1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Background of the study

Sexual Orientation (SO), Gender Identity (GI) and Expression (E) varies widely

throughout the world (Gemma MacArthur, 2015). Sexual orientation and Gender Identity

is nothing new because throughout history, LGBT communities are already present in

different faces of the society (Free and Equal, n.d.). However, Gerald Lackey (as cited in

Blau, J. et al., 2015) stated that in the past, issues on sexual orientation and gender

identity were not included on the international dialogue on human rights because it was

only considered as a matter of moral judgment. Subsequently, he claims that because of

increasing visibility of LGBT communities worldwide by 1990s, the United Nations was

pressured to take a stand for the LGBT communities resulting to overruling of past

decisions that greatly benefited the LGBT communities.

In November of 2006, spearheaded by United Nations, the Yogyakarta Principles

was made to address the broad range of human rights standards and its application to

human rights violations against others specifically because of their sexual orientation and

gender identity (The Yogyakarta Principles, 2007). The Yogyakarta Principles focuses on

promoting and protecting the rights pertaining to a person’s sexual orientation and gender

identity. Furthermore, Yogyakarta Principles gave a profound definition of the SO and GI

and E. Sexual Orientation (SO) refers to a person’s emotional, affectional and sexual

attraction to different gender, the same gender or more than other gender while Gender

Identity and Expression (GIE) refers to individual’s personal feeling in the internal and

individual experience of gender that may or may not correspond to sex assigned at birth

of the individual (The Yogyakarta Principles, 2007).

 2

Because of the complexity of SO and GI and E, SOGIE framework emerged to

point towards the diversity of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT)

communities which are affected by state and societal prejudices (Narrain, 2016). Narrain

elucidated that there are instances that people are being victimized by both the state and

civil society because of their gender expression which may or may not have anything to

do with their sexuality. This means that the SOGIE framework is sensitive in analyzing the

cases and concerns pertaining to a person’s sexual orientation and gender identity for it

looks into the dynamic relationship between a person’s orientation and identity.

The Philippines being a signatory to the United Nations since 1945 paved the way

for its participation in the 27th session of the Human Rights Council conducted in Geneva

last September 2014. The Philippines was one of the 25 countries that supported a

landmark United Nations resolution at the Human Rights Council upholding the rights of

the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) communities (Rainbow Rights

Philippines, 2015).The efforts of the country’s participation resulted to the passage of anti-

discrimination ordinances that protect lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgender people

from discrimination in different Local Government Units in the Philippines namely Quezon

City, Davao City, Cebu City, Bacolod City, Dagupan City, Candon City, Angeles City,

Vigan City and two provinces Cavite and Agusan del Norte (Rainbow Rights Philippines,

2015).

In the context of the Philippines, the country is taking slow efforts in lobbying the

issues and concerns of the LGBT communities. One example of this is the House Bill No.

342 also known as “Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity Discrimination Prohibition Act”

- an act penalizing discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.

Introduced by Hon. Sol Argones, the bill was received by the House of Representatives
 3

on the 1st of July 2013. Until now, the bill is still under scrutiny. Sadly, the country as a

whole still does not have specific laws and policies that pertains to SOGIE.

The Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) is the government

institution that is responsible for the protection of social welfare rights and the promotion

of social development. As an institution, it is expected to spearhead the integration and

mainstreaming of the SOGIE framework throughout the country. However, since the

Philippines downloaded and intigrated the SOGIE framework last 2014, there is still no

concrete program taken by the DSWD to mainstream the SOGIE framework. In the case

of DSWD Regional Field Office XI, an interview was conducted last February 26, 2016

with the Gender and Development chairperson. As the chairperson explained, the SOGIE

framework is still new to most of the employees in DSWD Regional Field Office XI and

some are still not aware about SOGIE. Trainings about SOGIE sensitiveness are

conducted, but most of the workers inside the DSWD XI are not still aware and some has

little knowledge about the SOGIE framework. If the mainstreaming of SOGIE framework

will not be taken into action, the DSWD XI will not be able to properly cater the needs,

issues and concerns of its beneficiaries specially the LGBT communities. Given this

context, how can the offices of DSWD (both national and regional) equally promote and

protect the welfare of its constituents if the office will not mainstream the SOGIE

framework?

Given the functions of Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD)

Regional Field Office XI, it is time for the office to take a lead action in maistreaming the

SOGIE framework by identifying specific and concrete activities that will make the office

SOGIE sensitive. By mainstreaming the SOGIE framework, the DSWD Regional Feild

Office XI can now appropriately handle SOGIE related issues and concerns. In addition,

mainstreaming the SOGIE framework also gives the notion of the LGBT communities

being included in the society in promoting equality. This study is useful to the
 4

administrative head of the office to see the need of the mainstreaming of the Sexual

Orientation and Gender Identity and Expression framework.

Therefore, this study aimed in knowing the perspectives of the Department of

Social Welfare and Development Regional Field Office XI about SOGIE framework. Based

on the said perscpectives of the office, the researchers also discovered how the DSWD

XI integrated and mainstreamed the SOGIE framework to the delivery of its social policies,

programs and services given that the SOGIE framework was downloaded by the country

last 2014.

Theoretical Framework

This study is anchored the Human Rights Based Approach (HRBA). As defined by

The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights OHCHR (2006), a

human rights-based approach is a conceptual framework for the process of human

development that is normatively based on international human rights standards and

operationally directed to promoting and protecting human rights. It seeks to analyze

inequalities which lie at the heart of development problems and redress discriminatory

practices and unjust distributions of power that impede development progress. According

to UN OHCHR (as cited in Maschi, 2016), one of the areas of value added by the human

rights approach is the emphasis it places on the accountability of policy makers and other

actors whose actions have impact on the rights of people.

Moreover, HRBA has six (6) principles that serve as guide in the whole process of

framing programs for all sectors. These principles are: universality and inalienability;

indivisibility; inter-dependence and inter-relatedness; non-discrimination and equality;

participation and inclusion; accountability and the rule of law (UN HRBA Portal, n.d). UN

HRBA as stipulated in its official website (hrbaportal.org) elaborated these six principles:
 5

 Universality and inalienability: Human rights are universal and inalienable. All

people everywhere in the world are entitled to them. The human person in whom

they inhere cannot voluntarily give them up. Nor can others take them away from

him or her. As stated in Article 1 of the UDHR, “All human beings are born free and

equal in dignity and rights”.

 Indivisibility: Human rights are indivisible. Whether of a civil, cultural, economic,

political or social nature, they are all inherent to the dignity of every human person.

Consequently, they all have equal status as rights, and cannot be ranked, a priori,

in a hierarchical order.

 Inter-dependence and Inter-relatedness. The realization of one right often

depends, wholly or in part, upon the realization of others. For instance, realization

of the right to health may depend, in certain circumstances, on realization of the

right to education or of the right to information.

 Equality and Non-discrimination: All individuals are equal as human beings and by

virtue of the inherent dignity of each human person. All human beings are entitled

to their human rights without discrimination of any kind, such as race, colour, sex,

ethnicity, age, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin,

disability, property, birth or other status as explained by the human rights treaty

bodies.

 Participation and Inclusion: Every person and all peoples are entitled to active, free

and meaningful participation in, contribution to, and enjoyment of civil, economic,

social, cultural and political development in which human rights and fundamental

freedoms can be realized.

 6

 Accountability and Rule of Law: States and other duty-bearers are answerable for

the observance of human rights. In this regard, they have to comply with the legal

norms and standards enshrined in human rights instruments. Where they fail to do

so, aggrieved rights-holders are entitled to institute proceedings for appropriate

redress before a competent court or other adjudicator in accordance with the rules

and procedures provided by law.

Using HRBA as an approach in our study, HRBA assumes that protecting and

promoting the basic rights of a person is the ultimate key to societal progress. It recognizes

that without looking into the importance of the basic human rights, a society will not be

able to address societal problems since these problems are rooted on violating or

disregarding the rights of its people. It also assumes that the framers of social services, in

this case the DSWD XI, must focus on those who are considered as minority in the society

– poor, oppressed, exploited, and marginalized. Moreover, the six guiding principles will

serve as standard measures whether the actions undertaken by the DSWD XI coincides

with the notion of having a just society for all. Lastly, it also highlights the rights of the

rights-holder that they should claim their rights as a human being and it also highlights the

obligation of the duty-bearers to act accordingly in promoting and mainstreaming SOGIE

framework.

Statement of the Problem

Generally, this exploratory study intends to understand the efforts of

administrators, Social Workers and staff of DSWD Regional Field Office XI in

mainstreaming the SOGIE framework. Specifically, it seeks to answer the following

questions:

1. What are the perspectives of DSWD about:

 7

a. LGBT communities

b. SOGIE Framework

2. How will the DSWD integrate and mainstream the SOGIE Framework in

terms of:

a. Programs and services

b. Handling LGBT related issues and cases

3 What are the possible difficulties and challenges that the DSWD will

encounter in mainstreaming the SOGIE Framework?

Significance of the Study

This study is significant for the following reasons:

Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) Regional Field Office XI

- This study will provide the office with needed information about their mechanisms of

responding to the needs, issues and concerns of the LGBT communities in Davao City.

This information may be utilized for organizational review and planning.

Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual, and Transgender Communities - The findings of this

study may inform LGBT communities or organizations in Davao City about available

mechanisms or initiatives in DSWD XI for LGBT. Similarly, the findings may help the said

LGBT groups in understanding how they can effectively work with DSWD XI in advancing

their interests.

Social Workers and Stakeholders -The results of this study may intensify the

awareness of Social Workers and other key stakeholders in development work about

SOGIE. A heightened awareness could sharpen their sensitivity in terms of the delivery

of appropriate social services as well as in lobbying for social policies and program.

Academe and Future Researchers – This study will enrich literature on the SOGIE

framework and SOGIE based discrimination and how a social welfare agency responds
 8

to issues and concerns pertinent to SOGIE. Key results of this study will provide novel

problems and themes on SOGIE vis-à-vis social welfare that can be investigated by other

researchers in social work, social sciences, policy studies and related fields.

Scope and Limitations of the Study

This study seeks to qualitatively capture perspectives from the administrators,

social workers and staff of DSWD XI on SOGIE framework particularly their experiences

in handling SOGIE issues and concerns among LGBT communities, their programs and

initiatives for the LGBT, difficulties and challenges that they have encountered in

integrating and mainstreaming SOGIE framework.

Being a qualitative study, this study will generate findings from purposively

selected respondents from DSWD XI. Similarly, the data will be rendered qualitatively in

the form of narratives, concepts and themes. Given the study’s sampling technique and

qualitative approach, the findings cannot be used for establishing conclusions and

generalizations about the phenomena of interest.

Operational definition of terms

Challenges – refers to the challenges and the problems that the DSWD XI will experience

in the mainstreaming of SOGIE framework to their office. And also,

the challenges that they will face in mainstreaming SOGIE framework to

the delivery of their programs and services.

Difficulty – refers to something that will prevent and hinder the DSWD XI in mainstreaming

SOGIE framework to their office.

Gender - refers to the attitudes, feelings, and behaviors that a given culture associates

with a person’s biological sex. Behavior that is compatible with cultural

expectations is referred to as gender-normative; behaviors that are

 9

viewed as incompatible with these expectations constitute

gender non-conformity (American Psychological Association,

2011).

Gender Identity – refers to each person’s deeply felt internal and individual experience of

gender, which may or may not correspond with the sex assigned at birth,

including the personal sense of the body (which may involve, if

freely chosen, modification of bodily `appearance or function by medical,

surgical or other means) and other expressions of gender,

including dress, speech and mannerisms (Yogyakarta Principles as cited

in International Commission of Jurists, 2009).

LGBT communities – this study used LGBT communities as a group of people belonging

to the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender. They are considered as

communities for every gender is considered as one community,

together they are called LGBT communities.

Mainstreaming - in this study mainstreaming is used as a term to make the SOGIE

framework characterized and integrated in the office of DSWD XI.

Perspective – in this study, perspective refers to the ideas and knowledge of the DSWD

XI about the LGBT communities and SOGIE framework.

Sex - refers to a person’s biological status and is typically categorized as male, female, or

intersex (i.e., atypical combinations of features that usually distinguish male

from female). There are a number of indicators of biological sex,

including sex chromosomes, gonads, internal reproductive organs,

and external genitalia (American Psychological Association, 2011).

Sexual Orientation – refers to each person’s capacity profound emotional, affectional and

sexual attraction to, and intimate and sexual relations with, individuals of a

different gender or the same gender or more than one gender

 10

(Yogyakarta Principles as cited in International Commission of

Jurists, 2009).

Social Welfare Programs and Services – ways and means by which policies are translated

into programs and services: the process of creating necessary

structures; the administration of these programs and services

(including financing, staffing, coordinating, reporting, etc.); the

system of delivering services (Mendoza, 2008). In this study, the Social

Welfare Programs and Services are public welfare that protects

the LGBT communities being implemented or delivered by the

DSWD XI. This study will look into the DSWD XI specifically in

their welfare programs and services if it is anchored to the SOGIE

framework and if it is accessible for all people.

SOGIE Rights – in this study, SOGIE rights refer to set of laws that protect and promote

individuals who have issues and concerns pertaining to sexual

orientation and gender identity.