The Bangus Ultimatum

Found a sliver of time to surf the net in a cafe. Weekend’s a bit toxic, with exams looming and a memorandum due next week. Still, there’s time to surf for some Animal Sillitude.

A school essay written by Democratic Party Vice Presidential Candidate John Edwards, when he was 11 years old.

Nothing like youthful naivete to soothe the shell-shocked.

First things first. I am no fan of Philippine sexy movies. They are disappointing as erotica, and have little or no value as cinema. I am no fan of censorship either. Without a clear-cut obscenity standard, the current scheme of “regulation and classification” (weasel words for prior restraint) is bound to cost us more as a society in the long run.

That said, I squirm at Senator Revilla’s plan to initiate congressional hearings on SM’s ban on sexy movies from its theaters. Congress has no right to inquire on the propriety of SM’s rejection of sexy movies, just as it cannot inquire into my movie preferences. Yes, the economic impact will result in less sexy movies, and in that sense restrain expression. But the Bill of Rights is a limitation on the state, not private firms. What SM decides to show in its theaters is largely a matter of private choice that is outside the legitimate sphere of Congress’ power. (THOUGH it can look into the allegation that 40% of theaters are owned by SM, a valid cause of concern if true; OR the sad, sad state of the Philippine movie industry).

The Senator justifies it in terms economic survival of the local movie industry. But our movie industry’s interface with government, just like any business’, is characterized more by rent seeking behavior, which distorts the economy and makes the industry uncompetitive in the long run. If Senator Revilla is truly interested in making the industry viable, he should tell these starlets and producers to suck it up and stop whining.

Researching the common-law origins of nuisance, I came across an interesting example of this particular family of torts: The Common scold, which is described by Wikipedia:

In the common law of crime in England, a common scold was a species of public nuisance - a troublesome and angry woman who broke the public peace by habitually arguing and quarrelling with her neighbours. The Latin name for the offender, communis rixatrix, appears in the feminine gender, and makes it clear that only women could commit this crime.

A common scold is punished in the cucking stool.