COMMENT: They say you can find anything for sale on the Internet these days, and apparently you can.
How would you like to be married to a pair of beautiful fraternal twins? That is if you are someone with RM4 million to spare. Well, apparently you can if one of the latest postings on Facebook is true.
There is a picture being spread on social media, supposedly of a 24-year-old pair of twins born two hours apart, looking for a rich suitor to take them both as wives at the same time.
“Both are willing to share the love (of a husband) as we do not want to be parted,” read the posting. The girls also added they are looking for a husband who is fair and with the means to care for both of them.
Of course the clincher is that the dowry they are demanding is a hefty of RM4 million.
It should be noted that theantdaily has been unable to verify the authenticity of this posting or trace the profile of the supposed twins.
But the matter reopens the debate of women being accused of “gold diggers” who use their beauty to snare potential wealthy husbands and alleged cases of beauties on sale to the right bidders.
Though such cases don’t mirror tales of human trafficking, where parents sell their daughters into marriage or worse the flesh trade, they do spark remembrance of beautiful artistes who marry into royalty or wealthy families, at times also termed “gold diggers”.
But this social media tale seems to make it look like it has become sundry for young ladies to aspire to such.
There are several things wrong with the supposed twins on offer. Firstly as both appear to be Malay Muslims, there is the question that a Muslim husband cannot be married to two sisters at once.
Per Islamic teachings, a Muslim man can marry his sister-in-law, but only after divorcing the sister who is currently his wife. But never two sisters at the same time.
Then again they could be East Malaysians or other races with Malay sounding names, which would preclude religious sanction to such a marriage, if their religion does not prohibit it.
Which brings us to the second issue — the RM4 million dowry demanded which makes it looks as if the beauties are selling themselves to whatever rich person out there.
It is worrisome, not only in the moral and religious sense, but for bachelors like me who do not have millions in my pocket, if looking for a wife will require such a price.
Former technician Juraimi Kamaludin, who spat at two women at Woodlands bus interchange last October, was convicted of five charges on Wednesday, March 19, 2014 after a three-day trial. — ST PHOTO: WONG KWAI CHOW
The man who spat at two women at Woodlands bus interchange last October was convicted of five charges on Wednesday after a three-day trial.
Cleaner Juraimi Kamaludin, 48, was found guilty of being a public nuisance; spitting at customer service officer Teoh Lay Peng, 41, once and pushing her out of the front door of SMRT service 950; two counts of spitting at secretary Lee Kuan Eng, 34, for a total of six times last October.
Juraimi, who has criminal records for mainly theft and drug-related offences, will be sentenced on Friday. Deputy Public Prosecutor Francis Zhang Zeyi had sought a total jail term of four months and two weeks for four of the charges, plus the maximum fine of $1,000 for the public nuisance charge.
On Wednesday, District Judge Lim Keng Yeow rejected Juraimi’s defence that he did not push Ms Teoh and that she had run down the bus on her own.
Yunalis Mat Zara’ai, Malaysian singer, songwriter and businesswoman known professionally as Yuna. She tweets @yunamusic
INTERVIEW HIGHLIGHTS WITH TALENTED MALAYSIAN SINGER YUNA.
On getting attention for her headscarves
Yuna and Lincoln Jesser are pictured at the Here & Now studios (click to enlarge). (Jesse Costa/Here & Now)
“Even in Malaysia it was a little bit of a new thing. We have Malay Muslim girls who were performers, they were artists. But for me, I was the first one who covered up and, you know, I just wanted to be myself. I didn’t want to change for the industry or anything like that.”
“Seven, eight years ago, I was approached by a recording label. But this was in Malaysia, so they were telling me like it would be a little bit difficult for me if I were to be wearing the hijab, so that was kind of why I didn’t go through labels. Instead, I started my own company and I recorded myself, you know, like produced my own albums and stuff like that.”
On who she’s singing to
“I see myself as a storyteller so sometimes I feel like I’m writing to an audience. But at the same time, sometimes I feel like I’m writing to just one person, if it’s like based on my personal experience. But yeah, I mean, I get my inspiration from a lot of different things. For example, like if I talk to a friend and, you know like if she’s going through a bad relationship and stuff like that, you know that’s something that would — like oh okay maybe I will sing about this, I feel like a lot of people can relate to this.”
On how religion figures into her music
Here & Now host Jeremy Hobson (center) is pictured with Yuna and Lincoln Jesser. (Here & Now)
“It plays a huge part. Obviously, you know, it is what it is. I’m a Malaysian Muslim, I grew up practicing Islam and there’s a focus there to just make music for a greater good. You know what I mean? Like I don’t sing about dancing in clubs and stuff like that. I feel like I have a little bit of a responsibility, and just making music to make people feel good about themselves. And you know, I just want to spread this positive energy and I think, even though we’re all different, in music there’s no — it’s borderless, you know? And I feel that’s a way for me to reach out to people who are not like me but they could relate to my songs.”
On people calling her song “Rescue” a feminist anthem
“I find it really weird because I don’t consider myself a feminist. And I don’t see how that song is a feminist anthem. It’s just a song I wrote about all the strong women I know in my life. For example, my mom and my friends back home in Malaysia. They’ve gone through so much and they’re so strong. And my mom, she’s a really strong individual, emotionally and physically and spiritually, and she’s always out there, looking out for me. I guess I just wanted to celebrate that strength.”
The Nahdatul Ulama and Muhamadiyah organisations will probably remain on their paths as modernist Muslim movements that address the challenges of modern Indonesia.
INDONESIAN POLLS: Can the state forestall the proliferation of new radical groups that chip at the country’s plural and democratic culture?
AS Indonesia heads to the polls next month, a range of political actors and parties have come to the fore to defend the country’s image and standing internationally, and to emphasise yet again the pressing need for Indonesia to defend its tolerant culture and beliefs.
More than a decade ago, it was feared that Indonesia would have been swept towards a rising tide of exclusive communitarian thinking that seemed poised to spread across that vast country.
Groups like the Laskar Jihad were waging what they regarded as a holy war against infidels, and Indonesia was hard-pressed to defend its reputation as a bastion of moderate Islamic thought and praxis.
Yet, despite the fears of many, Indonesia has been able to maintain its own cultural-historical course, and it remains a country where normative religiosity has not been overwhelmed by the culture of violence.
This is largely due to the important role played by the country’s mainstream Muslim organisations, notably the Nahdatul Ulama (NU) and the Muhamadiyah.
Today, as we watch the election campaign intensify, it is interesting to note how groups like the NU and Muhama-diyah remain steadfast in their stand against all forms of religious communitarianism and intolerance.
Take for instance the party-political TV ad for the Partai Kebangkitan Bangsa (PKB, National Awakening Party), which is the party-political offshoot of the NU.
The PKB’s ad features prominent leaders of the party reminding the viewers that Indonesia is not “like other Muslim countries”, and that Indonesian Islam has evolved along its own trajectory and has its own local character.
This is in keeping with the position taken by successive generations of the NU’s leadership, who have argued tirelessly that Southeast Asian Islam has to adapt to the realities of pluralism and diversity that is the norm in our part of the world.
It reminds us of the slogan coined by the late leader of the NU, Abdurrahman Wahid, who spoke of Indonesian Islam as being warna-warni: complex and with many hues. Today, that legacy of pluralism and diversity is being defended still by the NU and its party, the PKB.
The same can be said of the Muhamadiyah, that has been a reformist Islamic movement from the outset, and which has laid great emphasis on modern education, the sciences and a pragmatic approach to dealing with the question of diversity in culture and society.
Both the NU and Muhamadiyah have created a vast network of think tanks, publishing houses, intellectual and activist circles, etc. to consolidate their hold on the country’s Muslims and to disseminate ideas related to their vision of a modern, dynamic Islam.
Via bodies such as the LKiS research unit and publishing house and circles like the Jaringan Islam Muda Muhamadiyah (JIMM), the two mass movements have been defending Indonesian pluralism and diversity for decades.
But Indonesia today is a very different country than what it was two decades ago, and gone are the days where the NU and Muhamadiyah could propagate their brand of religious and philosophical thinking without being challenged.
In short, their view is no longer hegemonic and pervasive as it once was, and the reason for this lies in the erosion of state power as well as the opening up of public domains.
Since 1998, the once-invincible Indonesian state, that was centralised with power in the hands of the political-military elite, has been challenged by new political actors and agents across the country. The demand for more decentralisation of power has led to the emergence of competing power-bases and sites of discussion, and also opened the way for the rise of many smaller, yet vocal and demanding Islamist groups across the country.
Today, Indonesia’s Islamic arena is still dominated by the NU and Muhamadiyah, but it is being contested by groups as diverse as the Front Pembela Islam (FPI), the Hizb’ut Tahrir Indonesia (HTI) and even quasi-state bodies like the Majlis Ulama Indonesia (MUI) that has been busy issuing judgments on things as diverse as yoga and Facebook. As these new actors and agents enter the contested discursive arena, new debates are emerging and new concerns being raised.
Here lies the concern of many Indonesia watchers who wish to see Indonesia remain a peaceful and diverse country, for these new groups present a different, if somewhat homogenous and monolithic vision of what Indonesia should be.
Though they are small in number, their reach is greater thanks to the manner in which they have managed to capture the imagination of the young, poor, disenfranchised and the media. It is worrisome indeed when small groups of hardliners are given so much attention in the media, and when it is clear that such radical clusters have learned the art of media manipulation themselves. Over the past few years, these are the groups that have captured the headlines for their attacks on intellectuals, minorities and even other schools of Muslim thought.
As long as the public arena remains an open one where any new actor can enter and enunciate a different — sometimes provocative — stand on issues, groups like these will continue to thrive. The NU and Muhamadiyah may be able to command the loyalty and support of more than 70 million Indonesians, but it has to be remembered that in predominantly Muslim Indonesia today, there are around 200 million Muslim minds to win over.
So the question arises: Can Indonesia retain its reputation as the bastion of Muslim tolerance, pluralism and diversity?
The answer lies as much in mathematics as it does in ethics, for in the final analysis it is numbers that count. The NU and Muhamadiyah can, and probably, will remain on their appointed paths as modernist Muslim movements that address the challenges of modern Indonesia.
But if the state does not prevent or forestall the proliferation of the new radical groups that continue to chip at the country’s plural and democratic culture, this bastion, too, might fall in the future.
With these factors in mind, the coming elections in Indonesia will serve as a useful barometer of public sentiment and Muslim sensibilities, and so once again, I state the obvious: Indonesia’s coming elections are important not only for that country, but for the region and the Muslim world as well.
