Lukas #1 or Je #2 for KOMAHI? I’d go for the white space between two pictures (oration stage part 2)

Secondly, I’d like to comment on how they perform. Let’s start with Lukas and then we'll take a look at Je. Before that, it’s worth keeping in mind that when you’re a candidate, you need to make us give you our sympathy. You need to show the best side of you, your best qualities. I know it’s too early to judge, but if both do not take this into account, they could get none of us from class of 2014 vote for them. When there is this gap of angkatan, you must take it into account regardless of you, who is one year our junior, having the same age as ours. Yes we are equal. Some of s may know you well, but this gap inhibits us to know each other well.

Unfortunately, Lukas did not start off well. He addressed us as “temen-temen anak angkatan 14.” It doesn’t sound really sound good to us. Then Lukas goes on by saying “I’ll make this fast as our time is limited. Aku juga laper dan mau istirahat”. This does not sound good. Not at all. He’s the one who need our sympathy, so he’s the one who has to evoke it. Do not think that we can give it to you freely. This is by no means a good first-show. The other thing that came to my mind is that Lukas was nervous and he talked very fast, exactly like how I did last year. This is of course normal for us first-timers. He simply needs to calm down and practice delivering his thoughts. This is what I learned from Anwip who kindly evaluate my performance. Buka-Isi-Tutup. Here, he had a hard time eliciting our sympathy because of the words he chose to use. As for the tagline (Dedikasi untuk KOMAHI and# LukasForKOMAHI1), I think he and his team did just well and they have to build on it. Lukas did not explain what he means and how he would do things with Dedikasi. So he still needs to convince us by elaborating his concept.

As for Je, he started much better with the more preferable way in addressing us (“kakak-kakak angkatan 2014”). He then continued by saying that he looks to develop on the KOMAHI that we left him and he’s sure that professionalism is key. It was all fine, before we lost interest in him because of the way he said a slight thing. The class got a bit noisy and he said firmly (instead of humbly and politely) in the middle of his speech: “Can I have your attention please?” It’s actually okay to say that. He chose the right question. But not the right manner. No doubt that he’s been influential among his friends and to class of 2016. Unfortunately, we have not been implied by his influence as much as the groups that I mentioned. In a way, it appears to us as arrogance. So he cannot just tell us to give him our attention. Just like Lukas, Je did not succeed in eliciting our sympathy, not because of the words, but the manner. It may seem the slightest thing of all and not meaningful, but that’s exactly the impression it had created. However, Je delivered in some ways. He’s used to public speaking so I saw his charisma and confidence, and of course the fact that he’s professional.

Unfortunately for Je, I have to say I disagree with the concept he’s offering. Once again we’re trapped in the debate of professionalism versus family, just like how Asa and I were last year.

Sorry, but I need to relate this with a concept. Let’s say KOMAHI is a society. We, IR students and KOMAHI members, are individualist going for our own interests. KOMAHI as an organization can be viewed with Emile Durkheim’s conception of Division of Labour. KOMAHI is built upon the base of organic society, a society in which every individual is aware of what they have to do, of what duties are assigned to him. I can say that we are all professional. This is proven by the fact that KOMAHI does not have to change or erase any program. So the new administration can start working with the already established set of programs. They only need to build on these programs and ameliorate them so that people can benefit from it. We are also ruled by a law called AD/ART although it does not regulate firmly some things. In short, the staff members that run KOMAHI from year to year know very well what to do and how to do things in each division, departments and BSO to be exact. I cannot agree more with Je that program kerja is the core of KOMAHI, which gets this organization working. But, it has to be taken into account that this organization is also built upon voluntarism. None of us are getting paid for doing stuff. We even pay in order to have successful programs. Je explicitly stated that regardless of which state of personal relations we are in, we have to uphold professionalism and do things or get things done. Despite of the campaign posts that mentioned ‘make everyone feel at home,’ the things mentioned earlier were what was said in the campaign. If it were to be real, we’d have a KOMAHI of robots, not getting paid but told to put aside their emotions in order to have successful programs.

In such an organic society with such situation, we need to get the features of mechanical society, which is a sense of belonging, sense of being part of the family. The challenging part is that it is not given. it has to be garnerd throughout the one's service. In exchange of not paying the staff, the most important thing to do as the head of KOMAHI is to make people happy. This is not done solely by telling them what to do. This is very much about considering how they feel about doing things they need to do. The head of KOMAHI needs to ensure that everyone feels they are cared for, they are not left behind. They need to be sure that what they are doing is for the sake of the people the organization serves. It’s actually no simple task to be the Head of KOMAHI. Afterall, it’s not about being at the top of the pyramid. It’s about being at the very bottom of it: at the service of everyone. To be the head of KOMAHI is to serve, to get involved. Comparing KOMAHI with such a professional body is simply wrong, just like how I did last year.

It’s so last year, literally.

It’s not only Je and his team as the creator of their concept who needs to take this into account. At the same time, Lukas did not state clearly on how he would do stuff in his service (more precise word rather than ‘administration’). He only stated he is committed to this and that but did not elaborate further. The two camps don’t need to take this into account if they don’t want to. But if any one of them can get a new debate going other than professionalism versus family, it would show that this particular candidate knows KOMAHI better than anyone else in FISIPOL.

I know I have not done well during my service. I have not succeeded. I may talk of concepts but you may have yet to feel the impact. But the point of succession is to have development, to have bigger things delivered to the public of KOMAHI UGM. There is still a long way to go. So Lukas and Je had better work hard to convince us.

#KOMAHIkita

#Kita

Lukas or Je? I’d go for the white space between two pictures (oration stage, part 1)

Alors, c’est parti! Just around 09.40 yesterday we saw the ‘presidential’ campaign for KOMAHI kickstarted with speeches by the two candidates, Lukas (#1) and Je (#2), both from class 2015. It was in the class of Teori Hubungan Internasional, in which most are 2014 students. They will continue to other classes some time later on, and I assume the speeches will be similar.

To begin with, I’d like to say there is really not much to politicize in this process. Rather, we need to see the candidates’ merit (and other social capital) to help us to decide who deserves our vote to lead our beloved KOMAHI.

I know no one really needs my opinion, but I’d like to use freedom of speech privileged to me as a citizen of a quasi-liberal country. If you’re already reading this now, I hope it can help broaden your view and challenge you to assess critically what the two candidates have to offer.

The thing I’d like to point out is: none candidate impressed us (I talked to some classmates and they had the same thought as mine). Yeah, if I had to cast the ballot now (at least for now at this early stage), I’d go for the white space between the two photos.

When I point my finger to others, my other three (or four) fingers point back at me myself. I’m well aware of this and I’d like criticize myself first (you can skip this paragraph if you do not care though hehehe). I did not do well during the campaign; was not good enough in public speaking. I could not get what I said in line with what I think, simply because I find difficulties in getting shit together. I was very much part of this obsolete “professionalism v family” bunk. I concede that I did not have sufficient knowledge on my own concept that I was trying to build. I was so much into this conception of ‘family’ only to find things were much different from what I had envisaged. In short, I realized I did not have sufficient intellectual capacity and charisma to be the head of this immense organization, to create what I had envisaged. It needs much more than imagination and confidence of being able to do what I want. It needs real hardwork. But I’d also like to see what I did quite right. It was the commitment to get into the real work, to cope with the challenge. I challenged myself to be someone that was no different from the people I lead. It was a commitment to lead by example. I know I have not had much success, but I never regretted on trying to do so. I’m not a kind of person that tells people what to do (although this position obliges me to do so), but I’m trying my best to get involved directly into some of each of the 9 departments and BSO programs. I enjoy this particular part of the hardship actually.

Okay, enough talking about me. Now let’s get to the next two candidates.

First, an overview of the quality of the candidate. This is of course 100% my opinion.

Lukas offers “Dedikasi untuk KOMAHI” which I can confirm is not at all nonsense, looking form the track record. I’ve worked closely with him and I can see he’s been doing his best at INKA with its IRCCT montly discussion. He’s the program organizer in partnership with Tiffany and they did well. Lukas has been present in discussions that I attended and he made sure everything went well. The same case at HI CINE, he played his role in Antologi Anatomi, he did his job well in editing the films produced by the amazing HI CINE guys. In these two cases, he successfully showed his responsibility and proved himself reliable. Surprisingly, lately he got involved in DIRA and performed in two occasions. I argue that he’s been showing his dedication, which he can brag if he wants. So apparently, he’s multitalented. Had the chances never come, we’d never know that he is. However, he’s not a person who stands out in the crowds so few know his contribution to KOMAHI. For me, he’s also a little bit timid, so he’s okay with being not known.

At the other end, we have Je who offers professionalism as the key to KOMAHI’s thriving. In my opinion, he’s been a pro all his life. He’s a guitarist and he also sings and there’s a lot at stake with this role. It’s important not to make mistakes up the stage. Amazingly, he’s very much used to doing that and we can see this in other arena. As for KOMAHI, he’s been a staff at INKOM’s Diplomatic Affairs which mainly deals with building relations with KOMAHIs from other universities in Indonesia. However, due to some conditions, he wasn’t available at times when the diplomatic events were held. He’s been doing good recently by finally taking part in KORWIL IV meeting and also in the UGM’s delegation for the 28th PNMHII at Universitas Budi Luhur, Jakarta next week. At the last KORWIL IV meeting, he showed his ability to think critically and show his eagerness to learn about the affairs. Outside INKOM, he is also a member of Tim Minat-Bakat, HI Kustik under DASS. Well, no doubt he has impressed many people (especially girls) with his unbelievable talent and personality. He has performed in some occasion. As an addition, he was also successful as the chief of committee for MAKRAB 2016. Contrary to Lukas, Je is a person who stands out in the crowd. He’s got fans, which is undoubtedly good for him.

So we know already their contribution to KOMAHI. but it does not stop here.... (continue to part 2)

Standar Kecantikan, Konstruksi Sosial, dan Keadilan

Aku sendiri nggak percaya bisa menulis tentang hal-hal semacam ini.

Tapi semoga, kalau kalian membaca, tulisan ini bisa memberikan perspektif baru. Selain itu, mumpung masih 40-an hari sebelum demisioner, semoga tulisan ini punya semangat yang sama dengan HIPFEST 2016 demi penghapusan kekerasan terhadap perempuan.

Btw, HIPFEST 2016 Ignite The Revival, 25 November 2016, Jogja National Museum.

Masyarakat kita tidak lagi asing dengan berbagai standar estetika dan kecantikan manusia, terutama terhadap wanita. Maraknya pengeksposan kecantikan melalui iklan, majalah, video klip musik, dan kontes kecantikan (seperti Putri Indonesia dan Miss Universe) menunjukkan bagaimana kita terus didikte oleh mereka yang memegang kontrol akan agenda. Mainstream media menjadi agen yang sangat krusial dalam menyebarluaskan narasi mengenai standar kecantikan. Lebih jauh lagi, secara tidak sadar kita sangat terpengaruh dan memegang teguh standar yang telah dikonstruksikan media. Fakta ini termanifestasi melalui media sosial seperti Instagram di mana siapapun dapat mengeksploitasi standar kecantikan untuk kepentingannya, atau bahkan sekedar mengeksposnya, sedangkan kita terus mendukung struktur ini dengan likes yang kita berikan.

Saya berpendapat bahwa standar kecantikan merupakan konstruksi sosial, sebuah struktur yang dibentuk manusia (melalui mainstream media maupun media sosial) yang pada gilirannya akan memengaruhi cara berpikir dan kognisi manusia. Standar kecantikan menciptakan ketidakadilan di masyarakat, dengan seorang yang dianggap cantik akan dianggap lebih favourable, desirable, dan bahkan mendapatkan kesempatan-kesempatan tertentu secara eksklusif.

Standar kecantikan dapat dipandang sebagai suatu konstruksi sosial, sesuai dengan teori konstruktivisme sosial yang cukup applicable dalam memahami berbagai fenomena sosial. Teori ini berusaha untuk mengonseptualisasi hubungan antara agen dan struktur (Barnett 2014, 157). Interaksi manusia sebagai agen akan menciptakan budaya, norma, dan berbagai cara untuk memaknai realitas yang telah mapan di masyarakat seperti persepsi mengenai baik dan buruk. Konsekuensinya, terbentuklah social facts yang sekalipun abstrak tetap terasa nyata. Demikianlah cara masyarakat (society) menyepakati fakta sosial sebagai suatu kenyataan. Standar kecantikan juga merupakan suatu fakta sosial yang terbentuk sebagai suatu pandangan umum dan disepakati oleh masyarakat.

Hal tersebut seakan mengikis relativitas ukuran kecantikan dan attractiveness yang sebenarnya berbeda bagi tiap individu. Ide-ide mengenai relativitas ini tidak lagi menjadi otonomi masing-masing individu, tetapi juga dibentuk secara kolektif dalam masyarakat. Di sinilah interaksi antara agen dan struktur terjadi hingga terbentuk standar kecantikan. Agen-agen yang berpengaruh besar adalah media yang memiliki aspek visual seperti televisi, majalah, hingga iklan di billboard sekitar kota. Sebagai konstruksi sosial, ide mengenai kecantikan dan attractiveness juga tidak lepas dari tren globalisasi (Yan dan Bissel 2014). Dengan begitu, terdapat beberapa kesamaan antara standar kecantikan di negara satu dengan lainnya, dengan Barat sebagai acuan utama. Di Indonesia, standar kecantikan pun cukup serupa dengan negara lain seperti Amerika Serikat. Beberapa ukuran seperti tubuh langsing atau kurus, badan tinggi, kulit cerah (biasa disebut dengan istilah ‘putih’ (white)), hidung mancung, dan lain-lain. To a lesser extent, fitur lain seperti rambut pun juga dapat menentukan cantik atatu tidaknya seorang wanita, khususnya di Indonesia. Misalnya rambut lurus sampai berombak sebagai fitur fisik yang lebih favourable daripada keriting.

Media dengan baik mengokohkan konstruksi ini dengan mengekspos public figure yang dianggap cantik dan memenuhi standard tersebut, misalnya melalui iklan yang dibintangi penyanyi dan aktris seperti Raisa Andriana dan Chelsea Islan. Kedua contoh public figure tersebut tentunya memiliki beauty and attractiveness standard yang diterima secara luas oleh masyarakat Indonesia. Di area lain seperti pemberitaan, pembawa berita pun cenderung memiliki standar kecantikan yang telah disebutkan,[1] misalnya Grace Natalie dan Indy Rahmawati yang menjadi news anchor di stasiun televisi swasta TVone. Hal ini juga dapat dijumpai di negara-negara lain melalui media cetak seperti majalah wanita, misalnya Cosmopolitan yang tersebar di lebih dari 100 negara, diterbitkan dalam 63 bahasa, dan memiliki 36 edisi internasional (Yan dan Bissel 2014). Berdasarkan riset yang dilakukan Yan dan Bissel (2014), majalah fashion internasional seperti Vogue, Elle, Cosmopolitan, dan Glamour cenderung menggunakan model dengan physical appearance serupa, seperti Victoria Beckham, Kate Moss, Kate Hudson, dan Jennifer Lopez. Hal ini menunjukkan kemampuan media dan globalisasi membentuk dan menyebarluaskan beauty culture, serta menciptakan standar di berbagai negara.

Tidak hanya media massa, kehadiran media sosial seperti Instagram memberikan kita ruang untuk terus mempertahankan standar-standar ini. Tab ‘Explore’ Instagram misalnya, memperlihatkan foto-foto wanita muda dengan tubuh langsing, kulit putih, rambut lurus atau berombak, bermata lebar, kadan dengan aksentuasi lensa kontak, hingga bertubuh tinggi yang memiliki ribuan likes. Akun-akun ini juga cenderung memiliki pengikut yang mencapai belasan ribu. Selain itu, mereka memberikan layanan endorsement bagi produk-produk kecantikan seperti lipstik, masker wajah, dan pensil alis yang dijual secara online. Bukan hanya produk kecantikan, tetapi juga aparel, tas, baju-baju wanita, hingga endorsement  bagi kafe.

Terdapat pola yang sama pada mainstream media dan media sosial: wanita yang memiliki standar kecantikan yang diterima secara luas akan dianggap menjadi daya tarik tertentu bagi berbagai kepentingan khususnya ekonomi. Tidak hanya menunjukkan standar kecantikan yang sudah mapan di Indonesia, celakanya struktur ini menciptakan ketidakadilan di masyarakat Indonesia, misalnya dalam kesempatan-kesempatan kerja. Berbagai riset menyatakan bahwa  persepsi mengenai kecantikan dan attractiveness membuat seseorang yang memilikinya mendapatkan penilaian yang lebih favourable, dianggap lebih diinginkan (desirable), dan bahkan lebih sukses dalam berbagai interaksi sosial (Yan dan Bissel 2014).

Hal inilah yang ditunjukkan oleh berbagai media kini dan dapat dijelaskan secara sederhana. Tokoh-tokoh utama wanita dalam sinetron-sinetron Indonesia cenderung memiliki standar-standar kecantikan yang telah disebutkan di atas. Sedangkan, kita sangat jarang menemui aktris dengan tubuh gemuk mendapatkan peran utama tersebut. Hal yang sama terjadi pada periklanan dan pekerjaan lain seperti pembawa berita. Ditambah lagi, belum pernah ada televisi nasional yang memiliki pembawa berita dengan etnisitas Indonesia Timur, misalnya etnis Melanesia yang memiliki kulit gelap dan rambut keriting, apalagi sebagai bintang iklan produk kecantikan seperti shampo. Terciptalah pembatasan kesempatan pada orang-orang dengan penampilan fisik tertentu, di mana mereka lebih diuntungkan, bahkan keadaan ini memungkinkan terjadinya segregasi rasial di Indonesia yang mengakibatkan ketidakadilan. Media sosial juga menunjukkn bahaya ini. Hampir tidak pernah kita menemukan seseorang wanita yang obese atau sekedar berbadan gemuk menjadi iklan-iklan baju yang sedang à la mode.

Secara tidak sadar, kita telah menjadi masyarakat yang akrab dengan objektivikasi seksual, menjadikan penampilan fisik wanita sebagai objek yang dihargai hanya dari kegunaannya bagi orang lain (Syzmanski, Moffitt dan Carr 2011). Hal ini sangat jelas dalam promosi dan periklanan, serta kegiatan media lainnya. Seakan-akan kita memisahkan tubuh wanita dari dirinya sendiri sekedar sebagai alat untuk menarik perhatian khayalak atau bahkan laki-laki. Proses inilah yang mungkin dapat menghilangkan kemampuan suatu masyarakat untuk menghargai wanita sebagai social being. Dengan pengetahuan ini, mungkin kita tidak dapat menghancurkan struktur yang sudah ada dan kokoh berdiri di society kita. Akan tetapi, akan lebih bijaksana apabila kita dapat menghargai manusia, terutama wanita, bukan dari penampakan fisiknya saja, melainkan menghargainya sebagai manusia yang setara satu dengan lainnya. Hal yang perlu diingat adalah bahwa standar kecantikan telah memengaruhi society kita dan membuat kita melihat penampilan fisik sebagai komoditas yang dapat dieksploitasi. Sebaiknya kita tidak terjebak di dalam struktur ini.

Referensi

Barnett, Michael. "Social Constructivism." In Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations, by John Baylis, Steve Smith and Patricia Owens, 155-168. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.

Syzmanski, Dawn m, Lauren B Moffitt, dan Erika R Carr. “Sexual Objectification of Women: Advances to Theory and Research.” The Counseling Psychologist 39, no. 1 (2011): 6-38.

Yan, Yan, dan Kim Bissel. “The Globalization of Beauty: How is Ideal Beauty Influenced by Globally Published Fashion and Beauty Magazines?” Journal of Intercultural Communication Research 43, no. 3 (2014): 194-214.

---

[1] Hal ini dikuatkan dengan artikel online yang saya temukan, dengan judul “8 Presenter TVone paling cantik” (URL: http://www.portalfia.com/2015/07/8-presenter-tvone-paling-cantik_24.html)