Salah kapra arti emansipasi

Halo pemuda/pemudi Indonesia

Setiap tahun rakyat Indonesia merayakan Hari Kartini yang jatuh pada tanggal 21 April. Setiap tahun pula wacana emansipasi di Indonesia diungkit dalam rangka peringatan hari kelahiran pejuang wanita yang bernama Raden ajeng Kartini tersebut. Sayang, masih banyak yang keliru akan makna emansipasi.

Pada post sebelumnya tentang mengapa saya support feminisme, saya sudah menyentuh sedikit tentang kekeliruan masyarakat terhadap istilah emansipasi (emancipation) dan kesetaraan gender (gender equality). Karena post tersebut saya tulis dalam bahasa Inggris, kemungkinan banyak orang yang tidak membacanya. Ada juga yang membacanya tapi masih salah faham. Jadi di sini saya mau membahasnya kembali.

Tadi pagi saya membaca salah satu tweet yang di-retweet salah satu teman saya, mengatakan salah satu bentuk emansipasi itu seperti keberanian cewek menyatakan cinta duluan kepada cowok. Emansipasi itu seperti cewek boleh memakai baju cowok, sebaliknya cowok boleh memakai baju cewek, katanya. Ada juga yang mengatakan, emansipasi itu keadaan di mana lelaki dipaksa masuk ke dapur sedangkan wanita boleh bebas kelayapan di luar rumah. Ini jelas anggapan tentang emansipasi yang salah kapra.

Emansipasi itu berasal dari perkataan dalam Bahasa Inggris "emancipate" atau "emancipation" yang artinya memberikan hak yang sepatutnya diberikan kepada orang atau sekumpulan orang di mana hak tersebut sebelumnya dirampas atau diabaikan dari mereka. Ibu kita Kartini telah mencontohkan salah satu bentuk emansipasi yang membawa perubahan besar kepada perempuan Indonesia, yaitu perjuangan menuntut hak pendidikan bagi perempuan. Ini jelas bentuk emansipasi karena fakta sejarah menceritakan bahwa wanita pada zaman dahulu diabaikan haknya untuk memperoleh pendidikan formal dan berkat Kartini, wanita pada zaman itu dan sekarang layak mendapatkan pendidikan formal di sekolah maupun di institusi pendidikan dan profesional lainnya. Bayangkan jika perempuan dilarang untuk mendapatkan pendidikan formal, mungkin saya dan anda para perempuan Indonesia di luar sana hanya berkesempatan menjadi tukang jahit, juru masak, pengasuh anak, dan mungkin juga pencari kutu rambut bersama tetangga-tetangga anda.

Sekarang perempuan Indonesia sudah bisa menikmati pendidikan formal seperti yang diharapkan Kartini. Lalu bentuk emansipasi apa lagi yang perlu diperjuangkan? Banyak. Hak berpolitik misalnya, walaupun wanita sudah mendapatkan kuota 30% di parlimen, suara mereka masih dianggap remeh. Saya rasa kuota itu hanya sebagai stimulus untuk melunakkan hati perempuan saja. Suara perempuan masih lagi diwakili oleh suara lelaki. Hakikatnya, lelaki dan perempuan mempunyai kepentingan yang berbeda. Jadi, emansipasi perempuan dalam bidang politik seharusnya membebaskan wanita menyuarakan pendapatnya tanpa harus dibayangi imej seksis dan kepentingan kaum lelaki, apalagi kepentingan partai.

Pada zaman modern ini sudah banyak juga wanita yang menceburi bidang profesional dengan menduduki posisi yang sebelumnya didominasi oleh lelaki. Ini juga bentuk emansipasi, yaitu emansipasi menuntut hak di arena publik. Sebelumnya, perempuan selalu dikaitkan dengan tugas rumah tangga saja seperti memasak, mencuci, membersikan rumah, merawat anak, dan melahirkan. Sekarang sudah banyak wanita yang menjabat sebagai direktur, manajer, ketua oraganisasi, bahkan salah satu presiden kita ada yang berjenis kelamin perempuan. Mengenai performance mereka, itu urusan pribadi masing-masing. Yang terpenting, mereka sudah diberi kesempatan untuk menunjukkan sumbangan yang bisa diberikannya untuk pembangunan negara.

Sesungguhnya emansipasi yang sebenarnya adalah bentuk pemberian hak kepada wanita untuk mengembangkan diri dan kemahiran profesional agar bisa bergandeng bahu dengan lelaki dalam pembangunan negara. Tidak ada maksud negatif yang tersembunyi di sebalik gerakan emansipasi. Jikapun ada, itu kembali ke niat orang atau kumpulan yang memperjuangkannya dan apa latar belakang yang memotivasinya. Bagi saya pribadi, emansipasi bukan usaha untuk melegalkan prostitusi, seks bebas, homoseksualitas, gonta-ganti pasangan, aborsi, dan segala bentuk degradasi peradaban lainnya seperti yang dituduhkan oleh kaum konservatif patriarki. Jika ada gerakan yang mengatasnamakan emansipasi dan mendukung usaha-usaha ilegal tersebut, bukan berarti itu mewakili gerakan emansipasi kolektif secara umumnya.

Emansipasi juga tidak menyeru perempuan untuk membangkang dari ayahnya, walinya, orang tuanya, dan suaminya. Dalam Islam sendiri sudah disebutkan bahwa seorang istri (wanita) wajib mentaati suaminya (lelaki). Bahkan ketaatan seorang istri kepada suami dinilai ketaatan tertinggi setelah ketaatannya kepada Allah dan Rasul-Nya. Namun perlu digarisbawahi oleh lelaki, Islam tidak pernah mengajarkan lelaki untuk memukul, menghina, dan merendahkan martabat isterinya. Suami juga tidak boleh menyuruh hal-hal yang dilarang oleh agama kepada istrinya. Tidak ada dalam al-Quran ditemukan ayat yang menyatakan istri adalah hamba sahaya seorang suami. Suami perlu menghormati istri dan wanita di sekitarnya sebagai bentuk balasan ketaatan perempuan-perempuan tersebut. Sebagai lelaki yang dibawa ke dunia oleh seorang wanita, setiap lelaki tidak berhak untuk merendahkan siapapun wanita di sekelilingnya.

Saya seorang perempuan biasa. Saya tidak menuntut banyak dari anda semua. Saya cuma berharap melalui tulisan ini, mari kita sama-sama membuka mata dan lebih peka terhadap sumber masalah sosial yang sebenarnya dan tidak melulu menyalahkan pihak tertentu atas kebobrokan masyarakat. Menyalahkan perjuangan emansipasi dan perempuan misalnya, ini hanya akan menambah masalah dan tidak mencari solusi. Setiap gerakan memiliki sisi negatif dan positifnya. Yang positif kita dukung, yang negatif kita lawan.

Tulisan ini mewakili pandangan pribadi saya. Jika anda mempunyai pendapat berbeda, itu hak anda dan anda berhak mengutarakannya di sini sebagai bahan diskusi sehat.

Read More

Nothing's wrong with supporting the ideology of feminism

God day peeps,

Before I talk about the topic Im gonna discuss with you, I'll show you a screenshot from my Google+ page. This post was posted by my friend and I totally agree with what she said. So check this out.

I do agree with my friend said about nothing wrong to be a liberal as long as we still have believes in traditional--and religious--values. In modern days, people start seeing traditional and religious values less important. They tend to follow the flux in which they are more likely to be liberal. That's not surprising, though, in fact nowadays there are so many isms appear in attempt to influence people with brand new and eye-opening facts and ideologies that people previously do not pay attention to. Name it feminism, secularism, capitalism, free-thinker, etc. these isms have their own pros and contras.

Since I study gender, I would like to talk little bit about feminism. The term feminism was coined in Western world in late 19th century. Generally, feminism tries to bring women's concerns to mainstream so that women's fundamental right can be taken into account in the process of country development. Initially, feminism, in their first wave to third wave movements, were divided into, at least, four categories: liberal, radical, Marxist, and socialist. Each category had its own agenda. Liberal feminism fought for women's right in public sphere, such as access to education and politics. Radical feminism attempted to eliminate patriarchal values from society which were seen as the source of oppression against women. Feminist also adopted Marxism to form Marxist feminism in attempt to fight against capitalism as this ideology had tendency to marginalize women. Last but not least, socialist feminism which was influenced by radical and Marxist feminism, put the core agenda to work for elimination of patriarchal and capitalist values that oppressed women.

For me, I prefer to follow the ideology of social feminism because I hate patriarchy and capitalism that seem try to endanger women. I like the intention of this feminism which is to eradicate all the things that sound or seem to discriminate women especially those that are caused by patriarchal and capital systems. Patriarchy system obviously does not allow women to be in line with men in every aspect of life. Whereas, capitalism influenced by patriarchy has tendency to prioritize men over women. Thus the opportunities for women in political, social, and economical development are still limited.

Specifically, the patriarchy system always tries to put women as inferior to men. Patriarchy believes that women are subordinate. Thus women are only allowed to deal with domestic sphere while men are responsible in public sphere. For instance, women are always referred to domestic work such as cleaning, cooking, child-bearing, child-rearing, and so on. Nowadays, many women have entered public sphere through job employment and political involvement. Yet, they attach to domestic work considerably a lot. I am not saying that men today don't help in domestic work. My father, for example, will cook or do laundry and go for errands to shop household needs if my mother is not able to do so. How about majority men out there? Are they like my father? Well, maybe some of them are but in fact the patriarchy system influences them that they aren't supposed to involve in domestic tasks and follow women instruction. Therefore there are significant numbers of cases that men disrespect women as if women are born to be their slaves. Wallahi, I hate that.

I hate patriarchy so much. I think I hate patriarchy more that I hate capitalism. Well, in fact capitalism is just the matter of competition. Who are qualified to particular positions, men or women, those get the access and privileges. HOWEVER, due to the strong patriarchy system in the society, men always try to sabotage women in any competition. Just saying. I think I detest patriarchy to the max. Hence, I think I am more in favor of radical feminism. But I am not a feminist if I may say. I just believe in the ideology: eliminating all the patriarchal things that discriminate women.

Feminist movements were always seen problematic as their agenda was seen opposite to mainstream agenda. Even though in their land of struggle, Western, which liberalism was promoted publicly, feminist ideology always  got countered. That was because the patriarchy system in the Western was still strong then that women were seen as second class or a marginalized group which would never be equal to men. Despite their tough struggle in Western, feminists and their ideology could reach Eastern world. Yet, due to the strong attachment of the Eastern people to communal values, which was strong patriarchal too, the ideology could not go further here. It is not surprising when people in Eastern try hard to block this ideology to be spread in the society since their believe systems also put down on women. And because it was rooted from Western values, people of the East could not simply adopt the feminist values.

Essentially, feminist values and ideology were found in the East far before Western feminism went public. It was reported that women in India, for example, had fought for elimination of oppression and violation against  women in the name of religion or custom system, which was Hinduism. In ancient India, women who were left by their husbands due to death, should be burnt as a symbol of faithfulness. This practice was called "sati". In contrast, the husbands whose the wives died did not have the same practice. That's ironic and completely unjust.

Actually, feminism is just a term. It is raised as political issues because the term is from Western world and the ideology is not in line with the hegemony agenda. In Western, feminism might not bring along religious values but their intention to eliminate oppression, violence, and discrimination against women was pure and fruitful. So, why don't we look at the positive sides of their struggle? If we could create a better world in which discrimination does not exist against marginalized groups in terms of gender, ethnicity, religions, race, skin color like feminists strive in their movements, why not?

Alright, let's move to feminism in Indonesian context. Since tomorrow is Kartini's Day in Indonesia, I would like to say HAPPY KARTINI'S DAY to all women and girls in Indonesia. Kartini's Day is a day off to celebrate the born day of Raden Ajeng (R.A.) Kartini, the first woman who start a public woman movement in Indonesia. Kartini was famous with the term emansipasi (emancipation) as she fought for women's rights to be equal to men in access of education and other crucial aspects of life. She protested against Javanese culture that hampered the development of native women in Indonesia. Her enormous struggle to uplift women's dignity has been recognized as a patriotic commitment of speaking up for women's rights in Indonesia. Up until today, people of Indonesia still celebrate her patriotic spirit. I think Kartini's struggle could be consider as one of feminist movements since she fought for women's rights. And the people of Indonesia never see the Kartini's spirit as feminism probably because the term feminism/feminist was not familiar then and they prefer the term that is more practical or culture-friendly which is emansipasi.

Unfortunately, there are so many Indonesians misunderstood this term of emansipasi. Especially those who name themselves conservatives, emansipasi is understood as the efforts to place women and men equal in every aspect of life. Apparently, they assume that emansipasi is potentially to challenge men's power and take over men's position as the guardians or leaders. They have it in their mind that emansipasi tries to place women in public arena and men in home, COMPLETELY. This is absolutely wrong. This is not surprising if they think that way as they are still influenced by patriarchal norms.

Basically, emansipasi comes from an English word "emancipate" which means to give someone the political and legal rights that they did not have before. In fact, emansipasi movement done by Kartini attempted to give chances for women to get education as the right was denied before due to the traditional patriarchal system in the society and the Dutch colonialism. Emansipasi today, however, can be implemented by giving women the opportunities to get into political sphere IF they are really qualified for and not because they should be there due to the certain quota or just fulfilling the so-called gender equality.

This is also wrong to liken emansipasi to gender equality even though both terms are interconnected. As I mention, emansipasi is to give people what they are supposed to get that is denied before. It is not only in terms of gender differences. Instead, emansipasi can refer to returning the rights of any other marginalized groups so that they can also stand together with the mainstream groups in the name of humanity. Gender equality, in contrast, refers to promoting the equal rights of women and girls to support their full participation and involvement in the political, social, and economic development in their communities (UNICEF). In the other words, gender equality is not necessarily to give women and girls the COMPLETELY same rights as the men counterparts given. Gender equality according to Conference on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW),  is to promote substantive equality which consolidates two main approaches of equality: equality of opportunities and equality of results. Equality of opportunities refers to the same access to the resources or opportunities--such as jobs or positions or training--for both men and women despite their biological and social differences. Equality of results refers to providing different schemes for women and men (as their needs and requirements are different) in order to achieve the same results for both men and women, or to result the positive changes for women so that they can be standing in line with men to realize the country development goals.

The implementation of gender equality is not merely to give the same portion of obligations and of rights to women and men as it is defined in formal equality. Women and men have different characteristics and skills. Women's needs differ from men's needs  too. Thus, women's needs could not be fulfilled by giving them men's needs and vice versa. However, in terms of skills, if women are given opportunities to be trained like a man too, it is not impossible if women can do what men do. BUT it should not be across the boundaries as determined in religious faith. I repeat, it should not be across the boundaries as determined in RELIGIOUS faith, not CULTURAL believes. I must emphasize this because people often misunderstand between RELIGIOUS WORSHIP and CULTURAL TRADITIONS. For example, the practice of wearing burqa for women is often referred to a way of worshiping God. In fact, it is just a cultural tradition in Middle East or Arabian countries to keep women protected from men gaze and torture (Arab men are wilder than any other men in the world, reportedly), and according to my Middle Eastern friends wearing fully covering abaya and burqa can protect women's body and face from the heat of enormously hot weather. If you don't believe me, you can try it if you go to Arab countries.

From my last point of view about the difference between religious faith and cultural traditions, you can think that I am not fully rebellious against religion, especially my the only one religion, Islam. I still believe in Allah and I do practice the Islamic ways of life. I just do not place myself in extremist ways of worshiping. As long as I call myself a Muslim, I perform five times prayers, I am fasting during Ramadhan month and Monday-Thursday, I pay Zakat, and someday insha-Allah I will go for Hajj pilgrimage, and most importantly I do not commit a crime against humanity, I think I am free to support the POSITIVE VALUES of liberalism or feminism. Therefore, nothing's wrong with supporting feminism as long as you still stick to religious values and do not cross the line of religious faith. I am not trying to challenge men's positions or rights. I just do not like any statements or circumstances that discriminate women. And before I end my argument, I better leave you with this quote "nowhere in the Koran does it say women are the servants of men".

Most of things stated here is just my two cents, and you are free to have yours too. Or if you have different points of view, please feel free to drop comments here. Thank you and adios.

Read More

How are women disadvantaged in the face of natural disaster?

It is a slightly common decency for women to deal with social norms constructed by society in most parts of the world. The norms then indirectly determine social status to women. Consequently, women are often required to follow social and religious traditions which limit their movement and progress. In addition to that, those traditions are, in fact, tailored by men in the society to maintain their male-domination.

Those social norms have significant impacts to women in every single aspect of their lives. For instance, in dealing with impacts of natural disasters, social status of women consequently makes women more vulnerable to the events. This fact has been proven by many studies. To be clear about that, the women’s struggle following cyclone in Bangladesh and drought in Zambia can be good cases to better understanding the connection between women’s social status and impacts of natural disasters.

In April 1991, a cyclone hit Bangladesh in the eastern coast of the Bay of Bengal. It left a massive destruction and economic loss to the local people. Over 100,000 died caused by the disaster. Surprisingly, the number of women who died is greater than men.

Women are indeed physically weaker than men in which it makes them vulnerable to natural events. However, the social norms and restrictions have made women much weaker in some extent. The Bengali women, specifically, have to follow social structure which is male-dominated and driven by religious traditions. Their mobility is restricted by some integral roles in households such as taking care of children and property. When the cyclone struck, these women put their lives aside to prioritize saving their children and family’s property.

Their weak condition also limits their movement to access relief supplies and safety. Victims of disasters are usually desperately in need of help or assistance. When humanitarian aid comes following a disaster, such as food and clothes, the victims will be aggressive and fighting each other to get the aid. Man representatives of the victimized households of course will win the fight due to their physical strength and male ego. The female-headed households that only have an adult woman will definitely get small portion of the aid or even nothing.

Following the disaster, women are more necessarily involved to help in relief work. Despite their efforts, sometimes discrimination happens in the evacuation work which hinders their jobs in some extent. The woman relief workers are usually looked down by their man counterparts. They have to follow all instruction by men, especially those who are in local authoritative bodies. The men always tend to undermine the women’s credibility just because of their status in the society as a woman, which is below men’s.

Because of the social norms, the woman victims of the 1991’s cyclone in Bangladesh had tendencies to rely on woman relief workers more. Their pains that were related to reproductive system, and also emotional feelings, could be understood only by women. Following the disaster, some women really suffered from aches such us miscarriage, bad injuries, and whatsoever. They did not dare to tell about it to male relief workers. Instead, they were often treated roughly by those men in a reason of gender equality to male victims, which is somewhat unequal. Therefore they were more comfortable to leak their feelings and pains to other women.  

The women could not easily run away to save their lives when the cyclone hit their livelihood. They were also not convenient to stand side by side with men when there was food distribution. They chose to accompany their children, especially daughters, in order to avoid sexual or physical violence happened against them, especially in shelters where the man and woman survivors stayed. All these reasons were because they tended to stick to social religious norms. It then showed that the women were seriously vulnerable to the disaster impacts even before, during and after the cyclone.

Cyclone could happen once in a while in Bangladesh but not drought in Southern Africa. The drought has been a regular phenomenon in the region due to a long period of low rainfall within a year. As the result, local people suffer from water shortage, food insecurity and even starvation. Even though drought has been a common occurrence in Southern Africa, it is quiet new for women in Eastern Province of Zambia.

The women, who were not accustomed to the drought, found their tasks and problems were increasing due to the event. They had to walk further and longer than usual to fetch water. They had to find firewood as well but use only little of it because they did not have anything to cook. The grains that they usually got from agriculture were no longer available. Consequently, they had to depend on raw fruit, roots or grass from their surroundings.

Along the drought, people, especially adult women in rural areas, were really starving to death. They were so thin and fragile, suffering from diseases such as dysentery, chorea, diarrhea, and other diseases related to digestive system. It was not surprising because they were likely to risk their lives for their children. They skipped meals just to make sure the food available for their children. Yet, the children were also likely to die from starvation due to no food at all.

In normal daily life, women had no valuable properties such as land and animals. The land was often registered under their husbands’, brothers’, or uncles’ name. Therefore they did not have right to make decision in everything in their lives. They did not have economic support except cash crop from subsistence farming. Nevertheless, it had gone along the on-going drought as well as the last step of their husbands who fled to other villages to marry other women for food.

The women, however, still had encouragement to survive in the middle of the disaster by joining community development. They joined a workshop conducted by an NGO. Here, at least, they could involve in decision-making. They stood up in front of public to voice out their concerns that they had significantly become major contributor to their family and community, which all this time were not recognized. They put aside their hunger and grievance by singing and dancing.

In the workshop, both women and men were joining. The men were also suffering from hunger and they blamed the government for being ignorance. The women, instead, became a shoulder to the men to lean on. They did some efforts to fight hunger, including creating a club. It was not successful though, they still effortlessly fed their husband and children. Since they are reliable, it is not a disadvantage to help women. Therefore, women have to be empowered by providing them clean water, improved health, access to education, control over childbearing and access to credit in which they can use it to enhance their potential.

Almost in every natural disaster, people as a whole are likely to be impacted. However, poor people, especially minorities and women, are most likely to be affected. It is because their social norms required them to save their children and belongings first than their own lives. During evacuation and relief programs, they tend to rely on female relief workers due to safety. However, the female relief workers themselves have to deal with discrimination from their male counterparts as well as local governments officials. Women are surprisingly reliable for community development. Therefore their contribution should be recognized. They also need empowerment to bring a society to a more developed stage.  

Read More

Women and the politics of water

World now is in water crisis. United Nations (UN) has shown unbelievable facts regarding to water shortage around the world. Every year, 2.2 million people die because of unsafe drinking water. By 2025, sixty six percent of world population will suffer from water shortage. Collectively, women in developing countries have to deal with this water crisis by collecting water up to eight hours a day to ensure their household can survive.

Water now becomes a commodity. Many big companies emerge as capitalists that only think of profit. Government itself has no control on water supply which is owned by private party. Access to water is restricted to those who have more power in terms of gender, social class, economical class, and ethnicity. As a result, poor people especially those who live in rural areas, no matter in Third World or First World countries, are significantly affected.

Limited access to water is common problem in dried-countries such as African countries. In Tanzania especially, women of rural areas have to walk all the way for an hour to other villages just to fetch water every morning to fulfill their family’s need of water. The water they get is not clear with brown color and the quality is far from the standard quality of fresh water, though. The water is usually used for cooking, cleaning, and of course drinking. This situation causes new problems when many diseases related to digestive system and waterborne diseases appear. The situation will be worse when dry season which there will no water at all in the village or the other villages nearby.

Despite the fact that water is very limited and needed by most people in the villages of Tanzania, conflicts to defend the water from being taken always happen. A group of people in a village which has water resource tries to protect the water so that people from other villages cannot take the water. It seems that water resources become a private or group property and no more become public amenity. This circumstance even can cause a war among the people.

Not only in rural areas, even in the urban areas, water shortage is common problem too. Again, women are the ones whom always have to fetch water from water tanks nearby that are provided by water sanitation companies. Definitely, they have to pay some amount of money to get the water. Other than women, children, especially girls, also have to fetch water to help their parents. As the consequence, they do not have time to go to schools, to play among themselves, or to do activities for the development of their communities. In addition, they do not have time to empower themselves so that they maintain subordinate in society.

This problem is very serious and the people have asked for government concerns. Yet, the local government fails to overcome it. The practice of corruption has become a reason why the government people simply ignore the voice of the people. They prefer big companies to handle the problem and fulfill people demand of water so that they get their “pockets”. Meanwhile, the companies can gain big profit.

It seems the government does not know or does not want to know that water shortage has impacts on gender relation. Basically, women are the ones who get the worse impacts because they almost never have control to water. Thus it motivates women to fight for better quality of water. They then involve in water management even though it is in grass root level. They voice the concerns out in public. Yet, the government does not even listen to them.

In India, water for agriculture is more important than water for drinking. It is proven by the effort of the local government of India to build a dam near a river by displacing so many people. It affects the lives of the people who depend so much on the water from the river. Women who live there could not be only silent. They lead a movement to regain their control on the water again. It seems the movement goes better when the women are in the front line. The way they see the issue is different from the way men do. They tend to make the movement successful because they have closeness to families and community so that they understand the problem quite well and know how to deal with. Most importantly, they will not stop until their demands are fulfilled.

According to Biraj Swain from Wateraid India, the movement the women do is just a kind of silent revolution. It is so because they are not in decision making level. Besides, they just fight for water supply but forget to fight for better quality of water. However, Marcia Brewster from Gender and Water Alliance says it is not a silent movement since there are some of woman leaders are in positions of policy and decision making level. In Africa for instance, the Minister State of Uganda, Maria Gambao, is appointed as the chairperson of African Ministry Chancellor on Water. She makes sure of fair distribution of water in African countries. She even goes down with the people to fetch water. She encourages more women to involve in water management.

Access to water is actually an investment to community and future. Brewster outlines that access to water gives empowerment to women. With better access to good quality of water women will have more time to themselves. The girls especially, will have time for education and their development. In addition, the cost estimated to meet Millennium Development Goals in terms of water sanitation is only USD11.3 billion per year and it is nothing compared to spending on military.

Water is such a basic need for human-beings. However water is no longer public amenity. Water is becoming commodity which gives benefit only for the elite people. The poor, especially women, have no control on it. Therefore they are neglected to have access to it. Water supply is not only the issue here. The water management is also crucial to provide safe water for all humankind. Yet, the control on water management is never a woman. In short, women are the ones who suffer from water shortage.

*pic from womenandclimatechange

Read More

Ecofeminism

The word Ecofeminism is formed from “ecology” and “feminism”. Thus ecofeminism is a term to explain how feminist ideology can be used to discuss ecology issues that are happening in society. According to Lorentzen and Eaton (2002) Ecofeminism is an activist and academic (and also political) movement that concerns connection between domination of nature and oppression of women. In other words, ecofeminism is an ideology that sees domination of nature and exploitation of women as interconnected.

The term “ecofeminism” itself was first introduced by Francoise d’Eaubonne1 in 1974, a France feminist who fought during the third wave of feminism era. In conjuction with feminist movement, ecofeminism grew in late 1970s to early 1980s. At that time, ecofeminism movements were brought to mainstream level by anti-nuclear, enviromental, and lesbian-feminist activists. Since then, many discourses on ecofeminism have been engaged in many conferences. One of them was The “Women and Life on Earth: Ecofeminism in the Eighties” conference which was held at Amherst in 1980.

As mentioned above, ecofeminism sees connections between nature and women oppression. Warren sees that there are at least eight connections between nature and women (1993). Those connections are historical/typically casual, conceptual, empirical/experiental, symbolic, epistimological, political, ethical, and theorical interconnection. However, Lorentzen and Eaton (2002) states women and nature interconnections, which are explored within ecofeminist thoughts and actions, are defined by three only. They claim that the oppression of women and the domination of nature are interconnected empirically, conceptually/culturally/symbolically, and epistemologically.

The empirical connection between women and nature claims that most of environmental problems affect women and men differentially. Women are the ones who receive the more burdens from all of the most parts of environmental problems. Women depend on nature more that men do because they are seemed as closer to nature. When the nature which is the surrounding where the women have some plants on it is destroyed to become some sorts of modern development areas, they will not be able to provide their family with food that they plant by themselves anymore. This is because most of the development policies ignore the importance of women and so that they will not get the benefits from the development.

The second claim is conceptually/culturally/symbolically connection. This connection sees concept of dualism to differentiate women from men. As Ruther mentions that this concept of dualism most probably comes from Western world which once upon a time women of Western world are indeed treated as second-class group to keep them in subordinate level. The concept of dualism itself identifies women as femininity, the body, Earth, nature, sexuality, and flesh, while men are identified as masculinity, mind, heaven, culture, and power. While the mind of men is seemed more important to the society than the body of women, and culture seems more significant to the society than nature, women will remain subordinate. Just like nature itself, which is seen less important than the technology and the development that are applied on it. Therefore, the dominations of nature and women primarily appear as a culturally/symbolically connection.  

The third connection is epistemological which claims that women are more knowledgeable than men. It is because women care about nature and have some special skills to preserve environment which men do not. Therefore when there is something harmful happens to nature, there will be a tendency to appoint women for the curing process or just to give some sorts of ideas how to deal with natural degradation.

However, some ecofeminists also see connection between domination of women and nature from spiritual/religious perspective. As old and traditional believes regard nature as protected by gods/goddesses, and women are believed to always follow the spiritual/religious tradition, women tent to preserve nature as a way of worshiping to the gods/goddesses. Then when it comes to patriarchal religious tradition, the tradition that women carry is seemed less important. Consequently, nature is seemed less important to by the tradition of patriarchal religious.

In line with the importance of the discourse of the ecofeminism ideology and the movements, the people behind the movements are particularly important too. As mentioned above, in the early time of the development of ecofeminism, groups of people such anti-nuclear, enviromental, and lesbian-feminist activists are the ones who spread the ideas. It seems so because of their concerns on feminist and enviromental issues. It is obvious that ecofeminism ideology is a part of feminism ideologies. Therefore the activists themselves can be considered as feminists. And it becomes a discourse when it comes to the people behind the idology of ecofeminism.

Read More

Mengelak seksisme dalam penyelidikan (How to avoid sexism in research)

Seksisme atau sexism sering dijumpai dalam kebanyakan kajian. Seksisme itu sendiri merujuk kepada kepercayaan dan tingkah laku yang mengistimewakan lelaki daripada wanita (http://www.glbtq.com/social-sciences/sexism.html). Seksisme ini dimaksudkan sebagai mekanisme yang memastikan wanita tetap pada peranan subordinasi di mana nilai yang mengidentifikasikan wanita cenderung dikritik. Secara amnya, seksisme diertikan sebagai diskriminasi berdasarkan jantina tertentu.

Sebelum kita membincangkan bagaimana mengelak daripada seksisme dalam penyelidikan, terlebih dahulu kita harus mengenal pasti tujuh permasalahan seksisme dalam penyelidikan. Ketujuh permasalahan tersebut ialah penumpuhan kepada lelaki (androcentricity), generalisasi/pengkhususan berlebihan (overgeneralization/overspecificity), ketidakpekaan gender (gender insensitivity), piawaian berganda (double standards), kesesuaian jantina (sex appropriateness), familisme/kekeluargaan (familism) dan dikotomi jantina (sexual dichotomism).

Penumpuhan kepada lelaki bermaksud melihat dunia hanya daripada perspektif lelaki (Eichler, 1991). Ertinya, segala fenomena dalam dunia sains dan sains sosial hanya dinilai berdasarkan pandangan lelaki sahaja. Ini merupakan sesuatu yang tidak tepat untuk diaplikasikan dalam penyelidikan atau kajian. Penyelidikan yang baik ialah penyelidikan yang tidak bias atau tidak berat sebelah. Oleh sebab itu pengalaman wanita juga perlu diambil kira sama seperti ketika Seksisme atau sexism sering dijumpai dalam kebanyakan kajian. Seksisme itu sendiri merujuk kepada kepercayaan dan tingkah laku yang mengistimewakan lelaki daripada wanita (http://www.glbtq.com/social-sciences/sexism.html). Seksisme ini dimaksudkan sebagai mekanisme yang memastikan wanita tetap pada peranan subordinasi di mana nilai yang mengidentifikasikan wanita cenderung dikritik. Secara amnya, seksisme diertikan sebagai diskriminasi berdasarkan jantina tertentu.

Sebelum kita membincangkan bagaimana mengelak daripada seksisme dalam penyelidikan, terlebih dahulu kita harus mengenal pasti tujuh permasalahan seksisme dalam penyelidikan. Ketujuh permasalahan tersebut ialah penumpuhan kepada lelaki (androcentricity), generalisasi/pengkhususan berlebihan (overgeneralization/overspecificity), ketidakpekaan gender (gender insensitivity), piawaian berganda (double standards), kesesuaian jantina (sex appropriateness), familisme/kekeluargaan (familism) dan dikotomi jantina (sexual dichotomism).

Penumpuhan kepada lelaki bermaksud melihat dunia hanya daripada perspektif lelaki (Eichler, 1991). Ertinya, segala fenomena dalam dunia sains dan sains sosial hanya dinilai berdasarkan pandangan lelaki sahaja. Ini merupakan sesuatu yang tidak tepat untuk diaplikasikan dalam penyelidikan atau kajian. Penyelidikan yang baik ialah penyelidikan yang tidak bias atau tidak berat sebelah. Oleh sebab itu pengalaman wanita juga perlu diambil kira sama seperti ketika mengambil kira pengalaman lelaki.

Masalah kedua iaitu generalisasi atau pengkhususan yang berlebihan. Maksud daripada generalisasi berlebihan ialah jika suatu kajian fokus kepada satu jantina sahaja tetapi dijelaskan untuk menerangkan kedua-dua jantina. Contohnya, kajian terhadap tugas penjagaan anak di mana kebanyakan kes penjagaan anak dilakukan oleh ibu tetapi pengkaji sentiasa menggeneralisasikannya sebagai tugas ibu-bapa, sedangkan pada kenyataannya kehadiran bapa dalam tugas penjagaan anak adalah kurang. Pengkhususan berlebihan pula bermaksud penggunaan terma satu jantina sahaja untuk mewakili kedua-dua jantina. Contoh kes overspecificity sering dijumpai dalam penggunaan bahasa seksis seperti penggunaan kata “man” (lelaki) untuk mewakili terma “orang/person” yang sebenarnya merujuk kepada lelaki dan wanita.

Selanjutnya, masalah ketidakpekaan gender, iaitu pengabaian gender sebagai satu unit analisis kajian. Masalah ketidakpekaan gender saling bertindih dengan masalah generalisasi atau pengkhususan berlebihan. Jika generalisasi dan pengkhususan berlebihan sangat fokus pada perbezaan jantina/gender walaupun penggunaannya salah, masalah ketidakpekaan gender langsung tidak mengambil kira perbezaan gender. Masalah ini dapat dijumpai dalam kes pembentukan polisi-polisi yang tidak mengambil kira perbezaan pengalaman lelaki dan perempuan yang mungkin membawa kesan yang berbeza pula pada kedua-dua jantina tersebut.

Masalah keempat iaitu piawaian berganda yang membawa maksud menentukan hasil kajian atau membuat kesimpulan berdasarkan dua piawaian: piawaian lelaki dan piawaian wanita. Seperti yang kita ketahui lelaki dan wanita memiliki ciri-ciri fizikal dan psikologikal berbeza. Dalam kajian yang mengandungi piawaian berganda biasanya menggunakan ciri-ciri tersebut untuk membezakan lelaki dan wanita. Namun hasil akhirnya atau pada kesimpulannya sering kali hanya memihak pada satu piawaian sahaja, iaitu berdasarkan ciri-ciri yang dimiliki lelaki. Contohnya, penentuan perbezaan status lelaki dan wanita di mana status lelaki ditentukan oleh pencapaiannya dalam masyarakat manakala status wanita ditentukan secara semula jadi mengikut proses kedewasaan yang diwarisi daripada ibunya. Kemudian sebagai kesimpulan status lelaki dianggap lebih tinggi kerana “pencapaian” dianggap lebih bernilai berbanding “mewarisi”.

Masalah selanjutnya iaitu kesesuain jantina yang merupakan contoh spesifik daripada piawaian berganda. Kesesuaian jantina bermaksud pembentukan ciri-ciri sosial yang berbeza antara lelaki dan wanita. Sebagai contoh, pembahagian peranan jantina antara lelaki dan wanita di mana lelaki dianggap sesuai dengan kerja di ruang publik sedangkan wanita dianggap sesuai dengan kerja domestik.

Masalah keenam iaitu kekeluargaan di mana keluarga di anggap sebagai unit analisis terkecil. Pada kenyataanya, keluarga terdiri daripada ahli dengan jantina berlainan sehingga pengalaman setiap ahli keluarga juga berbeza. Namun dalam kajian yang seksis seringkali menganggap kepala keluarga, iaitu bapa (lelaki) dapat mewakili pengalaman dan kepentingan seluruh ahli keluarga.

Terakhir, iaitu masalah dikotomi jantina yang merupakan pengkhususan daripada piawaian berganda. Dikotomi jantina ialah pembezaan ciri-ciri sosial dan biological antara lelaki dan wanita dan mengabaikan ciri-ciri bertindih yang ada pada kedua-dua jantina. Sebagai contoh, lelaki dianggap rasional sedangkan wanita emosional. Pada kenyataanya, lelaki juga mempunyai ciri emosional dan wanita juga mampu mendahulukan rasionalitinya.

Setelah mengetahui permasalahan seksisme seperti yang disebutkan di atas, dapat dirumuskan panduan bagaimana mengelakkan diri daripada seksisme dalam penyelidikan. Yang pertama, penyelidik memerlukan pengetahuan yang luas. Pengetahuan yang luas dapat membantu penyelidik memahami secara mendalam bidang kajian sehingga kritikan dan pendapat penyelidik tidak terhad kepada fakta-fakta objektif yang memihak lelaki sahaja. Seperti yang kita ketahui bahawa ilmu pengetahuan awal dicipta oleh lelaki (phallocentric knowledge-making) sehingga fakta yang dicipta memihak pada kepentingan lelaki (Leed, 1991). Penyelidik dapat mengelak daripada fakta seksis sekiranya dia membaca tulisan feminis dan memerhatikan penemuan-penemuan baru dalam bidang sains sosial yang lebih peka gender.

Yang kedua ialah mengelak penggunaan bahasa seksis dalam penulisan laporan hasil penyelidikan. Ini dapat dilakukan dengan cara mengenal pasti subjek kajian kita sama ada spesifik kepada salah satu jantina sahaja atau bersifat umum yang melibatkan kedua-dua jantina. Jika subjek kajian memang difokuskan kepada satu jantina sahaja, maka terma yang digunakan untuk menjelaskannya harus spesifik kepada satu jantina sahaja. Sebagai contoh, dalam kajian tentang blogging yang saya lakukan, untuk menjelaskan amalan penulisan blog yang dilakukan oleh wanita, maka saya harus menggunakan terma “penulis blog wanita” (female bloggers) daripada “penulis blog” (bloggers). Sebaliknya, jika kajian dilakukan kepada subjek yang lebih umum, maka terma yang digunakan juga harus terma-terma umum dan bukan terma khusus pada satu jantina sahaja. Sebagai contoh penggunaan “she/he”, “s/he”, “they”, dan “one”, daripada penggunaan “he” untuk menerangkan “someone/person/people”, penggunaan “chairpersons” daripada “chairmen”, penggunaan “police officers” daripada “policemen”, dan lain sebagainya.

Selain penggunaan terma tepat bagi mewakili terma umum atau terma khusus, perlu dielakkan juga penggunaan terma non-parallel untuk menjelaskan situasi parallel atau sejajar. Sebagai contoh, “a man and his wife” menunjukkan bahawa wanita lebih dirujuk pada statusnya yang berkaitan dengan suaminya (lelaki) padahal dia boleh menggunakan statusnya sendiri. Untuk itu terma yang tepat ialah “a man and a woman”, “a couple”, atau “a husband and a wife”.

Suatu penyelidikan juga perlu seimbang di mana konsep dan rujukan yang digunakan harus mengambil kira pengalaman daripada perspektif lelaki dan wanita. Jika hanya mengambil pengalaman lelaki atau wanita sahaja maka tajuk atau skop kajian perlu dispesifikkan kepada salah satu jantina sahaja. Sebagai contoh, penyelidikan dilakukan ke atas amalan pertontonan filem dewasa di kalangan pelajar sekolah lelaki di Lembah Klang, sepatutnya diberi tajuk “Amalan pertontonan filem dewasa di kalangan pelajar lelaki di Lembah Klang” dan bukan “Amalan pertontonan filem dewasa di kalangan pelajar sekolah di Lembah Klang”. Ini demikian kerana yang dijadikan subjek adalah lelaki sehingga pengalaman yang diambil kira juga pengalaman lelaki sahaja dan tidak dapat mewakili pengalaman perempuan.

Selanjutnya, untuk mengelakkan penggunaan piawaian berganda, penyelidik perlu mengenal pasti konsep kajian sama ada digunakan untuk mewakili dua jantina tetapi diperlakukan secara berbeza berdasarkan perbezaan jantina atau tidak. Jika konsep kajian sedemikian, penyelidik perlu membuat konsep baru yang mengakategorikan lelaki dan wanita sama jika mereka menunjukkan kualiti atau karakter sama. Contohnya, kesimpulan bahawa lelaki dan wanita berstatus tinggi dalam masyarakat jika mampu menyeimbangkan kepentingan antara ruang domestik dan publik, dan bukan hanya ditentukan daripada pencapaian di ruang publik sahaja.

Untuk mengelakkan daripada penggunaan kesesuaian jantina pula, suatu penyelidikan harus memberikan deskripsi mengenai peranan atau identiti gender tertentu berdasarkan kajian empirik dan bukan berdasarkan asumsi stereotaip semata-mata. Ertinya, jika penyelidik ingin menjelaskan perbezaan peranan jantina, dia perlu mengkaji fenomena sosial berkaitan dengan topik tersebut sesuai dengan keadaan sebenar berdasarkan tahun atau zaman ketika penyelidikan dilakukan. Penyelidik tidak boleh menggunakan pengetahuan yang stereotaip mengenai hal tersebut.

Selanjutnya, untuk mengelak daripada penggunaan konsep familisme, penyelidik perlu mengenal pasti tingkah laku, ciri dan kebendaan yang dimiliki masing-masing individu. Ini kerana setiap individu adalah unik atau tidak sama sehingga kepentingan dan pengalamannya tidak boleh diwakilkan oleh individu lain.

Bagi mengelak konsep dikotomi jantina pula, penyelidik perlu mengenal pasti karakter dan kapasiti manusia secara umum daripada menggolong-golongkan ciri-ciri berdasarkan jantina. Ini kerana manusia memiliki ciri tertentu yang sama terlepas daripada perbezaan jantina yang ada pada mereka.

Kesimpulannya, seksisme sering wujud dalam penyelidikan. Seksisme dapat berupa androcentriciti, genelarisasi atau spesifikasi berbelihan, ketidakpekaan gender, kesesuaian gender, familisme dan dikotomi jantina. Untuk mengelak daripada seksisme, penyelidik perlu memiliki pengetahuan luas sehingga mampu mengenal pasti subjek kajian sama ada khusus kepada satu jantina sahaja atau melibatkan kedua-dua jantina. Penyelidik juga perlu mengelak penggunaan bahasa seksis. Terakhir, penyelidik perlu mengenal pasti ciri-ciri khusus masing-masing jantina dan ciri-ciri manusia secara umum sehingga penyelidik mampu membezakan pengalaman dan perspektif berlainan antara lelaki dan wanita.

 mengambil kira pengalaman lelaki.

Masalah kedua iaitu generalisasi atau pengkhususan yang berlebihan. Maksud daripada generalisasi berlebihan ialah jika suatu kajian fokus kepada satu jantina sahaja tetapi dijelaskan untuk menerangkan kedua-dua jantina. Contohnya, kajian terhadap tugas penjagaan anak di mana kebanyakan kes penjagaan anak dilakukan oleh ibu tetapi pengkaji sentiasa menggeneralisasikannya sebagai tugas ibu-bapa, sedangkan pada kenyataannya kehadiran bapa dalam tugas penjagaan anak adalah kurang. Pengkhususan berlebihan pula bermaksud penggunaan terma satu jantina sahaja untuk mewakili kedua-dua jantina. Contoh kes overspecificity sering dijumpai dalam penggunaan bahasa seksis seperti penggunaan kata “man” (lelaki) untuk mewakili terma “orang/person” yang sebenarnya merujuk kepada lelaki dan wanita.

Selanjutnya, masalah ketidakpekaan gender, iaitu pengabaian gender sebagai satu unit analisis kajian. Masalah ketidakpekaan gender saling bertindih dengan masalah generalisasi atau pengkhususan berlebihan. Jika generalisasi dan pengkhususan berlebihan sangat fokus pada perbezaan jantina/gender walaupun penggunaannya salah, masalah ketidakpekaan gender langsung tidak mengambil kira perbezaan gender. Masalah ini dapat dijumpai dalam kes pembentukan polisi-polisi yang tidak mengambil kira perbezaan pengalaman lelaki dan perempuan yang mungkin membawa kesan yang berbeza pula pada kedua-dua jantina tersebut.

Masalah keempat iaitu piawaian berganda yang membawa maksud menentukan hasil kajian atau membuat kesimpulan berdasarkan dua piawaian: piawaian lelaki dan piawaian wanita. Seperti yang kita ketahui lelaki dan wanita memiliki ciri-ciri fizikal dan psikologikal berbeza. Dalam kajian yang mengandungi piawaian berganda biasanya menggunakan ciri-ciri tersebut untuk membezakan lelaki dan wanita. Namun hasil akhirnya atau pada kesimpulannya sering kali hanya memihak pada satu piawaian sahaja, iaitu berdasarkan ciri-ciri yang dimiliki lelaki. Contohnya, penentuan perbezaan status lelaki dan wanita di mana status lelaki ditentukan oleh pencapaiannya dalam masyarakat manakala status wanita ditentukan secara semula jadi mengikut proses kedewasaan yang diwarisi daripada ibunya. Kemudian sebagai kesimpulan status lelaki dianggap lebih tinggi kerana “pencapaian” dianggap lebih bernilai berbanding “mewarisi”.

Masalah selanjutnya iaitu kesesuain jantina yang merupakan contoh spesifik daripada piawaian berganda. Kesesuaian jantina bermaksud pembentukan ciri-ciri sosial yang berbeza antara lelaki dan wanita. Sebagai contoh, pembahagian peranan jantina antara lelaki dan wanita di mana lelaki dianggap sesuai dengan kerja di ruang publik sedangkan wanita dianggap sesuai dengan kerja domestik.

Masalah keenam iaitu kekeluargaan di mana keluarga di anggap sebagai unit analisis terkecil. Pada kenyataanya, keluarga terdiri daripada ahli dengan jantina berlainan sehingga pengalaman setiap ahli keluarga juga berbeza. Namun dalam kajian yang seksis seringkali menganggap kepala keluarga, iaitu bapa (lelaki) dapat mewakili pengalaman dan kepentingan seluruh ahli keluarga.

Terakhir, iaitu masalah dikotomi jantina yang merupakan pengkhususan daripada piawaian berganda. Dikotomi jantina ialah pembezaan ciri-ciri sosial dan biological antara lelaki dan wanita dan mengabaikan ciri-ciri bertindih yang ada pada kedua-dua jantina. Sebagai contoh, lelaki dianggap rasional sedangkan wanita emosional. Pada kenyataanya, lelaki juga mempunyai ciri emosional dan wanita juga mampu mendahulukan rasionalitinya.

Setelah mengetahui permasalahan seksisme seperti yang disebutkan di atas, dapat dirumuskan panduan bagaimana mengelakkan diri daripada seksisme dalam penyelidikan. Yang pertama, penyelidik memerlukan pengetahuan yang luas. Pengetahuan yang luas dapat membantu penyelidik memahami secara mendalam bidang kajian sehingga kritikan dan pendapat penyelidik tidak terhad kepada fakta-fakta objektif yang memihak lelaki sahaja. Seperti yang kita ketahui bahawa ilmu pengetahuan awal dicipta oleh lelaki (phallocentric knowledge-making) sehingga fakta yang dicipta memihak pada kepentingan lelaki (Leed, 1991). Penyelidik dapat mengelak daripada fakta seksis sekiranya dia membaca tulisan feminis dan memerhatikan penemuan-penemuan baru dalam bidang sains sosial yang lebih peka gender.

Yang kedua ialah mengelak penggunaan bahasa seksis dalam penulisan laporan hasil penyelidikan. Ini dapat dilakukan dengan cara mengenal pasti subjek kajian kita sama ada spesifik kepada salah satu jantina sahaja atau bersifat umum yang melibatkan kedua-dua jantina. Jika subjek kajian memang difokuskan kepada satu jantina sahaja, maka terma yang digunakan untuk menjelaskannya harus spesifik kepada satu jantina sahaja. Sebagai contoh, dalam kajian tentang blogging yang saya lakukan, untuk menjelaskan amalan penulisan blog yang dilakukan oleh wanita, maka saya harus menggunakan terma “penulis blog wanita” (female bloggers) daripada “penulis blog” (bloggers). Sebaliknya, jika kajian dilakukan kepada subjek yang lebih umum, maka terma yang digunakan juga harus terma-terma umum dan bukan terma khusus pada satu jantina sahaja. Sebagai contoh penggunaan “she/he”, “s/he”, “they”, dan “one”, daripada penggunaan “he” untuk menerangkan “someone/person/people”, penggunaan “chairpersons” daripada “chairmen”, penggunaan “police officers” daripada “policemen”, dan lain sebagainya.

Selain penggunaan terma tepat bagi mewakili terma umum atau terma khusus, perlu dielakkan juga penggunaan terma non-parallel untuk menjelaskan situasi parallel atau sejajar. Sebagai contoh, “a man and his wife” menunjukkan bahawa wanita lebih dirujuk pada statusnya yang berkaitan dengan suaminya (lelaki) padahal dia boleh menggunakan statusnya sendiri. Untuk itu terma yang tepat ialah “a man and a woman”, “a couple”, atau “a husband and a wife”.

Suatu penyelidikan juga perlu seimbang di mana konsep dan rujukan yang digunakan harus mengambil kira pengalaman daripada perspektif lelaki dan wanita. Jika hanya mengambil pengalaman lelaki atau wanita sahaja maka tajuk atau skop kajian perlu dispesifikkan kepada salah satu jantina sahaja. Sebagai contoh, penyelidikan dilakukan ke atas amalan pertontonan filem dewasa di kalangan pelajar sekolah lelaki di Lembah Klang, sepatutnya diberi tajuk “Amalan pertontonan filem dewasa di kalangan pelajar lelaki di Lembah Klang” dan bukan “Amalan pertontonan filem dewasa di kalangan pelajar sekolah di Lembah Klang”. Ini demikian kerana yang dijadikan subjek adalah lelaki sehingga pengalaman yang diambil kira juga pengalaman lelaki sahaja dan tidak dapat mewakili pengalaman perempuan.

Selanjutnya, untuk mengelakkan penggunaan piawaian berganda, penyelidik perlu mengenal pasti konsep kajian sama ada digunakan untuk mewakili dua jantina tetapi diperlakukan secara berbeza berdasarkan perbezaan jantina atau tidak. Jika konsep kajian sedemikian, penyelidik perlu membuat konsep baru yang mengakategorikan lelaki dan wanita sama jika mereka menunjukkan kualiti atau karakter sama. Contohnya, kesimpulan bahawa lelaki dan wanita berstatus tinggi dalam masyarakat jika mampu menyeimbangkan kepentingan antara ruang domestik dan publik, dan bukan hanya ditentukan daripada pencapaian di ruang publik sahaja.

Untuk mengelakkan daripada penggunaan kesesuaian jantina pula, suatu penyelidikan harus memberikan deskripsi mengenai peranan atau identiti gender tertentu berdasarkan kajian empirik dan bukan berdasarkan asumsi stereotaip semata-mata. Ertinya, jika penyelidik ingin menjelaskan perbezaan peranan jantina, dia perlu mengkaji fenomena sosial berkaitan dengan topik tersebut sesuai dengan keadaan sebenar berdasarkan tahun atau zaman ketika penyelidikan dilakukan. Penyelidik tidak boleh menggunakan pengetahuan yang stereotaip mengenai hal tersebut.

Selanjutnya, untuk mengelak daripada penggunaan konsep familisme, penyelidik perlu mengenal pasti tingkah laku, ciri dan kebendaan yang dimiliki masing-masing individu. Ini kerana setiap individu adalah unik atau tidak sama sehingga kepentingan dan pengalamannya tidak boleh diwakilkan oleh individu lain.

Bagi mengelak konsep dikotomi jantina pula, penyelidik perlu mengenal pasti karakter dan kapasiti manusia secara umum daripada menggolong-golongkan ciri-ciri berdasarkan jantina. Ini kerana manusia memiliki ciri tertentu yang sama terlepas daripada perbezaan jantina yang ada pada mereka.

Kesimpulannya, seksisme sering wujud dalam penyelidikan. Seksisme dapat berupa androcentriciti, genelarisasi atau spesifikasi berbelihan, ketidakpekaan gender, kesesuaian gender, familisme dan dikotomi jantina. Untuk mengelak daripada seksisme, penyelidik perlu memiliki pengetahuan luas sehingga mampu mengenal pasti subjek kajian sama ada khusus kepada satu jantina sahaja atau melibatkan kedua-dua jantina. Penyelidik juga perlu mengelak penggunaan bahasa seksis. Terakhir, penyelidik perlu mengenal pasti ciri-ciri khusus masing-masing jantina dan ciri-ciri manusia secara umum sehingga penyelidik mampu membezakan pengalaman dan perspektif berlainan antara lelaki dan wanita.

Read More

Konsep pertindihan identiti/intersectional identity

Seseorang individu tidak hanya memiliki satu terma atau perkataan yang mewakili identitinya. Identiti seseorang biasanya berlapis-lapis. Maksudnya adalah bahawa sesorang itu tidak akan membawa satu identiti sahaja, tetapi membawa banyak identiti berdasarkan jantina, gender, umur, kelas, etnik, dan tahap keupayaan. Hal inilah yang dinamakan sebagai konsep pertindihan identiti (intersectional identity). Kimberle Crenshaw (1989) mendifinisikan pertindihan identiti sebagai keperluan mengenal banyak helaian (strand) yang membentuk identiti sesorang. Crenshaw mengambil contoh wanita berkulit hitam di Amerika dilihat memenuhi konsep pertindihan identiti dari segi jantina (sexism), iaitu wanita dan kaum (racism), iaitu berkulit gelap.

Konsep pertindihan identiti sendiri mula dikenal sejak akhir 1960-an dan awal 1970-an bersamaan dengan adanya pergerakan feminis daripada pelbagai kaum. Ianya bermula daripada penentangan sesetengah feminis terhadap pandangan bahawa “gender” sebagai satu-satunya faktor yang melahirkan penindasan terhadap wanita. Pergerakan tersebut dilakukan oleh wanita berkulit bukan putih (women of color) yang mengemukakan idea bahawa pengalaman wanita tidak semestinya sama. Bentuk penindasan yang dialami oleh wanita berkulit putih daripada kelas pertengahan tidak sama dengan penindasan yang dialami wanita berkulit hitam, wanita miskin dan wanita yang ada kekurang-upayaan. Pergerakan tersebut meminta feminis (yang kebanyakan berjuang untuk kaum putih sahaja) untuk melihat gender, kaum, kelas, tahap keupayaan/kekurang-upayaan sebagai kombinasi yang menentukan nasib/identiti seseorang, terutamanya wanita.

Selain gender, kaum, etnik, kelas, dan tahap keupayaan, identiti seseorang juga berkaitan dengan identiti politik. Identiti politik merujuk kepada proses pengiktirafan kumpulan yang terisolasi, secara sosial dan sistematik (Crenshaw, 1989). Di Amerika misalnya, kaum African-Americans, kaum berkulit bukan putih, kaum gay dan lesbian adalah antara kumpulan yang mendapat sumber kekuatan, komuniti dan pembangunan intelektual melalui identiti politik. Penerimaan identiti politik bagaimanapun telah menimbulkan ketegangan dalam konsepsi keadilan sosial. Identiti gender, kaum dan lain sebagainya sering dilayan secara bias dalam perbincangan wacana liberal arus perdana. Ianya menimbulkan pandangan negatif dalam kuasa sosial yang meminggirkan mereka yang berbeza.

Read More

Why are problems regarding Domestic Violence hidden?

Domestic Violence. Readers, this topic seems a bit heavy. But you cannot avoid it because it exists in our daily life without we realising it. I have been studying Domestic Violence two times so far. Once when I was attending Gender and NGO class, and once when I am back to study Introduction to Gender Studies. So, do you ever see by your own eyes domestic violence happens in your family or your relatives'? If you say No I will tell you why you do not see it. Yeah, it is because it's hidden. Why it is hidden? read more here...

Menurut Miranda Davis (1994), terma domestic violence atau keganasan dalam rumahtangga digunakan untuk menjelaskan pelbagai tindakan dan kelalaian yang terjadi dalam sebuah hubungan. Terma tersebut terhad kepada tindakan serangan fizikal juga keganasan seksual meliputi pemukulan, pencekikan, penyimbahan air rebusan atau asid, pembakaran yang mungkin dapat menyebabkan luka atau kematian. Kekerapan dan tahap keterukkan boleh bermula daripada peringkat kecil/jarang kepada peringkat sering dan paling teruk.

Davis juga mengatakan bahawa terma ‘keganasan rumahtangga’ digunakan oleh beberapa orang untuk menjelaskan keganasan mental atau psikologikal yang berupa gangguan verbal, gangguan seksual, pengurungan, serta penghilangan fizikal, kewangan, dan sumber-sumber pribadi. Penghalangan seseorang (isteri, suami, atau anak) daripada keluarga dan temannya juga merupakan bentuk keganasan rumahtangga. Keganasan rumahtangga ini sering terjadi kepada isteri atau anak perempuan. Oleh sebab itu terdapat juga pendapat sesetengah pihak yang memasukkan keganasan rumahtangga sebagai kekerasan terhadap wanita.

Apa yang menghawatirkan adalah, keganasan rumahtangga biasanya merupakan masalah tersembunyi. Penyelidikan mengenai keganasan rumahtangga sendiri baru bermula sejak 25 tahun yang lalu di beberapa negara seperti Eropah, Amerika Selatan, Australia, dan New Zeland. Namun seiring perkembangannya, UNIFEM melalui koleksi esei terbitan terbaru menyimpulkan bahawa penyelidikan ke atas keganasan rumahtangga sudah mulai dilakukan di pelbagai daerah di negara-negara berkembang.

Wanita biasanya menjadi mangsa keganasan rumahtangga dan lelaki sebagai pelaku tetapi tidak jelas wanita dan lelaki yang bagaimana biasanya terlibat dalam kes keganasan dalam rumahtangga. Selain itu, kejadian keganasan dalam rumahtangga juga sukar untuk ditafsirkan. Masyarakat biasanya menafikan adanya keganasan rumahtangga kerana takut melaporkannya dengan alasan untuk menjaga keutuhan rumahtangga dan akibatnya, statistik rasmi mengenai kes tersebut kekal sedikit. Statistik mengenai keganasan rumahtangga biasanya didapat daripada laporan dan rekod yang diterima polis, rumah kebajikan, dan hospital. Statistik tersebut setidaknya menunjukkan bahawa keganasan terhadap wanita dalam rumahtangga benar-benar wujud.

Selain itu, mangsa biasanya baru melaporkan jika sudah diganasi secara teruk. Mereka takut melapor kerana malu dan takut ancaman suaminya serta untuk menjaga kesetiaan keluarga. Juga, laporan wanita yang mengalami keganasan rumahtangga dianggap remeh-temeh oleh polis. Meskipun laporan tersebut mungkin boleh menjadi data penting bagi kes-kes keganasan wanita dalam rumah, statistik jenayah sering kali gagal mengesan jantina mangsa dan penyerang. Akibatnya, penyerangan ke atas isteri tidak dibezakan dengan bentuk penyerangan-penyerangan yang lain dan pada akhirnya penyerangan ke atas wanita menjadi tidak tampak (invisible).

Tindakan wanita yang tidak melaporkan kes keganasan yang menimpanya mungkin juga disebabkan kurangnya rasa percaya diri. Sebahagian daripada mereka menganggap keganasan yang mereka terima, seperti penamparan dan penolakkan, sebagai kurang cukup penting untuk dikategorikan sebagai keganasan rumahtangga.

Kajian lain mendapati, medium laporan yang sering digunakan adalah menerusi panggilan telefon. Oleh sebab itu, pengesanan statistik keganasan rumahtangga terhad kepada wanita yng memiliki akses kepada telefon sahaja. Wanita yang berasal daripada etnik minoriti atau dari daerah terpencil kurang mendapat perhatian. Kajian lain terhadap pasangan yang menjalani kehidupan bersama sebelum kahwin (cohabiting) juga mendapati wanita tidak dapat menunjukkan kesan keganasan setelah hubungannya berakhir sehingga tidak berani melaporkannya.

Kesimpulannya, kewujudan keganasan dalam rumah yang sebenar tidak dapat diketahui secara tepat, tetapi ianya jelas bahawa keganasan tersebut wujud dalam masyarakat dinamik sama ada di negara maju ataupun di negara berkembang. Keganasan juga berlaku di mana-mana kelas sosial. Penyelidikan mendapati bahawa wanita dibunuh, diganasi secara fizikal dan psikologikal, diancam dan dipermainkan di dalam rumah mereka oleh orang yang mereka percaya. Sayangnya, masalah tersebut tidak tampak atau tersembunyi daripada publik disebabkan oleh beberapa faktor yang dialami oleh wanita itu sendiri.

Read More