Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don’t

Yesterday in Showtime, judges Vice Ganda and Tado got into an exchange. Apparently, Tado’s anti-gay jokes didn’t sit well with Vice Ganda, and the latter reacted accordingly.

See the first part of the video for their heated exchange:


Later that night, I listened to portions of Tado’s show “The Brew-rats” on FM radio (I couldn’t finish it because I was listening in the car on my way to Greenbelt). There his co-hosts were explaining what happened. I was particularly struck by what Tado said. At the beginning, when he was still “answering” Vice Ganda’s challenges, he was just joking and thought that Vice Ganda was not going to take him seriously. But when Vice Ganda continued to insult him, that’s when Tado decided to keep his mouth shut.

I am of two minds with regards to this issue.

On the one hand, like Tony and Nimmy (who claims he’s a fan of Vice Ganda), I applaud the fact that there was an occasion—on a high-rating show national television, no less—to point out, especially to impressionable children watching the show, that mocking someone’s sexual orientation isn’t exactly funny stuff.

Or is it, really?

One philosophy on comedy states that comedy is suppose to shake, rattle and roll the status quo. It’s the comedian as gadfly—their comedy is purposefully biting, controversial even, often unnerving and decidedly un-PC. It’s a brand of comedy that’s supposed to make people uncomfortable.

So while there is comedy that is well within PC levels, I feel we should also allow for un-PC comedy. And comedians in general should be given more leeway for un-PC comedy. In fact, un-PC comedy is precisely Vice Ganda’ daily bread-and-butter.

I just watched on YouTube a portion of one of Vice Ganda’s live shows in the comedy bar Punchline, and there he was mocking a fellow comedian’s facial features, as in: “Pangit ka!” It’s classic laitan comedy that’s a staple in comedy bars and KTVs everywhere. (While we’re at it, what’s the difference between mocking someone’s looks and mocking someone’s sexual orientation? Is there a difference, given that one can say, “I’m proud to be gay!” but no one dares to publicly announce, “I’m proud to be ugly!”?)

I thought it was pretty obvious that Tado was mocking Vice Ganda by actually employing Vice Ganda’s comedic-weapon-of-choice: lait. What really bothered me is how offended Vice was with Tado’s comments—and how he reacted afterwards. That of all people a Vice Ganda failed to recognize the fact that it was a joke and instead took the bait is, to me, a classic case of pikon-talo. Dude, lighten up. If you can dish it, you ought to take it too, right?

I think it was the manner in which Vice Ganda corrected Tado that really rubbed me the wrong way. Putting someone to task for being bastos becomes a hollow act when Vice himself resorted to bastos tactics. For a moment there Vice Ganda sounded like Willie Revillame, but with more poise and eyeliner.

To cite a difference, let me illustrate by telling a short story featuring Jonas Bagas. (Sorry Jonas, your example was the first thing I could think of, hehehe.) While we were recording a podcast, someone cracked a joke that Jonas felt was a little too much. So what did he do? He immediately called attention to it by simply saying, “Uy, foul yan!” Simply said, with no drama and no condescending I’m-in-my-high-tower attitude. And the offending party immediately realized his mistake, apologized and retracted his statement. Granted, Jonas is not a comedian, and lait isn’t his sense of humor. Which I guess is precisely why he was more effective.

Of course, I acknowledge that a stage show is different from a televised show, and clearly Vice Ganda was conscious of the difference. In fact, at the start he actually said that he was correcting Tado precisely because there were a lot of kids watching the show and Vice wanted those kids to know that it’s wrong to make fun of someone just on the basis of his sexual orientation.

But if we really think about it, Vice Ganda’s statement (that he is thinking only of the welfare and moral education of the children) is merely an emotional ploy—a faux-appeal to higher authority—that is designed to blur the argument. Tado’s t-shirt states: “Di bale na ang magnakaw keysa sa mamakla.” Really now, do we honestly believe that a t-shirt copy will lead to an increase in juvenile theft? And even if they did, the deterrents against crime (the parents, the police, the threat of punishment when caught) are enough so that these kids, as they grow older, will realize that one of Vice Ganda’s statements is actually truer than Tado’s t-shirt copy: “Walang nakukulong sa pamamakla.” This is a lesson that numerous macho dancers, male masseurs and callboys have learned and embraced. This is a lesson A the security guard definitely uses to his financial advantage.

In other words, those who are adult enough to pause and think should realize what’s so glaringly obvious: Tado’s t-shirt statement is a joke, and mature adults shouldn’t even take it seriously.

Maybe it would be asking too much from comedians to act more maturely. And I of all people should know how difficult that is.

* * * * *

Someone tweeted this morning that Tado’s “Di bale na ang magnakaw keysa sa mamakla” t-shirts are selling like hotcakes after the incident. Tado should really thank Vice Ganda.