HUNI SA DAPLIN

photo courtesy of: http://my_sarisari_store.typepad.com

                   Outside the University where I am studying, there are dozens of kids wearing tattered clothes with dirty faces, running and playing with their bare feet. Giving a weathered smile and blank stares to passersby while asking for some alms; some huddling in the street corners on cartons that they use as their mats. Hollow eyes, bereft of hope and love, that somehow, due to their constant fixture in our lives, we hardly give a care anymore. Passing them by each day, seldom giving them a glance, and afraid, even angry that they would come near us with their extended hands and strained mumblings for some charity.

                   This scene is not unique; there are hundreds and thousands of them populating the streets and alleyways in every city and municipality in our country. And I guess, them being a common sight made us unaffected by their misery and loneliness…

View original post 596 more words

The Anatomy of Suicide: SEX and Perception (PART 1)

There are times in a man’s life when the cord that pins us to this plane of reality is stretched too taut and starts to fray. If the strain on the cord becomes too much, it will snap. At this point even sensible men will be pushed to the point that suicide will seem to be a very sweet and tantalizing option. To them, it is not an end to life but a release from the torments of the world, not the closing of the gates but as an opening of the doors to endless peace.

Suicide is a depressing reality. When life becomes too much to bear and when staying becomes an agonizing torture.

 The realization of defeat. 

The perpetual thirst for release.

The act of surrender. 

What causes a man to get a rope and hang himself by the neck like a fat piñata?
Or a woman to buy rat poison and drink it with her morning coffee?
Or, that of a boy of fourteen, to get his father’s razor and use it to cut and flay his wrists till they resemble a peeled banana?

Sometimes, the reality that we are living is less full of sunshine and more of gloomy rain, less full of happy smiles and more of anguished cries. A man can only take so much before the tantalizing pull to escape becomes overwhelming enough.

Suicide, is, in a way, an escape for those who perceive life more of a prison sentence rather than that of a wonderful journey to be enjoyed.

It can also be a form of sacrifice, for those who think that by ending their lives they are giving those who they have left behind a better chance to life through their deaths.

Or it may be a way of atonement for those who think that their sins could only be washed away by their deaths.

There are as many reasons to commit suicide as there are those who committed it, each one having their own personal motivation as to why they have done it.

But, it seems, despite all these occurrences that we may use as an example for us to learn from, we still fall to the same routines and the same pitfalls that will lead to that tight corner when suicide becomes more of a tantalizing option than a vague idea.

WHAT DOES SCIENCE SAY?

So, what does science say for man’s eternal predisposition to whack ourselves in the head at the slightest signs of dark clouds in the horizon?

One of the leading theories about suicide (put forth by Denys de Catanzaro,PhD.)  points that suicide is an adaptive behavioral strategy. In simple speak, the theory suggests that our brains are designed by natural selection to make hara-kiri (or if you are not into Japanese, blowing your head open like a fat melon with a fucking shotgun!) more enticing whenever we feel down in the dumps so as to give the rest of the gene pool a better chance of surviving the perceived crisis.

To concretize de Catanzaro’s theory, he made a  “mathematical model of self-preservation and self-destruction” 

(honestly, i don’t even understand half this shit, but anyway, it’s SCIENCE!!!)

Ψi = ρi + Σbkρkrk

Where Ψi = the optimal degree of self-preservation expressed by individual (the residual capacity to promote inclusive fitness);
ρ= the remaining reproductive potential of i;
ρk = the remaining reproductive potential of each kinship member k;
b= a coefficient of benefit (positive values of b k ) or cost (negative values of b k ) to the reproduction of each k provided by the continued existence of (-1 ≤ b ≤ 1);
r= the coefficient of genetic relatedness of each k to i (sibling, parent, child = .5; grandparent, grandchild, nephew or niece, aunt or uncle = .25; first cousin = .125; etc.).

Translated in simple speak:

People who have less chances to get laid and have children, and at the same time feel that they are a burden to their family in a way that reduces their family members’ chances to get ahead in life, plus get laid and have children themselves, are more prone to commit suicide.

Based on this study, we can say, that people commit suicide not just because of their perceived inferiority or feelings of worthlessness. The study suggests that there is a direct correlation (you could use “connection” instead of correlation, i am just using correlation coz it makes me sound smarter. duh!) between suicide and sexual reproduction (mind you, this is not just sex but the act of sex so as to make babies). Suicide, apparently, is designed to cull from the herd those that could endanger the reproductive well being of others and have nothing to give, in terms of more progeny and in helping raise those progeny, to the herd.

The twist is, we ourselves are the one’s who decide if we are of value to the herd or not. Thus, suicide, as the study suggests, is an act of free will.

Put it this way, a man who got dumped by his “true” love (with all the other factors being present) would be more prone to commit suicide than, say, a man who got dumped by a woman that his penis got a crush on. This is because, in the first case, the man had consciously limited (so he think! tsk, stupid guy.) who his partner will be in creating babies to his “true” love, thus, when their relationship ended, his subconscious mind took it as an end to his chances at procreation. In the second case, the man has no intention what so ever to have babies with the woman, making the dumping less aggravating, suicide-wise, to that of the first case.

A woman who was raped while still a virgin, and has conservative values and lives in a very conservative community, is more prone to commit suicide than that of, say, a prostitute. In the first case, the woman’s subconscious is telling her that her prospects of finding a good boy who will marry her and have kids is destroyed due to her destroyed innocence, coupled with her feelings of being dirty and unworthy that usually comes along in this instances.

A family man who just lost his job and has family troubles is also prone to suicide because of his perceived feelings of being a burden to his family and that he thinks his children will not get ahead in their lives because of the burden he is causing.

By this time we have to ask whether there is a difference between the mind of a suicidal person than that of a non-suicidal person? Or are there some sort of stages or process behind the mechanics of a suicidal mind?  What triggers a normal mind to go nose dive into the realms of self destruction and personal loathing? That would be discussed in the next article..

CLICK HERE TO READ THE CONTINUATION…

Now, here is a lonely photo. . just to make you more depressed.. we don’t want you happy, now, do we? (evil laugh)
———————————————————————
NB: most of the facts that i used in this article came from the article of Dr. Jesse Bering in the Scientific Americana website, “Being Suicidal: What it feels like to want to kill yourself“.

SULONG RH BILL!

Give every Filipino family a chance to have more food in the table, not give them condoms nor teach them how to prevent having kids. If it’s solving poverty you want, use our funds to increase salaries and give more employment opportunities.

We don’t need the RH Bill.

The above quote came from a friend who is a staunch anti-RH Bill advocate. What she is saying is not new, it had been echoed by so many others who loudly profess their belief that the RH Bill is anti life and passing it would mean the glorification of immorality and that it would not only legalize abortions but it would force abortion on people who do not want it.

But, are they saying stuff that are truthful or even logical? Or are they just mere propaganda to try and brainwash people into thinking that the RH BILL is really evil?

Let us try and shed light into some of their arguments. 

Logic and simple observation dictates that “more food on the table” does not actually quantify into a healthy population growth. Studies show that in times of a prosperity boom the population tends to increase rather than decrease, especially for countries with strong familial traditions. The Philippines has a very unhealthy population dynamics to date, if the current trend will continue, we will hit 150 million before 2030, which our economy, natural resources and infrastructure cant really handle now or even in 30 years from now.

The RH bill does not stop couples from having more children nor does it regulate and impose control over the population at large.. it merely affords people more choices in their familial well being as well as personal health. Read the RH “bills” first (in all its various proposals) before shooting it down. It is highly childish and immature both as a person and as a country at large if we prevent people from making their own choices in life. Even God granted us free will. Who are we, as mere mortals, to dictate upon our fellow mortals?

Give people the freedom of choice in how to run their lives.

It is as simple as that.

I think it is juvenile and simple minded to just easily say that we could use our funds to increase salary and job opportunities, and end it at that..

Look it this way through simple math. If you have 1 million pesos, and lets say that that 1 million pesos needs to be shared with 2 million people. How much money would each get?

Now take that 1 million pesos again and divide it among 5000 people. How much money would they now get each?

Let us even go even further, let us say that 20% of 10,000 people will get about 80% of the 1 million pesos (in rough estimation of poor and rich dynamics). So how much would each get now?

Compare the answers and see who gets the better deal and who gets the rotten one. 

As i have said, the bill does not impose, it merely concretize the basic government policy when it comes to reproductive health and our freedom to pick the right options in how to build our own family and whatnot’s. It does not even dictate on the number of children a couple may have, nor even force people to use contraceptives.

Be honest with me, those who are reading this, have you read any of the bills?

For those who have already made up their minds, either anti or pro RH Bill, don’t you think it is highly unprofessional and irresponsible to comment over something that you really dont have full knowledge over? Diba, too little knowledge is dangerous? Especially since many people who hear us may give much weight on our words? Don’t you think it is our responsibility, our obligation, to those who trust us and believe us to look deeper and understand better that which we are talking about before saying anything about it?

IMMATURITY

Another argument of those who are Anti RH Bill, aside from those who argue about morality and bible verses, goes something like this:

See it this way. Empower the 2 million people you have, give them the right technology and opportunities to further their lives and they’ll turn your 1 million pesos a billionfold. It’s not easy. But it surely is a solution.

Well, to be honest, that argument have some good points and is indeed a good thing to do, and i agree with them on that, it should be done.

However, at this time and in this country of ours it is not only an unrealistic thing but it borders in the realms of fantasy.

In the statement above, it presupposes 3 things:

1st. that it is easy to empower people.

Jesus Christ along with several thousand prophets, saints, holy men and whatnot’s have been among us and their teachings and actions had been passed down through the ages. One thing they all have in common, they strive to empower people to do good and be good. Question. What happened to us? Why are there still wars? Why do we still languish in this cesspool of apathy and villainy? Answer. Because it is hard to empower people. It is an attitude change, and attitude, just like stone is hard to mold. True, i did not say that “all” stones cannot be molded, some can but most could not.

2nd. That merely improving their lives will immediately change the population problem and their economic problem even if they have so many children.

Take for example India and China. They have very good economy and very good employment opportunities, but their people still languish because the resources are spread too thin over so many.

A man who earns 50 thousand a month would still be hard pressed to have all of his 8 children to finish college.

3rd. That People people will opt for the hard road over an easy one.

Majority of people are lazy. Facts shows that, studies shows that. Most people prefer to have an easy way out of things than to have hard labor over it. Even if you strive hard to empower them, if they will still remain lazy nothing will happen.

Yes, it is good that we focus on finding solutions but lasting solutions entails long term plans, and the government has already started on those, like economic prosperity through creation of new jobs, new investments and investor outreach and all that. So, what would we do before the fruition of those long term plans? Wait and allow the situation to fester and be more problematic in the time being?

The problem with social ills is that it acts like a disease.. if you let it be untreated for long it gets worse, if you dont apply first aid on it first before applying a more effective cure for it later – it will get worse.

It is best to have the RH bill and stem the progression of the disease of overpopulation and mothers dying due to lack of proper facilities and information than to confront a bigger problem that will be harder to fix later. Dont you think?

 

And again, i must reiterate, the RH bill gives choices, it does not impose, nor does it take away any freedom from others in practicing other things. The Bill does not make people immoral or that by passing it would condemn  the Filipino People into the ravaging fires of hell… Our choices makes as who we are, be it moral or immoral. Our choices condemns us to hell or to heaven.

 

I do not think that God is such a tyrant as to burn people in hell by just wanting to be more informed and doing informed decisions about their reproductive health, or that making sure that there will be a happier and healthier family by managing its size. After all, our God, the True God, is a God of Love. He even forgave Dismas, who was a sinner who had done countless wrongs, when he asked forgiveness for his sins and that to remember him when He will come into His Kingdom. 

Our God is not a vindictive God. Those people who say that “God does not want the RH Bill” or that “People will burn in hell for supporting the RH Bill” ought to be ashamed of themselves, they are using the name of God in vain. 

 

But then again, this is just me saying. I would advice you to read more about the RH Bill and then form your own opinion about it. Don’t believe what i am saying or what anyone else is saying without checking the facts first!

God gave you a mind to decide what is right and what is wrong, use it.

Don’t let others decide for you.

SULONG RH BILL!

IF YOU WANT TO KNOW MORE ABOUT THE RH BILL, TRY VISITING THIS SITE.  

>CLICK HERE<