Put affirmative action in the affirmative

No offense, but mention of the word "feminist" always kind of scares me.

It's just that every time I hear it, I imagine a group of radical women who do not like to wear makeup and who could care less about what they wear and who are always angry.

Or, it's the other side, those women who do wear lots of makeup and are trendy dressers but are so very proud of their intellectual capacity and all the degrees hanging on their walls.

And they are really pissed off, too.

Don't get me wrong. I know it's silly because those are just the stereotypes of feminists.

I do respect feminists and women's rights activists, and I admire their struggle.

And I do care about gender equality. In fact, I'm the loudest and most stridently persistent among my friends when it comes to stating the case for women's rights.

I have my reasons.

There are those tiny (but highly disturbing) things like our "obligation" to be the one to do the household chores and the deadline to get hitched by 30 at the latest or else we have passed our shelf life.

There are things that are even more destructive: polygamy, rape (it happened to one of my friends) and sexual abuse (has happened to LOTS of my friends).

So, I was interested to read a story on the front page of this newspaper last week, about the split between feminists over affirmative action for women.

Some feminists have rejected the idea of establishing quotas for women in organizations, saying that women should fight for better representation themselves instead of being given special measures.

No less than President Megawati Soekarnoputri blasted the idea, calling the proposal "counterproductive", "degrading to women's dignity" and "pseudo-advancement".

But other feminists argued that the quota is only a temporary measure for gender mainstreaming in politics.

I could not agree more with the latter group.

From when we are little, we women are told not to do things just because we are girls, like you can't play with dirt, you shouldn't run around, and be sure to sit still.

Growing older, you can't swear (what the f***?) smoke or drink, and never go out alone late at night because you will be considered a slut.

Personally, I think swearing, smoking and drinking are nongender specific vices, and who is to say that we cannot go out if we wish?

And then comes the time when you have to choose between career and motherhood. A line in a book on how-to-be-a-good-mother declared that an ambitious career woman cannot be a good mother.

If they can't, more often it's because the environment does not help the woman deal with motherhood. Her husband will be busy with the office, as well as his social commitments, like at the golf club.

So, it's OK for a child to lack a father figure as daddy is busy, but it is unforgivable if a child does not get mother's attention.

My point is, why is there always a different standard for women?

Why have there always been conditions for women if they want to achieve something, if they want to be legislators or attain any other high position in government or companies?

When they do get into power, under whatever circumstances, those 43 female legislators (a whopping 8.6 percent of the total 500 members of the House of Representatives) are blamed for having failed to fight for better policies for women.

Well, all I can say is, just look at their male peers. Try to interview them randomly, or be there when they have meetings, and you will find most of them are nothing but suits.

Sociologist and economist Mayling Oey-Gardiner once said that women legislators never speak because the media never quotes them.

It's probably true. Maybe their comments will be as useless as the male legislators, but they will still be overlooked.

Mayling also said that successful women always think that if they can do it, anybody else can follow suit. "They forgot that they have privilege, whatever that is," she said.

Activist Ratna Sarumpaet, who shares the same opinion as Megawati in rejecting affirmative action, said that basic changes like cultural modification were more helpful in dealing with gender discrimination.

To me, that's being too naive. Except for a few enlightened individuals, people do not all of a sudden wake up and decide that there is something wrong with the world, especially when cultural norms about gender roles are deeply entrenched.

Affirmative action is essential and urgent because women and men do not start from the same point in life, and it's not a level playing field.

Women have lagged behind through no fault of their own, and we need to mandate it so they can reach the same point to ensure it's not just a boy's club, with a few token women to make up the numbers.

Still, it's especially sad that the President herself does not give even a bit of support to those women out there who were not born with the same privileges in life as her.

-- Hera Diani