RemSpace

between Puerto Rico and (surprise, surprise) Japan! My golly, this year is perhaps the most surprising Miss Universe of them all. Imagine, Miss Russia made it to the Top 20! And Japan, despite having beautiful candidates in the past, I have never imagined this year’s Miss Japan would reach the prestigious Top 5!

There is a twist in this year’s Top 20 lineup. While Europe and the Americas dominated the roster, it was a shock that none from the favorite Latin countries – Mexico, Colombia, even Venezuela – made it to the Top 5. Perhaps Puerto Rico, another Caribbean bet, is the only exception.

Last year’s Top 5 saw the only non-Latin beauty – Miss Canada, Natalie Glebova – winning the crown. This year, the Top 5 was a dazzling and a “multi-faceted” roster – Switzerland (Lauriane Gillieron), Paraguay (Lourdes Arevalos), USA (Tara Conner), and as mentioned before, Puerto Rico (Zuleyka Rivera Mendoza) and Japan (Kurara Chibana). I liked the last two as they fared well in the final question and answer portion. In the pre-final question, however, Miss Japan wowed the crowd as she attempted to steal the limelight by making a last-minute greeting in not-so-fluent English. But that made me think that perhaps she might become this year’s Miss Universe. Nevertheless, Miss Puerto Rico, like Miss Japan, answered intelligently in the final question.

Announcement time came, and the hosts said the name: disappointingly, Miss Japan landed only on the second spot. And obviously it was Miss Puerto Rico who took home the bacon – or the pearl-and-diamond-adorned tiara, so to speak. (She, by the way, reportedly fell unconscious after the pageant due to fatigue) Which means that the Latinas reigned once more. Anyway, I am still happy that Japan reached the Top 5, and nonetheless got the first runner-up slot. At least, she also bagged the Best in National Costume trophy as she donned a samurai-like attire. And she was the only Asian in the Top 5, and also the best evening gown (that’s my opinion). That for me is an achievement worthy of recognition back home.

But some old things never change: the Philippines failed again in its bid to see another Filipina wear the crown. On the other hand, Lia Andrea Ramos only earned something that can be still considered an achievement – Miss Photogenic, despite the fact that it was based on people’s choice (online poll, that is), and you know how great Filipinos are at this. Miss Congeniality was Miss Ghana (Angela Asare), and (as already mentioned) Miss Japan won the Best in National Costume award.

It was an amazing ceremony. Among the four hosts, Queer Eye for the Straight Guy’s Fashion Savant Carson Kressley managed to blurt his usual funny spiels despite having admitted to still being on a jet lag (thanks to his trip with the other members of the Fab 5 here in Manila over the weekend). I just wondered why Miss Universe this year aired only now (the month of July), which usually occurs every last week of May. Perhaps we should ask… The Donald (Trump).

I’m tired of writing lengthy articles just to speak my mind. So I prepared a set of questions for you to ponder on. All of these questions revolve around (well as the title says) the never-ending debate on nationalism: (I would be glad for you to add more questions should you think of any, just feel free to do so)

Are you nationalistic? Just how nationalistic are you? Are you no longer nationalistic:

If you speak English more often than Filipino?

If you wear and adorn yourself with foreign-made clothes and accessories?

If you gobble up fast foods or Western/foreign foods than local ones?

If you are more enthusiastic with foreign acts than local ones?

If you listen more to foreign music than local ones?

If you know foreign dance moves more than local dances?

If you read foreign books and periodicals than local ones?

If you watch more foreign movies and programs than local ones?

If you no longer sing the National Anthem or the Panatang Makabayan? (Rel: If you know Star-Spangled Banner more than Lupang Hinirang, or Bayang Magiliw, or however you call it?)

If you have forgotten our National Symbols? (Rel: If you know the US Constitution better than our own?)

If you refuse to exercise your right of suffrage?

If you decide to leave the Philippines to find work elsewhere?

If you decide to migrate to other countries and become a dual citizen?

If you refuse to return to the Philippines and become TNT?

If you enroll in a caregiving or nursing course and leave the country after graduating? (Rel: If you enroll in other courses and decide to leave as well?)

If you’re a teacher/nurse/doctor/professional and decide to work abroad?

If you rally against the government? (Rel: If you already grew cynical of the government?)

If you have basically acquired American or Western values – both positive and negative?

If you have basically acquired Filipino values – both positive and negative?

If you feel unsafe in here?

If you feel Philippines is not your home? (Rel: If you deny your Filipino citizenship when someone asks you of your nationality?)

If you favor federalism or parliamentary form of government? (Rel: If you favor Charter Change, and policies like opening the Philippines up for foreign investments and ownership?)

If you are dissatisfied with the way the government works?

If you refuse to exercise your freedoms as an individual?

Again, feel free to post more questions, and I’ll publish them all. Remember, only questions that start with “If” and must correspond to the clause “Are you no longer nationalistic.” We should all ponder to ask ourselves with these questions and come up with a variety of responses. Remember, not one answer is right.

Remember these words:

“Let a hundred thousand flowers bloom; Let a hundred thousand schools of thought contend” – Chairman Mao Tse-tung

“I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend till death your right to say it” – Voltaire

How come I never burn “at the stake” whenever I attend masses? Oh well, I’ve forgotten. I only go to the church to listen to the gospel, and not to hear the Church lambaste on us gays and lesbians. The priests may cast the first stone to us, that’s okay (and I think it’s how the society would deem it fit), but then had they forgotten the sins of the clergy over there in the United States?

The sexual abuse scandals involving the Roman Catholic priests in the US some couple of years ago rocked the whole Christendom. Even the late Pope John Paul II tried to calm dowm the growing disbelief and disappointment by Catholics worldwide and in the US over the incident, while at the same time gave the “sinful” priests their deserved reprimand.

For sometimes I still don’t understand why being gay is sinful in the eyes of the Church when the clergy themselves keep dark secrets within their closet. Don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against this whole institution. I still go to the church every Sunday, and try to faithfully abide by the canons of my faith. But the Church’s amorphous nature only complicates my already ambiguous search for answers behind the Church’s stand on the existence of gays and lesbians in this world.

If I’m not wrong with my information, homosexuality existed even before Christ was born in this world. In ancient Greece, to see homosexual relationship between two Greek men, mostly soldiers, was considered neither abnormal nor immoral. Nevertheless most societies abhor homosexuality as taboo.

But following the sexual revolution of the 1960s as an offshoot of the paradigm shift at that time that gave rise to other schools of thought and movements like women’s liberation, anti-racism and socialism, the world is slowly but surely realizing the emancipation of the gay movement. Look around, and in every sector of our society, the presence of gays and lesbians in the academe, in the workplace and in the bureaucracy, albeit experiencing discriminations nevertheless, are all but evidence of the society’s increasing tolerance of homosexuality.

And the Church? Well, we Filipinos still look up to this institution (the way our Muslim brethren and ethnic kinsfolk look up to their faith) with high regard. As the biggest Christian denomination in all of Asia and perhaps the Far East (applying the hegemonistic Western perspective), the Church plays a central role in our daily lives, sometimes to everyone’s detriment.

We all recognize the pivotal role the Church played in the ouster of former strongman Ferdinand Marcos and actor turned president Joseph Estrada. But when the Church already turns didactic in influencing government policies, especially the controversial debate on population control and contraception, and on Charter Change, we all but somehow question the legitimacy of their moves. Isn’t the Church supposed to be separated from all affairs of the State, as our Constitution so provides? Well, being a Third World country does somehow explain the Church’s increasing role in the society, especially in our case where a lameduck government prevails and a climate of volatility looms.

In contrast to most developed nations in Western Europe, supposedly the bastion of Catholic faith, church attendance has dwindled in the last two decades as more people grow more satisfied with the efficiency of their governments in providing for their needs. And they also have a more liberal society. Divorce, which is loathed by our bishops, is legal in France and Italy. Canada and Spain, which brought Catholicism to the Philippines, allowed same-sex marriage. And euthanasia is legal in the Netherlands. In some other Catholic nations, prostitution and gambling, which are considered taboo in the Philippines, are also legalized.

Ok, perhaps we are somehow losing our way from our original argument. Well, we are actually questioning the integrity of the Church in our lives. Why “solid” Catholics shrink in number worldwide can be attributed to the Church’s losing integrity. It detests the use of condoms and artificial contraceptives for population growth as they are “sinful” but they are unable to provide solid answers (and I mean a lot of answers, not one) to curb the growing population and stop poverty. It abhors homosexuality but it lost sight on the horrible acts of some of its priests.

One can never expect good things from the Church when the Church itself cannot expect good things from within themselves. The Church after all is never powerful, nor clean. And if they’re indeed powerful, how come they can’t burn me at stake in the Church? And perhaps I am never alone in that thinking. On one rainy Sunday evening, I was in the church in Tayuman with my mother, and I noticed two pairs of male “couples” attending Mass as well. They’re sweet to each other, I observed. At the very least, I thought, they have the balls to reveal their true identities. Unlike the Church whose priests need to hide their acts under their robes, and still continue to preach against homosexuality.

Now, between the Church and the homosexual community, who’s got the dirty linen?

While everyone of us realize the fact that gays and lesbians in our society are prevalent and ubiquitous nowadays, we can hardly simply disregard one sad truth however – that even in a country like ours where the bakla and the tomboy are thriving somewhat in such a harsh environment, there are still guys and gals out there that remain troubled with getting out of the closet. In short, marami pa ring paminta. I myself know of persons I befriend in UP Diliman falling under this category.

I classify them into two sub-categories: pamintang buo and pamintang durog. While most of them are aware of their sexual orientation, they only vary in their approach to their sexual preference.

For example, many guys are the pamintang buo type. For persons whose eyes and nose are trained to distinguish such, or those born with built-in sensors, doing this task should no longer daunt them. And yet, for guys under this category, they can camouflage well so as not to be exposed. Why hide? Because they believe that the only way to survive the torments would be hiding. How to distinguish them? Well, we can hardly tell. As I told already, only a trained pair of eyes and nose or the sensors could do the trick. But for preliminary clues, look for the body gestures. Sometimes, you can catch through minor body languages whether this guy hides something. But beware, looks can still deceive! Even the cutest guy in town could be IT. Some may act effeminately, but then deep inside they are straight; while others may flaunt their collection of girlfriends, only to find one dating another more masculine than him. We can understand why most pamintang buo deny instantly whenever “rumors” circulate regarding his sexuality.

But then there remains a number of gays out there who, despite bearing all the semblances of a gay, insists that he is not. Ok, that’s the more bizarre type. He’s out, that’s true, and yet he denies as though he is just acting “normally”. And I know of guys who fall under this category – the pamintang durog. We can also understand why they need to conceal their cloak, although it won’t suffice. Still, the fact remains that they have come out in the open, and such contradictions all but complicate matters.

Being paminta is never sinful. Sexuality must therefore be put into the context of cultural determinism, or influence to be more politically correct. Biology dictates that there are only two sexes – the male and the female, and the genitals manifest this difference. But society tends to blur this distinction, as the concept of sexual preference explains, where people are no longer confined to that convention, that sexuality as manifested in the gonads is different from sexuality as dictated upon or influenced by culture and the predominant course of action in the environs. And the stimulus is to either tolerate or disdain the presence of homosexuals and bisexuals vis-a-vis the heterosexuals. And for the pamintas, they believe that the society will easily despise them once they come out. Or perhaps they acquire that trauma of being discriminated upon, such as those open homosexuals and bisexuals (either open or hiding) experienced. Moreso in a predominantly Catholic nation like the Philippines where it is sinful to be a homo or a bi.

To say that these pamintas are all but undergoing a major identity crisis is understandable. Truly, it’s hard to shout to the whole world who you really are, or you are confused about yourself. But don’t worry, it won’t last that long. And in the end, it all boils down to two choices – either you choose to be straight, or not. Perhaps you might choose the third one – which is to enjoy the best of both worlds. But who cares? After all those acrimonious sexual prejudices, the gays have withstood the tests of society. Where are they now? Look around. Were they never proud of their sexual preference? Ask them. Their mere presence demonstrates the height of that pride. So for the paminta out there, never hide yourself. Forget about that stereotypes and those chauvinist remarks you receive (or you perceive you would receive). To be true to yourself and to others – that should be the real essence of being gay. And happy.

PS: Just one word of advice: Since being gay requires carrying the gaydom’s name (and I mean the global gay community) everytime, never put the name and the reputation of the gays in this world, and in this country in particular, into bad light.

Next Week: Being Gay, and other topics I would like to raise