gender equality in the philippines essay brainly

Overcoming barriers to women’s work in the Philippines

Helle buchhave, nadia belhaj hassine belghith.

The current status of women in the Philippines is both a cause for optimism and a reason to accelerate efforts for promoting better access to jobs for all women. On several fronts, the Philippines is a best performer when it comes to gender equality in the East Asia and Pacific (EAP) region and even globally. In the latest Global Gender Gap report, the Philippines occupies the 17th place, with 78.4% of its overall gender gap closed to date. This performance is the second best in the EAP region, after New Zealand. A key driver behind the progress has been the Philippine Magna Carta for Women, a landmark law signed nearly 13 years ago seeking to eliminate discrimination against women. 

With the impressive performance in closing key gender gaps, it is therefore striking that women’s labor force participation remains persistently low. At just 49%, the Philippines’ female labor force participation in 2019 was one of the lowest in the EAP region (regional average rate is 59%). In contrast, 76% of Filipino men were in the labor force, creating a massive gender gap. Progress towards closing the gap has been minimal and female labor force participation has remained roughly the same since 1990, with the gap shrinking by a mere 0.3 percentage points since 2015. 

Women’s low labor force participation represents a missed opportunity for economic growth and increased prosperity in the Philippines. An increase of women’s labor supply by a mere 0.5 percentage points per year would increase gross domestic product (GDP) per capita by about 6% by 2040 and almost 10% by 2050.  

In our recent report, Overcoming the Barriers to Women’s Economic Empowerment in the Philippines , we set out to better understand what is holding women back from the labor market and what is hindering the Philippines’ gain from the growth potential associated with women’s economic empowerment. We document that childcare and social norms about gender roles in the household play a critical role in holding back women’s participation in the labor market in the Philippines. The report adds to our research across the EAP region offering evidence on the linkages between constraints to women’s labor force participation and access to childcare services in Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Mongolia, Solomon Islands, and Vietnam . 

What are the barriers to women’s labor force participation in the Philippines? We find four main answers:

Skills. Women who work are mostly concentrated in low skill positions (due to economic necessity) or high skill occupations (because of high rates of education). Women in low skill positions work to avoid falling further into poverty, whereas women in high skill occupations tend to select into the labor force with high earnings potential. Although many women work in private establishments or are self-employed, an important share (around 10%) of women are employed without pay in family-owned businesses and as domestic workers, occupations which tend to offer narrower avenues for skills development and career growth. Men on the other hand represent only 4% in these occupations. An important lesson from the COVID-19 lockdown was that more than a third of women (35%) who remained employed were able to work from home as compared to 19% of men. The pandemic has also opened some new working-from-home opportunities with industries such as business process outsourcing and e-commerce . 

Wage gap. Women earn more on average than men, but women in low skill positions earn much less than men. In families with both men and women being low skilled workers, the household income will suffer significantly less if the female engages in unpaid work than if the man does. In low skill positions, the daily wage is over 50% higher for men than for women, whereas in high skill occupations, the daily wage is about 20% higher for women than for men.  

Care responsibilities. The number of children reduces the likelihood of women’s employment. A large proportion of women are held back from productive employment opportunities by their family responsibilities and the concentration of women in high-skill positions declines considerably when they have young children. Having been married and having a young child aged 0 to 2 years old decreases the probability of women’s participation in the labor market by 7-14 percentage points. The presence of domestic help reduces this negative effect, reflecting how economic inequalities reinforce gender disparities.

Norms. Attitudes and beliefs about women’s roles and responsibilities decrease the probability of women’s engagement in the labor market by 14 to 22 percentage points (ISSP Family and Changing Gender Roles Survey and World Values Survey).  According to our 2021 nationally representative survey on women’s work and childcare, 75% of male and 80% of female respondents agree that a man’s job is to earn money and a woman’s job is to take care of the family and home. More than 70% of men and 76% of women believe that the emotional and psychosocial development skills of a preschool child suffers with a mother working outside the home (a belief that stands in contract to global research see for example Devercelli and Beaton-Day 2020). Moreover, willingness to use childcare services is limited, with over 95% of both men and women believing that childcare should be provided by family members.

What can the government do? We discussed policy recommendations at a recent roundtable between the World Bank, the Philippines Commission on Women, National Economic and Development Authority, the Department of Education, and Oxfam Philippines. Key outcomes were that findings highlight the need for policies and programs that increase female labor force participation in the Philippines by i) providing alternatives to childcare in the home; ii) promoting policies supporting flexible work arrangements, including work from home and e-commerce , such as amendment of the Telecommuting Act (Republic Act 11165); and iii) addressing gendered social norms that affect women’s participation in the labor market through media campaigns, behavioral and attitude change interventions that influence opinions about masculinity, gender roles, earlier childhood development, legislation and company policies that equally promotes parents to engage in care responsibilities. 

“We keep gender equality front and center in our work,” according to Ndiame Diop , the World Bank’s Country Director for the Philippines, Malaysia and Thailand. The World Bank is committed to supporting the Philippines, and one of the priorities of the World Bank’s Philippines FY20-24 Country Gender Action Plan is to increase women’s access to paid labor.   

• Philippines
• East Asia and Pacific

Senior Social Development Specialist and Global Gender Lead

Senior Economist

Join the Conversation

• Share on mail
• comments added

Fighting Gender Inequality through the Philippines’ Roots

By: Marc Adrian Aguilar

The Philippines had been hailed as one of the countries embracing gender equality. The Global Gender Gap Report 2020 of the World Economic Forum ranked the Philippines as the 16th on the index among the developed Scandinavian countries. The International Labor Organization detailed that the Philippines is the 5th in having the highest share of managers who are female.

In the effort of the Philippines to fight against gender inequality, the world might learn a thing or two from the archipelago in Southeast Asia.

Matriarchy in the Philippines?

In the Philippines, matriarchy is ingrained in its culture.

In my own home, my mother is the breadwinner of our home, not my father. She would leave our home early for work and come home when the sun is down. She would provide for the family and be the one buying me and my siblings' groceries. Apart from that, she acts as the family’s treasurer, handling the money.

A Brief History of Gender Equality in the Philippines

The Philippines always believed in gender equality. According to the Philippines: A Country Study, written by Ronald E. Dolan , gender equality was never questioned, even before the Pre-Spanish Colonial rule in the country. During the Spanish Colonial, women became the treasurer of the family. From the same source, it also stated that both education and literacy levels in 1990 were higher for women than for men.

According to the La Mujer Indigena - The Native Woman of Lorna S. Torralba Titgemeyer , the early Filipinos always valued equality, not just in husband and wife, but in the upbringing of their children. Quoting Titgemeyer, she stated that “The early Filipinos gave equal importance to both male and female offsprings”. It was further expounded that the country before the colonial rule gave equal opportunity to men and women, from education to inheritance.

The same source tells that the practice of primogeniture in the pre-colonial Philippines concerning inheritance regardless of gender allowed women to succeed their fathers as rulers of tribes. This shows that long before the people from the country saw power equally, in both sexes.

The high position of a woman is never unusual in the Philippines. Government seats, editors-in-chief, business corporation heads, all of which are positions wherein women have been in the country. In 1986, the country elected its first female president, Corazon Aquino, a champion of the country’s democracy. Even for service-oriented, such as assembly-type work employment opportunities, women flock to the workplace.

• Get Involved

• English pdf (0.8 MB)

Fast Facts: Gender Equality and Women's Empowerment in the Philippines

August 1, 2013.

Gender equality is well advanced in the Philippines. The country scores well on international gender equality measures and indices, but more is needed to sustain the achievements and to overcome remaining challenges. Despite a favorable policy environment – the Philippines is signatory to international human rights instruments and has successfully enacted policies and laws for the protection and promotion of women’s rights - the implementation of policies appears uneven and slow.

Document Type

Regions and countries, related publications.

Publications

Philippine sdg investor map.

SDG Investor Maps are market intelligence tools that help the private sector identify investment themes in emerging markets which have significant potential to ...

From Informality to Inclusion: Exploring the Informal Eco...

With support from UNDP’s Informal Economy Facility, Accelerator Lab Philippines (ALab PH) developed this study to dive deep into the BARMM informal economy, und...

UNDP-DOTr Bike Lane Master Plan

The Bike Lane Master Plan provides local government units (LGUs) in Metro Manila, Metro Cebu, and Metro Davao with a guide towards a more comprehensive, inclusi...

2022 Development Finance Assessment Report

Produced under the Joint SDG Fund - Joint Programme on Reaping the Demographic Dividend and Managing the Socio-Economic Impact of COVID-19 by Applying an Integr...

Data Governance Study for the Philippines

This document presents the exploratory study’s findings that aim to answer how we are doing in the digitalization of Climate Change Adaptation and Disaster Risk...

Digital Readiness Strategy for the Philippines

This document is the Digital Readiness Strategy (DRS) to advance the use of digital resources and technologies for disaster risk reduction and management (DRRM)...

Gender equality through school: providing a safe and inclusive learning environment

Credit: Khumais

Boys and girls must feel welcome in a safe and secure learning environment. Governments, schools, teachers and students all have a part to play in ensuring that schools are free of violence and discrimination and provide a gender-sensitive, good-quality education (Figure 16). To achieve this, governments can develop nondiscriminatory curricula, facilitate teacher education and make sure sanitation facilities are adequate. Schools are responsible for addressing school-related violence and providing comprehensive health education. Teachers should follow professional norms regarding appropriate disciplinary practices and provide unbiased instruction. And students must behave in a non-violent, inclusive way.

FIGURE 16: Who is responsible for what in ensuring gender equality through school

NATIONAL AND SCHOOL POLICIES SHOULD TARGET SCHOOL-RELATED VIOLENCE

School-related violence is a pervasive issue in some countries. Violence can be physical, psychological or sexual; it can occur on school grounds, in transit or in cyberspace; and it may include bullying, corporal punishment, verbal and emotional abuse, intimidation, sexual harassment and assault, gang activity and the presence of weapons among students. It is often perpetrated as a result of gender norms and stereotypes and enforced by unequal power dynamics. It was estimated that, globally, approximately 246 million girls and boys experienced some form of school-related violence in 2014 (UNGEI, 2017).

While the vast majority of teachers are caring professionals who put the best interest of their students first, some abuse their position of power. In West and Central African countries, sexual abuse and exploitation by teachers, school staff and others in position of authority is common practice (Antonowicz, 2010). Sexual violence happens frequently in many schools in South Africa but crimes are rarely investigated and prosecution rates are low (HRW, 2016). In the United Republic of Tanzania, over half of girls and boys who had experienced physical abuse identified a teacher as an abuser (HakiElimu, 2017). In Samoa, 41% of children surveyed in 2013 indicated that they had experienced violence at the hands of their teacher (Office of the Ombudsman and NHRI Samoa, 2015).

Some countries, including Chile, Fiji, Finland, Peru, the Republic of Korea and Sweden, have passed legislation on violence in educational institutions (UNESCO, 2015c, 2017b). The 2013 Anti-Bullying Act in the Philippines requires all schools to adopt policies to prevent and address acts of bullying. It explicitly refers to gender-based bullying, which is described as any act that humiliates or excludes a person on the basis of perceived or actual sexual orientation and gender identity. Yet in the following year just 38% of schools had adopted child protection or anti-bullying policies. The low rate highlighted a lack of communication and a weak monitoring framework.

The Department of Education responded by issuing a memorandum to clarify submission requirements and is working to build implementation capacity (UNESCO, 2015c). Teacher education and codes of conduct can help change teacher attitudes and behaviours. In South Sudan, the UNICEF Communities Care programme engaged with teachers to challenge norms that enable sexual violence and brought about some shifts in teacher attitudes and behaviours (UNGEI, 2017). The Doorways programme in Burkina Faso, Ghana and Malawi trained upper primary and lower secondary school teachers on children’s rights and responsibilities, alternative teaching practices, basic counselling and listening skills, awareness of sexual harassment at school and teacher code of conduct (DevTech Systems, 2008; Queen et al., 2015). The Communication for Change project trained teachers in the Democratic Republic of Congo to act as first responders when they witnessed school-related gender-based violence. The share of participating teachers who were aware of how to prevent gender-based violence in school increased from 56% to 95% after the intervention (C-Change, 2013). Teacher codes of conduct are generally written by teacher unions to guide their members. They promote professional accountability by giving peers a way to hold each other to account for adhering to norms (Poisson, 2009). A recent survey by Education International found that teacher codes of conduct were present in 26 of 50 countries surveyed (EI, 2017). A separate review of 24 countries found that over half of teachers believed the code of conduct had a very significant impact in reducing misconduct (McKelvie-Sebileau, 2011).

Teacher codes of conduct can be effective in reducing school-related gender-based violence if they explicitly refer to violence and abuse and include clear breach reporting and enforcement protocols. Mongolia’s Teachers Code of Ethics for General Education Schools and Kindergartens contains a section on teacher ethical norms, which specifies that teachers should protect student’s health and well-being, including from sexual abuse, and should ensure equal participation without discrimination, including on the basis of sex (Steiner-Khamsi and Batjargal, 2017). Kenya has a range of penalties for breach of professional conduct, including suspension and interdiction. Teachers convicted of sexual offences against students are deregistered (Kenya Teachers Service Commission, 2013). However, even when they exist, these codes are not always successfully disseminated.

The implementation of Ethiopia’s Code of Conduct on Prevention of School-Related Gender-Based Violence in Schools has been patchy. Some school staff reportedly lacked commitment to or a sense of ownership of the code (Parkes et al., 2017). Students are also responsible for ensuring their behaviour does not impinge on others’ right to education (UNICEF and UNESCO, 2007). Schools are increasingly implementing prevention-oriented models to teach students acceptable strategies for interacting with their peers (Horner et al., 2010). These models set clear guidelines for students and define consistent instruction, record-keeping and follow-up procedures for teachers and other adults, such as administrative and custodial staff, playground supervisors, cafeteria workers and parent and community volunteers (Lewis et al., 2014).

Students are more likely to show positive social behaviours and reduce negative behaviours after the implementation of such programmes (Durlak et al., 2011). There is also increasing evidence linking improved social skills to academic achievement (Horner et al., 2010). While these codes of conduct are mostly used in Europe and North America (Sklad et al., 2012), Asian countries such as Singapore have also begun adopting them (Durlak et al., 2011).

GENDER-SENSITIVE FACILITIES CAN INCREASE THE TIME GIRLS SPEND IN SCHOOL

Inadequate sanitation facilities for girls during menstruation can have a negative effect on school attendance. Among 145 countries with data, primary school access to basic sanitation facilities was below 50% in 28 countries, 17 of them in sub-Saharan Africa. Only limited data are available on whether girls have separate facilities, let alone whether the facilities are functional or well maintained. In only 9 of 44 countries did more than 75% of primary schools have single-sex facilities; in Benin and Comoros, under 5% of schools had single-sex facilities. An estimated one in ten African girls miss school during menstruation (HRW, 2016).

Regulations requiring separate toilet facilities for boys and girls can help. Yet analysis of regulations in 71 education systems by the GEM Report team shows that only 61% required sex-separate facilities for public schools and 66% for private schools (UNESCO, 2017a). Regulations alone are not sufficient to ensure facilities are available. Although separate sanitation facilities are mandated by regulations in Bangladesh, a survey found that in 2014 only 12% of girls reported access to female-only toilets with water and soap available. Combined with a lack of waste bins, the poor facilities contributed to girls missing school during menstruation. Two in five girls were absent during menstruation for an average of three days during each cycle (Alam et al., 2014). Girls in Haiti have reported having to go home to change the materials they use to manage their menstruation, resulting in lost instructional time (HRW, 2016).

School inspections play a key role in ensuring that schools adhere to regulations. However, inspections do not always take gender issues into account. In Sweden, the school inspectorate takes gender equality into consideration (Heikkilä, 2016) and in the United Kingdom inspectors evaluate equal opportunities in the classroom and whether the school provides an inclusive environment for boys and girls (Rogers, 2014). By contrast, gender issues are rarely included in inspections in Bangladesh, with sex-separate sanitation facilities only occasionally observed (Chatterley et al., 2014). In any case, inspectorates are severely constrained by human resource shortages in many poor countries. For instance, in Mvomero district, United Republic of Tanzania, although 80% of schools are supposed to be inspected annually, only one in five schools were inspected in 2013 (Holvoet, 2015).

GENDER EQUALITY IN EDUCATION REQUIRES UNBIASED CURRICULA AND TEXTBOOKS

To facilitate gender-responsive instruction, curricula and textbooks should be free from gender bias and promote equality in gender relations. How students perceive themselves and how they project their role in society is shaped to some extent by what they experience at school, including by how they are represented in textbooks.

Comprehensive sexuality education

School-based comprehensive sexuality education programmes equip children and young people with empowering knowledge, skills and attitudes. In many contexts, programmes focus almost exclusively on HIV as a motivator to encourage students to delay sexual activity and have fewer sexual partners and less frequent sexual contacts (Fonner et al., 2014). However, international guidelines and standards, along with emerging evidence about factors influencing programme effectiveness, increasingly stress the value of a comprehensive approach centred on gender and human rights (Ketting and Winkelmann, 2013). A review of 22 studies showed that comprehensive sexuality education programmes that addressed gender power relations were five times more likely to be effective in reducing rates of sexually transmitted infections and unintended pregnancy than those that did not (Haberland, 2015).

In 2009, UNESCO and other UN agencies published the revised International Technical Guidance on Sexual Education to provide an evidence-based, age-appropriate set of topics and learning objectives for comprehensive sexuality education programmes for students aged 5 to 18 (UNESCO, 2009). In 2010, the International Planned Parenthood Federation adopted a rights-based approach in its Framework for Comprehensive Sexuality Education, and the WHO Regional Office for Europe produced Standards for Sexuality Education in Europe as a framework for policy-makers and education and health authorities (WHO Regional Office for Europe and BZgA, 2010). Nearly ten years after the original report, UNESCO’s revised guidance expands coverage to both school-based and out-of-school programmes with a strong focus on human rights, gender equality and skills building. The guidance can act as both an advocacy and accountability tool for programme implementers, NGOs, and youth (UNESCO, 2018).

A 2015 review of the status of comprehensive sexuality education in 48 countries found that almost 80% had supportive policies or strategies. Despite this political will, a significant gap remained between policies and implementation (UNESCO, 2015b). In western and central Africa, UNESCO’s Sexuality Education Review and Assessment Tool was used to assess 10 out of 13 national sexuality education programmes. Fewer than half the curricula met global standards for required content for all age groups, with gender and social norms identified as the weakest areas (Herat et al., 2014; UNESCO and UNFPA, 2012).

Recent studies in Ghana and Kenya provided evidence of gaps in content and delivery. The Kenya study covered 78 public and private secondary schools. While 75% of teachers reported teaching all topics of a comprehensive sexuality education programme, only 2% of students reported learning all topics. Only 20% learned about types of contraceptive methods, and even fewer learned how to use and where to get them (Figure 17). In some cases, incomplete and sometimes inaccurate information was taught. Almost 60% of teachers incorrectly taught that condoms alone were not effective in pregnancy prevention (Sidze et al., 2017). Moreover, 71% of teachers emphasized abstinence as the best or only method to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, and most depicted sex as dangerous or immoral for young people.

FIGURE 17: In Kenya, only one in five students reported learning about contraceptive methods

Barriers to effective implementation of comprehensive programmes include lack of well-trained teachers, poor support of schools, weak regulation and supervision of policy implementation, opposition from religious and conservative groups, and culturally imposed silence about sexuality. In the Ghana study, 77% of teachers reported lacking resources or teaching materials. A smaller share reported conflicts, embarrassment or opposition from the community or students on moral or religious grounds (Awusabo-Asare et al., 2017).

Textbooks increasingly cover gender issues but progress is insufficient

Self-reporting from governments in Cuba, Estonia, Finland, Mexico, Nicaragua, Slovenia and Spain indicates that gender equality is integrated into national school curricula (UN Human Rights Council, 2017). The Ministry of Education, Culture, Science equality as one of the key values in its new core curriculum (Steiner-Khamsi and Batjargal, 2017).

Over the past 50 years, mentions of women and women’s rights in textbooks have increased (Bromley et al., 2016; Nakagawa and Wotipka, 2016). Nevertheless, in many countries women remain under-represented or, when included, are relegated to traditional roles such as housework and childcare (UNESCO, 2016a). Women accounted for only 37% of images in primary and secondary school textbooks in the Islamic Republic of

Iran in 2006–2007 (Paivandi, 2008) and across nine Jordanian secondary school history books only 21% of images were female. From Sweden to the Syrian Arab Republic, despite governments explicitly identifying the importance of gender equality in textbooks, women and men were still routinely portrayed in a stereotypical manner (Bromley et al., 2016).

Both governments and civil society can act to reduce textbook biases. The Human Rights Council has made it clear that ‘states have an obligation to periodically review and revise curricula, textbooks, programmes and teaching methods to ensure that they do not perpetuate harmful gender stereotypes’ (UN Human Rights Council, 2017). Some states include an explicit gender analysis as part of their textbook and review process. In Viet Nam, the National Strategy on Gender Equality for 2011–2020 specifies that textbook content should be reviewed for gender stereotypes (UNESCO, 2016c). In Ghana, the Textbook Development and Distribution Policy for Pre-tertiary Education included gender sensitivity as one of the main criteria for evaluating textbook proposals (Ghana MOE, 2001). By contrast, the Pakistan National Textbook and Learning Materials Policy and Plan of Action does not mention gender as a criterion of textbook review, referring instead to ‘quality of content, presentation, language and specific provincial coverage’ (Pakistan MOE, 2007).

Textbook monitoring by parents and civil society can be effective. In South Africa, a parent’s question posted on Facebook in July 2016 inspired a petition that ultimately led the textbook publisher to amend and issue an apology for content that promoted blaming the victim for sexual assault (Davies, 2016).

TEACHER EDUCATION CAN HELP ADDRESS UNDERLYING GENDER BIASES

Aside from the influence of official curricula and textbooks, teacher practice in the classroom is partly shaped by their assumptions and stereotypes about gender, which in turn affects students’ beliefs and learning. In Australia, female teachers felt particularly responsible for boys’ underachievement relative to male teachers (Hodgetts, 2010). In the United States, anxiety expressed by female mathematics teachers was associated with female students’ belief in the stereotype that boys are better at mathematics (Beilock et al., 2010).

Teacher education can assist teachers to reflect on and overcome their biases. Formal initiatives in teacher education with a focus on gender have taken place in Italy, the Republic of Moldova and Sudan (OHCHR, 2015). In Spain, the University of Oviedo requires teacher candidates to complete a mandatory course on gender and education (Bourn et al., 2017). In Ankara, Turkey preservice teachers that took a semester long course on gender equity in education developed more gender sensitive attitudes (Erden, 2009).

In low and middle income countries, teacher education programmes are often externally funded. The UNESCO Regional Bureau in Bangkok has recently funded a five-year project, Enhancing Girls’ and Women’s Right to Quality Education through Gender Sensitive Policy Making, Teacher Development and Pedagogy, which focuses on training participants from Cambodia, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Uzbekistan to conduct gender assessments in teacher education (UNESCO, 2016b).

In Karamoja region, Uganda, the UNICEF Gender Socialization in Schools programme trained over 1,000 primary school teachers to enhance their knowledge, attitudes and practices related to gender equality promotion and conflict resolution. The initial training lasted for two days and was followed by two refresher training sessions. A subset of teachers received reinforcing text messages reminding them of examples of good practice. However, while the programme improved teachers’ knowledge and attitudes on gender equality, classroom practices did not become more gender-responsive (American Institutes for Research and UNICEF, 2016; El-Bushra and Smith, 2016).

Nigeria updated its teacher education curriculum in 2012, in part to address gender issues (Unterhalter et al., 2015). While a policy is in place to ensure minimum standards on gender equality, a survey of 4,500 student teachers in 2014 showed that very few had an in-depth understanding of what gender equality in education might mean, while many were hostile to women’s participation in public life and any form of social engagement. Among respondents employed following graduation, teachers reported receiving no professional development on gender, a point echoed by other colleagues at the schools where they taught. Teachers who had the most egalitarian ideas about gender reported themselves the most frustrated of respondents and said that they were unable to put their ideas into practice (Unterhalter et al., 2017).

The examples from Uganda and Nigeria highlight some of the challenges in changing teacher practices. To be effective, teacher education and training need to be continuous to recognize the time it takes for such practices to change. They also need to incorporate other stakeholders to help build a more supportive environment.

Gender and Equality: A Look into Gender-Based Laws and Policies in the Philippines

• Last updated: 15 June 2023 08:23
• Created: 17 November 2021 22:33

Gender-based laws and policies refer to legal frameworks and government policies that aim to promote gender equality, protect the rights of women and marginalized genders, and eliminate gender-based discrimination and violence.

The Philippines has made significant progress in promoting gender equality in recent years. However, gender-based discrimination and violence remain prevalent in the country. The World Economic Forum's 2021 Global Gender Gap Report ranks the Philippines 28th out of 156 countries in terms of gender equality.

Gender-based laws and policies are essential for ensuring that women and marginalized genders have equal access to opportunities and protections. They also provide a legal framework for addressing gender-based discrimination and violence.

Gender-Based Laws in the Philippines

The Magna Carta of Women was signed into law in 2009 and provides for the protection and promotion of the rights of women. Key provisions of the law include:

• Equal opportunities for women in education, employment, and political participation.
• The establishment of gender-responsive programs and services in government agencies.
• Access to comprehensive health services, including reproductive health.

However, the implementation and enforcement of the Magna Carta of Women have been inconsistent, and many of its provisions remain unfulfilled.

Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004

The Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004 is a landmark law that specifically addresses violence against women and children. Key provisions of the law include:

• Harsher penalties for perpetrators of gender-based violence.
• Measures to protect victims and prevent further abuse.

However, implementation and enforcement of the law have been inconsistent, and victims of gender-based violence often face barriers to accessing justice.

Rape Law of 1997

The Rape Law of 1997 criminalizes rape and other forms of sexual assault. Key provisions of the law include:

• Broadening the definition of rape to include marital rape and rape by a public officer or employee.
• Providing stiffer penalties for perpetrators of rape and sexual assault.

However, implementation and enforcement of the law have been inconsistent, and victims of rape and sexual assault often face stigma and discrimination.

Gender-Sensitive Policies in the Philippines

The Gender and Development (GAD) program is a government initiative aimed at promoting gender equality and women's empowerment across all sectors of society. Key features of the program include:

• Integrating gender perspectives in policies, programs, and activities of government agencies.
• Allocating funds for GAD activities.

However, implementation and enforcement of the GAD program have been inconsistent, and some government agencies have been slow to adopt gender-sensitive policies.

Other Gender-Sensitive Policies

Other gender-sensitive policies in the Philippines include the Gender-Responsive Economic Actions for the Transformation of Women (GREAT Women) Project, the Women's Priority Legislative Agenda, and the Gender-Fair Education Policy. However, implementation and enforcement of these policies have been inconsistent, and their impact on promoting gender equality is not yet fully realized.

Challenges to Gender Equality in the Philippines

Despite the existence of gender-based laws and policies, gender inequality remains pervasive in the Philippines. This is partly due to cultural attitudes and social norms that perpetuate gender stereotypes and discrimination. For instance, there is a prevalent culture of machismo, where men are expected to be dominant and aggressive, while women are supposed to be submissive and passive. This mindset reinforces the idea that men are superior to women and can lead to gender-based violence and discrimination.

Moreover, traditional gender roles often restrict women's access to education and employment opportunities, reinforcing gender inequality. Women are often expected to prioritize their family responsibilities over their careers, which limits their opportunities for economic independence and self-realization.

To address these cultural attitudes and social norms, the government must take a multi-sectoral approach. This includes working with civil society organizations, religious leaders, and other stakeholders to promote gender equality and challenge harmful gender stereotypes.

In conclusion, while the Philippines has made progress in promoting gender equality and protecting women's rights through its laws and policies, more needs to be done to ensure their implementation and enforcement. The government must work towards addressing cultural attitudes and social norms that perpetuate gender inequality and violence against women. It also needs to take into account the disproportionate impact of the pandemic on women and implement gender-responsive measures to mitigate its effects.

It is important to emphasize the need for implementation and enforcement of gender-based laws and policies, as well as the importance of addressing cultural attitudes and social norms that perpetuate gender inequality. Furthermore, the government must implement gender-responsive measures to mitigate the effects of the pandemic on women. Through these efforts, the Philippines can work towards achieving true gender equality and women's empowerment.

Written by : Pinoy Attorney

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy

• Transparency Seal
• Citizen's Charter
• PIDS Vision, Mission and Quality Policy
• Strategic Plan 2019-2025
• Organizational Structure
• Bid Announcements
• Site Statistics
• Privacy Notice

• Research Agenda
• Research Projects
• Research Paper Series
• Guidelines in Preparation of Articles
• Editorial Board
• List of All Issues
• Disclaimer and Permissions
• Inquiries and Submissions
• Subscription
• Economic Policy Monitor
• Discussion Paper Series
• Policy Notes
• Development Research News
• Economic Issue of the Day
• Annual Reports
• Special Publications

Working Papers

Monograph Series

Staff Papers

Economic Outlook Series

List of All Archived Publications

• Other Publications by PIDS Staff
• How to Order Publications
• Rate Our Publications
• Press Releases
• PIDS in the News
• PIDS Updates
• Legislative Inputs
• Database Updates
• GIS-based Philippine Socioeconomic Profile
• Socioeconomic Research Portal for the Philippines
• PIDS Library
• PIDS Corners
• Infographics
• Infographics - Fact Friday
• Infographics - Infobits

Does 'gender equality' exist in the Philippines?

CNN Philippines Portia Ladrido Article Link

• Gender and Development

Related Posts

Publications.

Video Highlights

• How to Order Publications?
• Opportunities

• International edition
• Australia edition
• Europe edition

In the Philippines they think about gender differently. We could too

The labels we give ourselves can be helpful but restrictive too. Let’s embrace diversity by celebrating fluid identities

W e were excited young film-makers, sitting in one of our first pitch sessions, a panel of executives lined up against us. They had flicked through our script, looked at our mood boards and praised our song choice for the sizzle reel (Man! I Feel Like A Woman). Then the question dropped: “Which one of you is the alphabet person?”

I realised I was the only one holding my hand in the air. Then the guessing game began, as the executives ran through the letters – LGBTQIA+ – until they landed on one that gave them some understanding of who I am.

In this day and age of diversity, Australia is making great strides as a country in promoting and celebrating our differences, but in other ways it feels like it sits frustratingly behind the curve. It might have to do with how we label ourselves.

While diversity sometimes relies on labels to facilitate communication, those labels are also historically loaded. Each letter of the LGBTQIA+ rainbow denotes something in particular for the communities represented by them, but also comes with derogatory associations imposed by others.

But what if we start to rethink these labels – or even start to look at others?

Bakla is a Tagalog word that denotes the Filipino practice of male cross-dressing, denoting a man that has “feminine” mannerisms, dresses as a “sexy” woman, or identifies as a woman. It is an identity built on performative cultural practice more so than sexuality. Often considered a Filipino third gender, bakla can be either homosexual or heterosexual, and are regarded as one of the most visible LGBTQIA+ cultures in Asia – an intersectional celebration of Asian and queer cultures.

The bakla were renowned as community leaders, seen as the traditional rulers who transcended the duality between man and woman. Many early reports from Spanish colonising parties referenced the mystical entities that were “more man than man, and more woman than woman”. Even today, many bakla in the Philippines retain high status as entertainers and media personalities.

When I was eight years old, on my first and only trip to the Philippines, I met my older cousin Norman. He had shoulder-length hair, wore lipstick and eyeliner, and would walk around in heels. His father affectionately called him malambut (Tagalog for “soft”); his siblings called him bading , but he told me he was bakla . He wasn’t an outsider; he was part of the family – my family – and being an eight-year-old who liked to sing karaoke and play dress-up, I didn’t give it a second thought. But on returning to Australia, I told all my friends about Norman and they scoffed – the early seed of masculinity training at play – and when I asked my parents what the word meant, my mum replied, “it just means … bakla ”. It didn’t translate directly to English.

Later, I learned that many people problematically mistranslate bakla to “gay” in English. As an identity not tied to sex, the word does not correspond directly to western nomenclature for LGBTQIA+ identities, sitting somewhere between gay, trans and queer. As Filipinos moved to countries such as Australia and the United States, the bakla were mislabelled as part of western gay culture and quickly (physically) sexualised. Even worse, the word can sometimes be heard in Australian playgrounds, used in a derogatory way. When I was younger, we were banned from calling each other “gay”, so the boys accused each other of being “bakla” instead. It was quite confusing to my ears when hearing the word used in a negative way, its meaning truly lost in migration. I even made a film about it.

As my mother often explains when speaking about the differences between her inherited and migrated cultures, westerners point with their fingers, but Filipinos point with their lips in a general direction. Similarly, Tagalog does not categorise people with limited gendered pronouns, and English can be constricting.

Bakla and similar identities, such as hijra in India and the Native American concept of two-spirit , hint at the striking fluidity that can exist in humanity, often suppressed by the western identities pushed upon them. We are seeing more intersectional (queer and ethnic) groups rise up in Sydney alone, and hearing more and more conversations about non-labelling, so perhaps the next generations of the queer community are moving towards a fluid sense of self.

As someone who is often mistakenly identified (the result of an apparently unisex name), I can only see this non-labelling as a positive. By undefining ourselves, we free ourselves from the performative aspects of our respective queer cultures, and can embrace the intersectional diversity Australia has to offer.

• LGBTQ+ rights
• Philippines
• Asia Pacific

Most viewed

Request another

Follow class ace :.

Share this via Facebook Share this via X Share this via WhatsApp Share this via Email Other ways to share Share this via LinkedIn Share this via Reddit Share this via Telegram Share this via Printer

Download the full report

Download the summary and recommendations in Tagalog

“Just Let Us Be”

Discrimination Against LGBT Students in the Philippines

A girl covers anti-LGBT messages in rainbow handprints during a Pride rally in Manila on June 27, 2015.  © 2015 Bullit Marquez/AP Photo.

[Senator and boxing legend] Manny Pacquiao says we’re not human. They should just let us be. – Edgar T., an 18-year-old gay high school student in Manila, February 2017

Schools should be safe places for everyone. But in the Philippines, students who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) too often find that their schooling experience is marred by bullying, discrimination, lack of access to LGBT-related information, and in some cases, physical or sexual assault. These abuses can cause deep and lasting harm and curtail students’ right to education, protected under Philippine and international law.

In recent years, lawmakers and school administrators in the Philippines have recognized that bullying of LGBT youth is a serious problem, and designed interventions to address it. In 2012, the Department of Education (DepEd), which oversees primary and secondary schools, enacted a Child Protection Policy designed to address bullying and discrimination in schools, including on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. The following year, Congress passed the Anti-Bullying Law of 2013, with implementing rules and regulations that enumerate sexual orientation and gender identity as prohibited grounds for bullying and harassment. The adoption of these policies sends a strong signal that bullying and discrimination are unacceptable and should not be tolerated in educational institutions.

But these policies, while strong on paper, have not been adequately enforced. In the absence of effective implementation and monitoring, many LGBT youth continue to experience bullying and harassment in school. The adverse treatment they experience from peers and teachers is compounded by discriminatory policies that stigmatize and disadvantage LGBT students and by the lack of information and resources about LGBT issues available in schools.

This report is based on interviews and group discussions conducted in 10 cities on the major Philippine islands of Luzon and the Visayas with 76 secondary school students or recent graduates who identified as LGBT or questioning, 22 students or recent graduates who did not identify as LGBT or questioning, and 46 parents, teachers, counselors, administrators, service providers, and experts on education. It examines three broad areas in which LGBT students encounter problems—bullying and harassment, discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, and a lack of information and resources—and recommends steps that lawmakers, DepEd, and school administrators should take to uphold LGBT students’ right to a safe and affirming educational environment.

The incidents described in this report illustrate the vital importance of expanding and enforcing protections for LGBT youth in schools. Despite prohibitions on bullying, for example, students across the Philippines described patterns of bullying and mistreatment that went unchecked by school staff. Carlos M., a 19-year-old gay student from Olongapo City, said: “When I was in high school, they’d push me, punch me. When I’d get out of school, they’d follow me [and] push me, call me ‘gay,’ ‘faggot,’ things like that.” While verbal bullying appeared to be the most prevalent problem that LGBT students faced, physical bullying and sexualized harassment were also worryingly common—and while students were most often the culprits, teachers ignored or participated in bullying as well. The effects of this bullying were devastating to the youth who were targeted. Benjie A., a 20-year-old gay man in Manila who was bullied throughout his education, said, “I was depressed, I was bullied, I didn’t know my sexuality, I felt unloved, and I felt alone all the time. And I had friends, but I still felt so lonely. I was listing ways to die.”

Share this via Facebook Share this via X Share this via WhatsApp Share this via Email Other ways to share Share this via LinkedIn Share this via Reddit Share this via Telegram

The mistreatment that students faced in schools was exacerbated by discriminatory policies and practices that excluded them from fully participating in the school environment. Schools impose rigid gender norms on students in a variety of ways—for example, through gendered uniforms or dress codes, restrictions on hair length, gendered restrooms, classes and activities that differ for boys and girls, and close scrutiny of same-sex friendships and relationships. For example, Marisol D., a 21-year-old transgender woman, said:

When I was in high school, there was a teacher who always went around and if you had long hair, she would call you up to the front of the class and cut your hair in front of the students. That happened to me many times. It made me feel terrible: I cried because I saw my classmates watching me getting my hair cut.

These policies are particularly difficult for transgender students, who are typically treated as their sex assigned at birth rather than their gender identity. But they can also be challenging for students who are gender non-conforming, and feel most comfortable expressing themselves or participating in activities that the school considers inappropriate for their sex.

Efforts to address discrimination against LGBT people have met with resistance, including by religious leaders. The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) has condemned violence and discrimination against LGBT people, but in practice, the Roman Catholic Church has resisted laws and policies that would protect LGBT rights. The CBCP has sought to weaken anti-discrimination legislation pending before Congress, for example, and has opposed implementation of comprehensive sexuality education in schools. Representatives of the Church warn that recognizing LGBT rights will open the door to same-sex marriage, and oppose legislation that might promote divorce, euthanasia, abortion, total population control, and homosexual marriage, which they group under the acronym “DEATH.” In a country that is more than 80 percent Catholic, opposition from the Church influences how LGBT issues are addressed in families and schools, with many parents and teachers telling students that being LGBT is immoral or wrong.

One way that schools can address bullying and discrimination and ameliorate their effects is by providing educational resources to students, teachers, and staff to familiarize them with LGBT people and issues. Unfortunately, positive information and resources regarding sexual orientation and gender identity are exceedingly rare in secondary schools in the Philippines. When students do learn about LGBT people and issues in schools, the messages are typically negative, rejecting same-sex relationships and transgender identities as immoral or unnatural. Juan N., a 22-year-old transgender man who had attended high school in Manila, said, “There would be a lecture where they’d somehow pass by the topic of homosexuality and show you, try to illustrate that in the Bible, in Christian theology, homosexuality is a sin, and if you want to be a good Christian you shouldn’t engage in those activities.” Virtually all the students interviewed by Human Rights Watch said the limited sexuality education they received did not include information that was relevant to them as LGBT youth, and few reported having access to supportive guidance counselors or school personnel.

When students face these issues—whether in isolation or together—the school can become a difficult or hostile environment. In addition to physical and psychological injury, students described how bullying, discrimination, and exclusion caused them to lose concentration, skip class, or seek to transfer schools—all impairing their right to education. For the right to education to have meaning for all students—including LGBT students—teachers, administrators, and lawmakers need to work together with LGBT advocates to ensure that schools become safer and more inclusive places for LGBT children to learn.

Key Recommendations

To the congress of the philippines.

• Enact an anti-discrimination bill that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, including in education, employment, health care, and public accommodations.

To the Department of Education

• Create a system to gather and publish data about bullying on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in schools. Revise forms to more clearly differentiate and record incidents of gender-based bullying on the basis of sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity, and include these categories on all forms related to bullying, abuse, or violence against children.
• Revise the standard sexuality education curriculum to ensure it aligns with UNESCO’s guidelines for comprehensive sexuality education, is medically and scientifically accurate, is inclusive of LGBT youth, and covers same-sex activity on equal footing with other sexual activity.
• Issue an order instructing schools to respect students’ gender identity with regard to dress codes, access to facilities, and participation in curricular and extracurricular activities.

To Local Officials

• Enact local ordinances to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, particularly in education, employment, healthcare, and public accommodations.

To School Administrators

• Adopt anti-bullying and anti-discrimination policies that are inclusive of sexual orientation and gender identity, inform students how they should report incidents of bullying, and specify consequences for bullying.

Methodology

Human Rights Watch conducted the research for this report between September 2016 and February 2017 in 10 cities on the major islands of Luzon and the Visayas in the Philippines. To identify interviewees, we conducted outreach through LGBT student groups, particularly at the university level. Human Rights Watch interviewed members of those groups as well as students who were known to those groups, whether or not they had experienced discrimination in school. We sought interviews with students of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities, but gay boys and transgender girls were disproportionately represented among the students identified by LGBT groups and the students who attended the group discussions.

Human Rights Watch conducted a total of 144 interviews, including with 73 secondary school students or recent graduates who affirmatively identified as LGBT or questioning, 25 students or recent graduates who did not affirmatively identify as LGBT or questioning, and 46 parents, teachers, counselors, administrators, service providers, and experts on education. Of the LGBT students, 33 identified as gay, 12 identified as transgender girls, 10 identified as bisexual girls, 6 identified as lesbians, 4 identified only as “LGBT,” 3 identified as transgender boys, 2 identified as bisexual boys, 2 identified as questioning, and 1 identified as a panromantic girl.

Interviews were conducted in English or in Tagalog or Visayan with the assistance of a translator. No compensation was paid to interviewees. Whenever possible, interviews were conducted one-on-one in a private setting. Researchers also spoke with interviewees in pairs, trios, or small groups when students asked to meet together or when time and space constraints required meeting with members of student organizations simultaneously. Researchers obtained oral informed consent from interviewees after explaining the purpose of the interviews, how the material would be used, that interviewees did not need to answer any questions, and that they could stop the interview at any time. When students were interviewed in groups, those who were present but did not actively volunteer information were not counted in our final pool of interviewees.

Human Rights Watch sent a copy of the findings in this report by email, fax, and post to DepEd on May 15, 2017 to obtain their input on the issues students identified. Human Rights Watch requested input from DepEd by June 2, 2017 to incorporate their views into this report, but did not receive a response.

In this report, pseudonyms are used for all interviewees who are students, teachers, or administrators in schools. Unless requested by interviewees, pseudonyms are not used for individuals and organizations who work in a public capacity on the issues discussed in this report.

I. Background

The Philippines has a long history of robust LGBT advocacy. In 1996, LGBT individuals and groups held a solidarity march to commemorate Pride in Manila, which many activists describe as the first known Pride March in Asia. [1] Lawmakers began introducing bills to advance the rights of LGBT people in the country in 1995, including variations of a comprehensive anti-discrimination bill that has been reintroduced periodically since 2000. [2]

In the absence of federal legislation, local government units across the Philippines have begun to enact their own anti-discrimination ordinances that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. As of June 2017, 15 municipalities and 5 provinces had ordinances prohibiting some forms of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. [3] Attitudes toward LGBT people are relatively open and tolerant; a survey conducted in 2013 found that 73 percent of Filipinos believe “society should accept homosexuality,” up from 64 percent who believed the same in 2002. [4] President Rodrigo Duterte has generally been supportive of LGBT rights as well. During his time as mayor, Davao City passed an LGBT-inclusive anti-discrimination ordinance, and on the campaign trail, he vocally condemned bullying and discrimination against LGBT people. [5]

Nonetheless, many of the basic protections sought by activists remain elusive. A bill that would prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation—and in later versions, gender identity—in employment, education, health care, housing, and other sectors has been regularly introduced in Congress since 2000. [6] The Anti-Discrimination Bill, or ADB, passed out of committee in the House of Representatives for the first time in 2015, but never received a second reading on the House floor and never passed out of committee in the Senate. [7] In the current Congress, the ADB has passed out of committee in the Senate for the first time, but at time of writing, it has not yet passed out of committee in the House. [8]

The anti-discrimination ordinances that have passed in the absence of federal legislation remain largely symbolic, as Quezon City is the only local government unit to follow the passage of its ordinance with implementing rules and regulations that are required to make such an ordinance enforceable. [9] Even if fully enforced, these municipal and provincial ordinances would collectively cover only 15 percent of the population of the Philippines. [10]

In a pair of decisions, the Supreme Court limited the possibility of legal gender recognition, ruling that intersex people may legally change their gender under existing law but transgender people may not. [11] The Philippines does not recognize same-sex partnerships, and although Duterte signaled openness to marriage equality in early 2016 while campaigning for the presidency and his legislative allies promised to support same-sex marriage legislation, he appeared to reverse course and express opposition to marriage equality in a speech in early 2017. [12] Moreover, HIV transmission rates have soared in recent years among men who have sex with men (MSM) and transgender women, due to a combination of stigma, a lack of comprehensive sexuality education, barriers to obtaining condoms, and laws that prevent children under age 18 from purchasing condoms or accessing HIV testing without parental consent. [13]

Many of the efforts to advance LGBT rights have met with resistance from the Catholic Church, which has been an influential political force on matters of sex and sexuality. While the CBCP rejects discrimination against LGBT people in principle, it has frequently opposed efforts to prohibit that discrimination in practice. In 2017, for example, the Church sought amendments to pending anti-discrimination legislation that would prohibit same-sex marriage and allow religious objectors to opt out of recognizing LGBT rights. [14] It has also resisted efforts to promote sexuality education and safer sex in schools. [15]

The Church vocally opposes divorce, euthanasia, abortion, total population control, and homosexual marriage—which it groups under the acronym “DEATH”—and rejects recognition of LGBT rights with particular fervor when it is concerned those rights might eventually open the door to same-sex unions. [16] Beyond its influence in law and policy, the Church has shaped attitudes toward homosexuality and transgender identities throughout the country; citing religious doctrine, teachers, counselors, and other authority figures often impress upon students that it is immoral or unnatural to be LGBT.

In spite of this opposition, activists’ lengthy efforts to engage policymakers on LGBT issues have led to important protections for LGBT youth, as discussed below. But these protections have not been effectively implemented. They will need to be strengthened and expanded if they are to uphold the rights of LGBT youth in schools.

Existing Protections for LGBT Youth and Their Limitations

Child protection policy.

In 2012, DepEd enacted a Child Protection Policy, which it describes as a “zero tolerance policy for any act of child abuse, exploitation, violence, discrimination, bullying and other forms of abuse.” [17] Among the acts prohibited by the policy are all forms of bullying and discrimination in schools, including on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. [18]

The policy requires all public and private schools to establish a “child protection committee,” which is to draft a school child protection policy to be reviewed every three years; develop programs to protect students and systems to identify, monitor, and refer cases of abuse; and coordinate with parents and government agencies. [19] The Child Protection Policy also details a clear protocol for handling bullying incidents and dictates that investigation by school personnel and reporting by the school head or schools division superintendent should be swift. [20]

As advocates have pointed out, however, monitoring and implementation of the Child Protection Policy is uneven. One analysis notes that “[u]nfortunately, no monitoring is done on its implementation and hence whether it is helping LGBT children in schools.” [21] A collective of LGBT organizations in early 2017 concluded “such mechanisms did not deter the prevalence of violence [LGBT] children experience.” [22] In interviews with Human Rights Watch, advocates and school personnel noted that many child protection committees are not trained to recognize or deal with LGBT issues, and overlook policies and practices, discussed below, that overtly discriminate against LGBT youth. [23]

The Anti-Bullying Law

In 2013, the Philippine Congress passed the Anti-Bullying Law of 2013, which instructs elementary and secondary schools to “adopt policies to address the existence of bullying in their respective institutions.” [24] At a minimum, these policies are supposed to prohibit bullying on or near school grounds, bullying and cyberbullying off school grounds that interferes with a student’s schooling, and retaliation against those who report bullying. The policies should also identify how bullying will be punished, establish procedures for reporting and redressing bullying, enable students to report bullying anonymously, educate students, parents, and guardians about bullying and the school’s policies to prevent and address it, and make a public record of statistics on bullying in the school. [25]

The Anti-Bullying Law does not specify classes of students at heightened risk for bullying. The implementing rules and regulations for the law, however, explain that the term “bullying” includes “gender-based bullying,” which “refers to any act that humiliates or excludes a person on the basis of perceived or actual sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI).” [26] With the promulgation of these implementing rules and regulations, the Philippines became the first country in the region to specifically refer to bullying on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in its laws. [27]

The Anti-Bullying Law does not shield against all types of bullying, however. It does not account for instances where teachers bully LGBT youth. [28] As described in this report, many students and administrators are unaware of school bullying policies. Further, many students told Human Rights Watch that they did not feel comfortable reporting bullying, or did not know how to report bullying or what the consequences would be for themselves or the perpetrator. The datasets that DepEd releases regarding reported incidents do not disaggregate bullying on the basis of SOGI, so there is no available data to identify when such bullying occurs or what steps might be effective in preventing it. [29]

As with the Child Protection Policy, the implementation and monitoring of the Anti-Bullying Law has proven difficult. A United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) report observed that only 38 percent of schools submitted child protection or anti-bullying policies in 2013, and the “low rate of submission has been attributed to a low level of awareness of requirements of the Act and weak monitoring of compliance.” [30]

Comprehensive Sexuality Education

LGBT rights activists in the Philippines have long called for comprehensive sexuality education in schools. In 2012, Congress passed the Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Law, which provides that “[t]he State shall provide age- and development-appropriate reproductive health education to adolescents which shall be taught by adequately trained teachers.” [31] The law and its implementing rules and regulations require public schools to use the DepEd curriculum and allow private schools to use the curriculum or submit their own curriculum for approval from DepEd, promoting a uniform baseline of information in both private and public schools. [32] In response to lengthy delays, President Duterte issued an executive order in January 2017 requiring agencies to implement the law; in part, the order instructs DepEd to “implement a gender-sensitive and rights-based comprehensive sexuality education (CSE) in the school curriculum.” [33]

DepEd has previously incorporated some sexuality education materials into school curricula, but implementation is uneven. The sexuality education curriculum has not yet incorporated the recommendations developed by experts, teachers, parents, students, and other stakeholders, nor has it been accompanied to date by training to ensure that it is taught correctly and effectively. [34] At the time of writing, there were no sexuality education modules targeted at LGBT youth. [35]

Effects of Bullying and Discrimination

As DepEd and the Congress recognized with their initial efforts to address bullying in schools, exclusion and marginalization can exact a damaging toll on the rights and well-being of LGBT youth. In addition to the documentation contained in this report, data collected by the Philippine government, academics, and civil society organizations illustrate how bullying and harassment, discrimination, and a lack of access to information and resources are adversely affecting LGBT youth across the Philippines.

In the Philippines, as elsewhere, violence and discrimination place LGBT youth at heightened risk of adverse physical and mental health outcomes, including depression, anxiety, substance use, and suicide. [36] As the Psychological Association of the Philippines has noted, “LGBT Filipinos often confront social pressures to hide, suppress or even attempt to change their identities and expressions as conditions for their social acceptance and enjoyment of rights. Although many LGBTs learn to cope with this social stigma, these experiences can cause serious psychological distress, including immediate consequences such as fear, sadness, alienation, anger and internalized stigma.” [37] This has been borne out in small-scale empirical studies on LGBT youth and mental health in schools. One such study found that LGBT high schoolers were preoccupied with stigma, violence, bullying, discrimination in school, and anxiety over their future career prospects. [38] Nor do these problems end upon graduation from high school; another study determined that “LGBT college students exhibited extremely underdeveloped emotional and social capacity because they continue to experience stigma, prejudice and discrimination in the Philippine society that served as specific stressors that have an impact on their emotional and social intelligent behaviors.” [39]

On a broader scale, the increased risk of suicidal thoughts and attempts for LGBT youth is evident in nationally representative data. The results of the Young Adult Fertility and Sexuality Survey 3, for example, indicate that 16 percent of young gay and bisexual men in the Philippines had contemplated suicide, while only 8 percent of young heterosexual men had done so. [40] Young gay and bisexual men were also more likely to attempt suicide, with 39 percent of those who had contemplated suicide actually attempting suicide, compared to 26 percent of their heterosexual peers. [41] A similar trend was evident for young lesbian and bisexual women; 27 percent of young lesbian and bisexual women contemplated suicide compared to 18 percent of young heterosexual women, [42] and of those who considered suicide, 6.6 percent of lesbian and bisexual women made suicide attempts compared to only 3.9 percent of their heterosexual peers. [43] GALANG, a Philippine nongovernmental organization that works with lesbian and bisexual women and transgender people, found even higher rates among their constituencies. In a survey conducted in 2015, researchers from GALANG found that 18 percent of LBT respondents, who were almost all between the ages of 18 and 29, had attempted suicide. [44]

II. Bullying and Harassment

Whether it takes physical, verbal, or sexualized forms, in person or on social media, bullying endangers the safety, health, and education of LGBT youth. [45] Studies in the Philippines and elsewhere have found that, among young LGBT people, “low self-esteem and poor self-acceptance, combined with discrimination was also linked to destructive coping behaviours such as substance use or unprotected sex due to anxiety, isolation and depression.” [46] Benjie A., a 20-year-old gay man in Manila who was bullied throughout his education, said, “I was depressed, I was bullied, I didn’t know my sexuality, I felt unloved, and I felt alone all the time. And I had friends, but I still felt so lonely. I was listing ways to die.” [47]

When schools are unwelcoming, students may skip classes or drop out of school entirely. Felix P., a 22-year-old gay high school student in Legazpi, said, “I’ve skipped school because of teasing. In order to keep myself in a peaceful place, I tend not to go to school. Instead, I go to the mall or a friend’s house. I just get tired of the discrimination at school.” [48] Francis C., a 19-year-old gay student from Pulilan, said, “I just felt like I was so dumb. I wanted to stay at home, I didn’t want to go to school. And I would stay at home. Once I stayed at home for two weeks.” [49]

In many instances, the repercussions of bullying are long-lasting. Geoff Morgado, a social worker, observed that for some students bullying “turns into depression, because they feel they don’t belong,” and he believed that many students drop out because “[t]hey feel they don’t have a support group and feel isolated.” [50] Students who skip class, forgo educational opportunities, or drop out of school may experience the effects of these decisions throughout their lifespan. As a UNESCO report on school bullying notes, “[e]xclusion and stigma in education can also have life-long impacts on employment options, economic earning potential, and access to benefits and social protection.” [51]

Physical Bullying

In interviews with Human Rights Watch, students described physical bullying that took various forms, including punching, hitting, and shoving. Most of the students who described physical bullying to Human Rights Watch were gay and bisexual boys or transgender girls. These incidents persisted even after the passage of the Anti-Bullying Law. Carlos M., a 19-year-old gay student from Olongapo City, said: “When I was in high school, they’d push me, punch me. When I’d get out of school, they’d follow me [and] push me, call me ‘gay,’ ‘faggot,’ things like that.” [52] Felix P., a 22-year-old gay high school student in Legazpi, said, “People will throw books and notebooks at me, crumpled paper, chalk, erasers, and harder things, like a piece of wood.” [53] Benjie A., a 20-year-old gay man in Manila, said that once a classmate pushed him down the stairs at his high school, and added he still avoided his assailant as an adult for fear of physical violence. [54]

As detailed below, very few of the students interviewed reported bullying to teachers, either because they felt that reporting would not resolve the bullying or because they feared that reporting would lead to retaliation by other students and make the situation worse. In some instances, teachers also participated in harassment. Such behavior is not only discriminatory toward students of different sexual orientations and gender identities, but deters students from turning to teachers and administrators for help when they are bullied or harassed by their peers.

Sexual Assault and Harassment

For many LGBT students, bullying is often sexual in nature. Eric Manalastas, a professor of psychology at the University of the Philippines who has studied LGBT youth issues, observed “a theme of being highly sexualized and sexually harassed, especially for the gender non-conforming male students.” [55] Geoff Morgado, a social worker, described working with LGBT youth who told him that other students “grab the hand, or arm lock the child, or they force them into doggy style position. ‘This is what you want, right, this is what you want?’” [56] In interviews with Human Rights Watch, LGBT students described similar patterns of harassment and sexual assault in schools.

Gabby W., a 16-year-old transgender girl at a school in Bayombong, described a series of incidents that she experienced, including other students attempting to strip off her clothes in public, being forced into a restroom and sexually assaulted, and—on a separate occasion—being locked in a cubicle in a men’s restroom and sexually assaulted. [57]

Several gay or bisexual boys and transgender girls told Human Rights Watch that their fellow students had subjected them to simulated sexual activity or mock rape. Ruby S., a 16-year-old transgender girl who had attended high school in Batangas, described “[s]tudents acting like they were raping me, and then my friends saying, oh you enjoyed it, he’s cute. One of my classmates even said that LGBT people are lustful in nature, so it’s because you’re a flirt.” [58]

Gabriel K., a 19-year-old gay student who attended high school in Manila, similarly noted his classmates would “grab my hands, and they’d touch them to their private parts, and they’ll say to me that’s what gay is, that’s it.” [59] Jerome B., a 19-year-old gay man from Cebu City, recalled: “The worst thing, physically speaking, is they would—ironically, they hate gays, but they would dry hump me.… It was like rape to me. I felt violated.” [60]

Other LGBT students recounted slurs and stereotypes that were highly sexualized—for example, being catcalled in school or being labeled as sex workers. Sean B., a 17-year-old gay student in Bayombong, recalled how other students would shout “50 pesos, 50 pesos!” as he walked past, because “[t]hey think that we’re prostitutes.” [61] Gabby W., a 16-year-old transgender girl at the same school, said: “I feel bad about it—it’s so embarrassing. You’re walking around hundreds of people, and they shout that… and that shapes the perception of other people about us, that yelling by other people.” [62] Melvin O., a 22-year-old bisexual man from Malolos, recalled how in high school “people, especially the guys, would just sexually harass you, like you’re gay, you want my dick, stuff like that.” [63]

Rhye Gentoleo, a member of the Quezon City Pride Council, a city commission designed to enforce LGBT rights protections, observed that LGBT youth often face considerable pressure from heterosexual, cisgender peers to be sexually active because they are LGBT: “And that’s how the LGBT kids are being bullied as well. ‘Oh, you’re gay, can you satisfy me?’ They’re being challenged, how far can you go as a gay, how far can you go as a lesbian. And they have different ways of coping—some are hiding, but a lot of them are taking the challenge, being sexually active, without thinking of the consequences.” [64] As discussed below, the sexualization of LGBT youth is exacerbated by the absence of LGBT-inclusive sexuality education, which leaves many youth ill-equipped to protect themselves and their sexual health.

Verbal Harassment

The most common form of bullying that LGBT students reported in interviews with Human Rights Watch was verbal harassment. This included chants of “ bakla , bakla ,” “ bayot , bayot ,” “tomboy,” or “ tibo ,” using local terms for gay, lesbian, or transgender students in a mocking fashion. [65]

Daniel R., an 18-year-old gay student in Bacacay, said “People will say gay—they’ll say ‘gay, gay,’ repeating it, and insulting us.” [66] Ernesto N., a gay teacher in Cebu City, observed, “Here in the Philippines, being called bayot , it’s discrimination. It’s being told you’re nothing, you’re lower than dirt. That you’re a sinner, that you should go to Hell.” [67]

Many students described being labeled as sinners or aberrations. Leon S., a 19-year-old gay student from Malolos, said that “[s]tudents would say that homosexuality is a sin.” [68] Marco L., a 17-year-old gay student in Bacacay, said that “[p]eople say ipako sa krus , that you should be crucified.” [69] Gabriel K., a 19-year-old gay student who attended high school in Manila, said people told gay students “that you have to be crucified because you’re a sinner.” [70]

Anthony T., a gay student at a high school in Cebu City, said: “Some of my classmates who are religious say, ‘Why are you gay? It’s a sin. Only men and women are in the Bible.’ And I say, ‘I don’t want to be like this, but it’s what I’m feeling right now.’ Even if I try, I can’t change it. And if they ask why I am a gay and why do I like gays, I say, ‘it’s how I feel, I’ve tried, and I can’t be a man.’” [71]

Others described how they were treated as though they were diseased or contagious. Felix P., a 22-year-old gay high school student in Legazpi, noted: “Here, they call us ‘carriers’—there’s a stereotype that gays are responsible for HIV.” [72] Benjie A., a 20-year-old gay man in Manila, recalled a classmate telling him “don’t come near me because you’ll make me gay.” [73]

Some students noted verbal harassment that was predicated on the idea that their sexual orientation or gender identity was a choice. Analyn V., a 17-year-old bisexual girl in Mandaue City, observed, “It is inevitable that they’ll judge—like, you should date a real man instead of a lesbian because your beauty is wasted.” [74] Dalisay N., a 20-year-old panromantic woman who had attended high school in Manila, said: “When I was walking with my girlfriend, [other students] would tease us—they would say things like ‘it’s better if you have a boyfriend,’ or they would shout things like ‘you don’t even have a penis.’” [75]

The high levels of verbal harassment that LGBT youth faced in schools had repercussions for their experiences in schools. Teasing prompted some students to remain closeted, particularly in the absence of other positive resources to counteract negative messaging. Jerome B., a 19-year-old gay man from Cebu City, remarked, “For the majority of my life, I was in the closet. It’s really hard for me to express what I feel. In my school, being gay is really—it’s really the worst thing you could be. You’ll be treated like shit…. So being gay was a curse, I thought for a long time.” [76]

Some students altered their behavior or personality in an attempt to avoid disapproval from classmates. Patrick G., a 19-year-old gay man who had attended high school in Cainta, said:

They were teasing me for being effeminate. I developed this concept of how a man should walk, how a man should talk. It became—maybe because of them calling me malamya [effeminate], I became the person that I’m not. I was forced to be masculine, just for them to stop teasing me. [77]

Patrick’s experience is not unique. As one elementary school counselor observed, youth are “quite intimidated that kids will call them gay—even in Grade Six, you can tell that they don’t want to be called gay or lesbian.” [78] When verbal harassment became unbearable, some students removed themselves from the school environment entirely. Ella M., a 23-year-old transgender woman who had attended high school in Manila, noted that “[v]erbal bullying was why I transferred.” [79]

In addition to verbal harassment by peers, many LGBT students described verbal harassment and slurs from teachers and administrators. Patrick G., a 19-year-old gay man, said that at his high school in Cainta, “[s]ometimes teachers would join in with ‘ bakla , bakla .’” [80] Jerome B., a 19-year-old gay man from Cebu City, said that “it really feels bad, because the only figure you can count on is your teacher, and they’re joining in the fun, so who should I tell about my problems?” [81]

Often, disapproval from teachers was expressed in overtly religious terms. Wes L., an 18-year-old gay student at a high school in Bacacay, said, “My teacher in school told me that people are created by God, and God created man and woman. They say that gays are the black sheep of the family, and sinners.” [82] Danica J., a 19-year-old lesbian woman who had attended a high school in Cainta, described how a teacher “told me not to be lesbian anymore, and then he prayed over my head. He prayed for me. There were no supportive teachers at the school.” [83]

In some cases, disapproval from teachers was voiced in front of other students, reinforcing the idea that LGBT youth are wrong or immoral. Gabriel K., a 19-year-old gay student who attended high school in Manila, recalled how a teacher brought him before his peers and “compared me to the others—that being gay is not welcome into heaven, and made an example in front of the whole class.” [84] Benjie A., a 20-year-old gay man in Manila, recalled how a teacher in elementary school called him and two other effeminate students in front of her biology class to tell the students:

There’s no such thing as gays and lesbians. There’s man and woman, and marriage is only between a man and a woman.” And I was only turning 12—I hadn’t hit puberty at the time, and you’re telling me not to be gay!? How could I even tell? And everyone was looking at me—I was like, okay, teacher, I respect your religion, but come on, I’ve been bullied for five years. Haven’t I had enough? [85]

Cyberbullying

As students interact with their peers on social media and in other virtual spaces, cyberbullying has increasingly impacted LGBT youth in schools. LGBT students described anti-LGBT comments and slurs as well as rapidly spreading rumors facilitated by social media.

Leon S., a 19-year-old gay student from Malolos, said: “They would post things online, which is a far easier thing to do than say it personally.... I would post something, and they would comment about my sexual orientation. It was the usual, bakla , bading .” [86] Marisol D., a 21-year-old transgender woman, similarly noted, “Some of my friends would put comments like bakla , bakla on my posts. You just ignore it… [b]ecause if they see that you’re being affected they’ll bully you more.” [87] Carlos M., a 19-year-old gay student from Olongapo City, said, “My classmates would post stuff online—memes against LGBT, Satan saying ‘I’m waiting for you here.’” [88]

Jack M., an 18-year-old gay high school student in Bayombong, was a victim of rumors spread through social media: “They’ll make up stories. People will tell others [online] that I had sex with a person, even if it’s not true.” [89]

Cyberbullying also draws on stereotypes about LGBT students, and particularly transgender women and girls, with harsh disapprobation for those who were perceived to fall short of social expectations. Geoff Morgado, a social worker, observed that:

There are lots of trans women who are coming out on different platforms on social media, and they’re really bullied. Because people will base it on the looks—if you’re a trans woman, especially, they’ll say you’re not allowed to be a trans woman because you’re too ugly, or your skin is so dark. They say you have to be pretty, you have to be white, or you have to look like a woman before they decide you’re a transgender woman. [90]

Morgado added that many same-sex couples in schools must also contend with comments on social media criticizing their conformity to gender norms and the appropriateness of same-sex pairings. [91]

Intervention and Reporting

Human Rights Watch heard repeatedly that schools fail to instruct students about what bullying entails, how to report incidents when they occur, and what the repercussions will be. As a result, many schools convey tacit acceptance to perpetrators and leave victims unaware of whether or how they can seek help.

Both the Child Protection Policy and Anti-Bullying Law require that schools develop and convey policies regarding bullying and harassment. Nonetheless, many students interviewed by Human Rights Watch indicated they were unaware of the policies in place. Danica J., a 19-year-old lesbian woman who had attended high school in Cainta, said, “We didn’t get any information about bullying as high school students.” [92] Others said they had received some instruction on bullying, but it was incomplete or did not address LGBT issues. Leon S., a 19-year-old gay student from Malolos, said “[t]he school did anti-bullying seminars, but it didn’t really address bullying about your sexual identity—the seminar is more general in scope.” [93]

When students do not know how to report bullying and harassment or do not believe that reporting would be effective, they are unlikely to bring incidents to the attention of teachers and administrators. Jerome B., a 19-year-old gay man from Cebu City, said:

I would not tell the teacher. I was too ashamed. Because if I would tell the teacher, they would say, oh, you’re such a gay person, you have such weak feelings, you’re such a tattle tale. So I would just keep it to myself and endured the harassment for a long time, until I graduated. [94]

Some students attributed their reluctance to report bullying to the negative messages about LGBT people they’d received from teachers. Students identified negative messaging in various classes, including “values education,” a subject taught throughout secondary school to instill positive values and morals in Filipino youth. Although many students told Human Rights Watch that their values education courses were largely secular and focused on topics like respect and responsibility, others described overtly religious lessons that disparaged LGBT people. Dalisay N., a 20-year-old panromantic woman who had attended high school in Manila, remarked: “There’s a lot of teasing and bullying, but we don’t talk about it with teachers or counselors. I think that’s because of what they’re trying to teach us, in values education, things like that.” [95]

Interviews with LGBT students indicate that many teachers fail to intervene when they witness bullying or harassment occurring or it is brought to their attention, even since passage of the Anti-Bullying Law, which in turn discourages students from reporting cases of bullying. Analyn V., a 17-year-old bisexual girl in Mandaue City, said, “Teachers don’t step in. They think it’s a joke. But some jokes are below the belt. We conceal being hurt because maybe they think it’s overreacting.” [96] “The teachers don’t say anything or get mad —if they hear people saying bakla , they just smile or laugh,” said Felix P., a 22-year-old gay high school student in Legazpi. “Teachers might ask the students to stop, but they don’t punish them. And as soon as they leave, the bullying happens again.” [97]

In some instances, teachers and administrators may not have intervened because they had not received proper training or were unsure of their responsibilities. In one interview, a high-level administrator at a high school in Mandaue City remarked that she had never heard of the Anti-Bullying Law. [98] In another interview, a DepEd trainer and educator erroneously stated that the law did not cover LGBT students. [99] According to Rowena Legaspi of the Children’s Legal Rights and Development Center, uncertainty about existing protections is due in part to the tendency for school administrators to simply adopt policy templates from DepEd without tailoring them to the school environment, undergoing training, or fully understanding what is being implemented. [100]

As a coalition of Philippine organizations has noted, in many instances, “[b]ullying and other forms of violence within the schools or education settings is steered by institutional policies,” for example, “through gender-insensitive curricula, SOGI-insensitive school policies (e.g. required haircuts and dress codes), and [a] culture of bullying.” [101] As evidenced in the following sections, the many forms of exclusion and marginalization that LGBT youth experience in Philippine schools can reinforce one another. In schools where LGBT youth lack information and resources, for example, they may struggle more deeply with their sexual orientation or gender identity or be unsure where to turn for help. In schools where policies discriminate against LGBT youth, they may be placed in situations where bullying by peers is likely to occur and may feel administrators are unlikely to help them.

III. Creating a Hostile Environment

In addition to bullying and harassment, LGBT students encounter various forms of discrimination that make educational environments hostile or unwelcoming. To ensure that all youth feel safe and included in schools, school administrators should examine policies and practices that punish LGBT students for relationships that are considered acceptable for their heterosexual peers, restrict gender expression and access to facilities, and stereotype LGBT youth in a discriminatory manner.

Discrimination takes a toll on LGBT students’ mental health and ability to learn. Some students who encountered discrimination in schools reported that they struggled with depression and anxiety. [102] Others told Human Rights Watch that discrimination made it difficult to concentrate on the material or participate in class, [103] or caused them to skip classes, take a leave of absence, or drop out entirely. [104]

Both the Philippine Constitution and the Philippines’ international treaty obligations recognize a right to education. The UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has emphasized that the right to education, like other rights, must not be limited on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. [105] For educational environments to effectively serve all youth, they must treat LGBT youth the same as they treat their non-LGBT peers.

School Enforcement of Stereotyped Gender Norms

Uniforms and hair length restrictions.

It is common practice for secondary schools in the Philippines to require students to wear uniforms. Under these policies, the attire is gender-specific and the two options, male or female, are typically imposed upon students according to the sex they were assigned at birth.

In addition to clothing, many secondary schools have strict hair-length restrictions for their students, particularly for boys. Almost all interviewees reported that boys could not grow out their hair past ear-length or dye their hair at their schools, and many also noted that girls were prohibited from wearing their hair shorter than a permissible length.

Students whose gender expression differed from the norms associated with their sex assigned at birth told Human Rights Watch how these restrictions impeded their education. Students reported that being forced to dress or present themselves in a manner that was inconsistent with their gender expression made them unhappy [106] and uncomfortable, [107] lessened their confidence, [108] and impaired their concentration. [109] As Del M., a 14-year-old lesbian student who was allowed to wear the boys’ uniform, remarked, “It’s easier for me to learn wearing the boys’ uniform.” [110]

At many of these schools, students who did not conform to the uniform and hair-length requirements faced disciplinary action. Common punishments included being sent to the guidance or discipline offices and mandatory community service. Ella M., a 23-year-old transgender woman who had attended high school in Manila, described being punished solely on this basis of her general gender presentation. She said that her school’s handbook punished an “act of effeminacy,” not further defined, with “a conduct grade of 75, which basically means you did something really really bad. I might as well have cheated.” [111]

For many transgender or gender non-conforming students, the strict uniform and hair-length requirements were sources of intense anxiety and humiliation, and in some cases led to extended school absences and even leaving schooling entirely. [112]

Marisol D., a 21-year-old transgender woman, said:

When I was in high school, there was a teacher who always went around and if you had long hair, she would call you up to the front of the class and cut your hair in front of the students. That happened to me many times. It made me feel terrible. I cried because I saw my classmates watching me getting my hair cut. [113]

Other interviewees reported similar incidents in which teachers or prefects would publicly call out students in violation of the restrictions and forcibly cut their hair in front of the class.

Jerome B., a 19-year-old gay man, said that in his high school in Cebu City:

It applies for all boys. If [your hair] touches the ear and you don’t cut it, the school will cut it for you, and they do it in front of your classmates. The Student Affairs Officer who enforces the rules, once a month he would go to each classroom and knock, and say, “All those with long hair go outside,” and he would go one by one with these large, rusty scissors like the kind you see in horror movies, and they’d cut our hair in front of everybody…. I think on purpose, he’d cut it very badly. [114]

In most cases, teachers and administrators provided little to no explanation for the hair-length requirements when students asked about the policies at their respective schools. Felix P., a 22-year-old gay high school student in Legazpi, told Human Rights Watch:

Before, I used to have long hair. I entered the school grounds, but the school administrator asked me to cut [my] hair or else I couldn’t go in. So I was forced to cut my hair and wear the male uniform.… There’s no explanation about cutting the hair. I’ve asked them if having short or long hair will affect my performance as a student, and the administrators say, “No, you just have to cut your hair, you’re a boy.” [115]

As Lyn C., a 19-year-old transgender woman in Manila, recounted, gendered clothing requirements also extended to school-sponsored events such as prom nights:

For our prom night, I asked our principal if I could wear a gown, but he didn’t allow it. Back in high school I didn’t have long hair or makeup, so he said, “What would you look like as a boy wearing a gown? It’s ridiculous!” I felt really discriminated against. I had a friend who was also transgender and we were both begging the administration but they wouldn’t allow it. They told us that we would be an embarrassment to the school, that people would laugh at us at prom, and that “You’re guys and you need to wear guys’ clothes.” [116]

In some instances, students were able to request a full switch of the uniforms according to their gender identity. However, agreements to alter uniform requirements were usually not the result of consistently applied policies designed to respect students’ right to free expression of their gender identity, but rather of the compassion of a specific school administrator or principal. In one of the few such cases Human Rights Watch documented, a lesbian student was permitted to wear the boys' uniform primarily because the school’s principal was himself openly gay and supportive of the petition. [117]

Even when students are formally permitted to wear the uniforms of their choice, however, school personnel at times harass or humiliate them in practice. Gabby W., a 16-year-old transgender girl in high school in Bayombong, told Human Rights Watch:

They’re questioning us about our makeup and dress… not only the students, but the teachers too. It’s so disrespectful. We enter the gate and the security guard will say, “Why is your hair so long, are you a girl?” And it really hurts our feelings. [118]

Access to Facilities

For students who are transgender or identify as a sex other than their sex assigned at birth, rigid gender restrictions can be stressful and make learning difficult. One of the areas where gender restrictions arose most often for LGBT interviewees was in access to toilet facilities, known in the Philippines as “comfort rooms” (CRs). Most interviewees said that their schools required students to use CRs that aligned with their sex assigned at birth, regardless of how they identified or where they were most comfortable. Some said that both female and male CRs posed safety risks or made them uncomfortable, but that all-gender restrooms were scarce.

Requiring students to use restrooms that did not match their gender identity or expression put them at risk of bullying and harassment. Gabby W., a 16-year-old transgender girl in Bayombong, said that “boys peep on us when we use the boy’s restroom,” and “they say we’re trying to have sex with them, things like that.” [127] Reyna L., a 24-year-old transgender woman, agreed: “Boys or male persons are always vigilant when it comes to gays and transgenders. Any time they see us going in the CR, they sometimes look at you like I’m going to do something, with malice, or look at us like a maniac.” [128] Because of this, Gabby said, “Sometimes you don’t have a choice but to go home and use your own restroom.” [129]

Some schools punish students for using the CRs where they felt comfortable. Ruby S., a 16-year-old transgender girl who attended high school in Batangas, said:

I was called by the administration when I used the CR for the girls. They said you’re not allowed to use it just because you feel like you’re a girl. They used that as a black mark on my campaign for student council. They said, even though he wants to be student council president, he doesn’t follow the rules. [130]

Even students who were not formally punished described being humiliated by faculty and staff policing gendered spaces. Alon B., a gay teacher in Cebu City, said that the administration at the school where he taught had posted “a printed sign that says only biological females are able to be in this bathroom.” [131]

At least one secondary school has created all-gender CRs that any person can use regardless of their gender identity. [132] But while some students may feel more comfortable using all-gender CRs, others prefer to use the same CRs that everybody else uses. Reyna L., a 24-year-old transgender woman, said, “I’d like to use the female comfort room, and be treated as a normal person…. If I can’t, I’d rather not use it at all.” [133] Allowing students to use CRs consistent with their gender identity can be a simple and uncontroversial step that makes a positive difference for transgender youth. Ella M., a 23-year-old transgender woman from Manila, noted that when she transferred to a new high school:

I was able to use the girls’ bathroom, freely, since most of the peers were really supportive. And there hasn’t been any incidents of, like, adverse reactions to some guys going into the girls’ bathroom. My teacher knew I was doing it—he just warned me that some girls might get offended. But nobody complained. [134]

Gender Classifications

Even when students identify as transgender, some teachers and administrators insist on treating them as their sex assigned at birth. David O., a high school teacher in Mandaue City, recounted a story in which a transgender boy and his parent wanted the school to socially recognize him as a boy, but another teacher insisted that the student was female and should be treated as a girl. [138]

Imposing strictly gendered activities and requiring students to participate according to their sex assigned at birth can constitute discrimination and impair the right to education. Human Rights Watch found that some schools require boys to take physical education classes and girls to take arts classes, for example, which reinforces stereotypes and deprives boys who want to pursue art and girls who want to pursue sports of educational opportunities. [139] It can also be profoundly stigmatizing and uncomfortable for students. As Felix P., a 22-year-old gay high school student in Legazpi, said: “During flag ceremony, students used to line themselves up by male or female, and I think it’s really difficult—which line should I go in? I don’t think I’m welcome in the boys’ group, and I’m not allowed to go in the women’s group.” [140]

Hostility Toward Same-Sex Relationships

Many schools in the Philippines have policies restricting public displays of affection among students, and outline those policies in student handbooks or codes of conduct. Yet LGBT students reported that their relationships were policed more carefully or punished more harshly than their non-LGBT peers. In particular, young lesbian and bisexual women and transgender men who attended exclusive schools—those that are only open to one sex—reported that their friendships and relationships were closely scrutinized and policed by school staff.

Juan N., a 22-year-old transgender man who had attended high school in Manila, said:

When I was in high school, I had a girlfriend, but we were really careful about it, because once it becomes known—especially to admins, who are mostly nuns, and when your teachers know you’re in a relationship with another woman, they try to correct you, they would reprimand you, give you violations based on what you’ve done. [141]

Angelica R., a 22-year-old bisexual woman who had attended high school in Manila, said that more masculine girls were especially targeted to keep them from becoming close with other girls:

If someone is really butch, our professors are always watching us. They’re talking among themselves and student council to pinpoint who was involved in same-sex relationships. There’s not much bullying among the students, but it was oppression from the administration. I remember this particular experience where one of our professors went into our class and said, did you know, girls are for boys, girls are not for girls, we know who’s involved in same-sex relationships, and if you don’t stand up, we’ll make you stand up.… So as a result, some of my butch classmates would attempt to be feminine, they would hide it, they would wear more feminine clothes. You could see they were unhappy. It’s a struggle. [142]

The same standards were not applied to heterosexual students, as teachers and administrators acknowledged. Even a gay teacher defended this double standard, citing social and religious conventions. Ernesto N., a gay teacher in Cebu City, said of same-sex couples dating in schools: “It’s just like having sex in school! Goodness! It’s really our culture.... For boys and girls it’s okay, but not for LGBT.” [143]

Pressure to Conform to Stereotypes

LGBT youth also described the pressure that teachers and administrators imposed on them to act in a stereotypical fashion.

Many of the LGBT youth interviewed by Human Rights Watch emphasized that, to the extent they were respected in school, they had earned that respect by being better students than their peers. Often, this meant that LGBT students were tasked with more work or responsibilities than other students as part of the price they paid to be accepted and respected. Eric Manalastas, a psychology professor at the University of the Philippines who has conducted research on LGBT youth issues, found that:

[G]ay students or those who are out or coded as gay [are sometimes] given extra work at school, including extracurricular work—being asked to be the MC at an event, or fixing the stage for a performance, being asked to clean up after school. Because of a stereotype that they’re reliable, or combine the best of both male and female students, a kind of androgynous thing going on. I hear that from students but also teachers—teachers who say, I love my gay students, they’re so helpful, I ask them to stay after school. They’re tasked with leadership roles. [144]

In a similar vein, one university instructor told Human Rights Watch that “as faculty members, we’re often delegating responsibilities to members of the LGBT community because we know they’ll do it well.” [145] Rodrigo S., a gay high school teacher in Dipolog City, observed: “I guess there are pressures for gay children—and I see this—to do really well in class, I guess, because that kind of saves you from being bullied. Like, you ought to get somewhere so people won’t make fun. A lot of my students wanted to excel in whatever they were doing, being artistic, because they wanted to be accepted. A lot of my gay students were at the top of the class.” [146]

In interviews, it appeared that many LGBT students had internalized the message that their acceptance as LGBT was conditional on being dutiful, talented members of the school community. Virgil D., a 20-year-old gay man in high school in Bacacay, said, “I think the gays should dress properly and be responsible. And then they’ll be treated well.” [147] Mary B., an 18-year-old transgender woman in a high school in Manila, said:

For us to be better accepted, we’re taking proactive measures to be accepted into the community. We’re setting good examples. We engage in extracurricular activities, we organize events for the school, we stop bullying when we see it, we promote child protection. We become model citizens, model students, and it improves our stature. [148]

Manalastas found that the demand to be “respectable” put a heavy burden on LGBT students who did not conform: “It may be that gay students are warmly received, generally speaking, but if you’re characterized as one of the indecent ones—perceived as very sexual, very loud, very gender non-conforming or outré, it’s different.” He added that LGBT people from lower socioeconomic strata often face double discrimination, as exemplified by the common insult baklang kalye —“you’re bakla and also you come from the streets, you don’t have a proper house, you’re poor.” [149]

Some students were keenly aware of these conditions and expressed frustration with them, voicing a desire to be treated with the same inherent respect as their non-LGBT classmates. Felix P., a 22-year-old gay high school student in Legazpi, said:

Sometimes teachers say things like you have to respect gays and lesbians because they’re the breadwinners for their family, they’re reliable, they’re good at makeup, costume making, talent…. I’m proud of being gay—my teacher says something good about being gay, but why do I have to earn that respect? It’s not 100 percent good. Some of my gay classmates don’t have those talents, and how does that make them feel? [150]

Jerome B., a 19-year-old gay man from Cebu City, described another stereotype that he found oppressive: the idea that gay males should be entertainers, jokers, and talented performers. He said classmates and teachers:

…put so much pressure on me that because I’m gay, I should be comedic, I should be funny all the time, I should joke—and I’m not that kind of person, to crack jokes and sing and entertain. In our entertainment industry, gays are usually presented as comic relief. And that’s okay at some point, but that’s it? There’s more to being gay than being funny and entertainers. And because of that, usually our job opportunities are being limited to being a hairdresser, working at a salon, being a comedian. And I’d like to be a researcher or a lawyer. We’re diverse people, like straight people. [151]

When students and teachers reinforce these stereotypes, they put pressure on those who do not fit preconceived notions of being gay and constrain their education and employment options. In an interview with Human Rights Watch, a local government official who had organized a job training program for LGBT people noted that the program specifically trained LGBT people to be clowns and hosts for pageants and other events. [152]

Young lesbian women encounter different stereotypes. Dalisay N., a 20-year-old panromantic woman who had attended high school in Manila, observed that lesbian girls were particularly disadvantaged by teachers because “the lesbian community, they don’t see us like that, like the gays, the creative ones who do something artsy, that gay people are at the top of the list.” [153] Instead, according to Eric Manalastas, “the stereotype with lesbians is that they’re dangerous, a danger to other female students. Not in terms of being violent, but maybe as predatory. Or generally a bad influence—not good for moral development—as though they aren’t also adolescents themselves.” [154] In interviews with Human Rights Watch, young bisexual women recounted how teachers scrutinized girls they considered “butch” or masculine, and took steps to separate them from other girls to prevent them from becoming close. [155]

For youth who are transgender, pressure to “pass” according to their gender identity and, for transgender girls, to achieve high standards of physical beauty, were a serious source of stress for those who felt they lacked the ability or resources to meet the expectations of others.

These stereotypes were among the most consistent themes in interviews with LGBT youth. They illustrate how attitudes and informal practices, even when well-intentioned, can place heavy expectations on LGBT youth and undermine the notion that all youth are deserving of respect and acceptance. They underscore the importance of anti-bullying efforts, information and resources, and antidiscrimination policies that emphasize that all students, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity, have rights that must be respected in schools.

IV. Exclusion from Curricula and Resources

When LGBT students face hostility in their homes, communities, and peer groups, access to affirming information and resources is vitally important. In interviews, however, few LGBT students in the Philippines felt that their schools provided adequate access to information and resources about sexual orientation, gender identity, and being LGBT.

As scholars have noted, heterosexism—or the assumption that heterosexuality is the natural or preferable form of human sexuality—can take two different forms in educational settings: “(1) denigration, including overt discrimination, anti-gay remarks, and other forms of explicit homophobia against gay and lesbian students and teachers, or (2) denial, the presumption that gay and lesbian sexualities and identities simply do not exist and that heterosexual concerns are the only issues worth discussing.” [156] By neglecting or disparaging LGBT youth, both forms of heterosexism, alongside cisnormativity—the assumption that people’s gender identity matches the sex they were assigned at birth, sometimes accompanied by denigration of transgender identities—are harmful to the rights and well-being of LGBT students in the Philippines.

A recent analysis of issues related to sexual orientation and gender identity in the Philippines found that LGBT youth are often neglected in school environments, particularly in light of strong constitutional protections for academic freedom, which give schools considerable leeway to design curricula and resources. [157] In interviews with Human Rights Watch, LGBT students described how the absence of information and resources proved detrimental to their rights and well-being and why DepEd, lawmakers, and school administrators should embrace inclusive reforms.

School Curricula

Very few of the LGBT students interviewed by Human Rights Watch said they encountered positive portrayals of LGBT people as part of the school curriculum.

In many cases, LGBT people were simply invisible, with no acknowledgment that people are LGBT or discussion of LGBT history, literature, or other issues. One study found that, in elementary school textbooks required by DepEd:

[C]haracters that portray femininity are always women, while men always portray masculinity. There is a clear binary and strict gender attributes and roles between the two genders; and both gender are always portrayed in a ‘fixed’ stereotypical manner…. Hence, with the strict portrayal of women as feminine and continuously at home, while men [are] masculine as the breadwinner, couples, as heterosexuals, are legitimized and naturalized, leaving no room for other forms of sexuality…. These discourses do not leave any room for diverse forms of family, such as single-headed families, families with overseas contract workers, families that are cared for by young or aging people, homosexual couples, to name a few. It only legitimizes the heterosexual couple and renounc[es] other forms. [158]

Students confirmed that discussions of LGBT people in classes where LGBT issues might arise—for example, history, literature, biology, or psychology—are exceedingly rare. As Leah O., a 14-year-old bisexual girl in Marikina, said, “The teachers don’t mention LGBT.” [159] Alex R., a 17-year-old gay boy from San Miguel, similarly noted, “I didn’t hear teachers say anything about LGBT issues in class.” [160]

Interviews with teachers and administrators illustrated why LGBT issues are absent from the curriculum. Alon B., a gay teacher in Cebu City, recalled how a gay student asked a question about LGBT identities, which he answered in front of the class. Alon's department chair overheard the conversation and reprimanded him, and relieved him of his teaching load the following semester. [161] One LGBT advocate recalled asking his aunt, who was a high school principal, how LGBT issues were handled in the school: “She told me—I was surprised, she said, ‘I don’t want to touch on that subject.’ And I asked why immediately, and she said it was a sensitive issue…. [T]hey’re careful not to offend parents.” [162]

Interviews with LGBT students suggest that when LGBT issues are discussed in class, teachers frequently portray them in a negative light. Often, this was the case in values education or religion classes, which were offered in public as well as private schools but often had a strongly Catholic orientation. Juan N., a 22-year-old transgender man who had attended high school in Manila, said that in theology classes, “There would be a lecture where they’d somehow pass by the topic of homosexuality and show you, try to illustrate that in the Bible, in Christian theology, homosexuality is a sin, and if you want to be a good Christian you shouldn’t engage in those activities.” [163] Jessica L., a 22-year-old transgender woman from Pampanga province, noted how challenging this was as a student who was questioning her gender identity: “[T]eachers would say, oh God only created man and woman, and so I’m like who created me, I want to know? And who created us? So we’re the imperfections of God? It’s so hard. It’s like you’re taking the bull by the horns every day.” [164]

Ernesto N., a gay teacher in Cebu City, recalled walking down a hallway past a class being taught by a values education teacher, who “says that you should not be gay because you will go to hell. You will no longer go to heaven.” [165] One values education teacher explained why she taught students that a proposed anti-discrimination bill protecting LGBT rights was wrong:

I informed them of the SOGI bill, I told them that it will become a law soon. For some of us Christians it’s alarming, because for example two boys will be approaching a priest, and will ask them to be married. And if the priest wants to marry them, again as Christians, we have this kind of same-sex marriage, what can be next—it’s a slippery slope, there will be sexual intercourse, I don’t think that will be good. [166]

Juan N. said, “I remember even in a physics class, we had the topic of negative and positive attraction, and negative doesn’t attract, and [the teacher] said men are for women only, and never men for men or women for women. And I remember it because it came out of nowhere—we were talking about magnets!” [167] In a speech class, Ruby S., a 16-year-old transgender girl who had attended high school in Batangas, recalled delivering a presentation “about coming out, coming out of your shell, coming out as a gay man—which I was then—and I said coming out was a good thing to do, but the teacher commented, ‘I support you gay people, but if you have a relationship with a man, it’s a sin,’ the Bible says this, the Bible says that.” [168] Pablo V., an 18-year-old gay student who attended high school in San Jose, said: “In our school, we presented a play—there’s a gay character—and then our principal told me that it’s not possible for us to present because there’s a gay character in our presentation.” [169]

Without training teachers about LGBT identities and issues, stereotypes and misinformation spread unchecked. Jerome B., a 19-year-old gay man from Cebu City, recalled an instance in high school where “one teacher said that if you eat a lot of chicken, you turn gay. And she said if you would eat a lot of ramen, you turn lesbian. I wouldn’t dare question her, because she’s in charge of my grade, but deep inside I was shaking—I mean, how unbelievable. Eating chicken will turn you gay? That’s crazy. It would really help if they would undergo training. Because they’re teaching the kids wrong stuff. It’s a cycle—if they teach this, they pass it on to the next generation.” [170]

In discussions about curricular offerings, students of all sexual orientations and gender identities voiced a desire to learn about LGBT topics in school. As Isabel A., a 16-year-old heterosexual girl in Cebu City, observed: “We want to understand, even if we’re not lesbian or gay, so we can understand gays and lesbians.” [171] For LGBT students, discussing LGBT issues was particularly important. Felix P., a 22-year-old gay high school student in Legazpi, suggested that “it would be better if there was education on LGBT rights in the school, because it would be easier to respect and value individuals, regardless of whether they’re women or men—and LGBT people in school wouldn’t be stereotyped as infected with HIV.” [172]

Discussions of LGBT topics in high schools were rare, but occurred more frequently at the university level. There, professors who were open to discussing LGBT topics observed how inclusivity improved the educational environment. According to one literature professor, “If they’re out as members of the LGBTQ community, I can ask them questions about it, and they’re more engaged…. When I’m open with my students about their relationships, they tend to study better. They’re never absent. They’re more comfortable…. If the teacher is more discriminatory, they won’t be open to talking about how it affects them and what they think about it.” [173]

In order to understand their own sexuality and to make responsible choices, LGBT students, as well as other students, need access to information about sexuality that is non-judgmental and takes into account the whole range of human intimacy. In recent years, many countries have moved toward providing comprehensive sexuality education, which UNESCO describes as an “age-appropriate, culturally relevant approach to teaching about sex and relationships by providing scientifically accurate, realistic, non-judgmental information.” [174]

As part of comprehensive sexuality education, LGBT students as well as their heterosexual, cisgender peers should have access to relevant material about their development, relationships, and safer sex. Scholars in the Philippines have found that “[r]esearch on Filipino young adult sexuality has been explicit in stressing the need for a comprehensive educational framework that addresses gender and sexuality issues.” [175] One study found that gay learners “expressed dissatisfaction about sexuality education in high school, both for its heterosexist bias and its restrictive philosophy,” and desired more information about sexual identity and orientation, body image, love and friendship, HIV/AIDS, and gender roles. [176] This is more generally true across the Asia-Pacific region, where UNESCO has found that young people “want more inclusive content that address same-sex attraction and diversity.” [177]

The passage of the 2012 Reproductive Health Law, which calls for DepEd to issue a sexuality education curriculum and for schools to adopt minimum standards, created an opening for accurate and non-judgmental discussions of LGBT identities and sexuality. UNESCO, in a 2015 report, noted that “NGOs are working with experts and Department of Education officials to establish minimum standards on sexuality education that include anti-bullying standards addressing both gender-based violence and other bullying and violence on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity and expression.” [178]

However, at the time of this writing, DepEd had only recently incorporated sexuality education into school curricula, five years after the passage of the law, without adopting standards developed by a panel of experts or training teachers in sexuality education. Both the UN Population Fund and the government’s task force on the implementation of the law have noted that implementation of the law has fallen short, leaving students across the Philippines without access to comprehensive sexuality education. [179] Professionals who work with students have found that existing sexuality education modules are limited for youth of all sexual orientations and gender identities but also routinely exclude instruction about LGBT concerns. Perci Cendana, a commissioner with the National Youth Commission, explained that at present, “Young people don’t get information about safer sex, period. And young [men who have sex with men] and [transgender] kids don’t get it from the sources where they should get it.” [180] Human Rights Watch recently documented how resistance from conservative lawmakers and school administrators has stymied comprehensive sexuality education in schools in the Philippines, exacerbating rapidly rising rates of HIV transmission among MSM and transgender women. [181]

In interviews with Human Rights Watch, students who received sexuality education described receiving that education at various grade levels, with varying degrees of comprehensiveness. But across the board, they stated that their sexuality education classes either excluded any discussion of LGBT people or conveyed inaccurate and stigmatizing messages about same-sex conduct and the existence of transgender people.

While some students only discussed anatomy and reproduction in their sexuality education curriculum, others learned about sexually transmitted infections, HIV/AIDS, safer sex, and family planning. In virtually all cases, however, sexuality education was limited to discussions of heterosexual reproduction and sex. Mary B., an 18-year-old transgender woman in a high school in Manila, said, “We had classroom instruction on sexual health. They told us about sexuality—my teacher strongly believes in the Bible, and the idea that God created only men and women. They haven’t mentioned LGBT people.” [182] Efren D., an 18-year-old bisexual man who had attended high school in Quezon City, said, “we tackled the planning methods, the condoms, other contraceptives. But it’s basic. Not deeper than that. And it was all boy-girl. I’d like LGBT sexuality education, to be a little more aware, as LGBT people.” [183]

In many instances, sexuality education conveyed misinformation or disapproval about LGBT identities and relationships. Gabby W., a 16-year-old transgender girl at a high school in Bayombong, said that teachers “always say that gay is a disease, that it’s a contagious disease. Or say being gay is a sin.” [184] Bea R., a 22-year-old transgender woman at another school in the area, said that although science teachers do cover safer sex at her school, “They say that LGBT are the ones spreading HIV and chlamydia.” [185] Francis C., a 19-year-old gay student from Pulilan, was similarly told by teachers “ that there were same-sex who were doing those activities, but they would say that if two males or two female did those activities, they would become sick or ill.” [186] Jonas E., a 17-year-old gay boy in high school in Mandaue City, noted: “I get really offended when they talk about HIV. They say that gays are the main focus of HIV… I’m a bit ashamed of that, because I was once in section where I’m the only gay, and they kept pointing at me.” [187]

When comprehensive sexuality education is not provided in schools, students may not receive information about their physical and emotional development, relationships, decision making, HIV and sexually transmitted infections, safer sex, contraception, and reproductive health at all. Past research has suggested that, especially for LGBT youth, “[s]exuality is rarely discussed informatively in the home, and being gay not at all.” [188] Rodrigo S., a gay high school teacher in Dipolog City, observed that “parents avoid [sexuality] as much as possible. I don’t know if it’s actually easy for students to find a figure, someone they can ask about things like that.” [189]

With little guidance at home or in school, LGBT students turned to various sources of uncertain quality for information about sexuality. Students told Human Rights Watch that they had learned what they knew about LGBT identities, relationships, and sexual health from friends, the internet, pornography, and experience. As previous research has suggested, “[p]eers may provide very vivid information presented using shared meanings, but the adequateness of this information is, in hindsight, suspect.” [190] Students themselves doubted the information they received. Tricia C., a 14-year-old girl in Marikina, admitted, “The information we get from other people is not accurate. It’s too early for us to know what’s true.” [191] Reports that LGBT students learned about sexuality from what Jin W., a 20-year-old man who attended high school in Manila described as “live action” [192] are particularly worrying, as they illustrate how LGBT youth engage in sexual activity before they have access to information about how to keep themselves safe.

Counseling and Support

In addition to formal curricula, schools provide a variety of resources to students. Support from teachers, guidance counselors, school psychologists, and other school personnel is a valuable asset, and should be available to guide LGBT youth as well as their non-LGBT peers. According to UNESCO, “support from teachers can have a particularly positive impact on LGBT and intersex students, improving their self-esteem and contributing to less absenteeism, greater feelings of safety and belonging and better academic achievement.” [193]

Students in the Philippines have signaled a desire for faculty and staff support. As one study found, “[s]tudents want their teachers, who are in a position of influence and credibility, to dispel common misconceptions and misperceptions about gay and bisexual people.” [194] Nonetheless, few teachers or guidance counselors are trained to provide support for LGBT youth. As Rina Fulo of the Women and Gender Institute at Miriam College noted, “We do a lot of training related to gender fair education, and we see that teachers and administrators have their biases. We’re worried if they can actually follow through.” [195] Remedios Moog, a guidance counselor at the University of the East in Caloocan, similarly recalled that when she presents papers on LGBT-inclusive counseling, “there are different reactions, negative, positive, some counselors saying great job, and you see the affirmation, and other counselors, ‘No, you should not label, you should not call them lesbian, gay, bisexual,’” seeming to suggest that guidance counselors should ignore students’ sexual identities altogether. [196]

Although some counselors have created successful programs for LGBT students, such as support groups, such efforts need to have support from the school administration to ensure counselors are recognized as affirming, non-judgmental resources. [197] As one study found, “it has been the experience of gay students (or perhaps students in general) that the guidance counselor is associated with delinquent and problem students. This image of the guidance counselor may contribute to the problematization of gay identity in school settings, that being gay is something that has to be ‘dealt with’ with and by these counselors.” [198]

Interviews with LGBT youth in the Philippines underscore the urgent need for resources and support. Jerome B., a 19-year-old gay man from Cebu City, recalled that in secondary school, “I was questioning for a long time—is there something wrong with me? Am I mentally ill? I planned to talk to a psychiatrist because I thought I had a mental illness… . We had a guidance counselor. But I wouldn’t go to them, because I was too ashamed.” [199] For some students, bullying and a lack of resources led to depression and thoughts of suicide. Benjie A., a 20-year-old gay student from Manila, recounted struggling to make sense of his identity until “I thought about getting a gun from a policeman and shooting myself.” [200]

Many students declined to go to counselors for help and support, expecting that they would be hostile to LGBT youth. Patrick G., a 19-year-old gay man who had attended high school in Cainta, recalled that his high school guidance counselor would quote Bible passages and say “that God created Adam and Eve, and not Adam and Steve, things like that.” [201] As a result, Patrick said, “I didn’t really have the courage to come out of the closet, or at least accept or think I was gay…. I think it made me step back farther in the closet.” [202]

When students did seek out help, some counselors declined to discuss LGBT issues. Ella M., a 23-year-old transgender woman who had attended high school in Manila, recalled an instance when a counselor asked about her personal life. When she confided that she thought she might be attracted to a boy, the counselor told her “I’m not going to comment on that, because I don’t have any information on that.” [203]

Other LGBT students described going to counselors and facing outright hostility or condemnation. Ace F., a 24-year-old gay man who had attended high school in Manila, said that his school counselor used decades-old psychological materials:

What they taught us was DSM-3 or DSM-2—where being gay is still classified as a mental disorder. [204] That’s what they taught us. I was pretty well informed because I was a debater, so I would question them about it: it’s already outdated, it’s not the standard, it’s not considered a mental disease. But they would institutionally still say that it was a disease, a mental disorder, it’s bad. [205]

LGBT students interviewed said some counselors passed moral judgment on them. Reyna, a 24-year-old transgender woman, recalled being told to go to her high school counselor because she wore nail polish and makeup, and said “they would read some biblical passage or verses that includes, you know, Sodom and Gomorrah. They would always tell me, ‘Reyna, you will go to Hell if you don’t change.’ And I was afraid that time, because of course, who wants to go to Hell?” [206]

When guidance counselors were willing to discuss LGBT identities in an open and non-judgmental way, many LGBT students said they felt affirmed and supported. For instance, Nathan P., a 19-year-old gay man who attended a high school in Bulacan, said “I did talk to my counselors in high school, and I was thankful they’re so open minded, and helping me, when I’m so confused.” [207] For Nathan, whose friends were pressuring him to disclose his sexuality and causing him stress, having a supportive counselor was a source of comfort that ultimately helped him resolve the situation with his peers.

Student Organizations

LGBT student groups are extremely rare at the secondary school level in the Philippines. Yet at the university level, these groups have been a powerful resource for LGBT students. Since at least 1992, when UP Babaylan formed at the University of the Philippines, these groups have provided educational programming to the university community, advocated for policy changes, and offered peer support to LGBT members. [208] As a recent UNESCO study notes, these organizations can be powerful sources of information and support in school environments:

School-based and school-linked programmes providing peer support [for LGBT students] engage students in rejecting bullying, violence and other forms of discrimination. These can include student associations, youth groups, peer mentoring systems, extra-curricular or club-based activities as well as other pairing or peer networks within schools. These programmes can help to create feelings of connectedness, and respectful and supportive relationships that develop empathy, responsibility and concern for others. They can also build confidence, leadership behaviours and social skills. [209]

LGBT students have expressed a need for organizational support structures such as LGBT student groups. [210] Yet despite their many advantages and student demand, LGBT groups in Philippine secondary schools are rare. As Carlos M., a 19-year-old gay student from Olongapo City, observed: “I wish they had it when I was in high school. There were so many of us LGBT when I was in high school…. I wish they had a program to strengthen the bonds of LGBT students.” [211] Gloria Z., a 22-year-old bisexual woman from Cavite, said: "I wish we had a support group. There were other female students, lesbians, and they were forced to be straight because of our Catholic upbringing. They would discriminate [against] them, just like me. And there were so many of us trying to act straight, and we were part of the rainbow community.” [212]

In some instances reported to Human Rights Watch, school personnel have been unsupportive of LGBT groups. Sean B., a 17-year-old gay student in Bayombong, said: “I tried to start a student organization, but we don’t have enough allies with teachers. It’s all about awareness, to make other students understand what we are, to be able to reach out to them, to make them feel, we’re gays, we’re also humans, not animals or trash.” [213]

V. Philippines’ Legal Obligations to Protect LGBT Students

In recent years, the Philippines has enacted important laws and regulations that affirm the rights of LGBT learners in schools. DepEd’s Child Protection Policy, the Anti-Bullying Law, and the Reproductive Health Law—as well as anti-discrimination ordinances at the local level—reiterate the government’s commitment to ensuring that all youth are safe, healthy, and able to learn in schools.

The Philippines has also ratified core international agreements that obligate lawmakers, administrators, and teachers to protect the rights of LGBT youth, including the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). [217] The UN expert bodies that interpret these agreements have expressed concern about discrimination against LGBT students in schools, [218] prompting the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to recommend “that States establish national standards on non-discrimination in education, develop anti-bullying programmes and helplines and other services to support LGBTI youth, and to provide comprehensive, age-appropriate sexuality education.” [219]

Right to Education

The right to education is enshrined in international law, notably in the ICESCR and the CRC, both ratified by the Philippines. [220] The CRC specifies that education should be directed toward, among other objectives, “[t]he development of the child’s personality, talents and mental and physical abilities to their fullest potential,” “[t]he development of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms,” and “[t]he preparation of the child for responsible life in a free society, in the spirit of understanding, peace, tolerance, equality of sexes, and friendship among all peoples, ethnic, national and religious groups and persons of indigenous origin.” [221]

LGBT students are denied the right to education when bullying, exclusion, and discriminatory policies prevent them from participating in the classroom or attending school. LGBT students’ right to education is also curtailed when teachers and curricula do not include information that is relevant to their development or are outwardly discriminatory toward LGBT people.

To make the right to education meaningful, schools should ensure that school curricula, interactions with school personnel, and school policies are non-discriminatory and provide information to LGBT youth on the same terms as their non-LGBT peers. [222]

The right to education includes the right to comprehensive sexual education, [223] which is especially lacking for LGBT youth in the Philippines. As the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Education has explained: “The right to education includes the right to sexual education, which is both a human right in itself and an indispensable means of realizing other human rights, such as the right to health, the right to information and sexual and reproductive rights.” [224] A curriculum that only prepares students for heterosexual sex inside of marriage “normalizes, stereotypes, and promotes images that are discriminatory because they are based on heteronormativity; by denying the existence of the lesbian, gay, transsexual, transgender and bisexual population, they expose these groups to risky and discriminatory practices.” [225]

The Philippine Congress recognized the importance of sexuality education with the passage of the Reproductive Health Law, which mandates age- and development-appropriate sexuality education in schools. [226] The Philippines should take further steps to implement the law in a manner that is consistent with its treaty obligations. To ensure the right to education is respected, the Committee on the Rights of the Child has said that sexuality education provided by schools:

…should include self-awareness and knowledge about the body, including anatomical, physiological and emotional aspects, and should be accessible to all children, girls and boys. It should include content related to sexual health and well-being, such as information about body changes and maturation processes, and designed in a manner through which children are able to gain knowledge regarding reproductive health and the prevention of gender-based violence, and adopt responsible sexual behavior. [227]

This information must not only be provided to heterosexual, cisgender students. Schools must also provide LGBT students with relevant content to ensure they enjoy the same right to education without discrimination. Comprehensive sexuality education “must be free of prejudices and stereotypes that could be used to justify discrimination and violence against any group,” [228] and “must pay special attention to diversity, since everyone has the right to deal with his or her own sexuality without being discriminated against on grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity.” [229]

Violence and Bullying

Under domestic and international law, LGBT children in the Philippines have the right to be free from bullying, harassment, and violence. The Constitution of the Philippines obligates the government to defend “[t]he right of children to assistance, including… special protection from all forms of neglect, abuse, cruelty, exploitation and other conditions prejudicial to their development.” [230] To this end, the Anti-Bullying Law requires elementary and secondary schools “to adopt policies to address the existence of bullying in their respective institutions,” and outlines baseline requirements for such policies. [231] Similarly, DepEd’s Child Protection Policy requires that school administrators, among other responsibilities, “[e]nsure the institution of effective child protection policies and procedures, and monitor compliance thereof,” “[c]onduct the appropriate training and capability-building activities on child protection measures and protocols,” and “[e]nsure that all incidents of abuse, violence, exploitation, discrimination, bullying and other similar acts are addressed.” [232]

The terms of the Anti-Bullying Law and Child Protection Policy echo the Philippines’ obligations under international law. The ICCPR states that "[e]very child shall have… the right to such measures of protection as are required by his status as a minor, on the part of his family, society and the State," [233] while the CRC requires governments to “protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation.” [234] The government of the Philippines signed UNESCO’s Call for Action on Homophobic and Transphobic Violence, issued in November 2016, which commits it to monitoring the prevalence of homophobic and transphobic bullying in schools, providing students with information about harmful gender-based stereotypes, training school personnel, and taking steps to make schools safe for LGBT youth. [235]

Children who are especially likely to face violence, including bullying, merit specific attention and protection from the state. As the Committee on the Rights of the Child, the UN body that monitors implementation of the CRC, has noted, “[g]roups of children which are likely to be exposed to violence include, but are not limited to, children … who are lesbian, gay, transgender or transsexual.” [236] The committee has repeatedly described bullying, harassment, and violence against LGBT youth as violations of children’s rights, [237] and emphasized that “[a] school which allows bullying or other violent and exclusionary practices to occur is not one which meets the requirements of article 29(1),” the CRC provision specifying the aims of education. [238]

The Committee on the Rights of the Child has identified steps that governments should take to protect children from bullying, harassment, and other forms of violence. These include challenging discriminatory attitudes that allow intolerance and violence to flourish, [239] establishing reporting mechanisms, [240] and providing guidance and training for teachers and administrators to know how to respond when they see or hear about incidents of violence. [241] When taking these steps, the committee has stressed that children themselves should be involved “in the development of prevention strategies in general and in school, in particular in the elimination and prevention of bullying, and other forms of violence in school.” [242]

Right to Health

Bullying, exclusion, and discrimination generate physical and mental health risks that threaten the right to health for LGBT youth. The Committee on the Rights of the Child has expressed concern about the health consequences of bullying, including suicide, and has urged governments to “take the necessary actions to prevent and prohibit all forms of violence and abuse, including sexual abuse, corporal punishment and other inhuman, degrading or humiliating treatment or punishment in school, by school personnel as well as among students.” [243]

The ICESCR recognizes “the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health.” The CRC reinforces that children must enjoy this right, and states that, in pursuit of that goal, governments will “ensure that all segments of society, in particular parents and children, are informed [and] have access to education,” and will “develop preventive health care, guidance for parents and family planning education and services.” [244]

The Committee on the Rights of the Child has said that “[i]n order to fully realize the right to health for all children, States parties have an obligation to ensure that children’s health is not undermined as a result of discrimination, which is a significant factor contributing to vulnerability,” including discrimination on the basis of “sexual orientation, gender identity and health status.” [245]

The significant shortcomings of sexuality education in schools in the Philippines also undermine the right to health for all students, but particularly LGBT students. The Committee on the Rights of the Child has explained that youth are "vulnerable to HIV/AIDS because their first sexual experience may take place in an environment in which they have no access to proper information and guidance.” [246] Omitting information about same-sex activity and transgender identity from sexuality education curricula undermines LGBT students’ right to health. To ensure their rights are respected, the committee has said that governments must “refrain from censoring, withholding, or intentionally misrepresenting health-related information, including sexual education and information, and… ensure children have the ability to acquire the knowledge and skills to protect themselves and others as they begin to express their sexuality.” [247]

Freedom of Expression

The ICCPR recognizes that “everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression,” [248] and the CRC expressly recognizes that the right extends to children. [249]

The right to free expression is violated when schools limit displays of same-sex affection or gender expression solely for LGBT youth. Schools need to ensure that LGBT students are able to participate in the school environment on the same terms as other students, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

Freedom from Discrimination

Even as municipalities and provinces pass anti-discrimination ordinances to protect the rights of LGBT people, the Philippines has not passed comprehensive legislation prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity is prohibited under many of the treaties the Philippines has ratified. [250] As the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has concluded:

…freedom from discrimination is a fundamental obligation of States under international law, and requires States to prohibit and prevent discrimination in private and public spheres, and to diminish conditions and attitudes that cause or perpetuate such discrimination. To this end, States should enact comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation that includes sexual orientation and gender identity among protected grounds.” [251]

The Committee on the Rights of the Child has explained that discrimination in the school setting, “whether it is overt or hidden, offends the human dignity of the child and is capable of undermining or even destroying the capacity of the child to benefit from educational opportunities.” [252] Because of the dangers that discrimination poses to health and development, children at risk of discrimination are “entitled to special attention and protection from all segments of society.” [253] The committee has specifically expressed concern about discrimination against children on the basis of their sexual orientation and gender identity in its review of state policies. [254]

Students who are transgender or do not identify as their sex assigned at birth face especially pervasive discrimination as a result of uniform and hair-length policies and other gendered restrictions. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has expressed concern about “discriminatory dress codes that restrict men dressing a manner perceived as feminine and women dressing in a manner perceived as masculine, and punish those who do so,” [255] and noted that “United Nations mechanisms have called upon States to legally recognize transgender persons’ preferred gender, without abusive requirements.” [256] To make schools less discriminatory and more inclusive of transgender youth, UNESCO recommends that laws and policies “should recognise self-defined gender identity with no medical preconditions or exclusions based on age, marital or family status or other grounds.” [257]

Recommendations

To the president of the philippines.

• Speak out, as you have done in the past, against bullying in schools, reiterating that bullying of LGBT youth is harmful and unacceptable.
• Speak out in support of an anti-discrimination bill that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, including in education, employment, health care, and public accommodations.
• Authorize funding for the implementation of the Reproductive Health Law and any necessary support for comprehensive sexuality education in schools.
• Undertake a comprehensive review of school compliance with the provisions of the Child Protection Policy and the Anti-Bullying Law.
• Collect and publish data on the number of schools nationally that address sexual orientation and gender identity in their Child Protection Policy and Anti-Bullying Law. Recommend that schools that do not address sexual orientation and gender identity revise their policies to do so.
• Immediately review all curricula, including textbooks and teaching materials, to ensure that LGBT issues are incorporated. Remove content that is inaccurate or derogatory toward LGBT people and include content that is relevant to LGBT youth and promotes respect for gender diversity.
• Conduct trainings, in collaboration with LGBT rights groups where possible, to familiarize DepEd personnel at the division and district levels with LGBT terminology and issues.
• Enact local ordinances to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, including in education, employment, health care, and public accommodations.
• Promulgate implementing rules and regulations to ensure that existing anti-discrimination ordinances are applied and enforced.
• Conduct trainings, in collaboration with LGBT civil society groups where possible, for child protection committees and school staff to ensure that they are sensitive to the needs and vulnerabilities of LGBT youth. The trainings should inform school staff about proper terminology, the forms of bullying and discrimination that LGBT youth face, the rights that LGBT youth enjoy under domestic and international law, and resources and services available for LGBT youth.
• Conduct trainings, in collaboration with children’s rights groups where possible, for child protection committees and school staff to ensure they are able to recognize and intervene in bullying and harassment when they witness it occurring or it is brought to their attention.
• Promulgate guidelines instructing school staff to respect the gender identity of students with regard to dress codes, access to facilities, and participation in curricular and extracurricular activities.
• Commemorate occasions like Human Rights Day and National Women’s Month with programming that promotes human rights and respect for gender diversity in schools.
• Ensure that the school has resources available for LGBT youth, for example, books and printed material, access to counselors or other supportive personnel, and curricular resources that are inclusive of LGBT youth.

Acknowledgments

Ryan Thoreson, a researcher in the LGBT Rights Program, wrote this report based on research that he undertook from September 2016 to February 2017. Daniel Lee, associate with the Asia division, conducted additional interviews and wrote a section of the report.

The report was reviewed by Neela Ghoshal, senior researcher in the LGBT Rights Program; Michael Bochenek, senior counsel in the Children’s Rights Division; and Carlos Conde, Philippines researcher in the Asia Division. James Ross, legal and policy director, and Joe Saunders, deputy program director, provided legal and program review, respectively. Production assistance was provided by Olivia Hunter, publications associate; Fitzroy Hepkins, administrative manager; and Jose Martinez, senior coordinator.

Human Rights Watch would like to thank the experts and organizations that provided information for the report, including ASEAN SOGIE Caucus, Babaylanes, Inc., Bisdak Pride, Bulsu Bahaghari, ChildFund Philippines, the Children’s Legal Rights and Development Center, GALANG, Gayon Albay, Happy Hearts, Lagablab, MCC Marikina, Side B, TransMan Pilipinas, and UP Babaylan. Particular thanks go to the many students who shared their experiences with us.

Related Content

Philippines: lgbt students face bullying, abuse.

Discrimination and Lack of Support Undermine Right to Education

End Gendered Uniform Restrictions for LGBT Students in Philippine Schools

Bullied as a Child, Gay Filipino Comes Into His Own

University’s LGBT Student Group Provides Support System

• Philippines
• Children's Rights
• LGBT Rights

Protecting Rights, Saving Lives

Human Rights Watch defends the rights of people in close to 100 countries worldwide, spotlighting abuses and bringing perpetrators to justice

• UN Women HQ

International financial institutions advancing gender equality in Bangladesh

Date: Monday, 1 April 2024

International Women's Day (IWD) 2024 represented a significant moment as the world united under the theme "Invest in Women: Accelerate Progress." In the spirit of this global call to action, three chiefs of missions from international finance institutions working in Bangladesh offered their perspectives on the significance of investing in women to accelerate sustainable development.

EDIMON GINTING

Asian development bank.

How is the Asian Development Bank (ADB) advancing women’s empowerment and financing for gender equality in Bangladesh?

ADB is deeply committed to advancing women’s empowerment and financing for gender equality in Bangladesh through multifaceted strategies. We collaborate closely with the Government of Bangladesh to align our initiatives with national gender equality policies and priorities. Our efforts encompass various sectors, including education, healthcare, finance, and infrastructure development. We prioritize projects that promote women’s economic participation, ensure their inclusion in decision-making processes, and foster gender-responsive policies and practices.

Through targeted financial assistance and technical expertise, ADB supports gender mainstreaming across projects. This entails integrating gender equality considerations into project design, implementation, and monitoring, thereby ensuring impactful outcomes. Additionally, we work with civil society organizations and other stakeholders to enhance the effectiveness and sustainability of our gender-focused interventions. Our goal is to create lasting change by addressing the root causes of gender disparities and promoting inclusive development in Bangladesh.

This year’s IWD theme is ‘Invest in women: accelerate progress’. How is ADB promoting women’s leadership in climate action? What might be opportunities to strengthen gender-responsive climate financing in the current context?

ADB recognizes the pivotal role of women in climate action and is actively promoting their leadership in this crucial area. We support initiatives that empower women to participate in decision-making processes related to climate change adaptation and mitigation. Through capacity-building programs and targeted investments, we aim to enhance women’s skills and knowledge in climate-resilient practices.

ADB is also working towards becoming the regional climate bank, which further emphasizes our commitment to integrating gender considerations into climate finance mechanisms. Opportunities to strengthen gender-responsive climate financing include increasing investment in projects that directly benefit women, such as renewable energy and sustainable agriculture initiatives. ADB can also enhance access to climate finance for women-led businesses and organizations.

Additionally, collaboration with partners and stakeholders is key to developing innovative financing mechanisms that prioritize gender equality and empower women to actively participate in climate action efforts. By leveraging these opportunities, ADB seeks to accelerate progress towards gender-responsive climate financing and ensure a sustainable and inclusive future for all.

International Monetary Fund

How is the International Monetary Fund (IMF) advancing women’s empowerment and financing for gender equality in Bangladesh?

On January 30, 2023, the IMF Executive Board approved a 42-month financial program with Bangladesh. The program includes reforms aimed at creating fiscal space to enable greater social and developmental spending, strengthening the financial sector, and building climate resilience. These are expected to benefit women’s empowerment by supporting increased investment in health, education and infrastructure, expansion of social safety nets, greater financial inclusion, and tackling climate change-related challenges, which often disproportionately affect women.

In its most recent Article IV consultation , the IMF highlighted the large economic losses to Bangladesh from remaining gender gaps in labor force participation and financial inclusion and called attention to the important synergies between policies to address climate change and women’s empowerment. Our analysis also called for a strengthening of Gender Responsive Budgeting practices in Bangladesh to channel public resources more effectively towards the achievement of the country’s gender equality goals.

Bangladesh graduates from a Least Developed Country (LDC) status in 2026, what macroeconomic measures might be required to accelerate progress on gender equality and women’s empowerment?

As Bangladesh graduates from LDC status and endeavors toward reaching upper-middle income status, broader economic inclusion for women becomes indispensable. Stepped up investments in health, education, and infrastructure (transportation, sanitation, childcare) are required to increase women's mobility and reduce domestic work and care burdens. To finance this, Bangladesh needs to expand its tax base, improve tax efficiency, and reduce insufficiently targeted subsidies. Additionally, reforms in the financial sector are needed to ensure an inclusive financial system that attracts private investment and supports both female and male entrepreneurs. Finally, mainstreaming climate mitigation and adaptation policies is vital to ensure development gains, especially for women.

ABDOULAYE SECK

How is the World Bank advancing women’s empowerment and financing for gender equality in Bangladesh?

Bangladesh has realized early on that investing women is a critical economic driver. Women’s empowerment remained central to the country’s development strategy. We collaborate with the government to amplify women's voices, agency, and participation in social and economic activities through our investments and analytical works. This aligns with the World Bank's Gender Strategy and the Country Partnership Framework, addressing diverse challenges that hinder women's empowerment.

In Bangladesh, we have a dedicated Gender and Social Inclusion Platform that ensures each project identify priority gender gaps and integrate specific actions to bridge those. We have implemented Gender sensitized Grievance Mechanisms, mandatory signing of code of conducts, and regular consultation with all project beneficiaries and project staff, leading to positive outcomes in report and managing sexual harassment and gender-based violence. Several of the ongoing projects focus on improving female labor force participation through skilling NEET Youth, women in remote areas and belonging to marginalized groups, utilizing toolkits designed to ensure inclusion of such groups, for example women and girls with disabilities. Our studies explore and pilot innovative solutions to make public spaces safer, including public transport and workplaces. Studies are exploring and piloting ways to make public transport, workplaces, and public spaces safer for women, provisioning for childcare, GBV prevention and response mechanisms, and utilizing technology to bring more women into the formal employment and entrepreneurship.

Close to half a million Rohingya women and girls currently live in the refugee camps in Cox’s Bazar. Gender equality remains an unfinished agenda. In your opinion, what additional measures are needed to advance women’s leadership and address violence and discriminatory norms?

Gender equality efforts face many complexities, especially in situations with strong social norms. This was evident with displaced Rohingya women, many of have faced gender-based violence (GBV) and trauma even before arriving in Bangladesh. Their conservative background made it difficult for them to access support services.

But we are encouraged to see that change is possible within a short period of time with the right set of interventions. The World Bank supported the Health and Gender Support Project (HGSP) to help women and girls in the Rohingya camps and in the host community access to health, nutrition and family planning services as well as address GBV through preventive and response services. This support helped displaced Rohingya women participate in camp activities, study, volunteer work, or benefit from counseling, midwifery, family planning and GBV response services. Prevention efforts and community outreach were used to increase confidence and empower Rohingya women. These initiatives enabled them to see themselves as agents of change within their families and communities, making decisions. This shift in perspective is a stark contrast to their lives in Rakhine. The World Bank and the government are now in discussion about follow up projects, built upon the successful interventions used by HGSP to address widespread GBV, especially intimate partner violence and child marriage in the camps and surrounding host communities.

• ‘One Woman’ – The UN Women song
• Directorate
• Guiding documents
• Report wrongdoing
• Procurement
• Internships
• Facts and Figures
• Creating and Implementing Laws
• Creating Safe Public Spaces
• Preventing Violence against Women
• Raising Awareness and changing social norms
• Essential services for women
• UNiTE Asia Pacific
• Safe and Fair
• Our Resources
• Gender and Climate Change
• Coordination and Leadership
• Capacity Development
• Mainstreaming Gender into Data, Analysis and Advocacy
• Targeted Programming
• Toolkit for UNCT-SWAP Gender Equality Scorecard Assessment and Action Plan Implementation
• Advancement of human rights of LGBTIQ people
• UN Trust Fund to End Violence in Asia-Pacific
• The Fund for Gender Equality
• Economic Opportunity
• Gender Responsive Budgeting
• Migrant Workers in the Asia and the Pacific Region
• Women’s Land & Property Rights
• WE RISE Together
• Industry Disruptor Participant Profiles
• UN Women in Action
• Commission on the Status of Women
• Newsletters
• Resources and Publications
• Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
• CEDAW SEAP Phase II
• Governance Peace and Security
• Women Peace and Cybersecurity
• Preventing Violent Extremism
• Climate Security and Gender
• Women in Policing
• Conflict Resolution and Peacebuilding
• Protection and Peacekeeping
• National Action Plans
• Rule of Law and Justice
• Preventing Human Trafficking
• Women, Peace and Security, and COVID-19
• Political Participation of Women
• Women’s Access to Justice
• Programme implementation
• Afghanistan
• Income security, decent work and economic autonomy for women
• Women live a life free of violence
• Governance, national planning and budgeting for gender equality
• About UN Women in Cambodia
• Cook Islands
• Federated States of Micronesia
• Peace, Security, Humanitarian and Resilience
• Womens Political Empowerment and Leadership
• Ending Violence Against Women and Girls
• Women’s Economic Empowerment Programme
• Knowledge Products
• Strengthening Response and Service Provisioning for Gender-Based Violence in Tamil Nadu
• Peace and Security
• Leadership and Participation
• National Planning and Budgeting
• Human Rights
• Economic Empowerment
• UN Coordination
• Result at a Glance
• Data on Women
• Partnerships
• Peace Village
• Promoting Women's Human Rights
• About Indonesia
• Our key thematic priorities
• Where we are and what we do
• About Myanmar
• About UN Women Nepal
• Results at a glance
• Economic Empowerment and Sustainable Livelihood
• Ending Violence Against Women (EVAW)
• Partnership and Coordination
• UN Women Pakistan Flood Appeal
• Women Peace and Security and Humanitarian Action
• Governance and National Planning
• Women's Economic Empowerment
• Ending Violence against Women and Girls
• Intergovernmental Processes
• UN Coordination on Gender Equality
• Results at a Glance
• About UN Women Philippines
• Migration Philippines
• Safe Cities Hackathon
• Safe Cities Quezon City
• News and Events
• Publications
• About UN Women Papua New Guinea
• SANAP WANTAIM
• Market Project
• About UN Women
• Director Jeong Shim Lee
• Republic of the Marshall Islands
• Solomon Islands
• Women Peace and Security
• Women’s Economic Empowerment
• Women’s leadership in governance and decision-making
• Preventing violence against women and girls
• Women, Peace and Security
• Women’s Leadership and Participation in Decision Making
• Ending Violence Against Women and Girls (EVAWG)
• Gender Responsive Disaster Preparedness and Response
• United Nations Joint Programme (UNJP)
• Gender Responsive Planning and Budgeting
• Women in Politics
• CEDAW Implementation in Timor-Leste
• One UN Viet Nam
• Government Partners
• National Women’s Machineries
• Civil Society
• Foundations
• National Committees
• Cindy Sirinya Bishop
• International Financial Institutions
• GenderNet Bootcamp
• 30 for 2030: 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence
• Toolkit: Second Edition of the Youth Guide to End Online Gender-Based Violence
• Toolkit: Youth Guide to End Online Gender-Based Violence
• Media Compact
• Beijing+30 in Asia Pacific
• International Women’s Day 2024
• UN Commission on the Status of Women (CSW68)
• UN Women Asia-Pacific at COP 28
• 16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence
• In Focus: International Women's Day 2023
• In Focus: UN Commission on the Status of Women (CSW67)
• International Day of Rural Women
• International Day of the Girl
• In Focus: UN Commission on the Status of Women (CSW66)
• Gender equality matters in COVID-19 response
• Skilling our women and youth for inclusive and green recovery from COVID-19
• International Day of Women and Girls in Science
• "Girls", Not Objects: Youth Talk and Exhibition
• Geneva Peace Week
• Indigenous women
• World Refugee Day
• World Humanitarian Day
• Essential Services Package for Women and Girls Subject to Violence
• Empowering women to conserve our oceans
• Migrant Women and International Migrants Day
• Women refugees and migrants
• Recommit to CEDAW
• Women of Achievement
• Community of Change makers
• Women and the SDGs
• International Youth Day 2023
• Voices of Youth from Asia-Pacific
• Expert's take
• In the words of...
• Media Contacts
• Annual Report
• Generation Equality Forum: Asia-Pacific Regional Journey
• About Beijing+25
• Beijing+25 Asia-Pacific Youth Blog
• Generation Equality Forum in Mexico
• Generation Equality Forum in Paris
• #IAmGenerationEquality challenge
• Generation Equality Forum
• Generation Equality Youth Challenge
• Generation Equality 16 Days of Activism
• HeForShe Advocates in Asia Pacific
• Activities in our region
• #HeForSheAtHome Challenge
• Become a Supporter