Real talk: I don't hesitate to call myself a feminist, even if I realize that I have my lapses here and there. To me, it's simple: there is still a lot of disparity between genders, and feminism strives for equality not only in ways that will diminish my current position of privilege as a cisgendered Filipino male in the Philippines, but also enhance it, by hopefully destroying restrictive gender roles and expectations that do more harm than good to everyone.
So it's with a lot of consternation that I find myself surrounded by people who completely missed the point of this piece about the Vhong-Deniece situation. Anyone who bothers actually reading the article would realize that this alarming trend of misogyny has always existed, but its reach has expanded with the rise of the internet and mass media before it. Anyone who bothers actually reading the article would also understand that if they don't feel in any way guilty of bashing Deniece Cornejo based on her gender, then the article simply isn't talking about them.
Apparently, that was simply me overestimating the ability of the average reader to know better than to hijack a discussion that isn't even about them at all. Until they start calling feminists both "feminazis" and "brain-damaged," which sort of betrays that they're actually just butthurt at being called out on their bull.
Sometimes, I really wonder why I bother going through comments sections of articles when I know the comments will just give me a headache. People don't understand what the problem is. They don't see what the problem is. They think that it should be a standard course of action to applaud a man with many conquests and to castigate a woman who does the same. Do one, or do the other: don't switch the standards around when the genders do.
It's hard to explain, really: what else should we be looking out for to fix in equality other than the obvious economic gap? Why is the RH Law issue a clear sign that gender equality is nowhere near as good as we assume it to be in this country? Well, these are questions few people will ever ask in their lives, much less when they have more pressing concerns.
The arguments against feminism have been so predictable and so rote that you can practically make a bingo card out of them already.
Perhaps it's a case of obliviousness on the part of people in general, but it's tiresome. As we are inundated nonstop by the media firestorm surrounding the Vhong-Deniece issue, misogyny keeps on rearing its ugly head as we hear from people who clearly don't understand the point and think that feminists are complaining that a female is being castigated. Oh, if only that were the case. The thing is, the female is being castigated because she's a female. Furthermore, because she's female, we see it fit to sexualize our disdain for her.
Think back to all the hated female figures in Philippine society in recent times: we've poked fun at GMA for having breast implants. We've made sure to remind people that we think Nancy Binay is pretty much the epitome of unf*ckable, because she's ridiculously black. Kris Aquino is a slut.
Now, let's think back to the hated male figures in Philippine society in recent times: we poked fun at Erap for being an idiot. We've determined that Jejomar Binay is pretty much the epitome of "epal," not to mention ridiculously black. Noynoy Aquino is retarded.
Obviously, making fun of someone's complexion or apparent mental capabilities is pretty low as is, but Nancy Binay and Miriam get those, too, anyways. With that in mind, is it just me, or is there an alarming disparity here?