White men and Filipinas
elson
I think white males are after Filipinas because:
1) They can't get any white women themselves.
2) All white women are promiscuous VD-infested whores anyway.
3) They feel Filipinas will be more impressed by their penis size,
because white women will are more critical of it, since they've seen
and done it all.
4) THEY feel that since Filipinas are smaller than they are, they
will provide a "tighter fit."
5) THEY feel that Filipinas are not as accustomed to the concept of
such deficiencies as impotence, making them feel more like the studs
they are.
6) THEY think that only white women get PMS.
7) Of all minorities, white males feel that Filipinas (and Asian women in
general) are "model minorities" and will not mess up the Aryan bloodline as
much as Black women or Latinas.
Offended? Well, now we know which side of the fence you're on!
WATCH! WATCH! The only people who will flame me will be white males!
-- 30 --
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
E l s o n T r i n i d a d _______________________________
etri...@scf.usc.edu /_____________ /
University of Southern California /_____________ /
Los Angeles, California
This .sig is earthquake-resistant.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Rhett Valino Pascual
>
>I think white males are after Filipinas because:
>
A lot of amazing crap edited out. I'm sitting here thinking that this
must surely be flamebait. I mean, no one could be this ignorant.
>
>Offended? Well, now we know which side of the fence you're on!
>
>WATCH! WATCH! The only people who will flame me will be white males!
Last time I looked, my skin was as brown as adobo. But perhaps I have
been in America for too long. So, let me just say this. What you posted
has slightly offended me. I am offended not because of the frank and
unsubstantiated statements. I am offended that one could even write
something so intellectually unstimulating that it belongs where smuck runs
into smut.
However, I am truly impressed by the fact that you could actually think
up of all the stuff I deleted and that you could actually type them using
your keyboard. This suggests some control of motor skills but, some
semblance of rudimentary lower brain function, but a lack of higher brain
function.
So I am still in the dark. Was it flamebait or not? Para bagang
"Istupido ba ito, o matalino?"
--
***********************************************************************
Rhett V. Pascual : gldn...@uclink.berkeley.edu : Cal '90
If you are an alum from UC Berkeley, ask me about the private e-mail
directory I am compiling. GO BEARS!!!
Aaron B. Peterson
elson (etri...@aludra.usc.edu) wrote:
: I think white males are after Filipinas because:
: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:
Mr. Trinidad,
I am very impressed with your vast knowledge of all (approx.) 100
million white American males. That must take a fair amount of time, to
meet every single one and know what they're all about. Because we
certainly know an educated man like yourself wouldn't discriminate
against a people due to their skin and gender. Of course not!
Keep up the good work, Mr. Trinidad. I am glad my husband let me
use his account so I could read about American Filipinos and their opinions.
-Lenlen Cordero Peterson
(Filipina married to a WHITE MALE)
from Dinalupihan, Bataan
now living in Moscow, Idaho
c/o
pete...@crow.csrv.uidaho.edu
Elizabeth Hildegard Pisares
Rhett Valino Pascual <gldn...@uclink.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>In article <2lt04r$c...@aludra.usc.edu>, elson <etri...@aludra.usc.edu> wrote:
>>
>>I think white males are after Filipinas because:
>>
>
>A lot of amazing crap edited out. I'm sitting here thinking that this
>must surely be flamebait. I mean, no one could be this ignorant.
Yes, I'm *certain* Elson intended this as flame bait, probably for (whitemale)
netcom.com owners with nothing better to do but call Filipinas ho's. However,
Rhett, believe or not, there are individuals out there who believe all that
"amazing crap," (though, Elson, you forgot to add that Filipinas are supposed
to have horozontal vaginas ;-) ).
Its amazing and frightening, the number of people out there who really buy
into the popular stereotypes of Filipinas and other Asian women. Or, as
Jessica Hagedorn put it, we are supposed to be:
Pearl of the Orient. Whore. Geisha. Concubine. Whore. Hostess. Bar
Girl. Mama-san. Whore. China Doll. Tokyo Rose. Whore. Butterfly.
Whore. Miss Saigon. Whore. Dragon Lady. Lotus Blossom. Gook. Whore
Yellow Peril. Whore. Bangkok Bombshell. Whore. Hospitality Girl.
Whore. Comfort Woman. Whore. Savage. Whore. Sultry. Whore.
Faceless. Whore. Porcelain. Whore. Demure. Whore. Virgin. Whore.
Mute. Whore. Model Minority. Whore. Victim. Whore. Woman Warrior.
Whore. Mail-Order Bride. Whore. Mother. Wife. Lover. Daughter.
Sister.
"Asian Women in Film: No Joy, No Luck." In _Ms._ 4:4
January/February 1994, pg. 74.
Personally, I--as well as those close to me--see myself as "Lover.
Daughter. Sister." But there are many, many others who associate Filipinas
with less dignified female roles. And the recurring requests on
soc.culture.filipino for Filipina pen-pals, Filipina wives, Filipina cunts,
lovely obedient Filipinas, etc., just confirm my suspicion that these
stereotypes of Filipinas are alive and well in the U.S. (or, at least among
a number of computer account owners.) Its become so bad that some days I'll
just mark the newsgroup as "all read" to avoid getting upset. But I'm
glad I didn't do that today, because otherwise I would not have seen Elson's
cynical, angry post, read it with indignant glee, and responded to his
post in order to say "It was ugly and repugnant, but someone had to say it."
liz pisares, UC Berkeley Class of 1993--GO BEARS!
--
^ ELIZABETH H. PISARES graduate student ^
^ Department of English ^
^ el...@soda.berkeley.edu University of California ^
^ el...@uclink.berkeley.edu Berkeley CA 94720 ^
Virgilio (Dean) B. Velasco Jr.
>In article <2ltb83$a...@agate.berkeley.edu>,
>Rhett Valino Pascual <gldn...@uclink.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>>In article <2lt04r$c...@aludra.usc.edu>, elson <etri...@aludra.usc.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>>I think white males are after Filipinas because:
>>
>>A lot of amazing crap edited out. I'm sitting here thinking that this
>>must surely be flamebait. I mean, no one could be this ignorant.
>
>Yes, I'm *certain* Elson intended this as flame bait, probably for (whitemale)
>netcom.com owners with nothing better to do but call Filipinas ho's.
Yeah. I'm glad that _somebody_ got the point of Elson's post.
Someone other than myself, that is.
[Perhaps we should explain the concept of sarcasm someday? :-) ]
>It's become so bad that some days I'll
>just mark the newsgroup as "all read" to avoid getting upset. But I'm
>glad I didn't do that today, because otherwise I would not have seen Elson's
>cynical, angry post, read it with indignant glee, and responded to his
>post in order to say "It was ugly and repugnant, but someone had to say it."
Cynical and angry are indeed appropriate terms to describe Elson's post
--though I can see how someone, in his/her haste, might miss this point.
--
Virgilio "Dean" Velasco Jr, Department of Electrical Eng'g and Applied Physics
graduate student slave, roboticist-in-training and Q wannabee
Beam me up, Scotty. | I practice the safest form of sex | Will design robots
It ate my phaser. | known. It's called abstinence. | for food.
Szu-Yuan Tu Huang
intelligent, adorable, etc. It can become quite unfair to the former if we
overgeneralize on this topic.
Mike Huang
Rhett Valino Pascual
Virgilio (Dean) B. Velasco Jr. <v...@giskard.eeap.cwru.edu> wrote:
>In article <2ltop9$d...@agate.berkeley.edu> el...@soda.berkeley.edu (Elizabeth Hildegard Pisares) writes:
>>Rhett Valino Pascual <gldn...@uclink.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>>>In article <2lt04r$c...@aludra.usc.edu>, elson <etri...@aludra.usc.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>I think white males are after Filipinas because:
>>>
>>>A lot of amazing crap edited out. I'm sitting here thinking that this
>>>must surely be flamebait. I mean, no one could be this ignorant.
>>
>>Yes, I'm *certain* Elson intended this as flame bait, probably for (whitemale)
>>netcom.com owners with nothing better to do but call Filipinas ho's.
>
>Someone other than myself, that is.
>
>[Perhaps we should explain the concept of sarcasm someday? :-) ]
Well, yes, Virgilio. Why don't we explain what sarcasm is. I always
thought that sarcasm is something that should be obvious. However, when
people mistake sarcasm for something else like stupidity and
insensitivity and outright katangahan, well it is no longer sarcasm.
And even rereading that post does not make it clear that it is sarcasm.
So here is a suggestion to every single reader out there. If you thought
the original post was sarcasm, e-mail me saying so. If you thought it
was stupid and infantile, e-mail me. Let's tally this up.
Deadline to vote is March 21.
Virgilio (Dean) B. Velasco Jr.
>In article <2ltp8n$6...@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>,
>Virgilio (Dean) B. Velasco Jr. <v...@giskard.eeap.cwru.edu> wrote:
>
>Well, yes, Virgilio. Why don't we explain what sarcasm is. I always
>thought that sarcasm is something that should be obvious.
I suggest opening a dictonary then. Sarcasm does not, by any means,
have to be obvious.
>And even rereading that post does not make it clear that it is sarcasm.
Sure. That's because, as I stressed before, it should be read
in the context of the entire thread.
>So here is a suggestion to every single reader out there. If you thought
>the original post was sarcasm, e-mail me saying so. If you thought it
>was stupid and infantile, e-mail me. Let's tally this up.
Something tells me that since you've already stated your position
-- in quite vehement terms, in fact -- somebody else should probably
do the tallying. That is, if we want people to believe the results.
Not that I think there's any point in doing so. It is an intellectual
cop-out to decide what's right based on what the majority think is right.
Rhett Valino Pascual
>>the original post was sarcasm, e-mail me saying so. If you thought it
>>was stupid and infantile, e-mail me. Let's tally this up.
>
>-- in quite vehement terms, in fact -- somebody else should probably
>do the tallying. That is, if we want people to believe the results.
Very well. Would you volunteer to do this tallying? BTW, <sniff,
sniff> I am hurt that you don't trust me. <sniff, sniff>
>
>Not that I think there's any point in doing so. It is an intellectual
>cop-out to decide what's right based on what the majority think is right.
I must agree with your point in a scientific sense. However, if it was not
obvious to anyone
that Elson was being sarcastic or writing satire, then it seems like he
is a racist. So the poll would determine in the most simplistic manner
whether or not Elson's writing style came through to most people.
However, I must hasten to add that in dealing with society, one must
often define "right" as what the majority thinks is right. For example,
we look at Aztecs sacrificing virgins as wrong. But for the Aztec
civilization, this was the only way to assure a bountiful harvest. So in
their society, sacrifices are "right."
Now, applying this to Elson's diatribe, is the method which he chose
right or wrong? Well, since most people I have seen who posted their
opinions were offended, then Elson's post was wrong.
Virgilio (Dean) B. Velasco Jr.
>In article <2m33jv$k...@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>,
>Virgilio (Dean) B. Velasco Jr. <v...@giskard.eeap.cwru.edu> wrote:
>>
>>Something tells me that since you've already stated your position
>>-- in quite vehement terms, in fact -- somebody else should probably
>>do the tallying. That is, if we want people to believe the results.
>
>Very well. Would you volunteer to do this tallying? BTW, <sniff,
>sniff> I am hurt that you don't trust me. <sniff, sniff>
No. Read again. By my own statements, I disqualified myself.
Now think about it. You've argued for one side. Then you propose
tallying the number of people that agree/disagree with you. Suppose
that more people do side with you. Do you honestly think people will
believe your tally?
>>Not that I think there's any point in doing so. It is an intellectual
>>cop-out to decide what's right based on what the majority think is right.
>
>I must agree with your point in a scientific sense. However, if it was not
>obvious to anyone
>that Elson was being sarcastic or writing satire, then it seems like he
>is a racist.
It was obvious to me. It was also obvious to Ms. Pisares.
>So the poll would determine in the most simplistic manner
>whether or not Elson's writing style came through to most people.
The issue raised was whether or not his post was sarcastic/satirical --
not whether or not people misinterpreted it. The two are different
matters altogether. After all, if you're going to condemn someone,
you should condemn that person based on what he said -- not what
people think he said.
In fact, I raised this very issue, when I opined that such posts
can be counterproductive, due to misinterpretation.
>However, I must hasten to add that in dealing with society, one must
>often define "right" as what the majority thinks is right.
Baloney. Right is right -- even when you're in the minority.
No matter how many people adopt a wrong view, it is still wrong.
Rhett Valino Pascual
>>In article <2m33jv$k...@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>,
>>Virgilio (Dean) B. Velasco Jr. <v...@giskard.eeap.cwru.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>>Something tells me that since you've already stated your position
>>>-- in quite vehement terms, in fact -- somebody else should probably
>>>do the tallying. That is, if we want people to believe the results.
>>
>>Very well. Would you volunteer to do this tallying? BTW, <sniff,
>>sniff> I am hurt that you don't trust me. <sniff, sniff>
>
I still don't get it. The only part where I could see the you
disqualified yourself is pointed above. Yet is is not obvious to me.
Where exactly did you disqualify yourself?
>
>Now think about it. You've argued for one side. Then you propose
>tallying the number of people that agree/disagree with you. Suppose
>that more people do side with you. Do you honestly think people will
>believe your tally?
Well, silly me. Yes I did. What would be the point of lying about it?
None that I can see. But the other point of course is that since I
brought it up, I was willing to do the work.
>
>>>Not that I think there's any point in doing so. It is an intellectual
>>>cop-out to decide what's right based on what the majority think is right.
>>
>>I must agree with your point in a scientific sense. However, if it was not
>>obvious to anyone
>>that Elson was being sarcastic or writing satire, then it seems like he
>>is a racist.
>
>It was obvious to me. It was also obvious to Ms. Pisares.
Well, it was not obvious to three people. 1 e-mailed me. Two have been
frying Elson. And of course, it was not obvious to me.
>
>>So the poll would determine in the most simplistic manner
>>whether or not Elson's writing style came through to most people.
>
>The issue raised was whether or not his post was sarcastic/satirical --
>not whether or not people misinterpreted it. The two are different
>matters altogether. After all, if you're going to condemn someone,
>you should condemn that person based on what he said -- not what
>people think he said.
Nope this does not make sense. What Elson wrote was misconstrued as
being racist babble. He is being flamed for not being clear about his
sarcasm. Let's face it, he needs practice in writing. Whatever he wrote
whether he intended it to be sarcasm or not became racist babble. That
is what he is being flamed for. The point of whether it was satire or
not does not come in because some people did not see it as such.
>
>>However, I must hasten to add that in dealing with society, one must
>>often define "right" as what the majority thinks is right.
>
>Baloney. Right is right -- even when you're in the minority.
>No matter how many people adopt a wrong view, it is still wrong.
Ahh. Sarcasm, right? You can not seriously believe this? Let us take
the issue of morality. How would you define something that is right and
something that is wrong? Could you actually argue that something that is
right today will not be considered "wrong" in the future?
How about homosexuality? Before the 1970's, it was considered taboo by
society. Now, it is acceptable in some cities. So in the context of
history, homosexuality was wrong when viewed in the time frame of the
early 1800's. Now, it is an individual's choice.
Now, let us take an extreme example. Child pornography. It is clearly
morally unfavored at this time and this place. But, can you gurantee me
that in the next five hundred years that this will always be taboo? I
don't think so.
Fifty years ago, the idea of sexual freedom was taboo. Now, it is well
practiced and accepted as part of an individual's self.
Let's take another issue. Women working in jobs. One hundred years ago,
it was not acceptable for women to work. Now, they can work. So,
outside of science, whatever the majority thinks can determine what is
right and wrong.
Virgilio (Dean) B. Velasco Jr.
>In article <2m3cb3$6...@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>,
>Virgilio (Dean) B. Velasco Jr. <v...@giskard.eeap.cwru.edu> wrote:
>>
>>No. Read again. By my own statements, I disqualified myself.
>
>I still don't get it. The only part where I could see the you
>disqualified yourself is pointed above. Yet is is not obvious to me.
>Where exactly did you disqualify yourself?
When I took a stand on the issue and made it public. SHEESH!!!
>>Now think about it. You've argued for one side. Then you propose
>>tallying the number of people that agree/disagree with you. Suppose
>>that more people do side with you. Do you honestly think people will
>>believe your tally?
>
>Well, silly me. Yes I did. What would be the point of lying about it?
>None that I can see. But the other point of course is that since I
>brought it up, I was willing to do the work.
You were willing. This does not mean that the results you report
would be credible. It would be like a president conducting his own
popularity poll. He may be willing to do so, but the results would
not be credible.
>>>I must agree with your point in a scientific sense. However, if it was not
>>>obvious to anyone
>>>that Elson was being sarcastic or writing satire, then it seems like he
>>>is a racist.
>>
>>It was obvious to me. It was also obvious to Ms. Pisares.
>
>Well, it was not obvious to three people.
Your statement said, "if it was not obvious to _ANYONE_" (emphasis mine).
>And of course, it was not obvious to me.
Tell me about it.
>>The issue raised was whether or not his post was sarcastic/satirical --
>>not whether or not people misinterpreted it. The two are different
>>matters altogether. After all, if you're going to condemn someone,
>>you should condemn that person based on what he said -- not what
>>people think he said.
>
>Nope this does not make sense. What Elson wrote was misconstrued as
>being racist babble. He is being flamed for not being clear about his
>sarcasm. Let's face it, he needs practice in writing.
So criticize him for being unclear -- not for a stance which he
did not advocate.
>>>However, I must hasten to add that in dealing with society, one must
>>>often define "right" as what the majority thinks is right.
>>
>>Baloney. Right is right -- even when you're in the minority.
>>No matter how many people adopt a wrong view, it is still wrong.
>
>Ahh. Sarcasm, right? You can not seriously believe this? Let us take
>the issue of morality. How would you define something that is right and
>something that is wrong? Could you actually argue that something that is
>right today will not be considered "wrong" in the future?
Yes. What people _consider_ to be wrong is different from what is
really wrong. It's the difference between perception and reality.
Many centuries ago, most people believed the earth to be flat. Did
their strength of numbers make them correct?
>How about homosexuality? Before the 1970's, it was considered taboo by
>society. Now, it is acceptable in some cities.
So, just because more people advocate one view does not make it
any more correct or incorrect.
MY REALITY CHECK BOUNCED.
I'm not sure that I'm trying to flame you, but I'm definitely _not_ a white
male. I'm a Filipina-American who sincerely doubts her father chose to marry
her mother for the reasons you mentioned.
I don't like the posts about men seeking Filipinas to be their wives at all, butthat doesn't mean that I condemn all men for having such beliefs. Please
_don't_ generalize _all_ white males. Race is not necessarily a determining
factor for behavior.
Offended? Yes. Which side of the fence am I on? Mine.
Linda Mai Hower
Tony Castillo
> In article <2m3cb3$6...@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>,
> Virgilio (Dean) B. Velasco Jr. <v...@giskard.eeap.cwru.edu> wrote:
>>Baloney. Right is right -- even when you're in the minority.
>>No matter how many people adopt a wrong view, it is still wrong.
>
> Ahh. Sarcasm, right? You can not seriously believe this? Let us take
> the issue of morality. How would you define something that is right and
> something that is wrong? Could you actually argue that something that is
> right today will not be considered "wrong" in the future?
>
> How about homosexuality? Before the 1970's, it was considered taboo by
> society. Now, it is acceptable in some cities. So in the context of
> history, homosexuality was wrong when viewed in the time frame of the
> early 1800's. Now, it is an individual's choice.
>
> Now, let us take an extreme example. Child pornography. It is clearly
> morally unfavored at this time and this place. But, can you gurantee me
> that in the next five hundred years that this will always be taboo? I
> don't think so.
It might be acceptable to the society but that doesn't make it right.
Consider a person who is a womanizing (babaero). They/We usually refer
to them as a 'macho'. What about drunkard (lasenggo), they/we usually
refer to them as a true man (tunay na lalaki ine).
What about if gay bashing is acceptable to society, do you think that
this is right? Wake up Rhett!!!
>
> Fifty years ago, the idea of sexual freedom was taboo. Now, it is well
> practiced and accepted as part of an individual's self.
>
> Let's take another issue. Women working in jobs. One hundred years ago,
> it was not acceptable for women to work. Now, they can work. So,
> outside of science, whatever the majority thinks can determine what is
> right and wrong.
Okey, if you're going to do the tallying on whether Elson's original
post was sarcasm, count me on a positive sign. English is not our native
language and sometimes it is very difficult to express such an idea in a
language that we're not really familiar.
>
>
> --
> ***********************************************************************
> Rhett V. Pascual : gldn...@uclink.berkeley.edu : Cal '90
> If you are an alum from UC Berkeley, ask me about the private e-mail
> directory I am compiling. GO BEARS!!!
regards,
tony
--
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
* TONY CASTILLO e-mail: cast...@coco.cchs.su.edu.AU *
* Information Technology Services, The University of Sydney - CCHS *
* East Street, Lidcombe, NSW 2141, Australia *
* --------------------------------------------------------------- *
* And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God| ,-_|\ *
* was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of | / \ *
* angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, | \_,-._* *
* received up into glory. 1 Timothy 3:16 (Read Phi 2:8-9 also) | o *
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Oliver Weatherbee
of it is normally conveyed through the tone of voice or body language.
The fact is that some of the stereotypes expressed by Elson, particularly
about American women being loose and easy, are wide spread and accepted
throughout the Phillipines. Whoa, there I go. I should say that of the people
I knew and talked with from Panay to Sagada, most believed that all American
women were "wala huya" and that the term American virgin is an oxymoron. Then
again, most of these same people were convinced that americans subsist on steak
and bread (mostly bread) ;)
In no way am I defending any of these idiots who have posted all the pickup
posts to this newsgroup. I can understand Elson's and others emotional response.
Most of these white netcom.com types who post these solicitations have never
had to see the wonderful american contributions to Philippine society such as
Ilonggapo or Ermita. Personally, a spent alot of time in the Philippines wishing
I could claim canadian birthrights.
Anyway, as the holder of the whitest name I know of, I just wanted to put
in my 2 pesos worth.
Oliver
__
Oliver Weatherbee | Center for Remote Sensing
oli...@earthview.cms.udel.edu | College of Marine Studies
Phone: (302) 831-4697 | University of Delaware
Fax: (302) 831-6838 | Newark, DE 19716
Chris Miller
Of course you should expect a flame for such race-baiting.
I'm a white male who is married to a wonderful Filipino woman. I find (and I'm sure she would too) your generalizations disgusting, and probably not worth replying to.
I didn't marry her because of her race, "fit", acceptance of "deficiencies", or belief that she's a "model minority". I married her because she was my best friend for 3 years before we ever dated. She also has alot of class. Just as there are some Americans lacking class and basic human decency, I see now that idiocy is capable of crossing racial lines.
Get a life.
M.W.C.
In Article <2m7eac$d...@news.udel.edu>, oli...@earthview.cms.udel.edu (Oliver
Lolita
>Get a life.
I agree, as a Filipino-Amercan, I also agree that this list is a disgusting
display of insecurity. Just because Filipinas prefer white males to this
person, doesn't mean he should bash on them.
Filipinas are beautiful, and if this person is Filipino, he should
be ashamed to treat his homegirls like objects like he does in his list. I
applaud white males who like Filipinas for their taste.
Lolita.
--
"He who stops being better, stops being good."
-Oliver Cromwell
Oliver Weatherbee
> I that's "wala hiya", isn't it?
>
> In Article <2m7eac$d...@news.udel.edu>, oli...@earthview.cms.udel.edu (Oliver
> Weatherbee) wrote:
> >I knew and talked with from Panay to Sagada, most believed that all American
> >women were "wala huya" and that the term American virgin is an oxymoron. Then
> >again, most of these same people were convinced that americans subsist on steak
Well, having spent the majority of my time on Panay, I speak Illongo and Kinaraya,
for which "wala (or wara) huya" is correct. But yes, I was wrong not to use the
Tagalog version. I guess I'm going to have to start bringing my English-Tagalog
Dictionary to work.
Oliver
Vik Solem
|> In response to etri...@scf.usc.edu:
|>
|> I'm not sure that I'm trying to flame you, but I'm definitely _not_ a white
|> male. I'm a Filipina-American who sincerely doubts her father chose to marry
|> her mother for the reasons you mentioned.
[Lines deleted for brevity]
Well, I'd like to speak up as a white-male who married a Filipina WITHOUT
caring about her country/culture of origin.
I did not seek a Filipina as a wife. We happened to meet while dancing at
the Paladium on 14th St. in New York City.
All white males are not prejudicial bigots.
OK. Having said that I can also say that MANY white males ARE prejudical
bigots. (Many have made comments to me, assuming that I held their same
beliefs.) I think that we (as readers of SCF) can take action in two ways
that may have a positive (in my opinion) effect.
1. Ignore the "...seeking a feemail Phillippinno for ..." types of posts.
(IMHO These people are not likely to change their opinions no matter what
any of us may write.)
2. Mail to them directly saying something like "...get a life..." or
"...did you really think about what you were implying when you said..."
In my opinion these people are not worth our (SCF readers) effort. But,
then again, I do enjoy hitting a punching bag once in a while...
-Vik
--
Vik P. Solem "Hacko ergo sum." Opinions expressed are my own. |_. |_. ._.
VSO...@BBN.COM BBN STD, Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A. |_| |_| | |
elson
>Well, I'd like to speak up as a white-male who married a Filipina WITHOUT
>caring about her country/culture of origin.
>
>I did not seek a Filipina as a wife. We happened to meet while dancing at
>the Paladium on 14th St. in New York City.
Good for you. Honestly. That's the way it should be. Like I said, I have no
problem with people in your situation at all - just those that are bent on
specifically looking for a Filipina (or any other specific ethnic type based
on some kind of stereotype).
>All white males are not prejudicial bigots.
>OK. Having said that I can also say that MANY white males ARE prejudical
>bigots.
Amen.
>1. Ignore the "...seeking a feemail Phillippinno for ..." types of posts.
> (IMHO These people are not likely to change their opinions no matter what
> any of us may write.)
Yes, but, I think it's worth it to expose their exploits and make them look
like the fools that they are. Let them know the welcome mat will not be
out for them in case they want to post again. (BTW, love the mock mis-
spelling. :) )
>2. Mail to them directly saying something like "...get a life..." or
> "...did you really think about what you were implying when you said..."
I *do* plan on Emailing them directly from now on, only my responses will not
be as friendly. :)
Roland Grefer
etri...@aludra.usc.edu (elson) wrote:
> I think white males are after Filipinas because:
When interpreting it as sarcasm and cynism I'd like to say it's putting
a spotlight on a whole lot of prejudices of several people.
Otherwise I'd have to take it as an insult of a racist bringing up
a whole lot of bullshit.
Nevertheless it started a discussion.
Roland
[Joseph Weizenbaum]: "Think about, what you're really doing, think,
in which setting and under which circumstances your work will be applied.
Then consider: 'Am I willing to serve these purposes with my own hands?'"
## CrossPoint v2.93 ##
Roland Grefer
> Personally, I--as well as those close to me--see myself as "Lover.
> Daughter. Sister."
I'd like to add " Partner."
> And the recurring requests on
> soc.culture.filipino for Filipina pen-pals, Filipina wives, Filipina cunts,
> lovely obedient Filipinas, etc., just confirm my suspicion that these
> stereotypes of Filipinas are alive and well in the U.S. (or, at least among
> a number of computer account owners.)
It seems to me you're judging a whole lot of people by the insults of a few.
But maybe I'm wrong.
When talking to others around here about asians (should better say:
asian women) I realize a whole lot of prejudices of the kind quoted
above. Almost everybody seems to be projecting this on me, too.
I'm interested in filipine culture 'cause it's younger than many other
asian cultures. For several reasons it's become mixed up with a lot of
influences of other cultures and become a different type which doesn't
seem to have any equivalent elsewhere.
tom diesen
of this group, I am going to put my .02 in here..
I am a white male. I will freely admit I find Filipinas
rather astoundingly charming. So what?
I do not have some unrealistic neo-colonial stereotype
which causes me to see Asian women as some kind of object
or doll. In fact, I have found out some rather painful
lessons otherwise.
What it boils down to, believe it or not, is that after
several years in Asia, I am really not in the least
interested in American women. Somewhere along the way
they seem to have become just like guys. (sorry ladies,
but that is the truth)
So please get off the "insult white guys for being human"
bandwagon, OK? Just because a guy likes charm, beauty and
grace does not mean he is wrong. In fact, that is a pretty
good goal. We should all be so lucky.
Now, anyone willing to teach me some basic Tagalog? :)
--
tom
M.W.C.
>>>> Let's take another issue. Women working in jobs. One hundred years
>ago,
>>>> it was not acceptable for women to work. Now, they can work. So,
>
>ago? Are they just sitting, sleeping in their houses then? Don't you
>consider that child minding, cooking, cleaning and other stuff that they
>are doing then are not part of their jobs.
I was of the impression that throughout history, the women of the
Philippines have been *the* leaders in most aspects of society. The
majority of the Philippines early tribes even relied on women to perform
their sacred religious rites, did they not? Catalonan to the Tagalog,
baliana to the Bicolano, managanito to the Panhasinense, babaylan to the
Bisaya. She both healed her
townspeople with herbs and guided the tribe through communal life at large.
Later, the 'Christianized' Filipina proved most adept in trading with the
white man, and even though higher education was withheld from her until the
1800's,
her business prowess and power grew steadily. Later, while the men may have
fought the battles, she hid his weapons, carried his secret documents,
nursed his wounds and aided his escape. Brave widows, like Gabriela Silang
of the Ilocos, even took to the battlefield in place of their slain
husbands, as she did at the head of the male troops. In the years to follow
Filipinas soon outnumbered men in the colleges, and excelled in law,
medicine and pharmacy. Now Filipina's are encountered in all professions,
in public office and running modern corporations, and performs it all
without losing an iota of grace. It's been a long time since she was a mere
"friar ward." But, can she draw up her own contract today without her
husband's signature? And whose adultery is punished with greater severity?
Is a separated wife still granted less tax exemption as her husband? They
have come a long way...but not quite far enough.
Maria-Agnes
earlier post on Filipinas and their interest in intercultural relationships.
None of it has been flames...thus far. But many people want to remain
anonymous. I'm hearing from people whom I've never seen post before. I'll
wait a couple days, and then post what I've heard.
Ma.Agnes
MATEO
: In article <fmgcoon.1...@tigger.jvnc.net> fmg...@tigger.jvnc.net (M.W.C.) writes:
: >I was of the impression that throughout history, the women of the
: >Philippines have been *the* leaders in most aspects of society. The
:
: I seem to have lost the thread on Women in Science, based on the
: article in last week's Science. Anyway, here goes...
:
: One thing that surprised me here in the U.S. was the lack of women
: professors in Chemistry (Princeton has one out of about 25 profs),
: in contrast to the Philippines where at one point the chairs of the
: Chemistry depts of Ateneo, UP, DLSU, and UST were all women. So what's
: the deal? Are women in chemistry ending up in academic institutions
: back home because they want to or because they are shut out of the
: more lucrative industrial careers? I'd like to think that all these
: women profs represent the gains that women have made in our country
: but is that really the case? Can anyone from industry give another
: perspective on this?
Yeah, I noticed that too. We have two female profs here out of 17 or so
faculty. When I was in the Philippines, 1988, the chair of the department
of chemistry in DLSU was a women and during my stay there, she was replaced by
yet another woman. Most of the faculty and staff in DLSU when I was there
were mostly female. I think it's a matter of choice because when I worked
in UNILAB in Manila, the head of the quality control department was a woman,
so was the one in Warner-Lambert Philippines. I don't know if it is a fact
that Chemistry in the Philippines, I think is usually is dominated by women.
At least the Chem. Dept. at DLSU at that time, women outnumbered men.
M. Mateo
mem...@mtu.edu
Virgilio (Dean) B. Velasco Jr.
>nina rojas (ni...@berthaw.princeton.edu) wrote:
>: In article <fmgcoon.1...@tigger.jvnc.net> fmg...@tigger.jvnc.net (M.W.C.) writes:
>:
>: professors in Chemistry (Princeton has one out of about 25 profs),
>: in contrast to the Philippines where at one point the chairs of the
>: Chemistry depts of Ateneo, UP, DLSU, and UST were all women. So what's
>: the deal? Are women in chemistry ending up in academic institutions
>: back home because they want to or because they are shut out of the
>: more lucrative industrial careers?
>Yeah, I noticed that too. We have two female profs here out of 17 or so
>faculty.
I noticed that a while back, and decided that one of the factors
was probably that men, who tend to be the "breadwinners," generally
shy away from scientific careers. Hence, a relatively large number
of women wind up in the sciences.
I say "relatively large" because on the average, scientific fields
(esp. physics and math) tend to be dominated by males.
Maria-Agnes
>women profs represent the gains that women have made in our country
>but is that really the case? Can anyone from industry give another
>perspective on this?
Can't comment on any prof statistics, but did see an interesting piece in
the Wall Street Journal, front page, on Tuesday, this week, entitled, The
Waiting Game. Full of statistics on advances by women in American
management positions:
"Women have moved into non-clerical white-collar jobs in droves. They held
46% of all such positions at the companies reporting to U.S. Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission in 1992, up from 22% in the late 1960's."
But, WSJ analysis shows that women still held less than a third of
managerial jobs in the 38,059 companies that reported.
MA
Ted C. Gonzalez
Virgilio (Dean) B. Velasco Jr. <v...@giskard.eeap.cwru.edu> wrote:
|>>: In article <fmgcoon.1...@tigger.jvnc.net> fmg...@tigger.jvnc.net (M.W.C.) writes:
|>>:
|>>: professors in Chemistry (Princeton has one out of about 25 profs),
|>>: in contrast to the Philippines where at one point the chairs of the
|>>: Chemistry depts of Ateneo, UP, DLSU, and UST were all women. So what's
|>>: the deal? Are women in chemistry ending up in academic institutions
|>>: back home because they want to or because they are shut out of the
|>>: more lucrative industrial careers?
|>
|>was probably that men, who tend to be the "breadwinners," generally
|>shy away from scientific careers. Hence, a relatively large number
|>of women wind up in the sciences.
|>
|>I say "relatively large" because on the average, scientific fields
|>(esp. physics and math) tend to be dominated by males.
When I was a student at UST, the ratio of female to male chemistry
majors was about 4:1. As most of the faculty members at UST's
Chemistry Department were UST alumni/a, then the phenomenon noted
above just might be a reflection of the student demographics.
After college, I worked in industry for a few months and noticed
the same trend, i.e. more female chemists than male ones.
annette
Virgilio (Dean) B. Velasco Jr. <v...@giskard.eeap.cwru.edu> wrote:
>>nina rojas (ni...@berthaw.princeton.edu) wrote:
>>: professors in Chemistry (Princeton has one out of about 25 profs),
>>: in contrast to the Philippines where at one point the chairs of the
>>: Chemistry depts of Ateneo, UP, DLSU, and UST were all women.
>
>>faculty.
>
>was probably that men, who tend to be the "breadwinners," generally
>shy away from scientific careers. Hence, a relatively large number
>of women wind up in the sciences.
>
>I say "relatively large" because on the average, scientific fields
>(esp. physics and math) tend to be dominated by males.
Here at Colorado State there is at least one female prof. in the Chemistry
dept. Guess what? She's Filipino!
Interesting that Dean should mention physics and math. The article in
Science also mentioned math as an area where the number of women was
small, and this surprised me because when I was at UP, a large majority
of faculty members and math majors were women. Was this atypical?
In physics, though, the Science article had a graph of % of women
faculty members for 31 countries. Industrialized countries such
as the US, Japan, and Germany had less than 5% of the physics faculty
being women. The Phil. had the third highest percentage at about 30%,
next to Portugal and Hungary.
I think that men and women are much more equal in our culture than in
others (such as in the US), and success in the sciences is just a
reflection of this.
annette
Rhett Valino Pascual
Saztec Philippines, Incorporated <Saz...@casino.cchs.su.oz.au> wrote:
>In article <2mo6mi$c...@agate.berkeley.edu> gldn...@uclink.berkeley.edu (
>Rhett Valino Pascual) writes:>In article <1994Mar16...@cchs.su.edu.au>,
>
>>Hopefully my statements above have proven that I am awake.
>
>.and dreaming...
Ah, what a refreshing retort! I even felt that one on my cheek! How
wonderful to know that you are one of the blessed gifts to humanity. It
must be scintillating to look at your face in the morning! What pleasure
it must be to communicate with you. I can not even think of one blessed
thing to equal what you have written.
>>>> Fifty years ago, the idea of sexual freedom was taboo. Now, it is well
>>>> practiced and accepted as part of an individual's self.
>
>You mean...
What I mean was that stuff like watersports and an*l sex can be practiced
without fear of the law (at least in some areas like New York).
>
>Who told you that it wasn't acceptable for women to work one hundred years
>ago?
A history book.
> Are they just sitting, sleeping in their houses then? Don't you
>consider that child minding, cooking, cleaning and other stuff that they
>are doing then are not part of their jobs.
In the eighteenth century, work was equivalent to manual labor, clerical
labor and work that paid you. Was a housewife compensate for childcare,
cooking, and household cleaning? Nope.
>
>Do you think so? What about those police who thinks that putting a bullet
>in any suspected criminals are right.
Now clearly, shooting someone is not an accepted moral value, (yet). So,
for society now, it is not right. But who knows, maybe in twenty years,
it will be legal for the police to shoot anyone.
>
>>It is odd however that you left the majority of my examples above alone.
>
>My apology.
>
Apology taken.
>
>>My first language is English.
>
>Then, I'm proud of my son who knows how to communicate and understand me
>when I talk to him in Pilipino... And he's only three years old...
>
Right. But I can still read, write and speak Tagalog as fluently as
anyone. I even hab the accent wid my spokening dollars. :-)
Rhett Valino Pascual
Wow, it really is getting hot here. Wonder what is going on in alt.flame.
Maria-Agnes
>P.S. PA-RELAX-RELAX, PA-REDHORSE-REDHORSE
>
By the way, what IS the alcohol content of Redhorse compared with other beers?
Maria
Virgilio (Dean) B. Velasco Jr.
>In article <Sazt...@casino.cchs.su.oz.au>,
>Saztec Philippines, Incorporated <Saz...@casino.cchs.su.oz.au> wrote:
[Everything removed]
I previously decided to abstain from these discussions, for reasons
which I made publicly known. However, I have decided to throw my
own two cents in, in a hopeful attempt to separate some of the silver
from the dross.
There is a big difference between people's perception of morality
("what people consider/believe to be right or wrong") and morality
itself ("what is truly right or wrong"). It's the difference between
perception and reality.
Hopefully everyone can see that there is a difference.
enriquez erwin
>|>>: One thing that surprised me here in the U.S. was the lack of women
>|>>: professors in Chemistry (Princeton has one out of about 25 profs),
>|>>: in contrast to the Philippines where at one point the chairs of the
>|>>: Chemistry depts of Ateneo, UP, DLSU, and UST were all women. So what's
>|>>: the deal? Are women in chemistry ending up in academic institutions
>|>>: back home because they want to or because they are shut out of the
>|>>: more lucrative industrial careers?
>|>
>|>
>|>(esp. physics and math) tend to be dominated by males.
>When I was a student at UST, the ratio of female to male chemistry
>majors was about 4:1. As most of the faculty members at UST's
>Chemistry Department were UST alumni/a, then the phenomenon noted
>above just might be a reflection of the student demographics.
>After college, I worked in industry for a few months and noticed
>the same trend, i.e. more female chemists than male ones.
Does it have something to do with the men preferring to go to Chemical Engg to
Chemistry?
Also,in the Philippines, it seems that teaching was stereotyped to be a job for
women. For example, how many male teachers did you have in grade or high
school, or even in college?
Aura C. Matias
>
>I noticed that a while back, and decided that one of the factors
>was probably that men, who tend to be the "breadwinners," generally
>shy away from scientific careers. Hence, a relatively large number
>of women wind up in the sciences.
>
>I say "relatively large" because on the average, scientific fields
>(esp. physics and math) tend to be dominated by males.
I also think it's a matter of economics. As you said, men are traditionally
viewed as the "breadwinners" and working in the academe is usually not a
lucrative profession. Just recently, the IE department at U.P. lost one of
its good teachers to industry not because he didn't like teaching anymore,
but because he needed to earn more to support his two kids and wife. U.P.
tries to provide supplementary income through prof. chairs, teaching grants,
etc. but they can't really compete with the benefits/salary in industry.
My personal reasons for remaining with UP - it is one profession I can
have both a career and have more time for my husband and 2 kids. I have
no pressure of earning more, just enough to supplement my husband's income.
I know a lot of married women in the UP faculty who share the same reasons.
KAMM Con
Weatherbee) writes:
>Lastly, it will be a cold day in hell before you ever get the opportunity to
exercise
>reverse peristalsis anywhere near my tsinellas because only a fool, NPA
>sympathizer,
>or CIA operative would be skulking around Antique at 2:00am in the morning. So
>which
>are you, a commie or a spy?
>
Me ? I'm a commie spy.
GAL...@wsuvm1.csc.wsu.edu
ni...@berthaw.princeton.edu (nina rojas) writes:
>I seem to have lost the thread on Women in Science, based on the
>article in last week's Science. Anyway, here goes...
>
>professors in Chemistry (Princeton has one out of about 25 profs),
>in contrast to the Philippines where at one point the chairs of the
>Chemistry depts of Ateneo, UP, DLSU, and UST were all women. So what's
>the deal? Are women in chemistry ending up in academic institutions
>back home because they want to or because they are shut out of the
>women profs represent the gains that women have made in our country
>but is that really the case? Can anyone from industry give another
>perspective on this?
he more 'advanced' countries (US, Japan, W. Germany) have significantly lower p
ercentage of women with careers in science than in 'developing' countries like
the Philippines, Portugal and Hungary. Some of the reasons cited for the large
influx of women pursuing science careers in these developing countries were:
1) the mandatory math and science education from elementary to college level (
not optional as what is found in the US), and 2) the low pay and low status of
science in these countries, making the pursuit of a science career undesirable
to men and leaving this option open to more women.
In a separate article, Filipina scientists were reported to have broken barrier
s imposed by a male-dominated and patriarchal society that frowns upon women in
the workforce. However, the report also emphasized that although there are ma
ny Filipinas in science, glass ceilings still exist that prevent them from reac
hing the highest levels and most powerful jobs.
Fred Galvez
jl...@utxvms.cc.utexas.edu
male teachers in the ADMU faculty. I was still there about 2 years ago and
I can say that the male faculty way outnumber their female counterparts.
By the way, the chemistry dept chair is rotated among all ranking professors
in the faculty, male or female.
By the way, Professor Dayrit, the most prominent professor in the
ADMU chemistry faculty, got his Ph.D. degree from Princeton University.
Co Henry
: nina rojas (ni...@berthaw.princeton.edu) wrote:
: : In article <fmgcoon.1...@tigger.jvnc.net> fmg...@tigger.jvnc.net (M.W.C.) writes:
: : >I was of the impression that throughout history, the women of the
: : >Philippines have been *the* leaders in most aspects of society. The
: : <<stuff deleted>>
It is possible that Filipinas are generally more educated than Filipinos?
In high school as well as in college (at U.P.) I noticed that female
students appeared to be more conscientious than their male counterpart?
Alan M. Horowitz
I submit the claim, that this is not an artifact of Filipino or Asian
culture. I claim that the "median" college aged male, around the world,
is more willing to piss away time in the quest for sexual conquests and
attaining alcohol stupors, than the "median" college age female.
Nor is this a new phenomenon. Nor likely to change. Humans are
hardwired with emotions and instincts that are well adopted to the
hunter-gatherer condition they evolved in. Many mammals besides
teenage males have a prediliction for gathering harems.
Not for nothing did the wise elders dream up the concept of chaperoning.
Men are jerks. Thank god the females need us to fertilize their eggs, or
Olga C. Rodriguez
On the subject of interracial relationships, somebody asked Maria-Agnes
(I believe it was Paul) why she thinks Filipinas date/marry white men.
I'm still interested in hearing her answers.
I'll be honest-- when I think about getting married, which I eventually
want to do, I picture myself married to a white man. That's the picture that
naturally comes to me. The question is why. Well, it has a great deal to do
with my socialization. My parents are Filipino, I was born in the States.
I never learned to speak their language, something I deeply regret. I grew
up with images of white people as the standard of beauty everyone should
strive for. Plus, I just don't know very many Filipino men, so there isn't as
much as an opportunity to meet/date them as with white men. And the ones
that I do know from home (Georgia), I think of as brothers, because I grew up
with them, saw them at all the Filipino parties, that sort of thing. So, in
general, I haven't been exposed to the idea of viewing Filipino men as
potential husbands. Now that I think about it, my parents have never told
me that they want me to marry a Filipino. They've never encouraged me
to do so. But I assume they want me to. I guess I should ask. Anyway,
this is not to say that I object to marrying a Filipino. If it happens
that I should meet one and fall in love with him, so be it. But is it a responsibility of mine to actively seek out Filipinos? I ask that semi-rhetorically. I really am pondering that question.
What do you think?
Michael Hopkins
Filpinas seeking an American mate. What about black men, or are they not
acceptable to Filpino families? What do you think?
Cindy
In Article <11APR94....@marcie.wellesley.edu>,
orodr...@marcie.wellesley.edu (Olga C. Rodriguez) wrote:
>I never learned to speak their language, something I deeply regret.
I also regret not knowing how to speak Tagalog, (I understand some), or
Ilokano. When I grew up in Hawaii, I heard Japanese classmates talk about
going to Japanese school in which they learned about their heritage and how
to speak Japanese. Why is it that I never heard of a Filipino school or
something like that?
>Plus, I just don't know very many Filipino men, so there isn't as
>much as an opportunity to meet/date them as with white men. And the
>ones
>that I do know from home (Georgia), I think of as brothers, because
>I grew up
>with them, saw them at all the Filipino parties, that sort of thing.
I married a white man. When I was growing up, I always thought that I would
marry a Filipino. In fact, my first boyfriend was a Filipino army brat. I
didn't go out seeking white men to date or marry. I just had more
exposure to them from school and work. In terms of color, chances were
that I would meet a greater number of white than brown marriage prospects.
>So, in
>general, I haven't been exposed to the idea of viewing Filipino men as
>potential husbands. Now that I think about it, my parents have never told
>me that they want me to marry a Filipino. They've never encouraged me
>to do so. But I assume they want me to. I guess I should ask. Anyway,
> this is not to say that I object to marrying a Filipino. If it happens
>that I should meet one and fall in love with him, so be it. But is it
>a responsibility of mine to actively seek out Filipinos? I ask that
>semi-rhetorically. I really am pondering that question.
>What do you think?
>Olga
>orodr...@lucy.wellesley.edu
I don't think that you have such a responsibility. My parents had
informed me that they would have preferred I marry a Filipino but that they
would be happy with whomever I settled down with. As I see it, your
responsibility is to find a man who would make a good mate and fulfill
your needs and desires, whatever they may be.
Cindy - still looking for sig ideas
Marjorie V Mendoza
extremely degrading. I am a Filipina, and I would appreciate if people
out there would stop trying to compliment us because IT IS A STUPID EFFORT
THAT IS NOT WORKING!! All this about us being the best lovers who can go
on and on throughout the night is just total bs. It was this type of
thinking that led to the creation of the term "little brown fucking
machines" and others like it. This is why actresses in the Philippines
(please take note of the spelling - let's make spelling errors of this
work less common) had to be investigated for supposed prostitution in
Bruneii. This is why so many Filipinas who work as domestic servants are
abused, beaten, and raped. This is why the business for mail-order brides
is so lucrative. This is why Filipinas around the US bases in the
Philippines thought that prostitution was the best way to go. DO YOU
PEOPLE SEE WHAT YOU ARE DOING TO US?
--
JOY =)
jo...@dolphin.upenn.edu
myr...@netcom.com
Joy, I agree with you, it is more of a stereotype that is
shown, only presenting filipinas as exotic dancers and playthings
for American men...
My wife, a filipina is, nothing like these stupid
images seen in the media, she wont even let me touch her
and will beat my ass if I want to do what I want...
so, I too, have no compliments
for filpino women, Have a Nice Day!!!
:wq
>--
> JOY =)
> jo...@dolphin.upenn.edu
Virgilio (Dean) B. Velasco Jr.
[with regard to prostitution:]
>The departure of the U.S. military has NOT changed the situation. Take
>a stroll around Ermita if you don't believe.
Whoa! I find that somewhat difficult to believe. The situation has
NOT changed? Not at all? A stroll around Ermita would only show that
prostitution still exists -- not that any reasonable person would have
expected it to disappear. What about the numbers though? Has the
incidence of prostitution gone up or down? How about the rate of
STD transmission? Has it increased or decreased?
I don't have any figures on hand, so I won't argue either way too
strongly. Nonetheless, I remain quite wary of statements that there
has been no change, especially when such "change" appears to be
equated with simple existence/non-existence, rather than degrees of
complication.
tom diesen
Mendoza) says:
>
>DO YOU PEOPLE SEE WHAT YOU ARE DOING TO US?
>
Hi, Joy. You wrote a very persuasive post, and I know I am most likely
about to step on a whole bunch of something, most likely toes, but here
goes anyway..
Joy, I am guilty of believing, without a doubt, Philippinas are
most likely the single most charming group of women on the planet.
I had the good fortune to spend some time with a young lady from
Manila, who had for some reason a last-minute doubt or something
before she got married, and it was my great loss she decided not
to break it off for me.
Joy, if I thought there was some way to get away with trying to
meet a nice girl here without provoking a major flame war, I
would. I have seen, however, that most anything having to do
with relationships seems to gravitate to the poles.
Anyway, I just wanted to say there are people who for whatever
reason fall under the "I like Philippinas" camp, who do not and
would not act that way. We just don't dare speak up.
--
tom
1WWG...@ibm.mtsac.edu
should not be complimented for ONLY their looks or because they are good
lovers. Unfortunately, we live in a society that is judged mostly on sex and
outter appearance, not on morality, intelligence, kindness or any other
value that should be above and beyond looks and sex. This, by no means, is
limited to women or Filipinas. I am noticing a trend towards judging men
by how good their body looks, etc. No wonder why there is so much suicide
by young people. They feel that they cannot compete out there with the
*better* looking people. I know I feel that way sometimes.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
WENDELL GEE (Geeman) º
PO Box 129 º e-mail add: 1WWG...@ibm.mtsac.edu
Fontana, CA 92334-0129 º
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
...and still I hoped. As I clench the chain and watch her turn away
I hoped. As the music stopped playing and the light gave way to the
night I hoped. But, hope gave way to despair and I threw the chain
against the wall. The heart broke, love shattered, and the world was
cold.
Etc Bowers
> This is why the business for mail-order brides
>is so lucrative. This is why Filipinas around the US bases in the
>Philippines thought that prostitution was the best way to go. DO YOU
>PEOPLE SEE WHAT YOU ARE DOING TO US?
>--
> JOY =)
> jo...@dolphin.upenn.edu
reading so many of these "white men & pinays" posts, I guess I will
after all :-)
I have met, and gotten to know well, many of the "Filipinas around the
US bases" you speak of. Never, never, never did a single ONE of them
think that prostitution was "the best way to go." Almost invariably
it was THE ONLY WAY TO GO. I'd venture to say that at least 90 percent
of them had illegitimate children back in their home province to support,
and no way to do it.
Interviews with these girls usually sounded the same. I believe the
stories they told, since I was able to go and actually verify them in
many cases ( by meeting and talking to relatives of the girl ). Many
of them (most?) were gotten pregnant by what Americans call "date rape"
and subsequently ostracized by family and community. These women had
no other avenue to support themselves or the kid than to turn to
prostitution.
The departure of the U.S. military has NOT changed the situation. Take
the change within the R.P. regarding rape as a crime ! Until recently
a man could take advantage ruthlessly, with no fear of reprisal, as long
as he was socially higher up than her ! In fact, it was a matter of
pride among pinoys that I know, to deflower girls ! Imagine it.
To place Filipina womanhood on a traditional Catholic pedestal, while
routinely abusing them in that way ? I don't see that as a problem caused
by anyone but the Filipino people themselves.
The recently toughened laws on rape, and a vigorous enforcement of them
( a good child support law will help too ) should help the Philippines go
a long way toward ending the perceptions you speak of.
I guess my bottom line is that the world won't lose the picture of pinays
as "sex toys" until the Philippines does !
Flame away, I wear asbestos long johns. ;-)
Mark
David G. Canada
In a previous article, v...@lal.eeap.cwru.edu (Virgilio Dean) B. Velasco Jr.) says:
>
>Whoa! I find that somewhat difficult to believe. The situation has
>NOT changed? Not at all? A stroll around Ermita would only show that
>prostitution still exists -- not that any reasonable person would have
>expected it to disappear. What about the numbers though? Has the
>incidence of prostitution gone up or down? How about the rate of
>STD transmission? Has it increased or decreased?
The last time I went home, this past January, I passed by Ermita going to
Manila Hilton and I noticed that there are fewer bars in the area. Oh,
there are still women of the night visible in the area, but from what I
understand the new Mayor of Manila is trying his hardest to get rid of all
this bars in Ermita. The prostitutes have been migrating to a town north
of Bulacan, cant remember the name.
Olongapo -sp is now clean as the bars that once stood on both sides of the
main road, has been replaced with legitimate bussinesses. I've also
travelled along Clark Air Force Base, in Angeles City and that place looks
deserted, most likely cause was the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo.
I am not saying that there is no prostitution in Manila anywhere, there is
always prostitution in any big city to a certain degree. People here in the
states might call it Escort Service. But to say that there is no change, well..
Dave
Alan M. Horowitz
_acting_ work in Brunei for RP actresses?
The lawyers have a saying, "bad cases make bad law".
Gee, I recall it was Senator Maceda (someone help me here) of the RP
Senate, a 100%, pure blooded Filipino, who originally publicized the
Brunei Beauties schtick.
You might want to drop that *particular* clause from your next posting
on Filipinas-unjustly-getting-called-bad-girls.
Elson R. Trinidad
>In article <2p74ng$7...@netnews.upenn.edu>
>jo...@dolphin.upenn.edu (Marjorie V Mendoza) writes:
>
>>
>> This thing about Filipino women is not only annoying, but also
>>extremely degrading. I am a Filipina, and I would appreciate if people
>>out there would stop trying to compliment us because IT IS A STUPID EFFORT
>>THAT IS NOT WORKING!! All this about us being the best lovers who can go
>>on and on throughout the night is just total bs. It was this type of
>>Bruneii. This is why so many Filipinas who work as domestic servants are
>>abused, beaten, and raped. This is why the business for mail-order brides
>>is so lucrative. This is why Filipinas around the US bases in the
>>Philippines thought that prostitution was the best way to go. DO YOU
>>PEOPLE SEE WHAT YOU ARE DOING TO US?
>> JOY =)
>> jo...@dolphin.upenn.edu
>Agreed! Although I am not Filipino nor am I a female, women, in general,
>should not be complimented for ONLY their looks or because they are good
>lovers. Unfortunately, we live in a society that is judged mostly on sex and
> WENDELL GEE (Geeman) º
THANK YOU, both of you! Glad to see some intelligent, sensible posts on this
thread. I could say more, but I've said all I've wanted to say (months ago)
and both of you basically got the gist of it. Wham bam salamat, man!
Elson
-- 30 --
******************************************************************************
NOTICE!!!!
If replying, PLEASE make sure it is addressed to "etri...@scf.usc.edu"
******************************************************************************
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
E l s o n T r i n i d a d _______________________________
etri...@scf.usc.edu /_____________ /
University of Southern California /_____________ /
Los Angeles, California
This .sig is earthquake-resistant.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
DCONE2
Good speach. Ever heard of looking for the right person. Everyone is the same
under god.
Rhett Valino Pascual
>
>Good speach. Ever heard of looking for the right person. Everyone is the same
>under god.
But what happens if there is no god?
--
*****************************************************************
squick, squick. SAVE THE CHOAD!!! a.t.
fark, fark. gldn...@uclink.berkeley.edu
Game of the XXVIIth Olympiad
>In article <2r3ta7$r...@search01.news.aol.com>, DCONE2 <dco...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>Good speach. Ever heard of looking for the right person. Everyone is the same
>>under god.
>But what happens if there is no god?
And Ninoy said, "if there is no god, I'll invent one"
>--
>*****************************************************************
>squick, squick. SAVE THE CHOAD!!! a.t.
>fark, fark. gldn...@uclink.berkeley.edu
regards,
tony
email: cast...@tango.cchs.su.edu.au
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
* TONY CASTILLO e-mail: cast...@coco.cchs.su.oz.AU *
* EDP Unit, The University of Sydney, Cumberland College of Health Sciences *
* East Street, Lidcombe, NSW 2141, Australia *
* --------------------------------------------------------------- *
* And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God| ,-_|\ *
* was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of | / \ *
* angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, | \_,-._* *
* received up into glory. 1 Timothy 3:16 (Read Phi 2:8-9 also) | o *
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*