First, we can’t jump to the conclusion that all (or most) men have “devilish” humor. I’m not aware of any study or theory that has reached this conclusion. There’s also nothing unique or native about the kind of humor Hay! Men! provides. Benny Hill, for example, was popular (or notorious, depending on your point of view) for “toilet humor” a long, long time ago. Hay! Men! therefore only perpetuates the kind of humor that appeals only to the lowest common denominator, even if it results in sexism, among others.

If you’ve become more “sensitive” due to the posts of Hay! Men! then good for you. But judging from the quality of comments by the mostly anonymous online visitors of the blog, I doubt if this is a general trend. Be that as it may, the challenge for the enlightened ones like you is how to translate your awakening into action.

But to make this more interesting.. this, sir, is my reaction every time i read Hay!Men: “This thing here is so fucked up and sometimes true here in the Philippines that i think i should do something about it.” I mean.. I don’t know their ulterior purpose for creating that site, but i am now more socially aware of whatever kind of discrimination. And through channeling my “evil man side” to participating in that blog, i became more sensitive when it comes to dealing with any other gender, race, age and even animals. That’s somehow a good thing right?

You’re entitled to your opinion if you think “Hay! Men!” is brilliant in the sense that it is able to provide shades of gray in its “discourse.” But you should know that this literary device is nothing new.

If you’re looking for brilliance in providing “shades of gray,” try reading Frank Miller’s “Sin City” series that effectively puts in proper context why the good-evil dichotomy simply doesn’t work in a society we live in. Even comedy TV series like “Modern Family” has that “shades-of-gray” discourse on family living in the sense that funny, sometimes morally offensive, situations have redeeming values toward the end.

Much as you are wont to think otherwise (and I totally respect it), I find “Hay! Men!” to be sorely lacking in finesse as regards its brand of humor, as well as the way the blog administrators “engage” the readers. A critical analysis of its posts shows that it appeals only to the lowest common denominator, a practice that is common in many TV sitcoms that mainly engage in slapstick humor.

If you’re publishing something, even if it’s just a joke, there is a need to be responsible. You can’t just “enjoy the freedom” as we have to think about others.

It is utterly pathetic for people to use freedom of expression as an excuse to get away with sexism. It is even worse if one argues that he or she is just siimply joking. In the final analysis, what “Hay! Men! does is to perpetuate oppressive and repressive norms of our society, bereft of any socially redeeming value.

move on na, pare. pathetic na.

I personally think that the blog, “Hay! Men!” is brilliant. Sa society kasi natin masyado na black and white ang pagtrato sa mga sinasabi at gawain ng tao. Feel ko alam mo na yun, pero para sa mga nagbabasa nito black and white yung pagle-label ng mga tao sa mga bagay bagay as isa lamang sa dalawang category: good or evil. Ayun, ni-re-redefine ng Hay!Men! ang concept ng good and evil kasi naglelabel sila sa paraan na nakakatawa, sobrang mali, minsan may point at di mo iisiping seryoso… Kumbaga, kung nagiisip kang reader ay mas magiging aware ka pa sa tama at mali dahil nga hindi labeled lahat ng bagay duon sa usual na paraan.

Kaya yung followers nila ay ginagawa din yun through posting illogical and really crude comments varying in humor. Bilang fan nila, nagugustuhan ko yung pakiramdam na against sa norms ng society yung tinatype ko pero hindi naman ako seryoso sa sinasabi ko. Ang purpose lang ay magpatawa. Mala-rebel ba ang pakiramdam. PERO, para sa mga part ng usapan or readers na sineseryoso ang mga usapan dun at dinadala sa labas ng site yung kabastusan ay ibang usapan na… Personal na responsibilidad ng bawat mambabasa sa internet na alamin ang pagtanggap at di pagtanggap ng mga nababasa nya. SO, hindi masisisi ang Hay! Men! kundi yung kitid ng isip ng karamihan. Sorry sa salitang kitid, pero kawalan ng edukasyon at guidance ng magulang at kaibigan yung nagiging reason para magkaroon ng mga ganong tao. Parang medyo unfair lang na yung mga nagpasimula ng site ang masisi dahil dun.

There you have it. Hindi ko gusto yung pagiging irresponsible ng ibang tao sa internet ang maging reason para ikasama ng Hay! Men!

Let’s all just loosen up a bit and enjoy the kind of freedom that we can gain from the internet.

But then, I couldn’t agree more with Prof. Arao’s analysis about the nature of this blog as being sexist and irresponsible. Almost all of prof. Arao’s point are correct and valid. His objective is not only about defending LGBT and women’s right, but reminding people to be responsible on their own action. This blog, indeed, is a strong medium that influences the attitude of many people who read this blog. Assuming that the objective of this blog is to create fun, but too much of this creates undesired effects especially to those readers who cannot easily identify what is a joke and what is not a joke.

When you write something, you have to be responsible to your readers. This blog is definitely below par the essential elements of a satire. I’m afraid, this blog contributes in one way or another to the increasing state of violence, hatred, and crimes.

I acknowledge the wits and creativeness of the author of this blog. But I would be more happier if you can write something that can inspire people the way Bob Ong and Pablong Pabling did.

To Prof. Danny Arao, your consistent efforts towards you advocacy are highly appreciated. God Bless!

I thank Tina and Janna for their comments.

As regards anon’s comment (Nov. 1, 10:28 a.m.), please allow me to stress the following points:

1. Not being required to post your real name doesn’t mean that you should not do so. If you want to be accountable to the readers and if you want to be stand by your arguments, mentioning your real name lends more credibility to the points you raise. Anonymity on the Net gives so much room for abuse and misuse, after all.

2. Please give clear examples as to the satirical nature of “Hay Men!” posts. I studied them in the past and I haven’t found one. A post on Eman Lacaba a few years ago came closest to “satire” but the post is still problematic based on the points I raised in an earlier article.

3. I don’t look down on the authors of Hay Men. If that were the case, I would have just ignored them altogether. I used to think that they were open to criticism and debate given their credentials as award-winning writers and documentarists. Of course, given the ad hominem attacks some of them have initiated against me, I was proven wrong with regard to their willingness and openness. That is precisely the reason for the absence of a “healthy debate.” No discourse happens as the other side resorts to name-calling and character assassination (two things I haven’t done in the articles I wrote about the blog).

Danilo A. Arao
(again, my real name)

sori po, pero walang karespe-respeto yang bobong blog na yan. DTNT ka. Di tunay na tao.

“they are former activists and award-winning writers who should know better.”

they do know better, as do everyone else who understands how and why TNL blog is satirical.

walang mangyayaring “healthy debate” kasi ang tingin mo sa mga authors at readers ng TNL blog ay mga di marunong mag-isip, at walang kakayahan mag-discern kung ano ang patawa sa totoong sexist. at ang tingin naman namin sayo ay ganun din dahil pinapatulan mo ang isang humor blog. nakakaawa.

sori po, nawalan ako ng respeto sa inyo. DTNL.