UP Babaylan Book Drive for LGBT section for UP Main Library

2011 Manila Pride March

Task Force Pride, a non-profit network of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transsexual (LGBT) groups will organize the 17th Annual Pride March in Manila. The aim of the march is to gather different LGBT groups, allies and individuals in solidarity, as well as provide positive visibility to the community.

This year's theme, “Pride of the Orient”, recalls the community's achievements with regard to advancing LGBT human rights, such as... organizing the first pride march in Asia in 1994 and the formation of Ladlad party list, the only LGBT-oriented party list in the world, and extensive HIV/AIDS Awareness campaigns nationwide .

“Pride of the Orient” calls on LGBT Filipinos to reclaim these milestones and look forward to more victories they've yet to achieve.

For Organizations, please confirm in this link:
http://taskforcepride.blogspot.com/2011/11/2011-confirmation-form-organizations.html

For Individuals, please confirm in this link:
http://taskforcepride.blogspot.com/2011/11/2011-confirmation-form-individuals.html

Registration begins at 1:00 pm at Remedios Circle, Malate, Manila, and Pride March contingents that arrive early will be greeted by a brief program until 4:00 pm. The hosts will explain the event's concept and encourage contingents to come up with a cheer for the march.

The march will begin at 4:15 pm and will end by 5 pm. During this time, the second half of the program will commence. The program will feature LGBT performers as well as brief solidarity messages from prominent LGBT individuals.

Please check the TFP page regularly for updates on the program line-up and the venue. Thanks, and see you all on December 3, 2011 at the Pride March!

For more information you can visit this FB Event Page:
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=241089652610923

Visit the official website:
http://www.taskforcepride.blogspot.com/

email us at:
taskforcepride@gmail.com
or SMS us at 09163089903 (Globe), 09333049795 (Sun)

Yours with Pride,

Raffy Aquino
2011 Membership & Participation Head
Task Force Pride

Be Heard!

HB515 Anti-Discrimination Bill Committee Hearing Photos

photo : Atty. Kaka Bag-ao

Present during the House Committee hearing for HB515 or the Anti-Discrimination Bill were Atty. Venir Turla Cuyco (founding president of UP Babaylan), Ms. Ramil Andag (Executive Director of Babaylanes - UP Babaylan Alumni Association) Ms. Daria Barra (UP Babaylan Alumna) and Ms. Heart Dino (UP Babaylan Member, UP Diliman University Student Council Councilor, Head of the USC Gender Committee). They are with Akbayan Representative and Co-author of HB515, Atty. Kaka Bag-ao.

photo:  Alyansa

Sponsorship speech for HB515 - Anti-Discrimination Bill

this is from the facebook page of Akbayan representative Atty. Kaka Bag-ao

______________________

Fulfilling the promise of basic fairness

Sponsorship speech of Akbayan Rep. Kaka Bag-ao on the Anti-Discrimination Bill (HB515)

September 27, 2011 / Committee on Women and Gender Equality

Good afternoon, Madam Chair and honorable members of the committee.

In an interview in New York during the Asia Society Forum last month, President Noynoy Aquino reiterated his position on LGBT rights: that while the Aquino government is not ready to tackle the issue of same-sex marriage, it believes that LGBTs should not be discriminated.[1]

The statement of the President breaks the atmosphere of invisibility and silence that the previous GMA administration has build around the issue of equal rights. For almost a decade, the Philippine government turned a blind eye to the plight of Filipino lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgenders, and instead of engaging in meaningful dialogues about the inclusiveness of human dignity, it allowed divisive sectarianism to trump equal rights. Not everyone would be pleased about the stance that President Aquino made on same-sex marriage: by stating that it is not his administration’s priority, those who are opposed to it would see the stand as tepid; on the other hand, those pushing for same-sex marriage would see it as a concession to the Catholic Church.

But whether one is anti or pro same-sex marriage, it is important for all of us to step out of the hostile atmosphere that has marked our discussions on LGBT rights and go back to where the debate should be situated: within the context of human rights and equality. This is why the pronouncement of President Aquino is important: that whether we believe in same-sex marriage or not, we should all make a stand for equality.

The nature of the bill that we are tackling today, Madam Chair, is precisely that: basic fairness, and realizing the promise of equality guaranteed in our constitution. It reflects the yearning of many Filipinos for that chance to be treated as equals, and to live in a nation where dignity is not determined by one’s gender, or the sex of the person we found ourselves loving.

Basic fairness is the prayer of any mother whose child is being bullied in school for being too effeminate, for cross-dressing, for being “bakla”. It is the common aspiration of lesbian and gay students who, having faced prejudice in their schools and communities because of their sexuality, fear that they would encounter the same gender-based biases once they’ve entered the labor force.

When a gay man goes home after spending three nights in jail, where he suffered extortion, physical abuse, and humiliation in the hands of policemen who arrested him for vagrancy or prostitution, solely on the basis of the presence of condoms, his thoughts would be on the ordeal that he went through. This incident of police abuse would sear on his mind how dignity could be taken away easily and arbitrarily by abusive law enforcers. Same-sex marriage would be the last thing he’d think about.

Reducing LGBT rights to same-sex marriage renders invisible the inequality and abuse faced by Filipino LGBTs. This is the status quo, Madam Chair, that the Anti-Discrimination Bill aims to cure: we hope to provide a remedy for the inequality experienced by LGBTs by ensuring that human rights violations committed against them are penalized.

The Anti-Discrimination bill introduces the language of sexual orientation and gender identity in our laws and defines these concepts. This is not entirely novel, in a sense, since both sexual orientation and gender identity have been mentioned in some of our laws already. Currently, there are four laws where the above terms have been mentioned:

• Under Section 59 of the PNP Reform Act of 1998, the NAPOLCOM is mandated to establish a gender sensitivity program that includes the prohibition of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation;
• Section 17 of the Magna Carta for Public Social Workers (2007) includes protection against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation as one of the rights of government social workers;
• The Magna Carta of Women (2009) has included sexual orientation as a protected category in its human rights principles (Section 3, para 4) and gender identity in its women in sports provision (Section 14);
• The definition of crimes against humanity under the Philippine Act on Crimes Against International Humanitarian Law, Genocide, and Other Crimes Against Humanity (2009) includes widespread persecution against any groups or collectivity on the basis of several grounds, including sexual orientation.

High Five for HB 515! Pass the Anti-Discrimination Bill

Gender Equality quarantees equal opportunities to people

regardless of their sexual orientation and gender identity.

We encourage everyone to join the campaign for 

Gender Equality and fight against disrimination.

Pass the Anti-Discrimination Bill!

High Five for HB515! Pass the Anti-Discrimination Bill!

University of the Philippines Diliman University Student Council Official Statement through the USC Gender Committee head by UP Babaylan member, Councilor Heart Dino.

Meeting with UP President Pascual

We are happy to share with you good news. Never dropping the ball on the continuing fight to win the discrimination case of our member Hender Gercio, UP Babaylan is simultaneously working with the University to prevent future cases of discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity to happen to other students of the University. Finally, we were able to schedule a meeting with officials of the University to discuss our programs and plan of actions to prevent and stop discrimination from propagating inside the University. This is the solution that will prevent faculties, students and employees of the University to abuse loopholes in University policies that allow them to abuse and hinder students and other members of the University to grow and learn to their fullest potentials, by exposing the students to harmful and discriminatory acts based on biases against chosen sexual orientation and gender identity of the students.

UP Babaylan (represented by Punong Babaylan Bohn Vergara and Hender Gercio), together with the University Student Council Gender Committee (headed by Babaylan member, Councilor Heart Dino) met up with President Pascual and the Prof. Marion Tan from the Office of the Vice-Chancellor for Student Affairs and presented programs on how the University of the Philippines can be at the forefront of Gender Equality.

Among the issues and programs discussed were:

1. Anti-Discrimination Policy within UP

2. Mandatory Gender Sensitivity workshops for faculty and non-teachinf personnel.

3. Gender-neutral curriculum in UP.

4. Celebration of UP LGBT Week on June 28 - July 1

This is how UP Babaylan will continue to advance the rights and welfare of the students of the University, regardless of sexual orientation and gender identity. Join us in our campaign for a University that allows you to choose who you want to be, a person who is free to express who you want to be, without fear of prejudice from society inside and out of the University. 

To learn more on how you can be part of the campaign or how you can also enjoy how it is like to live your life free from discrimination and prejudice, add the following on facebook:

UP Babaylan
https://www.facebook.com/upbabaylan


UP University Student Council Gender Committee

https://www.facebook.com/pages/USC-Gender-Committee-11-12/129461897131014

UP RH Agenda

https://www.facebook.com/RHAGENDA

UP Babaylan Presses for LGBT Inclusive School Policies

U.P. Babaylan, the oldest LGBT students rights and support group formed in August 1992 and the first organization of its kind to be accorded University recognition, pressed the university administration to explicitly provide for non-discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identities (SOGI) in the university. According to the group, the absence of non-discrimination based on SOGI in university policies result in unequal treatment and various forms of discrimination experienced by LGBT students.

This call came in the wake of the experience of Ms. Hender Gercio, a self-identifying transgender student in the university and a member of U.P. Babaylan. In one of her classes, Ms. Gercio asserted her preference to be called in the pronoun corresponding to her transgender identity which one her teachers denied. When Ms. Hercio lodged the case with the involved department, she was informed that there are no existing university rules covering transgenders.

‘We are convinced that the case of Hender brought to light the necessity to further raise awareness on the issues related to sexual orientation and gender identities. It also surfaced the fact that the University has no explicit policy on non-discrimination. The experience of Hender is not an isolated case. Other LGBT students go through the same experience but are afraid to share their stories precisely because UP has no policies on non-discrimination’ according to Michael Singson, head of UP Babaylan.

Meanwhile, Ms. Gercio said “I am just a girl who wants to study in peace. I hope that this discussion will result in non-discriminatory and gender sensitive policies in the university to protect people like me.”

To shed light on the issues related to sexual orientation and gender identities (SOGI), UP Babaylan and its alumni organization Babaylanes, Inc. initiated the “Rainbow Policies: A Discussion on Gender Sensitive Policies in U.P. Diliman” today, March 11, 2011 at the Recto Hall of the Faculty Center of the state university.

The roundtable discussion aims to raise the awareness of the UP community on issues around sexual orientations and gender identities (SOGI) specifically on transgender concepts, issues and concerns. The discussion also aims to explore the existing UP Diliman policies on non-discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identities.

The roundtable discussion brought together various experts on LGBT and human rights issues. Transgenderism was also discussed from the perspectives of psychology, history and culture, and human rights.

Speakers at the event were Dr. J. Neil Garcia, author of various books on LGBT including the pioneering work “Philippine Gay Culture: The Last Thirty Years”; Eric Julian Manalastas from the UP Department of Psychology; Ms. Naomi Fontanos, Chairwoman of the Society of Transsexual Women of the Philippines (STRAP) and STRAP’s Vice Chairperson and former Pinoy Big Brother participant Rica Paras; UP College of Law Instructor and UP Institute of Human Rights Director Atty. Ibarra Guiterrez; Dr. Sylvia Estrada Claudio of the U.P. Center for Women’s Studies, and former Akbayan representative Ms. Risa Hontiveros.

Rainbow Policies: A Discussion on Gender Sensitive Policies in UP Diliman

Below is an excerpt from the article published by the Philippine Collegian.

___________________________________________

Turning Point: Pink propaganda

(This article was published in print in issue 27 of the Philippine Collegian on 04 March 2011.)

by Gino N. Chang

“It is okay to be homosexual, just don’t practice it.” I cannot remember who said this, but I am sure I want to put a dent on his head.

A professor claimed that the Church accepts homosexuality now. I raised my eyebrows. Centuries of pointless conservatism and religious bigotry gone in a snap? Dubious, and later I found out that I had sufficient reason to be. He said the Church now tolerates same sex relationships, as long as the couples do not engage in intercourse.

The lack of logic was as glaring as the meaning was obvious in the word itself. Homosexuality has the greek word “homos,” meaning “same.” Thus, homosexuality connotes sexual attraction or romantic involvement among members of the same sex.

It was actually very easy to understand, in terms of gist and if you set aside the wide spectrum of the LGBT for the sake of explanation. Romantic involvement is not the teenage chick flicks or the cartoon couples you watch in Disney. What did you expect, just tweetums, smacks, pleasant, general patronage scenes and nothing else?

To say that homosexuality is acceptable as long as there is no intercourse only proves how the Church treats the LGBT as an anomalous condition. Like a cold that will go away after sometime. A disease that will eventually be cured as long as you religiously take medication. It treats homosexuals as a spectacle. As a condition for acceptance, the Church had to dehumanize the LGBT into sexless individuals. In the end, the only tolerable form of romantic involvement is still heterosexual.

This case was just on top of the homophobia (I am uncomfortable with using the term) that spilled all over the past week. A European Languages major walked into the Collegian office one afternoon to pitch in a story of gender discrimination. She’s a transgender and was careful in correcting her classmates whenever they address her using male pronouns.

Her professor suddenly asked her to sit down for a talk. Thinking it was just an academic matter, she was caught off-guard with the professor’s sentiments on her gender. “I am a Christian, and this is against my religious beliefs,” the professor reportedly said to her, as if she totally forgot that she was teaching in a non-sectarian university that espouses academic freedom and claims to be a bastion of democratic rights. Insisting to misgender a student for her own religious freedom. 

Read the rest of the article here.

 

Transphobia and Inappropriate Blog Titles.

It has come apparent to the organization that there are individuals from the UP College of Arts and Letters who were offended by the title of a recent blog post which documented another act of discrimination that occurred in the said college. This second incident of discrimination happened prior to Hender Gercio’s case at the UP-CAL Department of European Languages. The blog post entitled “Why is the UP College of Arts and Letters so Homophobic?” elicited reactions from individuals stating that the blog title was inappropriate.

We apologize for the inappropriate title of that post if it offended you.

Transphobia in the form of disregarding titles and pronouns that reflect the gender identity of the person is just like using inappropriate blog titles. It is offensive. Transphobia, just like using inappropriate blog titles, is unjust. Transphobia, just like using inappropriate blog titles, creates an environment where individuals that comprise any institution, are deprived of the humane treatment.

We at UP Babaylan admire the individuals who had the courage to raise their voices. We admire you for being quick on your feet when it comes to correcting inappropriate blog titles. We also hope, that when it comes to raising voices and creating real solutions that provide social justice and uphold the equality of sexual orientation and gender identity in the UP College of Arts and Letters and in any other institution, that you also will commit the same fervor, passion and expediency.

Together, let us work towards a University that knows why inappropriate blog titles are wrong and unacceptable just as how inappropriate titles and pronouns are transphobic and unjust.

Woman Soul : a multimedia exhibit on transsexual women

"In the Alliance Française de Manille, there will be a multimedia exhibit on empowering transsexual women.

In the UP Diliman Department of European Languages, transgender people cannot even demand to be called using the pronouns that they prefer.

DEL boasts of having a more comprehensive program for future specialists in the French language.

But with gender sensitivity, mon Dieu, quel grand décalage!" - Hender Gercio

Click below to view Alliance Française de Manille Event page

Woman Soul : a multimedia exhibit on transsexual women

Click on thumbnail below to view large format.

Understanding LGBT: Drafting Gender Sensitive School Policies

In light of the recent discrimination case one of our esteemed member is experiencing, UP Babaylan will further the advocacy for gender equality and social justice by initiating and organizing the first Roundtable Discussion on Gender Policies. The Round table discussion is organized to draft policies for the protection of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) in UP. Hopefully, this policy will be adapted by other academic institutions. This is part of the ongoing campaign of UP Babaylan for advancing gender justice and promoting policies for sexual orientation and gender identity in the University, securing and creating a humane environment for learning. The discussion will also highlight issues and concepts concerning Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender individuals.

We all are aware of the problem. Together, let us provide the real solution.

Title: “Understanding LGBT: Drafting Gender Sensitive School Policies”

Roundtable Discussion (March 11, 9-12nn, Claro M. Recto Hall)

--- TENTATIVE LIST OF PANELISTS ---

Below are the institutions and panelists that the organization will be inviting to the round table meeting.

o Babaylanes, Inc.

o Society of Transexuals of the Philippines - STRAP ( TG situationer)

o Dr. Neil Garcia (Sexual Orientation and Gender Identities [focusing on TG] from a socio-cultural perspective)

o Atty. Venir Cuyco (Sexual Orientation and Gender Identities [focusing on TG] from a legal perspective)

o Sir Eric Julian Manalastas (Sexual Orientation and Gender Identities [focusing on TG] from a psychological perspective)

o Diliman Gender Office (Existing Relevant University Policies on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identities [focusing on TG])

o Office of the Vice-Chancellor for Student Affairs

o Office of Counseling and Guidance

o Office of Anti-Sexual Harassment 

o Centre for Women’s Studies

o University Student Council

o Law Student Government Central Board

o UP Institute of Human Rights - Law Center

o Commission on Human Rights

o Commission on Higher Education

o  European Languages Department (Ma’am Nikki Del Corro)

o Hender Gercio

No Compromise For Human Rights by Benedict Bernabe

Below is a reply written by Benedict Bernabe to a note that Anne Lagamayo posted regarding the discrimination case at the College of Arts and Letters.

Feel free to comment and share your opinions. ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE PUBLISHED.

------------------------------------------------

No Compromise For Human Rights

by Benedict Bernabe

“The State values the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for human rights.” - Section 10, Article II: Declaration of Principles and State Policies, 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines

Dear Anne,

First of all, I would like to commend you for the beautiful piece of literature that you wrote in reaction to the recent events that transpired between your classmate Ms Hender Gercio and your professor, Ms Nikki del Corro. I don’t know Hender personally, but I do know Nikki. We went to university together and although we are not close friends, we have shared some light-hearted moments together.

Compromise: such a beautiful word. It connotes consensus, agreement and unity.

In November 2010, 79 African and Arab countries overrode 70 dissenting countries and voted to remove “sexual orientation” from the list of discriminatory grounds of extrajudicial killings which the United Nations Resolution on Extrajudicial, Summary and Arbitrary Executions aims to address. Of course, sexual orientation is not the only ground and compromise would mean passing the Resolution without mention of sexual orientation. Many of these 79 countries that voted to remove sexual orientation cited religion as their cause. Additionally in many of these countries, homosexuality, whether perceived or manifested, is punishable by imprisonment, corporal punishment and in some countries by death.

When you made a reference to “pointing a gun at Ms del Corro’s” head, I appreciated the hyperbole. However, this is a reality for many lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgender people in many countries all over the world. They are being killed on the grounds of the same biblical verses that Nikki cites. They are being killed because some, in the exercise of their religion, have taken it upon themselves to play God in the deserts of Sudan, in the steppes of Afghanistan, on the oilfields of Iran, and in the savannahs of Zambia, and annihilate the “sinners” because the world has created an enabling environment that compromises human rights.

Thankfully, a group of countries refused to compromise and restored “sexual orientation” in the resolution. Had we compromised, the UN would be compelled to turn a blind eye on extrajudicial executions based on sexual orientation.

Nikki might have been referring to Leviticus 20:13 when she said that the Bible says that homosexuality is a sin: "If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them."

However, Leviticus 11:10-11 says that “But all in the seas or in the rivers that do not have fins and scales, all that move in the water or any living thing which is in the water, they are an abomination to you. They shall be an abomination to you; you shall not eat their flesh, but you shall regard their carcasses as an abomination.” This makes shellfish an abomination. What makes this abomination different from the one in Lev. 20:13? If it’s such an abomination, why are we not advocating for a ban on shellfish? Why are we being selective in the verses that we live by? Isn’t that prejudiced treatment? Isn’t that discrimination? Or, am I sounding like a Bible literalist? Effectively, this is the same literalism that people use to persecute lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgender people in other parts of the world.

People like Hender, people like me, people like many of my friends, your friends, many of your professors, people like us have lived our entire lifetimes in compromise with the rest of society and in the end, we have compromised our own lives. So excuse us for not taking up your offer of an impasse. We have struggled to play roles according to the script that the norms of society have written for us. We have dressed up as girls deemed unacceptable, as men deemed incomplete, as persons unequal. And now, Hender asks for the dignity to be referred to as the woman that she rightfully is, she comes upon a wall saying that she may not be a woman in Nikki’s eyes because regarding her as such is contrary to her religious belief. Having a different stance on issues (such as the RH Bill, for example) on religious grounds is acceptable for me; but denying someone else’s person on such grounds, I cannot let that pass.

I’m appalled not just because it happened; I’m appalled because of all the places where it can happen, it happened in the University of the Philippines, a cradle of the human rights movement, on whose own blood-stained walls, students and professors fought to champion human rights. It is sad that inside those same walls, we call for an impasse, and we wait for the issue to die a natural death. The silence of the Department of European Languages on the issue is deafening.

An impasse is no worse than a compromise; a stalemate is the deathblow to human rights. Do we let human dignity bow down to religious beliefs?

There is no compromise for human rights. Not for the gay men in Iran sentenced to hang by the neck because loving another man is against the Quran, not for the lesbian women in Africa who will be stoned to death because it is an abomination to lie lovingly beside another woman, not for the transgender women who are refused their identity because to do so is against the religious beliefs of some.

With much respect,

Benedict Bernabe
Bachelor of Arts in European Languages '06

P.S.

In a landmark ruling in 2006, the Supreme Court of the Philippines upheld freedom of religion when it “freed from administrative liability a married court employee who co-habited with an equally married person – a practice disallowed by some religions and sanctioned by the government.” (http://www.mb.com.ph/node/80573)

However, in the same ruling, the high court said that “we must emphasize that the adoption of the benevolent neutrality-accommodation approach does not mean that the court ought to grant exemptions every time a free exercise claim comes before it.”

In essence, although the Supreme Court upholds the free exercise of religion, it does not deem it as absolute and the judiciary looks at each claim through the lens of benevolent neutrality – which considers the sincerity of the religious belief. The court also points out that “the interest of the State should also be afforded utmost protection.”

As our Constitution itself states, the State values the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for human rights. I believe that dignity includes being referred to the gender by which you identify and the State guarantee of full respect covers the acts of its own actors – those who are under the employ of the State including civil servants and professors in State-funded universities such as our dear Alma Mater.

In the case between my contemporary Nikki and your classmate Hender, arguments in favor of Nikki invoke her claim to the free exercise of her religion. In your note, you have put this as equal and opposite to Hender’s claim to her right to be recognized according to the gender by which she identifies, hence the stalemate, hence the impasse.

However I beg to disagree and jurisprudence seems to be on my side. I believe that human dignity and human rights is universal as evidenced by the international treaties and declarations that our country has signed in recognition of such. Nikki’s freedom to exercise her religion is not absolute, in the sense that she may exercise it if it does not infringe on the interests of the State. Since it is in the interest of the State to guarantee fully the respect for the dignity and the human rights of every citizen, regardless of age, race or gender, Nikki cannot invoke her freedom of religion in this regard, more so since she is a State actor herself, representing the State as a professor of a State-funded university.

Additionally, since we are putting up Hender’s right to recognition and Nikki’s right to exercise her religion, the Supreme Court decision adds that “in the interpretation of a document, such as the Bill of Rights, designed to protect the minority from the majority, the question of which perspective is appropriate would seem easy to answer.” I believe the statement argues in favor of the interpretation of rights in favor or Hender, a gender minority.

References:
Resolution on Extrajudicial, Arbitrary and Summary Executions
(http://www.ishr.ch/component/docman/doc_download/1075-extrajudicial-execution-resolution-ga-65-l29-rev1)
UN restores gay clause to killings resolution
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12056608)
GA Third Committee deletes 'sexual orientation' from resolution on extrajudicial executions
(http://www.ishr.ch/general-assembly/957-ga-third-committee-takes-backward-step-on-sexual-orientation-in-relation-to-extrajudicial-executions)
Estrada v. Escritor
(http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/june2006/A.M.%20No.%20P-02-1651.htm)

Hender's Rights are Gender Rights.

Feel free to comment and share your opinions. ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE PUBLISHED.

[UPDATE] HOMOPHOBIA and TRANSPHOBIA in UP DILIMAN

Below is an update on the ongoing discrimination case of the Department of European Languages, College of Arts and Letters, University of the Philippines Diliman involving Ms. Hender Gercio.

Feel free to comment and share your opinions. ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE PUBLISHED.

---------------------------------------------

This is to continue where I left off in my last post. After the arbitration meeting I had with Ms Dominique "Nikki" Del Corro (my teacher) and Mr Wystan de la Peña (the department director) last 18 February 2011 (Friday), where Mr de la Peña verbally informed me that he cannot require Ms Del Corro to address me as female in class (i.e. using female pronouns, female forms of address, female adjectives), I requested to be furnished a written copy of his decision, in order to have the case reviewed by higher authorities.

His reply was finally handed to me on 23 February 2011 (Wednesday) by a staff of the Office of the College Secretary. Below are the letter's contents.

---

22 February 2011

Ms. Hender Gercio

B.A. European Languages

Through: Teodoro Maranan, PhD

College Secretary, CAL

Dear Ms. Gercio:

Thank you for coming to the office last Friday, 18 February 2011, to thresh out issues you raised in your 07 February 2011 letter.

With the conversation that ensued in the presence of one of your teachers and in the face-to-face exchange we had, I deem I have already provided a response to your letter of 07 February 2011.

Truly yours,

Wystan de la Peña

Chair

---

I was rendered speechless, needless to say. Five days of waiting, for two sentences? Where was his ruling? His explanation/s for his ruling? His source/s of information?

I expected something more substantial than "I deem I have already provided a response." So I wrote back, and now while waiting I keep my fingers crossed, and try to dodge as many "he" bullets as possible.

---

24 February 2011

Prof. Wystan de la Peña

Chairperson

Department of European Languages

College of Arts and Letters

University of the Philippines Diliman

Dear Sir:

I was surprised by your response to my request for a printed and signed copy of your decision regarding my complaint against Ms. Dominique "Nikki" Del Corro. Before I left your office last February 18 (Friday), I thought we had already agreed that apart from your verbal ruling, you would also furnish me a tangible copy of the Department's stand on the matter.

Documentation is essential in every formal meeting. Although I recall the "conversation" and "face-to-face exchange" I had with you, they would not suffice as a reference when I escalate my case. I would not risk misrepresenting yours or the Department's views. Although in hindsight I should have insisted that the meeting be recorded, I am convinced that it remains to be my right (under the freedom of information) to obtain the meeting's proceedings, or at the very least your official decision in print.

Therefore, I implore you to exercise transparency, efficiency and accountability, values that this State University holds dear, and provide me with the written copy of the Department's decision at the soonest possible time. Thank you in advance.

Sincerely,

Hender Gercio

BA European Languages

Student Number 2xxx-xxxxx

Email: xxxxxxx@up.edu.ph

Mobile: 0928.xxxxxxx

The right to be your gender identity all the time by Sass Sasot

Feel free to comment and share your opinions. ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE PUBLISHED.

----------------------------------

In support of Miss Hender Gercio: The right to be your gender identity all the time

by Sass Rogando Sasot on Tuesday, February 22, 2011 at 2:26am

Yes: transgender Filipinos can go to school and universities in the Philippines. But it doesn’t always mean that their gender identity and gender expression will be respected by the educational institution.

Ms Hender Gercio's highly-eloquent and courageous letter of complaint gave voice to one of the issues that transgender people face in schools and universities in the Philippines.

"On January 27, 2011, after our EL 181 class, Ms. Del Corro approached me and asked when it would be convenient for me to have a talk with her. I inquired about the purpose of the meeting and she told me not to worry and that it was something related to my subjects French 30-31 and EL 181. We had the discussion on February 2, 2011 after our French 30-31 class.

Ms. Del Corro began by saying that she noticed me correcting my classmates whenever they referred to me using male pronouns (in French: il, lui) or male forms of address (in French: Monsieur). I replied that I identified and socially presented myself as female, and that addressing me as a woman was the appropriate thing to do. She then asked me about my biological sex. I told her that my legal sex (i.e. the sex/gender marker on my legal documents) was male, but I argued that this was irrelevant and ultimately misleading, because my legal sex did not accurately reflect my real-life identity, that of being a transsexual female.

Ms. Del Corro then admitted to me that she did not feel comfortable addressing me as female in class. She said “I am a Christian, and this is against my religious beliefs.” She also told me that she cannot  separate being a Christian from who she was as a teacher. She then continued that she believed that homosexuality was a sin, and it was due to this reason that she cannot allow herself to accept and address me as female (I actually interrupted her to say that I was transgender, not homosexual/gay, but that did not affect her stance). Our conversation ended in a standstill, between my right to be recognized in my chosen gender in class and her right to her religious belief. We finally agreed to

escalate this to you for a decision."

On 7 February 2011, Ms Gercio filed this complaint to Prof Wystan de la Pena, the Chairperson of the Deparment of European Languages of the College of Arts and Letters of the University of the Philippines.

A week later, Mr de la Pena held a dialogue with Ms Gercio and Ms del Corro.

In that dialogue, Mr de la Pena ruled in favor of Ms del Corro, giving the following reasons:

1. Ms del Corro cannot be required to address Ms Gercio as female because Ms Gercio is still legally male.

2. There is no university policy addressing transender students. This was made verbally. Ms Gercio is stil waiting for a written copy of Mr de la Pena's decision.

Rightfully, Ms Gercio will appeal this case.

This case is a bit similar to the case of Rio Moreno which I told in my article Our Brave New World: The Birth of Transgender Liberation in the Philippines.

"Rio attended Nursing school wearing women’s uniform. All her classmates and teachers referred to her as Miss Rio and treated her as a woman. Sometime in July 2008, after one of the security guards saw that Rio’s name on her ID was male, Rio was asked to go into the Office of Student Affairs (OSA). The OSA required her to wear men's uniform and that she have to be identified and treated as male because Rio’s birth certificate says male."

The reasons given by Mr de la Pena to Miss Gercio are simalar to the reasons given to Ms Moreno. However, we have to give credit to the University of the Philippines because, as far as I know, they don't require their students to dress according to their sex assignment at birth (or to their legal sex).

Moreover, the first reason given by Mr de la Pena is akin to the comment of Attorney Alejandro Alonzo, the Cebu Regional Director of the Commission on Human Right, in 2001 regarding the Jonathan Agudana Case:

""If you’re a man, you should wear the apparel of a man or vice versa. Unless the court will grant the change of status...." But this time, Mr de la Pena means: if your sex assignment at birth is male you should be addressed as a man unless the court will grant a legal change of sex.

The incident that happened with Hender Gercio at the University of the Philippines raises challenging questions:

1. In the absence of a university policy addressing transgender students, in this case a transsexual woman student, and in the absence of a Gender Recognition Law in the Philippines, which is the right and ethical thing to do: treat transsexual women according to their sex assignment at birth or according to their gender identity?

2. Is it justified to use religious beliefs, specially in a State University, to treat transsexual women according to their sex assignment at birth?

Mr de la Pena is limited by the current rules and regulations of the University of the Philippines (UP).

Certainly, there is no university policy that addresses transgender people in their school. Because of  this situation, he couldn't require Ms del Corro to treat Ms Gercio as a woman. Hence, Ms del Corro has not violated any rule, and therefore is justified in treating Ms Gercio according to her sex assignment at birth.

But does the absence of this policy mean that transsexual women studying in UP should be treated according to their sex assignment at birth?

There may be no specific policy but the University has principles, which can be evaluated whether they  may or may not provide an insight on how to treat transsexual women in UP.

Ms Gercio is aware that there are no specific policy on transgender people in UP. So, in her letter of complaint, she invoked principles from the University Charter as well the Code of Ethics for Faculty Members of the University of the Philippines. She even explained that being treated according to her sex assignment at birth is harmful to her psychological well-being. In fact, Ms Gercio furnished Mr de la Pena a copy of "a FAQ sheet published by the American Psychological Association about transgender individuals and gender identity".

Ms Gercio's arguments are very cogent. And her appeal to being treated with compassion should have shaken the religious fundamentalism of Ms del Corro and should have touched the humanity of Mr de la Pena. Yet, Mr de la Pena dismissed Ms Gercio's arguments.

We need to know the reasons why Mr de la Pena decided that Ms del Corro didn't violate the principles Ms Gercio invoked from the UP Charter and Code of Ethics. We don't need to wait for the reasons, Mr de la Pena's other reason provides a clue why this is so: Ms Gercio is legally male hence no one can be required to treat her according to her gender identity.

Is this reason valid? The 2008 Supreme Court decision on the Jeffrey Cagandahan case provides an insight.

Jeffrey Cagandahan was assigned female at birth. Later on, he was found out to be intersex. During his puberty, he developed secondary male characteristics because of Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia.  Because of "his mind and emotion" - which is male - and the development of secondary male characteristis, he asserted that he is now male and his documents should reflect this. His petition was granted by a regional trial court but was overturned by the Court of Appeals. In September 2008, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Mr Cagandahan.

Looking at the footnotes of the decison, one can see that the Supreme Court of the Philippines was informed by M.T. v. J.T., the first case in the United States that ruled that post-op transsexuals can marry people who have a sex opposite to their post-operative sex. The Cagandahan Decision quoted from M.T. v. J.T.: "“It has been suggested that there is some middle ground between the sexes, a ‘no-man’s land’ for those individuals who are neither truly ‘male’ nor truly ‘female’.” The Cagandahan Decision further added that: "The current state of Philippine statutes apparently compels that a person be classified either as a male or as a female, but this Court is not controlled by mere appearances when nature itself fundamentally negates such rigid classification." (Emphasis mine).

Later on, the decision said that ruling in favor of Mr Cagandahan "....gives respect to (1) the diversity of nature; and (2) how an individual deals with what nature has handed out.  In other words, we respect respondent’s congenital condition and his mature decision to be a male."

The Supreme Court respected Mr Cagandahan's "congenital condition", in other words, a condition present at his birth AND most importantly, his "mature decision to be male".

In deciding about the case of Ms Gercio, Mr de la Pena could have been informed by the valuable insights of this Supreme Court Decision, which are:

1. When the Cagandahan decision affirmed that "nature itself fundamentally negates such rigid classification [of sex]," it affirmed that our rigid conventional views about sex are not supported by Nature.

Ms Gercio cannot be evaluated according to our conventional views on sex: that someone who has a penis, or who was assigned male at birth, is male and will live and should live as male. We must take into account the latest scientific information about gender identity.

2. We have to respect people's "congenital condition".

According to MedicineNet.com, a condition that is congenital is one that is present at birth. Ms Gercio has a transsexual condition. In Transsexualism: The Current Medical Viewpoint published by Press for Change UK, transsexualism is defined as a conditon where there is "a strong and on-going cross-gender identification, and a desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite sex." And that "the weight of current scientific evidence suggests a biologically-based, multifactorial aetiology for transsexualism".

There are brain studies as well as genetic studies that give evidence to the biological basis of  transsexualism (please Google them).  Given this evidence, the transsexualism of Ms Gercio is as natural as the intersexuality of Mr Cagandahan.

Some may say that Ms Gercio has a penis and therefore should still be treated as male. The question is, in which part of the body gender identity is located? Is it in your genitalia? Or is it in your brain? As what  Dr. William Reiner of John Hopkins Hospital wrote in "To Be Male or Female -- that is the Question,"the organ that appears to be critical to psychosexual development and adaptation is not the external genitalia, but the brain."

Indeed, the University of the Philippines has no policy on how to deal with transgender students, but as an academic institution, it should go beyond the limitation of its rules regarding this matter.

There was also no Philippine law regarding intersexuals, but the absence of that law didn't stop the Supreme Court from seeking information elsewhere, which even include Wikipedia. There 's a lot of information about transsexualism. Mr de la Pena is either lazy or stuck in his own prejudice.

Waiting for a court to change Ms Gercio's gender before Ms Gercio can be treated as female is inhumane. As Ms Gercio has said, and as what psychologists can prove, doing so would harm the psychological  well-being of Ms Gercio.

Moreover, does Ms Gercio need to secure a court order in order for the University of the Philippines to understand transsexualism, to evaluate the science behind it, and therefore, to respect Ms Gercio's congenital condition?

As for the question "Is it justified to use religious beliefs, specially in a State University, to treat  transsexual women according to their sex assignment at birth?"

The answer is No.

Religion is not a valid reference when it comes to gender identity. The act of determining our sex at birth is not a matter of religion. It is the medical institution that determines our sex at birth and not the Church. Insisting that the Catholic doctrine is the authority over the biology behind gender identity is like insisting that the Catholic doctrine is the authority behind astronomy.

The sun does not revolve around our planet and our gender identity is not in our genitalia, it is in our brain. This is not the realm of morality but of neurology.

Finally, let's say Jeffrey Cagandahan is a student of Ms del Corro. Will Ms del Corro insist that Jeffrey be addressed as female? Perhaps she wouldn't if she would inform herself about intersex conditions. Her religious belief would surely bow to science.

Now can Ms del Corro afford the same consideration to Ms Gercio's transsexualism, which like intersexuality has a biological explanation?

Let me end this by quoting the Supreme Court decision on Ang Ladlad, "as far as this Court is concerned, our democracy precludes using the religious or moral views of one part of the community to exclude from consideration the values of other members of the community." And the Supreme Court decision on Estrada vs. Escritor, "Religious teachings as expressed in public debate may influence the civil public order but public moral disputes may be resolved only on grounds articulable in secular terms."

(Sass Rogando Sasot)

The post otherwise known as "Is the UP College of Arts and Letters really Homophobic / Transphobic?"

Below is another documentation of a similar case of homophobia that occurred at the UP College of Arts and Letters as narrated by Libay Linsangan Cantor. Cantor is a Palanca-award winning fictionist and scriptwriter of children's TV shows. Lifted from POC. Follow Libay Linsangan Cantor at www.leaflens.blogspot.com.

Feel free to comment and share your opinions. ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE PUBLISHED.

___________________________________________________

Nang mag-out si Prof. Hom O. Phobic

by Libay Linsangan Cantor.

Minsa’y nakakatuwang mag-aral nang mag-aral, lalo na’t may kakayanan kang gawin ito. Minsan, maraming humahadlang sa pag-aaral, at iba-iba ang karanasan ng bawa’t estudyante sa kani-kanilang buhay-eskuwela. Pero para sa aming mga LGBT, minsa’y may kakaiba kaming nakakasagupa, at nakakalungkot lang na ang kasagupa mo minsan ay ang propesor mismo – lalo na kung siya ay si Propesor Hom O. Phobic.

Habang isa akong guro sa Unibersidad ng Pilipinas (UP), naging graduate student din ako. Isa akong creative writing

major at ang aking thesis ay koleksiyon ng maiikling kuwentong puro lesbianismo ang tema. Dahil sa iba’t iba ang larangan sa pagsusulat ng bawa’t faculty sa kolehiyo ko, kailangang magtugma ang thesis mo sa larangan ng faculty na magiging thesis adviser mo. Isa pa, dapat—kahit papaano—ay nakakaintindi o nakakaunawa ng mga isyu sa thesis mo ang kukunin mong adviser. Bilang lesbian feminist ang framework ng aking thesis, ang mga una kong nilapitan para kuning adviser ay ang mga guro-manunulat na nakita kong nakakaintindi at nakakaunawa ng ganitong mga isyu. Sa kasamaang palad, iba ang larangan nila – kung hindi tula ang sinusulat nila, sanaysay naman. O kaya’y ang iba ay wala sa bansa noon o may mabigat na trabaho. Kaya natuwa ako nang may isa akong kaibigang kapwa-manunulat na nagmungkahing kunin ang kakilala naming kuwentista rin, na pumayag nang akuin ako bilang thesis advisee. Kahit lalaki siya, sa palagay ko noo’y makakatulong siya dahil sanay na siya sa mga uri ng kuwentong sinusulat ko (puro tungkol sa LGBT community) bilang naging kaklase ko siya sa isang fiction class noong una akong nagsimulang mag-aral. Kilala naman akong openly out na lesbian sa unibersidad at dati pang nalalathala ang mga kuwento kong may mga karakter na LGBT kaya pamilyar na siya sa akin.

Nang una kong lapitan si Prof. Straight Adviser, nagpasalamat ako dahil kinuha niya ako bilang advisee. Nilinaw ko rin kung ano ang balak ko sa aking thesis, at tinanong ko kung sigurado siyang kaya niyang hawakan ito. Oo daw, walang prublema, sabi niya. Alam naman daw niya ang tungkol sa mga LGBT. Saka sa dami ng baklang manunulat sa kolehiyo namin at sa sirkulo namin—ang ilan ay kaibigan pa nga niya/namin—ay nakampante ako na kahit papaano, makakatrabaho ko siya ng maayos sa paghulma ng aking thesis.

Mali pala iyon.

Matapos ang ilang buwan, nakalap ko na ang mga kuwento ko at magpapatulong na ako sa kanya sa pagpili ng sasalain at rerebisahin pa. Maayos kong binigay ang makapal kong manuskrito at naghintay na lang ako ng abiso niya kung kailan kami muling magkikita.

Pero nang lumipas ang ilang linggo—mga apat o limang linggo mahigit na yata—ay naisip ko nang tanungin siya sa estado ng aking thesis, kung tapos na niyang basahin o anuman. Pinatawag niya ako sa opisina niya at nag-usap kami. Di ko lang alam na noong araw na iyon, si Prof. Straight Adviser ay magkakaroon ng ibang anyo sa harap ko.

“Nabasa mo na?” tanong ko.

“Yeah, I want to talk to you about it. So ‘yung gagawin mo pala ay may erotica, ano?” sabi niya. Medyo nag-iiba na ang ngiti niya pero di ko pinansin iyon.

“Oo, pero hindi lahat ng stories. ‘Yung iba lang. Iba-iba ang themes.”

“Okay. Kasi doon ako may prublema.”

Nabahala ako sa sinabi niya. Baka marami siyang ipapatanggal. “Ah, okay. Bakit?”

“I think I can’t handle this thesis anymore. Nahihirapan akong hawakan ito,” nangingimi niyang sinabi.

Ay, iba pala ang prublema niya. “Ah talaga? Bakit naman?”

Dapat pala ay kumapit ako sa silya dahil tumambling ako sa sinagot niya. “Kasi… I’m a Christian.”

Patlang.

Kakaiba. Sa tagal ko na bilang out lesbian, marami nang nag-out sa akin bilang LGBT para makakuha ng panibagong pananaw at perspektibo. Pero ito ang kauna-unahang pagkakataon na ang isang taong di ko naman inuurirat ang relihiyon (dahil hindi ko naman talaga ugaling uriratin ang relihiyon ng isang tao) ay nag-out na relihiyoso pala.

Matapos ang ilang sandali, wala, patlang pa rin. Mahirap sundan ang pag-out na ito. Ano ang sasabihin ko? Di rin niya yata alam kung ano ang susunod na sasabihin niya. Pero sumubok naman siya, kaya lang tumbling pa rin ako sa sinabi niya.

“Plus you’re also using some feminist and queer theories, right? I’m not really familiar with those theories. Maybe you need to ask someone who’s familiar with them.”

Tumbling ito talaga, dahil bilang graduate students, lahat kami ay kailangang kumuha ng literary theory course kung saan kasama na doon ang pag-aaral sa feminist at queer theories. Saan kaya niya hinuhugot ang mga sinasabi niya? O baka absent siya nang ang mga teoryang ito na ang pinag-aaralan sa klase niya.

Pero sabi nga sa infomercial – But wait, there’s more!

“So to solve the problem, I asked Miss Genre-Crossing Writer to be my co-adviser. Maybe she could handle the erotica part since she already taught erotica-writing classes before. Pumayag naman siya.”

Ganda. Ako ba, pumayag? Di ba dapat ako ang una niyang tinanong? Saka bakit ‘yun ang tinanong niya, e makata iyon at sanaysay ang sinusulat? “Um, sige… Kakausapin ko siya... Salamat…”

Natawa na lang ako nang kausapin ko na nga itong writer-prof. na ito, at laking gulat niya nang malaman ang tunay na dahilan ni Prof. Straight Adviser – ang pagiging Kristiyano nito. Ni hindi nga rin daw niya alam na Kristiyano ito. Ganda.

Buti na lang at nasa isang gradwadong komite pala si Miss Genre-Crossing Writer kaya naisalang niya ang isyung ito sa kanilang kolehiyo. Iminungkahi niyang sana’y di na maulit ang ganitong karanasan dahil malinaw na mali ito. Lahat ng pagkuwentuhan kong guro sa unibseridad ay sumasang-ayon sa pananaw na iyon – na mali ang paggamit mo ng relihiyon bilang hadlang sa pagtulong sa isang estudyante. Ang isang guro pa nga ay nagsabing walang puwang sa Unibersidad ng Pilipinas ang ganitong klase ng guro, dahil di naman Katoliko ang eskuwelahan. Inaykupo, naisip ko, kung ginagawa ito ni Prof. Straight Adviser sa mga graduate students, paano pa kaya sa mga kawawang undergraduate students na kadalasa’y walang lakas ng loob na labanan ang ganitong kamalian? Tsk. Kaya mula noon, kinilala ko na siya bilang si Prof. Hom O. Phobic.

Matapos ang halos isang taon ng pagkabagabag, tinulungan na lang ako ni Miss Genre-Crossing Writer na kausapin ang isang kapwa guro na kunin ako bilang adviser. Itong gurong ito ang talagang gusto kong maging adviser noon pa man dahil isa siya sa pinakamahusay kumilatis ng maikling kuwento at sanaysay, at mahusay rin siyang sumulat, siyempre. Buti na lang at naintindihan niya ang implikasyon ng kaso ko, at kahit marami siyang trabaho, inako niya ako – at masaya namang nairaos ang thesis ko, sa isang mas mabuting porma pa nga. Blessing in disguise? Baka blessing in the skies! Hulog talaga siya ng langit sa panahong iyon.

Habang tinatapos ko ang aking thesis, di pa rin maalis sa akin ang kalungkutan ng homophobia na bumiktima sa akin. Nilapitan ko ang isang kaibigang kapwa guro din, kapwa manunulat at isa ring bakla. Humingi ako ng abiso dahil sa nahihirapan ang kalooban ko sa pangyayaring ito.

“Mamu, ang hirap. Di ba dapat labanan ko ito? Advocate tayo, e.” Oo nga naman. Para saan ba ang pag-martsa-martsa namin sa Pride March kung di namin ipaglalaban ang karapatan namin dito?

Tinaasan ako ng kilay ni Prof. Bakla. “Madz, pagka-graduate mo na lang… saka ka magreklamo. Para sure. Mahirap na. Tapusin mo muna. Alam mo na…”

Minsan pala, ang pagiging advocate ay kailangang isantabi para sa mas praktikal na paggalaw sa mundo. Kahit sa akademya. “Hm, oo nga. Sige, fine.”

Pero siyempre, mabigat pa rin ang loob ko, noon. Ngayon, okay na ako, dahil graduate na ako, sa wakas.

Pero hindi, teka. Hindi pa ako okay. At hindi yata ako magiging okay. Habang alam kong malayang nakakapagturo si Prof. Hom O. Phobic at ang mga kauri niya sa unibersidad – at sa iba pang eskuwelahan sa buong Pilipinas – ay di yata ako matatahimik. Ayokong maranasan ng ibang estudyanteng tulad ko ang naranasan kong iyon. Dahil lamang sa kakulangan ng pag-intindi ng isang Kristiyanong tao sa mga karanasan ng taong kakaiba sa kanya, magpapalaganap na siya ng mga baluktot na isipin at gagawa ng baluktot na gawain laban sa mga LGBT? Teka, di yata puwede iyon.

Natawa pa nga ako nang isumbong ko ito sa kaibigan kong nagmungkahi na kunin si Prof. Hom O. Phobic bilang adviser. Kaming tatlo ang magkakaklase noon sa fiction class na nabanggit ko, at ang kaibigan kong ito ay heterosexual din, pero iba siya. Tulad nga ng sabi sa isang Pride March placard, siya ay “Straight, but not narrow.”

“Uy Chong, ayaw na ni Prof. Straight Adviser sa thesis ko.”

“Huwat? Bakit naman?” sagot niya sa SMS text.

“Kasi daw, Christian siya. Alam mo ba ‘yun? Ako hindi, e.”

Natawa ako sa kaibigan ko nang sabihin niyang “Ha? Nasira naman ang ulo ko sa sinabi mo! E di ba ang dami ngang erotica at malalaswang kuwento sa Bibliya? Hindi ba siya nagbabasa nito?”

Marahil ang binabasa lang niya ay ang mga berso na nais niyang gustuhin. Natawa na lang ako at pinasalamatan ko ang aking kaibigan.

Kaya ngayong naibahagi ko na ang kuwentong ito, magsilbi sana itong aral sa lahat ng nagtuturo. Sana nama’y mas buksan pa natin ang ating isipan bago tayo magturo. Sana’y magturo tayo nang walang kaakibat o bahid ng diskriminasyon laban sa mga taong kakaiba sa atin. Kung sarado ang isip ninyo, paano kayo mahusay na makakapagturo?