Alerts

Weather in Ilagan City, Isabela, Philippines

Tiktok

Sunday, February 01, 2026

Fast love

Love Beyond the Butterflies: Why You Shouldn't Fall in Love Too Fast

It's all too easy to fall for someone when they're dressed to impress, talking sweetly, and playing the laugh-factor under the hot glow of new romance. When that's going on, love really does seem like magic. But the real test of any relationship isn't in the good times—it's in the storms.

Why Falling Too Fast Can Be Risky


Early in love, emotions are intensified. Psychologists refer to it as the "honeymoon phase." You view the other person with rose-tinted glasses, and then pretend that there are no flaws or red flags. That kind of love isn't sustainable. Life catches up eventually—bills come due, work gets hectic, issues arise. That's when the mask is removed, and you get to see who they actually are.
  • How do they treat you when they're exhausted?
  • Do they still revere you when they're under stress?
  • Can they be honest with you when they're broke or in financial struggles?
  • Are they patient and gentle when they're starving or frustrated?
These are the actual moments that show character.

The Right Person Makes Hard Times Easier

Real love isn't about not facing challenges; it's about how you encounter them with each other. The right person won't erase your issues, but they'll make the burden feel less heavy. They'll make you realize you're not by yourself, that even on the worst days there's a sanctuary in each other.

The wrong individual, however, will increase your load. They'll blame, withdraw, or put you down. That's why it's risky to get married too fast without actually knowing how someone reacts to life's inevitable difficulties.

Signs You're with the Right Person

  • They remain calm and encouraging when issues come up.
  • They talk openly rather than closing down.
  • They are respectful even during anger or exhaustion.
  • They struggle alongside you to resolve issues rather than letting you fend for yourself.
  • These are the characteristics that keep a relationship going past the butterflies.
  • Love That Lasts Requires Time
Falling in love too quickly may be exciting, but developing love that endures takes time. Take the time to really get to know someone, not simply during the highlight reel moments, but during the raw, unfiltered ones.

Because at the end of the day, true love isn't about who gets your heart racing—it's about who is there for you when the world gets too much.

Last Thought

Don't force love. Allow it to come naturally. The right person won't only love you in your best time; they'll stick around, hold you up, and love you through the storms.

Sunday, January 25, 2026

Boundaries That Will Save Your Peace as You Grow Older

Growing Older, Growing Wiser: Boundaries Everyone Should Learn

As we grow older, we start to realize one thing: life gets lighter when you learn to set boundaries.
Boundaries are not about pushing people away, they’re about protecting your energy, your peace, and your self-respect. Yet in a culture like ours, where pakikisama and self-sacrifice are deeply valued, setting boundaries can feel selfish.

But here’s the truth: boundaries are an act of love for yourself and for others.

Let’s break down some boundaries you must carry with you as you get older:

1. You’re Not Obligated to Solve Everyone’s Problems

Not every burden is yours to carry. While compassion is a virtue, constantly taking on others’ problems can lead to burnout and compassion fatigue (Figley, 1995). You can care without carrying everything.

2. Choosing Peace Needs No Justification

You don’t owe anyone an explanation for seeking peace. According to mental health research, reducing exposure to toxic environments can significantly improve emotional well-being (American Psychological Association, 2019). Your peace of mind is reason enough.

3. Not Everyone is a True Friend

As Dr. Brené Brown reminds us, trust is built in small moments over time (Brown, 2010). Not everyone who smiles at you deserves full access to your life. Learn to discern between acquaintances, temporary companions, and true friends. Connection is important, but discernment is essential.

4. You Don’t Have to Attend Every Fight You’re Invited To

Silence is not weakness—it’s wisdom. Walking away from unnecessary drama protects your mental health (Mayo Clinic, 2021). Not every battle is worth the scars.

5. Prioritizing Yourself is Self-Respect, Not Selfishness

Putting yourself first can feel guilty in a collectivist culture, but psychologists emphasize that self-care is critical for resilience (WHO, 2020). You can’t pour from an empty cup. Self-care sustains your ability to love others.

6. Walk Away From Disrespect

If a place, relationship, or workplace does not value you, it is not where you belong. Studies show that toxic relationships are linked to stress, depression, and even physical illness (Umberson & Montez, 2010). Respect yourself enough to walk away.

7. Not All Opinions Deserve Space in Your Life

Everyone will have opinions, but only you live with the consequences of your decisions. Filter whose voices you allow to shape your path. Advice is optional. Your choices are yours.

8. Privacy is Power

You don’t have to post every success, failure, or detail of your life. Oversharing can invite unnecessary stress, criticism, or exploitation (Derlega et al., 1993). Sometimes the best moments are the ones kept private.

Final Takeaway

Boundaries are not walls—they’re gates. They allow in what nourishes you and keep out what harms you. Learning to say no is saying yes to your peace, your dignity, and your future.

As you grow older, you’ll find that the best gift you can give yourself is not just more opportunities, but stronger boundaries.

References:

  • American Psychological Association (2019). Stress and Health.
  • Brown, B. (2010). The Gifts of Imperfection. Hazelden.
  • Derlega, V., Metts, S., Petronio, S., & Margulis, S. (1993). Self-Disclosure. Sage.
  • Figley, C. R. (1995). Compassion Fatigue: Coping with Secondary Traumatic Stress Disorder. Brunner/Mazel.
  • Mayo Clinic (2021). Conflict Resolution and Stress Management.
  • Umberson, D., & Montez, J. K. (2010). Social relationships and health: A flashpoint for health policy. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 51(Suppl), S54–S66.
  • World Health Organization (2020). Self-care interventions for health.

Sunday, January 18, 2026

It's not the best constitution in the world

The 1987 Philippine Constitution: Why It’s Outdated, Flawed, and Far from the World's Best


For decades, the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines has served as the nation’s fundamental law. Born out of the struggle against dictatorship, it sought to restore democracy. Yet, decades on, a chorus of experts, reformists, and citizens now argue that the charter is defective, outdated, and unfit for the dynamic challenges of the 21st century.

Entrenchment of Oligarchic Politics


While the Constitution aims to foster democracy, in reality, it has done little to break the grip of a small elite on political power. The nation's post-1986 laws have proved more successful at legislating social and economic measures than enacting genuine structural political change. Even strong-willed presidents, bolstered by supermajorities and public approval, failed to realize deep constitutional change, highlighting the document’s rigidity in the face of urgent reform needs. Rather than opening politics to ordinary Filipinos, the charter has enabled the persistence of oligarchic structures, limiting meaningful political participation.

Unaddressed Regional and Ethnic Conflicts


The 1987 Constitution has not meaningfully resolved longstanding regional struggles, especially in Mindanao. The Moro people’s demands for political autonomy and justice remain largely unmet, prolonging one of Southeast Asia’s longest internal conflicts. Failure to grant effective self-governance, alongside poor governance and persistent discrimination, has further justified separatist aspirations and fueled violence. Attempts at peace and autonomy, often rooted in constitutional provisions, have failed to deliver true empowerment and sustainable development in these regions.

Inadequate Checks and Balances


The judiciary, intended as an independent check, is in practice shaped by presidential appointments, with clear government-opposition coalitions forming within the Supreme Court. This undermines judicial impartiality and allows partisan agendas to permeate crucial legal decisions. Such flaws hinder the effective separation of powers, allowing for executive overreach or legislative gridlock.

Stagnant Political and Economic Development


Despite aspirations for good governance and progress, the Constitution leaves significant gaps in institutional performance and accountability. It does not force an overhaul of outdated laws or promote bold governance improvements. Instead, political incentives for real structural reform are weak; attempts at incremental change often fall short of the tangible results needed to tackle poverty, corruption, and inequality. Socioeconomic disparities linger, with calls for agrarian reform and alternative development models repeatedly stymied by the charter’s neoliberal framework and strongholds of elite power.

Problematic Church-State Dynamics


Although constitutional principles call for the separation of church and state, contemporary events reveal that these boundaries are often crossed. Political leaders and church authorities remain locked in conflict over issues such as reproductive health, sex education, and lawmaking. Instead of promoting a secular policy environment, the Constitution struggles to prevent profound religious influence over public affairs. This dynamic stymies social reform and undermines progress on issues like women’s health and rights.

Outdated Provisions and Language Issues


Some constitutional sections, reflecting the historical context of the late 1980s, have not aged well. For example, language policies aimed at unity or global competitiveness often fail in practice, allowing social realities and English-language dominance to persist at the expense of local languages and cultural identities. The Constitution’s ambiguous language on certain rights, governance structures, and social policies complicate effective and equitable implementation.

Persistently High Corruption and Weak Enforcement


The Constitution’s provisions against corruption have proved insufficient for eradicating deep-seated malpractices. Despite anti-corruption laws and periodic purges, corrupt practices remain endemic in the government, casting doubt on the effectiveness of constitutional safeguards. Laws designed to guarantee land reform and social justice also struggle with implementation, leaving marginalized communities with little genuine redress.

Education and Governance Failures


Philippine education reform has fallen short of its promise. Decentralization, promoted under the constitutional framework, has produced piecemeal adjustments rather than bold institutional transformation. Fundamental governance issues, such as inadequately defined functional responsibilities and lack of inclusive policymaking, go unaddressed, perpetuating inequity and administrative inefficiency.

Conclusion: Rotten at the Core?


In summary, the 1987 Philippine Constitution has failed to live up to its billing as the world’s best. It is rigid in crucial aspects yet vague where specificity is desperately needed. The document both reflects and perpetuates the fractured, elite-dominated reality it was meant to transcend. Calls for charter change, whether gradual or sweeping, reflect a common recognition: the time has come for decisive constitutional reform.

Sunday, January 11, 2026

Spanish: The Language We Didn’t Choose to Lose

The Forgotten Majority: When Filipinos Spoke Spanish


The common answer says Spanish never really took root in the Philippines. That claim does not survive a serious look at the historical record.

Spanish was widely spoken in the Philippines by the time the Americans arrived. Not by a tiny elite (or ilustrados). Not only inside churches or courts. By ordinary Filipinos, as a first or second language. What changed was not public preference, but policy, power, and war.

The decline of Spanish was not natural. It was engineered.


First, we need to correct the numbers.

American censuses in 1903 and 1905 claimed that only around 10 percent of Filipinos spoke Spanish. With a population of roughly nine million, this placed Spanish speakers at about 900,000. But this figure counted only those who spoke Spanish as their first and only language.

In 1908, Luciano de la Rosa, a Katipunan veteran, lawyer, and member of the Philippine Assembly, published a different finding. He showed that around 60 percent of Filipinos spoke Spanish as a second language. Combined with first language speakers, this means close to 70 percent of the population could speak Spanish in some form.

That is a majority.

This was not an abstract claim. Early American officials confirmed it themselves. David P. Barrows, Director of the Bureau of Public Instruction, noted that the socially influential classes spoke Spanish. Politics, journalism, and commerce operated mainly in Spanish. English, at that point, was marginal.

Spanish was the working language of public life.


So what changed?

American rule deliberately disconnected the Philippines from the Hispanic world. This happened through three main channels.

First, education.

The Americans introduced a public school system that was broader and more efficient than what existed before. This part is often praised, and rightly so. But the system was designed to privilege English. Spanish was excluded from higher education and public administration. Over time, English became the language of mobility.

Ironically, early American education even increased Spanish literacy at first. Barrows himself admitted that more Filipinos knew Spanish after the American occupation began. This alarmed colonial officials. Barrows openly argued that Spanish would decline if it were cut off from institutional support, since the Philippines was geographically isolated from other Spanish-speaking countries.

That was not an accident. It was strategy.

Second, suppression and stigma.

Spanish was slowly removed from public life. It was portrayed as backward. Spain was framed as the villain of history, while the United States cast itself as the savior. English was presented as modern, practical, and necessary. Spanish became associated with the past, even with punishment. Speaking it meant exclusion from power.

Prominent Filipino educators resisted this shift. They were ignored.

Third, destruction.

World War II delivered the final blow.

Manila was the center of Spanish-speaking life. Districts like Intramuros and Ermita formed the cultural core of Philippine Hispanidad. During the Battle of Manila, over 100,000 civilians died. Most of the city was destroyed. Around 90 percent of Spanish-owned buildings and institutions were wiped out.

Spanish-speaking communities were physically erased.


Even then, Spanish did not disappear overnight. Before the war, Spanish literature in the Philippines experienced a golden age. Major Filipino writers were still producing works in Spanish well into the 1920s and 1930s. English literature was still developing.

Manila itself remained largely Spanish-speaking until the war. Ermita even developed its own Chavacano variety, now extinct.

After three American wars fought on Philippine soil, English became the language of the victor.

This history matters.

The disappearance of Spanish in the Philippines was not proof that Filipinos rejected it. It was the result of deliberate policy, cultural isolation, and mass destruction. Guillermo Gómez Rivera calls this cultural genocide. That term is debated. But the intent to sever the Philippines from its Hispanic roots is clearly documented.

The United States achieved many things. But its empire was built by dismantling other cultures. The Philippines is not unique. Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and Native American nations tell similar stories.

Spanish in the Philippines is weakened, but not dead. What is missing is an honest conversation. One that acknowledges how language power works. One that accepts that history is not neutral.

You cannot explain the present if you erase the past.

References

  • Gómez Rivera, G. La persecución del uso oficial del idioma español en Filipinas. Revista Arbil.
  • Gómez Rivera, G. Statistics: The Spanish Language in the Philippines.
  • Barrows, D. P. Reports of the Bureau of Public Instruction.
  • Quilis, A. and Casado-Fresnillo, C. La lengua española en Filipinas. Madrid, 2008.
  • Rodríguez-Ponga, R. Pero ¿cuántos hablan español en Filipinas? Cuadernos Hispanoamericanos.
  • The Sack of Manila. The Battling Bastards of Bataan.

To Amend or Not To Amend: That is the Question. A Debate on Charter Change.