Confronting Evil Head On

When I went to the advanced screening of “The Rite” in SM Megamall, I had apprehensions about the film because it was about exorcism. I had my bias against these kinds of films because I thought that they were simply movies made to scare people by showing that there was a demon dwelling inside a person. If there was one thing I wanted to get out of the movie, it was to disprove my prejudice against exorcism films. And after watching it, I was satisfied because it opened my eyes to the possibility that the devil really could exist, and acknowledging its presence was the first step towards overcoming it.

The film starts with the introduction of a young American seminarian named Michael Kovak (Colin O’Donoghue) who doubted his religious calling and his faith. After an accident on the street where Michael was forced to perform absolution rites on a woman, his superior sent him to Rome to attend a seminar training on exorcism, hoping that the experience will restore his dwindling faith. Once in Rome, Michael meets Father Lucas Trevant (Anthony Hopkins), a seasoned Jesuit who is an expert on exorcism. Once acquainted, Father Lucas immediately introduces Michael to his pregnant 16 year-old patient, Rosaria (Marta Gastini). While Father Lucas was performing exorcism rites on Rosaria, the pregnant girl spit out three long nails and suddenly spoke foreign languages. Still, Michael was skeptical about the whole phenomenon of her possession. Later in the film, it was learned that the possession started after she was raped by her father, thus making Michael more doubtful about her condition. He contends that Rosaria was probably suffering from psychological disturbances of the rape, and not because a devil was dwelling inside her as claimed by Father Lucas.

Tension exists between the exorcism expert and the doubter

Days passed and Rosaria’s condition worsened. She had to be rushed into a hospital for medical care, while Father Lucas performed exorcism rites once again on the young pregnant woman. After a while, Rosaria suffers a miscarriage, ultimately losing her life together with her child. After Rosaria and her baby’s death, Father Lucas started to doubt himself and his faith because he felt that he was beaten by the devil, which culminated in the death of Rosaria and her baby.

After this, Father Lucas exhibited signs of demonic possession, giving us the signal that the devil took over the priest’s body during his weakest moment. Father Lucas, being the expert that he is, knew that the demon was residing in him already. He requested Michael to find Father Xavier (Ciarán Hinds), the head professor of exorcism in Rome, to perform the exorcism on him. Unfortunately, Father Xavier was out of reach for three days. Confronted with Father Lucas’ worsening condition, Michael had no other option left but to perform the exorcism rites himself. The devil, knowing that Michael’s faith was highly unstable, tried to sway him away completely from his faith in order to join him in his demonic ministry. Fortunately, Michael remembers his late mother’s words that he was not alone; that God was always with him no matter what. And with a strong profession of faith, Michael successfully forces the demon Baal out of Father Lucas. The film ends with the revelation that Michael returned to America and became a full-pledged priest, overcoming his doubt and regaining his religious faith.

 

Michael performing exorcism rites on Fr. Lucas

After watching the film, I began to ask myself: “What was the movie trying to say?” And just like what I mentioned at the start, the lesson which struck me most was that in order to beat evil forces, as personified by the devil, we must first acknowledge its presence. In so doing, we can properly combat evil because we are AWARE that there is an entity which we are trying to overcome.

This was what the movie was trying to advocate and portray. However, sophisticated ways of assessing human behavior can be used in viewing this phenomenon of demonic possessions. It was clear in the film that the doubting Michael personified this kind of point of view. He doubts his mentors, specifically Father Lucas, to the point that he was claiming that the nails which Rosaria spat out were actually swallowed before the exorcism rites took place. Michael was firm in his stance that people who claimed that they were being possessed by demonic spirits just needed to see a shrink in order to fix their psychological problems.

While there is a lot of merit to what Michael stood for, the movie was successful in capturing my imagination because it erased my previous notion that it was possible to believe in God and have faith even without recognizing the presence of a devil. My mother and I were talking about the film after we watched it, and one of the lines she said was, “Nakakatakot. Pwede namang may faith ako pero hindi naniniwala sa devil. Ayoko ng gano’n (the devil).” I was inclined to agree with her at first, but when I gave it more thought, I figured that arriving at the same conclusion would be closed-minded and irrational. Certainly, that would not have given justice to the Jesuit training I have received over the years. After careful examination, I came to the conclusion that the movie SUPPLEMENTED my religious faith because it showed me that admitting the devil was real was the first step towards overcoming personal demons. And if we overcome our personal demons, then we can talk of the social demons that hover around our society. For me, believing in the existence of the devil is not only relevant, it is also REQUIRED of every Catholic in order for us to fight its every form and appearance.

I am not a psychologist nor am I aspiring to be one; I was trained to be a social development practitioner whose main goal is to try to improve people’s lives. There is a wide scope of development fields that anyone can engage in: economic, environmental, political, cultural, or social. Diverse as it may be, the one thing common in all spaces of development is the presence of injustice. Different kinds of injustices are evident in society — uneven distribution of wealth, gender inequality, environmental degradation, and corruption, among others. These injustices, when viewed with a true Christian lens, can be considered the demons that we face everyday. These demons need recognition; we cannot just let them pass us by without acknowledging them. The first step is to admit that these demons are real — domination by an economic elite, the perpetuation of a patriarchal society, the inappropriate use of natural resources, and the pervasive invisible hand of political corruption. Once we acknowledge that these evil forces are surrounding us, then we can devise ways to combat them that are grounded on faith with respect to the common good.

In this light, I remember what Father Lucas said about fighting demons: it is a long and hard process, sometimes the fight with the demon lasts for years. It has been 25 years since our EDSA People Power Revolution. Are we going to give up now in the fight against our demons?

Sociological Concept of the Week: The 3 Models of Society Interrelation

 

American sociologist Jeffrey Alexander came up with three models of culture/society interrelation in order to “describe the relation between conflict and consensus in advanced societies — models that refer to different relations between the social and the cultural system.”

The three models are the following: Cultural specification, cultural refraction, and cultural columnization.

Cultural Specification

The cultural specification model assumes that there is harmony and consistency among functions and groups in society. They are not in conflict with one another and they do specific cultural patterns in different ways. This model is also guided by the value of rationality in the form of dividing tasks and roles in society. For example, economic and political systems are separated but they have a general common theme of national development, what ever that may mean. Although separated, there is no emphasis on the conflict that may arise from the two (or more) groups or systems. Rationality itself is the object of analysis.

 

A simple diagram of public-private partnership (PPP) in terms of housing. The Aquino administration has expressed strong interest to adopt PPP as a road to national development.

 

Cultural Refraction

The cultural refraction model extends the cultural specification model because it welcomes the possibility that conflict may arise between social groups and systems. However, there is still a common cultural goal even if conflict exists. In short, groups have the same function but there is conflict present between them. A good example for this model is the tension between the social democratic and national democratic groups. In the Philippines, political parties like Akbayan Citizens’s Action Party (considered a soc-dem party) and Bayan Muna (considered a nat-dem party) have a lot of common goals: agrarian reform, women & youth empowerment, protection of laborers’ welfare and other marginalized groups among others. Aside from their common goals, both are also considered to be at the Left side of the political spectrum. But for all their common objectives, they have historically been against one another because their methods for pursuing political and social reform differ. Based on this example, it is called ‘refraction’ because different interests have been refracted through the same cultural lens.

 

Social democratic groups like Akbayan support the government's conditional cash transfer program. National democratic groups like Bayan Muna and Kabataan party-list do not.

 

 

 

However, both of them agree that the Sangguniang Kabataan should be improved and not be abolished.

Cultural Columnization

If the first two models share the same viewpoints, this third one says that societies also have groups or systems which have no common beliefs. The cultural columnization model is the polar opposite of the cultural specification model. It describes that there is a fundamental antagonism between interest groups. The Democratic Party and the Republican Party are almost always portrayed as extreme opposites of one another. This is true for issues like health care reform, abortion, and gay marriage. If a Democrat says yes to one thing, you can expect a Republican to say no to it. We can say the same ting about the Catholic Church and different civil society groups when it comes to the issue of reproductive health.

 

 

 

 

The media is having its way in portraying this issue. Don't you think?

 

 

—-

Reference:
Alexander, Jeffrey. “Commentary: Structure, Value and Action.” American Sociological Review 55 (June 1990): 339-345.

Sociological Concept of the Week: Suicide

French sociologist Emile Durkheim articulated suicide as “death resulting directly or indirectly from a positive or negative act of the victim herself/himself, which she/he knows will produce this result.” Positive acts are what we commonly perceive as violent actions like death via fire-arm, while negative acts of suicide are acts of abstention like refusal to take food.

 

Emile Durkheim. He says going through the South Beach Diet is a negative form of suicide.

 

His book, Le Suicide, was one of the first modern examples of how statistical methods and social investigation were used in a consistent and organized manner. He classified suicide as having a high or low integration, or the degree into which collective sentiments are shared, and as having high or low regulation, or the degree of external constraint of people. In his work, Durkheim had four categories of suicide: Egoistic, Altruistic, Anomic, and Fatalistic suicide. The  paragraphs below show the meaning and some examples of these types of suicide:

Egoistic suicide — committed when there is lack of integration of the individual into society. This kind of suicide can also be a result of weak integration of the individual into family life. In religious sectors, Durkheim found out that suicide rates were higher in Protestant societies compared to Catholic societies because Catholicism encourages solidarity among its people while Protestanism had a high rate of individualism.

 

Yup, definitely better than any religion.

 

Altruistic suicide — committed when an individual’s life is heavily controlled by customs, rules, and habits. The presence of “higher commandments” such as religious or political affiliations could cause this kind of suicide. Durkheim pointed out that altruistic suicide is evident in armies, since patterns of obedience are rife in the military.

 

Hello, Altruistic America

 

Anomic suicide — committed when the presence of social or moral norms are unclear or missing. It is a breakdown of social rules and regulations for an individual. Durkheim gives the example of marriage as an institution. He says that unmarried men had a higher suicide rate compared to married men because of the expectation of society for him to marry.

 

You're in trouble.

 

Fatalistic suicide — committed when the presence of social rules and regulations are very strong, to the point that an individual can no longer see how she/he can improve her/his life because of the oppressive rules which govern her/his actions. Slaves and prisoners are examples of this.

 

Women (or men?) would react violently if this guy committed fatalistic suicide.

 

——-

References:

Douglas, Jack. 1973. The Social Meanings of Suicide. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Durkheim, Emile. 1975. Suicide: A Study in Sociology. Great Britain: Lowe & Brydone Ltd.

Sociological Concept of the Week: Double Shift

Double Shift

• A term used in the discourse of sex and gender from a social, biological, and economic perspective rooted in the traditional and prevalent thinking that women should be the ones taking care of household chores and child-rearing because of their close association to descriptions such as caring, loving, nurturing, emotional, careful, motherly, etc while at the same time doing paid work to earn income for themselves and their families.

Why it is a problem

• Double shifting can be a problem for women in urban, rural or countryside areas because the amount of time they spend on economic and social responsibilities is (more than) doubled when the demands of housework and family are added to the time spent at paid work.
• Married women who have to work during the day and attend to household chores at night, or vice-versa, lose something essential to every human being: time.

• Economically speaking, domestic work is not considered “work” because it is unpaid and unproductive. It never leads to prestige, certification or promotion.

• The development of personal autonomy is jeopardized because of the need to manage the home, take care of the family, and earn income.
• Power relations between men and women become problematic because a patriarchal society is legitimized by the acceptance of such perspective, especially if husbands do not do their share in the necessary work at home.

What solution can we offer to combat double shifting?? I hope women won’t shun the idea of marriage!

————–

References:

Eviota, Elizabeth Uy. 1992. The Political Economy of Gender: Women and the Sexual Division of Labour in the Philippines. United Kingdom: Zed Books Ltd.

Mies, Maria. 1986. Patriarchy and Accumulation on a World Scale: Women in the International Division of Labour. United Kingdom: The Bath Press.

Toilets, Floods, and our Drivers

This is an unintentional product of a structured learning exercise on phenomenology under Dr. Liza Lim (SA 102 Contemporary Social Theories/Sociological Analysis). My groupmates and I were assigned to go to the “Cornfield” parking lot in front of Leong Hall, particularly in the area where they allow cars with drivers to park. Observation and interviews were done from September 17-22, 2010.

There is a “drivers’ lounge” located at the back of this parking lot and it consists of three spaces for drivers: one space allocated for drivers who are playing dama, one for those playing chess, and another one for those who simply want to mingle with other drivers. They go about their day playing these board games, talking about Manny Pacquiao’s past and future fights, or buzzing about UAAP basketball. Another thing that binds them, which we don’t usually notice, is the lack of toilets within the area.

A "drivers' lounge" at the back of the Cornfield parking lot in front of Leong Hall (photo by Arnelli Aportadera)

As seen in the picture below, there are two urinals present in the area which are for the use of the drivers and security guards. However, there is no toilet present for them to use. This is as a problem because the drivers and the security guards do not have any place to defecate. If they have a stomach problem, they have to go to the Institute of Social Order (ISO) in order to do their thing. But most of the time, according to the drivers, they are not welcomed in ISO because they do not pay for the water they use inside the comfort rooms. (note: Drivers are not allowed to use the nearby comfort rooms in Leong Hall, the Social Sciences building, or any other building in the Loyola Schools where students and faculty reside).

This is the communal restroom where the drivers and the security guards urinate. No toilets, no washing area, and in the next photo...

...not even a door! According to security guards, staff from Miriam College have already complained about this issue of privacy in the drivers' restroom.

Another problem in the Cornfield drivers’ lounge comes when it’s raining hard and flood starts to rise in their area. All drivers gather in the middle lounge area, or the area where they play chess, and stand on the place where they usually sit in order to avoid getting their knees submerged into the rising water.

This is where all drivers in the vicinity go to when flooding occurs. They stand on the seating area in order to avoid the floods. "Baka magalit ang amo kung mabasa ang loob ng kotse," according to one driver. (photo by Arnelli Aportadera)

I’m not sure which office should handle a concern like this (PPO, perhaps?), but from a student’s perspective, here are a couple of suggestions to address this sanitation and safety issue of our drivers:

1. In the next budget deliberation of the Loyola Schools, would it be possible to allocate some funds for the improvement of these facilities in the drivers’ lounges? I have yet to see, but some drivers told me that the urinals near Gate 3 are in worse condition: it doesn’t even have a drainage system.
2. With regard to the flooding issue, would it be possible to expand the shed of the drivers’ lounge so that they can accommodate more people under it during heavy rains? This suggestion came from the drivers themselves.

What other suggestions do you have? If you are reading this and you have a driver, kindly talk to him/her about this to verify and get some more insights or suggestions. You can forward them to me through 0917-5325878 or kurtcendana@gmail.com.

Paggunita sa ika-38 na taon mula noong i-deklara ang Martial Law

(This was written for a Political Science 100 paper two years ago under Ms. Pilar Berse)

Manhid na ang mukha ni Anna sa maraming sampal. Putok na ang bibig niya. Tumutulo sa ilong niya ang magkahalong sipon at dugo.

“Pangalan mo?”
“Hindi ko po alam!”
“Putang ina ‘to, ginagago mo ba kami? Pangalan mo, hindi mo alam?”

Hindi siya tinanggalan ng blindfold kahit pagdating sa masikip at maamoy na kwarto. Tinanggalan siya ng posas. Pero kung inakala niya na bumait na ang mga sundalo, doon siya nagkakamali. Tinanggalan lang pala siya ng posas para mas madali siyang mahubaran. Pinagpasa-pasahan siya na parang bola. Inihagis ng isa, sinalo ng isa, sinuntok ng isa, bumagsak sa kamay ng isa. Sinikmuraan, tinadyakan, itiniwarik, tinuwad, pinagpistahan. Hindi siya makapanlaban, hindi siya makakalmot man lang, ni hindi makapagmura. Nang matapos ang lahat at makaahon siya nang buhay, galit na gait siya sa sarili na ni kalmot, ni mura, ay hindi siya nakalaban…at sasabihin sa kanya ng mga psychologist na ang hindi paglaban ng biktima ay isang uri ng preserbasyon na rin ng sarili. Para hindi lalong ma-provoke ang nandadahas na magsasanhi ng ibayong karahasan.

“Pangalan mo?”
“Hindi ko po alam!”
“Putang ina, ginagago mo ba kami? Pangalan mo, hindi mo alam?”

——————-

Mula ito sa nobela ni Lualhati Bautista na pinamagatang “Desaparesidos.” Nilalaman ng nobelang ito ang kwento ng mga taong lumaban sa rehimeng Marcos, mga mag-aaral na sumapi sa kilusan laban sa martial law, at mga pamilyang nagkakulang-kulang dahil sa walang-awang pagpatay sa mga subersibong Pilipino. Ipinakikita rito ang dahas, pasakit, at hirap na dinanas ng mga Pilipino noong panahon ng martial law. Katumabas ng isang paggahasa ang nangyari noong mga panahong iyon. Totoo, hindi pa ako nabubuhay nang ipinataw ang martial law, ngunit sa mga nabasa at napanood ko tungkol dito, paggahasa ang pinakamainam na paglalarawan sa mga pangyayari noon. Isang mahaba, mapanira, at kasuka-sukang panahon ng panggagahasa.

Ano nga ba ang magagawa nating mga kabataan ngayon? Ano nga ba ang magagawa nating mga Pilipino ngayon? Isang EDSA holiday na nga lang ba ang paggunita sa mga buhay na naisakripisyo noong dekada ’70? Ang mga kabataang nagpasyang ihayag ang katotohanan at ipaglaban ang mga karapatang nilalasap natin ngayon, nagbuwis lamang ba sila ng buhay para sa wala?

Nakalulungkot makita at marinig ang mga palabas, larawan, at kwento tungkol sa mga inabusong Pilipino noong martial law. Nakalulungkot isipin na mayroong mga taong dinadala sa isang madilim na kwarto at tino-torture hanggang sa ikamatay nila ito. Ang mas nakalulungkot dito ay ang katotohanan na Pilipino rin ang umaabuso sa kapwa niya Pilipino. Siguro nga tama ang mga sikologo: lalo lang sasama ang pang-aabuso sa iyo kung lalaban ka pa. Ngunit ang katahimikan ay hindi nagbunga ng magandang pagtrato sa kanila, kung kaya’t kinailangan nilang humiwalay mula sa kanilang mga pamilya at mamundok upang mas mabuting pagplanuhan ang mga galaw laban sa mapang-abusong gobyerno.

Oo, nagtagumpay ang rebolusyon at ang People Power. Ngunit naisip na ba natin kung ilang babae ang pinosasan, hinubaran, inihagis, sinalo, sinuntok, sinikmuraan, tinadyakan, itniwarik, tinuwad, at pinagpistahan? Naisip na ba natin kung ilang Pilipino ang hindi makalaban, hindi makakalmot, ni hindi makapagmura habang tino-torture? Naisip na ba natin kung ilang Pilipino ang galit na galit sa kanilang sarili dahil hindi man lang nila sinubukang lumaban habang sila mismo ay nilalapastangan? Naisip na ba natin kung ilang kabataan ang nagsakripisyo ng kanilang edukasyon upang lumabas sa kalye, mag-protesta laban sa gobyerno, at sa huli ay pinaulanan ng bala ng mga sundalo? Sa puntong ito, sana ay nasusuka ka na rin tulad ko. Isang paghubad sa karapatang pantao. Isang pagmolestya sa kalayaang maghayag ng nararamdaman. Isang panggagahasa!

Marami na ang nawalang Pilipino at hindi na muling nahanap. Ito ang kanilang itinaya – ang kanilang buhay – para sa ating buhay ngayon. Mga desaparesidos sila kung tawagin, ngunit bakit parang tayo ngayon ang nawawala? Natutuwa tayong walang pasok sa araw ng EDSA 1, ngunit hindi natin naiisip ang tunay na kahulugan nito. Natutuwa tayong mga kabataan na hindi tayo nabuhay noong panahon ng martial law, ngunit hindi natin naiisip na marahil ang lolo at lola natin ay nakulong noon at nilapastangan ng kapwa nila Pilipino, na sila ay tumayo sa harap ng mga walang-hiyang manggagahasa upang ipaglaban ang kalayaan natatamo natin sa ngayon.

Nahihiya ako. Nahihiya ako dahil mayroon akong utang na loob ako sa libu-libong Pilipino. Hindi ko man sila kilala, hindi ko man alam kung nabubuhay pa sila, ngunit masasabi kong malaking parte sila kung bakit ako ngayon narito sa aking kwarto at nagsusulat gamit ang aking kompyuter. Siguro ay bata pa nga ako, hindi ko pa talaga alam kung paano ko maibabalik ang utang ko sa libu-libong Pilipinong ginahasa.

Siguro ay dito ako magsisimula: sa aking kwarto at sa aking kompyuter. Sana ay sa pamamagitan ng munting sulating ito, mabigyang-hustisya ko ang mga Pilipinong hanggang ngayon ay naghihilom pa rin sa mga sakit at sugat na kanilang tinamo mula sa panggagahasa ng kanilang panahon.

Para Kang Babae Mag-Drive

A few days ago, a female friend was crossing the street to go to her condominium in Quezon City. A truck passed by and the guy on the passenger seat started shouting obscene stuff at her. My friend chose to ignore the phrases at first, then gave him the finger when she couldn’t take it anymore. It was a pretty daring move; good thing the truck was speeding away and she was almost inside her condo lobby.

She told me that it was one of many instances of pambabastos that she experiences. In other days, motorcycles would honk at her and say obscene things once again – all this while waiting for a cab or just crossing the street. She can’t even wear her choice of comfortable clothes because she commutes going to and from school, and in a way, that’s limiting herself involuntarily.

I’m pretty sure this happens to a lot of women, some even having an attitude of resignation with the “fact” that it is already a normal, everyday activity.

Aside from the natural differences of females and males like genital makeup and reproduction capabilities, there are also “constructed” differences between genders. For example, if a little girl does a “boy thing” like climb a tree, her relatives would be proud and say how fun-loving the little girl is. But if a little boy does a “girl thing” like inspect a Polly Pocket, they would grab it away from him violently (and they won’t tell other relatives of what happened). Clearly, there is a stereotype that if girls do “boy” things, they’re stepping up their femininity to a “higher” level. On the other hand, if boys do “girl” things, they’re seen as stepping down or demeaning their manhood. There is always an emphasis on how the male character is the higher standard in which we gauge a person. Other examples: a beer-drinking girl vis-à-vis a margarita-drinking guy, or a girl who drives a Land Cruiser vis-à-vis a guy who drives a VW New Beetle. Stereotypes and the “male standard” are always at play.

When we walk along the streets at night, there is a control mechanism that resides in our mind. Males worry about getting their cellphones snatched (personally, I worry about my laptop while walking), while females worry about their cellphones getting snatched PLUS the possibility that they can be sexually harassed. For males, just walk and hope we won’t get snatched. For females, they walk and hope they won’t get snatched AND pray they won’t get sexually harassed. Some women even have to strategize while walking (e.g. no eye contact with anyone). Undeniably, walking alone at night has its dangers, and women have to be extra cautious to do a simple deed. Again, freedom, self-esteem & independence: men – 2, women – 0.

The trend seems to follow this format, and it is quite hard to level the playing field between females and males when we reproduce the current standards we have. We can start with doing away with phrases like “Para kang babae mag-drive!” or “Para kang babae sumipa ng bola.” In the end, it’s really about having respect to the humanity of a person regardless of gender.

What do you think?

Freedom?

There’s this song that I really like: Freedom is at Hand by the Bukas Palad Music Ministry. If I’m not mistaken, this was written by Fr. Manoling Francisco, SJ. It’s been a while since I’ve heard the song, and I listened to it again now and realized that the lyrics were so good that it didn’t match the melody. But it doesn’t really matter; here are the lyrics (I highlighted the lines I like):

We have walked all the highways
Yet where have we gone
We planted dreams along the byways
What else is there to be done

We spoke of peace, pure and simple
They seemed not to understand
We asked them to free our people
They said, “Freedom is at hand.”

We asked, “Is freedom a farmer with no land to farm?
Is freedom a fisher with no river to fish?
Is freedom a worker with no place to work?”
Yet they said, “Freedom is at hand.”

Guns cried out as night drew near
We hurried for home
To our children aged in fear
Whose dreams are made of stone

“Peace,” we said, “is not an empty plate
Nor a man with no land.
Freedom we can no longer wait.”
They said, “Freedom is at hand.”

The message of the song is pretty clear: We tell ourselves we enjoy freedom, we enjoy democracy, we enjoy equal opportunity for all. But who are the “we” who actually benefit from freedom, democracy, and opportunity? If you’re reading this, chances are you enjoy the freedom that society seems to have. However, the historical development of human civilization largely depends on who has what (and who has none). The general character of the social and political process of life has been largely dependent on this kind of association. In short, it is about relationships. The farmer has no land to farm, which means someone owns it. The fisherman has no river to fish, which means someone put up fish pens to keep them out of the lake. The worker has no place to work, which means someone opted to contractualize workers in order to gain more profit. Somehow, these relationships have become indispensible – it just continues to exist that it becomes a product of common sense and part of everyday life.

We are always fascinated with economic growth, but the truth behind 7.2% GDPs is that it does not trickle down to the poorest of the poor. Your garbage collector doesn’t feel its benefits, the porter in the wet market doesn’t feel it as well, and the tricycle driver surely doesn’t, too. Our attempts to join the march towards globalization certainly do not help because it becomes inevitable that there will be people who will be left behind in the prosperity game.

While a part of me accepts the fact that farmers, fishermen, and workers will continue to exist because they serve a function, we should do something to make their quality of life better. In the words of my liberation theology professor, Magkakaro’n at magkakaro’n ng mga taong gagawa ng mga bagay na ‘yan, pero sana hindi naman garapal ‘yung paraan ng pagtrato natin sa kanila. And I think that’s as plain and as simple as it can get. More than economic growth, we should aspire for prosperity for all – even without growth.

As we wait for our new President to betray his class, I am excited to see our people break away from the chains that characterize modern slavery. Then we can talk of freedom.

Push It Further!

I promised myself I would not give any unsolicited advice to President Noynoy Aquino, but after his Inaugural Address yesterday (video and text w/ English translations), I think I have an idea to share.

The whole concept of One Tama came alive today when PNoy said these lines: “Kayo ba ay nagtiis na sa trapiko para lamang masingitan ng isang naghahari-hariang de-wangwang sa kalsada?” and “Walang lamangan, walang padrino at walang pagnanakaw.  Walang wang-wang, walang counterflow, walang tong. Panahon na upang tayo ay muling magkawang-gawa.”  The whole concept of nation-building-through-my-own-small-deeds just came alive. Two Facebook pages (here and here) about wang-wangs are now up and running.

President Noy promised to do his part, and suddenly, Filipinos wanted to do theirs, too. The President captured people’s imaginations with those lines, and here is my suggestion how he can continue doing so: Make a commercial of you doing deeds that are proper, doable, and things we always knew but for some reason, we always forget. For example, if the President has a video of him using an overpass instead of crossing highways, I think a lot of people will finally use the overpass (or pedestrian lanes for that matter). Or what if he has a video segregating trash properly, or him patiently waiting in line for his turn to get a driver’s license? I’m sure this will greatly address the problem of lack of discipline. Tinitingala ang presidente;  take advantage, Mr. President! Stopping at the red light and not using your wang-wang is a good start; push it further, President Noy!

As much as our problems are economic and political, a lot of our faults are also behavioral in nature. We should also address these problems. If former President Gloria Arroyo (oh my, we can finally say “former”) can spend some money advertising her legacies, I’m sure President Noynoy can do the same for the sake of information and education of the ordinary Filipino. Go PNoy and Pinoys!

Graduation and Liminality

If you look at the Loyola Schools calendar for SY 2010-2011, you will see that graduation is on March 25 and 26, 2011. That’s exactly 9 months from now. Your philosophy teacher joked the other day that you are similar to a woman conceiving and eventually giving birth, which is the culmination of four amazing years spent in Ateneo. In a lot of ways, that’s true. But on graduation day, you will also be a liminal being.

Liminality is a term made popular by anthropologist Victor Turner which means being in a transitional stage or being “in between.” Therefore, the status of the liminal individual is unsure and ambiguous. For example, an 18 year old female who is celebrating her debut tonight can be considered a liminal being – she is not anymore a girl, but not yet a woman (yup, like the Britney Spears song). Having a lucid dream can also be considered liminal – you’re dreaming but at the same time you’re awake (and you know that you’re dreaming).

In nine months, you have had finished all requirements that the Ateneo wants from you, but at the same time you aren’t detached from this institution that you have grown to love. If you’re in the Ateneo High School covered courts on March 25 or 26, you’re not anymore a student, but you are not yet part of the labor force. You are asked to go down that hill between the earth and sky, but the view from the top is too good to let go. You are asked to be a professional-for-Others, but you want to stay in the comfortable arms of Loyola. You are asked to be a light in the darkness, a hope in despair, or courage amidst fear.. But somehow, you aren’t sure. Parang kahapon lang, high school graduation mo.

When you think of all these on graduation day, think of liminality. And when you think about liminality, think of its positive function: it can make you move, it can make you act. Realizing that this ritual (graduation) is a sign of you being in between and of you transitioning is a good step towards meaningful action. Maybe action for you means saying yes to the company who wants to hire you, or maybe going to graduate school, or maybe updating your resume before submitting it to an organization.

From the movie A Walk To Remember: "You're in two places at once." Same as you're neither here nor there.

On graduation day, you’re not here anymore, but you’re also not yet there. Ateneo has given you the proper tools to avoid being stuck in the liminal phase; I hope you use it for the improvement of the lives of your family, friends, and neighbors. It does not have to be big, but strive for the Magis, Ad Majorem dei Gloriam. Nine more months until you go down the hill, make them worthwhile.

This is me talking to myself, but I hope I reached you somehow.