Anomalous

Recently, there has been a considerable amount of animosity generated towards me due to a couple of my recent posts (Manny Pacquiao on Fire and Desiccating), which have touched on the taboo subject of having multiple partners.

Before I go on, I would like to touch on that subject one more time and provide some clarity regarding what I said. I never stated that it is necessarily “right” for philandering to take place (as that is purely subjective), and frankly, I never referred to the subject of having multiple partners as philandering or “cheating” anyway. Rather, I hold the perspective that it is definitely possible for a man to have romantic/caring feelings for and fall in love with more than one woman (whatever the circumstances may be).

On the question regarding whether this is morally “right”---well, that would certainly depend on one’s definition of morality and one’s own set of moral values---that is, if one even believes in the idea of morality. It is a totally subjective matter in and of itself. However, I merely pointed out in my statements that such feelings or tendencies is natural and ever-present amongst animals (especially mammalian species). And, of course, it is a fact that humans are mammals (animals) themselves. And since I feel that it is a natural instinct, then I do not think any external agency should restrict this liberty. However, I do point out that the manner in which this act is committed is totally at one’s own discretion as it depends on various personal circumstances, and it need not be at the expense of attachments and/or the neglect of responsibilities. This is my notion.

Moving on---the original motivation for this post is the hateful reaction I received from a great number of people---most of whom came from this particular blog’s entry ( chuvaness.livejournal.com/736207.html ). I guess the “violent” reaction should have come as no surprise as most unconventional (though not necessarily invalid or false) ideas have been rejected by the herd of society. Such is what happened with Galileo, Socrates, Charles Darwin, Mohandas Gandhi, Jose Rizal, and even Jesus (if he did in fact exist)---as these people were persecuted, exiled, and/or killed for what they believed. In essence, you are rejected, ostracized, and/or attacked if your ideas conflict with that of the stronger majority---just as what happened in my case upon stating my own opinion and personal beliefs. If I had expressed an unpopular idea a few centuries ago, perhaps the penalty would have been closer to lynching, disembowelment, or the like---but then again, what am I saying, assassination is still very much a possibility today if an idea angers enough people (especially if it involves the political and religious arena).

After reading the words of “war” that were machine-gunned at me, I began giving some thought as to what type of people constituted this massive opposition. After looking over the blog where they primarily originated from and their comments, I came to the conclusion that most of these people fall into one of two categories (if not both): elitists and conquistadors.

It was not hard to see the elitist nature of some of these assailants. First of all, the blog of their origin focuses on subject matter that is not necessarily typical, relevant, or of utmost importance for a third-world country. These are some of the same people who are disgusted to brush shoulders with the poor commoners and is likely why some of them took an interest initially in my story because I chose to give up the comforts of modern life to immerse myself in the unforgiving and cushion-less life in the provinces. Along with the aristocratic fancies, arrogance emanates so profusely through their language that it is not difficult to deduce that many of these people are part of the nobility of the Philippines. And some of these people are also part of one of the primary reasons the Philippines remains as impoverished as it is. These elites constitute one end of the extreme wealth gap where money and also power remain concentrated amongst themselves, leaving the masses suffocating in poverty. Even most of their “philanthropic” deeds are misleading and worthless in the long run as the money ends up getting funneled back to their pockets anyway, since they (and their businesses) are at the top of the food chain---making progress very difficult even for the most ambitious commoner. This is a major part of the corrupt system that is in place and is the daunting giant that cannot be dismantled because it is able to consume virtually anything that may pose as a threat or competition---very much similar to the herd mentality that executes anomalistic minds.

This brings me to the next breed---the conquistadors. These are the people who seek conversion, or else (insert intimidating and/or violent verb here)… Should you happen to stray from their beliefs, they will take it upon themselves to “correct” you (or destroy you if you resist). Similarly, Ferdinand Magellan and the Spanish conquistadors of yore attempted to convert Lapu Lapu and the native Filipinos to Christianity and change their way of life (and obviously, by force, they eventually succeeded). The same kind of act was committed in the attacks I received for my own personal thoughts and beliefs where these conquistadors lashed me with words of war, attempting to seek my retraction and/or conversion, or suffer the consequences. And I chose the latter. It is quite ironic that these people (and even the Spanish conquistadors/“messengers of God” who were massacring natives in order to convert them to Christianity) who allude to Biblical moral principles are the same ones committing acts that violate those very principles. It only makes me question even more their already questionable beliefs.

Indeed, ingenious systems have been set in place that allow the elites to exploit, manipulate, and maintain control over the populace. Big businesses control the food supply (agriculture and processed foods), addictive products (fast food, liquor, pharmaceutical drugs, etc.) reel in the ignorant/weak-willed masses and their cash, showbiz sells and dazzles the crowds, and politics remains as the art of corruption. Undeniably, the schemes are ingenious. And perhaps one of the longest-running business schemes of them all is religion itself, where groups of very clever individuals long ago formulated a means of taking advantage of human fear of the unknown and transforming it into power for themselves by creating a religious script (e.g. the Bible, Koran, etc.) to brainwash the masses and a place to conduct the business (e.g. a church, mosque, etc.). These elites would then work together with the conquistadors to spread the word (deception), to herd the people (customers), and to protect and enforce their ideas (the process of conversion). To broaden the scope even more---to an extent, the elites are also the major influencers of civilization itself, as they have the power to ensure that the laws in place, the values taught, and their version of “morality” are all geared to their benefit.

With such overwhelming powers controlling so many aspects of our lives, what can we do? Indeed, there is always the option of leaving it to natural selection---otherwise known as “survival of the fittest,” but not necessarily in the traditional sense anymore. In this manner, we would just play them in their own game---attempting to outsmart the deceptively clever elites and get a larger piece of the pie (wealth, power, etc.). But I believe that, for the most part, that’s already naturally taking place.

I also offer the reminder that power can also come in numbers. The masses are just that---they are the multitude. This is why revolutions are sometimes successful at removing problematic figures in power. The only problem is that revolutions do not always place an ideal figure in replacement or they do not totally reform the problematic governmental system. Moreover, masses are difficult to coordinate, organize, and mobilize. This is why a military was created (an organized mass)---and whoever controls that usually controls the nation. Regardless, masses can equate to power when effectively motivated and synchronized.

And finally, perhaps one of the most powerful pieces of advice I can give is to hold onto your beliefs. Just because what you believe is vehemently rejected and/or attacked by society, it does not mean that it is a worthless idea or one that should be sacrificed. If you have given your thought ample judgment and carefully considered its balance of positive and negative attributes and it still stands, then it is a thought worthwhile of holding on to. Such unique thoughts unfazed by the pressures of society are the ones that constructively and creatively contribute towards the healthy balance of our collective ideology. Always remember, if you throw away your own thoughts and freedom of thinking, then in essence, you not only discard the worth of yourself but you throw away your own very being in the process.
[ Full Post >> ]

Human Nature

If they say, why, why? ... Tell 'em that it's human nature...




[ Full Post >> ]

Desiccating (Re-published)

This is a re-post of an article I wrote way back in December 15, 2006. It seems it was just overlooked before, but I feel that its subject is more befitting now due to the "uproar" (hate e-mails, comments, and such) caused by the "Manny Pacquiao on Fire" article.

--------------------------------------------------

Reproduction is a natural part of life. Along with survival, reproduction is an organism’s main underlying objective. And our primary instinct to survive may very well be solely for the purpose of providing us with the chance to reproduce. This innate goal is embedded in all animals and is triggered in the mind at one point or another in an animal’s life. The goal may not necessarily be fulfilled by all, but the instinct to reproduce is certainly present in all.

From apes to lions to dogs, several mammalian species exhibit their tendency to form harems. In this context, when I refer to harems, I mean animal polygyny, or a male having more than one female partner at the same time. “Monogamy is rare among mammals; only 3% of species are monogamous.” And polyandry, the inverse of polygyny, in which a female has a harem of males, is almost non-existent among mammals and humans. The majority of male mammals will attempt to seek out and mate with as many females as possible during his lifetime. And the formation of harems comes about as dominant or alpha males obtain a batch of female mates. Other less-dominant males may sometimes have the opportunity to mate with one female, and the rest may not even have that much of a chance at all. Polygyny is the most common mating system among animal species that exhibit sexual dimorphism, in which males (in comparison with females) are more colorful, larger, more aggressive, better equipped for fighting, provide less care contribution or no care at all for offspring, and have more delayed sexual maturity. Some of these characteristics contribute to a male’s level of attraction, defense and fighting abilities, and chance of reproduction.

Physical attraction is by far the most common and important factor for most animals in choosing their prospective mate. Beauty is typically not overlooked in the animal kingdom, and an animal’s colors, size, physique, and other physical features are main determinants in attracting a member of the opposite sex. These characteristics usually display an animal’s state of health, and so an attractive animal oftentimes means a healthy animal. And thus, a potential partner will want to mate with a good-looking, strong, and potentially healthy counterpart in order to ensure the survival and good health of their offspring. In other words, Mother Nature embedded within us this instinct of pursuing attractive partners in order to ensure the passing of strong, healthy, and surviving genes.

Defense and fighting abilities are other deciding factors for males. A strong, healthy, and aggressive male has the potential to ensure that his genetic lineage and offspring can survive. A male’s aggression and fighting abilities can ward off potential enemies and other competing males, and at the same time, attract potential female partners and defend his tribe.

The naturally innate instinct and yearn to reproduce and a male’s aggressive tendencies can sometimes lead to forceful mating if the female is not in heat or does not like the particular male. This forceful mating is sometimes observed among animals, and is usually committed by a subordinate or non-alpha male. In such instances, the female will struggle to get away and sometimes fight back. If you look at these cases naturally, there are two legitimate sides. On the male’s side, he is only following the instinctive yearn to reproduce and may lack the ability to persuade the female by non-violent means, so he forcefully mates with the female in order to pass on his genes. The female, on the other hand, apart from being coerced into mating and unable to decline, may have underlying biological reasons as to why she is rejecting the male. She may be rejecting the male due to undesirable traits the male may have, which she is instinctively doing to ensure that her offspring do not inherit the male’s undesirable traits. And so the female will struggle and possibly fight back in order to escape the forceful mating. However, even if she doesn’t escape, her struggle and extreme dislike for mating with the male may work to her advantage by resulting in an unsuccessful conception. But in the wild, should the female have been near her alpha male (if she had one), perhaps this forceful mating would have been avoided.

Humans refer to this forceful mating as rape. Although quite natural in the wild, civilization views it as a crime. And so this brings me to the topic of the Subic Rape Case here in the Philippines, where “Nicole” alleged that Lance Corporal Daniel Smith raped her inside a van in Subic while three other members of the U.S. Marine Corps were also inside cheering Smith on. “Nicole” said that it was rape, while Smith claimed that it was consensual sex, so there’s no doubt that Smith had sexual intercourse with “Nicole,” as both statements confirm that sexual intercourse did happen. I don’t know the detailed evidence and intricacies of the case, but from thinking about it, if “Nicole” just wanted money out of the ordeal, I’m sure she would have accepted whatever the defense was willing to slip under the table. However, seeing that she continued with the prosecution, perhaps rape really did occur. In the wild and before the rise of civilization, this would have not been such a big deal. Either it would have been disrupted should a competitive or alpha male have been aware, or it would have just happened and then lived with or forgotten. Unfortunately for Smith, civilization views rape as a crime, and now he is being punished according to civilization’s regulation. But don’t get me wrong, I myself am not in favor of rape. I believe a male should always persuade a female through non-forceful and non-violent means.

In some groups there are anomalies, such as homosexuals. Homosexuals are not only present in human populations but also in other animal populations. Though a homosexual couple is not physically able to reproduce, homosexuals still have reproduction in mind, as I mentioned earlier that the instinct to reproduce is present in all. “Male penguin couples have been documented to mate for life, build nests together, and to use a stone as a surrogate egg in nesting and brooding.” Apparently the zoo keepers felt sorry for the gay penguins, so they replaced the stone with a fertile egg, which the couple then raised as their own offspring. Homosexual behavior has been linked to genes, specifically the X chromosome (distal region Xq28), and studies also show that it’s in the brain with documented size differences in hypothalamus neurons. There is a very high probability that sexual orientation is in the brain, in the genes, and can be inherited. However, having the genetic factor doesn’t necessarily mean that a person is born gay. So is it nature or nurture that makes one gay? That’s where the big question comes in, when does a person become gay? Did it happen during the prenatal period, neonatal period, childhood, puberty, or when? Were homosexuals born that way? Or do homosexuals choose to be that way and/or learn to be that way? Pondering about it just now, I think that gays are born carrying a “gay gene” that ultimately give them gay characteristics (including the difference in brain size) but is only completely triggered or put into full effect during or after puberty, as I believe only then can they fully contemplate and feel their attraction to and liking for members of the same sex. Many gays and lesbians like to believe and say they are born that way in order to be accepted by others and gain more supporters for gay and lesbian rights. However, this could also backfire, as parents may be able to screen for the “gay gene” and thereby get rid of a potentially gay baby sometime in the near future. And to end this discussion about gays, I would just like to say that I am NOT gay.

The aforementioned factors in an animal’s chance at reproducing can be summed up in Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection. Natural selection “is the process by which individual organisms with favorable traits are more likely to survive and reproduce than those with unfavorable traits.” Natural selection has also been known as “survival of the fittest.” The world has the resources for an animal’s survival. All an animal has to do is search for and obtain the resource. The problem is that the world’s resources are scarce. This scarcity factor is what makes life, in a sense, a struggle for existence. In this natural struggle for existence, only the “fittest” is naturally selected to survive. Apart from being “fit,” I believe there is also a luck factor. I actually believe that one can potentially live for a significantly much longer time than the average human lifespan (perhaps doubled or several times the average human lifespan today). I think this is possible by using the knowledge we have today regarding health and also incorporating our natural instincts on what should be eaten. And so, “old age” can gradually be reduced or eliminated as a reason for death. That’s where the luck factor comes in regarding survival. If we have healthy living down to an art, all that’s left would be uncontrollable unfortunate events and natural disasters.

And so how do humans fit into all of this? Natural instincts are still imbedded in humans. Physical attraction is still a major determinant in choosing one’s mate. However, due to the development and complexities of the human brain, other not-so visually obvious factors are now also taken into account in choosing one’s mate. Humans are mammals and also exhibit characteristics of sexual dimorphism in which the male has dominant traits compared to females. And so, naturally, polygyny would be prevalent in human society, with alpha males having harems of females. Alpha males would need to maintain top physical condition in order to retain their dominance. A leader gone soft would face the consequence of being challenged and perhaps being trounced by a younger prospective alpha male. However, civilization has changed this. The rise of religions, specifically Roman Catholicism, has created strict social guidelines that have interfered with the laws of nature. Today, anything but strict monogamy is frowned upon in most cultures. People today are brought up to view philandering as unacceptable in most societies, when in fact, it’s quite natural and instinctive for mammalian males to mate with several different females. A mammalian male’s tendency to mate with a variety of different females is to ensure that he produces a variety of offspring, which apart from increasing his genes’ survival in the human gene pool, it also increases the chance that a higher percentage of his diverse offspring will survive and pass on the genetic lineage. And before civilization, due to the prolonged period that an offspring remains in the womb, the long period of time before a mammal matures, and the chance that it may not survive before getting the chance to reproduce, it is only natural that males have the imbedded instinct to mate with as many females as possible as to ensure that not only his genes have a larger percentage in the human gene pool but also to ensure that the human race goes on to survive. Today, this is not the case. It is not an issue anymore that the human population may be diminishing. The issue is that the human population is growing out of proportion. Not only that, natural selection is no more. People today no longer have to worry about being fit in order to survive as civilization has gotten rid of that need. Humans have cheated the laws of nature. Humans no longer have to search for and obtain food. In fact, today, humans can even make food. Today’s need-to-have resource is an artificial creation--money. Fit people, fat people, good-looking people, ugly people, healthy people, and sickly people all strive and struggle to earn money. People no longer search for food, they search for money. It is how people obtain power and it is the new way to exert dominance. It is no longer a struggle for existence. There’s a very high chance you will survive. Civilization’s artificial selection occurs on how much money you can earn. It is not about whether you will live to reproduce (as that‘s basically a given, if you want to reproduce), but whether you will live rich or whether you will live poor. Having disregarded the need to focus on the basic instincts, and having multiplied so much and so rapidly, humans have shifted their focus to civilization’s concerns, which include politics, government, social systems and functions, intra- and international relations, religion, and whatnot. And when you have an out of proportion human population (or any population), you are going to have problems. Perhaps this is how Mother Nature prevents cheaters from ever succeeding. Now with such a large and ever-increasing human population, it is inevitable for humans to have conflicts. Most problems arise from man-made creations, such as religion. But essentially, the most major of conflicts originate from scarcity. As I have said, the Earth’s natural resources are limited. And when resources are running out, people will fight over it. Their instinct of searching for and obtaining resources and also their instinct of survival will kick in. If nothing is done about it, humans, who have long been trying to cheat the laws of nature, will end up killing themselves because of the very instincts they have been trying to morph, alter, and forget. Unfortunately, with their man-made creations, not only will humans kill themselves, they may even permanently destroy all other species and the whole world along with them.

I've made a follow-up to this post here: http://coconuter.blogspot.com/2009/11/anomalous.html
[ Full Post >> ]

Manny Pacquiao on Fire

Manny Pacquiao comes out on top again with another spectacular victory over Puerto Rico's Miguel Cotto--a true welterweight who has fought against elite opposition and is in his prime. His win, I'm sure, is another bullet through the hearts of his detractors and unbelievers--including the arrogant Mayweather clan, bitter De La Hoya, and whoever else who predicted/wished for his loss.

Manny is definitely close to his peak at the moment. His iconic status in the Philippines has transcended international barriers, as his prominence is now felt throughout the world--TIME magazine's front cover feature on him a manifestation of this.

I am one of the millions in adoration of the status he has achieved. Not necessarily because of his rags to riches story or the power, wealth, and fame he has attained in mega proportions--but for the pride, energy, and glory he brings to the Philippines and people all over the world.

In terms of boxing history, he has cemented his place among the boxing greats--even being called as the greatest fighter of this era. He has always faced and beaten the very best. And in the process, he has achieved a historic feat by accumulating seven world titles in seven different weight classes--one equaled by no other fighter.

Even more amazing, Manny has accomplished all of this despite the distractions all around him. With needy politicians tugging at him, having to carry the hearts of the Filipino masses on his shoulders, answering his family's needs, dealing with boxing camp in-fighting drama, taking on showbiz and political commitments, keeping up with his various side-businesses, etc., the maintenance of Manny's focus is a feat in itself.

Manny takes it all in stride and just keeps on going. It appears as though he plans on continuing his career in boxing and also getting involved in politics if he wins his bid for a Philippine congressional seat. I expect he will win--in fact, I expect he could even win if he ran for the presidency, which he may eventually do. Is it a good idea? No one can say for sure, but it appears that Pacquiao's humble beginnings and good heart would make him a better candidate than most politicians. If he should ever run for president and win, his performance will likely boil down to the politicians and advisers he chooses to listen to and place around himself. That is a very difficult task in itself, especially in the circus-like masquerade of Philippine politics and based on my belief that any politician is corrupt until proven otherwise.

However, in the more immediate future, promoter Bob Arum is still planning and negotiating for Manny's next handful of fights. There is Yuri Foreman, the not-so-heavy puncher and newly crowned Super Welterweight Champion who is an attractive opponent in case Manny decides to move up yet again in weight and beat his own record and make it eight world titles in eight different weight classes. There is still Juan Manuel Marquez who the Pacquiao camp wants to silence once and for all by beating him more decisively. And, of course, there is Floyd Mayweather, Jr., which is the match-up the public wants the most. However, if I were in Pacquiao's shoes, I would not accept the latter fight unless he is able to dictate the terms and get a larger share--or 50/50, at the very least.

Until something materializes, as he said in his Cotto post-fight interview, he plans on taking a break, getting some rest, and having some fun. I guess I would assume that this would involve time with his family and also time with his reportedly new flame--Krista Ranillo. To me, I can empathize with Manny regarding this issue, and I think that as long as he takes care of his responsibilities then he should not be restricted of his liberties. I find the situation quite natural and the instinct innate in the human male. I believe that it gives Manny added inspiration, motivation, and/or pleasure in his life, which is something that we all need in life to keep going. Thus, I feel that the media should just let it be.

Indeed, Manny's life is full of drama and chaos--perhaps as unconventional as his boxing style and his being. Yet somehow, in all of its complexity, enjambment, and pandemonium, it all seems to come together and just work phenomenally--producing a spectacular rarity that comes perhaps even more infrequently than once in a lifetime.

I've made a follow-up to this post here: http://coconuter.blogspot.com/2009/11/anomalous.html
[ Full Post >> ]

Jinkee Pacquiao and the Manny Pacquiao - Krista Ranillo Affair

It has been reported that Manny Pacquiao supposedly has a love affair with model Krista Ranillo, who is also Manny's co-star in his movie "Wapakman." Manny and Krista were first spotted together in Hong Kong, which they dismissed as a chance meeting. However, more rumors have spread that Krista has remained close with Manny--reportedly sometimes with him during training camp, helping dry him off, etc.

When confronted by the media about the alleged relationship with Krista Ranillo, Manny merely replied "No comment." Krista reportedly flew business class (and sporting a new and expensive Chanel bag) with her family members to Las Vegas to watch Manny Pacquiao's fight with Miguel Cotto. Her family members were also seen at Manny's after-party concert at Mandalay Bay.

Jinkee Pacquiao is obviously aware of the rumors as she almost canceled her trip to Las Vegas to watch Manny's fight. Yet, she did arrive but ended up getting into a heated quarrel with Manny--resulting in Jinkee locking herself in the VIP room, with Manny unable to pacify her.

Krista Ranillo Photo Gallery


[ Full Post >> ]

Manny Pacquiao on Jimmy Kimmel Show (Videos)

Manny "Pacman" Pacquiao makes his first appearance on a major US late night talk show--the Jimmy Kimmel Show. He discusses his fight with Miguel Cotto, has some laughs with Kimmel, and also sings "Sometimes When We Touch."

Manny Smashes Pumpkins - Opening Skit


Manny Pacquiao - Jimmy Kimmel Interview Part 1


Manny Pacquiao - Jimmy Kimmel Interview Part 2


Manny Sings "Sometimes When We Touch"

[ Full Post >> ]

Manny Pacquiao - Miguel Cotto Post-Fight Conference and After-Party Photo Gallery

Pictures from the Manny Pacquiao and Miguel Cotto post-fight conference and Manny Pacquiao concert/after-party in Mandalay Bay, Las Vegas.




[ Full Post >> ]