Mister misogyny

Do we still want to talk about Congressman Bong Suntay and his notorious quip about actress Anne Curtis?

That topic has probably been regurgitated countless times over the recent news cycle, with everyone and their auntie chiming in. Even two-bit actors have proffered their opinions, and would you believe, a word war has erupted between soc-med influencers?

Now that particular brouhaha has engulfed the online space with interesting sidebars into the personal hygiene, luxury purchases, gender identity, and sexual preferences of the influencers. The discourse has unfortunately descended unto depths even lower than what the Congressman could have foreseen. But that’s another column.

To recall, the congressman thought it worthy to mention that he had “desires” inside him triggered by actress Curtis. That itself triggered an ethics investigation from within Congress itself, as well as a complaint filed with the ombudsman by women who took up the cudgels for Anne. After all, there is the Safe Spaces Act to consider, as well as the Magna Carta for women. Plus, as Suntay is a lawyer, he is also subject to the professional standards required for members of the Bar.

Gulp. The congressman has now been crowned the poster boy for misogyny, and it is a label he will find very hard to live down over his professional career and personal life. With his wife siding with Curtis, and all these vitriol he has tasted, what’s a congressman under attack to do?

Perhaps, Suntay first has to hire a good PR agency. Because, for goodness sake, Anne Curtis certainly has a great team behind her. Did you read that statement she put out? Masterfully crafted, if I may say so. Anne did a multitude of things in her statement, all of which carefully shredded the congressman and left him in a very sad and sorry mess.

Curtis started out by rejecting the supposed apology given by Suntay, characterizing it as a non-apology. With this opening line, Anne let everyone know she was in the driver’s seat, that she had control, and that she had agency.

Then she rallied allies to her cause. She systematically aligned herself with other women, with those who would benefit by her speaking up against sexualized remarks, and with those who would champion women.

She identified the evil. She named it. She characterized it. She used words like “vulgar”, “perverted”, and “disgusting”. With those, Curtis pressed the emotional buttons that would rally others to her cause. At the same time, she diminished Suntay, casting him aside with the analysis that this “wasn’t even about” Suntay.

She did reach out to Suntay’s wife and children. She gave them dispensation, and then asked others to extend them grace. With that smart tactic, she weaned out those who might side with Suntay only because of their connection with his wife and children, and opened the doors to welcoming them into her own fold. That’s more to count among her supporters, maybe, and less allies in Suntay’s camp, certainly.

She framed her statement not as a personal defense, but as a means to help other women. She was speaking out so other women could speak out. Something much like the “me too” movement. And that movement had its own velocity, now fueling her own cause.

Note that along the way, she made reference to consulting lawyers (a warning that she could escalate this matter), and her being a taxpayer (a reminder that she was actually subsidizing his salary as a government official).

As her finale, Curtis made reference to the importance of Women’s Month, currently happening as we read and write, and with that final jab, coated her statement with a super-fine relevancy gloss. Claps all around. That, my dear, was a master class.

So, the ball is in your court, Congressman Suntay. Shall we see a more contrite version of you? Shall we read a more carefully-crafted apology, with remorse and self-recrimination bursting from it? Shall we see a more curated lifestyle, depicting you as a God-fearing, family man? Tried and tested techniques for sanitizing, if I may say so.

But that “poster boy” label? Dang. That will take a fortune in PR resources.