Tuesday, July 10, 2007
at
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
|
22
comments
What in the nutty world is wrong with the word “TITI?” And how “abominable” is it? This is my question to the full-page ad that appeared in July 9 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer. The ad, perhaps worth more than one hundred thousand pesos, was placed by Antonio Calipjo Go, academic supervisor of the Marian School in Quezon City. In the ad, it says:
“On page 114 of the public school textbook titled HIYAS SA PAGBASA for Grade 5 appears this instruction: “Pag-aralan ang mga nakatalang mga salita.” ( “Study the given words.” ) Among the words asked to be examined minutely (pag-aralan) by the students are the words TITI, defined as ARI NG LALAKI (male sex organ), and TITATITA, defined as BUGAW (pimp).”
Doesn’t Go know what titi is? What is wrong with titi being defined as male sex organ? Even a 6-year-old boy knows what titi means. Unless Go does have any other definition of the word (which I highly doubt), why not tell the educators? If he merely wants the public to know that titi is all but a “gross” word that lost its way in a textbook, then he just clearly demonstrated how narrow-minded and bigoted he can be. This is a prime example of how conservatism and its set of parochial mentality imprisons people’s faculty of reasoning and understanding. It was ironic that Go used the case of Galileo as an ideal in promoting the truth (the conservative Catholic Church condemned Galileo because the latter supported Copernicus’ theory that the Earth is not the center of the universe) while he himself is still confined within the walls of conservatism by describing the word “titi” as “abominable.” Coincidentally, he works for a school which has religious affiliation with the very same institution that condemned Galileo.
I find nothing erroneous with the word titi; it only becomes wrong or morally objectionable when a person uses it in bad taste. In fact, the word was used in the proper context; the authors of the book did not even use the word in a sentence denoting or connoting sexual activity. They merely defined titi as a male sex organ — which is absolutely a FACT. Heck, we have been using that word since time immemorial, even before the word “google” found its place in Princeton’s dictionary as a verb!
Which brings me to my point: How should one translate penis? Vagina? Breast?
Ari ng lalaki? Ari ng babae? Dibdib?
Get real. It’s about time that we detach ourselves from the marshland of close-minded morality. It’s about time that we clear our cluttered minds of the traditional connotations that limit our capability to perceive things around us. Penis is titi, vagina is pekpek and breast is suso. If people find these words unacceptable, or better yet nasty, then there’s a problem with their nutty heads. The next thing we know, another ad would appear in a newspaper identifying a word with which some “academicians” would find a problem...
BULBOL: BUHOK SA ARI
.
“On page 114 of the public school textbook titled HIYAS SA PAGBASA for Grade 5 appears this instruction: “Pag-aralan ang mga nakatalang mga salita.” ( “Study the given words.” ) Among the words asked to be examined minutely (pag-aralan) by the students are the words TITI, defined as ARI NG LALAKI (male sex organ), and TITATITA, defined as BUGAW (pimp).”
Doesn’t Go know what titi is? What is wrong with titi being defined as male sex organ? Even a 6-year-old boy knows what titi means. Unless Go does have any other definition of the word (which I highly doubt), why not tell the educators? If he merely wants the public to know that titi is all but a “gross” word that lost its way in a textbook, then he just clearly demonstrated how narrow-minded and bigoted he can be. This is a prime example of how conservatism and its set of parochial mentality imprisons people’s faculty of reasoning and understanding. It was ironic that Go used the case of Galileo as an ideal in promoting the truth (the conservative Catholic Church condemned Galileo because the latter supported Copernicus’ theory that the Earth is not the center of the universe) while he himself is still confined within the walls of conservatism by describing the word “titi” as “abominable.” Coincidentally, he works for a school which has religious affiliation with the very same institution that condemned Galileo.
I find nothing erroneous with the word titi; it only becomes wrong or morally objectionable when a person uses it in bad taste. In fact, the word was used in the proper context; the authors of the book did not even use the word in a sentence denoting or connoting sexual activity. They merely defined titi as a male sex organ — which is absolutely a FACT. Heck, we have been using that word since time immemorial, even before the word “google” found its place in Princeton’s dictionary as a verb!
Which brings me to my point: How should one translate penis? Vagina? Breast?
Ari ng lalaki? Ari ng babae? Dibdib?
Get real. It’s about time that we detach ourselves from the marshland of close-minded morality. It’s about time that we clear our cluttered minds of the traditional connotations that limit our capability to perceive things around us. Penis is titi, vagina is pekpek and breast is suso. If people find these words unacceptable, or better yet nasty, then there’s a problem with their nutty heads. The next thing we know, another ad would appear in a newspaper identifying a word with which some “academicians” would find a problem...
BULBOL: BUHOK SA ARI
.
Posted by
Nutty Boy
Labels:
bulbol,
philippine conservatism,
titi
Posts
