Berikut adalah cuplikan wawancara antara Jurnal Perempuan dan M. Hilaly Basya (dalam Jurnal Perempuan no 31 "Menimbang Poligami", halaman 110, terbit bulan Oktober 2003)

(JP) : Isu perempuan dalam wacana Islam yang sedang mencuat adalah tentang poligami. Bagaimanakah sebetulnya teks poligami dalam Al-Qur’an?

(HB) :  Teks harus selalu dikaitkan dengan konteks. Sebab teks selalu dilahirkan oleh konteksnya, yang menjadi pertanyaan adalah mengapa teksnya berbunyi seperti tiu. Ayat yang bicara soal poligami dan biasanya dijadikan landasan adalah surat An-Nisa ayat 3. Di dalamnya menyinggung tentang nikahilah perempuan yang kamu sukai, dua, tiga, atau empat. Tetapi kalau kamu takut tidak berlaku yang ada yaitu keadaan dimana mereka berpolimgai tanpa batas. seperti yang dilakukan para sahabat Nabi, paling banyak 10 istri. Bahkan ketika ayat itu turun, nabi sendiriistrinya sudah 11. Luar biasa, dan teks itu muncul untuk membuat sindiran kepada realitas tersebut. Maka bukan sama sekali diartikan bahwa agama menyuruh untuk poligami, tetapi yang terjadi agama sedang memotret realitas, dan kemudian sindiran itu keluar di ujung ayat tersebut yang berbunyi: "kalau kamu tidak bisa berlaku adil, ya satu saja." Bahkan kemudian di surat yang sama ayat 129 ditegaskan lagi, "kalau kamu ingin berlaku adil, kamu tidak akan bisa." Sebetulnya kata-kata ini merupakan inti sindiran yang menegaskan realitas poligami. Dari sini saya melihat poligami dalam teks sebenarnya tidak memiliki pembenaran, baik dari justifikasi maupun legitimasi teologisnya.

What is friend for in our life?

Friend can be a shoulder to cry on … can be someone to rely on … can be someone whom we will confide in when we need someone to listen to us … can be someone to whom we turn to when we need help … And in return … of course we will be their shoulder to cry on … to be someone they rely on … to be someone they talk to when they need someone to listen to them … can be someone to give them help …

What kind of person then who consider us as a good friend … and in some more ‘extreme’ degree … as a soul mate … but then … behind us he/she does something that can hurt us, try to hide it from us … then when he/she thinks that we will find it out … directly he/she says … "Sorry dear, I feel so guilty to keep this long from you. I am forgetful to tell you this…" meaning if she/he thinks that we will not find it out, he/she will always keep it from us … and for excuse, innocently he/she says, "Nobody is perfect dear …"

What am I supposed to do to such a friend?

The following is a poem written by Andrei Aksana in his novel Lelaki Terindah. To me, this is one of the most romantic and beautiful poems I have ever read. When the first time I read it, I directly fell in love with it, and mm … of course I have my someone special on my mind. LOL.

Suatu ketika dulu

Aku pernah dihanyut asmara

Tapi tak pernah ku tenggelam

Karena kekuatan cintamu

Menjadi perahu dan dayungku

          Hanya engkaulah yang mampu

          Melenyapkan ragu menjadi tahu

          Memupuskan kelu menjadi deru

          Hanya engkaulah yang bisa

          Menggantikan tawar menjadi rasa

          Menghadirkan tiada menjadi ada

Karena hanya engkaulah …

Lelaki terindah di hidupku

So, do you believe that love is blind? Or people are blinded by love? Some people tend to blame another part, rather than to be honest to admit that it is their own mistake. People do not want to admit that they are blinded by their love so that they easily say “love is blind”. Am I right?

It means … I wanna admit that I am blinded by my love to that Lelaki Terindah in my life. Hahaha … Being blinded by love sometimes can make life more beautiful and colorful. Agree?

Ciao,

Nana

         An Obstacle

Charlotte Perkins Gilman

         (1860-1935)

I was climbing a mountain path

   With many things to do,

Important business of my own,

   And other people’s too,

When I ran against a Prejudice,

   That quite cut off the view,

       My work was such as could not wait,

          My path quite clearly showed,

       My strength and time were limited,

          I carried quite a load;

       And there that hulking Prejudice

          Sat all across the road.

So I spoke to him politely,

     For he was huge and high,

And begged that he would move a bit

    And let me travel by.

He smiled, but as for moving! –

    He didn’t even try.          

       And then I reasoned quietly

           With that colossal mule:

       My time was short—no other path—

           The mountain winds were cool.

       I argued like a Solomon;

           He sat there like a fool.

Then I flew into a passion,

   And I danced and howled and swore;

I pelted and belabored him

   Till I was stiff and sore,

He got as mad as I did—

   But he sat there as before.

       And then I begged him on my knees,

          I might be kneeling still

       If so I hoped to move that mass

          Of obdurate ill-will—

       As well invite the monument

          To vacate Bunker Hill!

So I sat before him helpless,

   In an ecstasy of woe—

The mountain mists were rising fast,

   The sun was sinking slow—

When a sudden inspiration came,

   As sudden winds do blow.

       I took my hat, I took my stick,

          My load I settled fair,

       I approached that awful incubus

          Win an absent-minded air—

       And I walked directly through him,

          As if he wasn’t there!

In her poem entitled “Obstacle” as you can read above, Gilman explained women’s struggle to achieve equality with men in a very vivid illustration. In the first stanza, she symbolized ‘a mountain path’ as the ‘road’ a woman has to pass through to reach that equality. We know that it is quite a hard thing to do to climb a mountain, compared to when we walk on a flat road. Moreover, when we are burdened with many things to do, important business of my own, and other people’s too. This woman, or perhaps we can refer her to Gilman herself, walks through that hard way, bringing with her many things, not only for herself. She does that also for her folk—other women who believe that women are born equal to men. However, in the middle of her way, a Prejudice thwarts her effort. Prejudice here refers to patriarchal society—both men and women—who believe that women are the second sex.

Second stanza strengthens the first, that Gilman’s effort to reach equality was not an easy thing to do, moreover with her limited time and strength. We are not Highlanders that can live hundreds or thousands years, are we? Our time and strength to live in this world is limited. Prejudice made her struggle harder coz he hindered her journey.

Third and fourth stanza illustrate the first thing Gilman did to continue her journey; that is to talk to Prejudice politely, quietly, trying to use her common sense, to convince Prejudice about the importance of her effort. The Prejudice seemed to listen to her, but he didn’t do anything to approve her intention, to continue her journey.

The fifth stanza showed Gilman using a more daring effort, to challenge the Prejudice in a sort of duel. It still didn’t work, though. 

Feeling exhausted, Gilman changed her trick. The sixth stanzas illustrated Gilman’s way; no longer logical arguing nor haphazard anger. She begged the Prejudice on her knees, to ask for his pity on her. The seventh stanza showed that Gilman almost lost hope, so I sat before him helpless, in an ecstasy of woe– . However, in the middle of her hopelessness due to the limited time and unfriendly weather, Gilman got a brilliant idea, when a sudden inspiration came, as sudden winds do blow. She depicted it in the last stanza of her poem. she stood up from her kneeling, prepared herself with all her loads and continued her journey. She concluded her effort in the richest last two lines: And I walked directly through him, as if he wasn’t there! She went on her effort, continued her journey, just ignored the Prejudice, considered him not exist. She eventually realized, for ages men have done whatever they wanted to do, ignoring their fellow human creatures—women. For ages women have been considered not exist. Therefore, it is just fair if women do exactly the same thing, ignore the existence of their fellow human creatures—men. Do what we think the best for us, for our betterment, for our own future.

Women, my dearest folk, be confident to do things you like for your own betterment, for your future. Wish you all the best luck. HAPPY NEW YEAR 2006.

Love,

Nana

I shall speak about women’s writing. Woman must write herself. … Woman must put herself into the text—as into the world and into history—by her own movement.

(Helene Cioux — a French feminist writer)

In the nineteenth century America, the main norm imposed to middle and upper class women was well-known as The Cult of True Womanhood. If a woman wanted to be considered as “good” and “true” woman, she had to follow the four attributes in The Cult of True Womanhood; namely piety, purity, submission, and domesticity.

A woman must be pious in order to raise pious children that later on will be the pillars of the country in the future. (It is related to the fact that Americawas a Puritan country in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. With its Industrial Revolution in the beginning of the nineteenth century, American men were busy outside home, in industry. To raise religious children, they gave that burden on women’s shoulder! American people didn’t want to leave their heritage as a pious country behind.) Since it is her obligation, she will be easily condemned if the children grow up not as religious people. While the father is “free” from this duty. Easily society will judge the mother as a “bad” woman if something “wrong” (read à the kid doesn’t grow up as pious person) happens. Not the father.

A woman must be pure. This is especially in the context that a woman is not supposed to have sex before marriage. (While men can do it to their hearts’ content!! Either before or after getting married) When a man proposes her for a marriage, a woman must give her virginity to her husband in return of the dowry the husband has paid to her parents. Later on, a woman still must keep their being pure, meaning having sex only with her husband, in return of the monthly paycheck her husbands give. No wonder, then, if many radical feminists propose an idea that marriage is just practice of exclusive prostitution.

A woman must be submissive. She must submit herself to her husband. Her husband has a higher position than her. Inevitably, it must be related to the money the husband gives her every month. (Referring to Marx theory, the one who has money has the authority; the one who doesn’t have money is marginalized.) The husband makes any decision related to the family matters. The woman is supposed to say, “My husband knows better than I do. Whatever he says is the best for all of us.” She is not supposed to argue. She must keep all her own ideas for herself. It is not good to debate a husband.

A woman must be domestic. She has to stay home to take care of all household chores, including to take care of the children and the husband as well.

These four tenets in The Cult of True Womanhood do not differ a lot from what has happened in Indonesia, right? Only we don’t know term like The Cult of True Womanhood with its piety, purity, submission, and domesticity. But the practice is just the same. Since I did research only what happened in the nineteenth century

America, I don’t have any idea how these four tenets are similar to the condition in our country. What caused that? Can I simply say that Dutch (as a western country that used to colonize us for more than three centuries) brought this culture to our country? Or our ancestors in the past already practiced this for ages? In America, the separation between public and domestic spheres all started in the beginning of nineteenth century with the industrial revolution (during the previous centuries, people had home industry and America was still an agrarian country, so both men and women spent most of their time at home.)

Besides those four attributes, one most conspicuous thing is prohibiting novel reading. A woman is not allowed to read novels coz possibly it will excite their way of thinking so that they will be rebellious toward the “good” norm. When a woman wants to read, she is supposed to read Bible only, or Conduct Literature that comprises articles about how to be good and true women. (In our country now, examples of this Conduct Literature are, let’s say magazines such as Kartini. Femina, etc that usually contains articles such as “how to be an ideal wife” or “how to be an ideal mother” or “how to attract men/boys”.)

If novel reading is prohibited, novel writing is more cruelly banned. A woman is not supposed to write, especially to express herself. It can be especially related to the third tenet of The Cult of True Womanhood norm; submission. Expressing what is in her mind verbally is not allowed, moreover in written form that can be read by other parties. When a woman feels that there is something wrong, she must repress it. No questioning.

No wonder during the nineteenth century America more women became patients of mental hospitals than men. The main reason is women must follow what society determines for them. Not all women are created as passive and idle. This unwise norm of course triggers rebel to intelligent, hardworking and creative women. Women have their own way of thinking. Women have their own right to decide what is good and bad for themselves.

Charlotte Perkins Gilman, a feminist writer living in 1860-1935 proposed an idea that a woman must write to express herself despite the fact that people condemned women who wrote for expression, to speak up her mind. She cured herself from mental depression she suffered by writing a lot of articles, books, novels, and poems. She also went around America to express her way of thinking that a woman must be economically independent to have her own identity, to be equal to men.

So, girls, start writing from now on. Express yourself openly and confidently. Don’t let things blocked inside your mind and heart.

Nana

Dear friends,

Some months ago, a workmate of mine, male, got married. On the first day he came back to the office, I asked him teasingly, “So? How do you feel now after getting married? Happy?”

He answered, “I regretted it.”

I smiled wildly. I responded, “You regretted it coz you didn’t do it earlier, eh? Now that you know it is so heavenly to do it?” LOL. It is a cliché, do you agree?

However, unexpectedly, my workmate continued, “No, I mean it. I regretted it. I just found out that getting married even engenders more problems to my life. Living single is much more pleasant to me.”

I was dumbfounded to hear that. Then, I talked to myself, “Hmm … this is the first time I heard someone saying honestly about getting married, only some days after the wedding day.  …” I left him to come into my desk located in the corner of the teacher’s room, to do my own duty as a lecturer. But, this short conversation really haunted me.

It reminded me of a good friend of mine who got married in the beginning of 2005. I knew very well that her marriage plan didn’t run smoothly. Despite her family’s disagreement, she married her boyfriend she barely knew coz they knew each other in less than 6 months. Though she is my good friend, I didn’t know exactly what made her take that decision: to marry him. One thing I knew, after the wedding day, she was not really happy with it. Therefore, I was really upset and troubled when a workmate visited her after the wedding day and said, “She looked happy. Who is not happy after getting married?” I directly concluded that this female workmate of mine was the sufferer of Cinderella complex, who believed that marriage is the gate of eternal happiness, that all marriage brings happiness. If I use my rude and cynical nature, this workmate is not honest to herself. No matter what happens in the marriage, people must always show happy faces and say, “I am happy now that I am already married.” in front of other people.

How many people are not happy in their marriage? Uncountable. However, since we live in a so-called “marriage-oriented society”, people are not confident to deviate from this. They want to be considered ‘normal’ by living in a marriage, by believing that marriage is the best choice; that it is okay to be miserable inside as long as other people see us as ‘happy’ coz having the three things people covet to possess: being married, having a job, and having a kid. 

Suddenly I remember a comment of a good friend on my article I entitled “marriage”. He said, “You don’t believe that true love between man and woman exists, eh? That eternal love exists?” Simply I said, “Natural law says everything changes in this world.”

Hmm … do I really sound so pessimistic in marriage and love?

Peace J

Nana