komentaryo

what party(list)?

the list of congressmen who voted yes to the ConAss has been making the rounds of egoups and email inboxes. but more than giving us the names of those we MUST NOT VOTE FOR, i have found it more interesting, the partylist representatives and therefore organizations, that are part of this ‘wag iboto list.

BRIONES, NICANOR M. AGAP Party list
ESTRELLA, ROBERT RAYMUND M. ABONO Party List
PABLO, ERNESTO C. APEC Party List
SANTIAGO, NARCISO D. (III) ARC Party List
VALDEZ, EDGAR L. APEC Party List

a look at AGAP Partylist‘s website doesn’t give much information, only that they are “coordinating with” government offices including GMA’s, to “protect and promote the welfare of the hog and poultry industry” in the country.

the three other partylist organization don’t have websites, and there is very little information on them. ARC stands for Alliance of Rural Concerns — which seems like a huge umbrella organization, yes? — but doesn’t seem to stand for a concrete constituency. according to this news article from 2007, ARC advocates for CARP: “We value CARP despite its acknowledged defects, and look to the DAR as a principled partner in the struggle of the rural people for reforms and better life.”

they forget that the DAR and the CARP are both already enemies of the farmers of this country, something that has been proven by the continued existence of the Hacienda Luisitas in our midst, and by even more current events such as Henry Sy’s takeover of 8,000 hectares of prime agricultural land. too, that there is an alternative, one that’s about REAL agrarian reform: the Genuine Agrarian Reform Bill or GARB.

there isn’t much on Abono Partylist online either, except for news reports that they were topping the COMELEC count in the elections, and that they are an agricultural-fertilizer partylist.

and then there’s APEC Partylist, which apparently has the richest of congressmen in its ranks. it stands for Association of Philippine Electric Cooperatives, which seems self-explanatory.

there is no information on the constituencies of these partylist organizations, a requirement for partylist registration with the COMELEC. and the one org that had a website, listed all of two members — TWO MEMBERS!

but too, what might be more obvious here is that there doesn’t seem to be a clear marginalized sector being representedby any of these congressmen who voted yes to the ConAss. if anything, we have congressmen who represent capitalists who sell fertilizer, hogs and poultry, and electricity.

this tells us that we shouldn’t be giving this vote away. NOT.AT.ALL.

komentaryo

HR1109, ConAss, ChaCha, GMA Forever? WTF!

It is everything and confusing, this whole enterprise of the Chacha or Charter Change. Because really, you listen to these congressmen and it seems like ChaCha isn’t related to a ConAss or Constituent Assembly isn’t related to GMA staying in power. And where is House Resolution 1109 – which was passed Tuesday night – in all of this?

The ConAss is one of the ways through which changes to the 1987 charter or constitution may be made. The ConAss will create a bicameral Philippine congress, which will bring together the Senate and Congress, to amend and revise the existing constitution. This process of changing the constitution we’ve come to call ChaCha.

BUT HR 1109 actually convenes a constitutional assembly that will be allowed to amend the constitution even without the Senate. To the proponents of this resolution — and the majority of Congress — this will only mean inviting the Senate to join in the ConAss. And yet, really, if the senators don’t need to vote, why the f*^! would they want/need to be there?

On the level of congress, the fact that HR 1109 was going to be discussed in the plenary – that is, to be debated on by the representatives – was problematic to begin with. HR 1109 was rejected by the committee on constitutional amendments two weeks ago, and yet on Monday (June 1), the committee wanted it to be discussed in the plenary.  When BayanMuna Rep Satur Ocampo raised the issue of rules, i.e., no resolution should be up for discussion in the plenary without being approved on the committee level they thought that it would take a while before HR 1109 would be brought up again.

But on Monday night, the committee on constitutional amendments suddenly has a positive vote for HR 1109 being brought to the plenary. By Tuesday afternoon, it was clear that they were going to railroad it – they after all have the numbers.

Now how will all this keep GMA in power?

Once the ConAss is convened, then the process of ChaCha will be underway. The goal is really to change our system of government from presidential to parliamentary, which will allow GMA to run – and obviously win – for congresswoman in her native Pampanga. Given that she has majority of the congressmen in her pockets, and these congressmen will necessarily win – by hook or by crook – in the 2010 elections (which Def. Sec. Puno has promised will happen, obvious ba kung bakit?), this will allow GMA to get elected as Prime Minister.

This was actually the headline of the Philippine Daily Inquirer on May 13: “GMA may run for PM. The use of “May” here isn’t “possibly run for PM”; instead it is “allowed to run for PM”.

Congress has said that having passed HR 1109, they are now aiming for a July 27 opening of the Constitutional Assembly, after GMA’s State of the Nation Address. Of course they also insist that there will be a referendum naman, to find out if the nation agrees with the amendments to the constitution. But really, diyan pa ba naman sila hindi mandadaya?

And as Sen. Pangilinan says, there is no money or time or capability for that referendum. The Comelec isn’t ready, which makes that referendum even more suspicious.

Besides, why the rush? Why the seeming desperation? As stuartsantiago says in “kon-ass (kokak)”, quoting from ellen tordesillas, this is because “Operation Gloria Forever” is “behind schedule.”

GMA and her cohorts insist that HR 1109, the ConAss and the ChaCha, are all about removing the 40% limit on foreign equity on land and businesses in the country.  But this is even more reason to fight the ChaCha. As it is, our farmers are fighting for land and life; as it is, the multinational/transnational corporations are oppressing our workers, controlling wage and benefits, disallowing unions, functioning autonomously from the State.

Using this as an excuse should get us even angrier. Salt on an open wound? Insult to injury? Or, what do they take us for? Stupid?

RAGE!  Today, June 3, in the streets of Congress. Come as individuals, as groups, as Filipinos who want to Oust GMA!

It is so fluggin’ time.

kultura

Agaton and Mindy: love in the time of indie

Where does one begin with a good movie – the kind that resonates a day after watching it, the kind that you gush about? Maybe with this: for the first time in my life, I had the daring to watch a movie alone. Even when this theater in particular, my gay friend had warned, was a pick-up place; even when as I entered the theater, there were only two other guys, in separate ends of the theater, and I had no choice but to be nervous. Goodness, the things I do for Pinoy indie films.

But soon enough, three different couples walk in, and so does Jackie Lou Blanco with her kids – hooray! for intelligent viewers who chose Peque Gallaga over Angels and Demons! Having seen the first two of the Sine Direk project’s movies – Fuschia and Ded Na Si Lolo! – and missing Litsonero by Lore Reyes (because they pulled it out after two fluggin’ days!), I crossed my fingers for Agaton and Mindy. Oh, please please make my heart flutter, jaded as I am about love?

Thankfully, Gallaga outdoes himself here. I had imagined Baby Love (from the 90s) on the one hand, and Pinoy Blonde (from recent years) on the other. Agaton and Mindy is neither. Because it is informed by the contemporary and the current, which is to say that it also highlights an urgency that isn’t just for the young. It in fact goes beyond the notions of puppy love, and becomes more of a love story than any of those commercial romances. (more…)

komentaryo

sex without love*

If there’s any soundbite that I absolutely hated hearing in relation to the Hayden Koh sex videos, it’s from Boy Abunda, saying that sex, whether on video or not, must be about LOVE.

Goodness. Is this the dark ages? How many women have been oppressed precisely by this notion of love? I love you girl, therefore sleep with me. This dialogue is what has brought women to bed, before they are of an age when they can handle it, before they are even aware of their bodies. This is what has allowed for women’s bodies to be made into objects, because they enter the bedroom and think, oh, I love this man and this must be the way to prove it.

Love is what has allowed women to imagine love triangles to be acceptable, precisely what has kept all these women in Hayden’s bed and on his camera, what has allowed for Vicky Belo to imagine that she must stay, to prove she loves him.

Talk of love in relation to these sex videos is an injustice to love.

But maybe this is really just us, as audience, in over our heads about these sex videos, enamored with the ongoing debate, the continued media coverage, the chismis. It really is so juicy, yes? But all of these seems like we are, as audience, unprepared to deal with sex as sex, period. Ill-equipped to deal with the kind of technology that propagates videos of two people getting it on. Unprepared to look at sex in the eye and view it for what it is: two bodies articulating desire.

For who’s to say there was sex but no love or any emotions, and vice versa? This is only obvious when the act is done with no consent, and that would make it rape, no ifs and buts about it. And yet this isn’t porn either, nor your usual sexy movie. Both of these are done for profit, and presume what it is that the audience wants to see, over and above anything else.

But these Hayden videos have more than consent, and just run-of-the-mill movie sex. It has enjoyment. It has desire. It has libog, in the Pinoy sense of lust-desire-passion-tulo-laway-bodies-against-each-other-bahala-na-si-Batman sense. Only real life – not necessarily true love – would allow for that kind of desire. And two bodies acknowledging that desire, acting on it, enjoying it, is difficult to ignore. And maybe shouldn’t be debased to the level of just a sex video.

Or easily, and simply, oppression of one woman, or two or three. In the aftermath of these videos, we are told to see only the woman’s body, and how she had no idea something like this was going to be released to the public. All we’ve seen, in fact, and considered, are the women’s bodies. What about Hayden? Is he not objectified as well in this whole enterprise of sex videos? Yes, he taped these sexcapades, but it is obvious that he was not the one who released them. That makes him a victim, too. And he is twice victimized by the fact that no one has seen him as victim. I’m not saying Katrina and the other girls aren’t victims, too, I’m saying that they are not the only ones.

But again, to us as audience, Hayden is not victim because we imagine that he is the one in power here. He’s the one in a position to enjoy the sex, the videotaping, the different positions. But what of the women? Did they not enjoy it as well?  Isn’t it possible that in this whole enterprise of sex-video-talk, that we are the ones bringing the discussion to the level of shame and embarrassment?

Isn’t it that it is us, as audience and chismosas, who have oppressed Katrina and Maricris and whoever else will come out in these videos, as women whose lives are now over? And aren’t we the ones to actually, and truly, give Hayden an even bigger ego, as we refuse to even acknowledge that he is oppressed too?

In our insistence that only the woman is oppressed here, aren’t we also allowing for Hayden to get away with it? To get away with imagining his power to be more than it actually is, to be something to be proud of? In the age of masculinity studies and hypermasculinity experimentation, this can be turned around in his favor, you know. And after all, despite the threat of losing his license to practice medicine, he will still find himself a career – if only in the eyes that have objectified him through these videos. And maybe if only as Vicky Belo’s constant man, the one she proves her true love through (an absolute craziness in itself, of course).

In the process, what we fail to do is bring this discussion to the level of sex as truth, as real, and as something that we must all – particularly the women – deal with and be responsible about. In the age of technology, yes, but also in the age of sex without love, or at least questionable/ unstable/dishonest love. Here, women are being taught to have the stomach, the mind, the heart, for every other consequence that happens after the sex. We are being told that we will be alone, with no laws to help us, no reproductive health consciousness to bank on. As such, we must all bring this to the level of responsibility, of talking about it beyond the chismis, of making women – and men – realize that in the end, we do pay. For what our body wants, and for heeding its otherwise normal desires, in the face of a society that has yet to be  mature about sex. And love.

Over and above whether it’s on video or not.

*Title taken from Sharon Olds’ poem :

Sex Without Love

How do they do it, the ones who make love
without love? Beautiful as dancers,
gliding over each other like ice-skaters
over the ice, fingers hooked
inside each other’s bodies, faces
red as steak, wine, wet as the
children at birth whose mothers are going to
give them away. How do they come to the
come to the     come to the     God     come to the
still waters, and not love
the one who came there with them, light
rising slowly as steam off their joined
skin? These are the true religious,
the purists, the pros, the ones who will not
accept a false Messiah, love the
priest instead of the God. They do not
mistake the lover for their own pleasure,
they are like great runners: they know they are alone
with the road surface, the cold, the wind,
the fit of their shoes, their over-all cardio-
vascular health–just factors, like the partner
in the bed, and not the truth, which is the
single body alone in the universe
against its own best time.

From Strike Sparks, Selected Poems 1980-2002. U.S.: Alfred A. Knopf, 2004. Page 24.

kultura

Finding Juan

a version of this was published in The Philippine Daily Inquirer on May 24 2009.

Projects that deal with the creation of a Filipino identity are always bound to be met by debate and objections, violent reactions and a lot of hair-pulling. And rightfully so. At a time when we are being told that Manny Pacquiao is our sense of identity, we must be able to kick and scream our way towards a better sense of who we are.

The “Looking for Juan Outdoor Banner Project” of the Center for Art, New Ventures and Sustainable Development (CANVAS), seems to be a step in the right direction. Asking artists to create works that respond to the question of Filipino identity, the first batch of paintings on exhibit at the Cultural Center of the Philippines is telling of the individual minds of our young contemporary artists. Collectively, it is everything and indicative of where we are as a nation.

On that hot evening of the exhibit’s opening night, the slew of paintings hanging on the second floor lobby walls of the CCP was surprisingly refreshing. The youthfulness was difficult to ignore, owing literally to the bright optimistic colors across the canvasses. Even when a given canvass dealt with dark hues, there seemed to be something light and agreeable about the general look of the string of paintings in front of me.

It could have been the familiarity of it all as well. From afar, the amalgamation of images of being Pinoy (the jeepney, the Filipino child, a person sweeping, people smiling into camera phones) couldn’t help but be heartwarming. But too, it was almost a warning: the concern for identity after all is an overdone concern of the arts, visual and otherwise, and as such it does quite often become cliché.

As some of the works on exhibit are, falling into the trap of using overdone stereotypes of the Filipino. The Pinoy as unique in our ability to smile in the midst of pain (Galos Lang by Jeff Carnay) and oppression due to unjust laws (Juan Line by Dansoy Coquilla), to walk to the beat of our own drum (Hataw sa Traffic Light by Marcial Pontillas), and to rise above adversity given our heroic history (Like Our Heroes, We Will Rise by Anthony Palo). The realism that the first three work with don’t leave much for interpretation – a function as well of its being cliché – while the latter is strangely enough a representation of people flying with and on a hot air balloon, an image that connotes social class mobility. Is this to say who can become hero?

Many others, while dealing with realistic images of poverty, corruption and oppression, end up talking about the universal notions of environmentalism (Juanderful World? by Anna de Leon), unity (Maybe we are the pieces… by Jay Pacena II), personal struggle (Sarisari Storm by Maan de Loyola), determination (The Rise of Juan Tamad by Lotsu Manes), and hope (The Traveller by Palma Tayona). Understandably, it is these pieces as well that have more to say on the canvas.

Pacena’s piece in particular screams against the oppression of information, with a blindfolded image up-close, mouth filled with three-dimensional puzzle pieces. With eyes unseen and face half-covered, this was a statement on every Juan and Juana: you are being defined by too much, even as you remain unknown. Meanwhile, the Filipinos’ need for travel and movement is in Tayona’s work, showing an oversized figure carrying wooden children and lifted off ground by two hands. It is a statement on the enterprise of selling laborers’ bodies across the globe.

The clichés notwithstanding, a lot of thinking obviously went into many of the artworks. This was particularly true for the more politically charged ones, those that spoke of the true conditions of nation, and dealt with it head-on. There was the truth of poverty and how it understandably sacrifices hope (Juan Luma by Migs Villanueva), the contemporary Filipinization of what is foreign and how this hybrid identity is problematic in its abstraction (Hybrid Nation by Jucar Raquepo), the static state of the nation as potential never fulfilled (Penoy by Manny Garibay). Expectedly, the latter two paintings used a pastiche of images (popular culture and our unfulfilled, respectively).

But it is the flair for the revolutionary that is striking about this exhibit. The works “Byaheng Maynila” by Omi Reyes, “Aklas… Baklas… Lakas… Bukas!” by Marika Constantino, “Panata” by Salvador Ching, and “Pinoy Big Brother” by Buen Abrigo are priceless not just in its imagery but also in its call to action. Reyes’ close-up image of a jeep seems cliché, but up close its movement challenges the audience to an engagement: where are you going and why? The value of this question is true as well for Ching’s use of a Filipino everyman doingthe Catholic devotees’ sacrifice of flagellation. This man though is facing a bright red moon, his bare back bloodied – the Juan is himself the sacrifice, as he is the one facing the possibility of revolt with the red red moon. And while the image of two arms clasping each other in Constantino’s work could seem cliché as well, its flowing red background connotes the rage and revolt that seem all possible.

But it is Abrigo who outdoes them all, creating the image of contemporary times as transnational neo-colonial: an unstable building and tower is filled with everything commercial that permeates our everyday lives; figures beneath these structures, are that of a masked GMA/Imelda, a two-faced man in shadows, and a zombie-like creature with laser eyes. All of these are contextualized in the dark neglected buildings in the background – a telling sign of how the capitalist enterprise silences the nation. The eeriness reeks of injustice and murder, and this is precisely what works for “Pinoy Big Brother”. Because too, it highlights the need for change, the need to end the oppression that capital brings. Hooray for the revolution!

If only for Abrigo’s as well as Reyes’ and Ching’s works, and in the context of the highly debatable concepts of nation and identity, the “Looking For Juan” exhibit is everything and a must-see.