How to silence a woman
Alittle over a month after the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte began, what currently dominates online conversations is not facts from the case, but memes mocking a female prosecution lawyer. Her offense, according to her critics, was appearing too flirtatious. They called her style of questioning “malandi” and said she intentionally made the word “baril” sound like a double entendre. Some went so far as to say that her “bedroom voice” was more fitting for a sex worker than a lawyer or political leader.
A lawyer’s courtroom conduct, especially in an important trial like this, is open to scrutiny. But that is not what many of these memes do. Legitimate criticism asks whether she was effective. Sexual shaming, by contrast, uses perceptions of her femininity or sexuality to question her character and credibility.
The International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, an intergovernmental democracy organization, identifies sexualization and objectification as recurring forms of gendered disinformation used to humiliate women and undermine perceptions of their professional capacity. The implicit argument behind sexual shaming as a tactic is that if a woman can be made to appear morally questionable, then her trustworthiness and professional legitimacy become questionable too—overshadowing the merits of her education, experience, and overall performance.
This is not just a Philippine problem, but a regional issue that cannot be ignored. A 2025 study by the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), conducted in partnership with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Inter-Parliamentary Assembly, found that 60 percent of women lawmakers surveyed across the Asia-Pacific had been targeted online by hate speech, disinformation, image-based abuse, or doxxing. That is the highest rate for this type of abuse in any of the IPU’s regional studies, and an important reminder that making political spaces safer for women needs to be an urgent priority.
Advances in deepfake technology have also compounded the problem and made this tactic easier to weaponize. Female leaders are targets for fabricated, nonconsensual sexual imagery designed to discredit them. The result is a hostile environment that makes it harder for women in leadership, and for those in the pipeline, to thrive.
Repetition alone can also do significant damage. Hear a sexual rumor or joke often enough and it can become attached to a woman’s name in the public mind, whether or not it is true. That is why I have deliberately withheld the lawyer’s name. I want to discuss the issue without contributing further to that association.
What makes the issue even more insidious is that no version of womanhood is safe. A woman can be attacked for appearing too sexual, labeled promiscuous and immoral. She can be attacked for being insufficiently feminine, deemed bossy, abrasive, and unsympathetic. And then she can also be attacked for being overly feminine, too soft and emotional, and therefore unfit to lead. Research shows that women leaders often feel pressured to shift between masculine and feminine styles to satisfy these conflicting expectations and maintain both credibility and likeability.
Ultimately, women are often judged not just on their performance as leaders, but on whether they conform to society’s expectations of how a woman should act. And whereas men are often afforded a wider margin for error—where scandals involving sexual misconduct or personal failings do not immediately compromise perceptions of their credibility—women leaders are easily judged as unfit to lead after a slight misstep or deviation from the ideal.
Sexual shaming and other forms of sexism against women in politics threaten both democratic participation and inclusive governance. Unfortunately, too often, our lawmakers are part of the problem. Last week, Sen. Raffy Tulfo said the prosecution should be careful not to bring in “pa-cute” lawyers. He could have used his platform to condemn the vicious online comments and steer the discussion back to the merits of the prosecution’s case. Instead, his remarks inadvertently reinforced the sexist framing behind the attacks. I applaud House prosecution counsel Atty. Lorna Kapunan for immediately calling him out and reminding him that it was the Senate that passed the safe spaces law and should model those standards in political discourse.
The rest of us have a role too. For every sexist meme or demeaning comment, we can push back by centering the substance of a woman’s argument and body of work. We can remind lawmakers that criticism should never cross the line into misogyny and hold to account those who do.
Because while the public argues about a lawyer’s tone, almost no one is discussing the merits of the case. The memes have effectively crowded out the very thing the public is supposed to be watching: an accountability process involving the second-highest official in the land.
—————-
eleanor@shetalksasia.com
