philippines

 POP GOES THE WORLD  By Jenny Ortuoste for Manila Standard-Today,  30 March 2012, Friday

Hypocriciety

The other day I received a forwarded email. The subject was “Dump Starbucks”, and turned out to be a link to an online petition to boycott the global chain for allegedly supporting same-sex marriage in the United States.

The debate on same-sex marriage is raging in that country. The issue gained prominence in the media, with high-profile celebrities either bashing or advocating same-sex marriage.

The cons include Carrie Prejean (2009 Miss USA candidate), actor Kirk Cameron (Growing Pains), and Mel Gibson (‘nuff said).

Among the advocates are actors George Takei (Star Trek) and Neil Patrick Harris (How I Met Your Mother), who are gay, and George Clooney, who is not; they focus on the issue as being concerned with equality in general, with same-sex marriage being a part of equal rights for all.

In the United States, the states that allow same-sex marriage are: Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Washington DC, Iowa, and Washington. California recognizes the marriages it previously performed when it still allowed them, while Maryland recognizes out-of-state marriages.

The ten countries that allow full marriage equality nationwide are Argentina, Belgium, Canada, Iceland, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Spain, and Sweden. Denmark is expected to pass a bill on same-sex marriage in June this year.

In Brazil, they are performed in some states although allowed in theory; in Mexico, they are allowed only in Mexico City. Israel recognizes same-sex marriages performed elsewhere, while there are ongoing debates to allow it in Australia, Finland, Uruguay, and France.

How relevant is all this discussion in the Philippines, when we remain the only country without a divorce law? While our intellectuals and advocates are immersed in the global discourse on social issues related to marital, sexual, and gender rights, the rest of the country has lagged behind.

With the local Roman Catholic church still heavily sustaining the majority’s patriarchal mind-set, divorce and contraception remain bones of contention while many laws favor men over women (such as those on adultery and concubinage).

In order to cope with the dissonance between norms and actual behavior, people employ mechanisms such as dedma, or turning a blind eye.

Spousal infidelity is rampant across society; among the elite, recall the public exposure of Paqui Ortigas and his wife Suzie Madrigal Bayot’s private lives, and the Aleli Arroyo-Grace Ibuna-Iggy Arroyo triangle. Multiple families are a fact of life, as are the concomitant problems that everyone concerned, including the children, have to deal with.

Aleli Arroyo and Grace Ibuna. Image here.

Here’s an example of the difficulties that arise: last weekend, the 7-year-old daughter of my ex-husband by another woman asked me, “How are you related to my dad?” Now, how do we answer questions like that without causing trauma to the child?

My ex told me that she asked him last year, when she was introduced to our daughters, “How come I met my ates only now?” A divorce law would have spared us, and many others in unhappy marital situations, a measure of the anguish that arises from unfaithfulness and separation.

As for LGBT rights, much more needs to be done. Our society is generally tolerant of gays – many are prominent businessmen, showbiz celebrities, world-famous designers and artists, and successes in other fields – but they do not have equal rights when it comes to marriage. Though they live together and behave as married hetero couples do, and the fact is accepted, it is unfair that they do not have the same marital rights under the law.

Pride March in Manila, Philippines, Dec 2011. From a private Facebook page. 

Cultural norms and values are socially constructed, meaning that they are generally shaped through consensus or agreement among the members of society. Sometimes these are imposed through force (war) or guilt and threats (religion).

All these rules, whether codified as law or unspoken as norms, are determined by man. If society is to serve its members, rather than the other way around, people must be responsive to historic shifts in thought and perspective that seek to find solutions to old, recurrent problems. With the discourse gaining even more prominence globally, now is the time for us to face this too.

The choice is between the hypocrisy our society has resorted to as a coping mechanism, or laws that reflect the current social condition and provide the means to properly deal with present-day situations.

We have evolved a hypocriciety. When will we accept that not all marriages work, and that people need the chance to start new lives? When will we throw away biological distinctions and gender-based prejudices and think of ourselves and each other simply as humans, all entitled to the same rights and privileges? *** 

George Takei image from his Facebook Page. Paqui Ortigas image here.

taste more:

 POP GOES THE WORLD  By Jenny Ortuoste for Manila Standard-Today, 23 February 2012, Thursday

A Culture of Domestic Abuse

Last Valentine’s Day, instead of gabbing about their lovelives over coffee and cake, a group of women gathered to discuss a pressing and urgent matter, one that impacts the lovelives of all Filipinos.

The “Soul Sisters for RH”, a group of legislatrices urging the passing of the Reproductive Health Bill, held an open forum to exchange views on issues concerning women, relationships, and how these relate to the RH bills now pending in Congress.

The group comprises representatives Jaye Lacson-Noel, Kimi Cojuangco, Sandy Ocampo, Bernadette Herrera-Dy, Abigail Ferriol, Sharon S. Garin, and Emmeline Y. Aglipay.

Among the topics discussed, I was most interested in a disturbing fact mentioned by Rep. Aglipay (DIWA partylist) – that violence against women has been increasing.

According to the 2008 National Demographic and Health Survey of the National Statistics Office, “One in five women aged 15-49 has experienced physical violence since age 15. More than fourteen percent of married women have experienced physical abuse from their husbands; and more than one-third or thirty seven percent of separated or widowed women have experienced physical violence, implying that domestic violence could be the reason for separation or annulment.”

These are horrendous statistics. Can we, “the only Catholic country in Asia” and all that, supposedly having a strong moral foundation, hold our head high as being morally upright? No. These figures are too high.

This increase in the incidence of abuse has occurred despite the passage of Republic Act 9262, the Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004 (VAWC), which “granted the government the right to intervene in case of household violence or abuse against women and children. (Association for Progressive Communications).”

National Anti-Poverty Commission assistant secretary Lila Ramos Shahani notes that “The implementation gap in this country continues to remain particularly glaring…Violence against women and trafficking are overt manifestations of gender inequality in the Philippines and its prevalence in our patriarchal culture.”

Domestic abuse is a stark reality of life in the Philippines, no matter how much some people will try pretend it doesn’t exist. I remember attending a Bible study at a ritzy international church in Makati some years ago. The other members were older ladies from the ultra-wealthy set, coming to Bible class with Louis Vuitton handbags slung over their arm. One day we were discussing what sort of ministry to provide to womens’ correctional inmates; I suggested some sort of therapy workshop for abused women. One of women shuddered. “I can’t believe there is such a thing!” she exclaimed. “How can men hurt the women in their family? My father and husband love me and spoil me so much!”

I told her I myself was the victim of terrible physical abuse from my ex-husband. I proceeded to tell her a few stories from that dark period. Her eyes wide, she edged away from me, shaking her head, clutching her Epi leather LV closer to her chest. I left that church soon after.

Men are also likely to downplay the abuse that occurs. After a particular severe beating (I was gagged with duct tape and tied with leather straps), I went to the police precinct in our area to report the incident. The policeman on duty took down my statement in the blotter, but refused to take any other action. “Away mag-asawa yan,” he said. “That’s none of our business.”

Last week, a woman who lives a few doors away from ours was telling neighbors that the week before, she caught her seaman husband and another woman together in a motel. Her husband dragged her home and beat her savagely.  Having been caught being unfaithful, siya pa galit. The wife sported a black eye and bruises after that. The entire neighborhood saw.

According to the author of a version of the RH Bill, Rep. Edcel C. Lagman (Albay), the proposed law “is not anti-life. It is pro quality life.” Among other benefits, it provides for the “elimination of violence against women.”

It is doubtful whether the bill can be passed before the Congress recess on March 13, given the focus of lawmakers now on the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona.

What’s important is to ensure that the attention on the RH Bill does not wane. “Out of sight, out of mind.” Delaying this important matter does our country a great disservice, and continues to keep us locked in the shackles of fear and ignorance created by the dark side of culture and law.

As a citizen of this Republic, I urge – no, I demand – the passage of the RH Bill, and other legislation that will adequately protect women and children from pain and hurt inflicted by those obligated and sworn to protect and cherish them, not only at home, but in the societal milieu.  *** 

Stop VAW poster here. Lila Shahani image here. Edcel Lagman here.

taste more:

The Philippine Department of Tourism unveiled today its new slogan and logo – “It’s More Fun in the Philippines”.

Twitter immediately erupted with comments, both for and against. A lot of what’s going around right now is sarcastic in nature. But then, that’s what happens when it’s phrased in such a way as to lend itself to all kinds of interpretation.

I liked the old campaign better – “Wow Philippines”. It conveyed interest and excitement in one short word -”wow” – without making unsupportable or subjective claims such as “more”.

“It’s fun in the Philippines” would have been less likely to be made fun of.

However, compared to the “Pilipinas Kay Ganda” fiasco in November 2010, this new one is still an improvement. The fact that #itsmorefuninthephilippines is trending worldwide shows we can work with this.

taste more:

POP GOES THE WORLD  By Jenny Ortuoste for Manila Standard-Today,  15 December 2011, Thursday

The Corona-vela

The past two weeks we were talking about KC breaking up with Papa Piolo, in tears on television, and Mo spilling the beans about himself and Rhian, in tears on Youtube.

All this seems the stuff of telenovela – so dramatic and exaggerated. But a new narrative now bursts upon the Filipino consciousness – the impeachment of Chief Justice Renato C. Corona by 188 members of Congress last December 12.

The 63-year-old Corona was appointed by former president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to the Supreme Court on 9 April 2002. On 12 May 2010, two days after the 2010 elections and only one month before the expiry of Arroyo’s term in office, she appointed him Chief Justice of the SC.

The Constitution of the Philippines bans appointments by a president two months before a presidential election and until the term expires on June 30.

Father Joaquin Bernas, one of the framers of the 1987 Constitution, in a January 2010 newspaper interview opined that it would be the next president after Arroyo who should appoint the next chief justice. Even with the constitutional provision requiring the President to appoint a new chief justice within 90 days after a vacancy, he said the new president would still have 45 days to decide after taking office on June 30.

Corona has recently come under fire for siding with Arroyo in various ways and frustrating the ends of justice in the cases the government has filed against her. Therefore his impeachment by 188 lawmakers, when only 95 would have sufficed.

The vast majority of Filipinos, like myself, are not lawyers. We do not know nor understand the ramifications of the law on this issue. So we require the guidance of those who are learned in the matter, scholars and practitioners of the law. But they, like the ordinary folk, differ in their interpretations.

Most public opinion goes either of two ways: one, that the government is morphing into a dictatorship, that they are undermining one of the three branches of government, that checks and balances are being eroded, that the Constitution itself is being threatened.

The other view is that no one is above the law, not even the judiciary. For it is illogical to maintain, as many of them do, that because they are judges they hold the final interpretation of the law, and can therefore do no wrong. No one is above the law, not even the law.

It seems to me that the latter perspective is the more logical and fair, as expressed in the statement of the University of the Philippines Law Student Government 2011-2012 (the whole text was posted on Facebook yesterday): “From the point-of-view of the Honorable Chief Justice, the efforts of the current administration, allegedly in concert with its allies in Congress, threaten the independence of the judiciary, and ultimately threaten our country’s democracy itself.

“We submit that it was the former President Arroyo who was in fact the greatest threat to the Judiciary’s independence in the past decade. It was the former President who was responsible for politicizing the High Court in the first place by her many appointments, his elevation to the Chief Justiceship being the most questionable.

“The fact also remains that there is a steady stream of recent decisions by the High Court has continuously blocked major attempts by the current government to pursue its platform of holding the past administration to account for its sins against the Filipino people.”

Yesterday, Corona hogged public attention with a speech, attended by court employees and officials who declared a court holiday to rally behind him. It’s a cultural trait, the drama and the hyperbole, the carefully studied move or action executed in public, accompanied by exaggerated emotion (to elicit pity) or a lack of it (to show grace under pressure).

Corona said, “Ako raw po ay isang midnight appointee. Dapat raw po, hindi ko tinanggap ang paghirang sa akin. Bakit po ba, para si Ginoong Aquino ang makapagtalaga ng kanyang sariling chief justice na hawak niya sa leeg? Mapapa-iling ka talaga.”

“Iling” is to shake one’s head in disbelief, or incredulity. Opo, CJ Corona, napapa-iling ako talaga. Because according to the Constitution, you are a midnight appointee – of Gloria Arroyo, who has a tight grip upon your neck, and who wanted her very own Chief Justice in the highest court in the land.

I am not a lawyer. I do not know Corona personally. So I look at his pictures to gain some sense of the man. His eyes are like raisins pushed into his doughy, well-fed face as he hogs public attention with his grandstanding speeches. I try to muster empathy and benefit-of-the-doubt. But it’s hard. If this were a telenovela and he was cast as the hero, di ito bebenta. Give me more KC, Mo, and Rhian.

So I focus on the facts. The situation is complex for all its legal and political implications. But it seems simple to me. His appointment was made improperly and in contravention of the highest law of the land. For that alone, Corona does not deserve to hold office. *** 

Image of CJ Corona here. Fr. Bernas here. UP LSG logo from their public Facebook Page.

taste more:

Maligayang Araw ng Kasarinlan, mahal kong Pilipinas!

PILIPINAS KONG MAHAL

Ang bayan ko’y tanging ikáw/ Pilipinas kong mahál
Ang puso ko at buhay man/ Sa iyó’y ibibigay.

Tungkulin ko’y gagampanán na lagi kang paglíngkurán
Ang laya mo’y babantayán/ Pilipinas kong Hirang…

English Translation
My one and only country/ Philippines, my love
My heart and my life/ For you I’ll freely give.

I willingly perform my duty/ To always serve my country
Your freedom I will protect/ Philippines, my love.

AKO AY PILIPINO [Kuh Ledesma]

Ako ay Pilipino/ Ang dugo’y maharlika
Likas sa aking puso/ Adhikaing kay ganda
Sa Pilipinas na aking bayan/ Lantay na Perlas ng Silanganan
Wari’y natipon ang kayamanan ng Maykapal.
Bigay sa ‘king talino/ Sa mabuti lang laan
Sa aki’y katutubo/ Ang maging mapagmahal
Ako ay Pilipino, ako ay Pilipino
Isang bansa isang diwa/ Ang minimithi ko
Sa bayan ko’t bandila/ Laan buhay ko’t diwa
Ako ay Pilipino, Pilipinong totoo/
Ako ay Pilipino, ako ay Pilipino
Taas noo kahit kanino/ Ang Pilipino ay ako!

taste more:

…with its “unlimited rice”.

Yes, the Mang Inasal quick service restaurant that offers as its specialty grilled chicken Negrense inasal style serves unlimited rice to its patrons.  Much like what you’d get in the average home – you know, this much ulam that you have to share with everyone else in the family, but there’s more sinaing in the rice cooker or caldero on the stove if you’re still hungry.

It’s this relaxed, home-style eating theme that this restaurant’s savvy owner and managers have parlayed into commercial success – fortune, fame, and a buy-out by food megagiant Jollibee Corporation.

Inasal is made by marinating chicken in vinegar with minced garlic and tanglad, and grilling. Anatto oil, brushed on during cooking, gives the chicken its distinct orange color. A simple recipe, but flavorful. Don’t forget that at Mang Inasal, it comes with unlimited rice.

How to eat at Mang Inasal:

Step 1. Queue at the counter. Choose items from the lighted menu on the wall. Menu items are no-brainers like chicken (60% of the menu), pork barbeque, bangus, and sisig. These protein-based entrees come free with a cup of sinigang broth and, don’t forget, unlimited rice.

Step 2. Pay the cashier.

Step 3.  The food will be served, so take your number-on-a-stick to your table, insert one end into the carved wooden number stick-holder expressly designed for holding number sticks, and wait.

Step 4. When your food arrives, eat! Galit-galit muna.

Step 5. Drizzle “chicken” (anatto) oil (the sauce bottle on your table not filled with toyo or suka) on your rice for more fat and calories, er, flavor.

Step 6. Ask one of the waitstaff roaming around with what looks like an ice bucket for more rice; he or she will gladly scoop a cup of the hot fluffy steamed onto your plate, as much of it as you want.

Step 7 (optional). Have dessert – save room for halo-halo or sorbetes.

Step 8. Repeat Steps 1 to 7 as often as desired.

I personally know a 20-year old man (I’m talking to you, JM) who ate seven cups of rice at one meal with his order of chicken. And he could have had more, because at Mang Inasal, you get unlimited rice.

Now that’s the way to solve world hunger.

Photos taken with a Nokia C3 2-mp mobile phone cam.

taste more:

POP GOES THE WORLD By Jenny Ortuoste for Manila Standard-Today, 23 December 2010, Thursday

Holiday Serenity

Only in the Philippines, I think, is Christmas celebrated for practically an entire month. Work slows down by the first week of December. Malls, offices, and other public establishments evoke the holiday spirit by decorating, some lavishly, others simply, each according to their inclinations and capabilities.

Ayala Avenue this year is more brightly lit than ever before, with thousands of blazing white lights festooned like strings of  glowing pearls from the trees that line the center of the road, and damn the power bill because it all looks so splendid.

Ayala Avenue this Christmas 2010. Image here.

Shopping is always a favorite pastime of Filipinos, and especially so during this season, when cultural norms of gift-giving are observed. A person would sort the groups of people he knows into several categories – work (bosses, officemates, clients); friends (schoolmates, friends made elsewhere); family (immediate and others); and so on.

The nearest and dearest receive the most expensive presents, while officemates one isn’t close to get the gaily-packaged brownies or cookies bought in bulk from friends who “make negosyo” during the season. And so on. Hierarchy is a cultural meme, maybe even a survival imperative in our DNA, some thinkers suggest, and exerts influence even as we perform this pleasant chore.

It is a festive time, with food playing a major role in providing a sense of comfort and security and adding that extra fillip of extravagance that sets occasions like these apart from the ordinary.

When I was a child, Western fruit like apples, grapes, and oranges were to be had only at Christmas-time, along with chestnuts and walnuts which we cracked against door jambs. My mother made certain dishes only during the holidays – deep-dish one-crust apple pie sprinkled with parmesan cheese on top and fruit salad made with canned US Del Monte fruit cocktail that was mostly peaches, never the local kind that was mostly pineapples and made the salad too sour, and she would add a squeeze of calamansi to cut the sweetness. For an appetizer she would lay out plates of Edam cheese, some slices plain, others fried in butter.

Through the years, she’d mix up the menu, sometimes whipping up Caesar salad dressing from scratch with egg yolks, extra-virgin olive oil, and crushed peppercorns, while her entrees would include falling-off-the-bone roast crown of pork, fondue, beef stew, shrimp tempura, and one of my favorites, chicken marinated in Pepsi, ketchup, and secret spices then grilled over charcoal.

We lived in a series of small apartments that were easy to decorate, and my mother made sure that wherever we were, we always had a Christmas tree with ornaments and silver tinsel and colorfully-wrapped presents underneath, and garlands of evergreen with pine cones and red-and-gold ribbons on the walls.

I’ve kept up our family tradition of a tree. Mine is soft and warm and fuzzy with handmade quilted and cross-stitched ornaments from snail-mail swaps or bought at bazaars. No glitzy tinsel and metallic balls for us, just homespun decorations made with love.

Presents back then were simple – an Enid Blyton book, a kitchen playset, t-shirts. There were no electronic gadgets with their beep-boops and flashing lights distracting people from interacting with each other.

Today, with all the bustle and swirl of activity, the rampant commercialization by merchants, and the over-the-top keeping-up-with-the-neighbors, some might feel the need to slow down and find a quiet place.

Where is yours? It can be an actual location or inside your head. It is wherever one may retreat into calm and peace.

University of the Philippines professor emeritus Cristina Pantoja-Hidalgo recently shared with us, her graduate students in creative writing, an essay she wrote titled “In Search of Stillness and Serenity.” In the piece she revisits all her quiet places in the different countries she’s  been to.

Here’s an excerpt, where she tells of an oasis of stillness in the mountains of war-ravaged Lebanon:

“I remember our being invited by Frieda, a member of Tony’s staff, to her family’s old villa in the small Druze town of Abey, up in the mountains. Her great-grandfather had been the village blacksmith and had built the house in the late 19th century. It had walls of thick stone, deep windows, a high, vaulted ceiling, beautiful rosewood furniture, hand-carved and inlaid with nakkar and mother-of-pearl, and lovely old rugs, lamps, pipes, copper coffee pots…

“Frieda walked us through a small forest of oak trees, to the olive orchards, where her father was cutting off large branches and putting them into baskets—the white (green) olives to be made into araq; the red, into vinegar; and the black (the sweetest of all), to eat as part of the traditional Lebanese mezze. And then we came to the olive press, and were offered some freshly baked Arabic bread to dip into the freshly pressed oil, which was delicious.

“And there was a serenity about the olive grove, and the day, and the village itself, which seemed far removed from the ceaseless strife that plagued Lebanon.”

In Philippine culture, the holidays are full of rituals to be observed and traditions to keep up, and we do these joyfully, because it is when the past connects and extends into the present that we feel the tug of the bonds of family, society, history, and culture that define and shape who we are.

Yet in the midst of the maelstrom remember to visit your quiet place, wherever it is, to rest, recharge, and reconnect with yourself and all that you are, and all that you can be.

Happy holidays from my home to yours, and I wish for you blessings of deep peace, utter happiness, and boundless love. ***

Olive oil and bread image here.

taste more:

POP GOES THE WORLD By Jenny Ortuoste for Manila Standard-Today, 26 August 2010, Thursday

Sorry, We Aren’t Trained

That is what the acronym “SWAT” stands for in the Philippines, say many in the aftermath of last Monday’s hostage-taking bloodbath.

Former senior police inspector Rolando Mendoza’s frustration over what he perceived was an unjust termination of his bemedalled service in the police force drove him to hijack a tour bus full of visitors from Hong Kong and demand his reinstatement.

When this did not happen and instead an inept SWAT team took a sledgehammer to the back window of the bus, he slew eight of his captive tourists.

Brave but inept policement prepare to storm the bus. (Click on pics to go to image source.)

Hong Kong erupted in anger. According to the Associated Press, several dozen protesters chanted in front of the Philippine embassy there: “Strongly condemn the Philippine government for being careless about human life!” “Filipino police incompetent,” blared Hong Kong’s Ming Pao Daily News on its front page. The South China Morning Post said the incident was “a wake-up call” to improve gun control and security measures.

Interior Secretary Jessie Robredo, in charge of the police, was quoted by AP as having said, “Had we been better prepared, better equipped, better trained, maybe the response would have been quicker despite the difficulty. All the inadequacies happened at the same time.”

This painful admission underscored the galactic incompetence of those involved in the rescue attempt – the negotiators; the SWAT team members; the government officials who panicked and could not be reached by indignant Chinese diplomats demanding news and the safety of their nationals.

People who had their photos taken in front of the horror bus have been accused of insensitivity.

It also pointed to another tragedy brought about by corruption. There should have been enough funds for equipment and training. The delivery of basic social services such as law enforcement should have been prioritized by government.

Sadly, this hostage tragedy was not the only violence that humans committed against their fellows around the world.

Last week, a South Carolina mother suffocated her two toddler sons, strapped their corpses into her car, and pushed the car into a river before fleeing the scene. Upon her capture, police officers said she showed no remorse for her deed.

On Sunday, a Virginia man killed three family members and wounded four others in a property dispute.

On Tuesday, a suicide bomber killed 32 people at the Muna Hotel in Mogadishu. The attack followed a day of fighting in the Somali city in which around 40 others were slain, bringing the death toll to over 70 in just 48 hours.

Why?

In her column about torture last Monday, MST opinion editor Adelle Chua referred to psychologist Philip Zimbardo’s theory of the “Lucifer effect”, or how good people turn evil through the “pervasive yet subtle power of a host of situational variables” which can “dominate an individual’s will to resist” and cause him to perform actions that he would ordinarily consider evil.

Yet could there be a deeper, underlying cause for all this human rage and cruelty? Eccentric intellectual Howard Bloom, in his controversial 1995 book The Lucifer Principle posits that human evolution can “explain the fundamentals of human nature and the broad sweep of human history”.

Primal rage, he says, lurks within our reptile brains, and “a strange thing happens when humans and other animals are cornered by the uncontrollable. Their perceptions shut down, their thoughts grow more clouded, and they have a harder time generating new solutions to their problems.”

Experiments with rats have shown that faced with electric shock punishments, those given some sort of control (being able to leap to an unelectrified platform) avoided a brain-dulling endorphin surge, “remaining perceptive and alert”.

The rats without control, subjected to shock after shock, suffered from systems flooded with endorphins and were unable to “retain and act on vital information.”

In short, Bloom said, “Control, in humans and rats, energizes the mind. A lack of control can cripple mental powers”.

Perhaps this explains Mendoza’s actions. Freed bus hostage Ng (who did not give her first name) said that Mendoza at first “did not want to kill us, but since the negotiations failed, he shot to kill people.” His lack of control over the hijacking, adding to the loss of control in his own life, pushed a desperate man over the edge.

Many who watched the hours-long live coverage on TV said that it was apparent to them that Mendoza was not thinking clearly. Political science doctoral student and Lopez, Quezon mayor Sonny Ubana said that Mendoza’s use of violence as a way of settling his problems is “not part of our culture; we tend to seek amicable solutions.”

Moreover, by choosing foreign nationals as his victims, Mendoza violated the norms Filipinos hold most sacred – that of hospitality and its accompanying accommodative behavior. His culturally and morally aberrant actions, many opined, were proof of his mental breakdown.

One cultural meme that he got correct was that of the angry man running amok.

Mendoza’s fatal move of taking and slaying hostages was his way of regaining the control he had lost over his employment situation, which had defined him. Being a cop was his identity. Shorn of his badge and rank, he was a nobody, only a shell filled with rage.

For the Philippines and the world, this lamentable crime points to the lack of control of law enforcers and government over extreme situations such as these; the lack of control over corruption; the lack of control of an entire society over one lone killer.

A recent survey says the Philippines ranks twelfth globally on the “net happiness” scale  despite low per capita income. Are we as a people too high on mind-dulling happy endorphins to think rationally and logically, so that we give police badges and guns to untrained men who either go berserk or who through their inadequacy botch the rescue of berserker victims?

Ours is not the only nation where violence takes place. The Internet is full of stories of murder and mayhem every day. Yet this particular incident could have been avoided or its tragic effects averted or mitigated.

Sorry, world. We aren’t trained to take control.   ***

taste more:

POP GOES THE WORLD By Jenny Ortuoste for Manila Standard-Today, 22 July 2010, Thursday

The Coconut of Insecurity

A pretty, talented, world-acclaimed, and wrinkle-free 18-year-old girl gets Botox injections.  A public official whines that his office is “too bare”, “kulang sa yabang”, and that he wants to move to more impressive digs. Do these two disparate cases have anything in common, and how do they reflect current social norms and values?

The first case refers to singer/actress Charice Pempengco, who shot to international fame after a homemade video of her singing went viral on the Internet. Her most recent success is having been cast in the next season of the hit American TV show “Glee”. To prepare, she underwent Botox and Thermage cosmetic procedures at the hands of celebrity plastic surgeon Dr. Vicki Belo.

The second case refers to Vice-President Jejomar Binay’s latest pronouncements on the shabbiness of the office assigned him and that he’s considering the fancy Coconut Palace for his office and “official residence”, though the Constitution does not provide for the latter. Recall that one of “V-Nay’s” first acts after the elections was to oppose, in public, President Noynoy Aquino’s ban of wang-wang (siren) use by motorists – something V-Nay had been fond of to scoot quickly through traffic. Now, instead of doing some real work, he is spending his vice-presidential time and effort complaining that his office at the Philippine National Bank building in Pasay City is not large and imposing enough.

About Charice, entertainment columnist Butch Francisco wrote recently, “According to Dr. Vicki Belo, she had to fix the teenage singing sensation’s rather prominent jaw lines that became even more pronounced because she chews gum that gets all the muscles in the area all worked up. In a week or two, expect to see a lovelier Charice when her Belo procedures take effect.” Clearly this was a cosmetic procedure. However, contrary to this, other news reports claimed that the “singer’s representative” said the Botox procedure was “not for cosmetic purposes” but to ease “some jaw pain she’s been experiencing.” Ano ba talaga, kuya? This seems like PR damage control.

A backlash of dismay and disgust hit. New York Magazine’s website (NYMag.com) says Charice’s opting for Botox is contrary to Glee’s message of acceptance and body confidence, and talent and character over appearance. Showbiz blogger Perez Hilton calls it “sick”. Feminist writer and professor Bea Lapa says “This is the height of irresponsibility… Charice should not be getting Botox or Thermage at her age.”

This is not to say anything against cosmetic surgery or procedures, which in many cases are necessary and beneficial. Also, looking at the issue from another angle, why should we be concerned with what these individuals have chosen to do? Dr. Belo has the right to try to persuade celebrities of the necessity of these procedures for their success, and, if she can, have these celebrities endorse her services. Charice has every right to go for any procedure she wants. Why then is the mass media discussing something that, in effect, is none of our business?

For one, it’s a cultural thing. As a people, we perceive ourselves as one big family, as manifested in the way we use kinship terms to address strangers (ate, manong, kuya, and so on); the accomplishments of its members are celebrated by all. Under this mindset, the triumphs of achievers like Charice and boxer Manny Pacquiao are extended to represent the entire Filipino nation, even as they themselves offer their efforts “sa mga kababayan.”

In a large part, this is from where the discussion about Charice stems – the Filipino family expressing concerns for her health, the impression that the procedure is unnecessary, the indignation that Dr. Belo may be using Charice for publicity purposes. In sikolihiyang Pilipino, this is pakialam, the concern of the collective for the well-being of the kapwa.

Further, Charice’s Botoxification is an indicator of the kind of culture we now possess – a culture that sets racist, colonial-minded, and often unattainable standards of beauty for women – unattainable, that is, unless one has money to spend on the expensive whitening, smoothening, and slimming technologies touted by Belo and the other cosmetic surgery clinics that have sprouted all over the country.

Are these same standards applied to men? No. Do these standards place a higher priority on intelligence and good moral character? No. What does that tell you? That the standards our society has constructed on what gives a woman her worth and value are shallow, distorted, and counter-productive.

In V-Nay’s case, his attitude and behavior are of general interest because he is an elected public official whose role is of national scope. His attitude is under scrutiny because it affords signals and clues on how he will perform his functions and act towards others in his public capacity. So far, all he’s done is complain about petty matters.

But this insistence on grandiose trappings and privileges is not confined to V-Nay; it is representative of the mindset held by a huge number of politicians, in particular the traditional and dynastic kind. Decades of power, wealth, and privilege have instilled in these people a sense of entitlement, the arrogance conveyed by an attitude of “I don’t need to follow the rules because I’m above the rest of you.”

Wikipedia defines insecurity as “A feeling of general unease or nervousness that may be triggered by perceiving oneself to be unloved, inadequate or worthless…(it) may cause shyness, paranoia, and social withdrawal, or alternatively it may encourage compensatory behaviors such as arrogance, aggression, or bullying.” It is linked to puberty and may account for “stereotypical adolescent behavior”.

These two cases – Charice and V-Nay – may seem unrelated. The frightening realization is that they are two halves of the same coconut. They reveal that we are an insecure people, compensating for the national traumas of colonial oppression, economic instability, and political uncertainty.  Insecurity can be overcome, but it takes time, patience, and the acceptance that there is a problem that requires a solution.

It’s about time we grow up. ***

taste more: