Page 1 of 6

Domingo, Shaira G.
Tuanquin, Beatricia Elda S.

3MUS1BM

MARRIAGE AND EQUALITY: THE PHILIPPINE CONTEXT

Marriage is defined as the legally or formally recognized union of a man and a
woman, or, in some jurisdictions, two people of the same sex, as partners in a
relationship. Noting this, it is simply a legal union between two people who have rights
with each other. Same-sex marriage is a conjoined word wherein it drastically changes
the word marriage, emphasizing on same-sex. In the Philippines, marriage is somewhat
defined by the sociocultural roots such as religion, especially standards on gender roles.
Legalizing same-sex marriage can lead to the development of society, by tracing and
untying its sociocultural roots, diminishing the discrimination on human rights.
We discussed the reality that the LGBT Community faces wherein they are hardly
accepted because of their incapability of being normal, imposing an abnormal
development in marriage and family. We, then, rebut by pointing out sociocultural history
on both homosexuality and heterosexuality, on how this problem is a modern social
construct and how it leans to the favor of hegemony.
We gathered different sources of different perspectives, from priests to
psychoanalysts; then compared and contrasted. The authors, J. N. Garcia and J. N Katz,
presented first a view on todays cases and traversed with sociocultural history of the
Philippines towards homosexuality; then, concluded with regards to identity. With the
help of this, we traced the significance of the crises and cope with todays issues, not only
within the legalization of the same-sex marriage but also the acceptance of the LGBT
community. Regards to another point of view, we disregarded J. Gonzaless claim
concerning religion, and tackled his persuasion on the social norm of heterosexual
marriage as a root of families with more than just a counterattack on religion tracing the
precolonial gender roles and how it was sublimated. We also pointed out the
discrimination on gender and sexuality present in the Philippines, the Philippine
sociocultural anthropology the establishment of heteronormativity, the separation of the
church and the state, and the benefits of same-sex marriage.

Page 2 of 6
In this country, LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans) Rights have not been fully
recognized because of the heterosexual hegemony. It is quite common how their marital
right is being discussed and decided by the heterosexuals, claiming that their rebuttal is
not an act of discrimination, and that they protect the redefinition of marriage. Equality,
as they stated, would be impossible since homosexuals and heterosexuals are biologically
and anthropologically different, wherein these elements are considered as the basis for
granting them legal recognition; especially the foundation of marriage is not only
between a man and a woman, but also family. In addition, same-sex marriage would
affect the growth of children especially being deprived from the experience of fatherhood
or motherhood.
At the individual level, this takes the semblance of personal injustice: Married
couples receive from the State multiple protections and responsibilities, which are being
unjustly denied to same-sex unions on the same level as heterosexual marriages seems to
be for homosexuals an essential part of the battle to gain equality. Besides homosexuals
think they need the right to marry each other to ensure that they will be able to bequeath
their estates to their parent when they die. The reaction to these arguments is that they
ignore a key factor, namely, that the relationship between a man and a woman is
qualitatively different from that of a homosexual couple. Marriage is not just any intimate
relationship, but rather a normative, social, family-oriented institution, whose basic
reason for being is the societys survival. By the mere fact of being child-centered,
marriage has always been considered by law as to require a man and a woman: first,
because only their sexual relationship can lead to the conception of a child; second,
because the unique contribution of men and women to child rearing cannot be duplicated
by any other contexts in which child rearing cannot be duplicated by any other contexts
in which child rearing takes places. Now, same-sex marriage put all this at risk. The time
may have arrived to acknowledge the concession of certain benefits to some de facto
unions, even homosexual ones. But in any case, the tutelage of such unions would have
always to be kept within the frame of personal rights, never with the sphere of family
rights; that is, without any reference to or analogy with marriage. Equal right for
homosexuals in the context of employment or other matters is one thing, but marriage is
an institution that reaches beyond government and social institutions. More than civil
rights are at stake here. (J. Gonzales, 2004)

As some people would say, recognizing this right is not for the common good but for
selfish reasons; if social expediency and individual happiness become the criteria for
reforming marriage laws, then arguments against incestuous, adolescent and polygamous
marriages must also fall aside.
The discrimination of the LGBT community is widespread in the nation, from jokes
and insults to outright mistreatment. The so-called openness of Filipinos towards them,
such as lavishing them in the media, is actually social tolerance pretentious alliance.
(Garcia, 2008) People aim to change this as sincere equality in society by recognizing
them not as just their sexuality but as themselves persons.

Page 3 of 6
From the Philippine history of male homosexuality, the bakla were one of the
empowered genders, by their identity as gender crossers rather than cross dressers.
(Garcia, 2008) On the other hand, homosexuality was coined as the attraction towards the
same gender in Western culture. (J.N. Katz) The sublimation of the bakla gradually
started during the Spanish period, imposing the Spanish machismo. By their logic, the
bakla is the homosexual while the man who shared a relationship with the bakla is still
defined as heterosexual. Now, the terms bakla and homosexuality were far from
congruency. (Garcia, 2008) From that, sexuality became an identity.
With regards to female homosexuality, in the Philippine culture wherein patriarchy
was prominent especially during the precolonial period, lesbianism was not evident
during that time because male homosexuality was more of a threat to patriarchy. To add,
Filipino families had tendencies to teach men how to be masculine with its glory, and
women to be a dalagang Filipina carrying a patriarchal view. Although in the modern
era even with the rise of feminism, with Western influence, lesbian fetishism is also found
in the Philippines another case of social tolerance and subjugation of homosexuality as
pleasure or entertainment, despite the movement of deteriorating patriarchy. Most
lesbians are not taken seriously because of this social perverseness. To conclude the
homosexuality on both genders in Filipino context, people see homosexuality as a phase
or a trend especially on its gaining popularity and recognition in the Philippine media.
As civilized people, sexuality is not regarded as merely desire or attraction towards
other people; it is not really something to be concerned about as a society particularly if
one is open-minded. They would only contribute to the common good like a straight
person would do, sometimes better if not for their struggles in acceptance.
The issue is always attacked with radical religious beliefs especially in a Catholic
country like the Philippines. We look forward for the progress regarding the separation of
the Church and the State, reflecting Pope Francis statement on the subject If someone is
gay and he searches for the Lord and has goodwill, then who am I to judge?, and as to
the constitution No religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political
rights. (1987 Phil. Cons)

Page 4 of 6
For one thing, one will never find the term homosexuality in the Bible, as the term
was meant to be understood, because it was only coined in the 1800s. The concept of
homosexuality as we know it is a modern construct designed to box in practice which,
millennia ago, would have a different social-political milieu in the society...
After all, Jesus despite what conservative fundamentalists of today may insist
was a radical, which is exactly what got Him crucified. His was a liberal agenda, at least
in the way we box in liberal and conservative today, asking people to give up their
money to follow him and inviting people to mingle with the social outcasts while calling
the religious establishment of his time a brood of vipers.
This is why any gay Christian can easily reconcile his faith with his sexuality: look
to the source of Christianity, true Christianity, and understand what He has to say.
Sexuality and spiritually, it turns out, are never separate. (Cruz, 2014)

Lastly, with our position in this matter, we can present some benefits of the
legalization of same-sex marriage such as: 1.) a married couple can file income taxes
jointly; 2.) they can have joint parenting rights such as access to school records of their
children; 3.) they can have next-of-kin status for emergency medical decisions; 4.) they
can qualify for domestic violence intervention; 5.) they can receive spousal funeral and
bereavement leave, inherit property; 6.) they can receive spousal Social Security
payments; 7.) they can also apply for copyright renewal for works created by their
deceased spouse.
With these given benefits, basically, they are not different from the benefits that
heterosexual couples receive. Simply, heterosexual couples will not be affected by the
legalization of same-sex marriage. (King, 2016) The society simply divulge into norms
like heteronormativity that they find difficulty in accepting the sublimated members a
Filipino trait wherein ayaw nila malamangan (they do not want to be subjugated) and
felt intimated or insecure. If they try to dissolve the seemingly normal sexism in their
minds, this problem is not that of a threat to society as they would say.
The fact remains that [Jesus] did not [say anything regarding homosexuality], and so one is led to
see that all the current Christian hullabaloo about the LGBT Community is the byproduct of
something else: fear, perharps, or a disgust over what is not considered the norm (norm being a
relative term), or a desire to assert heteronormative power over the rest of the population. (Cruz, 2014)

Claiming that homosexuals are biologically and anthropologically different thus

affecting their legal recognition, what would make that of other human races? It is like
racism on gender; the difference is that interracial marriage is already legal. Implying that
the children would be deprived from experiences of fatherhood or motherhood (Gonzales,
2004) heavily imposes gender role which is not necessarily a significant factor when it

Page 5 of 6
comes to parenting, wherein it is more of a joint effort of child development. Rather, it is
a heteronormative tendency. Sexuality is not the foundation of marriage, but family.
Most people assume that heterosexuality is unchanging, universal, and essential. The
concept of heterosexuality is only one particular historical way of perceiving,
categorizing, and imagining the social relations of sexes. Although, not ancient at all, the
idea of heterosexuality is a modern invention, dating to the late nineteenth century. By
not studying the heterosexual idea in history, analysts of sex, gay and straight, have
continued to privilege the normal at the expense of the unnatural. Such privileging of
the norm accedes to its domination, protecting it from questions. (J. N. Katz)

The slippery slopes in their argument, like relating homosexuality with incest,
pedophilia and polygamy referring to Gonzaless argument nullifies their argument
concerning the difference between heterosexuals and homosexuals since their analogy is
inconsistent; incest can affect the physical and mental health due to hereditary issues,
while pedophilia goes under child abuse and sexual harassment, and while polygamy is
something far from homosexuality wherein two people are in a relationship and
surprisingly, legal in some places because of tradition what people are fighting for in
relation to marriage and respecting it. In case of sexually transmitted diseases found in
homosexuals, it is commonly ignored that heterosexuals also experience these kind of
diseases, so they could cherry-pick their point.
Another argument, wherein they say that some benefits would be solved without the
help of the legalization of same-sex marriage, is still somewhat discriminatory
concerning the additional taxes they pay when they commit to civil union especially as
how they are recognized by the state. (Gertsmann, 2008) They also claim that granting
legalization of same-sex marriage would not promote equality but equity. With their
context, they implied that homosexuals are handicapped or underprivileged. But what are
they afraid of?
Same-sex marriage in the Philippines is widely frowned upon like some subjects
because of misconceptions and ignorance regarding the matter. If people traced the roots
of everything, not only they would be aware of it, they might truly understand what it is.
History is essential in learning and accepting, particularly the sociocultural context when
it comes to things like same-sex marriage. One must not simply jump to conclusions

Page 6 of 6
performing such act would be prejudice. If marriage is redefined, it is not out of lack of
respect to tradition, but it is to respect every humans rights.

Bibliography
ABC News. (2013). Pope Francis on Gay Catholics: 'Who Am I to Judge?'.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cFLhUCaGqg
The new pontiff makes global headlines with new comment on sexual orientation.
Callueng, E., Editor (2014). Buhay Bahaghari: The Filipino LGBT Chronicles. Diliman, Q.C:
University of the Philippines Center for Womens Studies.
Buhay Bahaghari: The Filipino LGBT Chronicles is a compilation of essays contributed
by LGBT advocates. The book is edited by long-time lesbian advocate and the Philippine Online
Chronicles Pinoy LGBT channel editor-writer Eva Callueng. Buhay Bahaghari presents the
personal experience of the contributors as members of the Philippine LGBT community: their
personal struggle with their identity; and how their identity affects their relationships with their
family, significant others, and society.
Mention: Finding My Own Way Post-script to Women Loving by J. L. Cruz.
Garcia, J.N. (2008). Philippine Gay Culture: Binabae to Bakla, Silahis to MSM (2nd Edition).
Diliman, Q.C.: University of the Philippines Press.
J. Neil Garcia proposes an empirical and a conceptual history on the bakla of the
Philippines. The book presents the situations and controversies of homosexuality and homosexual
identity in the Philippines, tracing back during pre-colonial times. Garcias critical method
uncovers the process of sexualization in the Philippines.
Gertsmann, E. (2008). Same-Sex Marriage and the Constitution (Second Edition). USA:
Cambridge University Press.
Gertsmann presented an insightful framework for the Courts recognition of fundamental
rights more generally an area of constitutional interpretation that he terms a shambles at
present and makes a strong argument that principle should guide jurists.
Gonzales OP, JCD, J. (2004). Same-sex Marriage: Why Not? UST Law Review, Vol. XLVIII,
pg. 209-220
Javier Gonzales, OP, JCD refutes the idea of equality in marriage by pointing out the
difficulties and controversies that would raise in society concerning about the perversion of
traditional marriage and family.
Katz, J. N. The Invention of Heterosexuality.
J. Ned Katz claimed the heterosexuality as a modern concept by tracing from the Early
Victorian era the start of contextualization of true love (being between man and woman),
through the heterosexual hegemony the cult of domesticity following World War II, to
questioning heterosexuality the social invention.
King (2016). 10 Reasons Why Gay Marriage Should Be Legalized An Infogram.
https://infogr.am/10-reasons-why-gay-marriage-should-be-legalized
A simple graphic information telling the positive side of gay marriage. Each reason is
briefly and clearly explained.
Peddicord OP, R. (1996). Gay & Lesbian Rights: A Question Sexual Ethics or Social Justice?
Kansas City, MO: Sheed & Ward.
Richard Peddicord, OP challenges those within the Catholic community who deny civil
rights of lesbians and gays on the basis of Catholic sexual teaching. He emphasizes the important
distinction between morality and legality and sees the Catholic social justice tradition as
supporting civil rights for lesbians and gays.