New York ? Black man or white female? This is the question facing all those considering either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton as their candidate for the presidency of the United States, and who think both are equally qualified to run the country. Or, as put by Maureen Dowd, the often flippant New York Times Op-Ed columnist, ?Is misogyny worse than racism, or is racism worse than misogyny??

That is one conundrum facing those who wish to see someone in the White House bring changes that are startlingly different from the policies of its current occupant. I don?t just mean someone who can pronounce ?nuclear,? reads newspapers, knows the difference between Austria and Australia, and has a visceral dislike for waterboarding and the idea of spying on millions of his or her fellow Americans?though such qualities would be a good beginning.

I mean someone who will bring moral sense into U.S. foreign policy, has the interests of the working and middle classes at heart rather than those of oil companies and high-flying Wall Streeters, and is fiercely committed to preserving civil liberties. The litany of sins committed by Boy George, along with his sidekick Sneaky Dick is by now depressingly familiar: two disastrous wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, huge trade deficits, the decline of the dollar, rampant cronyism, head-in-the-sand environmental policies?all of which make him enormously popular with flat-earth believers.

But let?s give credit where credit is due: the man has excelled at trapo politics?the politics enthralled to narrow interests that benefit only the already mighty and wealthy. In this regard, he has justly earned many superlatives, but I?ll resist enumerating exactly to what words the suffix est might be appended.

While the Republican candidates for their party?s nomination were a throwback to the 1950s?an all-white male cast?those of the Democratic Party were a reminder that not only are the times a-changing, they have changed. There were an African American (Obama), a Latino (Richardson), a woman (Clinton), and one?Dennis Kucinich?who stands at only five feet and six inches. (He was the one I favored, not simply because we?re of similar height, but you have to love a guy who half-jokingly quipped that a short candidate would probably not win, and also advocated creating a Department of Peace.)

If Barack or Hillary wins the nomination and goes on to be president, he or she will be making history. On the march to history, however, will the greater stumbling block be that of sexism or racism? Another New York Times Op-Ed columnist, Nicholas D. Kristof, believes that ?sexism seems more of a factor,? with polls stating that Americans ?are less willing to vote for a woman than a black.?

He points to African American Shirley Chisholm, a presidential candidate in 1972, who ?always said that she encountered more prejudice because of her sex than her race.? Indeed, in the current campaign, many of Hillary?s perceived liabilities?cold, calculating, ruthless?would be seen as assets in a male. Things may have changed but not that much when it comes to popular perceptions of tough, independent, and brainy women.

Given that the Philippines has had two female presidents, including the current one (though much of the nation loudly regrets having GMA at the top, as she and her administration seem determined to one-up the Marcos regime in terms of massive, mind-boggling corruption and human rights violations), and that the country is top ranked internationally in terms of women holding corporate management jobs, sexism won?t be a factor for Filipinos voting in the 2008 elections, but racism will.

We are not as misogynist as we are racist?this is not to suggest the lack of issues with regards to women in Filipino communities, only that during this election season color will trump gender, since more Filipinos will be bothered by the thought of an African American being elected to the highest public office than they would by a woman president.

It is no secret that racism against African Americans?against dark skin --is alive and well among Filipinos, whether in Manila or Manhattan. In both cities, I have heard Filipinos recoil with horror at the prospect of a black American as president. In Makati I asked one such acquaintance if he objected to Barack simply because he was black. ?Of course,? was the reply of this man whose skin was distinctively kayumanggi. There were no hints of irony or sarcasm in his voice ? end of what could have been a productive discussion on the merits and demerits of the two candidates.

Maybe we should have talked about the possibilities of setting up a chapter of the KKK (no, not the 1896 revolutionary society). Though, come to think of it, the Ku Klux Klan would never accept the candidacy of a person seen as fair game for its genocidal philosophy.

Aye, there?s the rub. So many Filipinos behave as though they were white, never mind that their skin color is anything but. In a society where lightening creams sell so well, and in immigrant communities where whites are perceived, even if derisively, as models to be emulated since they hold power, acting white is the unspoken norm for acceptability. The demeaning term used for Filipinos holding such beliefs is ?coconut? or ?Oreos?: brown outside, white inside.

I have heard it from both sides: Filipino parents express their nightmarish fears that their American-born or reared sons and daughters (but particularly the latter) might wind up marrying an African American, while the offspring complain about their parents? reactionary attitudes, which conjure up all the stereotypical images of black men: drug dealers, gangsters, sexual predators. The elders react as though some ancient racial taboo were being violated. One can hear echoes of a Don and Doña exclaiming to their hija, ?Dios mio, how can you even think of marrying that indio!?

This deeply ingrained prejudice against African Americans--a powerful vestige of colonialism--conveniently ignores the history of racism directed against Filipinos themselves by white America, from the first waves of immigration to the present. The fears of Filipinos (who otherwise think of themselves as easygoing and tolerant) were formulated more than a century ago, when among the endearments white soldiers in the Philippine-American War lavished upon Filipino guerrillas was ?nigger.? In Hawaii and the West Coast young Filipino men were seen as sexual threats to white manhood. It isn?t too hard to argue that the bias against blacks among Pinoys is in effect a bias against ourselves.

If Barack does get his party?s nod, I wouldn?t be surprised if, come November, a significant number of Pinoys, Democrat or not, will choose McCain, not so much because they like him but as a vote against the black Obama. They will pounce upon whatever alleged dirt is dredged up, no questions asked, and spread it far and wide. Already the dirty-tricks campaign targeting him has begun, with one false allegation circulating on the Internet being that Barack Obama is Muslim, with its obvious implication that Muslims are by nature untrustworthy (while Christians are of course paragons of virtue).

This moro-moro also links him not too subtly to the 9/11 terrorists. Perpetuated by those either too gullible or too intent on spreading calumny propelled by sheer bigotry, such an allegation links its disseminators, ironically much more damningly, to the fundamentalists ?a tiny fraction of the Muslim world--who flew hijacked planes into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. Far more than any established faith, ignorance claims numberless believers.

Copyright Luis H. Francia 2008