Hypocrites, Hypocrites Everywhere

While channel surfing the other day, I chanced upon the TLC reality show of former Alaskan Governor, former US Vice Presidential Candidate (2008) and currently a 2012 possible contender to replace Obama, Sarah Palin, entitled "Sarah Palin's Alaska".

The show depicts her "normal day", as well as a mini-travelouge for the state, though it wasn't quite clear what exactly it was she does in an official capacity. In the particular episode I saw, she went white water rafting, signed the chainsaw of a lumberjack, and "fake argued" with her daughter who wanted a car for her 16th birthday.

One thing that struck me was when she talked about her daughter Bristol, the one who got pregnant, she  mentioned that she wanted to take her away from the spotlight, as Bristol had received negative comments in general from the press and public.

So, of course, Sarah does the most logical thing: star in a reality show, and have her daughter Bristol appear in it as well.

HELLO. Is there no one else seeing the problem with this picture?

But then, how could we not see this coming? During the 2008 US presidential debates (when she got introduced for the first time to the national and international stage as McCain's running mate), she fervently espoused the efficiency of abstinence as a birth control method - and mere moments (in politics) later, her underage unwed daughter showed up with a baby bump, with an annnouncement that she would marry the father's child.

I guess when she batted for abstinence, she failed to check her own backyard.

Why is it so much fun to see the conservatives go down? And why do they enjoy the taste of feet so much?

She is but one in a long line of hypocrites who act so sanctimonious and so better-than-all-of-us, yet are guilty or party to an act that conservatives have long called "immoral".

Locally, how can we forget Bishop Teodoro Bacani?

When he appeared in the GMA "Grand Debate" earlier this year, proclaiming his sadness that in the RH Bill debates, the dimension of morality has been discarded, all everyone can think about was the news item that starred him, in 2003.

"Bacani faces sexual harassment charge." (See http://www.newsbreak.ph/tag/bishop-teodoro-bacani-sexual-harassment-complaint/)

It wasn't enough that he laughed maniacally at his opponents in the debate, at every chance he could muster. It didn't matter that his arguments were nothing short of stupendous - stupendously out of touch with reality. He deigned to lecture everyone on the pitfalls of moral bankruptcy - that's rich. I'm not a saint, I know that, I never claimed to be one. But at least I've never been accused of ever forcing anyone in a sexually compromising manner. If the self-proclaimed "guardians of morality" cannot seem to refrain from their own amorous advances, on what laughable grounds can they now impose "holding off sex" as something doable for those they wish to consign to a life of celibacy as well?

We should also mention the former U.S. Senator Larry Craig.

A staunch opponent of everything "gay-friendly", the senator was caught in a now infamous bathroom scene in 2007 in Minneapolis, soliciting sex from a male police officer, making him such a go-to joke for the late night talk show circuit. He still vehemently denies that he is gay or has done anything "gay" in his life, decides to resign from the Senate because of the backlash his arrest could have on his political career, then withdraws that resignation, and continues finishing his term.

Right. Okay, we believe you. We also believe that child molestation is a consensual act.

And let's not forget on this list, Shirley Phelps Roper. The spokesperson of the Westboro Baptist Church, her church, headed by her father, Fred Phelps, espouses the belief that every word in the Bible must be followed to the end, and any and all "ills" in the world can be traced to ayone loving or supporting a homosexual.

(Picture above shows them picketing the funeral of Heath Ledger, who they say was "killed by God" for "potraying homosexuals in a positive light".)

Some time ago, they agreed to have their daily lives filmed by a British interviewer (BBC's Louis Theroux). He filmed them "ala reality show", a camera following them around as they proceeded to sing in church, or making picket signs, etc. Theroux was able to ascertain that Shirley herself had a child out of wedlock, and when he commented that it was rather hypocritical that she wished to impose her religious views on the world, when she herself could not "follow to the letter" what it was she was preaching, she then invoked the "I have made my peace with my God" line.

Since they have continued preaching their gospel, I thought it would be enlightening to see what fruits their sermons have borne. (Please note that the WBC's members are primarily the (extended) family only, with only a very few who can be considered "outsiders".)

Doesn't this give you a gooey, warm, fuzzy feeling inside? (Video clip above courtesy of youtube.com, uploaded by OnKneesForJesus. Again, my question was both rhetorical and sarcastic - it surprises me how many people are irony-challenged.)

I don't know about you, but if this is a sampling of what valuable lessons we can learn from the so-called "paragons of morality", then I'd rather not take anything these "leaders" say with any weight nor value.

How unfortunate then that many people still do not see them for who they truly are: Hypocrites.

Someone has commented that I seem to take a hard line on hypocrites - something I can't really deny - but then that person made the mistake of adding "well, maybe you should consider that you're not also perfect". Excuse me. I never claimed to be perfect, nor an angel, nor any other virtuous label that ever existed. The problem is that these people above did. And my next problem is that they are seen as some authority on what to consider as right and wrong. In the end, we all have to make our own moral decisions, but I certainly will not be getting help from these four - and countless others like them - in making them.

I hope you are having a wonderful Sunday.

A Theory On The Christopher Lao Phenomenon

By now, this video must have made it to your radar - it's going viral in YouTube and all the social networking sites. (The video above is courtesy of http://www.wheninmanila.com/, which was shown last night on the evening news program of local station GMA 7.)

Let's break it down.

Christopher Lao (the driver of the car) goes along Mother Ignacia Avenue in Quezon City, which is one of the areas perennially flooded (in some portions) owing to the up-and-down terrain. (I've lived in Quezon City for more than half of my life, so this is something I know firsthand.) Inexplicably, he drives his car into the flooded area, and suffers the soggy consequence.

Upon getting out of the floodwaters, he is interviewed by Jun Veneracion of Channel 7. (Admittedly, not the very best time to be having one, but I guess Mr. Veneracion knows a story when one, er, floats by.) Mr. Lao proceeds to lambast certain public departments for not "informing" him of how deep the waters were, insisting that there should have been blockades set up to prevent people from going in to the waters further.

When the reporter makes the (obvious) point that no one was going into the area, Mr. Lao then begins to repeat his "no one informed me! I should have been informed!" line.

Which set off a firestorm in all social media.

Many Facebook pages are being set up to commemorate this "event", with less than flattering descriptions of what transpired. Twitter is all abuzz with comments about IQ levels. People have dug up Mr. Lao's academic record (Reportedly, he is a UP - University of the Philippines - graduate with the highest of honors in academic excellence and is a law student in the same university. This was confirmed because one of his teachers at UP Law defended him online. See http://www.gmanews.tv/story/228346/nation/ex-up-law-dean-defends-student-who-drove-car-in-qc-flood.) When you read through people's comments, you get the feeling that this is a combination of a comedy show with a lynch mob and a disaster.

That's because that's what this really is. I learned this in Literature class freshman year, in, yes, UP also. The term my professor used for how people are now reacting to Mr. Lao was schadenfreude.

Here is how Merriam-Webster defines it: "enjoyment obtained from the troubles of others." (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/schadenfreude) It is German in origin, from the words schaden (damage) and freude (joy).

And, Mr. Lao, if you're seeing all these comments and reactions, you are witnessing it firsthand.

It certainly doesn't help that Mr. Lao came off as a rich, spoiled brat, incapable of taking responsibility for his actions. In this country, having a car automatically defines you as being "better off", so that's another item against him. Then the level of indignation that he exhibited, blaming everyone else around him - he even included Mr. Veneracion in his tirade - well, it suddenly became a gloves-are-off situation. The fact that he was educated at the country's top university makes the schadenfreude cake that much sweeter. (To quote my favorite character in Will And Grace, Karen Walker: "This is so rich, it's GOT to be fattening!")

It's human nature, and it always will be. That's because deep down, in the recesses and in the corners of our minds where we aren't supposed to linger, we really are jealous of other people's successes. We don't need a constant reminder of how someone is doing so well. As I mentioned in a previous post, in this country, what's on the surface is what counts the most. So those who have it made show it off as ostentatiously as they can. And those who hate those same facts must hide their envy with the most dazzling of smiles and pearly whites. (http://theguywithablog.blogspot.com/2011/07/wisteria-lane-philippines.html)

Vicariously, this incident just mirrors how we all feel: finally, someone who represents "having it all" stumbles. And in full view, on national TV.

Netizens have been busy making commentaries on how "lawyer-esque" it was of him to try to blame everyone when he should have used his head and not proceeded on his route. Or how arrogant he was to react the way he did, expecting someone to "inform" him that the road was not passable. There have been many "posters" in FaceBook, all for the purpose of "informing" Mr. Lao what not to do and where not to go/pass. And you can't pass by any of the commentaries without seeing the word "stupid" at least a million times.

In truth, any one of us could have done the same mistake he made. I am not defending him, or the way he reacted - that is something he has to defend alone. But we all do silly things because we weren't entirely focused on the task at hand - I've personally left my keys at the dining table and gotten to the parking lot before realizing I have to go all the way back for them. How many of us have "chanced" not bringing an umbrella on the probability that "it won't rain, it's just makulimlim (overcast)"? Or because we insist on using our cellular phones while driving, we end up in a ditch (or close to being in one)?

But the combination of Mr. Lao's mistake, coupled with his apparent arrogance and propensity to blame anyone but himself, the disclosure of his highly regarded academic record, and the appearance of coming from a well-to-do family (his Chinese lineage and name only fuels this some more, as most Chinese families are seen as financially successful in this country) makes this the perfect brew for a schadenfreude picture perfect moment.

Hey, if we seem to be relishing in his misfortune and how he is now being treated in public fora, that's perfectly acceptable because it's only human nature, right?

RIGHT?

Morality By Way Of Reality (TV)

We've been bombarded with a deluge of "reality shows" by now, so I thought I'd compile what I've, er, learned from them. After all, this is a fairly recent phenomenon, and I have a feeling that future social scientists will study our (by then) primitive habits and look back at this era with a mixture of pity and revulsion. And probably laughter.

Survivor

Jeff Probst (the host) takes us on various island settings, along with about 16 (or so) contestants, who, by virtue of their surroundings, have to be in various states of undress the whole time. They are fighting over a million US dollars, and they have to perform various physical and mental challenges to determine the winner. In underwear. While the concept of starvation (contestants have to look for their own food and prepare them) and physical exhaustion are serious red flags to contend with, I think the show is mostly anchored on two things humans are endlessly fascinated with: bitch fights and wannabe underwear models.

Alliances are formed within "tribes" in order to eliminate the competition or threats. If you're too strong or too smart, the others have to find a way to kick you out (the elimination process called "tribal council"), where people have to explain why they don't like you in gory detail. (Recipe for bitch fighting assured.) And again, they still have to be in underwear mode.

In effect, this isn't a "case study of human evolution" (as I saw in one blog's comments before, on how to describe the show). This is a celebration of mediocrity. In underwear.


Big Brother

A group of "housemates" are recruited and "forced" to live together in one house. Similar to Survivor, contestants have to perform various "tasks". The show becomes interactive (and lucrative) due to the "voting" aspect: while contestants themselves determine 2-4 members who they deem "unworthy" of continuing the "journey", TV viewers get to text their preferences on who to "save".

Having seen both versions (US and Philippines), I can say that the most important quality one has to get into the show is a better than average physical make-up (either by face or by body). If you don't have those qualities, you are either typecast as the joker, the brooder or the anomaly ("what the heck is s/he doing there?!?"), the better to have more drama with.

Locally, I read through a comment in a newspaper, praising the first winner of Pinoy Big Brother as a "hero". Unless we've redefined that word, I really don't see how tryng to gain people's votes and sympathies with a sob story and panning for the camera for a month - 2, tops - in the hopes of getting 15 more minutes of fame and a cash prize can be considered "heroic".


The Simple Life

Paris Hilton. Nicole Richie. Cow Dung.

No, that wasn't a mean equation (adding the first 2 producing the last one). It's where they expected the two, uhm, actresses (by actress, we mean "someone in a TV show, period") to dig their stillettos in.

The show follows the two socialites in their (mis)adventures in rural life, trying to buy groceries, milking a cow, and other activities regular people don't make a big fuss about, because - I don't know, there isn't any need to make a big deal about activities of daily living?!? The plus side of this show is that both "actresses" know they are in for the silly factor and have no pretensions to "greatness", just media mileage. In a strange way, that somehow makes them a little more likeable than the other pretenders in this genre.

And the poster girls for this generation's obsession with fame for its' own sake.


America's Next Top Model

Tyra Banks, having seen "better days" as a model (read: she is now deemed "fat" by the industry that spawned her), parlays her experience into running a successful reality show, where wannabes (I know this is gramatically incorrect, as my English teacher Ms. Liwanag would always remind us, but given the topic, this is totally appropriate) show up to be judged on their "modeling ability", requiring them to pose with scorpions, on top of a glacier, etc.

While I do not presume to know the "travails" of a professional model, what I've learned from the show is that models get to sit around all day waiting for their "moment" while make up artists scurry about them, gossiping till kingdom come, and no one needs to exercise, since everyone seems to be genetically emaciated. Yes, Tyra made an effort to put in plus-size models, but that lasted for all of 1 (or is it 2?) seasons. And since this show is up to something like 15 seasons (or even more), that pretty much says that "only sticks need apply".

And the judging process is a phenomenon by itself. A small 2 degree tilt of the head would have made a world of difference. Or showing one less tooth in the smile would have made it a "cover". If ever there was an argument against the tyranny of beauty, this would be it.


The Bachelor/Bachelorette

More than a dozen women or men applying to be your "soul mate". On international TV. For "true love".

Do I really need to dignify the absurdity of this concept? Practically all of the "winners" (the lovers who find themselves in each other's arms after the show's run) are "broken up" (some even going so far as breaking wedding engagements - the thing that surprised me when I heard of this was the fact that they even considered marriage when they should have treated it as their vehicle for a little more fame, nothing more) so that says it all about the show's "goal". And really, this is how you want "true love" to blossom?

And, it goes without saying, everyone here is above average in the beauty department. Again.


These 5 shows are a sampling of what constitutes "reality TV", and strangely, serve as a commentary of what we now value and consider as "what-to-do". I know some of you will say "the environment is totally artificial!" - true, on the surface. But what about these lessons that we learn?

1. Fame is all-important. Everything you do must be in service of this goal. Good and bad publicity, go for it. Take it.
2. If you act silly, make sure you look cute doing it, and you will get away with it.
3. If you have a nice body, strip as much clothing as you can/dare, and you will also get away with anything.
4. If you have a nice face and a nice body, you won't need anything else to be an "actor", "model", etc.
5. If you can't be the "nice one", then be the "nasty one". People will rally around both, anyway. At least you are assured a fan base. Plus, it's fun to lord it over everyone else.
6. Backstabbing is a part of life, and anyone who doesn't do it is just "weak".
7. Backstabbing saves you from elimination, so it must be a positive thing.
8. Before one gets eliminated, make sure to crap over everyone else. You want to leave your mark, however odious it may manifest itself.
9. You can marry the competition to multiply your fame. (Think Rob and Amber from Survivor where they were competitors, they went on to The Amazing Race as a couple, and eventually had their own reality show where they got married.)
10. If you are too smart, too athletic, etc., you are a threat to everyone else. Think small. Be smaller. Or suffer the elimination.

Do you still believe this is something removed from our actual lives? Think again.

Wisteria Lane, Philippines.

Anyone who follows the American TV show "Desperate Housewives" (ABC, http://abc.go.com/shows/desperate-housewives) knows that it is not really set in the "sleepy suburban town of Fairview". No, no, no. Wisteria Lane is really a street in the Philippines.

How can anyone miss this basic fact?

Yes, yes, the show is supposed to take place in the "Eagle State". But let me walk you through scenes and situations that, really, can only happen on a Pinoy kalye (Philippine street).


1. Gossiping is THE thing to do.
Need we say more? In Wisteria Lane, every day and every moment is spent gossiping - why did Mary Alice Young shoot her brains out? Who really ran over Mrs. Solis? How did Carlos get so wealthy? What the heck was Felicia Tillman thinking when she cut off 2 of her fingers?

And we go one step further. When we see a murdered corpse here, people find a stick to poke the body with. (You never know if there's cash lying around.) CNN reports a hostage shootout in Manila, we go to the site the next day to take pictures - and we're all smiles because we've transformed it into a local attraction.


2. You're Not Made If You Don't Have A Nice Car.
In "Desperate Housewives", the social strata is clearly delineated by the type of car that each of the lead character drives. Lynette Scavo, always seen as the "poorer one", goes around town with the family friendly option, the mini-van. Bree Van De Kamp, the doctor's wife, drives around in what can best be described as "high-end models" (think along the lines of an Audi). The pricier your car is, the better to rub in people's faces that you are worry-free financially. In one of their scenes together, Lynette can be seen hating the fact the Bree just purchased a brand new car on a whim, and in fact, verbalizes this to her.

A cursory glance of the cars coming out of villages like Forbes Park makes it apparent that the rich, er, showcase their status with their cars - of course, once they leave their glitzy enclave, the irony is that the teeming masses are in buses, jeepneys, and even on foot - most people here will never be able to even own a car, any car.


3. Marriage Vows Are Immaterial.
Gabrielle Solis makes a big show of being Catholic. Bree Van De Kamp proudly claims to be Presbyterian. And yet, these 2 characters - giving the illusion of "happy marriages" - have huge storylines concerning their infidelities: Gabby with her teenage gardener, Bree with her divorce lawyer - before her divorce. Yes, they resolved these loose ends - resolving them in classic Pinoy melodrama fashion - but the damage has already been done.

Everyone in this country knows someone who is born out of wedlock (in local parlance, "anak sa labas"). Mistresses parade around town with nary a care. Even presidential candidates are excused their "macho" proclivities. Gabby, Bree, welcome home.


4. Children Are There To Fill Our Labor Needs.
Tom and Lynette Scavo tell their kids they have no choice but to be the waiters, servers and everything else in their failing pizzeria. Julie Mayer has to balance her mom's checkbook, do the laundry as well as the grocery shopping. If there's work to be done, just call on the kids. In Wisteria Lane, they are indentured servants...until they turn 18.

We need to inform Marc Cherry (executive producer of "Desperate Housewives") that in our lovely islands, children are bound for LIFE. Owing to strong familial duty as well as encompassing Catholic guilt, we are told time and time again that "anak ka lang!" ("you are merely an offspring!") and so parents here have every conceivable right to demand that they be served hand and foot either until death (of either party) or when they decide to "set you free" - which incidentally amount to the same thing. If you refuse to do any of their biddings, watch as parents re-enact a mini telenovela right before your eyes: "Alam mo bang muntik akong mamatay nung ipinanganak kita?!? Alam mo bang nabaon kami sa utang para lang makapag-aral ka?!? Ang bawat hininga mo, ako ang nagbigay sayo nyan!!!" ("Do you know I almost died giving birth to you?!? That we became mired in debt just so you could go to school?!? I own every breath you take!!!")


5. Backstabbing Must Be Done With A Smile. Or A Pie.
One of the most pervasive ongoing themes in the show is how everyone uses whatever means they can employ to get what they want - of course, without the target knowing what has really transpired. In the guise of having a good time (read: getting stinking drunk), Lynette jeopardizes Tom's entrance exam so that he won't get into college for a second time. Bree needs a contractor to fix her house, and proceeds to fix him a spectacular dinner and offers her own son for a date. Gabby performs her marital duties so that Carlos won't go on a humanitarian mission with a nun she sees as a threat to her marriage. Susan kidnaps her new neighbors' dog in order to get them to be indebted to her.

This is the perfect country for them to continue filming the next season. No matter how much we hate someone, we never show it. It is considered bad form to be "honest", an affront to our cultural upbringing. Yes, we can dunk someone's steak in the toilet bowl before serving it to them. What's important is that all is well on the surface - and to Pinoys, that's what REALLY counts. We can't risk an ugly Kodak moment. Saving face is the all-too-important consideration, even as we are relishing twisting the knife in someone's back.


"Wisteria Lane, Philippines" shirts, anyone?