Biology and woman's destiny

Dyna Rochmyaningsih ,  Tangerang ,  Banten   |  Sun, 11/01/2009 11:45 AM  |  Opinion

Is biology a woman's destiny? This is a question that is so embedded in women's lives. It remains, wandering around, free-floating, and sometimes frustrating women, especially for those who are at a crossroads in their lives - when you have to choose between having a happy family or a high-flying career.

Does biology (childbearing and nurturing) determine the life of every woman?

This big question is represented in the form of other questions such as: Am I destined to have a family? Should I get married? Do I have to quit my job for my child?

Those questions keeps on boggling the mind of many women especially, I can say, most women in the region where the idea of feminism - Western-originated - mixes with traditional beliefs and wisdom. To put it simply, the mind of this majority is stuck between the mind of Luthfiana Ulfa - a 12-year-old girl who voluntarily married Syech Puji - and the mind of the thirtysomething feminist who writes for a "single-minded" life.

In my view, Ulfah is likely to answer "Yes", while the feminist is very likely to say "No". In the meantime, the majority of Indonesian women - especially those who are well-educated (with at least a bachelor's) - is likely to say "Well.ummmh". Very indecisive.

This question was first officially posed by Evelyn Reed (1971) - a scientist and feminist - who wrote a book entitled Is Biology Woman's Destiny?, the big question itself.

The book was specifically on the counter-arguments for the pseudo-scientific perspective of woman in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

The book convinced us that "the uterus and woman's stupidity" and "the hunting theory and female inferiority" are myths, not science.

It also said in the book that females in nature suffered no such disabilities, unlike what had been believed at that time. This idea supported the feminist movement until they succeeded in placing women in strategic positions in government, politics, economy, and education in this 21st century.

Women are equal to men. Now, we can see many women becoming good politicians, brilliant scientists and great CEOs.

Not to mention, a few months ago Newsweek reported that women's leadership may be a very important factor in alleviating the financial crisis we are now facing.

But these facts do not help us much in answering the big question. The context of "biology" which was answered by Evelyn Reed is about scientific facts on women's natural capability.

It was about how women are equal to men. But it was not about the most important biological feature of women: childbearing and nurturing.

In my view, this question still remains hanging, and this suspended question allows the idea of feminism - which is based on women's natural capability - mixed with the local and traditional wisdoms, to lead to the indecisiveness of most women.

The question itself consists of two terms which are not simple; biology and destiny. The term biology is scientific. It consists of the factual attributions of women's bodies (their biological nature). Women have their own hormonal and reproductive system which is unique to them.

While the term destiny is philosophical and psychological. It relates to the freedom to make important life decisions, including the decision to get married at the age of 12 or 33.

Biology is determined by nature while destiny is determined by education and local wisdom.

Both terms come into conflict in the minds of most well-educated women in Indonesia. And this conflict often causes confusion. It must be great for those women who can have brilliant career outside their home and a warm and happy family inside.

Many career-mothers leave their infants with their babysitters or their grandmothers, leaving the babies without their assistance. The infants seldom see their mothers. This is not good for mother-infant bonding.

The indecisiveness pertaining to this question is not good for women's lives. So I am suggesting that every woman must make her decision before her mid 20s.

Now, I personally would answer "Yes" to this question. However intelligent a woman is, she cannot get away from her body. Even if she has achieved everything she wants in her life, she cannot stop her menstruation cycle.

The hormones in her body keep on circulating in her blood. And this dynamic hormonal system will shape her motherhood. Biology is her destiny. Women are equal to men in intellectual ability, but they are destined to do the childbearing and nurturing.

The author is a science writer.

Comments (5)  |   Post comment
A  |   A  |   A  |   Mail to a friend  |  Printer Friendly Version |  Digg it!  |  Add to Del.icio.us!  |  Add to Reddit!  |  Stumble it!   |  Share on facebook  

Dynablossoms (not verified), tangerang — Tue, 11/10/2009 - 7:55pm

Hi all, Thanks for your comments,, But it's important for me to note that I used ulfah as an extreme outlier of my thought experiment. Perhaps you all thought that I support the her marriage, even though I didn't say it at all. I don't think that being a housewife means getting back to the Dark Ages. It is ultimate that you can not get out of your body. I agree with feminism in term of its struggle of human rights but I disagree wuth it in term of the change of our natural tendency which consequently lead to species extinction. as for shival, technology possibly help you solve the problem, but you have to throw your ethical concern. -dyna

Katharina Sri (former: Noor Aza) (not verified), Germany — Sat, 11/07/2009 - 6:02pm

The author does not seem to understand what feminism really means. Equality that feminists are fighting for, are within the human rights context. Of course, within the biological sense, men and women will never be equal - God has construct our physical being as differently (talking as a faith-believer) but within rights contexts, men and women are equal in every sense; and even in the bible, that has been stressed over and over gain; if one is wise enough to read it rationally and with conscience. Thus, I think it's very misleading to bring in the argument about the young underage girl, where within modern era, her circumstance should be defined under sexual crime as within human rights context. Thus, to justify such crime under biology, as if natural, is doing many young girls and boys, who are being sexually violated, a great injustice that has no more place in progressive modernity. We are talking about human rights here; not some sexist Dark Age customs that still need to be continued as if normal and which is denying such human rights of women/girls! And that's what also feminism is struggling again very fundamentally - to de-normalize and de-mythologize such primitive and sexist injustice, justified using the 'biology' of women/girls!

Marta (not verified), Bydgoszcz, Poland — Wed, 11/04/2009 - 9:22pm

Although I understand the importance of the issue questioned here, like Nazmiyah, I am appalled by the example of the 12-year old child quoted here. As a person born and brought up in Eastern Europe, the last enclave of Catholicism, I may have quite an interesting view on the subject. In Poland, like in all western countries, having sex with a child who is less than 15 years old is considered a severe crime, punished by prison and regarded as paedophilia. A 12-year old girl is a child who should go to school and learn and cannot be responsible for one's decisions. As far as motherhood and bringing up a child is concerned, I agree with Nazmiyah, that the mother is not the only parent, so the father of the child should share the responsibility and participate in bringing up the child. In Poland women get married quickly, usually until they are 25. Usually, they have just finished school/university and are staring their carriers. 1-2 year break in the carrier to nurtur the child is normal here, but when the child goes to the kindergarten, the mum goes back straight to work. I was myself brought up by my dad, who learnt to take care of me and to cook and to play and to comb my hair and to make breakfast and to accompany me to school. He was the best dad I could imagine and I'm sure that every girl would like to have such a father. So there is really no difference which one of the parents will take care of the child. I am the best example. Kind regards, Marta (from Poland)

Shivali (not verified), gujarat,india — Tue, 11/03/2009 - 2:49am

ya,i totally agree to your point. being a small girl i was very happy to be a girl as girls are mature,patient,sweet,beautiful but when i grow up things didnt remain the same.i envy boys whenever i see them playing, living life in carefree manner &we girls suffering from pain due to menstrual cyle. child bearing,nurturing is still tolerable BUT WHY SUFFERING EVERY MONTH THIS MENSTRUAL CYCLE. AND WHEN MENO-PAUSE OCCURS AGAIN I SEE WOMEN SUFFERING FROM VARIOUS HEALTH AILMENTS. CAN'T SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY DEVELOP SOME MEDICINE??????SOME TECHNIQUE?????A VACCINE?????OR SOMETHING???? LIKE WE HAVE VACCINE FOR POLIO,CHICKEN BOX etc OR LIKE WE HAVE CONTRACEPTIVE PILLS, SO THAT WE GIRLS DONT HAVE TO SUFFER MENSES EVERY MONTH.. I AM INTERESTED IN SUCH RESEARCH WORK.....IF GIVEN A CHANCE I WILL DEFINATELY WORK ON THIS.IT'S MY DREAM WHICH I WANT TO MAKE TRUE BUT HOW???? WOMEN UPLIFTMENT,WOMAN'S DAY,WOMAN-CREATOR OF WORLD,RESPECT WOMEN ALL THESE R JUST STATEMENTS GIVEN BY OUR SOCIETY.............BUT D TRUTH IS WE MAY COMPETE MEN INTELLECTUALLY BUT WE ARE LACKING PHYSICAL POWER!!! BEING A WOMAN MYSELF I DONT FEEL SHAME IN SAYING THAT I AM NOT COMPLETELY STRONGER THAN MEN BECAUSE I THINK WE ALL SHOULD FACE THIS TRUTH. I WILL ALSO SAY WOMEN INSPITE OF SUFFERING FROM THESE WEAKNESSES ACHIEVE THEIR GOALS WITH WILL POWER ..........IF MEN WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE MENSES,CHILD BEARING,NURTURING........THEN I DONT THINK THAT THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL!!!!!!!!! WHY WE?????????THIS IS MY ONLY QUESTION TO GOD,NATURE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NO LIVING CREATURE'S ANSWER CAN SATISFY MY MIND & SOUL............................................. ................................................... ....................................................... IF THERE IS ANY RESEARCH WORK, OR ANY ONE INTERESTED TO DO SOMETHING IN THIS FIELD PLEASE CONTACT ME........................................................ .......MY E-MAIL ID: shivali_omshanti@yahoo.co.in

Nazmiyah Sayuti (not verified), Depok — Sun, 11/01/2009 - 9:09pm

Biology and destiny is the old quest between proximate and ultimate answer. I share the authors' concerns on how women eventually reconcile this issue at least one in her life time. However, it is odd that the author raised an example of Ulfa, the 12-year old married to the old cleric. She justifies this further "While the term destiny is philosophical and psychological, it relates to the freedom to make important life decision, including the decisions to get married at the age of 12 or 33". Get married at the age of 12? My God, should she (or he) be finishing high school first, at least? The immediate concern is not about the importance of getting married, but giving our children the chance to grow, to learn, to work and to prepare for full adulthood. This concern is not only coming from the heads of "thirty-something feminist and women with bachelor degree" as the author put it, but also shared by every sensible parent, men or women. I would propose that in discussing this issue women should not leave it alone within ourselves. The most important biological feature of women should be perceived as the most important biological feature to men also. After all, no women can bear children without men, right? And men are bound to nurture the children within the commitment. Even I would go further to the extended family. In the history of mankind across cultures, grandmothers/grandfathers play important roles in child rearing. And so do other relatives or neighbors. Women do not raise the children alone or only relying on husbands. It takes a village, as the book said. However, the dynamics of ultra modern life in the city have changed this kind of structure, but this is another discussion. I just have to mention this to remind us, women, that we are not alone in childbearing and nurturing, and we should not make it so hard on ourselves. We should remember while discussing "biology and destiny" there is a proximate and ultimate horizon, as if we were biologically given, while we have to shape the ultimate destiny. The sufis say, our biological being is our prison, while our psychological make up and concept yearn to be free. Putting it another way, we put meaning to our biological being. In doing this we should manage in such a way, that biological men and women do fall into different, yet complimentary roles, in this case for childbearing and nurturing. The pair-bonding between men and women is one of the greatest human invention. Regards Nazmiyah Sayuti (speaking as a single parent)

What's On

more
more