The Role of Safe Spaces Act of the Philippines in Promoting Inclusivity and Addressing Gender Discrimination and Disqualification in Educational Institution.

The Role of Safe Spaces Act of the Philippines in Promoting Inclusivity and Addressing Gender Discrimination and Disqualification in Educational Institution

Rustom Jay D. Sano, Reysel Ann G. Sano

Laguna State Polytechnic University, Santa Cruz, Laguna, Philippines

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.908000533

Received: 13 August 2025; Accepted: 19 August 2025; Published: 19 September 2025

ABSTRACT

The Safe Spaces Act is legislation designed to promote inclusivity, diversity, and equity by establishing safe spaces in educational institutions and public areas. Its main objective is to create a supportive and secure environment for marginalized communities, including LGBTQ+ individuals, racial and ethnic minorities, and people with disabilities. The main focus of the study was to assess the Effectiveness of Safe Spaces Act in Promoting Inclusivity and Addressing Discrimination in Educational Institution, specifically in Laguna State Polytechnic University, Sta. Cruz Campus. In addition, developed methods used in the delivery of information in order to create a proposed action plan that will help to enhance the program of promotion of inclusivity and addressing the issue of discrimination. The descriptive survey method of research was used in this study to assess the effectiveness of safe spaces act in promoting inclusivity and addressing discrimination in educational institutions which was answered by the faculty and students. In the findings of the study, there is a difference in perception between students and faculty regarding the effectiveness of the Safe Spaces Act in promoting inclusivity and addressing discrimination in educational institutions. Students perceive the act to be most effective in addressing gender-based harassment, while faculty perceive it to be most effective in addressing gender inequality. Additionally, both groups perceive the act to be least effective in addressing gender stereotyping. A proposed action plan was formulated for the possible extension project of the College of Criminal Justice Education in the community of Sta. Cruz, Laguna.

Keywords: Safe Spaces, Harassment, Gender-Stereotyping, Gender Equality

INTRODUCTION

The Safe Spaces Act is legislation designed to promote inclusivity, diversity, and equity by establishing safe spaces in educational institutions and public areas. Its main objective is to create a supportive and secure environment for marginalized communities, including LGBTQ+ individuals, racial and ethnic minorities, and people with disabilities. This legislation aims to prevent harassment and discrimination, protecting the rights of individuals to be free from abuse, violence, and mistreatment. Safe space refers to an environment free from any discrimination and any forms of abuse regardless of individual’s gender preferences or social status.  Public spaces at some point was became an unsafe spaces where some of abuses typically against women and girls were happened. United Nation Women (n.d) explained that, women and girls experience and fear different forms of sexual violence in public spaces, from unwelcome sexual remarks and gestures, to rape and femicide. It happens on streets, in and around public transportation, schools, workplaces, public toilets, water and food distribution sites, and parks. This reality reduces women’s and girls’ freedom of movement. It reduces their ability to participate in school, work, and public life. It limits their access to essential services and their enjoyment of cultural and recreational activities, and negatively impacts their health and well-being.

Safe spaces have gained attention in recent years across various settings, such as educational institutions, workplaces, and public spaces. They are designated areas where individuals can freely express themselves without fear of discrimination, harassment, or violence. Sam (2021) explains that safe spaces on campuses encompass activities beyond the classroom, including residential halls and extracurricular activities. It is important to note that safe spaces are not limited to specific student populations but can include all students. Additionally, the term “safe space” can also apply to faculty and administrators who require a secure environment for their work, promoting growth and initiative. So, one of the key roles of the Safe Spaces Act is to promote inclusivity. By creating safe spaces, the Act ensures that marginalized individuals can feel welcome and respected in public places.

This is important because it helps to reduce the social exclusion and discrimination that many marginalized individual’s experience. Safe spaces promote diversity, equity, and inclusion by providing an environment where people from different backgrounds can feel comfortable expressing themselves and engaging with others. In addition, the Safe Spaces Act also has the potential to promote social change. By making it illegal to harass or discriminate against individuals in public spaces, the law sends a strong message that such behavior is not acceptable. This can help to raise awareness of the issue of discrimination and create a culture of respect and acceptance. Moreover, the Act may encourage more people to speak out against discrimination and harassment, which can lead to a more inclusive and accepting society.

While the Safe Spaces Act has   been widely accepted in the Philippines as a necessary measure to promote inclusivity and address discrimination, its effectiveness in achieving these goals remains a subject of debate. In fact, some incidents are still being happened in the country. According to the Philippine Commission on Women (2023), there are a total of 1,031 recorded cases of the violation of R.A 11313 or the Safe Spaces Act from 2016- 2023.  This is an alarming number of cases, considering that not all cases were probably reported. Meanwhile, exclusivity and discrimination simply start in a simple bullying that mostly happened in educational institution. It went out just a simple joke until it was seriously taken.

With that, it was identified that, there are challenges especially in the implementation if such laws in every institutional institutions. Wherein, some of the educational institution are inadequately address sexual harassment, with instances of administrators dismissing complaints or failing to conduct proper investigations. In addition, insufficient programs that will address this incident were limited especially in high school and senior high school. The U.S Department of Education (2024) agreed that, Preventing and remedying sexual harassment in schools is essential to ensure a non-discriminatory, safe environment in which students can learn. Unfortunately, students, parents, and school staff may not know what sexual harassment is, how to stop it, and what can be done to prevent it from happening.

This research paper aims to assess the effectiveness of the Safe Spaces Act in promoting inclusivity and addressing discrimination in educational institutions. Through this, it will brought out the efficiency as well as the readiness of educational institution in the effective implementation of the law to address discrimination and other related cases including gender based harassment.

The main focus of the study is to assess the Effectiveness of Safe Spaces Act in Promoting Inclusivity and Addressing Discrimination in Educational Institution. Specifically, to explore the following: Identify the demographic profile of the respondents in terms of: Age, Gender and Institutional Status; Determine the extent of Safe Spaces Act in Promoting Inclusivity and Addressing Discrimination in Educational Institutions in terms of: Gender Stereotyping, Gender-Based Harassment and Gender Equality; Determine the significant difference of the two groups of respondents on their perception on the Effectiveness of Safe Spaces Act in terms of variables stated above; Determine the challenges and concern of the respondents on Promoting Inclusivity and Addressing Discrimination in Educational Institutions.

METHODOLOGY

The descriptive survey method of research was used in this study to assess the effectiveness of safe spaces act in promoting inclusivity and addressing discrimination in educational institutions which was answered by the faculty and students. The questionnaire was served as the main data gathering instrument. The questionnaires were filled up primarily by the faculty, non-teaching staff and student of the LSPU  who are currently enrolled in the institution across the colleges.  In addition, informal interview was utilized to gather qualitative data and explore the problems encountered by respondent in relation to safe spaces act.

To answer the objective raised in the study, the researcher utilized different statistical treatment to facilitate the description of important features of data. Percentage, weighted mean, standard deviation and T-Test was used. On the other hand, the qualitative part was treated through thematic analysis.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

Figure 1, 2, and 3 show the demographic profile of respondents.

Figure 1. Gender Preference of the Respondents

It has been noticed on the above figure that 60 percent of the of the respondent were male which is the majority gender preference of the respondents. On the other hand, 38 percent were female and the 1 percent of the respondents were came from the LGBTQ community, wherein there gender preference were gay and bisexual. In connection to this, gender preference of the respondent were taken as part of the research, because violation of safe space were commonly victimize base on the gender preference of a person. Specifically, those who were a member of marginalize community.

Figure 2. Institutional Status of the Respondents

It can be seen in the figure above the institutional status of the respondent, wherein majority of it was from the students which was 81 percent of the total of the respondents. With that, 19 percent of responses came from the faculty. This was included in the study to determine the point of view of two different groups of community in relation to safe space act as a law. This was to identify their perception regarding the effectiveness of law in prevention of gender base sexual harassment or preventive measure against the safe space of every individual.

Figure 3. Age Bracket of the Respondents

As indicated on the figure above, 64 of the respondents which is 81 percent of the total respondent was with the age bracket of 18-25. Meanwhile, 6 of the respondents which is 8 percent of the total respondents was with the age bracket of 26-35. In addition, 5 of the respondents which is 6 percent of the total respondents was in the age of 41-50. Lastly, 4 of respondents which is 5 percent of the total respondents fall on the age between 51-60. Base on the figure respondent with 18-25 years of age were all students and the rest were all came from the faculty of Laguna Polytechnic University, Sta. Cruz Campus.

Tables which represented the result of the study and discussed its implication on the findings on the topic of the study was presented next.

Table 1. Level of Effectiveness of Safe Spaces Act in Promoting Inclusivity and Addressing Discrimination in Educational Institutions in terms of Gender Stereotyping

Table 1 displays the effectiveness of the Safe Spaces Act in promoting inclusivity and addressing discrimination in educational institutions regarding Gender Stereotyping. The statement concerning promoting women as nurturing and men as suited for leadership roles received the highest mean score of 3.92 (SD = 0.87) from students, with faculty responding similarly at 3.80 (SD = 1.05). The statement contradicting the notion of women being less interested and capable in STEM fields received the lowest mean score of 3.36 (SD = 1.11) from students. Additionally, the statement addressing the culture of male strength and female passivity obtained the lowest mean score of 3.07 (SD = 0.85). Overall, the effectiveness score for the Safe Spaces Act in addressing Gender Stereotyping, as perceived by students, was 3.65 (SD = 0.10), indicating it was considered Effective. Conversely, faculty rated it as Moderately Effective, with an overall score of 3.37 (SD = 0.12).

The Safe Spaces Act was seen as effective in promoting inclusivity and addressing Gender Stereotyping in educational institutions, according to students and faculty. However, some areas needs to be address and raise the awareness of everyone in labelling women as weak compare to men. Back then, it was the belief of some groups of individual, throughout the years, it has been forgotten as gender equality are continuously emphasize all throughout the community. However, as to the result of the study, there was sloping down understanding to the fairness between genders. With that, there were scope for improvement as it was perceived as less effective in certain areas of gender stereotyping. On that note,  Peus et al (2015), as cited by Hentschel, Heilman & Peus (2019), agreed that, the majority of barriers for women’s advancement that were identified were consequences of gender stereotypes. For instance, addressing the stereotype of women being less interested and capable in any fields was deemed less effective. Similarly, tackling the culture of men being strong and assertive while women being passive and submissive was also seen as less effective. With that, Priyashantha, Chamaru De Alwis and  Welmilla (2023) stated that Such an opinion is justified by the fact that gender stereotyping limits the capacity of women and men to develop their attributes or professional skills and make decisions about their lives and plans.

Table 2. Level of effectiveness of Safe Spaces Act in Promoting Inclusivity and Addressing Discrimination in Educational Institutions in terms of Gender-Based Harassment

Table 2 shows the extent of the Safe Spaces Act in promoting inclusivity and addressing Gender-Based Harassment. Students rated the prevention of sexual comments or jokes highest (mean = 4.45, SD = 0.85). Preventing physical force or intimidation received a mean score of 4.00 (SD = 0.97). Faculty rated preventing offensive comments about gender the lowest (mean = 3.00, SD = 0.97). Overall, students perceived the effectiveness as very high (mean = 4.23, SD = 0.05), while faculty considered it moderately effective (mean = 3.37, SD = 0.12).

It implies that safe spaces act was far beyond the normal in preventing the act of gender-based harassment. However, the act was found to be particularly effective in preventing sexual comments or jokes about someone’s appearance, body, or sexual orientation. But, there is room for improvement, as the act was perceived to be less effective in preventing the use of physical force or intimidation to pressure someone into sexual acts or other unwanted behavior, and in abstaining someone from making offensive comments about someone’s gender, such as belittling their abilities or intelligence because of their gender. Nobody deserve to be harass, no matter what was their gender preferences. One in three women will experience physical or sexual abuse. Many more will experience psychological violence. Yet less than one percent of global humanitarian funding is spent on sexual and gender-based violence prevention and response activities. Gender inequality and gender-based violence (GBV) restrict women’s and girls’ mobility, access to resources, and limit their decision-making power―all of which impact their ability to act on their sexual and reproductive health and rights (Pathfinder, 2022). The moment a person felt uncomfortable as they act in accordance on their sexual preferences, it was indeed considered as gender bases sexual harassment. In short, it doesn’t need to have a physical contact to consider it. With that, according to University of Illinois Chicago (2025), Gender-based harassment is not generally motivated by sexual interest or intent. It is more often based on hostility and is often an attempt to make the target feel unwelcome in their environment.

Table 3. Level of Effectiveness of Safe Spaces Act in Promoting Inclusivity and Addressing Discrimination in Educational Institutions in terms of Gender inequality (Students)

Table 3 displays the effectiveness of the Safe Spaces Act in promoting inclusivity and addressing Gender Inequality in educational institutions. The statement regarding equal pay and employment opportunities for women received the highest mean score of 4.22 (SD = 0.94) from students, while the statement addressing stereotyping and biases received the highest mean score of 4.13 (SD = 0.96) from faculty. The statement on addressing Gender-based violence and harassment received the lowest mean score of 4.08 (SD = 1.05) from students and 3.60 (SD = 1.02) from faculty. Overall, the effectiveness score for the Safe Spaces Act in addressing Gender Inequality, as perceived by both students and faculty, was 4.16 (SD = 0.05) and 3.76 (SD = 0.12) respectively, indicating it was considered Effective.

This implies that, Inequality still exists in the free society which hurdle some of group of individual to strive even better. The purpose of safe spaces act was to hinder and deter the oppression as well as the gender inequality which for a long period of time has been bombarding some of the group of individual in the society. The finding was supported by the study in Nepal by Dahal, Joshi & Swahnberg (2022), it is stated that, gender inequality and violence are not mutually exclusive phenomena but complex loops affecting each other. Women in Nepal face several inequalities and violence. The causes are diverse, but most of these results are due to socially assigned lower positioning of women. The hierarchies based on power make women face subordination and violence in the society.

Table 4. Summary of Findings on Level of Effectiveness of Safe Spaces Act in Promoting Inclusivity and Addressing Discrimination in Educational Institutions

Table 4 summarizes the findings on the effectiveness of the Safe Spaces Act in promoting inclusivity and addressing discrimination in educational institutions, as assessed by students and faculty at Laguna State Polytechnic University, Sta. Cruz Campus. The data revealed that students rated the effectiveness of the Act highest for Gender-based Harassment and lowest for Gender Inequality. Conversely, faculty rated the effectiveness highest for Inequality and lowest for both Gender Stereotyping and Gender-based Harassment. It is evident that the two groups have different perceptions regarding the level of effectiveness of the Safe Spaces Act.

It implies that, in spite of the given law which might protect everyone else and shall give the equal protection against abuse and discrimination, access for everything including the inclusivity, there are a lot of members of the community which were not satisfied of the said law. Whereas, in spite of that law, many were still experiencing the abused, harassment, discrimination as well as the exclusivity.  It was noted on the study of Remoto & Villalobos (2021), it was stated that, Sexual harassment has become an epidemic in the workplace, in academic institutions, in public places, on social media platforms and anywhere or everywhere else across the globe. It is evident that there exist inequalities between men and women, the physically challenged or disabled and the LGBTQ+. Everyone regardless of age, gender, status and physical condition should be treated fairly. There should be no place for any kind of discrimination, harassment or violence in a truly democratic country.

Table 5.  Test of Significant Difference

Table 5 shows the results of a statistical analysis of the effectiveness of the Safe Spaces Act in Promoting Inclusivity and Addressing Discrimination in terms of the forgoing variables: Gender Stereotyping, Gender-Based Harassment, and Gender Inequality, as perceived by both students and faculty. The mean scores and standard deviations for each variable are presented, as well as the t-value and p-value for each comparison.

The t-value measures the difference between the mean scores of the two groups and indicates the strength of the difference. The p-value represents the probability that the observed difference occurred by chance, and a p-value less than 0.05 is considered statistically significant.

In this table, the t-value and p-value for the comparison of students and faculty on Gender Stereotyping and Gender Inequality indicate that there is no significant difference in the perceived effectiveness of the Safe Spaces Act between the two groups, as the p-value is greater than 0.05. However, for Gender-Based Harassment, the p-values are less than 0.05, indicating a significant difference in perceived effectiveness between students and faculty. Specifically, students perceive the Safe Spaces Act to be more effective in addressing Gender-Based Harassment and Gender Inequality than faculty do.

Overall, these findings suggest that there may be differences in how students and faculty perceive the effectiveness of the Safe Spaces Act in addressing gender-related issues. This highlights the importance of ongoing education and communication efforts to ensure that all members of the educational community are aware of the goals and benefits of the Safe Spaces Act in promoting inclusivity and addressing discrimination.

Issues and challenges of in Safe Spaces act in Promoting Inclusivity and Addressing Discrimination

Based on the comments of the respondents, the following theme has been generated through the utilization of thematic analysis:

Promoting gender equality and inclusivity in educational institutions.

One of the respondents stated that “It seems that there are people who thinks that body shaming is just a joke. This is one of the problems that I personally encountered; they have the audacity to judge you by your physical appearance. The issues about weight. Some people (faculty) will really call you TABA loudly whenever they call you.” The text acknowledges that some people may not care about discrimination languages, according to Gan and Jiang (2022), In recent years, body shaming has emerged as a significant societal issue, with detrimental consequences observed in three key areas: a surge in self-harm incidents, a rise in rates of depression and anxiety, and an escalation in eating disorders.

Meanwhile, the language and terminology used to discuss inclusivity and discrimination evolve over time. What was once considered acceptable terminology may be seen as offensive or outdated by younger generations. The use of inclusive language, such as preferred pronouns, can be an area of contention between generations. While younger individuals prioritize using language that respects and acknowledges diverse identities, older generations may struggle to adapt to these linguistic changes.

Unequal Treatment.

According to the respondents “in our educational institutions we must give the equal treatment with regards to men and women in order to prove that women can do such things that men can do in that way we can easily prevent the discrimination in our or in every institution”.

The text emphasizes the importance of providing equal treatment to both men and women to combat discrimination and allow women to demonstrate their abilities. It highlights the need to challenge stereotypes that associate strength and toughness exclusively with men. Goldberg (2020) discusses legal gender discrimination, including restrictions on women’s access to certain professions and unequal pay mandated by law in some countries. These disparities can impact various aspects of a woman’s life, hindering her effectiveness at work.

Generational changes influence attitudes towards inclusivity and discrimination, with older generations having different experiences and social norms compared to younger generations. Access to diverse sources of information through technology has broadened understanding and acceptance among the younger generation, while older generations may have limited exposure to these new ideas, leading to potential conflicts and misunderstandings.

Lack of knowledge in Inclusivity

One of the respondents stated that “Being judge in the society most especially when we are part in the LGBTQI Community. Hoping that the society or community will be open whole heartedly to a community like us. LGBTQI. Most of us are being challenge by men for some sort of ego issues.” The text highlights challenges in promoting inclusivity, including a lack of knowledge about inclusive education, limitations within the education system, and inadequate resources. It emphasizes that inclusive education can help overcome barriers and stereotypes, and encourages mutual education, understanding, support, and meeting the needs of students to help them achieve their goals.

The United Nations (n.d.) states that discriminatory laws and socio-cultural norms marginalize and exclude individuals who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, or gender-diverse. This exclusion prevents them from accessing education, healthcare, housing, employment, and other essential sectors, leading to violence and discrimination. It perpetuates inequalities and denies these individuals equal opportunities and necessary resources

CONCLUSION

Based on the finding of the study, the following conclusion has been formulated: It has been concluded that there is a difference in perception between students and faculty regarding the effectiveness of the Safe Spaces Act in promoting inclusivity and addressing discrimination in educational institutions. Students perceive the act to be most effective in addressing gender-based harassment, while faculty perceive it to be most effective in addressing gender inequality. Additionally, both groups perceive the act to be least effective in addressing gender stereotyping.

In addition, based on the comments of the respondents, it can be concluded that promoting gender equality and inclusivity in educational institutions is crucial. The respondents discussed different themes, including the challenges of body shaming, the need for equal treatment between men and women, and the lack of knowledge regarding inclusivity. Discrimination against women, the LGBTQI community, and the need for education and support to break down barriers and stereotyping are also highlighted. It is emphasizing the importance of avoiding discrimination based on gender and the need to educate and support students to achieve their goals.

RECOMMENDATION

Based on the findings presented in the table, here are some recommendations for educational institutions to improve the effectiveness of the Safe Spaces Act in promoting inclusivity and addressing discrimination:

1. Conduct of intensive seminar-workshop to raise awareness on Gender Stereotyping, specially to students.
2. Enhancement of Student handbook, decorum and faculty manual; encapsulate the gender sensitivity practice. Conduct of intensive seminar, during every departmental orientation as they begin their classes.
3. Student Decorum should be properly implemented. In addition, gender sensitivity in line with the safe spaces act should be included in student handbook.
4. Provide a gender equality trainings and seminar.
5. Setting up the institutional environment conducive in every gender preference, from its material to classroom settings.

REFERENCES

1. Dahal, P., Joshi, S. K., & Swahnberg, K. (2022). A qualitative study on gender inequality and gender-based violence in Nepal. BMC Public Health, 22(1), 14389. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-14389-x
2. Gan, R., & Jiang, S. (2022). The impact of body shaming on female high school students in China. In Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research (pp. 2222–2232). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-494069-31-2_430
3. Garcia, M. K. P. (2022, September 20). Explainer: Salient features of the Safe Spaces Act or Bawal Bastos Law (RA 11313). Politixxx Today. https://politixxx.today/explainer-salient-features-of-the-safe-spaces-act-or-bawal-bastos-law-ra-11313
4. Goldberg, P. (2020). Unequal treatment of men and women by economic law: Global trends. Yale University Economic Growth Center. https://egc.yale.edu/research/Goldberg_et_al_2020
5. Hentschel, T., Heilman, M. E., & Peus, C. V. (2019). The multiple dimensions of gender stereotypes: A current look at men’s and women’s characterizations of others and themselves. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 11. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00011/full
6. Parsons, R. C. (2021). The work of classroom safe spaces. ERIC – Education Resources Information Center. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED615805.pdf
7. Pathfinder. (2022). Combatting gender-based violence. Pathfinder International. https://www.pathfinder.org/focus-areas/gender-based-violence/
8. Philippine Commission on Women. (2023). 2024 18-day campaign to end violence against women. https://pcw.gov.ph/2024-18-day-campaign-to-end-violence-against-women/
9. Priyashantha, K. G., De Alwis, A. C., & Welmilla, I. (2023). Gender stereotypes change outcomes: A systematic literature review. Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences, 5(4), 310–328. https://doi.org/10.1108/jhass-07-2021-0131
10. Remoto, A. K. B. W., & Villalobos, G. A. (2021). A case study on gender-based sexual harassment in the promotion of the Safe Spaces Act in Negros Occidental. Legal Research PH. https://legalresearchph.com/2021/02/27/a-case-study-on-gender-based-sexual-harassment-in-the-promotion-of-the-safe-spaces-act-in-negros-occidental/
11. University of Illinois Chicago. (2025). Gender-based harassment. https://sexualmisconduct.uic.edu/policy/definitions/gender-based-harassment/
12. United Nations Women. (n.d.). Creating safe and empowering public spaces with women and girls. https://www.unwomen.org/en/what-we-do/ending-violence-against-women/creating-safe-public-spaces
13. United Nations. (n.d.). Protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity (Report No. A/74/181). https://docs.un.org/en/A/74/181
14. U.S. Department of Education. (2024). Sexual harassment: It’s not academic. https://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/ocrshpam.html
15. Sam, C. H. (2021). Understanding the uses of safe space to inform higher education policy. ERIC – Education Resources Information Center. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED615805.pdf