Category: sex

screwed by manangs

read ricky carandang’s screwed and manuel buencamino’s “manangs” acquit a rapist.   my sentiments exactly.   what a huge setback for the women’s fight against sexist politics.   biglang we’re back to the dark ages when women were seen as sex objects incapable of saying no except when playing hard-to-get for extra favors.   biglang we’re back to the old biases and stereotypes, among them that girls who don’t behave with strict decorum, who dress to look ‘n feel good, who drink alcohol, dance dirty, flirt mightily in public, who just wanna have fun, are asking for rape.   wtf.   where are these women justices coming from?  opus dei?   catholic women’s league?  what books are they reading?   mills & boon?   barbara cartland?

read too rina jimenez-david who calls them “maiden aunts” and patricia evangelista who calls them “virtuous ladies”.   which set me wondering, teka, baka naman mga old maid nga ang “learned ladies” na ito of the court of appeals, and so maybe they don’t know any better about men and sex and rape, and quite possibly they’ve never been drunk in their lives?   so i googled them all, only to find that all three are wives and mothers, and maybe grandmothers, wow, good luck na lang sa karma.

both justice monina arevalo zenarosa and justice myrna dimaranan vidal were born in 1939.   zenarosa took up law in ust and feu, vidal in feu.  both are turning 70 and retiring this year.    hmm, formative years right smack during the japanese occupation and the liberation.   general douglas macarthur must be one of their icons.

justice remedios salazar fernando is a different story.   born in 1953, studied law in ateneo, so far she has been quite popular with post-EDSA administrations and has been having quite a rising career.

She was named Chairman of the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board in July 1987 where she concurrently held directorship posts at the Light Rail Transit Authority (LRTA)and the Office of Transport Cooperatives. In the latter part of 1991, she held the position of Officer-in-Charge/Assistant Secretary of the Land Transportation Office in a concurrent capacity.

In 1992, she was appointed Commissioner of the COMELEC. On May 21, 1999, she was appointed Associate Justice of the Court of Appeals, being one of the youngest to have been appointed to the position. She received several awards from both private and public sectors, such as Ten Outstanding Young Men given by the Jerry Roxas Foundation, Most Outstanding Capampangan, Woman of Distinction Award by the Soroptimist International, etc. When she retired from the COMELEC, she received an Award for Outstanding Service from the Senate of the Philippines.

i bet she has a moist eye on the supreme court.   i suppose this subic rape case decision is in aid of that?   how sad, specially for a baby boomer whose generation birthed the women’s movement for equal rights.

by the way, if you’re one of those who don’t feel competent to judge for themselves whether what smith did to nicole was rape or not because transcripts of the trial have not been released, so you’re willing to give the three  justices the benefit of the doubt, they must know what they’re talking about, you’re taking their word for it, smith is innocent, well you might want to make tambay sa subicrapecase website’s summary of  court proceedings.   it was rape.

nicole did not recant

what a shocker naman talaga.   it was bad enough hearing, first, that she had fired her lawyer evalyn ursua AND that she had left for the u.s., of all places.   it got progressively more scandalizing as the news trickled out that she had settled with smith for a hundred thou php and *omgwtf* that she had recanted *gasp*!

a day later i’m clearer about that 100k — it’s in compliance naman pala with the court order that found smith guilty of rape and liable to nicole for civil (50K php) and moral (50K php) damages, so that’s fine.   whether she left or she stayed, she had that money coming to her.   in my book she deserved more, and if she did get more, then good for her.

i’m also clearer about the so-called recantation, which is not a recantation at all — shame on everyone who calls it so.   nicole did not recant.    to recant would have been to deny now her original testimony.   to recant would have been to say now that it was all a lie, she wasn’t drunk, she remembers it all, the sex was consensual.   SHE SAID NOTHING OF THE SORT.

at most nicole ruminates on old questions raised by the defense at the trial.   she acknowledges that under the influence of alcohol she may have behaved inappropriately — which may have led smith to think that she wanted sex.   also she considers the defense line that if smith had intended to rape her he would not have so openly carried her out of the club into the van for all the world to see, so maybe he thought it was consensual?

so she behaved inappropriately under the influence of mixed drinks — but she also says, so did others in the club where there was a lot of kissing and hugging going on,  and, i’m sure, dirty dancing, and no one else got raped.    i think smith was just really horny and on white arrogant macho mode — youdon’tmesswithmeandgetawaywithitshit — never mind that the girl clearly was so drunk she couldn’t walk straight, much less do anything of her own volition.   the affidavit only makes this clearer.

finally she asks, if i was so drunk why did i suddenly become un-drunk when they dumped me on the sidewalk?   aba, kahit sino yata mahihimasmasan, matatauhan, pag biglang nagbago ang takbo ng mga pangyayari, from private to public, from warm to cold, from sounds to silence.   her alcohol-drowned mind was on party mode, even the van was on party mode, with music and cheering and clapping.   when she was dumped, the music stopped, the party was over, she’s suddenly alone, lying on a public sidewalk — the semento must have felt cold to her naked butt, and people were gathering around, someone was calling her a bitch, time to come to her senses, a matter of self-defense, of survival, what a rude awakening.

so, again, that affidavit wasn’t a retraction, rather, an affirmation, by which account, smith is no less guilty of rape.    let’s give nicole credit for managing to please smith’s camp — enough to acquire a u.s. visa perhaps — but without recanting.   that took some smarts.   good for us.

i’m sorry she’s gone but she has her own life to live, her own karma to work out.   if she were my daughter, like susan i would let her go, even insist on it.   obviously she has a karmic connection with america (american soldiers in particular).   until (like any fil-am) she works that out, she cannot be expected to do more for inang lupa than she has already done for the anti-vfa campaign.   mabuhay si nicole.

fucking for a fee

shades of camille paglia, galing! this that jeg has to say re tv dancers wiggling their butts at leering middle-aged DOMs on noontime shows, contradicting a comment that it’s “sexploitation writ large in the light of day.”

Not one to pass on the chance to defend scantily-clad women, I asked why is it sexploitation. Those dancers were not being coerced. They freely chose their profession and are being paid for it. And with that I think it is time to come to the defense of what is called the World’s Oldest Profession, the prostitutes, those purveyors of venereal services that society has maligned; indeed our legal system considers their profession illegal. A prostitute is here defined as one who engages in sexual services for a fee.

The way I see it, if the prostitute is an adult who has freely chosen to engage in sexual services for a fee, she is not being exploited. Mind you this isnt condoning the practice of white slavery, wherein the women arent free. That is deplorable. Our prostitute is a businesswoman, rendering a service for which there is a demand and the State has no right to stop her from plying her trade.

It is only through some sort of superiority complex that members of society, including feminists ironically, assume that the prostitute is being exploited. They lament the plight of the poor hooker, forced by poverty into a demeaning existence. But the prostitute doesnt see her job as especially demeaning, at least those Ive spoken to. It’s their profession. They have considered the pros and cons (short hours and high pay vs. harrassment by cops, the dangers of being in a vulnerable state with strangers, and the judgemental derision of society at large) and still choose to ply their trade. If the cons outweigh the pros, they are free to look for another profession.”

indeed.  the racy dyke-bitch radical anti-feminist feminist scholar paglia would ask, who is really sexploiting whom?

conventional feminist wisdom has it that the DOM producers-hosts of the noontime show — who can’t do without the sexy props and wiggling butts because it sells and it’s fun, the daily dose that keeps them going, coming — are sexploiting the girls, as in, treating them like sex objects and making money on them.

i think sexploitation is a two-way street.   are not the girls — who willingly play sexy props for a fee, wiggling their skimply-clad butts at men because that’s what men like, what’s the harm, let them look, we’re looking good — also exploiting the men?

which is, yes, breeding ground for prostitutes-in-the-making, girls who find that they enjoy dancing, flirting, making eyes at and turning on men.  it’s like they have a gift for sex the way others have a gift for math, or music.

and, yes, it’s not too many steps away from going professional, fucking for a fee.  foreplay and fucking as art.  sex as performance art.  it can be.

what’s interesting is that the demands on the time and energy of a prostitute is no longer limited to sex.  at least in new york when wall street was crashing, men mostly just wanted needed to talk, unload, despair, in private/with a hooker, before going home.

ganyan din siguro dito sa atin.  i wonder how our sex workers like it.  okay lang, nakakapahinga sa sex, or would they always rather fuck than talk?  i suppose the educated ones would sometimes rather talk than fuck?  but maybe that’s just me.  and paglia.   haha.

hot quotes from paglia’s intro to her impressive tome Sexual Personae: Art and Decadence from Nefertiti to Emily Dickinson, 1991:

The Bible has come under fire for making woman the fall guy in man’s cosmic drama. But in casting a male conspirator, the serpent, as God’s enemy, Genesis hedges and does not take its misogyny far enough. The Bible defensively swerves from God’s true opponent, chthonian nature. The serpent is not outside Eve but in her. She is the garden and the serpent.”

Daemonic archetypes of women, filling world mythology, represent the uncontrollable nearness of nature. . . . The primary  image is the femme fatale, the woman fatal to man.  The more nature is beaten back in the west, the more the femme fatale reappears, as a return of the repressed.”

Feminism dismisses the femme fatale as a cartoon and libel.  If she ever existed, she was simply a victim of society, resorting to destructive womanly wiles because of her lack of access to political power.  The femme fatale was a career woman manquee, her energies neurotically diverted into the boudoir.  By such techniques of demystification, feminism has painted itself into a corner.  Sexuality is a murky realm of  contradiction and ambivalence.”

Mystification will always remain the disorderly companion of love and art.  Eroticism is mystique; that is, the aura of emotion and imagination around sex.  It cannot be “fixed” by codes of social or moral convenience, whether from the political left or right.  For nature’s fascism is greater than that of any society.”

The femme fatale is one of the most mesmerizing of sexual personae.  She is not a fiction but an extrapolation of biologic realities in women that remain constant.  The North American Indian myth of the toothed vagina (vagina dentata) is a gruesomely direct transcription of female power and male fear.  Metaphorically, every vagina has secret teeth, for the male exits as less than when he entered.  The basic mechanics of conception require action in the male but nothing more than passive receptivity in the female.  Sex as a natural rather than social transaction, therefore, really is a kind of drain of male energy by female fullness.  Physical and spiritual castration is the danger every man runs in intercourse with women.  Love is the spell by which he puts his sexual fear to sleep.  Woman’s latent vampirism is not a social aberration but a development of her maternal function, for which nature has equipped her with tiresome  thoroughness.  For the male, every act of intercourse is a return to the mother  and a capitulation to her.  For men, sex is a struggle for identity.  In sex, the male is consumed and released again by  the toothed power that bore him, the female dragon of nature.”

The mystique of the femme fatale cannot be perfectly translated into male terms.  I will speak at length of the beautiful boy, one of the west’s most stunning sexual personae.  However, the danger of the homme fatale, as embodied  in today’s boyish male hustler, is that he will leave, disappearing to other loves, other lands.  He is a rambler, a cowboy and sailor.  But  the danger of the femme fatale is that she will stay, still, placid, and paralyzing.  Her remaining is a daemonic burden, the ubiquity of Walter Pater’s Mona Lisa, who smothers history.  She is a thorny symbol of the perversity of sex.  She will stick.”

The woundlike rawness of female genitals is a symbol of the unredeemability of chthonian nature.  In aesthetic terms, female genitals are lurid in color, vagrant in contour, and architecturally incoherent.  Male genitals, on the other hand, though they risk ludicrousness by their rubbery indecisiveness (a Sylvia Plath heroine memorably thinks of “turkey neck and turkey gizzards”), have a rational mathematical design, a syntax.”

Our lives as physical beings give rise to basic metaphors of apprehension which vary greatly between the sexes.  Here there can be no equality.  Man is sexually compartmentalized.  Genitally, he is condemned to a perpetual pattern of linearity, focus, aim, directedness.  He must learn to aim.  Without aim, urination and ejaculation end in infantile soiling of self or surroundings.  Woman’s eroticism is diffused throughout her body.  Her desire for foreplay remains a notorious area of miscommunication between the sexes.”

No woman has to prove herself a woman in the grim way a man has to prove himself a man. He must perform, or the show does not go on.  Social convention is irrelevant.  A flop is a flop.  Ironically, sexual success always ends in sagging fortunes anyhow.  Every male projection is transient and must be anxiously, endlessly renewed.  Men enter in triumph but withdraw in decrepitude.  The sex act cruelly mimics history’s decline and fall.  Male bonding is a self-preservation society, collegial reaffirmation through larger, fabricated frames of reference.  Culture is man’s iron reinforcement of his ever-imperiled private projections.”

Freud thinks primitive man preened himself on his ability to put out a fire with a stream of urine.  A strange thing to be proud of but certainly beyond the scope of woman, who would scorch her hams in the process.  Male urination really is a kind of accomplishment, an arc of transcendance.  A woman merely waters the ground she stands on.”

Historiography’s most glaring error has been its assertion that Judeo-Christianity defeated paganism.  Paganism has survived in the thousand forms of sex, art, and now the modern media. “

On the streets of every city, prostitutes, the world’s oldest profession, stand as a rebuke to sexual morality.  They are the daemonic face of nature, initiates of pagan mysteries.  Prostitution is not just a service industry, mopping up the overflow of male demand, which always exceeds female supply.  Prostitution testifies to the amoral power struggle of sex, which religion has never been able to stop.  Prostitutes, pornographers, and their patrons are marauders in the forest of archaic night.”

manny villar vs. sex education?

thanks to whistlebloggers pete lacaba and john silva for calling attention to senate bill no. 2464 also known as the Anti-Obscenity and Pornography Act of 2008 now pending in the senate, which would violate the constitution’s tenets of freedom and democracy and bring back censorship big time.

so what’s up ba talaga with senate president manny villar, he with the very moist eye on malacanang palace, sponsoring and earnestly seeking the approval of such an all-encompassing anti-obscenity and -porn law that would criminalize and penalize the production, broadcast, and exhibition of all materials deemed “obscene” by state & church watchdogs, “obscene” referring to

“anything that is indecent or offensive or contrary to good customs or religious beliefs, principles or doctrines, or tends to corrupt or deprave the human mind, or is calculated to excite impure thoughts or arouse prurient interest, or violates the proprieties of language and human behavior, regardless of the motive of the producer, printer, publisher, writer, importer, seller, distributor or exhibitor such as, but not limited to:
(1) showing, depicting or describing sexual acts;
(2) showing, depicting or describing human sexual organs or the female breasts;
(3) showing, depicting or describing completely nude humanbodies;
(4) describing erotic reactions, feelings or experiences on sexual acts; or
(5) performing live sexual acts of whatever form.”

and pornography referring to

“objects or subjects of film, television shows, photography, illustrations, music, games, paintings, drawings,
illustrations, advertisements, writings, literature or narratives, contained in any format, whether audio or visual, still or moving pictures, in all forms of film, print, electronic, outdoor or broadcast mass media, or whatever future technologies to be developed, which are calculated to excite, stimulate or arouse impure thoughts and prurient interest, regardless of the motive of the author thereof.”

covers it all, di ba, as in COVERS ! tinatakpan, ikinukubli, isinesekreto, ang tungkol sa sex. at inaasahan i suppose na kung walang magpa-publish ng mga sexy tabloid at mga tipong fhm at playboy, at kung masisibak na ang mga tipong eat bulaga at wowowee, at kung maipagbabawal na ang sexy billboards and commercial ads, sexy paintings and sculptures and fashions and dvds, aba, wala na ring magkakasala, as in, wala nang makakaisip ng “impure thoughts,” mapipigil na ang panggigigil ng madlang people, maaawat na ang population explosion, magiging history na ang sexual violence against women and children, gayon din ang prostitution, homosexuality, and sexually transmitted diseases.

WTF ! there’s no way any congress can legislate away “impure thoughts” and i’m sure our representatives and senators know it.  besides, ika nga ni john silva:

The bill’s assault on basic Filipino liberties and rights will have serious cultural and economic implications. Arts and Culture deprived of creative expression will be sterile and not saleable.

Suspected books and the printed media will be banned and the publishing industry will teeter and collapse. The manufacturing sector involved in the selling of goods whose advertising pitch depends on exalting the human form will suffer financial loses.

The broadcasting media, the film and video industry and the internet industry, dependent on unfettered information will be curbed and subject to financial ruin.

Our tourism industry will suffer considerably. If our society loses its unique tourist branding as one of the freest and most liberal in Asia to be replaced with a monastic authoritarian state, then who in their right mind would come and visit a poor version of Saudi Arabia?

so, again, i ask, wazzup, wazzup, with presidentiable villar?

my suspicion is, correct me if i’m wrong, this anti-obscenity anti-porn bill ay sagot niya, o panabla niya, sa long overdue and controversial reproductive health bill. note the phrase “regardless of the motive of the producer, printer, publisher, writer, importer, seller, distributor or exhibitor…” — i bet it’s aimed at the reproductive health bill’s sex education provisions.

Reproductive health education in an age-appropriate manner shall be taught by adequately trained teachers from Grade 5 to 4th year high school. As proposed in the bill, core subjects include responsible parenthood, natural and modern family planning, proscription and hazards of abortion, reproductive health and sexual rights, abstinence before marriage, and responsible sexuality.”

sana i’m wrong, but i wouldn’t be surprised if the senate president’s strategy is, to pass FIRST the anti-obscenity anti-porn bill, thereby trumping the reproductive health bill’s sex education provisions (we’ll just have to settle for a watered-down rh law?), which is to accommodate the holy-men-in-skirts and their chorus lines of moralists so they’ll all support him in 2010.  how devious.  how obscene.  how presidential.  way to go, manny villar.