Wexistence

This is happening! I’m proud to be a supporter of the RH bill, and to those who think that this is a fad, I will have you know that I have been an RH advocate for the last 10 years, long before RH was getting this much media attention.

The RH bill won’t solve poverty, but it will bring down the rates of maternal and infant mortality, decrease the number of abortions that result from unwanted pregnancies, educate the youth who are engaging in risky sexual behavior with no knowledge of its consequences, and promote equity for the poor by giving them access to reproductive health services that are easily available to the rich.

If you’re unconvinced that the poor need RH, I invite you to spend some time in Tondo to get to know the families who are living in squalor. Let me introduce you to Manong Pedicab Driver who has sixteen children and no pedicab (he sold it to buy medicine when his baby got sick). The family members eat once a day, if at all, and take turns sleeping on the cardboard floor of a shanty that’s barely 4 by 4 meters. Or 42-year-old Nanay Labandera who has nine children and whose last pregnancy nearly killed her. She doesn’t want to have any more children but she has no control over her reproductivity — her drunkard husband beats her when she denies him sex.

RH is just one component of poverty reduction. There is still much work to be done in numerous other areas. Thankfully we have a NAPC secretary who knows what he’s doing and a president who seems serious about poverty reduction, at least as far as budget allocation is concerned. I’ve never been a fan of President Aquino, but he has allocated more funds for poverty reduction programs than any other president before him.

I was fortunate to be part of a group of NGO representatives from various sectors with whom NAPC held a consultation on the National Anti-Poverty Strategy and Localization/Empowerment Framework. It’s a good plan, and it’s heartening that the government is sincere about listening to us and working with us. (Sige na nga PNoy, dahil rito at dahil sinusuportahan mo ang RH bill, peace na tayo.)

It’s an exciting time to be doing development work!

“Bar Fight – Blood & Roses” by Mitch Byrd © & ™ Blue Line Pro

“The most fervent opponents of Christian doctrine have often enough shown a temper which, psychologically considered, is indistinguishable from religious zeal.” – William James

I’ve been avoiding the RH bill issue for the last few months, partly because I’m disgusted by how the debate has degenerated into ad hominems and petty squabbles that have nothing to do with the real arguments for or against. Both sides have been behaving badly, and I’m especially disappointed by the antics of some otherwise reasonable and intelligent people whom I used to hold in high regard. It’s turning into a bar fight; people throwing blind kicks and punches without caring where they land. They don’t seem to realize that they’re hurting their cause.

I understand that people are angry and frustrated, but while lashing out at the other side is extremely satisfying, it’s also nonconstructive. And that’s another reason I’ve been quiet. I’ve been struggling to swallow my sarcasm.

“If you have nothing nice to say, say nothing at all.” – Thumper

Well, we don’t have to be fluffy-baby-animals-nice but we could try to let cooler heads prevail and be a little more civil. Some RH advocates seem to be relying on brute force to get the RH bill passed. They’re being as loud and obnoxious as possible and hoping that’ll be enough to steamroll the opposition. (Granted the opposition is guilty of similar tactics, but the problem with an eye for an eye is it leaves everyone blind.) But success of the RH bill (not just whether or not it will be passed in congress, but whether or not it will be implemented properly) depends on both sides finding common ground and working together. And that’s not going to happen in a hostile environment.

“What’s so funny ’bout peace, love and understanding?” – Elvis Costello

So this is an appeal (to the grand total of ten people who read this blog, who may or may not care about reproductive health, but, you know, whatever) for less cheap shots and more fact-based arguments, less antagonism and more openness to compromise and collaboration. That’s all. Thank you.

© Neatorama

There are a lot of myths going around, and a lot of incorrect assumptions derived from them. Everyone deserves access to the right information. Mulat Pinoy presents you with Get Real: The Facts vs. Myths on Population, Family Planning, and Reproductive Health, a comprehensive paper with cited facts and figures.

I recommend that you read the entire paper, but the Cliffnotes version is thus:

Myth #1: Contraceptives cause abortion. Life begins at fertilization, so contraceptives kill children.
FACT: Contraceptives DO NOT cause abortion. Research has shown that the use of contraceptives prevents up to 112 million abortions each year and reduces abortion by 85%.

Myth #2: Contraceptives are dangerous to health and cause cancer.
FACT: Contraceptives DO NOT cause cancer, have been proven safe worldwide, and even lower cancer risk.

Myth #3: Mandatory sex education and contraceptives will destroy the family, compromise morality, increase promiscuity and promote HIV infections.
FACT: Age-appropriate sex education and contraceptive provisions will support informed choice and lower the transmission of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections.

Myth #4: Family Planning using artificial methods is against Filipino culture.
FACT: National surveys show that a majority of Filipinos believe that family planning using modern and artificial methods is important. Many of them prefer smaller family sizes.

Myth #5: Natural family planning (NFP) is the most effective and safe family planning method, is free, and is the only program that should be supported by the government.
FACT: Both NFP and modern methods are needed to effectively and safely address maternal health, family planning, and sustainable development.

Myth #6: There is no link between population and poverty. Corruption is the sole cause of poverty.
FACT: There are strong, proven links between poverty, rapid population growth, and large, unplanned family sizes.

Myth #7: The Philippines has enough resources to meet a larger population.
FACT: The Philippines will not develop sustainably unless it slows its rapidly growing population.

Myth #8: Highly populated countries like India and China are successful because of their large populations, while other countries are experiencing a “demographic winter.”
FACT: India and China have been trying to reduce population growth and family sizes for decades, and their growth is due to the improving productivity of their citizens. The Philippines is 100 years away from a “demographic winter,” and even with lowered population growth and fertility rates, will already reach 160 million in 2060. Without this, the Philippines may have an unsustainable population of 240 million people.

Myth #9: Family planning through modern contraceptives is against the Philippine Constitution.
FACT: The Philippine Constitution and Philippine commitments to International Agreements allow family planning and the use of modern methods.

Myth #10: Islam, Christianity and other major religions forbid contraception.
FACT: Islam, most Christian denominations, and other major religions allow couples to use modern and natural methods to plan their families. The governments of Catholic countries have accepted family planning policies with State provision of modern and natural family planning methods.

Mulat Pinoy is a project of the Probe Media Foundation, Inc., supported by the Philippine Center for Population and Development. Its goal is to help the Philippine public understand the issues involved with population, based on accurate facts, figures and research from experts in industry, governance and the academe.

Mayor Robredo and one of his biggest fans (me)

As a student of political economy, Mayor Robredo’s transformational leadership in Naga City left a huge impression on me. I read this journal article in college and it was the first of many lessons that would lead me to firmly believe that there is hope for the Philippines. This conviction fuels my work in education, responsible citizenship and good governance.

I do development work as part of Synergeia Foundation, an organization that has Mayor Robredo among its esteemed trustees. For the last eight years Synergeia has been empowering local communities to practice participatory governance in education, drawing lessons from the Naga experience. We’ve made it work in 168 cities and municipalities all over the country, including ARMM. We believe there’s no reason it can’t work in the remaining 1,466 — especially if Mayor Robredo were at the helm of DILG.

Synergeia’s president and CEO, Dr. Milwida M. Guevara, said it best when she listed Ten Reasons Why It is Best for the Country to Have Naga City Mayor Jesse Robredo as DILG Secretary:

1. He leads by example. He is honest, competent and just.
2. He will institute accountability. Measures of performance for local government officials will be defined. Good officials will be rewarded and non-performers will be sanctioned.
3. All the operations of DILG will be made transparent.
4. He will inspire and mentor mayors on how to translate participatory governance from an idea to being real.
5. He is a visionary and thinks outside the box. He has the proven capacity to develop programs to solve red tape and bureaucratic procedures.
6. He will give dignity to every Filipino by defining public services that each resident is entitled to as well the standards within which they should be delivered.
7. He will work with non-governmental organizations, people’s organizations and civil society in providing oversight on the performance of local government officials and DILG personnel.
8. He is thrifty and will see to it that the DILG’s budget will be cost-effective.
9. He will has the engineering skills to simplify processes and translate them into computerized processes that will streamline operations and decision-making.
10. He makes us proud of being a Filipino because he is outstanding in every way.

Mayor Robredo, ang laban mo, laban naming mga Pilipino.

Find out more about Mayor Robredo on the Support Mayor Jesse Robredo for DILG Secretary Facebook page.

Some thoughts provoked by Winnie Monsod’s Mussings*:

1. I, too, share the same fears about Manny Villar.

2. After Cory died, when people first started buzzing about a Noynoy presidency, some government insiders I know rolled their eyes at the idea and dismissed Noynoy as “tamad” and “bobo.” Senate staffers observed that Noynoy is dull, can’t seem to keep up during senate deliberations, and is a notoriously late riser because he’s up all night playing PS3. Some community organizers we work with in Nueva Ecija said that they supported Noynoy up until they actually met him at a sortie, where he did not answer their questions satisfactorily and he was so spaced out that they wondered if he was autistic. A senior government official during Cory’s presidency said that while Cory was a “saint” she did not have the intellectual prowess and technical knowledge to be an effective president. Even people who adored Cory have come to realize that pureness of heart is not enough to run a country.
3. I understand why people so desperately want to believe in Noynoy. After Erap, followed by nine years of GMA, we just want a president whom we can trust. Even if he is painfully mediocre. Sure, Noynoy’s clean and he won’t steal, but c’mon. He has no outstanding achievements and he wouldn’t have even been considered as a presidential candidate if Cory hadn’t died. It was the outpouring of love for Cory and all that she represents (hope, democracy, goodness) that propelled Noynoy to prominence. Without his Aquino lineage, he is nothing.
4. Men Sta. Ana defends Noynoy’s lackluster legislative record, saying “The number of laws sponsored by a senator or congressman does not make one a competent legislator.” Okay, sure. Quality over quantity. I get that. But seriously, 9 bills? That’s all? Miriam authored 738 in the same time period. And technically sound as Noynoy’s bills may be, they aren’t exactly exceptional. It’s not like he has gems in there like, say, Mar Roxas’ affordable medicines act or EVAT funds for educational and healthcare law.
5. During presidential debates it’s all motherhood statements, he throws around terms he clearly does not understand, and when backed into a corner he invokes the memory of his parents as a talisman against difficult questions. During the Face-to-Face forum with LGUs, Noynoy sounded like he was just parroting sound bytes that had been previously fed to him by his handlers and could not expound further. Also during that forum, it became apparent that though Noynoy is chair of the Senate Committee on Local Government, he knows nothing about local government issues, particularly devolution. His answer to everything was “Pinag-aaralan ko pa ho.”
6. While Noynoy’s campaign slogan “Kung Walang Corrupt Walang Mahirap” is emotionally compelling, it is also largely untrue. Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, and Thailand are all notoriously corrupt but they were able to significantly reduce poverty. The solution to the problem of poverty is much more complex than the slogan would have you believe. Corruption is just one of many problems. Eliminate corruption and you’d still have to: (1) stabilize the country’s fiscal position; (2) provide adequate infrastructure; (3) strengthen the investment climate; (4) equitably distribute growth among sectors; (5) address the unequal pattern of development among regions; (6) alleviate demographic pressure; (7) implement genuine agrarian reform; (8) develop human capital, invest in basic services, especially education and health… and that’s just the beginning of a whole laundry list of things the next administration will have to address. An administration that is not corrupt will not necessarily know which strategies to pursue. “I will not steal” is not a substitute for “I am technically competent.” Integrity is a necessary but not sufficient condition for one seeking public office.
7. As unimpressed as I am with Noynoy, I admit that there are valid reasons to vote for him. It just annoys me that people insist on romanticizing him. Let’s recognize him for what he is: a mediocre candidate, but the only who seems capable of beating Villar in the polls. If it’s down to a choice between Noynoy and Villar, I can understand why you’d choose Noynoy. But please be honest with yourself and cut the crap about his “competence.” He is not our messiah. He has not demonstrated that he has any capacity whatsoever of fulfilling all the hopes and dreams that the nation is so eager to pin on him.
8. A number of people I respect and admire support Noynoy for pragmatic reasons. Former Finance Secretary Bobby de Ocampo told me that this election isn’t about who’s smarter or more competent, but it’s about making a clean break from the present administration. I don’t necessarily agree but it’s certainly something to think about.
9. I like many of the people who’ve chosen to rally behind Noynoy, among them Mar Roxas (accomplished in both the private and public sector, impressive legislative and executive track record, my presidential candidate if he hadn’t stepped down to make way for Noynoy), Risa Hontiveros (beauty and brains, Nobel peace prize nominee for her work as chair the Government Panel’s Reciprocal Working Committee on Socio-Economic Reforms in the Peace Talks with the National Democratic Front), Neric Acosta (distinguished academician and political scientist, principal author of many environmental laws including groundbreaking Clean Air Act), Jesse Robredo (outstanding multi-awarded Mayor of Naga City, my dream DILG Secretary), Mike Luz (former DepEd Undersecretary, the brains behind the LP platform on education, my dream DepEd Secretary). Noynoy is not lacking in advisers, intelligent people who understand our various problems and have concrete plans on how to solve them (even if Noynoy himself doesn’t). Maybe that’s enough to get him through. Maybe it’s okay that he’s not brilliant for as long as he listens to his betters. But I’m not sure.
10. I share Ma’am Winnie’s concerns about the Liberal trapos: “My only concern with Noynoy is how deep he might be in the Liberal Party and whether he has accumulate political debts to Liberal trapos. The Liberal Party, like any party, has its own share of crooks (including those bandwagon trapos who jumped off GMA’s boat to ride on Aquino’s popularity).” In that sense, Noynoy is really no different from Gibo, whose only real flaw seems to be membership in Lakas-Kampi-CMD — GMA’s party. If the concern about both candidates is political indebtedness to the trapos in their respective parties, what then makes Noynoy a more desirable candidate than Gibo?
11. Gibo’s party affiliation does concern me, but the guy is a shrewd politician. He’s managed to distance himself from GMA and the party. It’s a tough balancing act because he needs the political machinery of the party but at the same time he doesn’t agree with their positions on a lot of issues. I’m impressed by the finesse with which he’s handling himself. But I’m still wary of the people around him. And it’s still not clear who will hold important cabinet positions if he does become president. I want to make sure that no one is pulling his strings, that he won’t be so politically indebted to the party that it will compromise the decisions he’ll make in the future. I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt though. Thus far he seems to be his own man. I don’t believe that if elected he will merely be the party’s lapdog.
12. Gibo is a bar topnotcher and a Harvard magna cum laude. He is intelligent. Unlike many of the candidates out there, Gibo doesn’t fumble for answers. He knows what he’s talking about. I’m impressed by the depth of his understanding of issues. (In this interview with National Artist F Sionil Jose, he answered all the questions impressively, and I particularly liked his answers on poverty, population management, and the Philippines’ “damaged culture.” He quoted Mancur Olson and Thomas Friedman in the same breath and is apparently a neo-institutionalist. Be still my heart!) He’s not afraid to take tough stances, he will say things other candidates are afraid to say (e.g. disarm government and non-government groups in ARMM, yes to comprehensive reproductive health program). As far as I’m concerned he’s out-performed all the other candidates in the presidential debates.
13. Gibo is strong and confident, but I see no traces of ego whatsoever. I like that. He does not see himself as a messiah; he is offering himself up as a humble public servant.
14. Gibo exudes sincerity. I feel like I can trust him, and his public record suggests he is deserving of that trust. He is untainted by allegations of corruption, and is by all accounts an honest man. Noynoy isn’t the only one with a legacy to protect. Gibo is proud of his name and has carefully guarded his reputation.
15. Ma’am Winnie’s criticism of Gibo isn’t even really criticism. She’s holding his “galing at talino” against him because GMA supposedly has those qualities but she turned out to be a lousy president. She’s holding his eloquence against him because Marcos was a great public speaker. Should we not elect intelligent presidents just because they’ve screwed us over in the past? We elected a dumb president (i.e. Erap) and that didn’t turn out so well for us either. Intelligence is not enough to ensure a good president. But neither is moral uprightness (e.g. Cory).

* It would seem that someone wants to use Winnie Monsod’s influence to win votes for Noynoy. Ma’am Winnie says she did not write the “Why I Will Vote for Noynoy” statement that has been attributed to her. I’m kind of relieved. I was surprised when I first read it, having previously heard her views on Noynoy. My reactions to the piece are the same regardless of who wrote it though.

I probably should've just posted an entry on my journal instead of spamming this guy's blog with my epic rant, but that didn't occur to me till after.

(The italicized portions are quotes from the guy's post.)

Sadly, our claim to fame and world-class talents is matched only at home by massive poverty, repression, and mass exodus of workers.

I don't know why you insist on straining to make a connection between these talented Filipinos who get worldwide attention and our political/economic/social problems. Are they mutually exclusive? Should we stop being proud of them because we have problems at home?

We sing praise in unison to a copycat singer yet remain dumb and deaf to a stealing and murdering illegal president.

Seriously, are we living in the same country? Have you no idea what's going on around you? No one is deaf and dumb to corruption in government. We're all too aware of it. And really, you need to get over Arnel Pineda's success.

We take pride in having all these so-called world class entertainers who continuously ape foreign artists but we haven’t developed our own music. I would like to think of how Bob Marley and reggae music of tiny Jamaica has contributed for example.

What is our “own” music, pray tell? Does it necessarily have to be about the “painful laments, heroic struggles or rich stories” of the Filipino? Does it have to be played on tribal gongs? If so, you have a very narrow conception of culture and identity.

Culture is more than a set of values, beliefs, symbols, meanings, institutions, and behaviors shared by a certain group of people. Culture is not merely a noun, it is also a verb. Culture is something that people do, something they’re constantly engaged in, and it’s in a constant state of flux. The culture of a people will not always be what it has been since time immemorial. Culture is a dynamic process. It is a contested process of meaning-making. Culture is what people make it to be, and people are not always in agreement over what it is and what it ought to be (which is precisely why I am replying lengthily to this post, because though we were both Filipino we don't agree over what that actually means). Cultural identities are not bound or static: they are dynamic, fluid, constructed situationally, in particular places and times. As conditions change, cultural groups adapt in dynamic and sometimes unpredictable ways.

Filipinos today are so much more than the tribal people in g-strings who were living in huts in the 16th century when the Spaniards first arrived in archipelago. They've been colonized several times over and have learned and absorbed many things from their colonial masters, as well as from their various trading partners over the centuries. And because of this people accuse the Filipinos of having no culture of their own because it is an amalgam of so many different cultures.

But that's precisely what Filipino culture is, it is the unique way that Filipinos have combined their various influences and applied them to their everyday lives.

I don't know why some people are obsessed with the idea of returning to the “uncorrupted” or “original” Filipino culture. This implies that the more we return to what is native and the more we abolish what is foreign, the more truly Filipino we become. To loosely quote Nick Joaquin, is culture simple addition and identity subtraction? Peel away all the accumulated layers of foreign influence and we’ll end up with the true basic Filipino identity?

Change is necessary for survival – organisms, people, nations must either change or die. You can't change without incorporating new things. You can’t come up with all these new things by yourself. Just because someone else thought of it first, is that reason enough to reject it? Is where it came from more important than what it can do for you? Should we abolish all Western practices? Should we do away with Democracy, modern medicine, electricity etc. because they aren't indigenous to the Philippines?

Filipinos have embraced many aspects of western culture and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. If we identify with these cultural elements, if we apply them to our daily lives, then we have claimed them and made them ours. Japanese Anime, for example, is distinctly Japanese, but it got its inspiration from American cartoons, specifically Mikey Mouse and Betty Boop. I admit that, particularly in our pop culture, Filipinos tend to copy from other cultures wholesale. But I see this as the early steps in a process of development. Going back to the Japanese, before they were making their own electronics, they were copying wholesale from the Americans. After a while, when they mastered the technology, they began to innovate and develop on their own. That's just how culture is. It's a learning process and there's no shame in learning from someone who's better at something than you presently are.

We claim to have a chef in the White House yet we cannot even have mainstream restaurants in the US despite the fact other nationalities who have lesser population have managed to do so, like the Thais, the Greeks and even the Afghans.

There are Filipino restaurants abroad, and perhaps they just need a little time to hit the mainstream. Many foreigners enjoy Filipino food, and my friends and family abroad have told me that the Filipino restaurants they dine at are also frequented by foreigners. A friend of mine who recently married a Canadian and moved to Canada is considering opening her of Filipino restaurant and deli there. I'm sure the idea has occurred to some other Filipinos as well, perhaps the business opportunity for them to do so has not yet presented itself. It's not like a significant number of people have ventured into the business and failed, so I don't think the absence of mainstream Filipino restaurants in the U.S. at this particular point in time merits any lamentations from you or for anyone. Sounds to me like you're just grasping at straws for something to feel culturally inferior about.

We are the origin of People Power yet we are ruled by a fake, criminal, corrupt and lying president

“Even Westminster – the so-called Mother of Parliaments – took well over a hundred years to elect its predominantly middle-class, non-landed House of Commons. As late as 1841, individual votes were selling for between £4 and £15; and electors were subject to bribery, intimidation and every species of undue influence.” (Former House Speaker Ramon Mitra, 1999)

We are a very young democracy. People who complain that it's taken us so damn long to get it right lack a sense of history. It took the developed countries of the west centuries to make their democracies work, and even today they still aren't perfect. We haven't been a democracy for even century, and we've actually achieved in decades what other countries took much longer to achieve. (Because we have the benefit of learning from their experiences, among other things.)

We can have democratic institutions (laws, political structures, etc.), but unless we have a democratic culture (civic virtues), it's really not going to work.

I don't think it's fair to blame just the people in government for our problems. It's everyone's fault, from the politicians to the ordinary Filipino citizens.

“If liberty and equality, as it is thought by some, are chiefly to be found in democracy, they will be attained when all persons alike share in the government to the utmost.” (Aristotle, Politics)

Aristotle viewed citizenship as consisting not of political rights, but rather of political duties. Citizens were expected to put their private lives and interests aside and serve the state in accordance with duties defined by law. He explains that the ideals of democracy are only completely realized when every member of society shares in its governance. The very essence of democracy is self-governance, and, therefore, an effective democracy requires a civically responsible citizenry.

“I have given proofs as one who most wants liberties for our country and I continue wanting them. But I put as a premise the education of the people so that through education and work, they might have a personality of their own and make themselves worthy of liberties. In my writings I have recommended study and civic virtues, without which redemption is impossible.” (Dr. Jose Rizal, Manifesto)

Civic virtues are habits of personal living that are considered important for the success of a community. A civically responsible individual is one who “recognizes himself or herself as a member of a larger social fabric and therefore considers social problems to be at least partly his or her own; such an individual is willing to see the moral and civic dimensions of issues, to make and justify informed moral and civic judgments, and to take action when appropriate.” (Dr. Thomas Ehrlich, Civic Responsibility and Higher Education)

Until ordinary Filipinos are able to live up to that standard, no matter who we put in office the Philippines will not be a functioning democracy. We’re not there yet, but we’ve certainly come a long way since the beginning of Philippine democracy in 1935. There are examples of well-run communities (a good number of them are cities) in the country. Marikina, Naga and Davao are just some of the more famous examples. Less famous examples would include Lanuza Bay municipalities in Mindanao and Pandan in Antique. Examining these cases should give us a more nuanced view of Philippine society (actually, societies) and the potential for genuine democratic politics.

We insist on using the English language, no matter how ridiculous we may sound and appear (take a bow Janina San Miguel) arguing it is the passport to success and progress, when all it has given our people are call centers and not real industrialization.

I've already said what I have to say on the use of English, and you have yet to respond to my point. Also, do you suggest that because the use of English has not brought us instantaneous economic success, we should abandon the endeavor to improve our command of the language altogether? That makes no sense.

We claim to be the home of the world’s most beautiful women for having beauty contest title holders when this only speeds up further the global traffic of our women.

Please show me the evidence of a statistical correlation between beauty pageants and the trafficking of women.