the outdated diary of kourty buendia

Recent update

• Drugs and Love
• The Church, Graft anf Corruption and the Reproductive Health Bill
• GLOBE TELECOM KAWATAN
• Running out of patience, pag bad ka lagot ka- LOLZ!
• LOVE: the game of Basketball
• Trillanes is Joker than Joker Arroyo, A Flip Flopper without Havaianas
• GLOBAL WARMING
• Ang Pagkakaisa ng mga Wikang Pilipino
• responsibility
• DO SOMETHING and DO IT NOW Butuanons and Agusanons!

GMA: 75% of the Voting Population Voted, A display of Democracy in our COuntry

May 15th, 2007 by kurt-jumpman23

Read that on the Philippine Star, May 15, 2007!

MAo ba? PAGCHUR OI! tambling ko ron!.

Democracy in our country is just a thought.

The best way for people to test the powers of democracy is through conduction of elections.

But in this country, people are crying about change. But do these people really represent the Filipino population, statistically speaking? Just how much of Filipinos want change ?

Vote buying has become a sacred tradition of Filipinos( as what the great Armelo Beluan noted) .

POVERTY! CORRUPTION! hahay… social evils… spare us FILIPINOS!

Posted in politics, rants | tagged corruption | | 0 Comments

Dirty Dirty Dirty DIRTY Politics

May 14th, 2007 by kurt-jumpman23

Fucking politics.

This is my first election that I could vote. This was also the election that my brother ran for City councilor.

The Philippine Electoral SYSTEM is SO DAMN ROTTEN!!!!!!!!!!!

There were no attempts to improve and change this system.

If the main problems of previous elections were cheating and vote-buying, there is something worse than that.

Voters living in urbanized Baranggays, are actually selling their Votes. Mag Vote Straight kay BOYDAKU nga 200 ang hatag, mag vote straight pud kay ANGEL nga 500 ang hatag. Pascual? haha… ambot lang… zero zerohan man gani sa counting!

Much much much worse, these voters are presumed to be intelligent than those in the rural areas.

I was so upbeat that idealism, intelligence, and good platform of government of candidates are the qualities that make voters vote for them.

MONEY is the biggest factor. If you have big bucks, plus the mentioned factors above, then the probability of winning is big.

Reeducationg, reinforcing, empowering our voters, the electoral system is a virtual impossibility.

CHARTER CHANGE doesn’t make sense. There will be a balance of power among national politicians. But on the local scene, it is still dominated by political dynasties.

Being a UP Student, as I have been taught to be as a catalyst of change in society, the task is too much, especially when the society you want to make change is the avenue of politics. Philippine politics have so many errors in the past, which is continuing upto the present time. The results are pretty much irreversible.

To win, you must play dirty. I don’t think that’s consistent with my beliefs.

Posted in politics, rants | tagged corruption, election | | 4 Comments

THe ELite Filipino Youth and Politics

May 3rd, 2007 by kurt-jumpman23

This portion of Filipino youth should be involved in Philippine politics.

‘Involvement’ does not necessarily mean to support any particular candidate and vote him/her. Involvement could mean of being aware of what is happening politically, socially and atleast try to give a damn about it.

Most importantly, exercise your right of suffrage.Now if the youth of today will not give a damn and fuck about it,especially this portion of socioeconomic class of Filipino youth, I hope they will not blabber and complain when they reach adulthood and blame the politicians because of the failing political Philippine system.

Blame yourself for not doing anything, for not being involved.

The power for change is not always dependent on the politicians and candidates alone, but on the voters as well.

And before I forgot, if you are a ‘youth’ that belongs to top tier class of socioeconomic level of the society , then your involvement is pretty much powerful.

Posted in nationalism, politics, rants | tagged elections | | 2 Comments

year 2007: the year of the pig or dragon?

May 1st, 2007 by kurt-jumpman23

maybe chinese astrology is right

During the chinese new year, every time these experts predict that it would be a good year for those who born in those ‘ years of the dragon’, my experience on those years were, like what they say, lucky and happy.

Now it’s 2007, last January, these chinese people predicted that it will not be a good year for dragon people. I was born on a dragon year, perhaps that prediction is true.

I’ve been struggling this year, in many aspects of my life, almost all of it.

Now it’s election time and my brother’s gonna run for BUtuan City Councilor. ( Butuanons, please vote for him, view his profiles on my profile …please FROI MONTERO, choy sa konseho! )

But how I really really really wish these election tarpolins and handbills will be transformed into food.

Enough of the details and drama.

It’s really not my year, from January until May. Hope this jinx would end by this month or until june. December is still too far. Hope 2008 will be kinder to me.

Like the old Beattles song: “  I should get back where I once belonged.“

Posted in rants | | | 2 Comments

cutterpillow: a content analysis of the Philippine’s Best Selling Music ALbum

April 5th, 2007 by kurt-jumpman23

The composer, Ely Buendia was clarifying a socially relevant issue: how poor men die compared to how rich men die. The lyrics of the song were written in a narrative form. The only valuable things a poor man has were starving kids and a loving wife. The first stanza simply exemplifies the struggles of a poor man just to keep his family intact. The second stanza indicates that praying to Church and doing everything right won’t make life better. This could implicate the song as an opposition to the government, but the Church as well. This would also indicate that the composer is not that religious.The third and fourth lines in third verse indicates how hard life is for the man. The composer’s use of words is simple, but convincing. Poverty that resulted from social inequality was directly reflected on the lyrics, not hidden metaphorically and creatively.

In the lyrics of the songs, it will be better if the composer indicated directly who he wants to communicate the song’s message. Because hearing the song would tell that it is too much influenced by Western Music: heavy sound and English lyrics. A new rendition would fit well if the rhythm of the song were slowly arranged. It was too fast for song about death. The message was very simple but a recommendation will be made that the song will revised in the future. More powerful, evocative language/lines will be used if the purpose is to arouse people. Slower singing is required because the verses in the original song were getting heavier as it also got a lot faster during verses. For me, the song could be made melodic and a little bit slower. I also recommend that the song lyrics should be more creative for novel listeners. A hip-hop kind of song can also make buzz in the music industry.

Posted in music | tagged cutterpillow, eraserheads | | 0 Comments

my field psych paper: maintainaing interpersonal relationships

April 5th, 2007 by kurt-jumpman23

University of the

Philippines

in the Visayas

Cebu

College

AY 2006-2007

2^nd Semester

LEVELS OF EFFECTIVENESS AND SATISFACTION

OF THE MAINTENANCE STYLES

IN ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS

A Submission of

of a Research Survey

in

Partial Fulfillment

In Field Psychology

( Psych 118)

Submitted by:

Kurt

Chino

A. Montero

BA Psychology II

Submitted to:

Dr. Flora Generalao

March 29, 2007

ABSTRACT

There are too many intimate romantic couples in this world yet this excludes marital, legally-bound relationships. These relationships are either meant to be broken or to be maintained. As couples delve into the world of love when they found it, they also interact with environmental, naturally occurring processes that may disrupt, destroy, and end it. This survey-study is more focused on the latter, maintaining relationships.  Hence, the research of this study-survey aims to search on what individuals in romantic relationships and their partner’s do to maintain it.

The research setting of this study was in Barangay Sambag II,

Cebu

City

and it started from

March 5-24, 2007

. The researcher used the snowball technique in which individuals, contact persons and respondents were asked of known and available target respondents. Target respondents were individuals involved in romantic relationships ( N= 45,F=33 & M=12) . The research instrument used was a questionnaire. Open-ended questions were asked like what are their maintenance styles and of their partners and the perception of the future of their relationship. In assessing their maintenance styles, a 5-point effectiveness scale ( 1 as  never effective to 5 as always effective) was created, in assessing their partner’s maintenance style, a 5 –point satisfaction rating scale ( 1 as never satisfied to 5 as always satisfied) was also created. Other variables included were gender of the respondents and duration of the relationship.

Results will show that the maintenance styles of an individual and their partners are very complex and varied compared to others. Numeric data were statistically treated but found no significant results. Conclusions were drawn from the results of the study and interesting recommendations for future research were made.

Levels of Effectiveness and Satisfaction of the Maintenance Styles

In Romantic Relationships

Relationships are either meant to be broken or to be maintained. To end satisfying relationships is punishing while to maintain satisfying relationships is reinforcing. To maintain satisfying relationships is also to maintain these reinforcements.

The maintenance of intimate romantic relationships is the primary goal of couples who are in love. But people vary in their methods to maintain their romantic relationships; each style of maintenance is unique to them. Such kind of maintenance styles should be quantified as this research aims to assess its effectiveness and satisfaction of unique maintenance styles.

To empirically study relationships extends the horizons of the science of psychology. Recently, there has been an increase of publications of works on the study of relationships. This research, attempts to study relationships, especially its maintenance, its maintenance styles and the satisfaction and effectiveness ratings of it from the respondents. However, no study is absolutely perfect and this study may have limitations. This study is not an attempt to replicate the grand, full-scale, ultra-scientific experimental studies conducted by American psychologists in whom works are posted in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

Statements of the Problem

                  This study seeks to find answers on the following problems: (1) What do the respondents employ to maintain their romantic relationships?; (2) What is the perceived effectiveness of their intimate maintenance styles ?, What is the perceived effectiveness of their non-intimate maintenance styles?; (3) Is their a significant difference of level of effectiveness between the intimate and non-intimate maintenance styles of the respondents?; (4)What do the respondents’ partners employ to maintain their romantic relationship?; (5)What is the perceived satisfaction of their partner’s intimate maintenance styles ?, What is the perceived satisfaction of their partner’s non-intimate maintenance styles?; (6) Is their a significant difference of level of satisfaction between the intimate and non-maintenance styles of their partner?; ( 7) Is their a significant  difference between the respondents’ level of effectiveness in employing their maintenance style in terms of their (a) gender, (b) duration of their relationship and (c) perception of the future of the relationship?; and (9) Is their a significant difference between the respondent’s level of satisfaction on their partner’s maintenance style in terms of their (a) gender; (b) duration of their relationship and (c) perception of the future of the relationship?

    

Background of the Study

            Maintenance of Relationships.Interpersonal relationships are social associations, connections, or affiliations between two or more people. They vary in differing levels of intimacy and sharing, implying the discovery or establishment of common ground, and may be centered around something(s) shared in common ( Wikipedia.com ). The most popular, identifiable,common and interesting kind of interpersonal relationship is the romantic kind of relationship.

            Devito ( 1995 ) defined relationship maintenance as part of the relationship process in which one acts to continue/maintain established relationships. Maintenance aims to (a) to prevent relationship dissolution; (b) to prevent change of intimacy, e.g. having less or greater intimacy and (c) to keep it satisfying.

            Knapp ( 1996) provided a more exact definition. From his book, he explained:

“ maintenance is the way the partners deal with the critical and repeated acts of  discourse that constitute their relationship. It is the way they deal with conflict; their ability to use small talk for relational purposes; the judicious use of disclosures as well as secrets; their ability to make their partner feel their commitment and affection; their ability to engineer the proper mixture of teamwork and teamplay; the ability to provide for one another’s privacy as well as togetherness; and the ability to develop

the proper balance of predictable and novel communication patterns… relationship maintenance then, involves a blending of experiences and interactions,some of which  are perceived as pleasant and some of which are not” (p. 232 )

            Social Exchange Theories. There are three main theories that tries to explain processes that goes into romantic relationships. The first example example would be the Social Exchange Theories ( see Devito, 1995; Krapp & Vangelisti,1996; Cole,2005; Wikipedia.com ). This theory suggest that people involved in relationships are constantly exchanging resources like love, status, money, goods and services. This resources are evaluated by us if it is rewarding or not. And lastly, the theory argues that people have a tendency to seek those things which will be rewarding to them. This suggest that humans are in romantic relationships for we find rewards or feel rewarded in this relationships. Inability to maintain it would also mean to lose the rewards.The Equity theory emphasizes people care for equity and fairness in their relationships( wikipedia.com ). The theory predicts that relationship partners will be more satisfied with their relationship when the ration of benefits to contributions is similar for both of them. Inequity occurs when one partner is perceived as underbenefited relative to the other .The equality rule suggests that partners are satisfied in their relationships when they perceived that each partner is perceived as contributing and benefiting equally. The Reward Level theory suggests that people in relationships are getting happier if they get more rewards. The need-based rule says that people exchange sources in response to their perceptions of  their partner’s needs.The more this is perceived, the more satisfaction is felt for the relationshi. ( Knapp & Vangelisti, 1996, p.48;Cole,2005).

Dialectical Theory .The other main theory on relationships is the Dialectical theory. It suggests that  a relationship is not  static entity. Instead, a relationship is a continuing process, always changing (wikipedia.com). Changes takes place as a result of trying to resolve the inevitable tensions of relationship life.  The common most identiable tensions are integration-separation, which is  related to the occurrence of autonomy and connection to social systems  of the individuals; expression-nonexpression, which describes that we need expression and openness to achieve intimacy but we also make ourselves and our relationships vulnerable in doing so and the last is stability-change tension which suggests that we need a certain amount of predictability in our relationships and our partners to be comfortable but too much predictability in certain areas may take the relationship to stale and too look for something different ( Knapp & Vangelisti, 1996).

Attraction Theory.The attraction theory also provide explanations ( see Devito, 1995; Krapp & Vangelisti,1996; Wikipedia.com ). The proximity idea infers that while relationships continue, proximty is an advantage. When there is no desire to prolong the relationship,proximty is a problem and efforts will be made to decrease the possibilities of co-presence. The similarity/dissimilarity section predicts that relationships are more enduring if one’s reaction towards us has changed from negative to positive than we might be toward someone we like from the beginning.

            Devito ( 1995) identified six main reasons why individuals involved in relationships wants to maintain these relationships. First, emotional attachment makes individuals love each other. They do not find other alternatives enjoyable and unfulfilling. Second, for reasons of convenience like sharing mutual close friends,joint ownership of business and other social and economic concerns, individuals retain their relationship. Third, relationships are endured for the sake and best interests of a couples children, which could be fortunate or unfortunate. Choices are easier to make in childless relationships. Fourth, some couples stay because of fears of being alone, social criticism, facing some singles which they stereotyped as dangerous if they were involved in casual relationships especially for the women. Fifth, couples don’t wana break up because they have invested financially for their relationship. Lastly, they don’t want to break up because the temporal and emotional investments are too risky to be destroyed.

            Maintaining Processes. Devito ( 1995) identified R.E.P.A.I.R. as his means to maintain relationships: Recognize the problem ,Engage in productive conflict resolution

,Pose possible solutions, Affirm each other, Integrate solutions into normal behavior

and Risk.

Meanwhile, Knapp and Vangelisti ( 1996 ) have a more rigorous and comprehensive views on relationship reparation in their book.

Disclosures. In the case of having a third party in premarital relationships or extramarital affairs on marital relationships, there are two dilemmas an individual has to face if he/she wants to maintain the “legitimate” relationship : to tell it to the partner, if yes, how to tell it . Many couples have survived disclosure for the betterment of their relationship. But many couples reported that it’s not the fact that their partner had an affair, but the associations of deceptions in life and the exchange of symbols of their intimacy with a stranger/outsider. Process of repair may take years but the aim is to put away the associations with an affair Knapp and Vangelesti also said that self-disclosure is used to hurt, shock, or embarrass other people while we can also take it as an advantage to gain personal information or services from others(p.236-237). They also noted that as relationship reaches for more intimacy, disclosures will probably be more frequent that have established themselves and stabilized at an intimate stage.

Lies.  Knapp and Vangelesti noted that the real issue on lies is whether it will have a damaging effect on the relationship and whether the motivation for lying was well-intended. The best predictor of relationship termination as a result of a discovered lie is the perceived importance of the information lied about. This explains people who are more involved/ committed to their relationship are going to have a greater emotional reaction to lies that impinge directly on the relationship ( McCornack & Levine,1990 as cited on Knapp and Vangeliste,1996).

Cole ( 2005) wrote that use of deceptions in romantic relationships will not solve all the problems but it certainly helps to reduce stress, anxiety and uncertainty that occur when deception eventually comes to light .He also maintained that as we trust more in our partners, we also became more confident but less accurate at determining when the truth is told. Since romantic relationships are so rewarding yet constrictive, we are simultaneously getting truthful and deceptive to our partners. Hence, deceiving a partner is the most efficient way of maintaining the rewards we get from relationships while pursuing extra-relational goals that our partners prohibited.

Conflicts. Knapp and Vangeliste( 1996) noted that conflict is neither good nor bad; the way people choose to engage each other in conflict, however can be judged as positive or negative depending on how it affects the participants of the relationship. They also noted that profitable constructive conflict may provide a greater understanding of the other, oneself and the relationship; clarify similarities and dissimilarities; assist people to learn methods for coping with future conflict and reveal areas where communicative effort and adaptation need to be strengthened( p.247 ). They also reasoned out that those who are most effective in interpersonal conflict are those who foresee conflict and analytically weight the nature of their partner and the nature of the conflict prior to its appearance. For constructive conflict studies between, Notarius and Markman ( as cited in Knapp and Vangeliste,1996)  concluded that couples should decrease: negative problem talk, negative solution talk, mind reading to ones’ partner and critical talk. On the other hand, we should try to increase listening talk and positive problem talk. Lastly, Knapp and Vangeliste recognized that compromise is the hallmark of constructive conflict and that more often than not, the ability to compromise arises out of the ability to understand that out partner’s view of reality is just as real and just as right as ours (p.255).

Commitment & Intimacy. Our commitment is the barometer of our partners, to measure the extent to which we identify with relationship. Knapp and Vangeliste (1996) acknowledge that we many things to prioritize in life and that with relationships as a part of this things, willingness to exert effort increases our investments ( time, energy, money), which in turn increases our commitment to the relationship.

Knapp and Vangeliste ( 1996 ) confirmed that to show commitments, we should do commitment talks, and one kind of it is saying the “ I LOVE YOU” phrase to your significant other. Though in troubled relationships, the “ I love you “ phrase may not be enough to convince one’s partner that he or she is loved. The phrase alone could be empty, if it had not been follow-up by specific behaviors to justify its declaration. Knapp and Vangeliste emphasized that specific behaviors that complement more abstract statements of commitment are always more important. They also noted repetition of commitment talks and behaviors over and over again increases the impact on relationship as it reaches intimacy. They also included that explicitness, rather than equivocation and vagueness of commitment language should be used. Vagueness signal less commitment and messages are sometimes misinterpreted. Specifically, they suggested the following for effective commitment communication: (1) repeat commitment over and over in different ways,(2) use unqualified, absolute statements, (3) talk future relationship rewards, (4)statements of commitment should be made public and permanent , (5) always show effort and (6) initiate at least as much as you respond.

For young intimate relationships, personal idioms or language patterns are used to reinforce the identity of the couple as something special or unique and to define relationhip norms. Idioms tend to develop and receive use during the period when people want to emphasize commitment to the relationship. Example would be expression of affections, partner nicknames, teasing insults and sexual invitations ( Knapp & Vangeliste,1996).

Meanwhile, Knapp and Vangeliste(1996) also emphasized the giving of compliments and gifts They defined compliments that the things that tell other what we value and in turn, provides for what makes us happy. Compliments are the evaluation of another person. Giving of gifts is ways of periodically making a statement of the relationship since when gifts are given are crucial determinant of their relationship. However, showering of gifts seem unpleasing and annoying.

In adult and more matured relationships, especially for troubled relationships, couples increase the frequency of sexual behavior and intimate play to reestablish intimacy. However, sexual communication involves signals emanating from the partners, signals emanating from the environment, timing and individual factors ( Knapp & Vangeliste,1996).

Davitz( 1964,as cited on Knapp and Vangeliste, 1996) concluded in his study that intimate vocalizations include a lower pitch, softer voice, slower rate and slurred enunciation.

Lastly, Knapp and Vangeliste ( 1996) recognized the importance of showing intimacy without words. Their studies have shown that nonverbal messages have stronger impact for long-term relationships than for short-term relationships. Touching, on the other hand, reduces physical distance between partners. The greater the amount of touching would mean the greater the achieved intimacy. Silence between partners reflects either distance, as well as closeness, depending on the situation.

            Recent Studies.The literature of psychology offers new and interesting researches on the science of relationships, particularly topics that are related to its  maintenance ( Arriaga, 2001; Boldry,Campbell, Kashy & Simpson, 2005;Campbell, Overall,Fletcher, & Simpson, 2006,etc).

            Arriaga ( 2001) made a research  on whether stable versus fluctuating levels of satisfaction reflect distinct relationship experiences that yield distinct relationship outcomes. She hypothesized that (a) individuals who exhibit greater fluctuation in their level of satisfaction  will be more likely to be in a relationship that ends than will individuals who exhibit more stable levels of satisfaction; (b) if indicators of overall level of satisfaction are controlled, fluctuationin satisfaction will be associated with break-up status and (c) that if individuals who exhibit greater fluctuation in their level of satisfaction will report lower overall levels of commitment than will individuals who exhibit more stable level of satisfaction.

These hypotheses were later confirmed and corraborated. Individuals whose level of satisfaction exhibit an objectively stable trend are more likely to feel committed and indeed are on a course toward greater add of persistence. The detrimental effect of highly fluctuating levels of satisfaction was more pronounced for individuals with relatively  higher overall or increasing satisfaction levels than for individuals with relatively lower/decreasing satisfaction levels. Partners who experience pronounced fluctuation in their satisfaction levels and consequently fails to establish a pro-relationship behavioral orientation are more likely to be in relationships that end.  Developing pro-relationship behavioral orientations would lead a lasting relationship while developing self-interested orientations or failing to do so, leads to dissolution.     Happy relationships were likely to end if the participant was not consistently happy.  For the relationship to be stable, one’s level of satisfaction should be consistent. A single dramatic decline in satisfaction levels were more likely to be in relationshisps that ended than individuals who did not exhibit this pattern ( see Arriaga, 2001).

Boldry,Campbell, Kashy  and Simpson (2005) researched on how perceptions of relation-based conflict and support are associated with relationship satisfaction/closeness and its future quality. Along with a 17-item Adult Attachment Questionnaire,they included and employed diary studies for their participants in which they write daily their conflictual and supportive interactions with their partners

Their results showed that more anxiously attached individuals perceived greater relationship conflict each day and they reported a larger number of conflicts across the diary period. More anxiously attached individuals felt that conflicts (a) escalated beyond their original topic , (b) were more hurtful to them and (c) would have long term negative consequences for the future stability of their relationships. They were also not assuaged by their partner’s positive behavior during conflicts, but maintained these behaviors were beneficial in theabsence of conflicts.  A certain speculation would arise that highly anxious individuals may at times identify conflicts that did not really exist. Highly anxious people are less likely to adjust to their relationship evaluations proportionate to their parnter’s action. Highly anxious might simply ignore and deny their parnter’s positive overtures, for possibly they may construe it as not genuine. Highly anxious individuals base their judgments on relationship quality on amplified relationship conflicts, which eventually lead to relationship dissolution ( see Boldry,Campbell, Kashy  & Simpson,2005).

Meanwhile, Fletcher, et.al (2006) researched on the implications regarding partner regulation on partner perceptions an relationship evaluations. Their results showed that regulations attempts generally produce more negative perceptions of ideal consistency, which would seem counter-intuitive. Attempts to change the partner will signal that he/she is failing to meet expectations.  High levels  of partner regulation were likely to exacerbate low ideal consistency, particularly if regulatory effects were unsuccessful. The more the regulation attempts, the less they believed they matched their partner’s standards. They concluded that our judgments of self-ideal perception consistency and self-regulation were not related to perceptions of relationship quality. Attempts to improve the relationship should also include attempts to change self-attributes and/or aspects of the relationship that involves self and the partner ( see Overall,Fletcher, & Simpson, 2006).

Conceptual Framework

Respondent’s Intimate Maintenance Styles

Effectiveness Scale

Respondent’s Non-Intimate Maintenance Styles

Partner’s Non-Intimate Maintenance Styles

Partner’s Intimate Maintenance Styles

Satisfaction Scale

Perception of the Future

Duration of Relationship

Gender of Respondents

Methodology

Research Setting

                  The research of this study was done in Barangay Sambag II,

Cebu

City

.

Sampling Design

                  The researcher used a non-probabilistic type of sampling, specifically the snowball technique. This researcher argues that with the target respondents involved in intimate romantic relationships, an individual cannot be directly identified to have a romantic relationship unless s/he is with his/her partner. Target respondents however, are single individuals, not couples on the spot since answers to questions like perceptions about the future of the relationship will be greatly affected if it is the latter.

Sample Size

                  Since minimum sample size rule for snowball technique is N=30, this researcher obtained a sample size of 45 respondents for this study ( N= 45),in which individuals involved in romantic relationships were given the questionnaire.

Participants

                   Most of the respondents were 18 years of age with the minimum= 16 and maximum= 25 ( M=18.31, SD=1.49). 13 of them were males and 32 were females. 22 of the respondents were involved in a relationship in at least a year, 18 were at least a month, 5 were involved in at least a week.

Instrument

            

The following are the questionnaire guides for our respondents in. Pre-tests were made involving five respondents. Results from the pre-tests indicated that answers from open-ended questions like “ what do you usually do to maintain your relationship?”  should not scaled. Because answers were usually on the positive extreme end ( 5=always effective). Respondents were also too lazy to answer such questions.  Two items in the scale were removed. These items from the draft were “I tell everything to my partner” and “ Ask him/her to do activities together”, as both of these items tend to be equal in terms of meaning in items  1 and 6, respectively.  Items on each scale were divided into two conditions: numbers 1-6 are non-intimate maintenance styles while 7-12 were intimate ones. It was classified and generalized as such through information from literature (Knapp & Vangelisti, 1996). The effectiveness rating scale is to be checked in assessing the respondent’s maintenance styles as reflected to his/her partner while the satisfaction rating scale is for maintenance style is to be checked in assessing the maintenance styles of the partner as reflected by the respondent.  Below are actual questions and items used in the questionnaire.

Open Ended Questions.(1) What do you usually do to maintain your relationship?

(2) What does your partner usually do to maintain your relationship? And (3)  In your point of view, will the relationship last?  Why ?

Scales. An effectiveness rating scale was made to assess the maintenance styles of the respondents. The  values were: 1 as never effective;   2 as rarely effective; 3  as sometimes effective;  4 as often effective ; and 5 as  always effective. A satisfaction rating scale was made to assess the maintenance styles of the respondent’s partner. Values were: 1 as never satisfied; 2 as  rarely satisfied; 3 as  sometimes satisfied; 4 as  often satisfied  and 5 as always satisfied. The two tables below are the to be checked.

Your Maintenance Styles	1	2	3	4	5
1.   I lie to my partner on things that make him/her very mad
2.   I compromise when I argue with my partner.
3.  I listen well to my partner’s problems.
4.  I easily forgive my partner if s/he had faults.
5.  I text (or call) my partner everyday.
6.  I spend time with my partner every week.
7.  I  say “ I LOVE YOU” to my partner.
8. I call names of endearment to my partner.
9.  I show affection to my partner in public.
10.  I present gifts to my partner on occasions.
11.  I kiss and hug my partner.
12.  I make him/her feel that I’m proud of him/her.

Your Partner’s Maintenance Styles	1	2	3	4	5
1.  My partner lies to me on things that make me very mad.
2.  My partner compromises when we argue.
3.  My partner listens well to my problems.
4.  My partner easily forgives me if I have faults.
5.  My partner always texts (or calls) me everyday.
6.  My partner spends time with me every week.
7.  My partner says “ I LOVE YOU” to me.
8. My partner calls me names of endearment.
9. My partner shows affection in public.
10. My partner presents me with gifts on occasions.
11. My partner kisses and hugs me.
12. My partner makes me feel that s/he’s proud of me.

Results and Discussion

Respondent’s Maintenance Styles

Output from this survey indicated that the maintenance styles the respondents employed to maintain their romantic relationships were so varied. An individual involved in an intimate romantic relationship may have very few maintenance styles; so many or just none at all. A single maintenance style intersects with another maintenance style. Table 4 in the Appendix is about the different maintenance styles of the respondents. Most of the respondents indicated being open to the partner, spending time with partner’s family, making surprises and having constant communication, according to its modality. This would suggest that issues of openness and trust are very vital to maintain the relationship. Surprises may support the notion that it avoids the relationship from being boring and satiable. As the previous styles were in line with the literature, the style of spending time with partner’s family was not. However, the literature was in a Western context, perhaps this kind of style is vital in the Philippine society, which is predominantly Catholic and conservative.

Partner’s Maintenance Styles

Table 5 in the appendix indicates that being open, being sweet, going to Church, spending time with partner’s family and constant communication were the most frequent reported maintenance styles. The possible difference between the respondent’s own maintenance style and remembering their partner’s maintenance style was they remember the intimate style from their partner like being sweet. In remembering a non-intimate style, they mentioned going to church. This may suggest that going to church is a possible way to strengthen the relationship by sharing and fostering their religious beliefs. Another possible explanation could be that they go to church as an alibi for them to have dates against the wishes of their guardians.

Perception of the Future

The results indicated that 33 of the 45 respondents perceived that their relationship will last while 12 of them reported it would not. As shown in Table 1, the most common reason why respondent’s perceived that relationship will last is that they feel they have proven the love of their partners and that they already invested too much time, energy for the commitment of the relationship. The second most common reason is that they enjoy each other’s company. This seems that couples just go with the flow and compatibility is a major factor for the relationship to last.

Table 1.  Reasons for Why Relationship Will Last

	f	p
No Response	3	9.09
being considerate of short comings	1	3.03
Christ as Center of the relationship	2	6.06
enjoyment of each other’s company	8	24.24
intimate and friendly treatment	2	6.06
no major conflicts	2	6.06
proven love and commitment	14	42.42
secured feelings	1	3.03
Total	33	100

            However, when respondents seemed that the relationship won’t last, major reasons were feeling of not being contented, incompatibility and the hurdles of long distance relationships( see table 2 ).Perhaps, an individual’s satisfaction on the maintenance styles of his/her partner is beginning to fade. Physical proximity is also important; as an individual is too attached to an individual he/she can’t physically feel. Maintaining a long distance relationship maybe also difficult since communication and interaction is not as instant and direct compared to physically proximate relationships.

Table 2. Reasons for Why Relationship Won’t Last

	f	p
immaturity of boyfriend	1	8.33
incompatibility	2	16.67
long distance relationship	2	16.67
no love, just lust	1	8.33
no support from family, long distance relationship	1	8.33
too many conflicts	1	8.33
Not contented	4	33.33
Total	12	100

Effectiveness and Satisfaction

In determining significant differences of effectiveness and satisfaction scores in terms of intimate and non-intimate maintenance styles of the respondent’s and his/her partner, a paired samples test was conducted. Results indicated that there were no significant differences of the scores between Effectiveness of Respondent’s Non-Intimate Style - Effectiveness of Respondent’s Intimate Style, t(44) = -0.12,p > .05 ; Satisfaction of Partner’s Non-Intimate Style - Satisfaction of Partner’s Intimate Style,(t(44) =0.63, p > .05); Effectiveness of Respondent’s Non-Intimate Style - Satisfaction of Partner’s Non-Intimate Style, t(44) = -0.66, p>.05) and Effectiveness of Respondent’s Intimate Style - Satisfaction of Partner’s Intimate Style, t(44)= -0.023; p > 0.05. Table 3 shows the mean scores.

Table 3.  Effectiveness and Satisfaction Scores

	N	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	SD
Effectiveness of Respondent’s Non Intimate Style	45	10	29	20.93	4.413
Effectiveness of Respondent’s Intimate Style	45	6	29	21.00	4.918
Satisfaction of Partner’s Non- Intimate Style	45	6	29	21.42	4.859
Satisfaction of Partner’s Intimate Style	45	6	30	21.02	5.817
Valid N (listwise)	45

            There were also no significant differences of satisfaction and effectiveness in terms of gender of respondent, perception of the future of the relationship and duration of the relationship ( see tables 11 to 16 in the appendix).

            

Conclusion and Recommendations

            Studying interpersonal relationships, especially about its maintenance is very hard to organize. Maintenance styles of individuals differ and are almost very unique. An individual may employ this kind of style while another individual may employ a different style and another will employ both. This study failed to find significant differences among the dependent variables: satisfaction and effectiveness of intimate and non-intimate maintenance styles among respondents and their partners, to the gender of the respondent and the duration and perception of the future of their relationships.

            To find any statistical significance, future researchers should focus on a very specific dimension of a maintenance style.

            To find if whether satisfaction and effectiveness levels fluctuates or changes, a longitudinal study should be done.  Targeting couples and instead of individuals as respondents may be a great advantage for comparison purposes, but problems like willingness of the targets to participate should be noted. Couples are usually overprotective of their privacy than individuals. And the presence of a partner in answering such research questions may alter what should have been reported. A more balanced number of each variation in terms of the respondent’s gender and duration of their relationships should be desired.

            Studying romantic relationships is very complex, but making dimensions in relationships as quantifiable units makes it promising, exciting and interesting.

References

Arriaga, X.B. (2001). The ups and downs of dating : Fluctuatuins in satisfaction in newly

formed romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80,

754-765.

Cole, Timothy. (2005, November 04). Love, Lies, Betrayal, and Deceit - Why Do We Lie

            to Those We Love?. EzineArticles. Retrieved

January 13, 2007

, from http://ezinearticles.com/?Love,-Lies,-Betrayal,-and-Deceit—Why-Do-We-Lie-      

          to-Those-We-Love?&id=92035

Boldry, J., Campbell,L., Kashy,D.A., & Simpson,J.A. (2005). Perceptions of conflict and

             support in romantic relationships: The role of attachment anxiety. Journal of

            Personality and Social Psychology, 88,510-531.

Devito, J.A. ( 1995). The interpersonal communication book.

New York

: Harper Collins

            College Publishers.

Knapp, M.L. & Vangelisti,A.L. (1996). Interpersonal Communications and Human

            Relationships.

Boston

: Allyn & Bacon.

Overall, N.C., Fletcher, G.J.O., & Simpson, J.A. (2006). Regulation processes in intimate

             relationships: The role of ideal standards. Journal of Personality and Social

            Psychology, 91, 663-685.

http://wikipedia.com/interpersonal-relationships/

Appendices

Tables

Table 1.  Age of Respondents

Mean	18.31111
Std. Deviation	1.489695
age	f	­p
16	1	2.222222
17	10	22.22222
18	20	44.44444
19	10	22.22222
20	1	2.222222
21	1	2.222222
22	1	2.222222
25	1	2.222222
Total	45	100

Table 2.  Gender of Respondents ( N=45)

	f	p
male	13	28.88889
female	32	71.11111
Total	45	100

Table 3. Duration of the Relationship

	f	p
years	22	48.88889
months	18	40
weeks	5	11.11111
Total	45	100

Table 4.  Maintenance Styles of Respondents

	f	p
No response	10	22.2
use of unique nicknames, making surprises, being supportive,open	1	2.2
avoid being satiable	1	2.2
being considerate to bad habits	1	2.2
being considerate to bad habits, show of concern	1	2.2
being open	1	2.2
being open, jealous	1	2.2
being open, planning of future, finding time to date	1	2.2
being open, trustful, giving of gifts, giving of space and freedom	1	2.2
being strict to bad habits	1	2.2
being supportive,open,understanding,trustful,planning of future,joking around,cook food,experimentation,moderation	1	2.2
being sweet	1	2.2
being sweet, drinking beer together	1	2.2
being trustful	1	2.2
constant communication	1	2.2
constant communication, being trustful,respectful,obedient,open	1	2.2
constant communication, cooking of food, being open	1	2.2
focus whole attention	1	2.2
following relationship rules	1	2.2
going to Church	1	2.2
going to Church, spend time with partner’s family	1	2.2
know how to lie, never lend cellphone	1	2.2
making jokes	1	2.2
making surprises	3	6.7
making surprises, sing and dance in front of boyfriend	1	2.2
planning of future	1	2.2
spend time with partner’s family	4	8.87
spend time with partner’s family, praying	1	2.2
teasing	2	4.4
watching movies, making sincere-talks	1	2.2
Total	45	100.0

Table 5.  Maintenance Styles of the Partners of Respondents

	f	p
No response	18	40.0
avoid being satiable	1	2.2
being open, immediate solving of problems	1	2.2
being open, jealous	1	2.2
being open, planning of future	1	2.2
being sweet	3	6.7
constant communication	1	2.2
constant communication, following relationship rules	1	2.2
continuous courtship	1	2.2
cooking of food	1	2.2
cooking of food, planning of future	1	2.2
focus whole attention	1	2.2
gentleman effect, being sweet,spend time with partner’s family,complaining if when the "I-LOVE-YOU" phrase is missing or shortened during conversation	1	2.2
giving of compliments	1	2.2
going to Church	2	4.4
intimacy	1	2.2
making jokes	1	2.2
never getting mad, making surprises, treat like a baby, being supportive	1	2.2
painting her notebook	1	2.2
spend time with partner’s family	3	6.7
spend time with partner’s family, constant communication, showing of effort, making of surprises	1	2.2
staring straight into the eye, being thoughtful	1	2.2
teasing	1	2.2
Total	45	100

Table 6.   Perceived Future of the Relationship

	f	p
will last	33	73.33333
wont last	12	26.66667
Total	45	100

Table 7.  Reasons for Why Relationship Will Last

	f	p
No Response	3	9.09
being considerate of short comings	1	3.03
Christ as Center of the relationship	2	6.06
enjoyment of each other’s company	8	24.24
intimate and friendly treatment	2	6.06
no major conflicts	2	6.06
proven love and commitment	14	42.42
secured feelings	1	3.03
Total	33	100

Table 8.  Reasons for Why Relationship Won’t Last

	f	p
immaturity of boyfriend	1	8.33
incompatibility	2	16.67
long distance relationship	2	16.67
no love, just lust	1	8.33
no support from family, long distance relationship	1	8.33
too many conflicts	1	8.33
Not contented	4	33.33
Total	12	100

                           

Table 9.  Effectiveness and Satisfaction Scores

	N	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	SD
Effectiveness of Respondent’s Non Intimate Style	45	10	29	20.93	4.413
Effectiveness of Respondent’s Intimate Style	45	6	29	21.00	4.918
Satisfaction of Partner’s Non- Intimate Style	45	6	29	21.42	4.859
Satisfaction of Partner’s Intimate Style	45	6	30	21.02	5.817
Valid N (listwise)	45

Table 10.  Paired Samples T-test of the Different Maintenance Styles 

	t	df	Sig. (2-tailed)
Effectiveness of Respondent’s Non-Intimate Style - Effectiveness of Respondent’s Intimate Style	-0.11755	44	0.906956
Satisfaction of Partner’s Non-Intimate Style - Satisfaction of Partner’s Intimate Style	0.632935	44	0.530052
Effectiveness of Respondent’s Non-Intimate Style - Satisfaction of Partner’s Non-Intimate Style	-0.65554	44	0.515532
Effectiveness of Respondent’s Intimate Style - Satisfaction of Partner’s Intimate Style	-0.02352	44	0.981339

Table 11.  Group Statistics Between Gender and the DVs

	gender	N	M	S. D.	S.D. Error M
Effectiveness of Resp. Non Intimate Style	male	13	22.77	2.55	0.71
	female	32	20.19	4.81	0.85
Effectiveness of Resp. Intimate Style	male	13	21.77	3.79	1.05
	female	32	20.69	5.33	0.94
Satisfaction of Part. Non Intimate Style	male	13	20.38	5.56	1.54
	female	32	21.84	4.57	0.80
Satisfaction of Part. Intimate Style	male	13	18.53	6.38	1.77
	female	32	22.03	5.34	0.94

Table 12.  Independent Sample T-test Between Gender and the DVs

		t	df	Sig ( 2 tailed)
Effectiveness of Respondent’s Non Intimate Style	Equal variances assumed	1.825375	43	0.074895
	Equal variances not assumed	2.332968	39.62865	0.024815
Effectiveness of Respondent’s Intimate Style	Equal variances assumed	0.664572	43	0.509873
	Equal variances not assumed	0.766334	31.23557	0.44923
Satisfaction of Partner’s Non Intimate Style	Equal variances assumed	-0.91121	43	0.367263
	Equal variances not assumed	-0.83795	18.94513	0.412504
Satisfaction of Partner’s Intimate Style	Equal variances assumed	-1.87718	43	0.067288
	Equal variances not assumed	-1.73984	19.21343	0.097883

Table 13.   Group Statistics for Perception of the Future and the DVs

	perceived future	N	Mean	Std. Deviation	Std. Error Mean
Effectiveness of Respondent’s Non Intimate Style	will last	33	20.94	4.789	.834
	wont last	12	20.92	3.343	.965
Effectiveness of Respondent’s Intimate Style	will last	33	20.76	5.414	.943
	wont last	12	21.67	3.284	.948
Satisfaction of Partner’s  Non Intimate Style	will last	33	21.82	4.391	.764
	wont last	12	20.33	6.050	1.747
Satisfaction of Partner’s Intimate Style	will last	33	21.73	4.907	.854
	wont last	12	19.08	7.728	2.231

Table 14.  Independent Sample T-test Results for the Perception of the future and the DVs

		t	df	Sig. (2-tailed)
Effectiveness of Respondent’s Non Intimate Style	Equal variances assumed	0.015104	43	0.988019
	Equal variances not assumed	0.017822	28.15514	0.985906
Effectiveness of Respondent’s Intimate Style	Equal variances assumed	-0.544	43	0.589249
	Equal variances not assumed	-0.68	32.55312	0.501313
Satisfaction of Partner’s Non Intimate Style	Equal variances assumed	0.904582	43	0.370727
	Equal variances not assumed	0.778839	15.42216	0.447861
Satisfaction of Partner’s Intimate Style	Equal variances assumed	1.361272	43	0.180519
	Equal variances not assumed	1.10681	14.35606	0.286578

Table 15.  Descriptives for Duration of Relationship and the DVs

		N	Mean	Std. Deviation	Std. Error	Minimum	Maximum
Effectiveness of Respondent’s Non Intimate Style	years	22	20.73	4.399	.938	10	27
	months	18	21.22	5.001	1.179	11	29
	weeks	5	20.80	2.387	1.068	18	24
	Total	45	20.93	4.413	.658	10	29
Effectiveness of Respondent’s Intimate Style	years	22	20.68	5.250	1.119	6	28
	months	18	21.33	5.236	1.234	9	29
	weeks	5	21.20	1.924	.860	19	24
	Total	45	21.00	4.918	.733	6	29
Satisfaction of Partner’s Non Intimate Style	years	22	21.45	5.352	1.141	6	27
	months	18	21.72	3.478	.820	14	28
	weeks	5	20.20	7.463	3.338	12	29
	Total	45	21.42	4.859	.724	6	29
Satisfaction of Partner’s Non Intimate Style	years	22	20.68	6.578	1.403	6	30
	months	18	21.72	4.763	1.123	15	29
	weeks	5	20.00	6.671	2.983	11	28
	Total	45	21.02	5.817	.867	6	30

Table 16.   One Way ANOVA Results between the Duration of Relationship and DVs

		Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
Effectiveness of Respondent’s Non Intimate Style	Between Groups	2.525	2	1.263	.062	.940
	Within Groups	854.275	42	20.340
	Total	856.800	44
Effectiveness of Respondent’s Intimate Style	Between Groups	4.427	2	2.214	.088	.916
	Within Groups	1059.573	42	25.228
	Total	1064.000	44
Satisfaction of Partner’s Non Intimate Style	Between Groups	9.112	2	4.556	.186	.831
	Within Groups	1029.866	42	24.521
	Total	1038.978	44
Satisfaction of Partner’s Intimate Style	Between Groups	16.594	2	8.297	.237	.790
	Within Groups	1472.384	42	35.057
	Total	1488.978	44

Visayan Instrument

Maayong Adlaw Kanimo Higala!

            Ako kay isa ka 2^nd Yr Psychology Student gikan sa Unibersidad sa Pilipinas sa Sugbo (UP-Cebu). Mangayo unta ko ug gamay na tabang kanimo pamaagi sa pagtubag sa akoang questionnaire. Ako kay nagtuki sa “ Mga Pamaagi sa Pagmaintain ug Romantiko na Relasyon”. Bahin kini sa akoang requirements sa FIELD PSYCHOLOGY (Psych 118).

            Siguradong ang imong mga tubag mahimong CONFIDENTIAL.

            Daghan salamat ug amping kanunay!

Nagrespetong tigtuki,

Instruksyon:  Palihug paki tubag ug paki check( / ) ang kada item. Palihug pakitubag

                     ni nga questionnaire nga WALA ang imo uyab.

A.        IMOHANG PAMAAGI SA PAGMAINTAIN SA RELASYON

Effectiveness Scale ( Pagka Epektibo )

Di jud Epektibo    Epektibo Gamay     Usahay ra Epektibo     Kadaghan na Naepektibo       Pirme Epektibo

            1                    2                            3                               4                                   5

1.   Unsa man ang IMONG mga PAMAAGI para ma “MAINTAIN”  NIMO ang

      relasyon ninyo sa imo uyab?

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Palihug Paki-check.

Imong Pamaagi sa Pagmaintain sa Relasyon	1	2	3	4	5
1.      MAMAKAK ko sa mga sitwasyon nga makapa suko sa’ko uyab.
2.      Ako ang una MUKOMPROMISO(compromise) kung mag lalis mi.
3.      Dapat MAMINAW ko ug MUSABOT sa mga problema sako uyab.
4.      Dali rako MAGPASAYLO kung maka sala ako uyab.
5.      MuTEXT /TAWAG ko sa’ko uyab kada-adlaw.
6.      Kada simana, mangita jud ko ug ORAS para maka-uban ako uyab.
7.      Mu sulti ko pirme ug “I LOVE YOU” sa’ko uyab.
8.      Himoan nako ug angga/nickname ang ako uyab.
9.      Akong ipakita sa daghang tao ang akong paghigugma niya.( PDA)
10.  Muhatag ko ug  REGALO sa’ko uyab kada occasion.
11.  Ako KISSAN ug GAKSON ako uyab.
12.  Ipa-feel nako sa’ko uyab na PROUD ko sa iya.

B.   PAMAAGI SA IMO UYAB

Satisfaction Scale  ( Pagkakuntento)

Wa jud nakontento  Nakontento gamay  Usahay ra nakontento  Kadaghan na nakontento  Pirme nakontento

            1                          2                              3                            4                       5

2.  Unsa man ang mga PAMAAGI sa IMONG UYAB para ma MAINTAIN

     ang inyong relasyon?

    

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Palihug pakicheck.

Pamaagi sa Pagmaintain sa Relasyon sa Imong Uyab	1	2	3	4	5
1.      MAMAKAK ako Uyab sa mga sitwasyon nga makapa suko sa’ko.
2.      Ako Uyab ang una MUKOMPROMISO(compromise) kung mag lalis mi.
3.      Maayo MAMINAW ug MUSABOT problema ang ako uyab.
4.      Dali MAGPASAYLO ako uyab kung maka sala ko .
5.      MUTEXT  o MUTAWAG ako uyab sa’ko kada-adlaw.
6.      Kada simana, mangita jud ug ORAS ako uyab para nako .
7.      Mu sulti pirme ug “I LOVE YOU” ako uyab.
8.      Himoan ko ug angga/nickname sako uyab.
9.      Ipakita sa ako uyab ang iyang paghigugma sa DAGHANG TAO.(PDA)
10.  Muhatag ako uyab ug REGALO nako kada naay occasion.
11.  Mu-KISS ug GAKOS ako uyab nako.
12.  Ipa-feel ko sa’ko uyab na PROUD siya na’ko.

C.  PANAN-AW SA KAUGMAON SA RELASYON

Sa imong panan-aw, magdugay jud mo sa imo uyab? OO:___  DILI:____

Nganu kaingon man ka?

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Palihug paki fill-up.

Edad: ______

Katawohon ( Babae o Lalaki): _____

Unsa namo kadugay sa imo karelasyon: ( Tuig/ buwan/ simana)__________

Posted in Uncategorized | | | 2 Comments

i will be burst in flames na pod! Part 2

March 21st, 2007 by kurt-jumpman23

time check: 2:30 PM march 22, thursday

6 papers to make

i made one last night ( a 11 paged paper)

NEXT WEEK?
pass experimental paper, interpret results

analyze my field survey and have it statistically treated

exam sa experimental

exam sa learning ( overall! from biological to cognitive )

exam sa group dyn ( wala ra ba na impress si sir mike sa ko report ug group processing :< )

group processing demonstration

2 behavorial modification papers! 

wtf!

hope buhi pako ana.

april pako maka uli jud…

gamay nalang na utong…

di unta ko attackihon ug depression!

Posted in Uncategorized | | | 0 Comments

HArvey keh’s email: IDOL!

March 3rd, 2007 by kurt-jumpman23

Dear Fellow Filipino,

Good day to all of you! Before I begin my letter… just a disclaimer, for people who know me they know that I love the Philippines very much and I am not really one who rants and complaints to high heavens about what is happening to our country and does nothing about it, in fact, I feel that at my relatively young age of 27, I have done much service to the Philippines by setting up Pathways to Higher Education which has sent more than 500 poor but deserving students to college and AHON Foundation which has already built two public elementary school libraries that have benefitted more than 3,500 students. Yet, after seeing how events in our nation have transpired the past few weeks and talking with some friends, I feel the urge to share with you my own thoughts and feelings.

Over the weekend, we saw the completion of two major political alliances for this coming Senate Elections that has just began here in the Philippines. Now we have two political forces with familiar faces nonetheless on opposite sides of the fences. On one end, you have Tito Sotto and Tessie Aquino-Oreta who were two major stalwarts of the opposition and the FPJ Campaign in 2004 hobnobbing with the woman (Pres. GMA) whom they claimed to have cheated FPJ in the last Presidential Elections.On the other side of the fence, you see Manny Villar, the former house speaker who was actually responsible for impeaching Erap now part of the United Opposition who is led by no less than… Erap himself. Now if you don’t see anything wrong with this picture then you must be one of the many Filipinos who have accepted this very sad reality that there is indeed no permanent ideals that our government leaders stand up for but rather they just go where there self-interests can best be served. It is this kind of politics why I no longer wonder why good people like Ramon Magsaysay Awardee Mayor Jesse Robredo of Naga City or outstanding Bulacan Governor Josie Dela Cruz will find it hard or worse, never be elected to national positions.

It is with these in mind that I’d like to share with you what are events this coming May elections that will make me consider leaving the Philippines:

1.) If former COMELEC Commissioner Virgilio Garcillano of Hello Garci fame wins in his bid to become Congressman of Bukidnon…seeking to replace a good man no less in incumbent Cong. Neric Acosta… We would really be the laughing stock of the whole world if we allow a man with the reputation of Garci to be one of our so called “Honorable Gentlemen”.

2.) If Dancing Queen Tessie Aquino Oreta reclaims her seat at the Senate… I hope that all of us would still remember that dance that she did during the 2001 impeachment hearings after they voted to overrule the decision of then Chief Justice Davide… let us make sure that people like her never make it to the Senate again.

3.) If Richard Gomez becomes a senator… what does he know about making laws? We already have the likes of Bong Revilla and Lito Lapid in the Senate and their performance or lack of it would be reason enough not to elect another actor who has no prior experience in government to the distinguished halls of the Senate.

4.) If Gringo Honasan wins again…. have we not learned our lesson? I cannot believe that just because someone is charismatic then we will just elect him to become one of our senators despite the fact that he has time and again caused so much instability in our country… if we want a military junta similar to that of Thailand… then lets all vote for this guy….

5.) If Manny Pacquiao becomes Congressman of General Santos City… everybody loves Manny the Boxing Champ but Manny the Lawmaker? Lets be realistic here, Manny is our Hero alright but I think it takes more than just great boxing skills and a desire to serve to be able to make appropriate laws that would help uplift the lives of the many Filipinos who live in Poverty.

6.) If Lito Lapid wins for Mayor of Makati City… I don’t like Jojo Binay as well but Lito Lapid as city mayor of the country’s finance and business center?!?! And do you really think he is from Makati and has good plans for the city? The Arroyos asking someone like him to run just goes to show you how much love and concern this government has for our country.

7.) If Chavit Singson becomes a Senator, Illegal Gambling = Chavit… enough said.

Now if all of these 7 things happen during this coming elections then don’t be surprised if I decide to leave this country that I love dearly. Like I said during the first part of my letter, I feel that I have done much for this country but I think its time that Filipinos become more vigilant and critical in selecting our leaders for the sake of our future and the generations that will go beyond us. So I appeal to every Filipino who asks what can I actually do for my country… Choose and vote for the right people this coming elections, huwag na tayong magpaloko sa mga kandidatong maganda lang ang jingle o gwapo lang sa mga poster. Let us choose leaders who have a good track record for service and who are genuinely committed towards serving our country.

Manindigan naman tayong lahat para sa ating Kinabukasan at para sa Kapakanan ng ating Bayan!

Thank you very much for your time in reading this letter.

Sincerely,

Harvey S. Keh
Email: harveykeh@gmail. com

Please pass this on to everyone you know specially in the Philippines.

We could add more “unqualified” candidates to the list. I think you would agree with me if I say that the Philippine politics is one of its weakest points. We are served mostly by corrupt officials and being one of the most corrupt countries should make as ashamed enough to change our standards of choosing the candidates. Let’s not vote for popularity. Let’s not vote for money. Let’s vote for our future. Let’s vote wisely.

interesting kayo xa! hehe…Pero im not as rich like him to depart from this country. But there’s still hope that this style of Philippine Politics will change.

Posted in Uncategorized | | | 0 Comments

Depression

February 26th, 2007 by kurt-jumpman23

what are symptoms of depression?

• Feelings of overwhelming sadness and/or fear, or the seeming inability to feel emotion (emptiness).
• A decrease in the amount of interest or pleasure in all, or almost all, daily activities.
• Changing appetite and marked weight gain or loss.
• Disturbed sleep patterns, such as insomnia, loss of REM sleep, or excessive sleep (Hypersomnia).
• Psychomotor agitation or retardation nearly every day.
• Fatigue, mental or physical, also loss of energy.
• Intense feelings of guilt, helplessness, hopelessness, worthlessness, isolation/loneliness and/or anxiety.
• Trouble concentrating, keeping focus or making decisions or a generalized slowing and obtunding of cognition, including memory.
• Recurrent thoughts of death (not just fear of dying), desire to just "lie down and die" or "stop breathing", recurrent suicidal ideation without a specific plan, or a suicide attempt or a specific plan for committing suicide.
• Feeling and/or fear of being abandoned by those close to one.

Other symptoms often reported but not usually taken into account in diagnosis include:

• Self-loathing.
• A decrease in self-esteem.
• Inattention to personal hygiene.
• Sensitivity to noise.
• Physical aches and pains, and the belief these may be signs of serious illness.
• Fear of ‘going mad’.
• Change in perception of time.
• Periods of sobbing.
• Possible behavioral changes, such as aggression and/or irritability.

This according to the DSM manual, the bible of Psychiatrists. For the past month, I have suffered majority or half of these symptoms. And really! I don’t know why it was happening! Lately, I don’t experience these  symptoms… Hapit na ang finals. Gamay nalang. Can’t wait to get home.

Posted in Uncategorized | | | 0 Comments

On Freedom of Expression and Rights

February 26th, 2007 by kurt-jumpman23

Date:	Saturday, 24 February, 2007 11:27 PM
Subject:	Just a reminder…
	To the people of the Philippines especially the students and some people who are hallucinating that their human rights are being violated especially since ELECTION is near…. Just to remind you that ALL HUMAN RIGHTS ARE NOT ABSOLUTE which means that they have limitations and should not be abused especially the right to "freedom of speech" because too much of everything is bad Im sure your parents thought you that. The only human right that is ABSOLUTE is the Human’s right to THINK and I hope we will all use that absolute right properly and in good use…. JUST A REMINDER=) http://www.friendster.com/bulletin.php?bid=114500966&uid=10708083 since this was posted in the friendster bulletin, topics like these encourage me to comment. but really, what does the word ABSOLUTE mean? As the web defines it, ABSOLUTE is: perfect or complete or pure; "absolute loyalty"; "absolute silence"; "absolute truth"; "absolute alcohol" complete and without restriction or qualification; sometimes used informally as intensifiers; "absolute freedom"; "an absolute dimwit"; "a downright lie"; "out-and-out mayhem"; "an out-and-out lie"; "a rank outsider"; "many right-down vices"; "got the job through sheer persistence"; "sheer stupidity" not limited by law; "an absolute monarch" expressing finality with no implication of possible change; "an absolute guarantee to respect the nation’s authority"; "inability to make a conclusive refusal" without conditions or limitations; "a total ban" something that is conceived to be absolute; something that does not depends on anything else and is beyond human control; "no mortal being can influence the absolute" not capable of being violated or infringed; "infrangible human rights" wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn the list goes on.. hence, this bulletin post actually means that " The RIGHT to THINK " is unchangeable.  The right is perfect. The right itself is true in all cases, except when the MAN is DEAD or existing as a reformed Spiritual, unseen entity. Because to think is a cognitive form of action/behavior/response that involves the highest seat in the brain: the frontal lobe, specifically the prefrontal cortex.  What makes humans different from animals is the ability to think ( among other things ). Hence, the RIGHT to THINK, really is absolute. But wait… WHAT is  A " RIGHT"? I browsed wikipedia, it says that: "In modern English and European systems of jurisprudence and law, a right is the legal or moral entitlement to do or refrain from doing something or to obtain or refrain from obtaining an action, thing or recognition in civil society." "The right is therefore  a faculty of doing something, of omitting or refusing to do something or of claiming something. " ~    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights Based from these definitions, I classify RIGHT to THINK , as something as NOT REALLY A RIGHT. Why? Because Every HUMAN  BEINGS can think without anybody noticing a person that he/she is thinking. RIGHTS should be expressed. It does not reside merely in our brain. For me, RIGHTS ARE THOUGHTS that are needed to be transformed into physical action, there should be bodily movements. Or else, what you think will be just thoughts in your brain. When you SPEAK your THOUGHTS, now that is a right. For example, in a certain situation, Person A was offered a huge amount of money by Person B to do something favorable to Person B. Person A was given time to think to accept it or not. But In this case ," to think" is not a right.  Person A has the "right refuse or accept" the offer, which Person B recognized.  Responses or behaviors elicited to do, claim, ommit or refuse something is fascilitated by thinking. However, rights like the right to live is not fascilitated by thinking but by instincts of our unconscious mind. " some people who are hallucinating that their human rights are being violated especially since ELECTION is near…" Election is an issue that is very delicate. Because outcomes of the elections changes the peoples lives and the community as a whole. When people reiterate their freedom of expression, it is because they have the right to express it so.  People’s opinions can change or influence thoughts of other people, but their opinions varies. This is why we have what we call PERSONALITY. People differ in different aspects. And also, in a delicate issue like the elections, people have the right to voice their concerns because this is the most opportunistic time when unsatisfied individuals could COMMUNICATE with the campaigning and trotting candidates. Candidates should listen and recongnize the rights of the people, for better communications so that goals can be achieved. Hence, when we stand on our opinions by expressing it with conviction, the right is not being "hallucinated" but used and exercised. However, I Agree that the freedom of expression should never be offending. All rights should never be abused unless the rights of the people are abused. This is a form of expression. Just like the bulletin post above: a form of expression, of opinion, by the poster. All of this is just a matter of expressing it with conviction. Opinions are either meant to be defended or changed. peace and respect.

Posted in Uncategorized | | | 0 Comments

« Previous Entries Next Entries »