Shame and ‘hiya’ in the Senate
The scenes played out like a movie: a chase up the stairwell, finger-pointing and shouting in the Senate plenary, and accusations of fighting between Senate staff and the arresting officers. Big emotions were on display. Tears, anger, shame. One could say many things about Philippine politics, but you can never call it boring. However, we must remind ourselves that politics isn’t meant to be entertainment. It is meant to solve problems and address the needs of the public. Rightly so, admonitions from various sectors came out, saying that what happened was “nakakahiya.” Watching everything unfold, it struck me how different aspects of shame and hiya were on full display in the Senate.
In the field of emotion regulation, we believe that emotions are neither good nor bad. Each emotion, even distressing ones, carries an important function. Shame serves the function of alerting us that what we are doing will lead to social rejection. Shame can be justified or unjustified. Shame is justified when we engage in behaviors that go against our morals, which risk social rejection. Shame is not justified when we are being rejected for things outside of our control, such as being accused of things we did not do or being made to feel bad about who we love. Guilt and shame tend to go hand in hand. Guilt, the emotion evoked when we go against our moral code, tends to be internal and does not require an audience, while shame always has a perceived audience. This is why shame can also be humiliating and embarrassing.
Emotions also come with an urge to act. In the case of shame, our urge is to hide or deny in an effort to avoid social rejection. Public denials are all too common in our politics. Newly installed Senate President Alan Peter Cayetano denied that the sudden change in leadership had anything to do with Vice President Sara Duterte’s looming impeachment trial, despite its suspicious timing. Why would he deny such an intention? Because he knows that it is considered unbecoming for soon-to-be senator-judges, who will take a vow of impartiality, to make such partisan maneuvers.
In trying to do away with the feeling of shame, we can also react with defensiveness. When asked by reporters as to why he has decided to show up that day after hiding for six months, Sen. Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa was visibly upset and angry, raising his voice at the press. Instead of answering the question, he rebuked the reporters for criticizing him. When interviewed by Mel Tiangco, he admitted that “hiyang-hiya na ako,” pertaining to criticism of him receiving a salary despite his absence.
The Filipino concept of hiya, while similar, is different from shame. While shame is a distressing emotion evoked when we’ve done something that others don’t approve of, hiya is more relational. Hiya involves some form of “pakikiramdam,” an understanding of others with the goal of nurturing the relationship. As such, hiya concerns itself with mutual respect, trust, and social responsibility. A betrayal of these things can cause us to feel hiya. Even if it causes us momentary distress, hiya is a virtue because it signals to us that our actions are affecting people we care about. Hiya is not inherently problematic. On the contrary, we consider “walang hiya” as a hurtful insult because it is an accusation that we do not care about the consequences of our actions.
I understand the public’s sentiments of “nakakahiya” through this lens. More than just embarrassment, the behaviors displayed in the Senate betrayed the public’s respect and trust in the institution. Instead of adhering to order and decorum, they turned the stately halls into a circus. Instead of focusing on the welfare of the people, they seemed to be preoccupied with self-preservation and self-interest. In that moment, they abandoned their public responsibility and instead demonstrated exclusive allegiance to their allies.
Everyone will feel shame and hiya at some point. What matters is how we respond to it. Instead of ignoring it, we should use these instances to reflect if we are acting in ways that hurt our relationships. If the emotions are well-founded, then we take on the responsibility to repair.
Elected leaders often forget their relationship with their constituents when making decisions. We can argue that the worst transgression of a leader is a lack of hiya. Ignoring hiya can normalize lack of hiya. Among people in power, this is dangerous. When leaders no longer feel hiya, it means they no longer care about people’s welfare. When they don’t care and are not made accountable for their actions, they get comfortable in their self-interest. Lack of hiya makes it easier to lie, cheat, and steal. Corruption becomes the norm, and people suffer as a result.
The Senate can use its sense of shame and hiya to bring the focus back to the welfare of the Filipino. They should respond with accountability and repair of the public trust. Do what is in the public interest and not what is in their self-interest.
—————-
aatuazon@up.edu.ph
