Who isn’t?

Finally I am convinced of the bigotry and lack of utter sense of some people in the upper echelon of power in the Philippines. Not that I was too naive to realize this very late, but because I gave them a little benefit of the doubt.They cannot be stupid, I thought, but my subconscious was telling me that they are all morons.

I admit that I do not have a crystal clear grasp of gay politics in the Philippines. Filipino homosexuals, especially those in the fringes of urban areas, are disorganized, silent, and do not see themselves a part of the great gender revolution that is happening in Manila. However, I must say that even in Manila, few gays are politically involved. So calling it a gender revolution is a bit exaggerated. Being involved means getting ‘out of the  closet’. And gay men know better what it means to be ‘out’ in this society.  As a consequence most gay men distance themselves from each other, or at least from those who look flamboyantly gay.

This fear, to call it such, of a closeted gay man of being associated with other gays, as this will unavoidably lead to him and his secrets being brought to the open,  is the reason why it is difficult to organize homosexuals in this country.

The recent disqualification of the party-list party Ang Ladlad by the Commission on Elections with a justification that the party and its openly gay members led by the Ateneo de Manila professor Danton Remoto, definitely with the inclusion of all other gay people within or without their closets, are ‘immoral’, barred them from enjoying their right to run for public office.

From these I gathered that the commissioners assigned to the most daunting task of holding the elections in may 2010, who are in the rein of making sure this country will have a new lease of life,  have brains as microscopic as that of protists. Protists, by the way, do not have brains.

And so they declared a party ineligible for reason of immorality. As regards the basis for which this declaration was based, I do not know, and I can only, if you’ll allow me, speculate:

1. Pink, purple, fuchsia, and rainbow (since the commissioners who are the power-that-be this season consider this as one of the color of the spectrum!) are immoral colors because they are unpure, bastard mixtures of primary colors.

2. The gay parlance is a hybrid that changes endlessly. The last week’s most hyped word could easily be outmoded in seven days time. This is the sign of the scheming devil, continually changing forms and shapes to deceive the faithful.

3. The male body is ugly. The female body is beautiful. Beauty can be a moral question too, aside from it being a question of taste. Gay men lust for the male form, a breach in the universality of beauty. They are immoral because they worship ugliness.

4. Gay men participate in activities that are considered inappropriate, dirty, wanton, contributing nothing in man’s burgeoning gene pool. They express love by inserting an appendage of their bodies in holes unsanctioned by church leaders. And because they get unspeakable pleasure from this act against nature, they become moral zombies.

5. And lastly, they are immoral because the creator of the universe gave life only to the male and female of the species. Anything or anyone that does not fall in any of the two categories are definitely of the devil, including gay lions and lesbian garden snails.

But being stupid is the most immoral thing for me. And the COMELEC committed the most despicable form of immorality–being so stupid.

http://kawadjan.blogspot.com

Advertisements

10 thoughts on “Who isn’t?”

  1. don’t they realize that gays are indispensable for good governance? may i suggest they search for “sebastian little britain” on youtube as proof? ha ha ha.

    on a more serious note, really, in this century, gender should be such a non-issue already.

    1. most people in this country still believe in thoughts long dismissed as foolish by the rest of the world. and what is even more interesting is that the likeliest place where people who think this way work is in public offices.

  2. i was dumbfounded after reading your defense and was appalled by the truly wonderful way of your presentation. i realized my mistake. you were right all along: dry humor will never take the place of good argumentation.

    but the list was funny, though. i love it.

    still, I am not convinced.

  3. nah. . .

    Morality must be patterned using the MTRCB standard–because the moobie censorship people are pinoy government people. pinoy government people have a direct line to heaven and could talk to God whenever they want. you heard the phrase, “god moves in mysterious ways”? well. . . not to the government people because they could read God as if God is a book. therefore they (the government people) are, in turn, morally infallible.

    To educate you, I hereby write here the MTRCB Standard

    1. destruction of property is tolerable and deserves, at most, a pg13.
    2. violence towards others is relative. if it involves shooting and minimal spillage of blood, it deserves a pg13. If the violence is more visual and involves viscera and liters of blood, it deserves a pg18 and sometimes an r18 rating.
    3. saying curse words (fuck, bitch, etc.) is more sinful than destruction of property. if said curse words are used often, it will be slapped with an r18.
    4. exposure of boobs are evil evil evil and must be avoided.
    5. simulation of sex on the screen automatically gets a pg13. if it’s very graphic, an r18.
    6. movies featuring gay kissing and sex gets an r18 because gay people are bad bad bad and if the audience sees two men or two women kissing they will go out on the street and will instantly participate in homosexual fornication regardless of their own sexual orientation.

    to summarize–dante thinks the gays are bad. dante’s way of thinking about the gays is supported by the mtrcb. mtrcb is a sub branch of the government people. government people can read god’s law as if it was a book. therefore, gays are bad bad bad.

  4. ah, and jovito palparan’s party list that kills leftist activists (not that i believe in what these activists are fighting for) is not immoral? making it qualify to run for an elective post?

    since when did a party’s qualification a moral question? it’s basic human rights? hu-lloooo, any gray matter there?

    of course, it was during dante’s time. man’s way of thinking now is radically different (at least in as far as perception on homosexuality is concerned) from how it was centuries before. you need to let go of your ancient, antiquated, and obviously unusable way of thinking.

    you know…

  5. duh! didn’t you read dante’s inferno? gays are totally immoral. they have a special place in hell–its a desert where their flesh is constantly seared. hu-llloooooo.

    and in another version written by a less imaginative woman who claimed that jesus himself (that is before his showbiz career took off where he guests in a pinoy soap and mostly wears off-the-shoulder robe-inspired gowns and talks in cliche) gave her a grand tour of hell, gay people are being burned in a river of blood because they are nothing more than child-touchers who corrupt the next generation.

    that proves it. AngLadlad should totally NOT be approved in the party list.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s