Nuffnang ad

Monday, November 26, 2012

Lazy Parenting 101

No time to explain, okay?
(Courtesy of moms.today.com)

Having had to work on a Sunday, I decided to have coffee at the mall's Food Court before logging in for work. I got to the area smack in the middle of lunch time, and given the particular day of the week, it was filled with families doing their weekly ritual of having a meal, most probably after attending some form of church service.

I should probably qualify that as traditional families, which can be explained by what happened next.

Given the space limitations, I decided to bring myself (and my caffeine fix) to one of the "stool" areas, designed with "singles" in mind, meaning if you were all alone going to the food court: high table, high chairs, arranged loosely. From a management point of view, it was desirable to have this set up, rather than having one person occupy a "regular" table that could seat 4 or 6 people.

There I was, happily buzzed with my coffee, along with many other "singles", when we all heard a boy of about 8 years old asking his mom "why are they all alone?" and obviously referring to us on the high chairs.

The mom, probably not past 40, took a quick glance, and told him "that's because they have no families, and are probably single...kain na, Nico. You still have lumpia on your plate."

Nico remained fixated on us, probably feeling pity as to why we would have "no families".

I rationalized the mom's answer as the easy way out. It's probably easier than explaining to her son some facts of life, many of which I refuse to consider as "modern", because they have existed long before I was born, and are probably just being discussed more openly now.

(1) Some people are single, by choice. It's not easy to live that out, especially in a culture as family-oriented as ours, where everyone is expected to settle down, have kids, and be a picture perfect representation of the ideal pamilyang Pilipino.

(2) Some people have to work on weekends. Not everyone has a nine to five job.

(3) Some people do not feel the need to follow the "Sunday ritual", especially if it is one put on for show, when the rest of the week, everyone in that family acts crappily towards each other. Or if a family isn't particularly religious, then Sunday would just be another day. Period.

(4) Some people prefer to rest - and I mean nakatihaya all day - on the weekends, and if someone from the same family didn't feel the same way, then they could just go out and go to a movie, eat out, or see friends on their own. Shocking, yes, but people can actually decide freely what to do on their spare time without feeling like they have "betrayed" their own flesh and blood.

(5) Some people have a different family structure - e.g. non-traditional, both in form and substance. It may be three siblings, living apart, because both parents have passed away. Some people have friends and friendships, non blood relations, that would put those affiliated by marriage to shame by their devotion and affection to each other. Some people have a husband or wife, but without legal recognition of being declared as one.

I feel bad for Nico, who may grow up thinking there's only one way to be and have a family.

Saturday, November 24, 2012

In Daddy And Mommy's Name

I'll tell! Momeeeeee!
(Courtesy of abovethelaw.com)

Passing by Landmark Department Store the other day on the way to work, I decided to buy some supplies from their grocery, and had a deja vu of an acquaintance who had a "scene" right where I was.

Apparently, his mom had been a loyal customer of Landmark, so much so that she had some kind of credit account with the grocery, that she would be able to purchase items, and not pay a single cent at the checkout counter because the bill would be sent to their house (just like a credit card statement).

My acquaintance, the son, found himself having to shop there one day (at almost 40, still living with his mom, which explains why he had to do her bidding and had no choice in the matter). He forgot his mom's grocery card, so when he went to the counter, he relayed to the counter girl that his mom had a standing account and that he didn't bring the card, expecting fully that he could leave the store without paying a cent.

The employee, thinking only of job security, did not accept that explanation and required that he show his identification as well as that of his mom, in order to corroborate his claim of being the son and so she could check the so-called arrangement his mom had with the store.

"Excuse me! Don't you know who my mom is?!? Na-bale wala lang ang years of loyalty namin dito! How dare you treat me this way! Nasaan ang manager?!? Tawagin mo! I've never been treated this disrespectfully, ever!!!"

I was stunned (to say the least) while this acquaintance was relaying his story, for the following reasons:

(1) The cashier didn't know him from Juan dela Cruz.
(2) The cashier probably didn't know his mother, by the same reasoning.
(3) He was just a "regular" customer, as far as she was concerned.
(4) She subjected him to the same protocol as she would any other customer.

And even if all these reasons were rendered null, the biggest reason in my mind was:

(5) You are not your mom. Why are you expecting to be treated as if you were her?

Of course, I never voiced this out - why should I, when I can transform it into another post?

It's the misplaced sense of entitlement, by some osmosis, or principle of transference, that grates on my nerves. So just because your mom was a "loyal shopper", it follows that you are? And you be accorded the same "treatment"? Whatever happened to being your own person? Have you no identity apart from your mother?

It then dawned on me that this is exactly how our political dynasties come to be: the same misplaced sense of entitlement. My dad was a congressman, therefore, I should be voted as one as well, after his term expires! How dare you question my qualifications?!?...(altogether now) Don't you know who my dad is?!?

I used to think that the supermarket incident was isolated. Not anymore. And like that acquaintance, it seems to be an affliction of those who belong to the upper economic class. Or those who wield political power.

Until today, I have yet to hear anyone outside those "classes" bellowing "Don't you know who my father is?!?"

Thursday, November 22, 2012

Nakiki-join

Scanning my Facebook Wall, I am seeing tons of posts about Thanksgiving, which is not at all surprising, since it is that time of the year, for the USA. Can I repeat that, for the USA.

Count us in?
(Courtesy of enchantedlearning.com)

Which is why I was stunned to pass by a local restaurant that was celebrating the patently American holiday. I'm also receiving many offers online and through my email that American style turkey is being sold, available in time for the "holidays".

I had to check to see if I was still in the Philippines. I don't get it: why the need to ingratiate ourselves into a holiday for the USA?

I know, I know. There's nothing wrong with being thankful. Heck, I'm thankful everyday, for so many things, I can't even begin listing them all here lest I bore you into a comatose position. But it's the fact that those who do it here time it exactly when America celebrates it. So, obviously, there is this attempt to include ourselves in their holiday.

Do most Filipinos even know the term 'Plymouth'? More importantly, do we care? Or is this just another attempt by marketers to squeeze every last inch of holiday moolah from consumers, whether or not we know what it is we're celebrating?

See, our grasp on our "national identity" is tenuous, at best. We've all learned from our Social Studies classes how many times we've been colonized, to the point that we always seem to be the odd man out in Asia, so different from our neighbors. Long after all our colonizers have left, here we are, pining to place roasted turkey on our table, come November, when a majority of us would never know a Pilgrim if one passed right by us.

And before you start commenting, "there he goes again, yammering on about something insignificant, something most people won't care about" I know one sector that will rejoice at the point of this post, proving that they have made the right decision, they are doing the right thing, in a country with a psyche and predisposition like ours:

Manufacturers of skin whitening products.

Monday, November 19, 2012

To Delay And Decay

That, in a nutshell, is what some legislators wish for the Reproductive Health Bill.

Not so incidentally, the title of my post is what some netizens are calling Senators Enrile and Sotto, two of the most powerful men in the Senate (Senate President and Majority Floor Leader), who see eye to eye as far as the bill is concerned.

Round and round and round...
(Courtesy of njuice.com)

It may be time to impress upon these two men, as well as all our legislators, that we have had enough. And by we, I mean both sides of the RH debate, colloquially called the Pros and the Antis. One look at any online forum with the RH Bill as the topic will betray a singular fact, one perpetuated by the inaction of Congress, which is in a similar position: We have been going around in circles.

The Pros have repeated the same defense: it is a reproductive health issue, a free choice with no coercion, it respects the individual's right to choose according to their religion, it is a universal human right, you can choose to plan your family the modern or natural way, we do not have unlimited resources, the various rates concerning maternal and infant mortality would give anyone pause, female empowerment in a culture like ours, it will not prevent women with no financial resources to make the same choices as those who "can afford", and so on.

The Antis have repeated the same defense: it is an affront to life, artificial contraception is tantamount to abortion, it is coercive, it will force families to have fewer children, it is against religious rights, it is disrespectful to (the Catholic) faith, it negates the importance of what the (Catholic) religious leaders say and demand of its followers, there is no such thing as overpopulation, it is a conspiracy from well funded foreign lobby groups to make us their slaves, and so on.

Paulit ulit nalang.

Yun at yun nalang.

Lumampas na tayo sa isang dekada sa kakahimay ng isyu na to.

Many of us, when the debate started, were still in elementary, or high school. Today, at the twilight of the year 2012, my contemporaries are juggling the demands of making ends meet, whether to have both parents working, while trying to send their child or children to the best schools they possibly can.

We have already moved on to the next generation, a generation that is already approaching their 20's (I was so thrown when one of my best friends told me that her son is off to take a scholarship grant for his master's degree, and I froze on the spot thinking, Gaaaaad, I'm OLD).

We have wasted so much time debating endlessly, that while we were all bickering, the next generation is already here, and some of them have unplanned pregnancies to deal with already.

It is time to put this matter to some form of conclusion, at the very least.

Whether you are for or against the measure, vote on it already. The time that we have consumed with so much non-productivity with this issue is such that Enrile is now fielding his son for the next senatorial elections. Do we even need clearer proof of how much time has passed by, with there being no end in sight?

Akala ko ba paglilingkod sa bayan ang ginagawa niyo sa Kongreso?

Only you, members of Congress, will have the force of law to place a finite point on it.

Yes, it will have repercussions to your political mortality, that is definitely true. So even if expediency and longevity are the only words you subscribe to when you hear the term "public service", it is in your best interest - the selfish variety - to vote on the measure. Recognize that I am not appealing to any lofty concept like the common good, public interest, welfare of women and children, doing the right thing.

Having lived this long, I know these are not the terms that you will respond to as legislators.

But I am certain that once your future in your current position will be compromised, we will have your undivided attention.

This is not a threat, but a wake up call to reality. We will vote based on your action or inaction on this much debated measure.

Vote on the RH Bill. It does not matter which side of the matter you have aligned yourself with, but for goodness' sake, MAKE A STAND. For or Against. No more games, delays, legalistic maneuvers or subterfuge.

VOTE ON THE RH BILL.

Sunday, November 18, 2012

Not My Slice Of Pie(ty)

There seems to be a growing trend for keeping your tongue in check (especially if you plan to say something tongue in cheek), in being more circumspect about comments, and in holding back.

Easy peasy? Not quite.
(Courtesy of customsense.com)

I'm not buying it.

A particular episode in Sex and the City tackles this briefly, in an exchange between the lead character Carrie and her (gay) friend Stanford. The subject of judging others comes up, and Carrie is incredulous when Stanford points out the times that she was caught doing it.

"Judge? Judge? Do I judge?"

"Yes, we judge. Some people do arts and crafts, we judge."

The local version which I hear quite often is the line "sobra naman to, napaka-judgemental". The funny thing is, that in itself is a form of judgement, of trying to say "you're just as dirty as the rest of us".

Look, we all judge. It may be ingrained in our DNA, it may be something we have processed as a matter of evolving, as some kind of "warning system", because our very mortality depended on making a correct assessment. On top of that, it's practically impossible to stop doing it.

How many times have we dismissed someone we were just introduced to, simply because they didn't dress to your standard? Why would the beauty and cosmetics industry be worth billions if image is something to be considered as "fluff"? Granted, these can be argued as "shallow" reasons, but a study done by two people I know personally - which won them the best thesis in UP, beating graduate level research - ties this "judging" with work opportunities: given more or less the same credentials, the candidate perceived to be more attractive would be the overwhelming choice for the job.

What baffles me, however, is when it is the pious elements of our society (which almost always happen to be of some religious sect) that will stoop to the "that's so judgemental" defense...I mean, really? Seriously?

Why should they act so surprised when "everyone else" starts to chime in when these characters start their fall from (pious) grace?

Who was it that paraded their piety credentials, waving it like some badge of pride?

Who was it who said, implied or announced, to one and all, what a virtuous life they led?

Who was it who continued judging everyone else as "dirty", "sinful", "immoral", "unclean" and other words deemed unprintable, giving the impression that they alone had the matter of ethical conduct concluded, with a deity listening to their every word?

If you can afford to rub in our faces how "proper" and "moral" you are even when no one was asking or needed to know, then you should be able to take it whenever you are caught with your hand in the cookie jar, or literally having your belt around your ankles.

So stop the faux gasp, the horrified expression when someone "judges", it seems to me as human an activity as one can do. Stop acting like a reality television star, begging for attention, but when the sh*t hits the fan, expect everyone to turn away and mind their own business.

You gave up that luxury the moment you tried to force your version of morality down everyone's throats, which, similarly, is another form of judgement, of saying that everyone would be lost without your supposed guidance.

So I think Stanford's statement should be tweaked: Some people do arts and crafts, but everyone judges.

Friday, November 16, 2012

Planning For A Planner

Slurp.
(Courtesy of geog.queensu.ca)

Yes, it is that time of the year: when people of a certain economic class (or want to be perceived as being a member of it) start ordering drinks from their favorite coffee house, all in pursuit of a daily planner.

Truth be told, I tried it once (and was actually successful in obtaining one using the drink-64-orders method), and my lame-ass excuse was because while I did not smoke, my work colleague who I was constantly with did and because we both love coffee and he had to smoke, we would hang out at Starbucks which would satisfy everyone, and get a free planner, to boot.

I really shouldn't be saying "free" because (1) not even water is free and (2) have you sat down and tried to compute what it would actually cost to get the "free" planner? (The miser in me never looked back once I did the math.)

A disclaimer, first: I am not an enemy of capitalism. I think this is a shining example of creating a need where none existed before, it taps into a human need, both for tradition and inclusion, and it is most certainly legal while earning big revenues for the coffee companies.

My biggest disclaimer has to do with economic status: if you can afford it, then by good golly, go right ahead. Do not apologize for your financial success or capability (though this shouldn't apply to those who just "inherited" their money), splurge on it, the same way I don't mind people placing odd sounding chemicals on their faces or getting "cut up" in an attempt to look younger. It's your life, your body.

But the stingy part of me always raises the alarm, especially for those who are "wannabes": do you need to pay thousands of pesos for a planner, and gaining truckloads of calories in the process? (Not to mention sleepless nights with that much caffeine running in your bloodstream)

I'm talking about the people who need to go to Starbucks and other similar coffee houses because it's cool to be seen in these places, as far as perception goes.

If the defense is "bakit? masama ba mangarap?" then the answer is an unequivocal "no". Everyone is trucking along hoping to get a better future, and if you've somehow managed to do so, tastes do change. But not if you're not there yet. I know someone personally who tries to keep up with her amigas by shelling out hundreds of pesos on a drink and some desserts but actually has a problem with the amortization of her home, and needing to utang just to get a ride home.

It's people like her that seem so easily lured into the "planner mentality": I have to get it to maintain my (illusory) social status.

It's been my observation (unscientific, but there it is) that we seem to be obsessed with appearances, and not substance. As long as the guests are well-fed, who cares if we blow out the monthly budget.

We have actors and singers who can't act nor sing, but because they have washboard abs that can grate cheese or breasts that would make watermelons blush, they get the contract.

No one should know that we are in debt, so we have to keep making extravagant renovations on our house, which can be taken away any time now.

There is a preoccupation with seeming, instead of being.

Of seeming well off, instead of being financially secure.

Of seeming glamorous, instead of being happy.

Of seeming to prefer aspiration, instead of being authentic.

There is, of course, that cultural value of hiya, or shame, one we share with our other Asian neighbors. The loss of face, the gossips that might result, the judgmental stares - something that social scientists have recorded and dissected. And while it can sometimes be useful as a pseudo-warning device for propriety, I can't help but wish that there more substantial, more meaningful things to be ashamed for, and of.

Besides, where a planner is from is nowhere as important as what's inside it.

So, maybe it would be a nice question to ask, once you get the snazzy looking date book:

What, now?


Thursday, November 15, 2012

It Will Always Be Fashionable

The recent events of the past few months surrounding the "main players" around the Reproductive Health Bill - which is currently congregating around the letter of someone bearing the name of America's version of royalty to one of our own legislators - have made one thing patently clear.

Always hip.
(Courtesy of gq-magazine.co.uk)

Some things will never go out of style.

Honesty. The ability to say, bask in and propagate the truth.

Integrity. Being able to live with yourself, to sleep soundly at night, knowing that while life demands you compromise some things, you do not compromise what makes you you.

Giving credit where it's due. It's fun to watch reality show stars sulot everything in sight, and this happens rather often in the competitive workplace (meaning in every job imaginable), but it's never the right thing to do. It's alright to feel envious that someone beat you to it - it should be your cue to do something better or different, but not to steal it and pass it off as yours. It goes back to honesty.

Age does not necessarily mean wisdom. It may just mean you've had a lot of experience - of twisting the law to your own ends, mastering the art of delaying legislation by claiming "I'm not ready pa, huwag niyo ako madaliin", elevating the obnoxiously disgusting into a dubious art. It also means that sometimes, the wisest or best things and ideas may come from those who are termed "fresh blood" derogatorily, as if it was the worst thing to be labeled as.

Morality cannot be separated from the person. Even though they claim to stand for an organization, a group - or a religion. This is something I have given some thought to, this propensity of these so-called "leaders of the flock" to resort to cheating, outright lying, threats, deception, the list goes on. My only conclusion is they were that way long before they were peddling the idea that they were some sort of "moral arbiter" representing the so-called values that we "should" all abide by.

Tolerance and acceptance. Even though someone may have a different view than yours - in politics, religion, social graces or anything else. We should move past "tolerating", which translates rather nicely into tinitiis in the vernacular, clearly not conveying a positive state, more like a punishment to be endured. While the opposite term, translated as pagtanggap, implies an opening up of oneself and bringing the other into the fold.

It's time for all of us to be stylish, with concepts that will never grow old.