'll need to have a secure job locally if I'm ever going to establish my career whole-heartedly here, branching out, learning how to maneuver myself in this city, so on and so on. All of this is grossly misaligned with what I knew of me before so to me, it's no wonder that I'm in this perpetual state of crisis with regards to my identity.

In "Lost in Translation," the character Bob (Bill Murray) asks the character Charlotte (Scarlett Johansson) "What do you do?" to which she replies "I'm not sure yet actually" and later, in a different scene, she tells Bob "I just don't know what I'm supposed to be."

Chile is full of nuances, bureaucracy, crime, traditions and social norms - things that can make anyone's head spin even before they have to come to terms with all of a sudden being a wife and "mom" to a six month old dog in a foreign country where no one seems to understand where you're coming from. As such, it's pretty hard to determine what one is "supposed to be" at any given point. Shying away from the ordinary and in a land where a) being different isn't rewarded and b) being different isn't something easily accessible, you find yourself wondering where your path is and how you walk down it at your own rhythm once you've determined said path.

But "the good news is, the whiskey works" to quote the trailer/movie again. And in my case here and now, the whiskey is all things that make being here better than being there... the whiskey is all that stuff that nudges me and says "Hellooooo, remember this?" After all, as much as I loved my single life and LOVED my old apartment, the fact of the matter was that it was lonely on many occasions and even then I had days when I'd be home alone and talked to no one ... the bad news being that I didn't have the reality of G walking in through the door and sharing the evening with me. And if there's ever one common denominator in the field where all that's good belongs, it's G.

In summary, am I having an identity crisis? Yeah, I think I am. I'm in this strange land with its strange customs, where I don't know tit from tat and on top of that I'm all of a sudden a "housewife" in more ways than I care to recognize. Simply put, the housewife bit is not the gig I was thinking I'd have this time in life and I'm fighting it with blood, sweat and tears. The wife part I like - something one can definitely get used to, but this is also a learning curve. I'm attempting to introduce old Andrea to new Andrea ...one's lost and one's found. Both are versions of me that I know and love, though the former one is that which I've known for a lifetime minus the last year.

In the end it's the environment, where I am, what I do and who I surround myself with that's changed. I don't recognize the usual suspects because the usual suspects are played by completely different people now. It's on me to get with it and adapt already. I have yet to learn to identify with my new roles in my new world. This is the main reason for said identity crisis I'm proclaiming. In the end, I imagine it happens to others who find themselves in warp speed towards another chapter in life ... or is that just the new Andrea wishful thinking?

I have faith in the final thought in the "Lost in Translation" trailer above ... "Sometimes you have to go halfway around the world, to come full circle."

Labels: Everyday life, expats, world domination