THE FILIPINO EXPERIENCE, 1982
The following appeared as a feature article in the Manila Evening Post of 20 September 1982. The Philippines at the time was widely reputed to be the country where pederasty was most generally understood and accepted as part of local culture, and “the order of certain authorities in Manila to clamp down on pederasts”, criticism of which was the article’s purpose, only began to be implemented seriously three years later.
The illustrations and footnotes are this website’s.
The Filipino Experience
The detailed researches of Kinsey, Masters and Johnson, Pomeroy, Dr. John Money and Dr. Mary Calderone proved that homosexuality and pederasty are no more dangerous and harmful than any form of heterosexuality. What is harmful and dangerous is the general, totally uninformed public’s hue and cry about it. Every time psychiatrists, the police, or social workers scream about the villainy of men having sex with boys, they invariably refer to boys who have been attacked, assaulted or raped by men. Of course, any attack, assault or rape of any person by any other person is totally unacceptable and should be sternly punished. But about 98 percent of homosexual or pederastic contacts are between consenting individuals and therefore, far from being harmful, are often beneficial to the consenting parties. Remove the uninformed public’s hue and cry, and you remove 99 per cent of the problem. Sex – and any form of it between consenting partners – is personal, private and so universal and ordinary that a sensible man can only wonder what the commotion is all about.
A case in point is the order of certain authorities in Manila to clamp down on pederasts. On the surface, it sounds terribly “moral” and “good.” Having decided – after centuries of liberality – to do something about pederasty, the authorities pretend that it’s all because of monstrous foreigners who “exploit” our dear little defenseless boys.
The truth, however, is that our own pederasts outnumber the foreigners many thousands to one; that our boys, far from being “exploited,” rush to be included, whether we like it or not. And to say that pederastic activity is concentrated in the Ermita and Malate areas only proves the stupidity of the authorities. It is everywhere in Manila, everywhere in the country, everywhere in the world, especially in China and Russia.
The law is meaningless if many people believe differently. Until the law represents what the people really believe, all is lost because there exists a mockery of the legal system.
Since the stated rationale behind this drive is to “Save Our Boys” a review of why so many of them are involved in pederasty is in order.
The loaded, utterly inaccurate term, “child molester,” can refer only to such people as children hurt [sic] through assault, attack or rape. It must be glaringly obvious even to our obtuse, do-gooder authorities that at least 98 per cent of pederastic contacts do not fit this criminal category. On the contrast, at least 50 per cent of the time it’s the boys who solicit the men. A common accusation against men who like boys is that the older “dominates” the younger. Since the man finds affection, warmth, admiration and other qualities in sexual congress with a boy, he can only hope the boy will accept him. It is quite evident that the boy is left with the decision to say “yes” or “no.” Who dominates whom? Filipinos had better think twice about this matter of dominance.
Why do boys want sex with men? The reasons are very logical. They need more money for their sheer survival because they are stowaways or runaways, or their families are too poor to give it to them. They need the psychological affection and support which they often do not find in their own families. And it’s just fun – daring, different, better than boredom, better than lonely masturbation, the next best thing if you’re not allowed to sleep with girls. Who are these boys? They are the untold thousands in all the cities in the entire world who are stowaway or runaways because their own parents treat them cruelly, their families are so poor that they cannot be properly taken care of, their impoverished parents make them go out and get money any way they can – pederasty being far easier, healthier and more rewarding than criminal stealing or killing. Or they may be boys from middle class or even rich families who are fighting with their parents, or just out for fun, boys from all backgrounds who are going through a homosexual stage, or boys whose parents quite correctly see no real harm in such contacts.
Sexuality between consenting boys and men is found to be beneficial to both. First, both parties find happiness in the relationship as an enormous amount of potentially dangerous tension is relieved. The boys receive spending money, clothes, food, gifts, school fees, medical and dental attention, support for their families, and most importantly, psychological support and attention that they cannot find in their homes.
Even the government benefits from the relationship. Imagine how much money and manpower is saved from the enormous problem of handling thousands of stowaway boys.
WHAT IS TO BE DONE
And now, certain authorities say pederasty must be stopped, without knowing perhaps that such action will lead to the following:
First, we deliberately drive off the financial and psychological support that thousands of boys need. If anybody really believes that sending these boys to places like Alabang’s Marilac Hills – as though the boys were sick or criminals or bad – will do them any good, just wait and see.
Second, the authorities catch the tiniest fraction of boys and men involved. But let us say that they rid the Ermita and Malate area of pederasts. Let us further say that they catch 2,000 boys and deport 100 foreigners. Just as our population increases enormously every year (650,000 newcomers to the labor force every year) so will the vast number of boys and pederasts. The foreigners number a very, very few, after all. How do we propose to catch all of our own pederasts in every nook and cranny of the country? Not even the whole army and the police combined can watch every hotel, apartment, private home, beach, movie, park, plaza, swimming pool, public toilet, coliseum, school, woods, mountain, restaurant, bar, night club, and so on and so on, all day and all night,
Third, boys sent to jail are subject to beatings, tattooing and sodomy by older boys or corrupt policemen. They get poor food, hideous conditions, often end up with skin diseases or even VD. Worst of all they eventually come out hating the very law and authority they should respect!
In this mad situation we are actually making heros and “good guys” of the pederasts. The law takes away freedom, treats the boys either cruelly or impersonally or both. But the pederast stands out more than ever as a friend, a donor of many benefits, a helper when the boy most needs one. How can any “authority” compete with that? The answer is he cannot – whether we like it or not, and notwithstanding the shocking screams from ivory tower sociologists, professional do-gooders and fundamentalist religious freaks. We talk here sir, about what is.
And the only sensible answer is the lowering of the age of consent. That is the world tendency.
In some of the American states the age of consent is 16, in France it is 15, the Swiss want to make it 14, the state of Hawaii wants it 14, a British government commission actually advises 12. The Dutch wish to make consenting sex at any age legal. The super-smart, hardworking people of Japan have made it 13. Mexico, Norway and Indonesia have no laws against pederasty. Various African countries that have outlawed homosexuality completely are world-famous for being the most liberal because everybody well understands that the law is merely window-dressing. We believe that the Philippines might adopt the Italian version, making the age of consent 14 if the boy has not had previous experience, 10 if he has. (The Rationalists)
 Oddly enough, this long list of venues where the writer believed pederasts got together with boys was reflected in the equally long but slightly different list of places where it became a crime to be in the company of an unrelated minor more than ten years younger than oneself according to the sweeping Special Protection of Children Act (Republic Act 7610) of 1992: “any public or private place, hotel, motel, beer joint, discotheque, cabaret, pension house, sauna or massage parlor, beach and/or other tourist resort or similar places.” One might have thought that the initial “any public or private place” would have obviated the need to bang on so!
 Actually, there was no age of consent for boys between 1848 and 1997, when that for girls, twelve, was extended to boys, though the draconian legislation cited in the preceding footnote effectively outlawed pederasty in 1992.
 The writer’s view of the liberality of foreign countries’ age of consent laws was excessively rosy. Nowhere was really as liberal as the Philippines itself. What he said about the American states, Hawaii and Japan was true, but what he said about the British, Dutch, Mexico, Norway and Indonesia was wildly exaggerated, and the ages he gave for Italy as 14 and 10 were really 16 and 14.