1
Between Ethnicity and Gender:
Chinese Women in Contemporary Malaysian Politics
Johanes Herlijanto
Lecturer, Chinese Studies Program, Faculty of Humanities, University of Indonesia
Chinese women who participate in contemporary Malaysian politics have faced a political tendency to put emphasis
more on ethnicity than on other categories. This tendency, often known as the politics of ethnicity, has emerged as a
result of several developments that happened in the past. However, the last decades of the twentieth century ushered
a new era in Malaysia where the discourse of the politics of ethnicity was challenged by other discourse proliferating
during that period, one of them is concerning the women issues. The widespread of the discourse concerning women
issues have helped Chinese women who participate in party politics (re)construct their understanding of who they
are. However, instead of leading to a kind of “pure” identity, this (re)construction brings these women into an inbetween situation, where they stand between the two boundaries of identities. It is within this in between space that
those Chinese women find the latitude to speak out their voice, not only as women, but also as ethnic Chinese at the
same time.
1. Introduction
Malaysian women who participate in contemporary Malaysian politics, particularly those
who are active in political parties, could be arguably considered as being in a problematic
situation. Besides situated in a society notorious with its male culture, these women are also
faced with the political tendency to put emphasis more on ethnicity (and to a certain extent
religion) than on other factors, particularly in formal politics. Because of this tendency, women
are required to identify themselves with their ethnic groups, and consequently, their political
participations are then regarded as a part of “ethnic politics”. As a result, it will be outrageously
difficult for them to discover the terrain where they can speak out their voices as women.
In the case of Chinese women, the above situation is exacerbated by the nature of
Chinese politics in this country, which are said as having experienced a marginalization process
since the introduction of the New Economic Policy (NEP). 1 As a result of this marginalization,
Chinese politicians nowadays are bustling with the tasks of delivering developments, that is,
2
public works and services, to their constituents while avoiding to participate in the debates
concerning more “important” and “sensitive” issues such as justice, transparency and
democracy.2 This of course brings another consequence for Chinese women: they will have less
latitude for fighting for women rights since this fight requires involvements in the debates over
“sensitive” issues, such as challenging patriarchal system or questioning “gender bias” in some
religious tenets, which are usually avoided by Chinese politicians.
This paper attempts to deal with the question of how Chinese women taking part in
politics have constructed their understandings of who they are in spite of the above complicated
situation. Although the focus of this paper is those who conduct their political activities through
Chinese political parties in nowadays Malaysia, it will also try to describe the phenomenon
taking place in the past with the purpose of understanding the present. Besides, the development
of women movements in Malaysia will also be discussed. As it will be shown in the later part of
this paper, the development of those women movements is considerably influential for those
Chinese women participating in mainstream politics.
2. The Politics of Ethnicity and Malaysian Women Political Participation
Early participation of Malaysian women in politics was inseparable from the rise of
political consciousness among several ethnic groups in the region, particularly the three major
ethnic groups in Malaysian peninsula, that is, Malay, Chinese and Indian. Prior to Malaysian
independence, Malay women started to organize themselves in order to provide enough supports
for the Malay nationalist movements. 3 Meanwhile, Indian and Chinese women political
involvements were tantamount to that of their Malay sisters, that is, as a part of their ethnic
groups political agendas, or in several cases taking place during the British colonial period and
during the Japanese occupation, even as a part of the nationalist movements in their “homelands”.
Instances of the latter are when several Chinese Malaysian women were embroiled in China’s
politics at the beginning of the twentieth century4, or when many Indian women joined a brigade
to fight the British with the purpose of liberating their Motherland during the World War II. 5 Of
course, after the War ended, those “homeland-oriented” political involvements were superseded
3
by the more Malaysian-oriented one. 6 However, the close relationship between these women
political participation and the politics of their ethnic groups has become the pattern that could
continue to be observed for several decades. Thus, it could be said that in a period from the end
of the World War II to several decades after this country’s independence, women political
participation in Malaysia has been inextricably linked with the politics of the ethnic group to
which those women purportedly belong.
The close relationship between women political participation and their ethnic groups’
politics is ostensibly a phenomenon that could be taken for granted, given the fact that Malaysia
is a country inhabited by people with diverse ethnicities. Nevertheless, its emergence could not
be understood in isolation from the general situation of Malaysian society at the time these
women began their political activities. Thus, an analysis of the development of Malaysian
society in general is inexorable if an effort to scrutinize the rise of Malaysian women politics is
about to be undertaken. It is for this reason that this chapter will be devoted to discuss what
happened in Malaysian society before and after the War and how it has influenced the politics of
Malaysian women.
2a. The Emergence of the Politics of Ethnicity.
The first half of the twentieth century witnessed the emergence of inter-ethnic tensions
within Malaysian society, particularly between the Chinese and the Malay. These inter-ethnic
tensions came into being as a result of several developments occurring since the European power,
particularly the British, came and built their colonial government in Malaysia. One of them, that
mostly requires our attention, was the development of a model of society usually known as plural
society.7 In this model of society, different groups of people lived together, but there was not so
much interaction between the members of these groups except in the market place, where they
met to buy and sell. Or using Furnivall’s words, it is a society “with different sections of the
community living side by side, but separately, within the same political unit”.8 Thus Europeans,
Malays, Chinese, Indians, and “others” might live in same region but did not have intense
interaction.
4
It is true to say that the plural society was more a product of Western colonialism than a
phenomenon emerging naturally.9 This model of society came into being as a result of the British
policy to import workers from China, India, and Indonesia, in order to provide labors to help
them exploit the land.10 It is also true to say that the identities of these people were constructed
not outside the shadow of colonial power. In fact, each of these ethnic groups was not a single
group and just began to consider themselves (and be considered by others) as one group after the
categorization done by British administration at the end of the nineteenth century.11 The identity
construction of Chinese people is a clear example of it. While they were diverse in nature,12 they
were forced to become one when they began to be subsumed as one single category, namely,
“the Chinese”, during the census conducted by the British at the end of the nineteenth century.13
Thus, so to speak, the plural society and the identities of each ethnic group forming it were but a
creation of the colonial government.
But the fact that the plural society and the ethnic identities of the people living in it were
“merely” a construction of Western power did not reduce their significant influences on
Malaysian society. On the contrary, their influences were so real and embraced many aspects of
the society but most importantly economic aspect. The latter had a close relationship with the
existence of the division of labors based on ethnic line, that is, the Malays as rice farmers,
Chinese as businessmen and tin miners, and Indians as rubber plantations laborers.14 The result
of this division of labor was a society with a high segregation, which in turn created tensions
between elements of society.
Another development that could intensify the inter-ethnic tensions in Malaysian society
before the independence was the rise of nationalism among various ethnic groups, but most
importantly among Malays and Chinese. Malay nationalism developed soon after the
construction of Malayness through various policies taken by the British. One of them was the
introduction of the Malay Reservation Act in 1913 which officialized the definition of “Malay”
and “Malayness”.15 However, the strongest articulation of the Malay nationalism just took place
soon after the World War II ended, when the concept of the “Malayan Union” was introduced by
the British.16 The concept, which reflected British’s plan to establish a civilian government in
5
which every body was given equal status as citizens made the Malays upset. It was as a reaction
to this concept that a large amount of Malay people, including women, started to be politically
active by organizing many protests and rallies in many cities in the Peninsula.17
Chinese nationalism also started to develop at the same time with that of the Malays. For
many years, Chinese in Malaysia, as well as in other regions in Southeast Asia, have built a kind
of “historical identity”, that is, the identity that emphasized the way traditional family values,
clan origins and sub-ethnic loyalties, as well as symbols of a glorious Chinese past in order to
sustain their “Chineseness”. 18 But, during the 1920s and 1930s, this historical identity was
attacked by a new and aggressive nationalism from China which was built upon Dr Sun Yatsen’s concept of Minzu (translating the Western concepts of “race” and “nation”).19 In Malaysian
Peninsula, it happened soon after Dr Sun Yat-sen arrived at Singapore at the turn of the
nineteenth century. His arrival was followed by the establishment of several branches of Tung
Menghui (Society of Alliance), the organization led by Dr Sun, which since then engaged in a
series of propaganda activities that used newspapers, reading clubs, and drama troupes as its
vehicles. This propaganda series successfully inculcated the spirit of Chinese nationalism among
many Chinese in Malaysia, not only due to the effectiveness of its mediums, but also because of
several events occurring in China, most of them had a relationship with the tension between
China and Japan. 20 Thus, during the first half of the twentieth century, the Chinese nationalism
was widely spread in Chinese communities in Malaysia.
If the rise of the nationalist movements, particularly among the two ethnic groups (that is,
the Chinese and the Malay), had intensified the inter-ethnic tensions that had been alive in
Malaysian plural society, the arrival of the Japanese power had further exacerbated it. When they
occupied Malayan Peninsula, the Japanese favored the indigenous population over the immigrant
population, particularly the Chinese. The Japanese were very brutal against the Chinese in
Malaya, perhaps because they just experienced a victory in Sino-Japan war that had taken place
since the end of 1930s. Therefore, during the Japanese occupation period, the Malays and the
Chinese were in confrontational position, fighting each other as proxies, Chinese for the British
and the Malays for the Japanese, and thus worsen the tension between these two ethnic
6
groups.21This tension stayed there even after the Japanese left Malaysia, and thus leading to a
prolonged racial strife for at least a decade after that.22
British’s plan to establish a civilian government in Malaysia after the World War II ended,
though never be realized, has had a significant influence on Malaysian politics. It was during this
time that the tensions and rivalries among ethnic groups in Malaysia were started to be expressed
in a peaceful way. Various political parties were established during that time, particularly
between 1946 and 1952, most of which were ethnically based. Thus, there were Malay-based
political parties, such as the UMNO (United Malays National Organization) and the PAS (Parti
Islam SeMalaya or Pan-Malayan Islamic Party);23 there were also a Chinese-based party, that is,
the MCA (Malayan Chinese Association), and an Indian-based party, namely, the MIC (Malayan
Indian Congress). Founded by ethnic groups’ elites who purported to be the representative of the
not elite majority, these parties struggled for the interests of ethnic groups that they represented.
However, some parties, namely, the UMNO, the MCA, and the MIC, conducted a bargaining
process that led to an agreement which guaranteed Malay entitlement to political and
administrative authority on the one hand and non-interference in Chinese control of the economy
on the other hand. 24 It was on the basis of this agreement that those political parties built a
coalition which successfully became the ruler of Malaysia at the time this country gained her
independence. However, the success of these parties in achieving that agreement did not stop the
process of bargaining between these ethnic groups. Instead, the process, which is usually called
as “ethnic bargain”, continues to exist and is becoming an important factor in Malaysian politics,
particularly its party politics.25
As a result of the existence of inter ethnic tensions and the attempt of the elites of each
ethnic group to find a solution by conducting the ethnic bargain process, “the politics of
ethnicity” has become so central in Malaysian politics. Although history shows that there were
also efforts to built “transethnic” political movements within Malaysia society, the efforts failed
to survive due to several reasons. An example of such efforts was the establishment of a united
political front by anti colonial left movements representing different ethnic groups, that is, the
alliance between the All Malaya Council for Joint Action (AMCJA) and Pusat Tenaga Rakyat
7
(PUTERA, or Center of People’s Power). This effort was said to be among the casualties of the
British war against left movements between 1948 and 1960. 26Thus, since the attempts to make
alternative political efforts have always been subjected to failure, the politics of ethnicity remains
as the dominant discourse in Malaysia through several decades.
2b. The Politics of Ethnicity and Political Participation of Malaysian Women.
At the time Malaysian women began their political participation, the discourse of the
politics of ethnicity could be considered as a “dominating discourse” in the society. Since within
the logic of the discourse, the country’s politics is viewed as “a process of managing inter-ethnic
divisions, tensions, and conflicts amidst the efforts of avowedly ethnic based political parties to
advance the interest of ‘their communities’”, 27 the words “ethnic bargain” and/or “ethnic
interest” have been important vocabularies that should not be forgot for those who participate in
politics. It seems that these two words have been widely accepted in the society that women, as a
part of society, have found difficulties to free themselves from their influence. Therefore, it is not
surprising to see that women political involvements were (and to some extents, are) also imbued
with the spirit of those two words.
Malay women early political participation can provide a clear example of how the
women have seen their political participation more as an extension of their male counterparts’
politics which was aimed to advance “the interest of their ethnic groups”. Malay women started
their political activities by joining the demonstrations to challenge British plan to build a
government called as the Malayan Union.28 Several groups of women that existed in the period
after the end of the World War II to the independence of Malaysia were mostly organized by
women who were encouraged to enter political arena by male political activists who recognized
the obvious advantage in mobilizing women to help them achieve their nationalist goals. 29 The
groups later developed to be a bigger and more powerful group of women placed within the
UMNO as its women political auxiliary, that is, the Kaum Ibu UMNO. However, with the
exception of some strong leader such as Khadijah Sidek, these women could not escape from the
8
logic of the ethnic politics, and therefore put more emphasis on the effort to support their party in
their way to struggle for “the interest of ethnic Malay”.30
Chinese women were not unlike their Malay counterparts, and in some extents, even
worse in a sense that their political participation was begun long after the Malays and their role
was less significant than the latter. The first women section in MCA was set up in 1953 in Johore
Bahru, but the women presence within the party was barely heard until the end of the 1960s. It
was only in 1966, after the party decided to encourage women to involve in politics, that the
women started to assume more roles.31 However, the roles given to the women were limited to
providing helps for the party which was preparing for the 1969 general elections. During the
normal periods, where there were no elections, they just did what was usually called as “napkin
politics”, that is, preparing food for the meeting of male politicians. As a Chinese male politician
put it, “the women’s role in politics have been stereotyped as those related with preparing foods
and ushering and the biggest obstacle to help them change it is that they accept this stereotype”.32
Therefore, it could be said that Chinese women in MCA also joined the party with the purpose of
helping their male counterparts secure the interest of their ethnic group. And as their role in their
ethnic politics was more as helpers, their position in the party as well as in the politics in general
remained peripheral. The same situation also happened to Chinese women who did their political
activities through other political parties such as the Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia (Malaysian
People Action Party, or the Gerakan) and the Democratic Action Party (the DAP).
A serious consequence of the women tendency to locate their political participation
within the logic of the politics of ethnicity was its lack of the struggles for “women agenda”.
This lack of the struggles to some extents can be observed even until today, but most clearly
before the last two decades of the twentieth century. It was on the one hand due to the fact that
the interest of women could collide with the interest of these women ethnic groups. For example,
some issues concerning how women should be treated in marriage have possibilities to offend
both Malay tradition and religion, and therefore it is difficult for Malay women to raise their
voices on this kind of issues.33 Meanwhile, for the non Malay women, this kind of issues usually
would also be left untouched because they were unwilling to create problem between the Malay
9
and their own ethnic groups. On the other hand, the lack of the struggle was also because such
struggle needed a unity among women which was hardly possible to achieve within a society
where the discourse of the politics of ethnicity ruled. Within the logic of the politics of ethnicity,
women were divided, not only as Malays, Indians, and Chinese, but since Islam has been the
important feature of the Malay, the division line was also drawn between Moslem and other
women.34
However, it does not mean that there were no efforts ever made to form a group in which
women with diverse ethnic backgrounds might be united in order to struggle for the
improvement of women condition. There was a multi ethnic women organization founded in
1963, that is, the National Council of Women Organizations. This organization was purposed to
be an umbrella of various ethnic and non ethnic based women groups. It fought for several
improvements of women condition, such as to get better maintenance for divorced women, equal
pay for equal work in public sector, entry of women into the civil, diplomatic and legal services,
better income tax and pension arrangements for married women in the civil service and also for
the appointment of women as jurors and to National Councils, State Islamic Boards and the
National Council for Islamic Affairs.35 However, since the organization was then overtaken by
the women section of the UMNO (Wanita UMNO), and therefore worked side by side with the
government, its leadership structure mirrored the ethnic elite accommodation of the ruling parties
while its leaders were consciously representative of the three major ethnic groups in the
country.36 Thus the existence of this organization could not help the women escape from the
influence of the ethnic politics.
As a summary, it could be argued that the close relationship of women political
participation in Malaysia with the politics of the ethnic groups to which those women belong has
emerged within a certain situation taking place in Malaysian history. As a result of several
developments that occurred in Malaysia since the end of the nineteenth century to the period of
independence, the politics of ethnicity, emphasizing ethnic bargain and ethnic interest, came to
exist and became a dominant discourse. It was within the society dominated by this discourse
that Malaysian women started their political activities. Under the influence of the discourse, their
10
political participations were debilitated. Thus, instead of focusing in the struggles for women
agenda, they put more emphasis on the efforts to help their ethnic based parties conduct their
ethnic bargain and advance their “ethnic interest”.
3. The Women Movements and the Discourse of “Women Issues”.
Although successfully dominating Malaysian politics for decades, the discourse of the
politics of ethnicity was not as powerful as people might think. While “reigning” in the realm of
the mainstream politics, it could not go beyond it. Outside Malaysian mainstream politics, there
have been several developments occurring, that is the developments of Malaysian social
movements that started to evolve along with the implementation of the NEP, the policy aimed at
solving the socio-economic imbalance in the country. These social movements are based on
interest-orientation beyond class and ethnicity, and therefore transgress the logic of the politics
of ethnicity which lives in the mainstream. Though these social movements were fragmented
movements, they can be categorized as one phenomenon, that is, the phenomenon of the “new
politics”. 37 It is to this new politics that the women movements proliferating during the last
decades of the twentieth century belong. Though their origin was different from other
movements, the women movements share several basic features with others, that is, interestoriented, non ethnic in nature, and most importantly, independent in the sense that they are
neither structurally linked with the government nor under the influence of it.
These women movements were initiated by several women activists some of which did
their study in the West during 1970s and gained the influence of the feminist movements
developing in most Western country in that era. However, they just began their organized
activities in Malaysian in 1980s, when they started to talk about “women issues”. As one of a
prominent women movements leader recalled, the issue at the time she began to organize the
movements was Violence Against Women (VAW).38 Indeed, the VAW has become a significant
issue that motivates women to organize themselves. It was in order to publicize this issue that
several women’s organization came together in 1985 to form a coalition known as the Joint
Action Group Against Violence Against Women (JAG/VAW). 39 Through out the decades of
11
1980s until today, the women groups that form the coalition have focused themselves in working
around some important issues, such as rape, domestic violence and sexual harassment.40
Since the formation of the VAG/VAW, many women organizations have also arisen and
made significant steps in their efforts to struggle for women. These organizations also put
themselves in the debates about critical issues such as democracy, development, culture and
religion and sexuality in various historical moments and through coalitions, such as the Women’s
Manifesto in 1990, the Women’s Agenda for Change in 1998 and Women Monitoring Election
Candidates in 2004. 41 Thus, through several series of activities and campaigns, the voices of
women have become heard louder that it had been before.
In order to achieve their goals, these women organizations work in various ways. Besides
launching publicized campaigns on women issues, -which have made the issues considerably
more known in the society-, they are also involved in the education and empowerment programs.
The Women Center for Change (WCC, used to be known as Women Crisis Center) is an
example of how they use the educational and empowerment programs as their vehicles besides
the publicized campaigns. The organization provides the counseling and other supports service
for abused women to help them overcome the trauma. Besides, it also made the training for civil
service officers who deal with the women as its program. Interestingly, the people that they
trained in 2003 were the volunteers of the Women’s Ministry service center and the front desk
police officers.42 It shows that even though the organization is independent, it does not prevent
itself from cooperating with the government if by doing so they can achieve their goals.
In order to be able to reform the laws that discriminate against women, these organization
are also willing to “work together” with the government. They lobby the Members of
Parliaments (MPs) from various parties. However, it does not mean that they are captured in the
logic of the politics of ethnicity. Instead, they just want to find the way to make some changes to
the regulations that have put women in difficult situations. And as the power to change the
regulations is in the hand of the government and the ruling coalition, they try to lobby people that
“belong” to mainstream politics in order to get the needed helps. A statement of Loh Cheng Kooi,
a Chinese woman who becomes the executive director of the WCC, could be an example of how
12
those women activists try to free themselves from the ethnic politics. When she was asked if she
made use of her Chineseness in lobbying Chinese MPs as a way to achieve her goal, she
answered briefly, “we don’t lobby Chinese MPs, we just lobby MPs.”43 Nevertheless, since the
powers of the MPs are so limited, these people usually go directly to the Minister of Women,
Family, and Community Development, or other related ministers in order to submit their requests.
The struggles conducted by these women movements organizations have not only
improved women condition to a certain extent, but have also made the discourse concerning
women issues more widespread in Malaysian society. As a result of their tireless campaigns,
some vocabularies in women movements are more widely known compared to decades earlier.
Words such as “violence against women”, “women issues”, “women and men equality”, and
“women agenda” have mushroomed in some newspapers. Interestingly, these words are also
used by politicians from the mainstream politics, particularly when they wish to clarify that they
are also concerned with the issues.44 Thus, so to speak, the success of the women movements in
forwarding “women issues” and “women agenda” to people who participate in mainstream
politics has marked the opening of an era when the topics concerning women are started to be
widely discussed both in parliamentary meetings as well as inside the government.
4. Between Identity and Gender: Chinese Women in Contemporary Malaysia
The political developments occurring outside Malaysian mainstream politics have had
significant consequences on Malaysian society. Firstly, it shows that despite strong state
intervention, the state-elite does not have a monopoly over power and political space. 45 The
politics of ethnicity, which has been maintained by the coalition of ethnic groups’ elite, has never
become the only discourse that monopolizes the way of thinking of Malaysian people. It does
dominate Malaysian society in certain periods, but it can not continually be the only dominant
discourse that is immune from any challenge. Instead, it has been challenged by other ways of
thinking, that is, the ways of thinking which are not based on ethnicity and communalism, which
today are more widely accepted in Malaysian society, particularly after the reformasi movements.
Secondly, as there are other ways of thinking as alternatives to the politics of ethnicity, it is
13
possible for certain Malaysian people to free themselves from the latter. And as those alternative
ways of thinking have been actualized by some people through non ethnic political participations
outside the mainstream politics, it opens the way for more Malaysians to participate in politics
beyond the logic of the politics of ethnicity.
Among these alternative ways of thinking, there is a specific discourse concerning
women agenda, women equality, violence against women, domestic violence, and so on. This
“discourse of women issues” has been the impetus for various women organizations to launch
movements in order to struggle for the interest of women. As these issues have been forwarded
by those women activists to people of the mainstream politics, the question of how these issues
have been viewed by women in the mainstream politics will be an interesting one. It is this
question that will be discussed in this chapter. However as it was mentioned earlier in the
introduction section, this paper would focus the discussion on Chinese women.
As it will be shown in the stories presented below, Chinese women that participate in
party politics (at least some of them) have made use of the widespread discourse concerning
women issues in their effort to (re)construct their understanding of who they are. However, this
(re)construction of their understanding of who they are has not led them to a kind of “pure”
identity, either as an ethnic Chinese politician or as a women activist. Instead, they prefer to put
themselves between these two identities and stand on “the positions’ in between”46. This position
enables them to play their roles as a part of ethnic politics and women politics at the same time.
Chinese women participating in the opposition party, that is the DAP, are examples of
how these women try to stand between these two identity options. Fong Po Kwan, for example,
has comes to politics with the hope to make a better Malaysia for all Malaysians, regardless their
races, ethnicity, religion, or gender. She is also concerned with women issues and women agenda.
Her concern could be discerned from how she was involved in a long debate in parliament
meeting about the right for a Malay husband to have another wife without the permission of the
first wife, a phenomenon often conducted by rich Malay men simply by going abroad and get
married in another country. Considering the phenomenon as injustice, she asked a man who
conducts that action to be punished. On another occasion, she also supported women who
14
conducted their political activities through various Non Government Organizations (NGOs). In
fact, as she said, it is important to work together with the women in NGOs for with their support,
the struggle for the interest of women will gain significant results. One example of this was when
70 NGOs backed up women MPs to struggle against the moral policy, that is, the activities by
Syariah polices to raid men and women alleged as against morality, but in most of the cases, it
was the women who were harassed. She said that “if only MPs struggle against the moral policy,
the result would not be significant, but if there are 70 NGOs backed us, as what happened
recently, the result would be more significant”.47 From all that she said, it is undoubted that she
really considers women agenda and women issues as important things to care and struggle.
Chong Eng is another MP from the DAP. Much older than Fong Poh Kwan, she had a
long experience of becoming a women activist. She was one of the activist of the WCC Penang
with which she remains in touch and working together even after she has become the MP of the
DAP. More radical than Fong Poh Kwan in relation with women issues, Chong Eng stated that
what motivated her to join politics was because there were many inequalities between women
and men. While participating in NGOs is important and significant, she needed a better vehicle
to channel the voice of women. Political party was chosen since she viewed it as a direct way to
make changes.48 So to speak, her participation in political party could be seen as an extension of
her political participation as a woman, not as an ethnic Chinese.
Nevertheless, when it comes to the agenda of their political party, these women have no
choice but maintaining the logic of the politics of ethnicity, at least to some extents. Since the
DAP is a Chinese based political party, these two women have to emphasize their ethnic Chinese
identity, particularly when they are facing their constituents. Thus, in a visit to a village in one
area near her hometown, Chong Eng did not have to emphasize her woman identity. Instead, she
had to concentrate in winning that community’s hearts. And since that area was mostly inhabited
by the Chinese, she had to show herself more as a Chinese than as a women in order to be able to
communicate with Chinese old men and ladies, which possibly are the constituents of her party.49
Women from the ruling coalition parties were in a more difficult situation than their
counterparts from the opposition party because they should be careful not to discuss some
15
sensitive issues which would make the government angry. However, they are still able to make
every opportunity to show their concerns with women issues. Tan Cheng Liang and Ng Siew Lai
were two members of the ruling coalition parties who have successfully become the member of
state assembly of Penang. Though they are members of different parties (Tan Cheng Liang is
from the MCA while Ng Siew Lai is from the Gerakan), they share the same motivation to
participate in politics, that is, to serve people. In regard with women issues, these women say that
they support the idea of giving a certain quota for women. The reason is because the women are
still underrepresented, so they should be given the special chance first, at least until their
representatives are equal enough with those of the men. They also say that in regard with women
issues, all female MPs should work hand in hand. As Tan Cheng Liang said, “I don’t know about
the other, may be different individual has different perspective, but for me, when it comes to
women issues, I will stand up without bothering any ethnic line anymore”.50
However, again, when they departed from the women issues, both would just do the same
with their counterparts in the opposition parties. Tan Cheng Liang, for example, would support
the decision of the MCA. Her opinion also reflected the logic of the consociational politics that
have been lived in Malaysia for half of a century. For instance, when asked about Chinese
position in Malaysian politics, she used the vocabulary of the ethnic politics and began to explain
about the political contract that exists between the minorities and majority in Malaysia. She also
related Chinese position with the representative that the Chinese had in the parliament, although
she also said that Chinese representatives nowadays should be considered as enough, for if “we
always want more, how many will be enough”?
The stories above could describe how those Chinese women on the one hand try to
perform their role as the bearers of women agenda’s spirit and the fighters who struggle for the
sake of the women, but on the other hand attempt to maintain their relationship with the “old
politics”. However, instead of considering these actions as hypocrisy for they perform their role
as the heroines of women at a certain time but move to another role as the part of ethnic politics
at another time, this paper would rather conceptualize these activities as a way to locate the
selves within in between position. This is the way some Chinese Malaysian women understand
16
their position in a situation when the discourse of the politics of ethnicity is challenged by other
discourses, one of which is the discourse concerning women issues. They do not necessarily be
captured within one of the discourses and constructed their “pure identities”. Rather, they can
cope with the situation in a certain way, and choose to move back and fort between these two
boundaries, constructing a kind of Identity’s in between. It is on this in between space that these
Chinese women find the latitude to speak out their voice, not only as women, but also as ethnic
Chinese at the same time.
5. Conclusion.
As a conclusion, it could be said that Chinese women who participate in contemporary
Malaysian politics are situated in a difficult condition. These people face the political tendency
that puts emphasis more on ethnicity (and to a certain extent, religion) rather than gender or other
categories. As a result of this, they can hardly find the voice to struggle for women.
However, last decades of the twentieth century witnessed a significant development
occurring in Malaysia. The new politics, which are not based on ethnicity, started to embrace
Malaysian society. It is as a part of this new politics that women movements in Malaysia began
to evolve. The rise of various women movements in Malaysia has made the discourse of the
politics of ethnicity was challenged by the existence of another discourse, that is “the discourse
of women issues”. As a result of a tireless effort, the women movements’ activists have
successfully spread this discourse among the society.
Chinese women who participate in contemporary Malaysian politics have made a unique
respond to the widespread of the vocabulary concerning women issues. They made use of the
issues in their effort to (re)construct their understanding of who they are. However, this
(re)construction does not lead them to a kind of pure identity. Instead, they place themselves
between the two boundaries, and move back and forth, and stand on an “in-between” position. It
is this “in-between” position that enables them to raise their voice as women, while they are
struggling for the interest of women, and as ethnic Chinese at the same time.
17
Acknowledgements: I would first of all dedicate this paper to Mr. Syed Imtiaz Ahmed (University of Dhaka,
Bangladesh) who has provided me with the best and greatest friendship in my life. I would also like to thank the
Asian Scholarship Foundation for providing nine-month research scholarship which enabled me to do this study in
Malaysia. My special gratitude to Dr Lourdes Salvador, Director, and Ms Somkamol Yongkrittaya, Program Officer,
Asian Scholarship Foundation, Bangkok. My special thanks to my host institution, Institute of the Malay World and
Civilization, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) for the generous hospitality it lavished to me. I am especially
grateful to Prof Shamsul AB, the institute’s Director and Prof James T Collins, Senior Professor in the institute, who
have provided me with many helps. My special thanks also to Prof A. Dahana (University of Indonesia), Prof
Melani Budianta (University of Indonesia), Mr Chang Yao Hoon (University of Western Austalia) and Prof Lyn
Parker (University of Western Australia) for their helps and supports during my preparation to conduct this study.
References
Annual Reviews 2003, Penang: Women Center for Change.
Bhabha, Homi (1994) The Location of Culture, London: Routledge., cited in
http://prelecture.stanford.edu/lecture/bhabha/bilio.html, retreaved on May 1st 2005.
“Culture in Between”, in Stuart Hall and Paul Du Gay (eds)
Question of Cultural Identity, London: Sage Publications, p. 53-60
_______________(1996)
Brown, David (1994) The State and Ethnic Politics in Southeast Asia. London: Routledge,
354p.
Case, William (2002) Politics in Southeast Asia: Democracy or Less. Richmond: Curzon
Press, 318 p.
Chin, James (2001) “Malaysian Chinese Politics in the 21st Century: Fear, Service and
Marginalization”, Asian Journal of Political Science, Volume 9, No. 2, pp. 78-93.
Dancz, Virginia (1987) Women and Party Politics in Peninsular Malaysia. Singapore:
Oxford University Press
Furnivall, J.S. (1956) Colonial Policy and Practice: A Comparison Study of Burma and
Nederlands India. New York: New York University Press.
Hefner, Robert W (2001) “Introduction: Multiculturalism and Citizenship in Malaysia,
Singapore, and Indonesia”, in Hefner (ed) The Politics of Multiculturalism:
18
Pluralism and Citizenship in Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia. Honolulu:
University of Hawai’I Press, pp. 1-58.
Khoo Kay Kim (1994) “Malaysian Women’s Participation in Politics: A Historical
Perspective”, in Robert Haas and Rahmah Hashim (eds) Malaysian Women
Creating Their Political Awareness. Kuala Lumpur: Asian Institute for
Development Communication.
Loh Kok Wah, Francis (2001) “Where Has (Ethnic) Politics Gone?: The Case of the BN
Non-Malay Politicians and Political Parties”, in Hefner (ed) The Politics of
Multiculturalism: Pluralism and Citizenship in Malaysia, Singapore and
Indonesia. Honolulu: University of Hawai’I Press, pp. 1-58
__________________ (2002) “Developmentalism and the Limits of Democratic
Discourse”, in Loh Kok Wah and Khoo Boo Teik (eds) Democracy in Malaysia:
Discourses and Practises. Copenhagen: Nordic Institute of Asian Studies, pp. 19-50.
Mandal, Sumit (2004) “Transethnic Solidarities, Racialisation and Social Equality”, in
Edmund Terence Gomez (ed) The State of Malaysia, Ethnicity, Equity and
Reform. London: RoutledgeCurzon, pp. 49-78.
Manderson, Lenore (1980) Women, Politics, and Change: The Kaum Ibu UMNO,
Malaysia, 1945-1972. Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press.
Maznah, Mohamad (2002) “At The Centre And The Periphery: The Contribution of
Women’s Movements to Democratization” in Loh Kok Wah and Khoo Boo Teik
(eds) Democracy in Malaysia: Discourses and Practis Copenhagen: Nordic
Institute of Asian Studies, pp. 216-242
Ng, Cecilia (2005) “The Women’s Movement in Malaysia: Towards Multi-Cultural
Dialogue and Peace Building”, a paper presented in Regional Workshop on Peace
Building in Multi-Ethnic, Multi-Religious South East Asia, Penang, 29 April – 1 May,
2005.
Ng, Cecilia and Chee Heng Leng (1999) “Women in Malaysia: Present Struggles and
Future Directions”, in Cecilia Ng (ed) Positioning Women in Malaysia” Class
and Gender in an Industrializing State. London: MacMillan, pp. 169-204.
Shamsul, AB (2000) “Development and Democracy on Malaysia, A Comment on Its
Socio-Historical Roots”, in Hans Antlov (ed) The Cultural Construction of
Politics in Asia. Richmond: Curzon Press, pp. 86-106.
19
__________ (2001) “The Redefinition of Politics and The Transformation of Malaysian
Pluralism”, in Hefner (ed) The Politics of Multiculturalism: Pluralism
and Citizenship in Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia. Honolulu: University of
Hawai’I Press, pp. 204-226.
__________ (2004) “Text and Collective Memories: The Construction of ‘Chinese’ and
‘Chineseness’ from the Perspective of a Malay”, in Leo Suryadinata (ed) Ethnic
Relations and Nation-Building in Southeast Asia: The Case of the Ethnic Chinese.
Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, pp. 109-144.
Tan Chee Beng (2000) “Socio-cultural Diversities and Identities”, in Lee Kam Hing and
Tan Chee Beng (eds) The Chinese in Malaysia. New York: Oxford University
Press, pp. 37-70.
____________ (2003) “People of Chinese Descent: Language, Nationality and Identity”,
in Wang Ling-Chi and Wang Gungwu (eds) The Chinese Diaspora, Selected
Essays, Vol I, Singapore: Eastern University Press, pp. 38-63.
Wang Gungwu (1992) “The Study of Chinese Identities in Southeast Asia”, in Wang
Gungwu, China and the Chinese Overseas, Singapore: Times Academic Press, pp. 198221.
Yen Ching-hwang (2000) “Historical Background”, in Lee Kam Hing and Tan Chee
Beng (eds) The Chinese in Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press, pp. 1-36.
End Notes
1
For a discussion of this marginalization process, see Francis Loh Kok Wah (2002) and James Chin (2001).
See Loh Kok Wah (2002), Loh Kok Wah (2001), and Chin (2001)
3
See Lenore Manderson (1980)., pp. 41-44.
4
See Khoo Kay Kim (1994)., p. 1.
5
Ibid., p. 2-3., Virginia H. Dancz (1987)., pp. 70-75.
6
Ibid., pp.102-105.
7
The concept of plural society was coined by Furnivall. For a discussion of this concept, see Furnivall (1948)., pp.
303-312 and Robert Hefner (2001)., p. 4-8.
8
Furnivall (1948)., p. 304.
9
See e.g., Hefner (2001)., pp. 4-8., Shamsul (2000)., pp. 96-97 David Brown (1994)., p. 216., and William Case
(2002)., pp. 101-103.
10
See Shamsul (2000)., p. 96.
11
For a discussion of the constructed character of ethnic identities in Malaysia, See e.g., Sumit Mandal (2004)., pp.
56-57., Shamsul (2004)., pp.126-130.
2
20
12
Chinese in Malaysia, as well as in other regions in Southeast Asia, were diverse communities and are still so until
today. They came from different places in China and consist of several dialect groups based on which they usually
identify themselves and be identified by others. Some major dialect groups in Malaysia today are Hokkien, Hakka,
Cantonese, and Teochew. For a further discussion, see Tan Chee Beng (2000 and 2003).
13
See Shamsul Op. Cit, p. 124.
14
See, e.g., Brown, Op. Cit., pp.217-218., Shamsul (2000)., p. 96.
15
Shamsul (2004)., p.120.
16
Ibid.
17
See Shamsul (2000)
18
For a detailed discussion about this “historical identity”, see Wang Gungwu (1991).
19
Ibid., pp.199-200
20
For a detailed description about the condition of Malaysian Chinese during the arrival of Dr Sun Yat-sen and how
they began to be influenced by the Chinese nationalism, See Yen Ching-hwang (2000)., pp. 12-17 and 23-24.
21
Shamsul (2000)., p. 97.
22
Ibid.
23
The PAS is basically a political party based on Islam. However, since Islam is inseparable from the Malay and
vice versa, the PAS is commonly categorized as ethnic Malay based political party.
24
See Shamsul, Op.Cit. pp. 96-100, Loh (2002)., pp. 22-23.
25
Shamsul, Op.Cit.
26
Mandal, Op. Cit., 53-55.
27
Khoo Boo Teik (1995)., p. xvii (quoted in Mandal, Op.Cit., p. 50)
28
Manderson, Op.Cit.
29
Ibid., p. 56.
30
Khadijah Sidek was one of few leaders who bravely struggled more for the interest of women, particularly women
position in relation with men. However, she was expelled from the party soon after being elected as the leader of the
Kaum Ibu. See Manderson, Op.Cit., 112-114.
31
Dancz, Op. Cit., p. 131, Maznah Mohamad (2002)., p. 220.
32
Interview with Dato’ Dr Toh Kin Woon, Penang, May 5 2005.
33
An example of these issues, which is still under discussion today, is the domestic violation among Malay women.
Human Rights commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) proposed that husbands who force their wives to have sex
against their will be considered as an offence. However the minister of Women, Family and Community
development commented that this issue should be examined carefully for it includes Syariah Law. See Utusan
Online, 24 August 2004.
34
See, Cecilia Ng (2005)., p. 3-4
35
Maznah, Op. Cit., pp. 224-227
36
Ng., Op. Cit., p. 4.
37
For a detailed discussion about Malaysian “new politics”, see Shamsul (2002)., pp. 219-223.
38
Interview with Maria Chin Abdullah, the Executive Director of Women Development Center (WDC), Kuala
Lumpur, July 14 2005.
39
See Maznah, Op. Cit., p. 230, Ng, Op. Cit., pp. 4-5., Ng and Chee Heng Leng (1999), p. 182.
40
Ng, Op. Cit.
41
Ibid.
42
Women Center for Changes’ Annual Review, 2003., pp. 16-20.
43
Interview with Loh Cheng Kooi, Penang, May 5 2005.
44
For instances, the statements of the Deputy Minister of the Ministry of Women, Family, and Community
Development, that the the Non Government Organisations (NGOs) should strengthen their roles to squash the
“violence against women” (Utusan Online, October, 12-2004), the Minister’s determination to focus on “women
issues” (Utusan Online, July, 19-2004)
21
45
Shamsul, Op. Cit., p.205.
While using the words “in between” to refer to this situation, I am inspired by Hommi Bhabha’s concept of in
between, which was used to show the space in which a subject identity is elaborated and negotiated using several
categories such as race, gender, generation, etc. See Homi Bhabha (1994 and 1996).
47
Based in the interview with YB Fong Poh Kwan, Kuala Lumpur, April 11 2005 and the observation in parliament
building in July 12 2005.
48
Interview with YB Chong Eng, Kuala Lumpur, March 30 2004.
49
Based on the participant observation conducted in penang, May 6 and 7 2005.
50
Interviews with YB Tan Cheng Liang and YB Ng Siew Lai, Penang, May 18 th 2005.
46