My group mates and I recently did a pilot study for our thesis on the effects of a video-based health education intervention to decrease anxiety, increase knowledge and decrease pain perception on boys about to be circumcised.
We gave a test to all participants of the study to assess the knowledge of the children and we found out that most of the children undergo circumcision for the wrong reason. Majority of them answered “Para magging tunay na lalaki”. This led our group to thinking what if the child, didn’t actually want to be a man?
Thus came the ingenious flow of ideas from our group. One talked about on why God didn’t make all the babies unisex when they were born and then just grow up a penis or a vagina when one is in the reproductive age. That way, he said, would prevent the less capable of reproducing from having sex. This would also prevent the usual Elektra complex (a girl’s competition with her mother for possession of the father) and Oedipus complex (a boy's competition with his father for the possession of his mother) as the child would not even know that gender he is supposed to be identifying with. Another one added a more scientific proposition where the hormones that would determine the gender of the unisex baby would be based on kung ano ang tinitibok ng puso nya or what the child thinks his gender is as one grows up. This would erase the disgusts of those who are not satisfied with their gender and would like to be of the opposite sex as this allows the person to make a choice rather than live by the choice life set for them. He added, “Kung ganun ang mangyayari, wala nang sisihan, di ba?”
My group mates and I have the most random conversations, don’t we?
Pernes. I love your idea of being born a unisex baby first and then getting the reproductive organs afterwards na. Pernes talaga. Napaisip ako dun.
ReplyDeletehahah. o diba panalo? :) haha siguro in the future mapaparaanan rin yan.lol
ReplyDeletein fairness RJ, that is a very real struggle for free thinkers right now.
ReplyDeletemost of them wish to discard circumcision as part of the more dominant cultural practices, because what if someday, the child decides to embrace atheism or islam?
circumcision is a sustained practice of the covenant laid down by God to the israelites during biblical times, and until now, it continues to be one of the more visible stamps of catholicity.
pero what if, what if, ayaw ng bata maging katoliko paglaki nya? ang hirap kayang igrow back ang foreskin. hehe :)
pero tama. i actually liked the ideas that came from your group. hehehe :)
WV: motel. HAHAHA. :)
Haha! Yeah! Nice....from circumcision to complexities of life...how can we simplify that? hehehe...
ReplyDeleteOo nga, I met some of the freethinkers in UST and I can say na napaka active nilang pagusapan yan.
ReplyDeleteYun nga eh. Pero kung religion ang dahilan, wala naman masyadong connection yun sa pagkawala ng foreskin. Kung ang pananampalataya mo naman ay matibay, it really does not matter.
Haha! We have the most bersek ideas.haha
@jag- oo nga eh. :) Struggle para sa lahat ito until all your neurons are exhausted.
I have always thought that transgenderism in Philippine society has been woefully undertheorized and the few upper-class transgender NGOs simply apply Euro-American gender norms and theoretical structures to Philippine life to make their political claims -- adding little critical awareness to anything.
ReplyDelete@claudio: circumcision was banned by the Catholic Church until the 1600s and its existence in Christianized lands has been in spite of strong religious opposition (until around 1900). Circumcision is a long-standing practice indigenous to most Austronesian cultures well before the Christian era.