Showing posts with label Relationships. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Relationships. Show all posts

Saturday, December 1, 2012

IMAGINED RELATIONSHIPS


Relationships start from that magical spark. Most people call it love at first sight; others, being struck by Cupid’s arrow. Once we become captives of this spark, the imagination begins to play. For the first time in years, you see your future in clear view. You see times spent in parks and beaches, holding hands and building sand castles. You picture trips to some far-off destination, exploring the sights and exploring each other. Sooner or later, you develop a mind photo of a family together, with perhaps two children in a house on a hill. It is the pursuit of this imagination that leads lovers to go on a pursuit of true love. It is the pursuit of this imagination that encourages two people seated on a bench to sit beside each other, to share an embrace, a kiss, and eventually, goodbyes.

I've never imagined it to end this way. In fact, I never saw it coming until a thorough afterthought of the signs for months later. I would like to think it is my fault that the imagined relationship we had eventually faded to oblivion. But it takes two to tango and thus, I am more convinced it was more of our individual differences, flaws, misgivings, and unfounded assumptions that brought us to a demise. These cracks in the imagination are what led her (and sooner or later, me) to pursue a different imagination of a relationship. Perhaps, one with less bickering and more communication. With someone who pays a listening ear regardless of our own myopic ideas and selfish talk.

So here I am, imagining once more what the future has for me. Chronicling a love foretold. I don’t wish for the next one be a real-life fairy tale or something out of a Nicholas Sparks novel. I just want it to be real—the love, care, understanding, even the few moments of anguish that comes in every romance. Again, there will be poetry, perhaps short stories, even books written for this prophesied woman. There will be walks with her, barefoot, on foreign coasts and romantic dates in never-before-heard-of restaurants. We will make love like we've never made love before. We will fight like children over a game of Scrabble, or missing out on monthsarries. But we’ll always love each other no matter what caveat God puts along our way.


For it is in these worst case scenarios that we prove if someone is really worth staying with. I’d want her to be strong and committed if ever I’ve become Will Smith in “Pursuit of Happyness”, sharing the pursuit with me instead of doing what Thandie Newton did in the film. I want to be loved like Hugh Jackman in “Real Steel”, who despite his many wrong turns and disappointments, Evangeline Lilly never gave up hope on him. I’d stick around for her in sickness and in health, just like Jake Gyllenhaal in “Love and Other Drugs”. She’d do the same for me like Jennifer Connelly in “A Beautiful Mind”. We will search for each other like John Cusack and Kate Beckinsale in “Serendipity”, or be best friends-turned-lovers like Billy Crystal and Meg Ryan in “When Harry Met Sally”. We will grow old together like Noah and Allie in “The Notebook”.

But for imagined relationships to become real life, both lovers must be courageous, strong, and determined to overcome the odds, even those made by themselves. Stuff like pride, selfishness, and envy. For while we think love is supposed to make us strong, it does not. It’s a sickness, meant to make us weak. But if we are already strong even before the imagination comes to life, before the weakness sets in, we can weather hail or storm hand-in-hand and by being the strength to each other.

To you, my imagined relationship, the woman meant for me. I love you.

Wednesday, April 13, 2011

McDONALD'S AD: MISLEADING OR MISINTERPRETED?



I saw in the news today that fastfood giant McDonald's pulled down their new ad after receiving flak from Church leaders, particularly, the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP).

The advertisement (as shown above) shows a young girl asking a young boy if she is his girlfriend, to which the boy answers, “Ayoko nga. Hindi pa ako ready. Demanding ang mga girlfriend. Gusto ganito, gusto ganyan (I don’t want to. I’m not ready. Girlfriends are demanding. They want this, they want that)."

In a statement from Caloocan Bishop Deogracias IƱiguez, he said that “[the commercial gives] the wrong message to children that it’s all right to enter into courtship, and it could pave the way for the very young to be lax and carefree.". The CBCP, through its spokesperson Father Melvin Castro, said in an interview over Radio Veritas, that the ad must be replaced because "it plays with kids’ emotions and cheapens relationships."

Now, I've watched this commercial for the nth time and everyone would agree that the commercial is really cute. Who wouldn't chuckle at the sight of two kids mirroring in a cute and cheeky way what adults find difficult to talk about? But from a moral perspective, the Church does seem to have a point. A young girl asking a young boy if she is his girlfriend does promote entering into early relationships which the Church finds as a dangerous precedent for young kids. From a gender sensitive perspective, it also connotes that women are demanding when it comes to relationships and that men are afraid of commitments.

But, reading between the lines, the advertisement also sends a more positive point -- a point which I think the Church and other detractors of the commercial seem to be missing out. “Ayoko nga. Hindi pa ako ready. Demanding ang mga girlfriend. Gusto ganito, gusto ganyan." Could it be that the young boy is also promoting physical and emotional readiness before entering a relationship? Could it be sending a message to young kids like them that they shouldn't enter in a relationship when they are not yet ready? Could be. But the point has already been missed and the ad is now off-air.

What complicated the matter for McDonald's is that the storytelling of the advertisement itself is misleading. It wants to impart a good message to kids, but the ending imparts an entirely different one. If the commercial could've ended by showing the two kids, all grown-up and now in a relationship, sharing in a heap of McDo fries, it could've have been a happy ending for the company and for the CBCP. The message they'll be sending therefore is that true love waits. The message would have been entirely consistent if closed in a such a way.

But another interesting matter in this issue is the Church being vocal all of a sudden when it was entirely quiet throughout the recent Janjan Controversy in TV5's Willing Willie variety show. It's also surprising that Church is speaking out against early relationships and yet continues to disapprove the passage of the Reproductive Health Bill, when the latter is also against early relationships through promotion of sexual education. I am aghast at this somewhat double standard on the part of the Church. It's good that the Church spoke in this issue -- and made a point -- but looking back at their stand against the RH Bill, do they really have the credibility to make such point?

In the end, an advertisement, no matter how short, can convey a variety of values to its viewers. As I've said in my previous article, the responsibility of extracting values from what we see on TV does not only lie on the viewers and their parents but on the producers themselves, who must ensure that they are conveying the right message on air. TSS
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...