TV footage and photos of men, led by no less than TV-movie star and newlywed Dingdong Dantes teetering on a road in their sky-high heels as they attempt to “walk in her shoes” in celebration of International Women’s Day today, had me by turns snickering and sighing.
A feminist once wrote that until men “know what it is like to run after a bus going uphill while wearing three-inch heels,” they would never know what it means to be a woman. Of course, it wasn’t just the stilettos. It was also the need to be both breadwinner and beauty, productive citizen and attractive mate, efficient and sexy, intelligent and sensuous.
It’s possible for women, of course, to be all these. But for the vast majority, it’s a stretch. So why do men seem to expect this duality in the women they love—or the women they’re attracted to? It’s like a woman going on a date with a measuring tape and googling a man’s financial status minutes after meeting him.
Still, I must admit that the sight of the “macho” officers of the National Youth Commission squeezing their broad feet into the narrow confines of pointy-toed pumps had me smiling. It didn’t help that most of the machos looked really discomfited by their footwear. Now they know what it feels like to have your toes dying on you as you stand around looking glamorous and holding a cocktail in your hand.
But it was also such a sweet gesture of solidarity. Gimmicky, yes, but also effective in its goal to get men to reflect on all the demands society makes on women—including the demand to live up to the unrealistic expectations perpetuated by advertising, entertainment and upbringing.
* * *
But really, men don’t have to squeeze their little piggies into our shoes just to know what life is like for us. In many ways, we, men and women, share much the same challenges in life—to earn enough to feed, house and educate ourselves and our families; to find the time in equal parts for work and leisure, accomplishment and enjoyment, love and respect.
If they really want to “walk in our shoes,” they might want to share in some of our chores: caring for infants and children, keeping the home livable and comfortable, balancing the demands of work and domesticity—maybe even keeping up with the latest telenovelas?
Many men might protest that they really believe in equality between the sexes—in theory. But when asked to put this into practice, especially at home, to take on half the burden of cooking, laundering, cleaning, decorating, and all the sundry duties of domestic life, these same men would balk, protesting that it somehow tarnishes their “manhood.”
But this indeed is the basic inequality of today’s battle of the sexes: that women are expected to take on their share of the productive side of life, earning a living, making a difference, but at the same time taking on the full burden of the “reproductive” side, that is, caring for home, family, “reproducing” and restoring the tired-out members of the family to face another day, another challenge. Where’s the fairness in that?
* * *
There’s a growing humanitarian crisis in much the same area where the Mamasapano “massacre” unfolded. Reports have it that the intensifying campaign against the Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters, which has been augmented by another “breakaway” group, the Justice for Islamic Movement, has led to thousands of families fleeing their homes and squeezing into cramped evacuation centers.
In turn, the difficult conditions in the evacuation centers have led to the spread of illness and disease among the evacuees. But the only alternative—to return to their communities and get caught in the crossfire between the military and the Moro rebels—seems even more fraught with danger and hardship.
Take a look at the footage of the “bakwit” and you’ll notice that most of them are women and girls, along with the very young and the very old. Truly, in situations of conflict and violence, the real victims are the innocent, the majority of them women, the elderly and the children.
Military authorities have said they will soon call a ceasefire to the operations against the BIFF and its allies. But the Moro rebels are threatening to spread out and bring the fighting to other areas in Central Mindanao. All this even as the hard-fought and negotiated peace agreement between the government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front lies in peril, held hostage to the flames of rhetoric and hostility resulting from the Mamasapano killings.
* * *
Friday’s spate of peace marches and prayer rallies may have helped clarify and cool the obfuscating passions aroused in the wake of Mamasapano.
It helped a lot that the activities—painting murals calling for peace on the walls of public schools, prayer rallies, lighting candles—created a sense that there is a growing public consensus that the peace process deserves to be saved, and that the passage of the Bangsamoro Basic Law should be pursued. As Muslim friends point out, the constituency for peace remains steadfast in Mindanao. Mindanaoans are by and large crying out for peace. But it is public opinion in Manila and other urban centers elsewhere in the country that is shaping the debate and setting the stage for the failure of the BBL and the Bangsamoro.
Some suspect, in fact, that the campaign against the BIFF and its reported breakaway group is a “cosmetic” campaign to placate those who still suspect that the MILF is coddling the other Moro groups, and demonstrate the state’s resolve. If true, all the more reason to call an end to the fighting, if only to show our Moro brethren that peace will win the day.