‘How contraceptive methods turn women into liars’

Found this on the Inquirer’s letters section today. A woman reacts to one of the paper’s editorials and frankly shares her feelings about contraception and the RH bill.

The Mother’s Day editorial (“For mothers and their kids,” Inquirer, 5/13/12), using a “CNN hero” to call for the swift passage of the Reproductive Health bill, must have been written under a certain spell. Our Magna Carta for Women, which just needs to be implemented, more than covers all our needs.

As the Philippine Medical Association itself said: Contraception turns women into liars. “I give myself to you entirely,” I tell my husband, “but I don’t give you a key part of me: my fertility!”

I tell you: when my husband was using a condom, I could feel na ginagamit niya lang ako. I’ve told him so; and he has been so good as to change his behavior.

Is the Inquirer really pro-women? Or has the Inquirer just been victimized and fallen under the spell of the materialistic, animalistic, amoral and atheistic brainwashing of the powerful media of the degenerate West?

—YVONNE CHAN-DE LOS REYES

Read the whole article on the Inquirer website »

Advertisements

The anti-Corona media coverage on the Corona impeachment trial

If there’s one thing I totally agree with in deposed Chief Justice Renato Corona’s testimony, it’s his — and the rest of the civilized world’s — observation that Philippine mainstream media ganged up on him, as if by order of the Godfather (or a head of state with close ties to media moguls).

Being neither former President Arroyo’s or President Aquino’s fan, I didn’t decide to favor or oppose the then chief magistrate in his impeachment trial. I was for truth. Let the process go through its course, then let’s see and judge, I thought.

Unfortunately, news superstars Inquirer, ABS-CBN News, and even newcomer Rappler seemed to dismiss attempts to render fair reportage, destroying chances for audiences to know what really happened.

I cannot speak much for how the others fared (as I only “studied” them occasionally), but I sure noticed how the Inquirer gave us a brazenly anti-Corona, pro-Noynoy stand.

Just do a cursory (but careful) check of the paper’s frontpages in the past few months, and you’ll see evidence screaming at you. Corona was guilty until proven innocent.

Once, the paper even swam in the murky regions of “bad taste” through that Vicente photos blunder — in what seemed to be a case of character assassination.

And look at how they projected this country’s head of state as “hard at work” (with a dramatic photo, no less) at the height of the “Noynoying” hype.

***

I am moderately happy with the conviction, of course; anyone you call “Justice” (and a “Chief” at that) should be a paragon of his namesake, down to the detail of reporting wealth scrupulously.

But I am sad for him, because others who are surely worse are basking in the general triumph of democracy, as if they were immaculate and bright all along, as if catching a fellow wrongdoer would exonerate them of their own wrongs. But sadder still, because media has ruined one man’s family — unfairly — with what seem like strings attached to the presidential Palace.

Journalists, please — not gossipmongers

The consensus on the Net is that the Filipino boxing champion has fallen from grace because of his rant against gay marriage.

Thus wrote Bayani San Diego Jr. in his “news” report on boxing champ Manny Pacquiao’s recent remark opposing same-sex unions. The report appeared on the Inquirer’s May 17 frontpage.

What’s wrong with the report?

It is obviously biased. From paragraph one to the last, it actually rants against Pacquaio, citing or quoting LGBTQ advocates and leaving Pacquiao undefended.

It is not verified. More like an emotional knee-jerk reaction, really.

In a recent interview in the US newspaper National Conservative Examiner, Pacquiao likened gay marriage to “Sodom and Gomorrah” and quoted a biblical passage that said “gays should be put to death.”

San Diego should have tried to verify first whether the second-hand information he got was indeed accurate. It turns out that Pacquaio didn’t really “[liken] gay marriage to ‘Sodom and Gomorrah'”, nor did he “[quote] a biblical passage that said ‘gays should be put to death’.” The disgraced Examiner writer said so. The least that San Diego could have done was insert “alleged” in the right places.

San Diego, as a reporter (particularly in that article), should not use the Inquirer to forward his personal agenda. The Inquirer’s readers deserve true and fair journalists, not gossipmongers.