Trafficking is... tolerable

I seriously hope that people will not just stop and stare when they see something like this again. 

I also hope that the men who stayed to watch "the show" did not just walk away like nothing is wrong.Or if they did walk, I hope it is a walk of shame.

I earlier saw another video regarding feminism. I only want to add now to it a scene like this, where men are in the place of women.

Human trafficking is rampant no matter how much statistic governments all over the world release about having reduced its incidence. Actually, it may have reduced due to the fact that in some countries it is either not illegal, or it has been declared legal. It is not illegal when the law is silent on it, or indifferent towards it. It is legal when the law declares it to be allowed.

In this video we see the city of Amsterdam. It is well known that prostitution is legal in that city. This was done to allow the prostitutes a way to protect their rights as women, while working in the sex trade industry.

However, just because it is legal does not mean it is right. There is more to what is right than the law declaring it so. The law is merely a tool which states have created to regulate its citizens in conformity with the nation's interests and morals. It does not tell you how to treat another person with care. Nor does it show you how to respect. It only tries to embody those principles which we, as people, deem to be right.

So, if you think it is right that these women who hoped for better futures be subject to occupations they did not want, then I think there is something wrong. There is something wrong with what we think is right. 

For some of those men who watched them dance, the right thing to do was to react and slowly disperse from the crowd. For some of them maybe the right thing to do was to engage themselves in the anti-trafficking campaign. For some, maybe they will continue to patronize the sex trade industry. 




Truly yours,


Czarina

Impressionable Young Minds

It is true what they say about children that they have impressionable minds. And it is precisely because of that that we should take extra care and caution of what we say and do to them and around them. So it is not surprising that the children that grow up to be the best people we know are those who have been constantly given and shown the right amount of affection and discipline.

Butt to discipline a child is entirely different from abusing them. It is often suggested that some of the ways parents have used to discipline their young are already forms of child abuse. I remember in grade school there was this television program showing stories of children who have suffered abuse from their families. Oddly enough then, it seemed like a normal thing to me that those incidents happened in poor families. But fifteen years later I realize those incidents may be happening on a regular basis, but they should not be. In no person's eyes or thoughts should it ever be alright that a child be subject to any form of physical, mental, emotional, or social suffering.

I found an article written by my professor in Rights of Women and Children a few years ago. It lays down elements of what acts by adults would constitute discipline still, and what acts are those that are already borderlining abuse. You can find a copy of her article in the link below. One of those she listed down was if the act was anger-driven. It says in sum that when an adult punishes an action by a child because it caused him anger, then that act of punishment is a form of abuse. I personally experienced this as a child when my nanny scalded me with a hot kettle on my left shoulder when I was about three years old. She got infuriated with me for being a bit of a rugrat.

Child abuse need not be entirely physical as well. I remember one of my high school teachers in religion class shared one of his experiences as a child. We were discussing the power of spoken words could do to others and so we must be careful what we say to them. He noted that this care must be extended especially to children because children have such a terse memory and a fragile hearts, and so they can remember most what struck them most may it be positive or negative. He was in elementary school and they were rehearsing a dance performance for a school feast. During their rehearsals he had some difficulty following the steps so his teacher lost her temper at him. She marched onto the stage, he recalls, and pulled him by the arm and said "Bakit ba hindi mo makuha? Ang tanga tanga mo namang bata ka! Hindi ka marunong sumayaw!" 

Children have a way of retaining memories that affect them. That is probably why you could remember something from as far back when you were five or eight. You remember when someone calls you ugly, or stupid. You remember the first time you were praised for creating a grand sculpture or winning a medal for running. You remember it because it made you feel in a way that you liked, or that you did not.

Children remember as much of those because they are eager to learn. Instinctively, they learn through experience, and in experience, you listen with your mind and your heart. Because of that, childhood memories are sometimes hard to shake. There are so embedded in you that even when you try to forget some of them, you remember them again later on. And so this is what adults hope to achieve when they discipline their children. But just keep in mind and in heart that whatever children experience, they never forget, much like you do.

I just hope that this is not too much for you to remember. I hope you do not forget.


Here is the link to my professor's article:
http://pinayjustice.blogspot.com/2005/04/child-abuse-or-child-discipline.html



Hoping to inspire,


Czarina
April 3, 2014- 4:30pm
"Na sa kabataan ang pag-asa ng bayan."
                       - Dr. Jose P. Rizal

How bothersome

Watching the news today made me realize we are the specie that is never content with what we have. In a way it is a good thing because our thirst for bigger and better things drives us to be extraordinary. Most of the time though, we can never get our heads together and see what we have.

It is just disappointing. I don't know if somebody else out there sees it, but it seems no matter how much we try nothing better than the desire to live above standards will prevail. We are driven by desires and nothing more. We are blind to how this affects others. Or maybe there are those who see, but refuse to do anything. Maybe there are those who care, but end up doing the wrong thing. 

Maybe this is the sign that we are close to another world revolution.

-Czarina

A sincere thanks, from the people of the Philippines

In light of the recent events in the Philippines, I would like to extend the warmest thanks, on behalf of the Filipino people, to the international community for the quick responses. These initiatives you made to reach out to the Philippines warmed the hearts of those in need in the affected regions. Thank you for sending aid to the people in the Visayan region despite your non-affiliation towards us. It may be that some are obligated and some are not, but thank you nonetheless. Your aid will never be forgotten, I promise you that.

I would also like to thank the local international non-government organizations for their initiatives. Lastly, I would like to thank the other private institutions and other local governments for their efforts.

To the foreign aid governments, thank you for filling in the void that our national government seems incapable to do at this time. The amount of relief goods you sent in no doubt will reduce the state of anarchy in these areas. Also, thank you for reducing the task load of the national government in what they needed to provide for in such a state of calamity. At least now they could focus on reconstructing, restoring, and rehabilitating these cities.

To the non-government organizations, other local governments, and institutions, thank you for you relief efforts. Thank you for taking the initiative to help the victims make it through this tough period in their lives.

Now that you have taken care of this angle of the problem resolution, I have to wonder what our national government is doing to rehabilitate the areas destroyed not just by the typhoon, but also by the preceding earthquake. I guess now it is their turn. If only they will respond just as quick.

This is not the kind of Christmas that many of us here wished and hoped to have. But despite our losses, you gave us a glimpse of hope that we can move forward still. 

Thank you and may you have a blessed holiday ahead of you.

Greatfully yours,

Czarina

Medieval Governance

I would like to make a sarcastic note first:
"Want to take a trip back in time and see the middle ages? Oh wait, we're here already."

We are currently caught in the middle of the "pork barrel scandal". For this entry, I would like to recognize my esteemed professor in administrative law for giving our class this assignment because it just made me realize how much immature, or premature our government really is-- even with our glorified president in power right now.

As I write here, the newspapers are scattered with clippings and opinions on these funds. The news currently states that our government plans on abolishing these funds in the next budget allocation and adds that due to the findings of misuse and misappropriation of the funds by legislators, the budget is set to be re-allocated to the branch of government that should be the one to hold the funds for projects. The executive branch being at the forefront of this seems to be appropriate. I would also agree with the budget reform plans that they should be the branch given the funds since they are the ones

Coming fresh from reading medieval history, the excruciating image of the reign of monarchs is still in my head. Because of  this, I realized that there really is not much of a difference in the way they ruled and the way the state of our government is right now. I remember writing a few years ago in my political science essay that our government is still young and underdeveloped despite being in the advent of the age of technological advancements. It is sad to think, but I still hold that opinion today. The horrible part is probably that the whole scheme of it is familiar to that period of state governance when king-militants were necessary. I guess this shows just how much we have progressed in the area of state governance. Or has it?

But what I think is worse of it is that I held out hope for impending development. But to give the President the benefit of the doubt, I do believe and think that he is doing a better job than any of the past administrations-- other than Magsaysay of course.

What is it then with the medieval ages that I found is so familiar still in today's government? The discretion. Back then, the king held all the power subject to what he deemed would be a favorable decision to God's will. He gave grants and gifts to his kinsmen as a form of political alliance. This was to show that the power and resources were being distributed evenly so that they would reach the people, the ultimate beneficiaries of it all. He decides then who gets the royal titles, and the lands and riches that go along with them and who gets the favors from the royal treasury. Evidently, it is up to his good graces. The decision as to who gets what is decided by a single factor, political alliance. As a result, members of the royalty tried their best to be on the king and queen's favor in hopes of being given those titles.

Today those good graces and discretionary powers of the king are apparently still around. History would show us that several treaties and international conventions were signed to strip monarchs of such powers. Thus the formation of other forms of government. The laws were revised and the separation of powers were encoded in what several states today call the constitution. In our country's current state, I slowly realized how much the separation of powers imbibed in the constitution serves only as a reminder, but that it takes no particular effect to the actual exercise of these powers. 

Dani

November 7, 2013- 10:42PM

Take everything with a grain of salt

I've Got this in the Bag!

That was just one of the few phrases that lingered in my head as I pretended to be one of the top contending candidates for this year's senatorial and local elections. Yes, dear citizens, it is that time of year again, and it is that time when we must all go about our duties as citizens and elect some people into office again. Sam old same old.

But then again, maybe it's not the same. I realized checking out these candidate's commercials that something  has changed. It hasn't gone on a complete 180 spin, but perhaps a 30 degree spin for the better? I'd add a smile to that because it means the race is getting tougher to win. And by that, I mean the following factors have changed substantially in terms of national poll results and advertising strategies:

1. Less candidates seem to make campaigns revolving on being seen with the poor
2. Less poor people shown in commercials
3. Less celebrity endorsers
4. More talking in advertisements
5. More speeches on what their platforms are, though they do not really elaborate on any plan
6. Still the same promise of eradicating poverty, but still no clear plan of action
7. More interaction with people of the working class-- which I think is to simulate the idea that they are going to make more policies on quality job opportunities.
8. More smiling in campaigns
9. More political endorsers-- it's an evolution from the less celebrity endorsers. I think this was meant to raise their credibility status in the public eye. I just don't know by how much
10. More serious smiles in photographs rather than "cute-pleasantry" smiles.
11. More posters and fliers illegally posted everywhere.-- Which I think they should be penalized for.
12. More campaign caravans with irritating jingles.
13. More sympathetic commercials regarding their outlook over the Filipino poor
14. More ballot numbers in posters


So, for the most part this list comprises of observations mainly on the main factors purportedly affecting voters' choice. Back in college my friend and I wrote our senior research paper on the same subject, only it was to compare the national and barangay elections in 2010. I'd be doing the same here only it would be shorter and would mainly be about the national elections only.

In its most recent survey, Pulse Asia released results on the top contenders for seats in the Senate. Not surprisingly, most of them are incumbents, and at the top of the ranks are those who were personally endorsed by the President himself in TV commercials.A short note I have about this move is a simple question. This question is directed to the President: "Why would you make such a political move?" On the plausible honest side I would like to give the benefit of the doubt that he truly believes in the capabilities and moral of these people. On the odd side that this is merely a political campaign to boost his party's name, I think it is a very cautious move. Then again, he is the President, and I doubt he would make such a move that he knew would hurt his reputation. I just think that on the blind side it is giving off the notion that he favors this set of candidates to win so that he would fully support their proposals.It comes of as a prejudiced move in short.

As to incumbents being at the top ranks, I would have to commend them on that because it means that campaign wise, they are very good-- or very creative. Still, what this only means for the veracity of campaign ads in pre-election periods is that they are still a very powerful force even with the learned. It is quite bothersome, but at the same time, commendable. Bothersome because it only shows how much better political analysts and campaign managers have gotten much better at merging recent favors of the electorate and purporting that to be the spitting image of the candidate's plan. Commendable because it means the Filipino voter is getting more complex and prudent when it comes to voting for a candidate. 

This is evidenced by the attempted data input in the campaigns. An example would be illustrating or indicating their platforms. Though still general, the attempt is shown. The mere phrasing of "I will eradicate poverty and create more viable jobs" is no longer good enough to sway the average voter. I guess this is the product of years of experience under non-productivity from incumbents. I am surprised though at the slow pace of realization. But the electorate cannot be blamed. After all, it was only under the recent regime change that honest information freely circulated.

For the most part though, I guess you could say an increased quality in voter scrutiny and campaign complexity is at hand. They are not completely at the stage of "let us see what his platform is" because as you can see, most of the incumbents are still at the top ranks. How do I know then that voters have become more prudent? From the campaign materials being flashed on screen and in the radio. If you could listen to one, the prominent features from the fifteen I mentioned are the mention of plans, less celebrities, and more political endorsers. Not much progress though on the manifestation theory on physical presence because campaign posters have evolved to show the ballot number of the candidate.

Just a note to the candidates then, do not be mad, or start filing suits against COMELEC if your ballot number is suddenly changed. it was you who decided to endorse yourself using your ballot number and nobody else. However I would have to say that that is highly unethical.

Back to the campaign results then. As mentioned, the voter scrutiny has changed. Why then? More than the fact of more information circulating, it is the fact that members of the electorate are tired of mere unfulfilled promises. This is why-- to the candidates who have nothing but songs and smiles in their campaigns-- it is likely that voters would choose to vote for those whom they actually hear concrete plans from. Though they may not be well-planned out, these plans would be worth their vote.

It is now only six more days before the election. I would love to tell you who to vote, and who not to vote, but I will not. Yes, I will not do such out of my conscious effort to help you exercise your right. It is your right, not mine, nor anybody else's. So choose wisely my dear citizens...




With faithful scrutiny,


Czarina

Here's to Hoping

To the Senate President, 

Shame on you! Shame on you  for even merely entertaining the idea of distributing those funds to your senator friends. Shame on you for tainting the honorable office that you hold. Mostly, shame on you for demeaning yourself. I was beginning to look up to you after your incredible speech during the impeachment trial. Now, those expectations just dropped a hundred degrees below zero. I am sorry that I might cause you some hurt if you ever get to see this. I am sorry that you are old enough to not change. And I am sorry that your better judgement might have gotten lost somewhere in the books and papers you have piled up. Maybe it's somewhere in your gloomy office at PECABAR *yes I've been there a few years ago on a career trip*. Mostly though, I am sorry that I think this way of you and you probably don't even deserve it. But what would I know, I'm still learning.

Forgive me for this ungraceful note, but I think it is just for you to hear such a criticism especially at this time when expectations have run higher and higher than they ever have. I thank the President for that. I was hoping to see the same illustrious performance from the senate, but then again, the people there still do not seem to know what being a senator truly means. Again, I apologize for tarnishing your reputation even more, but this is not my intention.

Prudence and honor are merely some of the compositions that I look for in a statesman. Sadly that does not seem to be present in many of our legislators. I do not hope to offend any more than I might already have. But you know how the Tagalog saying goes, "bato bato sa langit, tamaaan huwag magalit." I believe that our ancestors came up with that idiom for a good reason. However, as to you sir, I expect no hurt because I want to believe that a Senate President does not have anything to be embarrassed or ashamed of. I still want to believe that. And I am hoping that I will soon learn to. I am hoping that soon, I will come to have some form of faith in the legislature.

I am nothing but disappointed in what transpired in that session. The President's headlining comment made my day then. I seriously hope not to see anymore setbacks from this branch than it has accumulated. But to me, the lowest point of that confrontation was the mere fact that it had to happen at all.

First  of all, why doe the Office of the Senate President give out such funds to other members of the senate? For what use is it? I should think the answer is obvious but I refuse to state it out loud because I said, I wish to gain even a shred of faith in this branch. And it is proving to be more difficult than I had hoped. Those funds were initially meant for what? I was under the impression that members of senate had a pork barrel as well because it was to "aid in executing projects as approved in legislature". Though what these projects are I have no idea. Perhaps I should care to ask the common passerby. Or perhaps the little man crossing the street carrying a rice sack filled with assorted items to his home on the corner of the side walk next to the decrepit street light. Or I could be wrong. Perhaps those funds were meant for the internal operations and daily functions of your office? Please do educate me on this matter.

Either way, I need a very basic answer to a very basic question. What were those funds of the office for? Why were they distributed to members of the senate? And, perhaps most important for this sparked all the controversy, why were the amounts distributed uneven as to the four members? You might not see this, but I am hoping for an honest and honorable answer good sir.

Second of all, why did you retaliate during the interrogation? Being the intelligent man that you are and the knowledgeable lawyer I know you to be, why on earth would you answer that way?

In criminal law, it is common knowledge that flight is an evidence of guilt. To this end sir, that manner of speech you did shows a retaliation that tries to escape from a problem. I am not sure if this lackluster defense of yours is due to your age, but nonetheless, your honor should have spoken true for you. And with that I pity you. I pity you for despite the riches you have gained, which I know you will also try to disguise, the end of your graceful career  as a statesman will always be tarnished with your ungracious evasion of that question.

I am sorry Mr. President. I am sorry your peers at the senate hoped to remove you from your position. I am sorry nothing is going well for you now. But when you get to see this, and I am hoping that you do, I hope you come to realize that at the end of all this, nothing is more worth than living for the betterment of all. Nothing, sir. Nothing.


Hoping for more enlightened days,


Czarina