[DASH of SAS] Body count and baby count

Taylor Swift has got talent, millions of adoring fans across the globe, and business sense that has made her a fortune. Cheering fans at her concert tours are said to cause seismic tremors and boost enough sales in host cities to jolt GPD numbers.

Her sold-out concerts (I’ve witnessed one) are packed with glittery kids with their parents, decked-out Gen Zers,  swooning millennials, and fun-loving seniors. Apart from the singing and dancing, there is also a Swiftie tradition of giving out colorful friendship bracelets with pebbled messages of empowerment. 

The term “wild” is probably best applied to Swift’s career success. When it comes to her image, the word “wholesome” is a better fit though a male journalist for Newsweek doesn’t seem to think so. According to him, Swift is not a role model for young women because already *gasp* in her 30s, she remains unmarried and childless. 

“Would any loving parent reading this want their daughter to date 12 different men in the span of just a few years?” asked the male journalist. Um, sir, in this age of dating apps, some people can date 12 people in a month–or less.

The article acknowledges Swift’s accomplishments but insists that her “revolving door” of relationships puts her character and stability into question. 

Kamala Harris is on her way to possibly being the first female president and woman of color to head one of the most powerful countries in the world. She has the support of the Gen Z brat generation, the second most powerful corner office on the planet, and what appears to be a supportive husband, but still, a political opponent bemoaned, Harris is a “childless cat lady”.

One woman scrutinized and valued by her body count. Another evaluated and measured by her biological baby count. A woman can have the money, power, and track record of achievements of a Taylor or a Kamala but she will always be valued by what she puts in or pushes out of her vagina.

The example of Swift and Harris is important because the upcoming US elections are a test of what society values and where it sees as the “place” women and gender-diverse people who veer away from heteronormative standards should occupy. While there has been a regression of gender rights around the world, the historical hegemony of the United States puts it in a position to not only legitimize these backslides but advance it under the guise of promoting traditional family values.

Of value and values

In the Philippines, we can see a similar pattern. We have had not one but two female presidents, a feat that many of the most powerful countries in the world have not been able to replicate. The country ranks as the most gender equal in Asia with indicators such as education almost at parity. While a pay gap remains, there is also a near parity in senior officer and technical worker positions. 

However, we have some of the harshest laws that prohibit women from deciding over their bodies. Because laws serve as a foundation of what is right and wrong and underwrite moral social codes, these laws set the tone for viewing body count and baby count as a measure of a woman’s value.

Abortion is outlawed and sanctioned with the threat of imprisonment. There is no wiggle room for exceptions that account for incidents of rape or to save the life of the pregnant person. Never mind if data shows that about 26 people–the majority of whom are vulva owners–are raped every day in the Philippines or that global health statistics indicate that one in four pregnant people will require a therapeutic abortion in their lifetime because certain medical conditions will not only require an abortion but may save their life.

The Philippines remains among the estimated dozen countries in the world where abortion is strictly prohibited. In addition to this is the limited accessibility of birth control except for those who have the privilege to afford it.

This kind of reproductive coercion unjustly influences the when, how many, and how often of pregnancy – of baby count. 

[Read: Sotto attempt to remove fund for contraceptives is reproductive coercion ]

Our current adultery laws apply only to women and threaten them with imprisonment for having sexual relations with someone whom she is not married to. 

Divorce is banned. The only legal recourse is annulment, a grueling, expensive, and inhumane process that is not even guaranteed unless you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that your marriage is beyond repair. 

The laws on adultery and divorce disproportionately disadvantage women and are rooted in imposing a narrow standard of what is sexually acceptable, requiring that sexual relations are kept with partners of the opposite sex, within marriage, and kept to the lowest possible body count.

The situation is more dire for gender-diverse people. There are no laws that protect LGBTIQ+ people from discrimination. An estimated 50 transgender and non-binary people have reportedly been violently killed since 2010–but the actual death toll is likely to be much higher. 

What really counts

These existing laws date back to the Spanish Penal Code, an era when women and their bodies were the subjects and property of the colonial powers behind the Church and State. 

A measure of progress is breaking free from outdated norms and social calibrations. Although the justification for these laws often centers on “family values” in the West and “traditional Filipino values” in the Philippines, a more accurate measure of progress versus regression would be to examine how these imposed traditions serve as tools of control and oppression.

Progress should be measured by how well laws and policies align with scientific advancements, development indicators on quality of life, and the diversity of lived experiences. Factoring in these realities ensures that rights and resources are distributed equitably.

At its core, laws and the social norms and beliefs it frames can be viewed as regressive when they prevent someone from realizing their own potential. 

You cannot tell women — any one — that they have the power to decide their own future without giving them the right to decide about their own body. It is precisely in and through our bodies where personal futures are planned, determined, and lived out. 

A person’s life is valued not only by what they put in and push out of their sexual body parts but by the totality of their contributions to society and their communities through their various roles as someone’s child, parent, sibling, partner, mentor, or friend. 

It is time that we value what really counts. – Rappler.com

Ana P. Santos is Rappler’s gender and sexuality columnist and the host of the video series, Sex and Sensibilities.