When our woke jokes can’t read the room
By Mikaela Gabrielle de Castro
For all the anarchic storms and leaderships we’ve endured, we made it clear that Filipino resilience is deadly. And although we’re gradually relearning that romanticizing it kills, our country remains a sinking ship as we push our desensitized mentality and humor during disasters. Indeed, calamities taught us that we only have each other (to blame).
In July, there was a fire explosion in a camp in Cagayan de Oro. Scrolling down the breaking news article, I didn’t expect the comment section to be flooded with banters or insults like, “Tsismis lang ‘yan, respect my opinion,” “Iyak later xD,” “Unity na lang po,” derided with green and red hearts, fist bumps and peace signs, and laughing face emojis. Similar sentiments were made by some netizens who would use these mantras; making fun of apologists as they were “nabudol,” while sharing donation drives, tweets, or photos of the victims of the previous typhoons and earthquakes, including the lethal Typhoon Paeng last October.
No one is innocent of laughing or mimicking infamous lines made by President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. supporters (BBM). But imagine leaving unhelpful and bitter remarks for fun towards people who are simply seeking help and are victims of the circumstance. Many were dumbfounded by the election’s aftermath. We’ve excruciatingly given the remaining patience and love left to enlighten the misinformed and even the deliberately disinformed; to pull them from their echo chambers, but we may have been too late. As some Kakampinks, supporters of former vice president and presidential candidate Attorney Leni Robredo, put it jokingly during the first days after the election, their “radikal na pagmamahal” era is over.
On Facebook pages, there are photos of supposedly funny replies that roast the baseless and troll comments of apologists. And let’s be honest, we’ve probably engaged with, laughed at, and shared them several times. It was a battle of cynicism between their buoyant bible-thumping and well-mannered facade that accused the other side’s intellectual elitism and clout sensationalism.
So this cycle made me ponder: Is our fixed goal to just creatively ridicule the 31 million followers who led us to our irredeemable fate in every crisis?
Becoming what we hate
A common trait shared by diehard Duterte supporters (DDS) and BBM supporters online is their habit to attack the person, rather than their argument or stance. We’re used to criticizing them or letting them go, but we aren’t so clear from doing this too.
For instance, Ilocos Norte 1st District Representative and presidential son Sandro Marcos and education secretary and VP Sara Duterte have often been quipped with homophobic and transphobic remarks about their looks made by their antis. But this Gen Z “yassified” cyberbullying is frequently brushed off. One bantering about their “tomboy” looks only perpetuates more taboos, further dragging down the LGBTQ+ community and gender expression as the butts of the joke. Because of our fixation on simply joining the hate train, we suffocate and lose the necessity to truly call them out for their misdeeds.
The Twitterverse has also spoken about Kakampinks’ tendencies to revel in clout and not progress beyond that. Ex-Comelec commissioner Rowena Guanzon, the hailed “Bardagulan Queen” and Heneral Luna of Kakampinks grew in popularity after being a critical voice against Marcos Jr. and actively “roasting” his supporters online. As much as her spunk excited many and I, it was iffy to see that at times, the hype surrounding her fierce image was inordinately sensationalized over the advocacies of running candidates. This overboard meme mentality has continued in the in-group itself, as rallyists have also faced criticism about the unrelated,inappropriate, and irrelevant messages they’ve ascribed in placards, which could have been used for actual calls of pandemic response, food security, solidarity, and justice statements.
And last but most impactful: catering high engagement to the big bad wolves. Instead of de-platforming controversial celebrities and creators, we feed them with memes and edits. Satire that doesn’t critique their power, but does the opposite: free delivery of traction and virality. They’re very much aware that their questionable bills, intentionally poor edits, and their memeable reactions will serve as distractions and the talk of the town from pressing issues. Hence, we make it easier for them to raid exposure and privileges thanks to the hateful (amused) reactions we spur, satisfying the reverse psychology they capitalize on.
After all, all’s fair in love and war where bad publicity is still good publicity.
Empathy shouldn’t be selective or choosy; our insensitive jokes should
As we’re all psychoanalyzing this red and pink binary, I think a lot of us are confronted with the valid predicament of still choosing empathy even if it won’t get returned. Some joked they’re currently living in their own reality in Robredo’s Angat Buhay program while neglecting politics, which goes against the whole program’s advocacy about inclusive empathy.
Think pieces have been released here and there about the pink movement’s lapses that cost them to lose the election, even going as far as to say they are the new DDS that simply cancels all opinions (which I think is overkill). And while certain points were made and surfaces about being self-reflexive have been scratched, we fail to emphasize the part where we must take a step back and realize our execution is not always right just because we thought our justice-driven intentions were.
At this point, it should also go without saying that the enemies aren’t the exploited masses we love to blame and shame. Perhaps we feel we’ve earned the right to let them learn their lesson because it’s what they deserve; to suffer in guilt as we all suffer under the idle unity their candidate has promised.
All of us want someone accountable for opening the floodgates. However, it wasn’t like they wished for the downfall of each Filipino when they cast their vote. Like everyone else, they’ve also seen it as their ticket to hope and change, but were unfortunately duped by the well-oiled machine of scathing and charismatic disinformation that won them over. When we point fingers at each other, who wins but those in public office — busy reciting false litanies of nurturing the poor, mothers, children, and minorities? For the next six years, the most morally superior vote or best punchline will not save us from the draconian rules, inflation, cases, and death tolls that are on the rise.
It is without a doubt that our ever-evolving and vibrant Gen Z and millennial political wit have been effective in innumerable ways: initiating eccentric movements, creatively critiquing people in power; challenging discourse; and bringing attention to significant issues both online and offline. But if it’s properly communicated in the necessary context, without denying or bullying victims, only then will we realize its untapped potential in enhancing inclusive and empathetic shifts that are needed the most in our political scene.
