Local ka ba o AFAM: The Impact of Dubbing the 1994 March in Manila as “Stonewall Manila.”

(Source: https://globalvoices.org/2021/06/11/remembering-asias-first-pride-march-in-manila/)

Abstract: On June 26, 1994, the Progressive Organization of Gays in the Philippines (PROGAY Philippines), the Metropolitan Community Church (MCC), and other Filipino Gay and Lesbian organizations and activists marched from Quezon Boulevard to Quezon Memorial Circle to protest against their lack of rights and legal safeguards from discrimination in the country. Father Richard Mickley, a key organizer of the event, explained that their protest, which became known as the 1994 Pride March, commemorated the 25th anniversary of the Stonewall Riots in New York City to bring attention to the Gay and Lesbian Liberation Movement in the Philippines. Since its onset, the 1994 Pride March has been popularly dubbed as “Stonewall Manila” and was credited as the first Pride March in the Philippines. I argue that the term “Stonewall Manila” is problematic since it employs a distinct and narrow definition of queerness to sexuality which subsequently traces the origins of the Gay and Filipino Liberation Movement westwards while disregarding their local beginnings. This displaces the Filipino Gay and Lesbian Liberation Movement from its association with class-based advocacies and draws inaccurate parallels between the socio-political environment surrounding Stonewall and 1994 Manila leading to historical inaccuracies.

Keywords: Pride March, public memory, gay and lesbian liberation movement, Philippines, kabaklaan

“Stonewall Manila”: The Philippines’ first Pride March

The Philippines’ LGBT Movement experienced a mass increase in visibility and mobilization in the 1990s within the country’s academic sphere; with the first gay studies courses being offered at De La Salle University and University of the Philippines and the publication of the first anthologies of gay and lesbian writing in the country.[1] Whereas, the public sphere witnessed the establishment of various LGBT organizations such as the University of the Philippines’ Babaylan, PROGAYS, and the Womyn Supporting Womyn Center. On June 26, 1994, the Progressive Organization of Gays in the Philippines (PROGAY Philippines), the Metropolitan Community Church (MCC), Oscar Atadero, Edgardo Tolosa, Murphy Red, and other Filipino Gay and Lesbian organizations and activists gathered and marched together from Quezon Boulevard to Quezon Memorial Circle to protest against their lack of rights and for legal safeguards from discrimination in the country.[2] In a written testimony, Father Richard Mickley, a queer pastor for MCC and a key organizer of the event, explained that their protest, which became known as the 1994 Pride March, commemorated the 25^th anniversary of the Stonewall Riots in New York City in order to bring attention to the Gay and Lesbian Liberation Movement in the Philippines.[3] Mickley noted that the 1994 Pride March was a publicity breakthrough for the Philippines’ LGBT+ rights and liberation movement as it “showed how the gay and lesbian people of the Philippines are real people, and they are not freaks in the closet.”[4] Since its onset, the 1994 Pride March has been popularly dubbed as “Stonewall Manila” and was credited as the first Pride March in the Philippines. and all of Asia.[5]

Globality and Locality: Homogenizing Local Conditions and Meanings of Queerness

The Philippines’ Gay and Lesbian Liberation Movement was not immune to the global influence of the Stonewall Riots. The following excerpt from Mickley notes how he was inspired by Stonewall and its ability to increase the visibility of the Gay and Lesbian Liberation.

“…the movement was still quiet or unknown and LGBTIQ+ people were often misunderstood. We felt we needed a Stonewall. By that time Pride Marches, following up Stonewall, were being held in many cities all over the United States and in cities around the world. I told him I was inspired by the pioneer of pioneers of the movement”[6]

However, I argue that the rhetoric that a ‘Stonewall was needed in the Philippines’ employs a distinct and narrow definition of gayness while inaccurately tracing the origin of the movement westwards.

Firstly, the Stonewall Riots and the Gay and Lesbian Liberation movement forwarded a narrow definition of being gay.[7] This definition solely related to one’s freedom in sexually pursuing one’s sexual object of choice. This trend continued to occur through the 1990s, when the main ruptures within the movement were related to questions surrounding the inclusion of sexual and gender identities (i.e., transgender and bisexual individuals) into overarching queer identity.[8] This juxtaposed the local definition of gay (bakla), tomboy (lesbian) and queerness (kabaklaan) in the Philippines, wherein kabaklaan often referred to a conflation of gender identity, gender expression, and sexuality.[9] The Filipino Gay and Lesbian Liberation Movement, also witnessed a rupture with the introduction of Western and global understandings of queerness in the 90’s and early 2000’s. In which members sought to legitimize the Filipino movement by denouncing kabaklaan and embracing the term gay. In doing so they intended to tap into the global Gay and Lesbian Liberation Movement by omitting the Filipino movement of its distinct inclusion of gender minorities. This is reflected in the writings of Jomar Fleras, where he emulates the Stonewall Riots and Gay Liberation in America, as something that the Philippines should aspire to achieve. His comparison noted that: “while the Stonewall riots gave birth to gay liberation in the U.S., in the Philippines, homosexual men and women were still perpetuating the feudal stereotypes.”[10] In the eyes of Fleras and other middle and upper-class queer Filipinos, kabaklaan was to be viewed as an impediment to attaining rights for the broader gay community, and a symbol of an archaic understanding of queerness that was to be associated with the low-class masses.[11]

Furthermore, employing the term Stonewall Manila credits the West with the onset of Gay Liberation in the Philippines. This paints America as a harbinger of LGBT+ rights compared to the Philippines. However, this differs with the oral accounts of baklas who lived throughout the mid-20^th century, which displayed a higher degree of perceived LGBT+ tolerance in the Philippines compared to America . For instance, one interviewee named Ruby stated that in relation to being gay in the 1970’s: “In America you might be imprisoned for being gay. But here in the Philippine no one is imprisoned for being gay! Here, it can only happen in gossip!”[12] Moreover, baklas and kabaklaan held high statuses in pre-colonial Philippines, often possessing positions as chief priestesses in the barangay (village).[13] Contemporary intolerance towards LGBT+ individuals in the Philippines is a direct product of Spanish and American colonization on the islands, with the Americans having labelled homosexuality as a disease in the Philippines.[14] Therefore, the term Stonewall Manila is problematic as it is used in a manner to erase kabaklaan and replace it with gayness while crediting the West with bringing LGBT+ rights to the Philippines.

Discursive Origins Lost: Distinguishing Developments of the Gay and Lesbian Liberation

Referring to the 1994 Pride March as “Stonewall Manila” displaces the Filipino Gay and Lesbian Liberation Movement from its class-based advocacies; since the American Gay and Lesbian Liberation Movement developed in a manner that steered away from “radical” anti-capitalist politics. Rather than class-based advocacies, the Gay and Lesbian Liberation Movement in America followed a trajectory which emphasized increased visibility of the movement, resistant mobilization against the state, sexual deregulation, and the expansion of state- recognized relationships.[15] Alan Sears and other queer scholars recognize that the development of the Gay and Lesbian Liberation Movement was propelled by the expansion of market relations and moral deregulation. They stress how “open lesbian and gay life has thrived primarily in commodified forms: [including] commercialized Pride Day celebrations with corporate sponsorship.”[16] This marked departure from class-based advocacies is exemplified through the fact that non-commercial spaces established shortly after the Stonewall Riots “tended to wither with the development of a gay and lesbian commercial sector.”[17]

The commercial development of the Gay and Lesbian Liberation Movement in America juxtaposes class-based sentiments and advocacies that were present in the 1994 Pride March. Unlike their American counterparts, the activists present at “Stonewall Manila” mobilized against both anti-gay discrimination and the imposition of an increased Value Added Tax (VAT).[18] It is important to note that the VAT is a form of sales tax in the Philippines that is often shifted onto the buyer of a product or a service.[19] Philippine President Ramos had proposed to increase the VAT by 10% across all goods and services, which prompted many individuals and legislators to protest against it.[20] The intertwining of class and LGBT+ struggles in the Filipino Gay and Lesbian Liberation Movement was explicitly mentioned in the written accounts of Tolosa and Red. Murphy Red stated how “you cannot separate LGBTQ resistance from that of the common people.”[21] Red recalled how attendees of the march had “shouted against state policies that favoured capitalists at the expense of its common people…”. [22] The sentiment that the Gay and Lesbian Liberation Movement and class-based advocacies were intertwined, is echoed by Tolosa’s account of the motivations behind the 1994 Pride March. This included:

“fighting for the rights of gays and lesbians, fighting against discrimination, cancelling the ratification of the VAT, lowering gas prices, increasing workers’ salaries, fulfilling promises of agrarian reform for farmers, lowering the cost of goods, ceasing tuition hikes, stopping police and military abuse, fixing the delivery of medical services, ceasing the demolition of impoverished neighbourhoods, and fighting against the harassment of Gays, Lesbians, and Women…”[23]

Therefore, due to the direct contrast between the commercialization of the American Gay and Liberation Movement and the presence of anti-capitalist demands in the Pride March in 1994; referring to the latter as a Philippine-version of the former would paint an inaccurate picture. Wherein, the 1994 Pride March would be framed as a catalyst for a Gay and Lesbian Liberation Movement that solely mobilized against LGBT+ discrimination and was separate from class-based advocacies and struggles.

Differing Landscapes: Mismatched Parallels between the Two Stonewalls

Dubbing the 1994 Pride March as “Stone Wall Manila” is also problematic as it inaccurately draws parallels between the socio-political landscapes of Queer Filipinos prior to the 1994 Pride March and that during the 1969 Stonewall Riots. This mismatch in landscapes is particularly seen in the presence of lesbians at the Stonewall Riots. In which albeit not being centered as the subject of inquiry at the Riots; their presence, support for, and mobilizing with their gay counterparts against LGBT+ persecution and discrimination was felt. For instance, many lesbians were detained at the House of Detention for Women (House of D) in Greenwich Village, which was two blocks away from the Stonewall Inn.[24] Wherein, they were jailed for participating in a variety of queer activities including standing in a queer bar and lacking the required number of gender-conforming clothing at the time of a stop-and-frisk.[25] However, unlike the discreet nature of queer activities outside of the House of D, these inmates had made their queer presence known by shouting obscenities, publicly expressing their love for one another, and by flaunting their butchness.[26] This overt expression of Lesbian resistance was present at the night of the Stonewall Riots, on June 28, 1969 when they clamoured, set toilet paper on fire, and dropped it from their cell windows, to show their support, according to Doric Wilson’s oral accounts of the event.[27] Lesbians were also present at the site of the Stonewall Riots themselves albeit in smaller numbers, having been amongst those subjected to and resisting against police raids. This marks a clear coalition of resistance amongst Gays and Lesbians in their Liberation movement at the time of the Stonewall Riots, which directly contrasts the level of solidarity amongst Gay and Lesbians in the Philippines prior to and around 1994.

This problematizes the parallels drawn between the two events and anachronistically places the onset and existence Filipino gay and lesbian solidarity at the time of the 1994 Pride March. In Roselle V. Pineda’s publication on the historical development of the Filipina Lesbian Struggle, she states that it was solely in 1990’s Philippines,

“…that the lesbian struggle came to work in collaboration with the male gays. Historically lesbians owed the birth of their struggle to the women’s movement, but they came to affirm that they also had certain commonalities with their gay brethren.”[28]

Furthermore, this perceived solidarity and coalition-building that is imposed upon the label of “Stonewall Manila” fails to take into consideration that lesbians solely saw “possibilities of collaboration and coalition with their gay brethren” at a 1994 forum titled ‘When Lesbians Meet Gays’.[29] Moreover, this newfound solidarity did not manifest into the 1994 Pride March but rather the First Filipino Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride March held in June 1996 at Malate.[30] Compounding this issue is that there were virtually no lesbians present nor centered in the development of the 1994 Pride March despite it’s historiographical position of being a catalyst for the mobilization of the LGBT+ movement in the Philippines. This juxtaposes its supposed similarity to the popular commemoration of the Stonewall Riots as a catalyst for the American and later global LGBT+ movement.[31] To dub the 1994 Pride March as “Stonewall Manila” is to commemorate the event as catalyst for Gay and Lesbian Movements in the Philippines. However, this historiography reinforces a trend of rendering the involvement, contributions, and struggles of Lesbians in the Filipino Gay and Lesbian Movement as invisible; “relegating them to the silent corners of this collaboration.”[32]

Conclusion:

The 1994 Pride March in Manila and the 1969 Stone Wall Riots in America allowed for the increased publicization and visibility of the Gay and Lesbian Liberation movement as a politically mobilized entity in their respective countries. However, there are distinct differences between the two, i.e., understandings of gay as an identity vis-à-vis kabaklaan, developing with and/or separate from class-based advocacies, and the strength of gay and lesbian solidarity at the time of each event’s occurrence. Therefore, to dub the 1994 Pride March in Manila as “Stonewall Manila” would paint historical inaccuracies and draw inexact parallels between the two events, while omitting the event of its local characteristics.

Alfonso Ralph Mendoza Manalo is in his final year at the University of Toronto Scarborough, double majoring in Global Asia Studies and Co-op Public Policy with a minor in Critical Migration Studies. He is currently on a year-long exchange at the National University of Singapore studying Southeast Asian Studies, Language Study, and Public Administration.

Bibliography

[1] Coloma, Roland Sintos. “Ladlad and Parrhesiastic Pedagogy: Unfurling LGBT Politics and Education in the Global South.” Curriculum Inquiry 43, no. 4 (2013): 483–511.

[2] Paradela, Teilhard. “Tracing the Origins of the Metro Pride March: According to the University of the Philippines’ Babaylan.” Spot PH, June 29, 2019. https://www.spot.ph/newsfeatures/the-latest-news-features/78298/history-of-pride-march-in-the-philippines-a4410-20190629-lfrm?utm_source=Facebook-Spot&utm_medium=Ownshare&utm_campaign=20190629-fbnp-newsfeatures-history-of-pride-march-in-the-philippines-a4410-20190629-lfrm-fbfirst&fbclid=IwAR0zdxDof3sgvCvLPxiPifVP16NK_EKXxdpfkTcwbLA_9VUKZCvfDElqmyQ.

[3] Mickley, Richard. “My Recollection of the Start of the Philippine Pride March.” Facebook (blog), July 4, 2018. https://www.facebook.com/saintaelred/posts/10155622016362844.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Baclig, Christina Eloisa. “PRIDE MONTH The Memory of Stonewall Riot Lives On.” Philippine Daily Inquirer, June 3, 2022. https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1606112/pride-month-the-memory-of-Stonewall-riot-lives-on.; OutrageMag.com Staff. “Living History: Phl Makes History with First Pride March in 1994.” Outrage Magazine, July 3, 2018. https://outragemag.com/living-history-phl-makes-history-with-first-pride-march-in-1994/.; Tolosa, Edgardo, and Murphy Red. “Statement: The Category Is – Pride Is a Protest!” Facebook Account. BAYAN Canada (blog), June 27, 2020. https://m.facebook.com/BAYANCanada/photos/a.430688590688764/956579311433020/?type=3&_rdr.

[6] Mickley, Richard. “My Recollection of the Start of the Philippine Pride March.” Facebook (blog), July 4, 2018. https://www.facebook.com/saintaelred/posts/10155622016362844.

[7] Manalansan, Martin F. “In The Shadows of Stonewall: Examining Gay Transnational Politics and the Diasporic Dilemma.” GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 2, no. 4 (October 1, 1995): 425–38.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Manalansan, Martin F. “The Borders between Bakla and Gay.” In Global Divas Filipino Gay Men in the Diaspora, edited by Judith Halberstam and Lisa Lowe, 38–61. Perverse Modernities. Durham: Duke University Press, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780822385172.

[10] Manalansan, Martin F. “In The Shadows of Stonewall: Examining Gay Transnational Politics and the Diasporic Dilemma.” GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 2, no. 4 (October 1, 1995): 425–38.

[11] Benedicto, Bobby. “THE HAUNTING OF GAY MANILA: Global Space-Time and the Specter of Kabaklaan.” GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 14, no. 2–3 (June 1, 2008): 317–38. https://doi.org/10.1215/10642684-2007-035.

[12] Foe, Johnathan. “The 1960’s Gay Life in the Philippines: Discretion with Tolerance.” Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality 17 (2014).

[13] Garcia, J. Neil C. “Male Homosexuality in the Philippines: A Short History.” IIAS Newsletter. Leiden: International Institute for Asian Studies, November 2004. file:///D:/Course%20Materials/Filipino%20Sexual%20Identities/Male%20Homosexuality%20in%20the%20Philippines%20a%20short%20social%20history.pdf.

[14]Tan, Michael. “Sickness and Sin: Medical and Religious Stigmatization of Homosexuality in the Philippines.” In Ladlad: An Anthology of Philippine Gay Writing, edited by J. Neil C. Garcia and Dante Remoto. Mandaluyong City, Philippines: Anvil Publishing Inc., 1994.

[15] Sears, Alan. “Queer Anti-Capitalism: What’s Left of Lesbian and Gay Liberation?” Science & Society, Marxist-Feminist Thought Today, 69, no. 1 (January 2005): 92–112.

[16] Ibid.

[17] Ibid.

[18] Dulpina, Nelvin. “In Pride and Solidarity: Statement on the 21st Anniversary of the Pride Movement in the Philippines.” University of the Philippines: Centre for Women’s and Gender Studies (blog), July 1, 2015. https://cws.up.edu.ph/?p=312#:~:text=On%20the%20occasion%20of%20the,more%20caring%20of%20LGBT%20people.

[19] Republic of the Philippines, Bureau of Internal Revenue. “Value-Added Tax – Bureau of Internal Revenue.” Accessed November 4, 2022. https://www.bir.gov.ph/index.php/tax-information/value-added-tax.html.

[20] Riedinger, Jeffrey. “The Philippines in 1994: Renewed Growth and Contested Reforms.” Asian Survey 35, no. 2 (February 1995): 209–16.

[21] Red, Murphy. “Dalawampu’t Limang Taon Na Ang Nakalilipas Ngayong Araw, Bilang Pag-Alala Sa Ika-25 Anibersaryo Ng Pag-Aalsang Stonewall Sa New York, USA…” Facebook (blog), June 25, 2019. ; https://www.facebook.com/murphy.red28/posts/pfbid0K5EuUyNH6aJQ7h2MLFHRXiHFvpSdRsfRRNPwwFjKHR71SUjPKuTVv8LqPruBJn3wl.; my translation.

[22] Ibid.

[23] Tolosa, Edgardo. “26 Na Taon Ng Pakikibaka Ng Mga LGBT Ng Pilipinas, Ipagpatuloy Ang Laban.” Facebook (blog), June 25, 2020. https://www.facebook.com/edgardo.tolosa.5/posts/1523515927819574. ; my translation

[24] Thistlewaithe, Polly. “Where Were the Lesbians in the Stonewall Riots? The Women’s House of Detention & Lesbian Resistance.” City University of New York Academic Works, Stonewall 50: Remembering the Lesbians, June 27, 2019, 1–5.

[25] Ibid.

[26] Ibid.

[27] Ibid.

[28] Pineda, Roselle V. “Bridging Gaps, Making a Struggle: The History of Filipina Lesbian Struggle in the Philippines.” Kasarinlan Philippine Journal of Third World Studies 16, no. 1 (2001). https://www.journals.upd.edu.ph/index.php/kasarinlan/article/view/1077.

[29] Ibid.

[30] Ibid.

[31] Armstrong, Elizabeth A., and Suzanna M. Crage. “Movements and Memory: The Making of the Stonewall Myth.” American Sociological Review 71, no. 5 (2006): 724–51.

[32] Pineda, Roselle V. “Bridging Gaps, Making a Struggle: The History of Filipina Lesbian Struggle in the Philippines.” Kasarinlan Philippine Journal of Third World Studies 16, no. 1 (2001). https://www.journals.upd.edu.ph/index.php/kasarinlan/article/view/1077.

This paper seeks to problematize and contextualize the label given to the 1994 Pride March as Stonewall Manila. I argue that the term Stonewall Manila in itself is problematic. It employs a distinct and narrow definition of queerness to sexuality which subsequently traces the origins of the Gay and Filipino Liberation Movement westwards while disregarding their local beginnings. Using “Stonewall Manila” to signal a local equivalence of the Pride movement in the West would displace the Filipino Gay and Lesbian Liberation Movement from its association with class-based advocacies. Lastly, the use of the term Stonewall Manila draws inaccurate parallels between the socio-political environment surrounding Stonewall and 1994 Manila leading to historical inaccuracies. This paper seeks to problematize and contextualize the label given to the 1994 Pride March as Stonewall Manila. I argue that the term Stonewall Manila in itself is problematic. It employs a distinct and narrow definition of queerness to sexuality which subsequently traces the origins of the Gay and Filipino Liberation Movement westwards while disregarding their local beginnings. Using “Stonewall Manila” to signal a local equivalence of the Pride movement in the West would displace the Filipino Gay and Lesbian Liberation Movement from its association with class-based advocacies. Lastly, the use of the term Stonewall Manila draws inaccurate parallels between the socio-political environment surrounding Stonewall and 1994 Manila leading to historical inaccuracies.

Globality and Locality: Homogenizing Local Conditions and Meanings of Queerness

Firstly, the Stonewall Riots and the Gay and Lesbian Liberation movement forwarded a narrow definition of being gay.[1] This definition solely related to one’s freedom in sexually pursuing one’s sexual object of choice. This trend continued to occur through the 1990s, when the main ruptures within the movement were related to questions surrounding the inclusion of sexual and gender identities (i.e., transgender and bisexual individuals) into overarching queer identity.[2] This juxtaposed the local definition of gay (bakla), tomboy (lesbian) and queerness (kabaklaan) in the Philippines, wherein kabaklaan often referred to a conflation of gender identity, gender expression, and sexuality.[3] The Filipino Gay and Lesbian Liberation Movement, also witnessed a rupture with the introduction of Western and global understandings of queerness in the 90’s and early 2000’s. In which members sought to legitimize the Filipino movement by denouncing kabaklaan and embracing the term gay. In doing so they intended to tap into the global Gay and Lesbian Liberation Movement by omitting the Filipino movement of its distinct inclusion of gender minorities. This is reflected in the writings of Jomar Fleras, where he emulates the Stonewall Riots and Gay Liberation in America, as something that the Philippines should aspire to achieve. His comparison noted that: “while the Stonewall riots gave birth to gay liberation in the U.S., in the Philippines, homosexual men and women were still perpetuating the feudal stereotypes.”[4] In the eyes of Fleras and other middle and upper-class queer Filipinos, kabaklaan was to be viewed as an impediment to attaining rights for the broader gay community, and a symbol of an archaic understanding of queerness that was to be associated with the low-class masses.[5]

[1] Manalansan, Martin F. “In The Shadows of Stonewall: Examining Gay Transnational Politics and the Diasporic Dilemma.” GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 2, no. 4 (October 1, 1995): 425–38.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Manalansan, Martin F. “The Borders between Bakla and Gay.” In Global Divas Filipino Gay Men in the Diaspora, edited by Judith Halberstam and Lisa Lowe, 38–61. Perverse Modernities. Durham: Duke University Press, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780822385172.

[4] Manalansan, Martin F. “In The Shadows of Stonewall: Examining Gay Transnational Politics and the Diasporic Dilemma.” GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 2, no. 4 (October 1, 1995): 425–38.

[5] Benedicto, Bobby. “THE HAUNTING OF GAY MANILA: Global Space-Time and the Specter of Kabaklaan.” GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 14, no. 2–3 (June 1, 2008): 317–38. https://doi.org/10.1215/10642684-2007-035.

[1] Mickley, Richard. “My Recollection of the Start of the Philippine Pride March.” Facebook (blog), July 4, 2018. https://www.facebook.com/saintaelred/posts/10155622016362844.

[1] Coloma, Roland Sintos. “Ladlad and Parrhesiastic Pedagogy: Unfurling LGBT Politics and Education in the Global South.” Curriculum Inquiry 43, no. 4 (2013): 483–511.

[3] Mickley, Richard. “My Recollection of the Start of the Philippine Pride March.” Facebook (blog), July 4, 2018. https://www.facebook.com/saintaelred/posts/10155622016362844.

[4] Ibid.