DOM Magnet.
As far as I can remember, I’ve always been hit on by DOMs.
When I was in fourth grade, there was this “Teacher’s Week” held in school. All the teachers got a 1-week rest and the HS students took over teaching the students in the elementary level. One of our substitute teachers, a sophomore, had a huge crush on me (I wasn’t assuming as he told my close friends). I noticed how he would always find time to sit beside me and talk to me. I noticed the difference in the way he treated me vis-a-vis the way he dealt with the rest–he was very sweet to me. He would bring me chocolates and candies. He would always ask me if I was doing alright. He gave me special attention. One time, I was on my way home. I saw him playing basketball with his friends. He looked, smiled and winked at me. I was disgusted. (Hello, I was just 9 years old!) I got so scared that I decided to absent myself from classes for the rest of the week. When I got back, my friends told me that he “confessed” to them, that he really liked me and wanted to court me at the “right time.” It was traumatizing and shocking. For so many weeks, I was always on guard. I didn’t want to see him. I get nauseous whenever I thought of what he told my friends.
Well, technically, my first encounter with an older guy isn’t really a case of a DOM hitting on a younger lass. But you know what I mean. He was probably 14 or 15 and I was just 9! It’s certainly shocking to the morals! Haha.
My encounter with DOMs didn’t stop there. It became more pronounced when I entered law school. Ugh.
Last week, I took a jeepney on my way home. As I got off, I noticed an older man taking a second look at me. I ignored him. He was plump and bespectacled. He’s about in his early 50s. He was ahead of me so he slowed down so he could walk beside me. He then approached me and said,
“Ma’am, pwede ba makipagkilala?”
I was like, “Huh? Ano po?”
“Pwede ba makipagkilala?”
“Uhm, bakit po?”
“Wala lang. Saan ka ba nagttrabaho?”
“Oh, I’m still in school po.”
“Ah, akala ko may asawa ka na.”
“Oh, yes po, may asawa na po.”
“Ah, ganon ba? Pwede ba makuha number mo?”
“Wala po ako cellphone ngayon,” I lied some more.
He left without saying a word. CREEPY.
I don’t know what’s with me that attracts these unscrupulous DOMs. (And I don’t know why guys my age/younger don’t get attracted to me! Haha!) If things don’t change, then maybe I’d end up marrying one of them. Haha. EEEEEWWWW.
Philippine Marriage Laws: Absurd and Not in Touch with Reality.
When I had my internship at the Office of the Solicitor General last summer, I was assigned to draft a Comment on a case, a petition to enforce a foreign divorce decree. The factual backdrop of the case revealed that the petitioner, a Filipina, worked as an entertainer in Japan and there she met her Japanese ex-husband. They were married for about two years until the honeymoon stage of the marriage waned. Her husband thus filed a petition for divorce under Japanese laws, which was granted by the foreign forum. Relying on the provisions of Article 26, paragraph 2 of the Family Code, the Filipina filed a petition to enforce the foreign judgment in this jurisdiction and so she could remarry. The RTC judge, however, denied the same mainly on the ground that the petitioner failed to allege that under Japanese laws, the ex-husband’s national law (obviously), he was allowed to remarry by virtue of the divorce decree. To have a better grasp of what I’m blabbing about here, let me quote Article 26 of the Family Code:
“Art. 26. All marriages solemnized outside the Philippines, in accordance with the laws in force in the country where they were solemnized, and valid there as such, shall also be valid in this country, except those prohibited under Articles 35 (1), (4), (5) and (6), 3637 and 38. (17a)
Where a marriage between a Filipino citizen and a foreigner is validly celebrated and a divorce is thereafter validly obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the Filipino spouse shall have capacity to remarry under Philippine law.”
When I read the judge’s decision, I got confused because I didn’t know that the capacity to remarry of the Filipino spouse was dependent upon the capacity to remarry of the foreign spouse under his national laws. (Maybe my professor back in first year told our class then but I was either not listening or absent. Hehe.) To me, that was just…revolting. I couldn’t (and still can’t) find the logic, the reason behind such requirement. It’s just RIDICULOUS.
Last week, my Civil Law Review professor confirmed what the RTC judge said in his decision: that the capacity to remarry of the Filipino spouse premised on Article 26, paragraph 2 of the Family Code hinges on the capacity to remarry of the foreign spouse. In simpler terms, the Filipino spouse cannot remarry if the foreign spouse who obtained the divorce cannot remarry under his national laws. This interpretation gave rise to many questions that I wish someone could answer satisfactorily:
1.) Why does the law have to require that the Filipino spouse can only remarry if the national law of the foreign spouse allows him to remarry by virtue of the divorce decree when there are no ties binding the two already? What has the foreign spouse still got to do with the Filipino ex-spouse when the ties have already been severed by the divorce decree? And what has the national law of the foreign spouse got to do with the Filipino spouse who is governed by his/her own national law?
2.) Any law student would have heard from his professors or read somewhere that every law enacted has a reason/rationale that animates it to life–the spirit of the law. In this case, what is the purpose of the law in rendering the capacity to remarry of the alien spouse a condition precedent for the Filipino spouse’s capacity of remarriage? To preserve the marriage? If that is the rationale, I just can’t find the logical connection. It has been said that the purpose of adding the second paragraph to Article 26 is to EQUALIZE the standing of the Filipino spouse and the foreign spouse. If this really is the purpose of the law, then I don’t see how the law, by mandating that the Filipino spouse can only remarry if the foreign spouse also can under his national law, gives an equal standing to both. In fact, it even places the Filipino spouse in a disadvantageous position. You see, it is the foreign spouse who obtained the divorce decree–in lay man’s terms, HE/SHE IS THE ONE WHO LEFT THE FILIPINO SPOUSE. And now the Filipino spouse is further made to suffer by effectively depriving him/her of the right to remarriage–in lay man’s terms, THE LAW DEPRIVES THE FILIPINO SPOUSE THE RIGHT TO MOVE ON.
3.) If the divorce decree obtained by the foreign spouse is recognized in the Philippine jurisdiction by virtue of Article 26, why should the capacity to remarry of the Filipino spouse be made to depend on the capacity of the foreign spouse to remarry? Isn’t it a natural consequence of divorce that the parties can remarry simply because they are not bound by any marital rope under the law anymore?
4.) Finally, what is the status of the subsequent marriage contracted by the Filipino spouse, assuming he/she is incapacitated to remarry for the reason that his/her foreign spouse is incapacitated to remarry under his national law despite the grant of a divorce decree? Does this make another case of VOID MARRIAGE? And what is the status of the children born out of such subsequent marriage?
It is a settled doctrine in statutory construction that laws should not result to absurdities. And so to avoid this absurdity, it is submitted that the phrase “capacitating him to remarry” in the second paragraph of Article 26 should be interpreted as a qualifying phrase of the word “divorce”. In other words, the phrase “capacitating him to remarry” should not mean that the foreign spouse must be allowed to remarry under his national law before the Filipino spouse may remarry; it should be interpreted to be a mere qualifying phrase, signifying one of the basic consequences of divorce–enabling the parties to marry again. To my (cluttered) mind, this is the only way to put some sense and sanity into the law and make it in touch with reality. Otherwise, no amount of reasoning can convince me to justify the present interpretation interposed by some professors and commentaries. It just doesn’t make sense. It’s ridiculousness at its best.
Law school is worse than the swine flu.
Law school is seriously making me sick. I’ve been home for three days already because of a throbbing headache and on-and-off fever. *sigh* I missed out on a lot. =(
Last Tuesday, I was sent home by the school because I was feverish. It was a bit funny because they (my professor and the people at the Dean’s office) panicked when I said I felt feverish.
Anyway, I guess I just have to make up for my absences by studying at home. =)
Going literary.
I want to write more songs. Poetry. Short stories. But time always evades me, like a debtor evades his creditor. HAHA. Now that’s creative writing! (EEW!)
So guys, don’t be surprised if I post my amateurish attempts to write “poetry” and other “literary” works herein. OK? Just like the one below. 
An Eternal Wish
If only he would listen
If only he would care about what I say
And not dismiss it as insane
Then I wouldn’t be treating him
So bad, this way.
If only he would stop making me feel
Left out all the time
If only he would try to see through me
If only he would take delight
In fulfilling his empty promises
If only I can get through him…
But there seems to be no way in
This wish, I’ll keep within
As it will eternally stay a wish.
____________________________________________________________
For all love-story suckers out there, here’s one for you.
This is one very inspiring love story that a friend shared a few weeks ago. Savor it.
_______________________________________________________________________
“Our first, personal conversation is so memorable not only because it is our first encounter but because of its highly cerebral content. It went something like this:
(Boy gets out of class while girl is standing outside. She strikes a conversation with him. And then he speaks.)
Boy: What’s your score in Legal Medicine (preliminary exam)?
Girl: Uhm, it was OK.
(What a dork, she thought.)
It’s a good thing that I didn’t get turned off by that…because there were other things to love about him. Otherwise, our love story wouldn’t have blossomed.”
______________________________________________________________________
Haha. One great love story, indeed. =)
They are made to disappoint…and be broken.
“In any kind of relationship, never ever make promises. Why? Because when they don’t get fulfilled, that’s when disappointment, misunderstanding and fights start to set in. Eventually, they’re going to cause the relationship to falter into pieces.”
_________________________________________________________________________
My comment: So TRUE.
Meen inta?
A lot of people out there find themselves at a point in their lives where they feel like they have to “find themselves.” They are constantly bothered by the question “Who am I?” and they do all sort of things to, yeah, find who they really are.
As for me, it’s not that I haven’t asked myself that question at times…it’s just that I’ve NEVER BEEN GIVEN THE CHANCE TO BE MYSELF in my entire life. Yes, believe it or not.
All my life, I’ve never been allowed to be me, to be loved and accepted for who I am. I’VE ALWAYS BEEN COMPARED TO OTHER PEOPLE.
“Why can’t you be smarter than X?”
“Why can’t you be thinner than Y?”
“You have to be smarter and get higher grades than Z.”
“Oh, how we wish you were like XY.”
These are the statements that have been bothering me the entire time I’ve been here on planet Earth.
So when will I get to be me?
I don’t know. In a million years, I guess.
P.S. The title is means “Who are you?” in Arabic. Just in case you’re wondering.
D*ckhead.
Just because you have that creature hanging around doesn’t make you entitled.
El-Oh-Vee-Ee.
“When I was in college, my Logic professor asked us to define love. Everyone in class had his/her own definition. All our answers, however, were rejected. ‘Love is too broad to be defined,’ he remarked.
‘For instance,’ he began, ‘A guy tells his girlfriend “I love you” but the girl dismisses it because she feels that it doesn’t show in his actions. Is saying “I love you” enough to show your love to someone? Of course it isn’t. But my point is, it is all-encompassing that defining it would be stripping it off of its very nature.
After that class, I thought, ‘How could love be such a complicated thing? It must be easy! My professor is just being his crazy, weirdo self.’
Now that I am in a relationship, I will have to take back what I thought about my professor. He is absolutely right. Love is…whatever it is.”
__________________________________________________________________________
Oh, really?!
