The Bhagavad Gita, abridged and adapted :
"Why do you worry without cause? Whom do you fear without reason? Who can kill you?
The soul is neither born, nor does it die. Whatever happened, happened for the good;
whatever is happening, is happening for the good; whatever will happen, will also happen for the good only. You need not have any regrets for the past. You need not worry for the future. The present is happening... What did you lose that you cry about? What did you bring with you, which you think you have lost? What did you produce, which you think got destroyed? You did not bring anything, whatever you have, you received from here. Whatever you have given, you have given only here. Whatever you took, you took from The Universe. Whatever you gave, you gave to It. You came empty handed, you will leave empty handed. What is yours today, belonged to someone else yesterday, and will belong to someone else the day after tomorrow.
You are mistakenly enjoying the thought that this is yours. It is this false happiness that is the cause of your sorrows. Change is the law of The Universe. What you think of as death, is indeed life. In one instance you can be a millionaire, and in the other instance you can be steeped in poverty. Yours and mine, big and small erase these ideas from your mind. Then everything is yours and you belong to everyone. This body is not yours, neither are you of the body.
The body is made of fire, water, air, earth and ether, and will disappear into these elements. But the soul is permanent - so who are you? Dedicate your being to The Journey. He is the one to be ultimately relied upon. Those who know of his support are forever free from fear, worry and sorrow. Whatever you do, do it as a dedication to The Journey. This will bring you the tremendous experience of joy and life-freedom forever."
Can we do the same for the Bible, Koran, Pentateuch, and Tripitaka?
Friday, July 31, 2009
The Bhagavad Gita, abstracted
Posted by R.O. at 12:05 PM 3 comments Links to this post
Thursday, July 30, 2009
No privacy in Manila
(Manila, now a small town)
This city has become too claustrophobic. It used to be that everyone was a stranger. Now, there’s always someone I know wherever I go. It doesn’t matter how sparse or thick the crowd is. I am neither the gregarious diplomat type nor the campaigning politician, yet I can trust bumping into somebody just when I least expect. Gone is the prized anonymity, the reason I chose to live here in the first place.
I, therefore, share Michael Jackson’s extreme sport: paranoia. I always feel like somebody’s watching me that I feel constrained to wear H95 masks and name my pet chimp Bubbles. Statistically speaking, being easily spotted should be close to impossibility in a city without a one-child policy (population: a staggering 11M), but a multivariate analysis would reveal that I’ve spread myself out too thinly, too evenly, too literally, so that I’ve come to know people residing in every city and municipality. At a random recall, there’s Gilbert in Kalookan, Ramil in Alabang, Jonjon in Project 8 (Quezon City), Mer in Pasig, Stan in Tondo, Marvin in Las Piñas.
One night, I was waiting for the bus home along EDSA cor. Ayala. Who would I spot and spot me back but Jem. He was on another bus going to BF Alabang from his shift as barista in Bo’s Café, Glorietta. His bus stopped a minute long enough so that we came face to face and managed to squeeze a small talk. We conversed about how we used to hold meetings to organize garage sales, newspaper drives, Christmas caroling, and such fund-raising schemes.
Another time, I was ordering brewed coffee at Country Style in MOA when the face serving me struck me as familiar. I got nervous even before I took a sip. He turned out to be a former data encoder in ASEC, my former company. I was glad he’s too shy for the remember-me's and how-are-you’s because my mind was blank and wasn’t ready for any contact with human beings (that’s why I needed to perk myself up). Nonetheless, the encounter made me recall hard which floor and department exactly was he stationed in and which other faces I associated him with at the time. It was disorientating to refresh one’s memory when one is counting back up to ten years.
These scenes repeat themselves in many iterations, give or take another road or parking lot and another fast-food resto. And each time, a lost episode of my sordid past never fails to unfurl, as though in auto-rewind, to embarrass me. It feels like those who find themselves having a near-death experience.
My college life thus haunts me back as I recognize Mylene, now a store manager at Burger King. The first time I saw her, she was still with Shalimar. The next time, I learned they had broken up. Visiting hospitals, I can also count on seeing Renan, Nena, Ai, and countless other doctors who have been my classmates before. I can’t be mistaken: Those faces that now look like templates of the past were indeed faces I used to see everyday in Baguio. What are all they doing here? Oh, they’re Manila residents, to begin with. Past college events thus fly past unexpected: college fairs, CMT drills, plays, intrams, Oblation runs. It’s awful to have good photographic memory; it will never free you from remembering faces, ever.
Even my past lives in high school and grade school are not spared. I’ve seen Angie once, doing the tickets at SM North. If I was hiding something, I could not go to Duty Free because Menchu is there, to COMELEC because Badz is there, to the Bicutan Police because Dennis is there, to NTC because Don works there, to Villamor Air Base because Cesar is currently stationed there, to the Casino Filipino because Allen is dealing cards there, or the Asian Hospital in Alabang because Jona works there and might rat on me in case I contracted VD. Since each of my classmates’ next-of-kin also know me, I can expect them to report sightings of me as though I were a UFO or the endangered black shama bird.
Having worked in various companies doesn’t help that much in lying low and hibernating like a secretive animal or a wanted criminal. If you really want to dig deep for dirt about my other pasts, you will want to connect with certain people in the US Embassy, certain companies in Makati, and so on. Clue: I have worked for years in that rarefied sector of the KPO industry, in which many ex-practitioners now slave off in their graveyard shift in various call centers.
Being a member of a lay religious community, a free-for-all type, I belong to no particular parish, so my chances of becoming Invisible Man becomes even more remote. Just contact the right people who know me at Landbank, Smart, PNOC, and other companies, or this or that village. They all know me, I know them all. Just name a mall and we are sure to meet there without meaning to. There’s no rock under which to hide I might as well shed all manner of clothing. That’s what I feel now: nude, or is it naked, like a lab gerbil or an arowana in a bowl -- even if I feel like I have nothing left to conceal.
It’s no surprise that I know the respective members of their families, down to the househelp, or I am at least close to someone who’s close to them. I know who keeps a promiscuous Siamese cat or a shih tzu named Aling Dionisia. That’s another way of saying everybody is just one to two degrees centigrade of separation away. How do I know this? Why, they are mostly in Friendster and Hi5 and Multiply if they have not migrated yet to Facebook and Twitter.
In a way, lack of privacy can be good for us. If one is a terrorist like the Abu Sayyaf, we can trust the military to kidnap one’s third wife in exchange for a hostage. The military can do that because they keep a dossier of everybody, including one’s pet parakeet’s exact home address. If I were a coup plotter, I couldn’t hold clandestine conferences like Gringo Honasan would, or manufacture bombs out of shabu base chemicals, because I'll be easily traced just by smelling the air around. If you are a member of an illicit drug cartel or gun-for-hire syndicate, or a plain suicidal maniac, we can trot out your mother or grandma or former high school principal to do the pleading for us. It’s totally salutary to have a National ID system if only for this purpose. Kill privacy, assure life.
It's a wonder, therefore, how criminals thrive in this place, where even the country's president can be wiretapped without any of the perpetrators ever facing the firing squad. I can only surmise it's because the police and military allow it to remain in business.
But too much exposure is especially bad, I imagine, for one who aspires to become a movie star or top politico. An army of reporters and paparazzi will await one's every move like a sensor-driven GPS, from one's walk down the red carpet for one's latest smash hit down to where one last vomited and took a leak or had illicit sex with somebody’s wife after doing the same with somebody of one's gender. One can trust media people to plant or embed a paid mole everywhere there are janitors, maids, waiters, gardeners, bellhops, and hangers-on. Some of them will do a part-time work of yellow investigative journalism, muckracking, leaking restricted .pdf and .jpeg files and stolen videos, exposing dirty laundry, scrutinizing each grocery item in one's cart even as the victim unloads them for the cashier and bagger.
In this world, no appearances public or private can be kept secret for long. There is nothing left to hide where there are night vision goggles. There are no mysteries, untold stories, secret lives, and hidden personas because there are always hidden cameras and CCTV monitors. All confessions of private indiscretions can now be made on TV and shown as a reality show. There are no passwords, close-door meetings, and confidentiality agreements, only bugs and bugs. If all else fails, there are even microwave cameras monitoring the latest twitch in traffic and satellite cameras and, the latest development, Google Earth, which can zoom in right on your scalp and nose its way down to your most intimate thoughts. Abandon all hope, all ye who attempt to be Private First Class.
Posted by R.O. at 10:08 AM 0 comments Links to this post
Common-sensical
- Great news for people who attract mosquitoes like cows attract gnats: It's good when mosquitoes bite you. (Mosquitoes deliver malaria 'vaccine' through bites)You are inoculated and gain immunity for malaria. I didn't know we could do that, i.e., develop immunity from protozoans (the malaria-causing Plasmodium spp). But the entire idea is common-sensical. Anyway, I hope the same thing happens with dengue and other horrifying mosquito-borne diseases.
- Scientists Outing ‘Gay Gene’ Myth, NCR, July 24, 2009 by Anneke Pieters. This report tells something I have observed before: Why are there twins in which one is homosexual and another is not? Isn't that enough genetic proof? Common sense says it is, but denial will find elaborate rationalization.
- Newfound Bird Is Bald by Clara Moskowitz, LiveScience. Welcome to the family, Passeriformes pycnonotidae or Laos's bare-faced bulbul
- Meanwhile, something truly hilarious: 20 Snappy Replies to the Comment, “Uy, tumataba ka ata” by Lourd Ernest de Veyra
Posted by R.O. at 7:45 AM 0 comments Links to this post
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
An OFW's Letter to President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo
(Fwdd email via Jeff)
____________________
An OFW's Letter to President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo
Dear Mrs. President,
How I wish I were home when you had your recent State-of-the-Nation Address. I would have joined the millions of Filipinos excitedly awaiting for your yearly report over the broadsheet, and radio and television stations. I would have been so vigilant in monitoring crowd formations near Malacanan Palace, EDSA-Ortigas, Paseo de Roxas, or near the House of Representatives in Commonwealth. Over the years I was an active spectator, joining public opinions about the possibility of changing our nation's course of events through the strengths and opportunities that form part of your SONAs.
This year, however, is the first time that I failed to have an access to the first-hand account surrounding your State-of-the-Nation Address. I will surely miss the blow-by-blow reports and analysis of top-rated journalists whose words charismatically provoke citizens, even in the margins, to speak and to take a stand, for or against our country's social issues.
I failed to join the public opinion this time because I am away from my country and my family. My decision to leave the Philippines is not simply for pleasure. I am working in great hardships to provide my family a decent living. The sacrifices are always underway. There had been countless sleepless nights since I came to the United States due to homesickness. The amount of tears poured was almost out of my number chart. My only child has not spoken with me for quite a while because of my failure to convince her that this separation will be "for the good of everyone."
I have made my decision to leave the country and my family, no matter how painful it may be, because our country has failed to provide people with ordinary lives a decent way to survive. The meager income that I received as an ordinary teacher, after earning a master's degree and advanced courses leading to a doctoral degree from leading universities in the country, coupled with more than a decade of experience in the field, has never alleviated us from poverty.
For several SONAs now, your administration has always uplifted the morale of my fellow Overseas Filipino Workers around the world as "partners in rebuilding a strong economy." The dollar remittances that OFWs earn are a powerful fuel in our economic growth, you have emphasized as a constant reminder. These words have been very encouraging, Mrs. President.
But has your administration ever asked why OFWs flee the country? Because of the national economy's failure to provide adequate jobs for the millions of skilled Filipinos. Your administration has statistically blurred us with tons and tons of jobs available in the market today. But what are these? Call center jobs that require high proficiency in a loaned language that has always been thought of as a culturally divisive factor? This can only be assumed by linguistically-trained and emotionally-hard graduates who could get through their erring foreign clients. Human Resources administration jobs whose required qualifications can only be met by a few? How about jobs for engineers, nurses, teachers, IT specialists, and the likes who spent painstaking years in school in order to acquire their much-needed title? How about jobs for the semi-skilled workers who are breadwinners in their respective households? Has your administration asked about jobs that are appropriate for the unskilled workers whose only fault was that their parents failed to send them to school due to poverty?
Has your administration ever thought what happens to the OFWs and their families after receiving that impressive title, "partners in rebuilding a strong economy"?
The fancy impression is that they are now living in plenty. But let me show you some real, down-to-earth illustrations that your fellow economists and intellectually arrogant statistics experts in various government agencies may have not gleaned from "available data".
A family whose parent went to the US recently is now being threatened by a financing company due to a failure to pay the interest of their loan's interest in the amount of Php500,000. This money was used for processing the application, but when the worker landed to the US, there was no available job for her. Another family decided to send their breadwinner to the US recently, but due to the agency's neglect to provide a link to employers, the worker didn't earn for months. This led to two of her children quitting their college studies. Another hopeful family brought all their children abroad, but failed to send them to universities due to high cost of tuition. They would have enjoyed quality education in the top universities in the home country, but the family realized how harder life is in the Philippines.
In the Middle East, numerous workers exchanged their Php15,000 salary back home with Php20,000 in Saudi Arabia, Oman, and Qatar. In Dubai, a number of Filipino workers took chances of it being an "open city" but were sent home afterwards due to retrenchment. Overseas Filipino Workers in Singapore, Hong Kong, and Taiwan would been enjoying their pay but their brutal sacrifices from the hands of employers are not just a game of chance. They are real, and they happen on a regular basis.
Mrs. President, I never blame you for the course of events that happen in the country today. True, the effect of global recession has severely affected even the hardest and most stable economies in the world. But have you not done anything about changing paradigms, selecting good leaders whose foresight can at least matter in alleviating our country's desperate economic condition? Have you not challenged leaders who have been suspected of continually engaging in massive graft and corrupt practices? We all would have enjoyed what they deposited in their personal bank accounts. Have you not thought of any other strategies to empower citizens, improve morality, affect change in various social institutions, and clean every corner of the public offices with wealth that were obtained in an evil manner or by dishonest means?
Mrs. President, time and again, you have suggested to us that after the SONA, there is much work to do and progress is underway. But after years of being our leader, you have only showed us that poverty is in its constant motion. We have not withered from what our parents, and our parents' parents have suffered in the course of Philippine History.
A quote from your 2009 SONA says, "When my father left the Presidency, we were second to Japan." What happened to us? Why have we not sustained that record? What have your administration done to at least set a direction to meet that record again?
I know you should not be blamed for this alone because you are just an heir of a nation that had been struck historically by structures that have made our people a predestined poor people in this generation. Our colonizers did, together with the leaders who were trained by them, with the participation of the past presidents and government officials who thought they could make things better.
But let me appeal to you, Mrs. President. And as I do this, please reflect carefully upon our situation as OFWs, together with the situation of our families back home...
There are still a few remaining months to do something extraordinary. Please clean our government. Please regain the confidence of the people. Please provide the poor majority with decent ways to live their lives. We, too, are uncertain of the time after your administration because the same old personalities are playing the game called politics in our country. But you can still make a difference.
May God bless us all.
Sincerely,
Mamerto Fernandez
Overseas Filipino Worker
North Carolina, USA
Posted by R.O. at 11:55 AM 0 comments Links to this post
Magallanes facelift
What used to be Magallanes Cloverleaf area's permanent eyesore -- that forever unfinished skeleton near Pasong Tamo Ext., which I decried as a "hesitant landmark" -- is now a mall. Why do places I have occupied in past lives seem to improve by leaps and bounds only when I am no longer there -- after praying from my heart for urban renewal; why??
I passed by there recently, and here's what I saw while climbing the stairs of the MRT:





Posted by R.O. at 7:25 AM 0 comments Links to this post
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Triangulation
I learned a new concept in family dynamics: triangulation. It basically means backbiting (in a bid to upset the balance of power or harmony in the relationship), which I've learned to be the hardest to control, even among the pious, but once controlled, ah saintliness!
Wikipedia: “Triangulation is most commonly used to express a situation in which one family member will not communicate directly with another family member, but will communicate with a third family member, forcing the third family member to then be part of the triangle. The concept originated in the study of dysfunctional family systems, but can describe behaviors in other systems as well, including work.
“Triangulation can also be used as a label for a form of "splitting" in which one person plays a third person against the person that they are upset about. This is playing the two people against each other, but usually the person doing the splitting, will also engage in character assassination, only with both parties.”
Items you might have missed:
- 100 Things Your Kids May Never Know About By Nathan Barry
- Is China's One-Child Policy Heading for a Revision? By Simon Elegant
- Senior City-zens: The 10 Oldest Still-Inhabited Cities
Written by Steve xxx
- Could you survive without money? Meet the guy who does by Christopher Ketcham: "In Utah, a modern-day caveman has lived for the better part of a decade on zero dollars a day. People used to think he was crazy."
I have updated these posts:
Freddie Aguilar’s original sound (plus the band Asin’s too)
Pinoy thing-none-knew jokes
Jolog Nation’s anthem
Posted by R.O. at 3:44 PM 4 comments Links to this post
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Now showing
(Personal film festival)
The Pianist by Roman Polanski - It has exceedingly beautiful photography as a counterpoint to all that unbearable, unrelieved brutality. It’s like I’m on the verge of a nervous breakdown trying to survive this film. I hate Polanski for putting me through it all. Extending the torture-fest beyond two hours makes it all the more unforgivable. Someone should lecture Polanski on the art of proper pacing. Almost every scene is suspenseful, which results in an overload that can kill the viewer. Adrien Brody is great, though. It's amazing what he can do with his droopy eyes and, uh, broody face despite the distractin of his crooked nose.
Batch 81 by Mike de Leon – This movie, though funny (in a bad way) and boring in parts, contains everything I’d wish for in a movie I could consider worthy enough to dissect the bothering phenomenon of college frats. It is initially cold and ironic in its scathing condemnation, but totally unforgiving in hyperbole as it delivers the verdict with finality.
I am reminded of a post I made against Greek-letter frats during the time when someone promising died of hazing yet again.
The Flor Contemplacion Story by Joel Lamangan – Hey, this is a great story, one of the best I’ve had in quite a while. It is bound to endure as a classic. The story, which is credited as the subject’s husband’s (Efren’s) story, basically writes itself from current events. Ricky Lee just had to piece everything together into a coherent whole, so the film triumphs wonderfully despite the nonlinear narrative. Without Lee’s deft writing, the story’s varied themes most likely would have crumbled into a gooey mishmash.
It’s remarkable how an unjust death sentencing of one woman exposes so much muck on different levels:
- family (i.e., all the attendant complications of an absentee wife and mother),
- society (i.e., social mores and attitude toward people who do menial labor),
- bureaucracy (i.e., its officers' attitude toward the country's own migrant workers and my-hands-are-tied dilemma in representing a mendicant nation in front of an employer state),
- national policy (i.e., of labor exportation),
- a nation's justice system (i.e., Singapore’s))
- the universal poor-versus-rich struggle for dignity vs. domination
The film is as much an indictment of capital punishment as a censure of our own belittlement of lowly people like maids (who, in the case of Filipinos, are mostly college-educated). I emerged edified and guilty as sin. I was among those initially dismissive of the case, thinking it to be one of those sensationalized stories being peddled by media.
The film can be a shameless five-hankie tearjerker (“Kaya nila ‘kong patayin, pero hindi ang aking pagkatao!”) – a Nora Aunor noir, you could say, making it a totally non-cool film. But its bright lights, other than Flor's quiet but tragic personal heroism, are the little people: Flor’s family, her uncelebrated friends who came out of the woodwork one by one, the nuns, the militant labor groups, and an attorney who was eventually touched by Flor's plight.
What an unusual story indeed, a story about the silent killer called labor exportation, modern-day slavery! How many more are victims today like Flor Contemplacion? As a son of an ex-OFW, I couldn’t help but be touched. Ronaldo Valdez’s non-evil lawyer delivers in the end a eulogy that’s perfectly pitched, one that captures everything that the movie tries to indict and condemn.
I am reminded of this old post of mine, where I am obviously irked and hurt: Imagine a world without Filipinos having to go abroad just to work.
Blood Diamond by Edward Zwick – This is a learning experience for me. I didn’t know there are “conflict diamonds” around, not that I intend to buy one. Because of this movie, I will never look at jewels the same way again. This film impresses in that it captures the complex global geopolitics around the tainted rock, with the use of a journalist and her "tainted source," a scheming smuggler, and a victim, a native of Sierra Leone in desperate search of a missing son, who had been kidnapped and indoctrinated to become a boy-soldier.
Un Secret by Claude Miller – This should be congratulated for being a far more nuanced Holocaust story. I read this IMDB review with interest.
Serbis by Brillante Mendoza. I agree with his vision ("Reality can be really ugly"), but I’m offended by the way he presented the sex part, and to think I'm no prude. It simply is too real, too in-your-face. Not even Y Tu Mama Tambien dared that far, dangling prosthetics and all. He pushed the sex envelope too far, to the point of obscene. Maybe I was just being a prude, after all, so I consulted other people what they thought. Guess what -- they said they were not offended, the sex scenes weren’t pornographic, or at least not intended to be, but they all left a trailing “but,” which to me is telling. No wonder so many people are scandalized by this movie, with not a few calling it pornography and "Third Word misery pornfest." Perhaps Mendoza forgot he's just making a movie, not a documentary.
Having said that, the story-telling, admittedly is top-notch: I like the little, slow revelations using the subtlest of details, in high contrast to all that blatant ugliness. Mendoza is a brilliant creative storyteller –- that much I can tell.
Leaving Las Vegas by Mike Figgis - What a bwiset award-winning movie -- a super-boring and slow story of co-dependency mistaken for true love between a Las Vegas stripper and an alcoholic moron. Didn't like it at all. I could have devoted my time birdwatching instead. Maybe this is how it feels when men have menopause.
The Departed by Martin Scorsese - I have much respect for Scorsese and his anti-cool treatment of violence, so I gave this movie a chance. Well? Um, it's okay. It's too lengthy, though, which is a crime in this case.
Sherman’s Way by Brad Goodman - I simply love this little movie. How do I put it? It’s almost autobiographical! Sherman doesn't know how to drive, bike, and swim -- in other words, a compleat jerk! The pinstripe-wearing klutz and nerdy elitist from New York is essayed by Michael Shulman, whose eyes remind me of John Malkovich and Keanu Reeves, but whose body is that of plain and dull Mr. Everyguy. Don’t be deceived by the simplicity of this “bittersweet comedy about absent fathers and damaged sons.” For it is “for anyone who has ever strived to find balance between responsibility and recklessness,” “between being a snob and being a slob.”
Che by Steven Soderbergh
The Hangover by Todd Philips - This is a movie with so much potential but fails to deliver. It's funny at times and I like the way it plays around the idea of a hangover in the context of a stag party. What guy has not imbibed one more bottle too much and ended up not remembering all the stupidity he has done and uttered in the middle of last night's bibulousness? Alas, this movie is merely low and trashy, the three supposedly oddball supporting characters are unconvincing and not so funny. The idea could have been great for the movie, given the way it creatively traces, the morning after, the awful things that happened to the stupid drunkards, but it revels in, instead of satirizes, the blatant worldliness of Las Vegas-grade amusement. What a ludicrously dismal act of celebrating loose morals and high crassness instead of ridiculing the low life of Las Vegas high dives. Maybe I wasn't just in the mood, but this is a movie I could've done without, given my busy sched. I should get paid for even watching.
King Arthur by Jon Favreau
Finding Neverland by Marc Forster - After bad father-figures and failed male models (The Departed) comes this feel-good story, for a change, a story of a good surrogate dad. I was poised to like or even love this movie just because it's another movie about a writer (J.M. Barrie), but I was disappointed. It induced me to sleep, and when I awoke, I missed all the good parts.
The Wrestler by Darren Aronofsky – A movie about an amateur professional wrestler. A daughter he had abandoned and now tries to win back. The wrestler’s budding romance with a stripper.
For the viewer, the movie is a tempting invitation to witness staged wrestling drama in the ring. The choreograph is indeed hilarious, like what we see on TV. It’s surprising what wrestlers actually do in secret to appear bloodied and still emerge unaffected. (Clue: hard workout and harder sleight of hand.)
There are more poignant surprises: The former star working the grocery store in the real world. Seeing the ‘real’ world in terms of his other real world, the world of cheered-on violence and alpha-male rough-and-tumble. Life as a wrestling arena! Living in a trailer. Shedding a tear. Exhibiting humanity – a surprising capability.
Then there’s being suddenly recognized by a fan. And the shame of it. And the throwing of a superstar-strength tantrum, a catalyst to a cataclysmic transition.
Unexpected themes are thus explored: ageing and obsolescence, parental abandonment and its consequences (including, possibly, father hatred and lesbianism), embracing social rejects.
My Sister’s Keeper by Nick Cassavetes based on Jodi Picoult’s novel - I thought I’ve just reached my quota of human desperation for the year with The Pianist and all the recent novels I’ve read, but Malou made watch the movie My Sister’s Keeper. The reason I said yes was that I thought we were going to catch Raya Martin’s and Piolo Pascual’s Manila. Turned out that movie was no longer showing.
So we are left to deal with topics we’d rather not dare talk about: Cancer. A donor child’s plea for her right to her own body. A family spare tire! Bioethics.
The unspeakable things that happen to a cancer patient’s body, thoughts, and feelings. The things the rest of the family had to do and sacrifice just to care for and show love to the cancer-stricken. The mother’s denial. The father’s strength and endurance. The son’s own needs being neglected for it.
But the movie’s premise and twists and turns are a tad implausible. This is the movie’s greatest fault.
Posted by R.O. at 8:57 PM 0 comments Links to this post
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Mounting irritation
(Unearthed Baguio stories)
When I was attending UP Baguio, it was always a pain to take that unavoidable trek to the City of Pines since my parents couldn't afford a helicopter ride for me. The reason is not because of the notorious hairpin curves and perilous inclines, nor because of the overhead boulders along the way, with all their stored potential, nor because of the ravines that promised an exciting plunge to the hereafter. It’s not even because of the fog which made me feel like indeed I’ve reached heaven without me intending to. It was because of those outrageous road signs that pockmarked Kennon Rd. and the other snaky roads to Baguio like bad, intermittent jokes.
The vexations start with the numerous premature signs of “Welcome to Baguio City” which are misleading to first-time tourists especially when they realize that they’re actually nearer Pugo, La Union than Baguio City itself. First-time tourists especially end up getting upset as they rise from their seat a number of times ("Are we there yet?") checking out for signs of the city at the slightest hint of a mountain protruding. They then applaud they have finally arrived, only to find nothing but native huts, pine trees, and ancient untouched mountains. (They’re actually checking out Tuba, Benguet without knowing.)
Another prominent sign along Kennon reads, “Orchid 100 meters.” Believe it or don't -- an orchid on the way to Baguio allegedly grows up to 100 meters long! How come no one ever takes a glimpse of either the orchid or the dangling modifier?
Then there’s this irksome sign that says “Kennon Road Reforestation Project,” but you squint at a backdrop of a totally denuded -- that is to say, logged-over and quarried -- mountainside that looks like a giant slab of wood waiting to be sculpted into the Baguio barrel-man with the unnatural endowment suddenly springing up at you (or that even more notorious phallic ashtray).
In the middle part of the serpentine highway, one can spot the sign "Weak Bridge." A sports columnist once complained about the distressing sign, which he had spotted just in time upon approaching one bridge, which indeed looked rickety. "Why place such a sign if the bridge is weak?" he wrote. "Why not just simply shut the bridge and do the repairs?" Imagine the nervous wreck that you were while treading even just a few seconds on that damned bridge.
Up high in Kennon Rd., there’s this idea of converting the ride into a poetry reading of sorts. Someone had thought of putting up signboards of Joyce Kilmer’s “Trees,” to be read line by line, give or take a hundred meters of travel. Each line of the poem appears on a separate metal signboard painted green, as though it's another "Caution: Rocks Falling" sign along the way. The strategy forces the budding poetry reader into hanging on to every line after a few minutes. One moment of inattentiveness and, presto, one misses out on a verse or two, leaving one hanging with suspense and irritated disbelief. (Update: In my last trip there (June this year), some lines indeed appear to have been carted off, giving the poem novel interpretations.)
You would think that the mounting irritation would soon plateau as you reach the City Proper. But no, the ultimate aggravation is reserved for when you approach the Baguio Colleges Foundation and the huddle of bus terminals along Gov. Pack Rd. One billboard taunts in bold red fonts, “Arrive Alive!”
As if to add further to the annoyance, a bus stop eatery sign a few meters ahead reads “Buzz Top,” grating at one's grammar and spelling sensibilities. If I remember it right, the signboard used to be painted “Buzz Stop.” I had found that one error worth glossing over; "Bus" and "Buzz" are, after all, homonyms. But "Stop" being shaved off and transforming overnight to "Top"!
Near the same site, one week before Holy Week, an infuriating message flashed before the eyes of lowlanders rushing home for the most sober of all vacations. It read “Happy Easter from Mayor Labo and family!” when it wasn’t even Holy Monday yet.
The last sign I saw entering the city was more of a tease, though: “Time is gold but life is diamond.” Still, it rubbed me the wrong way. I don't like creative writing being used to remind me of my mortality while traveling to and from the City of Pines and Precipitous Ravines.
In downtown Baguio, particularly on the side of Burnham Park, there's an orchidarium that has a sign that would make you think twice: "Entrance Fee: Adults (P2), Children (P2)." Talk about wordiness, or is it existential dilemma.
To Baguio City officials: Signs for "Slippery When Wet," "Rocks Falling," "Dangerous Curve Ahead," "Narrow Road Ahead" -- all necessary signs -- already chafe at one’s sense of safety when going up to Baguio, so please, if you could spare us the torment of those improper signages! Now please excuse me while I check out the progress this coming summer.
**
Update:
Now, take a look at even more horrendous blunders I have picked up from Pangasinan on my way to Baguio:
Calasiao: A poster read, “Follow Jesus or you go to jail.”
Carmen, Rosales: "D’Loser Lodging House." (It went kaput a few years later.)
Mangaldan: “Accident Prone Area,” a wooden signage says, whose side panel adjacent to the road was -- you guessed it -- smashed by most probably a speeding ten-wheeler.
Bayambang: Board on top of a waiting shed reads, “Bayambang Waiting Shed and Dagupan Bus.” Someone should give a lecture on parallelism.
Dagupan: An advertising streamer said, “..a sensational show with Bold Star Pia Moran and other surprised starlets.”
And beyond Baguio:
La Trinidad, Benguet: Names of buildings at the Benguet State University read:
High School Related Subjects Building
Home Economics and Canteen
2.3.1999
Posted by R.O. at 12:20 PM 0 comments Links to this post
Engineers' Hill
(Unearthed Baguio stories)
Let me tell you how my friend Glenn and I were able to rent a room in this lovely old wooden bungalow sitting on Engineers' Hill when we were in our third year in UP Baguio.
We were knocking at the iron gate of the house when we were met by a short-built, Hispanic-faced lady. She said she's from Samar. As evidenced by huge statues of Sta. Rita of Cassia and Christ the King in one of her rooms that could be glimpsed from the iron gate, she must be a fervent Catholic. Our friend Rich had recommended her place to us.
“So, where are you studying?” she probed us through the grille.
“Sa UP po” ("In UP Baguio, madame"), we answered.
“Sa UP?” she asked suspiciously. “Ayoko sana ng taga-UP kasi mga nag-a-addict at lasenggo yang mga iyan. Member ba kayo ng fraternity? Ano’ng organization n’yo?” ("I swear to God I simply hate UP students! They are all rebellious demons! What's your org?")
“UP Student Catholic Action po,” we answered nervously and, ahem, calculatingly.
There was a sudden change in the weather, as in a good poem. “E, ang singil ko, siyempre gaya ng iba, one month advance, one month deposit, P300 pesos per month. Tapos ang bayad, every first week of the month. Kelan ba kayo lilipat?" ("So when are you moving in?") She tried to hide her feeling like she won the jackpot.
And so, our quest for a temporary domicile instantly drew to a close and, as if to affirm it with a dry seal, our landlady, whom we learned to call Tita Francing, remarked, “Gusto ko yung ano n’yo ha...ano ba ‘yon, Student Catholic ano?..”
Tita Francing became our foster mother for two years. Oh, to become holy and devoted servants of God. Ha-ha!
Glenn and I shared a room with Larry, a soft-spoken graduating student from Saint Louis University (SLU) College of Engineering. It turned out that we would be sharing this one-story affair with several others occupying the two other rooms for rent, plus our host family with its brood of five. It was a fairly huge house.
The motley crowd in the boarding house convinced me that Baguio City is sort of a melting pot. There was Salome, another student who was from Zambales and who talked in a curious dialect called Sambal, and the brothers Jessie and Benjie from Bantay, Ilocos Sur (Ilocano-speaking of course). Larry was another Ilocano from Dupax, Nueva Vizcaya. Tita Francing’s family were actually migrants from Olongapo City and her children conversed in Tagalog.
The cozy old cottage from the American era was almost identical with other such structures around Engineers' Hill. The only difference was that the present painting of chalk-white replaced the original pine tree color combination of dark green and dark brown.
One could sit on the porch in the morning to wait for the sun to rise and for the fog to slowly thin out. On the front lawn, Tita Francing maintained a terraced garden of marigolds, zinnias, anise (fennel?), and cosmos, assuring the yard of assorted blooms all through the year. From the porch, one could see the other cottages down the hill, one of which had been converted by the government into an office of the Department of Social Welfare and Development. Farther away is the unassuming spire of the Pink Sisters chapel and convent; one didn’t have the excuse to skip Sunday Mass for it was only walking distance from the house.
The porch was easily my favorite part of the house despite its ill repute of being a favorite “tambayan” (hanging-out corner) of a really ugly “kapre” (mythical ogre). The entire house itself was said to be haunted by spirits. This I'd never got to prove. What's important to me was sitting on the porch always gave a glimpse of the pine tree crowns huddled under a low cloud and tracing the road below, which bent mysteriously to nowhere, and the quaint unnanameable florals thriving luxuriantly. Even grasses bloomed here.
Near Pink Sisters is the Corfu pension house, where our wealthier classmates stayed. Here, I once saw a talkative classmate, Jinji B., typing a report using two ballpens. Intriguing! Upon closer examination, it appeared that she couldn't use her fingers because she was wearing those red, inch-long, faux (plastic) fingernails. Soon, I learned she's a niece of an auxiliary Catholic bishop, and that famous athlete with the same surname was her cousin.
Also nestled among the evergreen pine needles are the country-style summer vacation houses of wealthy lowlanders which are unoccupied the whole year but for one or two maids or caretakers. One postcard-pretty bungalow down the hill is said to be owned by actress Vilma Santos.
The boarding house was walking distance to just about every essential destination: school, church, downtown, mini-market, bus terminal. I couldn’t ask for more. We had decent housemates and a God-fearing landlady who raised a beautiful family. Her husband was a contract worker in Saudi Arabia, which explains the absence of a father in the house. Their eldest, Ana, was already married and living separately elsewhere in the city, and had a little lovely daughter nicknamed “Pangkra” (Mary Francis). Tere, the second daughter, was an accountant. Jun was a seminarian-on-leave who had apparently absorbed the disciplined, spartan life in the seminary. It always felt weird dealing with him because he seemed so distant. Cecil was a fresh and pretty-looking pharmacy student in SLU. Vincent (Teng), a high school student, was a budding musician who kept an improvised drummer set and a pigeonhouse full of white doves. Sometimes, we'd jam with him and other boarders, singing "With or Without You" by U2. Francis (Angke) was a high school student who served in the parish in Pacdal as an acolyte.
Every Sunday night, Tita Francing would knock on all doors for the family rosary. I wonder how the non-devout residents felt. (They must have felt violated.) Every feast day and family anniversaries, we would be invited to feast on her Vizayan delicacies: pinaksiw na isda (a tuna-like fish) which were dusted with bread crumbs and deep-fried, sweet and spicy alamang, ginataang bilo-bilo, and apple juice with floating apple slices.
Tita Francing regaled us with stories and stories: how she met and flirted with her husband, how she came to settle in Olongapo until Mt. Pinatubo's eruption drove them all away, etc. I can't remember the details much except that story about having lots of boarders before us. They all used to call her Mommy. One time, she recounted, she had an Iraqi student-boarder whose name was Mahmoud. So every time they saw each other, they'd exchange greetings this way: he: "Mommy!!..."; she: "Mahmoud!!..."
Tita Francing once intimated that her great frustration in life was to become a nun. She was an ardent member of the "Blue Army," which prayed hard for "the fall of communism and the conversion of Russia." She wore the brown Mt. Carmel scapular as a devotion and encouraged everyone to recite the rosary everyday. I didn't like Tita's rabid Marcos-loyalist politics, but I understood, and was convinced of, her urgent Marian religiosity. I could say this woman is influential in my current spirituality.
As if these privileges weren’t enough, the family’s sala had voluptuous, authentic black-leather sofas where we sat on to watch free American shows via FEN. Camp John Jay was virtually an American territory then, housing among other things, the Voice of America relay station. My classmates once went to the station, which was deep inside John Hay, and from there proceeded to play bowling, dodging golf balls on our way, only to find that the blasted place only accepted dollars, which we couldn't produce. Members of the leftist League of Filipino Students loathed the place like hell, but honestly, the rest of us simply loved the all-American Coney Island ice cream flavors, the quaint pet dog cemetery, the colonial cottages, and the rows and rows of pine tree groves which were left untouched and thus good for hiking and picnicking, not to mention the FEN station, which beamed to us really entertaining American shows all day and night.
The fact that we lived in a sturdy wooden cottage would prove to be providential in another way, one which we never imagined. In July 16, 1990, a terrible earthquake shook Baguio out of its wits, toppling water tanks off the roofs and making the Oblation at UP do the lambada.
What do you know -- Glenn and I came home from school to find our boarding house totally intact, unlike most concrete structures around. One neighbor found their gorgeous glass window in front hanging by a thread. Of course, a lot of plates and glasses in our kitchen were broken, which we shoveled by the sack and the cooking area was impassable because all sorts of cooking ware stumbled out of the cupboard.
But we couldn’t complain. Tita Francing rescued us from sure staarvation by feeding Glenn and I like family. (Come to think of it -- our boardmates at the time, all students of SLU, were in their respective hometowns due to a university-wide strike.) In gratitude, we helped in washing the dishes and cleaning up the whole mess, joined the family in sleeping under huge tents that were hastily set up outside, and shared the scant relief goods meant for American servicemen (courtesy of then Olongapo Mayor Dick Gordon). We prayed the fifteen mysteries nightly like we never did, like it's the end of the world.
Amidst all the immediate danger of aftershocks and objects falling on our head (remember -- we're talking of a hill here), Glenn and I were happy to be in the company of a good family.
When the time for graduation came, it pained me so much to say goodbye.
I am looking back now at everything eight years hence -- with much gratitude.
8.3.99
Posted by R.O. at 12:20 PM 0 comments Links to this post
UP Baguio quips
(Unearthed Baguio stories, circa 1987-1991)
There were just too many weirdoes in school that I couldn't help quoting them. My teachers, most especially.
Leftist History 10 teacher P-wi Aragon: “’Pag wala nang land ang mga landlord, e di lord na lang sila!”
After the class, he'd also say: "Class, any additions, subtractions, multiplications, divisions?”
Botany 101 instructor from UP Los Banos Aurora Azucena: “Give me a wild guess and I give you a wild grade.”
Terror teacher (Calculus) Mr. Rey Rimando: “Be careful about how you solve a problem because you won’t be there when I check your papers! Whenever I see an error, I’ll go ‘Minus’, “Minus.’ It’s my favorite operation. Subtraction” (Eevil!!!)
Biochemistry professor Ms. Elsie Jimenez: “I don’t require you to memorize those (chemical reactions) which I cannot memorize.” (Love you, Ma'am!)
Physics 32 instructor Mr. Alipio Garcia: “Ano’ng mahirap sa lesson bukod sa lahat?” (Eviiiil!)
(From second-hand accounts), Spanish teacher Mr. Mejia: “First impression is lasting, but last impression is everlasting.”
PI 100 teacher Atty. Ventura: "I don’t believe in ‘life after death’. It is ‘life after life.’"
He also called Gia Damaso, a famous dean's lister, "the daughter of Padre Damaso."
"What are fluids?" went my Bio 101 teacher (of course, I contrived to forget her name), pointing at random at anybody who dared answer. When no one got the answer right, she answered her own question thus: "A fluid is anything that flows!!! Ay Apo, naglakaan haan yo ammo!" ("Gahd, easy-peasy yet you don't know!")
The Most Irksome Quip Award goes to the infamous/notorious Ms. 'Macky' Macaranas, who would answer this way whenever we asked her how the heck she got her answer to an Analytical Chemistry problem: “You add this to that, you get this, you multiply this to that, you get that. Hay, nako..." (I.e., ang bobobo nyo, taga-UP pa naman kayo!)
~1989
Posted by R.O. at 12:19 PM 0 comments Links to this post
Why I failed to learn to speak Ilocano
(Unearthed Baguio stories)
It is not necessarily the rule of thumb to be fluent in Ilocano to survive Baguio. When I became one of Baguio's transient citizens (four years plus of stay), I barely lived with true-blue Ilocanos or at least those who spoke Ilocano fluently and without hesitation. (You see, it was then the worst time to be Ilocano because Marcos was just booted out of power and a mere mention of his name was to invite murder.)
As a freshman, I lived with Ilonggos: the Laboys, who, after joining the ancient waves of migration to Mindanao from the Vizayas, immigrated here all the way from as far as South Cotabato. They would talk in Tagalog to me, but when I was out in the conversations, their musical, incomprehensible Ilonggo took over. Their Tagalog was sort of spiked with Ilonggo, so I was particularly amused at the way the old woman (Pat’s mother) talked with me. She would always combine the two Philippine languages, plus English on the side, and so you could imagine how many times we altered the normal flow of conversation. She'd always ask me "Naga-buy ka ng Coks?" ("Are you buying some Coke?") It always puzzled me why the Ilonggos referred to the softdrink Coke as "Coks." She'd tell her apo Jay-Jay to drink his milk first before going to bed: “Gigi, drink your milk anay.” I was always left wondering what "anay" meant. It took time for me to figure out it meant "muna" or roughly "first," not the Tagalog "termite."
My roommate then was a UP upperclassman, Alex, from Laoag City. Neither did I hear him talk in Ilocano except when his brother from the PMA (the prestigious Philippine Military Academy) visited our place, which was rare. There went my hopes in learning the language beyond "Wen, manang, mano daytoy ti sayote yo?"
In the school campus, my blockmates represented what I call a riot of tongues, a Tower of Babel, though everyone always spoke in variously accented Tagalog, which we might now call Filipino, the Philippines' default language or lingua franca after Manuel Quezon's term. But again, when they each happened to meet their provincemates, they reverted to their first language. There was:
- Glenn, the Bicolano;
- Nena, Vincent and Gina, the Pampangueños, with their vanishing and reappearing h's (they pronounce mahogany as /ma-o-gany/, and when you asked what they had for breakfast, they'd say, "Am and hegg!");
- Rich, Mitos and P-nats, my fellow Pangasinenses;
- Ann, the Davaoeño (yes, this is also allegedly a dialect that descended from Cebuano);
- Cris, Ryan and Mona, the Cagayanos who knew how to speak Ibanag but were not necessarily Ibanags;
- Eleazar and Maricel, the Tagalogs; and lastly,
- Renan from Quezon City, with his distinctive Manila accent.
- Alma and Bing were the Ilocanos, but for some reason they were not that enthusiastic in uttering an indigenous word. They struck me as elitist snobs.
Later on, I had this roommate from Quezon City named Richard, who would rather speak with me in Tagalog rather than in Taglish, which was his natural language, but that’s another story. Apparently, he regarded me as an alien even though I was born in Manila myself, though I spent my grownup years in Pangasinan.
My second and third years in college meant sharing the room with Glenn, the Bicolano from Sorsogon and with Jessie, the Ilocano from Pozorrubio, Pangasinan. Jessie was just as hesitant, his Ilocano sometimes surfacing only in the presence of relatives in the city. Then there also was Chris, my fellow Pangalatok from San Carlos City who would dazzle us his boardmates with very impressive Tagalog, i.e., without a trace of the infamous Panggalatok accent. I think that’s due to his long stay in Quezon City while studying at the Philippine Science High School. But he did speak in Pangasinan to me, too: “’Pag nagkakautangan na" ("When somebody's borrowing some cash"), observed Ramon, yet another roommate, a genuine Tagalog of the Nueva Ecija strain.
The owner of the boarding house we were staying in then was Mrs. Purita Casuga, Glenn’s fellow Bicolano. Talking to her was virtually unavoidable, no matter how it pained me because I was always a bad tenant. She further added to the crowd around me who would not talk in Ilocano even if they could. As part of the household, there also was Annie, the household helper from Misamis who commanded a certain presence. A Vizayan, this woman would impress us with her passable Pangasinan, passable Kapampangan, impressive Ilocano, and passable Tagalog. A polyglot! -- i.e., a person who has acquired multiple tongues from living and moving out frequently from place to place. In Annie’s case, that meant living with different men from different regions in Luzon one at a time. Her Ilocano only became really audible when she hollered like a self-appointed major doma to the lesser maids who reported to work only on certain days and who were Ilocanos at heart. But their exchange didn't help much, for they all switched from one confusing language and unfamiliar grammar structure to the next.
Later, the arrival of new boarders, a bunch of typical Pangalatoks from Bayambang, further honed my already excellent Pangasinan, not my Ilocano.
Realizing I would never learn in Baguio City the first language of my mother (she's from Aparri, Cagayan), I began improving my limited library of Ilocano words and phrases by bribing Glenn the Bicolano, of all people, to help me learn. He became kind of good at it, perhaps due to osmosis or perhaps by telekinesis, but our informal class was much limited.
Presently, my fourth year is proving to be far from exception. Glenn and I landed inside an old wooden house as our new home-away-from-home after a bone-breaking search for a new place. Renovated and rented out by a family of seven from Olongapo City, it is occupied by six more people who also posed as responsible renters like Glenn and me.
Although my knowledge of Ilocano is just enough to allow me to haggle with market vendors, I have found its use unnecessary since the people of Baguio are generally conversant in Tagalog (a.k.a. Filipino). Even the Igorots nowadays are slowly shedding off their monolinguality together with their G-strings to accommodate the onrush of lowland culture.
Nevertheless, it is still highly recommended that Baguio short-timers take up Ilocano as one item necessary for Baguio survival skills. One never knows how it can help one snag an extra piece of strawberry at the Public Market if one knows how to adjust to the right inflections.
Unlike the pace of buses trekking up here, anyone can learn the language in relative ease and speed because the language is really very simple. Wen manong, Ilocano can be easily picked up from a noisy crowd even without one meaning to, as long as one is nosey enough with regularity. Anyone who has stayed in Baguio for more than four years and claims not to have learned the rudiments of the language must be lying. One just have to make sure to stick with the right crowd to snoop on.
~1990, Baguio City
Posted by R.O. at 12:16 PM 1 comments Links to this post
Keating, on the human condition

Quotes:
"All of us come into this world as little bundles of emotional needs, of which we can identify three in particular: security and survival, affection and esteem, and power and control. ...
"The energy that we put into trying to find happiness is fulfilling these emotional needs tends to increase with time. The painful sense of early rejection may be repressed into the unconscious, where it continues to affect how we react to daily life and our adult decisions. Our experience of life on the ordinary psychological is normally one of being dominated by external events and our emotional reactions to them. Some of this is conscious, but much of it is rooted in the unconscious. This is the illness of the human condition from which we all suffer.
"Daily life constantly triggers events that frustrate our emotional programs for happiness. Then such afflictive emotions as fear, anger, and discouragement arise automatically. The fact that we experience anxiety and annoyance is the certain sign that, in the unconscious, there is an emotional program for happiness that has just been frustrated."
**
"The spiritual journey is not a career or a success story. It is a series of humiliations of the false self that become more and more profound."
- Thomas Keating, The Human Condition: Contemplation and Transformation
Posted by R.O. at 10:05 AM 1 comments Links to this post
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Bradshaw, on shame

Quotes:
"Shame as the source of spirituality"
Abraham Maslow, the pioneering Third Force Psychologist, once wrote,
'The spiritual life is...part of the human essence. It is a defining characteristic of human nature....without which human nature is not full human nature.'
From--"The Farther Reaches of Human Nature"
"What is spirituality? I believe it has to do with our lifestyle. I believe that life is ever unfolding and growing. So spirituality is about expansion and growth. It is about love, truth, goodness, beauty, giving and caring. Spirituality is about wholeness and completion. Spirituality is our ultimate human need. It pushes us to transcend ourselves, and to become grounded in the ultimate source of reality. Most call that source God.
"Our healthy shame is essential as the ground of our spirituality. By signaling us of our essential limitations, our healthy shame lets us know that we are not God. Our healthy shame points us in the direction of some larger meaning. It lets us know that there is something or someone greater than ourselves. Our healthy shame is the psychological ground of our humility."
Shame as toxic
"Scott Peck describes both neuroses and character disorders as disorders of responsibility, Peck writes;
'The neurotic assumes too much responsibility; the person with a character disorder not enough. When neurotics are in conflict with the world, they automatically assume that they are at fault. When those with character disorders are in conflict with the world, they automatically assume the world is at fault.'
From his book--"The Road Less Traveled"
"All of us have a smattering of neurotic and character disordered personality traits. The major problem in all of our lives is to decide and clarify our responsibilities. To truly be committed to a life of honesty, love and discipline, we must be willing to commit ourselves to reality. This committment, according to Peck, 'requires the willingness and the capacity to suffer continual self-examination.' Such an ability requires a good relationship with oneself. This is precisely what no shame-based person has. In fact a toxically shamed person has an adversarial relationship with him/herself. Toxic shame--the shame that binds us--is the basis for both neurotic and character disordered syndromes of behaviour."
**
Guilt vs. shame
"Toxic shame needs to be sharply distinguished from guilt (guilt can be healthy or toxic). Healthy guilt is the emotional core of our conscience. It is emotion which results from behaving in a manner contrary to our beliefs and values. Guilt presupposes internalized rules and develops later than shame. According to Erikson, the third stage of psychosocial development is the polar balance between initiative and guilt. This stage begins after age three. Guilt is developmentally more mature than shame. Guilt does not reflect directly upon one's identity or diminish one's sense of personal worth. It flows from an integrated set of values."
-- All from John Bradshaw's Healing the Shame that Binds You
(via James)
Posted by R.O. at 6:09 PM 0 comments Links to this post
Obama pilloried for wearing "mom jeans"
You'd think Obama would be criticized for his stand on abortion and embryonic stem cells.
But shouldn't that be "dad jeans"? Mom jeans are, aside from being extremely ugly, to be worn extremely up, up in the waist.
Crazy report:
"Last week, when President Obama threw out the ceremonial first pitch at the All-Star Game in St. Louis, he was probably more concerned with getting the ball over the plate than with his choice of attire. Call it a rookie mistake. The president's baggy pants were mocked as being... brace yourselves... "mom jeans." Now, the leader of the free world has responded to his fashion critics.
"In an interview on NBC's "Today Show" that mostly covered serious topics, President Obamaacknowledged that he "looked a little frumpy" in his baggy jeans. In his defense, Mr. Obama said that he hates to shop and that "those jeans are comfortable." The President went on to say: "For people who want a president to look great in tight jeans, I'm sorry." No apology necessary, Mr. President. The thought of our Commander-In-Chief wearing skinny jeans is a terrifying prospect.
"The interview, which in our unofficial estimation marks the first time a sitting U.S. president apologized for not wearing tighter denim, sparked renewed interest in the infamous jeans. Searches surged on "obama's mom jeans" and "obama wears mom jeans." We even noticed a few queries on "what kind of jeans does obama wear?". Perhaps some brave souls are looking to copy the President's devil-may-care look. If it'll help stop the skinny-jeans menace, we're all for it."
Posted by R.O. at 11:37 AM 7 comments Links to this post
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
The trauma of poverty
Or, reading Imelda Marcos a little bit more correctly
The Imelda Marcos story is really the story of every Filipino, indeed every person, who has ever been traumatized by subhuman poverty. Ramona Diaz’s docu film Imelda failed to point this out in clear terms. I don’t know if that musical play of the same name by David Bryne is conscious about this aspect of the Imelda story, but as far as I know, the focus of artistic works on the subject is almost always on the villainy of the “conjugal dictatorship,” the vanity of the 3,000 pairs of shoes (plus hundreds of diamond tiaras wrapped in baby diapers for shipment). The movie Evita succeeds and fares much better, although it lends Hollywood's uncomfortable big-budget gloss to the crime of whoring and mass hypnosis (which resulted in blinding mass hysteria). Here, I’ll dare attempt to analyze, albeit briefly, Imelda’s public actuations through the prism of psychological trauma.
What happened, I think, was that Imelda was traumatized by being born into humiliating poverty, on top of being a daughter of an other woman who lived with animals under the legit family’s house (if I am correct in paraphrasing Carmen Navarro Pedrosa).
Of course, the shame of being poor is really rooted in the fear of being rejected by society for being poor. It is really a phobia for social suicide. With this toxic fear (i.e., negative, unnecessary fear), she is bound to have any or both of the following reactions just so she could evade tremendous pain: projection and denial.
- projecting her shame by secretly hating poor people by dissociating herself from them and thinking herself to be naïve in the ways of the poor
- denying that she is poor, most importantly denying to herself, by mentally positioning herself to be actually rich and has always been so in reality
If one is poor, it’s a curse to be beautiful, making one's existence a double curse (or cross). (In the Philippines, it sticks out really bad to be poor and fair at the same time; Filipinos usually associate being fair-skinned with being beautiful and well-off.) The irony would be even more unbearable for someone like Imelda, and all the more reason that a beautiful poor person like her would need to project and deny, all the more reason that she needed to create a front, a false self, one that hews closer to her own liking and imagination.
Other defense mechanisms are bound to ensue. Since it appears to be unnatural for man to be poor in a world of embarrassing riches (and one unfortunately governed by misguided leaders and a selfish, and equally fearful, ruling class ever-guardful of their loot), the one traumatized by poverty has no choice but to find a way of avenging oneself.
One way is to tread the path of excessive compensation (or overcompensation), as in stashing jewelry, gold bars, and million-dollar accounts here and there. American folk rock icon Tina Turner reportedly has confessed to a similar fetish for shoes as Imelda's, buying all the designs she ever wanted because there was a time in her life when she couldn’t even afford a decent pair.
The other route is altruism, as in philantrophic activities that are unconsciously meant to repair the damage done to self by extending help to others similarly situated. Of course, real virtue may reside in the philantrophic acts of rich people, but one couldn’t help but suspect the original motive of the formerly poor-turned-fabulously rich. (I used the word ‘original’ to drive at the point that such motives may be cleansed or purified through time.) The problem with Imelda is she tried to appear to be above it all, instead of being one among rubber-slippered poor folk.
Another defense reaction, though not among those taken by Imelda, is open anger, as in outright rebellion. This is the route taken by those embracing radical and militant politics. Theirs is a much valid and oft-dismissed anger, the anger of the traumatized, although one that also embraces violence and reinforces division, thus resulting in class struggle. In their blind anger, they forget that the enemy has to be engaged with in the negotiation table because they, too, have a valid fear, which turns out to be the same: the fear of falling from their precarious estate. This fear, in case of the American middle class, has been finely explored, analyzed, then scathingly castigated by left-wing writer Barbra Ehrenreich in Fear of Falling. She concludes that it’s a cowardly, unpatriotic, inhumane fear, but the reader senses how both the rich and the poor are on the same boat of fear, a fear that kills in opposite directions.
Yet another reaction is perhaps philosophizing and romanticizing (or mentally masturbating with) poverty, which is the exclusive province of creative artists who’ve been through the wringer of deep want and deprivation. The act suits their art, but one can’t help wondering whether it’s another form of the fight-or-flight response of the traumatized -- or yet another form of unconscious escape. Even Imelda Marcos showed a side of this reaction in Diaz’s award-winning docu. One can’t help but recall those hilarious diagrammatic representations that make the head spin (“The Seven Portals to Peace”!!! (there were 10, it turns out), then God as an Apple computer!!! good grief!).
At the end of the excellent unofficial biography of Imelda Marcos (The Untold Story of Imelda Marcos, which was banned during Martial Law), the author Carmen Navarro Pedrosa makes the right act of closing with a sober judgment of character. To paraphrase: “If only Imelda faced her humiliation and used it as an inspiration to lift her country and people out of poverty….” The line speaks for itself, but again the reader is no doubt left speechless with that unsettling sympathy for poor Imelda, after learning the lows of hardships and embarrassment that she had to go through. There is an afterglow of understanding of how poverty, one not chosen by avocation as is the case with Franciscans and Benedictines and the Poor Clares, kills the ego, shames the pride, impoverishes the spirit, and triggers all sorts of delusions, denials, and defenses. True, the victim has the choice of acknowledgment, of facing the truth, and using the pain to rise above it all and become a wounded healer of sorts, a champion of the poor. But who is anyone to judge another who has actually gone through the stinging pain and the shame of it all?
I guess, without knowing it, this is how most people ‘read’ the Imelda Marcos of today, a person deeply wounded by grinding, dehumanizing poverty that even after decades of fantabulous wealth, of rococo luxury, the pain remains within, collecting pus, even if the surface scar seems to have long healed. We all seem to secretly share this innate fear and loathing for poverty, which is a threat to our innate desire for security, survival, power, and control. We all know that it’s cool to be a Gawad Kalinga or Habitat for Humanity volunteer, but it’s not cool or hip to live in a squatter’s colony and depressing to live in a depressed area, where there’s neither plumbing nor electricity, both unbearable hells on earth. The mere thought is not even romantic, it’s despicable. Look at the how we all desire to be thought of as cool – that alone is telling enough. The shopworn adage couldn't, therefore, be truer than before: “There’s an Imelda in all of us.”
(This post is lovingly dedicated to my aunt Virginia)
Posted by R.O. at 9:23 AM 6 comments Links to this post
Letter

(Forwarded email)
Industrialization as key to development
None of the presidential candidates for the 2010 elections has mentioned industrialization as a plank of his or her program of government. This is tragic. No country in the world has become prosperous without industrialization. Under an agricultural economy, our people will be condemned to perpetual poverty. This is the lesson of history.
"In Europe and North America, countries had gone through a process, lasting in some cases more than a century, in which most workers had left agriculture (and rural areas) and became industrial ... This structural change was seen as the key element in rising incomes and national power." ["The end of the Third World: Newly Industrializing Countries and the Decline of Ideology" by Nigel Harris]
In his book, "The Reign of Greed," Dr. Jose Rizal, through the main protagonist, Don Simoun, gave a trenchant piece of advice on how the Phiippines could prosper. During a party thrown by a wealthy Chinese, a group of merchants who had been complaining just how bad business was, asked Simoun, a well-travelled gentleman, for his opinion on how the Philippines could prosper. "My opinion?" Simoun huffed. "Study how other nations prosper, and then do as they do." (Translation by Charles E. Derbyshire.)
Rizal, who had been to Europe, the United States and Japan, knew that these countries were "advanced" precisely because they were industrialized. Japan, a latecomer, rose to the ranks of the advanced countries by studying how Europe and the United States prospered, and by copying them. The newly industrialized countries countries (NICs) such as South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia and China all folllowed the Japanese path.
The constitution of the La Liga Filipina which Rizal founded provided that the "The introduction of machines and industries new or necessary in the country shall be favored." This policy was followed by the Commonwealth government under President Quezon, and implemented by Quirino, Magsaysay and Garcia, until it was scrapped by Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's father, President Diosdado Macapagal, in favor of free trade, liberalization and privatization, dictated by the Washington Consensus and the IMF-World Bank.
Under the theoretical model devised by these Western institutions, our country fell to the bottom of the heap. Under the regime of industrialization, exchange controls and protectionism adopted by the industrialized countries in similar stages of development, the Philippines advanced second only to Japan in economic growth in Asia.
We shoud learn to measure development by the results.
--MANUEL F. ALMARIO
Spokesman, Movement for Truth in History (Rizal's MOTH)
mfalmario@yahoo.com
Posted by R.O. at 8:07 AM 0 comments Links to this post
Monday, July 20, 2009
Peasant romanticism
Pearl S. Buck’s The Good Earth kept me busy the last few weeks. It’s not among the titles on The List, but what the heck, it’s a Pulitzer Prize and Nobel Prize winner, I just had to go take a look.
Well? All the horrors and beauties, the ugly truths and the subtle virtues, of ancient rural China are here:
- totem-pole view of people and society, with a status-consciousness that attains its peak in raising girls with bound feet (lotus bud feet) and great consideration given to what others would say
- a life governed by destiny, fortune, luck, geomancy, and other superstitious beliefs
- importance of family and the theory of relativity (if it’s a relative figuring in the decision, it’s a big deciding factor)
- levels of poverty that would make Jurgis of The Jungle feel lucky (cannibalism and female infanticide, anyone?)
- open extramarital affairs as a norm
- embarrassing machismo, with wife and children treated as a man’s personal property and sold as slaves
- horrible limits in personal freedom, with young girls routinely given in prearranged marriages (with prenups), and boys being assigned in what career to have in life (never mind what they really want)
- frightening sexism, with boys viewed as good luck or big happiness and girls as bad luck or small happiness
- technological backwardness: use of human waste as fertilizer (I heard Igorots do this too, or used to) and women giving birth all alone
- polytheism, with gods who are inscrutable, whimsical, deities always needing to be appeased with incense smoke, always in a love-hate relationship with people, who are given to dressing them up in red paper robes for every favor granted
- great poor-rich divide, with the self-indulgent rich smoking opium round the clock and sons screwing their slaves if not laying a lusty hand on their own father’s concubines (incest? no, just almost), and ‘inferior’ humans as being resigned to a tragic career as slaves, courtesans, human coolies
- ancestor worship for rich families
- China as a prodigious nation of poets, with their beautiful metaphorical, philosophical language
- business savvy
- humility of common folk
- care for the land and family lineage
Snapshot:
“Have done with all this painting and polishing. It is enough. We are, after all, country folk,” [said Wang Lung]
But the young man answered proudly,
“That we are not. Men in the town are beginning to call us the great family Wang. It is fitting that we live somewhat suitably to that name, and if my [stingy] brother cannot see beyond the meaning of silver for its own sake, I and my wife we will uphold the honor of the name.”
Now Wang Lung had not known that men so called his house, for as he grew older he went seldom even to the tea shops and no more to the grain markets since there was his second son to do his business there for him, but it pleased him secretly and so he said,
“Well, even great families are from the land and rooted in the land.”
But the young man answered smartly,
“”Yes, but they do not stay there. They branch forth and bear flowers and fruits.”
Wang Lung would not have his son answering him too easily and quickly like this, so he said,
“I have said what I have said. Have done with pouring out silver. And roots, if they are to bear fruits, must be kept well in the soil of the land.”
This is a novel that was reviled by Chinese expats in the US and looked upon with disdain at home (in China) because it wasn’t written by a Chinese but by a blue-eyed foreign devil (and a woman too!). It holds a special place in the history of American letters for humanizing the much-negatively stereotyped Chinese.
I’m glad to have picked up this engrossing tale with universal themes. Simple narrative with memorable characters and breathtaking speed. Not one boring page! A truthful, yet non-condescending take on the ancient Chinese and the pre-revolutionary China that has come and gone. A rewarding read.
**
Up next, I will be wishing myself luck on novels by the following: Zora Neale Thurston, Saul Bellow, and Lawrence Durrell. That Chesterton and other unreadables-for-now will have to wait it out until the next year.
Posted by R.O. at 4:48 PM 0 comments Links to this post
STR: Signs of stroke?
I get lots of forwarded emails of this type, but this one seems important, if true, so I feel that I need to share it widely, especially in the wake of an aunt dying of massive stroke (she was 70). I used a question mark because I still have to verify with doctors the following claims.
___________________________
Now doctors say a bystander can recognize a stroke by asking three simple questions:
S * Ask the individual to SMILE.
T * Ask the person to TALK and SPEAK A SIMPLE SENTENCE (Coherently) (i.e. It is sunny out today.)
R * Ask him or her to RAISE BOTH ARMS.
If he or she has trouble with ANY ONE of these tasks, call emergency number immediately and describe the symptoms to the dispatcher.
**
Another New Sign of a Stroke -------- Stick out Your Tongue
NOTE: Another 'sign' of a stroke is this: Ask the person to 'stick' out his tongue.. If the tongue is 'crooked', if it goes to one side or the other, that is also an indication of a stroke.
**
Update: Okay, so here's what a doctor-friend says:
These signs are correct. But they are not "new" signs. They are all part of the cranial nerve and motor tests between the two sides of the body. If you ask the patient to smile (CN VII), stick out your tongue (CN XII) and raise their arms (Motor Strength) and it's not balanced on both sides, there is a neurological weakness that was probably brought about by a stroke.
The fact regarding reversing a stroke within 3 hours if detected is also true. The drug is rTPA (reverese tissue plasminogen activator) which dissolves blood clots in the brain, provided the storke is brought on by a clot (block) and not by a bleed (ruptured blood vessel).
Hope this helps. :-)
Posted by R.O. at 9:41 AM 0 comments Links to this post
Sunday, July 19, 2009
My actual workplace

You seen this fugitive? He's wanted for ransacking my lunch by breaking into a window screen. He remains nameless as of press time, but we baptize him the provisionary name of Muning.
It's one of the unexpected fringe benefits of working at home: a stray cat giving you the goo-goo eyes.
Posted by R.O. at 9:49 PM 3 comments Links to this post
On self-acceptance

(Latest reflections in counseling class; a stitching together of inputs from various sources)
I’m tired of being envious, so what do I do next? The answer that came to me is acceptance.
Yes, self-acceptance is it! I must accept myself totally, not just the good things but especially the bad things, whether real or as alleged. I don’t mean that I thoughtlessly accept the bad to be true –- some of them may be true, but as for the false ones, I will at least accept that the unfortunate accusations happened. In my checkered past, I was like this and like that, and people saw me as this or that. I was in denial before, I’ve been ashamed before, but now I can at least accept that they ever happened. With acceptance, I will be at home in my imperfections, at peace with my inadequacies, and thus will be more willing to learn.
In accepting myself, I can’t avoid accepting other people as well for who they were (or are) and what they thought (or think). I feel that I must accept the fact that I can’t control what they think of me, and if they insist on thinking ill of me, then that’s their problem. It’s probably more a reflection of who they are, more about their own projections. I must also cut people some slack, for most people, I believe, will want to be just as loving and accepting. Perhaps I can even expect to be rejected again and again, but I won't hurt that much any longer, unlike before. Sometimes, or oftentimes, it's not about me.
As for me, I will affirm and improve myself in the ways I see fit. Of course, I am bound to and still will appreciate other people's affirmation, but it is I who need to do that for myself the most. The thing is, I will not be slave to other people’s thoughts about me, and my feelings won’t depend on their rejection and/or approval. I shall accept that I am not perfect, and there’s no need to be. "Excellence does not mean perfection," and if I fail or commit a mistake, it doesn't mean I am the mistake nor I am a failure. I have to lower a bit the high, unrealistic standards I have set for myself based on the negative scripts I have internalized and have since wrongly played on and on in my mind. There will always be someone who will be better than I am, and I need not be better than most people to feel better about myself. I have to love even my scars, my imperfections, and accept them as broken parts of me.
Of course, I can still aim for the ideal. It's just that I have to be open to the thought that since I am human, I am bound to be imperfect and bound to have many imperfections. ..And because of that, I need to give my best shot, but I also must expect the worst, because that’s how reality is: unpredictable. I shall accept that I am like this today because of so many things that shaped me: my family, my environment, my education, my religion, each of which one way or another bore a lot of good fruits and bad fruits in me.
Now that I no longer deny that these things ever happened, now that I’ve realized each one of them slowly and grieved them one by one, I can move on. I can now live my life more fully because I am no longer in bondage to demons I couldn’t see before.
Self-acceptance –- what a sweet word. No one else can do it for me –- not God, not my counselor/therapist, not my family, not even my friends, and neither my closest friend. I myself will have to do the act of accepting. Sure, I am to do the act of accepting itself based on the knowledge and belief that God has accepted me first. But God's acceptance needs a reaction: I have to do the act of self-acceptance.
Self-acceptance is about being real to God, to myself, and to others. Margery Williams' novel, The Velveteen Rabbit, is concerned with this 'realness,' which is a reality of healthy self-regard, a reality of self-acceptance: One becomes real the moment one is really loved -- by God, by oneself, and by others, in that order.
**
The problem with acceptance
Now, acceptance is good only in terms of not denying that something is wrong, and in terms of not denying that something is, or can be, right as well. The problem with acceptance is that, first, I need to grieve, and second, I need to forgive, whether it’s the offender (other people, life itself, or God) or myself.
But the problem with grieving is that, first and foremost, I need not be in denial. To stop denying is to face the hard truth, and to face the truth, I need to be in touch with my emotions.
The problem with acceptance is that, if I am in denial, I won't even know that I am, try as I might to be accepting; I won't be able to accept myself, deep down, because I am not aware yet what and who to grieve and which and who to forgive. I won’t know I’m in denial until someone else tells me (and only if I’ll be led to believe him eventually) or until crisis hits me.
Acceptance is troublesome in that, just like forgiveness, it can't be rushed, it's a process; it's not in the mind, it's in the heart -- self-acceptance and forgiveness are one and the same.
Posted by R.O. at 9:33 PM 0 comments Links to this post
Glassy-eyed in Pandacan
Mayor Lim: Transfer the oil depot! Now! This is no way to live.







These random shots from my birthplace in Manila were stolen from inside the car, while grieving a dear aunt's demise. She lived a sad life there, and I feel guilty as hell for being unable to help her enough to make her a bit happier. But I am confident that after a life of too much suffering, there can only be a reversal. She always complained that I didn't visit her, but I know -- or hope -- or wish -- I tried my best to love her.
Posted by R.O. at 6:03 PM 0 comments Links to this post
Jose Rizal is now on Facebook!
(Forwarded joke)
Google search "Jose Rizal" + %Facebook%. Then sign up here.
Add him. Send him an invite. Block him permanently. Whatever.
Take note of his status: "It's complicated." 
Aguinaldo too! W00t!
Posted by R.O. at 7:17 AM 0 comments Links to this post
Friday, July 17, 2009
Glutton in the city


This glutton is not exactly a foodie and neither the type who'd cry, "Hail, gluttony!" because he believes the pursuit of happiness is not the end-all of life. But when tempted by novelty, he generally gives in.
I’m not comfortable with the third person point of view, so let’s go back to “I.”
**
Recently, I went to Amici in Don Bosco for some business with Chris and we had a lunch of Italian sausage, spinach fusili, and blueberry and sans rival gelato. Still the delish authentic Italian food in a school canteen ambience that we knew.
**
I went to a tiangge with Ruth and Chie somewhere along Ayala yesterday, and I was glad to discover Bakers’ Depot, a little booth that sells baker’s ingredients at bargain-bin prices. A little bag of walnuts (in their uncracked-brain glory) for only Php155, nude almonds at the same price, pecan nuts at 255, and a 5”-by-3“ block of bittersweet chocolate at Php41. Because I was feeling so low (a dear aunt had died of stroke), I bought that bagful of walnuts for a day of rat-like gnawing.
**

I noticed a new gimmick too in SM Makati. They offer a bowl of fruit salad in which the customer can choose from a variety of freshly sliced fruits temptingly laid out al fresco in the middle of the ground floor. Judging from the way the customers are spearing their loot, I think the gimmick is a quiet success. I noticed dragonfruit slices among the choices. Not having tried that weird fruit yet (except as a blendered juice ingredient), I might swing by the mall again just for that.
**
This reminds me of the nutty pecan pie I once tried in Almon Marina. It was okay. It’s Almon Marina, for Pete's sake, where you get consistent value-for-money quality, be it roast pork with chopped apples or a tomato-lettuce pesto panini or a quiche lorraine (though I haven’t tried the quiches).
**
V. has an impeccable taste in stuff. He took us to Conti’s in Bonifacio High Street for that unmistakable First World ambience (what would the proletarian Bonifacio say?). We had linguine in pesto sauce with seafoods for dinner and mango bravo for dessert. Both items are highly recommended winners.
**
Other finds: Hickory-smoked spare ribs in Cucina. Pork stew in tomato sauce, parsley, and basil in Felice.
Posted by R.O. at 8:49 AM 0 comments Links to this post
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Notes to self

Scientific American Top 10 Myths about Sustainability by Michael D. Lemonick: "Even advocates for more responsible, environmentally benign ways of life harbor misunderstandings of what "sustainability" is all about" (via PP list)
Claim: "Myth 9: Sustainability is ultimately a population problem.* This is not a myth, but it represents a false solution. Every environmental problem is ultimately a population problem. If the world’s population were only 100 million people, we would be hard-pressed to generate enough waste to overwhelm nature’s cleanup systems. We could dump all our trash in a landfill in some remote area, and nobody would notice. Population experts agree that the best way to limit population is to educate women and raise the standard of living generally in developing countries. But that strategy cannot possibly happen quickly enough to put a dent in the population on any useful timescale. The U.N. projects that the planet will have to sustain another 2.6 billion people by 2050. But even at the current population level of 6.5 billion, we’re using up resources at an unsustainable rate. There is no way to reduce the population significantly without trampling egregiously on individual rights (as China has done with its one-child policy), encouraging mass suicide or worse. None of those proposals seems preferable to focusing directly on less wasteful use of resources."
**
In Philstar, William Esposo tries to detail here some of the foul things that the Americans did to us that our history books don't tell -- not that we're trying to be anti-American commies, we're just trying to be more fair, balanced, objective, and historically accurate, says he. Amen. (via chance encounter)
Abstract: "Many Filipinos still live with the illusion of a benevolent US as colonizer, a US that liberated us from the brutal Japanese during World War II in the Pacific and a US that always championed democracy. In fact, the US was no less exploitative than our previous colonial masters. Had the US respected the neutrality provisions of the Tydings-McDuffie Act, Japan would not have justification to attack us in 1942. It was the US who wanted Ferdinand Marcos to impose martial law in 1972. During that period when martial law was declared here, there was a series of dictatorships that sprouted in Asia and the Americas which were sponsored by the US. The US feared the Domino Theory — the spread of Communism and the overwhelming of many weak democracies. Now, a US that is waging war against Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan is also a US that is siring the birth of a Moro Homeland in the Philippines. Today, the dwindling oil reserves in the world and the fear of China becoming more powerful than the US are two major factors that are pushing American policy makers to resort anew to employing unconventional means. To be able to check China, the US must have access and control of the South China Sea. Control of the South China Sea enables the US to cut off China from its main shipping lanes. It also gives the US the presence to be able to possess the suspected big oil reserves in the South China Sea. US power extends only up to the Pacific Ocean. Study the layout of the aborted BJE (Bangsamoro Juridical Entity) and there you will see the importance of the Moro Homeland in facilitating US geopolitical objectives. Without the BJE, there can be no US presence and control of the South China Sea. Clearly, the future of US domination in Asia rests heavily on the BJE. The Americans have been known to do worse things for lesser objectives."
However, Mr. Esposo, would you rebut the argument that, without US's interventionist policy, we would've been a communist state? Hope you'll have a separate column on this.
**
Bo Sanchez wants to hug you. Moving, eye-opening, and profound thoughts. Sample: "When it comes to death, I’ve realized that there are only two kinds of people: Those who are afraid to die. And those who are not afraid to die. All classifications disappear. Rich. Poor. Educated. Not educated. When it comes to death, they’re all the same. They’re either afraid or not afraid to die. I’ve noticed that when a person’s heart is filled with love, he isn’t afraid to die. But a person whose heart lacks love has great fear of death. I’ve noticed that many of them, as children, weren’t loved. Or they experienced traumas early in life, making them fearful people. I’ve realized that behind all our minor fears is really The One Great Fear: The Fear of Death. If you fear rejection, you actually fear social death. If you fear heights, or sickness, or anything else in this world, you actually fear the loss of self—which is another word for death. Here’s what the Bible says: Perfect love casts out all fear. I’ve noticed that people whose hearts are filled with God’s love aren’t afraid to die. They know death will bring them more of God and more of love." (via Lito)
Posted by R.O. at 10:00 AM 2 comments Links to this post
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
The angry atheists
One thing I noticed about the Internet, other than it's infested with porn, is that there are so many angry atheists who are very much active online, proudly wearing their atheism like a badge of honor and coming out of the woodword most probably as a result of the freedom engendered by the medium. I have once posited here that, psychologically speaking, atheists are angry at God for something that they think God 'did' in their lives. Maybe they had run into an accident or any traumatic event in which they blamed God, and their ultimate expression of anger is open defiance, apostasy, and denial that God exists.
For example, they might have a close relation in the past who had met a terrible accident, which traumatized them so much and triggered them to question God and His
supposedly unconditional love. They'd go, "How could God do such a thing?" or "How could God allow such cruelty to happen?" In their moment of anger, they never get to consider the other side of the coin:
"Did God do it?" or
"And so what if He did? He is God. God is free to get angry and be whimsical." or
"Why do we blame God for evil in the world? Why do we blame God for faults that are entirely ours?" or
"Why can't we believe that He can at least allow such a thing when
we believe in the same breath that God gave us free will?" or
"Could it be that we bring to ourselves whatever bad things that
happen to us?" or
"Are punishment and hell illogical? Who or what created hell and suffering anyway? Who is the author of sin anyway?" or if all else fails,
"As in old Job's case, could it be that there's something good to be had out of it (the terrible suffering we are accusing God of) that we can't see yet?"
Dealing with these raving atheists, therefore, would mean appealing to their sense (if there's anything left) of wonder at the possibility that God is the author of this unspeakably remarkable complexity called life and appealing to their sense of a kind and unconditionally loving Deity and His indescribably breathtaking yet inscrutable creation. I have a young atheist friend (a very close one) who became atheist because his father, a devout Catholic, is a harsh, controlling figure in his life. Much as he longs for his father's approval, the poor boy is also deeply hateful and rebellious of his father and everything he stands for, especially his Catholicism. The result? A missionary zeal to discredit and destroy the Church and a dream to bring its downfall someday.
I’ve found it's tough convincing people like him. No amount of witnessing and intellectualization will 'defeat' them; only prayers will because they are so caught up with their blind hatred that it's oftentimes futile to even raise the issue.
Since atheists, for some reason, are also very intelligent, it's easy for them to rationalize everything, including apparitions and medical miracles (although doctors who are atheists are very few because of the miraculous nature of healing). It’s exciting for them to argue against the existence of God despite the devastatingly convincing arguments (via Dr. Peter Kreeft and Ronald K. Tacelli):
1. The Argument from Change (Mechanism versus vitalism argument)
2. The Argument from Efficient Causality (St. Thomas Aquinas's "the uncaused Cause")
3. The Argument from Time and Contingency
4. The Argument from Degrees of Perfection
5. The Design Argument (Intelligent design argument)
6. The Kalam Argument
7. The Argument from Contingency
8. The Argument from the World as an Interacting Whole (Scientific laws themselves as a proof of God)
9. The Argument from Miracles
10. The Argument from Consciousness
11. The Argument from Truth
12. The Argument from the Origin of the Idea of God
13. The Ontological Argument (Anselm's (of Canterbury) argument)
14. The Moral Argument
15. The Argument from Conscience
16. The Argument from Desire
17. The Argument from Aesthetic Experience
18. The Argument from Religious Experience
19. The Common Consent Argument
20. Pascal's Wager
It's good to examine the secret, private lives of these atheists, to discover where they are really coming from and thus learn to understand and love them better.
Posted by R.O. at 11:18 AM 13 comments Links to this post
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Amazing variety in these isles
Like the Smart as said, it's simply amazing how Ivan Henares, a walking museum tour of cool Filipiniana, is able to list down, sample, and briefly feature all the different varieties of cuisine in the Philippines. Here are his list of longaniza subtypes and his list of pancit noodle versions. I knew it -- we've only scratched the surface of the richness of life in the P.I. I'm glad that today's kids are rediscovering these subtle varieties one by one. Featuring what surprises each unprepossessing town in the hinterlands (that is, outside Manila) holds will be a work of a lifetime.
Posted by R.O. at 12:23 PM 0 comments Links to this post
Thought-provoking
Aguilar, on originality
-Ka Freddie clarifies 'monkey' remark
Quote:
"Aguilar, who is behind the worldwide hit "Anak," also made this challenge to all Filipino singers: 'Ako magtatanong sa lahat ng mga singer na Filipino. Bakit puro banyaga ang kinakanta ninyo? Iyan ang tanong ko. Hindi iyong tinatanong niyo sa akin kung bakit ko kayo tinatawag na unggoy.'"
"'Kayo ang nagpatawag na unggoy dahil gaya-gaya kayo,' he added."
Comments:
Hmmm, there's much to agree with here, noting how Charice and Sarah monkey around with Celine Dion, Gary V. monkeyed around with Michael Jackson before, Regine apes Whitney-Mariah, and so on. Gary, though, has evolved as an artist, so why is he hurt? Could it be that Freddie Aguilar is right?
If there’s a shoo-in for the highest awards in music and in arts, it should be Freddie Aguilar or the band Asin. I’m rediscovering the works of these two artists, and I am blown over by how much soul, emotional authenticity, and yes, ORIGINALITY, there is in their music. Their lyrics may contain flaws of oversimplification, but their collective works both deserve the adjective “great.”
Consider this song, Freddie Aguilar's "Bulag, Pipi, at Bingi," whose melody sounds soothing and nostalgic, totally unforgettable. The message, though, feels like either a great consolation or a great consuelo de bobo: "no temptation = less sin." True virtue, I believe, lies not in having no temptation but in overcoming it. And what’s with normal people being blind and deaf and mute? Isn’t that only to be construed as folly? Contradictory! But perhaps in the grayness of it all lies the truth. Nonetheless there is a level of compassion that I never thought possible. How could someone who’s never been blind, deaf, or mute able to feel what the handicapped feel?
Compare this with Aegis' hysterical high:
Or Yeng Constantino's awfulness:
Here's another great: Asin's "Sa Bayan Kong Sinilangnan (Timog Cotabato)," a sumptuous use of tribal sounds to make an affecting plea for peace borne of mutual respect for freedom of religion:
**
"The power of negative thinking"
- Yes, I Suck: Self-Help Through Negative Thinking By John Cloud
Quotes:
"The study's authors, Joanne Wood and John Lee of the University of Waterloo and Elaine Perunovic of the University of New Brunswick, begin with a common-sense proposition: when people hear something they don't believe, they are not only often skeptical but adhere even more strongly to their original position."
(I smell defensiveness, rebelliousness, or negative pride here -- all indications that something is wrong.)
"The paper provides support for newer forms of psychotherapy that urge people to accept their negative thoughts and feelings rather than try to reject and fight them. In the fighting, we not only often fail but can also make things worse. Mindfulness and meditation techniques, in contrast, can teach people to put their shortcomings into a larger, more realistic perspective. Call it the power of negative thinking."
(How can counselees accept their negative thoughts when they are not even aware that their thoughts are negative or that they are thinking negative in the first first place? 'Acceptance' is good only in terms of not denying that something is wrong, and not denying that something is, or can be, right as well. The problem with acceptance is that, first, you need to grieve, to feel the pain. The problem with acceptance is that, second, you need to forgive the offender, whether other people or life itself (or God), and not the least yourself. But the problem with grieving is that, first and foremost, you need not be in denial, you need to be in touch with your emotions. The problem with acceptance is that those who are in denial don't even know that, try as they might to be accepting, they can't yet, deep down, because they are not aware yet what and who to grieve and which and who to forgive. Acceptance is troublesome in that, just like forgiveness, it can't be rushed, it's a process, it's not in th emind, it's in the heart.)
**
Levant, on human rights
- Book Review: (Ezra Levantz's) Shakedown - How Our Government is Undermining Democracy in the Name of Human Rights Review by John Jalsevac.
(Never expected even the name of Christopher Hitchens would be mentioned in this review. I suddenly lost my bearings. But I sure will remember the name EZRA LEVANTZ!)
Related article: United Kingdom to Decriminalise Defamation
Posted by R.O. at 5:46 AM 2 comments Links to this post
Friday, July 10, 2009
An attempt to explain pederasty
I have read this, and these are my thoughts on it:
Michael Jackson is still in my mind. Despite being apathetic to it all – the accolades pouring in from all over, that OA tribute of a Chinese Neverland in China, and the embarrassingly corny "We are the World" tribute of Cebu inmates -- I just can’t erase the fact that MJ’s story is a case we’ll have to dissect in the years to come. It’s an endlessly interesting case because it’s a complex, multifaceted case of a superstar, a case that engages our many conflicted thougths and feelings. Here’s a rundown of what has been said by polite people, so far:
A showbiz columnist viewed MJ’s life as a cautionary tale of raising child prodigies. (Makes sense, but incomplete.)
Psychologists viewed him in terms of the psychodynamics and dysfunctions lurking behind his talent. (Unfortunately, they also all stop at the child abuse story, which was predictably linked to the Peter Pan complex. What about the homosexuality and pederasty angle? Is that too offensive to tackle?)
“Let’s not talk about the scandals,” said a well-meaning fan. (But why is she acting the censor’s chief? Could she ever control what people would think?)
Predictably, other fans from the world over only want glowing speech to issue forth for their fallen idol. Many of them prefer to deny the demons that controlled much of their idol’s life and tormented him to bits. But isn’t that a terrible state of denial? Just to avoid argument, we can dismiss them all by saying "Let us leave the deniers to their denials -- that's how they protect themselves." However, it's a problematic proposition because if one can deny such a thing, one can also deny the Holocaust.
Let's take a further look at a couple of other very telling statements:
“Michael’s father was a good father,” Michael’s mother said. (Could it be that she was being too kind? Surely, repeated charges of physical/child (?) abuse are not just falsifications or manufactured reports? And even in case Michael's father was indeed a loving father, the most important point is, "Did Michael feel loved? Did he feel abused?" Because if he did, the abuse may have been merely perceived, but the feelings were real, the feelings were factual.)
“Your father was not a strange man,” a bishop/pastor said to Paris, MJ’s daughter. (Honestly, I don’t know whether to laugh or cry. Charity obliges us to applaud for the sake of the kid, but I don’t know. The wording doesn’t strike me as right because it is totally dishonest, coming from a man of God. Let's face it: Michael Jackson was a total weirdo if there ever was one.)
Of course our timing is bad. It’s not proper talk ‘bad’ things about the dead, especially the recently departed, especially when he’s a much-loved and almost revered global icon, especially when he has children who might be listening in. It is this desire for their protection that is of utmost concern now. That concern is only right and admirable, that’s why we have to hold our horses, given the choice.
But perhaps the poor kids themselves won’t be offended if we frame our words in “charity in truth.” I’m sure we all realize that there are causes higher than theirs? Besides, when is the perfect time?
“Who has the right to judge anyone?,” someone might protest. But who said judgment is our aim? Our aim is insight and clarity, in the hope that lessons can be gleaned from the tragedy.
John Meyer voiced out best what a lot of people were thinking at the time of Michael’s demise: “I hope he will be remembered for the good things.” But sorry to say this, John, but you are right only in the sense that your unspoken fear is not unfounded. People will be talking and talking in a way that’s unpublishable, and there’s no way you can avoid that. Offensive books will be written, I am sure.
**
At this juncture, an attempt to explain Michael's story as a case of pederasty:
Like I said from the start, my problem with what I’ve read so far is that the real issue with Michael Jackson’s case (judging from media reports) appears to be not just Peter Pan complex, but pederasty, a type of homosexuality that views young boys (non-teen boys) as objects of sexual attraction, which is a highly deviant behavior -- and criminal (legally speaking), immoral (ethically speaking), and sinful (religiously) if acted upon.
Understandably, society is hugely in denial about this angle because it’s a deeply hurtful subject. But in the spirit of accuracy in the hope that we tackle the subject more wholistically, someone’s got to point out some things that were missed out here and there.
It appears that Michael didn’t just lose his boyhood; he also grew up unconsciously grieving that wound and making up for it, compensating for it to such an unseemly extent as building his own version of Disneyland in his backyard and making friendships that crossed boundaries. It appears that he also lost his healthy sense of self per se, and that’s the real root cause of his problems.
Why wasn’t it simply a case of Peter Pan complex? (There are so many childish grownup men who are heterosexual.) Because there must have occurred a sexualization of an unmeet need, and the resulting attraction happened to be directed not just at the same sex but also one of different age, the age in which the statutory rape concept applies. Let’s us bear in mind that the sexual attraction could have been directed at women, or young girls (in which case it would have been called pedophilia). It seems there was a repressed desire or unmet need: more than the need to enjoy one’s boyhood, it is the need to have a healthy self-esteem via the father’s act of affirmation of his sonship and the father’s unconditional acceptance of who he was.
Without such things that only a loving father figure can give, the child experiences great deprivation and may even go through what they call “emotional abuse.” Unconsciously, because in the child’s universe the father is viewed as a godhead (together with the mother), the child blames himself. He couldn’t possibly slap the hands that feed him. In a child’s mind, he has committed a mistake (believing that “I am ugly and unacceptable”), and he is guilty and ashamed for it. “Toxic shame” ensues, which we all know to result in a lot of awful complications.
For one, the child does not, can not, distinguish between “I made a mistake” (which is a wrong perception in itself, in Jackson’s case) and “I am a mistake.” The emotionally abused child is bound to think that, and this is a tragedy because it is very hard to reprogram a young mind that believed the original lie, the negative mental script he keeps on playing out in his subconscious mind.
Second, a child who blames himself will find other ways to prove that he is good, desirable, admirable. That defense mechanism is called overcompensation, which is but natural and logical for any victim.
Not only that: Because it is the nature of a boy to still want to be affirmed and accepted for his manhood despite being rejected, he will want to repair that damage on his own and in some other place. Without knowing any better, he will resort to all sorts of defense mechanisms -– and again there are myriad ways that young boys do this.
You may ask: How did meeting his unmet need get sexualized? The only reason I can think of is that he must have found a way, young as he was, of discovering that sex satisfied at the basest level, that sex numbed or medicated the pain. It’s good to investigate whether Michael Jackson was sexually abused or whether he viewed pornographic materials as a child. Those two factors are major keys to this stage of "sexualization of unmet needs." That’s mostly how boys become homosexual, according to so many psychologists of the ‘reparative drive” school. If you should get angry at this thought, then please redirect all your hate mails to them.
Unaware of this dynamic, the boy will then find himself sexually attracted helplessly to the things he secretly wanted for himself: normal boyhood, happy and innocent childhood, attractive boyish physical features (it turns out he has nose issues and possible even skin tone ones), confident manliness. He will find himself guilty of having prematurely lost his innocence, and fearful of having to grow up and then grow old alone.
Psychologists call this attraction “sexualized envy,” which is rooted in the shame, the guilt, the sadness that something so basic is sorely, desperately lacking in him. With the failure of male modeling and the failure of developing a healthy self-esteem, self-acceptance must have been impossible for Michael.
Note that these ‘shames’ and ‘guilts’ are all false – false shame, false guilt, which the young boy was unaware of, and which he has subconsciously internalized to be true, valid, right, acceptable. Without this self-awareness, the child grows up being controlled by his dysfunctional drives, especially his abnormal sex urges. And there’s no way he could have realized this without the help of the right psychologists. No matter how inherently good a person he was, no matter how intelligent and talented, and no matter how devoted a child of God he was, Michael would have been helpless, totally in bondage to these unseen demons.
I was hoping to catch a thread of these thoughts in media or elsewhere, but there’s none offered so far. (Or at least none that I know of.) I hope those who are really authoritative in this subject will speak up.
**
If there’s any consolation, we can close on a good note with a quote from my friend Chris. He said, “I am touched the most by what Paris (MJ’s daughter) said in her testimony (requiem speech?) during the funeral: ‘Michael was a loving father.’ It proves that the dysfunctional can also be loving.”
What do I say to that, but a resounding, Yeah!”, knowing that those who suffer much are in the best position to love much and be very compassionate?
I am also reminded of this Henri J. M. Nouwen quote that Malou had texted to me: “When our wounds cease to be a source of shame, we have become wounded healers.” Michael’s song “Heal the World” would have sounded even better if only he received the right help and advice. We who are left behind grieving would do well to understand his case better, if only to avoid in the future another great tragedy such as his.
Posted by R.O. at 6:23 PM 0 comments Links to this post
Notes to self

Mineral water and missing text messages are today’s headlines. Mineral water safety has long been a topic in the US a few years back. I wonder why it suddenly popped up.
Re. the missing text messages: Good thing Sen. Enrile has experienced how it is to have his text load suddenly vanish right before his eyes. I wish he’d experience poverty too first-hand, and working like a fool for almost nothing, commuting day and night, living, getting sick, and dying.
Parenthetically, because Villar is the only one (among the presidentiables) who really knows how it is to be poor, I’d vote and campaign hard for him (no matter how annoying that interview of him that Boy Abunda did). But first, I must re-register.
**
First, look at yourself in the mirror. Then read this: How to spot ten physical signs of lying (in yourself and your lying friends): Dating advice: 10 things you don’t know about liars
More: Survey: How can you tell a person is lying?
**
Gee, why did I forget these other much-discussed character weaknesses of the Filipino while I was on the subject? I must find a way of inserting them in the map: “Paraphrasing the sages: can’t we, shouldn’t we all be men for others rather than thinking only of our personal well-being, shedding inggit (envy), the ‘[talangka]’ mentality (crab mentality), ningas cogon (unsustained passion), pataasan ng ihi (piss-fest), and magkano ako riyan (what's in it for me?)”?”
Add to the mix "utang na loob" ("debt of honor"). And the nonconfrontational nature, which becomes really bad when we say one thing and mean another, say yes but actually mean no.
**
Did you know that there’s a technical difference between “signs” and “symptoms” in Medicine? That’s one of the basic things I’ve learned in my new job: Symptom versus sign
“A symptom can more simply be defined as any feature which is noticed by the patient. A sign is noticed by other people. It is not necessarily the nature of the sign or symptom which defines it, but who observes it.
“A feature might be sign or a symptom, or both, depending on the observer(s). For example, a skin rash may be noticed by either a healthcare professional as a sign, or by the patient as a symptom. When it is noticed by both, then the feature is both a sign and a symptom.
“Some features, such as pain, can only be symptoms, because they cannot be directly observed by other people. Other features can only be signs, such as a blood cell count measured in a medical laboratory.
**
I'm happy to have a new landline phone, I had a very bad time with it lately. I dialed a number, and it said the usual inanition, “If you press 1, press 2. If you press 2, press 3. If you press 3, press 4.”
But when it came down to: “Thank you for waiting! We will now connect you to the nearest technical service representative.”
...All I got was this: The phone rings, finally, then: “[eep, eep, eep, eep…],” then a song: “She loves you yeah, yeah, yeah! She loves you yeah, yeah, yeah!…”
Yeah, right.
**
I like how this article frames the argument for preservation in the right terms (aesthetic and cultural reasons) while being cognizant of other people’s more pragmatic views on the same subject: Future Vision Banished to the Past by Nicolai Ouroussoff
**
I realized I was much too kind with the Erap’s reign in my earlier essay, so I should insert this somewhere: “Look at Erap, for example. Despite being convicted and receiving executive pardon and all, he never made any public admission of misconduct.”
**
I think I should compose an essay titled: “So wrong-headed, and yet so arrogant.”
**
My reading time for the new encyclical got sidetracked because of this NYT blog/column featuring thoughtful posts such as this: Happy Days: The limits of control
**
There are four major ways that a mature person copes: 1) altruism, 2) humor, 3) sublimation, and 4) suppression. Which one is your favorite coping mechanism? I wish everyone who’s been wounded deeply choose being altruistic. The motive may be a bit suspect and a bit impure, but it can easily be purified (healed) in time. We can’t say the same for the other forms of coping, which get worse and worse with time.
Posted by R.O. at 1:04 PM 0 comments Links to this post
Wednesday, July 08, 2009
"Caritas in veritate" ("Love in truth")

First, a quote from Whispers in the Loggia in relation to the latest encyclical:
"Since love of God leads to participation in the justice and generosity of God toward others, the practice of Christianity leads naturally to solidarity with one's fellow citizens and indeed with the whole of the human family," he said.
"It leads to a determination to serve the common good and to take responsibility for the weaker members of society, and it curbs the desire to amass wealth for oneself alone. Our society needs to rise above the allure of material goods and to focus instead upon values that truly promote the good of the human person."
**
Quick comment:
This is an old teaching. We're too remote to reaching papal levels, but we've been preaching the same for years, and we know the thought is problematic in the legal sense because we "can't legislate love." The moment love is legislated, i.e., enforced, it ceases to be love, it becomes either communism (extremist) or socialism (mild). That is the big problem. Maybe we have to legislate more against greed and unjust social structures or unequal opportunity? Charity -- and the future of global economy -- is totally dependent on human initiative. Even if we all know it's the only way because it is the nuanced, balanced way, the one treading the in-medio-virtus-stat path, we know it's only workable or feasible in as much as society is willing to reconsider. I don't trust mankind so much, apparently, but then again, who knows?
(Will do the actual task of reading through the whole thing a little later.)
**
Update: Editorial: Pope's New Encyclical Speaks Against, not for One-World Government and New World Order by John-Henry Westen
Posted by R.O. at 2:38 PM 2 comments Links to this post
Tuesday, July 07, 2009
War = "human animals"
Anent an impending nuclear war instigated by you-know-who, the terrorist attack on a Cotabato cathedral, and the lawlessness among law students of Ateneo and Lyceum...
I'd use "manimals," though. That's what we turn into each time: Remarque's "human animals" or "manimals":
"At the sound of the first droning of the shells we rush back, in one part of our being, a thousand years. By the animal instinct that is awakned in us we are led and protected. It is not conscious; it is far quicker, much more sure, less fallible, than consciousness. One cannot expalin it. A man is walking along without thought or heed; -- suddenly he throws himself down on the ground and a storm of fragments flies harmlessly over him; -- yet he cannot remember either to have heard the shell coming or to have thought of flinging himself down. But had he not abandoned himself to the impulse he would now be a heap of mangled flesh. It is this other, this second sight in us, that has thrown us to the ground and saved us, withot our knowing how. If it were not so, there would not be one man alive from Flanders to the Vosges.
"We march up, moody or good-tempered soldiers -- we reach the zone where the front begins and become on the instant human animals."
The horror
"We see men living with their skulls blown open; we see soldiers run with their two feet cut off, they stagger on their splintered stumps into the next shell-hole; a lance-corporal crawls a mile and a half on his hands dragging his smashed knee after him; another goes to the dressing station and over his clasped hands bulge his intestines; we see men without mouths, without jaws, without faces; we find one man who has held the artery of hs arm in his teeth for two hours in order not to bleed to death. The sun goes down, night comes, the shells whine, life is at an end."
The trauma, the unfeeling
"Just as we turn into animals when we go up to the line, because that is th eonly thing which brings us through safely, so we turn into wags and loafers when we are resting. We can do nothing else, it is a sheer necessity. We want to live at any price; so we cannot burden ourselves with feelings which, though they might be ornamental enough in peacetime, would be out of place here. ...
"...[T]here are a hundred and twenty wounded men lying somewhere or other; it is a damnable business, but what has it to do with us now -- we live. If it were possible for us to save them, then it would be seen how much we cared -- we would have a shot at it though we went under ourselves; for we can be damned quixotic when we like; fear we do not know much about -- terror of death, yes; but that is a different matter, that is physical."
- From Erich Maria Remarque's All Quiet On the Western Front
**
In other news, I like this poem. Why? Because I understood it. Haha.: "Pamana ng Trapo'y Republikang Basahan"
Posted by R.O. at 2:02 PM 0 comments Links to this post
Kidlat Tahimik's new dig
Random shots by Mike (La Azotea, Session Rd., Baguio City, June 2009):Emu Cassowary Chicken with spoon feet and shattered china feathers
Curious chandelier, bizarroes galore. (Would you buy this item for the condo?)
Posted by R.O. at 1:37 PM 0 comments Links to this post
Monday, July 06, 2009
The art of forgiveness
(Fwdd email)
THE ART OF FORGIVING
Author Unknown
-The most creative power given to the human spirit is the power to heal the wounds of a past it cannot change.
-We do our forgiving alone inside our hearts and minds; what happens to the people we forgive depends on them.
-The first person to benefit from forgiving is the one who forgives.
-Forgiving happens in three stages: we rediscover the humanity of the person who wronged us; we surrender our right to get even; and we wish that person well.
-Forgiving is a journey; the deeper the wound, the longer the journey.
-Forgiving does not require us to reunite with the person who broke our trust.
-We do not forgive because we are supposed to; we forgive when we are ready to be healed.
-Waiting for someone to repent before we forgive is to surrender our future to the person who wronged us.
-Forgiving is not a way to avoid pain but to heal the pain.
-Forgiving someone who breaks a trust does not mean that we give him his job back.
-Forgiving is the only way to be fair to ourselves.
-Forgivers are not doormats; to forgive a person is not a signal that we are willing to put up with what he or she does.
-Forgiving is essential; talking about it is optional.
-When we forgive, we set a prisoner free and discover that the prisoner we set free is ourselves.
-When we forgive we walk in stride with our forgiving God.
***
"A dog's faith"
(Fwdd email)
"Have you seen the video, "Armed with Hope", a celebrated story a boy who was born with no arms? He wrote the book, "One Step at a Time". Now comes the story of a dog, named Faith, with no front legs. This is his story."
Posted by R.O. at 1:27 PM 0 comments Links to this post
Sunday, July 05, 2009
Imeldific watch
(Or, A reflection on forgiveness and justice)
Since no one is saying it, I guess you will have to let me: Will Imelda Marcos’s absurdity ever stop? I’m not sure whether people understand the Christian concept of forgiveness, as Imelda would like to espouse. I could have glossed it over, as most people dismiss her antics by now, were it not for the fact that something is blatantly amiss somewhere.
Being the many-times-aggrieved Filipino, I’ve been an active student of forgiveness side by side unconditional love, and until now, I find it hard to grasp both mysteries. But from what I’ve learned so far, Christian forgiveness is always a good thing, but not without its many ifs and buts. (Which I never tire of revisiting in this blog.)
This is no news: Imelda says and does things that are too far out. But this is news: Telling the whole world that she is praying for Cory Aquino’s recovery (from colon cancer) is tantamount to unconditional forgiveness of the Aquinos, but, really, have Imelda and the Marcoses asked pardon yet from the Aquinos and the nation for their sins? Has she prayed the right prayer? Now Imelda is making herself out to be the saint in the story, and the Aquinos and Marcos victims the villains. What a grievous offense!
Whenever things turn out way this – lies becoming facts and falsehoods becoming truths – I’m always vehemently offended! Why? Because the offender is bound to repeat the same mistake, and we are forever tied to the receiving end of it! Committing an offense is damaging, so it’s the height of foolishness and naivete to allow it to be done to us again and again.
Pardon first, reparation next, then forgiveness last. That’s the natural order of things. Not even God can forgive, in the face of one’s refusal to own up to one’s sin. It is the aggrieved party’s prerogative to forgive, never the offender’s call. The offender doesn’t have that luxury. This is what I understand forgiveness to mean. I hope we’re all agreed on this.
The problem with forgiveness is that, if it is given out of place, it results in a) glossing over faults and b) failing to demand the necessary atonement needed to amend for the slight. Whether or not the offender atones for her sins or not is up to the offender, and a good Christian is expected to forgive in either case. But it is the aggrieved one who’s in the right position to do the forgiving. And we have to respect the aggrieved one's anger; we'll have to wait it until the person is ready to forgive in his/her mind, and heart -- something which takes time.
Excessive ‘forgiveness’ is simply evil. Correct me if I’m wrong, but in Christian understanding, a minor picadillo, even after it is expunged from the list of offenses (thanks to confession and reparation), still holds its own curse, its own punishment later (unless one avails of plenary indulgence, which is God's prerogative). Every misdeed has its consequence, just as every good act has its own reward. One can’t just sweep everything under the rug or put everything at the back burner, hoping everything is soon forgotten. It may not be God who actually dispenses the punishment; it may be that he merely allows it. But it is always us who condemn ourselves for our faults in the end.
This is no an-eye-for-eye thinking, no. We’re not living in the Old Testament here. It’s just that our sense of justice is being mocked, and we all seem to be saying amen.
Just like Imelda, my prayer for healing goes out to Cory, it goes without saying. But I also hope that the Marcoses would sincerely repent before they prance around like the cool, devoted people they are. That’s the only prerogative left for them, if they are to restore their dignity and regain a kinder judgment of history.
As things stand, though, the offending parties and their allies are adamant they did no wrong.
The bigger problem is why are we Filipinos excessively forgiving of them? Is it merely because we are afraid to cast the first stone, that we are equally guilty as hell? Or could it be that we have a weak sense of right and wrong (in other words, justice)? If so, why? Where is this disturbing conflict coming from?
Posted by R.O. at 4:50 PM 2 comments Links to this post
Green, on discernment
“To those who are in desolation: Never, never make any life decision, unless you like the devil to be your spiritual adviser.” – retreat master Gail Gines, quoting Fr. Thomas Green
See an improved version of the source of this quote: a past retreat report.
***
I’ve also been continually updating these posts, which proved to be a challenging goldmine:
Postcolonial trauma
The paradoxical Pinoy
What sex fetishes could mean
Posted by R.O. at 11:35 AM 0 comments Links to this post
Saturday, July 04, 2009
Williams, on denial

I realized that Tennessee Williams’s The Glass Menagerie is a powerful story of denial – three characters with expectations so high they’re so out of touch with reality. They deny because they are hurting so badly from what life has given them. Telling them the truth, therefore, will be the unkindest cut of all. They threaten to shatter into pieces like glass at the merest hint of it. They are as frail as little glass figurines. The reader's hope lies in the afterthought that, after finding themselves in crisis and thus being finally face to face with bitter reality, they will move on from the aftermath of the wreckage that is their life, and real selves. …Else they’d be living the rest of it in fabulous falsehoods, in fancy facades –- the sad lot of many of us. Brilliant story!
Posted by R.O. at 2:36 PM 0 comments Links to this post
Sanchez, on success

I like this article by Bo Sanchez: "Quit Often To Succeed In Life." This opposable thumb of a topic is tricky, but he nails it down fine by making the right qualifications.
Posted by R.O. at 11:28 AM 3 comments Links to this post
Friday, July 03, 2009
Update on ugliness
- Article: Demolished! 11 Beautiful Train Stations That Fell To The Wrecking Ball (And The Crappy Stuff Built In Their Place) (via Ivan)
We've got to commend Ivan's group for doing the footwork necessary, i.e. contacting the Vatican and all, to help stop the remodeling of colonial Catholic churches into "crappy stuff" by our parish priests.
- Still on ugliness, the Wall Street Journal has an article acclaiming our indie films that wallow in our ugliness, making art out of ugliness, we could say (not that it's entirely a bad thing): Real to Reel: Philippine cinéma vérité: Acclaimed abroad, banned at home by Emma-Kate Symons (via PP list)
Posted by R.O. at 11:08 AM 0 comments Links to this post
The paradoxical Pinoy
It appears that our greatest weaknesses as a people are also a source of our greatest strengths. Puzzling? Well, yeah. From what I know, low self-esteem, for example, leads to terrible pride and defensiveness, to compensate for the perceived inadequacy. It, therefore, takes a great amount of humility for someone with low self-esteem to forgive. So where does our generous forgiving nature comes from? Beats me.
The reason could be that regarding ourselves inferior or low also makes it easy for us to be open, entertaining the foreign automatically as something superior. Our openness has led us to consider the wildest ideas from outside, including the idea of unconditional pardon.
I guess we can do roughly the same analysis for our other weaknesses that, puzzlingly, each explain the reverse, our strengths. Everything is a double-bladed dagger, cutting both ways, going either way. Here'a rundown of the most common Filipino traits:
1. Low self-esteem could lead to unhealthly self-deprecation that leaves out no space for our authentic identity OR could mean openness, being easily accomodating of the foreign.
2. A forgiving nature could mean glossing over faults that need to be corrected and penalized, foregoing the meting out of punishment, and with the offender, fully confident in that knowledge, ending up being even more brazen in committing repeated offenses OR it could mean a sense of peace or wholeness/well-being, and a predisposition to say sorry. (“Ay, sorry, po! Pasensiya na. Tao lang.”).
3. “Bahala na” (“Come what may”) may be construed as either a great alibi OR an ejaculation of great faith.
4. “Pwede na yan” (“That would be good enough”) implies either an allergy to perfectionism and idealism and fine craftsmanship due to laziness or lack of inspiration OR pragmatism (at least we get the job done no matter how slapdash/shoddy/sloppy); also may indicate a hidden passion for excellence, i.e., we know high-quality when it strikes us in the face; this could also explain our holding education in high regard.
5. “Kawawa naman ako” (“Poor me”) suggests either a wallowing in self-pity OR a strong potential for compassion/mercy for the downtrodden (“Kawawa naman!” or “Poor thing!”)
6. “Ganyan talaga ang buhay” (“Life’s like that”) means either negative resignation, or the hesitation for initiating change in one self and society, thus resulting in stasis (no self-improvement) and weak civic consciousness OR positive resignation: acceptance, even contentment, even extreme patience or endurance of suffering, when things are way beyond control and above human faculties.
7.“Nahihiya ako”/“Nakakahiya kasi” (“I’m ashamed”/”It’s too shameful”) means false shame due to low self-esteem or lack of confidence, resulting in negative fear of superiors and authority OR a strong sense of proper decorum, of knowing one’s place, resulting in social order and respect for authority/elderly.
This above item doesn’t fit right with:
8. "Palusot" means crafty rationalization and making excuses, OR talent in problem-solving, especially untying Gordian knots.
9.“Pakikisama” (“Going with the flow”) means either herd mentality OR a harmonious relationship with everybody and the potential for mass action or civic consciousness (in a long line of tradition, from bayanihan to ‘people power’ revolution) if properly motivated.
This one, however, doesn’t square snugly with this:
10.“Kanya-kanya” or “galit-galit muna tayo” (a humorous or facetious expression) (“To each his own”), which is masturbatory selfishness, closed-minded regionalism, and Family-First-ism OR strong devotion to family and strong regional loyalty and pride.
11.“Aray ko!” (“Ouch!”) means being onion-skinned (overly sensitive in the wrong way: “pikon” or “asar-talo”) OR being great in satire, in mocking the faults and foibles of self and society.
Of course, the above doesn’t fit in with:
12.“Ma at pa” (a mnemonic for “Malay ko at pakialam ko!”) (“Who cares?! I don’t.”) means shameless apathy/uncaring, being impervious to others’ needs or sad plight OR having fine breeding/social decorum, not digging one’s nose into others’ business, minding one’s own hair.
13."Ang baduy!”/"Ay, jologs!" (“Ugh, so tacky!”) means a blanket putdown on anything Filipino, resulting in putting down even the good parts OR an indication of fine taste.
14.Strong sense humor, if black, could indicate an expression of deep anger as a form of coping from something too traumatic to face squarely, or if facetious, could mean escapism, also a form of coping from harsh realities that urgently need to be addressed concretely, OR if outrageous, could indicate a happy, positive outlook in life, enabling the Filipino to endure tremendous hardship.
(As of today, I’m still figuring out where the two major conflicts are coming from.)
**
Of course, other people have written about the issues discussed above. But I got the idea of explaining ourselves in another way (the way I did above) from an Ignatian retreat I had attended. I merely applied the principle I learned.
I noticed that writing about being Filipino has become a ritual for me every time it’s Independence Day. I have lots of old essays about the paradoxical Filipino that you might want to revisit. Here’s also a related piece that will keep you depressed for one year, guaranteed. (Don’t say you weren’t forewarned. Don’t worry -- depression is one step to acceptance, and strong awareness could lead to change.)
**
Update:
Gee, why did I forget these other much-discussed character weaknesses of the Filipino while I was on the subject? I must find a way of inserting them in the map: “Paraphrasing the sages: can’t we, shouldn’t we all be men for others rather than thinking only of our personal well-being, shedding inggit (envy), the ‘[talangka]’ mentality (crab mentality), ningas cogon (unsustained passion), pataasan ng ihi (piss-fest), and magkano ako riyan (what's in it for me?)”?”
Add to the mix "utang na loob" ("debt of honor"). And the nonconfrontational nature, which can mean tact and politeness, charity and kindness, but becomes really bad when we say one thing and mean another, when we say yes but actually mean no.
Posted by R.O. at 10:38 AM 0 comments Links to this post
Thursday, July 02, 2009
Žižek, on Iran
(Note from the PP list: "The author, from Slovenia, is a professor at the Institute for Sociology, Ljubljana and at the European Graduate School EGS. He uses popular culture to explain the theory of Jacques Lacan and the theory of Jacques Lacan to
explain politics and popular culture. He has lectured at universities around
the world.")
-------------------------------------------------------------
*Will the cat above the precipice fall down?*
by Slavoj Žižek
When an authoritarian regime approaches its final crisis, its dissolution as
a rule follows two steps. Before its actual collapse, a mysterious rupture
takes place: all of a sudden people know that the game is over, they are
simply no longer afraid. It is not only that the regime loses its
legitimacy, its exercise of power itself is perceived as an impotent panic
reaction. We all know the classic scene from cartoons: the cat reaches a
precipice, but it goes on walking, ignoring the fact that there is no ground
under its feet; it starts to fall only when it looks down and notices the
abyss. When it loses its authority, the regime is like a cat above the
precipice: in order to fall, it only has to be reminded to look down...
In Shah of Shahs, a classic account of the Khomeini revolution, Ryszard
Kapuscinski located the precise moment of this rupture: at a Tehran
crossroad, a single demonstrator refused to budge when a policeman shouted
at him to move, and the embarrassed policeman simply withdrew; in a couple
of hours, all Tehran knew about this incident, and although there were
street fights going on for weeks, everyone somehow knew the game is over. Is
something similar going on now? There are many versions of the events in
Tehran. Some see in the protests the culmination of the pro-Western "reform
movement" along the lines of the "orange" revolutions in Ukraine, Georgia,
etc. - a secular reaction to the Khomeini revolution. They support the
protests as the first step towards a new liberal-democratic secular Iran
freed of Muslim fundamentalism. They are counteracted by skeptics who think
that Ahmadinejad really won: he is the voice of the majority, while the
support of Mousavi comes from the middle classes and their gilded youth. In
short: let's drop the illusions and face the fact that, in Ahmadinejad, Iran
has a president it deserves. Then there are those who dismiss Mousavi as a
member of the cleric establishment with merely cosmetic differences from
Ahmadinejad: Mousavi also wants to continue the atomic energy program, he is
against recognizing Israel, plus he enjoyed the full support of Khomeini as
a prime minister in the years of the war with Iraq.
Finally, the saddest of them all are the Leftist supporters of Ahmadinejad:
what is really at stake for them is Iranian independence. Ahmadinejad won
because he stood up for the country's independence, exposed elite corruption
and used oil wealth to boost the incomes of the poor majority - this is, so
we are told, the true Ahmadinejad beneath the Western-media image of a
holocaust-denying fanatic. According to this view, what is effectively going
on now in Iran is a repetition of the 1953 overthrow of Mossadegh - a
West-financed coup against the legitimate president. This view not only
ignores facts: the high electoral participation - up from the usual 55% to
85% - can only be explained as a protest vote. It also displays its
blindness for a genuine demonstration of popular will, patronizingly
assuming that, for the backward Iranians, Ahmadinejad is good enough - they
are not yet sufficiently mature to be ruled by a secular Left.
Opposed as they are, all these versions read the Iranian protests along the
axis of Islamic hardliners versus pro-Western liberal reformists, which is
why they find it so difficult to locate Mousavi: is he a Western-backed
reformer who wants more personal freedom and market economy, or a member of
the cleric establishment whose eventual victory would not affect in any
serious way the nature of the regime? Such extreme oscillations demonstrate
that they all miss the true nature of the protests.
The green color adopted by the Mousavi supporters, the cries of "Allah
akbar!" that resonate from the roofs of Tehran in the evening darkness,
clearly indicate that they see their activity as the repetition of the 1979
Khomeini revolution, as the return to its roots, the undoing of the
revolution's later corruption. This return to the roots is not only
programmatic; it concerns even more the mode of activity of the crowds: the
emphatic unity of the people, their all-encompassing solidarity, creative
self-organization, improvising of the ways to articulate protest, the unique
mixture of spontaneity and discipline, like the ominous march of thousands
in complete silence. We are dealing with a genuine popular uprising of the
deceived partisans of the Khomeini revolution.
There are a couple of crucial consequences to be drawn from this insight.
First, Ahmadinejad is not the hero of the Islamist poor, but a genuine
corrupted Islamo-Fascist populist, a kind of Iranian Berlusconi whose
mixture of clownish posturing and ruthless power politics is causing unease
even among the majority of ayatollahs. His demagogic distributing of crumbs
to the poor should not deceive us: behind him are not only organs of police
repression and a very Westernized PR apparatus, but also a strong new rich
class, the result of the regime's corruption (Iran's Revolutionary Guard is
not a working class militia, but a mega-corporation, the strongest center of
wealth in the country).
Second, one should draw a clear difference between the two main candidates
opposed to Ahmadinejad, Mehdi Karroubi and Mousavi. Karroubi effectively is
a reformist, basically proposing the Iranian version of identity politics,
promising favors to all particular groups. Mousavi is something entirely
different: his name stands for the genuine resuscitation of the popular
dream which sustained the Khomeini revolution. Even if this dream was a
utopia, one should recognize in it the genuine utopia of the revolution
itself. What this means is that the 1979 Khomeini revolution cannot be
reduced to a hard line Islamist takeover - it was much more. Now is the time
to remember the incredible effervescence of the first year after the
revolution, with the breath-taking explosion of political and social
creativity, organizational experiments and debates among students and
ordinary people. The very fact that this explosion had to be stifled
demonstrates that the Khomeini revolution was an authentic political event,
a momentary opening that unleashed unheard-of forces of social
transformation, a moment in which "everything seemed possible." What
followed was a gradual closing through the take-over of political control by
the Islam establishment. To put it in Freudian terms, today's protest
movement is the "return of the repressed" of the Khomeini revolution. And,
last but not least, what this means is that there is a genuine liberating
potential in Islam - to find a "good" Islam, one doesn't have to go back to
the 10th century, we have it right here, in front of our eyes. The future is
uncertain - in all probability, those in power will contain the popular
explosion, and the cat will not fall into the precipice, but regain ground.
However, it will no longer be the same regime, but just one corrupted
authoritarian rule among others.
Whatever the outcome, it is vitally important to keep in mind that we are
witnessing a great emancipatory event which doesn't fit the frame of the
struggle between pro-Western liberals and anti-Western fundamentalists. If
our cynical pragmatism will make us lose the capacity to recognize this
emancipatory dimension, then we in the West are effectively entering a
post-democratic era, getting ready for our own Ahmadinejads. Italians
already know his name: Berlusconi. Others are waiting in line.
Slavoj Žižek
Posted by R.O. at 12:05 PM 0 comments Links to this post
Freedom vs. belonging

The following old movie comment I accessed from an egroup is Wittgensteinic and Zlavoj-Zizekish, but I love it. You should watch's Truffaut's 400 Blows so you'll know what a quality art film means.
---------------------
400 BLOWS: Theme Deconstruction
by __________???
"Technological innovations, a new approach to the economics of film
production and a new sense of political and social value of film
inspired New French Filmmakers or any new group of filmmakers in the
1960s to collectively create its own voice in World Cinema. Thus,
the New Wave was born.
The 400 Blows is one of the best-remembered materials that introduced
the New Wave to the world. The movement uses an approach sometimes
called dialectical film that involved reconceiving the entertaining
consumer commodity as an intellectual tool, a forum for discussion
and examination. Often, materials written for this movement were
personal essays that tackles political and social values that sought
to communicate a message by engaging the audience in an intellectual
discussion using the material as the arena for the forum.
Theme deconstruction is a useful tool in identifying the message that
is encapsulated in the material. By doing this exercise, one is able
to understand the evolution of a material in terms of the type of
statement it tries to communicate to its audience.
The 400 Blows, in terms of theme, explores the basic human struggle
between belonging and freedom. The four principal characters in the
material, torn between two irreconcilable needs, complicates their
lives as each one struggles to satisfy the need to belong somewhere
with someone and the need to be free. In the end, one of the
characters, through force of circumstance, opt for freedom at the
complete sacrifice of the need to belong. Thus, it is difficult to
be free and to belong to somewhere with someone at the same time.
This desire to enjoy both freedom and belonging is the very thing
that complicates the lives of the principal characters. The more
that they insist in pursuing both needs, the more it becomes evident
that sooner or later each one will be force to choose between the
said needs.
Marriage, Family and Community are arenas that satisfy the need to
belong to somewhere with someone. But these arenas restrict our
individual freedom to do whatever we want. Being part of a marriage,
family and community requires commitment and consensus. The
individual disappears and the collective emerges. Freedom, on the
other hand, is the absence of commitment and consensus. It does not
submit to any social contract and operates on individual sense of
independence. But freedom alienates a person from the collective and
veers away from arenas that limits it.
Thus, the material is a socio-political value that engages the
audience in a discussion about freedom and belonging. It asks the
question; Are you willing to sacrifice the need to belong somewhere
with someone for the sake of freedom? Or are you willing to sacrifice
freedom for the sake of the need to belong somewhere with someone?
Theme deconstruction enriches our knowledge in terms of understanding
how a material was constructed. We begin to appreciate the skills of
highly creative writers in coming up with materials that [engage] the
audience in terms of presenting a statement of fact, argument,
persuasion or propaganda.
The 400 Blows is definitely a statement of argument that challenges
us to re-examine our individual definitions of freedom and belonging
as well as the inherent conflict of the said needs. In the process,
as we struggle to enjoy both needs, it only delays the unavoidable.
Sooner or later, we need to make a choice."
Posted by R.O. at 12:02 PM 0 comments Links to this post
The ugly “politics of truth”
I think scientists and academics must be punished severely if they are found twisting facts and bending rules to accommodate an agenda. If they lie under oath or report skewed findings for any reason other than the task of arriving at the truth, who else is left to correct them? (Are there strong world governing bodies policing each field?) Maybe strict peer evaluation can do the job. But if their peers give in and sign any official Statement, Guideline, Recommendation, Manifesto and the like, what awaits the public being served can only be disaster, as the ‘truth’ fascists and their mistakes and lies gain currency, as they successfully invade media and pop culture.
The war on truth is especially escalating in the topic of homosexuality, what with the nations of the Western world seemingly rushing legislations to normalize gay marriage and gay sex. In his review of John Nicolosi’s latest book, Shame and Attachment Loss, for example, similar negative sentiments are eloquently and bravely expressed by H. Newton Malony, Ph.D. (Senior Professor, Graduate School of Psychology, Fuller Theological Seminary, Pasadena CA) (bolding mine):
"I would recommend publication of this volume for the following reasons: First, although Reparative Therapy has been maligned by some in Division 12 (Clinical) of the American Psychological Association, it has not been rejected as a therapeutic modality for those seeking to change their sexual orientation-- especially Christians.
"Second, while there is strong current emphasis on empirically validated treatment modalities, all approaches initially began as theories which were clinically applied long before they were subjected to controlled clinical studies. Reparative therapy as described in Nicolosi's volume is one such modality. Empirical validation will be the next step in its development, but it should not be discounted for being in this stage of development."
A Dean Byrd, Ph.D., M.B.A., M.P.H., Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Utah, concurs (bolding mine):
"Nicolosi is convinced that the world's great religious traditions are right: humanity was designed for gender-complementary coupling. The mental-health associations must respect this viewpoint; to do otherwise would be a gross violation of worldview diversity as well as the client's right to freedom and self-determination."
**
The “politics of truth” is really pot-ugly. (Why should there be politics in dispensing truths, anyway? The nerve of these manipulative, hidden agenda-driven people!) As someone who straddles both worlds of science and English writing, I am an appalled witness to all this.
The writing world, for its part, has had its share of giving in to the “dark side” of compromise in the name of political correctness. To illustrate a case, let me point to one grammarian as a culprit: Martha Kolln in her book Rhetorical Grammar (2007) has canonized this type of sentence structure as acceptable, changing her stance from the 2003 edition of the same book:
“Each physician should complete their progress notes on time.”
Those college/university instructors who say the sentence disagreement is okay and need not be corrected now can find an official ally, a valid reference or source. But what’s a writer/copy editor/tutor like me to do? Do I follow the new rule because “authoritative sources” dictate it? Sigh.
Thank goodness there are people in the medical community who frown on this. Says Flo Witte, PhD, ELS, of the American Medical Writers Association (in her own medical writing manual Sentence Structure and Patterns), “This sentence is grammatically incorrect because the plural pronoun their doesn’t agree in number with the singular antecedent each physician.”
She goes on, “Using the singular pronoun his is politically incorrect because this sexist language implies that women can’t be physicians.” While I agree with the sexism part, I can’t, in my conscience, write or refuse editing any antecedent-pronoun disagreement. It would be like agreeing to gay marriage by legislative fiat.
Witte continues, “So what we do? Here are six ways to rewrite the sentence, making it both politically correct and grammatically correct.” (Take note, Jesuit-run Ateneo de Manila University, "the center of gay literature and gay studies in Asia".)
1. Use a plural noun as the antecedent of a plural pronoun: “All physicians should complete their progress notes on time.”
2. Omit the noun completely: “Each physician should complete progress notes on time.”
3. Rewrite the sentence so that the pronoun isn’t necessary: “Each physician should be punctual in completing progress notes on time.”
4. Replace the pronoun with another word: “Each physician should complete all progress notes on time.”
5. Rewrite the sentence in the passive voice: “Each physician’s progress notes should be completed on time.”
6. As a last resort, and only as a last resort, use his or her: “Each physician should complete his or her progress notes on time.”
There’s of, course, the option of using the neutered pronoun, “one,” in place of “his or her.” But what’s wrong with either "his or her," anyway (or "her or his," for that matter)? Have the male and female species both ceased to exist now? Seriously?
I closing, Witte writes something I am in complete agreement with, something I tell tutees even if I know they might vehemently disagree and even if other tutors don’t like the idea: “Note that the overuse of these dual pronouns (his or her, he or she) is frustrating to readers. The AMA Manual of Style (Iverson 2007) also recommends avoiding ‘common-gender pronouns’ such as s/he, shim, and himorher.”
Posted by R.O. at 8:52 AM 2 comments Links to this post
Suddenly, Honduras
It’s been a long time since we’ve heard anything major from Central America, which is good news. It used to be Haiti hitting the headlines. Now, it’s another country we’re only familiar with because it’s routinely lumped together with all the others in the region as one of the “banana republics” (the political term, not the shirt).
The knee-jerk reaction is, of course, “Still a banana republic, Honduras?”
It’s a comfort to know that the community of nations is still hugely disapproving of coups. And that the people of Honduras won’t take a power grab sitting down. They do believe in democracy there, don't they?
But I hope the world’s cameras don’t leave their focus on Iran even as they train their zoom lens on Honduras. I hope the message we’re all giving is, “Honduras, we’re watching you. But, Iran, we’re still watching you.”
Posted by R.O. at 8:51 AM 0 comments Links to this post


