Social Ethics Society Journal of Applied Philosophy

Volume 9, 2023

From a Culture of Domination to Safe Spaces

Mark M. Gatus
Bicol University
[email protected]

Abstract

This paper examines the culture of domination and oppression that

poses a challenge in creating safe spaces. This culture normalizes
oppression affecting marginalized groups, particularly women. This
culture threatens safe spaces, which hinders women’s participation in
society without the fear of being silenced, dismissed, and excluded.
But how can we establish safe spaces in a culture where dominant
groups control the narrative of society? This paper analyzes the
culture of domination in the Philippines using the philosophical lenses
of Iris Marion Young, bell hooks, and Judith Butler. Young’s Five Faces
of Oppression and hooks’ notion of intersectionality were used to
analyze the intricate relationships between oppression’s multiple
manifestations and how they affect Filipino Women. Butler's work is
also cited to explain how social constructs like gender as
performativity shape women’s experiences and actions in different
spaces. Finally, this paper suggests creating safe spaces when this
oppressive culture persists.

Keywords: Culture of Domination, Oppression, Safe Spaces, Feminism,

Patriarchy

Introduction

Creating safe spaces raises conflict among those who seek to

utilize such spaces. In a society where the culture of domination
perpetuates, the marginalized group struggles to achieve a certain
degree of inclusion and equality. The power and privilege granted to
certain groups foster a culture of domination, enabling them to control

© 2023 Mark M. Gatus

ISSN: 2546-1885
12 Mark M. Gatus

the narrative and structure of society. This control leads to the

assigning roles for every member, resulting in the silencing, exclusion,
and dismissal of the non-dominant groups. This culture normalizes the
experience of domination and oppression. Hence, it provides us with
the struggle to create safe spaces.
Generally, a safe space is defined as a place intended to be free
of bias, conflict, criticism, or potentially threatening actions, ideas, or
conversations.1 In such spaces, people could express themselves freely
and authentically and participate in society without fearing being
excluded and discriminated against. Safe space is necessary to
humanize the experience of every individual. However, achieving safe
spaces is difficult considering the society’s structure. For example,
Karl Marx argued that in any given society, two distinct classes exist:
the bourgeoisie (the ruling class) and the proletariat (the working
class).2 This class distinction results in class struggle where there are
oppressors or exploiting class and oppressed or exploited class.
Indeed, throughout history, the conflict between social classes has
consistently propelled humanity toward domination and oppression.
The ceaseless strife between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat
persists because the former has control, power, and privilege while
the latter grapples with exploitation and marginalization.
Every society has its unique narratives of domination and
oppression. The Philippines, a country colonized for more than 300
years, embraces an unconscious acceptance and tolerance of
domination and oppression. It is embedded in Filipino culture and
affects life socially, economically, and politically. The history of
colonialism significantly impacted Filipinos’ lived realities,
particularly women, resulting in marginalization, gender-based
violence, and cultural inferiority. These experiences situate women in
an unsafe space. Hence, it raises the discussion on safe spaces.
Bearing that the norm of domination for Filipinos persists, it presents
a problem of how to create safe spaces to humanize the experience of
every Filipino woman. The existence of this norm raises the question,
“How can we create safe spaces in a culture where the domination of
power and privilege exists?”

1 “Definition of Safe Space,” in Merriam-Webster Dictionary, August 24, 2023.

2 Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, “Manifesto of the Communist Party”
(Marxists Internet Archive, 2010), 28.
 From a Culture of Domination to Safe Spaces 13

As the country faces critical issues in creating safe spaces for

everyone, it is essential to analyze the factors hindering such spaces’
creation. One of them is the norm of the culture of domination and
oppression, which is strengthened by the patriarchal structure of
society. Consequently, this paper aims to contribute to the ongoing
discourse on creating safe spaces. Moreover, this paper uses critical
reflective analysis to answer the question above.3 To do this, I first
define the meaning of safe spaces to frame the use of the term. Next, I
examine the culture where a demonstration of domination leads to the
oppression of women in the Philippine condition. I use the lens of
selected feminist philosophers: Iris Marion Young, bell hooks, and
Judith Butler. Finally, I provide an avenue on how marginalized groups
and individuals may create safe spaces.

What is a [Safe] Space?

Space is neutral. It does not possess any inherent prejudice or

qualities. It is a place where people exist and coexist. In people’s co-
existence, understanding spaces are influenced by their social
relations, perspectives, biases, and norms. With this, space becomes a
concern since the significance we attribute to these spaces is shaped
by societal, political, historical, and personal factors. Our perception
and experience of safety within specific spaces become precarious
within societal structures.
Our experience of safety varies on how people perform and
identify their identity in it and how space is used and controlled.4 The
idea of safety generally relies on an underlying threat of violence.5
Violence affects our lives, and its presence erodes our sense of
security, which produces adverse effects like fear, exclusion, and
oppression. To address this critical issue, we must dismantle systems
that sustain unsafe spaces for people, like patriarchy, which results in

3 Critical Reflective analysis uses reflection to analyze certain problems,

phenomena or situations. Reflection is a crucial cognitive practice in the research field.

Reflection aims to understand the forms of intelligibility by which the world is made
meaningful; in the heuristic context of the research work, reflecting means to
elucidate the epistemic acts developed amid the inquiry process (See Mortari, 2015).
4 The Roestone Collective, “Safe Space: Towards a Reconceptualization,”

Antipode 46, no. 5 (2014): 1349.Ibid, 1349. Also, see Bondi and Rose 2003:234 and
Valentine 1989:389.
5 The Roestone Collective, “Safe Space,” 1349.
14 Mark M. Gatus

male domination and a system of oppression, sexism, and racism.

Everyone has a responsibility to create safe spaces. Thus, creating and
maintaining safe spaces is crucial and necessary.
Defining a safe space is complex. In gender studies, it explores
the “mutual constitutions of gendered identities and spaces.”6
Gendered norms and beliefs create acceptable behaviors for men and
women.7 These gendered norms influence their actions in certain
spaces. Considering that our society is patriarchal, power and
privilege were given to men, affecting space safety. As such, safe
spaces respond to the often patriarchal, heteronormative, racialized,
and classed construction of safety.8 The discussion of safe space
challenges oppression operating within the dominant culture.9 Unsafe
space excludes the marginalized and the oppressed, while safe spaces
usually support and affirm marginalized identities since they may
offer a “safe base” and site for organizing resistance.10
In this paper, these definitions were used to analyze the unsafe
place of women in society. Their experiences of oppression must be
examined to provide a way to create and maintain a safe space for
them. The cultivation of safe spaces is a way of practicing social justice
that recognizes, emphasizes, and in some ways encourages social
difference.11 Cultivating safe spaces requires examining the norms of
domination that cause inequalities among groups.

Oppression and the Culture of Domination, Power, and Privilege

Safe space is threatened by oppressive structures brought by a

specific culture of domination, power, and privilege in societies. This
prevents and limits women from accessing and enjoying spaces
without seeking approval from the dominant group. Safe space can be
a refuge from these structures, yet this culture impedes its realization.
This section provides three different feminist lenses, including
Iris Marion Young, bell hooks, and Judith Butler, that explain how this
culture works as a system of oppression. Their philosophical ideas are

6 Ibid.
7 Sarah Metcalfe, “Adolescent constructions of gendered identities: the role
of sport and (physical) education” Sport, Education and Society, (2018): 1.
8 The Roestone Collective, “Safe Space, ”1349.
9 Ibid., 1352.
10 Ibid.
11 Ibid., 1360.
 From a Culture of Domination to Safe Spaces 15

essential to analyze how the complex ways of power and privilege

intersect with gender and other social categories that sustain
structural injustice within the society, affecting Filipino women in the
pursuit of safe spaces.

Young: Structural Injustice and the Five Faces of Oppression

Iris Marion Young (1949-2006) is a feminist political

philosopher whose philosophy is “focused on gender, race, justice,
equality, democracy, globalization, and international relations while
immersing herself in activism and political organization.”12 In her
book, Justice and the Politics of Difference she provided a critique
against the systemic structure. Young is known for her significant
contributions to social justice. In her analysis, social justice is closely
linked to oppression. Oppression, for Young, is structural. She argued
that “its causes are embedded in unquestioned norms, habits, and
symbols, in the assumptions underlying institutional rules and the
collective consequences of following those rules.”13 She claimed that
oppression is a systemic constraint on social groups that leads to
injustice.14 In oppression, social groups are immobilized and
diminished. A social group is a collective of persons differentiated
from at least one other group by cultural forms, practices, or way of
life.15 They have a specific affinity with one another because of their
similar experiences and way of life.
Young provided categories and distinctions experienced by
certain social groups to explain the complex norm of structural
injustice. The five faces of oppression are adequate to describe the
oppression of any group since oppression is a condition of groups. The
five categories or faces are exploitation, marginalization,
powerlessness, cultural imperialism, and violence.16 Exploitation
occurs when one social group has a steady process of transferring the
results of the labor of one social group to benefit the other.17 For

12 Feorillo A. Demeterio III, Young’s Theory of Structural Justice and Collective

Responsibility (De La Salle University (DLSU) Publishing House, 2019).

13 Iris Marion Young, Justice and the Politics of Difference (New Jersey:

Princeton University Press, 1990),41.

14 Ibid.
15 Ibid., 43.
16 Ibid., 40.
17 Ibid., 49.
16 Mark M. Gatus

example, in capitalism, the wealthy benefit from the working class's

struggle, which results in economic inequality. Yet, exploitation enacts
structural manifestations of oppression experienced by social groups,
particularly women.18 Another is marginalization. It is a form of
oppression where certain groups are excluded from meaningful social
participation, leading to material deprivation. Young provided two
categories of injustice in marginalization: first, the provision of
welfare that takes away the rights of others; second, the welfare state
prevents opportunities despite reducing material deprivation. 19 Young
argued that even though the welfare system addresses basic needs, it
creates new forms of injustice by enforcing rules and sustaining power
imbalances among social groups. Next is powerlessness, which is
characterized by the inability to be autonomous.20 Powerlessness
highlights that people in this situation lack agency and control over
their experiences. Some restrictions prevent them from realizing their
full potential. For example, Young distinguishes powerlessness
between professionals and non-professionals. The former has a
privileged status as compared to the latter.
The non-professionals are the specific victims of
powerlessness.21 Cultural Imperialism involves universalizing a
dominant group’s experience and culture and establishing it as the
norm.22 They reinforce their position by bringing other groups under
the measure of its prevailing norms.23 This creates deviance and
inferiority to the non-dominant groups. Due to the widely
disseminated cultural expressions of the dominant group, they
become universal expressions. Last is violence, “it is systemic because
it is directed at members of a group simply because they are members
of that group.”24 Young identified women as a social group who
experience frequent physical violence. Violence as a form of
oppression is a phenomenon of social injustice since social context
makes it possible and even acceptable. Thus, violence is a systemic and

18 Ibid., 49-50.
19 Ibid., 54.
20 Marella Ada V. Mancenido-Bolaños, “Iris Marion Young’s ‘Faces of

Oppression’ and the Oppression of Women in the Responsible Parenthood and

Reproductive Health Act of 2012” Kritike 14, no. 1 (June 2020): 104.
21 Demeterio III, Young’s Theory of Structural Justice.
22 Young, Justice and the Politics of Difference, 59.
23 Ibid.
24 Ibid.
 From a Culture of Domination to Safe Spaces 17

social practice.25 Thus, the existence of institutionalized and systemic

group-directed violence is a clear threat to women’s ability to create
safe spaces.

bell hooks: Power, Privilege, and Oppression

bell hooks or Gloria Jean Watkins, is an American scholar,

feminist, and activist. She is known for her work by examining the
connections between race, gender, and class. In her book, Feminist
Theory: From Margin to Center, she critiqued the existing feminist
discourses, arguing that the current feminist discourse only privileges
white bourgeoisie women and neglects the plight and experiences of
black women. Hence, she proposed a new lens of the feminist
movement that seeks to “fight to end sexist oppression and
exploitation without neglecting other forms of oppression such as
racism, classism, imperialism, and others.”26
hooks proposed a “revolutionary feminism”27 to make a
difference in the plight of women. It is a response to the existing
feminist theory by white people. For example, hooks critiqued Betty
Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique, arguing that the book described the
condition of women is referring “to the plight of a select group of
college-educated, middle and upper class married white women—
housewives bored with leisure, with the home, with children, with
buying products, who wanted more out of life.”28 For hooks, Friedan
“made her plight and the plight of white women like herself
synonymous with a condition affecting all American women.”29 Hence,
there is a neglect of experience by women outside of their class. For
hooks, there is racism in the writings of white feminists, strengthening
white supremacy.30 Due to white supremacy, class structure in the
American setting has been shaped. Thus, affirming class struggle and

25 Ibid., 62.
26 Hazel T. Biana, “Extending bell hooks' Feminist Theory”, Journal of
International Women's Studies, no. 21-1 (2020), 13.
27 Revolutionary feminism proposes a more holistic actualization of the self

that can eventually give birth to a global political restructuring. The self-development
of a people will shake up the cultural basis of group, which is oppression. (See Biana
“Extending bell hooks' Feminist Theory”, 17.)
28 bell hooks, Feminist Theory from margin to center (New York: South End

Press, 1984),1.
29 Ibid., 2.
30 Ibid., 3.
18 Mark M. Gatus

oppression of black women. According to hooks, “As a group, black

women are in an unusual position in this society, for not only are we
collectively at the bottom of the occupational ladder, but our overall
social status is lower than that of any other group. Occupying such a
position, we bear the brunt of sexist, racist, and classist oppression.”31
Furthermore, for hooks, class matters in the discourse of
feminism. In her book Where We Stand: Class Matters, she argued that
there is class conflict and struggle which is an interlocking system of
race, gender, and class. She added that it is crucial to face the issue of
class to become more conscious and know how best to struggle for
economic justice.32 It is significant to talk about class because class
warfare may be the people’s fate if we do not collectively challenge
classism. For hooks, this class conflict is already racialized and
gendered.33 In this book, hooks argues the importance of class in
understanding and addressing inequalities. Women’s experiences of
oppression are shaped by their class background. Poor women and
rich women may experience differences in how society treats them.
Thus, domination is intertwined with social class. Social class
reinforces hierarchies and social class segregation. All of these sustain
oppression and affect our path toward safe spaces. hooks’ ideologies
were extended by Hazel Biana, who claimed that hooks’ ideas would
be problematic if presented to third-world brown women since racism
is also experienced from other vantage points, not only the black
vantage point.34 Thus, for Biana, hooks failed to address the voice of
the oppressed from developing nations, like the Philippines.35

Butler: Gender as Performativity

Judith Pamela Butler, popularly known as Judith Butler, is a

feminist American philosopher whose theories of the performative
nature of gender and sex were very influential within feminist
philosophical discourses and cultural theories. In her best-known
work, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, she
argued that gender is socially constructed.36 For her, there is no

31 Ibid., 14.
32 bell hooks, Where We Stand: Class Matters (New York: Routledge, 2000), 8.
33 Ibid., 9.
34 Biana, “Extending bell hooks,” 19.
35 Ibid., 21.
36 Judith Butler, Gender Trouble, (Abingdon: Routledge classics, 1990), 16.
 From a Culture of Domination to Safe Spaces 19

inherent natural basis in which men naturally behave as masculine

and women as feminine; rather, these are the social conventions.37 She
argued that gender is not something internal but is a repeated
performance of acts, gestures, and desires evident on the body’s
surface.38
For Butler, gender is not just a process, but it is a particular
type of process, “a set of repeated acts within a highly rigid regulatory
frame.”39 The idea of gender as performativity states that gender
proves to be performativity, constituting the identity it is purported to
be. In this sense, gender is always a doing.40 However, this kind of
performativity is already determined within the regulatory frame.
Gender performativity is constituted through repeated acts performed
within societal norms. These norms prescribe specific roles for
individuals of their assigned gender. These arguments tell us that
gender is not a voluntary choice but a process influenced by social
structures and power dynamics. Considering this, the dominant
culture’s gender performativity could oppress the marginalized,
particularly women. Hence, gender performativity should be changed
by raising awareness and disrupting and challenging traditional
gender norms and expectations to create a safe space.

Status of Filipino Women: Subordination, Oppression

Based on the metric system, the Philippines is one of the

leading countries in promoting gender equality; being ranked first in
Asia, second in the East Asia and the Pacific (EAP) region, and 16th
place globally.41 This shows significant progress, highlighting our
commitment to address gender disparities. Yet, it is crucial to
acknowledge that no country has achieved full gender parity. Based on
the pace of progress, it will take approximately 131 years to reach full
equality.42 More effort is needed to enhance our means of addressing

37 Ibid., 6.
38 Joy Jenkins; Finneman, Teri, “Gender trouble in the workplace: applying
Judith Butler’s theory of performativity to news organizations.” Feminist Media
Studies, 2017; 2.
39 Sara Salih, "On Judith butler and performativity." Sexualities and

communication in everyday life: A reader (2007): 56.

40 Butler, Gender Trouble, 25.
41 World Economic Forum, “Global Gender Gap Report 2023”

https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GGGR_2023.
42 Ibid.
20 Mark M. Gatus

gender issues. We need to address the norms affecting the people's

behavior, which create a culture of domination and oppression.
Particularly, Filipinos still hold fundamental biases against women.43
These biased gender social norms impede our progress in achieving
gender equality and empowering women.44 While some Filipino
women may consider themselves empowered, it is essential to
recognize that many still face ongoing struggles in their quest for
empowerment.
Like any other [oppressed] women in the world, Filipino
Women who have yet to attain empowerment and full agency often
experience various forms of “otherness”45 that impact their way of life.
This norm of “otherness” positions them at a disadvantage as the
societal structure fails to provide them with equitable privileges,
power, and authority. The persistence of biased gender social norms,
inhibiting women from attaining full agency, perpetuates their
experience of subordination and oppression. This situation persists
because some groups uphold biased gender social norms and
inequalities.
Our society is structured where Filipino women’s gender
performativity is constructed as victims of domination. They are
described as symbolic victims of the movement of social dialectics and
not just of male domination but also of political economy.46 The
periods of colonization and neo-colonization transformed the
Philippines into a patriarchal system.47 The subordination of Filipino

43 United Nations, “2023 Gender Social Norms Index (GSNI),” Human

Development Reports, June 12, 2023, https://hdr.undp.org/content/2023-gender-

social-norms-index-gsni#/indicies/GSNI.
44 Ibid.
45 The term is used similarly to the idea of Simone De Beauvoir, who argued

that women throughout history are treated as the “other” in relation to men. These
norms position women as only a secondary sex and a subordinate as compared to
men. So, there is a subordination of women and domination of men. The latter
becomes an invisible reality and the former is acceptable. (See Simone De Beauvoir,
The Second Sex, 1949).
46 Rodrigo Abenes, “The Genealogy of Male Domination in the Philippines,”

Baybayin 1, no. 1 (2015): 23–36.

47 Abenes, “The Genealogy of Male Domination,” 27. Also, see Feorillo P.

Demeterio and Leslie Anne L. Liwanag, “The Philosophy of Sr. Mary John Mananzan:
Some Contributions to Filipino Philosophy,” International Journal of Philosophy 18, no.
2 (2017) and Tran Xuan Hiep et.al, “Women Education in The Colonial Context: The
Case of The Philippines,” Psychology and Education 58, no. 1 (2021).
 From a Culture of Domination to Safe Spaces 21

women subjected them to male domination.48 They were compelled to

domestication through enforcement of the traditional gender roles.49
Once they failed to conform to these norms, they were often
considered potential servants of evil powers.50 These periods changed
the status and role of Filipino women. They instilled false
consciousness among Filipinos, sustaining male domination and
subjecting women to unsafe conditions.
Male domination reinforces patriarchy, solidifying Filipino
women as victims of oppression. Oppression could happen to any
Filipino woman in society who does not have full agency. Patriarchy
hinders the full agency of women. “It can be conceptualized as a
system or systems producing and reproducing gendered and
intersectional inequalities, men's power and women's
subordination.”51 It is embedded in our political, social, and economic
system, which creates a structure of gender. For some feminists,
patriarchy is the primary cause of women’s oppression. It reinforces
traditional gender roles, unequal power dynamics, control, violence,
and abuse. To further understand Filipino women’s experiences of
patriarchy and oppression, let us examine their colonial and
neocolonial experiences in the context of Young, hooks, and Butler.
Patriarchy, for Young, is a systemic and structural form of
inequality. Her notion of the five faces of oppression explains the
dimensions of oppression within patriarchy. These five faces of
oppression are reflected in Filipino women’s experiences, where they
could experience one or more, as these faces are often interconnected
with their experiences. Cultural Imperialism happened when the
Philippines became a colony of Spain, America, and Japan. In
colonialism, particularly during the Spanish regime, male domination
was legitimized by Roman Catholicism and has been accepted as a
natural phenomenon.52 Roman Catholicism transformed the social
structure of the Philippines, converting it into a patriarchal system.

48 Carolyn Israel Sobritchea, “American Colonial Education and Its Impact on

the Status of Filipino Women,” Asian Studies 27; 72.

49 Demeterio and Liwanag, “The Philosophy of Sr. Mary John Mananzan,”

193.
50 Ibid., 186.
51 Sofia Strid and Jeff Hearn, “Violence and Patriarchy,” in Encyclopedia of

Violence, Peace, & Conflict, ed. Lester Kurtz, Third Edition (Academic Press, 2022),
319–27.
52 Abenes, “The Genealogy of Male Domination,” 35.
22 Mark M. Gatus

The teaching of the church is male-centered and male-dominated.

Centuries of colonization have instilled a certain degree of inferior
consciousness in Filipinos, particularly women. For example, the
Hispanic and American education systems shaped the subordination
of women. In the Spanish period, women were discriminated against
and excluded. Their education is very minimal, and the formal training
beyond primary grades was generally a male privilege.53 Many
institutions were established exclusively for males, and higher
learning for girls was meant for daughters of Spaniards and other local
elites.54 This is a deliberate neglect of women’s education because of
the existing norm that they will just do housework. Because of Roman
Catholicism, women are taught to be obedient to elders and always
subservient to males and should only concentrate on developing skills
that would turn them into excellent daughters, homemakers, mothers,
and servants of God.55 Furthermore, the American education system in
the Philippines helped to broaden the range of learning opportunities
for women.56 Nonetheless, this has the same gender bias and
ideologies inculcated among Filipinos. It did very little to dismantle
the patriarchal structures that the Spaniards implanted in us.57 By
strongly emphasizing domestic skills and moral teachings, the schools
delimited the career opportunities of women to those compatible with
their mothering and housekeeping roles, which later posed more
serious obstacles to the improvement of women’s status.58
Neocolonialism has brought Filipino women to another
struggle. Capitalism emerged as a new social structure, exploiting and
dehumanizing women.59 Capitalism itself became the colonist.60 It
became the new form of cultural imperialism. Considering this, the
Philippines is regarded as one of the world’s top migrant-sending
countries.61 Among the Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs), women

53 Sobritchea, “American Colonial Education,” 72.

54 Ibid.
55 Ibid., 74.
56 Hiep et.al, “Women Education in The Colonial Context,” 5219.
57 Sobritchea, “American Colonial Education,” 79.
58 Ibid.
59 Abenes, “The Genealogy of Male Domination,” 34.
60 Ibid., 29.
61Jean Encinas-Franco, “Filipino Women Migrant Workers and Overseas

Employment Policy: An Analysis from Women’s Rights Perspective”, Asian Politics &
Policy 8, no. 3 (2016), 495.
 From a Culture of Domination to Safe Spaces 23

have a more considerable number than men.62 The majority of them

were engaged in elementary occupations.63 Although we consider
them modern heroes, OFWs experience several forms of
discrimination and violence. Moreover, these OFW women continue to
support households and economies despite challenges such as low
pay, a lack of legal protection, and discrimination.
Marginalization is experienced not just by OFWs but also by
women residing in the Philippines. Filipino women experience
economic insecurity.64 In seeking employment in the Philippines, few
companies would avoid employing married women.65 Women's
vulnerability and subordination under the existing gender hierarchy
are taken advantage of in these companies, allowing exporters to
squeeze even more profits from the underpaid workforce.66 Moreover,
Filipino women are marginalized because of their home care
responsibilities. Many women are held back from productive
employment opportunities by their family responsibilities.67 The belief
in gender-specific roles limits Filipino women’s full participation in
society, sustaining marginalization.
Filipino women also experience violence and exploitation. As
argued, capitalism as a new form of social structure exploits and
dehumanizes women. In 2019, estimates revealed that there are
around 2.2 million OFWs deployed internationally, where the vast
majority are working in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates

62 The number of Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs) or Filipino workers

who worked abroad during the period of April to September 2021 was estimated
at 1.83 million. By sex disaggregation, more women were reported to be working
overseas, accounting for 60.2 percent or 1.10 million in 2021. (see Philippine Statistics
Authority, 2021 Overseas Filipino Workers, Final Results)
63 Elementary occupations involve the performance of simple and routine

tasks, which may require the use of hand-held tools and considerable physical effort.
It includes cleaning, restocking supplies, and performing basic maintenance in
apartments, houses, kitchens, hotels, offices, and other buildings; washing cars and
windows; helping in kitchens and performing simple tasks in food preparations;
delivering messages or goods; carrying luggage and handling baggage. (See Philippine
Statistics Authority, 2021 Overseas Filipino Workers, Final Results)
64 Lesley McCulloch & Lara Stancich, “Women and (in)security: The case of

the Philippines”, The Pacific Review 11, No. 3 (2007), 422.

65 Ibid.
66 Ibid.
67 Helle Buchhave Nadia Belhaj Hassine Belghith, “Overcoming barriers to

women’s work in the Philippines”

24 Mark M. Gatus

(UAE).68 Among these OFWs, women comprise more than half, with
domestic workers constituting the majority. However, women are
vulnerable to exploitation, abuse, and trafficking in persons.69 In 2021,
nearly 5,000 cases of abuse for OFWs were recorded. Domestic work
for women has been a venue of exploitation, maltreatment, and
dehumanization among Filipino women.70
Filipino women experience exploitation through unpaid or
underpaid labor. They still bear the burden of two full-time jobs,
managing their full-time work and household chores, and caring for
the family members.71 These enduring societal gender norms
regarding unpaid care work for women indicate that they continue to
shoulder a significant portion of domestic responsibilities at home.
Balancing these responsibilities with their professional career is
indeed challenging. This situation highlights the ongoing existence of
gender-based discrimination in the workplace. Thus, this norm
confines women in a space where achieving complete self-sufficiency
is hindered by traditional gender roles.
Violence Against Women (VAW) remains a prevalent societal
issue in the country. For example, one in four Filipino women aged 15-
49 has experienced physical, emotional, or sexual violence by their
husbands and partners.72 It is disturbing that VAW persists despite
efforts to solve the issue.73 The gender-based violence experienced by
Filipino women stems from unequal power relations. Societal norms
position men in dominant roles while relegating women to
subordinate positions, leading to instances of violence. VAW is men’s
way of asserting dominance over women to retain power.74

68 Philippine Statistics Authority,

https://psa.gov.ph/statistics/survey/labor-and-employment/survey-overseas-
filipinos Accessed May 23, 2023.
69 ASEAN-Australia Counter Trafficking, “Overseas Filipino Workers

vulnerable to trafficking will be protected under new Philippines Department of

Migrant Workers”
70 Abenes, “The Genealogy of Male Domination,” 32.
71 Oxfam, “Survey: Filipinos still believe gender stereotypes on

breadwinning, unpaid care work but positive changes seen,” Oxfam Pilipinas.
Accessed May 24, 2023.
72 Philippine Commission on Women (PCW), “Violence Against Women”

accessed May 24, 2023.

73 Ibid.
74 Ibid.
 From a Culture of Domination to Safe Spaces 25

Unfortunately, victims of VAW in the country are unreported because

of the “culture of silence.”75
Powerlessness happens when there is a “culture of silence.”
Many cases of VAW remain unreported due to the prevailing belief
that speaking up would not make any meaningful change.76 This can
also be observed through societies’ dismissal and lack of interest in
adequately addressing the suffering of the victims. Tragically, there
are situations where, instead of helping, the victims are unfairly
blamed for the incidents they have experienced. These things
collectively contribute to an environment where women victims
hesitate to voice their experiences.
Consequently, this culture of silence renders women
powerless, stripping away their ability to be autonomous. Women lack
agency and control over themselves because of the violence they
experience. To further situate the struggle of Filipino women, let us
see it through hooks’ notion of class struggle. Patriarchy for hooks
does not work in isolation but intersects with other forms of
oppression, such as racism and classism. It is also about power
imbalance and cultural and symbolic domination. We must analyze
social “class” to understand oppression. Social classes exacerbate the
systemic oppression experienced by women. And I agree that hooks’
idea is relevant in the Philippines. As a colonized society, we are
subjected to colonial rules, significantly impacting our existence.
Considering that the Philippines is classified as a “third world,”77
women’s experience of oppression is laden with poverty, which is
difficult to overcome since the society lacks policies and
infrastructure.78 Hence, Filipino women’s colonial and neocolonial
experiences put them in a specific social class that shaped their
collective experience of oppression. This “class” positions them at the
bottom of the hierarchy. Considering economic status that makes
social class distinction, wealthy and privileged Filipino women do not
have the same level of oppression as women who do domestic and
unpaid work in their work and homes. Like Young, hooks’ ideologies

75 Ibid.
76 Charie Mae F. Abarca, “Ending the ‘Culture of Silence’ in PH’s Fight vs
Violence against Women,” Manila Bulletin, November 26, 2022.
77 “Third world” is the term used by bell hooks to describe and explain the

condition and experiences of marginalized black women within Western societies.

(See bell hooks. Feminist Theory from Margin to Center. South End Press, 1984.)
78 Biana, “Extending bell hooks,” 8.
26 Mark M. Gatus

can be reflected in the five faces of oppression experienced by Filipino

women. Thus, the existence of oppression against Filipino women
threatens their safe spaces.
For Butler, patriarchy is closely tied to her philosophy of
gender performativity and the social construction of identity. For her,
gender is not inherent but a performative act. With this, the
situatedness of oppression experienced by Filipino women is a result
of the regulatory frame that leads to the performativity of Filipino
women into specific gender roles. These social constructs were
practiced repetitively from the period of colonialism to neo-
colonialism. Patriarchy operates by conditioning Filipino women to
perform activities that treat them as inferior to men.
On the other hand, Filipino men are unconsciously placed in a
position of domination over Filipino women. Both adhere to these
roles of domination and subordination and are viewed as conforming
to accepted social norms. This domination is not a personal expression
but is learned and reinforced through social means. Social norms
coerce Filipinos to conform to the system of gender performativity,
affecting safe space for Filipino women. Any man who failed to
conform to these masculine gender social norms was judged by their
social group as weak. So, individuals, particularly those in positions of
power and privilege, contribute to reproducing oppressive power
structures. In this situation, the power dynamics set by the colonial
and neo-colonial experiences of Filipino women maintain and
reproduce their struggles and oppression.

Safe Spaces in the Culture of Domination?

Creating safe spaces is a struggle in a culture of domination.

The presence of this culture makes a gender social construct
supporting patriarchy and putting Filipino women as symbolic
victims. Considering the situation of women, how do we create a safe
space for them?
The Philippines enacts laws to promote safe spaces for women.
These laws aim to protect and promote their rights. Some noteworthy
laws are the Republic Act (RA) no. 9710 or the Magna Carta of Women
(MCW), RA no. 9262 or the Anti-Violence Against Women and their
Children (AVAWC) Act of 2004, and RA no. 11313 or the Safe Spaces
Act. The MCW seeks to eliminate any form of discrimination against
women through recognition, protection, fulfillment, and promotion of
 From a Culture of Domination to Safe Spaces 27

the rights of Filipino Women, especially those belonging to the

marginalized sectors of society.79 The AVAWC is a law that protects
women and their children from any form of violence, including
physical, sexual, psychological, and economic abuse.80 The Safe Spaces
Act is the law that penalizes gender-based sexual harassment done in
public spaces, both physical and online.81 These laws are essential in
safe spaces.
While all the laws mentioned are significant in creating a safe
space and advancing women’s rights, we cannot deny that the
oppression of many Filipino women persists. These laws have
challenges and limitations that make it difficult to create safe spaces.
For example, while the MCW is a comprehensive law that promotes
women’s rights, the oppressive cultural and societal norms engraved
in the traditions and beliefs of the people pose significant challenges to
the effective creation of safe spaces. The normalization of oppression
hampers the establishment of safe spaces. Patriarchal norms obstruct
the implementation of the law and sustain the faces of oppression and
class struggle among Filipino women. Although the MCW recognizes
the existence of patriarchal norms and tries to advance gender
equality and empowerment, it does not lay down explicit mechanisms
to dismantle the patriarchal system itself. The law primarily focuses
on providing and securing women the rights, opportunities, and access
they need for equality and empowerment. The MCW is a significant
legal framework that serves as a foundation. Still, it requires a
collective effort to create safe spaces.

79 Philippine Commission on Women, “Republic Act 9710 or the Magna Carta

of Women”, accessed May 24, 2023.

80 Violence Against Women and their Children refers to any act or a series of

acts committed by any person against a woman who is his wife, former wife, or
against a woman with whom the person has or had a sexual or dating relationship, or
with whom he has a common child, or against her child whether legitimate or
illegitimate, within or without the family abode, which result in or is likely to result in
physical, sexual, psychological harm or suffering, or economic abuse including threats
of such acts, battery, assault, coercion, harassment or arbitrary deprivation of liberty
(see RA no. 9262, Section 3-A).
81 Based on the Safe Spaces Act, public spaces refer to streets and alleys,

public parks, schools, buildings, malls, bars, restaurants, transportation terminals,

public markets, spaces used as evacuation centers, government offices, public utility
vehicles covered by app-based transport network services and other recreational
spaces such as, but not limited to, cinema halls, theaters, and spas (see RA no. 11313,
Art. I sec. 3-g). This also includes online spaces as gender-based sexual harassment
may be done online as stipulated in article II of RA no. 11313.
28 Mark M. Gatus

Another law is the AVAWC. The legislation of this law

guarantees rights, protection, support, and legal assistance for women
and children who are victims of violence. Despite this, many women
still experience violence. This is a result of the unequal power relation
between men and women. The culture of silence makes women
endure the abuse they experience since society lacks safe spaces that
will safeguard their pleas. The lack of confidence in the authorities
reflects our government’s law enforcement. Victims are reluctant to
report what happened because speaking up may not yield meaningful
results. Instead of having help, society views them as responsible for
the violence they experience. The feelings of fear and shame are also
strong restraints for women. This occurs when society establishes
biases that blame the victims instead of holding the perpetrators
accountable.
Lastly, the Safe Spaces Act addresses gender-based sexual
harassment in public spaces. This law faces implementation
challenges because it requires the full participation of all institutions.
However, suppose a patriarch controls institutions; effective law
implementation remains challenging. Some may consider offensive
actions like catcalling, misogynistic remarks, sexist slurs, and stalking
normal because of the false consciousness perpetuated by patriarchy.
These actions go unchallenged as they are wrongly deemed acceptable
by society, leading to the objectification of women. Moreover,
institutions controlled by a patriarch may not deal with these
situations seriously and urgently. This hinders the enforcement of the
law.
As mentioned earlier, the laws are significant legal reforms in
achieving a safe space for women. Yet, merely relying on the legal
penalties for the perpetrators would not solve the problem. These
people will just defend their actions as right based on the accepted
norms shaped by the culture of domination. They will not see any
wrong in their actions. Furthermore, the laws penalize individuals, not
the collective social group or class that sustains the system of
structural oppression.
Moreover, the poor implementation of these laws reflects the
patriarchal structure of society, considering that they do not see the
urgency of addressing patriarchal norms because they will lose
control and domination over women. Men want to stay on this kind of
gender performativity or the traditional gender norms because it gives
them convenience, power, and privilege. So, we need to reinforce our
 From a Culture of Domination to Safe Spaces 29

means of addressing the oppression experienced by Filipino women.

This includes more legislation to realize women's full participation in
society and grant them full agency. But, creating safe spaces should go
beyond legislation. It requires changing the culture of domination so
that women will be given equal opportunities, access, and resources.
To achieve safe spaces, confronting and dismantling the culture of
domination, particularly patriarchy, is necessary. It requires collective
resistance against this dominant culture that sustains oppression and
class struggle. Through resistance, the dominant social group could be
aware of the injustice and oppression experienced by women. Thus, a
collective and transformative approach is needed to create safe spaces
in the country.

Toward Safe Spaces: Collective Critical Consciousness, Action, and

Responsibility

There is a need to address the issues of a patriarchal system

that sustains the intersectional oppression experienced by Filipino
women to have safe spaces. It is necessary to reconstruct the gender
performativity being practiced by the dominant class or social group
that causes the oppression of women. We can only reconstruct it if we
recognize that the idealized patriarchal system is not a safe space and
is oppressive. People just cannot recognize these because the culture
of domination necessarily promotes addiction to lying and denial.82
Lying and denial because the culture of domination suggests that
oppression no longer exists and the feminist movement has been
successful. But this is not the reality. Women are still victims. The
dominant social group or class silences the oppressed through lying
and denial. In this kind of domination, how could we recognize
oppression?
Critical consciousness-raising about the oppression that
hampers the realization of safe spaces is essential in creating safe
spaces. Through critical consciousness-raising, we could make the
invisible oppression experienced by Filipino women visible as a
crucial starting point in having safe spaces. Victims should resist the
patriarchal system. The oppressed social group and class should have
a collective consciousness to resist the oppressive norms collectively.
In resistance, the marginalized group must speak and analyze their

82 bell hooks, Teaching to Transgress, (New York: Routledge, 1994), 28.

30 Mark M. Gatus

situations and make a firm position against the norms that obstruct
their full participation in society. They should come together to raise
awareness and fight the societal structure for social justice. Critical
consciousness-raising of the oppressed group and class could lead to
collective action and the formation of social movements aiming to
restore the dignity and humanity lost in the culture of domination.
Their union and collective action could establish a movement that
would deconstruct the narratives, biases, false consciousness, and
perspectives embedded in society. Through critical consciousness-
raising, Filipino people would understand the multiple layers of
oppression that intersect with class, race, gender, and other social
categories. Thus, we should not look at oppression in one dimension
or category only but how it intersects with societal norms.
Three significant spaces were identified that play a critical role
in developing critical consciousness for having safe spaces. These are
school, home, and society. School can be a source of constraints but
also a potential source of liberation.83 As a source of constraints,
traditional schools have biases that uphold and maintain supremacy,
imperialism, sexism, and racism that corrupt and distort the education
system.84 On the other hand, as a potential source of liberation, schools
transform students by providing them with the foundations for critical
thinking where students could question the status quo and develop an
awareness of social inequalities and injustices. Schools are significant
places for creating a safe space because this is where people learn
ideas, values, and beliefs. So, schools should be inclusive and
empowering. Valuing this norm, schools could lead students to
become socially responsible citizens.
Consequently, schools should develop inclusive curricula
where oppression norms are analyzed, criticized, and addressed. In
this way, schools could promote social justice, reshape false
consciousness, and make education liberating. The Philippine
education system should defuse the curricula that sustain structural
injustice and the cultural imperial ideology hampering women’s full
agency, which normalizes oppression and class struggle in the
country. School curricula must include discussions about the terrain of
oppression embedded in our history during colonialism and

83 hooks, Teaching to Transgress, 28 and Specia, Akello & Osman, Ahmed,

Education as a Practice of Freedom: Reflections on bell hooks, Journal of Education

and Practice 6, no. 17 (2015); 196.
84 hooks, Teaching to Transgress, 29.
 From a Culture of Domination to Safe Spaces 31

neocolonialism to fully understand and examine the experienced

domination and oppression in the country. Our colonial experience
has left significant traces of why women are subjugated by men which
were sustained in the neo-colonial period. Our education should
critically examine the layered experience of oppression among
Filipinos embedded in our political, historical, and personal
experiences. Learning this should be a requirement for all academic
institutions, from basic education to higher learning. Educational
institutions should provide a clear mechanism, direction, program,
and policies for realizing safe spaces.
Teachers and scholars have a critical role in developing critical
consciousness. As intellectuals, they must transform society. They
should not remain aloof in ivory towers; instead, they should be
agents who engage with social issues and offer solutions.85 In the
classroom, teachers’ pedagogies should teach students to “transgress”
against dominant norms to achieve the gift of freedom.86 Significantly,
individuals will become self-actualized through education because it
allows people, particularly the marginalized and discriminated, to
acquire critical consciousness. Hence, teachers must create a learning
environment where students can actively engage in discourse without
threat or discrimination. As facilitators of learning, teachers should
encourage students to reflect and construct their knowledge,
particularly on issues involving domination and oppression.
In understanding the culture of domination, teachers and
students should have a critical inquiry to defuse the hierarchy
perpetuated in our society and create a sense of community.
Philippine schools should not be the site where teachers indoctrinate
their students with a culture of domination. It is where students
engage in a critical dialogue on issues affecting human development.
Also, it should not be the space where the culture of silence is
sustained; schools should be liberating. So, classrooms should be a
safe space for everyone to discuss important issues freely without
being silenced, dismissed, or excluded. Through critical discourse, the
teacher and the students could arrive at a new set of liberating ideas
and values. Critical dialogue fosters intellectual curiosity that will help
students understand the dynamics of oppression and domination,
which are crucial in building a just society. This kind of discourse

85 see hooks, Teaching to Transgress.

86 Ibid., 29.
32 Mark M. Gatus

could contribute to developing proper means to address conflict and

promote peaceful dialogue, leading to safe spaces. So that when
students leave schools and are exposed to the realms of society, they
have the appropriate knowledge and values that will guide them when
faced with domination and oppression. They will be the agents of
social transformation, promoting safe spaces.
Another significant space is home. At home, family members
first learn the values and norms that influence them in viewing
society. These values either support or refute patriarchy. In the
traditional family setting, the culture of domination brought by
patriarchy is present. As discussed in the previous sections, its
presence threatens safe spaces, including homes. To have safe spaces,
homes should not sustain patriarchal norms. A Filipino family typically
comprises a mother, father, and children.87 Fathers are said to be the
haligi ng tahanan, while the mothers are the ilaw ng tahanan. This is
an example of gendered roles that separate the roles of men and
women at home. Women’s roles are limited to providing emotional
strength and nurturing, while men are considered the pillars and
breadwinners of the family. Considering these dichotomic gender
roles that favor men, women frequently experience violence from
their partners. To eradicate hierarchy inside homes, there is a need to
eliminate sexism within the family. Thus, families should not reinforce
any gendered roles at home. So, parents can be both haligi at ilaw ng
tahanan. Critical dialogue is also significant in making homes a safe
space. Having this, each member could speak and share their
perspectives to better understand one another. Moreover, families
must have a mutually liberating agreement involving child-rearing,
family duties, love, respect, and empathy. For example, in child-
rearing, women and men should value fatherhood with the same
meaning and significance as motherhood.88 However, since societies
construct these traditional gender roles of men, they avoid
responsibility for child-rearing because it is considered feminine. By
placing parenting solely as the responsibility of women, social issues
may arise, like female parenting gives children few role models of
male parenting. This reality could perpetuate the idea that parenting is

87 This is the traditional or nuclear family set-up. Nonetheless, there are

other forms or types of family structures you could observe in society, including,
extended family, single-parent family, step family, same-sex family, and foster family.
88 bell hooks, Feminist Theory from Margin to Center, (United States; South

End Press, 1984), 137.

 From a Culture of Domination to Safe Spaces 33

solely a woman’s job leading to the reinforcement of male

domination.89 Thus, we need to revolutionize parenting. We need to
educate men about their shared responsibility to women. As hooks
argued, men will not equally share parenting responsibilities until
they are educated, ideally from childhood.90 If men fail to learn their
caring relation and responsibility to their children, many women will
be victims of having children with them, like the cases of single
mothers. Thus, to have a safe space at home, women must discuss
childcare and other essential issues with men before they have
children. To ensure that women and men are educated, society should
require all hopeful parents to attend sessions or programs to teach
and enlighten them on parenting and creating safe spaces within every
family.
Finally, society is another essential space. As argued,
establishing safe spaces faces layers of challenges in the culture of
domination and oppression. Structural injustice sustains the power
and privilege granted to the dominant social group and class. To
realize safe spaces in such a society, we must have a collective action
and responsibility to eliminate all forms of structural injustice that
intersect with the different social categories. Injustice makes an unsafe
space, and collective action and responsibility would rectify the
problematic structure. For Young, collective responsibility is proactive
and forward-looking since it aims to stop the recurrence of a given
structural injustice.91 Where should we begin this call for collective
action? We need to acknowledge systemic structural injustice and
intersectional inequalities in how our society is organized. Critical
consciousness about this reality will help us to analyze and
understand how the different forms of discrimination operate and
intersect. Young argued that since oppression is structural, blaming
individual actions would not solve the social issue. Instead, we must
shift our focus from individuals to the systemic and structural factors
that perpetuate inequalities. Through critical consciousness, we can
make society realize that addressing structural injustice is not just the
duty of the oppressed but, most importantly, the duty of all social
groups in any given society.92 Thus, collective action and responsibility
should lead to social, economic, and political movements. This should

89 Ibid., 140.
90 Ibid., 137.
91 Feorillo A. Demeterio III, Young’s Theory of Structural Justice, 209.
92 Ibid.
34 Mark M. Gatus

advance the society’s advocacies, raise social awareness, and influence

citizens' democratic participation and public policy. In the Philippines,
systemic structural injustice is experienced by oppressed Filipino
women. That is why, to have safe spaces, they should be given the
voice to participate in the decision-making process. Our legislative
body should ensure their participation with full agency and free from
external control. When adequately represented in legislation, it
ensures that policies and systems are passed with their inputs and
perspectives, empowering marginalized social groups, and classes.
Adding the idea of hooks, addressing oppression requires breaking the
silence about class, but this cannot be done if only a few people are
aware of class hierarchies.93 Thus, safe spaces could only be realized
when structural injustice and class struggle are addressed.

Conclusion

Safe spaces promote social justice and are free from

patriarchal norms. However, the culture of domination perpetuated in
the society normalizes oppression affecting certain social groups and
classes, such as Filipino women. This creates structural injustice,
making them vulnerable to several forms of oppression. Oppressed
women had no full agency over themselves and were controlled by a
patriarch. Thus, safe spaces are needed to restore the dignity and
humanity lost in the culture of domination. Despite the Philippines
performing well in international rankings on gender equality, Filipinos
still hold fundamental biases against women. While other Filipino
women may consider themselves empowered, many still struggle in
their quest for empowerment. So, we need safe spaces to safeguard
their fundamental rights. To do this, we need to dismantle patriarchy.
The philosophical lenses of Iris Marion Young, bell hooks, and
Judith Butler are utilized to examine the culture of domination and
oppression experienced by Filipino women. Their ideas help unveil
the complex and intersecting social categories, like gender, race, and
class, that sustain the structural injustice within society, affecting
Filipino women in the pursuit of safe spaces. To create safe spaces, the
Philippines enacts laws, such as RA no. 9710, RA no. 9262, and RA no.
11313. These laws are significant legal frameworks in safe spaces.

93 Hazel Biana, “The Matter of Class: COVID-19 in the Philippines”, Social

Ethics Society Journal of Applied Philosophy 6, no. 2 (2020), 28.

 From a Culture of Domination to Safe Spaces 35

However, these laws still need to be revisited and implemented

because a patriarchal society is unwilling to lose its power and
authority over women. Considering this, there is a need to eradicate
patriarchy, as it is a solid barrier to creating safe spaces.
Critical consciousness-raising is a significant starting point
toward safe spaces. This paper identified three essential safe spaces.
These are the school, the home, and society in general. In these spaces,
structural injustice should be addressed through collective action.
Everyone, after all, is responsible for creating safe spaces.

References

Abarca, Charie Mae F. “Ending the ‘Culture of Silence’ in PH’s Fight vs

Violence against Women.” Manila Bulletin, November 26, 2022.
https://bit.ly/46DTeWh.
Abenes, Rodrigo. “The Genealogy of Male Domination in the
Philippines.” Baybayin 1, no. 1 (2015): 23–36.
ASEAN-Australia Counter Trafficking. “Overseas Filipino Workers
Vulnerable to Trafficking Will Be Protected under New
Philippines Department of Migrant Workers - ASEAN–
Australia Counter Trafficking.” ASEAN–Australia Counter
Trafficking, November 24, 2022.
https://www.aseanact.org/story/ople/. Accessed May 23,
2023.
Biana, Hazel T. "Extending bell hooks' feminist theory." Journal of
International Women's Studies 21, no. 1 (2020): 13-29.
Biana, Hazel T. "The matter of class: COVID-19 in the Philippines." Soc.
Ethics Soc. J. Appl. Philos 6 (2020): 17-36.
Buchhave, Helle and Nadia Belhaj Hassine Belghith. “Overcoming
Barriers to Women’s Work in the Philippines.” World Bank
Blogs (blog), August 25, 2023.
https://blogs.worldbank.org/eastasiapacific/overcoming-
barriers-womens-work-philippines.
Butler, Judith. Gender Trouble, (Abingdon: Routledge classics, 1990).
“Definition of Safe Space.” In Merriam-Webster Dictionary, August 24,
2023.https://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/safe%20space.
Demeterio, Feorillo A III. Young’s Theory of Structural Justice and
36 Mark M. Gatus

Collective Responsibility (De La Salle University Publishing

House, 2019): 185-212.
Demeterio, Feorillo P., and Leslie Anne L. Liwanag. “The Philosophy of
Sr. Mary John Mananzan: Some Contributions to Filipino
Philosophy.” International Journal of Philosophy 18, no. 2
(January 1, 2017): 1.
https://ejournals.ph/article.php?id=11400.
Encinas‐Franco, Jean. "Filipino Women Migrant Workers and Overseas
Employment Policy: An Analysis From Women's Rights
Perspective." Asian Politics & Policy 8, no. 3 (2016): 494-501.
Hiep, Tran Xuan, Tran Dinh Hung, Tran Hoang Long, Nguyen Tuan
Binh, and Tran Thai Bao. "Women Education in the Colonial
Context: The Case of the Philippines." Psychology and
Education 58, no. 1 (2021): 5213-5221.
hooks, bell. Feminist Theory from margin to center. South End Press,
1984.
hooks, bell. Teaching to transgress. Routledge, 1994.
Jenkins, Joy and Teri Finneman. “Gender trouble in the workplace:
applying Judith Butler’s theory of performativity to news
organizations.” Feminist Media Studies, 2017, 157-172.
Mancenido-Bolaños, Marella Ada V. "Iris Marion Young's' Faces of
Oppression and the Oppression of Women in the Responsible
Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act of 2012." KRITIKE:
An Online Journal of Philosophy 14, no. 1 (2020).
Marx, Karl and Frederick Engels. Manifesto of the Communist Party.
Marxists Internet Archive, 2010.
McCulloch, Lesley, and Lara Stancich. "Women and (in) security: The
case of the Philippines." The Pacific Review 11, no. 3 (2007):
416-443.
Metcalfe, Sarah. "Adolescent constructions of gendered identities: The
role of sport and (physical) education." Sport, Education and
Society 23, no. 7 (2018): 681-693.
Mortari, Luigina. “Reflectivity in Research Practice.” International
Journal of Qualitative Methods 14, no. 5 (2015): 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406915618045.
Oxfam Philippines. “Survey: Filipinos Still Believe Gender Stereotypes
on Breadwinning, Unpaid Care Work but Positive Changes
Seen,” n.d. Accessed May 24, 2023.
https://philippines.oxfam.org/latest/press-release/survey-
 From a Culture of Domination to Safe Spaces 37

filipinos-still-believe-gender-stereotypes-breadwinning-
unpaid-care-work.
Philippine Commission on Women. “Violence against Women –
Philippine Commission on Women,” July 7, 2022.
https://pcw.gov.ph/violence-against-women/. Accessed May
24, 2023.
Philippine Commission on Women, “Republic Act 9710 or the Magna
Carta of Women,” October 20, 2022. https://bit.ly/3PQ8ysj
accessed May 24, 2023.
Philippine Statistics Authority. “Survey on Overseas Filipinos |
Philippine Statistics Authority | Republic of the Philippines,”
December 2, 2022.
https://psa.gov.ph/statistics/survey/labor-and-
employment/survey-overseas-filipinos. Accessed May 23,
2023.
Roestone Collective. "Safe space: Towards a
reconceptualization." Antipode 46, no. 5 (2014): 1346-1365.
Salih, Sara. "On Judith butler and performativity." Sexualities and
communication in everyday life: A reader (2007): 55-68.
Sobritchea, Carolyn Israel. "American colonial education and its
impact on the status of Filipino women." Asian Studies 27
(1989): 70-91.
Specia, Akello, and Ahmed A. Osman. "Education as a Practice of
Freedom: Reflections on bell hooks." Journal of Education and
Practice 6, no. 17 (2015): 195-199.
Strid, Sofia, and Jeff Hearn. “Violence and Patriarchy.” In Elsevier
EBooks, 319–27, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-
820195-4.00108-4.
United Nations. “2023 Gender Social Norms Index (GSNI).” Human
Development Reports, June 12, 2023.
https://hdr.undp.org/content/2023-gender-social-norms-
index-gsni#/indicies/GSNI. Accessed August 21, 2023.
Young, Iris Marion. Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton
University Press, 1990.