Hannibal Lecter’s Whore: Blog Of

It has always been said that language is “a medium of thought and a tool for conveying meaning”. Yet other than that, it can also tell something about the speaker – who and what kind of person he is – as revealed in the way he/she uses language.

As I lined up to pay at the cashier of National Bookstore, I notice a young lady talking to another woman beside her at the counter. The store was fully-packed; shoppers are rushing in and out of the store hastily. The line was quite long and the cashier, who happens to be a trainee, was moving like a snail. Beside her was their manager giving instructions to the trainee as she accommodated the busy customers.

As I eavesdrop her conversation with the novice, I observed the manager with emphasis on the way she uses language. One could say that the manager is educated by her manner of speaking – her accent is good so with her diction. Her articulation also is fluent and erudite. When she talks to the trainee, she used plain bisaya, as opposed to her use of the Tagalog language when talking to the customers. It was a “broken Tagalog“, the one that is exercised here in Davao. I believe this could be attributed to a concept in Sociolinguistics called Social Dialect – a certain dialect or a language has, in some ways, gained a prestige over another dialect or language. The use of these languages differs when put into different contexts; the language of higher prestige is used in a more formal set-up as opposed to the one of lower prestige. Here in Davao, the “broken Tagalog” has achieved a certain stature that is why the manager used it when conversing with the clienteles. On the other hand, she used plain bisaya, a language of lower prestige, when talking with the trainee. The application of social dialects, of course, is context-based.

What is really fascinating with communication is that it is not only limited in words. Here comes in the concept of non-verbal communication which also expresses ideas as effective as words. These nonverbal cues transmit meanings that need not be spoken orally. This is true when applied to the manager, in which her nonverbal gestures speak more of her too. Through her facial expressions (e.g. frowning, raising of eyebrows, dropping of the jaw) convey that she is not satisfied with the performance of the apprentice. Even her eye behavior shows that she is distracted with the going in and out of customers. Under kinesics (the study of body movements) is posture, which is mainly involuntary but can send out significant social signals. The manager’s posture shows superiority over the trainee. The manager’s physical appearance also communicates information. Furthermore, her clothing and make-up provide clues to her age, personality, attitudes, and status information. By just looking at her, I speculated that she is in her early twenties, single, sophisticated. I also concluded that she is a stylish, classy lady who likes to go out a lot.

It is important to take note that of the two kinds of communication – nonverbal and verbal – context and culture really matter. Culture suggests our interpretation to both nonverbal and verbal communication, that is why interpretation differs in accordance to the kind of society such communication was applied.

The film The Crime of Padre Amaro tells of a young priest – fresh out of the seminary, seemingly idealistic, and was ready to devote his life to God – only that he was then confronted with real-world choices: that of temptation and corruption.

Father Benito’s receiving of financial help from the region’s drug lord for the construction of a new health clinic, with him claiming that reveal how difficult it is for any generation of priests to stick to their celibacy vows.

Natalio – who was excommunicated because he was suspected of assisting guerilla troops in the highlands. We see the ‘devout’ and ‘pious’ Amelia tempting the young priest. We see Father Amaro and Father Benito succumbing into hypocrisy to hide their own ‘immorality’. Paradoxes indeed.

I believe there was really ‘no crime of Padre Amaro’. Well, at one perspective, as in the title, that crime may be his swindling with the rules of the Church which leads him to his temptation, to the act of abortion, and then to the death of both his child and his lover. But I do not see it as a crime at all; Father Amaro was just victimized and persecuted by the rules he himself does not believe in, only that he was forced to conform and accept them for it was part of the convention.

This thus leads to the issue between nature and culture – of which the latter was seen as ‘higher’ than the other. When confronted by his temptation, Father Amaro reasoned out that ‘he is but a man’, and that speaks of his carnal needs – and that is something biological, something part of human nature.

Padre Amaro was indeed persecuted not with anything else, but by the rules of the convention. I believe that in the truest sense, no crime was done by the Father. Though passionate for the vocation he had chosen, Padre Amaro only took the vow of celibacy because he was required to. When he The Crime of Padre Amaro is a biting indictment of the hypocrisy and corruption that has plagued the Catholic Church even before. Hypocrisy in the sense that the Church and the people inside it had chosen to stick with the ‘image’ they had been living in pretense for hundreds of years.

            When asked to define what a “family” is, one would normally respond with the answer that it is the basic unit of the society. Generally speaking, yes, the family is referred to as the basic unit of the society, but in a world obsessed with political correctness, more and more definitions come up to explain what really constitute a “family”.

            The notions of “family” and “household” are seen as two different constructs. A “family”, in the simplest term, is made up of a couple and their offspring/s. While this talks of kinship, “household” takes on shared residence and/or living arrangements as its organizing principle.

            This discussion on family and household leads us to the discussion of headship. When asked about who heads in the Filipino family, the usual answer would be the padre de familia, which, as the term itself shows, suggests of a patriarchal domestic system. This kind of system can be attributed to the Spaniards who introduced us the notion of patriarchy and male domination. Because the family headship is often attributed to the one who contributed much to the domestic economy, the husband is then perceived as the family head because of the stereotyping that the husband is the one earning for the family, the one contributing to the household resources. This thus boils down to the discussion of power within the family; the “power” rests on the income earner.

            Societal stereotypes tell of households as generally headed by men, thus the term padre de familia for the household head. This problem on presupposing male headship as customary and conventional, overshadows current realities wherein the headship is in fact shared by both the wife and the husband, or even by the woman alone, as in the case of female-headed households.

            Now that much of the Philippine setting had changed over time, the Filipino family is no longer contained in a particular household pattern – men earning for the family, and their wives taking care of the house. Nowadays, it is no longer strange to see women working as more women are entering the labor force. This has been one focus of liberal feminists­ – the entry of women into paid labor market, and their capability to participate and compete with men.

            These changes in the Filipino household system even challenge the very concepts of motherhood and fatherhood. Motherhood is seen to be attained through pregnancy, childbirth, and eventually, child-rearing. World history (religion, art, literature, etc.) tells us of the “magical power” invested in women for having the capacity to procreate life. But nowadays, women are devalued and their dignity reduced. Thus, the thinking now is that the husband impregnates “his” wife who is to deliver “his” child. Women are thus reduced to a sexual object and reproductive property owned and controlled by their husbands. With that situation, Marxist feminists believe that women, with its capacity to reproduce, are in fact reproducing patriarchal and capitalist social relations biologically and socially speaking.

            Another major issue under motherhood is the concept of childlessness. Here in the country, the use of artificial contraception, though greatly discouraged by the Catholic Church, is acknowledged by the government. While the use of contraceptives signifies temporary prevention of pregnancy, the notion of childlessness is choosing never to have children at all. It can not be prevented that there are those who choose not to have children. Some resort to surgical operations so to permanently thwart pregnancy. Advocates of childlessness call for an end to sexism and patriarchy, insisting that women are “designed” not only to reproduce, and that they have a choice whether they want to have children or not. Thus, advocates of this assert that there needs to be a change in the society and its system so to allow such choice, making the option of childlessness really open to women. This notion of childlessness eventually challenges the concepts of sexuality and parenthood.

            Moreover, there are also issues concerning the idea of fatherhood. Artificial Insemination – the process in which male gametes are collected and introduced artificially into the female genitals for the purpose of fertilization – is one matter confronting fatherhood. It is the fetishism to that microscopic sperm, reasoning out that you are the father because it was your sperm that begets the child’s life? Or “fathering” the offspring through child-care/rearing? The question really could be “how do we define “fatherhood” in the first place?”

            Truly, there are lots of concerns that confront modern-day families. This may also encompass topics like single parent families, and lesbian/gay households which are under Cultural Feminism. Even concepts like “surrogate motherhood” and the perennial debate on child adoption challenge our notions of parenthood. These are some issues that concern the Filipino family. Now, concepts like shared parenting also come in the picture, and in a country influenced by patriarchal society, a man who “dirties his hands with diapers” is in a way removing himself from his patriarchal pedestal. And this can be seen as a crucial shift from the traditional Filipino society wherein women are seen as household objects inferior of their husbands. Moreover, shared parenting can be taken as a political effort to challenge the unequal nature of the family, and at the same time, encouraging a healthier child development and growth.

            This discussion on the domestic system inside Filipino families reverberates to the discussion of culture and the system. Given a patriarchal society, it is inevitable that men and women will be brought up in different positions and roles in the labor force – men for paid labor market, and women for the household. And in a Marxist perspective, the entire point is not just to explain the society, but to change it.

           One of the most important contributions of the development of governments in the world is the concept of the “citizen” as a legitimate entity that influences his society as well as the state. Such concept has evolved into different perspectives that are basis for the ideologies proposed by so many thinkers all throughout the history of the world as we know it. The springboard of which is the confidence that is put to the rationality of the human being.

            Despite this evolution of thought, much of the operation of states has primarily delved on the concept of power: how it is exercised, who shall exercise it, to what extent it is exercised and how people and the society work as a whole in the management of said power. This is where the Enlightenment thinkers such as Thomas Hobbes, Jean Jacques Roseau, and John Locke etc. grounded their philosophies and ideas of the state and the society.

            Although these academic and philosophical endeavors were dominated by the western thought, it cannot also be denied that such ideas were also present in the Asian setting. It is only in the modern are that Asian studies have become an important undertaking in the field of politics, economics and sociology to name a few. And such undertakings have provided essential data on the understanding of Asian civilization as a whole.

            In fact, there is a striking difference between western development and Asian development. This is evident in the lush history of the Chinese, Indian and Japanese civilization. Although these said countries today are being influenced heavily by the western thought and ideals, remnants of the past still holds manifestation until today.

            The Philippines as an Asian country is marked not only of western foreign colonialism but also of the influences embedded in its culture by its Asian counterparts, specifically the Chinese culture. Even before the coming of the Spaniards, the Chinese have been trading with the Philippines for continuously for years. With this relationship the Philippines has also continuously adopted certain characteristics of the Chinese culture which today is still present.

            As a political science student, I was exposed to different perspectives in understanding politics, culture, the state and the society. One of such exposures the practicum training program of the Ateneo de Davao University.

            I went trough the highly technical work of running a law office. And I’ve just finished being exposed to what socio-political scientists as the work of “voluntarism” my work being in an NGO or an IGO which is the Philippine National Red Cross Davao City Chapter.

            Much like the theories I learned in the four walls of the classroom, the outside world, if not totally reflective of the theories and facts that I encountered, bears a huge semblance to the ideas fostered by the philosophers, sociologists, political scientists and historians.    

            Political participation is a major factor considered in the progress of a society or a state for that matter. This concept has been introduced to me by western thought that is largely the foundation of our educational system here in the Philippines but it not solely the west who has the monopoly of this concept. The Chinese have been toying with the concept of civil participation as part of the duty to the state or the dynasty. Having procured large numbers of population in the large provinces of ancient China, the numerous dynasties provided solutions in order for the effective operation of the dynasties themselves. One such solution offered was the establishment of a governmental bureaucracy that involves the participation of the civil society.  Participation of the citizens of the Chinese empire required immense trainings and examinations. The concept of civil service was recognized in China.

            Civil service as part of political participation in the government is very present today. The call of civil service does not only confine itself within the governmental institutions but also in the Non-governmental Organizations (NGO). But there is a difference with the kind of civil service that is being practiced in NGOs.  

            If in the government civil service comes with the promise of compensation that is not only just but also secured. There is also a promise of rising into higher ranks with more compensation and benefits. In NGOs on the other hand civil service is synonymous to voluntarism. There is no secure compensation and sometimes there is even none at all. The only compensation, but is also the best of all, is the altruistic feeling of being able to help other people and the society as a whole for the service in the name of justice and humanity which I think is the pillar of NGOs, IGOs or IHOs for that matter.

            It should not be taken into the negative the ‘volunteer’ side of the Philippine National Red Cross or the Red Cross as a whole. Even though it has left off from the conventional concept of civil service, the spirit still remains. The whole point of voluntarism is service to the people who have less in life which surmounts any other type of service.  The Red Cross being a humanitarian organization has evolved from the time it was established as being a provider of medical relief the wounded in battle. Today, it participates together with the governments of the world in providing service in any type of tragedy, natural or man-made. The Red Cross has given a different meaning to civil service that the Chinese has so openly contributed to our system of governance.

            Our system of governance also has evolved although less progressive as compared to the countries in the western hemisphere. Since our culture play an important role on the way we run things even in the business of governance, it cannot also be denied that its tentacles of influence has reached the foreign organization like the Red Cross.

            Public administration here in the Philippines isn’t a model to be imitated. In fact, as many political critics would say, it is one of the worse in the Asian region. This fact cannot be proven wrong of course if you consider the majority of the people in charge of public administration. Perhaps there are a few exceptions but these are rather rare. Much has been done on the part of the United Nations as well as the political groups within the Philippines to rectify these ugly facts, still the Filipino political culture persists its influence. Even the educational system does not provide considerable effect on the problem of the Philippines that is “Public Administration”.

            Political scientists interested in public administration study government organizations and their relation to other parts of government. Political scientists investigate how these organizations work, and try to devise methods of improving them. For example, David Osborne and Ted Gaebler’s book Reinventing Government (1992) inspired many national, state, and local governments to adopt more-competitive and less bureaucratic ways of delivering services to the public.

            Although in the Philippine context, the above statement doesn’t ring true. Our conception of public administration is plagued with red tape and impediments posed by heavy bureaucracy. Combine these with our political culture; there occurs a very serious problem.

            Our political culture which emphasizes these trademarks namely; a. Patron-clientilism, b. Palakasan system, c. Manana habit, d. Utang na loob system, e. Strong family ties and such others have contributed to the problems of public administration.

            The Red Cross, being a foreign institution but nevertheless run by Filipino employees is not spared of these indicators. In the course of my on the job training, I observed that even the Red Cross even with its highly western way of management still has problems with the culture of manana habit.

            For one thing, the employees do not arrive on time at the office and the work they do is not always done on time. But these are not as a general rule though. There are only a few instances where the habit comes into the picture and this includes us practicumees. There are also remnants of patron-clientilism in the Red Cross as well as the palakasan system but only on certain services such as the Care-giver Program of the Red Cross and the Safety services where those who are in the upper middle class are given importance. Suffice it to say that the Red Cross badly needs sufficient funds on-order for it to continue its humanitarian services. But again, this is rather an exception than a general rule.

            Still the political culture is there and it poses a problem if it is not strictly monitored which by the way is one of the habits of us Filipinos, we tolerate the little bad things and realize in the end that these little things have become a serious problem.

            It is the contention of modern political sociologists that the state is more or less a reflection of the civil society. And that the problems of the state reflect those of the problems within the civil society. This is clearly manifested in the kind of culture that we have as explained in the above paragraphs.

            One of the political sociologists that have contributed much on the understanding of governments as well as institutions in the society is Max Weber. His study on the rationalization of the government and the society are the basis of modern bureaucracy. The efficiency of governments and the institutions of society heavily depend on its bureaucratic operation in the assumption that the people running the bureaucracy are also efficient.

            Bureaucracy, personnel and administrative structure of an organization. Business, labor, religious, educational, and governmental systems depend on a large workforce arranged in a hierarchy to carry out specialized tasks based on internal rules and procedures. The term is used mostly in referring to government administration, especially regarding officials in the federal government and civil service. It is often used derogatorily to suggest waste, inefficiency, and red tape.

In a more important sense, governmental systems depend on bureaucracy, without which no modern government can function. A hindrance to development in some nations has been the lack of large-scale organizational techniques.

Whilst the previous statements are true, the effective operation of a bureaucracy corresponds to an effective rendering of services in the government. The use of bureaucracy also includes institutions that are not connected with the government as popular belief would contend. Almost all the institutions in our society make use of bureaucracy as a tool for efficiency.

The Red Cross, which is the probably one of the biggest international humanitarian organizations today, keeps itself running effectively through its bureaucracy. It is unimaginable for the Red Cross to not be in hierarchy and not be in doing things in specialized tasking. Otherwise it would crumble into pieces and be in disarray. Its bureaucratic system keeps it in order and working smoothly.

However there is a downfall to this system especially in the Philippine context. As explained in the previous paragraphs, the Filipino culture has an influence on the way institutions are being ran.

As a concrete example, I observed someone applying for the safety services training of the Red Cross for a group of students. Since the Red Cross has a bureaucratic system to follow, naturally the person applying for the service has to comply with them. Unfortunately for her, the one in charge for the applications of the said service wasn’t at the office but was instead somewhere else for no apparent reason. The applicant waited for over an hour and the lady in charge came in.

They exchanged information regarding the application and the lady informed the applicant that the service will be available to them in a week or so. It is quite a long time to wait considering that the safety services training doesn’t really need a lot of preparation since the Red Cross is fully equipped with personnel and facilities to provide such training. The only reason for the delay is the bureaucratic requirement. There are lots of employees in the office who are more than capable of processing the application but then bureaucracy says so otherwise. This is one of the reasons why it bureaucracy is not always effective. And again, this only happens in a few instances in the Red Cross.

The prevalent political culture of our country is still not that mature as compared to other developed nations but this should not be taken as reason for not to opt for change but rather an avenue for the continuing enhancement of the capacity of the processes of education to better mold the consciousness of the Filipino people. If it took the United States of America almost 300 years of democracy to do it, then maybe we really don’t need to hurry up.