Going vegetarian, to me, is synonymous with Armageddon, culling the sinners and the saints, and Kingdom Come.  “Vegetarianism,” like every “-ism,” is an ideological apparatus meant to make cabbages and toge (bean sprouts) the supreme masters of the world.  I won’t have any of it.

But I had to, at least for last night.  Me and a friend went to eat at this vegetarian eatery at Katipunan, just at the edge of UP Diliman.  It took me about 30 minutes to finish off a plate of potato curry and a seafood wrap made out of canned vegemeat.  Thirty minutes is far too long, considering that I can wolf down a McDonald’s cheeseburger and fries in seven minutes flat, which gives me a minute to go up the office elevator and take a seven-minute cigarette break.

When you have a one-hour break for eight hours of cubicle work, you start to divide everything into 15-minute intervals.

I won’t be found in a queue for meals at vegetarian restaurants anytime soon, but a change of diet is just what I may need.

I will never understand vegetarians: back in Baguio, Oh! My Gulay and Bliss Café seem to detoxify you of everything (which basically includes something as toxic as money).  I’ve had the distinct displeasure of eating more than my own fair share of vegemeat before, as well as mushroom burgers in UP Los Baños that supposedly “taste like meat.”  When someone uses the a subordinative conjunction, like the word “like,” it’s a poor substitute for figurative language.

Consider the phrase, “Tastes like crap.”  I think you get the picture.

Anonymity breeds, at least in me, contempt.

I’ve been blogging for three years, and save for being known as “Marocharim,” I have always used my real name.  I put my reputation on the line simply because I stand by everything I say.  I’ve been ridiculed for it, like say, in “Patriots4Truth,” who has this to say about poor old me:

Oh btw, Marck Ronald Rimorin, only stupid people publish their real name on public forums like this one. This is not friendster or multiply. It is tantamount to riding a train full of strangers with your name written on your forehead with a permanent marker.

Just be sure that intelligence can be associated to your name. Drop the “taga-UP ako” egotism dahil madami kaming taga-UP dito.

Marck Ronald Rimorin, you think you’re brave for daring us and saying “damn you?” *CHUCKLES* or should I say LOL, that is all you get from the ANONYMOUS me …

Hmmm… guilty as charged.  So what can a stupid real-name-using person like me say about this whole fiasco?

Let me reiterate my stand on the issue: Jun Lozada’s testimony is not the reason why GMA should remove herself - or be removed - from office.  The Presidency - as well as every public office - demands transparency, accountability, and responsibility.  “Who should replace Gloria” is out of the question: “who” has never been an issue in the ethics of political life.  Plato is explicit about it: “The ruler should be the best.”  The fact that GMA is not the best person to rule this country right now, in the eyes of some, means that she is not the best.  The fact that we already have a concept of “an alternative to Gloria” means that we, as a people, have already lost confidence in our leader.

The concept of the social contract, as explained by Rousseau and Locke, and to a certain extent even Rawls, is not a question of a person subjugating the people: it is a question of the relationship between sovereign and subject.   “Who will replace Gloria” was never the question in the first place: in fact, it is irrelevant to the debate.  Somebody out there will replace Gloria, and it behooves him or her to ensure that the welfare of the people is the highest concern.  This is a “plain and simple” issue of justice, not personality politics.

*     *     *

Which brings me to “anonymous” posters.  Yes, I happen to agree that there is a perceived “stupidity” for people, like Marck Ronald Rimorin, who use their real names in a public forum.

I’m proud to be one of those stupid people.  I have worked with the school press for 11 years,  blogged for three years, and I make my living as a writer.  Not as “Sexyboy69,” not as “EmoM00n,” not as “tHuGLiFe_187.”  I’m reminded of a certain passage in the blog of Mr. Gerry Alanguilan:

I really don’t put much stock and credibility towards anyone who doesn’t tell me who they are online. Their opinions are just OK, be they praise, criticism, or insult. I can’t deny that these opinions don’t affect me, but it’s just a little frustrating because their thoughts would be of much more worth to me if I knew who they are. I don’t take them seriously, and for the most part, I don’t really make much effort to discuss weighty issues with them, unless I find an opportunity to talk about matters where I perceive my words to be misunderstood, or as jumping points for matters I’ve always wanted to talk about, written for the benefit of everybody, anonymous or not.

An anonymous blogger contends: “It’s not important who I am, but what I say.”

I’m sorry, but for me, that is a load of CRAP.

I have to agree: I admire bloggers like Manolo Quezon, Shari Cruz, Karlo Mongaya, and even Teo Marasigan (whom I have had a few online scuffles with) who use their real names, and in a way they have inspired me to put my own real name in conspicuous places on my blog.  It’s not about having intestines or testicles, but it’s about injecting just a little bit of credibility in writing stuff.

*     *     *

It’s just so damn easy to say something online with people not knowing who you are, isn’t it?  Or hide under the guise of anonymity.  Like, it’s so easy to write down a cheque under the name “Jose Pidal.”  Or it’s so easy to call “Garci” and then end up on national TV years later and mention calling up “a COMELEC commissioner” and say, “I’m sorry.”