Society

We have seen riskier art with religious images at the CCP and other galleries; people complained, but never at a scale such as this. Why? Because back then only the artist gains from the attention.

Despite every effort made at civil accomodation, the CBCP and Pro-life Philippines have shown through their actions that they do not want discourse or discussion; they only want their demands met and their dictates obeyed.

It has often been said that “beauty is in the eye of the beholder,” that is, the things we see around us are interpreted by differently from viewer to viewer. But what about the flip-side? Is the “profane” just as subjective as the “pleasing”?

A brief e-mail interview with Mideo Cruz, the artist behind the controversial works being displayed in the Cultural Center of the Philippines which the conservative Catholics of Pro-Life Philippines are trying to take down for blasphemy.

I don’t count myself a feminist, but I felt a strange flurry of indignation, bewilderment, and despair some might accord to a feminist sensibility as I processed my response to certain reasons and logic used to justify (1) the “practicality” of the above quotation as if it does not imply the prevalence of a problematic patriarchal vocabulary and (2) condemnations of the slut walks as if their participants use the term “slut” merely for shock value. To some, that makes me a silly feminist. To me, that simply makes me someone who’s fighting for a free world where sluts, prudes, and everyone in between and beyond, can live in harmony.

Having taken on the imperialist capitalist conspirators Mcdonald's and Bench Apparel, perhaps the CBCP and their ilk now finally feel confident enough to crush the greatest threat to the cultural heritage of the Philippines: the, er, Cultural Center of the Philippines.

I am totally for women speaking out not only against harassment, but also in support of their right to be open about their love for sex, whether mindless or meaningful. What I find very weak about these women’s concept, however, is their dependence on the image of a scantily-clad slut to further such a well-intentioned cause.

I'm ambivalent about Miriam's RH sponsorship speech. As an RH advocate, I'm happy. Her speech was effective in terms of increasing the chances of the RH Bill passing. But as an advocate of secularism, I'm disappointed.

Democracy and with it, freedom of choice, are among the best moral ideas that we have developed, a “universal value” of...