 Good morning. Good morning, everyone. I hope you can hear me well and good Welcome to the Graduate Students' Feminar. This event is in cooperation with a DLSU Feminist Philosophy Graduate School class and the Philosophical Association of the Philippines. So the idea to come up with this Feminar came about after a small class pseudo-conference with graduate students attended by myself, Hazel Diana, Dr. Gina Apegno, and Miss Sally Domingo. Oh, by the way, according to the Orban Dictionary, a Feminar is a discussion or meeting about feminism. So anyway, we decided that it would be interesting to share some of the papers to the public to illustrate various ways and trends of thinking feminism and gender. Incidentally, it is also feminist activist and cultural critic Bell Hook's 68th birthday today. And what better way to celebrate her life and her work, so happy birthday Bell Hooks. So you might notice that all of our speakers are male. This is a function of the composition of the class, but this doesn't mean though that males cannot engage feminist topics, a common misconception, which we would like to debunk. So on this Friday morning, let us give our thanks to our speakers who have agreed to share their time with us. So as for the format of our Feminar, our three speakers will each present their papers after which an open forum will follow. You may send your questions through the Zoom chat box or comment section of our FB Live. May we also request everyone to please mute your audio and hide your videos as courtesy to the speakers. Now, please allow me to introduce our speakers. Our first speaker is Aron Maika Esteban. So he's an assistant professor in Assumption College Makati and is currently a PhD student in philosophy at De La Salle University, where he also received his master's degree in philosophy. His public education and research areas include digital game studies, philosophy of mind, and artificial intelligence. Apart from his academic duties, he spends most of his time playing visual novels and RPGs. Francis Kenneth Rathera, our second speaker, took his undergrad degree in philosophy at De La Salle University. He is currently taking his MA and PhD in philosophy at VLSU. His current research interests are on the philosophy of fashion, metaphysics, and the philosophy of science. Rodney De Leon is an educator and took his undergraduate degree in secondary education major in English at De La Salle University. Because of his interest in philosophy, he is now taking his master's and PhD in phyllo at the same university. His current research interests are on sexual ethics, mostly based on Vaiduva and Aquinas' philosophy. So may we please call on Mr. Aron Esteban to start with our first lecture. Thank you very much, Dr. Biana. I will be sharing my PowerPoint now. So is it sharing? Yes, please proceed. All right. So my research is entitled Exploring the Gender-Based Interplay of Modern Role-Playing Games. The goals of my research is to draw on Judith Butler's theory of performativity and as I expand the understanding of modern role-playing games as an embodied performative practice that provide opportunities for alternate gender performance. I also want to analyze the inclusive mechanics of a virtual environment as a space for exploring as a space for exploring identity and standards outside of what society considers normal. You would see later on how the potential of different activities can be done in these virtual environments, specifically role-playing games. So I'm going to start with the theory of performativity as my framework. What is the theory of performativity by Judith Butler? For her, there is no objective ideal gender aspires. That means that there is no essence that expresses or externalizes gender. You might have the idea that probably gender is socially constructed, but for Judith Butler, it's something more than being socially constructed because gender is the app that is constructed regularly and somehow it conceals its origin or genesis. In the series of acts and repetitive acts in constant with the agent's performance of gender, gender becomes real because it is performed. This leads us to the idea of what we call sedimentation. What is sedimentation? Just like the picture on the lower right, these tiny bits of debris or sand or rock or whatever material is that gets deposited underneath the body of water would eventually manifest or crystallize into a future island or rock or whatever big material that you could think of. Same thing with gender is that the series of tiny acts that we build over time would create the legacy of a gendered body. We are those tiny actions that somehow sediment into a bigger one. That's why you can really pinpoint a particular act or a particular behavior because it's a combination of actions that build over time. So performance does not express real gender identity. It creates gender identity. There is no real or true gender. There is only the act of performing it, hence the theory of Butler's performativity. This means that gender is both socially established and performed with a little bit of making constant changes and eventually that would be what your gender identity would be. It is already and always will be an imitation with no fixed nature because in the first place it was just an imitation to begin with. So what about virtual environment? So that's the framework we're going to use and we're going to apply it with the virtual environments in what role-playing games or particularly modern video games offer. Most role-playing games offer a variety of safe environments. In this case, the virtual environment presents the player's opportunity to take on a role or an experience firsthand and could bring them different choices. And by exploring these identities to take on a role, the players have the opportunity to assimilate their own sense of self on what is employed in virtual situations. I'm going to give you examples later on how this is applied on particular games. I chose two most popular games later on. I will be introducing that to you later. So what about the gender identities in virtual environments? How does it manifest? So games can establish or problematize the concept of gender as the same as it could maintain or contest it. Players are free to explore and act in any way they want regardless of the starting point. The game might have particular gender roles at the start of the game, but regardless of what the game presumes, it is still the freedom of the player to perform the game. So different gender identities can be explored in independent of the pre-assigned gender roles of the narrative. The environment, gameplay, and narrative play vital roles in the construction of a player's in-game gender identity. So how is a game normalized, the culture in the game? How would you be part of the virtual environment and see that you, the role you're playing coincides with what the game wants or what you want and how it corresponds with your understanding of the narrative? Well, the game has a set culture and the player finds out through a series of challenges and players are rewarded for the following rules for following the rules of the game. So when the game repeats over and over, it settles within the environment and the player perceives everything eventually as something normal. Think about how gender is perceived as gender roles or performances are perceived as eventually normal in real life as well. But in this case, playing a video game is grounded on repetitive actions, just like what the butter is contemplating on gender performativity. As the player is being trained to act in a specific in-game, in a game world that follows predetermined rules. Now, sometimes there are variations in games that doesn't allow you to act in a certain way, even though you want to and those are some certain constraints. You could see it as kind of like the social constraints that prevents you to somehow challenge different gender notions. This leads us again to the idea of the embodied performance. The player or the player playing the game is an embodied performative performance of practice. Instead of being a passive of server, the player actively participates and takes on a role with their own sense of agency. In repeated playthroughs, players may pick up cues from video game characters or narratives such as the non-playable characters or NPCs, and they could construct their own cognitive script about gender roles and sexual objectification. So how does this work now? Here's an example of a very popular game, The Witcher 3. So you play as that guy, Geralt. Geralt, however, the game somehow leads you to see that he might be a womanizer and you might want to play his role. However, it was praised to somehow populate the game and its narrative on the empowerment of women and that most of the leaders here are actually women. However, the in-game constraint is that you might still lead to believe that you have to see the weaknesses of women instead of their strengths. So that's one of the dangers here. However, we're talking about the potential of a game to transcend to those in-game culture or values. Here's an example of the choices that you could make. And I mentioned earlier that the repetitive actions and rewarding behavior of the player could lead to that same behavior repeated over and over until they see it as normal. And in this case, the main character is having a choice, a dilemma, into either helping the woman in need eventually becoming his or her partner in the whole game. So you have choices here on who you want to be with and who you want to date and probably spend time with. And there are some clear characters as well, but that would be for another material. Here, this is another game called Skyrim and you would be amazed on how many hours or at least one hour or two where players try to construct their own avatar just so that they could look like these, different races and so on. But the question still remains, how does the player perform their gender roles here? How do they represent themselves? And in the virtual environment, they could be any of those gender identities. Now, take note, I only use single player games here, but there will be more pathways in research by multiplayer games. So I just imagine if the research is applied on multiplayer games and how gender identities and gender roles is conceived or constructed through a multiplayer game. So here are some of the quests and the quest would lead you to either progress within the culture of the game and learn about the lore and the narrative eventually being part of the game itself. And you would have this separate identity that you could play around with. So in conclusion, role-playing games for its virtual environment, which is culture narrative and gameplay, is this in providing imaginative methods which lead to the transmission of information and opportunity of its accessibility to players that contribute to the construction of gender identity. Well, the assimilation of the newly presented ideas and experiences within the virtual environment could proceed to overcoming a player's perception of different issues, such as cultural influences, gender representation, and gender roles. And that ends my presentation for this morning. Thank you for listening. Thank you, Mr. Esteban. May we call on Mr. Francis Jeterta for his presentation? Thank you, Dr. Liana. I'll start sharing my screen now. Can everyone see my screen? Yes, please continue. Thank you. Okay, so good morning, everybody. Today, I'll be presenting my paper called Visible Signifiers, Recognition and Unrecognition, Problematizing Vienna and Joaquin's Gender Galaxies. So this will be the outline of my presentation. First, I'll be discussing Ashley Taukert's fuzzy gender model, the model which Vienna and Joaquin argue against. Next, I'll discuss Vienna and Joaquin's proposed alternative model, the metaphorical gender galaxies. Third, I aim to establish a connection between what is visible and what its connection is with recognition. That's going to be tackled in the third section. Lastly, I'm going to present my identified problem with these metaphorical gender galaxies by incorporating the ontology to lesbian galaxies. So let's start. So what is the fuzzy gender model? According to Ashley Taukert, the model represents other genders as fits or fuzzy units located in between a gender line. So in this gender line, male and female are at the opposite ends of the line and treated as special cases. This model said to disempower the male-female binary and it accounts for while de-centering hegemonic sexual binaries. So this is what the model might look like or is wherein the male and female are at the opposite ends and all other possible gender categories that we can think of will be points or units in between the lines. So gays, lesbian, bisexual, transsexual, so on and so forth. So this is actually a, I googled up gender line. This is what came up. So this is basically what the fuzzy gender model looks like. So what's wrong with this model, the fuzzy model according to Biana and Joaquin? Biana and Joaquin argue that the fuzzy gender is problematic for two reasons. Number one, the model is self-defeating because it still defines the other genders in terms of the male-female opposition by treating the binary as special cases. So may privileging for the binary by putting them at the opposite ends of the spectrum and calling them special cases. Next, the model is theoretically inert since it admits of an infinite number of gender categories but feels to give a voice to each possible gender category. So again, if we consider, for example, number three and number four, according to the model, the fuzzy model, in between number three and four, there exists more finite, more diluted gender categories. So there are so many possible gender categories and according to Biana and Joaquin, if Tucker's goal is to give a voice to each possible gender category, she might fail to do so. So they propose an alternative model which they call the gender galaxy model. So in this model, each gender category will be treated as an independent galaxy within a single vast gender universe. So the gay galaxy, the gays would have their own galaxy, the lesbians would have their own galaxy, and so on and so forth. Sub-categories of each gender will fall under their respective galaxies as galaxy systems. So for example, bears, twinks, twunks, these would all be considered galaxy systems under the gay galaxy. So what more can be said about the model? So a key, the key aspect of this model is that each galaxy is said to be socially conferred, meaning to say, what a given galaxy is like will ultimately depend on how a given system. So in this case, gender galaxies are highly context dependent. So different societies may recognize each gender, each gender galaxy differently. So for example, the Philippine society might recognize the gay community or the gay galaxy in a different manner compared to for example, the Canadian society. Last, they're also flexible in that people in a society can always redefine how they recognize the galaxy. So next, let's talk about bits on recognition and visible signifiers. Let's start with the rainbow pride flag. Notice that a key aspect of the six colored pride flag is that the political aspirations, societal goals, the identity, the unity of the LGBTQIA plus community is perfectly encapsulated in a single visible item which takes the form of a flag which bears the rainbow colors. So given this, there is, there seems then to be a connection between what's visible, such as clothes and collars with one's identity and social and political concerns and aspirations. In strategizing visibility, in making visible these things, the subject is able to express their number one individuality and number two, their membership with the community which they identify with. So how does this relate to recognition? Well, according to Samantha Brennan, strategizing visibility is intimately linked with a quest for recognition. I make visible these things, my societal concerns, my political aspirations, my identity because I want to be recognized as belonging to that community which I identify with. So according to Brennan, recognition has two aspects, recognition within one's community and recognition by a larger community. So given all of this, how can we problematize the pathology of gender galaxies? So I erase the problem with a socially conferred aspect of gender galaxies. Recall that each gender galaxy is dependent on how a given society recognizes them. So since there is a connection with visibility and recognition, signifiers, okay? So according to Lisa Walker, though performing the visible can be politically and rhetorically effective, it is not without its problems. A given identity that invests certain signifiers with political value, figures that do not present those signifiers are often neglected. So what I'm trying to say is, when a society recognizes a given galaxy, for example, based solely on the signifiers that they wear, it runs the risk of excluding members who do not bear those signifiers. So a perfect example would be to consider the lesbian galaxy. So in the lesbian galaxy, we have different subcategories or galaxy systems. We have the lipstick lesbians, chapstick lesbians, boy lesbians, butch, and so on and so forth. So according to a study done by Blair and Hoskin in 2015, they conducted a study involving 147, they're not mistaken, FEM identified individuals. And what they found out is that coming out as FEM is a different experience from coming out as a sexual minority. So it is easier to come out as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or other gender categories than it is to come out as FEM. So in their paper, they also highlighted that the butch look or lesbians who dress in a particularly masculine manner is seen as the paradigm in terms of how lesbians ought to look if indeed they want to be recognized as lesbians. So we can already see what kind of implications this stereotype is on the or how this would impact those FEM lesbians. So the queerness of FEM lesbians would be questioned since they dress in a typically feminine manner. They're not only will people outside the LGBT community question whether or not they are indeed lesbian, but the other lesbians themselves or for example the butch lesbians might question a FEM lesbian whether or not she is in fact a lesbian. So FEMs are only lesbian through her association with the butch. So the notion that if you're a lesbian, you ought to look like a butch. So more problems for the FEMs. FEMs are forced to adopt a butch or even androgynous aesthetic because they want to be seen, they want to be recognized as lesbians. FEMs go out of their way to be identified as queer or lesbian or bisexual. There's a conflict there. There's a conflict between your self-expression, your gender expression, how you want to represent yourself. But on the other hand, you want to be seen as belonging to the community that you identify with. So let's take this point and put it into context in the gender galaxy ontology. So let's say you have a society on the lower right hand of your screen. My society and it recognizes the lesbian galaxy as having a set of societal concerns, issues, needs, political aims. But let's also say that this given society holds on to the notion or adopt the notion that lesbians ought to look butch or lesbians ought to look masculine. Now the problem with this confirming is that it assigns the butch look as a property which the entire lesbian galaxy has. So in this case, the only ones getting recognized by the society are those who look butch or those who dress in a masculine manner. Whereas the FEMs, those who dress in a feminine manner, they fail to get recognized or they remain unrecognized or invisible. So I argue the process of social conferment fails when the means of recognition, for example, the signifiers is over identified with the galaxy it represents. So as I mentioned, the butch look, the butch aesthetic is so overly identified with the lesbian galaxy that anyone, that any lesbian who does not resemble the butch is not recognized or is not acknowledged as a lesbian. This runs the risk of excluding members who do not bear the signifiers. So just to end my report, let me just summarize what we talked about today. First, I discussed the fuzzy gender model wherein the gender, other gender categories are represented in a line wherein the male and the female are at the opposite ends of the spectrum. Next, we discussed Biana and Joaquin's identified problems with the fuzzy model and their proposed gender galaxies, which as it turns out is very socially socially conferred and is highly context dependent. Last, third, we established the connection between recognition and visible signifiers. Lastly, I talked about my identified problems with the gender galaxy model by applying it to the lesbian galaxy. So that's my presentation. Thank you and Stacy. Thank you, Francis. Maybe call on Rodney for his presentation. Hey, good morning, everyone. I'm about to share my screen. Okay, can everyone see the PowerPoint? Hello, can everyone see my screen? Yes, please proceed. Okay, thank you very much. Okay, so good morning, everybody. Okay, names Rodney de León. I'm going to be presenting about the expounding the feminist critique on pornography, a reply to Causton. So to give you all an idea of how my presentation will go by, here's an outline. First, I'll be presenting for an introduction the paper of Amanda Causton, a feminist philosopher in Netherlands, which is the paper I replied to. And then we'll proceed to my suggested areas of expansion and for the conclusion of wrapping up of everything. Okay, so the goal of this reply paper is to simply suggest possible further areas of expansion for the new feminist critique on pornography as a reply to Causton. So as also to help those feminists who write or critique, write critiques on pornography. So first, let's have a brief introduction. In 2019, Amanda Causton from Tilburg University, Netherlands wrote a paper entitled the feminist case against pornography, a review and re-evaluation. In this paper, she revisited and critiqued three common arguments used by the anti-porn feminists, aka APFs, to argue against pornography. So these are the three common ineffective arguments according to Causton used by APFs. First, highlighting the harm or suffering associated with pornography, arguing that it has a causal relationship with rape or sexual violence. Second, arguing that it violates women's right to free speech. And third, equating pornography to sex in the context of patriarchy, thoughts furthering inequality and women's obligation. So to briefly present her reputations, here are they, here are the following. For arguments one and two, Causton argues that rape and sexual violence are not essential aspects to pornography. In fact, there exists a case of so-called soft pornography, which does not involve or romanticizing or fantasizing rape and sexual violence. Same goes for the second argument, wherein not all productions of pornography are done by coercing women. Some productions are done with the women's full consent. In fact, they would even argue that it is something empowering for them. And the case of Netherlands, which is a very liberal country with a widespread access to pornography, actually shows a very low case of sexual violence and rape. So therefore, Causton argues that it is actually hard to argue that there is a causal relationship with pornography and sexual violence. So she only argues that there is only a correlative relationship between porn and rape or sexual violence. So take note, Causton versus correlative. And third, for the third argument, for her, the problem with this argument is that it equates sex. It constantly argues that sex automatically means misogyny in the perspective of females. In other words, it seems to automatically assume that the males are the more dominant ones and that in sex the women are subjugated. When in fact that is refuted by some, my numerous women who claim that sex is an empowering or liberating activity for them. So that refutes the misconceived notion that sex is always under the context of patriarch and misogyny. Second, it also tries to perpetuate the sex equals immoral notion often pushed by conservatives. When in fact there's been growing studies on sex in the previous decades, even in the Catholic context, which actually argues that sex is good, although how they define good differs based on different schools of thoughts. Overall, there exists a egalitarian or soft pornography, which all of these notions are not present, rape, sexual violence, violating free speech, etc. So therefore, the case of soft pornography automatically refutes these arguments and actually helps the pro pornography crowd to argue that pornography is okay. Overall, what for Costin, what makes the three arguments ineffective is that it focuses on the pornographic object itself. So for Costin, the new argument, the new feminist critique on pornography should focus the critical gaze, I should shift, the critical gaze should shift from the pornographic object to the male consumers of pornography and the attitudes such consumption reflects and conceals. So I would like to take note here that the focus of Costin's paper is only on male consumers. So for Costin, the consumption of pornography among males reflects sexist attitudes and conceals them. For Costin to quote, we should think of pornography as an externalized form of prostitution, specifically a practice that allows externalized expression of the attitudes associated with prostitution. What does she mean by this? Okay, she made a comparison between John's, John's are males who are quote unquote buyers or consumers of prostitution. She argues that they actually expressed similar sexual attitudes as male porn consumers. How does this work? Okay, in case you know that it's striking similarity between the attitudes of John's and male consumers, both of which express domination, exploitation and objectification, all of which are sexist in nature. Furthermore, there's more social disapproval of John's as compared to male consumers and how the latter the male porn consumers do not feel or recognize that their behavior expresses power and domination, lack of empathy, or an indication of their objectification of women. And a major factor as to why it seems that there is a greater social disapproval of John's and seemingly greater social approval of male porn consumers is that there is a distance between the male and the female consumer, either female in the pornographic object. In other words, the male watching pornography and the woman being performed or the hymn consuming or watching, there is a distance unlike in prostitution where there is a direct contact between the male and the female, the prostitute. So because of this, it makes it seem more acceptable the distance that males consuming pornography. So in brief, Costin argues that pornography consumption is a practice which reflects the same sexist attitudes as seen in buying sex or prostitution, and that such sexist attitudes are concealed because of the nature of pornography wherein there's a distance between a male consumer and the female object. So it makes the consumer feel less aware of the sexism his consumption reflects. So given that given Costin's new feminist critique on pornography, I decided to suggest further areas of expansion so as to help expound the feminist critique on pornography. First, on female consumers. First, I'd like to suggest that why not try talking about the effect of pornography on female consumers too, since pornography consumption is not exclusive to females. The number one challenge for APFs like Costin and others is that is the notion that pornography is quote-unquote empowering to women. According to the studies of Atwood Smith and Barker and Marx, that is the biggest challenge for APFs. For example, in the study of Atwood Smith and Barker, four women were all interviewed and all claim to consume pornography regularly for various reasons. And for the study of Marx, 26 Canadian women are interviewed about their perceptions and they're finding the motion that pornography is female degradation as based on a radical feminist discourse. And another study from Matibo et al is that pornography actually affects women's sexual views and lifestyle. For example, higher rate of sexual activities for consumers. Now as to whether they feel empowered or not is beyond Matibo et al's scope and limitations, but for these two, they both argue both of their results claim that pornography is actually empowering to women. So that is a challenge. So therefore, given these three findings, feminist critiques may use these as a springboard to analyze further the attitudes of female consumers and try comparing them to males as to whether they do they exhibit the same sexist attitude as males or not. Or if such attitudes of women are also concealed by pornography and whether it contributes to their gender hegemony or not. Next, on varying degree, general genres of pornography, we all know that there are now new genres of pornography, queer pornography, feminist pornography, lesbian, gay, et cetera, most of which are often overlooked or excluded in feminist discourses in pornography. In fact, Costa herself clearly stated at the beginning of her paper that the focus of her critique is only on heterosexual pornography and its male consumers. So given these, maybe it might be good to tackle the varying genres, so particularly how it could further expound the feminist critique on pornography, particularly in how it affects consumer behaviors, since the focus of Costin's perspective are the consumers. The study of Mokkotchan and Bishop studied 14 women's perception of gay pornography. They had a generally positive perception about it, but they elicited negative stereotypes on gay men. But one of the notable reasons why they consume is power dynamics, because they seem to perceive gay pornography as having a better atmosphere of equality, since the performers are of the same sex, unlike in heterosexual porn, where there seems to be a power competition between men and women performers. Next, for Kornu et al., it's basically the same. They also studied 974 users of porn in Canada, particularly gay porn. And their perspectives are quite complex. It was a mixture of positive and negative. Therefore, findings of these two studies may allow feminist critiques to further expound the feminist critique on pornography by exploring and analyzing the attitudes of the consumers. And even the pornographic object itself, given its difference from heterosexual pornography. For my second to the last point, the pornified or hypersexualized culture. It might good to explore as well whether pornography has a causal or a poor relative relation to the hypersexualized culture. And where their continuous proliferation and open access to pornographic magazines or lab mags actually contributed a prevalence of such sexist attitudes. This is according to a study by Mooney in 2008 in London, UK. Lab mags have known to normalize pornography and culture, particularly by forcing women to achieve their so-called real representation by being a sexual object for a man, furthering the hegemonic norm. Okay, according to Gail Dines, a popular APF and Professor Robert Jensen, pornography undermines the Me Too movement. And it is where males first learn to control women for their sexual pleasure and intensified the message of male dominance. Further perpetuating the hypersexualized culture. So the question remains, is pornography the cost of this hypersexualized culture? Or is it just one of the many factors, hence a correlation? Lastly, further reduction of consumption. Costs and highlighted that pornography is not simply one form of sexist oppression among a myriad of others, which does not deserve attention. And that rather, it is a particularly insidious social practice that functions to conceal and normalize sexism. So the bigger question is whether the reduction of its consumption by males would actually reduce two attitudes, two sexist attitudes. No, by reduction there's a clarify. We don't mean censorship, because censorship has not known to be a good idea when it comes to tackling pornography. So it was identified that pornography is one of the major variables which increases the likelihood of men objectifying women, particularly to body evaluation and making unwanted sexual advances, both rooted in their adherence to traditional masculine gender adherence, particularly playboy attitudes, power over women and violence. Therefore, the study of Mikorsky and Sismansky stressed the need to highlight pornography and apply interventions aimed to reduce men's sexual objectification of women. And next for the study of Seabrook Ward and Gikaribe, consumption of pornography is associated with a greater acceptance of objectification of women and rape myth acceptance. And lastly, this one from my last point here, in the case of Japan, Professor Giliot, in an opinion piece in the Japan Times, noted that Japan's female objectifying culture in which pornography in a different form, hand-by-art, is one of the factors blamed for its perpetuation. Although it is a global problem, he recognized that, what sets Japan apart is that many young women seem to accept and emulate this objectified image of themselves. And lastly, another study from Marma and Morita, the greatest foe of the anti-porn feminist movement in Japan is pornography. So the aforementioned opinion piece and study goes to show how pornography is a major factor in perpetuating the sexist and women objectifying culture in Japan. So given these claims, the new feminist critique and pornography might look into these and analyze and answer the question as to whether reducing pornography consumption would decrease the incest of sexist attitudes among men, as well as unmasking it or its unmasking or concealment. To conclude, the three main points mentioned are suggested by men, or rather for, I'm sorry, four main points mentioned are suggested possible areas for further discussion on the new feminist critique or pornography based on Costa's attitudinal approach. But those four points are attitudes of female consumers of pornography, the varying genres of pornography such as gay, lesbian, porn, the nature of its connection to the hypersexualized culture, and whether the reduction of its consumption would lead to the decrease of sexist attitudes. And lastly, the writer of this paper categorically sides and agrees with Costa. In fact, I find her new feminist critique quite groundbreaking, I would say. But I believe that once these underlying questions I've suggested have been settled and clarified to a more sustainable and expounded feminist critique of pornography could be explored and established. Lastly, Costa clarified as well that her critique or study, it's not meant to compete with other critiques, but rather it is meant to complement them, even the critiques focusing on the pornographic object and often the consumers. So that ends my presentation. Thank you very much. Thank you so much, Rodney. May we call on Dr. Gina Apinyano to take care of the open forum? Good morning. Sorry about that. Dr. Gina's having some technical difficulties. May we call on Dr. Wachin instead to take care of the open forum? So good morning, good afternoon, and good night for everyone. So let's start with the open forum for this segment. Okay, for the speakers, please open your video so that people will see who you are again. Okay, let's start with a question coming from Jonathan James O. Canete. I think he's from DLSU. So for the first speaker, namely Aeron, could it be possible that a video game avatar is a virtual representation of the real self of the player? Can there be a possibility that a video game avatar's sense of self is being embodied in the real and concrete by the player himself? So let's start with that question first. Okay, thank you. For that first question, my answer is yes. The real or authentic self can be represented. However, please be reminded that the game also allows the player to experience different viewpoints and narratives in a safe space that is otherwise limited outside of the game. That's my answer for the first question. Okay, so the other question will be, is there a possibility that an existential frustration on the part of the player, due to the fact that what is seemingly impossible in the material world becomes a possible in the cyber world? So in this question, I'm not really sure what you mean by existential frustration, but I'm just going to connect it with, I guess, gender identity conflict, I guess, because somehow if it's in connection with the first question, that let's say you are, you have this certain gender identity, and then you play the game, and now you have access to different roles, and so you could form different identities with different narratives and performances, and you would now be in conflict with what your identity is supposed to be, and that's the goal of performativity, of the theory of performativity, and also with video games is that there is access to gender fluidity, and so it gives you a sense of leeway into understanding different narratives and experiences, and so you don't get, it actually challenges certain heteronormative standards as well, so that's my answer for the second question. Okay, very good, so for the second speaker, namely Francis, now is the gender galaxy model of Joaquin and Diana? In the gender galaxy model of Joaquin and Diana, that's me, could there be an instance where in a fusion of horizon can happen? It's the idea of a contextualized approach towards understanding the guy like fused respectively, signify absolute distinctiveness, and the impossibility for a connoia, coming together to exist. Is there a possibility of fusion of horizons here? Thank you Jonathan for that question. By fusion of horizons, do you mean an overlap of two distinct gender galaxies? Is that what you're asking? Is it possible for two independent galaxies to overlap? I think that's the main idea whether there's a fusion of these galaxies. Well, in itself, based on my reading of Dr. Bian and Dr. Joaquin's paper, the galaxies themselves do not overlap, but that doesn't mean that a person cannot identify with the two galaxies, for example, if I could identify with the trans galaxy, and at the same time I could also identify with the queer galaxy. So I think that's the best take I can give on regarding the fusion of horizons happening. So with regards to the second question, thus being us positing independent galaxies lead to the impossibility of coming together? No, of course not. I would think that Dr. Bian and Dr. Joaquin proposed this model because they just want to highlight that each gender category has their own unique set of concerns, needs, and whatnot, their own unique identity. But as stated in their definition, each gender galaxy is part of an entire gender galaxy. So in a way, although independent, independent of the galaxy for example of straights, gays, lesbians, interconnected, we all belong in a single vast gender galaxy. Right. I think that's the model we're trying to propose as well. I love your take regards Francis, that's a good presentation. I just wonder whether it's my personal take on your criticism, which is, well, good observation. But I wonder whether your idea of signifiers and recognition really would be vital in so-called recognition. Just a follow-up concerning that point. Yes sir, because I argue that, for example, when talking about signifiers, I'm talking in this case about obviously clothes or colors, the visible ones. But we can also talk about recognition in terms of, you recognize, for example, societal concerns or issues or political goals. So what if those goals become overly identified with the galaxy? So would that necessarily mean that, for example, members of that galaxy who did not share those aspirations, those goals, does that mean that they're not legitimate members of the galaxy? So that's the line of thinking. It's the thought process that I came up with regarding that. I just used visible signifiers because it's one of the easiest, most measurable ways wherein we can identify people. Okay, for the third speaker Rodney from Joy Lim, I think pornographic videos are the representations of what in real life, male and female, especially a couple do. Looking at the different pornographic videos, pornography seems to be a job. No one could ever go for free sex unless he or she has a girlfriend or boyfriend or wife or husband. Well, what's your reaction to this? Thank you very much, Sir Joaquin and to Jay Lim for your comment. I think the notion that pornographic videos are representations of what in real life male and female couples do, I think that's quite a subject for debate. Because in some schools of thought, they actually blame pornography as one of the causes of divorce. Why? It's because oftentimes in the case of the males, because of their addiction, if not addiction, frequent consumption of pornography, it gives them unrealistic expectations of what to experience in sex, particularly with their wives or with their partners in the case of Lee and Mary. Therefore, I think for one to say that it is a representation of what real life couples do, I don't think that's the case. And in fact, in some APF schools of thought, a male and a female couple watching porn together, they don't see it romantic. They even noted that it is quite similar to what child pornographers do or child rapists do, watching porn together with their victim. And no one could ever go for free sex unless he or she has a girlfriend, boyfriend, wife, or husband. Well, good point, but we might need to remember that free sex code and code needs to be consented. And it shouldn't be forced unless she has a free girlfriend. But yeah, but sometimes you can also get free sex code and code if it's a case of casual sex, wherein you're not in a relationship, but you just want to experience it and it's both consensual. So that's my reaction to her. Is this his or her comment? I don't know. Okay, so for Francis again from Dr. Eva, what are the educational implications of seeing, are you seeing in putting these orientation in galaxies? Thank you, Dr. Calwing for that question. Yeah, so I think that's a good question. Can these gender galaxies be applied educationally? For example, when teaching gender studies? Yeah, I think this ontology proposed by Dr. Biannagokin would help students understand the importance of distinguishing each gender category from one another as a unique community. Although they're part of the LGBTQ community as a whole, the proposed model by Dr. Biannagokin actually allows us to dive deeper into each gender category. So for example, if we teach in a school about lesbians, we can apply this ontology in such a way that we can expose what are the problems that are unique to lesbians, what are the problems unique to gays, so on and so forth. So I think that's a good educational implication that I see in terms of this gender dialysis. Okay, thanks for that. Here's another question. I think this is for all of you. How should philosophical organizations such as the PAP find these representations, these gender representations problematic? How would these organizations respond to these problematic representations? Let's start with Aaron. For me, I think we should have guide policies, gender and development policies, or guidelines to or more gender related programs such as this. This seminar is, I think, would be a start, would be really helpful to provide awareness. So again, policies, awareness-raising, and gender-related programs. Okay, so how about Rodney? Thanks, Aaron. How about Rodney? Thank you very much, dog walking. Maybe based on what my study, what I can suggest for the PAP is that, like what Aaron said, maybe they could also, these feminist critiques, particularly in the context of pornography, they might use them as the basis for coming up with policies, or if possible, if it is, I don't know if it is in line with PAP's goal or objective, but maybe they could make a stand on what is their real stand on pornography, or other gender, female or male gender representations. While taking a stand does not necessarily mean that you're going to close doors for criticism, because it defeats the purpose of the organization, but maybe if not taking a stand, they could also use this feminist critique by Costin on pornography as a gateway for other feminist scholars or researchers to further study on the subject of pornography. Say for example, you guys could open a seminar like this, revolving around the theme of pornography, or you could also promote her critique in a way that could be further expounded, or is there any flaws? Are there any flaws or mistakes in her critique, or does it have a good objective basis, or is it actually tackling questions which have already been tackled by other studies, things like that. So that is what I suggest. Thanks Rodney, how about Francis? Okay, so with respect to PAP and organizations in general, conducting feminists like this is a start. Getting speakers to talk about issues in representation, gender feminist issues, that's a good way to start, but I think we can go deeper in terms of the educational system itself. So you notice that in schools, for example in Lesale, let's take Lesale, gender studies is only offered as one subject, and it's not available across all courses. So before I was an engineering student, there was no gender studies in engineering, so that impacted a lot on me. So once I shifted to liberal arts, the knock on the expose, most of the things are gender studies, gender sensitivity, so on and so forth. So I think in addition to these seminars, to these feminist, to go to the educational system itself, to educate the students regarding the issues on gender feminism and so on and so forth. Yeah, thanks for those comments and highlights. Actually we're doing that, that's why we have this kind of activity, we have been doing these activities for the past few years, because we want to educate people, we want them to be socially aware of what's going on in terms of gender or oppression brought about by gender inequalities and so on. Any more questions from our audience? Here's another question. What about the case for Rodney, I think? What about the case of partners who are pornographic stars? About a case who are pornographic stars, partners who are pornographic stars. Well I must admit that that is beyond the scope and limitations of my study, so maybe you could use that as another springboard to expound the feminist critique on pornography, but as for them being pornographic stars, well if they're 100% okay with it, if it works for them, okay good for them, if they're remaining faithful to each other, although it seems unimaginable for me, but for the other case we cannot also deny the fact that sometimes pornography has been blamed to be a destroyer of marriage and okay, as I was stated by one comment here, they get educated, female married friends, they watch videos just to educate, okay good that they get educated, but how about the women, the wives who actually feel left out and who actually feel insulted because their husbands need to actually find another women just to satisfy, just for them to quote-unquote consume or just to satisfy their sexual urges and vice versa, so those are many factors which might come into play as well, so in other words what works for one may not necessarily work for all. Okay thanks, let me turn you over to Gina for some announcements. Gina are you here? All right good morning, so thank you very much for the participation of the three speakers and to the other participants, thank you very much, so in a little while I'll be sharing the evaluation link for today's activity, but before that let me just share the call for membership to the PAP organization, membership is still open and there's a registration form for this purpose and the membership fee, okay so that's the membership link which you can find in Facebook page and then call for abstracts for an upcoming world conference for women's studies, the theme is environment and gender equity in the post-COVID world, abstracts are accepted until September 30th, so deadline will be on the 30th of September at 11.59 p.m. New York City time, the conference dates will be October 30 to 31 2020, so if for those interested you may email your abstracts to www.cws.gmail.com, so these are the themes or some themes for the conference and then please like our Facebook group or I mean join the Facebook group, its Facebook name is Philosophical Association of the Philippines PAP Incorporated, all right, so this is the link to the evaluation of the event for those who would like to receive their e-certificate, I'll be sharing the evaluation link in the chat box, chat box in a little while, all right so thank you for joining, we hope to see you in the next PAP event. Thank you so much Gina and thank you to all our participants for the closing remarks, I call on Dr. Jeremiah Joaquin, the president of the Philosophical Association of the Philippines. Okay, so hello again, so just to close this program, it's one of the hopes of PAP as an organization to educate people about gender equality and issues about gender and any sort of oppression because of inequalities of identity, so I hope that you have learned a lot from this webinar, actually it's a seminar because it's a feminist seminar and we have a lot of things in store for you, one of the things that will come up in the next few months will be the PAP's General Assembly, so please do join the PAP organization and be a member because we will have a general assembly by November 15 I think, we'll make the proper announcement which will announce the winners of some of our activities like the Isabella de las Reyes essay prize, we will also announce the winner of the first PAP public intellectual prize and of course we will have an election, so we will call for nominations in the next few weeks for the next set of board members of the PAP. So to close, thank you very much for everyone who's here and for those who are watching on Facebook and we'll see you again next time, cheers.