The Pacman’s failed fight
WHAT MANY had expected would be a blistering battle on the floor of the House of Representatives turned out to be a repeat of the Pacquiao-Mosley fight. But it turns out the tables were turned, with the Pacman content to let loose with a few jabs here and there while failing to score significant hits. Instead, it was Rep. Edcel Lagman, who declared before the encounter that he was “ready to rumble,” who managed to land telling blows.
One such blow was when he noted that the Sarangani representative was out of the country preparing for his fight with Mosley when some provisions he was questioning were discussed on the floor and amended. Several times, too, Lagman observed that questions raised by Pacquiao had already been raised previously by other interpellators, although he agreed to answer them nonetheless.
Overall, the performance of Pacquiao, for whom other anti-RH bill legislators had made room for no other consideration than his celebrity, was disappointing. He seemed merely to be reading from a list of questions, and rarely bothered to follow up on Lagman’s replies. He gave the impression that he was barely listening to Lagman’s explanations, despite his declared passionate interest in the issue. And far from wanting to craft a better RH law, he seemed to have set out instead to torpedo the bill altogether with nothing but the power of his name and fame. Which, given the impression that he had barely read the draft law and done little research or thinking on the issue, smacks of bad faith.
* * *
BUT a sidelight to the Pacquiao-Lagman dust-up deserves some comment. When he attended a luncheon given in his honor by Catholic bishops, Pacquiao was quizzed by media on why he had taken a stance against the RH bill when his wife Jinkee had revealed some years back that she had taken oral contraceptives to space the births of their children.
Later on, Jinkee clarified that while she was on the pill shortly after the birth of her two sons, “I stopped when Manny found out and he told me he didn’t approve.” The Pacquiao couple has had two daughters since. In other interviews, Jinkee said that while she is content with four children, Manny would prefer to have as many as eight.
This is one of the crucial aspects of reproductive health and rights. Reproductive health seeks to protect women from getting pregnant when they do not want to, are unprepared for it, or if their health will be severely affected if they get pregnant when they’re too young (below 18) or too old (over 35), when it’s too soon (less than three years after a previous pregnancy), or when they have too many (more than five children).
While ideally a couple should talk about their reproductive goals—how many children they want or can afford, how close together they will come—and how they are to achieve them, my own view, one shared by many others, is that the woman’s choice should prevail. After all, it’s her health and body at stake, and she should know best when and if she’s ready for a pregnancy. And since tradition dictates that the mother takes on a large share of child-raising, it only stands to reason that she should be able to decide how big a family she wants.
* * *
I DON’T want to create dissension within the Pacquaio household, but shouldn’t Manny give Jinkee a greater say in her childbearing history? When RH proponents talk about “male participation,” it is precisely the need to get men to “participate” in their wives’ reproductive decisions and to respect those decisions. It doesn’t mean dictating to one’s wife or partner whether she is to use contraceptives or not.
There is also a social dimension to the Pacquiaos’ reproductive behavior. Manny may want eight children, but he should first ask himself (and his wife) if Jinkee wants the same thing, or if her health would allow her to bear so many children. Sure, they can well afford to raise eight or even more children. But it isn’t just money that determines a couple’s capacity to raise children. Parents also need enough time to nurture their children, enough patience to cope with the challenges of childhood (and adolescence), and enough wisdom and sensitivity to discern the physical, emotional and psychological needs of each child.
And given how popular Manny the boxer is, he could be sending the wrong message to his followers, who may want to emulate his reproductive goals but do not have the economic or emotional capacity to raise as many children in the manner they deserve. And since Sarangani is one of the poorest provinces in the country, it’s time Manny began doing what’s best for poor women and families among his constituents.
* * *
IT’S STUNNING how much Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the now-resigned IMF chief, was willing to throw away for what he thought would be a quick-and-easy lay.
In just a few minutes, up to the time he was led off by New York police from a plane bound for France, Strauss-Kahn jettisoned his prestigious position, his bright political future that included the possible presidency of France, his personal reputation, and his freedom.
Some have wondered what could have possibly possessed him, given the details provided by his alleged victim. Until we know all the details, my own thinking is that Strauss-Kahn must have carried out these furtive sexual assaults so often with little consequence that he thought he could get away with it one more time. A sexual predator, in other words.
Also, allow me a few admiring words for the hotel management, the NYPD and the prosecutors for their determination to go after Strauss-Kahn despite his stature. Can you imagine a similar event taking place here, when our government cannot even protect a Filipina from a mere American Marine?
