Sex Talk: Demanding SSS

In bed, if you want some well-deserved oral action, you coax and ask nicely. Unless your partner is a newbie, the kind who finds vaginal fluids yucky, or just a selfish jerk (and honey there are a lot of 'em), then he (or she) would most likely give in to your desires. After all, how many times have you given him head (or vice versa)?

In the Philippines, safe, satisfying sex is much harder to get...and I'm not talking about the Filipino's prowess in bed. The RH Law has been dragged through the legislative process for nearly 15 years, and the Filipino people, especially those who belong in the lower economic class, have had to deal with the alarming increase in teen pregnancy, the staggering statistics of new cases of HIV/AIDS, maternal deaths, and everyday headlines of violence against women and children. SSS (safe and satisfying sex) - or as we in the the Philippine Society of Sexual and Reproductive Health Nurses like to call it, sexual and reproductive health and rights - should already be at hand. After all, the law has been passed. But after several petitions in the Supreme Court by the anti-RH camp, it was placed in Status Quo Ante. This is like dangling a particularly scrumptious piece of bread in front of a starving child. Sadly, this metaphor is surprisingly adequate given that government-supported reproductive and sexual health services would not only make our men, women, and children healthier, it would also contribute to the economic stability of families and individuals. 

We all know the arguments of the Pro-RH - no need to re-state them here. The problem is this: we have an RH Law that is NOT being implemented, and everyday that it is being delayed, more and more women die giving birth, more and more people are at risk for early, unwanted pregnancies and sexually-transmitted diseases.

In response to this, the Forum for Family Planning and Development rounded up one of the most powerful groups to drumbeat the issue - media. I was lucky enough that, as member of the Philippine Health Bloggers Society and the Philippine Society of Sexual and Reproductive Health Nurses, I was tapped as one of the attendees of the 2-day media training and planning. 

The plan is simple: Get the media to demand for Reproductive Health. 

This was why the Forum organized Demand RH: Media Training and Planning, a two-day event held at the Manila Pavillion from September 28-29. 


Joining forces for RH

When I was younger, I wanted to be a literary writer and a journalist (which explains my admiration for Sir Karl de Mesa, but that, my friends, is another story), so you can imagine my happiness at meeting some of the veterans in print and broadcast media. The participants came from all over the Philippines, each with years of experience in telling news and influencing people. We even have people coming from Zamboanga. T These attendees had years of experience in the craft of telling real stories of real people. I felt quite privileged to be learning with and from them. 

There were also some pretty influential people coming from new media, which is being used as platform to advocate for Reproductive Health. My group, the Philippine Health Bloggers Society, was also part of the event. In attendance were Andrei Dela Cruz, Erick Bernardo, Grace Bondad-Nicolas, Neil Aguas, and Tess Termulo.

 PHBS convening for a #DemandRH media event proposal. I must say Doc Tess look ready for battle. Photocredit to Likes Manglal-lan.

 The power of the media - traditional or otherwise - has proven itself, time and again, in agenda-setting and catalyzing action. This gathering was Step 1 of what would be an all-encompassing campaign for demanding reproductive health. 

What Went Down

Day 1 started off with the Forum's Ms. Chi Vallido's review of the journey of the RH law, including her personal report of what went on in the Supreme Court during the oral arguments. I was simultaneously infuriated and entertained by some of the comments and questions made by the anti-RH camp petitioners and justices. Honestly, the idiocy behind the words would have all been very funny, if we didn't have mothers dying left and right because of the delay in implementing the law. 

We then had Atty. Clare Padilla, Executive Director of EnGendeRights, talk to u about her experience in defending the RH Law. Her manner of arguing for the law and points of contention against the petitions to have the law declared unconstitutional were brilliant and I very helpful for those of us who are rather vocal in our support for the law. The classic secular vs religious ideologies was brought up again, but the lawyer also highlighted constitution expert Father Joaquin Bernas's argument that the life of the unborn should not take first priority over the life of a person. This is also a premise to back therapeutic abortions. 

Our the  afternoon session was a surprise - we actually had a legit Catholic priest with us to talk about the RH Law. When he started his talk by saying "There is no Prince Charming", my doubts began to dissipate. To protect his identity, we shall call him Father Enlightened. He was rather a pleasant surprise. He was not as sassy as my favorite lady journalist Ana Santos, but Father Enlightened had talked of the dangers of gender bias with pretty much the same the broad perspective. Two very striking ideologies hit me quite hard: 

"You do disservice to the RH Law if you just focus on FP."

"The personal is political: Women are facing daily experiences of gender inequality constructed not by nature but PATRIARCHY and SEXISM."

Okay, so I already know this. But it's a pleasant, if not surreal, experience hear a priest talk like this. There were even things that Father Enlightened say that were quite romantic enough to bring back my hope for my own happy ending.: 

"Gender equality demands that we treat one another as an end and not just a means."

Among these wonderful bits of wisdom, Father Enlightened also shared how he defends the RH Law from religiously-rabid anti-RH. The key, he told us, was to fight fire with fire - to use religious doctrines to counter religious doctrines. The Dignitanis Humanae is an encyclical that is a good start. There are several other Church documents that the Pro-RH people can look into, such as the Life of the World (Pope Benedict XVI) and Pope John Paul's Letter to Women in 1995. The irony was sweet.

I have to say that Father Enlightened's talk was one of my favorite's. 

The last talk of the day was about combining gender sensitivity and media practice. Dianna Mendoza from the Rappler walked us through through creating pieces that consider the plight of women and that would highlight gender equality. This is of particular importance to me, because the Catholic Church, the main religion rallying against the Reproductive Health Law, has quite a network when it comes to media and thus agenda setting using both traditional and new media is easy to them. 

Day 1 ended with Chinese dinner and beer, and Likes Manglal-lan, fellow Emerging Youth Leader for SRHR, hanging out with me and Ms. Grace in our room. 

Day 2 of the Demand RH training was quite exciting for me. We had two speakers in the morning, the first one being Rochit Tañedo. Ms. Rochit gave us several feature stories on SRHR scenarios, one of which is about a teen-age girl called Princess who got pregnant as a result of corrective rape. The girl was a tomboy. After reading the material, we performed an impromptu interview. I played the Princess, and another of our fellow trainee played a radio host who threw me interview questions. The exercise unearthed some pretty disturbing realities, primarily how calloused media personnel could be in the face of getting the news. It was a good analysis, especially since we also shared the good practices when dealing with sensitive cases like that of a rape victim. In addition, having read Ms. Rochit's pieces made me realize that a compelling story is a story with a face, and the human element is imperative to drumbeat the need for RH. 

One of my girl crushes, Ana Santos, was the last speaker of the training. CEO (Chief Empowerment Officer) of the fab website Sex and Sensibilities, Ms. Ana has always been my idol when it comes to writing about sex. She does it in a way that is neither too sterile nor too pokpok-like. Ms Ana brings the casual tone to sex talk, which is always a breath of fresh air, since we live in a country in which anything related to sex is spoken in faint voices or as jest. Being the awesome, sassy word-weaver that she is, Ms. Ana had several quotable quotes. My favorites, though, are these: 

"Sex is not a dirty word. But IGNORANCE is."

" If we want to change the way we view sex, we have to change the way we talk about it."

Day 2 of the media training ended with the mini-meeting of people from different media groups with colleagues using the same medium to come up with plans for drum beating RH. I can't wait for when PHBS finally start.

Learning from the speakers and from each other has given me a different perspective in blogging, and has made me realize that integration of traditional media ethics and skills shall benefit me as a social influencer and an advocate for safe, satisfying sex. 

Demand RH classmates from different media - broadcast, print, and new media. Photocredit to Jonathan Monis.

Leap of Faith: Going Full-time for Safe and Satisfying Sex

That's right, ladies and gentlemen. I have finally pursued my calling. I have shed my teacher-y facade and gone into a world where vaginas, condoms, and penises dominate. I am now a full time sex worker... and I work with kids! Yum.

Don't worry, I haven't gone into pedophile prostitution, but I have to admit the situation now is quite orgasmic. Last week, I submitted my application to the Foundation for Adolescent Development. I applied for the position of Program Manager (yes, makapal ang mukha ko) hoping against hope that I'll be called in for an interview despite the overwhelming number of people who I believe are more qualified for the job. Imagine my utter bewilderment when I was called in for an interview a few days letter. Imagine, again, how stupefied I was upon learning that I got the position.

So here I am, finally, after months of saying it but never quite meaning it: I am officially a full time advocate of sexual and reproductive health and right. What's more, I work for and with the young ones - adolescents to be exact -, which is an absolute privilege. I am also quite lucky to be working with one of the most prominent names in reproductive and sexual health and rights advocacy, my boss Alvin Dakis, and my oh-so-awesome partner Erick Bernardo. My baptism of fire started on the last week of May and my first official brush with the wonderful world of adolescent sexual and reproductive health and rights came last Tuesday. 

I represented the Foundation for Adolescent Development in a forum called Defining the Best Interest of the Child and the RH Law which was held at the Quezon City Hall last Tuesday. It was organized by the NAPC Youth and Children Sectoral Council, WomanHealth Philippines, Save the Children, Women's Global Network for Reproductive Rights and the Office of Vice Mayor Joy Belmonte. I was privileged enough to be able to sit down with some  the members of the Active Youth Participation (AYP) members and talked about the Reproductive Health Law. Several interesting points came up. 

One of the issue that discussed heatedly was the limitations of reproductive and sexual health services offered by the government to minors. The RH Law specifies that minors cannot receive RH services from  health centers, unless they are given explicit consent by their parents and guardian. The kids thought this would hinder rather than better the access of the young people to better reproductive health. They can always go to a clinic, but really, which kid has that much money these days?

The kids believe that the written consent requirement is difficult to achieve because a significant percentage of parents do not want their children to know or to talk about sex even if it is with a professional health worker. Understandable. After all, if you're 15 and you come up to a parent and say, "Hey mom/dad, can you like write me a consent letter? Coz I really wanna know how a condom works", you'd probably get a slap on the face plus at least three hours of lecture on the immorality of sex for your troubles. 

It's sad that a majority of the Filipino people still don't want to admit that if kids can't get straight answers from their parents (and proper authorities) then the next big step is looking through the Internet and pornography, which are great for techniques and positions, but not quality instructional material for safe sex. And their boyfriends and girlfriends aren't exactly resource speakers on the matter.

I don't know much about private high schools (as I'm a legit government-educated kid during my HS days), but in public highs you'd be lucky if your teacher in Health is not very squeamish, hypocritical, and the overly-conservative. You might actually get some decent sex ed, even if it's just a minuscule part of the class. One of the girls I got to speak with, Ma-Rose, related a story of one such lesson. Her Health teacher had allowed them to speak and ask about sex, and despite laughing about the topic, she said the class actually learned about it. When their adviser found out about the oh-so-energetic lesson, the class got a metaphorical whip on the butt for being more active when it comes to sex ed than Math class. 

Algebra is important, I know, but I'm pretty sure that learning to prevent unwanted pregnancy, keeping oneself safe from HIV/AIDS and other STIs, and simply learning about the changes our bodies undergo during puberty and no less important. The teacher got pissed because the students liked and enjoyed talking about sex. This is as hypocritical as Sotto saying that the Filipino culture is conservative when half-naked women gyrate to novelty songs in that overly-reincarnated noontime show that really needs to die already. But I digress. The point: many parents don't want their kids to learn about sex, even from legit sources like teachers and health care professionals, probably because of some irrational ideology that is akin to Sotto's myopic perceptions of the Filipino culture. 

This is why upon asking for suggestions, the group recommended that parents also be educated in the realities of reproductive and sexual health and rights. 

And that is, of course, another issue - education. The earlier sharing of one of the AYP members brings to light how sex ed was touched in Health class before the mandate on sex ed. Ma-Rose said that sometimes, they would be tested on things that were not even discussed inside the classroom. She felt that the teachers failed to give ample information on the topic. Thank goodness for the RH Law - at least sex ed won't just be about the novelty of saying puke and titi. Also, the young people added that although it is fun to laugh at sex talk, it is also not that helpful because of too much joking around. Content AND delivery matters.

Which brings us back to HOW the Filipino people talk about sex. I can rant about this all day that I'd start to sound like another Philippine Health Bloggers Society member Raimskie. We have lived for so long in a society that either cringes upon hearing about what's between a human person's legs and as a result we shut up about everything related to it. Which is utterly codswallop given that we sexualize almost everything - from kids' toys like Bratz to TV ads for liquor and roof leak seals. 

The young ones have spoken: They WANT to know what's going on with their body. They BELIEVE the importance of knowing about sexual health and rights. They NEED comprehensive adolescent reproductive and sexual health services.

Now what? 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On a side note, I'd like to invite everyone to be a member of the Foundation for Adolescent Development's Junior Board program. Train under the best board of trustees of FAD, get the latest know-how on adolescent reproductive and sexual health, have opportunities for scholarships to conferences here and abroad, and advocate for your peers.

The Foundation for Adolescent Development (FAD) is a not-for-profit, non-government organization established in 1988 catering to a very specific clientele: Filipino adolescents and young adults aged 13-24 years old who may be in school, in the community, in the workplace, including difficult situations such as the street.

Be the present of today's reproductive and sexual health and rights advocacy! Join the Foundation for Adolescent Development's Junior Board. See details below. Good luck, leaders and advocates!

Anyare?!

So the Supreme Court issued a status quo ante, stopping the implementation of the RH law, apparently to hear out those who filed petitions against it.  The RH Law is being suspended for 120 days or 4 months. Those who voted for this controversial move are Presbitero Velasco Jr., Teresita de Castro, Arturo Brion, Diosdado Peralta, Lucas Bersamin, Roberto Abad, Martin Villarama Jr., Jose Perez, Jose Mendoza, and Bienvenido Reyes. Going against them were Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno, Antonio Carpio, Estela Perlas-Bernabe, Mariano Del Castillo, and Marvic Leonen. It was a 10-5 battle, and we're obviously in the losing end. Remember their names, my friends. Remember their names.

After 14 years of blood, sweat, and tears, of battles in the cyberworld, in congress, and in the streets, this happens. After the bill was torn apart and put together in both Upper and Lower House for more than a decade and after the finally President signed it, they take it back. After the IRR has been written with all the consideration for people's religious feelings despite sacrificing so many good provisions, they stop a law that is built to better people's lives dead on its tracks. 

Wow. 

Good job, Anti-RH peeps. You guys are probably celebrating in your self-righteous, sinless ways, which of course excludes alcohol and hot make-out sessions. Way to go. Excellent job. Great work. We're 14 years delayed already, what's four more months? It'll only mean the death of 1,320 mothers because of pregnancy-related complications that might otherwise be prevented or solved if the LAW had been implemented as it should be. It'll only mean more cases of teenage pregnancies because the youth have very little access to reproductive health. It'll only mean the continuous rise of HIV infections. 

In a statement by RH advocate Edcel Lagman, he explains the constitutionality of the RH Law.

Time to put on my Vagina Warrior armor again. They say it will take four months to sort out the petitions, and out champions are optimistic of the outcome. We advocates can wait this out. But we won't wait quietly. We will watch and speak and act just like we have watched and spoken and acted to make comprehensive sexual and reproductive health services a reality. 

We don't take injustice sitting down. 

Your move, Supreme Court. 

Selfishness, RH IRR, and Adios Damaso!

I was told that I should be selfish and think of myself, as advocacy will still be there when I am more established and probably in a much better position to help people. This is the same person who taught me that discrimination isn't 100% bad. Thank you for thinking that this isn't just a phase and I'll 'grow out of it'. Sadly, some people think that - think that I am a frivolous little girl with frivolous desires. I promise to focus on bettering my career, but like I said, I am in love with advocacy. I'll manage it, somehow.

Although I am already very selfish, I am sharing this poem. It's not financial stability and career improvement, but it is all mine... or should I say all me?

Their secrets and her secrets, she whispers to the sky.

Her secrets are wishes

written upon clouds and upon paper,

neither fulfilled nor heard

by gods or by fate.

Meaningless against indifference,

perishing in insignificance.

…for perhaps there is no god,

and perhaps there is no fate,

to blame for the fragments of her heart -

only unquenchable desire

for the untouchable stars.

(3 March 2013, 2:13AM)

Now back to regular programming. 

I was fortunate to be at Implementing Rules and Regulations Consultation for the Reproductive Health Law last March 9 at the Century Park Hotel, along with other members of the Alliance of Young Nurse Leaders and Advocates and Philippine Health Bloggers Society. I saw a few familiar faces such as fellow nurse and AIDS prevention advocate Angelo Esperanzate (with his cool, top of the line camera), Red Tani and his gang from the Filipino Freethinkers, my ultimate girl crush Ana Santos of Sex and Sensibilities, and Ms. Beth Angsioco of DSWP.

The IRR was signed, sealed, and is ready for implementation on Easter Sunday, and that makes me one incredibly happy chick. Despite this, there is one parts of the IRR (and the law, for that matter) that is like a cloud in a clear blue summer sky. 

In Chapter 2 of the IRR presented for the consultation, a section is devoted to the access of minors to family planning services:

This part is okay; it's what the RH Law is all about, after all:

• No person shall be denied information and access to family planning services, whether natural or artificial

This part got many people scratching their heads: 

• A minor will only be allowed access to FP services in public health facilities if he/she

         1. Presents written consent from their parents and/or legal guardians; or

  

       2. Has had a previous pregnancy as proven by documentation that includes, but is not  limited to:

              ~ Written documentation from a physician;

              ~ Documentation through ancillary examinations such as ultrasound;

              ~ Written documentation submitted by guardian

So it is either the girl's already a teenage mom (which is what we're trying to prevent in the first place) OR it's "Hey Mom, I'm 15, I think I'm in love with this boy, and I wanna have sex. Can you give me a written consent so I can get some rubber from the health center nurse?" 

Good luck with THAT happening. 

Unfortunately, the IRR team can't really change what is in the law, and this particular mind-numbing restriction IS in the law. Fortunately, the IRR team is a wais lot. This little problem could be solved by exploiting loopholes, and explore loopholes they did. IRR Drafting Team member Nr. Alvin Dakis enumerates some of the changes here.:

• One parent providing consent is acceptable. This is to recognize single parents.
• Social Workers can give consent for street children.
• An older brother or sister can give consent, provided that they are above 18.

Of course, since the restriction is for public facilities only, minors can still get appropriate help with birth control through private providers and non-government organizations like Likhaan. Check them out.: http://www.likhaan.org. Or you can phone them at 926-6230.

Here's another shiny new feature of the signed IRR:

That in case a minor satisfies any of the above conditions but is still refuse access to information and/or services, the minor may direct complaints to the designated Reproductive Health Officer (RHO) of the facility. Complaints shall be acted upon immediately.

The law may be restrictive to providing RH information and services to minors, but there are still loopholes to be exploited. And exploit we shall.

Check out the full IRR here.

What brought about this mother of contradictions? The RH Law was crafted not only to better maternal mortality and morbidity, but also to curb the staggering numbers of teenage pregnancy. The Philippines is practically teenage pregnancy capital of Asia, and one of the ways that is seen to be effective solution to the problem is providing FP and RH information and services to the youth. 

That kamot-ulo restriction had kamot-ulo origins. Why was this allowed in the RHRP Law? Two things: bargain buy and Sotto Conservatism.

In order for the other legislators to buy the RH Bill, some changes had to be made in its less conservative provisions. The universal access to services apparently suffered along with many other important provisions. "Of course minors should not know how to put on a condom! Why, they might actually USE it! And knowing about sex might make them eager for premarital sex! Even if studies show that it's the opposite, well, I don't believe it!" We're talking about reproductive and sexual health education here, not porn. It's kind of sad that minors have to turn to porn to learn about sex. I mean, it's great for techniques and positions, but it doesn't really say a lot about safe sex. This way of thinking is one of the products of idiot conservatism that the RH Law had to fight through - ultra-conservative and hypocrite society, politicians, and the Catholic Bishop's Conference of the Philippines whose vendetta against those who passed and lobbied for comprehensive sexual and reproductive health has been preposterous at worst, atrocious at best. 

The Diocese of Bacolod's infamous Team Buhay/Team Patay oversized 

tarp.

Above is the latest name the CBCP has for RH supporters: Team Patay. In fairness, it is a tad better than the Saved Sex tarp that cropped up with a few months ago. Despite the obvious improvement of wordplay, I still think that the move is far from cute. After denying time and again that they are politicking - well, they are politicking. Bashing people on the pulpit; branding those who go against them as the anti-life and family wreckers; endorsing candidates who are anti-RH and calling them Team Buhay even if their only merit is to go against the RH Bill and having pamatay less-than-squeeky-clean records. Threatening candidates who've ignored their irrational pleas with the mythological Catholic Vote. Plain -as-daylight politicking.

The COMELEC has asked the Diocese to take down the tarp, and the Diocese cried fowl and invoked Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion. Ironic that they should be citing the same right that should have allowed Carlos Celdran to go free for his Damaso act in the Manila Cathedral. Way to invoke the law when it suits you. 

We all know the story. RH champion Carlos Celdran showed up in the Manila Cathedral and told the Bishops to keep their noses and rosaries out of politics. That little stunt got him sued. So much for Freedom of Speech.

The truth: I am tired of these  men, the so-called Princes of the Church, throwing self-righteous codswallop about morality when they mollycoddle their rapists and pedophile ka-baro and criminals who supply them with Pajero, turn a blind eye to discrimination because they are a major force behind it, and believe themselves above others and above the law. The RCC invokes the power of the majority, believing its followers will follow without thinking, believing that its decision is the best decision, regardless of how it marginalizes those who they believe to be below their moral standards. These old men preach righteousness, when they have barely have any.

I am, in short, tired of bullshit. So tired, in fact, that I was wonderfully relieved that Tagle was not made Pope. I did know know how I'll be able to stand CBCP's rabid fanboying if that happened. 

There you go, ladies and gents: the reason why I've left. I'm not good with terms, so I don't know what to call myself as of now. But labels are just labels, after all, like "Princes of the Church" and "Team Patay."

Should I be questioned on my religious beliefs, well, here is my answer.:
Do I believe in God? Does that even matter? I believe that no one is above others. I believe in people's ability to love truly and to give, to be kind and to be merciful of others. I believe that even without religion a person can be good. 

The Sotto Conservatism, the Idiot Society, etc

This meme has been circulating in FB since Sotto's
ironic claims of how conservative Filipinos are.

During the second reading of the Reproductive Health Bill in the Senate, Majority Floor Leader Tito Sotto moved to take out the phrase "safe and satisfying sex" because we Filipinos are conservative. This, coming from a man who hosts a noontime show famous for having scantily-dressed girls gyrating to double-meaning novelty songs. You can see how utterly honest the concern for the Filipino people's conservative culture is. You can imagine me doing a very aggressive eye-roll

 I don't understand this about the Filipinos: we speak so much of how we value the Maria Clara image, but EDSA is congested with billboards of men and women in their underwear and we belong to a society that would need a woman stroking herself to sell a product that takes care of holes in the roof.

Hypocrisy has always bothered me for so many reasons, primarily because it's stupid and it hides behind the mask of righteousness. Many people hold on to traditional ideals that are directly contradicted by how act and how they treat others, and by how little they know/have consideration for the facts of what they are talking about. Like supposedly fighting for the sanctity of life of the unborn while scoffing at the 11 women who die every day because of lack of maternal care, or pretending to be a respectable public servant while plagiarizing other people's work. Conservatism without logic. Traditionalism without thinking. Self-righteousness without righteousness at all.  I am re-naming this kind of attitude the Sotto Conservatism. 

S.C. is has always gotten in the way of resolving really important issues. It took the RH Bill almost 16 years to be passed. I've witnessed the battles going on inside both houses of parliament, on the streets, and in the cyberworld. I've been in these battles. The fight for a legislation to provide comprehensive reproductive health services did not drag out just because of due process - it was because there are powerful people afflicted with the S.C. who make sure that the process was delayed. We all know who we're talking about, of course. 

Sotto Conservatism is, I believe, the root of many problems that I am passionate of abolishing - such as blaming victims of rape for their ordeal - and one of the biggest hurdles to overcome when it comes to pushing for legislation that would benefit people.

The past few days, I’ve been getting really cringe-worthy news on Facebook. Sure, the RH Bill is now the RH Law, but the oppositions seem to be gearing up for a Word War with flimsy logic masquerading as smart arguments. Bishop Gilbert Garcera of the Diocese of Daet spoke of how he views overpopulation in the Philippines in an interview. He believes that the population of the Philippines is ideal because the our countrymen can be sent overseas as workers and migrants.  “God’s plan for Filipinos to be caregivers to ageing nations whose populations had become stagnant.” He also said that Filipino women would make “good wives” to foreigners. As if needing to dig his own grave further, he said that poverty which stems from overpopulation is not a problem at all because poverty brings people closer to God.

Dear Bishop: So this isn't a problem? You seriously need to get your eyes and your morals checked.

 I’ve also been severely pissed by an Italian Catholic priest’s proclamation that women who are sexually abused and beaten ask for it. Fr. Piero Corsi wrote and posted a Christmas message on the door of his church. “How often do we see girls and mature women going around scantily dressed in provocative clothes? They provoke the worst instincts, which end in violence or sexual abuse. They should search their consciences and ask: did we bring this on ourselves?” Corsi wrote.

In New Delhi India, a gang raped teenager committed suicide after being forced by the police to drop the charges against her attackers and marry one of them.

In our country, Speaker of the House Belmonte expressed his sentiments in pursuing the divorce bill by the next congress. Of course, ultraconservatives have started posting Facebook status messages claiming that those who want to divorce their spouses are selfish and irresponsible.

Here are some of my two-cents’ worth, without censorship:

     1.      Sorry to burst your bubble, Bishop Garcera, but I was not born to be just someone’s wife. I was born to pursue self-actualization. As a Filipino, you seem to have some twisted sense of nationality to actually be happy that our countrymen have to leave to pursue better life. The Filipino people are not commodity. Ikaw kaya ang i-export ko. Also, if you believe that poverty is not a problem, you probably have never left the comforts of your church. Or you have, but your eyesight needs correcting. Poverty is a very big problem. I don’t understand how having nothing to eat and having nowhere to live make you closer to God. I don’t believe that going through hell on earth brings you closer to God. Because if it did, I would rather not believe in your god, because he seems to thrive in cruelty. Your argument against the law on comprehensive reproductive health is invalid at best, atrocious at worst. Wake up and smell the crap of your argument. This attempt at remaining conservative in the face of population and development just killed a couple of my brain cells.

   

      2.      Father Corsi, if we were to go by your premise, then the kids who get the sh*t beaten out of them by abusive adults “should search their consciences and ask: did we bring this on ourselves?” What about the children priests such as yourself molested, Father? What did they do to deserve what sex offenders in your rank did to them? Your victim-blaming attitude is medieval, offensive, arrogant, and it honestly scares me. We have been trying to teach society to NOT RAPE, but you keep insisting that IT IS OUR FAULT WE ARE RAPED. Trust me on this one: You can be wearing a ratty old shirt and be a wallflower of a girl – if someone makes the decision to rape you, he/she will. Quoting from a former high school guidance counselor and a dear friend, “If it is true that girls and women, who are clothed scantily, provoke men to rape them, then Boracay would now be the epicenter of thousands of rape cases!”

Victim blaming is a culture.

     

      3.      Making a victim marry her attacker is plain stupid, although I understand the concept. Psychologically traumatized, victims would sometimes seek to have a relationship with their attackers just so they can assure themselves that what happened was not rape but legit, consensual sex. Or course, this is not the case here. In some societies, a raped woman is a disgraced woman. Raped women who belong to this culture are often murdered for disgracing the family – stoned by the males of her family.  This is an extreme case of victim-blaming attitude that stems from Sotto Conservatism – let woman suffer because she’s lost her hymen. Borrowing my good friend Duston Barto’s precise description of the feeling, you make me want to punch a kitten (or punch the people in charge of the case in the Indian gang rape case, for that matter).

Sometimes, things can't be put back together.      

     4.      Isn’t it irresponsible and selfish of people to say that those who want divorce are irresponsible and selfish when they nor the people they care about have never gone through a loveless marriage that’s destroying them? Are they even aware of what people who undergo annulment go through? One of the people I’ve been working with has expressed her sentiments about annulment: “Pinagmumukhang puta ang babae” (The women are made out to be whores.) The experience is demeaning to both parties. What’s the difference between annulment and marriage? The process. Divorce is less bloody. It would probably hurt as hell as well, but essentially, it’s not crafted to drag out for years. Think about this, anti-divorce people: essentially, the results are the same. Married people are separated completely, giving them another shot at a happy ending. I’m probably an idealist, but I think most people deserve a happy ending, no matter how screwed up that person was in the past. If the end is the same, won’t it be better to take the less psychologically traumatizing road?

There are many, many other issues that stem from idiotic traditionalism, and these are just a few, and it is kept alive by our complacency to follow blindly and not question norms. Among them: LGBT rights, dealing with HIV/AIDS, gender equality, and secularism. But seriously, it’s almost 2013, people.

 Isn’t it time we get over what we are used to and move on to a future that is ruled by what is right and not just what is easy? I say abolishing Sotto Conservatism is long overdue.

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/331529/overpopulation-good-for-filipinos-says-bishop

http://www.thejournal.ie/piero-corsi-san-terenzio-italy-priest-christmas-message-women-murder-sexual-violence-732418-Dec2012/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/27/india-gang-rape-suicide_n_2370859.html?utm_hp_ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=false

On Delubyo, Discourse, and the RH Bill

I worked very long, bloody hours last Monday– 8AM-9PM. When I left the office it was hell and high water, the latter literally. I seriously thought it was Ondoy all over again. Turns out, I was half right. Although I was able to go home this time, I still got stuck at a convenience store just outside our subdivision because the flood water was already way too deep. I finally got home by removing my shoes and walking through three feet of water. Could have been worse though, but these are the times I wish I were a water-bender, or better yet, a ninja.

Despite this, I was quite happy yesterday. Finally, after years of being dragged in Congress, the reps have voted to get the controversial RH Bill off the debates and into amendments. This is a very big progress since the bill was proposed about 14 years ago, and thus part of the battle of RH advocates has finally been won. I was teary. I was emotional. When I saw the Facebook post, I thought that, for a moment, I was going to bawl like a kid. I wanted to throw a freaking Purple Party with condom balloons as decoration and give out kisses as party favors. I was THAT ecstatic.

I still am, despite my bare-foot journey through flood waters that might have given me leptospirosis or something equally horrible.

Of course, like all victorious battles, it isn’t all fun and games after. There is still ensuring that the bill does not get watered down and the essential provisions wiped out. There is still the continuous lobbying for progress and RH advocates are sure that the opposing party will enthusiastically go against this. And of course, there will always be the ongoing battle on the importance (or immorality, depending on which side you are on) of the bill.

I’ve always been a fan of debates, and to make this more fun, here are a bunch of tips for both sides of the RH battle.

     1.       Before engaging in debates, read the bill. It’s pretty damn useless to be for or against something you don’t completely understand. It’s like saying you like Twilight series story because Rob Pattinson is hot. The connection is pretty difficult to see.

     2.       Get facts straight, such as this one: condom prevents the meeting of the egg and the sperm, thus, the use of condom prevents fertilization. It does not, however, cause abortion. If you’re still against condom use, fine. But spreading wrong information just to derail your opponent’s argument will eventually bite you back in the behind. Painfully.

     3.       Don’t drag your god into a debate. Religion is always a very bad basis for argument. Debate means arguing to persuade. It will probably be effective if you’re speaking to someone with the same religion as you have, because basically you speak of the same beliefs. But what if you’re using, for example, Catholic tenets but you’re speaking to a Muslim? Or a neo-pagan/Wiccan? Or even an atheist/agnostic. Result: your argument is invalid.

     4.       As stated before, in a debate, your aim is to persuade people. Calling me an “anti-Christ” is not persuasion. I won't agree to you just because you called me fat. That's just plain stupid. Once you start throwing names around, you’ve lost. In law, they call it ad hominem. You trash talk the person because you’re not smart enough to go against the ideas toe-to-toe. I’m still hoping all of us can be better than that.

     5.       We think we’re right. You think you’re right. Let’s not be idiots, and let’s keep our minds open.

     6.       I actually went to certain anti-RH Facebook pages, because I was seriously and sincerely trying to understand their point of view. When I started to clarify what they mean when they said certain things, such as “disoriented sa (about) reproductive process”, what I got were scathing replies that made me feel I was being insulted for being ignorant. If you truly want to persuade, you win people over not by making them feel stupid, but by clarifying and explaining your stand. This has exceptions, though…

The admin of the page actually banned me from this one. I was trying to clarify the phrase he/she used to describe a friend:"disoriented sa (about) reproductive health". I was about to say that definitions can be operative and words have nuances, after all. But I got banned before I could post my reply. My posts have also been deleted, thus the lack of screenshots. I have edited this to delete replies that do not concern my queries, but I can post the whole screenshot if needed.

     7.       …and the exception is that if the person asking for an explanation is a troll. In discussions and debates, idiotic questions are appalling. One such question I got was “may budget allocation ba ang masturbation?” (Is there a budget allocation for masturbation?). Seriously, you can’t be seriously asking me that. Feigned idiocy does not persuade; it makes people more wary to join your cause. Idiocy, even if faked, is rarely ever attractive, after all.

     8.       Persuasion is continuous. If you tell me that you’ve gotten tired of sincere questions about your beliefs, then it shows that you’re either prejudiced (because I am an enemy and thus there is no way in hell or heaven that I want to understand you) or you’re a lost case because you haven’t got enough arguments to back up your stand.

    9.       Last but not the least: Please remember that a debate can just be an exchange of ideas, a mental stimulation exercise (and a rather braingasmic one, if I do say so myself). It IS possible that you leave without convincing the opposite party. It is possible to walk away without changes of hearts, only (hopefully) a more open-minded perspective of your stand and theirs.  It is also possible for debates to end without us being barbaric, and keeping our respects.

    Enjoy the discourse.#