In defense of Dan Brown

I haven't actually read Dan Brown's new book Inferno, but Metropolitan Manila Development Authority's Francis Tolentino may have overreacted to Brown depicting Manila as such a horrible place in his latest novel. Whether the portrayal was accurate or not, it's a work of fiction, and Brown can write whatever he wants.

Mr. Tolentino may have reacted because Dan Brown's description of Manila might be dead on, or just really close to reality. But is it appropriate to react that way if that is really the case? Is it also appropriate to react if the depiction was clearly the opposite of what is real (which is what Mr. Tolentino alleges)? Suppose that Dan Brown created a character called Francis Tolentino, or Frank Tolentino, or Fred Tolentino, or something similar, who is a government official but is actually the Devil in disguise but hit his head somewhere and had amnesia, and so he doesn't know he's the Devil. Should Mr. Tolentino cry foul?

I am not saying that Mr. Tolentino and the MMDA need not react over Manila's role in Inferno. They should do a lot of things about it, but sending fan mail to Dan Brown is not one of them. Manila may not be the literal gate to the Christian hell, but it surely is a kind of hell, with the traffic jams, poor sanitation, pollution, high crime rates, and poverty. It's not what the MMDA and the rest of the Philippines wants the world to see, but that's what it is. Go see for yourself - take a train ride from Baclaran to Monumento, or drive along EDSA from North Avenue to Taft. Enjoy the view. And the smog. And the smell. And enjoy getting your wallet snatched away by an expert pickpocket if you let your guard down even for a minute. Perhaps it is a good thing that Dan Brown drew attention to these things that ail the city - so the people responsible, namely its citizens and residents, are reminded that there is a lot of work to be done.

Religion: None

"What is your religion?" asked the lady who was taking my details at a government office a few days ago.

Despite the strong temptation to go "Haroo! Haroo!" I said "None."

The man queuing behind me snickered. He must have thought I was an ignoramus and didn't know what the word meant and that I was supposed to have one. Guess what. I know exactly what religion is and have a pretty good idea of how it works, more than enough to make an informed decision not to have one.

The lady might have thought I was pulling a joke on her and studied me for a while as I kept a straight face. I was dead serious that I didn't have a religion. She tried again.

"Are you Catholic?"

"No," I said.

She looked at me like I just claimed to have been born in Mars. Or more like I just said that I eat humans and that I thought she looked very lean. She handed me back my form and told me to proceed to the next queue.

I got my needed government papers and left the place contemplating that if people are unaware of the existence of atheists and agnostics, then we sure have a long, long way to go. It is more likely that people are aware of atheists but unaware that atheism is not a religion, but that still means there is a huge amount of catching up to do in terms of education.

Ignorance breeds hatred, therefore it pays to know about different people. Especially when one lives in a country that is a melting pot of cultures. This may be a country where atheists are very outnumbered by religious people, but we atheists do exist and if one listens carefully enough, they would realize that we do have a voice.

I dare say that there are far more atheists in this country than those who are openly admitting their atheism, because I, even after becoming atheist, kept saying for a while that I was Catholic since I didn't formally resign from Roman Catholicism. I didn't always get the chance to explain that I am only a nominal Catholic and have long ceased to be convinced of Catholic doctrine, and people just love shortcuts, so they always assumed that I was religious. I grew tired of that, and I went from saying "I am Catholic, but..." to "I am not religious, but I'm technically a Catholic" (which is a little better, but as people love shortcuts, only the "Catholic" part stuck) to "I am atheist and I have no religion."

There are people who, for various reasons, are kept from being open about certain things, whether it's about their religious beliefs, political opinions, or sexuality, among others. We, the marginalized, the outnumbered, have reasonable wants and needs that cannot be catered to by society and the state if we do not take it upon ourselves to speak up and make our opinion count. We have a voice - we have to use it, and we have to use it well. We have a voice - we have to use it, and we have to use it well. It's about time that atheists make themselves heard.

Sexism and the modern "Filipina"

Whenever Filipinos lament that women today do not act the part of the ideal shy, religious, quiet, submissive Filipina maiden anymore, it clearly stems from the assumption that for a woman to show one hint of assertiveness, even one sliver of archetypal manliness, is to be evil (thanks to three centuries of Spanish rule). No wonder the liberal Filipina comes across as defensive and insecure. She is being vilified despite the improved position of women in today's Filipino society. Because old habits are indeed hard to break.

My grandmother was booted out of nursing school when she got married, and that was in the twentieth century, in the early 1960s. As a consolation, she was still able to have a job and to raise her growing family at the same time, which wouldn't have been possible had she been born a few decades earlier. Though discrimination still occurs today, the Filipina of today lives in a relatively less sexist society than her predecessors. She is able to move freely, literally and figuratively. She is not required to wear restrictive clothes. She is able to have a career. She is free to choose whether to start a family or not. She is aware that not all her contemporaries enjoy the same privileges that was bestowed upon her, and she works hard to bridge that gap.

Now something about the word Filipina makes me wince. It doesn't sound right. Why do we refer to ourselves as Filipinas, not as Filipino women? The difference is apparently superficial, especially if you're familiar with how Spanish speakers attribute genders to inanimate objects, like la mesa and el avion. The modern Filipino language acquired this practice along with thousands of Spanish words, and the word Filipino itself is a remnant of the country's colonial past. It is uncomfortable, even painful, to be reminded of a dark past, but like it or not, the Philippines is a former Spanish colony, and the Philippines as we know it wouldn't even exist as a country today if not because of colonization, which in a way unified most of the different tribes that inhabited these islands.

But I do not like how the words Filipino and Filipina make it sound like the Filipino man and the Filipino woman are two distinct nationalities. The word Filipina has its sexist implications. It differs greatly from the words girl and woman, since it refers to nationality. Sex is an inescapable biological thing that differentiates men from women (though it doesn't make them any less equal), while nationality (which, to some degree, is related to the concept of race) is a contraption made by society to facilitate group cooperation. How could one woman feel a sense of unity and cooperation with the man next to her when their nationalities are referred to using different words?

Even though the Tagalog-based Filipino language is gender-neutral, it has become common practice to use the gendered Spanish words that we have acquired such as doktor and doktora, and I think that is where the confusion arises. That is why the letter a at the end of doktor seems to make all the difference. We simply aren't used to gendered words.

I think it would pay to return to Tagalog's unsexist roots, i.e. refer to both men doctors and women doctors as doktor, refer to both men and women from the Philippines as Filipino, etc. It's one step further towards bridging that gap between the two sexes, something that both modern Filipino men and women should strive for.

Please do not pray for Manila

In light of recent events involving a crazy amount of rainfall within 24 hours, massive flooding, and landslides, I appeal to everyone to please stop all this nonsense about God being angry over the reproductive health bill.

And don't even start on that Genesis 8:7-12 nonsense. I wonder why it wasn't Revelation 8:7-12 that they thought of when the flood waters came rushing in:
The first Angel sounded, and there followed haile, and fire mingled with blood, and they were cast vpon the earth, and the third part of trees was burnt vp, and all greene grasse was burnt vp.
And the second Angel sounded, and as it were a great mountaine burning with fire was cast into the sea, and the third part of the sea became blood.
And the thirde part of the creatures which were in the Sea, and had life, died, and the third part of the ships were destroyed.
And the third Angel sounded, and there fell a great starre from heauen, burning as it were a lampe, and it fell vpon the third part of the riuers, and vpon the fountaines of waters:
And the name of the starre is called Wormewood, and the third part of the waters became wormewood, and many men dyed of the waters, because they were made bitter.
And the fourth Angel sounded, and the thirde part of the Sunne was smitten, & the third part of the Moone, and the third part of the starres, so as the third part of them was darkened: and the day shone not for a third part of it, and the night likewise.

Please do not pray for Manila. We should know by now that it wouldn't do anything. Please help Manila and the rest of the affected cities instead, either by donating to the Red Cross and other agencies, by coming over to assist the rescue and relief efforts, by helping spread the word to people who may be of help, or by informing authorities if you know of stranded people who are in urgent need to be rescued. Thank you.