HAVE a forgiving heart… We voted for a President, … not… a priest, … not… a saint.”
In the face of sexist remarks made by President Rodrigo Duterte, Assistant Communications Secretary Marie Banaag gave this advice to women during the “Digong’s Day for Women” event recently held in Malacañang, reported the “Philippine Daily Inquirer” on April 1.
Where does one begin dissecting this statement for irony and paradox?
The advice to ignore discourse that discriminates against women is made at the close of March, celebrated as National Women’s Month.
The speaker is a government executive handling communications. The pronouncement is uttered during an event organized by Malacañang to “honor women.”
Aside from the President’s rape jokes, sexist comments, catcalling, and inappropriate comments, such as his backhanded compliments of Vice President Leni Robredo’s legs and knees, there has been no letup to the misogyny uttered or demonstrated by public officials in official settings.
Recently, House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez drew fire for his brazen admission about extramarital affairs and illegitimate children, as well as insinuations: “Who doesn’t have a girlfriend?”
The President’s allies in Congress also drew heavy criticism when they sought to show a sex video that allegedly involved Sen. Leila de Lima during a House inquiry on the illegal drugs trade. Leading the pack that accused de Lima was Speaker Alvarez, who lambasted the senator as “immoral” for conducting an affair with a married member of her staff.
Yet, one can sense the abuse of power behind the House clamor for the public viewing of the sex video. This “slut shaming” was intended to harass and destroy the credibility of an outspoken critic of the President.
Some insist on dismissing sexist language as “just words,” prone to be “misunderstood” or “misinterpreted” and easily countered with a “heart that cares” and a “helping hand,” say the President’s apologists.
However, studies show that discourse steeped in misogyny and sexism breeds a toxic culture promoting victimization and dehumanization. The damage escalates when public figures escape accountability for misogyny.
In a Nov. 4, 2016 article in “The Atlantic,” multiple studies were cited to show that “Trump-style sexism” exacts a “major impact on thinking, stress, and self-esteem,” resulting in “lasting harm.”
When Trump’s bragging about groping women was published, the Atlantic reported that “women tweeted accounts of their molestations at a rate of 50 per minute” and sexual-trauma survivors “talked openly… for the first time” about assaults they had buried for decades.
While it has been pointed out that Trump’s “locker-room talk” has liberated some female victims to “reclaim the insult,” multiple studies confirm that “rude language can impair cognition.”
In several experiments where the experimenters were rude, the participants exhibited reduced creativity and thinking, and heightened anti-social tendencies, including an inclination to be violent towards the experimenters.
Watching uncivil behavior and hearing discriminatory discourse in official debates aired on television undermine trust in one’s self and the government. “Perceptions of sexism or discrimination lead women to doubt their qualifications to enter the political area,” commented an academic in the same article in “The Atlantic.”
A study published in the January 2001 issue of the “Journal on Social Issues” established that more women than men bear the brunt of everyday sexism.
At a rate of “about one to two impactful sexist incidents per week,” women are exposed to “traditional gender role stereotypes and prejudice, demeaning and degrading comments and behaviors, and sexual objectification.”
The misogyny takes a toll on “women’s psychological well-being by decreasing their comfort, increasing their feelings of anger and depression, and decreasing their state self-esteem.”
Starting with President Duterte, we must clean up our talk.