Changing your name, in the name of language immersion

This is the first time I write about a reddit story which I didn’t obtain from Smosh videos.

It is written by a mother whose daughter refused to change her name for Spanish classes. Basically, her teachers changed their students’ names to the Hispanic versions, believing it helped the cultural immersion. One teacher respected her wish to not have hers changed. The other one refused to; she only started respect the wish after the mother got involved.

People both on Reddit and Facebook reacted negatively. They said the mother was being a bad mother who raised a culturally close-minded brat. For me, those people are the close-minded ones.

I am from Indonesia. I can speak Indonesian and English (unfortunately, I cannot speak any regional tongues). I started learning English from a young age, both in schools and private tutorships; I even had a few native speakers as my teachers.

Not once my teachers – including the foreign ones – told me to Anglicise my name. Not once they claimed my non-Anglophone name hindered the cultural immersion aspect of language learning. And yes, you can find many fluent English-speakers from all over the world who do not have Anglo names.

In this context, I cannot speak about Indonesian language without talking about Indonesian names.

As entertaining as those memes are, they perfectly describe how Indonesian names are a mishmash of different cultural and religious traditions.

What kind of names you have depend on your ethnic backgrounds (mind you, mixed lineages have been common for many decades), how “traditional” or “modern” you are and, of course, your religious backgrounds; if you are a Muslim, whether you are “traditionalist” or “modernist” is also a factor.* Not to mention there are parents who just make up new names.

Yes, the names on the first meme are of actual public figures… and yes, if you google Muhammad Wishnu, you will find quite a handful of men with such name.

Because of the seemingly unpredictable and categorically-imprecise nature of Indonesian names, there is no pressure for Indonesian speakers to embrace specific naming traditions. You are not seen as less Indonesian simply for having non-indigenous names.

Also because of that reason, I have yet to hear about foreigners being to forced to “Indonesianise” their names when learning our language. When they do get Indonesian names, they are endearing nicknames given by their local friends or adopted family.

In fact, one of the most prominent Indonesian-speaking Youtubers is Jang Hansol, a Korean national who grew up in Indonesia (and who is quite distinguishable for his Eastern Javanese accent). His Indonesian viewers have no problem calling him by his Korean birth name.

But, I also have to talk about the flip side. Even though Indonesians are generally accepting of different naming traditions, one minority group is a victim of a glaring and reprehensible exception: the Chinese-Indonesians.

Most of them do not have Chinese names, at least not in their official identifications. They were discouraged by Soeharto’s anti-Chinese regime from having Chinese names; they either use “indigenous” or western (mostly Anglo) names.

Some argue it is also caused by detachments from their ancestral heritage. There are indeed Chinese-Indonesians – especially ones in Java – who no longer speak any Chinese languages.

But, I doubt this is the main cause, considering there are Chinese-Indonesians who still speak the languages and yet, don’t have Chinese names in official identifications. Not to mention it was difficult to embrace your heritage when your government banned you from doing so publicly.

If you look at prominent Chinese-Indonesians with Chinese names, they were mostly born at least two decades before Soeharto’s regime.

I am very passionate about this reddit story because it reminds me of my own country, both of its bright and dark side. A country that can be both pluralistic and hateful at the same time.

I don’t know if there is a pressure in the Spanish-speaking world to “Hispanicise” our names. But, if it does exists, it is one of those cultural differences which I refuse to tolerate.

Not only it is bigoted, it also puts us in confining boxes, denying us of our own versatile and complex humanity.

No, I don’t think the teacher and negative commenters had bigoted intentions. But, their idea of cultural immersions is extremely shallow and misguided, they unwittingly coddle those closed and bigoted minds. Those fascist-wannabes would consider them allies.

Altering your names makes sense only when the other language has a different writing system.

.

.

*Regarding their religious identity, Indonesian Muslims use neither “traditionalist” or “modernist” as their preferred adjectives (I learned about them from Wikipedia); they simply identify as “Muslims”. When non-Islamist Muslims do use specific words, they identify as “moderates” and/or adherents of “Nusantara islam”.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

Refusing foods for the wrong reason

Pictured here dishes which are NOT Indian

I guess writing about Smosh’s Reddit videos has become a recurring thing for me.

This time, I am thinking of a particular AITA story about a woman who refused Indian foods and got called a racist for it. While many Smosh viewers don’t think she is one, they believe she is the asshole. But, a handful of people (they are more prominent in Smosh’s Facebook comment section) are on her side.

And those people are in the wrong. Let me elaborate.

Yes, the OP does explicitly say she cannot stand spicy foods and her Indian coworker has known that from the very beginning. But, most of her defenders are only focused on those two details and ignoring the rest.

First (and it is a detail even many of her detractors forget about), it was at her Indian coworker’s private dinner party. Unless there is a risk getting fired, why would you willingly attend it, knowing you cannot eat anything there? If networking is really important, why don’t you create your own party, where you have complete control of the feast?

Second, her coworker was actually fine about the rejections; it became a problem when she offered OP one particular dish, which she also refused. When explicitly told it was a dessert, the OP insisted it was spicy because it had reddish colour. She later found out the dessert was called Jalebi and, instead of reading the goddamn recipe, she still focused on its appearance, still convinced the non-spicy food was spicy.

And that’s the reason why she got flamed: shunning an entire cuisine because of a preconceived belief and clinging onto it even after proven wrong, acting like she knows everything about a cuisine she has little or no experiences with. It is not because she refused, it is because of the reason why.

I don’t know why people miss those two details. Maybe they ignore them intentionally, to feel good about their own food pickiness. Maybe they simply have poor listening comprehension (as Smosh always reads the reddit stories out loud and, apart from the reddit posts’ titles, it never shows the texts on the screen).

Some of the OP’s defenders do pay attention to the details. But, they don’t think the details are damning.

Some of them openly admit they are picky eaters themselves. I do agree we should never coerce anyone into eating anything; in fact, it can backfire, causing people to develop food trauma.

But, at the same time, I refuse to pretend pickiness is a good thing. I refuse to pretend having limited tastebuds is a strength and something to be proud of. I refuse to pretend having limited sources of nutrients and homogenous gut microbiome are good for our health in the long run.

A handful of people argue the OP may be autistic herself; I also notice something similar when Smosh read the reddit story about bringing ranch to a mom and pop eastern European restaurant…. and the OP – an American – dismisses the restaurant as not “normal” for not having ranch.

I am not diagnosed with autism (even though a handful believe I am autistic, simply on the basis that I am “too different” (their condescending tone when uttering the word “autistic” is very telling)) and I am certainly not an expert on it. But, using autism to excuse cultural close-mindedness doesn’t sit well with me.

And, of course, there are those stereotype believers, who insist stereotypes are reliable sources of facts and are not products of prejudices and overtly-simplistic thinking. When I reminded them the reddit story involves a dessert, one person said Asians/brown people have no one but ourselves to blame, as we love to brag about how spicy our foods are.

I told him he should had used his common sense, as we clearly referred to our savoury, non-dessert dishes. He doubled down, insisting that many, if not most, of our desserts are indeed spicy. He never provided evidences to back his claim up, he even never claimed about trying the foods himself. He just said it was dishonest to not believe his claim and he stopped making comments afterwards.

Do spicy desserts exist? Definitely. But, are all Asian/brown people desserts spicy? No, definitely not.

Like that person, I am not from India, and I know very little about Indian cuisine. But, also like that person, I also have a goddamn internet access.

Wikipedia has an article listing all the most well-known Indian sweets. Sugar syrup, milk and clarified butter are the recurring ingredients in many of them, not all of them use spices; when they do, they use cardamoms and saffron, ones which do not yield hot flavour in dishes. You can also google search them, read their recipes on other websites and I guarantee the ingredients are similar as the ones stated in Wikipedia.

When I googled “spicy Indian desserts”, the results were similar to ones shown in Wikipedia. When I googled “hot Indian desserts”, the search engine thought the word “hot” referred to the temperature, not flavour. In this case, even Google refused to affirm my hypothetical preconceived belief.

I also wonder if this problem is linguistic.

In the English language, the words spicy and hot are used interchangeably and it may have compelled monolingual English-speakers to mistake all spices as hot. I don’t know if it just another case of stereotyping or the English language being confusing. I believe it is both.

Personally, I believe the redditor is neither a racist nor a xenophobe. But, I do think she is close-minded, a proud bubble dweller who refuses to pop it when given the opportunity to.

And she will remain one, as long as people keep coddling her mindset.

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

You need to be consistent with the so-called “The Great Replacement”

You believe in the conspiracy “theory” in which there is an attempt to replace all white people AKA anyone of full European descents with non-white people, particularly non-white Muslims. You even dub it the white genocide.

No, white people are not on the brink extinction. Not only they are still the majority in Europe, their ancestral homeland, they are still very much present in other parts of the world. Australia, New Zealand and much of the Americas, especially North America. In fact, they still dominate the establishments in Australia, New Zealand and much of the Americas.

Unless there are evidences of white people all over the world being systematically massacred, displaced from their homelands, having their heritage sites regularly demolished and having their babies taken away from them and given to non-white families, there is no genocide. Your only evidence of the “white genocide” is the fact that non-white people are allowed to live and thrive in the west.

No, you are not concerned about being a victim of genocide. You are concerned about how whiteness is no longer seen as a strength and virtuous by default, how European-rooted cultures are no longer seen as the epitome of civilisations.

And that matters to you because you have spent your entire life believing your white European lineage – something which you have no control over – makes you an inherently superior being, because being white and European is your entire personality, because you are unable to see your non-white and/or non-European fellow human beings as fellow human beings.

It also shows how insecure you are. You love boasting about how mighty your western heritage is, how it is objectively the best in the entire history of mankind…. and yet, you also believe the mere existence of non-western cultures in the west is enough to threaten its existence.

So, which one is it, then? Is western heritage mighty or feeble? If it is mighty, then why can it be easily threatened by other heritages? Where is the mightiness you love hyping about it? I will come back to this later.

I also wonder, what’s wrong with being a minority, anyway? Surely, you don’t fear discrimination and bigotry considering you keep saying they don’t exist.

And that segues to what the title of this blogpost is referring to.

One thing I notice about some of you is your rejection of the racism accusation.

You insist you are not a proponent of white supremacy and your judgements of non-whites are not driven by hatred or any emotions; you believe you are just stating the objective facts.

….which is ridiculous in itself. If you are truly reasonable, you wouldn’t claim your judgment are 100% guaranteed objective, data-driven and not emotionally-driven, you wouldn’t claim you embody the perfect human. Because you try too hard to paint yourself as “rational”, you end up sounding the exact opposite.

And that so-called “rationality” of yours also extends to the genocide of indigenous people in the Americas and Australia, which you consider perfectly acceptable.

You claim it is not because you hate non-whites, but because it is just a matter of “survival of the fittest”. If the indigenous people lost their lands and heritage, then you believe they deserved it. You believe anyone deserve to be annihilated for being weak and what racial categories we belong to are irrelevant.

If that’s the case, then why are you opposed to the so-called white genocide?

Following your so-called “logic”, if the mere presence of non-whites in the west is more than enough to threaten the existence of white people, it proves that they fail they survival of the fittest test and it means they deserve to be “exterminated”.

Following your so-called “logic”, shouldn’t you accept that all genocides – including the ones against people like you – are a good thing? Why can’t you be consistent about this?

Rhetorical questions, obviously. You are just racist cunts.

I feel gross for typing those previous paragraphs because I don’t believe what I typed. I did so because I wanted to make a point.

Meanwhile, if you type the exact same words about certain “others”, you wouldn’t feel grossed out. In fact, I am certain it will excite you.

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

Enabling food pickiness

First, I do acknowledge that forcing children to eat food they hate will backfire. While I didn’t grow up with food pickiness, I certainly was forced to do things I hate (and no one made attempts to make those activities appealing) and I end up hating them.

I can imagine if parents are being too harsh with foods, their picky children can get even pickier. From the anecdotes I heard, the children can end up having food-related traumas.

But, just because forcefulness can be detrimental to children’s well-being (especially if they are neurodivergent), that does not mean you should allow them to be picky. Letting them be so can be detrimental as well.

Before I talk about the detriments, let me talk about acquired tastes.

Some people I have encountered online believe acquired tastes are actually bad because, if they are actually good, they don’t need to be acquired in the first place. But, here’s the thing: every taste is acquired.

Pizza is easy for you to like not because it is objectively tasty, but because you grew up eating bread and/or anything greasy and cheesy. Yes, if you grew up with neither, you would have a harder time enjoying pizza. And yes, believe it or not, many people in the world didn’t grow up eating cheese and bread.

You may think people who love durian are either freaks or tryhards. But, in some parts of Southeast Asia (including my home country Indonesia), nobody thinks of you for loving it; you are not special, both in derogatory and non-derogatory sense. It is considered a normal food, albeit not for daily consumption, for health and financial reasons.

Offal is still widely-consumed in many parts of the world. On a global stage, you cannot call yourself the “normal” ones for not consuming organs.

And that segues to the first detriment of pickiness: it traps you in a bubble.

Obviously, you can interact with people from different cultures without eating their foods. But, if you want to understand them on a deeper level, you need to try immersing yourself in their cultures; arguably, eating their dishes is the most effective way because sustenance is one of the basic human needs.

And yes, no matter how often you travel outside your home regions, you still can be stuck in a bubble. You can visit a culturally “foreign” place and fall for the tourist traps, without having to dip your toes in the authentic local cultures. Just because your body is well-travelled, that does not mean your mind is.

Of course, if you take pride in your narrow horizons, that argument may not work for you. But, I am certain some of you care about your health. Yes, food pickiness can also ruin your health.

Consuming a little variety of dishes means you consume a little variety of ingredients, which means you have very limited sources of nutrients. Even if those limited ingredients give you enough nutrients, your health is screwed when some or all of them suddenly become unavailable for whatever reasons.

If you consume highly-varied plant-based ingredients, including legumes and whole grains, and adequate amount of fermented foods, you will also foster the growth of good bacteria in your gut.

Not only they can maintain good bowel health, they can also boost good cholesterol level, control blood sugar and maintain the health of our neutral system.

Introducing certain ingredients to children at a very young age can also reduce the possibility of food allergies developing later in life. As an Indonesian, I was surprised to hear about peanut allergy; never mind the deadliness, I didn’t know peanut could be an allergen.

Unless you don’t care about health, you would be gravely concerned by the pickiness which afflict you and/or your loved ones.

Oh, and if your children have ADHD, you can find online sources which give you tips on overcoming their pickiness. Involve them in the food preparation (which gives them a sense of pride in their food) and make meal times fun and distraction-free.

While they are against forceful parenting, they also warn parents to not succumb to their children’s demands. Have plain water as the only drink in meal times and do not give them sugary treats as rewards for eating veggies, as they will always see them as revolting foods.

I also googled about whether parents should sneak veggies in their children’s foods; some sources say we should not overuse the trick, others say we shouldn’t do it at all. Not only children won’t learn how to appreciate the taste of veggies, they will also end up distrusting the foods you make. Again, it can backfire.

What’s my point here?

We shouldn’t be too harsh towards picky people as they are shaped by their health conditions and/or upbringing, none of which they ask for.

But, it is also obvious some people defend pickiness not because they care about children’s well-being, but because they want to justify their own pickiness.

If that’s not the case, why would they wear their narrow tastebuds as a badge of honour, as shown by their “acquired tastes” argument?

https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/gut-microbiome-and-health

https://www(.)additudemag.com/picky-eaters-adhd-food-children/

https://www.healthychildren.org/English/tips-tools/ask-the-pediatrician/Pages/Should-I-sneak-fruits-veggies-into-my-preschooler-food.aspx

https://www.epicurious.com/expert-advice/please-stop-trying-to-sneak-vegetables-into-your-kids-food-article

https://www.learntolovefood.com/learn-to-love-food-1/is-sneaking-veggies-a-good-idea

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

The most bizarre arguments I have ever encountered

Throughout the years in my blogposts, I have written about the people I have argued with, ranting about their narrow-mindedness, poor moral integrity and their lack of brain usage.

Sometimes, I don’t talk about specific individuals, more about groups of them. When I do talk about specific individuals, their worldview and behaviours aren’t uniquely theirs; I have encountered others just like them.

But, in this case, I am a bit overwhelmed.

Online, more than once, I have criticised westerners’ ideas of diversity and multiculturalism. While I do acknowledge pogroms are non-existent in the modern-day west, I despise the wide-held belief that diversity and multiculturalism only exist there; I also criticise some westerners’ try-hard attempts to be multicultural, which end up as tokenism rather than genuine acceptance.

I also assert that many Indonesians have strong experiences with interethnic and interreligious relations… while admitting the latter is more flawed than the former and our race relations still have lots to desire.

And the reactions are predictable.

Conceited westerners get too defensive, accusing me of demonising the entire west and whitewashing my own country’s image. Every time I talk about genuinely good things about Indonesia, self-hating Indonesians start making weird criticisms about their homeland: they accuse Indonesia of being “guilty” of certain things… while also fawning other countries which are also “guilty” of those same things.

In this particular case, this person is one of those self-hating Indonesians; they rebuke me by asserting Indonesia’s proneness to sectarian violence. I cannot deny it because it is unfortunately true.

But, I also state that acceptance in the west is also far from perfect and the COVID pandemic proves it; in some countries, there was an increase in hate crimes against people of Chinese descent… or anyone perceived as such.

This person says that’s BS. Not only the increase was exaggerated (as if a threefold increase was nothing), they also said determining how bad sectarianism should not be based on how fearful the minorities are, but based on how many tourists and investors still flocking into the area.

Then, it went downhill even further.

I live in Batam and when I said it is very diverse, they said its diversity was due to its location in Java, which this person insinuatingly considers to be the country’s only diverse place.

Wrong! Not only Batam is not located in or near Java, it is an island city which is a part of an archipelago located east of Sumatra, South of Singapore and Malaysia.

They also said the people of the city of Banjarmasin were being intentionally provocative… simply for using words differently, as if this person’s dialect is the objectively correct one.

And I still haven’t talked about the weirdest part.

They also believe Indonesia is not multicultural because it suffers from Malaysisation AKA domination of Malay culture. Their evidence? Our national language – Indonesian – is one of the standardised registers of Malay language.

I told them our national language is Malay-derived because, prior the Europeans’ arrival, Malay had already been used as a lingua franca in the region for centuries.

This person said it wasn’t a good enough because the language was used only among traders. When I asked which language they think deserve to be the national one, they gave me two: Javanese and Sundanese. Why? Simply because ethnic Javanese and Sundanese are the biggest and second biggest ethnic groups.

While they are indeed the biggest, there is a problem with that: their languages were never used as lingua francas.

They were never used as mediums of interethnic and intercultural communications. They don’t have experiences catering to other cultures. While old Javanese was used outside Java, it was mostly used as a literary language of the educated elite. Because the ethnic Javanese form around forty percent of the country’s total population, declaring their language as the national would culturally suffocate the other ethnic groups.

Malay? While it is based on the native language of one ethnic group, it has been used interethnically and interculturally for centuries; it has many years of experiences catering to different cultures.

In fact, there are at least twenty Malay-based creoles found all over the region, including the eastern part of Indonesia. Malay also has some influences in even more faraway places; Sri Lanka has an endangered Malay creole language, there is a practically extinct language in western Australia called Broome Pearling Lugger Pidgin which uses significant amount of Malay words and, prior the Spanish colonisation, Malay was the lingua franca of the Philippines.

The standardised register is different from the one used in Singapore – where Malay is mostly used by ethnic Malays – and in Malay-majority Malaysia and Brunei.

Indonesian has some loanwords from the regional Indonesian languages and, from all of them, Javanese is the biggest contributor.

Unlike the ones in the other aforementioned countries, which still retain their melodious sounds, the standard phonology in Indonesia is very flat and clipped; even though it does sound lifeless and bland, it is a type of accent which anyone can easily acquire. It is also normal to hear public figures – including our current president who is an ethnic Javanese – speaking Indonesian with noticeable regional accents.

Not to mention the most widely-used informal register of Indonesian is a creole natively spoken by ethnic Betawis, adopted by non-Betawi Jakartans and any Indonesians who heavily consume the national pop culture. Different regions also have their own informal registers of Indonesian, which are basically Indonesian infused with words from the local languages.

Basically, our standard Malay has mutated so much, it no longer becomes a “purely Malay” tongue.

I have a controversial take: if I have to choose between Dutch and Javanese, I would rather choose the former as our national language.

Yes, it is the colonial tongue. But, because of its entirely foreign origin, it doesn’t take side with any of our indigenous ethnic groups. In the context of Indonesian unity, it can be neutral.

And let me reveal this person’s most outrageous claim: Indonesia suffers from Malayisation. It is outrageous because, even if our standard Malay is still a “purely Malay” tongue, it is still the only Malay thing about our national identity.

None of our patriotic songs have Malay-influenced melodies and arrangements; they tend to sound like marches more than anything. Every time the country is represented in overseas performance arts events, Javanese and Balinese music and dance are prevalently represented, Malay ones barely exist.

After I said Malayisation exist where ethnic Malays congregate, that person accused me of flip-flopping and being inconsistent. I wasn’t. Malayisation existing in some regions is not the same as it existing on the national level.

But, do you what exists on the national level? Javanisation.

While the Indonesian establishment is very multiethnic, there is no doubt it is dominated by ethnic Javanese. Literally all of our presidents are of Javanese descent (even though, admittedly, Habibie didn’t grow up surrounded by Javanese culture).

Soeharto also implemented a policy of transmigration, in which he sent ethnic Javanese citizens to settle in less crowded places outside their homeland. Whether he intentionally used the policy to Javanise the country or not, it doesn’t matter. It still helped Javanising the country even further.

I have talked a lot about how our national symbols are of Hindu and Buddhist origins. But, recently, I just found out they might be the legacy of Majapahit, an ancient kingdom centered in Java which conquered a huge chunk of modern-day Indonesia, including a small chunk of western New Guinea. The Javanisation started long before the country existed.

When I pointed those facts out to the person (minus the Majapahit one), they said Javanisation is a good thing. Good because it supposedly prevents the spread of Islamic extremism.

Which is, again, more BS!

If that is the case, then why does the country still end up having cases of it? Why aren’t the people raised in Java immune to it? Why does this long-Javanised region fail to prevent its rise? I don’t know if the person answered the question or not, as I got too exhausted to revisit the thread.

Whatever the causes of extremism are, if you pay attention to the world, no backgrounds can make you immune to it, not even the so-called superior Javanese culture.

Now, to sum things up:

I am overwhelmed for various reasons.

That person lost their credibility almost immediately. Batam is not just a village in the middle of nowhere, it is a city of over a million residents, a job opportunities destination for many Indonesians and, due to its proximity to Singapore and Malaysia, one of Indonesia’s gateways to the world.

If you don’t know the location one of Indonesia’s major cities, it is clear you lack even the most basic knowledge about this country. You shouldn’t be that confident when talking about the country.

This person also claims to care about multiculturalism. But, their words clearly indicates otherwise.

In the western context, this person thinks sectarian violence is bad NOT because it makes minorities feel unsafe and unwelcome in their own countries, but because it drives tourists and investors away. Basically, this person believes multiculturalism – in the west, at least – should be about the money, not the minorities’ well-being.

I have encountered people who love exaggerating western countries’ diversity and multiculturalism, while also downplaying and even denigrating the non-western ones’. But, this is the first time I encountered someone who sees multiculturalism solely through the profitability lens.

In the Indonesian context, this person has contradictory views. They believe adopting a national language based on Malay is a symptom of Malay cultural imperialism, even though it is the only Malay thing about our national identity. Yet, at the same time, not only they tolerate Javanese cultural imperialism, they wish it happens more thoroughly.

Combine that with their unreasonable hatred of Banjarmasin dialect, it is obvious their “concern” for multiculturalism is just a mask, a mask to conceal their prejudice against anything non-Javanese, to conceal their sense of Javanese supremacy.

I am not surprised by the existence of such views; everyone here knows Javanisation and Javanese supremacism exist. I am just taken aback someone finally says the quiet part out loud.

.

.

*My usage of the word “Javanese” can be interpreted loosely.

Foreigners who know nothing about Indonesia may assume Javanese refers to all people and things from Java. That’s incorrect.

In Indonesia, the word Javanese refers to the ethnic Javanese – who are indigenous to Java – and anything associated with them. If you are referring to someone or something in Java and they are not “Javanese”, you say “of Java” and “from Java” instead.

To make it more confusing, the Javanese are not the only ethnic groups indigenous to the Island – there are also the Sundanese, Cirebonese, Madurese, Betawis, Osings, Tenggerese, Banyumasans – and yet, they have the island’s namesake. For the longest time, I didn’t know why that was the case.

Then, one day, I found a book called A New Spirit (Indonesian: Semangat Baru) by Mikihiro Moriyama, a Japanese scholar specialising in the Sundanese language. He asserted that centuries ago (don’t remember exactly when, probably before the 14th or 15th) Sundanese people were once considered a sub-group of the Javanese. Nowadays, no one consider the two as the same; even their languages are mutually unintelligible with each other.

According Wikipedia (yes, I know), people who identify as Betawis didn’t exist prior the 1800s and, even though Cirebonese identity has existed for centuries, its existence was first acknowledged by the census in 2010. The Madurese are from Madura, which isn’t technically in Java; it is an island located very close to Java.

The Banyumasans, Osings and Tenggerese are considered subgroups of Javanese. I know many Banyumasans see themselves as Javanese. I am not sure about the other two.

For the most part, if you have basic knowledge about the country, what constitutes as “Javanese” should be clear-cut to you. So, what do I mean by the word being interpreted loosely?

The problem is not simply Javanese people dominating the establishment, it is also about how island itself exerts too much power.

Jakarta – the country’s capital, economic centre and media centre – is located in Java. If a national company is not headquartered in Jakarta, it is very likely headquartered in other cities in Java. Most of the top universities are in Java. When a development happens, it starts in Java and other islands may or may not be given the opportunity to follow suit.

Indonesia is not simply Javanised, it is also very Java-centric. Two different, but equally problematic things.

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

Feeling persecuted by foreign tongues

Are you someone who can only speak English and nothing else?

Do you always feel uncomfortable when people near you speak in another language to each other?

Why is that? Is it because you believe they are talking crap about you behind your back? Is it because you find it rude because you feel excluded?

There is only one effective method to deal with this: stop making everything about yourself, you conceited fuck!

If those people insist on speaking to you in a language you don’t understand, then you should be mad. But, we know damn well that is not the case.

What happens is they are speaking to each other – minding their fucking businesses – and then, you intrude their conversations, insisting they have to speak in English even when talking to each other. You believe you have to know what they are talking about, even when what they are talking about does not fucking concern your soiled ass.

You are the one being inconsiderate, not them.

I also notice that the likes of you love using this particular justification: those people may be talking about y0u behind your backs. Well, there is the keyword: MAY.

Unless they are talking to each other while staring at you mockingly, how do you – a worthless monolingual who doesn’t know the difference between there and their – know they are talking about you? No, probability is not an evidence.

Le me give you a tangential anecdote.

As you can tell, I am not a pleasant person to interact with. I can be aloof, rude and mean. I would be surprised if people don’t talk shit about me behind my back.

I am also from Indonesia, a culturally-diverse country with lots of languages. Relatives, classmates, teachers, shopkeepers, repairmen, mom’s acquaintances, clergymen, I grew up hearing them speaking Sundanese, Javanese, Batak, Minang, Dutch, Arabic and various Chinese languages like Teochew, Hokkien and Mandarin. I am only fluent in English and the national language, I understand none of the others.

But, despite all of those facts combined, I am never paranoid.

How am I not paranoid? Well, not only because I literally don’t have evidences of their badmouthing, I am also not conceited enough to believe others are thinking about me 24/7.

Basically, if the mere sounds of other languages unnerves you, it is not the speakers’ problem. It is yours.

Either you are narcissist who thinks the world revolves around you… or just a bigot desperate for excuses.

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

My kind of ideal place to grow up in

Disclaimer: while I didn’t grow up with an upperclass lifestyle, my upbringing was still a financially-privileged one. Privileged enough to not growing up hungry, privileged enough to not be financially wrecked by the ongoing pandemic.

But, even if my family had a billionaire dollar, I am certain I would still not grow up with the ideal physical and human environments.

Let’s start with multiculturalism. I wish my upbringing was even more multicultural.

I am a Muslim who grew up in urban parts of Indonesia; anyone with similar upbringing would have been exposed to people of different ethnic backgrounds (and, to some extent, their foods) and would have interacted with Christians (arguably more than western Christians have interacted with Muslims). Interethnic marriages are also common among urbanites.

The diversity of my hometown specifically – Batam – is even more noticeable. Because it is a planned city, it is dominated by five ethnic groups instead of one. Christianity is not the only visible minority religion; Buddhism also has a strong presence.

But, it is not enough for me.

While I am used to interacting with my culturally and religiously distinct fellow countrymen, I wish I can witness them “practicing their identities” up close.

I wish I grew up attending traditional cultural festivals of different ethnic groups, complete with the traditional music, dance and attires. I also wish it is more socially acceptable to join the religions’ holiday celebrations and marry outside one’s religion.

Most importantly, I wish I grew up in a place where bigotry and incitement are more unacceptable. It is disturbing how many Indonesians love inciting/tolerating anti-Chinese violence, use Israel to justify their anti-Semitism, perceive atheism as extremism and perceive dark skin as a defect. I hate that I used to be one of them.

While I wish Indonesia has more racial and religious diversity, it can be dangerous with the thin ice we are currently standing on.

It would also be better if the multilingualism is official as well. I hate how we have hundreds of language and yet we only official recognise one. I also hate that not all Indonesian schools obligate the teaching of regional languages, treating them them as mere vernaculars, making them more prone to extinction; even Javanese, the most spoken and empowered regional language, is on the decline.

Even if it is unfeasible to use regional languages as mediums of instructions at schools (like they do in India), the least we can do is acknowledging their importance to our identities as Indonesians, just like we do to our national language.

Now, about the city itself.

I spent most of my life in Batam and a handful of years in Jakarta metro area. While Batam is definitely less hectic, both undoubtedly have poor walkability and mass transit. But, even if they are almost the exact opposite, it is still not enough.

My ideal city should has more parks, more lush trees in the pedestrian areas, more car-free streets, less highways and less cars in generals. I want it to consists entirely of mixed-use, transit-oriented developments, where every amenity and transit stop is accessible by a short walk. I want all public transit to be rail ones; inexplicably, every time I visit countries with better mass transit, I prefer their trams and metros over their buses.

Oh, and when I say amenities, I am referring to medical emergency units, primary and secondary schools, stores that sell fresh foods, pharmacies, community centres, multilingual libraries and lush parks. I believe those are facilities which every person must have easy access to, both financially and geographically.

It is not enough for public housing to be well-maintained. It also needs to be spread out all over the city, ensuring the residents are not segregated into the periphery. Yes, I am also opposed to gated communities, where the privileged ones live in a bubble.

Ideally, I want as many festivities possible. From traditional Indonesian festivals similar to Sekaten and Tabuik to ones with more “international” themes like Jazz. But, if I have to choose, I would prioritise the traditional Indonesian ones.

Pragmatically, traditional Indonesian arts make Indonesia stand out on the global stage. Spiritually, they help feel more attached to our ancestral heritage. As much as I love modern western music, it is unable to do any of them (unless when fused with traditional Indonesian styles).

Apart from the usual themes of arts, sciences and history, the museums should include niche or weird ones. They can be about dolls, stamps or history of specific neighbourhoods and districts.

There should be at least three non-sectarian research universities that attract students from all over and offer a wide range of academic programmes, especially the so-called “useless” ones. Each of the university operates their own public museums and public broadcasters. If there are religious seminaries, one of them must be multireligious.

It has its own local and multilingual public broadcasters that prioritise quality over ratings. While they can broadcast programmes produced elsewhere, 60% of the programmes must be locally produced.

It has a diverse range of architectural styles, preferably pre twentieth century and early twentieth century ones. But, if I have to include more modern ones, I would prioritise ones that have as many ornaments as possible or ones with weird shapes.

If I have to include the simplistic ones, I would rather choose the Critical Regionalist ones. If I have to include International Style, I would want the number of such buildings to be kept to a minimum. If I have to include Brutalism, I would relegate such buildings to film and TV sets that produce dystopian fiction.

The city is connected to a Swiss-type railway system, ensuring the citizens can arrive to not only other human settlements, but also a wide-range of natural recreational places (e.g. beaches and highlands) within two hours or less. No cars and highways needed.

I am certain that if I grew up such environment, I would be a much better person.

I would grow up as a much more self-reliant child and teenager who didn’t need assistance just to leave the house. I would develop a greater sense of adventure (without being a thrill seeker who can only have fun when the risk of injury and death is high). I would have been physically healthier as well. While I am not ashamed of my homebody tendency, it would be nice to balance it with more outdoor activities.

I would have been more curious about my hometown and discovered many hidden gems, like small eateries in alley ways, niche museums or even weird-looking buildings. I would be familiar with my hometown inside out.

I would have been exposed to more diverse aesthetics. While I am not ashamed of my enjoyment of pop culture, I wish I also grew up with more niche and offbeat alternatives.

I would have learned that unity in diversity requires more than just living side-by-side. It also requires us to confront and overcome the differences and, most importantly, humanise our fellow human beings.

My upbringing would have been a much richer, more well-rounded and more pluralistic experience.

Of course, there is high a possibility of me taking things for granted. But, as long as I am exposed to the world beyond my hometown and country, it’ll be okay.

Yes, interethnic and interreligious lives are far from perfect here. But, I started to appreciate them more when I learned about the ones overseas, with their glaring imperfections.

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

Diversity: from pro to anti

I used to be very conservative; it is not unexpected when one grew up as an Indonesian Muslim. I don’t have labels to describe my current social stances; leftists may find me too liberal and liberals may find me too left-wing. But, I can definitely say I am no longer conservative in that department.

Recently, I found myself baffled: why are there conservatives who used to be liberal or left-wing? Specifically, why do some pro-diversity people end up as anti-diversity?

I have my own hypothesis. I base it on observations of white westerners online – especially the so-called “progressives” – and moderate Indonesian Muslims, which include my former self.

Sidenote: Moderate Indonesian Muslims are not liberal or left-wing in the slightest; they are conservatives who fancy themselves as accepting and tolerant, even though they have badmouthed interfaith romance and are racist against Chinese-Indonesians. They appear “progressive” because they are romanticised by wide-eyed foreigners, they are often compared to Islamists and moderate religious tolerance is the tradition here.

Now, for my hypothesis.

Some people are pro-diversity because they want to feel good about themselves. They want to feel it so bad, they miss the point of it all. As a result, they face some snags in their embrace of diversity.

They learn that embracing it requires more than just eating exotic foods, supporting more diverse fictional characters, sleeping with people of different skin colours and not committing pogroms. They realise they also have to learn traversing human differences; never mind the consequential ones, they even don’t know how to deal with the trivial ones.

Not only they don’t understand the values and worldview of the “others”, they also have bad experiences interacting with them. For them, if something is indecipherable, it deserves to be hated. If they have bad experiences with people of certain backgrounds, they think it is acceptable or even a must to demonise the entire groups. They just can’t help themselves from doing those.

They love othering the “others”, whom they perceive as nothing but giant monoliths. They think Asian-Americans are not divided to different subgroups and are the same as Asians in Asia. They think every true queer person was born with rainbow imagery planted in their minds. They stereotype their fellow human beings… just like the bigots do.

They also don’t care about how the “others” think and feel. They only care about pushing their thoughts and feelings onto the narratives. They hate how they are not worshipped for doing the bare minimum. They hate how they cannot make everything about themselves.

Sooner or later, they will have the realisation: not only pro-diversity belief cannot be exploited for their own benefits, it is also against the actual worldview they have been clinging onto and were in denial about. As a result, the “woke” – who was never “woke” in the first place – becomes “anti-woke”.

Hypothesis ends.

Obviously, like any hypotheses, mine must be “tested” before it becomes a theory. I am also too lazy to find out if someone else has thought about it (someone probably has).

But, one thing I am very certain of: I have met people who claim to be progressive and yet, they are guilty of the sins I describe above.

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

No, homogeneity is not a strength

When people argue against multiculturalism, they often project themselves. They think their inability to handle human differences is universal and sectarian conflicts are mundane in diverse places.

Another one of their favourite argument is citing the success of South Korea and Japan. They argue the countries’ near 100% homogeneity is the reason why they are globally successful.

Of course, there are multiple issues with that assertion.

Issue number one: success is relative. While South Korea and Japan have wealth and greater soft power than my country Indonesia does, I will never be envious of their high suicide rates, drinking cultures, stressful student life, severe school bullying and, in this case of Japan, strong history of fascism and historical denialism.

Issue number two: correlation does not equal causation. Those people never provide evidences. They simply connect two things and expect others to believe it at face value. Life is also complicatedly interconnected; even if homogeneity is a factor, it is definitely not the only factor.

Issue number three: even if I accept that shallow definition of success and correlation equals causation, I still don’t see how it proves the inherent superiority of South Korea and Japan.

If homogeneity brings prosperity as they claim it does, then it is comparable to wealth we are born into.

Both give us unbelievably massive leverages. Children born into wealth have better access to education and they can pursue their passions without financial worry. Due to the stricter conformity, homogenous societies have an easier time achieving their collective goals.

Neither wealth nor homogeneity is inherently bad. But, praising a country’s homogeneity is like praising someone for coming from a wealthy family.

You basically praise someone for being born with cheat codes.

Personally, I don’t believe we must commend people who can find common grounds despite their stark differences. Not only I consider that to be a bare minimum, I also don’t want them to pat themselves on the back.

But, I would rather reserve my praise for them. Considering they are the ones who do extra efforts, it is just sensical.

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.

“You should ‘go out’ more”…

… is what people usually say to me in arguments. When they say ‘go out’, they mean leaving my safe space and exposing myself to different worldview.

Obviously, that’s a sound advice. We should thrive to avoid any echo chambers if we truly have the desire to grow and discern our reality. But, I do know those people don’t care about my well-being; they just hate it that I refuse to appease to them.

People who love exaggerating the flaws of Marvel films think I need to watch anything other than Hollywood blockbusters, not realising that my favourite film directors are Andrei Tarkovsky, Ingmar Bergman and Stanley Kubrick, arguably giants of arthouse cinema, and some of my favourite films are not even American, let alone Hollywood.

Some people think I will grow out of my “extremely woke” politics and suggest leaving my echo chamber. It is interesting because not only there is nothing radical about centre-left politics, I used to be a lot more conservative. I also live in a country where even self-proclaimed moderates are very socially conservative. Not to mention the many conservatives, libertarians, liberals and centrists I constantly run into online.

Pro and anti-multiculturalism and anti-Muslim westerners have something in common: they genuinely believe that the west is the only diverse place on earth. The differences? The pro wants to feel superior about their own countries, thinking simply seeing minorities on the streets and having foreign ancestors boost their multicultural cred. The other camps think other places aren’t being forced to be diverse. When I refute their factually incorrect claims, they condescendingly suggest me to interact with people of differing cultural and religious backgrounds.

What they don’t know is I am from Indonesia, a country with six officially recognised religions and literally hundreds of ethnic groups; my hometown specifically has five dominant ethnic groups, which is unusual even for an Indonesian city, and has visible Christian and Buddhist minorities. I attended a middle school where I was one of the few non-Chinese-Indonesian and non-Buddhist students and I got my degree from an Australian university. Oh, and virtually all of my online friends are foreigners and much of them are non-Muslims.

My exposure to different cultures and religions is so mundane. If it wasn’t for my interactions with dumb westerners, I would have kept taking my diverse upbringing for granted.

“The more you know, the more you don’t know”

The older I get, the more I can relate to the quote. As much as I want to see myself as extremely knowledgeable, I have to acknowledge the horizon’s infinite vastness.

I haven’t tasted every film style of imaginable. I haven’t matured politically. And I have only been exposed to a tiny chunk of the world’s cultures and religions. I need to keep learning.

But, as one can tell, my aforementioned opponents clearly don’t care. They all share something in common: the belief that some or all of their opinions are absolutely correct. My mere disagreement is more than enough for them to make a baseless assumption about my personal life, which they make even before I say anything about it.

One may argue I am a hypocrite because I also make assumptions about others when I disagree with them. But, there is a difference.

My aforementioned opponents make assumptions simply because I disagree, that’s literally the sole reason. Meanwhile, I make assumptions based not only on how (un)reasonable and factually (in)accurate their opinions are, but also the anecdotes which they willingly share.

If you say enjoyment of pop culture is a sign of immaturity, I can assume you are a self-righteous bitch who want to feel undeservingly high and mighty about your tastes.

If you say centre-left politics – which is closer to the centre than it is to the far end – is too “woke”, I can assume you are swinging too far to the right end. I can also assume you are unable to perceive life’s many many shades of grey.

If you say multiculturalism can only be found in the west, I can assume you are jingostic westerners who think your countries are more special than they really are and/or you know nothing about lives beyond your borders.

If you admit that you intentionally avoid interactions with the “others” and avoid visiting other countries because you “know” how bad they are, I can definitely say you don’t care about the truth, you just want to affirm your preconceived beliefs.

Again, I refuse to say I have fully escaped all kinds of bubbles. But, I am confident I have escaped more bubbles than my opponents do.

.

.

.

.

.

Donate to this deadbeat, preachy blogger on Patreon.