Connect with us

Op-Ed

Legalizing same-sex marriage isn’t divorcing history

Peter Jones Dela Cruz writes about the same old arguments used against LGBT people and their relationships. For him, there is a need to learn from history that fallacies cannot be used to infringe on the inherent rights and control the lives of a minority.

Published

on

This is a response to the opinion of Ms. Angela Alvarez. Even if I wrote this a while back, and while it’s kind of late to post it, I think the message of this still rings true.

On my first post about Angela Alvarez’s reaction to same-sex marriage, I mentioned that she was probably too young to talk about this issue. But I figured that there are much older people who give the same arguments as she did. So, her age has probably nothing to do with her opinion. However, I have to point out that her arguments are not new. They are the same old arguments that have been debunked so many times.

From Angela Alvarez

Let’s start with the misrepresentation of the marriage equality advocacy. I think she’s right about the “marriage is not all about love” part. It’s just partly about love. Yes, love does play a huge role in this advocacy and is, indeed, a good part of the story, but it’s just part of the story. The other part has to do with state recognition and the rights and privileges that come with state-sanctioned unions. This “other part” is about upholding the dignity of same-sex couples, getting state recognition, owning properties together, having next-of-kin privileges, adopting a child together, etc.

Also, marriage isn’t about any kind of love we can think of. It’s about mutual love between two adult human beings in a committed relationship. What she wasn’t right about was comparing love between two men or two women to, for instance, that love of a pet owner to his pet. Here, she made a fallacy called equivocation. Those are different forms of love. Hence, the comparison is faulty.

This equivocation lends itself into a slippery slope argument that doesn’t die. It assumes that same-sex marriage will encourage people to marry their dogs or marry kids or marry two or more partners. I think marriage traditionalists imagine a sort of ladder. Heterosexual partnerships occupy the top rung. Beneath this rung are homosexual partnerships. And then you have polygamy, incest, pedophilia, and bestiality. Marriage equality critics have this paranoia that when you move the limits of marriage laws a step below the conventional, it will lead to moving the limits further down. That sounds logical at face value, but it has a few problems.

  1. Homosexual relationships are not inferior to heterosexual relationships. Opposite-sex love is no different from same-sex love. There is no logical or scientific argument that supports the conservative stand on the matter of marriage. There is no moving down the ladder in this case.
  2. Supposing for purposes of argument we say, all right, same-sex partnerships are inferior to opposite-sex partnerships, it still doesn’t follow that sanctioning such partnerships will lead to sanctioning of bestiality or pedophilia. When women gained voting rights, after years of being considered inferior to men, voting rights were not extended to children or dogs. When African-Americans gained civil rights after being considered inferior to white Americans, civil rights were not extended to chimpanzees. Of course, now it’s silly to think women are inferior to men or African-Americans are inferior to white Americans.
  3. The argument ignores important differences between same-sex relationships and pedophilia, incest, or bestiality. One can’t get married to a child because children are too young to give considerable consent. One can’t get married to a dog because dogs can’t sign on a marriage certificate or read what it says, let alone understand why it’s getting married.
READ:  Obama issues LGBT Pride month proclamation

Regarding polygamy/polyamory and incest, I couldn’t decide on these things on my own. There are certain cultures that allow these things. But I will maintain that same-sex marriage, incest, and polygamy are three different issues. They are independent of each other and therefore should be discussed independently. Same-sex marriage should be discussed in its own right, not under the influence of issues that are not related to it. If people want to lobby polygamy, it’s their right. Let us listen to their advocacy and let’s decide whether it is wrong or not. Besides, many cultures even within our country allow polygyny, effectively rendering the one-man-and-one-woman-union-only-ever argument inconsistent even within our diverse society.

That marriage is only between a man and a woman through the church is a traditional and religious argument and is the very reason why same-sex marriage advocates want marriage redefined. Many societies around the world have shifted from the traditional man-woman definition to simply a union of two adults (unrelated by blood). But that’s not the point. The points are as follows:

  1. Same-sex marriage advocates are not after churches. We understand churches will keep their traditional hold on marriage. We know that. We are asking the state. Philippine legislation does not adhere to religious doctrines. The law is secular. Section 6 of Article II of the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines states that the separation of Church and State is inviolable. Section 5 of Article III, on the other hand, states that no religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights.
  2. Marriage is not for procreation. It is for legal and social recognition of unions. The state is not interested in whether you make kids or not. If it were, it would not have allowed old and sterile couples to marry. We don’t need marriage for procreation, and procreation isn’t a requirement for marriage, but merely an option.
READ:  As a lesbian, am I still at risk for HIV infection?

The adoption argument is not an argument against same-sex marriage per se but an argument against adoption by same-sex couples. President Aquino made the same fallacy when he talked about SSM. You cannot say that SSM is wrong because it leads to adoption, and gay couples do not make good parents; so they are not allowed to adopt, so they shouldn’t get married. Aside from being plain ridiculous, this is a very bad argument for the following reasons:

  1. SSM doesn’t always lead to adoption, in the same way that not all conventional marriages lead to having kids, born or adopted.
  2. Gay/lesbian couples can make good parents. Studies have shown that kids raised by gay/lesbian couples fare just as fine as those raised by straight parents.
  3. The parents’ ability to rear children doesn’t depend on their sexual orientations.

In Ms. Alvarez’s criticism of the SCOTUS ruling, there was an unclear statement about same-sex marriage encouraging more homosexuals. Did she mean encourage kids to go gay? It doesn’t work that way. Being gay isn’t learned or imitated. You don’t go gay because you’re parents are gay, in the same way that you don’t necessarily go straight because your parents are straight; otherwise, there would have been no gay kid today. Sexual orientation doesn’t work that way.

That gay couples shouldn’t get married because they might raise HIV/STI cases is a cruel argument. We have a problem when we want to stop gay and lesbian couples from getting married because of high likelihood of sexually transmissible infections. This argument is absurd because of the following reasons:

  1. It assumes that all/most gay and lesbian couples engage in unsafe sexual practices and that all/most straight couples do not.
  2. It assumes that same-sex marriage encourages such unsafe sexual practices.
  3. It confuses marriage with sexual practices.
  4. It implies that people with predisposition to certain diseases cannot get married.
  5. It assumes that sexually transmitted infections are contracted via gay/lesbian sex alone.
  6. It assumes that same-sex marriage/unions and safe sex are mutually exclusive.
READ:  5 Ways to give to charity when you have no money

We have to be careful when making an appeal to consequences. Something is not necessarily wrong because we think it leads to our assumed consequences.

This is not divorcing history. This is learning from history that fallacies cannot be used to infringe on the inherent rights and control the lives of a minority.

Peter Jones Dela Cruz is a gay demiguy, a heretic, and someone who believes popular opinion and norms should be challenged if they are devoid of reason. He yearns for a future wherein everyone is treated equally regardless of who they love or what they wear ― a future where labels no longer matter. Apart from ranting for LGBTQ rights, he also likes to snap pictures and sing covers.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Protected by WP Anti Spam

From the Editor

Start with that wo/man in the mirror…

With revisionism, credit-hogging, co-opting/hijacking of causes, et cetera happening even within the LGBTQIA community, Michael David C. Tan says “we need to look at ourselves closely and see if we have become the very people/systems we seek out to destroy/dismantle.”

Published

on

PHOTO BY TWEETYSPICS FROM PIXABAY.COM

“…I’ve been a victim of a selfish kind of love
It’s time that I realize
That there are some with no home, not a nickel to loan
Could it be really me, pretending that they’re not alone?

I’m starting with the man in the mirror
I’m asking him to change his ways
And no message could have been any clearer
If you want to make the world a better place
Take a look at yourself, and then make a change…

MICHAEL JACKSON
Man in the Mirror, 2008

This is going to be short; and yet I hope… crisp.

But – to start – considering Michael Jackson’s tattered past, let me apologize for starting this article with portions from his “Man in the Mirror” hit. Not to lift him up (he doesn’t need me for that) or attack him for his flaws (and he sure had many – e.g. child molestation charges), but his words sort of easily sum up a key message so many of us want to forget. That is, that for change to happen, we need to start with us. It’s a hackneyed statement/cliché, I know; but – guess what? – the stock statement has not gone stale.

Here’s the thing: So many of the (now out-to-the-world) flaws from within the LGBTQIA community merely reflect what we sought out to change. And so many of these same flaws are there because of our refusal to see that, in so many ways, we have become mini versions (some are actually exact replicas) of those we attack.

READ:  Adjusting ARV intake according to time zones

Off my head, check:

1. Revisionism.
Yes, LGBTQIA people (like non-LGBTQIA people) claim that the Marcoses – and by extent, the role played by the likes of Pres. Rodrigo Roa Duterte here – seem to be busy amending our Martial Law history. By all means, we should be mindful of all forms of revisionism; we should not forget our past (the good and the bad) because we can only move forward if we know our history.
But – this is what’s unnerving! – there are also LGBTQIA community members (many of them the most loud in criticizing the revisionism that is happening) who are revising the LGBTQIA history in the Philippines – e.g. who should be credited for starting “Pride”, who we should thank/adore/praise/treat as gods for starting (not even for getting pass) an anti-discrimination law, et cetera. When we criticize what we, ourselves, are doing, that’s called (in a word) hypocrisy.

2. Dictatorship.
We go back to former strongman Ferdinand E. Marcos; and we now have Pres. Duterte, both we attack for their (what we refer to as) “wanton desire to cling on to power”. Rightfully, it should be said.
But then we look inside our LGBTQIA community, and we have:
A) Metro Manila-centric “leaders” who would go to LGUs to ask/dictate/tell them to develop ADOs sans community consultation of the LGBTQIA people there;
B) So-called “networks of LGBTQIA organizations” with “leaders” who are there as forever heads (with no mechanisms for passing of power); and
C) “Leaders” who help dictate where funds go, and yet only give the same to their inner circles.

READ:  Bursting the love bubble

3. Idya-idya/Sila-sila/Nepotism/Special groups.
That the supporters (no matter how evil they may be) end up dividing the spoils of war is an oft-cited observation. In the past, the term we used was “cronies”. The terms may have changed, but the concept remains the same – i.e. that a small circle of people end up benefiting from those in power.
Yes, this is wrong; and yes, this has to be criticized (and changed).
But looking inside the LGBTQIA community, it’s not like we’re “exempted” from this practice.
Consider:
A) The non-inclusive approach to developing the anti-discrimination bill (ADB) (I have said this in the past, and I am saying it again and again and again);
B) As noted in point #2, the giving of available funds ONLY to inner circles; and
C) The continuing Metro Manila-centric-controlled discourse re “LGBTQIA movement in the Philippines” (there are those who’d deny this, of course; that’s their right. But that these same people are based in Metro Manila or are even overseas bely their very denial).

We often hear – as reasoning or as excuse, depending on how this is interpreted – that it’s because our LGBTQIA movement is “still young” And yes, this may be true. But the fact remains that when we’re no better than the very people we attack; when the systems we say are wrong/erroneous are the same inside our movement, then who are we kidding, really?

READ:  Fighting for safe spaces in the Church

Continue Reading

Op-Ed

Where’s the fire?

Reighben Labilles notes that the movement has only succeeded on a surface level. “It seems as if its reduced the queer struggle as a regular yearly narrative – a PR thematic during Pride Month, or something that resurfaces when a famous Pinoy queer couple gets married abroad, or when a queer Filipino becomes a victim of a violent crime… It’s time to go beyond the echo chambers of FB and Twitter.”

Published

on

By Reighben Labilles

When the rocks were soft and I had more hair, I used to be active in the local efforts for LGBT rights.  But shit happens and I had to move on.

I’ve led a colorful adulthood since then: balancing work in a very queer-friendly IMC firm, enjoying a quiet, private life with my partner, and participating in the testosterone-dominated MTG gaming community which I deeply love. In short: this lady hasn’t been fulfilling her role (no matter how small) as a civilian participant in social issues – hanggang FB-FB na lang and the occasional rally pagpasok sa schedule.

But it did allow me insights into the shared Filipino psyche when dealing with social issues. It can be summed-up into two observations: (1) people don’t care enough; and (2) people don’t know how to care for issues that don’t directly affect them.

Now this leads to my opinion on the state of progressive movements in the country. Given the public’s almost apathetic attitude towards dealing with society’s problems outside of furious FB and Twitter posts – movements struggle to make a dent in the status quo. When the population barely participates in these efforts, it cannot facilitate lasting change in the nation within the timeframes we need – which is dapat now na.

Case in point: this administration reacts when people have adverse online responses to their policies – but they still find ways to move forward with their plans because push-back from the citizenry isn’t strong enough. What’s even shocking is that there is a non-zero percentage of the population that actually likes what’s happening!

READ:  45 Days later (A plea from MacArthur, Leyte, Philippines)

In my opinion, these are the same harsh truths faced by groups that continued the fight for queer rights. They have rallies, online and offline campaigns, press events, and even the occasional nods from “allies” in the government. But the groups, in their various forms and iterations and evolutions, have been at this endeavor for decades now. So why is it we don’t have major victories in the pursuit of progressive changes in the country?

Years of reflection and observation have led me to this realization: The movement has only succeeded on a surface level. It seems as if its reduced the queer struggle as a regular yearly narrative – a PR thematic during Pride Month, or something that resurfaces when a famous Pinoy queer couple gets married abroad, or heaven forbid when a queer Filipino becomes a victim of a violent crime. The approach so far has its benefits, as it has encouraged more Filipinos to come out and pursue their own truths despite adversities. There is more queer visibility in the media. And we even live in an age where we have a proud transwoman serving in Congress.

But there is something I sorely miss. Something that I am guilty of no longer possessing. Gone is the fire and fury of old, of screaming at the wholesale injustices of the world against everyone from the poor to the queer. Where is that blaze that consumes people’s hearts – the passion that drives us to spill into streets until the elect gives us the rights and benefits and opportunities we all deserve. And finally, where is the push for greater compassion and understanding between all Filipinos – so we can make the most out of this struggling country.

READ:  Why we are here

As I am far removed from the forces that actively continue the fight for our rights, I can offer no practical solution to what we face. I only offer these thoughts: We can only succeed in enacting change now when all of us finally understands that changing how the world works requires sacrifice.

It’s about taking time in our day to participate in causes that matter, of going beyond the echo chambers of FB and Twitter, of actually going to the streets, into communities, with our personal efforts evolving into finally working with each other for our shared aspirations.

And ultimately this: ending the culture of US vs THEM, as true and lasting progressive change can only be achieved when we are unified by shared goals while celebrating each other’s uniqueness and diversity.

Continue Reading

Op-Ed

Finding my Pride by not holding back

Though he was bullied while growing up for being part of the LGBTQI family, Edward Maalihan now says that “there’s always a rainbow after the rain. You go do you, even if it’s hard, even if it’s impossible. Because in the end, you’ll grow old and only remember how you held back to life and wished you had just ‘let it go’.”

Published

on

PHOTO COURTESY OF EDWARD MAALIHAN

By Edward Maalihan

Since I was young, I’ve been bullied by my schoolmates, friends and even my own relatives for being feminine – in the way I walk, my voice, and the way I reacted to things. So through high school and college I was in hiding even if others knew what I really am.

It was hard. I tried to suppress who I am because of what they always say to me: “Lalaki at babae lang ang ginawa ng Diyos (God only made a man and a woman)”, “Mga bakla, pinagtatawanan (Gays are there to be ridiculed)”, “Ang gwapo mo pa naman, sayang ka (You’re good looking; such a waste/what a pity!)”. Heck, I can say hundreds more like these; and because of it all, I came to a point where I believed them, that being gay is wrong. I even tried to force myself to have a girlfriend (obviously it didn’t work), and believe me you won’t want your sons and daughters to feel that way.

But after I graduated from college, I got into my first REAL relationship. And from then on, the weight of the world on my shoulders slowly started to lighten up. I could finally breathe and see what life really offers, without being chained to a heterogender system.

When I joined my first Pride gathering, I realized many things. It also made me ask myself: Were those bullies from the past at fault? Should I blame them for making me feel miserable?

Maybe, right?

But for me now, it’s their lack of knowledge about being LGBTQI; it’s the society that made being gay wrong; it’s those movies that made gays look ridiculous (yes we’re funny, but we are also deep and sensitive); it’s the “church” that made us sinners (yes we can be, but so can others) that are to blame.

READ:  LGBT teens use e-cigarettes more than straight peers, survey says

They don’t see that, yes, we are not perfect, but we also just try to be good citizens/people.

I already forgave all of my bullies, and I am even bestfriends with some of them now.

I still want to say so much more, but I’ll end now with this: There’s always a rainbow after the rain. You go do you, even if it’s hard, even if it’s impossible. Because in the end, you’ll grow old and only remember how you held back to life and wished you had just “let it go”.

FOLLOW @EDWARDMAALIHAN

Continue Reading

FEATURES

The impetus for organizing LGBTQI Pride in the Phl

All year round, various parts of the Philippines host LGBTQI Pride marches/parades/events. But the very first one happened in Metro Manila, which Outrage Magazine revisits to see how the annual LGBTQI gathering continues to evolve.

Published

on

It was in 1994 when the very first Pride March was held in the Philippines (and in Asia). The Philippines was actually the pioneer in the region.

“There was no interference or harassment along the way, but a lot of noise and shouting in the ranks of the 50 or so marchers,” recalled Fr. Richard Mickley, who used to head Metropolitan Community Church (MCC) in the Philippines. MCC held a mass during that first Pride March in the Philippines.

Aside from Mickley, Oscar Atadero – then with ProGay Philippines – helped make the event happen, along with the likes of Murphy Red, et al.

Incidentally, 1994 also marked the 25th year since the “modern” lesbian and gay movement “started”, thanks to the Stonewall Inn Riot in New York.

“We recognized that we now had open, not closeted, organizations. But the movement was still quiet or unknown. We felt we needed a (local) Stonewall,” Mickley continued.

So the date was set.

The route was planned.

As the small group of LGBT organizations marched along Quezon Avenue to Quezon Memorial Circle, they were confronted by the park police and was asked, “Where are you are you going?”

“We had no assembly permit. We sat by the roadside until the activists of ProGay ironed out the stumbling block. (After it was settled), we made our way to an assembly area with a stage,” Mickley said.

Aside from Fr. Richard Mickley, Oscar Atadero – then of ProGay Philippines – helped make the first LGBT Pride March in the Philippines happen, along with the likes of Murphy Red, et al.
PHOTO COURTESY OF FR. RICHARD MICKLEY

But in the end, “the first Pride March brought a publicity breakthrough. The purpose of the Pride March was realized – (to show) that the gay and lesbian people of the Philippines are real people, and they are not freaks in a closet,” Mickley added.

READ:  The Murder of Winton Lou

CONTINUING PRIDE

In 1996,  several LGBT organizations formed the Task Force Pride (TFP), a community-driven organization that was to be in-charge of organizing the annual Pride March in Metro Manila.

“One of the highlights of the early years was that of 1998. The Pride March was part of the contingent of the National Centennial Parade, as the Philippines celebrated 100 years of independence. Let that sink in. We marched in front of two presidents at the Quirino Grandstand, just before the transition from Fidel Ramos to Joseph Estrada,” Mickley said.

Ten years later, the LGBT movement in the Philippines grew bigger and stronger. And the fight for equal rights was – finally – in everyone’s consciousness.

Metro Manila Pride March in 2011, when the annual gathering was still political.

TFP continued to organize the annual march – at least the one in Metropolitan Manila. As a network, it was headed by different members of the LGBT community, representing different organizations. Every decision, every move was derived from consultations by/from the participating groups and members.

“More than the celebration, what was really memorable was that despite the community coming from all walks of life and various agendas, sub agendas, locations, et al., it was great to see everyone working as one, for just one moment in a year,” Great Ancheta, one of the organizers of the 2004 and 2005 Pride celebrations, said.

There were years when Pride almost did not happen.

In 2013, Quezon City was supposed to host the annual Pride March, but the supposed organizer (the local government unit/LGU) opted to cancel the event to donate the funds collected to the victims of Typhoon Yolanda.

“I was rattled with the idea that there will be no Pride March that year. I had to call all possible LGBT advocates that could help me organize Pride in two weeks time,” Raffy Aquino, one of the organizers of the 2013 Pride celebrations, said.

The Pride march almost did not happen in 2013; but REAL community effort – with approximately P5,000 – still made it happen.

Aquino – with the likes of GANDA Filipinas, Outrage Magazine and Rainbow Rights Project – reached out to different organizations and establishments in Malate (at that time still thriving as the LGBT capital of the country).

READ:  As a lesbian, am I still at risk for HIV infection?

“We had more or less P5,000 in funds, which came from the previous TFP organizers. I even waited until six or seven in the evening in Manila City Hall, the day before the event, for the permit to be released,” Aquino added.

But the 2013 Pride March happened.

And then came 2014, when “a super typhoon hit the country at the same time when Pride was scheduled, and we nearly had to cancel. Despite that, people still attended. (And) understandably, it had the lowest turnout in years. But it still showed that for many people, celebrating Pride is still important,” Jade Tamboon, one of the organizers of the 2012 and 2013 Pride celebrations, said.

PRIDE HURDLES

Organizing an event like the Pride March is not an easy feat, with organizers needing to deal with different factors – both internal and external to the LGBT community.

Pride in 2015 remained political; even if the march also started to become as just a parade.

“Working with the local government was one of our challenges (during our) time. Securing permits was also hard. And of course, rallying up sponsors,” Ancheta said.

Since the LGBT community in the Philippines is (still) only tolerated and not widely accepted, getting supporters that could help the event happen has been the most common problem year after year.

“Financing Pride has always been a major challenge, then and now. People don’t realize how expensive it is to mount Pride. But there’s also the logistics – the sourcing of materials, permits and vendors – that’s another thing people rarely see when they go to a Pride celebration,” Tamboon said.

READ:  Trans panic defense as victim-blaming when violence is violence and can never be justified

He added, “this has been a perennial problem of the Pride organizers: early fund-raising. It may be because organizers have not come up with a solution, rather than raising funds so close to the event date.”

YOUNG PRIDE

Today, organizing Pride marches – or aptly, parades – is mostly dominated by the young members of the LGBT community. And – whatever their stands/positions may be on LGBT human rights – this is as should be/bound to happen, with the passing of the baton inevitable.

By 2017, the annual Pride has followed the Western format, with private companies supporting the parade, and some even co-opting the LGBTQI struggle.

But the younger generation have it somewhat easier. As Ancheta said, “Pride celebrations are not limited now to the Pride marches/parades or events, with support for Pride now coming from various companies as evidenced in social networking posts.”

There are now also numerous Pride-related events – whether in the form of marches or parades – in various parts of the Philippines, from Baguio City to Cebu City, Davao City to Iloilo City, Iligan City to the Province of Batangas, among others. Even within Metro Manila, other cities already started their own (separate) Pride marches/parades, finally “devolving” the so-called Metro Manila Pride parade (nee “march”).

But even if the expressions of Pride (now) vary, that sense of solidarity – and raising awareness via that solidarity – remains…

“The increased interest and participation during the recent years, especially among the younger people, is a success in itself. More and more people are unafraid to be out and to showcase their (so-called) Pride,” Tamboon added.

“The recent Pride celebrations are successful in terms of numbers; they were able to target a bigger audience and wider corporate supporters. The younger organizers are also creative and well-versed in branding and marketing. They were able to utilize social media and digital marketing,” Aquino stressed.

STRUGGLE NEEDS TO CONTINUE

But for Aquino, everyone needs to remember that “Pride is not just a one day event.”

“The LGBT community of the Philippines is no longer hidden, closeted or unknown. We are here; we are everywhere – with our heads held high,” Mickley said. “We are on the way, (but) we are (still) seeking equality in the human family,” Mickley said.

*Interview requests were also sent to other past Pride organizers, but – as of press time – Outrage Magazine did not receive any response from them.

Continue Reading

Op-Ed

The missing link

For Patrick King Pascual, Pride is a moment of reckoning. Yes, it’s a time to give each other a pat on the back. But it’s also an opportunity to remind people that there is still a long way to go, and that no one can do it alone. “Without mincing words: We’ve taken steps, but we are still in deep shit. And that’s not being negative or cynical or drunk; just plainly stating reality.”

Published

on

IMAGE FROM PIXABAY.COM

Twenty-four years ago, the Philippines was introduced to the concept of parading for “Pride”. In fact, it wasn’t even just a parade when it started; it was a “march”. The former – in a gist – is mere celebration, while the latter has more weight, what with the political undertones. The coming of “Pride” helped in the continuation of the sparking of the local LGBTQI movement by serving as additional stepping stone of some sort.

Since then, in fact, the Philippines’ LGBTQI community has continuously experienced many firsts.

To name a few, the milestones included: LGBT-related crimes based on hate finally made the headlines; Ang Ladlad, a political party-list that was initially shamed and called immoral successfully joined the roster of electoral candidates; the anti-discrimination bill (ADB) crawled its way to the session halls of lawmakers; HIV prevalence and poor access to ARV (antiretroviral) drugs were discussed; the community was called “masahol pa sa hayop” by a senator; a transgender woman wins a congressional seat; and the issue of same-sex marriage continuously hounds everyone.

The first Pride March in the Philippines, held in the early 1990s, helped make happen the things that the younger generation are enjoying. It may be cliché, but those who came before us took a lot of the hit by being the first to confront erroneous systems that gravely affected (and still affect) us.

Here’s the interesting thing, though: NOT everyone believes we owe those who came before us any shit.

READ:  LGBT teens use e-cigarettes more than straight peers, survey says

I was in an LGBTQI event (one of those that were held to – ironically – celebrate “Pride”) when a young “leader” infamously claimed: “They (the elder LGBTQI people) haven’t done anything for us (Millennials). What did they do for the community, exactly; and for us/my generation?”

That someone can even think so left me dumbfounded.

National hero Jose Rizal keeps getting upgraded to make him relevant to the youth; one of his latest iterations is via a manga comics (even available online). But it seems that aside from the “cool” reinterpretation, the lessons he taught aren’t necessarily learned. Otherwise, the oft-cited “Ang hindi marunong lumingon sa pinangalingan ay hindi makakarating sa paroroonan (He who does not know how to look back at where he came from will never get to his destination) won’t be forgotten so quickly.

And then, just a few days after that (this time, in the “Pride” event of the US Embassy), I met another young member of the LGBTQI community who told me that – for all intents and purposes – “Pride” has ceased to be a struggle. This is, her insinuation is, for the oldies. At least for her (and her followers/supporters), for the young, “LGBTQI ‘Pride’ is now all about partying and celebrating.”

Yes, I agree with her, of course.

But no, I can’t agree with her completely.

Because while Pride is a time to mark all our successes, all the milestones, we should also use that moment to remind everyone that there is still a long way to go. That many members of the LGBTQI community are still struggling is a fact; ignoring this is not only ignorant, it is selfish.

READ:  When you tell us there are other things to talk about other than Pacquiao’s anti-LGBT stance

She called me cynical, negative… and drunk.

If seeing the ongoing struggles of many LGBTQI people is cynical and gives many younger LGBTQI people negative vibes (that dampens their party spirit), then perhaps I am a cynic. And if being able to question erroneously held beliefs means being branded as “drunk”, then so be it, too.

Because – at the end of the day – even though “Pride” continues to evolve, two facts remain. First, that our concepts of “Pride” now (even the wanton partying) is because those who came before us made it possible; and second, that even if we just want to party during “Pride” nowadays, not every LGBTQI person can access these elitist “Pride” gatherings because they continue to experience hardships in life (many of these difficulties aggravated by their being LGBTQI).

Pride is a moment of reckoning. Yes, it’s a time to give each other a pat on the back. But it’s also an opportunity to remind the person standing next to us that there is still a long, long, long way to go, and that no one can do it alone.

Because in the end, let’s stop pretending that it’s all rainbows and butterflies. Without mincing words: We’ve taken steps, but we are still in deep shit.

And that’s not being negative or cynical or drunk; just plainly stating reality.

Continue Reading

Op-Ed

‘We still have a lot of work to do’ – True Colors Coalition

Statement of True Colors Coalition for #PrideMonth2018.

Published

on

IMAGE FROM PIXABAY.COM

As we are about to march again together, we strengthen our vow to continue struggling for our rights as members of the society.

Our struggles as LGBT people are no different from the struggles of every sector in our society, and we must pursue these with concerted efforts to create united stands and actions to achieve our goals and put an end to all forms of discrimination.

We also continue to remember the great contributions of LGBT people before us; their courage have ignited many hearts and minds to stand for what is right and just. We will never forget the likes of Willem Arondeus who saw beyond our sector’s plight and led the people to a battle for freedom against the Nazis in 1943. We will never forget how Marsha P. Johnson and Sylvia Rivera, two transgender women of color who instigated the #StonewallRiot in 1969, started the riot that gave birth to the first Pride March as a protest against discrimination and violence towards the LGBT community.

These are just some of the many great involvements of our LGBT forerunners. Their legacy led us to where we are right now, but we still have a lot of work to do.

Locally, we still have to fight for the Anti-Discrimination Law, and the Supreme Court is still discussing marriage equality. These two battles remain, and we need all the support we can get to win them. We need all the strength from within our community and our allies so we can champion these. With this, we vow to never stop fighting. We vow to never get tired. We vow to keep fighting until we achieve victory.

READ:  The Murder of Winton Lou

Brothers and sisters in the community, we have won many battles. We have proven our courage and strength. Today, we must again prove to the world that we are united, and we will never back down from any challenges. And we will continue to #RiseUpTogether and create a society with no people facing oppression.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Facebook

Most Popular