Bawal Bastos law emboldens Filipinos to condemn Duterte sexism – Hontiveros

Though President Rodrigo Duterte is immune from suit while he is Chief Executive, the new law should
serve as a guide for him and a resource for Filipinos who want to call out his misogynistic behavior.

MANILA, Philippines – While President Rodrigo Duterte is immune from suit over any violation of the
Bawal Bastos law while he is Chief Executive, the law can embolden Filipinos to call out his sexism.

This was Senator Risa Hontiveros' hope for the new measure, Republic Act No. 11313 or the Safe Spaces
Act. Hontiveros was principal sponsor and author of the measure in the Senate.

"I'm hoping that with this Bawal Bastos law, our citizens will feel braver, will speak with louder voices to
call out anyone in public spaces, even the most powerful someone in the highest public space, the Office
of the President," Hontiveros said in a Rappler Talk interview on Wednesday, July 17.

Noting that Duterte has been called "Misogynist-in-chief," Hontiveros recalled some of the President's
most controversial sexist slurs. (READ: From 'fragrant' Filipinas to shooting vaginas: Duterte's top 6 sexist
remarks)

Duterte's call to soldiers to shoot female communist rebels in the vagina was, for her, among the worst.

"That was outright inciting to violence and sexual violence, because he said that would render women
useless so reducing us to a body part and in such a political and violent manner," she said.

She also called Duterte's call to spread an alleged "sex video" of Senator Leila de Lima as a clear violation
of the Bawal Bastos law's provisions on online sexual harassment.

It's one example of how the President has used sexism as part of his political vendetta against female
critics, said the senator.

The Bawal Bastos law improves on previous legislation penalizing sexual harassment by expanding the
acts considered sexual harassment and recognizing that it can happen in different settings, spaces, and
relationship dynamics between victim and aggressor.
The Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995, for instance, only penalized sexual harassment in the
workplace and when done by a superior to a subordinate.

The Bawal Bastos law recognizes sexual harassment in public places and online. It also penalizes
harassment against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer (LGBTQ+) persons.

'No more excuses'

The presidential privilege of immunity from suit means Duterte can only be held liable for violating the
Bawal Bastos law if he makes sexist slurs after June 30, 2022, the day his term ends.

But as chief enforcer of the country's laws, the new measure should at least be treated by Duterte as a
"guide" on how to behave.

Be a Rappler PLUS Member

PHILIPPINES

Bawal Bastos law emboldens Filipinos to condemn Duterte sexism – Hontiveros

Though President Rodrigo Duterte is immune from suit while he is Chief Executive, the new law should
serve as a guide for him and a resource for Filipinos who want to call out his misogynistic behavior

Pia Ranada

@piaranada

Published 4:13 PM, July 17, 2019

Updated 10:41 PM, July 17, 2019

ROOTING OUT SEXUAL HARASSMENT. Senator Risa Hontiveros explains the Bawal Bastos law. Photo by
Rappler

ROOTING OUT SEXUAL HARASSMENT. Senator Risa Hontiveros explains the Bawal Bastos law. Photo by
Rappler

MANILA, Philippines – While President Rodrigo Duterte is immune from suit over any violation of the
Bawal Bastos law while he is Chief Executive, the law can embolden Filipinos to call out his sexism.

This was Senator Risa Hontiveros' hope for the new measure, Republic Act No. 11313 or the Safe Spaces
Act. Hontiveros was principal sponsor and author of the measure in the Senate.

"I'm hoping that with this Bawal Bastos law, our citizens will feel braver, will speak with louder voices to
call out anyone in public spaces, even the most powerful someone in the highest public space, the Office
of the President," Hontiveros said in a Rappler Talk interview on Wednesday, July 17.

Noting that Duterte has been called "Misogynist-in-chief," Hontiveros recalled some of the President's
most controversial sexist slurs. (READ: From 'fragrant' Filipinas to shooting vaginas: Duterte's top 6 sexist
remarks)

Duterte's call to soldiers to shoot female communist rebels in the vagina was, for her, among the worst.

"That was outright inciting to violence and sexual violence, because he said that would render women
useless so reducing us to a body part and in such a political and violent manner," she said.

She also called Duterte's call to spread an alleged "sex video" of Senator Leila de Lima as a clear violation
of the Bawal Bastos law's provisions on online sexual harassment.
It's one example of how the President has used sexism as part of his political vendetta against female
critics, said the senator.

The Bawal Bastos law improves on previous legislation penalizing sexual harassment by expanding the
acts considered sexual harassment and recognizing that it can happen in different settings, spaces, and
relationship dynamics between victim and aggressor.

The Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995, for instance, only penalized sexual harassment in the
workplace and when done by a superior to a subordinate.

The Bawal Bastos law recognizes sexual harassment in public places and online. It also penalizes
harassment against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer (LGBTQ+) persons.

'No more excuses'

The presidential privilege of immunity from suit means Duterte can only be held liable for violating the
Bawal Bastos law if he makes sexist slurs after June 30, 2022, the day his term ends.

But as chief enforcer of the country's laws, the new measure should at least be treated by Duterte as a
"guide" on how to behave.

Advertisement

Hontiveros rejected Duterte's and the Palace's explanations for his words and behavior – which range
from admitting he was leering at Vice President Leni Robredo's legs during a Cabinet meeting to kissing a
Filipina migrant worker on the lips during an official trip abroad.

Duterte had also wolf-whistled at GMA-7 reporter Mariz Umali back in May 2016 during a press
conference in Davao City, where a local ordinance he signed in 1997 prohibits wolf-whistling.
The President slammed critics of such behavior for limiting his "right to freedom of expression."
Hontiveros said Duterte can't hide behind such an excuse.

"Even the President should know and every lawyer would, every citizen who believes in human rights,
would know that we exercise our freedoms, our liberties while respecting also the rights of others," said
the Akbayan lawmaker.

She also thumbed down Duterte's claim that wolf whistling has no sexual connotation and could be a
compliment to women.

"Typical excuse of an aggressor is to claim innocence when it's very clear to the majority of women who
have been wolf-whistled at – women know, LGBTIQ persons know, some men know, that wolf whistling
is inherently sexual," said Hontiveros.

Consistency important

Duterte and his spokesman, Salvador Panelo, can't also use his support for pro-women government
policies to justify his sexist words and deeds, said Hontiveros.

"Because words and gestures tend to spill over into deeds. The words and gestures can incite more
abuse or actual violence against women and LGBTIQ persons," she said.

And because Duterte is President, his words are taken as official policy. Hontiveros called on Duterte to
be consistent and to stop his sexist ways. (READ: Not just a joke: The social cost of Duterte's rape
remarks)

She remained hopeful that the Chief Executive would follow the new law.
"I hope he read it before signing it. I hope he will follow it. I hope he sets an example. I'm not quite
holding my breath but who knows?" said Hontiveros. – Rappler.com

Racism in Italian football reflects the everyday migrant experience

Italian striker Mario Balotelli has hit out at the “small minded” fans who have once again targeted him
with racist abuse. The Brescia player kicked the ball into the crowd and threatened to walk off the pitch
after being on the end of racist chants during the team’s away game against Verona. His anger is
understandable. It’s not the first time Balotelli has been targeted. But very little seems to be being done
in Italy – a country where racism in football has a long history.

It’s not that these racist events aren’t happening across the whole of Europe. In October, England’s Euro
2020 qualifier put the issue under the spotlight in the UK when black players on the men’s team were
targeted with racist chants by Bulgarian fans in Sofia. And, as many pundits and ex-players commented
then, England has its own problems that need to be addressed.

But in Italy, the issue of racism is even more acute. In September, Romelu Lukaku, the Belgium and Inter
Milan striker, was racially abused during a match in Cagliari, forcing him to speak out. Balotelli has
previously been targeted with the chant “non ci sono negri Italiani” (“there are no Italian blacks”) by
Juventus fans. Not to mention the now standard monkey chants endured by players like Stephan El
Shaarawy (Milan), Kevin Prince-Boateng (Milan) and Samuel Eto’o (Inter Milan) in recent times. Indeed,
in an angry post on Instagram following the latest attacks on Balotelli, Boateng said: “NOTHING has
changed. But we don’t give up.”

Endemic racism

Between 2011 and 2016, the Observatory on Racism in Football (ORAC) counted 249 racist incidents in
Italian stadiums. But in the 2017-18 season alone, ORAC registered 60 racist incidents. One can simply
dismiss these episodes as the rotten behaviour of the ultras (the most extreme fringes of football
supporters), but the truth is that racism is not confined to these extremist fringes. Racism also
penetrates the institutions that regulate Italian football.

The case of Carlo Tavecchio, the former president of the Italian Football Federation, is a prime example.
In July 2014, during his presidential election campaign, Tavecchio criticised the excessive number of
foreign players in Italian professional clubs, referring to players who “previously ate bananas” suddenly
becoming first-team players. Despite this overtly racist remark, Tavecchio was elected president of the
Italian FA and cleared of any wrongdoing by the Italian football authorities, whereas both UEFA and FIFA
issued a temporary ban on him.

The world of football punditry also doesn’t seem immune from racism. In September, Luciano Passirani,
a sports commentator for the Milan-based local TV Telelombardia, was sacked for making an ugly racist
comment about Lukaku.

As a club, #ASRoma stands with Mario Balotelli, who was racially abused on Sunday.

Whether it’s 20 people or 2,000, racist abuse is never acceptable.

It’s time to choose a side - those prepared to stand up to racism and those who will allow it to destroy
this game we all love

Ingrained in law

Our research (which involved speaking to hundreds of Italian children of migrants in person and on
social media) found that race is embedded in the way many Italians look at themselves. The Italian
nation is thought to be constituted first and foremost by white Catholics, even if “Catholic” has gradually
lost its religious dimension and become more of a cultural marker.

Despite various reform attempts, the nationality law (which lays down how people can get citizenship)
privileges the so-called “bloodline” and marginalises the children of migrants who were born or
educated in Italy. For example, the grandchildren of an Italian who migrated to Argentina last century
and who no longer speak the language and have no connections to Italy are more entitled to obtain
Italian citizenship than the children of Nigerian parents born or raised in Italy.

Our study found that neither the law nor the most of Italian society regards these children of migrants –
also known as the “Balotelli generation” or G2 – as Italian.

‘You speak just like me’

Italian children of migrants told us many stories that captured the sense of displacement, puzzlement
and surprise that white Italians experience when they hear someone – who doesn’t look like them –
speaking like them. Let’s take for instance the experience of a Korean man who grew up in Bergamo, in
northern Italy. After being adopted at a very young age by an Italian couple. When South Korea beat
Italy in the football World Cup in 2002, he said suddenly all the city’s Asians “became Koreans”.

When he ran into a group of four youngsters in a car at a set of traffic lights, one of them shouted in
dialect: “Bastard Koreans, get the fuck out of here!” He responded angrily in the same dialect. “They
first looked puzzled,” he said, “but then at the green light they skidded away and kept insulting me.”

A young Italian woman, born and raised in Italy to an Eritrean mother and an Ethiopian father, told a
similar story that happened on the day Italy won the World Cup in 2006.

We were all out celebrating this victory. Everybody was screaming and shouting because everybody was
happy. There was also a group of Senegalese men, who were celebrating with their drums, the djembe.
It was a happy moment, but then a group of Italians approached them and told them that they had to
stop, because it was the celebration of the Italians and they were not Italians.

Similar stories of everyday imbarazzismi) (a mix of embarrassment and racism) were recounted over and
over again by our participants. The fact a person is born and brought up in Italy hardly seems to matter.
What matters is their face and the colour of their skin. Because for those who regard Italy as an ethno-
racial community, someone who is black or has almond eyes simply cannot be a real Italian.

If racism in Italian football is to stop, it has to stop first in Italian society. Kicking it out from the stadiums
would achieve little if it is not kicked out from society first.

Reagan Calls African Delegates 'Monkeys' in 1971 Call With Nixon

The former president was referencing the way members of the Tanzanian delegation danced after a
United Nations vote.

By Alexa Lardieri, Staff Writer July 31, 2019

ON A PHONE CALL WITH then-President Richard Nixon, then-California Gov. Ronald Reagan can be heard
disparaging "monkeys" from African countries.
The tapes, published in The Atlantic by Tim Naftali, the former director of Nixon's Presidential Library,
reveal that Reagan, who later went to become the 40th president of the United States, called Nixon on
Oct. 26, 1971 after the United Nations voted to recognize the People's Republic of China.

About six and a half minutes into the phone call, Reagan, a strong defender of Taiwan, seemingly
references the way members of the Tanzanian delegation danced after the UN voted to seat the
delegation from Beijing instead of Taiwan.

"Last night, I tell you, to watch that thing on television as I did," Reagan said to Nixon. "To see those,
those monkeys from those African Countries — damn them, they're still uncomfortable wearing shoes!"

Nixon can be heard laughing as Reagan speaks.

In another phone call later that day, Nixon discusses his conversation with Reagan with then-Secretary
of State William Rogers. About 30 seconds into the call, Nixon references Reagan's words.

"As you can imagine," Nixon said to Rogers, "there's [a] strong feeling that we just shouldn't, as [Reagan]
said, he saw these ... cannibals on television last night, and he says, 'Christ, they weren't even wearing
shoes, and here the United States is going to submit its fate to that,' and so forth and so on."

Naftali said in The Atlantic that the conversations were recorded by Nixon and later became the
responsibility of the Nixon Presidential Library, which he directed from 2007 to 2011. However, when
they were released by the National Archives in 2000, Naftali alleges that Reagan's racist comments were
withheld to protect the former president's privacy.

In 2018, Naftali requested Nixon's conversations with Reagan be reviewed and the Archives released the
complete tapes two weeks ago.

The release of the phone calls comes after the house voted to condemn comments President Donald
Trump made about four Democratic congresswomen of color as racist language.

Why feminism still matters to young people

Kristin Aune, Coventry University

February 6, 2018 4.31pm GMT

Updated February 7, 2018 8.53am GMT

It has been 100 years since women won the right to vote in Britain. More accurately, it’s 90 years since
young women were able to vote; 2018 actually celebrates 100 years since suffrage was given to women
over 30.

Feminism is held up as one of the most successful social movements of the 20th century. But ten years
ago, when Catherine Redfern and I were planning our book on reclaiming feminism, some said young
people just weren’t interested in “the f word” anymore.

Back in the 1990s and early 2000s, young women were portrayed smashing glass ceilings in Louboutin
heels, and feminism seemed rather outmoded. Many women thought of themselves as post-feminist,
feeling there was no need for feminism, since gender equality had been achieved. But this wasn’t really
true, and a lot of the fear about calling yourself a feminist came from the negative stereotyping of
feminists as bitter “killjoys”.

It’s still needed

Things have changed. Feminism is now less despised because it’s more obviously needed. Women in the
UK have been living under a regime of austerity since the 2008 economic crisis. They have shouldered
86% of the income loss from changes to the tax and benefits systems since 2010, simply because they
are more likely to be welfare recipients in the first place.

Meanwhile, the resurgence of the far right has led to violence and harassment against ethnic minority
women, with Muslim women bearing the brunt of virulent Islamophobia. There is a stubborn gender pay
gap (now 14% for full-time workers), and women pensioners in the UK face one of the worst gender
income gaps in Europe.

The list goes on: gender-based violence is alarmingly high. Crime statistics show that one in four women,
and one in seven men aged 16 to 59 have experience domestic abuse. The most harmful forms of abuse
– sexual violence, especially – affect mostly women. Yet three-quarters of councils have cut funds to
domestic violence services due to government budget cuts, and a third of referrals to refuges are now
being turned away because of a lack of room.

It’s gaining popularity

These examples of gender inequality explain why more people are identifying as feminists – especially
young women. A 2013 Girlguiding survey found that 35% of girls and young women aged 11 to 21 were
happy to call themselves feminists. In 2017, this was the case for 43% of 18 to 34-year-old women,
according to a poll by Plan International, or 54% of 18 to 24-year-old women, according to UM London.

Today’s feminist movement is more diverse than ever before. Feminism has become more attentive to
the wider range of experiences of those oppressed by gender norms and stereotypes, including men,
non-binary and trans people.

There’s also greater awareness of the way that racism, anti-religious hatred, disablism or homophobia
work alongside sexism, creating complex forms of prejudice and oppression. It’s not so much that
feminism has moved “beyond” sexism. Rather, a wider range of voices is now being counted as feminist.
The HeForShe campaign, which encourages men to become advocates for gender equality, and
Muslimah Media Watch, a forum where Muslim women critique how they are presented in the media
and popular culture, are examples of this.

It’s already happening

If the current situation has anything positive to show, it’s that where there’s injustice, there’s also
resistance. Young people are already challenging the forces feminist author bell hooks calls “white
supremacist capitalist patriarchy” with style and skill – they don’t need to be told how by older feminists.
What’s crucial now is to recognise the work they are doing and draw even more people to the cause.

Campaigns such as #TimesUp in the US and #tystnadtagning in Sweden have used the star power of
famous actors – many of whom are young women – to draw a line under sexual harassment and abuse
in the workplace, across all industries. Yet even worldwide movements can start with the actions of a
single person: activist Tarana Burke has been credited with starting the #metoo movement more than
ten years ago, based on her experiences as a youth camp director for Just Be Inc.

As these examples show, feminist activism takes many forms, from a single person signing a petition, to
group protests on local issues such as the campaign to close Yarl’s Wood detention centre in
Bedfordshire, right through to large-scale actions coordinated by women’s organisations, such as
Women’s March. Feminist acts can be taken through formal political routes. For example, by lobbying a
local member of parliament, or by informal means, such as sharing information about a topic on social
media or boycotting a company known for exploiting women employees.
Individuals can make a difference by working for a women’s charity, becoming a local councillor or
calling out sexual harassment wherever they encounter it. Even the conversations we have with our
friends in our spare time can be a productive way to raise awareness about sexism.

There is no “right” form of activism and no one issue of greatest importance. A century ago, women’s
rights activists weren’t all fighting for suffrage – some of them were working on other campaigns, such
as equal access to university education, or a decent wage for working-class women. Nor did getting the
vote solve other instances of gender injustice. So this 100-year anniversary is about much more than just
“the vote”. Feminism is a movement for gender justice, and it needs to be fought by many different
people, in many different ways.

Feminism is for everybody

The Lancet Published:February 09, 2019

“To be ‘feminist’ in any authentic sense of the term is to want for all people, female and male, liberation
from sexist role patterns, domination, and oppression.” bell hooks made this clear and powerful
statement in her 1981 study of sexism, racism, and the feminist and civil rights movements Ain't I a
Woman: Black Women and Feminism. Almost 40 years on, the world is still reckoning with pervasive and
inexcusable gender inequality underpinned by bias and sexism, and research and health care are no
exception. Today, The Lancet publishes a theme issue on advancing women in science, medicine, and
global health, with the aim of showcasing research, commentary, and analysis that provide new
explanations and evidence for action towards gender equity. This theme issue is the result of a call for
papers that led to over 300 submissions from more than 40 countries. The overwhelming conclusion
from this collection of work is that, to achieve meaningful change, actions must be directed at
transforming the systems that women work within—making approaches informed by feminist analyses
essential.

It is well established that women are under-represented in positions of power and leadership,
undervalued, and experience discrimination and gender-based violence in scientific and health
disciplines across the world. Intersectional approaches have provided insights into how other categories
of difference such as ethnicity, class, geography, disability, and sexuality interact with gender to
compound inequalities. Most submissions to this theme issue came from high-income countries,
highlighting the need to support scholarship from the Global South. Geordan Shannon and colleagues
provide a global overview of gender inequality in science, medicine, and global health, and discuss the
evidence for the substantial health, social, and economic gains that could be achieved by addressing this
inequality. Indeed, some studies, including one in this issue by Cassidy Sugimoto and colleagues, show
that more diverse and inclusive teams lead to better science and more successful organisations.
Despite decades of recognition, these problems have proved stubbornly persistent. It is now
commonplace for organisations to make public statements valuing diversity, hire diversity officers, and
implement programmes to advance women's careers. Yet, all too often, such programmes locate the
source of the problem, and hence the solution, within women and their own behaviour. Thus, although
actions such as mentoring and skills training might be well intentioned and advantageous to a degree,
they often fail to engage with broader features of systems that disproportionately privilege men. For
instance, Holly Witteman and colleagues show, using data from a federal funder, how gender bias
disadvantages women applying for grant funding.

Reflecting on these biases can be difficult for professions like science and medicine that are grounded in
beliefs of their own objectivity and evidence-driven thinking. A trio of papers in this issue demonstrates
the value of critical perspectives in this regard. Malika Sharma explains how the “historical gendering of
medicine prioritises particular types of knowledge (and ways of producing that knowledge), and creates
barriers for critical, and specifically feminist, research and practice”. Feminist and other critical
perspectives enable researchers to question the underlying assumptions that produce and maintain
social hierarchies, and in doing so, imagine ways to transform fields and practices to make them more
equitable and inclusive. Likewise, Sara Davies and colleagues argue that a feminist research agenda is
key to advancing gender equality in global health, and Kopano Ratele and colleagues explain why efforts
to engage men in advancing gender equality must be grounded in an appreciation of theories of
masculinity.

For actions to have lasting and far-reaching consequences, they must therefore be directed at creating
institutional-level change. Several pieces in this theme issue discuss such approaches, with a Review by
Imogen Coe and colleagues providing a toolbox of organisational best practices towards gender equality
in science and medicine. The Lancet's commitments to addressing gender bias in publishing are detailed
in a Comment. Gender equity is not only a matter of justice and rights, it is crucial for producing the best
research and providing the best care to patients. If the fields of science, medicine, and global health are
to hope to work towards improving human lives, they must be representative of the societies they serve.
The fight for gender equity is everyone's responsibility, and this means that feminism, too, is for
everybody—for men and women, researchers, clinicians, funders, institutional leaders, and, yes, even
for medical journals.