You are who you think you are

 

I have heard the term 'leftover' for women who are above 30 years old who are still single, in one foreign country, not in Indonesia. And I never think about it further, such as, making it as one topic to be discussed with some people around me, or write it for my blog.

 

(yeah, and finally I am writing about it! Lol.)

 

I just read one thread written by a man, aged 30 years old, still single. He wrote about his old schoolmate, a woman, 31 years old, still single too. The woman was somewhat upset with that term: 'leftover'. Apparently she thought that she could be labeled as one because she was still single. Despite the fact that she was successful in career, she still felt useless because of 'being a leftover'.

 

In order to calm the woman, the man then said, "Well, how about if you consider yourself as 'fried rice'? Here in Indonesia, people usually use the leftover rice to be cooked again, to be fried rice. And you know, fried rice is much more delicious than just rice. And, please stop thinking of yourself as a leftover."

 

Reading that thread reminded me of one bestie of Angie. The last time they spent time together, the bestie confided in Angie about her still being single. She felt okay to be single, but her parents didn't. They even gave her three-month time to get a husband-to-be!

 

"Why didn't her parents find her a husband-to-be? Perhaps they have friends who have a son who is looking for a wife-to-be?" I asked Angie.

 

"They did! Some years ago. She refused because she thought that she could find one by herself. Now he is already married with someone else." said Angie.

 

PT56 13,45 26 May 2026

 

P.S.:

In this 2026, Indonesia still has parents who are still marriage-oriented for their daughters.  

 

Why getting married? (3)

 

the pic was taken from this link

 

Around a year ago, one loved of mine was asked by one good friend of hers to accompany her to 'escape' to another town for two days. Let's call her 'Y'. Y needed to 'run away' to avoid a wedding invitation: her ex married another woman! She felt cheated because she and her ex just broke up, then she got that invitation. Her 'reading' was: her ex-boyfriend dated two girls at the same time. When Y refused his marriage proposal, he decided to marry the other one.

 

Just a few days ago, my loved one told me another story, still related to Y. Y met her college friend, let's call him X. X clearly seemed to try his best to get close to Y. And last weekend, X asked Y out, where X gave her a quite expensive gift, while saying something like he wanted to get married in the near future now that his parents are getting old and X thought the parents need a daughter-in-law to take care of them. How about X? X works out of Java island, quite far from where his parents live.

 

There!

 

I just came to another 'conclusion': I need to add another reason why people get married: to take care of parents. Oh, perhaps I can still add another one: the parents already want to have grandchildren. These two reasons are very typical Indonesian culture, I presume! This reminded me of one quite popular singer in Indonesia: Denny Caknan wanted to get married as soon as possible (his ex-girlfriend seemed to refuse his marriage proposal) now that his parents really want to have grandchildren. Therefore, Denny married another girl.

 

Let's wait for the next news: will Y accept X's proposal to take care of X's parents. My loved one said that Y told her, "Did he think only his parents need to be taken care of? Didn't he think I also want to take care of my own parents in their old age?"

 

PT56 13.37 11/06/2024

P.S.:

 

Y refused her (last year) boyfriend's proposal because she knew that in fact the ulterior motive of that man to marry her was to take care of his parents.

 

 

Why getting married (2) can be viewed here.  

 

Why getting married can be viewed here

Why getting married?

 

In episode 15 season 4, Sex and the City, Carrie asked her 3 friends: "Why do we even have to get married? Give me one good reason, aside that no wants to die alone thing."

 

Charlotte answered: "For me, when it is good, marriage gives me a sense of security."

Carrie responded, "I feel secure in this relationship now. Things are great with us."

 

Many years ago, when I asked my students why people get married, in Indonesian culture, the first reason is to celebrate sex (legally, both in the country law and in the religion law). In Indonesia, on the 'surface' culture, people are not supposed to have sex before they get married, although of course, in sub-culture, sex outside wedlock is acceptable. (Am I right? Or not yet?)

 

Related to my post here, from some reasons I mentioned why people get married (in Indonesia), where is 'security' positioned? ('security' as Charlotte mentioned.) But, perhaps, first, we need to find out how Charlotte defined security here. Is it

 

1. Financial security; when the couple get divorced, the wife will get some money from the husband, or on the way around
2. Social security; people know that the couple are married. This is somewhat important in Indonesia now that many hotels ask for a copy of marriage certificate when a couple want to stay a night
3. Another social security: when a married woman gets pregnant, people will not judge her as  a bit*h because she is married, she is legal to have sex, therefore it is accepted when she is pregnant

 

Well, in my opinion, with the shrink of the world (due to internet technology) Indonesian culture -- in this case is getting married -- is still far cry from Western culture. Carrie felt secure in her relationship with Aidan without getting married, from Carrie's point. On the contrary, Aidan felt insecure if he didn't 'tie' Carrie in a marriage bond; in their previous relationship, Carrie cheated on him with Big. Therefore, he really wanted to marry Carrie while (he thought that) Carrie was still head-over-heels in love with him.

 

In fact, marriage does not guarantee that someone will not cheat on his/her partner, anyway. Marriage is as fragile as boyfriend/girlfriend relationship.

 

Don’t you think?

 

PT56 13.48 27/05/2024

 

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. 😊

 

SHOULD WE BE IN A RELATIONSHIP?

 

Samantha and Smith

In (the so called) Western culture, where people can have sex with anybody they want -- as long as both parties agree -- and they do not need to bother thinking about 'being sinful to have sex outside wedlock', why should they get married? Or why should they still want to be in a 'relationship'?

 

(background of this thinking was: most of my 'respondents' (read => my students) answer when asked, "why people get married" was to be able to have sex 'unsinfully' and legally.)

 

I sometimes think this way. In my favorite serials SEX AND THE CITY, the three main characters (Carrie, Miranda, Charlotte) were shown to be okay to be in a relationship, only Samantha refused to be 'tied' in such a relationship. In one episode entitled "Plus One is the Loneliest Number", Carrie illustrated that New Yorkers will feel that their life is complete if (1) they have steady job (2) they have a place to live (3) a plus one. A plus one here is not always necessarily related to a boyfriend/girlfriend/husband/wife, but this one can also refer to a child.

 

Charlotte and Harry

 

 

Charlotte -- the most conventional girl among the four girls -- always thinks that having a plus one is important; this will make her feel loved and not alone to live her life; this will make her feel not miserable. Due to her love to Harry, she even converts to Jew in order to marry him. Miranda and Carrie undergo a long way to look for someone the most compatible with them; until Miranda realizes that Steve -- the father of her baby Brady -- is the one. Carrie -- the first main character -- finally ends up with Mr. Big a.k.a John Preston, the guy she falls in love with at the first sight in the first episode of season one, after a long up and down journey of their love.

 

Miranda and Steve

 

 

Why do they need to be in a steady relationship? And not enough just having random sex partners? First, perhaps to feel secure in one relationship, that there is someone beside them, that will do anything to make their life feel easier and better. Second, of course a safer sex, because they have steady partner for that.

 

Charlotte is the first of the 3 girls (Samantha is not included) who gets married. It is apparently due to the fact that she belongs the conventional type. Getting married is Charlotte's teenage dream. Miranda finally marries Steve after several breakups and realizes that Steve is the best partner for her, moreover Steve is the father of her baby.

 

Carrie refuses Aidan's proposal in season 4 because she is not sure whether she really loves him. She seemingly cannot let go Mr. Big's presence from her heart. Carrie and Mr. Big get married in Sex and the City movie 2. Why finally get married? And not just enough be in a relationship? Perhaps New Yorkers still worship marriage. Haha …

 

Carrie and Mr. Big

 

Samantha is the unique character because she seems to be highly confident with herself. Of course during 6 seasons of SATC, Samantha has several steady relationships. The first boyfriend is James, with whom Samantha patiently waits until their fifth date before making love. Unfortunately, James has a small dick that Samantha cannot accept. The second one is Mr. Cocky. On the contrary from James, Mr. Cocky is told to have too big dick Samantha cannot handle. The third is Chivon Williams. Their relationship doesn't last long because Adeena, Williams' sister doesn’t like to see her brother date a white woman. The fourth is Maria, the first time Samantha is told to have a lesbian partner. Their relationship doesn't last long because Maria is easily jealous of other men who want to date Samantha; and Samantha herself is not ready for a steady relationship with someone, moreover this someone is a woman. The fifth is Richard, the playboy. Samantha cannot accept the fact that many women like to date him, the rich tycoon. And the last one, Smith Jarrod, the sexiest and most loving boyfriend despite their quite big age gap.

 

Unfortunately, although Jarrod patiently and devotedly stays with Samantha while she is battling her breast cancer, and their sexual drive is compatible to each other, Samantha eventually says goodbye to her. This is perhaps either she belongs to the type who cannot stay with one steady partner; or Smith is too young for her.

 

--------------

 

How about in Indonesia?

 

Some time ago, I had a casual talk with a loved one. He told me about his (ex) workmate who refuses to get married although "he loves having sex". I asked him whether his friend refuses to get married because he doesn't want to be responsible with any 'burden' in a marriage. He said, "perhaps." when I asked him whether his workmate had sex with any random partner, he said no. perhaps he has a steady relationship with someone, only he doesn't want to marry her? Or is it their commitment together that they are just be in a domestic relationship without getting married? Unfortunately I don't get the answer yet. Because I am of opinion that even though the relationship is 'only' domestic, both of them must face the 'burden' together.

 

Meanwhile, another good friend of mine told me that his girlfriend doesn't want to get married. She only wants to be in a domestic relationship without legally getting married. My question is: is it already openly acceptable in Indonesia? Moreover in small cities? (not in metropolitan such as Jakarta.)

 

I also interviewed another friend whether he doesn't want to get married. He has a girlfriend. And he said, it is up to her whether they will lead the relationship into marriage. He also said that perhaps if he and his girlfriend live abroad, they will not think marriage knot is important, because he believes that domestic relationship is okay there. So, if until now he is not married yet, it is not because he avoids the 'burden' in a marriage. He let his girlfriend decide.

 

Another interesting story from a friend is that her college mate -- a transsexual woman -- is married (or perhaps 'only' in domestic relationship?) with a woman and live together 'normally' (I mean just like a common man-woman relationship) in one district in DIY. The neighbors know that one of the women is a transsexual one. And they accept this pair. Isn't it lovely?

 

To conclude, indeed, to be in a relationship or not depends on us. We are the ones who will be responsible with the consequences.

 

PT56 13.48 2 September 2022

 

Other Half

 

the pic was taken from here

Intellectual gap is the main 'culprit' of the divorce between ex and me. You can condemn me anything, I don't mind at all, lol.

 

Based on this thing, I told my only daughter to focus on being compatible when looking for a life partner, with whom she can talk about anything with ease. Well, of course it is somewhat impossible to find someone who is 100% compatible with us, but, at least we can try our best to get someone who has the most 'common ground'.

 

*******

 

Honestly, as an English teacher, I heard this phrase -- other half -- for the first time only around 15 years ago, from one very good friend. He called his wife as 'my other half'. Better late than never, don't you think? At that time, I was of opinion that the phrase was a romantic one, instead of just use the common word "my wife". I didn't come to think where the term came from.

 

Until out of the blue I met someone with whom I share many things in common, things that oftentimes make both of us wonder, how come we have the same way of thinking, when viewing things? And, just like that, suddenly the phrase 'other half' came to my mind, and it made me think,

 

 

"Oh, is it why the phrase 'other half' is suitable to describe a couple? Because many common things unite them? 

 

 When writing this post, I didn't come to the phrase 'other half'. However, when starting writing this post, I read the article I entitled "why getting married". How many people who are married in fact are really 'other half' of their partner? How many of them really find their life partner compatible before they decide to marry him/her? I am of opinion that more people get married due to social pressure (perhaps this is only in Indonesia?) instead of awareness that the love they have for their partner comes from how compatible they are. If so, isn't it predictable that unwanted things will happen in their marriage?

 

Just my two cents.

Semarang, 29 March 2022

Marriage-Oriented Society

More or less ten years ago, I believed that only in Indonesia (plus perhaps some neighboring countries) we could find people who adore marriage. The so-called (boring) “normal” life cycle for Indonesian people is this : being born – going to school – going to college – graduating – getting a job – getting married – having kids – getting old – finish.  :) To be (considered to be) happy, someone MUST get married, then MUST have kids. Without getting married and having kids, someone’s life is considered not complete, even perhaps dull.

While watching serials in Sex and the City (season 5 dan 6) around a decade ago, I noticed that for New Yorkers, to be considered happy, there are three things they must have (1) established job (2) house (3) life partner. 

The main focus of Indonesians and New Yorkers are a bit different. But there is one similarity : life partner, although in Indonesia, someone must get married (legally) in order to avoid being gossiped by neighbors, (cohabitation is still considered morally low here) while in New York, someone does not need to get married, as long as they have life partner. 

Recently I have started watching SATC again, but this time starting from season 1 and 2. In these two seasons, the four girls were still single, changing dates very often. I saw how unhappy they were when they broke up, or when they had no dates. Despite the fact that they wanted to be known as “being single and happy”. Isn’t it contradictory? This made me question whether this serial really wanted to show that girls can choose to be single and happy? 

We know that by the end of the serial (season 6), Miranda and Charlotte both were illustrated as happily married. Samantha was happy with her young boyfriend, Smith. Meanwhile, Carrie (eventually) married Mr. Big in the movie. :)

Perhaps marriage-oriented society still lingers everywhere, not just in the developing countries. J Feminists still have to struggle to convince society – especially girls – that to live single and happy is absolutely possible. Well, at least, minimize the number of people who choose to get married only because of social pressure. Get married when they are really ready for that.

LG 2015 - 2016

The pic was taken from here 

Marriage & Homosexuality

Marriage will always be a never-ending topic to be discussed. :) In my "Religion Education" class we also talked about it. (See my previous posts here and here.)  Below you will find the answer of my students in one quiz I gave them some time ago. There are 12 students in my RE class.

The first question is "why do people marry?"

Interestingly, the number one answer is to be able to celebrate the joy of sex. Well, despite the fact that some students of mine claim that they are non-believers, they put "sex" as the most important thing people pursue from getting married legally. The second most answer is to have babies. No matter what if you live in Indonesia, you will feel more ungodly if you have babies outside wedlock. You will feel that you follow the society norm by having babies after you get married.

(I remember many years ago, I liked teasing my students if they answered "to have babies" to answer why people get married by saying, "To have babies, you don't need to marry, you just need to have sex with someone. LOL.)

Some other answers vary from to strengthen the bond with the one they love, to prove to their loved one that they love him/her, to continue the family name after having babies, to ensure that their partner is committed to them and is responsible for the babies they "produce" :) to get rid of society's pressure that someone must get married after reaching a certain age until more "economic" reason such as to lessen parents' burden, to ease financial burden, and to continue the family business (in case of forced marriage). Some students answered people marry because their religion asks the adherents to. :)

The second question is "Explain why attitudes towards marriage have changed."

There are some interesting answers. First is the influence of globalization era. This era really has shrunk the world so that one nation cannot avoid the influence from other nations. Second now that women have more rights (in public sphere), such as working to make their ends meet or pursuing education as high as they want, they become less dependent on men. When a woman does not depend on a man, she probably can view marriage differently; this probably makes her think that she no longer needs any bond with any man. Third, economic factors.  Marrying and 'building' a family is costly in  this era so that it can stop someone from thinking of the need to get married. This, therefore, leads to the following reason: people are a lot more career-oriented.

Besides those four reasons, some other reasons are mentioned such as in this era people are not that strict anymore in adhering a religion so they do not need to feel guilty/sinful to have sex outside marriage. When they can have sex before getting married first, why do they need to marry? :) (This reason is really contradictory to the answer in the first question, isn't it? :) ) The practice of cohabitation is more acceptable now. Last but not least is in this era gay people are more open about their sexual orientation; so as long as they have a soul mate (from the same sex), they do not need to 'imprison' themselves in a marriage boundary. :)

The third question is "How does Judaism view marriages?" but I do not want to include the answer of this question in this post.

The last question is "Do you think religions should accept homosexuality?"

From 11 answer sheets I have (1 sheet was gone :( ) three students answered NO. There is only one reason: it is against religion teaching. They believe that God created man and woman to love each other, it is the natural law. Man and women are created to love each other, then marry and have babies to continue "human race".  A homosexual couple cannot have baby so they are against the "natural law".

Eight students answered YES. Some reasons are

1. It is everyone's right to choose who they will live their life with as long as they do not harm others.
2. Spiritual encounter is personal, it differs from one person to another.
3. Gay people deserve equality with heterosexual people.
4. Religions (are supposed to) believe that only God judges a person for his/her sins, not a preacher.
5. There is nothing wrong for being gay.

No one remembers to answer that love is more important than being heterosexual/homosexual. As long as love exists between two people, what else matters?

GG 08.14 11 September 2014

Changing attitude towards marriage (2)

First thing to do before discussing the subject, "Family and Relationship" the material provides some vocabulary needed. Excitingly, most vocabulary is related to sex :D such as promiscuity, cohabitation, pre-marital sex, adultery, civil partnership, nuclear family, reconstituted family, faithfulness, remarriage, contraception, and homosexuality. It is surprising that my students do not know yet many words, such as promiscuity, cohabitation, adultery, nuclear family reconstituted family and civil partnership.

The material does not provide the reasons why and how British attitudes towards marriage changed. We came to one point, though, "women are now more financially independent so they no longer depend on men/husband." If 50 years ago, women wouldn't have filed a divorce -- no matter what happened in their marriages -- because they depended on their husband to finance themselves, now women are free. Therefore, I suppose that women movement really brought big impact on marriage life. If 50 years ago, nuclear family referred to father, mother and children, in this era, nuclear family can mean only a mother (or a father) and kids. Talking about civil partnership, well, as I wrote in the previous note, after doing research, scientists concluded that being a gay is not a choice; it is fixed by mid childhood. This means, a nuclear family can mean same sex parents and kids. 

The last topic we discussed this week is about divorce, from Christian point of views. As in the discussion last week, in viewing divorce, the material also provides us three different views, Catholic Christian which is very strict, Church of England which is in the middle, and Liberal Christian which is liberal.  

The material of RELIGION EDUCATION class in the school where I work provides students different point of iviews. The students are expected to open their horizon so that they can accept differences. 

Vocabulary  

promiscuity: having sex with many partners without getting married

cohabitation : living together with a partner without getting married legally

pre-marital sex : having sex outside marriages

adultery: a sexual act between a married person with someone who is not their marriage partner

nuclear family: mother, father, children living together as one unit

remarriage: getting married again after divorce

reconstituted family: two sets of children (step sisters and step brothers) become one family after their divorced parents marry each other

contraception: intentionally preventing a pregnancy from occurring

faithfulness: staying with your marriage partner and only having sexual contact with them

homosexuality: sexual attraction to the same sex

civil partnership: a legal ceremony giving a homosexual couple rights as a husband and wife

LG 18.10 06/09/2014

Changing attitudes towards marriage

For these past a few months, my Religion Education class has been talking about "Family and Relationship". The first subject is about the changing attitudes towards marriage. Since the material is from Cambridge, the topic is about the changing attitudes towards marriage in the UK. (And it surprised my students to find out that several decades ago UK was as "conventional" as Indonesia nowadays. (It made me remember one lecturer I had once said that Indonesia is 50 years left behind America. :) ) 

Here are the list we discussed what happened in 1960s

1. Most people got married in churches in their mid 20s.
2. No sex before marriage
3. Divorce was taboo
4. Children were born inside marriages
5. Homosexuality was sin

In the beginning of 2000s, those 1960s "attitudes" changed into:

1. Less marriages are held in churches
2. Divorce is more acceptable
3. Sex before /outside marriage is common
4. Many children were born outside wedlock, some children were raised in same-sex parents
5. Homosexuality is more widely acceptable -- although the UK does not really "endorse" same-sex marriage, the government accepts civil partnership (same sex couple live together) and they get exactly the same rights as heterosexual couple

Two weeks ago we talked about homosexuality. The changing attitude viewing this is in1960s, homosexuality was a criminal offence as well as a sin, but now homosexual couple can have their relationship recognized legally with a civil partnership. After studying for many years, scientists concluded that being gay is NOT A CHOICE. It is generally accepted that people do not choose their sexuality, but it is fixed by mid childhood. The prejudice suffered by many gay people in society certainly wouldn't be chosen by anyone. Many gay people we see on the television are stereotypes and do not really help people accept homosexuality.

Last week we talked about sex before/outside marriage. First, the students are to write their own opinion about cohabitation, promiscuity, and pre-marital sex. whether they agree and disagree. Second, they must write what their religion teaching tell them about those three things. (Un)luckily this time we "only" discuss Christian views on these attitudes. (Not yet from other religions such as Islam.) Christian view is divided into three; 1) Catholic Christian (which is very rigid) 2) Church of England 3) Liberal Christian. Catholic of course condemns both homosexuality and sex outside marriage; Liberal sets the adherents free because people are seen as resposible people who will take the responsibility of anything they do. Church of England is in between Catholic and Liberal.

Are you interested to know how my students think about this changing attitudes topic? 

(2 students of mine are Muslim, 2 students are "strict" Christian, the others are 'liberal' Christian and Buddhist. Some say that they are non-believers.)

We do not talk about inter-religion marriages yet, one topic which is still very much debated in social media at this moment. :)

LG 11.38 06/-9/2014

"This is Ibu Agus ..."

NOTE: In Bahasa Indonesia the word 'Ibu' is a label addressed to respected women regardless their marital status. It is followed women's first names. In my case, for example, it is very common for people to call me 'Ibu Nana'.

 

A few weeks ago, a female workmate of mine -- her name is Prima Siska -- got married. She took some days off after her wedding day. On the first day she came back to the office, a male workmate of mine greeted her, "Ibu Agus ... how are you today?" The female workmate of mine did not respond it because the other one is known as a playful guy.

 

Several days ago, I got an email from a good friend. Out of the blue she was wondering if -- as an acclaimed feminist -- I will let other people call me using my husband's name (for example 'Ibu Didi', well at the moment my boyfriend's name is Didi, but at other time it can be any other name LOL) when I get married again later.

 

I heard that the custom for Indonesian people to adopt the family name of the husband to be mentioned behind a woman's name after getting married was brought to Indonesia by the Dutch colonial government. The so-called 'real' culture of Indonesian people do not recognize the practice of 'annihilating' the existence of women only due to marriage. Even, one lecturer of mine said that in Javanese culture -- or perhaps only in Jogja culture since this lecturer of mine is from Jogja) several decades ago, a new married couple would leave their both maiden names and then they would choose one new name to be used by both of them.

 

That a colonized country adopts the culture of the colonizer is taken for granted. Even there is a tendence that the colonized country will consider everything from the colonizer better, more modern or more advanced. To adopt the husband's family name behind a woman's name after getting married is included. For those who live in areas where the people do not use family name -- like in Javanese culture -- married women will be called 'Ibu' plus the first name of the husband, such as 'Ibu Agus ..." My female workmate's husband's name is 'Agus Sulistiyo'. (NOTE: 'Sulistiyo' here is NOT a family name.)

 

I was amused by my mother's experience relating to this addressed name. In 1970s when my family lived in an area where the inhabitants were included into the low class society, neighbors called her own name -- Ida -- plus 'auntie' at the front. (NOTE: In Indonesia, mostly in Javanese culture, it is very common to call the married female neighbors 'auntie' while the married male neighbors 'uncle'.) My mom was popularly-known as 'auntie Ida' in that area. Meanwhile, when she got involved in any gathering held by my dad's office -- attended by the wives -- my mom was called 'Ibu Muien Podungge': my dad's name. Her own name -- Ida -- was not known.

 

When our family moved to another area in 1981, my mom was also called as 'Ibu Muien'. Then I recognized the 'trigger'. The inhabitants there could be included into the middle class society.

 

To conclude it, women who belong to the middle class society, they will get the annihilation of self-existence after they get married.

 

This conclusion is supported by what happened in the low class society of American women in the nineteenth century. In her poem entitled "Ain't I a Woman?" Sojourner Truth complained the unfair treatment to low class women, moreover she was black. ((Click http://afeministblog.blogspot.com/2006/07/aint-i-woman.html ) Besides, Mary Ann Fitch Wescott, the mother of Charlotte Perkins Gilman (one feminist author living in 1860-1935), the author of "The Yellow Wallpaper", chose to stay at home, instead of working outside, because she felt that she belonged to the middle class society, although her husband left her with her two kids, that meant she had to depend on her relatives to support her own life and the kids. In the nineteenth century, "the Cult of True Womanhood" -- one tenet was the domestication of women -- was only for middle class and upper class women.

 

Going back to the case 'Ibu Agus ...' or 'Ibu Didi ...', I work because I want to work, to actualize myself, as well as to share the knowledge I have with others, not merely because I am a feminist. Nowadays, women working outside the house do not exclusively belong to the low class women. While for nicknames, well, I agree with what Shakespeare said, 'what is in a name?' I respected women who proudly use their husband family name behind their name, and leave their maiden name, as long as it is their own choice. I believe they have their own ways to actualize themselves. Even if they are willing to annihilate their self actualization, I respect it. In other words, I also demand other people to respect my choice if I still want people to know me as 'MS NANA PODUNGGE' or just 'Ibu Nana' when I get married again later.

 

Nana Podungge

PBIS 14.34 02.02.10

 

Check my other posts about 'family name'

 

http://afeministblog.blogspot.com/2006/03/family-name.html

http://afeministblog.blogspot.com/2006/07/family-name-2.html

http://nana-podungge.blogspot.com/2009/04/cedaw-convention-on-elimination-of-all.html

William Faulkner's A Rose for Emily

pic was taken from here

The story’s setting is after the civil war and it takes place in the Southern part of America. At that time many aristocratic families started to disappear. People did not respect other people only because of their nobility any longer, but people respected others because of their achievement. Therefore, people from aristocratic families who still held old dtradition—that they must be respected because of their nobility—became the center of attention of townspeople because of their awkwardness.

We can see the example in Emily Grierson’s family. Everything Emily does gets full attention of the townspeople because it is considered awkward. For example, her reluctance to pay tax because she says that Colonel Sartoris has remitted her taxes. It is awkward because everybody else pays tax. The tale that her father has lent some amount of money to the town is unbelievable for younger generations.

Another example of Emily’s awkwardness is her behavior toward the ladies who call at her house to offer condolence and aid after her father passes away. She says that her father is not dead and se refuses to dispose the body. It must be hard for her to be left alone. She does not have anybody else to talk to after her father passes away because she does not socialize with other people whom she considers common people—not noble like her.

Her interest in Homer Barron—the foreman of the construction company—is also considered awkward by the townspeople. Homer Barron who is only a day laborer must have a lower status than Emily who keeps her dignity as a noble person highly. Therefore, their relationship attracts the townspeople’s attention. They want to know whether the relationship will lead to a marriage because “Homer himself had remarked that he was not marrying man”. With Homer Barron disappearing, the townspeople become disappointed. They do not know what has happened, only after that, Emily is very rarely seen.

That’s why Emily’s death makes the townspeople pour into her house. Some want to show respect for the last noble person in the town. Some others just want to fulfil their curiosity to see the inside of her house. Their finding a man’s body lying in the bed in a room upstairs revealed long-time hidden secrets. The first secret is about the awful smell spreading that makes people disgusted years before. The second is about Homer Barron’s disappearance. I believed that Emily has poisoned him using arsenic she buys in a drugstore. After Homer dies, Emily treats his body like she treats a husband—the body had apparently once lain in the attitude of an embrace. From the iron-gray hair found in the pillow beside the man, it can be concluded that for years Emily sleeps there as is she slept with her husband.

What a sad life of a woman who keeps her dignity and nobility highly. People in the town always pay attention to her from a distance. However, no one dares to get close to her because of her perverseness and imperviousness. Besides that, nobody loves her so that she lives in loneliness because she herself avoids other people’s presence around her.

Jogja, April 2003

--------------------
What a sad and lonely life Emily had. It must be resulted from the un-readiness and reluctance of people to adapt themselves with the new social life; in this case ‘noble’ people who unwillingly faced the fall of the aristocratic society.

To add my writing above (which I wrote five years ago), I want to focus on Emily’s weird attitude related to Homer Barron. As the only daughter of the only left aristocratic family in the town, Emily must have got a very big burden to live her love life. She was expected to have a love relationship with a man from her kind. However it must have been very difficult since her family was the only aristocratic family. Besides, the townspeople considered her family ’antique’. None of the guys in the town had courage to get close to Emily, I assume. Nevertheless, the townspeople loved Emily so that they poured all attention to her, to anything she did, without realizing that in a way it doubled Emily’s burden.

Feeling lonely as well as disturbed by the continuous attention given by the townspeople, Emily became very introvert and she hid herself inside her big house. Therefore, when Homer Barron came to the town (as an ‘outsider’, it is understood if Homer didn’t share the same reluctance shown by the other guys in the town), got courage to get close to her, Emily did not want to lose him. However, it didn’t take a long time since Homer soon found out the ‘awkwardness’ of Emily as well as the high expectancy of the townspeople for Emily’s husband-to-be. He was considered not equal to Emily. Therefore, he wanted to leave Emily, to come back to where he was from.

Not wanting to lose the only guy who had courage to get close to her, Emily did the weirdest action—killing him. She did it not to get rid of him, but to ‘keep’ him always instead. Afterwards, she treated him as if he were her husband. In order not to make the townspeople curious, she mostly hid herself inside her big house, laid off most of the servants but one most loyal servant to take care of her.
PT56 22.54 190508