as in any controversy that grips the nation, there will be sinners and saints. in the hayden kho sex video scandal, we are being asked to see senator bong revilla as the saint who is playing don quixote, taking the cause to the maiden in trouble, katrina halili.
never mind that this saint was a bit stung with the release of a picture of the senator and another actress in a tight embrace, kissing and fully naked. the senator very gallantly faced the picture by demurely and humbly (ahem) saying that the upper body of the picture was his but the bottom half was not. (ahem!) he said, with a smile, thaat his “buttocks” look better than what is depicted in the picture. (we wonder if the actress in the picture who was also naked will say the face was hers but the rest of the body wasn’t. ahem)
the damsel in distress is katrina halili. how much of a saint is she? do saints pose in the nude in magazines, movies and anything else possible? we have seen every inch of ms. katrina’s body from all angles, in numerous poses in countless magazines.
ok, we should not be judging her. after all, women who pose in the nude, in all form and manner should not be judged. right? right?
for us, the only legitimate complaint that halili can lodge is the video that was taken of her was without her consent. based on the video, the sexual acts that were video recorded were obviously consumed with mutual consent. they were consenting adults with both adults thoroughly enjoying (again based on the video) what they did but one not knowing the other recorded the whole thing in video.
the inverse is that this is the sin of sinner hayden. he recorded the consensual sexual acts without the consent of the woman. however, hayden’s sin ends there.
the public display of the video, if we are to believe hayden, was not his fault. he says it was stolen or at least taken without permission and distributed in the internet without his permission,
this sin was committed by his friend and frat brod during their UST days, dr. erik chua. chua apparently was the person responsible for releasing the sex videos to the public. chua has a business of selling DVD duplicating machines and own many stores that sell videos. he has the capability and know how on the wide distribution of these sorts of movies. edu manzano, optical board chair also said the hayden kho-katrina halili master video was being sold for P2M in the black market. it is apparently being sold at a premium as even hollywood movies are being sold only for P50T to movie pirates. the DVDs of the sex scandal is also selling at a premium, going for P100 to P150 per piece versus the usual P20 to P30 for regular movies.
we do not know how much of a sinner vicky belo is in this whole affair. hayden says only belo had the hard disk that contained the sex videos. we wonder if it’s possible that there is link between belo and chua and what the story is behind that ”conspiracy”.
who is the biggest sinner in this scandal?
we think the biggest sinner is chua, the one responsible for distributing the sex scandal to dvd distributors in quiapo and the internet. if the sex video was not released to the wilds of quiapo and the internet, it would have remained a very private affair, a romp in the bed that only hayden could playback as often as he wants in the privacy of his dvd player and computer in his home.
what people do in bed is nobody else’s business. we can choose what we want to do in bed. the portrayal of hayden as a pervert and a sicko by senator revilla is uncalled for, unfair and too much hysterics. is senator revilla a cmpetent psychiatrist to label hayden a pervert and a sicko? there was nothing that hayden did in the video that was perversion or sick – they were all normal sexual acts done by most normal people.
what may be seen as sickly and perverted is its release to the public. but that was not done by hayden, it was done by chua. and chua did not release it because he was a pervert and a sicko, it was released for business gain, for money.
selling out on a friend of many years as chua did to hayden may be seen by many as sickly and perverted, but that is a moral question, not psychiatric.
who is the victim here? i think there are three victims here – katrina and yes hayden himself. katrina was a true victim as she just happened to be in the video that chua released for monetary gain. hayden is a victim as he is now villified and made into being the poster boy of video scandal evil without consent.
the third victim is us, the public. the country and that includes a senator of the country, malacanang and the police are now involved in an otherwise a private sex between two people that in truth is non of our business. we were forced into this situation not because of hayden, but by chua, the true sinner in all of this.
saints? there are none….
Most Recent Readers Comments