Rallies on the Streets

It was a Monday afternoon, I had no class for my classes are only up to 12 noon, so I planned to go to church for a mass. I’ve prepared myself, took a bath, ate some snacks and then had a ride on a jeepney bound to the metropolis.

When I reached the terminal, I decided to walk from the terminal to the church for the church is not that far.

As I was walking my way to my destination, my attention was caught by a faction of young individuals with banners and cards shouting and yelling while forming an assembly on the streets. I stayed in my position for a while and started observing what these people are doing.

          

    

I heard them shout about education, about their right to education and the like. There was a man holding a mega-phone and was shouting his sentiments to everyone;

“And edukasyon ay para sa lahat, ang edukasyon ay karapatang dapat ipagkaloob ng bulok na gobyernong ito sa atin”, he said.

A reporter went near on one of the rallyist, they’ve conversed for a short while and was both speaking in English, the interviewee had all the conviction and the vigor as she was answering the questions of the reporter;

“Education is a right that we, the youth, should enjoy”, those were some of the words that I’ve heard from her.

As I looked at their faces, most of them looked very tired and were full of sweat, I asked the vendor near me of some details of what those people were doing before I came, she said that they were there for hours, beginning at around 8:00 am and never even had lunch.

Some ideas were then formulated inside my mind;

“Why do these people shout about their right to education? I believe that they were enjoying that right already; first of all, these people won’t learn how to speak fluently in English or even in Filipino if they’re not schooled. Why would they shout about Filipinos having the right to go to school? On the first hand, they are students and they’re on school. It’s like that, they’re kids, complaining and crying because they want a lollipop, but if you’ll look at their hands, they’re already holding one on the left and one on the right.

“These people have parents; these people’s parents are expecting that during that time, as they’ve given them their “baon” or allowance, they’re on their classrooms learning algebra, history or physics, but instead, they’re on the streets, dehydrating and exhausting themselves of a thing they’re shouting which they have taken  for granted that very time, they had classes during that day I guess, it was not a national holiday”.

“You’re shouting that you must have the right to go to school, but during that time you’re supposed to be in school, yet you decided not to go to school because you want to shout out to the whole world that you must be in school!” What was that?

I had many realizations that day! What an experience; so I continued my way to the church, and as the mass went on, I thanked God for the new knowledge I learned that afternoon of Monday.

-Ronnie John Dohina Barrientos

A Parent to Children - Government to People Analogy

There had been two famous types of parents, the first one, the extremely conservative, and the second one, the extremely liberated. There had also been two famous types of governments, the first one, the extremely socialist, and the second one, the extremely democratic. The family is the basic unit of the society and the society the foundation of the government; therefore, understanding and knowing what we may do with our families may pave way on the understanding and knowing of what we may do on our government.

A parent to children: government to people analogy.

If the parents of a conservative family is very strict on their child, exaggerated 5 pm curfews; no night outs; no night swimming; no boyfriend; not this, not that; do this, do that; “or else I’ll cut off your allowance”; “go to your room”; “you’re grounded, what, because you came home at 5:05 pm?”; the church-school-house-house-school-church rule and the like; obviously, if the children will not turn into robots then there is a possibility that they’ll turn into rebels.

In a socialist state, where all decisions are from the government and you don’t have any choice but to follow every decision they make, if the government is too strict; like, we don’t allow this, we don’t allow that; you can’t do this, you can’t do that; you can’t say this, you can’t say that; you can’t own this, you can’t own that; do this, do that or else you’ll end up in jail, you’ll have your hands cut off, you’ll be buried 6 feet below the ground or worse you won’t even have a proper burial for your body will be found floating in the river without any questions, explanations and reasons as long as the government finds your action/actions wrong without even hearing your side of the story or having a proper trial; if the people will not watch CIA movies, Alias, Ninja-Assassin, Salt and other assassin-like movies to know some assassin-basics in order for them to be able to personally assassinate their own government leaders, then there is a possibility that they will result into a revolution.

On the other hand, if the parents of a very liberated family would have no grip of their child; “okay, let it be”; go there, go here; have multiple boyfriends; sleep on your boyfriend’s house; “no problem, you’re already 18 now, you’re allowed”; here’s some money, drink, smoke, have some coke, it’s okay”; “you’re saying bad words, it’s okay”; you have your freedom; if the children won’t have the initiative to discipline their own-selves, then, there is a possibility that their children will become professional junkies and bitches. Where would the essential tools for the cognitive development of the child come?

In an extremely democratic state, where all decisions are made in the approval of the people ( the majority); “we would like to propose RH Bill, the people say no, okay”; “we would like to propose this and that, the people say no, okay”; “we would want this action for our country, the people say no, okay”; the government does this and the people will go to the streets and rally, the government approves this and the people boycotts and paralyzes the business firms, the government invites visitors, then the people burn the visitors’ flag in front of their faces and throw stones on their cars; a government official promotes an act, the media doesn’t like it, give negative reviews and comments, and he will loose on the next elections; if the state will not be able to have all the miracles in the world to be able to have a way to uphold itself then would you think that there’s still a chance for such a country to achieve development?

If the government is too tight, people will revolt, if the government is too loose, there will be no societal discipline that is essential to development such as a family so strict that will have rebellious off-springs and a family too open that will produce not so beneficial new actors in the society.

The point is that, too much of everything is bad, we can have a hybrid of both, a not so strict family but still have limitations and moderation and a not so strict, controlling and suppressing government but still uses its powers of vested authority.

At the end of the day, government officials, by nature, will seek for ultimate control so the people must now allow it and must limit it, and every individual, by nature, will wish for ultimate freedom, so the government must not allow it and must limit it.

-Ronnie John D. Barrientos

Bollywood in Pakistan

Since the 1947 bloody partition of India and Pakistan, the two countries had a rough road relationship with each other. Though living as neighbors for so many years, constant conflicts between religion, culture and beliefs still exist. It’s so hard to imagine how these states would start opening doors for each. Will a phenomenon be able to bring these two age-old enemies together?

According to the Times of India, some experts say Pakistan is now one of Bollywood’s top five overseas markets and could soon rival the business done in Australia. Film executives told beyondbrics that Pakistan is making up more and more of their overseas revenue, while offering an extra market that has the added benefit of shared history and culture.

 “As of now the top markets are North America, UK, the Middle East, Australia and then it’s Pakistan,” said Mahesh Ramanatha, COO of international distribution at Reliance Entertainment, which has released three of Bollywood’s most successful movies in Pakistan: 3 Idiots, Bodyguard and Don 2.

Pakistan becoming one of Bollywood’s fastest growing markets outside of India seems hardly a surprise. Who would have thought that the two could agree on some things? 

The spread of Bollywood movies in Pakistan doesn’t mean that the two countries are now open for finishing their long-term dispute. But although both countries share countless cultural differences, the fact that some Pakistanis are now having fun watching Indian films is a sign of things to come.

"Salad Oh! Init Pa!"

-Salad Oh! Init Pa!

Are you familiar with this phrase, “Salad oh, init pa”? Recently, I’ve been hearing such words whenever I go to the market, school, malls and even inside the church.  But what do these words really mean?

“Salad Oh! Init pa!” is a phrase originated from a vendor selling commercial fruit cocktails from Cagayan de Oro City, Philippines. The vendor shouts the word, “Salad Oh!” which tells of his product-the fruit salad. Mostly, he uses it when he sells his products at Night Market and Night Cafe in Cagayan de Oro City. Later then, the word was being added by “Init pa!” (HOT) which is basically, the irony of it (it should be like “BUGNAW pa!” (COLD)). After which, it was used by one of the Disc Jock of an FM Station and was introduced to the people (made popular by Totoy Bugoy of MOR 91.9 FM).

So, what does this phrase mean?

Simple! It is a Visayan phrase for “GORGEOUS and SEXY”.

What a compliment, right? But don’t be flattered, before, it’s true that it had been used like congratulation for a girl, but it no longer connotes such nowadays.

Aside from being popularized by a radio DJ, the phrase had also been made famous by junkies and men mostly in the cities of Davao and Cebu. The term which was previously used to describe a “hot and sexy lady” had already been a slang used to say that, “Hey there’s a slut!”, for them, a “BURIKAT” or a lady selling herself is like a salad, so hot, and is being sold to hungry and craving men.

Many use the phrase for it’s popular, many finds the phrase as a “cool”, “in” and “trending one, and worse, many say such words to girls but doesn’t even know what it meant. 

Every lady deserves every guy’s respect! Now that you already know, the next time you see a beautiful girl; refrain from saying “SALAD OH! INIT PA!”.

Ang Pagdadalaga ni Maiximo Oliveros (The Bossoming of Maximo Oliveros)

Maximo (Nathan Lopez) is a 12-year-old unmanly gay boy who lives in the slums with his father and brothers who are lowly thieves. The story primarily revolves around the conflict between his love for handsome young police officer Victor (J. R. Valentin), and his family's illegal livelihood. Neo-realist in orientation, the film is a tale of lost innocence and redemption amidst the poverty of Manila's slums.

Maxi behaves like a girl, wearing clips in his hair and bangles on his wrists and even wearing lipstick. He is teased by neighbors and former school friends. His sexuality is, however, fully accepted by his two brothers and by his father. One night he is accosted by two men who attempted to molest him, but is saved by the appearance of Victor. Victor does not have a girlfriend, and his sexuality was never revealed. He rebuffs Maxi's advances, only affectionately stoking Maxi's head even when the boy steals a kiss.

After Maxi's father is killed by Victor's boss, Maxi resists, then, Victor's attempts to renew their friendship. The closing scene shows Maxi walking past Victor who has parked by the roadside on Maxi's way to school. He ignores Victor as he passes him, hesitates momentarily as he crosses the road, then goes on his way.

If we base our judgment of the movie on the “mainstream films” I can say that the movie is poor in the technical aspects because of the use of natural light and only one camera. Some scenes are dark and the camera is sometimes shaking and was not steady. But if we criticize it based on the category of “independent films” then I guess these flaws can be considered.  Each scene is full of meaning. Each character was well presented. It’s so amazing how the director managed to build each character, from the father who does illegal activities for a living but whose love for his family is immeasurable, the brother that supports his youngest sibling, the cop that is exposed on the sad realities of life and a young homosexual whom for the first time in his life felt affection with someone.

If I were to describe Ang Pagdadalaga ni Maximo Oliveros, it’s a true representation of life. There was no over-showing of the good ones and hiding the bad. It was plain reality. That’s why every scene was outstanding, like the adherence of Maximo to his unkept neighbor, the tight bond between father and son, praying before meal, the persistence of honor as a law enforcer and the importance of friendship. In the film, the correlation of value is the highlight, and even if the characters were surrounded with violence and corruption, it was shown that there still is a room for good moral values.

The movie was greatly done but there are two things that disturb me.  First, the very open acceptance of the characters to homosexuality, especially the father and his brothers considering their ways of living and the society that surrounds them. Second, is the concept that there is a need to use violence (which leads to murder) to suppress the evil.

Ang Pagdadalaga ni Maximo Oliveros as a whole was a superb film.

Pagdadalaga is a heartfelt family movie -- a tale of life in the slums and the bittersweet aftertaste of first love. This film will surely touch your heart.

<a href="http://www.xworld.us/">XWorld</a>

Did Rizal Retract?

Did Jose Rizal retract?

                Was there any retraction? A question still unanswered from 1896 to the present day. Professor Padilla of the University of the Philippines states the position of many and perhaps most educated Filipinos in this way.
                “Briefly then the picture presented before us is that of Dr. Jose Rizal, the man, the scientist, and rationalist who wrote vigorously against the Catholic Church, and who ridiculed the idea of hell. A few hours before his execution, when threatened with eternal damnation, he became suddenly ‘distributed’ and like a child, ‘ No, no, I would not be condemned’. Answered by Father Balaguer that he would certainly go to hell if he did not retract and return to the Catholic Church, the fear became greater, his reason capitulated to faith, and he exclaimed: ‘Well father, I promise that the remainder of my lifetime I will employ asking God for the grace of faith’. Where  upon he signed a retraction in which he disowned all that he ever said and wrote against the church and abominate Masonry. This supposed facts brought out in the way of evidence, when pieced together, do not seem to fit psychologically into the picture.
                The ones who believed that Rizal retracted are mostly basing their arguments to the statement of Father Balaguer who have given the story of how the Jesuits managed to convince Rizal to go back to church and make a retraction. The retraction paper and the book ( Act s of Faith, Hope, and Charity) was their most important evidence.
                These evidences instead of proving that Rizal retracted caused more doubts. Rizal’s relatives were promised that the retraction would be read to them in Paco Church, but the never heared it. That caused doubt. The newspapers published different versions. That caused doubt.
                Then came the report that it had been lost. Absurd! After four years of effort in Dapitan to convert Rizal succeeded, after the orders had all prayed with penances, the retraction, the most precious document the church possessed in the Philippines, had be been lost?
                Father Balaguer swears under oath (1917) that he took it to Ateneo before Rizal was brought out to be shot, and that Father Pio Pi carried it to the Palace of Archbishop Nozaleda, entrusting it to Gonzales Feijoo, who deposited it in the chest for reserved papers. Then all trace of it was lost. Father Pio said they looked for it but could not find it. That caused doubt.
                For thirty-nine years, million of Filipinos, whether Catholic or not, denied that such paper existed. Then the retraction was found by Father Manuel Garcia on May 18, 1935 in the very files where it had been formerly sought in vain. That facts caused doubt. Why had it been missing for thirty-nine years?
                The archbishop permitted Ricardo Pascual, Ph. D. to examine the retraction, and gave him a good photostat of it. On Pascual’s book called “Rizal Beyond Grave” in which he seems to show the minute measurements that the retraction diverges from the style of Rizal’s other writings of that period, and he concludes that the paper was forgery. Pascual points out that both the signatures of the “witnesses” were signed by the same man, and they do indeed look alike.
                There were more issues which produced doubts. Rizal was not buried where persons in good ecclesiastical standing are buried in  Paco Cemetery, but in “unconcentrated ground” between the outer and inner wall where Father Burgos had been buried after his execution. This raises doubt, if he really did go back to the church why was he not buried in a coffin or a boy of any kind. This raises doubt.
                As to the burial of Rizal, if you will receive the burial record of Rizal in the Paco Register it is not on the page 147 where the persons who died in December, 1896 were recorded, but on page 204, where person buried ten months later, in September, 1897 were recorded. His name was written on the burial record 10 months after he was buried. Pascual’s theory ist hat they buried Rizal as an unrepentant criminal, and the had to frame a case later to fit the retraction story which was in question.
                Doubt has also been raised by the fact that neither the archbishop nor the Jesuits asked for pardon or mitigation of Rizal’s sentence. If he really retracted and went back to the Catholic Church, he must have been protected by the Jesuits but only his family begged for mercy.
                The strongest argument was the character of Rizal. Few months before his sentence he had rejected Father Sanchez’ offer offer of a professorship, a hundred thousand pesos and an estate if he would retract; and he had declared that the could not be bought for half the Philippines.
                That is Rizal and not the one who cried infront of Father Balaguer. He was not only incorruptible, but very angry at the least suggestion that he might be buried. The character speaks so loud against the retraction that all of Rizal’s old friends believe he could not have written it. They look at the writing and say “ Yes, that is his handwriting, but then, Maraino Ponce and Antonio Lopez and many others could write exactly like Rizal.
                The question,”Did Rizal retract?”depends upon the the genuineness or otherwise, of the supposed retraction. The archbishop should settle this suggestion, or at least attempt to settle it, by permitting the document to be submitted to the greatest hand writing experts in the world, preferably to several of them working independently. He should permit the paper and the ink to be subjected to the best tests of modern science.
                The analysis which has thus far been made is that of Pascual, and he pronounces the document to be a forgery. Under these circumstances, the church must shoulder the burden of proof that it is not. As of now, after thorough research on this topic, if you are to ask the researcher of his answer on the question, “Did Rizal Retract?” He would answer NO.

-Ronnie Barrientos
-for classroom purposes only-

Analysis: Does Homosexuality Pose a Threat to Children?

"I have known few homosexuals who did not practice their tendencies. Such people are sinning against God and will lead to the ultimate destruction of the family and our nation. I am unalterably opposed to such things, and will do everything I can to restrict the freedom of these people to spread their contagious infection to the youth of our nation." - Pat Robertson, May 24, 1994 letter.

This argument is based on several misunderstandings: that homosexuals are more prone to molest children and that it is possible to recruit children into homosexuality and that homosexuals carry out such acts of recruitment.

On the issue of molestation, this is what Dr. Gregory M. Herek at the Psychology Department of the University of California at Davis has to say: "The empirical research on adult sexual orientation and molestation of children does not show that gay men are any more likely than heterosexual men to molest children. This is not to suggest that molestations of children by adult homosexual men never occur. They do. But molesting children has nothing to do with whether a man is heterosexual or homosexual."

On the issue of recruitment, this idea imposes two theories: that homosexuality can be induced by conscious acts and that homosexuals wish to and do recruit.

The first theory is obviously based on assumptions. First, almost all the research in psychology and biology indicate that homosexuality is a part of a person's inner personality, just seeing gays or gay couple or living with gays can’t turn a person into a homosexual, “homosexuality is caused by genes and not by the environment (Search for the Gay Gene: Dean Hammer and David Copeland), thus proves that homosexuality can’t be induced. As for the second theory, that homosexuals wish to and do recruit, this is without any basis. For a person to recruit, first he should have the ability to induce homosexuality to someone, it’s already proven by science that homosexuality can’t be taught or be imposed so no recruitment can occur.

It is often said that homosexuals wish to portray homosexuality in an attractive manner in the media and in the schools in order to attract young, impressionable children. This accusation is incorrect, for it’s possible to influence the sexual orientation of a youngster by means of movies, articles, or factual classroom information. Even if that were the case, the heterosexual lifestyle is clearly so predominant in society (which heterosexuals most often do not even reflect upon), that the impressions taken by youngster must be much stronger from that side than from the side of homosexuality. Weinberg, President of The American Psychiatric Association stated in 1977: "A parent's fear that their child will be recruited at school or elsewhere is without scientific foundation".

The information about homosexuality in media and schools is desired by gays and lesbians solely to help kids who feel attracted to kids of their own sex to accept those unchangeable feelings. The sole purpose is to make these kids feel better about who they are, because most of us who grew up with homosexual feelings felt quite lonely and scared of society's reaction. Good information can help these kids to grow up healthy and self-confident. Gay and lesbian teens are two to three times more likely to attempt suicide than their heterosexual peers and account for up to 30% of all completed suicides among teens - in 1989, suicide was the leading cause of death among gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered youth (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1989). Therefore, honest information, positive role models, support from well informed teachers, counselors and friends could be of a great help to a teenager who is struggling with his or her sexual orientation.

To conclude, then, the claim that homosexuals pose a threat to children is defaming and without basis. Homosexuals, just like heterosexuals, generally love and care for children and wish them only to lead good, rewarding, and honest lives.