Marites. Chismis. Chika. Tea. Blind item. Mosang. We have, at some point, engaged in gossip whether actively or by accident. Perhaps because a piece of gossip is “juicy” if it involves someone we actually know, and regarded as harmless if it doesn’t affect us directly. Often generally viewed in a derogatory light, gossiping is painted as uncultured, senseless chatter among the idle and superficial. Yet, we can’t seem to escape from it. 

While encountering gossip might not be exclusive to the Philippines, a different perspective on it may help us better grasp the intricacies of gossip in our culture.

Why We Gossip

“Likas sa atin ang makihalubilo. Kaya nga, may salita tayong tulad ng ‘usap-usapan’ o ‘sali-salitaan’ na maaari nating katumbas ng tsismis (It’s natural for us to socialize. That’s why we have words like ‘usap-usapan’ or ‘sali-salitaan’ which we can equate with gossip),” says professor, award-winning literary artist, and clinical psychology degree-holder Vim Nadera. 

Our nature to socialize may be the reason why gossiping has endured societal shifts and continues to evolve especially now that technology has made it easier and faster to exchange gossip. Could it also be that gossip satisfies our urge to know what we shouldn’t or can’t completely know?^[1] Once the gossip is shared with us, the compulsion to know more escalates for various reasons.

Take blind items, for example. They can be intriguing because there is a challenge to guess the subject/s of the intrigue. We don’t even know whether the stories are true and if the main characters are who we think they are. 

How about gossip involving companies? They seem valuable because many of us won’t know what companies are actually like unless we work there. 

Then there’s the neighborhood gossip about the shenanigans in the house at the end of the street. Word can travel fast and we find ourselves trying to catch up because, well, we’re part of the community. 

When we can’t easily verify information through our own experience or documented evidence and have reason to believe those involved won’t tell us the whole truth, the influence of gossip becomes stronger. 

In such cases, gossip may not only shape our perceptions,^[2] but also our actions.^[3] Should we care? Should we get involved? Should we continue the cycle by passing on the gossip? 

We may avoid following stories about celebrities who allegedly behave badly on or off the set. We might not apply for work at a company or include it in our investment portfolio if the rumors surrounding its culture and performance are exceptionally bad. If we hear that a new neighbor frequently lashes out at members of their household, we may not invite them to a casual cookout with other neighborhood families.

With gossip’s potential impact and increasing reach, it may be difficult for us to say that we can disregard gossip culture completely. The question now is if there is such a thing as participating in gossip culture safely or responsibly.

The Consequences of Being a Marites

Marites is another term for chismoso/chismosa that was coined during the pandemic and quickly became popular through social media. Many among us know a Marites. Some of us even admit to being one.

Being Marites is an example of how gossip culture has evolved to become more visible, even relatable. Yet, being an irresponsible Marites can be harmful, not just to others, but also to us. If we respond to gossip by immediately making our judgment of its main character based only on the gossip we just received, it can backfire on us. It can reflect on our character, and we might end up harming our own reputation especially if the gossip is proven to be untrue.

The consequences can be especially severe if the judgment we shared was negative. 

Our words may ruin livelihoods and lives. The characters of gossip stories aren’t just characters. Behind them are real people whose reputation, mental health, and finances we may have unfairly damaged recklessly.

Using Ryan Cayabyab’s song “Tsismis” as an example, Nadera suggests that whether true or not, negative rumors affect all of us. Unlike characters and storytellers, we don’t exist in isolation or just relative to a single story. Our interactions can traverse across stories, creating new implications and even forming fresh stories beyond our knowledge and control. 

The safer option might be to not take our own versions of the story too lightly. 

But saying nothing doesn’t necessarily mean we haven’t responded to gossip in other harmful ways. Taking gossip at face value can mislead our views and affect our decisions. We may instead treat gossip with caution if we use critical thinking to analyze what we hear. 

We can ask two important questions to start: 1) Has the person witnessed what they’re describing, or are they sharing third-hand information? 2) What does this person have to gain or lose from sharing this with us?

We also don’t have to keep our concerns about the gossip to ourselves. We can take a more active role in engaging with gossip even as recipients. 

A responsible gossip recipient, according to Nadera, is one who tells the sharer, “O baka hindi tunay ‘yan. Puwede bang huwag natin munang ipasa sa iba?”(“Oh, maybe that’s not true. Can we not share this with others for now?”)

To be, or not to be, the Gossipmonger

To be a “responsible” Marites, we can avoid sharing gossip especially if we do not have solid proof or personally witnessed, to say the least, the gossip. 

Let’s say we saw our cousin drink six cans of beer in one sitting. 

If we simply tell our relatives that our cousin drank six cans of beer in one sitting and don’t present them with any other evidence besides our own account, they may see it as gossip. But to us, we’re just sharing what we’ve witnessed or experienced. 

However, if we go around saying that our cousin drinks six cans of beer every day, or they were hungover the following morning, then that’s a different story. Just like the earlier example, this can backfire on us too. 

While certain gossip can seem trivial or harmless, the effect may not be as forgiving in more serious cases.

Can We Control Gossip?

We may be vulnerable to gossip and its negative consequences, but we can also gain useful, albeit unverified, information that we otherwise wouldn’t know. What we can control is what we do with it.

Nadera, in discussing the gossip habits of Filipinos from Quezon Province (such as himself), says, “May ganitong ugali kami…na mag-batobalani sa isang lugar at doon…magpapalitan ng kung ano-ano….Maaari rin namang wala kundi impormasyon na ibabahagi para patunayan o di kaya’y pabulaanan! Sa kasamaang-palad, mayroon din namang paninira lamang ang hatid.” (“We have this habit of gathering around a place and exchanging things there. Sometimes, it could just be information that we share to prove or otherwise disprove! Unfortunately, there are some of us who only intend to slander.”)

We may not fully escape gossip culture, but we’re not entirely powerless within it. Each time we make an effort to pause, question, and verify a story passed on to us before sharing it with others, we are helping shape a culture that values responsibility over recklessness. In that sense, gossip is not only something that happens around, or to, us; it is something we actively define. Whether it becomes a tool for socializing or something that enforces harm depends, to a certain extent, on our actions.

*all images are AI-generated

---

^[1] “Participants more frequently discussed others’ behavior when it was not directly observable.” 

Jolly, E. & Chang, L. J. (2021) Gossip drives vicarious learning and facilitates social connection. Current Biology, 31(12), 2545.

^[2] “Participants also adjusted their social judgments, such that they felt more affinity for group members who behaved cooperatively and less affinity for those who behaved selfishly, despite being unable to directly observe these behaviors themselves.” (Ibid.)

^[3] The past behaviors of those whom the participants could not observe were more predictive of the participants’ future behavior than the past behaviors of those whom they could observe directly. (Ibid., 2542)