Hidden Messages, Hidden Biases

Pretty = Delicate = Should Not be Abused? Shame on You!

2008-10-17T10:15:00.000-07:00

I was a talk show the other day, and I pounced on it as the hosts were carrying out a makeover. Two women were getting their hair done, their skin cleaned, and their wardrobes changed. I wondered if this was one of those random things that showbiz people did to make non-showbiz people feel like queens/kings for a day. Turns out I was wrong.

The women who were being made over were victims of spousal/partner abuse. One complained that her boyfriend spit on her. The other said that her husband made her bathe in his dirty bath water. The point of the show? To make over the women and give them confidence, and then bring them back to their husbands - who would not abuse them because they looked so good.

What kind of values would this show perpetrate? That women are only as good as they look? That women who look good do not deserve to be abused? That confident women do not get abused? Too bad the truth is far less simple than this show assumed.

Abusive men do not abuse wives or girlfriends simply because their significant others are ugly, smell bad, look like hags, or are not confident. Some men abuse because their own fathers abused their own mothers. Some men abuse because they grew up in a culture where abuse is considered manly and necessary. Some men abuse because they feel powerless and out of control, and therefore want to exert their force over their women because they have nowhere else to turn.

And to return these women to the lion's den, when they could have been given counseling and protection! What kind of show advocates the treatment of women as mere objects, as things to look pretty and decorate with the hope that they will not be smashed to smithereens? These women need psychological care - they shouldn't be turned back to their husbands or boyfriends!

And why, in your right mind, woman, would you return to an abusive husband or boyfriend? Forget the makeup. Forget the clothes. Get out - and then remake yourself. Re-earn your self-esteem. Get yourself out of the mud. But first, GET THE HELL OUT OF THAT RELATIONSHIP.

THAT is the best make over that any abused woman would have.

If Staying in Prison Were This Fun...

2008-07-02T10:38:00.000-07:00

Fiilipino prisoners made the world news headlines last year when they came together to perform their version of "Thriller." In this Cebu stronghold, prisoners are reformed through dance and fun, and every month, they have a YouTube dance video to show to the world.

The videos, however, have become fodder for criticism. Shouldn't prisoners be reformed and not given the chance to have fun, some viewers ask? This Cebu jail houses sex offenders and murderers - so shouldn't they live out a harsh sentence? Shouldn't prisoners be given work to do, work that is productive and economically stimulating, instead of dance moves that amount to mouse clicks and nothing else?

Thanks to the prison's techniques, however, people from all over the world have started visiting the prison, and word has gotten out on the peace-loving methods used to reform the prisoners. In my opinion, even a prisoner is human, and is entitled to have some fun - in fact, being required to dance and having to follow strict steps every single month can be hard work. For people who don't like dancing, it can be humiliating. For those who want to learn things on their own, following specific steps can be constraining. Even fun, it appears, can be its own prison.

Is there a chance that this message could show how nice prisons are, and how crime can be tolerated - and how crime can actually lead to one getting the chance to work out and have fun? Such a speculation might not be too farfetched - but the fact is, the dancers are still in a prison. They may learn dance steps and perform to the applause of a world audience - but they still have to go home to their cells, eat poor food, and be away from their families.

Perhaps the message is compassion for those who are still human, but have strayed.

Black Swans

2008-06-04T14:52:00.000-07:00

Anything that groups people into different categories and makes generalizations about them can hinder creativity. I do know of an exception to groupings, however - that would be me and my boyfriend.

We've been together for over a year now. We're exact opposites in lots of ways, but we've found common ground in many more ways as well. When I look back on everything that we've been through, I find one of my sociology lessons coming to mind.

A theory is only good until it's been disproved. You can theorize that all swans are white - but when someone points out JUST ONE black swan, then your theory falls apart.

I want to say more - but let's just leave it at that. This is an experience, but unlike everyone else who blogs everything down to the last gory detail, I'll be the black swan and I won't.

Here's the exception to the rule. And here, the entry ends.

Language. Culture. Barrier. Problem?

2008-06-02T22:07:00.000-07:00

My boyfriend loves free, open source software, not only because it doesn't cost him a cent to use, but because it bucks the trend of capitalism and people making money out of their creations. His operating system is Linux's Ubuntu, which takes its name from the African term for neighborliness and brotherhood. One thread on the Ubuntu forums, however, shows a much less prettier face than one would expect from a brotherhood of software users.

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=815635

Important Changes to Dell Ubuntu Support

_______________________________________

This is just a heads up that Dell has decided that it is too expensive to keep the Ubuntu Technicians in Ottawa on (as well as all the XPS techs and DOC techs from Ottawa). In mid April 100% of the DOC staff and 60% of the XPS staff in Ottawa were let go. The remaining staff, including all the Ubuntu staff were given notice that their jobs are over as of the end of June.

Effective Monday June 9, 2008 all Ubuntu support will be moving from Ottawa, ON, Canada to Pasay, Philippines. What does this mean for you/me? If you have a Dell that shipped with Ubuntu on it, and have anything wrong with it at all, and you want to speak to someone who you can understand, you must call before June 9th.

Now some of you may be wondering how I know this? I was formerly a Dell DOC and later an XPS agent in Ottawa. As such, I still have many friends both on the Ubuntu support queue, and in XPS. The kicker of the whole situation is that Dell is not letting the Ubuntu staff go as of next Monday, instead they are being required to take XPS(hardware and windows support) calls for the last three weeks that the center is open.

What's really strange is that while I worked there, Dell was proud of the percentage of their support staff that were located in North America, but as soon as the US dollar dropped and the economy slowed down, they pulled out (they built and were scheduled to open a second building in Ottawa in April, instead they are closing down and looking for a buyer in a market where there is currently a 25% vacancy rate for commercial buildings). In a way I'm happy that my friends won't have to listen to customers bitching about how they always get India when they call, that was the worst part about working there... when you get a North American on the phone, don't bitch at them about India, they know only too well and all you do is piss them off (and if you called regarding Ubuntu, and didn't get someone in Ottawa, you dialed the wrong number).

Anyhow, I offer a fond farewell salute to the hard working Ubuntu support staff at the Dell Ottawa Call Center, may your job hunts be short and fruitful (and thanks for all the help over the past year)!

***

This initial post drew a wide variety of reactions: Filipinos began posting on the message boards, saying that although they sympathized with the people who had lost their jobs, Filipinos could understand English well and would therefore serve as good customer service representatives. Other posters claimed that many Filipino call center employees knew English but did not understand the nuances of the language and were therefore ill equipped to deal with the North American market. These same posters often posted messages without bothering to check their grammar or spelling, not to mention their sentence clarity.Tension was, and still is, high on this thread: the message was posted only one day ago, and messages are still trickling in.

There are many ways to view this problem, and there are many perspectives that can come into play and therefore cloud the debates. First, capitalism has taken its toll on many North American companies, and the drive to earn money can rise over and above employee loyalty. With the economic slump, companies have no choice but to try to keep their services without spending a lot on employee compensation - this means taking labor to cheaper places, hence outsourcing. This outsourcing, however, benefits no one but the company: the people who lose their jobs are forced into a job market that has very few openings left in a stagnant economy; while the people who gain them are forced to work long hours, at unholy times, for relatively higher pay in their respective countries. The call center, after all, has to cater to the North American market, so call center employees work from 9 PM to 9 AM in the Philippines.

Call center employees are often tired: they lose sleep, they have to reverse their body clocks, they have no holidays and sometimes have to negotiate for a Christmas break - all for the sake of getting paid about $ 333 a month, a rich sum by Philippine standards. This work, in Marx's words, is alienating: many of the calls follow a script, a prescribed routine; these routines have to be f0llowed strictly, since calls are recorded and monitored. Call center employees may not be working on a factory assembly line or pulling levers and pushing buttons all day, but they are subjected to a new breed of capitalism that silences their protest: money - or the promise of higher pay.

Call center employees are also trained in accent neutralization: they need to take classes to assume a neutral American accent, and they are often trained to understand and recognize idiomatic expressions. The Philippines is also a former American colony, our medium of instruction is English, and English is widely spoken; coupled to cheap labor, the Philippines is fertile ground for call centers to grow. And grow these call centers have.

I find it grossly unfair for people to generalize call center outsourcing and label its new employees as incompetent. Their arguments revolve around lack of knowledge about a culture, and how language is not enough. True, language is not the only way to communicate, but with globalization and a wider audience for American mass media, could we escape knowledge of other peoples' culture? Culture, moreover, is not the be-all and end-all of communication: according to some cultural sociology scholars, culture is a toolbox from which we take different behaviors, actions, reactions, and thought processes. Culture is not a static entity that divides us, but a fluid atmosphere that moves, evolves, changes, and is shared.

I can understand why some North American clients have a difficult time with Indian call center employees. English, when spoken with an Indian accent, can be harder to understand, and Indian culture is not as heavily influenced by American culture as the Philippines' is. Several posters have heaped the Philippines along with India when describing the difficulty of dealing with outsourced call centers; and the Philippines along with China when describing how outsourcing toy making has become dangerous. It is in this anger and fuming that we can see people's underlying conceptions of cultural divides, and how their frustration over a failing economy can unearth old biases once thought to be non-existent.

The other side of the argument, however, is still understandable. Victimized by the capitalist machinery and faced with cheaper labor, the North American labor market has no choice but to fume - and fume it will, invoking stereotypes in the process. In this debate, there are no winners - the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and lines are drawn where there should be none. This forum is only an example of reality. Who is wrong, between the outsourced employees in the Philippines who are taught American culture, and the laid-off employees in North America who show their anger in often hate-laced ways? Can we even get out of this economics-and-capitalism-influenced trap?

The Girl in Me Doth Protest

2008-06-02T11:17:00.000-07:00

I have been a debater since high school, and I have always loved speaking in public. There's nothing like the stage of public speaking to get my adrenaline running, and there's nothing like the rich applause of my audience to tell me that I just performed a job well. I was a public speaker all the way through high school and college, and I toured the Philippines along with my fellow professors in order to talk about genetically modified organisms.

I love genetics, see, and it was fun to talk about it to different audiences. I talked about basic genetic engineering before an audience of high school students, lectured on forensic molecular biology in front of high school teachers, and discussed diseases testing with elementary school students.

My emotional downfall came when I started work as a science communication specialist, and I had to talk to other scientists from various countries.

I like using humor in my speeches, and I like using my energy when I speak. I have always gotten good reviews for this energy: students find it contaminating, teachers find it encouraging, and scientists find that it breathes life into otherwise boring science. What I got, however, was a slap in the face.

"You can't use humor - it makes you look nervous."

And thus began my protest against stereotypes. I know myself best, and I know when I am nervous: when I can feel my heart pounding in my throat, when I'm not sure I remember what I'm supposed to say, I become sedate and quieter. But when I know every single word of the concepts that I wish to impart, my brain goes into hyper-drive: I can turn concepts into humor, and I know that I have the gift of imparting knowledge without looking like a stodgy scholar.

"You're a girl, and you're young and attractive. It's hard to take you seriously."

And thus began a fresh protest against stereotypes as these words were uttered by a superior in my company. I felt defeated: I had been born with two X chromosomes, I had a pretty good mix of genes from attractive parents, and I was no more than 26 years old. I had biology against me - and someone, somewhere, had drawn the lines and said that women who were young and pretty had not right to talk. This made me wonder, of course, why I had been pushed into the talking arena in the first place by my critics - and it made me wonder: has stereotyping become so institutionalized in our culture that I could not break out of molds without being chided?

After a month of silently ruminating on the criticism and plotting world domination, I realized that I had come up against an opinion. Some people like sedate speakers who impart an air of serenity. I like energetic speakers who are openly enthusiastic about their subject matter. The matter of me being a young, attractive woman, however, still hurt me. The stereotype runs rampant in Asian cultures, it appears: women are not seen as managers or superiors, and if anything, they are teachers of basic subjects. They cannot claim authority, superiority, or expertise. Pretty women are apparently decorations: they do not have brains, and in the Asian brand of genetics, the "Pretty," "Brains," and "Communication Ability" genes do not occur together.

I may not be the best public speaker in the world, but I know that I can do good things, teach well, and impart learning. How can I fulfill my dreams if I am turned away - if all ears are shut - even before I start talking?

Gates Shut, Eyes Open

You see, but you do not know
That I am more than a woman
in heels and trinkets tiny,
dressed to decorate what she sees as the greater gem

You see a girl to grace your fantasies, a jester to laugh at,
my mouth mere purveyor of words
while the owner is but the wall through which other voices speak

I see a woman who speaks and jests for she knows things you do not
and wishes that you, too, would love learning
and not simply love the sight,
shut the gate,
and watch the speaker

I see a woman who weeps within as your eyes brim with fire
and wishes that you would stop
or look away
or see beyond the borders of your imaginings

For the WHO?

2008-06-01T14:45:00.000-07:00

I came across this article months ago, and I've been raring to blog about it ever since.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUKMAN8576220080327

Playboy to launch in Philippines as eyes mature Dads

MANILA (Reuters Life!) - Playboy magazine is launching in the Philippines next month and will be targeting mature men who like well-written articles and tasteful photographs of semi-nude women.

"Maxim and FHM are called laddy magazines. We can be called a Dad magazine," Beting Laygo Dolor, Playboy Philippines' editor, told Reuters on Thursday.

"We are targeting a more mature market, Filipino men, 30 and above."

"There will be no full frontal nudity."

Mens' magazines with risque photos are already sold in the Philippines, which despite being a largely Catholic country has a macho culture that encourages promiscuity.

Although rural areas are more conservative, Manila and other large cities have a relaxed attitude to sex.

Dolor, who describes himself as a "bad Catholic", said the religion's values had influenced the decision not to go for a raunchier look for the magazine.

"I don't want to be ashamed to show it to my mother," said the father of four. "I have daughters in their twenties. It's something that I want them to also enjoy. I want them to be proud of their Dad."

Founded in 1953, Playboy has some 20 local editions around the world that cater to local taste rather than simply exporting and translating its U.S. content.

***

I have to confess. I have everything AGAINST Playboy. I don't see the point of showing skin. I don't like the idea of people lusting after women. I don't like indecency, period.

This article plays on a "traditional" mode of masculinity: men, no matter how old they are, will want to see some skin. Even when they are married to the women of their dreams, even when they are committed, with a family and a stable job, they will still like to see naked women. This mode denigrates both men and women to animals: men become beasts who lust after nakedness and have no sense or maturity, while women are made and fashioned to feed the greed and lust of men. What kind of outfit is Playboy magazine, then? It is nothing but an excuse for art and literature - a business that thrives and feeds on the basest of all human instinct simply because money shouts louder than morals.

I also resent how Playboy aims to make itself a "Dad" magazine. My father would protect me from perverts, he would be angry at me if he caught me watching sex scenes in a film - I grew up with a conservative household that was happy. I would never wish a girl to grow up with a father who looks through Playboy magazines, or a father who exercises his machismo every chance he gets by staring at other women and spending time at girlie bars. I would like a husband who has the same constancy and conservatism of my father, and who is faithful to me as I will be faithful to him. What is Playboy doing to such wishes?

I may be prudish, but I see all girlie magazines as excuses for lust. Playboy hides behind well-written articles and so-called tasteful photographs - but all it is is a magazine designed to feed sexual appetites. What kind of man would read Playboy? What does Playboy think men are? Are men always the lusting, brainless automatons that follow where their greeds lead? What kind of a father would like to read Playboy? Could he even be trusted to take care of his children? When Playboy says it targets a "mature" market, it means an older market, not necessarily a wiser one.

In purportedly going for "Dads", Playboy cultivates a stereotype of the testosterone-drunk male who cannot withstand temptation and is forever doomed to be a victim of his lust. Are men so weak? I hope not.

Uh...

2008-05-31T13:57:00.000-07:00

Advice columns litter the pages of Philippine newspapers. Not all of them are easy to read, of course - many of them can be biting, vitriolic, and painful, and simply because I read them as someone who sympathizes with the letter-writer's situation. On the other hand, advice can often be handed out by someone who tries too hard to claim authority on a subject - and therefore risks alienating readers, not to mention offending them.

The Advice Column that I am blogging about appeared in the Philippine Star, but is not available on the Philippine Star's website. However, some bloggers have picked it up, and they have posted their views along with the original article here http://jocelynism.multiply.com/journal/item/191/10_Scientifically-Sound_Tips_To_Improve
_Lovelife_do_you_agree, and here http://makeminedecaf.multiply.com/journal/item/2/How_to_find_the_love_of_your_life.

"How can I find the love of my life?" the letter goes. The author, a medical doctor, starts by listing tips that the writer can follow. The original letter appears in this entry in bold font, and I will critique each point in normal-sized font.

1. Ladies, don’t show your IQ. Guys admire smart girls, but they don’t marry them. If your BF’s car broke down and you repaired it, that’s a blow to his ego. Guys are secretly afraid, too, that they can’t get away with their vices with a very smart girl. So, ladies, play it smart or, rather, play it dumb.

This advice seems to feed into the pre-existing bias of men as the heads of households, the perfect fathers, the always-correct-ever-faultless boyfriend - and the women as the dumb, brainless decorations that should hang on the arms of their powerful men. This can be extremely discouraging for women who are naturally smart: should they pretend that they are silly and stupid, and do smart women stay single because they are smart?

In this tip, the advice giver makes wives appear like idiots and game-players, and makes men appear like power-grabbers who thirst and lust for the smarts over women. Hasn't society changed since the Victorian ages? I believe that men like smart women - or for that matter, women who do not pretend to be someone else. What people won't like, I believe, is someone who pushes his or her smartness on someone else - people don't like arrogance.

2. Find a complementary mate. If you’re a bookish person, you’d like to marry a street-smart guy. If the girl has an average IQ, she’d like to marry an intelligent guy. According to Leil Lowndes, author of wonderful book How to Make Anyone Fall in Love With You, we instinctively look for somebody who complements our weakness. In fact, studies show that dominant firstborns get along well with baby-like last-borns (their personalities mix well). This will bloom into a strong partnership later. Hence, showing what you have that the other lacks can make you attractive to the opposite sex.

If I say that opposites attract, I am invoking a stereotype; if I say that relationships should be between people who have everything in common, I am calling up yet another stereotype. There is no escaping stereotypes, no escaping how I have seen so many exceptions to so many rules. I am an academic, but my boyfriend is not - in fact, he hates school. A friend of mine is about to marry a fellow scientist. My mother and father are exact opposites in many respects, but they still share a lot of things in common. What determines the "opposite" and "common" levels? Do we even need to measure things?

I believe that this is where we start drawing lines: when we look for things to measure, things that are not easy to measure, things that are not even quantifiable or tangible. I did not find someone who would complement my weaknesses - I looked for someone that I could laugh with and be happy with. For me, it did not mean filling out a form and seeing if I was exactly complementary with my boyfriend. Like real life, things are never measured. They just happen.

3. Smile. Studies (yes, studies) have shown that the most effective way to attract the opposite sex is to smile. In a study of 750 encounters between men and women, 56 percent of conversations were initiated by smiling. Flipping the hair for ladies, and taking the direct approach came in second and third in effectivity.

This bloke gets a thousand points for stating the obvious. I wish, however, that he had said that smiling sincerely allows people to make friends - smiling for the sake of catching a man or a woman? Isn't that trying too hard to be happy? Trying too hard to be someone you're not, to please someone that you're not sure about?

4. Be helpful and generous. I know that helping may not be your thing, but nobody likes stingy and thrifty guys. Buy her take-home snacks. Volunteer to help in her work. Do errands for her. Who says you can’t mix work and courting?

Nobody likes ANYONE who is stingy and thrifty. In this world of racism and delineations, no one has any reason to be un-helpful and un-generous.

5. Look near, not far. Again, studies show that the average distance between the homes of future couples is less than five blocks. That means your soul mate is just lurking within walking distance from your home right now. Forget about long-distance affairs. They’re tedious and prone to get intercepted by enterprising girls.

There are thousands of things that are wrong with this statement. In fact, I have been taught not to look for love - but to let it just happen. Someone can come from another country, another continent, another city, another neighborhood, another island - that person is somewhere, and you don't have to even try hard to look. Just let life happen - if you keep on concentrating on looking, you often lose the chance to improve yourself, and to live life and enjoy it.

This advice also seems to limit people to a certain radius, to keep them in their place. I read it as a racist comment: marry within city limits, your true love is near you, don't look too far, anyone who is too far from you is not "soul mate" material and you will not be compatible, whatever compatible means.

This message can benefit from a little tweaking: sometimes, the person meant for you will just come into your life. Don't try too hard with your searching.

Now, as for the long distance relationship thing: I'm in one, and I'm sure there are enterprising people right around my corner and my boyfriend's corner. But we have to be strong enough to resist temptation. Some relationships work, some don't - it isn't always a function of distance. It's a function of emotional maturity - and sometimes, it's just luck (or lack thereof).

6. Don’t date a model. Studies show that most happy couples are about equal or come close in physical attractiveness. Be honest. Look at yourself in the mirror and rate yourself from 1 to 10. If you’re a 6-boy, you should only aim for an 8-girl at most. Look around, 75 percent of couples rank within two points on the attractiveness scale. An average-looking 5-guy shouldn’t go for a 9 or a 10-girl. It’s not possible and doesn’t portend a happy marriage later.

Of course, there are exceptions that tilt the balance: being rich, being influential, or having some other outstanding quality. If an old balding guy is walking with his young and pretty wife, what instantly crosses your mind? That guy is probably filthy rich. Or if you see a handsome guy with an average-looking girl, wow, she must have a nice personality! These are the exceptions but all in all, the attributes balance out.

Not only does this man thrive on racism or the idea of like marrying like (or opposites attracting, we're not really quite sure), he also sees relationships being built on equal attractiveness. What does this advice tell us? That only pretty people should aspire to marrying attractive people - and that the less attractive people should discard any idea of a fairy-tale affair and resign themselves to someone they settle for, not down with. What is attractiveness anyway? Can it be more than a face, a personality, IQ, EQ, or sex appeal? Can it just be something that someone sees in someone else? Can it even be defined or scored?

7. Consider marrying someone in your line of work. In my experience, most doctors end up marrying a doctor. The belief is that it’s difficult for a layperson to understand the doctor’s lifestyle. Being called in the middle of the night and canceling family affairs due to an emergency can put a strain on a marriage. The same is true with other professions. It could be advantageous to marry someone in the same profession as yours.

This makes me wonder about the "complement each other" advice given above. True, doctors will have different personalities, and fellow doctors should marry each other but make sure that they find someone who has a different personality from theirs. Again, this advice speaks of more delineations: not only should people marry those who live close to them, but those who work with them. I believe that a marriage survives not because the spouse knows exactly what the other spouse feels - I believe that marriages succeed because of sympathy and empathy, whether or not your spouse and you come from the same professions.

Again, this advice is a generalization. My parents are from different professions: my father works with an airline and is always on call; my mother works for a membership card telemarketing company as a manager and often spends a lot of time at the office. But they work things out because they are working toward the same goals.

I suppose that's one generalization you can make about marriage: it works when the people in it have the same goals. Marriage is a partnership, not a way to draw lines and erect walls where there should be none. How else can we teach our kids multiculturalism? How can multiculturalism start in a home where the parents are exactly alike in professions, maybe differing in personality, but are from the same place?

8. Ladies, marry before 30. Factoid for ladies: The farther from graduation, the lower are your chances of marrying. Look around and see the multitude of unmarried ladies in their 30s. Even if you have a steady boyfriend, you’re still not safe. Ladies can easily lose their attractiveness during years of hard work.

And when you’re pushing 30, suddenly you’re competing for your BF’s attention with 21-year-olds. My advice: Tie your BF down. Threaten him if you must. Ask support from your parents and marry early. You can earn later. Sorry, but there’s no space for the many sob stories of ladies who lost their BFs to fresher competition.

For guys, your options are open.

Guys are lucky in that as they get older, their stature, confidence, and attractiveness grow. That is why most guys, especially professionals, find it easier to find a partner as they reach middle age. In fact, many Filipinos find a mate even after they’re married! Just the same, I would advise guys to plan (and commit) early.

Here's one of the more disturbing generalizations - if I were reading this with far less confidence than what I possess, I would be scrambling for a mate now. I am 28 years old, and I will turn 29 in less than two weeks. Is my boyfriend looking around for 21 year olds? Am I that old and undesirable? And what is this about marrying now and earning later? Are we again tying women down to marriage, and then telling them to work themselves to the bone later because they married too early - and therefore are not experienced in the job market?

My mother taught me a very important lesson when I was young. She told me to earn my own money and develop my skills because no one wants to live with someone who doesn't know how to work and doesn't know herself. I am learning more and earning more because I want to be a better person - and when I finally settle down and get married and start a family, I will not have any sob stories to tell my children. Such sob stories will probably begin with, "When I was young, I wanted to do so much, but I had to get married because I was afraid that your daddy would leave me and I would never get a boyfriend when I got older - now, I wish I had stayed in school/entered the work force/made myself a better person."

Take note: this advice column was published early this year. I know of so many women back home who married late, but who were successful and had their own cash stash to keep them secure. They were rich and prosperous, they were happy - they didn't care about age. They married at 31, or 32, or 33, and had two or three children - they married and found the loves of their lives.

Sometimes, good things come to those who wait. But this isn't just ordinary waiting: it could be waiting with a twist, waiting by getting that PhD or doing better at work.

Good things come to those who spend their waiting times wisely.

Now there's a generalization I can believe.

9. Pray that you find the right one.

To our readers, no need to be so choosy when finding a mate. Don’t look for a perfect person. There isn’t one. God, however, has a plan for you. Pray for the angels and the cupids to open your mind and heart. Your future partner could be the person seated beside you right now.

I have nothing against this. I'm a devout Catholic. I prayed for my boyfriend to come along, and I'm still praying now. That's what I wish this advice section said: Pray for the best person, and pray for that person who is with you. Pray that if this is meant to be, then your relationship will be strengthened. And if it isn't meant to be, pray that it will end so that you don't waste your time.

That's a generalization meant for older gals like me. Smiles all around!

10. Lastly, there is always blessed singleness if one misses the boat. Anyway, there are lots of advocacies and projects lined up to fill your time. But never say never. A relative of mine postponed her marriage to her BF when she was 30. Then, 25 years later, she reunited with her long-lost BF (still single and now 55) and they finally tied the knot.

I don't even get how this is advice.

This advice column annoyed me (and my boyfriend) for its generalizations, its line drawing, its borders. I don't think you can generalize anything, certainly not finding one's true love, and certainly not on the basis of outmoded beliefs that will work with some relationships, but not with others. What a sting to women everywhere, to be told that they cannot be themselves! What a bite to us who survive in our long distance relationships! What a painful stab to women who are older, but who are making sure that they love themselves first before they start any relationships!

Now I wish I had the chance to write an advice column. How to find your one true love? Pray, hope for the best - and wait.

But enjoy your life and make yourself a better person while waiting.

Spell it Right, Get Corrected?

2008-05-29T17:00:00.000-07:00

I am an editing geek. I may not have perfect grammar and editing skills, but I still cringe when I see words spelled wrongly, an "its" in place of "it's" and vice-versa, a phrase used wrongly, a double negative - I have pet peeves when it comes to words, in short. I can often be irrational, in fact, when I make grammatical errors, and I actually imagine a red pen coming out of the sky and impaling me as I spit out the wrong word, the right word wrongly spelled, the comma that comes out of nowhere to tell me that no, I am not perfect.

Miss Editing Geek emerged last semester at a statistics class. Our professor showed the raw data for a statistics problem that involved the 50 U.S. States. His question was, "What's wrong with this data?"

I immediately spotted an error: Massachusetts was spelled "Massachusettes". So I spoke up, "Massachusetts is spelled wrong."

My seat mate, a White American, turned to me. "Are you sure?"

"Yes," I said, and too confidently, I think, "There isn't an 'e' before the last 's.'"

"Oh," he replied, with an understated sneer, "Is that how they spell it in the Philippines?"

"No. That's how they spell it anywhere. Wanna bet?"

I wish I had placed that bet, because my seat mate had promised a hundred dollars - I pitied him then, but I don't pity him now.

Mercilessness aside, I think his question was more than a joke about people who are over critical about spelling. It could be a defense mechanism set up by Caucasians who think that they are the English experts versus the Asian Editing Geek who has no right to correct Americans. It could be a way to put down the Asian girl who seems to be too smart for her own good, especially considering the fact that this same seat mate is a Conservative. For all I know, it could simply have been a joke, and I am over-reading into a mere jest.

On the other hand, I find his comment disturbing. First, how could he not have known how Massachusetts is spelled? Why did he need a non-U.S. citizen to point it out to him? Second, why did he react defensively? Why did he make it sound as though he were putting my skills down - and simply because I wasn't from his country? Was this another case of White Supremacy in action?

I know I could simply be reading too much into the comment - and I, too, might have been annoying for picking out such a tiny error that could have little to no bearing on the data. Then again, I brought this issue up with my boyfriend, and his reaction was, "Could I even trust the data if the data encoder can't spell stuff right? What if the extra 'e' had been an extra '0' in the numbers?"

Then again, we could both be over-reacting.

And still, I remain an Editing Geek. If there are errors in this post, however, please consider the fact that I'm ranting and raving while I'm letting out my verbal diarrhea. I may be setting letters, punctuation marks, and even my sanity loose.

A Relationship Built on Hair

2008-05-28T11:22:00.000-07:00

Love is certainly more than running one's hands through a lover's hair, but these commercials from the Philippines seem to think otherwise. In fact, they join dozens of other hair commercials that propagate the image of long, straight hair as a desirable norm - and curly hair as a relationship wrecker.

In this TV commercial for a popular shampoo, we find a pair of lovers sitting on a park bench. The man moves closer to the girl constantly and tries to run his hands through her hair, but every time he does, she moves away or finds something to do to distract him. We then get images about an impending separation - until the girl apparently takes charge and shampoos her hair with the right shampoo. With her hair now straight and black, she has more confidence, and she and her man become much closer. Of course, anyone watching the commercial might make the excuse that it merely shows how a woman has to have confidence in order to be loved; confidence can only come from loving oneself; but loving oneself, contrary to this commercial's message, need not necessarily come from having straight hair.

Most shampoo commercials in the Philippines operate on stereotypes, with a woman getting pushed down because of her non-straight, non-shiny, non-black hair. A woman cannot keep a relationship running, get a man, keep a career, or be successful, in general, without desirable hair. The scene presented however, is not typical: it is difficult to have a picnic in a park in Manila, what with all the pollution; and no picnic ground is that well-trimmed unless it's reserved for the upper classes. In presenting an image of richness, and then tying it in with the desirability of dark and straight hair, prospective customers are led to believe that they too can attain better lifestyles by merely shampooing their hair to straight perfection.

Although this may seem to be reading too much into the issue, I find that such commercials can change people's minds about the richness of beauty that can be found beyond hair and white skin. My own hairdresser used to urge me to straighten my hair because curly hair was "wrong." Commercial models usually have white skin and very dark, straight hair. Standards are being set - but should there be standards at all?

A Romp in the Devil's Playground

2008-05-28T01:30:00.000-07:00

There are many misconceptions about the Amish that are propagated by the mass media: Hollywood portrays them as extremely backward, they are often seen as closed and confining, and their lives seem to be built around rigid traditions that make little sense in a modern world. However, in the film "The Devil's Playground," we are presented with another side of the Amish; perhaps, it is this side that can make us more aware of our ills as a capitalist society.

All eight parts of this movie are on YouTube. The entire film revolves around the activities of Amish youth during Rumspringa, where they are given an indefinite amount of time to experience the outside world - the Devil's Playground. When translated into English, this time off from Amish life is "running around," which most of the youth do. They have wild parties, stay away from their parents, speak and dress "English" (or non-Amish), do drugs, even land in jail. Their untamed natures seem to be expected: Amish children are banned from attending school beyond a certain age due to the vanity that education purportedly instills in children. Hence, half-educated children are brought forth into the world, and such children can often fall into the traps of drugs and capitalism. Capitalism has its trappings and good things - but the Amish youth may not be aware of these advantages and thereby go for the underground.

In this film, Amish youth are shown as either wayward or well-bred, providing a good balance to the film. No one is entirely blameworthy nor blameless; Amish children, like any group of children all over the world, are actually a diverse bunch. There are those who go into drugs, those who stay home and are obedient to their parents; there are those who leave the church, those who stay in it; there are children who find their way back after years of running around in the world, and others who are still thinking about their destinies. Once they enter the Amish church, they no longer have the freedom to leave - they must make a decision based on their "adventures" in the outside world.

The diversity here is no longer about color or disability, age or education - it is about thought processes in children who are forced (perhaps shackled) to their "ethnic" group. The diversity exists in their ability (or lack thereof) to handle stressful situations, their adherence to religious norms, their ways of coping. Even in the white and spick-and-span, seemingly homogeneous and strict world of the Amish, there are differences that must be addressed. Will a single place of worship solve these differences? Are these differences actually problems that must be solved?

The film itself is thought provoking in that it shows the different sides of the Amish - sides that most people do not know exist. Here, the powers that hold them to their religion no longer hold: these children try to create their culture, their underground method of control, their way of coping. Does it succeed? Sometimes. Does it make them better? Maybe. Can it shed light on our own faults as a capitalist society - yes.

We Taught them Something, Too

2008-05-27T10:09:00.000-07:00

The most remarkable thing about the Philippine Ad Congress is that it always strives to go beyond stereotypes. There are no helpless maidens in their promotional ads, no women who want straight hair and white skin, no men who are overly and absurdly macho and independent. Last year, congress participants met at Subic, a Philippine municipality that was once home to a U.S. military base, and which is also the home of the Aeta, an indigenous Philippine group. In the past, Aetas were laughed at because of their curly hair and dark skin - but they were far from being mere indigenous peoples who simply sat back and watched the action as the Philippines went through wars and battles. As these ads show, Aetas were, and still are, survivors and teachers.

In this first ad, we hear someone speaking in the Aeta language, and talking about someone who learned to survive during the war, and in the Philippine jungles. This someone, we presume, is an American serviceman, as shown by the pictures through which the camera pans. In the end, however, the Aeta does say that the serviceman learned all that he needed from the Aetas of Subic.

The first part of the commercial is almost like a typecasting trick. We are almost led to believe that people somewhere are worshiping the survival skills of an American. Once the end comes, however, we find that the American owes his survival to the skills of a native. Although this might seem like a promotional bid for using natives to meet the needs of conquerors, the ad can be more a reminder of who helped the Americans win the war in the Far East. And even with the war over, the Aetas continue doing what they do, and living in the jungle that once was home to American servicemen. Movies and mass media will often show that American soldiers are foolhardy and stalwart, and learn everything that they need to learn in military school. This ad shows that soldiers, whoever they may be, survive by learning from locals.

This second advertisement shows students hiking through a jungle. They are carelessly laughing and trading banter, when one man falls. He scrapes his leg severely. When he looks up, he finds a native looking down at him. The native bares his knife; behind him, more natives appear; behind the wounded man, his comrades inch away. The native steps forward, raises the knife, and then bears it down - upon a plant next to the shocked, wounded man. The native then proceeds to dress the wound with the plant's leaves. The other natives come forward, look at the boy's leg, and say, "Sugat lang yan," or, in English, "It's just a wound."

As with the previous ad, this one tricks us with stereotypes. We have hikers who walk gleefully along, thinking themselves masters of the jungle. We have a native with his bared knife, signaling the presence of a savage, of someone outside of civilization. When the knife comes down, we find the roles reversed: the natives are the civilized masters of the jungle who know exactly how to care for wounds, and see them as mere wounds, nothing more; the hikers are visitors who have their own stereotypes about the natives, and are helpless in a world that is far removed from their own.

What I like about this ad is that it does not stereotype: it goes against trends, and acts as a reminder that the Philippines is not filled with uncivilized tribes - it is also peopled with so-called modern peoples who are unaware of the limits of their powers. The real heroes are the natives, and those who depend on them are the same people who think that they know everything.

A Reflection on Reflections

2008-05-23T16:29:00.000-07:00

After my last post, I've been wondering: Am I really racist? Do I patronize racist slurs cloaked in the guise of stand-up comedy? Am I so insensitive that I try to find excuses for my own bigotry? I spent a few hours yesterday entertaining myself: I laughed at what Mencia said, about Whites being illogical, Blacks being fun, Asians being clumsy, this group being strange, that group being silly - there were many groups, many labels, and many things to laugh about. But why was I laughing?

There is a quote in Professor Rishel's e-mails that I agree with wholeheartedly (especially as laughing is looked upon with disdain in my profession back home, and I CAN'T HELP LAUGHING SOMETIMES, DARNIT!)

"If you wish to glimpse inside a human soul and get to know a man...just watch him laugh. If he laughs well, he's a good man."

Signore Fyodor got it right, I believe - and as I remembered the quote, I got the EUREKA moment that I had been waiting for.

The good thing about a multicultural education class is that everyone gets to see what hope lies for a burgeoning field - and what advances are being made in understanding and educating more and more children from more and more diverse groups. One trap that some people fall into, however, is self-defense. This can happen when members of the dominant group see the doings of their forebears, and find that their dominance was bought, and is still maintained, at a high price. As a result, and whether they are aware of it or not, some members of the dominant group will be defensive: they will claim to be experienced in working with people of diverse backgrounds; they will claim that they, too were oppressed; they will claim that they, too deserve attention.

This, I believe, would be an understandable gut reaction: no one wants to be blamed for the world's ills, and no one wants to be affiliated with the bad guys in today's supposedly enlightened world. But I believe that we constantly fall into this trap when we get carried away in talking about our experiences. It was this potentially disruptive discourse, this often annoying method of thinking and expressing oneself, that I witnessed many times in class this week. There were times when there was so much tension in class for what someone had said, that some of my classmates had supposedly gone home and let off steam. There were times when exchanges and banter began, appearing innocent, but ending with more tension on both sides. I felt as though I were treading on eggshells when I spoke in class: I could offend someone, I could lose a potential friend, I could strike a nerve even when I did not mean to. I was living in a world of tension.

My solution? I had to come home and vent by making myself laugh - and by doing it through someone who did not care about tension and treading on eggshells. I let go of the tension by sitting in my room, laughing at jokes and labels, and just letting my virtual feet heal from the eggshell-inflicted wounds.

I'm not a racist. But maybe I'm just afraid.

****

On a non-significant note, my boyfriend and I celebrated our 15th month together today. Hurrah for us!

I Know I'm Not Supposed to Laugh...

2008-05-20T21:08:00.000-07:00

But I can't help it!

Introducing, Carlos Mencia...

I love to laugh, and I love stand-up comedy. I also come from a family of irreverent people, where we laugh at everything, from bad fashion sense to pizza sauce made from ketchup. In my stay in Purdue, I have come across many different stand up comedians; Carlos Mencia is only one, but I found myself laughing at his spiels. The problem is: nearly every single routine that he has will focus on the misdemeanors of a race, or the stereotypes of it. Perhaps the good thing about Mencia is that he does not single out any one race, and goes from Mexicans, to Whites, to African-Americans, and to Asians, without putting anyone on a pedestal or completely dissing any one race. The Mexicans in his routines are often clumsy and silly, high on testosterone and often coping with their lives as illegal immigrants. The Whites are racist, but do not have a sense of their own culture. African-Americans can do crazy things and can dance well and sing well, but not have a stable job. Asians will be smart, but will often be impractical. Even mentally challenged children find their way into his routines, and surprisingly, he performed these routines at a hospital for mentally challenged or retarded children. In his opinion, Mencia says, if you can't tell a joke in front of the people that the joke pokes fun at, then you don't have the right to tell the joke at all.

It is perhaps this aspect of Mencia that is his saving grace, despite the fact that he focuses on racial stereotypes. He has the courage to speak out about his observations - White people will go after wild animals on TV, but will never go to Oakland because of African Americans? - and to poke fun at people of different ethnicities in front of those people. When I first saw him on TV, it disturbed me that I was laughing so hard. Was I racist? Was I agreeing with his claims? I was even laughing at his jokes about Filipinos. Did that make me unpatriotic? As I kept on listening, however, and watching his show, I realized that he was speaking in front of a diverse audience, and introducing them to the strange things that made up their individual races. He wasn't afraid to make a joke - I wasn't afraid to laugh. It seemed that I wasn't afraid to lighten up.

In a multicultural world, we can do the right thing in accepting differences and celebrating them - but we can also go overboard in thinking that anything that we say can be taken against us, and that we must constantly tread on eggshells every time we open our mouths. Sometimes, we can take things all too seriously and lose the chance to not only have a good laugh, but let go of the tension that we feel inside as well. In watching Mencia, I realized that I was looking at an act: true, he said a lot of things that would appear offensive to some races, and I know that by the power of mass media, he can shut up if told to do so - and people can stop listening to him or watching him if they choose to. I realized that I am not racist - I had the courage to laugh and lighten up, and to know when things were said in jest. In fact, I learned something from watching Mencia: we cannot be race or color blind, and we all have our own idiosyncrasies, as related to race. If we all can learn to laugh at these idiosyncrasies, then perhaps we have yet another commonality to celebrate.

Of course, I don't like all the cursing - but I welcome an hour of lightening up all the same. In fact, Mencia might have taught me one of two things. First, I may be racist, and the laughing is actually a sign that my subconscious is calling out for help. Or second, he might be revealing just how racist America really is - and how people just won't admit it.

Bells, Belles, Chills - Do Wedding Jokes Go a Little Too Far?

2008-05-20T11:26:00.000-07:00

There's nothing like a little wedding humor to make a potentially staid and boring wedding more exciting. After all, a wedding is a celebration, not a sacrifice - the hard work and fighting and bickering and snapping will come later. For one day, the husband and wife will celebrate their union with either glorious grandiosity or elegant simplicity. Humor does help: for instance, this wedding dance took the lucky couple all the way to the Ellen DeGeneres Show, and spawned different copycats on YouTube.

Another fun way to add spice to a wedding could include decorations, which may in turn include the wedding cake topper. Humor is harmless, some claim - but what messages do these cake toppers send? (all images courtesy of http://www.weddingaccessories.net/cake_toppers_3.htm)

A woman drags her man to wedded bliss. What a stereotype of women as the instigators of marriage, and men as the poor sheep who must simply follow!

That's right: start the wedding off with a fight. What a stereotype of marriage: all fights and quarrels, even on the wedding day itself?

A woman chains her husband down and keeps the key. Poor man, to be chained down all his life? What a bummer, or what a stereotype?

Here's a stereotype of woman as the shopper who leaves her husband behind. I don't have the shopping gene, and this ticks me off.

Even on their wedding day, our bride and groom are still too busy for each other. What a waste of money if they're just partners in name.

Due to wife being helpless, and apparently clueless as to where the top of the wedding cake is, the dear smart husband has to help her up there.

In another reversal of roles, we have the male on the leash and the woman leading. However, again, we also have a stereotype of the man being helpless in the face of slave-driving woman.

Okay, it's funny. BUT GET A ROOM!

Agreed, we need to have humor at weddings, but what would such cake toppers do in portraying what a wedding is, or in representing it? What would such images, projected online, or placed on a wedding cake for all to see, or shown in wedding pictures - what would such images say about marriage? That it is a burden for men? That men should lead and women should follow? That sex is no longer sacred? That couples fight all the time? That they have no time for each other? That women are inveterate shoppers? One day, I will be married - one day, many women and men all over the world will find their special someone. But will they back away because of a stereotype? Has marriage become so cheap, with cheap thrills and cheap humor? Has even the simplest wedding cake topper become a representation of how marriage is all pain and no happiness? What about the marriages that actually last, that are actually happy? Shouldn't the world get a chance to see them, too?

If You’re Not _____, Don’t Even Bother

2008-05-20T10:00:00.000-07:00

Job hunting in the Philippines can be dramatic and frustrating. There are far more fresh graduates than there are available jobs, leading to massive unemployment, as well as its likewise brutal cousin, underemployment. Students with degrees in molecular biology and biotechnology, for instance, will often work at a call center at unholy hours if only to receive high pay on their first job. If the job market fails fresh graduates, they look for ways to go out of the country to work as nurses, domestic helpers, construction workers, or cruise ship staff in countries such as the United States, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, or Australia. The job market at home, after all, pays little for a lot of work - the job market, moreover, practices a good deal of discrimination based on physical traits.

Age, height, and gender are often used by human resource management staff in filtering out applicants. Job listings will often appear online or in major newspapers, advertising companies looking for people who will fit not only an academic requirement, but a height, age, and gender requirement as well. Here are a few examples from job listings available online.

FRONT DESK CLERK
· Male & Female, ages 21 to 25
· Preferably graduate of BS HRM or Tourism
· At least 5'3" (F) and 5'8" (M) in height
· With pleasing personality
· Excellent communication skills
· Customer-service oriented
· Driving skills for males is a must
· Preferably a renewed or practicing Christian
· 4 vacancies available
(from http://www.philchristiandirectory.com/jobonline.htm. The front desk at their office is apparently too high for smaller people to function in)

5. Utility Personnel
Qualifications:
Male, Not more than 25 years old
At least High school graduate

6. Receptionist
Qualifications:
Graduate of any 4 year busines course
Female at least 5’ 4” in height, with pleasing personality
With good communication skills
Not more than 27 years old
Willing to be assigned in SM Pampanga

7. Cashier
Qualifications:
Graduate of any 4 year busines course
Male at least 5’6” in height, Female at least 5’ 4” in height, with pleasing personality
With experience in any service industry. Familiar with pont of sale (POS) operation
Not more than 27 years old
Willing to be assigned in SM Pampanga

8. Stock Custodian/ Inventory Clerk
Qualifications:
Male at least 5’ 6” in height and with pleasing personality
At least 2nd year college level
Preferably with experience in retail industries
With good communication skills
Not more than 25 years old
Willing to be assigned in SM Pampanga
(from http://pesoolongapo.weebly.com/local-employment-vi.html. Males handle cargo, females work at the front office, and relatively tall people make good cashiers, these people seem to say)

Executive Assistant/Secretary
Female not more than 30 yrs. old >With pleasing personality >Graduate of any 4 year course 3-5 yrs. experience as Admin. or Executive Assistant >Reporting directly to CEO or president Second hand smoker
Location: Manila - Manila
Salary: P40,000-P45,000.00
Date: 21 May 2008
(from http://www.bestjobs.ph/bt-job-SC002-1-Clerical_Administrative_jobs.htm. I don't know why a secretary should be a second hand smoker either)

Company Nurse	Female at least 25-30 years old graduate of B.S Nursing single with NO child with experience in hospital or as company nurse with training of emergency exposure and Red Cross computer literate
Counter Personnel	Female 19-26 years old college level at least 5'2 in height with pleasing personality and good conversant of english willing to be assigned in any branch experience is an advantage

(from http://www.mandaluyong.gov.ph/jobs.html. Children - stay out. Oh, and this company seems to be looking for counter personnel that speak English well - maybe to teach the company how to write English better?)

These are only a few examples of the many advertisements that appear both online and offline in the Philippines. It seems that anyone below 5'2" might hope for better jobs elsewhere; people with families don't deserve to get into the job market; people who can't speak English will usually be shunted out. What kind of message does this send to the youth? That appearance is all that counts? Speaking English with flair is all that matters? Being tall is better than being small but able? Such listings can actually promote and socialize the idea of attractiveness being the sole key to success - a stereotyped tall person will win over the smaller, but not necessarily less able one; being small, in contrast to being tall - or having children, as opposed to being single and childless - is seen as desirable; you may work hard and have the best grades in the world, but when you walk through that door and don't even manage to brush your hair against the upper part of the door frame, you're doomed.

***

This has always disappointed me, this stress on physical characteristics, this great value placed on people whose pituitary glands fortunately worked overtime. For me, the experience proved to be all too real. When I graduated from college, I had a degree in molecular biology and biotechnology, a resume filled with details on speaking engagements, and a cum laude to tie a ribbon around the entire package. I inquired at the crime lab of the Philippine National Police to see if I could work as a forensic molecular biologist. They were in need of staff, and I my thesis dealt with using DNA evidence to solve rape cases.

They looked at me from head to foot and said that I could not qualify: I had to be at least 5'4", I had to undergo police training, and I had to be athletic. I could still work for the lab, they said - but at half the pay of everybody else.

I was at a conference then, and the Police staff were looking at my research poster, which I had based on my thesis. If my expertise was to be shelved in favor of more inches, then I could not stomach working for such a place. I did not give them the luxury of a reply.

I simply stared, and then looked away in annoyance.

Part II. That’s Not Something I Can Swallow

2008-05-19T12:55:00.000-07:00

There doesn’t seem to be typecasting of any sort on Hell’s Kitchen. The squabbling is expected where a big prize is up for grabs. There are the usual outspoken team members, whether they are women or men. The battle lines are drawn between the sexes, but there is no stereotyped woman putting on makeup while waiting for the beef to go from medium rare to well done, or stereotyped male throwing sexist remarks while doing a stir fry. There were Caucasians, Asians, and African-Americans. There was no insult on race or gender, only on how bad the food tasted or how messy the kitchen was, thanks to the barking and blaring Gordon Ramsay. It seemed that in Hell’s Kitchen, everyone was a chef. No one was poor or rich; no one was smart or dumb; everyone was cooking, and if they didn’t, Chef Ramsay would scream, “F*** the thank you/insults/thinking/talking and START COOKING!” No one was serving anyone; everyone was competing for the prize, everyone left their lifestyles at the door – but just when Hell’s Kitchen seemed to be heaven for equality, one contestant crossed the line. Matt, newly transferred to the women’s team, was asked if he would be willing to return to the men’s team. He replied, “I’d rather be called a girl than go back to the boys.”

Matt can cook – but can he think before talking? (courtesy of http://www.fox.com/hellskitchen).

If only I could raise an eyebrow, I would have! What was wrong with being called a girl? Why did Matt have to make an issue about being part of the girl’s team? Did being part of the team mean that he was going to be called a girl? The jump of logic made no sense to me, and although it was a single sentence in a little interview nestled within the entire show, it seemed to echo in my ears throughout the rest of the competition. I was cheering for the girls even more rabidly because they had been labeled by their fellow teammate.

Apart from that slip-up by the aspiring chef, however, the rest of the show concentrates on a person’s ability to cook under pressure and almost incessant cursing. The language is rife with curse words: people are tired and exasperated with each other, and often cave beneath the demands of Chef Ramsay. Success is measured by perfection, and sometimes, Ramsay can be a frightening standard to go by. He can throw food into the waste bin or the sink if it is less than perfect as it emerges from Hell’s Kitchen. However, this is no empty competition: contestants are actually serving people and are judged on how satisfied their customers are. The competition breeds pressure, and pressure does not always result in a well-made dish. In the end, we have contestants who leave their lifestyles at the door, but quarrel nevertheless, aim for a prize, curse and get cursed at, and still try to cook despite the heat. I wonder: do they come out better chefs, or bitter people? Would this kind of show condone harshness as a method of making people do better? Or would it actually strengthen what seems to be a society gone too soft in its treatment of people?

Part I. Cheering for the Girls – Just Because I’m One

2008-05-19T12:52:00.000-07:00

Food was the order of the evening: I was reading about the first Thanksgiving, and Hell’s Kitchen was playing on TV. I had to watch. After all, the only way that I could get in touch with my old life as a molecular biologist was to play in the kitchen and do culinary experiments. I wouldn’t dream of being harassed endlessly by a perfectionist chef, of course. I could simply live vicariously through the show’s contestants – or let them live courageously for me. Last night, I found myself doing more than just watching how food was cooked, and how contestants dealt with the pressure of the Kitchen and each other. I found myself cheering for the girls, especially when they started winning the challenge. The contestants underwent a blind taste test, where they were made to eat different foods while blindfolded. In true fan girl fashion, I said, and quite loudly, “The girls are winning this. Girls have better palates than men.” Granted, the girls did win the competition, but I found later that I did not cheer so much because I knew that girls would win a challenge based on their physiological abilities – I kept recalling that most of the world’s best known chefs are men, and women had to prove their worth. The question was – why?

When I was young, my peers accepted, and wholeheartedly, the idea that women were weaker than men. I could not and would not swallow the concept. I have spent the last few years lobbying for women’s strength, from correcting my classmates in college when they stereotyped women as clumsy scientists, to loudly cheering for any women’s team when it was pitted against a man’s team anywhere. Tonight, watching Hell’s Kitchen meant that I had yet another chance to cheer (albeit in the privacy of my dorm room) for women, whom I believed could be as good as men at cooking. Weren’t we the mothers and housewives? The kitchen queens?

Scream, Gordon, Scream! (courtesy of http://www.fox.com/hellskitchen).
Gordon Ramsay might have sneered at the Girl’s Team, but the ladies still won the night.

That would be my greatest contradiction: seeing women as the stronger sex in the kitchen because of the housewife label. I really didn’t care if there were many other ways for chefs to be great, the ways having nothing at all to do with gender. I am a woman, and my natural impulse was to cheer for the girls: I had to, because I would not lay down the old arms I had fought with as a child; and I wanted to, because I know I believe, deep within, that men just can’t make it where women have held their turf for hundreds of years. Equality – of course! Now boys, just acknowledge that all those years we women were forced to stay in the kitchen should mean that we’re also better at the craft. Of course, I won’t say that out loud, but I’ll still cheer for the next girl who wins the competition – because she’s just like me, waiting to prove something, wanting to show that women have an edge thanks to a label.

Cheering for Hell’s Kitchen

2008-05-19T12:50:00.000-07:00

Hell’s Kitchen is a reality cooking show with an evil twist. Two teams square off and cook up the best meals every week, until only one person remains and gets the top prize of being an apprentice at a posh restaurant owned by host Gordon Ramsay. The problem? Gordon Ramsay can make sailors blush with his cursing. He is a difficult boss, a pusher and extreme motivator, a harsh superior who can compliment recipes once in a blue moon while throwing pots and pans across kitchens and kicking wastebaskets and cooking stations over as often as contestants try to hold back their tears. The show isn’t called Hell’s Kitchen for nothing.

Chef Gordon Ramsay (courtesy of http://www.smh.com.au/news/tv-reviews/hells-kitchen/2007/05/14/1178995061555.html).
Knighted, renowned, and honored, this top chef does not mince his words. If Hell’s Kitchen had a script, the screenwriter’s keyboard would be missing the letters F, U, C, and K by now.

This season, Chef Ramsay pits aspiring men and women chefs against each other. One man, Matt, is labeled by the men’s team as a weak link because he can’t seem to work with the rest of the boys. Chef Ramsay transferred Matt to the girls’ team last week, and this week, Matt has to prove that it isn’t his fault that the boys are doing pitifully.

It turns out that Matt is right.

What follows are experiential and media journal entries on the May 13 episode of Hell’s Kitchen.

It’s Not Just About the Color

2008-05-19T09:52:00.000-07:00

I come from a country obsessed with white skin. Olive skin, albeit beautiful to many Western eyes, is seen as a badge of poverty. True, many Philippine beauty queens had olive skin, tanned and bronzed and made as smooth as silk. But they did not get commercial spots or film roles – not like the women who were fair skinned, who used “block and white” and similar whiteners (see above) in an effort to “perfect” their skin. I grew up with a mestizo father, and fair-skinned mother and sister. I alone was not fair-skinned, or white, like them. Hence, my mother invested heavily in bleaching creams and retinoic acid, starting me off with dermatology at the ripe old age of ten. Once, I chided her, albeit jokingly, “Mom, why are you so obsessed with getting white skin?”

“Because white skin is clean,” she retorted angrily.

I had never felt more humiliated than at that moment, as I gazed sidelong at a mirror and eyed my apparently less-than-perfect skin. My mother had not directly scolded me, nor had she intended to appear racist – but she had shown me what the media and my peers would later reinforce. That having white skin meant that you were healthy, and any other color was a sign of sickness. That having white skin meant that you were clean, and any other color was a sign of putridity. I can only vaguely trace it to the long years of colonization of the Philippines, where we fell beneath Spanish, and then American rule – and where adaptation of the habits of colonizers meant not only survival, but wealth. If you knew Spanish during the Spanish occupation, and if you dressed like the Spaniards, then you were supposedly respected. If you knew English during the American occupation, and if you dressed like an American, then you were supposedly paid more attention. In this new occupation – or should I say preoccupation? – with fair skin, I find a new invader: an illusion of beauty powered by Western mass media. To be globalized means to be Westernized, and it seems that the fear of lacking a global perspective drives many to fall into the trap of a Western worldview. To be native, the fear states, is to be backward; and to be backward may translate into poverty in the global economy. Hence, speak English; worship the dollar; act like someone from a Superpower Country; and if possible, look like someone from that country. If you can’t look the part, you can’t get the dollar; if you can’t get the dollar, you go hungry. It’s a leap of logic, but it seems fitting for an impoverished Philippines.

In reading the first day’s readings on how skin color seems to allow people to bend the rules, I find myself in that afternoon once more, when I scoffed at my mother’s obsession with white skin. I find myself thinking of how I, the “Other”, had to suffer being called ugly because I did not have fair skin; how I had to be inspected more thoroughly than my family before I entered the mall, because I didn’t look as “rich” as they; how I endured being laughed at for purportedly being adopted because I did not have the white skin of my parents. I am not angry – I am only challenged, because I have fought against the stereotype for years by earning high grades and always coming out on top. However, I find myself sighing: how much longer must I fight to get the attention I deserve if only to tell people that there is more to love in me beneath my non-whiteness?

My Name is Not Color

I am not the olive that wraps my soul. I am not the brown that holds me in. I am not the blush that bursts with the blood of a thousand passions caged by rules.

But I am a soul, you see
I know how to weave such weeping words that droop like willows from a stagnant page
I know how to dry the tears and paint the sunsets and spill forth the rivers that flow through my imaginings
I am not olive

I am held in
Prisoner behind the bars of labels laid upon a weaver and painter and architect of worlds of words
Soul like dove fluttering and laughing in a cage that fails to clip her wings
I am not brown

I am blood
Passions
Wants and wishes and dreams

I am not mere blush.

I am not painted upon this canvas, made to assume the colors you wish.