Anong sabi mo, Tito Sotto?

Social Welfare Secretary Judy Taguiwalo once more faced the Commission on Appointments on May 3. This comes after failing to secure the CA’s approval before the Senate went on recess earlier this year, and then being reappointed by President Duterte.

Taguiwalo, for the uninitiated, is a former professor at the University of the Philippines. She is native to Bacolod, born to parents who were both in the academe. She is a well-known social worker and activist; a key figure in organizing the Malayang Kilusan Ng Kababaihan (MAKIBAKA) during the Marcos regime. Her career in the academe has positioned her as a head of Women’s and Gender Studies, a member of the UP Board of Regents as a faculty representative, and as a founder of the UP Academic Employee Union. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

Taguiwalo sat as several senators drilled her with questions, particularly about her left-leaning associations and her personal political agenda. She was cool, calm and collected. She said, unequivocally, that she is no longer a member of the Communist Party of the Philippines (although it was their recommendation that hoisted her up as a viable nominee), and that she is here to serve the people regardless of their political affiliations. Taguiwalo made such an impression that she received vocal support from Senators Drilon, Pangilinan, Lacson and Legarda.

It was going so well

Where everything started to go south, and what you’ve no doubt heard about over the last few days, was this absolutely unnecessary exchange with Senator Tito Sotto:

SEN. SOTTO: On the lighter side, Senator Drilon and I were looking at the personal information about you. You have two children. Daughters ba or sons?

SEC. JUDY TAGUIWALO: Yes, two daughters.

SOTTO: Two daughters. But you’re single?

(Laughter from the room)

TAGUIWALO: (Laughs uncomfortably) My life has never been a normal one. I never had a whole father/mother/children kind of thing, except when I was growing up in Bacolod. Remember, I graduated from UP in 1970. I did organizing work. From 1972 up to 1986, it has been life underground or in prison. So, well, my story would be different from the stories of those who have gone through, you know, UP, a corporation, et cetera.

SOTTO: Ah, in the street language, when you have children and you are single, ang tawag diyan “na-ano lang.”

(More laughter from the room)

SOTTO: Thank you, you have my 100-percent support, Madame Secretary.

TAGUIWALO: Senator Sotto, I teach women’s studies. We respect all kinds of families, and that includes solo parents. Thank you.

The amazing thing being that no one else in the room acknowledged Sotto’s unnecessary, belittling, and extremely sexist comment, and instead proceeded to acknowledge the presence of JV Ejercito before turning the floor over to Senator Drilon. There was only laughter where there should have been a minimum amount of defense for a woman who was there to answer questions about potential employment, and whose lack of a husband has no bearing on her very apparent qualifications.

‘Na-ano’

Before moving on any further, let’s discuss the term “na-ano.” There is no real English translation for it, because it uses the term “ano,” literally meaning “what,” and allows your imagination to fill in the blanks. But in this context, for those who might not completely understand, Sotto is implying that Taguiwalo allowed herself to get plugged: to be used by a man at his pleasure, panting at the mouth and willingly bending over without thinking of the consequences, like a possible offspring. Sotto, sitting in the very place where words become law and the future of our nation is carefully shaped, casually implies that Taguiwalo was loose and easy, as though that was at all humorous or appropriate, before oddly extending his support.

The Internet (at least on this side of the world) exploded. If you had a friend whose mother or father was a single parent, but didn’t know about it, Wednesday was the day you learned all about family histories. Everyone wanted everyone else to know that they weren’t simply products of “na-ano,” but rather, of the rearing of a loving parent who had to play the role of both mother and father. The outrage was palpable, and Sotto has rightly been called many a name, including the immortal words of Manny Pacquiao, “mas masahol pa sa hayop.” (Infinitely lower than an animal.)

Following the interview, an ambush interview had Sotto saying that people were maybe “overly sensitive.” His “apology” is quoted as follows: “Kung minasama nila, ‘de I’m sorry. They don’t understand the joke. Sa lahat na… kahit sino na, basta intindihan na lang. Humihingi ako ng paumanhin.” Sotto then goes on to say, “Perhaps some people were overly sensitive or perhaps they didn’t realize that it was the CA. Perhaps these are just people who are really not my fans, so to speak. Baka mga pakontra lang sakin iyan na kahit ano makita sakin ay pakontra na.” Now really, only a celebrity masquerading as a public servant would have the gall to even assert something like this, that people are deliberately finding fault because he’s easy to dislike. I’m sorry to inform you, Senator Sotto, that consistently putting your foot in your mouth is what makes it easy to find fault. Committing fault is what makes it easy for people to criticize you; it’s not that anyone is particularly rooting against you, it’s that you do irresponsible things all the time and then you stand by them like it makes you honorable.

Back in 2016, a woman came on his television show and spoke about how she had been drinking with friends, and one of them raped her. In the most compassionate act, Sotto replied, “Kasalanan ng lahat ng ‘yan ang pag-inom... Kababae mong tao pa-shot-shot ka.” Let’s put this side by side with what Sotto said in response to the remark on Taguiwalo’s single parent status: “As I said, I will be the last person in this country to disrespect a woman, because my mother was one of the founders of the women’s rights movement and president emerita of the Kababaihang Rizalista. I have two daughters who are separated or single and have children, so I don’t think there should be big fuss about it.” It’s the same argument a racist would use, saying “I have one black friend, so I’m not a racist.”

What irks me about Sotto trying to spin all this is that he can’t even fake that he’d be the last person to be disrespectful to a woman, because he’s quite literally always the first. He is exactly the kind of man that perpetuates consistent macho bullsh*t, that believes a woman has a certain and very specific place in society, that a woman should always be in a skirt and at a man’s beck and call, that a woman is always thirsty for a man’s nether regions, and that a woman parenting without a man is less than a family. Sotto is the kind of man who believes that it’s fine, even when you’re in one of the most highly respected chambers in the entire nation and in a hearing funded by taxpayers, to take a moment to reduce a woman to a punchline, simply because he can. And then, in a final burst of this maddening ego, somehow becomes upset when you don’t “get the joke.” We get the joke, Senator Sotto, and the joke is you.

The greater problem

The infinitely greater problem here, however, is not really unintelligent people saying offensive things, because I’m frankly quite sure that Senator Sotto doesn’t even understand the weight of his own comments. If he did, there would be more contrition or he would maybe have learned something by now. But all he ever seems to say is “the reporting in the media is distorted” (you know, like when he lifted content from a Kennedy speech in 2012 and passed it off as his own), or “it’s a joke” (with everything else he says). Sotto is indeed a problem — I mean, this is a guy who literally outlawed poppy seeds because of their supposed opiate content (true, but not that high unless people were ingesting them by the literal pound). But it’s not as big as the question of how he got there, and how forgetful we are as a people when it comes to public servants who we pay to belittle us and wastefully allocate our resources.

The greater problem isn’t the one who said what he said in that room to Secretary Taguiwalo, but the people who laughed. The people who surrounded her and could have admonished Sotto for that comment, but didn’t. The people who saw the dignity in the room decline exponentially and moved on without so much as batting an eyelash. The greater problem is the power that’s given to people like Sotto because we stand for it, and because we don’t address, then and there, that what happened was unequivocally wrong. And until we can stand up, until we can have voices that are equally loud, we will talk ourselves into the ground and still nothing will change. So Sotto may be a problem, but the next natural question here is, what are we doing to change it?