Special Space-Women

Single Muslim women in Mumbai, are finding it tough, working in a male dominated environment.


Heena aged 35, a teacher in Mumbai, is still single and plans to remain so. “I started working when both my parents died and I had four younger siblings to look after. I became the ‘mother’, to four teenagers at the age of 23,” she said, somewhat bitterly.


Working in a male dominated environment is too daunting for the Muslim women. Male co-workers can make a single woman feel alienated. If there is any discrimination at the work place, it only adds insult to injury.


“I am over-burdened with work and thinking of quitting because I have had enough. For the eight years that I have worked here, I have closely watched my male co-workers and with each passing day, my decision to quit the job has become stronger,” said Asma a banker. “I am convinced that a woman is not made for office work but at the same time, I also agree that marriage is also essential, but the problem is do I have a choice? I want to marry and settle in life, but I am still waiting for a decent proposal. All I want to do is quit my job, sit at home and take care of my family”, she said.


There are many problems single women face at the workplace, let alone society, throughout the country, but this is especially true in Mumbai. Mumtaz, a 32-year-old single woman, has been in the media for nine years, but finds the environment not women friendly. She says it is a place where a woman’s dreams of proving her worth can easily be shattered.


“I joined the field of my choice although my family did not support my decision. I had taken a bold step but now with the passage of time I am fed up,” she said sadly. “I always wanted to do something extraordinary with my life and didn’t want to be treated the same way my mother has been, as a submissive homemaker.” Mumtaz dreamt of being financially independent as she did not want to rely on her brothers as both her parents died. “When I started work I had a lot of difficulty adjusting, as I was the only woman working in an office of 30 employees.”


Many women like Mumtaz, who are educated, have to take up one job or another to support themselves or their families. “I have to be very careful about my behaviour among my male colleagues. A single woman has to be on guard and not smile too much, or talk too much to a certain colleague, as others get jealous and start spreading rumours which can tarnish a woman’s reputation,” said Mumtaz. “A woman working in the field with men always has to stick to traditions and social norms whereas men don’t bother about such things.”


Amela, a single working woman in her 30s said that another challenge was dealing with men, both single and married, who try to flirt or make inappropriate advances. “Your male colleagues will never accept you as one of them, even if you’ve been working with them in the same office for years,” she said.


Most of the single working women approaching 30 or over 30 don’t think they have much of a chance of marriage since most families want their sons to marry younger women. “Given a choice I would like to marry a young girl with normal qualifications, as opposed to a highly qualified working woman, because they can be quite bossy. They won’t listen to you - instead they will try to dominate you - and men don’t like to be dominated, you know,” said Abbas Hussain, a medical student.
“The moment you step out of your house for work, harassment starts, and you have to bear it because you can do nothing to stop it,” said Farheen, a single woman who works in a accounting firm. “It has nothing to do with being educated or illiterate as even housewives can harass you. I don’t see their attitudes changing so all you can do is ignore them.”


This is not to suggest that these women are against marriage. Many believe that because they started working, they got side-tracked and their parents searched for matches for their other younger daughters. Today, these women who are single, hold their parents responsible for their marital status.


Farheen believes that women should stay at home as much as possible because the working world is no easy place to be in. “It’s a dog eat dog world out there,” she said. “With the passage of time, you lose interest in things; you lose your femininity, and neither are you a satisfied career woman, nor truly independent like men. “You live your life in a constant state of insecurity, criticism and social pressure”.

The Americans know very well that at the moment the image of USA is at an all-time low in Indonesia - the world’s largest Muslim nation.


The Tsunami tragedy that struck the countries of Southeast and South Asia recently has been compounded further by the vicissitudes of politics. Thus far we have witnessed both the redeeming demonstration of human charity that extends beyond borders, as well as the less-than-dignified posturing of governments that can only think within the constrains of their borders.


The Tsunami tragedy in Southeast Asia was quickly transformed into a gross pantomime of states and governments: The country worst hit by the catastrophe was undoubtedly Indonesia, with more than a hundred thousand killed in the northwestern province of Aceh, and many missing and displaced. Almost immediately the government of neighbouring Malaysia came to the fore to offer aid and assistance, but not without the prompting of the Malaysian public, who loudly condemned the initial indifference of the Malaysia media that hardly gave the event the coverage it deserved on the first day of the tragedy.


Malaysia’s apparent charity is also laced with political concerns, for when the tragedy struck the Malaysian government was engaged in a nation-wide round-up of illegal Indonesian migrant workers who were being sent back to Indonesia.


The Malaysian government went as far as resorting to the use of national reserve forces, and threatened the illegal immigrants with punishments that included whipping as well as fines.
But the most visible actor on the stage in Indonesia’s Aceh province today has to be the United States of America, alongside its ally Australia. The American government has directed its troops and naval forces to Aceh, sending in soldiers as well as army helicopters to help with the relief effort. No doubt, this act of apparent benevolence was likewise coloured by genuine political concerns as well: The Americans know very well that at the moment the image of USA is at an all-time low in Indonesia - the world’s largest Muslim nation.


Coming as it did at a time when the image and standing of the United States is at its lowest ebb, the Tsunami tragedy was - ironically - a boon for some. The American government knows very well that its reputation and credibility has suffered greatly of late, and in the battle for hearts and minds of the Muslim world countries like Malaysia and Indonesia are of enormous strategic importance as they have come to be cast as ‘model Muslim states’ that Washington believes ought to be followed by other Arab countries.


America therefore has tried its best to win over the support of Southeast Asian Muslims in both Indonesia and Malaysia, and in the case of the former has gone as far as setting up ‘American corners’ in Indonesian universities, to showcase the American way of life and to illustrate the meaning of American values.


But at the same time Washington seems oblivious to the fact that its arrival in Indonesia is not without precedent. Despite President Bush’s pledges to help Indonesia recover from the tsunami catastrophe, the people of Indonesia remember the role that America played for so long as the strongest supporter of the Soeharto regime, from 1965 to 1998. Indonesians also recall with horror the collusion of the US - notably its intelligence agencies like the CIA - in the bloodbath that led to the destruction of the Indonesian Communist Party (PKI) in 1965.


Today, America’s relief efforts show the same signs of political machiavellism of the past. In areas like Aceh, there is now a veritable race among foreign donor agencies to get as much help on the ground as soon as possible. The US has a head start thanks to its logistical advantage. But another reason why it is so prominently visible is because it has also eliminated other donor agencies and sources of funding: Local Indonesian relief groups, many of them linked to local Indonesian Islamist parties like the Partai Keadilan Sejahtera (PKS) and movements like the Hidayatullah have been sidelined from Aceh, on the grounds that they might be working alongside radical Islamist forces.
To make things worse, Washington’s ‘War on Terror’ in Southeast Asia has also obstructed many Arab and South Asian donors who find that they cannot donate to Aceh for fear of being accused of funding ‘radical Islamist groups’. As a result of these restrictions, Muslim relief organisations from countries like Malaysia, Pakistan, the Gulf states and beyond are forced to make the long trip to Aceh themselves, to hand over the money and aid they have collected personally. A Malaysian Muslim-based relief group has recently complained that unlike the Americans and their Western allies, Muslim NGOs are treated with suspicion and made to feel unwelcomed by the US and the Indonesian authorities.


So deep is the scepticism of American intentions and its agenda towards the Muslim world that even the leaders of moderate Islamist organisations in Southeast Asia are not impressed by the US’s latest humanitarian efforts. As Ahmad Azam, President of the Malaysian Islamic Youth Movement (ABIM) noted: “After the 11 September tragedy, followed by the attack on Afghanistan on the pretext of blaming Osama Bin Laden for it, and then invading Iraq on thequestionable basis of supposedly amassing weapon of mass destruction (WMD), the Muslim world will never trust the U.S. anymore as a nation that stands for freedom, human rights and justice”. Such sentiments have also become the norm among leading advocates of human rights and democracy in the region. In the words of Chandra Muzaffar, president on the Movement for a Just World, one of the leading NGOs in Malaysia, Washington’s relief efforts may well come to naught, for “we have now reached a point where there is widespread antipathy towards Washington amongst Malaysian Muslims.”
As for the Acehnese themselves, they have their own doubts and suspicions about the role and agenda of the US and its Western allies in Aceh. Why, they ask, are the Americans there now, to hand out aid, shelter and medical supplies? Why were they absent when the province of Aceh was caught in a civil conflict with Jakarta and the Indonesian army; when thousands of Acehnese were murdered and buried in secret mass graves in the jungle; and when the social infrastructure of Aceh including its schools and colleges were being destroyed? The answer is obvious enough: For when the Aceh uprising was at its peak and the Indonesian army was at its most brutal in the province, it was Washington - under the leadership of successive US presidents from Gerald Ford to Ronald Reagan to Bill Clinton - who was the strongest supporter of the Indonesian regime itself.
(Dr. Farish A. Noor is a Malaysian Political Scientist and Human Rights Activist. He can be reached at korawa@hotmail.com)