After writing the result of the discussion in my class on FREEDOM WRITERS, in this article I will write what I like most from this movie.
Erin Gruwell is always the most conspicuous character. She really did her very best for her students although being a teacher at Wilson High School didn’t give her much money. Her own father, Steve Gruwell, who inspired her to treat others as well as she could, without looking at the different ethnic groups (from Steve’s involvement in the civil right movement), praised his daughter as a gifted person. I do appreciate her willingness to do two other part time jobs to make her earn more money where she used the money to provide facilities her students needed, especially books, and some other experiences they got from the trips they did out of town. The trips as well as the books opened her student’s awareness that there was a different kind of life beyond their own hard life. She opined that assigning her students to read DIARY OF ANNE FRANK would make them realize that they were not the only one to suffer from racial discrimination. Living a life as a gang member would even make their life more chaotic.
Among Erin’s students (I noted down eight of them, Eva, Marcus, Andre, Jamal, Cindy, Tito, Gloria, and Ben), I was very interested in Eva and Marcus. Eva easily attracted my attention since her life was portrayed at the very beginning of the movie. Her father raised her to believe in “Don’t go against your own people, your own blood.” Since she was a kid, she already got to know the racial ‘principle’ in America that the Latino people “are less than the white”. She grew up hating the white since the white cops imprisoned her father although her father was innocent.
Eva amazingly controlled herself well (to show that she was a very careful person, she didn’t easily like other people, moreover if they were white) while her classmates already showed their attraction toward Erin. Her disappointment when finding out that Anne Frank died was resulted from her big dream that Anne Frank, as the symbol of resistance, had to survive. She viewed herself as in the same shoes as Anne in the past. When Anne died, would she have to die too?
Eventually, Eva made a big change when she showed her courage by telling the truth in the court. She decided to do this by herself in spite of the fact that her parents as well as her Latino community asked her to protect Paco. This “seemingly small” step was expected to open people’s eyes to tell the truth so that they would do the same thing.
Marcus also stole my attention. His rebellious character came to an end in Erin’s way of teaching. Erin successfully made him realize that education would really make a big change in his life. Going back to his family’s house showed his seriousness to alter his way of life besides studying seriously.
My favorite scene in the movie is the discussion between Erin and Scott, her husband, before he left the house. When Scott asked her to choose between the class and him, Erin came to her realization that what she was looking for in her life was to make her life meaningful by helping her students get rid of their hard life as gang members where they would oftentimes get involved in racial tensions. Her dedication to her job gave her a much greater satisfaction as well as happiness than to dedicate her life to her husband. ‘Helping’ more people to live decently gave her life more senses than just ‘helping’ one person—her husband.
This reminded me of one character in T.S. Eliot’s play “The Cocktail Party”, Celia. Celia who didn’t find what she was looking for in her relationship with Edward realized that she wanted to dedicate her life to human beings, not just one person, Edward, who happened to be married to Lavinia. This awareness—that what she was pursuing in her life was to dedicate her life to God by taking care of human beings—made her decide to go on a missionary.
Happiness in someone’s life—especially in women’s lives—is not necessarily always related to marriage life. When some women find deep happiness in dedicating their life to their husband and children, some other women possibly find it in different ways. Erin chose her students because that was her call. Btw, luckily Erin didn’t live in Indonesia where women get praised as “true and honorable women” only via marriage, especially by dedicating their life to their husband. Erin would get ‘bitch’ label since she ignored her husband, and chose her students instead. People would say that Erin just cared for her own happiness.
Another part of the conversation between Erin and Scott that attracted me was as follow:
“Why can’t you stand by me, and be a part of it, the way a wife supports her husband?” asked Erin to Scott.
“Because I cannot be your wife,” answered Scott.
The above exchange has always been my favorite dialog in the movie. Scott—or patriarchal men in general—would feel impotent when realizing that his wife was more successful than they were. This also apparently would hurt men’s ego.
Scott had shown his disappointment when Erin had the second part time job at Mariott hotel during weekend. “You even didn’t ask me,” was his first complaint. His second complaint was, “Everyone knows you can do anything!” He showed his being inferior in front of his smart wife since he lost his spirit to pursue his architect degree.
In patriarchal culture, men are always welcome to work hard, they even will get appreciation from society as good husbands. However, when women do that, they will even get mockery and they will be considered to oppose their destiny to be domestic creature, because they don’t do household chores as they “are created”. So, instead of getting appreciation because she had dedicated her life for her “unfortunate” students, Erin would get disapproval from society.
To end this writing, I want to cite my own idea of being a feminist: women are free to choose what kind of life they want. I do appreciate Erin’s choice to make her life more meaningful by dedicating her life to her job and deserting her marriage life. In our life we often come to time when we have to make a choice. Erin has absolutely made the best choice, to help more people (her students) than just one spoiled man (her husband).
PT56 16.10 180508
-
Freedom Writers 2
@ Wednesday, May. 21, 2008 – 20:13:05
-
Freedom Writers 1
@ Wednesday, May. 21, 2008 – 20:04:46
On Saturday 17 May 2008 I invited my class to watch FREEDOM WRITERS. The class consisted of 15 students, 4 guys and 11 girls, and all of them are college students. Before watching the movie, I gave three questions to be discussed afterwards:
- Which character attracts you most? Why?
- Which scene in the movie attracts you most? Why?
- What do you think of the moral lesson conveyed by the movie?
In short, Freedom Writers portrays the struggle of the new teacher, Erin Gruwell, to make her students—that mostly have been involved in gang life, violence, killing, drugs, etc—realize that education is the most important aspect in their life if they want to make a change to their lives.
For the first question, 8 students chose Marcus to be the most attractive character. They had a similar reason for that: they considered Marcus the most successful to make a change in his life. He left his family to get involved in street life as gang member because he thought it was the only way to show ‘tolerance’ to other African American people who had always been marginalized. In one long discussion/debate between Erin and the class (spurred by one student’s cartoon to ridicule Black people), one can find out how Marcus viewed his life: he felt like a hero when he showed tolerance to the sufferings of other African American people who happened to live on the street. He opined that if he got killed in a racial discrimination, he would get respect from his ‘community’. “We live in a war everyday,” he said to Erin. However, after he got enlightened by Erin, he realized that living on the street by joining gang life to survive was not right. Therefore he decided to come home and show his family that he changed. He proved that by studying seriously and graduating from high school.
Meanwhile 6 students chose Eva Benita as someone who made a great change in her life. Eva was raised by a father who believed that the white always marginalized the other ethnic groups. No wonder if Eva hated Erin who happened to be white. However, eventually Eva realized that not all white people were like what her father described. Erin who introduced the students to the Holocaust disaster—as an analogy to the kind of life her students had—successfully made Eva break what her father always taught her, “Don’t go against your own people!” In the court, Eva told the judge the truth about one accident where she was the crime witness. Although Eva had to risk being hated by her own father and Latino community, Eva daringly did what she thought it was the right thing to do. She must have been inspired by what Mip Gies did, the woman who help hide Anne Frank during the Holocaust.
One student chose Ben Samuel, the only white student in Erin’s class. Outside the classroom, the white were the majority while inside the class, Ben was the minority. If at the very beginning Ben showed his restlessness to be in that class, felt very insecure among the Cambodian, Latino and Black students, eventually Ben stayed put in the class and behaved like one member of a big family consisting of various ethnic groups comfortably.
To discuss the three questions, I divided the class into four groups. For the second question, the first groups chose a scene when Erin did ‘line game’. She put a red line in the middle of the classroom. Afterwards, she asked some questions to her students. If the question applied to the students’ interest (or if the students answered ‘Yes’ to her Erin’s questions), the students were to stand close to the red line. The essence of the ‘game’ was that Erin wanted to make her students realize that they were all undergoing similar lives. When they had similar experiences in life, they were supposed to have one strong emotional tie among themselves and not to hate the other ethnic groups. Erin was successful to make her students aware that they did not need to show hostility to the others because in fact they faced the same problem. While for Ben, the only white in the class, Erin wanted to make him view life from other ethnic groups’ perspective—who happened to be the minority groups in America.
The second group chose a long debate—spurred by Tito’s cartoon on Black people, especially to ridicule Jamal—between Erin and her students. This debate made Erin know more what kind of problems her students faced. This also inspired her to broaden her students’ horizon that happened to know nothing about anything else but their own life. This resulted in Erin’s bigger dedication to her job. She did two other part time jobs to get more money to buy books for her students, also to take them on trips: to visit museums, to have dinner with ex Holocaust victims, etc. This “impractical” way of teaching of Erin’s proved to work well.
The third group chose the scene when Erin read her students’ journals. This made Erin realize how difficult her students’ lives were. That’s why they had bad behavior and didn’t pay serious attention to their studies. Writing to let go off their restlessness and anxiety seemed to help them release tensions in their daily life. Moreover at the same time their writings let the world know their sufferings. To know this would make people give sympathy.
The last group chose the scene when Erin started the first day in the sophomore year by having ‘a toast for change’ session. After making it till the end of their freshman year, the students were expected to have a new perspective in viewing their study. Erin was also successful to make her students feel like they were in one big family in a ‘warm home’ in their classroom, Room 203.
For the third question, the four groups agreed that the movie conveyed “No more racial discrimination, please!” It will be very lovely if, despite difference in ethnic groups, languages, customs (plus religions), people live together hand in hand peacefully as well as respect one another.
PT56 14.35 180508 -
On Kartini Day 2008
@ Wednesday, May. 21, 2008 – 20:01:39
On Kartini Day, 21 April 2008, I was invited as one resource person in one local television of Semarang. The theme was talking about Kartini, as a woman who was popularly known as the ‘triggerer’ of women emancipation movement. The other two resource persons were Fitriyah, the leader of KPU (The Commission for General Election) of Central Java, and Nuki, one public relation officer of one hotel located at the heart of Semarang, Simpang Lima. The hostess was Ayu, one employee of the local television.
To tell you the truth, before the program started, I didn’t have any idea what questions would be asked to me. When reading the invitation letter, I found the main theme of the program was “the application of gender mainstreaming in our society”. For that, I equipped myself by reading JURNAL PEREMPUAN number 50 with the main topic PENGARUSUTAMAAN GENDER (gender mainstreaming). For sure, I didn’t want to disappoint my fellow feminist allies. It didn’t mention about Kartini day, women emancipation, etc, that probably (so I thought) was already a bit out of date. Now it is the time to apply gender mainstreaming in all aspects of our lives! It is time for the REAL ACTION! ‘Women emancipation’ has been a quite hot issue in Indonesia for many decades but we still can find many unfair policies for women.
However, when the four of us were in the studio, waiting for the time to be aired, Ayu told me that she would ask some questions related to feminism; for example, how many kinds of feminisms, etc. I am of opinion that kinds of feminisms are not important to really improve women’s lives in Indonesia.
After introducing the three special guests to the viewers, Ayu asked Fitriyah what she was thinking about Kartini and the relationship between her struggle and women’s betterment in life in recent decades. One very important thing was mentioned by Fitriyah: “Kartini struggled to improve women’s lives. It is time for women to have rights to make decisions, to make choices in their own lives. They are not always to listen to what their father or brother or husband asks them to do.”
“Making a choice for themselves” is one thing I always underline in my blogs.
When Ayu asked my opinion, I said, “What Kartini struggled for her fellow women citizen was to get education. Being educated is very important so that women are considered ‘able’. Related to what Ibu Fitriyah said before, I completely agree that women must have rights to make choices and decisions for themselves. In the past, women were not believed to be able to make their own choices probably because they were not equipped with what people needed to have to make choices: knowledge and education. With much bigger chances to pursue as high education as possible, it is time for women to ‘enjoy’ their independence to make choices and decisions.”
The question for Nuki was a bit different. Ayu related this issue to Nuki’s job as a public relation officer in one hotel. “Does working in a hotel (which was traditionally stereotyped as having a bad environment for ‘good women’) make Nuki feel at ease in her surrounding?” Nuki said even the first disagreement she got from her parents. But it happened when the first time she started working. After some time, they believed that Nuki could face the environment. Besides, she said people would recognize kinds of people from their appearance. So far, she never got a serious problem (read sexual abuse).
The following question for Fitriyah was related to her main job as the chief of KPU. “Why, among five pairs of governor and the vice governor, is there only one woman? And she is only as the candidate of the vice governor, not as the governor?”
Fitriyah related this question to the affirmative action for women to be involved as legislative members. Each political party is expected to include women as their representatives until 30%. However, in the election for a leader of one region, (mayors for cities, regents for regencies, governors for provinces, and presidents for the country), there is no regulation to fulfill the 30% number. Political parties are free to choose their own candidates regardless sex. Therefore, Fitriyah thought that it was a good idea that in the next general election, Indonesia will give more chances to women to be chosen by political parties to go to the leader election.
The following question for me was not related to the question for Fitriyah. Ayu asked me about feminism, whether feminism was triggered by emancipation movement. I cited the woman movement in the middle of the nineteenth century America as the main real action by women to equalize their position in society. The nineteenth century American women struggled to get suffrage that they believed would give them equal feeling to their fellow male citizens. This meant ‘emancipation’. The term ‘feminism’ itself was coined in the last decade of the nineteenth century to refer to this woman movement.
“Well, we know many kinds of feminist movement, such as radical, liberal feminist movement, etc, don’t you think that they are really not ‘Indonesian’? Ayu went on asking me.
I said that we must admit that feminist movement was ‘born’ in the western countries, radical as well as liberal (and some other kinds) feminisms represented western women. I agreed if people said that these two feminisms were not really the representatives of Indonesian women.
“There are more other kinds of feminisms though that can represent Indonesian women. For example, multicultural feminism.” I responded further.
This made Ayu go on with the following question about women who want to ‘enjoy’ the equal roles but they also want to be treated ‘special’, such as in the workplace. As an example, Ayu mentioned about right for women to be off several days from the workplace due to menstruation. Fitriyah wisely said that biologically women were different from men. Women who get menstruation every month are to be treated differently from men who don’t get menstruation.
I added that the equal treatment to women was not supposed to be related to that biological difference. As an example I mentioned the income tax for women that generally is bigger than men. A woman—no matter whether she is single or married and having kids—is always regarded single. This makes the taxed income bigger. A married woman who has one child must pay bigger tax than a married man who has one child. (With one note: this man and woman have the same position and the same length time to work in the same company.)
I also said if the special treatment for women to get several days off due to menstruation made men envy, this was really wrong. Women were created having womb and vagina that made them get menstruation monthly. Men were not. How could they envy this? Why should they envy this?
My answer in fact invited two viewers to make a phone calls to ask. The first question was about the regulation that gives women right to be off from the workplace due to menstruation because in her company, there is not such a thing. Even pregnant women don’t have enough days off when delivering their babies. Unfortunately, I was not equipped by the law and regulation about this so I could not give a satisfying answer. However, if there were not such law and regulation yet, I proposed it to be made as soon as possible. (Fitriyah whispered to me quickly that the law and regulation was still being made.)
The second questioner asked my opinion about a career woman who neglected her household chores as well as the husband and children. She even said, “This emancipation movement has made women become too independent so that they forgot their ‘destiny’ to be born as women.” To answer it, I related to the question asked by Ayu about a highly-educated woman who chose to be a housewife.
“As long as the decision to be a housewife is made by the woman herself, it is okay. So, it is not a force from the husband who selfishly wants his wife to be at home only. However, when a woman chooses to have a career outside the house, the husband must support her. And this support is also included to give a hand in doing household chores, plus taking care of the children. There must not be an accusation for this woman to neglect the husband and the children. There must be a compromise between the husband and wife on this.” This was my answer.
Further, Ayu asked Nuki whether her workplace—one three-star-rated hotel—gave enough ‘protection’ to women employees there. Nuki answered that her boss was very supportive. She mentioned one incident when there was a sexual abuse done by one male employee to another female employee; the boss directly laid off the male employee so that the atmosphere became conducive again.
This is really interesting to me since mostly I heard or read articles somewhere about contradictory things. The way patriarchal society accuses women as temptress is still strong, in my opinion. The pornography bill proves this. (Check my article on this pornography bill in my blog at http://afeministblog.blogspot.com) One example: in many rape cases, the victims were even accused as the ones who “tempted” or “encouraged” the rapist to do the rape, such as from the way the victims got dressed, or talked or behaved.
Btw, this led Ayu to the following question to me, a question which was very immature and sexist, in my opinion. She mentioned about women’s want to be considered equal with men but they still want to get special treatment. For example when there was an accident in a ship—let’ say a ship is sinking—the order to the ship crew was: “Save women and children, first!” why women? If they were equal with men, there were not supposed to be such ‘unfair’ treatment to men.
“No matter what,” I responded, “when talking about physical power, everybody must agree that men are stronger than women. Men are expected to have enough power to swim to the seashore. Therefore women—who don’t have such a strength—must be saved first, together with children.” Again, I mentioned when men envy what women are supposed to get—let’s say several days off at the office due to menstruation—this was really illogical. When men—who generally have bigger body and power—envy women who get saved first in a sinking ship accident, how do you call such men?
Ayu’s another question about which kind of feminist ideology was suitable to be applied in Indonesia, I refused to mention one kind of feminist ideology. (Just like in one article I wrote some time ago in my blog at http://afeministblog.blogspot.com , I refused to include myself as the follower which feminist ideology.) Kinds of feminist ideologies are not important. The main core to apply the movement to equalize women to men is giving women rights to make their own choice and decision in their life.
The last question from Ayu to end the program was what Fitriyah, Nuki, and I expected in the future, in the name of the betterment for women’s lives. I expected that gender mainstreaming is really applied in all aspects in our lives. To do so, we have to make sure that all country decision makers understand what gender mainstreaming is, issue policies that support the betterment for women—that eventually will also be good for men. Fitriyah mentioned the importance of educating children in families about no stereotyping of gender roles. (FYI, Fitriyah as the chief of General Election Commission is very busy outside the home. Nearing the gubernatorial election in Central Java next June 22, she must be bloody busy outside the home.) This will create younger generations who do not think, “Father goes to the office, mother goes to the market” anymore.
Nuki made me disappointed by saying, “Women must be given as broad opportunity as possible to show their capabilities without forgetting their ‘destiny’ as women.”
Luckily she said so by the end of the program. I didn’t have time to ‘explain’ or ‘lecture’ the misconception of ‘women’s destiny’ as domestic creatures—“the angel of the house” this was how women movement activists in the nineteenth century America cynically chose the term. I knew exactly this was what Nuki thought about “without forgetting their destiny as women”.
P.S.: The article is especially written for
1. Radit, the producer of the program who has invited me. I wrote this article several weeks after the occasion (I was so damn lazy to do it soon. LOL.) Therefore, I already forgot some things discussed in the program. I didn’t have any note on it. I just wrote what I still keep in my mind well till now.
2. Ibu Fitriyah, how proud I am to be together with Ibu in this special occasion. I will be happy if in the future Radit will make us meet again in the next special occasion. Huehehehe …
3. Nuki, I assume that we need to talk a lot about what is created and constructed in our life. You are just still too young and do not get enough exposure to be with ‘women activists’ like me.
4. Ayu. In fact I am wondering who made those questions you had in your list? From you? Who else was involved in ‘creating’ some questions that made me easily see that this particular person didn’t know a lot about feminist movement?
5. The makeup artist. LOL. I mean the one who made me look more ‘eligible’ to be shot by camera. Angie said, “Mama looks odd!” hahahaha …
6. The other crew who welcomed me warmly.
PT56 15.44 010508
