Showing posts with label gender bias. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gender bias. Show all posts

Saturday, October 27, 2007

Housewife, anyone?

“Everything happens for a reason.”
This somewhat wise statement was uttered by one of my workmates yesterday. She told me about one of her cousins who is about the same age with her. Since they were child, they were somewhat competitive to each other; such as in education, beauty, career, and perhaps eventually the success to get rich husband.
My friend said, “She got married at an earlier age that made me envy her because that gave me an idea that she beat me finally. I got married after I reached a so-called ‘crucial age’ for women to get married. Therefore, I felt like I didn’t have many choices whom I would marry. When knowing that her husband is quite successful in his business so that they have a good house and car, I had to say that I even envied her more. She is a full housewife, only sometimes she gets some order to make cakes, one of her capabilities that can make her earn her own money. Sometimes when my kids protest when I am about to go to work, because they want me to stay, they really make me down in the dumps. I want to be a full housewife too so that I don’t need to work. But only depending on my husband’s paycheck, we will not be able to survive.”
I kept listening to her.

“However, she is a bit fussy to her maids so that none of them stands working with her for more than one month. This made her obliged to do all of household chores by herself, including to take her children to go to school. Her husband doesn’t help her do the chores at all because his right hand cannot be used freely due to an accident. And perhaps because he thinks that he is the main breadwinner in the family, he doesn’t need to help his wife to do household chores. It is fully his wife’s responsibility. Not long ago, my cousin’s mother –in-law passed away. And in fact this has made her much busier since the responsibility to take care of her father-in-law who is already elderly becomes hers too. This made me think whether I could change position with her: having a rich husband, two children who are still studying in the elementary school, but no housemaid, and also having to take care of an elderly father-in-law, plus one grandmother-in-law, I think I will give up soon.”

This sounds more interesting, doesn’t it? 

“I have two toddlers, one is two years old and the other one is still six months old, and my husband is really helpful to do household chores, perhaps in return of my helping him earn money. I don’t think I can make it without having a housemaid, as I have told you after Lebaran (Eid Mubarrak Day) my housemaid didn’t go back to work anymore, I am often at my wits’ end. It is not easy to look for a new housemaid who cares and loves my children as to her own kids. I start to realize that everything happens for a reason. I am not supposed to envy my cousin.”

A good ending, eh? LOL.
“I believe that being a full housewife is really a hard task for me. I am not sure if I can make it. Can you?” she asked me.
Recently I must say that sometimes I ask myself that question, a question that in the past I would answer strongly, “NO!” 

“Well, I don’t mind being one as long as I still can do something that will make me reach my self-actualization. The problem is being a full housewife for me doesn’t give me self-actualization. To me, doing household chores doesn’t give me satisfaction.” I responded.
“I opine that being a housewife is really noble for women, because it is hard to do. I cannot make it either.” She went on.

“I am sorry to say that I don’t really agree with you. Women have choices to do what they want to do, things that give them satisfaction, and even self-actualization. No profession is nobler than any other profession. Women who choose to be a housewife perhaps get that satisfaction and actualization by doing household chores, for example by having a neat, and tidy house, without any single spot of dirt, without anything lying not at the right place—just like the women in “The Stepford Wives” movie. Women who choose to do desk job—behind desk from eight to five daily, probably get their satisfaction in it. Women who choose to do dangerous and risky job, such as working in mining sites possibly get another kind of satisfaction. Women who choose to work in glamorous world, such as models, actresses, etc, get different satisfaction too. And they are all equal, in my opinion. Just like some women who are very proud and satisfied when they get ‘label’ as superwomen because they are willing to do both domestic (read => doing household chores) and ‘public’ job (read => having career outside the house) are equal too with other women who choose to do only one of them, domestic or public job; not better not worse.”
It is just a matter of making a choice.
PT56 10.35 261007

Friday, October 19, 2007

Women's Burden ...

Last Monday 15 October 2007 when reading an article in the local newspaper about a thirty-year-old woman who left her two toddlers in a car parked in the parking lot of one big mosque located in the downtown of Semarang, I remembered one article I posted in my blog more than a year ago. (Here is the link http://afeministblog.blogspot.com/2006/04/mental-depression.html) Women who are burdened by patriarchal society’s norm to be “good women” or “good wife” are more apt to get nervous breakdown more often than men.
More than a year ago when my Mom told me about one friend of hers—around sixties—who left her husband and children, I also thought of the same thing. The husband said to my Mom, “We never quarrel, everything is okay between us. That’s why I don’t understand why she left abruptly.” I must say that until this twenty first century, Indonesian women—or perhaps eastern women—are still burdened by “doctrines” to be “good women”, such as: always submit to your husband, listen to anything he says to you and obey it, give him your first priority while yours is the last, etc. That’s why I somewhat doubted with what her husband said. “Never quarrel” did not automatically mean that everything was okay because it was very possible that his wife was practicing those good-women doctrines that unfortunately did not fit her way of thinking. However, she did not have any other choice but obeyed. After she thought that she no longer had patience to live her life, she went away.
On Tuesday 16 October 2007 the same local newspaper informed that the thirty-year-old woman—she was recognized as Diana—was found in one street in the country—between Semarang and one small town nearby. She was diagnosed as suffering from a serious mental depression so that she could not give any explanation of her act. Due to that, she was brought to a mental hospital in Semarang.
Similar to one accident that happened to a mutilated woman body several months ago, the local newspaper started to try ‘making up the background’. Therefore, suddenly Diana became like a new-born celebrity in Semarang. People are made to be curious to know the personal life of Diana (by the continuation of ‘making up the background’ news in that local newspaper daily), her ‘individualist’ lifestyle (read  not get along with the neighbors well), her marriage life, her business, etc. This reached a peak when the local newspaper featured this case in its editorial on Wednesday 17 October 2007 entitled “Ibu yang Tega terhadap Anak-Anaknya” (A woman who is heartless to her children). Apart from what was written in the article, the title itself already gave unfair judgment toward Diana. She was judged as heartless without trying to look into the background of her act first.
The article also emphasized on Diana’s individualist lifestyle and aloof character as “unhealthy socializing’. If only she had been more sociable, perhaps the accident (read  Diana leaving her toddlers in a car in a parking lot of one mosque) would not have happened.
I do agree when people say that human beings are social creatures. They need to get along with other people. To some extent, some people really need someone they trust to confide in, to reduce their mental burden, or to share their happiness and sorrow. However, for aloof people—I am one of them—it is not easy for them to do that. Being friendly to other people—for example neighbors in this case, or workmates—does not always mean it is easy to confide in to them, and automatically it will reduce their burden.
LONGMAN Dictionary defines ‘individualist’ as someone who does things in their own way and has different opinions from most other people. An individualist will not like the idea to bother other people while expecting that other people will let them live their life peacefully too. No one bothers and no one to be bothered. Someone becomes an individualist when they realize that their way of life is different from other people so that they will feel uncomfortable to open themselves, moreover in society in Indonesia, where people will not easily be able to differentiate whether their neighbors care or are nosy.
So, does it mean that an individualist does not need someone to talk to or to confide in? In PRIME the movie, Rafi needs a therapist, a professional “listener’ so that she has to pay some amount of money only to find someone to talk to. In Indonesia, recently there have been some cases of celebrities to go to ‘ustadz’ or ulema that they call as their “spiritual teachers” to talk about their problems and ask for suggestion. The newspaper mentioned that Diana also has one spiritual teacher.
Perhaps it does not sound practical, besides it is also expensive because someone has to spend some money to find someone who is willing to listen to them. However, for aloof people who cannot easily talk to anybody, it is the best choice.
Going back to Diana’s case. I am of opinion that this is closely related to this patriarchal society that are still gender-biased. I am looking forward to the time when women are no longer burdened by “doctrines” to be good woman or good wife.
PT56 22.00 171007

Sunday, September 16, 2007

'Aurat'

In some mailing lists I join, people are still discussing ‘hotly’ about ‘aurat’. (aurat means parts of bodies that are supposed to be covered.)
What is ‘aurat’?
When I was in elementary school (I attended an Islamic elementary school), I was taught that ‘aurat’ for women is most parts of their bodies, except face and palms, while for men, ‘aurat’ is ONLY from their navel to exactly above knees. It means parts of women’s bodies that are allowed to be seen are only their face and palms. Meanwhile, people can freely see men’s full head, neck, shoulders, chest, upper belly, arms, hands, and legs from knees below.
Why should women cover most parts of their bodies?
It is stated that women’s bodies—hair, neck, ears, etc—will easily turn men on. I suppose all men—creatures having penis since birth—are considered heterosexual in Islam, because people say that Islam only recognizes two kinds of sexes: male—again, all creatures having penis, and female—all creatures having vagina and breasts. If a man is turned on because of seeing a woman’s parts or her whole body, he will probably do some ‘unexpected things’, such as whistling, staring, touching, etc. Therefore, ‘to protect’ women from those unexpected acts, they are to cover (or ‘imprison’?) their whole bodies under loose clothes. This is also ‘to protect’ men in order that they will be ‘saved’ from temptation to do ‘immoral acts’. To protect men here of course means different from ‘imprisoning’ that I mentioned earlier.
I am of opinion that definition of ‘aurat’ here is closely related to the fact where Islam ‘was born’, that was in Arab. When it is related to two previous celestial religions ‘born’ before that—Christian and Judaism—that were believed by most Muslim people as “Islam in different forms” or “Islam which was not perfected yet by Muhammad”, these two religions were also born in Arab, where the people ‘originally’ wore kinds of clothes covering most parts of their bodies.
It reminded me of one question from one chat friend—a Californian male, a non believer—several years ago, “If Islam had not been born in Arab, but in Indonesia, more specific again, in Papua, where the ‘original’ people only wore ‘koteka’, do you think ‘aurat’ in people’s bodies that have to be covered would be the same—all parts of our bodies?
After reading more books and articles about human beings’ history from the very old time—at the very beginning of human beings’ life in the earth—in my effort to get rid myself of indoctrination I got from my elementary school teachers, I found out that there was time where men and women were equal, there was no separating domain—domestic and public spheres—an era where perhaps people did not know the existence of celestial religions. In that era, seemingly both men and women wore the same kind of clothes, not covering much, no imprisonment toward women, no protection given to men—from temptation to expose their sexual desires. Therefore, I do agree if people say that ‘aurat’ is very cultural. Regulation to cover ‘aurat’ is only to imprison women, and to spoil men, so that they will be able to avoid doing ‘immoral’ things. (Have you ever heard that heaven later will be full of men, on the contrary, hell will be full of women.)
In conclusion, I completely agree that this ‘aurat’ thing is just for fooling us around, just a joke. That’s why I also agree when one woman in one mailing list complained why only men are protected from sexual temptations, why women are not protected from the similar things. Aren’t there any women who get easily turned on when they see men’s naked chest, or muscular arms/biceps?
PT56 13.31 160907

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

Dorce Show


Dorce is the name of one most popular transsexual in Indonesia. I don’t remember when he/she had operation to ‘let go of’ his/her penis and then the surgeon made a vagina for his/her genital. I don’t really know his/her private life so I don’t know whether he/she has a spouse. (Forgive me for not following the hottest gossip in Indonesia. LOL.)

He/she has become a host of one quite popular television show in Indonesia, named “Dorce Show”. This talk show has invited many people to be guests, and they come from various background. I am not one of its loyal audience of course since I don’t like watching television. However, I know this program that is aired five times a week, around 09.30-10.30. My dear Mom oftentimes watches it Therefore I once in a while know the topic of the show, especially when I am at home around that time and luckily pass the dining room where one television set is located and my Mom watches it.

Last Friday, a workmate told me the topic of this show aired one day before, September 6. A woman who has got domestic violence from her husband was interviewed. When Dorce asked her, “Will you divorce your husband?”, the woman said, “No.” The answer got a big applause from Dorce him/herself and the audience in the studio did it too. Furthermore, Dorce said, “Be patient, Bu (one greeting usually addressed to a mature woman in Indonesia, a bit similar to ‘Ma’am’ in English). God will pay you back. Just pray that your husband will realize his mistake. He will change, I am sure. And for you yourself, you will go to heaven for being patient.”

The applause and the comment from Dorce, directly or indirectly, have supported the status quo of male chauvinism in Indonesia. Besides, it will make millions women who watch the show will think that domestic violence will easily be abolished only by praying to God, no need a real action.

My friend’s story reminded me of one Dorce show I accidentally watched several months ago. There were some women as guests to be interviewed. They had the same background: their husbands were imprisoned because of doing one crime. The first woman was “interrogated”, “Will you divorce your husband?”

I knew from the way Dorce asked the question, the tone he/she used when asking that, and also from his/her facial expression, I instantly could conclude that Dorce expected the woman to answer, “No.” Unfortunately, unexpectedly, the woman answered, “Yes.” Automatically, Dorce commented, “Yes? Oh … Do you plan to get married again?”

The woman responded cheerfully, “Yes. I have got married again for several years.”

Dorce sighed, although in a tone of joking said, “In fact you are a bitch, eh?”

In Indonesian culture, it is still a common thing for a woman to be called “bitch” if she gets married again not long after getting divorced. No matter what, staying married with one man is still worshipped and the woman who undergoes it although she gets domestic violence will get a big applause from society.

FYI, as far as I know, Dorce is the only case of transsexual who got operation to “change” the genital and it was made known publicly. His/her being celebrity, his/her way to get dressed as a good Muslim woman (covering all of the body, sometimes also the head), quoting some verses from Alquran in his/her show, in my opinion, easily attracted public’s attention (seemingly, this also made people forget the fact that Dorce is a transsexual) although there are also many people who are against him/her by accusing him/her not to accept the life/sex God has chosen for him/her—a body with penis.

As a feminist, one thing that bothers my mind is that Dorce, a transsexual, where in the reality there are many other transsexual/transvestite/gay/lesbian people that are marginalized, even follows the stereotype of “good women” in this patriarchal culture. I am wondering if after the genital operation, Dorce then felt like he/she was a “real” woman, forgetting that he/she was once a transsexual so that to be accepted as a “real woman” he/she had to support the stereotype? I assume that it would be much better if Dorce joined the women’s movement, to crush the stereotype of good men and good women in the male chauvinist society.

PT56 22.40 100907

Monday, February 20, 2006

GENDER BIAS

When discussing kinds of jobs with my students some days ago, a question reminded me that bias gender is still very strong in the mind of youngsters of Indonesia, in this twenty first century, while in Princess Diary written by Meg Cabot, or Bluejean, a book full of articles written by female teenagers from other countries, I found out that feminism ideology (read  equality between men and women in all facets of life) is very familiar to teenagers in other countries, especially in America.The question is “Which job is done better by men than women, and vice versa?”My students’ answer was unfortunately still following the stereotyping of male and female. For example, my students came up with an idea that men will make a better chef than women. Their reasons varied, from “men are stronger than women so that it is okay for them to carry big pans.”, “men are more creative than women. As a chef, he/she must be creative to decorate food before serving it to the guests/diners.” “No female chef is famous, mostly men.”In another side, women will be better nurses coz women are more patient to take care of patients rather than men; women will be better fight attendant than men with the same reason; women will be better secretaries to “comfort” and “amuse” the boss, with the assumption that the boss here is a man.My being feminist really encouraged me to talk a lot about that unfair stereotyping. How much I wanted to lecture my students that those stereotyping things were just constructed by society, and not created by God. I didn’t have much time though to do that. I realize that I don’t have much time coz I have to catch up with the material provided, many lessons to cover, to follow the curriculum made by my workplace while I must not forget that my role is not to teach feminism but only to teach English as a foreign language.How much I detested to see my female students’ facial expression when hearing the boys said, “Men are created to be superior, Ma’am.” Or “Men are created to be stronger than women.” When I asked my male students, “What is the definition of being strong here? Being able to Lift big pans? How about if we change the definition of ‘strong’? Why did God decide to create women to be pregnant and deliver the baby and everybody must know that it needs a lot of energy to do that? Why not men who claim themselves as stronger?”When saying that, I saw my male students’ expression annoyed while my female students excited. I went on saying, “Have you ever heard that there are more women than men in this world? Do you know that it happens coz women are stronger to survive in this harsh world rather than men?”When my students said that men make a better pilot rather than women, they gave reason, “If women become pilot, they will go often, to fly planes. They will not be a good mother, then, coz they often leave their family.” It made me argue, “Well, if men become pilot, they will go often too, to leave their family. It means that they will not be a good father, right, coz leaving the family, and don’t spend much time with the children?”My students, especially the males ones, got numb, looked at me as if looking at a weird creature, while the female ones smiled wildly, and some nodded their head.Again, coz I didn’t have much time to elaborate more about this gender topic, I didn’t talk a lot. If I went on saying, I am afraid that my students wouldn’t have enough time to practice their speaking or writing English. I would be the sole speaker. Who the hell needs to practice, the students or the teacher? LOL.