Illustration by: Virgilio Biagtan
The University of the Philippines (UP) finds itself at the crossroads of tradition and modernity as its latest fundraising project for varsity athletes stirs up a heated national conversation. The release of a limited-edition jacket priced at PHP 3,500 has polarized the UP community and beyond, raising questions about the balance between supporting athletic programs and maintaining inclusivity in a nation deeply conscious of socio-economic disparities.
The jacket, designed to embody school pride and serve as a funding tool for UP’s sports teams, is more than just apparel—it is a symbol of institutional support for student-athletes who represent the country’s premier state university on various competitive stages. For years, UP athletes have faced financial hurdles, from inadequate training facilities to insufficient allowances. This project aims to address these gaps by channeling proceeds directly into their development.
However, the jacket’s steep price has cast a shadow over its purpose. Many argue that the cost alienates a significant portion of UP’s diverse community, particularly students and alumni from underprivileged backgrounds. While the garment is marketed as a source of pride, its exclusivity risks reinforcing economic divides rather than uniting the UP community behind a common cause.
In a country where public universities like UP are seen as bastions of opportunity for the marginalized, the campaign has inadvertently highlighted the tensions between aspirations of excellence and the realities of accessibility. The backlash is not simply about the price; it reflects deeper concerns about how initiatives like these resonate with the broader values of equity and inclusion that UP symbolizes.
The challenge for UP is clear: to weave a fundraising strategy that bridges the economic gap while still achieving its goal of supporting athletes. Diversifying fundraising options could provide a solution—offering a range of items at varying price points, from premium products like the jacket to more affordable merchandise, would enable a wider audience to participate. Additionally, public transparency on how the funds are utilized could help rebuild trust and encourage more enthusiastic support.
Nationally, the controversy surrounding the jacket speaks to a broader narrative of how public institutions navigate the delicate interplay of tradition, pride, and practicality. While the intent to rally support for athletes is commendable, ensuring that such efforts reflect the inclusive spirit of UP and the country it serves is equally vital.
The UP jacket may be a “pricey pride” for some, but it also offers an opportunity to redefine how the university approaches community-driven support. By weaving accessibility into its fundraising fabric, UP can demonstrate that school spirit is not limited by cost but enriched by collective participation—a fitting tribute to the athletes who carry its colors with honor and determination.