"Hayop ang Dating!"

Do you ever wonder how animals would probably feel and react if they're aware of being compared to certain human behavior? It's how much I wonder why the kind of association. As if it's unusual for these animals to act their nature; it is rather "out of proportion" to be cited for such "beastly" peculiarity, especially if used to associate with people who have the ability to act sensibly and be responsible for their own actions unlike the animals that are merely being 'it' as naturally expected.

Pigs, upon seeing one among their own being clean and elegant at that, don't alienate that pig and start teasing it with "ang tao mo naman" ("oh you're such a man"). And two people fighting know they can avoid such squabble if they want to, not as if their hostility is due to their instinct like that of aso't pusa (dogs and cats). Prostitutes don't have wings, for if they do, they will just 'fly high' and be highly regarded. Hence, to be called "kalapating mababa ang lipad" would be unfair to the real one that could have flew as low just to check out some bird feeds perhaps. (Could you imagine how these "low flying pigeons" would tender their services to a "stallion in bed"?)

Of course, these idioms and jargons were composed by men to further pull-off their literary creativity and prove they're not "hare-brained". Or to work out interaction and comprehension adeptness the way parables convey its message. More so, it results to their already-given superiority to a supposedly higher level over and at the expense of their "counterparts". Part of which, animals don't mind; not that chickens will "chicken-out" whereas tigers will live up to its fierceness and threaten you with its "tiger looks". Neither will these creatures shed "crocodile tears" nor make a big deal out of being unsuitably deemed as a "rabbit". But then again, man's actions are achieved on his own merits as much as that of the animals' instinctive nature.

Men may be a cut above but can learn from these animals. We're not mere "leeches", dependent on others for we can work our way into our continued existence unlike the survival of the fittest and balance of nature taking place within the animal kingdom. Yet, as we know by now, animals are relying on their survival instinct; thus, the reason behind their nature as divergent and unfairly linked to men but with a defiled meaning.

A "buwaya's" (corrupt official's) reason for his greediness is to survive in style, much different from that of a real crocodile's objective. These kin to the alligators don't play "dog in a manger" for it devours only what it needs. The same goes for snakes, its traits may be sneaky but it's not a traitor; Judas is.

While we can be "guinea pigs" as subjects of analysis whom inspiration can be drawn from; let us not forget the set of 10 rules that really matters. Perhaps, we can "molt our own black wools" before getting accustomed to beastly orientations only to end up as "zebras" (convicts). This way, we can be like animals, I mean, "hayop ang dating!" ('animalistic' in a positive way) "ROAR!"