"Sirena" and "Ituloy Mo Lang": Pro-LGBT or Anti-LGBT songs?

I was with two of my closest friends, chillin’ on a Saturday afternoon when Siakol’s “Ituloy Mo Lang” played on the radio. I heard the song several times, but I never really knew the lyrics, word-per-word. All I knew was that the song was for a friend of the composer who was apparently gay. It goes on about how he got his friend’s back since he was bullied a lot because of his gender. And so, thinking the song was “pro-gay”, I liked it. I tried to listen closely to the song while humming to its tune when suddenly, one of my friends interrupted.

“I don’t like that song. I despise it.”

I was shocked, of course, hearing that from my friend (who is gay, by the way), since I thought the song was for them (them, referring to the LGBT community). Seeing my blank reaction, obviously waiting for an explanation as to why he hated it, my friend continued.

(Non-verbatim):
“I don’t like it because people think that song it’s so ‘empowering’ for us gays. It’s not. It actually does the opposite. That song is kind of being used against us, if it does anything,” he said.

            I looked towards my other friend (who is also gay), and he nodded in agreement.

“Totoo yan. Pati yung kanta na ‘Sirena’ ni Gloc-9? Ginagamit ‘yang kantang yun pang-asar sa akin ng mga kaklase ko,” says my friend. “Pag dumadaan ako sa kalsada sa amin, yung mga batang makikita ako, bigla na lang kakantahin yun, na para bang pang-asar,” he added.

      Hitting a somewhat controversial topic, the discussion heated up and opinions were shared regarding these songs whose lyrics revolve around the issue of gender equality, particularly the acceptance of the LGBT community in society. The sharing of stories and opinions by my friends, as a result, was quite enlightening for me. Ever since I became an Iska, I have supported the LGBT community as much as many of us do, and it was a great shock to learn that sometimes, we feel that we’re so ‘gender-sensitive, but unconsciously, we’re not being sensitive enough. And so, I will be sharing in this blog the reasons why (in our personal opinion) these songs are not too gender-sensitive like how we thought they were.

·       These songs strengthen and add up to gender stereotypes and prejudices.

Cross-dressing, waist-swaying, doll-playing, loud, comedic, artistic people. These are only few of the many stereotypes and labels that have been placed upon the gay community. Unfortunately, by adding these labels into the lyrics, the songs that were made and produced to supposedly “empower” seem to have strengthened our society’s habit of stereotyping, as well as reinforcing a generalized perspective on the LGBT group. While we know that there is some truth in these labels, we want to avoid reinforcing these stereotypes because they tend to limit an individual on what he/she can be, thus defeating the goal of empowerment. Lady Gaga’s Born This Way is one of the songs that showed us that labels and stereotypes are not necessary to paint the picture for the people to know that our generation’s demand is a demand for gender equality, acceptance, and empowerment.

·       They become tools for discrimination and bullying.

While it would be pleasant to think that the motive of the bands and song writers in writing their lyrics are to express their support and sentiments of the seemingly lack of and clamor for acceptance by the LGBT community, we have to admit that sometimes, these songs are being used for ridicule instead. Yes, the song in its entirety is supposedly putting a positive image, however, the labels and the stereotypes are just so strong that the message of the song is being overlooked, and so mockery, prejudice and ridicule take its place instead. Let’s face it, we live in a hostile world, using everything that can be used to beat the uniqueness out of every extraordinary and special individual, forcing them to conform to what is “normal” and “right”.

So? What should we do now? Should we dismiss these songs as unethical or gender-insensitive? Should be stop listening to them? Well, that will be your personal decision. I think that these songs are not totally unethical, nor gender insensitive, but it depends on how we use them. If you feel that I’m overreacting and that these kinds of songs are totally harmless, I’m afraid I would have to disagree. We must be aware that stereotypes and labels, regardless of what form they are presented, are always harmful and never beneficial.

So, the next time you feel like singing out a line from Sirena to one of your gay friends or acquaintances, think first. Think very well. Sirena nga ba ang kausap mo, o tao ’ rin na katulad mo, nakakaramdam at nasasaktan?

2011-61230 (1)

Flawed youth?

Goin’ Bulilit Episode: November 23, 2014

As much as some TV shows nowadays are meant for fun or in other words, the entertainment of target audiences, still the occurrence of unfavorable acts in any show is inevitable. And in a bridge that connects us to this idea lies the critical situations of the young budding actors and actresses in the show and their fellow young counterparts on the side of the audience.

Take the case of ABS-CBN’s show, Goin’ Bulilit. It is a gag show featuring children in various comedic situations, thus its main objective is to be funny and entertaining for young spectators. Based on some observations, some segments and jokes involved in the show are apparently not suitable for young audiences.

   

         To discuss this issue, let’s take a look at the episode on November 23, 2014. There was a part in the said episode where two children were playing the role of a husband and a wife. At the end of that certain part, one of the child actors said “walang hiya ka!” — an evident act of  letting young actors speak such nasty words.

   

          Moreover, another example is the show’s other segments where the young cast of the show danced sexily and wore sexy outfits inappropriate for them. Although it’s a gag show and parody is one of its main focuses, making them wear attires that are not suitable for them is not really ‘cute’ in the eyes of most adult audiences.

            Furthermore, in the ‘Use it in a sentence’ (one-liner jokes) portion of the show, there was this line: Use ‘zigzag in a sentence.—“Huwag kang tatawa kundi zigzagin kita ng kutsilyo!” Apparently, there was a tinge of violence promoted in the execution of such language.

    

        In support to the said examples, here’s Article 11 sec.11 of the KBP Broadcast Code of the Philippines: “Children should not be made to perform acts, use language, or put on attire that is vulgar, obscene, indecent, or inappropriate for children.”

         In addition to the aforementioned examples is the “Pampainit Tips” segment of Goin’ Bulilit. These one-liner jokes were mentioned in this particular portion: (a) Talukbong ng kumot at plantsa ng katawan. (b) Umupo sa mainit na kawa, etc. According to Article 11 sec. 1, the airing of programs that would help children to develop their full physical, mental, and social potential as well as attain psychological, emotional, and spiritual maturity shall be encouraged. But then, considering the unlikable idea of the “Pampainit Tips” segment of the show, that certain part seems to be violating what the article says.

           Digging deeper, another example is a part on the same episode where the scene acted out portrayed a situation of making fun of the LGBT. The criticism on this segment of the show falls under Article 22 which states that: DISCRIMINATION. A person, religion, color, ethnicity, gender and physical or mental disability shall not be used in a way that would embarrass, degrade, or ridicule him.

            I must say that it is indeed a program of flawed staging. But still, the show goes on obviously with no strong foundation in making any changes. So, as a soon-to-be media practitioner, it is best to find a way that will align with the innocence the children are entitled of.

2012-52278 (1)

Exchanging dignity for money? Eat Bulaga's Suffer Sireyna

          Most of the Filipinos, especially families, are fond of watching noontime shows. These shows obviously have entertainment value since almost all of the hosts are comedians; plus the poor funny contestants make them even better. We watch out for these shows on television because they give us time to relax in our couch, because they make us laugh, and because most of us are not aware that they are not (editor’s note: morally) good in a deeper sense.

           Let us take a look in one segment of the longest-running noontime show Eat Bulaga, the Suffer Sireyna. It is a beauty contest where gays from different barangays are introduced. They do modeling with their costumes, show their talents, and also undergo a question and answer portion. Some say it is good to see that media found a way to empower the LGBT community because it gives chance for the gays to prove their selves. But is it really for empowerment? First of all, it is not a beauty contest. Second, it humiliates the participants. Third, they are using poverty to make fun of other people.

            It is not a beauty contest because it is not meant to show the gays’ beauty but to tell people that they are funny. They do modeling with barbeque smoke, show their funny talents, and undergo a question and answer portion wherein they have to eat unusual food such as fresh onions while answering funny statements with the shows’ nonsense questions like “In what way do you want to die, in the middle of a country war or bombing?” plus they have to pass obstacle race. Maybe there is nothing actually wrong with these because this was really meant for fun.

            But the way they are treated? That is another story. Some say that it is the contestants’ fault why they are humiliated. They say it is because those gays know that they are going to be insulted if they join and they just let the hosts throw bad words or insult to them. That is the point. Almost all of the people joining such noontime show contests are there for money and by that, they do not already have the time to think if they are going to give up their dignity. People who produce the show know that poor people can only hope for the amount they will give because nowadays, joining such contests can be considered as the contestants’ instant source of income.

             As I can see, the situation is really about the humiliation of dignity, but the media’s decision is to still have it as a show. John Stuart Mill’s utilitarianism under Teleological ethical theories says it is alright if it harms one as long as a greater number of people are happy. But they are violating the KBP Code of Ethics Article 17 that talks about quiz shows, contests, public participation programs and promotions; Section 3 says that public or audience participation programs shall not ridicule, diminish or demean the dignity of an individual participating in such programs. Even people who are poor or included in the so-called “third sex” still have the right to maintain their dignity.

2012-40511 (1)