P R I S O N

 

I got the following poem from a blog friend from England. He told me that he got the idea from reading some posts of mine in my blog. (Thanks for the lovely poem, Pete:) )

 

a woman's prison is in the mind

a man's prison he will find

that pale yellow wallpaper around the room

helps the thoughts and helps to groom

 

each person has the truth inside

all it needs to open wide

truth and honesty with careful thought

deceit and hate we need to halt

 

look outside at the sun and rain

we need them both like wheat and grain

food for thought we have within

let it out to stop decayin'

 

women and men must live together

or end up as cold as a glacier

so don't think of life as a strangled cry

think of life as a small mayfly

 

flying free up in the air

looking at life so happy and faire

explosions of color up high and below

red, blue, and green and even YELLOW.

 

It is a lovely poem, do you agree? My favorite stanza is the second stanza where he wrote that "each person has the truth inside". It means what both men and women say are equally meaningful. Also the fourth stanza where he said "women and men must live together". Women and men indeed complete each other. That's what God created men and women for. This I also agree.

 

My question is even in the first two lines of the first stanza, "a woman's prison is in the mind ... a man's prison he will find ..." why not equal? What made him say that a woman's prison is in the mind? While men's prison doesn't exist yet, that's why he will find it (later).

 

As a feminist, I will say that why women's mind is the prison is caused by what men have indoctrinated women for ages that women are submissive. A woman will keep questioning, on her mind, why this male-dominated world is so cruel, why men always want to be dominant.

 

Men are of course not imprisoned by anybody, in any culture in this world. They will "imprison" themselves if they are willing to do so. If not? Of course not at all.

 

Talking about men's tendency to be polygamous, this is what one of my workmate complained to me some time ago, I told her that I don't believe in such a thing--that men have tendency to be polygamous so that we women must understand that. Men who say so are just irresponsible men and easily find a scapegoat for their being irresponsible by blaming/saying an excuse that "men are created to be polygamous." They are not willing to admit that they are just bullshit. A male workmate of mine who was there also when my female friend talked to me, he said, "It's all back to our own commitment in our own life, especially in our commitment when getting married. I think it is just natural for all of us--men and women--to be attracted to other people who are not our spouse. But, yeah ... only attraction for temporary, then come back to our own commitment with our spouse.

 

"It is obviously seen that this male workmate of mine is willing to imprison himself. Talking about marriage, well, I am not a marriage hater, just like what some people suspect me. When discussing marriage with my students, I just want to give them a clear description of what a marriage is, the position of man and woman in marriage, with many reasons that make people to decide to marry someone, where the reasons can be different from one person to another. Talking about prison ... who is willing to be imprisoned by someone else? :D

 

Semarang, April 25, 2006

 

P.S.: I copied the following writing from an old blog of mine, that doesn't exist anymore. I wrote it in 2006, it means this was based on my opinion 16 years ago. 😛 As the natural law says, I have changed too, although I still claim myself as a feminist. 😊

 

DATING YOUR HOMETOWN?

 

In an episode titled "Anchors Away", Carrie Bradshaw mentioned that New York City is a very good 'date' for single people. There are lots of theaters, parks, museums, night clubs, movies, not to mention restaurants. And if you are lucky, perhaps you will find a great love when you are dating your hometown. :D

 

Well, perhaps because Carrie is not an introvert person; she does not belong to a homebody type either.

 

 

 

As an introvert person, I cannot imagine I am dating Semarang, my hometown, lol. Semarang, the capital city of Central Java, is not a big city; though it is not a small one either. Even though Semarang does not have many 'amusement places' as Carrie mentioned (museums, theaters, parks, etc) I sometimes spend time to visit such places we have here, e.g. museums, but I don't do it alone. I do it with Angie, my daughter, or with Ranz, my biking mate. Once in a blue moon I watch plays in Taman Budaya Raden Saleh (before pandemic) because my (biking) friend played as one actor. :D watching movies is not my cup of tea to spend spare time. I'd rather watch movies in my laptop at home although it is perhaps not as entertaining as when we watch movies in the cinema.

 

I sometimes go to cafes, sometimes alone, sometimes with Angie when we want to eat out; or with Ranz when she is in town.

 

Despite the fact that when I was a teenager, I didn't really enjoy staying at home during weekend or holiday, (I used to like visiting friend's homes or hanging out with them somewhere) recently I stay home most of the time. As a part time teacher, I go to my workplace only when teaching. I do the preparation at home. After finishing doing my household chores, I will sit in front of my laptop, behind my bedroom's window (acting like Carrie does at SATC, lol) and start doing anything what I wanna do.

 

Before pandemic, I used to sometimes go to mall alone, just to get rid of boredom from my routines. After pandemic? I sometimes go to supermarket/department store nearby my house to go (real) shopping, not just for sightseeing. Pandemic indeed changes our lifestyle, do you agree?

 

Nevertheless, I think Carrie's idea is not a bad one.  Perhaps I need to go out more often, alone. I need to date my hometown, lol.

 

PT56 10.31 15.11.2022

 

FLIRT OR ABUSE?

 An old writing of mine, I copied it from my facebook note.

Just found it inside my mailbox. I wrote it four years ago. Well, I am not sure if I have posted it in one blog of mine (I sent it to a good friend of mine.) Now, I want to share it with my blog visitors.

 

FLIRT OR ABUSE? FLATTERED OR HARASSED?

 

When women become a criminal only coz of wearing “open” clothes—under accusation to turn on men’s desire when looking at their sexy body, why is there no law saying that men are allegedly guilty for abusing women by staring at women, or whistling at them or saying something abusive to women who don’t wear “open” clothes?

 

I was brought up in a very religious family, sent to an Islamic elementary school, indoctrinated that women’s body is the source of sin, that women can become the cause of the fall of men to hell due to women’s sinful sexy body. (Similar to the fall of Adam to this mortal world coz Eva gave in to Satan’s trick to eat “khuldi” (this is how Al-Quran named it)—the forbidden fruit in heaven.) Because of that, women are supposed to cover their source-of-sin body in order that men will not get aroused.

 

After I grew up (I always consider myself as a rebel), I started to wonder why all mistakes are put on women’s shoulder? Why is there no punishment for men who cannot control their lust?

 

Since knowing feminism, and got answers of my lots of questions (due to the gender bias in Islam) when I was a kid or teenager, I came to the conclusion that if women can control their lust (women are just human beings, like men, they have lust too!) when seeing naked men’s body, men are supposed to be able to control their lust too and not abuse any woman they want. I completely agree with Fatima Mernissi, a Muslim feminist Morocco saying, “If the rights of Muslim women become problems for a group of Muslim men, this is not engendered by Al-Quran or Islam itself, but this is caused by the different interpretation resulting in contradictory interpretation opposing the want of a group of elite Muslim men.”

 

sample of sexual harassment at workplace

 

Btw, some months ago, I had a middle-aged private student who was outstandingly pretty. We often took a walk for sightseeing or had lunch in a downtown mall. Contradictory from me that mostly wear my “uniform” (long black dress and black blazer—I am not an Amish nor Quaker though LOL) this student of mine loved wearing “sexy” clothes. The first time we went to have lunch, I felt very disturbed and annoyed by men who stared at her greedily. It sometimes made me want to throw my thick-heeled shoes to those men’s eyes! Later on, I realized, that not only her “sexy” clothes attracted those men with greedy eyes, she in fact also showed “inviting” body language to those guys. No wonder she didn’t feel abused. She herself invited those guys to abuse her.

 

As a feminist that believes women can do anything they like, as long as they enjoy it and not harm other people, I think it is okay for her to do that. However, as someone with very religious upbringing when I was a kid, I still sometimes didn’t understand why the hell that private student of mine attracted men’s attention demonstratively despite her outstanding beauty. Her beauty only was already enough to attract people’s attention. So, when she wore sexy clothes and showed inviting body language, it was just very understandable if then those guys with greedy eyes “abused” her. (Oh well, she herself didn’t feel abused. She felt flattered. LOL)

 

On the contrary from this flirt, LOL, I never show any inviting body language, I never wear any open clothes to attract men’s attention. I never feel ready to get abuse. Does it mean, then, I never get abused? Unfortunately, the answer was SOME GUYS WITH GREEDY EYES STILL ABUSE ME, by staring at me indecently, whistling at me, smiling at me abusively, etc.

 

The conclusion? SOME MEN ARE INDEED BIG SHIT.

 

Recently, in Indonesia there has still been a very “poignant” debate about pornography bill where it states that women are not allowed to wear body-hugging, tight and “open” clothes because it will cause men to get aroused. A woman will be punished if she unintentionally/intentionally turns on men in public, by wearing “sexy” dress, for example. Why is there no statement that men will be put into jail when they cannot repress their lust in public?

 

I prove it myself that although I mostly wear clothes covering all over my body (except my head), it still doesn’t stop men to try to abuse me. Who can guarantee that issuing such a bill will stop sexual abuse? Something wrong is not in what women wear, or how women walk and move, not in women’s voice, but in men’s mind! 

 

Nana Podungge

Semarang March 16, 2006

 

P.S.:

Or this is just myself who still cannot get rid of idea that men harass me when they stare at me 'unclearly' why. I myself need 'medication' to get rid of idea that I -- belong to the creature with breasts and vagina -- am the victimized and not on the way around despite the fact I have been 'indoctrinating' myself to be a feminist. As many 'wise' people say "We are what we think."

 

Ugh ... :'(