 |
Source: https://www.facebook.com/pia.ranada/posts/10154233846289518
PIA'S AGGRESSIVE LINE OF QUESTIONS gave her sudden popularity. She seems to be basking in this new found fame as she is treated like the new heroine in the fight against Duterte.
Instant sikat.
Pia has been praised as courageous for confronting President-elect Duterte last June 2, 2016 about the whistling issue but she has somehow lost the courage to specifically mention who she meant as the mean-spirited, delusional, and close-minded politicians in her post shown above.
Although she didn't specifically say who she referred to as having 'delusions of grandeur', I will assume she was pointing at Duterte (of course maybe she wasn't).
What is a delusion of grandeur?
"A delusion of grandeur is the fixed, false belief that one possesses superior qualities such as genius, fame, omnipotence, or wealth. It is most often a symptom of schizophrenia, but can also be a symptom found in psychotic or bipolar disorders, as well as dementia (such as Alzheimer's)."
Aside from being a journalist, Pia apparently is a doctor because she diagnosed with certainty, that Duterte has delusions of grandeur.
Based on the definition, doesn't that describe Roxas instead? Wasn't Roxas the one who pitched his superior qualities of intelligence and wasn't Duterte the one who downplayed his credentials and was even self-deprecating?
Let's face it, her line of questions were intended to embarrass the Duterte. It is what is called the "gotcha or huli ka" questions. The questions were not intended to clarify Duterte's position, it was to meant to show the President was wrong.
What is my proof?
If you read the transcript shown below, especially towards the end; Pia said "Sir, for you it might not be sexual, but to others it might. So the world does not revolve around your definition."
What? Pia, do you mean that the world and the courts will base everything on subjective definitions? There is such thing and objective reality and subjective reality. Which world do you live in?
Plain stupid remark.
Of course the the world does not revolve around anyone's definition; what's why we have dictionaries/glossaries to provide standard definitions and brains to figure out the context of what is being said.
Either Pia was clearly trying to pin down the President to admit that he was 'catcalling' Mariz Umali or maybe her brain has limited processing power incapable of comprehending the wider context.
What is the definition of a catcall?
Catcalling is defined as making a whistle, shout, or comment of a sexual nature to a woman passing by.
Mariz Umali was not passing by and Duterte was not making anything of a sexual nature. It was playful banter because Duterte treated her as a friend and also to lighten up the crowd.
Everyone knows Duterte likes to joke around and it looks like his good intention was maliciously twisted.
If Mariz Umali was offended, why was she caught smiling in the video shown below? Was it because she knew Duterte was joking? Everyone in the room were laughing because they knew it was a joke.
To a dirty mind, anything will have a sexual context.
No comments:
Post a Comment