Male Acquisition of Gay Lingo in

An Academic Community

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree

Bachelor of Secondary Education

Major in English

JR G. Requita

Arfe Jay S. Sarignaya

2017
 Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

The study of gay language is a relatively new and topical area within Sociolinguistics,

which focuses on the language of members of the LGBTI (Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender

Intersex) community, their various forms of communication and communicative practices,

including the use of Lavender Lexicons, and how members of the community affirm their

sexuality and gender through language. Cage (2003) states that due to heteronormative ideas of

gender, sexuality and language, members of LGBTI communities worldwide, particularly gay

men and lesbians, have developed a Lavender Culture which includes the use of code switching

in their spoken communication, and non-verbal paralanguage which communicates to other gays

and lesbians key information about the individual.

Gay men in the Philippines, especially those who are out, speak to each other using a colorful

language that they invented, mixing English, Tagalog, Visayan, and sometimes even Japanese.

Those who would hear (or read) Filipino gay slang for the first time feel like they are deciphering

a Da Vinci Code.

The use of gay lingo means of defying the cultural norms and creating an identity of their

own. Gay speak evolves really fast, with obsolete words and phrases being rewritten and replaced

especially when non-gays learn what it means. As such, the reason of the researchers in

conducting this study is to answer how and why many males from an

academiccommunityspecifically at Cotabato Foundation College of Science and Technology

acquired gay lingo and its benefits to their academic and personal lives who were already

influenced by gay speak and used it, as it is after all under the umbrella of Sociolinguistics. It is a

phenomenon that cannot be isolated and could be found everywhere.

 Statement of the Problem

The research aims to determine the male acquisition of gay lingo and its importance.

Specifically, it sought to answer the following question.

1. Are the following socio-demographic characteristics influence the acquisition of the

respondents in terms of:

a. Age

b. Civil Status

c. Tribe

2. What are the reasons for males in acquiring gay lingo?

3. What is the importance of the gay lingo in males?

4. How does the use of gay lingo affects their status in the society?

Significance of the Study

The findings of this study will be beneficial to the following:

For the society as a whole, this study will serve as a vehicle to understand how and why

males acquire gay language or queer language and accept the speech of queer community in hope

for a wider knowledge and appreciation established the male homosexuals.

For the scholars, this study will be a contribution that would inspire them to broaden the

topics or issues stated. It will be a great contribution to the field of linguistics and subject for

research.

For the body of knowledge, this study will have a utility value especially to linguists as

this phenomenon is rapidly spreading throughout the community and cannot be isolated.
 For the individuals who seek sympathy and insights related to the queer language and its

miscellany, this study is an open book for them to better understand queer community, learn more

of their identity and accept gay speak as a colorful language.

Scope and Delimitation of the Study

The study will focus mainly on the male acquisition of gay lingo. The respondents of the

research will be selected based on the set parameters. They will be male heterosexuals studying at

Cotabato Foundation College of Science and Technology who are using swardspeak or gay speak

daily. Questions that will be asked to the selected respondents will be personal and will be

enclosed only in the context of developing this study.

Researchers will be guided by the factors in selecting respondents which includes ability

to speak gay lingo, dress code, vices, group of friends, manner of movements and practices in the

school year 2017-2018.

 Chapter 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter indicates the ideas relevant to the present subject relating to the other studies

and is briefly discussed to provide the foundation of the proposed study. In order to develop a

new method and procedures, careful review of literature and studies must be done for the

development of the study.

According to Bing and Bergvall (1996) the central target of Queer Language is the

linguistic manifestation of heteronormativity and, connected with it, binary gender and sexual

identity discourses. “Linguistic” manifestation may in principle pertain to both language use and

language system as places of discursive materialization. It was raised by Motschenbacher (2008)

that from a Queer Linguistic point of view, the binary distinction between language use and

system must be questioned because discourses (including heteronormativity) affect both, although

they exhibit different degrees of discursive materialization. When analyzing language use, a

Queer Linguistic approach assumes that (sexual/gendered) identities do not exist pre-discursively

but are constructed socially in the very moment of speaking or writing. Thus identities

becomeorientation points in processes of inter- and intra-contextual identity negotiation. The

relevant question then is no longer “How do gay and heterosexual men speak?” but rather “How

are sexual identities linguistically constructed in particular contexts?”. Instead of asking how the

binary macro-categories differ in their speech behavior, one would rather ask which differences

are to be found within these categories and whether not a large amount of similarity between the

two can also be identified. This is significant for gender studies at large, which used to

concentrate on the documentation of female-male differences, while research findings pointing to

gender similarity were frequently not seen as worthy of attention or publication. Furthermore,

Motschenbacher (2008) also states that research practices thatonly highlight inter-gender or
hetero-/ homosexual differences may have a certain commercial value, but they strengthen

heteronormative discourses.

At the core of sociolinguistics is the fact that human societies are internally differentiated,

whether by gender, age or class.

Chambers (1995) and Fasold (1984) both agrees that a sociolinguistic approach to

problems of language and interaction target the aspects of social problems that give people a

common basis to understanding and communicating with each other. In addition, Myhill (2004)

and Skutnabb –Kangas (2000) states that the origins and uses of initial language

implementationhave as great of an effect on social problems and inequality as do the perceptions

around, andstereotyping resulting from the linguistic (i.e. tonal, phonetic, semantic, etc.)

variations of genders, races or sexualities.

Downes (1998) and Skutnabb-Kangas (2000) accentuated that language remains the most

important aspect of intercultural and transcultural communication. It also guides the

intergenerational and transgenerational production and reproduction of knowledge, norms and

values. Thelegacies of histories can be found in the sociolinguistic structures and language

patterns ofindividuals, communities and nations. The social strata, class structures, gender roles

and stereotypes of domesticity are reflected in the language and patterns of social interaction that

arederived from the experience of yesterday (McConnell-Ginet, 2011). We are faced daily with

the strength of the inequality and oppression of days gone by, each memory a result of a word, a

concept, a piece of legislation that permitted, forced or guides the actions of a social being. We

cannot take language away from interaction if we desire to fully grasp the realm of political,

social, economic and cultural dynamism. The ways in which language and people change open

areas for improvement, bring about hope for an equal tomorrow and challenge the present to look

towards a brighter future. It may be that a day will come when we no longer talk about sex or

gender, race or ethnicity, sexuality or normative behavior, because the indifference in which we

should treat socially constructed hierarchies will be no more; Identities will come from within and
we will have the chance to define and redefine, time and time again, the relevant meanings of all

things in an every changing world.

The most widely-used term for gay or homosexual male in the Philippines is the Tagalog

bakla or Sugbuhanon bayot. Both however are regarded as pejorative and demeaning, abusive

even to the point of being a stigma. The more acceptable ones are bading or badette, marse, or

atey, which are, when qualified, mere euphemisms to the supposed to be neutral term bakla but

otherwise having achieved negative connotation. Words in any language depend on the context

for meaning. Although the term bakla is also attributed to cowardice, in the literary Pasyon,

where it is quoted as “Si Jesus ay nabacla.” on the part when he was tempted by the devil, the

term signifies having doubts, confusion, or second thoughts. Its connection possibly relies on

being confused or having second thoughts about ones gender or sexual orientation.

While the language Filipino has been stuck on its seedling stage rather than its fruition

and struck with controversies and trivialities, swardspeak has been an active language, by being

an amalgam of many different languages used across the country – balaychina, from Visayan

balay, jombagin from Hiligaynon sumbagon1, and matud and daot from Sugbuhanon – and even

from Asian language such as Nippongootoko, nomu, sukoshi and European languages with

achtunggak from German achtung, Janno Gibbs from English give, and Ombre Miles from the

Spanish hombre. The diversity and richness of the assemblage of terms that are collected and

used to create the pool of swardspeak is as diverse as the langue naturelle of Filipinos. True to its

form, swardspeak may verily be a national language – one that binds a people, is a combination

of different vernaculars and languages, is understood by its users in a magnanimous scope.

Swardspeak is the language of Filipino gay men. However, with its current user base, it is not

exclusive to the mentioned population. Even women these days are known to have been using

swardspeak. The use of swardspeak has become prevalent even among women; those who are

referred to as babaengbakla, also known as fag hag, as early as four decades ago. Aside from this,

gayspeak is also adaptive. A set of gay vocabulary is determined by the social class the user
belongs to, since many if not all of the words created or modified in gayspeak is from another

language. Thus, diction is affected by either the profession, orientation, principles, or even

environment of the Filipino gay individual. Those from with extensive education background and

considered part of the upper working class stratum, would have a different set of words used

compared to those of the lower strata (e.g. Penicillin and nochikels both pertain to phallus). The

spectrum of users of this language based on age also enjoys a wide range just by inference on

how the 1970s Philippine societal scenario was teeming and was, flamboyantly active. But,

Garcia may have posited that swardspeak, a sublanguage, “provided gays symbolic purchase into

sexuality”. Furthermore, the said author added

Aside from sex, the other concerns which swardspeak apparently addresses are identity,

community-formation, and the outing of someone whom the swardspeaker thinks is ‘one of the

tribe.

With this, Garcia may have unconsciously positioned swardspeak under a major,

acceptable and accepted language when he added that it is “less an actual language”; thereby

solidifying the very structure of oppression that the language is trying to dismantle.

On the contrary, quite on the rise recently is the usage of words in many different media – in film,

radio, television, and even in print. Mass media, more particularly television, has been pivotal in

the proliferation and dissemination of the words currently being used. The range of terminologies

churned out by swardspeakers has become massive and extensive that almost all words can have

equivalents or derivatives. Remoto qualifies this as swardspeak is “continuously updated” (“On

Philippine gay lingo”). This, directly negates Garcia’s mention of the limited scope of vocabulary

swardspeak had, which was, unfortunately more focused on the physical and sexual overtones

(SA, Catacutan, 1998).

There has been no widely accepted document that details the rules in creating terms to be

used in swardspeak. Although lately, through the technology available these days, there have

been attempts by many to list down commonalities and repetitive usages in various instances
which may well constitute in the future the Baklarila or Baklangbalarila (gay grammar). This

absence of accepted rules to form conversational messages in spoken language could possibly be

the message content itself. Swardspeak was born into the world to defy the rules that have been

set in place to suppress the rights a particular sector of the society. It would then be ironic for the

progenitors to use that very same reason – which could be detrimental, counter-ethical, and

anachronous. In creating the common tongue among Filipino gay men, the biggest consideration

is for the message to be concealed. Tagalog Gay Lingo 101 (va.michaelangelo) presents the most

common alterations to popular terms, giving birth to a new set of communication pattern (SA,

Catacutan, 1998).

Language is a political act of mediation and communication which either perpetuates or

challenges existing power structures within wider social and cultural contexts. The birth of a

common language among gays clearly and explicitly defies the culture that the Philippines has

had. It had tried to break away from the dualistic perspective of life – heaven and hell, black and

white, man and woman. Swardspeak was the weapon that Filipino gay men used to connect with

other gays – those who are discriminated, oppressed, and ridiculed and belittled.

Swardspeak as a language regards hierarchies as a means to exploit gender. Although

arguably, users of gayspeak do not have terms for ditse, sanse, diko, sangko, and bunso. The

general term for a male is kuyey and for the female, atey (and its variants, e.g. teh, ateng,

acheng). Bakla, baklush, badette can be used interchangeably between the two sexes, particularly

for female acquaintances. “Language is an example of a control and conditioning factor in the

over-all thought of what gender is. Precedence of masculine over feminine words denotes

dominance and superiority.” (Catacutan, 2012) The aforementioned Tagalog words for siblings

“employ a hierarchy and distinction to refer to older brothers and sisters. Although some would

contend that these show a culture of respect, nevertheless, these unconsciously inculcate in an

individual, submission to the “ruling” strata.” (Catacutan, 2012) In contrast, swardspeak does not

look at age and sex as a means to exploit or impose power over another individual.
 Language is an oppressive mechanism. Taboo words or terms such as regla, which refers

to menstruation, is treated as denigrating therefore euphemisms such as dalaw and meron are used

instead of the base term which is but natural for any healthy woman of age. Swardspeak is able to

send the same message across by using the suffix “–belle” and create reglabelle (or sometimes

Regla Bella Torres, a popular Brazilian volleyball player). Although some may argue that this

may still be a euphemism of the original term, the nature of swardspeak verily proves that the

new term for menstruation is common, natural, and acceptable as opposed to the base term being

regarded as improper and even, unclean. Language as part of culture can be used by society as a

means to maintain gender inequality, through power relations, which is both repressive and

oppressive. In this case, men, because of the patriarchal society, have always had the upper hand.

Swardspeak is a mode of the many forms of social resistance. How some gays are drag

queens, flamboyantly displaying faux fur and donning makeup of extreme proportions and hues,

dressing up like the latest Barbie doll or beauty pageant title holder, swardspeak rebels against the

norm of syntactic rules but gives heavy emphasis on semantics through shared consciousness and

knowledge but more importantly, unconventional pragmatics. The outright intention in the use

and origin of swardspeak is to conceal the meaning of the conveyed messages in

communications. However, it is also a battle against the norm or the status quo. It does not adhere

to strict form, nor does it squarely follow structures which other forms of languages have.

Even in its earlier stages, swardspeak was the essential communication medium Filipino gays

used. Rightfully, swardspeak can be classified as an argot, a secret language. Even with its rising

popularity these days, swardspeakers, through wit, find new derivations of terminologies in order

to conceal the true meaning of messages conveyed.

The term swardspeak was born during the country’s darkest days – the Martial law era.

Talking bad against the government can put you to jail, or smite you and banish you from the face

of the Earth. It was about the same time that the Philippines, in the 1970s, coined the term jeproks

and repa (or repapips) by syllable invertion (Tan, 2002). What effected the sprouting of these
terms and communication modes could be attributed to the power exerted against free speech.

Swardspeak, on that regard is also an underground movement. It destroys the clout of power

being brandished to minorities, oppressing those who would speak truth, and gagging the

Filipinos preventing them to communicate efficiently and freely. Furthermore, it “reflects the

experiences and historical oppression of gay Filipino men.” (Manalansan, 2007).

Gays have been using this mode to express themselves. From the time that freedom of

expression has regained its footing in the Philippines after the 1986 revolution, a lot has already

been founded. From the 80s to the early years of 2000s, two shows have been created by

Philippine television network GMA-7 which catered to gayspeak – Giovanni

Calvo’sKatokmgaMisis and Out – both of which had segments that dedicated to explaining the

meanings and etymologies of gay terms. These shows have made the swardspeak experience

transcend into national awareness by means of mass media. In the more recent years, Vice Ganda

of Showtime was able to concoct terms that have gained national scope and usage with anyare

and ansaveh, to name a few.

This mode of expression has become pervasive, able to migrate from spoken to written

and now to hypertext. Compendiums or lexicons of gay terms abound in many sites in the Web.

In the popular social networking site Facebook, BEKINARY – The BEKIMON dictionary lists

gay terms along with its meanings, some with etymologies. Aside from this, the owner of the

account has also uploaded videos in Youtube (bernjosep), starting three years ago, with a couple

of them breaching the 100,000 hits mark. Aside from these, the Filipino gay individual has taken

steps to celebrate his coming out by recreating himself or his works in the virtual world. Bloggers

abound, many of them becoming “avenues for a more entertaining discussion on gayspeak. These

bloggers are gatekeepers and progenitors of gayspeak; they maintain the sanctity of their own

craft … as well as contribute to the development of this language” (Casabal). The Filipino gay

rhetoric, from being a common tongue among many parloristas and baklanghalimaw or tarat, has

been slowly introduced into mainstream Filipino usage through different media. It has
successfully, though not completely, hurdled waves of discrimination. It has transformed from

one medium of communication to another, able to adapt to challenges technologies have ushered

us in. With Bekimon and other sites, ‘professing’ and using it online for various purposes, in

different platforms, swardspeak is here to stay – everything that ever was - available forever

Catacutan, 2012).

Theoretical Framework

The study is anchored on the Queer theory which states that identities are not fixed and

do not determine who we are. It suggests that it is meaningless to talk in general about any group,

as identities consists of so many elements which assume that people can be seen collectively on

the basis of one shared characteristics is wrong. Heavily influenced by the work of Lauren

Berlant, Leo Bersani, Judith Butler, Lee Edelman, Jack Halberstam, David Halperin, José Esteban

Muñoz, and Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick. Queer theory builds both upon feminist challenges to the

idea that gender is part of the essential self and upon gay/lesbian studies’ closes examination of

the socially constructed nature of sexual acts and identities. Whereas gay/lesbian studies focused

its inquiries into natural and unnatural behaviour with respect to homosexual behaviour, queer

theory expands its focus to encompass any kind of sexual activity or identity that falls into

normative and deviant categories.

Queer theory "focuses on mismatches between sex, gender and desire". Queer has been

associated most prominently with bisexual, lesbian and gay subjects, but its analytic framework

also includes such topics as cross-dressing, intersex bodies and identities, gender ambiguity and

gender-corrective surgery. Queer theory's attempted debunking of stable (and correlated) sexes,

genders, and sexualities develops out of the specifically lesbian and gay reworking of the post-

structuralist figuring of identity as a constellation of multiple and unstable positions. Queer theory

examines the constitutive discourses of homosexuality developed in the last century in order to
place "queer" in its historical context, and surveys contemporary arguments both for and against

this latest terminology.

Research Paradigm

Male using gay lingo Male Status in the

Academic
-Socio – demographic
Community
characteristics

 Age
 Civil Status
 Tribe

Figure 1. Schematic Representation of the variables in the study.

Operational Definition of Terms

The following terms are conceptually or operationally defined to enhance the

understanding of the readers of this paper.

Male Acquisition – refers to the learning of the respondents of gay lingo in Doroluman

particularly at CFCST.

Gay Lingo–refers to the jargon or language used by gays inside and outside the CFCST Campus.

Academic Community- refers to the institution where the study will be conducted, specifically

Cotabato Foundation College of Science and Technology.

Swardspeak– refers to the slang which contains elements from different language and dialects, as

well as name of places, celebrities and trademark brands, giving them new meanings in different

contexts. e.i. Tai chi – namatay – died, Purita Corales – mahirap – poor, Myanmar – maliit – little

Lavender Linguistics – refers to the study of language as it is used by gay, lesbian, bisexual,

transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) speakers.

Queer –refers to the umbrella term for sexual and gender minorities who are not heterosexual.
 Chapter 3

METHODOLOGY

In this chapter, discussions of the methods of the study are presented which include

research design, research instrument, and data gathering procedure.

Research Design

The researchers will use descriptive-phenomenological method of research study. The

descriptive design will be employed to obtain the demographic profile such as age, civil status ans

tribe. Phenomenological method will be also used to obtain cohesive information that will be

taken from interviews.

Location of the Study

The study will be conducted specifically at Cotabato Foundation College of Science and

Technology Campus, Doroluman, Arakan, Cotabato.

Respondents of the Study

The respondents of the study will be male heterosexuals who are studying at Cotabato

Foundation College of Science and Technology, Doroluman, Arakan, Cotabato and who are using

swardspeak or gay speak daily.

Research Instrument

The instruments that will be use are researcher-made questionnaire to be used to gather

the needed data for the respondent’s demographic profile and a semi-structured in-depth

interview.
 The requirements in the designing good collections of data were considered in the

preparation of the instrument.

Preference for the use of the structured questionnaire is premised on several research

assumptions such as a) cost of being a least expensive means of gathering data, b) avoidance of

personal bias, c) less pressure for immediate response, and giving the respondents a greater

feeling of anonymity. In the end, it will encourage open responses to sensitive issues at hand.

Data Gathering Procedure

To capture the essence of the phenomenon under investigation, a letter will be presented

to the respondents informing them of the nature of the research, the topic to be discussed and

extent of their participation. After seeking their permission and willingness to participate, they

will be given the questionnaire and will be under one-on-one interview. To elicit natural

responses for questions, all the respondents will be interviewed in locations of their own choice

and will be lasted for at least 5 to 10 minutes per respondent.

The in-depth and semi-structured interview will be conducted in English language and

will be translated into dialect in which the respondent is fluent if necessary. They will be given

the freedom to answer the questions in other languages like Filipino, the national language or in

their native language that they are comfortable with to ensure the richness of data. The

respondents will be oriented about the observation to be done in which would include video or

audio recordings. The recorded proceedings will be transcribed to produce the field text which

was utilized for the analysis.

 Male Acquisition of Gay Lingo in an Academic Community

Interview Questionnaire

Name (Optional): ________________________________________

Age: Civil Status: Tribe:

16-20 Single Ilonggo

21-25 Married Cebuano

26-30 Separated Maguindanaoan

31-35 Widow IP

36-40 Others, please specify

___________________

1. Why are you speaking gay lingo?

2. How did you learn gay lingo?

3. Do you have any gay family member or peer? Yes None

4. Do you find learning gay language beneficial? Yes No

5. How beneficial it is in your study?

6. What is your view about gay lingo?

7. Are you in favor on using this language (gay lingo)? Yes No

If yes or no, why should or shouldn’t we continue to use this language?

 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Butler, J., 2004. Undoing Gender. New York: Routledge.

Cage, K., 2003. From Moffietaal to Gayle - the evolution of a South African gay argot.
Johannesburg, South Africa,

Cage, K., 2003. Gayle: the language of kinks and queens: a history and dictionary of gay

language in South Africa. Houghton: Jacana Media.

Motschenbacher, H., 2008. Impact: Studies in Language and Society: Language, Gender and

Sexual Identity: Poststructuralist Perspectives. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins

Publishing Company.

From Web

Casabal, N.V., 2008. Gay Language: Defying the Structural Limits of English Language in the

Philippines. Master’s Thesis, Lyceum of Subic Bay, Philippines.

http://150.ateneo.edu/kritikakultura/ images/pdf/kk11/gay.pdf; accessed on 25 April, 2011

Harris, K., 2005. Queer Theory Definition and Literary Example,

http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/harris/Eng101_QueerDef.pdf.