Is Michael Fassbender today's Laurence Olivier?

Have you noticed how they uncannily resemble each other?

OLIVIER


FASSBENDER



OLIVIER


FASSBENDER



It is as if Fassbender will look like the old Olivier after a a decade or two.






I don't know if Fassbender could spout Shakespeare but he could definitely hold a candle to Olivier's Heathcliff.

Have you also noticed how Fassbender's roles seem to run a common theme?

According to Fassbender, he always wants to keep himself guessing,

he constantly always wants to challenge himself,

he always wants to do something different.

His breakout role was Hunger.

Though the first time the director Steve McQueen saw Fassbender, his first thoughts were "Who's this geezer?"

Steve McQueen: When you first auditioned for 'Hunger', I think I actually fancied you! I thought, ‘Who is this geezer?’ You came with a bit of a swagger, a bit of an attitude. I thought, ‘I don’t know if I like this guy.’

Michael Fassbender: That’s because I thought you were doing a remake of Saturday Night Fever…

Steve McQueen: Wrong audition! No, really, my first impression was, ‘Does he really want to be here?’ I wasn’t too sure. And then when you came back for an audition the next day, there was a transformation – you were a totally different person: extraordinarily engaged and engaging. And I thought, ‘This guy could play Bobby Sands.’




His second memorable role was in Fish Tank where he played a seemingly nice guy who took advantage of a female minor's naivete.

The director who chose him for the role says she handpicked Fassbender because she saw a dark side to his otherwise harmless demeanor.




And then played Rochester in Jane Eyre who similarly charmed the wits off a generous-hearted girl.



And then played Jung who got cozy with his patient - also an emotionally vulnerable woman.



And then played sex-addicted Brandon in Shame - a man whose goal in life is to seek out pleasure.



And then played an android in Prometheus - who this time is asexual but is hungry for information.




I wonder how much of Fassbender is in the characters he played?

Why do I even care?

So Madonna Showed her Nipple in her MDNA Concert in Turkey

Nothing weird about that.



What's weird was how it still made the news.



It's a breast. Don't you have one of your own? Don't you have a mother, sister, friend, aunt, female cousin, female co-worker who has one too?

What's the big deal?

Is it because she's 50?

What? 50-year olds should keep their breasts to themselves?

Says who? The misogynist in you? The Pope in you? The voice of your parents in your head?

She wasn't walking out on the street and flashing her breasts to bystanders, she's in a concert, her concert, singing HUMAN NATURE with its lyrics going like this:

And I'm not sorry
It's human nature
I'm not your bitch don't hang your shit on me
You punished me for telling you my fantasies
I'm breakin' all the rules I didn't make
We all feel the same way
I have no regrets
Just look in the mirror
I don't have to justify anything
I'm just like you
Deal with it


What's weirder was - when she showed her nipple - those who screamed the loudest were gay guys.


She showed her butt too. And yes she was singing the same song.



She was performing.

She was not buying ice cream or drinking coffee.

So relax.


What's weirdest though was the existence of a "sterilization team tasked with wiping away all traces of Madonna so obsessive fans cannot steal her DNA after she has left a concert venue / dressing room."

What was that all about?

Wait a minute. DNA? and Madonna's concert is called MDNA.

PR - stunt much?

(To Ruffa Gutierrez and everyone else who can't) Just Say No

If you do say NO, stick to it specially if that is what your gut is telling you.



If you feel offended, you are. Period.

Do not rationalize, do not explain it away in your head. Do not make up excuses to make yourself feel better, albeit temporarily.

Stick with your NO.

There is a reason why you said NO, do not forget it. Do not say or think otherwise.

And if you say NO, do not allow others to sway you to change your mind.

Say NO now, not after.

No matter what others say, no matter what others think. Just say it.

If not, you'll end up getting angry at your self.

Do not give other people permission to change your mind.

Only you can do that.

If you feel something at that moment you do, feel it. Allow it.

Once you do, you will conserve energy by not making a rehearsed smile, from repressing a tear, from repressing anger.

A NO makes your boundaries stronger. It strengthens your self. It helps your body know you love yourself enough to protect it.

And if you feel offended, say so.

Acknowledge it to your self and to others.

Bring it out there.

Face it. Let others see it too.

It's being authentic. It is your soul's message to the world saying it deserves more and should not in any way settle for less.

Say it now, not later. When you do, you not only save yourself from hurt, you also help others from being hurtful. Both of you then share the space of being respectful. You lift each other up. But if he or she doesn't want to, let him/her stay where he/she is. The important thing is, you now know where you should be and where you belong and what you deserve.

Saying NO is empowering. Use it when you feel it. You won't be sorry you did.

5 Ways on How To Live Unhappily Ever After

Why live happily ever after when you can live miserably for the rest of your life? The key is to not be aware enough that you think this is what you think you want so you fight off people, events, circumstances who say otherwise. Hey, you even fight with your self. You even hate yourself for fighting with yourself. Eitherway, you make sure you win at all cost sans the truth.

This is a partial list which could grow as time passes or as our awareness expands or if you pitch in your own suggestions in the comments section. Feel free to do so okay?


1 Compare yourself with others.

If you want to feel small, inadequate, unworthy and always lacking, make sure to compare yourself with people who you think is better than you in whatever type or form. When you do, you highlight their strengths while diminishing yours - an unnecessary thing to do despite your belief that doing so is the only sure way to look at the world. Whoever or however you learned this self-defeating skill from, continually doing this will keep your life remarkably static, restricted, non-changing. You will also feel perpetually fearful, angsty, angry and insecure.

On the positive side, if you want to feel temporarily happy and good about yourself, compare yourself with others who you think fall a rank lower to your financial / intellectual / physical / psychological / whatever-ial level. Most of us have learned that it is easier- and is less hurtful - to judge than to be judged. Doing the judging gives us the seeming power over others. We then appear, at least to ourselves, as more potent than we actually are. It also empowers us to look at other people's flaws and not recognize our own. We then end up merrily blind, acting as if life is but a dream.

In summary, be blind to your own faults - better yet, project them onto others.



2 Base your identity on what you have, what you do or something skin-deep or something outside of you (your place of work, your place of study, what you do, what you study, what you don't do, the fact that you didn't study, your bank account, the fact that you have no bank account, the color of your skin, the texture of your skin, your facial features, etc.).

The idea is to base your identity on something you think others find worthy.

Make sure you identify yourself as __________ (job title) of ______________ (company X),

e.g.

"Hi I'm (place your name here), writer of the box-office hit movie ____________"

"My name is Atty. ___________"

Or in a tense social situation, break the ice by starting with a spine-chilling greeting: "Kilala mo ba ako?" or "Di mo bako kilala?" ("Do you know who I AM?" or "Do you not know who I AM?")

The point is to disturb others into submission or agreement with what you think of yourself and how.

This could also work in reverse. If you base your identity on how much you don't have, use that identity to elicit pity and / or guilt from others.

Again, the point is to disturb others into submission or agreement with what you think of yourself and how.

This process would be easy to do if you had a Catholic upbringing.

If you're Catholic, you have probably learned how to jump through hoops your whole life to make yourself feel worthy because at zero age you have been told that, even if you're pulled straight out from your mother's womb, you are already a sinner by virtue of you being alive. Add to your original sin the fact that Jesus died for you so nothing you will ever do could even top or compensate for that. Sorry. As all Catholics now know, guilt is a very prized virtue.


3 Treat relationships as an X-deal.

Treat all your relationships as a business transaction. Make sure you do not limit this to your co-workers, business partners, employers, employees, customers, etc.

Relate with family, friends, acquaintances and even your version of God as a business deal. Or maybe, you might not have noticed it yet, you already are.

When praying, negotiate, haggle.

Example:

Tell God that you will stop smoking IF he makes you partner.

Plead with God to make you win P164 million in the Lotto draw and in exchange you will donate half of your winnings to churches and orphanages.

Tell God to grant your wishes and in exchange you will dutifully attend mass every Sunday, and even give 10% of your earnings to the church.

You ask God to magically make you pass your exam and in exchange, you will feed the poorest of the poor in your community.



Note that you can also do these same things in your relationships.

Example:

If you want to make someone join your religious group, bribe them with food, a sense of security / community / protection.

If you want someone to help you move, ask them what they want and then give it - make sure you do the latter before doing the former as this decreases the possibility of them saying "no."

This set-up allows guilt to naturally flourish so once it does, use it to the hilt. Wave it at others to make them do what you want them to do.



4 Treat others the way you don't want to be treated

Follow the age-old cliche,' "I hurt others before they get a chance to hurt me"

This saves you from feeling rejected or unworthy. Constantly one-upping someone takes a lot of effort but every single moment you do is worth it. For a fleeting moment, it makes you feel full, that is until this buzz wears off and you have to get your fix by one-upping someone again.

When choosing someone to one-up, bring out your self-esteem counter and gauge how much self-worth they feel. The lower someone's self-worth is, the easier it is to one-up them. To further sharpen your one-upmanship, make sure the following conditions are present:

a) The one-upee must be invested in the one-upper or the situation the latter has created

Note that instances where a one-upee is invested in the one-upper is when the one-upee is dependent on him/her in some way.

b) The one-upper must make the one-upee further feel less of his/herself. While this is going on, the one-upper must also make an effort to prop himself up. When this is regularly done, a Stockholm-Syndrom-ish dynamic develops within the relationship. Eventually, the one-upee fails to see nothing wrong with anything and everything the one-upper is doing, even if it is to the detriment of the former.


Similarly, you don't always have to treat others like shit in order to live miserably. You can also treat others better than the way you treat yourself. You can one-up yourself with your own permission.

Example:

You can give your relatives all the money they want while you scrimp your savings enough to buy 2-weeks worth of cup noodles - because you'd rather save all your cash for others than spend it on yourself. Because you'd rather see other people live the good life than allow yourself to enjoy yours.

This follows another age-old cliche,' "I hurt myself first before others can hurt me."



5 Guard and preserve your ego at all costs

Do not be like mall security. Do not simply point a stick at the inside of other people's bags and wave them off.

Be like a Nazi. Be paranoid. Ransack their bags and if you find even an iota of a possible bomb-paraphernalia, (e.g. you think that soft rice pudding you're squeezing is for making a bomb) throw the owner of that bag out of the mall.

Similarly, the moment you sense someone deflating the puffed-up image you have of yourself, kick them out of your life. If you can't not cut them off - either due to family or work reasons - stab them at the back. Not literally because you will get yourself in trouble and you don't want to taint your image by being hauled out in handcuffs right?

Assassinate their character. If you have to lie, so be it.

The point is to bring them down good and hard because they revealed an aspect of yourself you don't want others or yourself to see.

Your ego is the only thing that keeps your life going. It is you. If your ego is wounded, it will become frail, flail and eventually die - and you will inevitably go down with it. So protect it. It is your identity. It is the only one that cares for you. It is the only reason you think people want to be with you. You know nothing else. You are nothing without it.

You are it.




In summary, these five tips highlight the fact that nothing is more important than non-change.

Changing means you know something's wrong with you or how you relate with others. But admitting that something's wrong is impossible specially if you are convinced that you are right.

Living unhappily ever after requires non-admitting that something's amiss since that is equal to seeing the cracks to your thought-of perfection. Ironically though, you are also smart enough to not admit you're perfect. You know that if you do admit to being perfect, that would be too vain, even for your taste. You also know people dislike vain people. So in order to be liked, you do not admit or see yourself as vain. But you are. You therefore do all you can to conceal this while at the same time being this.

Just follow these basic rules and you are off to a very good bad start. Goodluck!

Prometheus Questions and SPOILERS

YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!!!! STOP READING UNLESS YOU HAVE WATCHED THE MOVIE.

Michael Fassbender, Idris Elba and Ridley Scott all together in a film about "where we came from" and how our search for our beginning could be our end -- what else should one do but watch Prometheus?

And we did.

And the following questions came up:

1 Why does the alien look like a vagina with penis tentacles?



Does it represent the male and female psyche and thus it goes along with the movie's theme about creation and birth, life and death, entropy and evolution?


2 Was the machine which operated on Dr Shaw to take out the baby octopus alien from her body, sexist? Or does it represent technology's failure to understand the intricacies of the female body?


3 Did David's character represent the intellect (male psyche) and did Dr Shaw represent the emotions (female psyche)?





Did David find the mission's desire to meet and greet the "engineers" of the human race - "just because" his creators can - illogical?

Was him putting a drop of alien goo on Holloway's wine glass the same way as him putting one over his creators? The same way the mythical Prometheus did to Zeus?

Because David is the intellect and is solely mind-based, is that why the only thing left of him when he's destroyed was his head?

And Dr Shaw needed David's strong and powerful head in order to pursue her dream of making contact with the "engineers" despite reality presenting that possibility as nil. Blind hope much? thus Prometheus?

"Prometheus, you are glad that you have outwitted me and stolen fire ... but I will give men as the price for fire an evil thing in which they may all be glad of heart while they embrace their own destruction." (Zeus to Prometheus 1. Hesiod, Works and Days 55)."

"It was then that Prometheus 1, out of compassion for that wretched breed of mortals, planted blind hope in their hearts.."


4 Was the mission - like Dr. Shaw - way over its head? The way Dr Shaw clings stubbornly to blind hope and the fact that she doesn't mind going around in circles and end up in the same place where she left off only to search for something she may have already found but the head has "chosen to believe" it hasn't represent the intellect winning over emotions? Or the emotions using the head to rationalize its unfounded desires, wishes?


5 Did you notice how Idris Elba and his crew were the only ones in the ship to die without being eaten alive, maimed, burned or squished? They're the only ones who surrendered willingly to their deaths. They were also the ones who had no preconceived notion about the mission nor did they set out to discover anything. In the Captain's own words, he "just flies a ship." They were being in the moment whatever that moment called for, whether it was to put up a Christmas tree or fly the ship to their and the alien's death. How cool was that?

That scene where they raised their hands in surrender when they crashed the Prometheus to destroy the alien spacecraft was so breath-taking it made me tear up, did you?

The captain and his crew were neither thinking hard or feeling hard, they were just being and living, savoring the moment and even surrendered to it.


6 If the original 1979 ALIEN is about the fear of being pregnant/being a mother/unwanted pregnancy, then Prometheus is its perfect prequel.

The horror in Prometheus is sex. This time, it's fear of intimacy.

See how the alien enters the body and then the host screams, shakes until the host explodes?

See how Meredith Vickers (Charlize Theron) is so obsessed about keeping the ship clean, lean, pure, safe and free from any foreign / alien elements the same way she is fixated and hyper-attentive to keeping her body lean and clean. Notice how everyone was throwing up after getting out fresh from the pod, but Vickers is already doing push-ups.

See how the relaxed and free-wheeling Captain (Idris Elba) advise the uptight Vickers, `If you want to get laid, just ask.'

See how when the ship Prometheus crashes with the alien ship and collide into one orgasmic explosion, Vickers is squished along with it. The Prometheus ship is an extension of her and it being destroyed means she also is. She couldn't let herself be vulnerable as that would be death.

Being intimate requires letting go and going with the flow. It requires surrender. Intimacy doesn't come from the head.

Intimacy lets go of the need for control.

If you hate your self, how can you be intimate with your self or with others?

What breeds this fear of intimacy is not being knowledgeable of the self because you don't want to know -- out of horror of what you will see.

Is that why Dr Shaw and Weyland `had to go that far in search of a miracle?'

The heavenly orgasm they need in order to satisfy themselves is always out there and is never close to home?

Or is this self-hatred the reason why those super humans wanted them dead? The creator hates his creation. The createe fires back and wants to kill his parents.

And it goes all the way back to Zeus when he created humans whom he loathed but whom Prometheus loves enough to steal fire for. Why would a creator hate his creation if it is made from his own image & likeness?

It's a dysfunction.

Prometheus is from Greek mythology.

Classical Greek culture, especially philosophy, had a powerful influence on the Roman Empire, which carried a version of it to many parts of the Mediterranean region and Europe, for which reason Classical Greece is generally considered to be the seminal culture which provided the foundation of modern Western culture.

White people issue much?




7 Prometheus it seems is also about a woman dealing with her “father issues” and her vision of THE “IDEAL” — whatever that ideal may be. As it turns out, `the ideal’ was all in her head. She was chasing her dream which in reality was a horrific nightmare. And her search lead to a lot of casualties, death and destruction all because she “chose to believe” something. Alas, she didnt even learn from her experience since she stubbornly still chooses to believe she will be lead to her "ideal" thanks to the help of the intellect who could rationalize away anything and everything through clinical denial.


"All film criticism (all writing, all filmmaking) is, on some level, autobiography, don't you think?
I remember David Thomson talking about it that way in the intro to his first edition of "The Biographical Dictionary of Film." What somebody notices, finds of interest, and chooses to write about can't help but be determined by who they are and what they bring to the movie. It's personal -- but, as I always say, it has to be rooted in specific observations of the movie itself. Otherwise it's like we're all talking about our own dreams. Close observations of the movie give us common ground for discussion.

For answers to a few of the questions on this post, go to: http://www.jessicarulestheuniverse.com/2012/06/09/alien-prometheus-and-the-biggest-fear-of-all/


For an analysis of Prometheus from a mythic perspective, go to:
Prometheus Unbound: What The Movie Was Actually About

Katrina Stuart Santiago's article is blind to its own stereotype

My take on Katrina Stuart Santiago's article on @GMANews regarding Claudine's NAIA 3 scuffle:


Katrina Stuart Santiago: It’s in this sense that Claudine’s anger, her taray, is to me refreshing.

It's refreshing because the author thinks women do not normally do this. Or she thinks people think women dont do this, shouldnt do this. Since Claudine is a popular media personality, let us mention other popular media personalities whose taray the author could find refreshing:

Anabelle Rama,





Lolit Solis,





Amalia Fuentes.




It's not about age, right? It's about their femaleness.

Or if you want to go younger, here's Cristine Reyes.




KSS: Granted that she was scolding employees who also had no control over the situation, granted that lashing out would not mean getting their bags back any faster, much might be said about releasing frustration in the face of inefficiency. Yes, these are unfortunate employees faced with such anger, but that is not so much Claudine’s fault, as it is the company’s which knows only too well that those in the lower rungs are the ones who will suffer. We might call Claudine out on verbal abuse, but then again what are the limits to complaining about bad service? No cuss words? No threatening that employees will lose their jobs? No screaming? How to measure anger?

How to measure anger? Anger does not get violent. Rage does.

Claudine has every right to be angry at inefficient service. But to be verbally abusive? Why should that be okay?

Why is the author asking about the limits of getting angry? Why is she even contemplating about using cuss words? Threatening to get employees fired? Does she think there should be no limits just because it is a woman getting `angry?'

By her line of argument, the below kind of anger is possible.




But wait, she says she draws the line on physical abuse.


KSS: Was she wrong for being that angry? That’s a judgment of one anger over another. I draw the line at physical abuse.

Because she doesnt consider verbally / mentally / psychological demeaning remarks as abuse. That's a form of myopia no medical doctor could resolve.


KSS: That Claudine was this angry – and again we don’t know exactly how angry – despite being a celebrity tells me that she was ready to face the consequences of her actions.

Ermmm..or that she has poor self-restraint much?



KSS: As I will draw the line at calling her ill-bred, which is what’s on the interwebs, as if we do not know of the class biases of such a judgment. And how can we not be in crisis by the fact that if we are using notions of breeding for this story at all, then we should be pointing the finger at Tulfo. He who saw the situation and decided that documenting it was in order. He who could’ve decided otherwise and just gone on with his life, let the story happen as it would on these shores, via tsismis and blind items, may be a small story in the showbiz section that would prompt Claudine and Raymart to maybe make a short public statement about the incident.

I will draw the line and halt with any what-ifs and not control the NAIA 3 situation in my head.



KSS: ..why couldn’t this woman be as angry as a man, be as aggressive as the other men in this video are? Why do we demand differently of a person as aggrieved if not even more so? And then we judge her as ill-bred and tactless, as basagulera and nakakahiya, because she dared kick ass.....And yes, this is about women going against other women because many of us think like our men; that is a tragedy in itself.

Wait a minute. Why single out Claudine's aggressiveness and violence? In the first place, why are the men's aggressiveness and violence deemed okay enough that it is okay for women to be equally so? Because they're men? Who said aggressiveness and violence is okay for men or for women? Ergo, if men can sleep around, why can't women? Who thinks it is okay to sleep around anyway? Just because men are doing it does not make that shit right.

Katrina Stuart Santiago might not notice it but she is thinking like a dude too.



KSS: Which reminds us all that we can’t handle a woman doing exactly that, as we fall back on stereotypes to describe her. We will be blind to the fact that at the core of hitting Claudine with words that hurt is a demand on the woman to be the good ol’ stereotype of soft spoken and mahinhin.

Ermmm....why is the author generalizing women as mahinhin and soft-spoken? That was how Star Magic packaged Claudine Barretto's career. That is not how today's hot item Marian RIvera is packaging hers.




KSS: We want the woman who waits for the man to defend her, yes? And in which case the ones who get angry enough to shout, those who know to fight back, we prove that we cannot handle those women.

No, we can. Maybe the author can't.

I personally cant equate anger with violence. But rage and violence go together like peanut and butter.



KSS: That this means being unable to appreciate it when a woman shows us we can be bigger than the Maria Clara stereotype we’ve been stuck with all this time goes without saying. That we fail to appreciate Claudine kicking ass the way she has? That is our bigger tragedy. - GMA News


The tragedy is that women think acting like a dude means empowerment. It does not. It simply means women are acting like dudes

AKA

Being abusive is okay as long as its women doing it to men.

And I dont know of anyone who is solely pointing the finger at Claudine but clearly, Katrina Stuart Santiago's article is.

CheezMiss' Theories on the NAIA 3 (Raymart1 - Claudine2 - Mon Tulfo3) Incident

Before the YouTube video came out, GMA News reported about the incident and interviewed the two parties involved: Raymart and Claudine and Mon Tulfo.



Did you find it weird that Mon Tulfo was the one who had the bruised eye but he was more relaxed and calm during the interview compared to the clearly agitated Raymart Santiago and perennially rage-filled Claudine Barretto?

What is Mon Tulfo being so Zen about as he was describing how the fight started?

See how Mon Tulfo is more emphatic in his interview with Noli de Castro and Mel Tiangco.

An earlier report also said that Mon Tulfo claimed that he won't press charges against Raymart, Claudine & Co. unless they press charges against him first.

If he was the aggrieved party, why wouldn't he want to press charges first? Doesnt he feel aggrieved being beaten, choked, smacked, punched black and blue?

Something's off.


Did you find it weird that Claudine has a pattern of going batshit crazy towards front desk personnel - be it at a bank, airport or Angel Locsin? -

See how her nostrils flare as she blames the bank about her "missing" P5 million pesos from her joint bank account with her husband. See how she puts her rage on the teller but did not even think of asking her husband? (0:19)

Weird!!!!




Isnt it just as weird that her husband focused his attention on someone RECORDING his wife's rage and not notifying his wife that she is being recorded or that she lower her voice - at least for the camera?

Or is it because it is easier to blame someone than to manage his wife's rage?

In fairness, Raymart couldnt even get a word in to Claudine in this old interview of them. (4:27-4:37)





And why is Mon Tulfo admitting to kicking Claudine out of "instinct" because she was allegedly punching him



but took that statement back at his live interview at GMA News' 24 Oras last night (May 7, 2012)?



INCONSISTENCY is a RED FLAG. How difficult is it to remember kicking or not kicking someone?

I believe Raymart when he said Mon Tulfo "punched" him with an "open-fist." But that open-fisted punch is more of an ARYUKEN though. Mon Tulfo "ARYUKEND" Raymart. (ARYUKEN a-la Street Fighter).

I also believe Mon Tulfo when he said Raymart tried to grab his cellphone - which Raymart demanded that Mon Tulfo give at (0:57-59).



I also believe Claudine when she said Mon Tulfo kicked her. Mon Tulfo even admitted to doing it, DUH.

I also believe Raymart when he said he is afraid of Mon Tulfo and his brothers (0:56)



but I also believe he has long been afraid of Claudine and her rage.

I also believe the bag with the asthmatic meds is a red herring. It was not the reason for Claudine's rage. Claudine is naturally rage-filled. It is her default emotion. It is so natural I think that Raymart found nothing wrong with Claudine allegedly dressing down Cebu Pacific staff. What Raymart felt was WRONG was the way a media person was RECORDING his wife's rage (which everyone has already seen when Claudine INVITED GMA 7 to record her rage at a bank).

Ironically, what was recorded was a 4-way (Not 7 as Mon Tulfo claimed) rumble with tons of extras.

Mon Tulfo probably felt 7 punches land on his face but they only came from 2 people and one of them was Claudine. Booyah!

Also, in Raymart's interview with DZMM and Boots Anson Roa, Raymart admitted that it was not their bag which has the medicines for kids, it was their friend's. And in Claudine's first interview with GMA News' Aubrey Carambel, she DID NOT mention anything about medicines inside the loaded off bag but the FACT that they were made to wait for their bags to come out of the conveyor only to learn later it wasnt included in the plane. She was stressing the TIME wasted not the kids' asthmatic meds.

Also, its so sad how Claudine uses her kids to gain sympathy in front of the camera.

I also believe Mon Tulfo, just like his brothers, are experts in provoking someone's ire. Have you seen BITAG?! Duh!

I also believe that Raymart, Claudine and 60+ year-old martial arts expert Mon Tulfo should have fought in the grade school quadrangle and not the airport.

I also believe that I have seen 8-year old kids act more maturely than all of them did.

In fairness, I understand Raymart when he reiterated to Kabayan Noli re: Mon Tulfo

"Sya po nauna eh."

I said the exact same thing when I was fighting with someone, I was 6 years old.

I also believe the guards were batshit scared of Mon Tulfo, Claudine and Raymart and that they were acting not as guards but as open-mouthed spectators who are confused as much as they were deathly afraid to hurt an ex-action star, an ex-actress and a six-foot media bully.

I also believe NAIA guards need more firm holsters to place their guns in.

I also believe the truth will set everyone free, but first it will make you batshit angry.

What to do when a dude goes John-Lloyd on you - Updated

Definition of John-Lloyd:

In this post, "John-Lloyd" will be used as a verb and/or adverb (grammar Nazis feel free to correct me please) to refer to how the actor John Lloyd Cruz referred to his public persona in the edition of People Asia Magazine (?). According to John Lloyd Cruz the actor, his public persona is something he values and takes care of as that is how he is `packaged.' Essentially, this `packaging' is something he treasures and consistently attends to.

John-Lloyd will then be synonymous to how one SHOWS / PRESENTS himself to whoever he deems important for his survival (be it emotional/financial, psychological etc.).

This `showing' and `presenting' trumps everything else - specially the truth - since what is important is how a person skillfully makes you believe what he wants you to believe.

Your positive perception of him (as according to what he wants you to perceive about him) is his end goal.

John-Lloyd is also synonymous to the process of convincing someone to believe what he wants you to believe. Similar to the way a credit card marketer is convincing you to acquire a card, the same way a promodizer wants you to buy chocolate-flavored milk, the same way a priest wants you to believe about God and/or the salvation of your soul.


Use John-Lloyd in a sentence.

e.g.

"Sabi mo walang bukas na imburnal dito, ba`t ako nahulog? Jina-John-lloyd mo bako?"

(Putting me on; Niloloko)


"Hoy Asiong, hinahanap ka ni Eva nung umaga, ni Lorna nung hapon, saka ni Fe kagabi. Nagpapaka-John-Lloyd ka na naman ba!?"

(Feeling too sexy for only 1 "love")




Him: Sorry na. Wala na talaga kami ni Foofa.

Her: Eh bat tumatawag pa sya sayo?

Him: (Smiles sheepishly while running his hand through his hair) Ang John-Lloyd ko daw kasi eh.

(Pogi, adorable, charming, charismatic)


Take note though that the term John-Lloyd need not be explicitly used in a sentence yet still denote John-Lloydiness.

One example is a line from the movie Unofficially Yours:

The scene is where Mackie is telling Ces all about Singapore and volunteers to get her a ticket after learning that she will be going to SGP without him. Her going away signals the end of their FWB-relationship.

Ces: Stop being so nice!

Mackie: Ganto lang naman ako kasi mahal kita.

As shown by Mackie's line, the process of convincing - in this case that he is being loving - uses tactics such as guilt and manipulation. The point is for the attention to be put on you so you will fail to see what he is doing to manipulate your feelings.

And it worked!

See and hear Ces say:

Ces: Lalo ako nahihirapan eh.

Girl, that is his point.


Also note that, "Truthful people convey, liars convince." (Janine Driver)



So what should you do if someone is doing a John-Lloyd on you?


1 STOP

My best suggestion is for you to not believe what he is saying.

But, we all know that when someone tells us "Don't!" we usually go the opposite route and "Do."

Admittedly, not believing what he is saying is is easier said than done specially when you so want to believe everything he is saying because you're invested in the relationship.

So simply accept the fact that you want to believe him.

Accept your desire of wanting to believe him.

Allow yourself to feel the desperation of wanting to believe all of what he is saying.

Doing this helps get your anxiety out of the way.

Once you put your anxiety aside, you have nothing else to do but

let the burden of proof come from him not you.

If you find yourself rationalizing the reasons of why you believe him, STOP!

Rationalization is your way of convincing yourself something which your body knows is untrue but your mind wants to believe as true. When you catch yourself rationalizing away anything, you are doing a John-Lloyd/you're putting the charm on/ you are deceiving You.



2 Look


Look carefully at what you're rationalizing about. What is it that you are telling yourself and want to accept as true?

e.g.

"He only did it because he's sad and lonely."

"He really didnt mean it, he was just at the lowest point in his life."

"He'll change. I know he will. I'll help him, I'll make him, I'll save him."


Honey, if you have to convince yourself of something, you highly likely do not believe it in the first place - though you want to. But you also know deep down that you dont have to.



3 Listen


Listen NOT to what he is saying.

For a change, listen to what your body is telling you. Doing this helps you to not be lured by his charm, his smile, his touch, his cuteness, his adorableness and everything-else-ness.

Listen to what your gut is telling you.

Your gut is your body's second brain.

Trust it. Heed it.



4 Act

Act on your knowledge and awareness. Minus your beliefs, your desires, your illusions, what everybody else thinks, what everybody else says, what your mind is telling you,


you know what's best for you. This knowledge comes from clarity and simplicity. It does not come from your head or your heart alone. It comes from working out all the emotional muck, conditioned thought process, belief systems you have claimed and considered as your own but really isn't.

It comes from being honest with yourself. When you are honest with yourself, it is easy for you to detect falseness from others. This gives you the strength to see through and not be swayed by the powers any John-Lloyd does on you.


But the key is, you really have to intend to be true to you. Only then could others be true to you.

Unless, you really want someone to do a John-Lloyd on you, go ahead. But when you do, ask yourself, "Why?"





Remember no one, not even a thousand John-Lloyds, can exert power over you unless you let him.

When his powers of persuasion is trumping your good old common sense,

when you're tempted to give in,

when you're blinded by the treasures he is offering,

when your illusions are seemingly coming true right before your eyes, do not forget that that these are all smokes and mirrors;

say out loud, say out clear:

YOU HAVE NO POWER OVER ME,

own this. Heed this. Know this as true.

and feel his energy dissolve right before your eyes.

Only then can you be free.

Why Unofficially Yours is a Box-Office Hit (John Lloyd is acting like a chick, Angel is acting like a dude)

(BUT WAIT THERE's MORE!)



It's not only because of Angel Locsin's sultry bod



or John Lloyd Cruz's charisma and charm





though these helped.


It also helped that 5 of us trouped to the theater to watch it,

though technically it actually didnt because we didnt buy our tickets and instead availed of Star Cinema's free movie passes.


It also helped that the movie started with the action scenes first.

By action scenes in this day and age, because of Arnold Schwarzenegger's retirement as well as FPJ's death, actually means sex scenes.

By sex scenes in this day and age, because Seiko Films is virtually non-existent in our mainstream local movie world, actually means SPG-13 wholesomeness.


It also helped that John Lloyd and Angel look so good together.



It also helped that the film is a date movie targeted towards the youth, young couples as well as pseudo-couples - as the movie's creators assumes most are in this day and age

as evidenced by one of the lead star's pseudo-relationship with footballer Phil Younghusband;

"...nang tanungin kung ano na talaga ang real score sa pagitan nila, paputul-putol ang sagot ni Angel: "Magulo nga, e. Kapag tinanong na kasi ako... pero... gano'n na rin 'yon."

Nagtaka naman ang press nang sabihin pa ni Angel, "Kapag tinanong na ako, sabihan kita."
Paliwanag ni Angel, hindi kasi nila napag-uusapan ni Phil ang tungkol sa estado ng relasyon nila ngayon."

the on again, off again, then on-again relationship of John Lloyd with Shaina Magdayao;

Shaina Magdayao says her relationship with John Lloyd Cruz runs parallel to mature roles they portray



and the Tumblr posts of those who watched Unofficially Yours all of whom swear by their lovelives that the movie is an audio- visual tribute to their love lives.

akosijackjack:
The lines were so relatable

500daysandcounting:
Bottom line is: it was as if this movie was written solely for me. Everything was just so freaking relevant.

Wala kaming pinanghahawakan na kami or what basta ang alam ko masaya ako at siya (sana). I’ve learned na kaya kung sino mauna mainlove edi’ bahala na basta ewan. Ayoko na lang masaktan uli hindi kas malayong mangyari bahala na si God kung may plano siya na ipush ko ito.

Etu talaga ung usong status ng relationship ngayon ..
Ung tipong kayo , peru ndi nman talaga kayo .. doesn’t have any commitments but doing sweet things together . (kulang na lang ung langgamin na ..) ung tipong .. OO mahal niyo ang isa’t isa , “mahal kita” doon , “mahal din kita” dito . “I love you” dito , “I love you too” doon . peru walang anniversary or monthsary na involve . kase ndi nga kayo commited sa relationship dba ?! ung tipong.. laging magkasama , laging magkausap .. kung hindi nman , nanjan nman c Fb para sa chat .. pagka’out, todo tecs nman .. “kumain knb?” dito , “I miss you” doon .. more kiligin effect and doing special things with each other peru hindi nman kayo ..
Sa una lang yan masaya, kase more kilig pa ang drama .. ndi nman pwedeng puro saya lang . ganun lang ? Bigla mu na lang maiisip at a moment na .. “di ko na kaya . mahal na talaga kita . tayo na lang ? pwede ba ?”
in the other side .. when it comes to the point na dumistansya na ung isa ? syempre sasabihin mung ndi masakit . walang commitments kaya ndi ka masasaktan .. peru kapag nadama mu na .. may magagawa kba ? e ndi nman kayo diba ?




No wonder the long line of people we saw in Trinoma waiting to watch the movie were young couples.

Whether they were looking forward to be entertained or inspired I could only guess.

Unofficially Yours' aim, like all Star Cinema movies, is to be aspirational.

Who doesn't want to see 2 gorgeous people boinking on a large screen and hearing them spout lines we usually hear (or want to) in our real life.

As proof, seated at my right were 2 women reacting emphatically to the movie's lines:

““Aminin mo na Cess.”
“Bakit ganun? Bakit parang hindi ka nag-sasawang masaktan?”
“Hindi naman. Hindi lang ako napapagod magmahal.”
“Hindi ka napapagod?”
“Eh paminsan-minsan. Napapagod din, syempre.”
“Oh bakit ayaw mong tumigil?”
“Bakit ako titigil? Pwede naman akong huminto sandali.”
“Kahit ilang besas ka ng umasa? Masaktan?”
“Oo.” “Naniniwala ako na may nakalaan na tao para sa bawat isa sa atin.”


Anong masama sa sabaw? Masustansiya naman.
- John Lloyd
Akala mo kung sinong malaman, sabaw lang naman.
- Angel Locsin

“Sa isang daang libong bagay na pinipilit, may isang bagay diyan na hindi mo kayang tanggihan.”
-Mackie Galvez


Love? Lilimitahin ka lang niyan. Ang dami-daming magagawa kung hindi ka lilimitahan sa love na ‘yan. Higit sa lahat, paiiyakin ka lang niyan.


The reel lives of Angel and John Lloyd's characters cathartically fulfilled what the audience - and even Angel Locsin - could only hope for in their real lives,

with a song to match their current emotional state: "If You Asked Me To."

Is it just me or isnt Angel Locsin waiting to be asked too?





Because Unofficially Yours is a mainstream movie, it made it easy for Angel and John Lloyd to go beyond fuck-buddies.

The movie assumes that you do not want to see Angel or John Lloyd be dark, edgy and unromantic because life is already dark, edgy and real. The movie thinks you want and need to be lulled to believe and see the romance, illusion of a happy-forever-after after consistent casual sex.

Thus the (1st) reason why the movie is a box office hit.

Who doesn't want to see a friends-with-benefits dynamic evolve to real love?

I'm not the only one who thinks a FWB pseudo-relationship is unhealthy, right? Who in their healthy mind and heart wants to be someone's fuck buddy anyway? Not me. (At least, not anymore.) If you're a man, you do not have to answer this question.

Besides making the fuck-buddy idea romantic, the movie also made it appear as if it is Angel's character who wielded the most power, with John Lloyd giving the impression that he is the poor lad in waiting (for Angel to hand out sex and/or love in crumbs).

Minus the delusion, you can actually see that Angel's character is not in power in this dynamic. Though she thinks she is.

She thinks she is being liberal/progressively enlightened/strong/cool by fucking someone and then saying, "Kthanxbye" after.

What she is doing is acting like a dude. This is what dudes do. And she is pretending to be one. She is one-upping her ex by being better than him. Her decisions are reactions of anger at his betrayal.

Her relationship-decisions are filtered through this thought process: "I'll show him, no man could push me around. Not him, not anybody, not ever. I'll show him I'm tough. I'll play his game but by my rules. I'll be hypersexual, (which Angel doesnt know is always set up in favor of the dudes) and in the process deny my Self while I'm doing it."

What she doesnt know is she's doing it all to spite her ex. But she thinks she's doing it because she wants to.

She's drinking poison hoping that someone else will die (anger and resentment does that too) which is sort of equal to

not praying the rosary to the Virgin Mary because Mama Mary didnt fulfill your intentions. Not praying the rosary, `that'll show Mama Mary.' (Thanks to Martin Scorsese for this quote)

Because we deflect our rage, take it out on each other or ourselves, because we are terrified that if we take it out on the real target we may wind up alone



Angel / or any woman leaving after casual sex is every dude's dream. It saves him from cuddling, saves him from offering her drinks, meal, lunch, etc. Now he doesnt have to be pseudo-polite. She just exits just as she should.
She has served/fulfilled his need. Dude says to his self: Thank God.

She also thinks she is protecting herself from hurt by merely exchanging bodily fluids and not emotions.

She also thinks having a release receptacle and being someone's release receptacle is a mutually beneficial thing to do.

She also thinks she's saving her self from pain by compartmentalizing her entirety and distributing little pieces of these to someone.

She also thinks she is in control of her life

when she has actually been set up to think and act this way. She has also set herself up to act this way. Sure she has been in a lousy relationship and is no longer in it but she acts as if she still is or that every relationship will be that way. Her fear and anger are clouding her good sense.

She also thinks that John Lloyd's character is being nice by being a boy scout and volunteering details about - and a ticket too! - to Singapore, what he is actually doing is provoking Angel's guilt. He is manipulating her emotions in order for Angel's character to not just re-consider the SG offer but for her to still feel connected to him while and if she's already in SG.

Thus Angel's response: "Pinapahirapan mo ko eh!"

Girl, that is his point.

And it worked! See Angel open up her life and history in one fell swoop (credit goes to the writer for pouring all details in one cringing Oscar-moment - the writer is saving him/herself time by wasting ours).


The main reason why Star Cinema is currently the sole local film production company who can afford to punch out at least 1 movie per month is because it knows its target market --- females who drag their bf's/fb's; females who drag their female friends; females who want a John Lloyd in their life; females who want to be Angel Locsin, males who think they look like John Lloyd, males who want to ape John Lloyd's acting abilities and use it in real life to dupe a chick).

Do you want to know if you're like Angel Locsin? Marian Rivera? Kim Chiu? or KC Concepcion?

Take this test to find out: Which leading lady are you?
Because even if you dont become a movie star, you can always pretend you're the star in the movie in your mind.


See how the friends and co-workers of Ces and Mackie seem to live their lives only for the betterment of Ces and Mackie's love lives?

Thus the (2nd) reason why the movie is a box office hit.

Ces and Mackie's friends are two-dimensional characters because they are mere props to propel the story of Ces and Mackie forward. They are not supposed to have lives of their own unless these relate to Ces' and Mackie's. They're only there because Ces and Mackie are there . They're not needed unless they fawn, flatter, play up to Ces and Mackie. What do they care whether Ces and Mackie fuck or not/love or not. What's in it for them?

What's in it for them is everything. Their characters are designed to live solely for the main characters of that movie. Their reel lives are invested on it.

In real life, when you are using/looking at others as props to serve your purpose, when you think you're the star of your own show and the rest are mere extras and supporting characters, it's narcissism. When this is done in the movies, it's mainstream entertainment. When this is done between two mutually consenting adults - you-stroke-me-i-stroke-you - it's called friends-with-benefits/no-strings-attached/fuck buddies/ you two are being ethical sluts.


The (3rd) reason why the movie is a box office hit:

To be fair, isnt John Lloyd a dream for waiting hand in foot for Angel's sweet YES? Or so he seems.

Its a dream because shit like that cant be real. Even John Lloyd - in real life - aint like that. Ask Ruffa and now Shaina.

John Lloyd's character is acting like a chick and/or the way chicks want their dudes to act.

Star Cinema knows dudes dont watch romantic movies, even if Angel Locsin is there. Sure they'll watch Angel Locsin but not in a rom-com. Are you crazy????

Why watch Angel act when they can simply watch Angel Locsin.




Do you know why most of the female audience members found John Lloyd's character sooooooooooo adorable?

Because Mackie can mold his life to his partner's life. Statistically, so do most women!

If men do this, they could only do so for a month or two, the longest they can pretend to act like they mean it is a year. The rest of the time, they rely on the women's denial of him "changing" when he has in fact have become what he actually is.


Again. is it a coincidence that most of these Unofficially-Yours-related Tumblr posts are from women?

You could literally count in one hand the male species in this online population,


and would lose count at the self-sacrificial / ready-to-die-for-pseudo-love /ingrained codependence
themes coded in the psychological vocabulary on these posts:



iamcheesekate:
Naiyak ako sa part na sinabi ni John Lloyd (boyfriend ko, hahahahaha) na hindi siya dapat magalit, hindi siya dapat masaktan kasi daw wala naman siyang karapatan. Sakit naman nun..


Friends with benefits?...
...Pero bakit may mga taong mas gusto ang gantong status?
Kasi..
- MASAYA
- YUN FEELING MO KUMPLETO KA
- NAKUKUNTENTO KA KAHIT HANGGANG DUN LANG KAYO..
Kasi MASAYA KA …


bipolarbtch:
"Handa ako sa lahat, handa ako sa kaya niyang ibigay... At oo, kung mangyari man, handa akong masaktan." - Macky, Unofficially Yours
I’m sorry Macky slash my dearly beloved John Lloyd but I’d have to say that this is COMPLETE AND UTTER BULLSHIT. You may expect to get hurt, even know for sure that it will happen but no amount of awareness and preparation can ever make you ready for the pain. Pano ko alam?
Because I fucking said the exact same fucking thing and I still ended up getting hurt and crying.


Tngna feeling ko nung una ‘di ako makaka-relate pero sa huli, relate na relate ako sa Character ni Angel Locsin men. KV na nakakatawa :)
millelimeter:

pinaasa-sa-wala:
About sa movie. Maganda siya...kawawa din si Jl nung una dun kase sya ung taong wagas kung magmahal. gagwain nea lahat para sa taong un.


"Hindi nyo alam status nyo."

This last quote needs to be examined because it doesnt make sense. How can you not know your status? You only not know when you dont want to. Either both or one of you is afraid, one or both of you have a prior commitment, one or both of you is dysfunctional. Yes, dysfunctional. Now that you know, what are you going to do about it?



If you're in an unofficial relationship

and you're a female,

expect to be hurt,

be prepared for nothing and everything.


If you're in an unofficial relationship and your male, place your thoughts in the comments below, I'm interested to hear your side.

But I'm speaking to the females because I am one.

Ask yourself, if you're really that want-able, wonderful, fuck-able, love-able why isn't he with you?

Better question: Why are you with him?

If you think you're want-able, wonderful, fuck-able, love-able and he's not with you, why do you allow it?

Sure, you're afraid too. You cant risk having your heart hurt. But, being in a pseudo-relationship, isnt that a risk too?

You: It's a risk I can control. I know what Im getting into. Im in it for old time's sake. It's better than nothing while Im waiting for something.

Of course you can tell yourself that. But do know, even if youre in a pseudo-relationship, you're still waiting for nothing. The better risk is having nothing as you work on your self to be everything.

Be officially yourself first. After which, see if you'd want or even think about being someone's unofficial other.




Pop culture controls you even if you think you're separate from it. It is everywhere, from the clothes you wear to the language you use to the way you think. It is a viral pandemic that masks infection by pretending to be part of you. There's no cure. But if you know the structure of the virus, at least you can recognize the infection as not-you.

"No way, I'm not getting infected, I'm not exposing myself to all that trash. I'm going to think for myself."

That's the virus talking.
-TLP

What Philippine Catholic Schools really care about...

And I heard it straight from the horse's mouth.

Sincerely, it was straight from the mouth of a Monsignor of a Catholic School in Manila

while I was attending my nephew's Recognition Day - where he won 3 awards (they call it certificates but I call them awards because I just did).

During the event, Monsi made a speech in front of 6 - 16 year old students and highlighted to them three things which stood out to me, - and which brought me back to my own days as a kinder,elementary,highschool student in a PAASCU-accredited Catholic school run by nuns - these are the following:

1) "Be a good girl/boy"

2) "How does a good girl / good boy sit? A good girl / good boy sits with his / her hands on his lap and with his/her legs together."

3) "We take care of our identity"

4) "We form highschool students, we train elementary students."


Monsi also described a scene in the movie Captain America - to connect to his "Be a good boy/girl" speech - but I couldn't remember how he put those two together, he just did.

Did you just see how he doesn't give a shit about the minds and hearts of the students he's giving the speech to?

You didnt have to be physically present to know or understand what he said, just look at the four sentences above (note that the first two are actual quotes and the third and fourth are paraphrased ones) and you'll get his drift.


You: Wait a minute, I dont understand, what do you mean he doesnt give a shit?

I mean he doesnt care.

You: What do you mean he doesnt care?

I mean he doesnt really care about the students.

You: What do you mean he doesnt care about the students?

Okay, he cares about the students....

You: SIGH OF RELIEF.


....But he only cares about them when they are being "good girls" and "good boys" because that is how they were formed and trained to be. They were not formed and trained to think on their own or to think of themselves in any way other than the student of Catholic School X.

Have you ever wondered why schools even bother to label their students as "Maryans," "Theresians," "Thomasians," "Lasallians," etc. other than to maintain or develop, not the student's own character but the school's identity?

Have you ever wondered why they make students memorize Mission Statements and mottos?

If you're a student of Catholic school X Y or Z, you are supposed to be a good girl, good boy, you're supposed to value service; value religio mores cultura; Veritas in Caritate; Caritas Veritas Scientia; etc.

To state what is blatantly obvious, Monsi and Catholic schools form and train its students to be extensions of the school's identity.

So any flaw, mistake, any bad boy, bad girl of Catholic School X is equal to a stain in the identity of that school.

Because Catholic Schools dont care about students as persons or individuals. They care about students as how they serve the school's image

the way they are properly "formed" and "trained" to do.


Philippine Catholic schools values its students for how they reflect back the image of that school - and that image is supposed to be "good," only "good."


So if students are in a beach wearing a bikini and they post pictures of themselves (on a social networking site which a LOT of people has access to) in a beach wearing a bikini, and school authorities see pictures of these students in a beach wearing a bikini, the students are

1) Not being good girls.

2) Obviously does not sit with their hands on their laps and with their legs together.

3) Is not taking care of the school's "virtuous" identity.


What's important is the school's feelings and how hurt and shamed the school was by these girls improper behavior. Whoever "school" is supposed to be.

Because the school doesnt really care about what the girls feel and think.

That is why no one called these girls "sluts,” “addicts,” “drunkards,” and “cheap" except them.

To others who did not know they were STC students, they were just girls wearing a bikini while on the beach.

Because -- and I bet you hear these a lot from Catholic school authorities, I know I did -- these students are supposed to be carrying the name of the school wherever they go.

That is why students who want to loiter around in the mall during or after school hours change their uniforms and wear casual clothes (also, mall guards turn away uniformed students during school hours/days) because no one wants to see a Maryan, Theresian, Whateverian watching Unofficially Yours in the middle of the day, right?

What would everybody think? That the school is so lax in its discipline!? That it couldnt even regulate / control the behavior of its virtuous students?!

So not allowing these students to attend the Commencement Exercises - despite court orders that the school should - is a very Christian thing to do a-la Matthew 5:29:

"If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell."

Cutting them off from the school activity, denying them the opportunity to be part of the graduation rites is the school cleansing itself of the dirt and stain it perceives the students brought on the school via pics on their Facebook account because - and this is again a direct quote from STC - the students did not "live the values that the school stands for..”

If STC/Infant Jesus Academy allow these students to attend, they would in effect be publicly certifying that these children are their products. And if they do that, it would be identity/image-suicide.

Imagine Piolo acknowledging what everybody else is thinking. It would be career-suicide because that is not the "image" he wants you and advertisers to see, see?

"It is the school’s certification to the world that these students are our products...If you view commencement in that light then, the school has no alternative than to refuse to certify these students."


Wait a minute. Change the word "school" and replace it with your last name / family name or your father's name / mother's name / grandfather's name / grandmother's name and Voila! See how these same words are so familiar you actually swear you heard someone say these from your family of origin.

"Wala akong anak na (fill in the blank here)."

"Akalain ng iba di ako marunong mag-disiplina; mag-palaki ng anak na maayos; mag-(fill in the blank here)."


You: Woah! Do you mean our family of origin cares much for their identity / image too?

I dont know, do you?

Why Magnum costs fifty fucking pesos

You're not paying for this,



or this,



or this,




or this.





What you're actually paying for is this



this




this



this



this




all these freebies




and the cost of making all these people put this ice cream in their mouths while you drool in envy and wonder.





Your drool and wonder is exactly what Magnum hopes is enough to make you rush to your neighborhood supermarket and fork up P50 to temporarily feel you're worthy enough to deserve what they have.

To feel worthy and royal for P50? -- it's a fucking steal.





Credit goes to Chuvaness and Magnum for the pics.