Talk:Filipino people/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 2


Contents

Entitlement

July 21, 2004 - We the Filipino people do not deserve the widespread poverty, injustice, and continued government corruption that plague our country and society. My heart cry out that these will all come to pass before my lifetime is over.

--202.138.180.33 10:05, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Being Filipino

Being FILIPINO is being a musically inclined, if not competent person. The best performers and the best singers in the world are Filipinos! For isntance in Broadway, you will hardly find a musicale without a Filipino artist in it. Of course, our best import has alwayus been LEA SALONGA, the original Miss Saigon and the most saccharine-voiced Cosette of LesMiz.

What other Pinoys? Black Eyed Peas has one. Metallica. z is 50% pinoy by blood. What more?

Being Filipino is being the best care-giver in the world. Being the most capable craftsmen in the luxury and tanker ships that cruise the world, even the call centers that transmit infos all over the world. Ha! What would happen to the world if all Filipinos died in an instant!? All will also die. Because there will be no competent hands (hearts and minds) to man the world. Indeed, flips are cool! WILLI BACLAO

Philippine Independence/Corruption

To my understanding, many tribes settled the Philippine Islands back in the day and were peaceful with each other. They formed a type of confederation with each other...meaning that they pretty much governed their own tribes with their own tribal leaders but recognized that they were all basically one people in one "island nation." The Spaniards came in the 1500's during the "heyday of imperialism" when European nations such as England, Germany, Spain, Portugal, Italy, France, and the Netherlands (Holland) went out among the world and flexed their political and military muscle collecting as many lands outside Europe as possible to make themselves look more powerful to the other European nations.

The Spanish pretty much consolidated all the islands and peoples of the Philippines as they could (except for the rebellious south) and enforced their language, religion, and culture onto the island people. The Spanish were inherently corrupt people by this time as shown in the Americas in tales of the Spanish pillaging their way through lands previously untouched by Europeans in search of fountains of youth, gold, and new lands to conquer. The Philippine people resented such rule when they had previously been an independent people, so they longed for independence. When Spain somehow angered the US and caused the Spanish-American War and the Philippines fell into US hands, the Philippine people knew this was the time to gain back their independence. Alas, not only did the Filipinos inherit Spanish culture and religion, they also inherited Spanish corruption and greed. The United States understood the need for independence looking back at its own history fighting the British for independence, and they let the Philippines go back to its people. Many argue the Philippines would've been better off economically and militarily being a possession of the United States, but the Philippine people had been too busy caught up in fighting for independence for centuries that they focused more on that than thinking what might be better in the longrun and for the future.<-- comment from a ananomous user!


  • ReplY:
To: the ananomous user!, Hey! , The comment made above, sounds like a bias critism and insults coming from the U.S.A., is it??, if it is, You have a lot of guts for critising our "proud home-land" that we proudly call "Las Islas de Filipinas". We "do not care" about your critism, because we are an "Independent" nation .We were never!! were a colony of The U.S.; they "intervined" on the Philippines, so that they can cash inn and steal the rich resources of our land. Everybody knows that!! cool!:).We are very Proud of who we are!!. Please respect our country and thoughts and decisions. It's none of your business. Cool!,VIVA Revolución!, VIVA FILIPINAS!!

From: THE La RazA, LaTiNO-FILIpINOS-Christian- Muslim-brother-sister hood! :)

  • Reply:
To: The La Raza,

My apologies, but you misinterpreted/misconstrued my post. On the other hand, someone irl told me that Chinese merchants/traders/businessmen are responsible for the Philippine corruption. The Chinese have the power and wealth to influence law-makers, government officials, and business owners. They also cheat Filipino laborers from work-related benefits and also remain loyal to China. Should China ever engage in any global conflict, their wealthy, powerful Chinese family allies in the Philippines will back them up one way or another. The Chinese people don't encourage birth control b/c they want to overwhelm the global economy and community. They are industrious and patient people; even though western nations utilize cheap labor in China, China has amassed enough wealth to eventually overcome any country in the entire world if not hindered soon enough. They patiently wait for the day to come. The Filipino people are very studious, however. Despite other developing countries like Vietnam and Mexico surpassing the Philippine population, it is from Indian and Filipino populations that Americans seek for doctors, nurses, and other occupations often requiring a college degree.


  • Reply:
To: Above-writer,

Umm... Chinese don't encourage birth control?!? Then why on earth do they have the One-Child-Policy? Population growth in China is actually VERY low... By the way, this page is about Filipinos, I don't think there was a need to put all that anti-Chinese sentiment. I'm a Chinese-Filipino, and I'm not scheming to take over the country. I think it's unfair to blame our community for all the corruption in the Philippines. We, being Filipinos too, are as corrupt as any Filipino is... it has nothing to do with our ethnicity. While I agree that some Chinese-Filipinos are "loyal" to China, it's more in tribute to their ancestors than to nationalistic zeal. Most in our community are really peace-loving and have assimilated really well with the majority (especially in recent years). And the majority are even starting to see us less as foreigners and more as fellow-Filipinos with a different ethnic and cultural background. Like it or not, we have become a part of the Filipino identity, much like the Cebuano, Tausug, Bicolano, or Tagalog.

Edits & New Page

Let's make this page solely a disambiguation page. The rest should go on to a new page called Filipino people. This is to make it uniform like Swedish, Italian, Japanese, Chinese, Spanish, etc. --Chris 19:29, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Filipinos' ethnic make-up

This is addressed to User:TruthComission and his/her confusion concerning the Filipinos' ethnic make-up.

Although Filipinos are popularly called Malayans, the reality is that they are not. The reason they were called Malay(an)s was due to H. Otley Beyer's theory that Filipinos are descended from Malays who came from the Malay peninsula. Beyer took the name of an existing ethnic group and expanded it to include Filipinos. Since Beyer, there have been more conclusive studies that Filipinos came from the north rather than the south. If they didn't come from the south, then this does not them Malay. The ancestors of the Malays instead came from the Philippines (but ultimately from southern China).

As for Filipinos being Melanesians, I am not sure how where you got this information from. Would you care to share your source? I don't see any indication from the 89 year old source you quoted. The ancestors of the Melanesians also came from the same place where the ancestors of the Filipinos came from.

Chinese - yes there are many Chinese Filipinos. But to state that all Filipinos are mixed of Chinese blood is very misleading.

Here are sources that I urge you to peruse:

  • Bellwood, Peter. "Taiwan and the Prehistory of the Austronesians-speaking Peoples." The Review of Archaeology. 1998
  • Bellwood, Peter. "The Austronesians: Historical and comparative perspectives" 1995
  • Blundell. “The Austronesian Dispersal,” Newsletter of Chinese Ethnology.
  • Blust, Robert. "The Austronesian Homeland: A Linguistic Perspective." Asian Perspectives.
  • "The Austronesian Dispersal and the Origin of Languages." 1991. Scientific American. July.

And here are some websites to peruse:

Last but not least, "Asian Latinos?" Filipinos indeed have Hispanic influence. And indeed they are Asians. But they are in no way Asian Latinos. First, they do not meet the definition of Latino as you can see in that article. Second Asian Latinos refers to something totally different. Please stop redefining terminology that is not even used in academia. --Chris 09:46, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Umm Filipinos are not Melanesians. Melanesians are black and arent related to Filipinos at all with the exception of language. We are related to the Polynesians though because they are a mixture of Melanesian and the original Austronesians from Taiwan.Jcdizon 14:01, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Filipinos are predominantly Malay

While it is true that Filipinos descended from Austronesians originating in Taiwan. Most of the Malay ancestry descended from Filipinos came directly from the Malay Peninsula. There were 3 waves of Malay migration in the Philippines. The first wave came directly from Taiwan, these are the ancestors of the T'boli, Igorots and other highlander tribes. The second wave of migration came from the ten Bornean chiefs who brought along them their subjects. These were the ancestors of the Tagalogs, Ilonngos, Bicolanos, Cebuanos and other low-land Filipinos. Majority of the Philippine population came from this wave. The third wave came just about the end of the Pre-hispanic era up to the Spanish Colonial era. These Malays are now the ancestors of the Muslims in mindanao and Sulu. Furthermore, even before the Chinese have trade and commercial relatonship with China, Malays are already imbued with Chinese, Arab, Hindu, Persian blood and all other blood of ancient civilizations they have been in contact with. Malayan/Malay and Malaysians are two different terms, please learn to differentiate them. Melanesians are what is locally known in the Philippines as the "Negritos". Thus, it is correct to say that categorically, Filipinos are descended from the Malay, Chinese and Melanesian peoples.

Also, there are small communities of Latin people that came directly from Asia and Oceania where the Spaniards and Portuguese once colonized it. Some of them are in the Philippines.

The migration wave theory is exactly what Beyer proposed. And wave theory is what is no longer true. All Filipinos came from the north, as evidenced by current research. There were people from Malaysia who came to the Philippines, but this was much later. But they did not intermingle with the Filipinos. Given linguistic research, the languages of the the northern Philippines (Ilokano, Pangasinan, Kapampangan, Ifugao, etc.), central Philippines (Tagalog, Bikol, Cebuano, Tausug, etc.), and southern (Maranao & Maguindanao) are closely related to each other. This suggests a common source. Furthermore, the Malay language is so dramatically simplified. The languages of the Philippines are conservative - they retain many of the features of the ancestral languages. --Chris 18:07, 24 July 2005 (UTC) Filipinos rock!!!

Majority of Filipinos did NOT directly come from the Taiwan

The research only explains the migration of Austronesians from Taiwan to Southeast Asia to Oceania via the Philippines. This however, does not give extensive research on the history of migrations exclusively in the Philippines. That while it is true that first migration came directly from Taiwan, the descendants of most Filipinos came from the Malay Peninsula. The reason is that, when the first wave of Austronesian migration from Taiwan to the Philippines occured, these austronesians do not have the technology as advanced as those in the Indo-Chinese regions. These tribal villages only adapted the technology coming from their previous settlement. Many Austronesians however, continued to move from Philippines to Southeast Asia and then to Oceania. And after several centuries, these Austronesians who settled to the Malay peninsula, adapted the technology and culture of the advanced civilization of India and other ancient civilizations of Asia as exhibited by the Majapahit and Sri-Vijaya empires. The second wave of Malay migration occured because these austronesians or malays, trying to escape the clutch of invasion from the latter empire, went to the Philippines where they also brought the culture and technology they have adopted. Majority of Filipino's ancestry are rooted to this said wave.

Please read the other sources I gave you. There are two issues you are dealing with here. First, you are dealing with the Malay people. They refer to a particular ethnic group in Malaysia. Because of Beyer's migration theory - that all Filipinos came in "waves" of migration from the Malay peninsula - he began labelling the Filipinos as "Malays." However, Malays is no longer used by archaeologists, anthropologists, and linguists who study Austronesian-speaking people. Furthermore, the concept of race (read the article) is no longer supported by anthropologist. In essence, there is no such thing as a "Malay Race."
On another issue.. There are records of "Luzones" who have settled inMalacca in Malaysia. Does this make Malaysians Filipino? Of course not. That is what you're doing with the Filipinos. A fraction of Malays in a certain part of the Philippines does not make all Filipinos Malay.
The second issue is the migration of Malays and what nots to the Philippines. This may be true for some areas. But certainly not for all; i.e., not all Filipinos have ancestors who came from Malaysia and Indonesia. Malay words such as dalamhati, salamat, and guru are to be found in Tagalog due to contact with Malay. Malays came when the Tagalogs were already there. The evidence is in the language. If what you're saying were true, wouldn't Tagalog resemble Malay? No. Are you a Tagalog speaker? Can you understand "Malayic" tongues? Of course not.
What they teach in Philippine schools is simply fantasy. There were no 10 Borneo dodatus. There were no "waves" of "Proto-Malay" migrations who came at certain dates. The Visayans had nothing to do with Sri-Vijaya; or at least there is very little record of their presence in the Philippines. The Code of Kalantiaw is a fake. I could go on. I hope you consider reading the resources I gave you. --Chris 03:45, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Malays

  • To Chris:

Malays is not refered to a particular group in Malaysia, rather, it referred to a generic group that posseses the same characteristics and features commonly found in and around the Malay peninsula. As I said before, Malay or Malayan is different from Malaysians by definition. Another point is that, Malay is not a race when taken in a scientific context, just as much as the Franks, Saxons, Visigoths, Semites, Arabs, Norse, Aztecs, Incas, Inuits, Hmongs and Hans is not a race by scientific or bioligical term. But “Malay” term is meant here in a historical context. And yes, there are records of Luzon people that settled in Malaysia, most people called them Tagals. There are many ethnic groups in Malaysia as much as in the Philippines. And as I said before, Malay/Malayan does not necessarily refer exclusively to the Malaysians. As for the language both language are different from each other, as much as Visayan is different from Tagalog. However, both of their predominant vocabularies originated to the Austronesian language family. And while it is true that the code of Kalantiaw has been proven to lack validity, Philippine History taught in Philippine schools is not a fantasy. The ten Bornean Datus is not a fantasy as you claimed. Rather, it is a story handed down by word of mouth for several generations, and is very rich in detail that support it. The story may be shrouded as myths, but the Bible of the Old Testament is shrouded with mythic-like events either, still, the scientific circles consider it as the oldest historical book and used it as basis for some of the historical research on ancient history and civilizations. The” waves of migration” is also not entirely discarded, since it is a theory and the most possible one at that as supported by scientific researches. There is no basis that says Sri-Vijayans has no connection whatsoever with Visayans, it has not been proven nor disproven, not yet. The Philippine archipelago has never been a part of the Sri-Vijaya empire, which is the reason why the “Second Wave” migrated in the Philippines. It is simply a repeat story they did thousand of years ago in South China where the Mongolian people started to dominate. One thing for sure though, the Second Wave proved to be more advanced and different in technology and culture than the first wave. As exhibited by their literature, artisanship, manner of dressing, warfare and culture. The characteristics have more in common with the people of the Malay peninsula and their oral history roots them directly in that region. Also, Austronesian is used mostly in terms of language and culture, the racial term used for Austronesian is Malay-Polynesian. We indicated Malayan to differentiate them from Melanesians and Polynesians who are also subgroups of the Austronesian family. Lastly, Austronesians did originate in South China, but we were just merely rebutting on your claim of Austronesians immigrating on just one single route to the Philippines from Taiwan.


The reason is that, when the first wave of Austronesian migration from Taiwan to the Philippines occured, these austronesians do not have the technology as advanced as those in the Indo-Chinese regions.
This makes no sense at all. Please cite your sources. I'd also like to see your sources regarding the number of Europeans or Spaniards as you claimed that mixed in with "most" of the Filipinos. --Mamoahina 19:58, 25 July 2005 (UTC)


To: the Truth commisioner!, Hey dude how's it going?. :)I agree with Chris!, he is right!. Filipinos did come from mainland Asia thousands of years ago! every mongoloid austroneans did!, including the native Americans, negritos, Australian aborigines, New Zealand Maoris etc. To be honest! The real Filipinos are the Negrito them selves. But i also agree with Truth commisioner's issue of "Asian latino". In Latin America, people who belong to the Hispanic world or associate them selves with Spain, are considered a latino or Hispanics what ever their race is, That's only if you or they associated their culture with Spain. Latino is also a made up name too, in Latin America. It's a fantacy word that defineds native pride, against the White Espanyol race. The word "La Raza" is a Mexican word, that defines "mestizo pride" it's a made up name too.The Majority of Filipinos! are not mixed with Spanish blood, the mestizo group mixed with Spanish ownly number to (1.5%), but that doesn't mean Filipinos are not defined as Asian Latinos. Filipinos are Asian Latinos - that's because, it's a fantacy word that defineds "Filipino Pride". Just like "latinos" and "la Raza" in Central and South America. And also, if you didn't know about this, "Filipinos are considered hispanic, by the Español people and the Hispanic world", no doubt about it.

I am Spanish from spain (Malaga) and i have grown up there most life. We learn about Philippines when i was in school, and i also know some Filipinos that live in Malaga and i can tell you now that Spanish people to do not think or view Filipinos as Latino or Hispanic. We do not even look at ourselves as Latino or Hispanic. To us Hispanic and Latino is only South America. Everyone i know looks at the Filipinos as Asian people. But what i cannot understand is why Filipinos try to be something else but not Asian? it is impossible because when we look at Filipinos we see that they have asian face, asian skin, asian voice, but they still try to pretend they are something else? why is that? I like them the way they are, along with Chinese people and Japanese people. ~~David~~

I agree with that^. Since when were Filipinos considered Hispanic/Latino? Never heard that one before. Coojah 18:10, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


I believe there should be a reference name for racial stock of people that are the majority of Malaysia,Philippines and Indonesia. I dont know what word but the word that most people will go to, is Malay. Even though in these countrys, the word "Malay" may mean something different. It is obvious that these (Austronesian) people are very similar by blood, and i dont know why other Filipinos would rather be just classed as Asians alongside others (Chinese,Japanese,Indians) that have very little to no cultural or racial relation to us at all. There needs to be an official word/name or else Filipinos are gonna be called Malays, Malays from Malaysia are gonna be mistaken for Filipinos as they already are, and same goes for Indonesians.--Jandela 08:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Latin Union Commitee

To: AllanBz! Hey dude how's it going!:). The Truth commisioner's issue of Asian Latino is a Fact! If you didn't not by know, The Philippines is a member of the Latin Union Organization and Commitee for 51 years now, since it's creation in 1954. East Timor is there too! :) cool! --Gonzalo 9:25, 30 July 2005 (UTC) :) cool! Thanx!

Gonzalo. I attempted to verify with various sources that Filipinos are Asian Latinos, and have been unsuccessful . Could you list me some sources, please? Looking at Latino, Filipinos don't fit the definition. I think we should avoid the labeling and just say that Filipinos are from Asia and they have a lot of Spanish influence. --Chris 01:38, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Chris: How's it going dude :). Well, Filipinos are from Asia that's a fact! influenced by Hispanics that's a Fact. Asian Latino is word that defines Filipino pride in association with the "Romance language and culture", that's all:). Just like the "Latin peoples" in South America, who also association with the Romance Language and culture. "Latino" is also a made up name too which evolved over a 10O years ago in (North AMERICA - U.S.A) Central and South America designed to established a sense of native pride particularliy for the Mexican peoples living in the U.S.A. Latino was later on applied to all the Hipanic people living in the Americas. I know most people do not aggree with me and the truth commioners issue of Filipinos indefied as latinos because of "Demography issue" with the Filipino - Spanish Mestizos population number to (1.5%). But that's cool,:) It's fine by me. But, I don't know about The Truth commioners point of view though!. It looks like, you have to explain it to him. :)-- Gonzalo 10:05, 30 July 2005 cool! thanx!

Without a doubt Filipinos are Asian. BUt are Filipinos Latino? The definition of Latino doesn't fit Filipinos. Hispanicized maybe - to denote our influenced. But there is no official word. We shouldn't be creating neologisms or redefining a term to fit something especially since it's not widely used. One of the important things on Wikipedia is verifiability. And I cannot verify the Asian Latino thing. --Chris 02:30, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Modern day Filipinos are Asian people in terms of "Demography" only. In terms of Culture and History, we see the Filipino people as Hispanic and latino. We have always identified Filipinos as Hispanic. The whole Asian latino issue is a fantancy word that defines filipinos close relationship with the Romance culture and language. In Spain, we only identify Asian people "particulary peoples from: China, Taiwan, Malaysia, Japan, Korea, Thailand, Vietnam and Laos". But "not" Filipinos and East Timorese. Filipino are just Filipinos, plain and simple, identified as native Hispanic-Indians. That's how we have always seen it through out the century. But I don't know about the U.S.A. point of view though!. The Philippines might be located in Asia, but the culture and history is not Asian. We see the country as an extension and provincial part of Mexico. It's not a bias comment or anything it's just, how we see it. that's all. cool:) -Gonzalo 5:55 p.m., 30 July 2005 (UTC) cool.Thanx!

You seem to be implying that thousands of years of Chinese trading has never influenced us? And that only the Christianized section of the population are the only ones "Filipino"? What about the Chinese Filipino? The Muslim Filipino? The indigenous peoples of the Philippines? We have retained the superstitious beliefs of our animistic ancestors. We have been influenced in our business practices by Chinese merchants. Our staple food is rice. Our family values are very similar to the family values exhibited in China and other parts of South East Asia. The best term i think for the mainstream society/culture of the Philippines is Hispanicized-Americanized Asian. Colonial influence have not completely eradicated our Asian traits. --seav 22:05, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

I think you mean "geographically" b/c demography is the statistical study of human populations especially with reference to size and density, distribution, and vital statistics...I dun think demography has anything to do with why Filipinos are Asian

By "demography", I think the poster was implyting ancestry/race. He was saying that by race, by geneaology, Filipinos are Asian. Period! Culture is another kettle of fish. Although Filipino culture is also fundementally South East Asian, it is highly influenced by western cultures and traditions (what I call the Hispano-Anglo influence on Filipino culture), but it is by no means an extension of either of these (Hispanic or Anglo) cultures.
The culture of Chile, for example, is an extension of Spain and hence Hispanic, the population majority of Chile also happens to be descended from Spaniards (whether as mixed or unmixed descendants), thus ethnographically they are also Hispanic. The culture of New Zealand is an extension of England, and hence Anglo, and the population majority of New Zealand also happens to be descended from Englishmen (mostly as unmixed descendants), thus ethnographically they are also Anglo.

It is settled, then.


I think this discussion is pointless. It doesn't matter if we are hispanics or not. It doesn't matter really if we speak English, Tagalog, Spanish, Cebuano, Chinese or not.(To be able communicate is more important ). It would be good if we could speak many languages though, including Spanish(or Chinese, French, etc)But I really don't think we are Hispanics. It's like saying the English are French because they have french words in the langauge and were once a colony of France.Everything synthesizes into something new.--Jondel 06:31, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Southern Chinese/Taiwanese origin

Filipinos from Southern China & Taiwan? Oh please I would rather believe they came from via Malaysia, Indonesia or other Pacific Islands. They closely resemble those groups. Just because an American researcher said that it does not mean its true.

In Philippines schools, were taught that majority of ancestors are Malay, Indones races. With mestizo included in the minority groups.

  • Even if something is taught in schools that doesn't mean its not subject to change.23prootie 02:25, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Zuni girl; photograph by Edward S. Curtis, 1903 This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.
NB: Assessment ratings and other indicators given below are used by the Project in prioritizing and managing its workload.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's quality scale.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's importance scale.
After rating the article, please provide a short summary on the article's ratings summary page to explain your ratings and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses.
WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks:

Archive 1

According to Spanish Migrant Statistics Filipino Population in Spain is around 40-50,000 not 25,000????

The infobox

Change needed: How can the number of filipino people in Phillipines be around 87 million when our own webpage said population of Phillipines is 83,054,000. This should be changed immediatelly, and I am not sure if that is strictly filipino people or includes minorities as well. Also, where is this many number in the US found? That is incredibly large.Youtube 22:35, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

The US estimates includes illegal immigrants, who are not usually counted in the census.23prootie 02:29, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Filipino is a nationality, not an ethnic group. Therefore, the use of {{Infobox Ethnic group}} in this article is misleading. Any thoughts? —Khoikhoi 01:14, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

^ You don't know what the difference between nationality and ethnicity are. It's like this. If you were born in american then your nationality is American and if you are Filipino then your ethnicity is Filipino. So, it's correct that this falls into ethnicity group it's what you are not just where you are born.

I am not an expert, but I am a sociocultural anthropology student, and according to anthropologists, if people consider themselves to be of a particular ethnic group, then it's an ethnic group. There is no such thing as an "official ethnic group." Many people consider themselves to be Filipino, hence Filipino is an ethnic group. So, no the infobox is definitely not misleading.
Thus, Filipino is both a nationality and an ethnicity. People are usually both, but many are one. Using myself as an example, I do not have Filipino citizenship, so I am not a Filipino national. However, I am ethnically a Filipino. American is the same thing; it's both an ethnicity and a nationality. I am an American by both ethnicity and nationality. --Chris S. 01:49, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
I know that, but if I say I'm Russian, does that make me Russian by nationality and ethnicity? What if I'm Chukchi? —Khoikhoi 23:40, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
Hyphenate I suppose. --Chris S. 00:11, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
But what about the first question I asked? ;) —Khoikhoi 04:11, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Do take into account that every country is different in terms of classifying ethnicity and nationality. I don't know the Russian position, but I would say that you would be both. If you were Chukchi, I don't know. I would consider them Russian by nationality but also Russian by ethnicity. And I don't mean the Slavic Russian, but non-Slavic Russian. Just as there are many people of Arab descent in France who consider themselves French by ethnicity as well. They have assimilated well into French culture even if their ancestors were not born in France.
The situation in the Philippines is different. While the Philippines is also home to many ethinc groups, there also exists a kind of national conscience that they are Filipino. There is just not one "real" Filipino as there is a "real" Russian (the Slavs) or "real" Chinese (the Han Chinese). All Filipinos are equally "real." Whenever from Filipinos from different regional ethnic groups interact, they usually do not think of the differences. It's like me meeting someone from Michigan or whatever. --Chris S. 17:36, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I understand what you're saying now, thanks! —Khoikhoi 18:25, 3 June 2006 (UTC)


Nationality and ethnicity are very different, Australia is a perfect example. Any ethnic group can be Australian. Australian is the nationality. For centuries it has been known that Filipinos are Malays. They even teach that in schools and universitys in the Philippines, I know because i live and study here.

Gary Valenciano

See Talk:Gary Valenciano#Citizenship.

Forthcoming Filipino People Image

Hey folks,

The image for the ethnobox was removed becaused it contained four images of questionable copyright status. I am working on getting three more images from public domain sources such as the Philippine government. I think I found acceptable public domain ones for the Tboli & Ifugao pics. I should get it by this weekend. So just letting you all know that this is getting done. --Chris S. 23:58, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Mission accomplished. It's on the page now. And I used Freddie Aguilar as per someone's suggestion. I was lucky that I have a German friend who visited him in the café he performs two years ago. She was thrilled that her pic, under GFDL, would be on the page. So everything works out - all the images, but the Aguilar one, are public domain and thus not subject to deletion. --Chris S. 21:52, 15 July 2006 (UTC)


Spanish is not a major language of the Philippines

I am a Filipino that has lived in philippines for most of my life and i can say that i know myabe one person who speaks Spanish, and they were taught in Spain.

Yeah, you're right. I don't know how that one slipped in. --Chris S. 16:57, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Supplemental Information

The Spanish language in the Philippines eventually died out sometime between the 1940s and 1950s. During the height of Spanish occupation, a Filipino is not considered truly educated unless they are fluent in Spanish. As the Spanish influence over the Philippines diminished, so did the the popularity of the Spanish language.
Spanish education stalwarts like the University of Santo Tomas and Letran University tried to keep the Spanish language alive as much as they can, by making Spanish courses a mandatory part of their curricula. But this eventually fell out of favor among the Filipinos and eventually became just an optional course.

As a child growing up in the Philippines, I remember my aunts furiously trying to learn Spanish because it was part of their mandatory lessons. I dreaded the day I would enter college since I thought that Spanish is a brutally difficult language to learn (It turns out it is not). But by the time I was in high school, the Spanish courses in most colleges were practically phased out.

NetScout55 00:14, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm just chiming in to point up the fact that Article XIV, Section 6 of the RP constitution speaks of four specific languages. Filipino is designated as the national language. Filipino and, until otherwise provided by law, English, are designated as official languages for purposes of communication and instruction. The constitution provides specifically that Spanish and Arabic shall be promoted on a voluntary and optional basis, and provides generally that the regional languages are the auxiliary official languages in the regions and shall serve as auxiliary media of instruction therein. -- Boracay Bill 01:36, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Culture and Religion section - possible contradiction?

"Filipino culture is primarily based on the cultures of the various native groups, and has little to no influence from Spanish or Mexican cultures. The customs and traditions of the Roman Catholic faith are Spain's lasting legacy."

However, the article Culture of the Philippines states:

"The Customs and Traditions of the Philippines are strongly influenced by its colonized past. The Spanish colonization of the Philippines, actually governed from Mexico, lasted for more than 350 years, thus there is a significant presence of Spanish and Mexican influence in many facets of the Filipino culture."

Being Filipino, I have noticed that much of the culture contains facets of Spanish culture. Should it be changed in the main article? -Shiryu22 18:28, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I don't know how that phrase you put in bold slipped by. I've removed it. --Chris S. 20:15, 27 August 2006 (UTC)


Does roman catholic faith have anything to do with spanish tradition or custom? Sabah of North Borneo was hardly touched by the Spanish but the majority of Natives are Roman Catholic. I mean just because Spain brought it, dosent mean that Catholocism is a Spanish tradition. I think the article is a little misleading because strongly influenced cultures are the countries where the national language is spanish (e.g. Mexico, Puerto Rico, Chile, Argentina). Spanish is hardly spoken in the Philippines.

I quote from the Hispanic culture in the Philippines page,

"The Philippines, having been the sole Spanish possession in Asia, endured the least amount of Spanish influence on its culture and people out of all the colonies of the Spanish Empire."

and another from the Hispanic page,

"Although most Hispanics have a Spanish surname, not all do, and while most Spanish-surnamed people are Hispanic, not all are (e.g., there are tens of millions of Spanish-surnamed Filipinos, but very few, only about 3.5%, would qualify as Hispanic..."

My point is, that the information on all the pages relating to Hispanic Culture, has indicated that The Philippines was not strongly influenced by Hispanic culture. Country like Mexico and Colombia have been strongly influenced, Philippines has been lightly influenced by the Spanish but the Spanish were far from making a Huge impact on the culture.

" one could easily argue that the 37 years as an American unincorporated territory have left a greater and more visible legacy in the country than 377 years as a Spanish colony" Hispanic culture in the Philippines

i have copied and saved what i wrote in case some people who would not like this revealed have the urge to delete my query/comment. (past experiences) Regards, --Jandela 17:07, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Must merge

The Wikipedia article Who is a Filipino? should merge with this article. I don't see any reason for having two. It's like an ego trip. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.21.41.231 (talk) 2000, December 12, 2006 (UTC)

The Pasalubong article too... No one's discussing it here, and for some reason this article has a tag on top suggesting the merge. It would be a good idea, in my opinion.

Ancestry section

Hi! Could you add an 'Ancestry section', as with any other Ethnic Group page?

North American section

Hey, I'm going to trim down that section. It's unproprtionately large compared to the others.23prootie 00:26, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


Regions with significant populations

Umm where are the sources? Were are we getting these numbers? We dont even have the source for Philipines itself.
--Coojah 18:31, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

The section is getting long. Can we just add the places with alot of filipinos. I mean filipino's in norway? I mean it says regions with "significant" populations NOT "All regions with filipinos". Plus, THERE STILL ISN'T SOURCES, are you guys just making up this info?
--Coojah 06:02, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
I trimmed it. --Howard the Duck 10:27, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Article Renaming

Hey, I am going to rename the article. After reading Talk:Malays, I am starting to doudt if this article is truly an ethnicity. I think the comments that watered down that article could also be applied here. So, I am going to rename this into Filipino (identity), which is more inclusive., in regards to the Moro people, Igorots and the Chinese Filipino. --23prootie 05:14, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

If a group of people consider themselves as an ethnic group, then they're an ethnic group. --Howard the Duck 10:26, 22 January 2007 (UTC)


lol thats ridiculous, if im from new jersey and me and a thousand people decide we want to make an ethnic group called "jerseyin" dosent mean my ethnicicty is jerseyin. --Jandela 15:24, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

See Ethnic group. -- Boracay Bill 03:32, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
New Jerseyans, New Yorkers, Washingtonians, Texans, Pennsylvanians, etc. can all be considered ethnic groups. It can even be broken down by cities! Seattlites, Chicagoans, and in the Philippines you have the Buhinons (they live in a town called Buhi and have their own dialect!), Manileños, Nagueños, Zamboangueños, etc. They all have different cultures and people identify with them.
Ethnic groups are situational, so depending on the situation you use the appropriate label. I mean, here in America saying "I'm American" is of very little use to the person you are conveying this information to since virtually everyone around is an American. So you would say, to a New Yorker, that you're a New Jerseyan (or New Jerseyite, if you prefer!). To a Frenchman, a New Jerseyan wouldn't make sense just as Toulousain would be to you... so American generally is more appropriate. --Chris S. 04:11, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

The vast majority of Filipinos are not related to Hispanics

Filipinos are not related to Hispanics in blood at all. The two groups are only related in culture. Filipinos are basically an Austronesian people while Hispanics are a mixture of white Spanish, native Americans and black Africans -Jcdizon 02:09, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree about Filipinos and their non-blood relation to Hipanics, however the statemant "Hispanics are a mixture of white Spanish, native Americans and black Africans" is not exactly true...Hispancs aren't exactly as 'Black and White' as you say. A Hispanic can be European, Amerindian, Mestizo -Euro./Amer.(which most are), Mulatto (Euro./Afri.), or African...and most are not 'all three at the same time'...there may also be Asians in Latin America who would be 'Hispanic' by the U.S. standards. You probably didn't mean it to be so 'Blacka and White', so it's not a big deal... --Cali567 02:42, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
You have misunderstood, Jc. When I added Hispanics, I did not mean blood relations at all. Their relationship has to do with a cultural/ethnic standpoint. --Chris S. 02:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

i think using the word "ethnicity" or "ethnic" is confusing and misleading in a way. Yes i have read the wikipedia definition of ethnicity but im sure most people such as myself, will associate the word ethnicity in this context, with meaning blood relation to Spaniards. Also i disagree that the Philippines is a Hispanic culture anyway. The base of Filipino culture is pretty much as South East Asian as it gets just because some festivals are celebrated that the Spanish introduced does not mean its a hispanic culture at all. Bring a mexican guy from his village and drop him in Illigan City in the Philippines and you really think he's gonna feel like he's familiar?? i dont think so. Tagalog borrows many words from the Spanish language, but so does Japanese, does that mean Malaysian Culture (if there is such a thing) should be seen as having a hispanic culture because they have hundreds of borrowed portuguese words? Does that mean Malay is a romance language? --Jandela 08:45, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I can't help the way people think about the words ethnicity and ethnic group. Also, I did not say that the Philippines has a Hispanic culture. I said that the culture of most Filipinos (the Lowland Christians who make up over 3/4ths of the population) is related to that of the Hispanics. Would a Bicolano be more at home in a town fiesta at Spain or fasting during the Holy Month of Ramadan in Indonesia?
And the Japanese and Malaysian analogies you presented do not work. Spain was not in their countries for over three centuries. Spain did not influence their cultures dramatically. It's kind of funny that I am having this debate, because I have spent years debating with the extremists Hispanists, insisting that Filipinos are not Hispanic but merely Hispanicized. In any case, I think Chamorros are the most related ethnic group to the Philippines because of the similarities in our cultures. They have the Austronesian, Spanish, and American influences like we do. --Chris S. 08:54, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


cmon chris, firstly your implying that all indonesians are muslim and only celebrate ramadan. Secondly your implying that the Philippines is the only place in South East Asia with any Catholic festivities. A Bicolano would definately be more at home during a Catholic Christmas Festival in Indonesia than one in Spain. Firstly the language Bicolano is closer to Indonesian than Spanish, excluding religion and religious traditions, the culture of Indonesia and Philippines are way closer together than that of Spain. They eat practically the same foods (especially Bicolanos who's food is known to be spicy).

And the Portuguese were in Malaysia for approxametely 130 years and then it was the Dutch so we are not the only country in asia with significant european history. The difference is we are the only country with a large amount of people who cling on to it as if we suffer from self hate issues. And Malaysia is home to not only a significant community of Portuguese speaking people, but also is the only other place in the world apart from the Philippines (Mindanao) where Chabacano is spoken (Sabah).

--Jandela 11:23, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Spanish would be much, much easier for the Bicolano to learn than Indonesian. The grammars of Bikol and Indonesian might be very similar, but the words and affixes are just mutually alien. While it's true that Spanish grammar bears no similarities with Bikol, at least the Bicolano has a head start in terms of vocabulary; s/he can learn grammar later. Vocabulary is much more useful than grammar when traveling to Hispanophone countries--with words, you can at least communicate that you want to use the teléfono because you had an accidente in the calle on the outskirts of the ciudad near the isla. When all you have is grammar, on the other hand, what will you do with pronoun positioning, subjunctive conjugation, N morphing into M before B and P, and all that other stuff? What help would that be of?

My point is not so much about language, because neither Spanish or Indonesians would be able to accurately comprehend what is being said. My point is culture(s) and a way of life that is relative and natural to these people going back to precolonial times. They are both very similar. And I dont believe that what you said is entirely correct (just my opinion), check out the bikol basics on the bikol language page, Indonesians say "aku" for me/I, Bicolanos say "ako", Indonesians say "kau"/"mu" for you, Bicol is "ka"/"mo" hundreds if not thousands of other words are the same sounding. Kita,Kami,Manuk,kamu/kamo, saya/saiya, its very very similar. I have even spoken tagalog before in front of a malay speaker and he can get the jist of what im talking about, where as a spanish person would find it hard to even be able to pick up a lot of the words that we borrow from spanish. The basis for all the malayo-polynesian languages are all very similar, much much more similar than that to spain for The Philippines or Portuguese for Malaysia/Indonesia. Thats like saying an Arab would be able to understand an Indonesian better than that of a Malayo-Polynesian speaker. Its alot more to do with just vocabulary, accents, body language, pronounciation are huge factors.--Jandela 17:27, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../f/i/l/Talk%7EFilipino_people_Archive_2_64fc.html"