This year, I am celebrating my first Pride Month as an open and proud bisexual man.

But in an ideal world, the whole idea of “coming out” would not be necessary. “Coming out” implies that something about your identity is not acceptable, therefore, there was a need to hide in the first place. (READ: [OPINION] I do not believe in coming out)

We still live in a world where society sees heterosexuality as the “normal” and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, and asexual (LGBTQIA+) as the exception. (READ: President Duterte, praying the gay away didn't work for me)

My coming out story is a slow and confusing one. But like Sansa Stark said in the hit TV show Game of Thrones, “I’m a slow learner, but I learn.”

While I may not be of nobility, I can relate to Sansa’s slow character development and persistence: from starting as a quiet and timid wife to becoming a force-to-be-reckoned with in the imaginary kingdom of Westeros.

I grew up in a conservative and very Catholic Cebuano family, meaning that I was indoctrinated with the western-imposed construct of heteronormativity from a young age. (READ: Coming out of the shadows: On being LGBT in Mindanao)

The only acceptable way to live was to aim to get married by 25, buy a house, have children and build a comfortable life with a family.

I tried to want this. I’ve only been in one relationship ever with a girl, and even today I am certain that the love was real. 

But there was a part of my identity that I omitted even from my closest friends. Yes, I’m attracted to women – still am and always will be. But I am attracted to men too.

Was it shame? Maybe. But a big part of not saying anything for the longest time was that I didn’t understand it myself, and it took a long time before I did.

I thought growing up that bisexuality was not possible because the conversations around me framed sexuality as a mutually exclusive deal: you either liked men or you liked women, not both.

So when I fell in love with a woman, I thought that was that. I am straight and I was just confused before.

But while that relationship eventually ended, my attraction to men did not. Again, I was in the predicament of trying to choose “which side” I was on.

Around 2016 I started to read more into sexual identity, and met more male bisexuals and talked about their experiences. I realized that I didn’t have to choose a side, and that was my first enlightened moment in realizing my identity.

Aside from being stuck in the dichotomy of choosing a side, many others too have been told outright by both homosexuals and heterosexuals that bisexuality is only a phase.

There’s a popular saying in the LGBT community that bisexuality is “just a stop on the way to gay town.” While I believe it is okay to change labels at different points of one's life, statements like these are dismissive, and perpetuate the idea that bisexuality is solely a transitional identity and not a permanent one.

In the Philippines, bisexuality is often also misused by homosexuals who feel masculine or “straight-acting.”

Bisexuality simply means an attraction to people of both genders. This attraction is regardless of the person's gender expression, whether it is masculine or feminine.

Personally, my expression can range from masculine to feminine. But it should not even matter. Caring too much about these things gets tiring.

My breakthrough moment finally came in late 2017. I was interviewing TV host Boy Abunda for a pop culture feature I was working on for another news outlet.

The topic was colorism in Philippine entertainment. However, in the middle of the interview, Boy subtly asked me, “I want to ask you something, Ryan. You don’t have to answer, but are you straight?”

“I’m bisexual, tito Boy,” I answered.

It was an unbelievable moment. Here I was with probably the most famous TV host in the country today, and I was telling him about my sexual orientation when I had never even hinted that to most of my closest friends, my parents, siblings, or longtime colleagues.

But what I realized was if I could tell tito Boy, I could tell anyone.

From that day on, I decided I was going to work on giving less of a damn.

I was going to stop caring about what people in a movie theatre would think if I go out with another boy; or if friends or colleagues see me with other boys; or if i lose a gig or job for being too queer; or if queer people dismiss my identity as a phase, and I won't be able to date women again because they won't understand. 

While living as an openly LGBTQIA+ person is tiring and difficult, not living your truth is more tiring.

I chose truth.

I was going to be me all the time – online and offline – regardless of what privilege or friends and family I would lose because of it.

Outside of journalism, I am a spoken word artist. I performed at Metro Manila Pride’s Himagsining Queer Arts Festival. That night I told myself I’m finally, completely, out. I am not afraid, and I am not turning back.

FIRE#HOLDTHELINE#HIMAGSINING@ryanmacaseropic.twitter.com/y6H4IrTWjb

— Jann #HalalanDayaan2019 (@JannArabelo) March 30, 2019

I will attend this year’s Metro Manila Pride with other strong, courageous queers who taught me that being queer is not something to be ashamed of but to celebrate. 

Yes, I’m late, but count me in on the fight and struggle for LGBTQIA+ equality here in the Philippines and beyond. #ResistTogether

Pride is community. Pride is rooted in protest. Pride is solidarity in action.

Standing strong and standing up for who we are is just the beginning. Together, we must act.

This year, with the strength of our colors—different but united in a common goal—we #ResistTogether.pic.twitter.com/sG2LfI8zh0

— Metro Manila Pride (@mmprideorg) April 1, 2019

– Rappler.com

Ryan Macasero is Rappler's Central Visayas correspondent by day, spoken word artist by night, and bisexual both night and day.

Currently, local governments in 13 countries covering 65 million people have declared a "climate emergency." While definitions of such an emergency varies across borders, all declarations signify one thing: an urgent need for raising ambition for mitigating climate change.

Cities and towns in Australia, Britain, Canada, and the United States have made the symbolic move of passing motions that support immediate actions to address this crisis in recent months. Local councils are now pledging to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions on or before 2050, use more renewable energy, and effectively place climate change at the center of decision-making.

This brings to mind the following question: should the Philippines declare a climate emergency?

At first glance, it makes sense for the Philippines to make the said declaration. As one of the most vulnerable to climate change, few countries have experienced its impact the way we've had for the past decade. With scientists stating the climate crisis may become fully unstoppable as soon as 11 years from now, the current effects on our social, economic, and environmental well-being would become even worse. (READ: What can you do to prepare for disasters?)

However, the Philippines is not ready to declare a climate emergency because we as a country still do not fully understand the climate crisis in the national and local context. This reality is especially evident in our governance, which remains lacking in understanding, coordination, and operationalization.  

While awareness and efforts to address climate change have increased over the years, the misconception that climate change only affects the country during sudden onset events such as super typhoons remains prevalent.

This is best exemplified by recent efforts to create a Department of Disaster Resilience, which foolishly attempts to place climate change adaptation and mitigation under the disaster risk response paradigm. Such a move is contrary to the proper science-based approach which clearly shows that the impact of climate change go beyond disasters caused by sudden onset events.

At the local level, many cities and municipalities still suffer from a poor understanding and use of existing options to address climate change, from the People’s Survival Fund to the Local Climate Change Adaptation Plan.

It is impractical to formally recognize our current dilemma as an emergency if our government leaders do not even understand its implications on policies, programs, and activities they are mandated to uphold for the benefit of the Filipino people.  

Part of what triggered local and national governments in other countries to make such declarations is the spirit of the youth who participated in recent climate strikes. Around the world, students are choosing to skip their classes to protest their governments’ inaction on tackling climate change because their future is on the line. They know attending classes to know more about the world around them is pointless if that world would not even exist.  

However, the recent Philippine participation in the global youth climate strike shows the need to further empower our leaders of tomorrow. While young advocates have stepped up to champion the call for climate action, their numbers have generally not been enough to have the impact that their counterparts abroad have had. (READ: 'No Planet B': Tens of thousands join global youth demo for climate)

Furthermore, some of the issues raised are not aligned with the central message of a climate strike. Environment-related matters, including the controversial Kaliwa Dam project, are obviously important in their own right and must also be addressed immediately, but deserve to be highlighted in a more appropriate platform.

A diluted climate strike that does not strongly focus on its supposed calls for limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, a just transition to renewables, financial assistance from big polluters, and stronger adaptation measures will not lead to the desired change in policymaking and implementation.  

This does not mean that we should dismiss climate change as a priority issue. In a way, our country already recognizes this issue as a threat that immediately needs to be addressed. While this crisis is of global concern, developed countries from which emergencies have been declared have not experienced its impacts the way nations like the Philippines have had. 

Yet more needs to be done. While most still struggle with understanding the basics, we Filipinos at least recognize that these impacts of climate change do exist and are affecting cities and provinces. Perhaps that is good enough of a starting point to increase efforts to deal with higher temperatures, sea level rise, and other impacts that would hit Filipinos in more ways than expected. (READ: 6 ways climate change will affect PH cities)

Removing our collective business-as-usual attitude about our environment through actions within our homes, communities, or organizations will not be easy, but we must start now. (READ: Despite experience with typhoons, most Filipinos 'not prepared for disasters')

Actions always speak louder than words. It is one thing to recognize the climate crisis as an emergency. It is another thing to follow through with concrete, sustainable, and inclusive actions that will allow us to survive and thrive through it.  – Rappler.com

John Leo Algo is the Program Manager of Climate Action for Sustainability Initiative (KASALI) and the Science Policy Advisor of Living Laudato Si Philippines. He recently earned his MS Atmospheric Science degree from the Ateneo de Manila University.

And just like that, pageant season is again in full swing.

On April 4, the 40 candidates of the Binibining Pilipinas 2019 were introduced to the media. Among these ladies, 6 will be chosen to represent the country and wear crowns, including the coveted Miss Universe Philippines crown, which Catriona Gray won in December 2018. (READ: Waiting for a queen: Catriona Gray’s fans welcome her home)

With Bb Pilipinas about to crown a new set of winners, the fans are giving all their support to their chosen candidates. In my blog entry last year, I talked about my observations as a pageant reporter that Filipino fans can be the best fans but also the worst critics of a potential beauty queen. With that in mind, I wrote and compiled some reminders for pageant fans with the help of some friends who have been supporters themselves through the years.

1. Support, don't bash. I decided to start with this tip because bashing is predominant among fans. While criticism is nothing new, the advent of social media, has made it quite toxic.

I applaud the many supporters of candidates who organize themselves and support the queens. But some fans have gone overboard and end up bashing the rival contestants. In last year's pageant, a friend of mine who was supporting a candidate told me about one fan who walked up to her idol's rival candidate and told her she would never win.

That rival candidate ended up in the Top 15.

Recently, Filipino fans also came to the defense of a candidate whose national costume was criticized for allegedly being a copycat of another country's costume. The candidate addressed the issue and said that she hoped fans of both countries would stop exchanging tirades.

2. Stop the comparison. This is easier said than done. After all, it's still a beauty contest. But when I asked a friend why this needs to be kept in mind, he said, "This is where the bashing starts."

One candidate might have the X-factor, another one may be tall, while another may have the overall package. So yes, people will always compare one person to the other. Maybe instead of comparing candidates, just highlight the girl's positive qualities. Improve on the weaknesses and most of all, give CONSTRUCTIVE criticism.

3. Encourage, don't discourage. As a fan, your words of encouragement are highly appreciated by the candidates, so cheer them on in every activity they have or organize get-togethers, which not only gives you the chance to know the candidate better, but also to gain friends.

4. Don't be a freeloader. Candidates love being with supporters during fan meets, but don't expect that everything will be free during meetups. A friend who organized a fan meet for a candidate shared that one time, some fans went to the event just because of free food and free tickets to the pageant.

Another time, he found out that a group of "fans" ordered food despite being late, when the others had already ordered. He simply told them that they had to pay for the food, since they only ordered according to the head count.

If you're really a fan, always update yourself, ask questions, or clarify.

5. Know your limits. As a fan, you have to respect your candidate's privacy. While it's okay to be chummy, there are times when you have to step back and check if you're already borderline stalking a candidate, or simply being a toxic person online.

For instance, when Catriona Gray kept a low profile during the Christmas season, a "fan" demanded her manager Esther Swan to tell him where Catriona was. The post went viral. Esther responded to him calmly, but he was rude and had an attitude very unbecoming of a fan.

6. If you commit to watch a show through pageant admins who will pay for you first, be honest if you will go or not.

This may not be a new problem but I recently learned about this from some friends who are pageant administrators. During the Bb Pilipinas fashion show on May 29, two of my friends informed me that fans from their groups asked to secure tickets. But during the day itself, those who reserved tickets did not show up, citing various reasons.

What's annoying is that the admins had to pay the tickets for reservation. Some of those who asked to reserve did not even bother to at least pay for the ticket.

The lesson here is if you think you cannot go, then don't commit at all. Do not waste people's time and money.

7. Be grateful and respectful.  Fans need to be grateful that their candidate appreciates their support. If your candidate wins, be humble and celebrate. If she doesn't, learn to respect the winner and accept defeat in grace, even if it hurts. There's no point in being bitter.

Comedian Inday Garutay summed up everything that fans should remember as they support their candidates in this year's Bb Pilipinas pageant. She said that beauty is subjective and that what might be beautiful to some may not be beautiful to others. She added that it would be best to keep quiet if you have nothing to say nice.

This part of the statement she made: "Bilog ang mundo. Paano pagdating ng Coronation Night at natalo ang bet 'nyo at nanalo 'yung nilalait 'nyo  eh di nganga kayo? Kaya i-enjoy na lang natin ang pagsuporta sa mga bet natin.... It's everybody's ball game lahat sila may karapatan manalo. Good vibes lang tayo. Remember the winning answer of Queen Pia...? #ThinkB4UClick." 

 (The world is round. What if on coronation night your candidate loses and the person you've been criticizing wins? So let's just enjoy supporting our respective candidate...It's everybody's ball game. All of them have the right to win. Let's just have good vibes.)

Now hopefully, we will have a good competition come coronation night on June 9. May the best lady win! – Rappler.com

British Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt spoke about media freedom at the World News Media Congress in Glasgow on Saturday, June 1. Here is the transcript of his speech, as delivered and as uploaded on the British government's website.

Members of the Board of WAN-IFRA,

Distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen,

Good afternoon.

I'm delighted to be in Glasgow, the city of the Industrial Revolution, science, invention, progress – and Laura Kuenssberg, who grew up here.

And it's a privilege to address this Congress.

For many news outlets around the world, these are challenging and even dangerous times. 

Last year, 99 journalists were killed and another 348 locked up by governments.

In April, Lyra McKee was murdered by dissident republicans in Northern Ireland. 

The senseless killing of a talented young journalist showed that here in the United Kingdom, we too have no cause for complacency.

The latest World Press Freedom Index describes how the "number of countries regarded as safe, where journalists can work in complete security, continues to decline." 

And yet despite all the pressure, the risk – from physical threats, from insidious self-censorship – journalists in many countries press on with holding the powerful to account, exposing wrongdoing, deterring corruption, and strengthening democracy and openness.

In the Philippines, Maria Ressa and her team at the news website Rappler have reported on the extrajudicial killings of the war on drugs. 

In the Middle East, Jamal Khashoggi was a voice for freedom of expression until he was murdered inside the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul last October.

At the time, I condemned his killing in the strongest possible terms – and I do so again today. 

Journalists have one essential task which Timothy Garton Ash, the academic and foreign correspondent, defined as follows.

He wrote: "The first job of the historian and the journalist is to find facts…. The facts themselves must be checked against all the available evidence. But some are round and hard – and the most powerful leaders in the world can trip over them."

Massacre in Rakhine

Few journalists have fulfilled this task as diligently as Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo of Reuters news agency, who were released from prison in Burma last month. 

Their crime was to have uncovered deeply disturbing facts that powerful military leaders had done their best to conceal.

Thanks to these journalists, we know for a fact that 10 Rohingya Muslims were massacred in the village of Inn Din in Northern Rakhine state on 2nd September 2017. 

The dead have not been recorded, thanks to them, merely as an impersonal number.

Because of the two journalists, we know their names, we know their ages.

We know what they did for a living, whether they were married and whether they had children.

We know, for example, that the two youngest victims were Rashid Ahmed, aged 18, and Abul Hashim, aged 17, both students at the local high school.

And we know the most salient fact – the stubborn fact that tripped up the Burmese generals.

We know that soldiers from the Burmese military shot dead 8 of the men, and local villagers killed the remaining two.

The army was forced to admit as much.

But even so, draconian steps were taken against the journalists – including a 7-year prison sentence based on a fabricated case – betraying just how anxious the generals were to suppress the truth. 

To their credit, Reuters published the story anyway, complete with photographs of the dead and satellite images of the scene.

Burma's generals discovered they could imprison journalists, but they couldn't imprison the facts.

From their cells, Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo won the Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting in April.

Then, last month, they were freed after the President of Burma granted a pardon and the country's civilian leaders wisely acted to correct a grave failure of process.

The generals gained nothing from their actions because the facts emerged anyway.

The central iniquity, however, was not the two journalists in prison but the fact that 10 human beings were killed – alongside many, many others in Rakhine state.

Now we can only hope that the exposure of what happened at Inn Din might serve as an object lesson in the value of determined reporting, the futility of repression – and how international pressure can make a difference.

International pressure

From the beginning, many foreign governments condemned the treatment meted out to Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo. 

I raised their case in person with State Counselor Aung San Suu Kyi.

British diplomats attended their trial in Yangon – and in case you think our diplomats pull punches and mince words, then let me quote what the British ambassador said on the day the journalists were convicted, when he condemned what he called a "hammer blow for the rule of law."

We cannot physically stop journalists from being locked up for doing their jobs. 

But we can alert global public opinion and make sure the diplomatic price is too high.

Media freedom campaign

So this year, I have joined my Canadian counterpart, Chrystia Freeland, to launch a global campaign for media freedom. 

Our aim is to shine a spotlight on abuses and raise the cost for those who would harm journalists for doing their jobs. 

We want to build a coalition of governments committed to a stronger diplomatic response when media freedom is curtailed – and to greater support when countries do the right thing, remove restrictions and push out the frontiers of free expression.

I was honored to celebrate World Press Freedom Day in Ethiopia this year, which has climbed 40 places in the Index since Prime Minister Abiy took office last year.

Next month, I will cohost with Chrystia Freeland the world's first ministerial summit on media freedom in London, bringing together foreign ministers, international organizations, civil society, and journalists.

Amal Clooney, the human rights lawyer who represented the Reuters correspondents in Burma, has accepted my invitation to become my special envoy.

She is convening a panel of experts to recommend how to improve the legal protection of journalists.

The British government is also helping to strengthen the practical skills of journalists around the world. I've created a new Chevening Africa Media Freedom Fellowship, which will allow 60 African journalists over the next 5 years to gain experience in the newsrooms of Britain's leading media organizations.

The Foreign Office has always sought to improve good governance and defeat corruption – and we need a free media to do both.

Authoritarian states might launch sudden "crackdowns" against corruption – which mysteriously target political opponents while leaving others untouched – but the risk of exposure by a free media is far more effective than any theatrical campaign.

And how do we know this? Because of the 10 least corrupt nations in the world, as ranked by Transparency International, 7 are also in the Press Freedom top 10.

So the evidence is categorical. By serving as a constant deterrent against corruption and misrule, the best journalism helps an economy and helps a society to flourish.

Conclusion

But in the end, we must promote a free media not solely for practical reasons but because it's what we stand for. Democracy and freedom of expression mean nothing unless independent journalists are able to scrutinize the powerful – and discover the stubborn facts – however inconvenient this might sometimes be for the politicians on the receiving end.

If we want to embrace the opportunities of a free society, encourage the open exchange of ideas, pass informed judgment on our leaders, and do it peacefully through the ballot box, then we must defend the institution which enables all of this.

A free media is not an optional extra, still less a "Western" value: it forms one pillar of a thriving society, benefiting people in every corner of the world. – Rappler.com

I grew up in a house where my mother was the breadwinner and made the decisions, while my father stayed at home doing housework. This wasn't a plan my parents made, but rather a matter of consequence since my father was very sickly. I didn't realize the impact this would make on me until in elementary and high school when I slowly became a feminist.

In Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE), there were lessons that taught us about gender roles: how mothers were in charge of the house and how fathers were breadwinners. This idea was foreign to me to the extent that I failed an exam since I didn't believe what the book had said. But a failed score didn't stop me from knowing that the roles parents could have were interchangeable. This was clearly a bias on gender roles that were more in favor of men rather than women.

The problem now pervades in a society where men are not held accountable by their actions. That society gives them so much privilege to the point that it saves them from having any repercussions.

Such an instance is that in social media, there have been reports of boys from academic institutions sharing lewd photographs of their classmates. This is a clear violation of the law, with some even hinging on child pornography, but the sanctions given to the perpetrators were a mere slap on the wrist.

It makes my blood boil to see boys sharing nudes of their classmates among themselves and having no respect whatsoever for the women in those photos.

What makes me even angrier are the decisions of educational institutions to downplay the situation to save themselves. By handing out the diplomas of the alleged perpetrators, they doomed themselves by showing everyone that they still reward inappropriate actions.

Schools are supposed to be a safe zone for children, in whatever form of safety that may manifest. Schools are no longer safe zones from sexual harassment. (READ: [OPINION | Dash of SAS] School punishment for boys and girls)

Administrators, principals, and teachers need to understand that the children that they are fostering now are the better tomorrow. They are the institution that is responsible for the outcome of the next generation. They should lead by example and show that the intrusion of women and disrespect to whomever should not be a norm, and that grave offenses should be punishable.

We see the manifestation of these actions even in the highest office of the government, the President's tirades and rape jokes are a result of a society that stemmed from this hateful and violent bias. We should not be tolerating this kind of behavior anymore from anyone – nor should we excuse our boys to crimes they've committed due to the standard of "boys will be boys."

Change needs to start small. It is up to our schools to teach the youth of this nation that these kinds of behavior have no place in the future to come. It is time that they think first of the well-being of the youth and their image second. Maybe by then could we live in a society where there is no more hate, nor do we crown privilege on the basis of sex and gender.

I remember being asked by a friend: If I'd have a choice to change the sex I was born into, would I choose to be a female instead? I replied that I'd still prefer to be a man. I wanted to remain a man since I can use the privilege given by society to voice out concerns of women.

This has always been the responsibility of people with privilege: to speak and fight for those who have less. The world needs more men who share the views of feminist ideals. (READ: [OPINION] This is what we want for our women)

What it means to be a feminist, in my opinion, is the fight for equality.

It is not simply the discussion of not giving up our seats for women, but rather the discussion of deeper social issues that women and LGBTQ+ communities face today like uneven wages, employment discrimination, domestic and sexual abuse, and other problems. Problems that men like me, in all privilege, almost never experience.

It is time that men also fight against the toxic masculinity and patriarchy and revere everyone, no matter what gender, as equal to everyone else. By then can we see the beginning of change. – Rappler.com

Gillian Reyes is a registered librarian who works at the University of the Philippines Diliman. He often writes stories for children, and hopes to build a library for kids someday.

The bicycle is such an important piece of technological innovation. No other type of vehicle is honored with its own international day of celebration, no less than by the United Nations.

The World Bicycle Day every June 3 is celebrated to raise awareness on the undeniable benefits of cycling, and to lobby public and private sectors into adopting measures that will make cycling safe in their communities, thus making the bicycle a viable transport option for more people. 

True enough, its clamor is somewhat getting heard. Here in Metro Manila, more bike infrastructure, facilities, and legislations have popped up in recent years. As of now however, these remain insufficient for keeping cyclists safe on the road, and for convincing more to use bicycles as a regular means of transportation. 

Most bike lanes in Manila for instance remain meager lines painted on roadsides or sidewalks, which do very little in the way of protection. There haven't even been efforts to clear these lanes of potholes and obstacles that force cyclists to deviate. A proper bike lane should be segregated, like that of the new Laguna Lake Highway, and that along Julia Vargas in Pasig City. (READ: LOOK: Philippines gets first protected bike lane along national highway)

In my experience, most motorists do try to respect and avoid bike lanes. It is when traffic jams accumulate that these lines get blurred. Motorists and cyclists alike are all trying to get to their destinations as quickly as possible through whatever means they can get away with.

It is hard to complain about cars hogging bike lanes when many cyclists also are often seen breaking road etiquette and traffic rules – and no, the argument that those traffic laws technically do not cover bicycles is not an excuse.

Another example is the recently approved House Bill No. 8911 mandating a 1.5-meter minimum overtaking distance of cyclists by motor vehicles. This is indeed a step in the right direction that is very much appreciated.

I, however, cannot imagine how this can be thoroughly and effectively implemented. How will traffic enforcers objectively judge the space between bikes and passing cars? How will they even monitor all public roads?

As far as I can tell, this rule is not only restricted to primary city roads. We don't want this bill to only come to light after an unwanted incident has occurred. 

Pollution

Air pollution is another conundrum that deters people from cycling in city centers. Exposure to it is linked to a whole load of killer diseases, that much is true. People do not want to commute using a bike because of pollution, and yet we need more people to ride bikes to reduce pollution.

Pollution is not something to fear if you are reasonably fit from frequent cycling. Researchers from Imperial College in London reported that the benefits of frequent physical exercise greatly outweigh the risks of air pollution. Even in severely polluted cities such as New Delhi in India and Beijing in China, riding for one to one-and-a-half hours is still safe, according to them.

Eat healthily, avoid stress, have ample rest, and you'll have even stronger natural defenses against air pollution. This is not to say that reducing our exposure to it is pointless. Snugly wearing a simple filter mask and avoiding vehicle dense roadways will help, but are not decidedly essential. (READ: 4 more reasons why we need protected bike lanes now)

Making the metro bike-friendly

These are among the many reasons why few take up bike commuting in Metro Manila. As with the example about pollution however, the solution to these setbacks that stop people from cycling may be cycling itself.

Maybe if more people rode bikes now for transport, there would be less cars, and city roads would naturally unclog, freeing up more road space for cyclists. (READ: What happens when you build protected bike lanes in cities?)

Private establishments will deem it necessary to adopt bike-friendly policies and provisions if several of their patrons arrive on bikes. Legislators will heed the urgency of establishing bike centered regulations and infrastructure if the majority of their constituents are already cycling for transport.

We can all do our share in turning Metro Manila into a bike-friendly place. Start with being a good and proper example of how a cyclist should ride and behave out on the road. Then go and encourage others to start riding. Teach them, guide them, ride with them.

If you're not yet a cyclist or a bike commuter, there are several guides and resources online on how to become one, or find a group you can ride with and learn from.

Now head out, ride, convince someone new to join you, and then get them to do the same. (READ: Tour on two wheels: Seeing Iloilo City's historic sights by bike) – Rappler.com

Jose Martin Punzalan knows only cycling, follows only cycling, races only cycling, works in a company about cycling, writes freelance about cycling, and with the rest of his time goes cycling.

Shortly after he learned that he was shortlisted for the Southeast Asia assistant professor position at the University of California, Berkeley, my colleague and friend Leloy Claudio was surprised by a petition addressed to the search committee warning about his anti-communism. The petition currently has 195 signatories, the majority of these from the Philippines, but also a sprinkling of prominent American-Filipino academics and writers. The petition enjoined the search committee to take into consideration Leloy's "anti-communism" and his penchant for "red-tagging" so-called militant organizations back home.

First, the petition is notorious for violating an unstated norm among academic institutions that they respect each other's hiring process particularly in the stage when a short list of candidates has been decided. Academic collegiality informs this arrangement, including being respectful of the ability of fellow academics to deliberate and decide on the merits of the shortlisted candidates accordingly. By seeking to interfere with the hiring process of their UC-Berkeley colleagues, the academics who signed this petition have sullied this principle.

More importantly, none of these petitioners addressed Leloy's scholarship, which is the principal criterion that any academic committee will be considering when vetting hires. There is no excuse for not doing this. If it is often the case that one's academic works do reflect one's political disposition, what better way to delegitimize an academic target than to show how reactionary to the core his academic perspective is? But the academic critics of Leloy opted for the easy way out – simply accuse him of being a threat to Filipino leftists and at the same time a de facto ally of the brutal regime of Rodrigo Duterte.

Let us address this issue.

The petitioners bewail the "current repressive political climate" "produced from the well-documented state-sponsored extrajudicial killings," and declare that Leloy "has been one of the astonishingly reckless voices in the academe who unambiguously tags organizations, leaders, students, and ordinary activists despite the peril of such [red] tagging."

The petitioners then address their plea to the search committee, arguing that to give Leloy "a platform in a university as yours amplifies that danger" and stains "your university's prestige [as it] would give weight to language that can limit and endanger legitimate activism and protest in an already dire Philippines."

All these are based on speculation. The petitioners cannot supply any direct evidence that links Leloy's "anti-communist" rhetoric to the killing of their comrades. It is a stretch to show how someone writing something facetious as "stupid communist" brought about the extrajudicial assassination of "militants" and activists. The American academics who signed this should know. If they are serious academics, what they should have done was to seek out Leloy and get his side of the story. Or read his book Taming People's Power: The EDSA Revolutions and their Contradictions (Ateneo, 2013) where he talks about communist manipulation of peasants. But they let their political bias get ahead of their responsibility as evidence-based professionals.

It is really cheap and easy to just put your name down on a petition that you know is likely to have little or no impact on your own life and career (particularly if you are an American academic). This risk-free predilection for petitioning is symptomatic of how little the stakes are for these academics, who like to burnish their "progressive" credentials from the safety of their eyries, taking for granted (or seeing themselves entitled to) the liberties that are secured for them by the existing "liberal" order and institutions. They should try moving to China – or the Philippine countryside, for that matter – to see what it's like to live in a country where you can be persecuted (even executed) for advocating nonconformist ideas. 

And have these academics ever asked themselves – before signing the petition – what this counter-tagging could do to Leloy? He could very well the a possible subject for communist assassination.

This progressives waxing moralistic in this petition have conveniently forgotten that this was an M.O. they charge Leloy of doing, is not exclusive to "anti-communists" like him.

Between 2000, "Professor" Jose Ma. Sison started attacking organizations and tagging individuals which/who had broken away from the CPP by rejecting Sison's interpretation of the CPP's history under Martial Law. He accused them of being renegades, spies, militarists, every label the CPP could conjure against its perceived enemies. Three years later, the ex-cadres he accused were gunned down by special NPA hit teams.

Toward less threatening organizations, a threat was sufficient. Here was how Fidel Agcaoili, a Sison factotum, explained it: "[W]ith regard to 'other groups like Siglaya, Alab Katipunan, Bisig, BMP, IPD, Pandayan, Sanlakas, etc, the CPP wages ideological and political struggle in the nature of struggle of ideas vis-à-vis these groups.'"

Pierre Rousset, the Trotskyite author of this piece, added that Agcaoili openly admits that against other political parties of the independent Left (especially those of communist reference) and some mass movements, the confrontation is not limited to a "struggle of ideas" and can take on a military character.

"The threat is directed here against Akbayan, the CPLA, the MLPP, Padayon, the PMP, the RPM-M, the RPM-P, the Peace Foundation and the Task Force Bondoc Peninsula (and the peasant movement), as well as many former leaders of the CPP... Mass leaders can be targeted because they are identified by the CPP with one of these organizations. Nobody can feel safe after reading Fidel Agcaoili." 

The petitioners are filled with moral anger when they accuse Leloy of stoking Duterte's killer instincts. Yet some of those who signed the petition know very well what happened between 2000 and 2004. But there is nary a word of protest or criticism from these angry progressives. And, of course, their American academic allies are unaware of these blood-letting, or if they were, preferred to listen to Sison’s supporters and never the other side.  Was this black propaganda? Hardly. After her husband Romulo Kintanar was killed, his wife filed murder charges against Sison. 

Sison got away because he refused to go home even if the statute of limitation had passed. Silence from his Filipino supporters; ignorance from his American fans.

Extrajudicial killings are horrible and have been condemned universally, even by "anti-communists" like Leloy. And here the distinction between Leloy and his militant critics is quite palpable: Leloy has been consistent in his criticism of Duterte while the petitioners are not.

Consider this. When Duterte won the presidency, Sison alluded to Duterte as someone similar to Hugo Chavez, speaking highly of him as someone who could bring about "national unity." When Duterte declared his intention to jumpstart peace talks with CPP, Sison called this a "critical honeymoon period." The Makabayan bloc visited Malacañang, some of its people joined Duterte's Cabinet, and on August 31, 2016, Bayan and the UP conferred on Duterte and Sison its First Gawad Supremo Award on National Heroes Day. The "poet" Joi Barrios even penned a piece in praise of the new President in Davao!! 

This leftwing lovefest was all publicly played out in the Philippines while Duterte's people were assassinating drug suspects and offenders, many of them poor, a lot of them children – the very "masses" these petitioners claim to represent.  

Here is a clincher. The petitioners' entreaties to the UC Berkeley screening committee that it was completely wrong for Leloy to tag groups like Bayan, Kilusang Mayo Uno, and other "militant" groups as communist fronts. If they are not indeed fronts, could the petitioners explain this bragging video of Sison himself laying out the forces behind the "national democratic revolution led by its vanguard, the Communist Party of the Philippines? Listen to Sison. 

If the military – which I am sure has all the files about these communists and radicals in its database – is indeed looking for people to point out who the communists are, why would they seek the services of a loud but politically inconsequential liberal when they have the founding chairman of the Party himself ratting out these organizations as communist fronts if not allies? – Rappler.com

Patricio N. Abinales teaches Philippine politics and history

Braving the roads of Metro Manila with its endless traffic is a story of strength and courage. Braving principles of gender sensitivity which should start at home and with family roles is another.

On my way to visit my best friend who lives in Quezon City, I decided to take time and not rush from Cavite. While I usually prefer more convenient options, it was a day of savoring the city – its noise, its people, and its colors. What best way to engage myself in the city by taking the jeepney, right?

As I gave my fare to the driver and checked out what's new in the city, I saw stickers of striking violet and yellow colors inside the jeepney. With the words "Kaya ni mister, kaya ni misis (What the husband can do, the wife can too)" and "Kapag mas maraming babae, ekonomiya ay lumalago (When there are more women, the economy thrives)," they caught my attention. (READ: Empowering women: Because women can and women will)

I asked the driver where he got them and he told me that those stickers were distributed by their local government. After some exchanges of information, I figured out that it was the same campaign advocating for gender equality which also appeared on social media. I knew it was somehow familiar to me and I'm glad that the advocacy is in action.

The stickers are about a campaign entitled Infairness Movement, initiated by Spark!, a non-governmental organization championing women and equality. The campaign aims to break stereotypes of the roles of men and women. (READ: [OPINION] This is what we want for our women)

Men can do household chores, and women can take part in economic development by being employed or heading their own businesses, among others.

The Filipino family

One can picture a "usual" Filipino family scenario where the mother stays at home to do the cooking, while the father is in office attire, juggling meetings in corporate offices. It's evident in elementary education stories, advertisements, and soap operas.

But over the years, we've observed a shift. Take the train, for example, where we see people from all walks of life. It includes both men and women who work in the city and who go home to provinces close to Manila.

However, has Filipino society really embodied that there must be no stereotypes, that discrimination must be a thing of the past?

I can remember my elder brother who recently got married. As they were preparing for their new house, he quickly said that his wife must take charge of all the household chores. Should that really be the case? What if my future nephew and niece would see such behavior?

Infairness Movement advocates that there must be no specific task delegation at home. The family must work together and break stereotypes, which I believe is necessary for community development. If dad can check the car engine, so can mom. If the mother can sew the hemline, so can the father. (READ: Defending Filipino women from stereotypes)

In Technology and Home Economics education, girls are not be separated from boys if the lesson is about woodwork, while boys also learn table skirting just like the girls. These are shared skills.

Moving forward

My brother has to see those stickers of Infairness Movement. Fortunately, they're also visible online and not just in public transport. (READ: The role of social media in women empowerment)

Transportation brings us to places and thus, we move forward. I hope that we all move forward to a society where there is no prejudice of who does what. We all have a home and we all have families – be it our biological relatives, or our friends, or colleagues. Each must do their part in building the strongest connections.

Try to spot those stickers when you take your next jeepney ride. Heed the call of sharing roles and tasks in the community, regardless of gender. 'Yung mahal mo sa buhay, kasangga mo sa gawaing bahay (Your loved one is your partner in doing household chores). #infairness! – Rappler.com

Ralph Ferolino works at the French embassy. He majored in French at the University of the Philippines. A family-oriented and friendly traveler, he seizes every opportunity with his cultural capital to give a better understanding of the world, which after all, is just small.

Sabi ni Pangulong Rodrigo Duterte noong Nobyembre 2018, “I encourage Congress to enact a law that will require mandatory ROTC for Grades 11 and 12 so we can instill patriotism, love of country among our youth.” Ngayon, ilang tumbling na lang, maipapasa na ang batas.

Oo, si Duterte. Siya na umaming nameke ng medical record para makaeskapo sa Reserve Officers' Training Corps o ROTC noong nasa kolehiyo.

Pansinin natin ang mga salitang "patriotism" at "love of country." Anong pagmamahal sa bayan ang maitatanim sa mga disisais, disisyete at disiotso anyos ng ROTC?

Bakit mismong ang UP Vanguard ang pumosisyon laban sa ROTC? Sabi ng grupo, hindi sila kontra sa ROTC – pero kontra sila sa pagpapatupad nito sa hanay ng mga menor de edad. 

Dagdag pa ng mga taga-Vanguard, nilalabag ng panukala ang Optional Protocol to the Convention of the Rights of the Child na hindi dapat nandaramay ng mga bata sa armadong tunggalian.

At laking kalokohan na gawing mandatory sa high school ang training na dinisenyo para sa “reserved officers,” gayung wala pa sa wastong edad na pumasok ng reserved force ang mga ito.

Babala ni Alliance of Concerned Teachers representative France Castro: "Bakit po ba tinanggal 'yung ROTC no'ng 2001? Kasi maraming nareport na ginagamit ito sa corruption…. At an early age, natuturuan na ang bata ng corruption.” 

Sa salaysay ng isang nagkomento sa Facebook, "Ang natutunan ko lang sa ROTC magbilad sa araw subalit dati ko nang gawain yun, ang gamitin ang salitang "gaddemit!!!" Natutunan ko ring magtanim ng galit sa mga mapang abusong officers na pag gustong mag trip mag titrip. Madami akong natutunan. Ang lagyan ng ihi ang sabaw ng tinolang isda ng mga officers kasi ginagawa kaming alila. Pero hindi ko natutunan kung ano ba talaga ang tunay na ROTC."

Alalahanin natin si Mark Welson Chua, isang University of Santo Tomas at myembro ng ROTC. Natagpuan ang bangkay niyang lulutang-lutang sa Pasig River noong 2001. Konklusyon ng National Bureau of Investigation na mga myembro ng UST ROTC ang responsable sa kanyang pagkamatay dahil isiniwalat niya ang korupsyon sa UST ROTC sa pahayagan ng unibersided. 

Dagdag pa ng isang nagkomento sa Facebook sa isang pagbabalik-tanaw sa ROTC: 1) I wasted 2 years of Saturdays during my freshman and sophomore year in formation doing nothing. 2) My parents spent more money for my uniform and boots than my everyday clothes (‘di s’ya mura).

Anong values ang matutunan ng kabataan sa ilalim ng administrasyong nagtalaga ng isang Ronald Cardema sa National Youth Commission na nagpakulo ng militarista at mapanupil na mga panukala?

Anong values ang mututunan ng kabataan kay Duterte na sa isang pagtitipon ay nang-agitate ng mga musmos na Boy Scout sa Malacañang. Pagkatapos ng event, sabi ng mga kabataan: "Magsusundalo ako. Papatayin ko ang mga rebelde." "Papatayin ko ang mga drug pusher."

Ngayon pa lang, ginagaya na ng kabataan ang pambabastos sa kababaihan na nakikita sa mga pinuno ng bansa. Sa pinagpipitagang institusyong Philippine Science High School o Pisay na umano'y rurok ng kagalingan ng matatalinong kabataan, nilapastangan ng mga estudyanteng lalaki ang mga kaklaseng babae – nagpalitan sila ng nude pictures ng mga dating girlfriends na parang nagpapalitan ng trading cards.

Sa kasaysayan ng mundo, andyan ang Hitler Youth na humubog sa kabataang Aleman para maging Nazi. Ganoon din ang Opera Nazionale Balilla at Gioventù Italiana del Littorio na nag-indoctrinate sa mga musmos na 8 taong gulang pataas nung panahon ni Benito Mussolini.

Ito ang malinaw: dahil sa kagustuhang maaagang makontrol ang isip ng kabataan, ipapataw ang isang programang lumalabag sa karapatang pantao ng mga bata. 

Sa isang editorial, Bringing Up Cain, tinanong ng Rappler: Lumilikha ba tayo ng henerasyon ng insensitibo, walang pakiramdam at imoral na mamayang hindi matitinag ang sampalataya sa gatilyo ng baril?

Ibasura ang basurang panukalang ROTC sa grade 11 at 12. Pasasalamatan tayo ng susunod na henerasyon na 'di natin sasayangin ang oras nila. – Rappler.com

I went on my very first date with a girl (who is now my girlfriend) 5 months ago. Seeing her for the first time after weeks of flirting online was amazing. As I made my way to her, my heart started to pound twice its normal speed and my hands shook while I was trying to think of the first words to say.  

I immediately went in for a hug. We then decided to go for a walk, our arms intertwined, occasionally holding each other's hands and kissing each other on the cheek.

But after a while, fear consumed me. I realized that what felt like the most natural thing for us was unnatural in the eyes of many around us. I’d never wanted to be the subject of scrutiny, and holding hands with a girl in public seemed like I was handing myself over for judgment. I was scared that strangers might come right up and tell us to fuck off for being too affectionate. 

It took me 5 months to get used to the stares and whispers. But even though we had earned the support of my parents and her mom (for which I am forever grateful), pretending that we were just close friends in front of my other family members and her father was harder than we thought. We were scared that one day we would slip and accidentally call each other babe during a family dinner. We were afraid of running out of excuses whenever we went on dates and sleepovers. (READ: [OPINION] How to be a true friend to LGBT folks)

We feared the day when they would find out that what we have is real and pure. They just might not understand. 

We’re not the only ones

My girlfriend and I are just two of the countless LGBT+ individuals who have been victims of prejudice. In fact, according to Rainbow Rights Philippines, 6 out of 10 LGBT+ individuals experiencing outright injustice. 

There was 26-year-old Jennifer Laude, who was drowned by an American soldier after he found out she was a transwoman.

Jervi Li, popularly known as Kaladkaren, was denied entry to a bar in Makati last year for being gay.

Senator Manny Pacquiao has called the LGBT+ mas masahol pa sa hayop (worse than animals).

Friends from the community have been raped and abused by people they used to call their loved ones, the latter using my friends' sexuality as their excuse for this foul behavior, and it still breaks my heart hearing their stories up to this day.

“Bakla ka naman, pa-isa lang.”

Our current world 

The LGBT+ lead lives tainted by hatred and misunderstanding. Our safety is threatened each day, and all we want is to live beyond the boundaries others have set for us. We just want to walk safely in our own neighborhoods without having to worry about being attacked for dressing too "gay" or too "manly." We want to be treated as equals and not as objects given second looks whenever we hold our partner’s hands in public. (READ: 'Celebration, freedom, and equality:' Netizens speak up about pride) 

We just want a world where we’re humans.

LGBT+ rights will always be human rights, and to deny this is to deny our existence. Furthermore, we demand accountability from the perpetrators of homophobic culture.

What we want is for the Senate to deliver on the SOGIE Equality Bill in the last two session days of the 17th Congress. We simply cannot afford to go back and waste 19 years of fighting for the rights of my community. (READ: Pia Wurtzbach calls on Philippine Senate to pass SOGIE equality bill) 

It isn’t our fault that we want to be more than what society tells us to be. Let us live our lives to the fullest, because we will not stop until we get to. We will resist together. (READ: [OPINION] The B in LGBT: The long journey to coming out) 

And to you, my love, someday they will understand why we hold each other’s hands. Someday they will understand that what we have is real and pure. Someday, they will see that our love is love. – Rappler.com 

Maegan Ragudo, 19, is a first year student of the AB Political Science program of De La Salle University-Manila (DLSU). She is the Director for National Affairs of Alyansang Tapat Sa Lasallista, the leading progressive political organization in DLSU. Her internship in the office of Senator Risa Hontiveros exposed her to the lobbying efforts for Human Rights, Safe Spaces, Mental Health, and SOGIE Equality.

The US and China are currently locked in a burgeoning trade war. This means they’re slapping higher and higher taxes – more precisely “tariffs” – on the goods they import from one another.

If they were ordinary economies, such a trade war would not be much cause for concern.

But the US and China are the world’s two biggest economies. As they disrupt the lake that is the global economy, the ripple effects will invariably reach Philippine shores.

How exactly will the Philippines feel this trade war? Will we helplessly suffer as we watch from the sidelines? Is there a silver lining in all this?

Trumponomics

To understand the trade war, let’s talk about “Trumponomics.”

If you ask US President Donald Trump, the ballooning US trade deficit with China – or the excess of Chinese imports over Chinese exports – is at the heart of many supposed ills of the US economy.

To him, it proves that China has been “stealing” American jobs, especially those in manufacturing.

Trump espoused this view even before becoming president. Back in 2016 he tweeted:

Hillary Clinton surged the trade deficit with China 40% as
Secretary of State, costing Americans millions of jobs.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 21, 2016

Today, just as Trump is erecting a wall at the US-Mexico border to ward off Mexican immigrants, so is he erecting trade barriers between the US and China to ward off imported Chinese goods.

But this tendency toward protectionism is dangerously misguided for 4 reasons.

First, the US trade deficit with China is not very informative about the US economy’s true health, and should therefore not be the pivot on which US trade policy hinges.

Second, it’s plain wrong to say the Chinese are “stealing” American jobs. Economists instead attribute the steady decline of US manufacturing to other factors like automation.

Third, Trump’s trade war goes against the sweeping decline of global trade barriers we’ve seen since World War II. Average tariff rates have gone down as many – but certainly not all– countries came to realize trade barriers tend to do them more harm than good.

Fourth, Trump likes to trumpet that China will end up paying for the new tariffs anyway. But Econ 101 tells us this is misleading: American consumers are likely to foot the bill partly, if not wholly. 

Global fallout

Despite a profound ignorance of the economic implications, Trump has ordered the most sweeping protectionist policies the US has seen in many decades.

He imposed higher tariffs on Chinese imports in 3 batches last year. His most recent move was a 25% tariff on $200-billion worth of imports from China, effective May 10, 2019.

The effects have been immediate. In a recent report, the IMF or International Monetary Fund said US imports from China have shrunk considerably (Figure 1). When China retaliated with its own tariffs, US exports of goods to China also floundered.

Figure 1.

The reason stems from basic supply and demand. As something becomes more expensive, you buy less of it. Likewise, when imported goods become pricier because of tariffs, people order fewer of them.

True enough, one damning study suggested that American consumers wholly bore the costs of the new tariffs last year.

As for American producers, it’s a mixed bag.

Some firms were definitely hurt, especially those which use imported Chinese goods as inputs to their own production. But other firms benefited from this: stifled competition created legroom for them to jack up their prices, thus adding to consumers’ burdens.

Chinese consumers and producers, too, have reeled from the trade war, especially firms which export a lot to the US.

But make no mistake: The trade war’s effects are by no means confined to the US or China.

The IMF expects global economic growth to fall by 0.3% in the short run due to lower business confidence, disrupted global value chains, and a slower spread of new technologies.

Unfortunately, it seems the trade war won’t end any time soon.

Just last month, Trump imposed an effective ban on Chinese tech firm Huawei. This move effectively restricts Huawei’s access to, say, computer chips made in the US.

In retaliation, China is now floating the idea of restricting exports of rare-earth minerals, key components in computer chips.

Trump also recently tweeted – yes, tweeted– he would impose a 5% tariff on all goods from Mexico effective June 10: 

On June 10th, the United States will impose a 5% Tariff on all goods coming into our Country from Mexico, until such time as illegal migrants coming through Mexico, and into our Country, STOP. The Tariff will gradually increase until the Illegal Immigration problem is remedied,..

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 30, 2019

Is it just me, or is the trade war fast spinning out of control?

Philippine fallout

What about the Philippines?

President Duterte said in a recent speech his government is “deeply concerned” about the US-China trade war, which is “creating uncertainty and tension.”

By contrast, Bangko Sentral Governor Ben Diokno said the trade war is “totally out of the picture” where Philippine growth is concerned.

There may be a silver lining in all this uncertainty. A recent study by the ADB or Asian Development Bank shows that ASEAN countries – including ours – may, in fact, see boosted incomes and exports as a result of the trade war (Figure 2).

The reason is that the US – instead of importing from China – will choose to import from firms located in other countries unaffected by the new tariffs. Firms in ASEAN countries might receive orders from the US, thus allowing them to expand their domestic operations.

This so-called “trade redirection” will be apparent in many sectors, especially electronics and optical equipment, textiles and garments, and chemicals.

Whether the Philippines can cash in on this depends on our ability to promote domestic manufacturing investments and attract foreign investors seeking refuge from the trade war.

Sadly, our competitiveness in the region leaves much to be desired, what with lingering uncertainties about the Trabaho bill (which wants to make it harder for investors to enjoy various incentives) and the endo bill (which, although well-meaning, some economists fear, might turn off prospective investors).

More than a year since it passed, the Ease of Doing Business law has also yet to have implementing rules and regulations. 

Meanwhile, Vietnam is fast becoming the manufacturing hub of ASEAN, what with its low labor costs, myriad tax incentives, openness to foreign investors, and young, educated workforce.

Foreign direct investments are now pouring into Vietnam, and global assembly lines are increasingly choosing to locate there.

Unsurprisingly, experts say Vietnam stands to gain the most from the US-China trade war.

Another missed opportunity?

There are enough threats to Philippine economic growth without the escalating US-China trade tensions.

Exports could be our saving grace. If somehow we can quickly lower the costs of doing business, beef up our competitiveness, and promote enough export-oriented manufacturers, the US-China trade war could – however counterintuitively – turn into a blessing in disguise.

But at the rate the administration is addressing these and other issues, the deck appears to be stacked against us.

Is this going to be yet another opportunity that will slip through our fingers? – Rappler.com

The author is a PhD candidate at the UP School of Economics. His views are independent of the views of his affiliations. Follow JC on Twitter (@jcpunongbayan) and Usapang Econ (usapangecon.com).

This is the valedictory speech of Reycel Hyacenth Bendaña – president of the Sanggunian ng mga Mag-aaral ng mga Paaralang Loyola ng Ateneo de Manila, recipient of the 2019 Loyola Schools Awards for Leadership and Service Most Outstanding Individual, recipient of the St Ignatius Award for Most Outstanding Scholar, 2018 Most Outstanding Jose Rizal Model Student of the Philippines awardee, cum laude, program awardee for Management Economics, and the Ateneo de Manila University Class of 2019 valedictorian – delivered during the Loyola Schools Commencement Exercises on May 31 and June 1.

To the Superior of the Philippine Province of the Society of Jesus Fr Primitivo E. Viray Jr, SJ; to the Chairman of the Board of Trustees Mr Ernesto Tanmantiong; to our University President Fr Jose Ramon Villarin, SJ; to our Vice President to the Loyola Schools Dr Maria Luz Vilches; to the Vice President of the Ateneo Professional Schools Dr Antonette Angeles; to the Vice President for Administration Fr Nemesio S. Que, SJ; to the Vice President for University and Global Relations Fr Jose M. Cruz, SJ; to the dean of the School of Social Sciences Dr Fernando Aldaba; to the dean of the School of Humanities Dr Jonathan Chua; to our commencement speaker Mr John Nery; and to parents, admin, faculty, staff, fellow graduating students, good afternoon!

Let’s talk about barriers. In Ateneo, we have a no ID, no entry policy. Students with hold orders cannot enlist in classes, and in some cases, students are sent out if they don't follow the dress code.

In one way or another, we all experience barriers that make it difficult for us to achieve certain goals. But in the real world, the biggest barrier to education is not forgetting our IDs, having hold orders, or violating the dress code, but poverty. (READ: [OPINION] Game of poverty)

Dumating ako sa mundo bilang panganay ng isang construction worker at ng isang SM saleslady – parehas hindi regular at underpaid, kaya kahit nagsisikap, parehas hindi sapat ang inuuwi.

Ang kabataan naming magkapatid ay maghanap ng tindahan na mauutangan ng pagkain dahil pagod ng magpautang ang mga tindahan sa kalye namin. Ilang beses na nag-sorry sa akin ang mga magulang ko kasi hindi sila makakabayad ng tuition in time for the exam o dahil sa susunod na linggo pa sila makakapagpadala ng allowance.

Anyone can understand that for my family, my graduation from any university, let alone Ateneo, is not a realistic dream.

Sa totoo lang, baka nga nakita 'nyo na ako dati habang dumadaan sa may Service Road. Ako 'yung batang sumisigaw sa gilid ng jeep, "O Alabang Alabang Alabang FTI FTI Bicutan! O sa wala, sa wala. Meron pa po, pakiusog naman po nang konti pa. Sampuan po 'yang upuan."

Isa po akong barker ng jeep, tumutulong sa tatay ko sa pasada. At sa pag-uwi, tumutulong naman sa nanay ko magtahi ng basahan para ibenta kinabukasan.

O baka nakita 'nyo na rin 'yung kapatid ko. Dati siyang naglalako ng kakanin sa bahay-bahay, kumakayod para may dagdag baon.

In one way or another, you may have seen my family in the faces of our jeepney drivers, barkers, and street peddlers – the poor that are invisible to most.

'Yung Hya na barker ng jeep at nagbebenta ng basahan sa kalsada, 'yung batang hindi napapansin ng lipunan, ay kagaya rin ng marami pang bata na hindi natin nakikita ngayon. I am here as a reminder that the unseen poor are real.

My story has been celebrated, even romanticized, for its sheer improbability. Kahit mga magulang ko, hindi rin makapaniwala. But a story like mine is the lucky exception, not the rule. As a matter of fact, I wouldn't be standing here today if it weren't for the generosity of those who helped me to get here. But generosity is not enough. Generosity means inequality. Inequality means that there is a hill, and the rest is down from the hill.

At hindi makatarungan ang hindi pagkapantay-pantay. Sino bang makapagsasabi na dapat tayo lang ang nandito ngayon? Marami tayong kasabay na nagsisikap, pero hindi natin kasama ngayon dito.

Nung high school ako, nagkaroon ako ng pagkakataon na magvolunteer magturo sa isang public school. Doon ko nakilala si Noynoy. Sa pagkakaibigan namin, nasampal ako ng katotohanan na hanggang ngayon ay dala-dala pa rin ng konsensya ko.

Grade 1 si Noynoy noon, pero siya'y 12 years old. Apat na beses na siyang umulit ng Grade 1 kasi lagi siyang absent. Kailangan niya kasing kumita ng pambili ng pagkain para sa kanyang pamilya.

What reason could there be for someone to persist, and repeat Grade 1 four times, if not for a better life? Kung hindi pa ito sapat na katibayan ng kanyang kagustuhan para sa mas magandang buhay, ano ang sapat? Ano pa ba ang kailangan?

Pero hindi lang kahirapan ang hadlang sa edukasyon. Maraming kabataan ang hindi nakakapag-aral dahil sa gulo at giyera, kagaya ng nangyari sa Marawi, at iba pang lugar, lalo na sa Mindanao.

Maraming kabataan ang kailangan pang umakyat ng bundok at tumawid ng mga ilog para lang makapasok sa paaralan. At maraming kabataan, kagaya ng mga Lumad at iba pa nating kapatid na katutubo, ang hindi makapasok dahil sa karahasan sa kanayunan. Their distance from us here in Metro Manila makes it easy for us not to see them. But these unseen people are also real.

There are also barriers closer to home. Many of us here are scholars too, and even among those who can pay tuition, there are some who barely managed to.

Many of us struggled with separation and homesickness, on top of the rigorous demands of school. Your parents, who moved heaven and earth so you could take your place here – this is their victory too.

There are children of OFWs (overseas Filipino workers) present today, whose parents could not be here to see them graduate. And there are those who still grieve the loss of a beloved parent. If they were here, I'm sure they would have been very proud to see you in your togas today.

Many of us here struggled bravely with trauma and mental health issues. There are some of us who would not come to class for fear of coming face to face with our abusers. Marami rin sa ating halos mag-overcut, hindi dahil tamad o batugan, hindi dahil ayaw bumangon, pero dahil hindi kayang bumangon.

We faced all of these with unspoken bravery. Difficulty has been our shared experience. And because we are not strangers to pain, grief, and struggle, we have been able to share in the broader fight for social justice.

This is the batch that protested over various social issues – for the first time in years, different student organizations and unaffiliated students grabbed the megaphone and spoke out.

This is also the batch that submitted a petition to the Senate against the lowering of the minimum age of criminal liability. This is the batch that strongly condemned sexual assault and asserted the inviolable dignity of a human person, regardless of gender.

This is the batch that does not forget. We have done all this united in the struggle against all unjust realities.

This is why I believe that this batch understands why these realities are not acceptable. Hindi dapat kailangan maging barker ng jeep, magbenta ng basahan, o maglako ang bata para makakuha ng dagdag baon.

Hindi dapat kailangang um-absent ng isang bata para tumulong mapakain ang kanyang pamilya. Hindi dapat kailangang mangamba ang isang bata para sa kaligtasan niya. At hindi dapat kailangang maramdaman ng isang bata na nag-iisa siya sa laban niya.

For all our efforts and our struggles, and all we have done so far, we deserve to march proudly today. But while our graduation marks the end of our academic lives, it also marks the beginning of a deeper commitment to working with others to transform unjust social realities.

These realities are systemic, complex, and intertwined. It will take more than one batch of graduates, or even one generation of Filipinos to even begin to unravel the knots that have been tied over and over for decades until we no longer see where one problem ends, and where another begins. We are called to do better than this.

Every graduation, Atenean seniors are told to go "down from the hill." This year, perhaps it is time to ask why there is even a hill at all. Though we worked hard to be here, we know that this hill exists because there is much work left to be done.

As long as society has not overcome bigger, deeper problems – social discrimination, stark economic inequality, and the concentration of political power in the hands of the few – there will always be something better to struggle for.

Sa isang makatarungang lipunan, hindi na natatangi ang kwento ng iskolar na gaya ko, pero isa ng realidad sa sinumang nangangarap. Sa isang makatarungang lipunan, ang edukasyon gaya ng atin ay hindi na lamang para sa iilan. Sa isang makatarungang lipunan, mas marami pa sana tayong kasama na magtatapos ngayon.

Pero kahit hindi makatarungan ang mundong minana natin, kasama natin ang kapwa kabataan, ang mga magsasaka't manggagawa, ang mga guro't kawani, ang mga lingkod bayan, at marami pang ibang sektor ng lipunan, sa paglikha ng mundong ito.

At ito ang hamon sa ating lahat: bumuo tayo at mag-iwan ng isang Pilipinas na mas makatarungan kaysa sa lipunang dinatnan natin – isang lipunan na ikararangal nating ipamana.

Maraming salamat, po! Dios mabalos. – Rappler.com

Lying within the global center of marine biodiversity, the Philippines is one of the world's top fish producing countries, and millions of Filipinos derive their livelihood from fishing. However, these rich and precious resources are declining rapidly, with research showing that 10 of the country's 13 major fishing grounds are already under threat due to overfishing, destructive fishing practices, habitat degradation, pollution, improper waste disposal, and extreme weather.   

It is estimated that the Philippines loses nearly P68.5 billion a year to illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing, a trend that affects the country's economic development through lost revenue and unrealized opportunities for local fishermen and  associated seafood industries. With fish making up the major protein source in the Filipino diet, this decline in fish stocks also has implications for the country's food security, particularly for the nearly 52% of fisherfolk who already live beneath the poverty line. Illegal fishing practices also put law-abiding fishers and seafood producers at a disadvantage in both the domestic and global marketplace.

As we observe the International Day for the Fight against Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing on June 5, I'd like to thank our Philippine partners for working with us to address the threats posed by illegal fishing and to protect our marine resources for future generations. For over 3 decades, the US government has worked closely with the Philippine government and local partners to achieve our shared goal of sustainable fisheries and healthy marine ecosystems. For example, the US Agency for International Development's (USAID) 5-year EcoFish Project worked with the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) and local governments to increase the number and weight of fish by 24% in focus sites. USAID's new P1.3-billion, 5-year Fish Right project, launched in 2018, works with BFAR, DENR, and a consortium of local partners to address biodiversity threats and increase fish biomass in select marine biodiversity areas in the Philippines. Building on the gains of previous USAID-supported coastal, marine, and biodiversity conservation projects that introduced an ecosystem approach to fisheries management, the Fish Right partnership promotes the sustainable use of critical coastal and marine resources, enhances the resilience of these resources, and improves the ability of Philippine authorities to sustainably manage fisheries – for the benefit of all Filipinos.

The Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) has partnered with other US agencies, such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), to develop and implement capacity-building programs for managers of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs). This effort will continue to train new MPA managers to more effectively address threats to Philippine marine resources.  

Recognizing the important role law enforcement plays in combating illegal fishing and protecting marine resources, Philippine law enforcement officers have collaborated with US experts to better utilize sophisticated satellite data to detect boats fishing illegally in Philippine waters and to prevent and deter illegal fishing. We have helped to train nearly 100 officers and inspectors from BFAR and the Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) on practical law enforcement techniques, such as how to board foreign fishing vessels, conduct comprehensive fisheries inspections, and draft briefings and affidavits for prosecutors. 

This year, the US Coast Guard led a first-of-its-kind multinational fisheries law enforcement workshop in Manila that built capacity for at-sea enforcement operations in Southeast Asia. The workshop, which included participants from the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, and Indonesia, strengthened domestic fishery enforcement in each country and helped to improve regional cooperation, coordination, and interoperability.   

American scientists also seek opportunities to collaborate with Philippine counterparts on marine science research projects.  These scientific endeavors do not just increase our joint understanding of oceanographic phenomena or marine species distribution, they help inform global and local evidence-based fisheries management policies and ensure that there will still be fish for Filipino generations to come. 

Ensuring the health of Philippine fisheries – and the country's economy – will not just require robust law enforcement and improved science, it will also require innovative new ideas championed by young Filipinos. To that end, we have supported marine-focused education and empowerment camps for some of the country’s most inventive and motivated emerging leaders. We are proud to see the dynamic youth pioneer new social entrepreneurship models in their communities, establish green businesses that address marine challenges, and strive to educate those around them about the importance of healthy ocean ecosystems.

The US government is honored to work alongside Philippine government agencies, civil society, and inspiring young Filipinos to address these challenges. And we will continue to work together to advance human and ecological well-being in the Philippines and to support initiatives that ensure the continued health of Philippine fisheries. We truly believe that your fish is your future.– Rappler.com

Sung Kim is the United States' ambassador to the Philippines.

The sun was already scorching our backs after two sujood (prostrations). About a third of the Baguio Athletic Bowl was filled with the faithful – Muslim residents of Baguio, international students from Africa and the Middle East taking up allied health courses, converts and journalists covering the event. (READ: IN PHOTOS: Filipino Muslims break fast at start of Eid'l Fitr)

A few more verses and the khutbah (sermon) had begun. It usually begins with prayers in Arabic and then a commentary in the vernacular. At last, the imam (religious leader) spoke in Filipino. Foreign friends waited a few more lines in hopes that the imam would shift to English but, sensing it would not happen, they left one by one.

To a curious mind, the choice of language here opens up a lot of questions. Why, for example, did he not choose English, when obviously, a quarter of his audience were foreigners? Why did he not choose a regional lingua franca say, Ilokano or Bisaya? Why Filipino? (READ: Eid'l Fitr: The challenge after Ramadan) 

Language and accessibility

Choosing the national language was the best option. In Islam, the Arabic language is the global language, and it defeats English in this position. Since the khutbah is interspersed with Arabic verses, those who are learned in Qur’anic Arabic will pick up the essence of the message.

While Muslims have been in the north for decades (even centuries, as history will tell) thanks to economic trade, only a few of them speak the regional lingua franca. Most of them speak Filipino as a second language. The rising number of converts, like me, also come from different ethnolinguistic groups.

I am used to attending Eid prayers where the khutbah is delivered in English. In these instances, I can tell that much of the audience could not relate. Filipino remains to be more accessible to the masses.

Accessibility is important in Islam because the Qur’an was written with an intent to be conveyed verbally, as it addressed the then illiterate Arab population. For many people in the country, Filipino as the national language also served as a bridge to spiritual emancipation. (READ: Speaking in tongues: How storytelling shapes Philippine languages)

Filipino is not foreign to the Moros or Muslim Filipinos in much the same way as Arabic is no alien to Filipinos. (WATCH: What is Eid'l Fitr? Islam expert explains)

Many words of Arabic (and Persian) origin have become a staple in Philippine languages. Words as basic as alam (knowledge), hukom (hukm, judgment), talak (talaq, divorce), paham (wise), alak (alcoholic beverage), kapre (kafir, non-believer), salawal (sharwal, trousers), kamison (qamis, tunic), even Manila (Fi Amanillah, In God’s protection) and salamat (salam, peace) have been part of its vocabulary. (READ: Filipino, the language that is not one)

We owe this to that first contact of Arab and Persian traders who landed on the ports of Sulu prior to their sojourn to Guangzhou, China. Muslims soon then reached many provinces in the present-day Philippines as far north as Pampanga and Ilocos. Remember that Rajah Sulayman (Arabic for Solomon), the ruler of the Rajahnate of Manila, was a Muslim, and Manila was a Muslim polity.

Beyond a matter of scheduling

More than just a medium, language is also an annal of history. This is why the recent decision of the Supreme Court (the Kataas-taasang Hukuman) to make Filipino optional in the core curriculum of the tertiary level is a disservice to a people begging for its soul. (READ: 12 reasons to save the national language)

To the justices, the issue was just a matter of scheduling – whether it should be taught up to the tertiary level or not. They have succumbed to ahistorical literalism.

Was it the lady justice’s blindfold’s fault that the court failed to see even our linguistic context and the colonial mold of our education?

I particularly agree with the defenders of Filipino in saying that higher order thinking skills are developed in college, and that there is no better place to intellectualize the national language than in the tertiary level.

We would be remiss to see language education as only a matter of developing proficiency in a medium vis-à-vis developing metalinguistic awareness and national consciousness.

In retrospect, many nations have decreed laws on language use and many of these laws also failed. Scribes will try to obscure the letters of the law to fool its readers. However, it is the masses – the sovereign – that define its spirit.

It is only a matter of time that they will see through these false prophets. Those who have not been deceived have the duty to tell that the emperor has no clothes.

Ipagtanggol ang pambansang wika at bayan! (Defend the national language and country!) Eid Mubarak! – Rappler.com

Pete Sengson is a peace activist. He started his advocacy when he converted from Catholicism to Islam back in 2009. He is one of the co-founders of Muslims for Progressive Values - Philippines, a non-governmental organization which aims to gather Muslims in the cause of human rights, social justice and inclusion.

MANILA, Philippines – Reading the news has become a tiresome and stressful thing to do lately, especially with all the hate and negativity.

History professor Leloy Claudio teaches us some ways on how to make reading news less stressful.  – Rappler.com 

Last summer season, the Philippine Coast Guard got the ire of the local and foreign tourists who waited for the completion of predeparture inspection before their watercraft could depart. The PCG has the mandate, based on the Republic Act 9993, to conduct such inspection on all vessels that sail within the maritime jurisdiction of the Philippines. Due to the limited number of PCG personnel nationwide to carry out the inspection, the process usually causes delay in the scheduled departures.

This brings us to the question of whether the PCG personnel has enough resources to inspect all vessels that depart in a day nationwide. Also, whether this mandate is practically tenable or not. 

According to PCG records, there is a monthly average of 71,500 domestic watercraft nationwide that are inspected before departure. If conservatively computed vis a vis the 73 Coast Guard stations nationwide, it would mean that one station should inspect at least 33 watercraft in a day, excluding the foreign flag vessels which are subject to port state control.

It is worth noting that there is a limited number of PCG personnel in the frontlines who are also performing vessel safety enforcement inspection. Other personnel must attend to equally important coast guard functions, like maritime law enforcement, marine environmental protection, among others. 

The PCG is given such mandate because legislators recognized the perilous environment of the sea. They intend to make sure that an agency of the state could control the greed of the shipowners who accommodate excess passengers or operate vessels that are not seaworthy and would endanger the public and harm the maritime environment. While the law may sound rational, it is also this mandate that has made the PCG the scapegoat in the recent maritime tragedies. Instead of the shipowners and boat operators, it is the PCG that had received the blame for the mishaps.

Notably, the registration of domestic vessels is the mandate of the Maritime Industry Authority. It is the responsibility of Marina to ensure that a watercraft, before it is registered, is at all times in seaworthy condition and equipped with the necessary life-saving appliances, communications equipment, and other requirements set forth by the agency. It is also necessary that a licensed and competent crew should operate it. Consequently, it should be understood that the condition of the vessel, once it is registered, is not an assurance that it will remain safe for departure once it operates. Due to this gap, Congress recognized the importance of PCG to conduct a predeparture inspection on all these vessels.

However, the setup has created more problems. The shipowners have been more complacent since they were not impugned for any maritime incidents. Since the terrible Doña Pass incident in 1987, considered to be the world’s worst peacetime maritime disaster until the Princess of the Stars in 2008, no shipowner has been imprisoned because there are no specific laws that could legitimately pinpoint the shipowners’ responsibility in sea mishaps. The usual charges of reckless imprudence under the Revised Penal Code can be technically circumvented to escape such accountability.   

The PCG officials are always put in the limelight after every incident. They are the ones held accountable to the public to explain why vessels collided or capsized. They are the ones crucified in matters that concern the unseaworthiness of the vessel or the excessive number of passengers on board. The rationale behind such thinking is because they are the last government agency that should ensure that the riding public would be safe.

Ironic as it may seem, it is because of this PCG mandate that the public has forgotten the shipowners who were given “Certificate of Public Convenience” as a license to operate and have this responsibility. The PCG’s performance of the predeparture inspection takes away this burden of responsibility from the shipowners. 

Needless to say, this particular setting could also be an opportunity among coast guard ranks to abuse their authority in exchange for favors. There had been accusations that PCG officials were given bribes or gifts so that the departing vessel would be cleared even if it had engine problems or excessive number of passengers. There was also an instance in Palawan where the dive boat owners alleged a coast guard official of extortion for them to be permitted to sail. These kinds of issues could only be eliminated if the PCG would be relieved of such absolute authority in allowing a watercraft to depart or not. 

The state conducting predeparture inspection of vessels is something no longer practiced in other parts of the world. The mindset that the sea is a perilous environment had long been altered when the planes started carrying passengers in the sky. It is about time that our lawmakers pass a dedicated law for the shipping industry that explicitly defines the responsibility and accountability or the shipowners once an incident occurs. Let the modern PCG focus on its multifarious tasks. (READ: [OPINION] What is missing in Duterte's war on drugs?) – Rappler.com 

Jay Tristan Tarriela is a commissioned officer of the Philippine Coast Guard with the rank of Lieutenant Commander and is currently a Ph.D. student at the National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies (GRIPS) under the GRIPS Global Governance (G-cube) Program in Tokyo, Japan. He is also a Young Leader with Pacific Forum CSIS, Honolulu. All views expressed in this article are his own and do not necessarily represent the official stand of the Philippine Coast Guard.

This is in response to Professor Walden Bello's piece that was posted on June 1, 2019: [OPINION] Defending academic freedom from political extremism

Dear Professor Bello,

As a member of the U.S. academic community who signed the petition circulated several weeks ago regarding Lisandro Claudio’s hire, I feel called to respond to your defense of said person’s academic freedom; and the allegation that I and my fellow signatories were “seduced by a scurrilous petition authored by political forces external to the university...who are contemptuous of academic freedom and are determined to hijack a great university’s hiring process....” 

I signed the petition without knowing the author or authors’ identity/identities. As for Professor Claudio, I know him hardly at all: we met once at a conference several years ago, and did not share any interaction or correspondence following the event. This is to say that, while we are anything but friends, he is certainly not my enemy.

I signed the petition on the content of the argument and the supporting evidence that Professor Claudio’s identification of students and student groups as extremist exposed them to added surveillance and possibly danger, given the current breakdown in the administration and enforcement of laws and individual rights and freedoms in the Philippines under the current government. That this allegation has come from students themselves raised an ethical concern that, I imagine, was shared by many colleagues who also signed the petition.

How does this allegation measure up against the defense that the said candidate is simply exercising his academic freedom, as you say, and should not be censured or targeted for doing so? I can’t pretend to know with certainty the answer to this question. But I can tell you what brought me to consider the question in the first place.

When I was last in the Philippines (last January-February), people were protesting police impunity, in response to a 12-year-old boy who was taken out of his home in Caloocan City and shot by police without resisting arrest, in front of cameras, for allegedly being a drug pusher. You probably remember the government’s immediate response: far from denouncing the atrocity, many senators began to openly debate advancing a bill that would allow police to shoot anyone over 9 years old on suspicion of criminal activity, without trial. (READ: Who's afraid of a Filipino peti-liberal?)

Like me, you may have had the occasion to wonder: Does this count as the administration of law? How do police know whether a typical citizen is a criminal? Or a child? Who tells them? What if the accusation is false or misleading? How can one know if the police are right or wrong? Does anything happen if they are wrong? What are laws and freedoms in a state of impunity? 

As a faculty member who regularly invokes the principle of academic freedom and tenure as the only protection scholars have to ensure our safety in the pursuit of truth, and as a U.S. citizen who respects and values the freedom of speech as a principle enshrined in our Constitution, I did not sign the petition without careful consideration.

If I and my colleagues are to be blamed for not having done the proper research to discover the ideological leanings of the author/s, the ideological debates that inspired or fueled this confrontation, the ideological consequences of opposing the right of someone to call out students and render them vulnerable, I can only remind you, as one teacher to another – without pretending that my accomplishments and struggles compare in any way to the life of principled struggle and scholarship I have witnessed from you over the course of many years – that alongside our vocation to tell the truth on the basis of what our research suggests, we also have an obligation to protect our students, students in general, from harm.

We engage our students with the ideas we have developed over the course of our study and research; but we also concern ourselves with their safety and welfare, even at times despite our own beliefs or opinions. I ask again: How does the obligation to uphold one principle measure against the other? In the vacuum of accountability in which the freedom of one person has come to directly impinge upon the life and freedom of another, or others, it is indeed a tragedy that the immediate consequences of our opinions and ideas have become so immediately drastic, and uncontrollable. 

If you can agree with me that this is so, and if you can also agree with me that the current social breakdown in the rule of law has weaponized the exercise of certain freedoms in the service of state repression and censorship, then I believe you can also understand why I and many of my colleagues would dare to voice concern on an issue that otherwise appears to fall outside our sphere of academic research.

Our concern, to reiterate, has little to nothing to do with his academic credentials (which I am sure the faculty of any given college or university are more than capable of evaluating), but rather with the use to which they have been put. As I anticipate that I will be asked not to speak publicly on this issue in the future, I apologize in advance for not being able to entertain your response.

Respectfully,
Jody Blanco  

– Rappler.com 

Jody Blanco is a scholar and teacher. He has taught at the University of the Philippines-Diliman and Ateneo de Manila University, and currently lives in San Diego. 

Editor's note: Leloy Claudio has a show on Rappler, "Basagan ng Trip."

I lost this year a most valued source – a veteran intelligence officer whom I met a lifetime ago, when I was a young reporter covering Camp Crame.

Boogie Mendoza died of a heart attack last March in his home province of Pangasinan, while I was finishing my Nieman fellowship at Harvard. The news of his sudden death came like a punch to my stomach, as I had just written a narrative on him for the non-fiction class I was taking in the Spring:

Behind an empty desk in a windowless room, he flips a Mongol pencil while his sturdy left hand softened by well-scrubbed nails brings out a yellow pad from a hidden drawer. I don’t talk to reporters, he says, eyes flat, cold as steel.

This is Boogie Mendoza, after all, the notorious intelligence agent, a captain in the Philippine military who has arrested dozens of communist leaders and sowed fatal intrigues in the underground rebel movement that’s been fighting Asia’s most stubborn insurgency. It was late 1989. He was at the prime of his career – a rising star, a power center in a camp run by generals who understood the war only through his eyes. I was 24. I hated the military, and I hated more my editor’s decision to assign me to cover it.

To the communists, Boogie was the agent who played with their heads if he was not busy plotting their arrest. 

To this journalist who had known him for nearly 30 years, he was Camp Crame’s wiliest spinmeister who lived in two worlds: the fiction in his head that wanted to kill an ideology, and the reality of the streets that drove him to hunt down guerrillas.

He taught me to smell spin from miles away. He taught me to catch a lie through the twitch of an eye, the tone of a voice, the shift of big hips glued to a chair.

I trusted him completely. I distrusted him totally.

He’d dish out reams of fake documents for me to either gobble up or dismiss as one of his psy-war concoctions. He’d embellish a story of one arrest, adding more color and character, because this is an art to him – telling tales with the end in view of crushing a revolution.

Now why am I writing about him in a blog meant to introduce the newsletter I would be writing to Rappler readers every Tuesday? 

Because journalism’s business goes beyond writing stories. Especially in today’s world, we’re required to smell a PR stint from miles away and distill propaganda from facts before it reaches you.

We’re not always successful. But know that we try every single day.

Journalism is also about our complexities as human beings, a profession that immerses us in what drives a public servant, what motivates a business person, what makes a soldier endure, what makes a man call God stupid.

It is what I hope to talk to you about each Tuesday – going beyond the spin and past the chatter but also looking at characters through a nuanced lens, such as the likes of Boogie Mendoza who, in various times in his career, justified the means to what he felt was a noble end and who suffered for it. Quietly.

For in the end, we write stories not only because they need to be told but also because they help us see the world more clearly, and regard people in all their tangled lives. – Rappler.com

“Chisms” was the concocted name of a bar-café that we, a group of journalists, imagined owning while shooting the breeze many moons ago. We fantasized it would be a watering hole of newshounds, politicians, artists, activists, musicians, other newsmakers, and young, aspiring journos.

I ripped the name from the Filipino word “chismis” or gossip. We thought what great fun it would be to have people from different walks of life just walk in and share the latest stories while they guzzled bottles of beer or sipped cups and cups of coffee after.

Admittedly, journalists and news junkies alike are suckers for secrets and gossip. The hotter and the more current, the better. The more controversial or shocking, even more than better because they make for the best of stories.

After all, it’s stories that build communities and bring people together in piazzas or plazas. We imagined “Chisms” to be our own public square where conversations went beyond gossip.

Journalists are a naturally curious lot. We observe and listen intently to storytellers then ask a litany of questions. The best journalists, they say, are those who know how to listen…and to casually eavesdrop. After all, these methods are among the easiest ways of collecting information even for the toughest of stories.

Among the toughest stories I’ve written about is human trafficking published by what used to be a fortnightly investigative magazine, Newsbreak, which eventually migrated online. From the southern backdoor, I tried to trace the footsteps of young Filipino women in search of a better life in Sabah, and who tragically ended up in pubs and bars not as receptionists or waitresses as promised, but as women for hire.

Sexually abused and deeply in debt, they became virtual slaves, some of them held in the Roma Mera detention center in Sabah. Among those I met was “Marissa” – not her real name.

Later arrested during a raid, she frantically texted me, her last message saying her cell phone would soon be confiscated by the police. I had returned to Manila by that time and my messages to her went unanswered. I tried to communicate with the welfare attaché I had interviewed to tell him about Marissa’s plight and asked him if he could please make sure she would be all right.

He told me it would be difficult to trace where she was taken. And I never heard from her again.

There are challenging investigations and heart-breaking stories aching to be told. They make me angry, agitated, extremely sad, helpless, or hopeless. Sometimes, however, I turn hopeful especially when I see a story with impact, prompting people to try to bring about change.

These stories are often difficult to write because they require rigor, a discipline of verification, tons of patience, and time. But journalists pursue them in the belief that the public and the community ought to know about them so they can do something.

I want to share with you every Thursday, via The Newsbreak Agenda newsletter, stories that deviate from day-to-day news which you pick up from coffee shops or bars. Let’s create our own virtual and ideal Chisms Café and exchange notes about stories that will build a community of genuine truth-seekers.

And yeah, let’s not do this on Facebook, yes? – Rappler.com

If you’re that one millennial among 3 who checks social media at least once every day, then you’ve probably come across those “listicles” about how journalists are as partners – you know, why you should date a journalist, or you know you’re married to a journalist if…  

I’ve been ambivalent about those types of write-ups. Sure, among fellow journalists and their partners, anecdotes about our “strangeness” make for good appetizer or dessert in get-togethers. But sharing them with the public, most of whom probably see us as unfeeling deliverers of information (or supposed purveyors of “fake news” – i.e., truths they don’t want to hear)? I’m afraid I’d come out so self-absorbed, or my friends and I cliquish. 

That reluctance could be an extension of that good old reminder from our professors in journ school and the editors who mentored us: third-person point of view, you shouldn’t be in the story, you are not the story. 

I haven’t thrown out that tenet.

I still believe we can show in a documentary that a village is kilometers away, across a river and muddy roads, from the town center, without declaring, “I walked this many kilometers to get here – as you can see, I’m huffing and puffing and dehydrating from all that hike.” 

Yet, I also now recognize the necessity of welcoming our audience a bit more into our lives via the newsroom.

Sure, we have volunteers we call Movers who send us updates from areas that our correspondents cannot reach. We crowdsource sentiments about the burning issues of the day. We do Twitter conversations on consumer issues. We run Facebook polls on a whole range of interests. We respond to sincere questions and well-thought-out comments on our posts.

These have not been enough to make a considerable segment of news consumers truly understand how journalism works.

Every day, several times, on multiple platforms, we see users loosely throwing around phrases such as “bayaran” (paid hacks), “bobo” (dumb), “biased” when they dislike or don’t agree with the way we’ve written a headline or angled a story.

Or when they simply do not understand why this report was used, why one quote was highlighted over another, why we treated a story in a certain way.

Or when they see us being swarmed with the "fake" news label when we report – along with other media outfits – the findings of state auditors that public officials misused taxpayers' money.

Suddenly, the free-for-all nature of social media and technology has made users aggressively – although not always credibly – challenge the trust we used to automatically command from our audience.

Suddenly too, the same platforms have afforded us to explain our work, our views to our public: we have Rappler’s channels; we have our journalists’ verified accounts. (You can get to know us too by clicking on our bylines from the story pages – they will lead to our individual profiles.) 

Away from our smartphones and laptops, we organize or speak at campus meet-ups, community workshops, international forums. We are designing media literacy modules for high school and college students because they are the ones who are most vulnerable to lies, misinformation, and propaganda, yet are also most ready to be taught responsible news consumption and social media behavior.  

The media is not the enemy.

There may be some bad eggs in the industry, but which industry or institution doesn’t have them? And you can be sure that in individual newsrooms and through media watchdogs, their shenanigans are addressed, and we strive to make them irrelevant.

What I can tell you, from my decades in journalism, is that most practitioners consider this a calling, a moral responsibility. You can trust us again that every crucial time – and every time, to us, is a crucial time (we are OA like that) – we do and will rise to the occasion.  

As journalists, as your traditional gatekeepers, we vet sources and distill information, we sniff for motives and pry into agenda, we draw from institutional memory. We have inside stories.

But I’m certain, too, that you know things we don’t, you have views we’d be interested in taking, you have questions we ought to answer, not to mention juicy appetizers and delectable desserts!

So starting on July 25, and every Wednesday after that, I’m going to send out a newsletter to your emails to share the stories behind the latest issues flooding your social media feeds, or how we think stories will unfold beyond today’s take.

I promise it to be a conversation – say, a huddle – between you and me, just like how we process, discuss, debate, argue things in the newsroom.  

What turns our morning coffee time from a leisurely sip into a hurried slurp? What triggers frenzied alerts on our chat channels on what began as a slow day?

What stirs the mom or big sister in an editor that she would impulsively treat the reporters to beer and barbecue after work hours because she felt they needed that on this particular night? What makes us stay so late in the newsroom that our dogs forget what we smell like? We’d like to share that with you.  

What makes you check Rappler.com for breakfast (or in the middle of traffic)? What kinds of news and information excite or provoke you that you just have to take to Facebook or Twitter or Reddit or Instagram in the middle of your work just to make a point?

What concerns do you feel passionate about but which you feel is not getting the attention they deserve? Who are the people, the communities, you want us to know because they, too, have stories whose angles and headlines we should take up in the newsroom huddles? We’d like to know.  

So, how about that kind of date with journalists – Rappler journalists – on Wednesdays? – Rappler.com