Intsiksiomai's Blog

I can so much relate to the character Miranda of Sex and the City.  When Miranda got pregnant, she got asked by people around, friends, acquaintances, even strangers, if she’s pregnant.  Then, after she says “yes.”, the friend will gush and grin, and the follow up question is “Is it a girl or a boy?”  After she mentions the gender, the friend will gush even more and grin even more.  Miranda gets annoyed, creeped out with such response.  Eventually, she tells people not to gush about it.  I was never pregnant, but I have the exact same impulse as Miranda.  I get goosebumps and creeped out with such sugary sweetness.   I even find “Happy Birthday” greetings quite creepy.  The only reason I bother to greet people with a happy birthday is because I assume the other person values his/her birthday so much. (?!?)  I’ve finally itemized the reasons why I have that impulse:

1. I don’t find having a baby as something just cute, but more like an added RESPONSIBILITY,  something to be taken really seriously.

2. I don’t find birthdays as worth celebrating and getting attention from.  Any idiot can feign significance on his birthday.  Did he do anything significant anyway?

3.  I feel more ashamed for the pregnant girl more often than not, especially if I find her not worthy to proliferate.   I pity the unborn child for having a “half-a-person” mom and maybe a jerk dad.

4.  I feel ashamed of myself when being greeted for nothing, for getting so much attention for nothing on birthdays.  I’d rather they attend and support my recitals (if I have).

5.  Accentuate and celebrate what matters, neglect what doesn’t matter.

Advertisements

I was watching an episode about nuns recently.  Nuns cannot own possessions, should be obedient to their church, and devote their life to serve their church.  Interesting things I learned about nuns: They don’t have to be a virgin to become a nun. Their costume called the “habit” is actually their wedding dress, and they are married to Jesus.  They even wear a wedding ring that symbolizes their union with Jesus.

I know that people have different callings and purpose in life, and maybe, that’s really what they were meant to do.  But I have some contentions about nunnery.  First, where do these nuns get their money for their food, clothing, shelter?  It’s from the donations of working people, not from Jesus!  I suggest they should give something back to the people who donate money to their church.  What about Jesus will grant you a wish for every donation you make?   Second, they focus so much on helping the starving people, but never on the full actualization of human beings.  So what if everybody survives and can inhale and exhale air?  The focus and concentration is too much on the nursery and kindergarten, not on college and PhD.  Everybody survives, but nobody thrives.  Another aspect is the nuns have to live in poverty(or are required to), so how can they even advocate thriving and success?

I don’t completely disagree with the institution of nunnery.  It just needs to be more grounded and practical.   I don’t even want to give them the title or respect and regard that they expect. Sister Susan, Mother Magdalene, useless, impractical.  Can they stop a typhoon with their prayers?  I hope they can or learn to do it soon, so they will be deserving of their title.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/10419076.stm

I’m very supportive of this kind of technology.  I really hope that this procedure will become much cheaper and will reach the masses, similar to the use of contraceptives these days.  This is definitely life-changing.  Why?  Girls don’t have to rush getting married  and choose any bozo when they reach a certain age.  Girls can focus on self-development first and become better humans and not just girly girls.   Girls can eventually attain freedom– freedom to explore their career, freedom to form and embody their own personal philosophies and convictions, freedom to live a fuller life and not just half-a-life.

My idealism combined with a sheltered background lead me to think that “friends” should never become your business associates or customers or creditors or anything to do with economic advancement.  I thought friends should just enjoy each other’s company, watch movies together, shop together, or go out of town together.  It was only much later or maybe recently that I realized I can’t live in my fairyworld anymore.

People really use people for their own cause/gain, and the term “friend” becomes just a euphemism.    My ex-crush just told me his friend is not a true friend because he didn’t want to lend him money!  For me, my ex-crush is less of a friend than the one who refused to lend him.   Then, my uncle kept calling his supplier his “friend”, when he can’t even crack a joke on his face and all they talk about is price-haggling.    I myself have been tainted by this system of pseudo-friendships already, much as I don’t want to.   It’s like taxes and BIR.  Even if you want to pay the correct taxes for your business, the tax collector still pushes you to give under the table, so you might as well learn how to dance their beat, hopefully, without creating so much damage and corrupting your whole self.

Is it important to genuinely like a friend?  Is it important to share common interests with a friend?  Is it important to have similar values with a friend?  (at least the values they both deem important)  Is it important to have activities with a friend?

Chinese girls are starting to open up with their sexuality. They already have expectations and some demands that were unheard of a generation ago. This is actually progressive. But, I just want to point out that sexual freedom comes with extra responsibilities. Aside from the need to practice the usual disease preventive methods and pregnancy prevention methods, sexually liberated women should eventually become economically independent women. One of the reasons men pay a premium on girls is because of the girls’ “innocence”, helplessness, vulnerability, incompetence. We girls cannot have our cake and eat it too. That is just abuse of men.

Sexual freedom is power. Economic independence is power. We cannot walk a path of conflicting values and hypocrisy. Do we want to change the diaper or wash the underwear of a sexually-active 15 year-old child? Chivalry should eventually fade as we progress. The delicate issue here is the transition phase and the teaching/passing the torch phase. Both sides are prone to abusing the other side. Men can just pass all responsibilities to women and become useless self-absorbed loitering men. Women can also either feign “innocence” to get away with freebies or just be lazy, or become powerhungry manipulative bitches.

The main reason why UN encourages us to teach sex education to young children is to control overpopulation. It’s almost impossible to control overpopulation without the introduction and use of different contraceptives. And this is where CBCP and the conservatives become such a hassle and hindrance to any progress in this area. These religious institutions are just so unrealistic and blind to what’s really going on in the real world. Most of my classmates lost their virginity at 13-16 years of age. Ergo, sex education and contraception knowledge and skills should start before 13 years old.

http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=585654&publicationSubCategoryId=63
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,543203,00.html?test=latestnews

UN backs sex education in RP. UN advocates teaching masturbation to 5 year olds.
Calculate: Which is weightier and stronger in the mind of a child, his religious conviction or his sexual desire? Her cultural adherence(Maria Clara/the virgin chinese bride) or her need to express her “love/lust” to her bf? I personally know a number of born-agains(Christians) and hard-core Christians who cannot stop themselves from being sexual, what more the average children with lesser religious conviction?

In my opinion, no amount of ideal-pushing and enlightenment can bring long-term peace into this world unless these issues are resolved— economics/economy and  balance of power.  A person whose survival is threatened cannot think of peace, while struggling for survival.  In the hierarchy of needs, survival is more immediate. Tell a beggar he will go to hell when he steals, and he’ll just laugh at you because he is literally in hell right now.  I don’t fully agree with balance of power in the sense that some people deserve more power because of their sense of responsibility, unselfishness, caliber, and abilities.  But for the sake of being realistic of the tendencies of humans in general, I’d have to choose balance of power.  The international community is still surviving because the oil-rich Arabs, the Americans, the emerging Chinese, and the not so rich war-like Communists still have a balance of power.  But once the power goes to one direction heavily, then we cannot expect the mediocre peace we are now enjoying to continue.  Of course, it’s better that the more enlightened get more power, but knowing humans as humans, power still gets to our airy heads.  (This balance of power and economics can be applied to the smallest organization, including a simple couple.  Try being a useless powerless partner, and see if there will be peace.)

Oppressed underpaid laborers, women liberation groups, slaves, cannot and should not opt for “peace” first.  It just doesn’t make sense.  There are more important and immediate advocacies than peace.  Peace shouldn’t be approached in a simplistic way.  Peace is  just a result of good economy, good governance, and proper distribution of power.  Simply pushing peace without viewing the big picture is just naive.

What about what the god/gods/goddess/goddesses say about peace?  That is what I call Advil/Ponstan/Biogesic/Midol, a temporary pain-reliever.