Prejudice in The Philippines
Prejudice in The Philippines
Prejudice in The Philippines
Summary:
I;-.; 1955 A QUESTIONNAIRE designed to explore the nature of stereo-
typical thinking and of cultural animosities in a non-Western cultural
context was distributed to college students at the University of the Phil-
ippines. An analysis of the data supports the earlier observations that
there is a tendency for Filipinos to prefer Caucasians (especially Amer-
icans) to Orientals (including even certain Philippine sub-groups). Per-
haps the most significant findings of the study are: (1) demonstration of
the inapplicability of an American-type "vocabulary of prejudice" to
another culture and (2) the implications of such a study of antipathies
for an understanding of the nature of Philippine culture as a whole.
Questions in American studies dealing with the issues of antipathies
and of social: distance which have been found to be highly correlated with
items in the universe of prejudice in the different context of Philippine
society a ppear to be correlated to a universe of social relations. Only
in the examinations of the "extreme cells" (which are not scale types)
was it possible to detect any indication that antipathy of personality,
values, contacts, and general background questions.
87
88 ASIAN STUDIES
4 The number of Chinese who registered in 1958 was put at 145,750 by the
Philippine Burean of Immigration. Estimates of "ethnic Chinese" range from
300,000 to 750,000, with the lower figure probably closer to the actual number.
5 Registered American and Spanish citizens total only a few thousand.
H:owever, the social picture is obscured by large numbers of naturalized FBi-
pmos, of "mixed" ancestry-especially Spanish mestizos.
90 ASIAN STUDIES
group 6 famous in the Filipino folklore for its magic-sexuality and for
constituting the "bogeyman" of all Christian Filipino children, and the
recently (post 'World War II) repatriated Japanese community have also
produced occasions for discord in the past and at present. However, the
point should be made that while the typical Filipino village (barrio) or
small town often possesses the features of a homogeneous and mutually
cooperating extended kin group, the larger towns and cities possess (by
Filipino standards) heterogeneity that Americans 'would associate with
New York City at the height of the various waves of migration. The vil-
lager has a word for the outsider or stranger (taong-labas). To the villager
transplanted or uprooted to the city, the Chinese, the "Bombay" (Indian),
Spanish mestizo, the American tourisia, and the Filipinos who are not his
kin (hamag-anah) nor even his village mates (Kababayan) are all "outsiders."
(taong-labas). Thus, antipathy to the Chinese (or any other ethnic group)
embodies elements of antipathy to the non-kin. 'While at times (which
might be quite often) such "compounding" intensifies ethnic animosities,
on the level of individual interaction, personalistic contacts and elabora-
tion of ritualistic kinship ties can conceivably dissipate such antipathies.
At the same time, overt prejudice and anti-locution against the Chi-
nese in the Philippines operate in a socio-political context strikingly di£.
Ierent from that of America. For in America, despite all the marked
expressions of socio-economic discrimination and conflict, ethnic and ra-
cial prejudice runs counter to the basic American credo, posing what
writers have termed the "American dilemma." Discrimination against
fellow-Americans creates ambivalent feelings which even the most zealous
bigots must attempt. to rationalize. 'This is not necessarily the case in
the Philippines where discrimination and anti-locution against the "alien,"
the stranger, and iaong-labas find overt expressions in folklore, law, and
society. Thus, anti-locution, cultural antagonisms, and ethnic stereotyping
are far more overt in the Philippines than in the United States. Yet, given
the personalistic orientation of the traditional Philippines society, preju-
dice may be expected to be more differentiated than in the American
context.
([he fact that social distance scales correlate with rather than are neces-
~arily equivalences of prejudice was often obscured.) None of these stu-
dies, however, passed far beyond the most elemental aspects of the social
distance method nor were they productive of data on the more complex
discussions of opinion in the area of inter-group relations. In 1955,
while a member of the Department of Sociology of the University of the
Philippines, this writer attempted a construction of a survey of attitudes
which would closely parallel similar studies that had been carried out in
Americ:l. This admittedly exploratory account was designed to produce
some insights into the forms of stereotyping and social antipathy taken
in a particularistic rather than a universalistic culture.
In July 1955, the questionnaires were distributed in the first term
course of Sociology, which was then compulsory for all students at some
time in their college career. Since the classes were compulsory and
cantroUed by the surveyor, the choice of the first term sociology students
was obvious. There had been no previous discussion of ethnic rela-
tions in the class sections. The original sample numbered 672, of which
654 were Filipino citizens. But it should be borne in mind that in their
sociology classes - to say nothing of their university contacts - there were
foreign nationals (e.g., Chinese, Indians, Vietnamese, Americans, and
Spaniards). In addition, a handful of the Filipino "citizens" are "eth-
nic" Chinese or "ethnic" Spaniards, while many more are of recent
"mixed" ancestry. Almost half of the sample (313) were in their first
year of college. Sophomores accounted for 233 of the remainder. Cer-
tain peculiarities of the general Philippine educational system led to the
following age distribution: 8
16 years and below (i.e., 14 to 15) 156
17 years 169
18 years 159
19 years and above 170
1957. pp. 186-194 summarizes the various findings of S.E. Macaraig, Benicio
T. Catapuzan, Chester Hunt, and Akhtar Sharif Kanwar, Kanwars A Study
Of Social Distance between some Filipinos and Sixteen Other Ethnic Groupe is
the most elaborate and Philippine oriented of these initial studies.
8 Since there are only ten years of pre-college schooling and many children
commence school before the legal age of seven, it is quite possible for a college
freshman class to include many fourteen and fifteen year clds.
92 ASIAN STUDIES
are discussed here only to note that any sample drawn from the Univer-
sity of the Philippines would not possess the characteristics usually asso-
ciated with an American state university.
TABLE I
TABLE II
they are deemed to be dishonest and far better businessmen than the
Filipinos.
Actually the story which the marginals tell may be deceptive. There
is indeed an impressive progression in the preferential directions of the
marginals. True, an increasing number find it "distasteful" to eat, dance,
marry, and party with various ethnic minorities. There is a clear pre-
ference for Westerners over Orientals. However, analysis of the matrix of
responses to all the items revealed that the responses indicating preferences
or antipathy for these alien and native groups do not form a scale pattern.
In other words, these sets of antipathies cannot be said to refer to a spe·
cific discussion or variable "antipathy," but on the contrary, indicate dif-
ferential responses. Many who find it distasteful to dance with a foreigner
would not find it distasteful to eat with, or even have a relative marry
one. Many who would not find it distasteful to have a relative marry an
American, Spaniard, or Chinese would find it distasteful to party with
them. Regarding Chinese as dishonest, Spaniards as "high hat" and
proud, and Moros as cruel was seen to have little relationship to whether
or not one would find it distasteful to have a relative marry one or to
party with them. Indeed, a large part of those who did not find it dis-
tasteful to mix with Chinese or Spaniards agreed with descriptions of
these groups that stressed certain unpleasant traits attributed to them.
How, then, to explain this seemingly erratic behavior? Actually the
responses were anything but erratic; they graphically mirror the parti-
cularistic nature of social life in the Philippines. Items in America which
belong to the universe of prejudice are found in the Philippines to be
involved in a universe of personalistic social relationships. Thus, the
question, "Would you find it distasteful to dance with a Chinese?" is
94 ASIAN STUDIES
asking not only about one's reaction to a Chinese but also to one's reac-
tion to dancing. Anyone who finds it distasteful to dance must -ine-
vitably find it distasteful to dance with a Chinese. Although Filipinos,
as a group,' are quite fond of Western dancing (in contrast to other South-
east Asians), a not too small minority find it immoral per se, Similarly,
it might be demonstrated that the question, "Would you find it distaste-
ful to eat with a Chinese (or an American)?" involves more than a mere
response to a specific prejudice.
The question, "Would- you find it distasteful for a member of X
group to marry your brother or sister?" probably most sharply represents
the case where for American and Philippine societies the concepts are not
the same. In the particularistic and personalistic Philippines, a member
of X group who marries one's sister is perceived not as a member of X
group but as a brother-in-law. In contrast, to go to a party as an out-
sider is to go 111to a social situation unstructured by previous personalis-
tic ties. Many Filipinos would thus find such a party distasteful whether
or not X group were Chinese, Americans, rich men, paupers, engineers,
or members of another Filipino kindred. In effect, to many Filipinos the
questien is perceived as asking, "How would you like to feel that you
didn't belong at the party>".
Whereas the question dealing with social interaction was confounded
by Philippine perceptions of social relationships, those dealing with ste-
reotyping were confounded often by a literal grasp of social realities in
the Philippines. One of the individuals concerned with the project once
asked. "How can these statements (Questions 36-44) give an insight into
prejudice? Most of them are true." In the more literal Philippine
context it appears that the non-prejudiced, just as the prejudiced, will
agree that most Chinese businessmen are dishonest (most Filipino busi-
nessmen are similarly regarded), that most Spaniards (who are upper
class) are "high hat" and proud, and that members of the Iglesia ni
Kristo (who possess some annoying evangelical techniques) are fanatics
because they are.
Fifty years ago in America, dialect jokes and overt stereotyping of
minority groups were so widespread that they could hardly be used as
effective cutting points to differentiate high and low prejudice groups.
Now, however, it is assumed quite accurately that the use of stereotypical
epithets and thinking closely mirrors prejudice in America. In the Phil-
ippines often extreme (by American standards) stereotypical verbalization
by -a Filipino tells one surprisingly little of how the speaker will respond
to a specific Chinese (or other ethnic group member). The widespread
anti-Chinese sentiments in the Philippines are generalized rather than
A STUDY OF PREJUDICE IN A PERSONALISTIC SOCIETY 95
9 Joel V. Berreman op. cii., p. 191. Although Dr, Berreman assigns "lux-
uJ'y-living" 'as an unde~irable trait, this may not be the Filipino estimation.
96 ASIAN STUDIES
TABLE III
(49) (83)
5- 5+
% CJ1
/0
Sex
26 Male 40
74 Female 60
fA STUDY OF PREJUDICE IN A PERSONALISTIC SOCIETY 97
Residence
45 City Inhabitants 55
51 Town (poblacion) 42
4 Village (barrio) 5
Mother's Education
14 Elementary or less 29
27 High School 19
59 Some College or More 52
Father's Education
4 Elementary or less 18
18 High School 11
78 Some College or More 71
Age
32 16 and below 15
47 17-18 60
n 19 and above 25
College Year
48 First 47
40 Second 29
8 Third 19
4 Fourth 5
Home District
59 Tagalog 64
13 Ilocano 12
12 Visayan 12
Father's Occupation
21 Government 16
7
50 Professionals and Educators 262
17 Commerce 31
4 Skilled-unskilled 9
0 Farmer-Landlords 7
TABLE IV
Sinophobia Related to Contact, Values and Personality
01
/0 %
Contact with Chinese
20 Considerable pre-college school contact 55
25 Short period 25
65 No 40
Contacts zn Recrmt Week
35 None 23
20 One II
31 2-11 34
6 5-9 II
'6 10 or more 21
Occasions tor Recent Contact
Values
62 Cannot trust people 47
Most Important
34 Doing what is expected 27
4 Having fun I
31 Being friendly 46
31 Being successful, 25
Personality
61 Feel uneasy meeting strangers 31
33 Feel guilty often 25
47 Sometimes 63
20 Hardly ever 12
Feel People Treat Unfairly
33 Often 16
55 Sometimes 66
12 Hardly ever 18
TABLE V
Agree
14 Americans - insincere 14
20 Americans aid in self interest 18
31 Leytefios - lazy 12
65 Moros - cruel 48
'7'2 Country better off if fewer foreigners 42
82 Chinese-dishonest in business 48
84 Chinese - better businessmen than Filipinos 83
84 Iglesia m Kristo - fanatics 50
90 Spaniards - high hat 71
Favor
Nationalization of labor 28
(barring aliens)
This is an objective truth but one would imagine that the Sinophobes
would draw a different conclusion from this than would the non-Sino-
phobes. Not too surprisingly, the Sinophobes endorse the Nationalization
of labor (i.e., Filipinization) far more than do the non-Sinophobes. Yet,
recalling the background characteristics one notes that this means that the
competitors of the Chinese and the labor force are precisely the groups
most opposed to such legislation, although the advocates of such political
restrictions argue that this legislation is designed to benefit those groups.
Although the Philippine House of Representatives has repeatedly passed
such a legislation bya wide margin and despite the widespread press-radio
campaign in its favor, nearly two-thirds of the total sample opposed such
legislation.
Even the extreme cells are confounded; certainly xenophobia was an
aspect of the Sinophobia. And among the "non-anti-Chinese" are not
only the non-prejudiced but also the adherents of "Asia for the Asians"
and the "Joe (the American) Go Home" schools of thought. A study of
the extreme cells on responses to questions about Americans might prove
rewarding and offer insight into the realm of Philippine prejudice in
general 'and of Filipino xenophobia in particular.
There appears a strong indication that economic and social factors
are related to Philippine ethnic antagonisms in a manner different from
that observed in America and elsewhere (i.e., economic competition as a
crucial factor). Probably the explanation lies in the fact that the emerg-
ing semi-professional middle class senses the Chinese as a rival for power
far more than does either the old elite or the mercantile elements of the
society (who may very well be of recent Chinese ancestry). Perhaps a
JA STUDY OF PREJUDICE IN A PERSONALISTIC SOCIE'l'Y 101