*HQGHU3OXUDOLVP0XVOLP6RXWKHDVW$VLDVLQFH(DUO\
0RGHUQ7LPHV
Michael G. Peletz
Social Research: An International Quarterly, Volume 78, Number 2,
Summer 2011, pp. 659-686 (Article)
3XEOLVKHGE\7KH-RKQV+RSNLQV8QLYHUVLW\3UHVV
DOI: 10.1353/sor.2011.0005
For additional information about this article
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/sor/summary/v078/78.2.peletz.html
Access provided by University of Warwick (11 Jun 2015 11:31 GMT)
Michael G. Peletz
Gender Pluralism: Muslim
Southeast Asia since Early
Modern Times
SCHOLARS AND JOURNALISTS IN THE WEST AND ELSEWHERE HAVE
devoted a good deal o f a tte n tio n in recen t decades to th e ways in w hich
g e n d e r a n d sex u ality are ex p erien ced , co n stru ed , a n d re g u la ted in
M uslim societies an d u n d e r Islam ic law in particular.1To date, however,
h ard ly any studies dealing w ith M uslims have focused squarely on long­
te rm histo rical tran sfo rm atio n s w ith resp ect to gen d er o r sexuality.2
One co n sequence is th a t scholarly an d o th e r public discourses fore­
gro u n d wildly co ntrasting im agery o f gender an d sexual realities in th e
M uslim w orld. F u rth er ex acerb atin g th e problem s are tim e-honored
practices involving th e use a n d abuse o f term s such as “trad itio n al” to
characterize social an d cultural-political p attern s am ong M uslims th a t
are o ften o f relatively recen t provenance and th a t do in any case vaiy a
good deal th ro u g h t im e and space.
F rom th e M iddle Ages th ro u g h th e V ictorian era, for exam ple,
W e ste rn lite ra tu re d ea lin g w ith M uslim s fre q u e n tly ad d ressed th e
ways in w h ic h m id d le-ag ed a n d eld erly m e n in som e p a rts o f th e
M uslim h e a rtla n d s w e re in s p ire d by th e b e a u ty o f p re -p u b e sc e n t
boys a n d b eard less y oung m e n w ith w h o m th e y som etim es engaged
in ero tic if n o t ex plicitly sexual relatio n s. This lite ra tu re com m only
I am grateful to Perrinh Savang for research and editorial assistance and would also
like to thank Afsaneh Najmabadi and Rayna Rapp for their comments on an earlier
draft o f this essay.
social research
Vol. 78 : No. 2 : Sum m er 2011 6 59
fo cused o n w h a t w as ta k e n to b e relig io u sly sa n c tio n e d lu st, deca­
d ence, a n d p e rv ersio n , o fte n su g g estin g th a t a t least for elite m ale
secto rs o f M uslim so cieties a n d p o lities, th e re ig n in g —a n d “tra d i­
tio n a l”—eth o s w ith re sp e c t to g e n d e r an d sex u ality w as essen tially
o ne o f “a n y th in g goes.” These im p ressio n s are usefully view ed in re la ­
tio n to stereo ty p es u n d e rg ird in g m ed ia an d o th e r public discourses
in th e n ew m ille n n iu m , w h ic h s h a rp ly in v e rt th e ir V icto rian -era
predecessors. The in v ersio n is p a rtic u la rly obvious w h e n th e m edia
deal w ith subjects such as th e ex ecu tio n o f allegedly gay m e n in Iraq;
p ro n o u n c e m e n ts fro m leaders in Iran th a t th e re are no hom osexuals
in th a t co untry, a n d th a t i f th e re w e re th e y w o u ld be p u t to death;
a n d th e c o n stra in ts o n w o m en a n d fem ale sex u a lity (h etero n o rm ative an d otherw ise) th a t are w idely d o cu m en te d for settings such as
Saudi A rabia, P akistan, a n d A fghanistan. The m o st g en e ral sense we
are left w ith is th a t M uslim s are in h e re n tly conservative w ith regard
to m a tte rs o f g e n d e r a n d sexuality, a n d th a t th is c o n se rv a tism is
so m eh o w “tra d itio n a l” o r “ra cial.” T he m o re specific im p ressio n s
are e sse n tia lly th re e fo ld . T h ere is n o ro o m in M uslim societies or
cu ltu res for any k in d o f p lu ralism w ith re sp ect to g e n d e r o r sexuality;
M uslim m e n are in v ariab ly given to p a tria rc h a l excesses o f various
kin d s, i f n o t m isogyny, h ete ro se x ism , a n d h o m o p h o b ia; a n d all o f
th ese dynam ics are san c tio n e d a n d en g e n d ere d in th e first in stan ce
by divinely o rd a in e d law (syariah) a n d a tte n d a n t n o rm s laid dow n in
th e Q u ran an d o th e r sacred tex ts such as th e H ad ith (oral accounts,
la te r w ritte n d o w n, o f th e te a c h in g s a n d a c tio n s o f th e P ro p h e t
M uham m ad).
How m ig h t w e m ake sense o f th ese co n tra stin g d epictions o f
g en d er and sexuality? T here are at least tw o ways o f engaging th e ques­
tio n . The first involves asse rtin g th a t th e tro p es a n d stereotypes to
w h ich I have d raw n a tte n tio n have little bearing o n em pirical reality,
and th a t th ey tell us m ore ab o u t those w ho traffic in th e m (W esterners)
a n d th e ir (shifting) sen sib ilities—alo n g w ith w id esp read processes
o f O thering—th a n th o se to w h o m th e y p u rp o rte d ly apply (Muslims).
T here is som e tru th to th e se arg u m en ts, b u t th e y are too sim plistic.
660
social research
A m ong th e ir shortcom ings is th a t they are profoundly ahistorical; they
m ake no provision for im p o rta n t developm ents th a t have occurred in
M uslim societies a n d polities in re c e n t cen tu ries, som e o f w h ich go
a long w ay to w ard acco u n tin g for th e real a n d im agined contrasts at
issue.
The second a n d m o re pro d u ctiv e w ay to engage th e q u estio n
is th u s to ex am ine re lev an t h isto rical developm ents in one or m ore
regions o f th e M uslim w orld, including in p articu lar th e ascendance o f
certain kinds o f h eteronorm ativities. The m ore encom passing dynam ic
I ad d ress in th e pages to follow involves th e tra n sfo rm a tio n an d
constrictio n in re cen t centuries o f a critical range o f pluralistic sensi­
bilities a n d dispositions w ith re g ard to gender, sexuality, a n d bodily
practices, w h ich I subsum e u n d e r th e rubric o f gender p luralism .3 Like
o th er kinds o f pluralism s, g en d er pluralism is relative in a n u m b er o f
d ifferen t ways. Indeed, th e exam ples o f g en d e r p lu ralism in M uslim
Southeast Asia th a t I focus o n are m ost appropriately view ed as com po­
n en ts o f system s o f g rad u ated pluralism . The la tte r te rm draw s a tte n ­
tio n to th e differential d istrib u tio n th ro u g h o u t societies an d polities
o f sentim ents, dispositions, an d institutionalized arran g e m e n t condu­
cive to o r in h ib itin g p lu ralism , m any o f w h ich are keyed to system s
o f stratified rep ro duction—defined as encom passing system s o f pow er
relations th a t encourage certain groups’ n u rtu ra n ce an d reproduction
w hile discouraging or precluding those o f others (Foucault 1978; C ohen
1995).
T he m a in g oal o f th is essay is to an aly ze g e n d e r p lu ra lism
in M uslim S o u th e ast Asia since th e b eg in n in g o f th e early m o d e rn
era, w h ic h h isto ria n s o f th e re g io n co m m o n ly define as th e p erio d
e x te n d in g ro u g h ly fro m th e fifte e n th to th e e ig h te e n th ce n tu rie s.4
I pay p a rtic u la r a tte n tio n to th e roles o f tra n g e n d e re d p erso n s a n d
th e sex u al v a ria b ility asso ciated w ith th e m , a n d sh o u ld th u s n o te
th a t I u se th e te rm “tra n s g e n d e r” to re fe r to in d iv id u als involved
in c u sto m a ry b eh a v io rs t h a t tra n s c e n d o r tra n sg re ss m a jo rita ria n
g en d er practices. One o f m y arg u m e n ts is th a t tran sg e n d ere d persons
provide a po w erful lens th ro u g h w h ich to view g e n d e r p lu ralism in
G ender Pluralism : M uslim S outheast Asia since Early M odern Times
661
M uslim S o u th e ast Asia since th e b eg in n in g o f early m o d e rn tim es.
This is p a rtly because, fo r th is reg io n a n d period, th e vicissitudes o f
tran sg e n d erism index a n u m b e r o f analytically d istin c t y et culturally
in terlo ck e d processes: th e in creased fo rm alizatio n a n d segregation of
g en d er roles; th e d istan cin g o f w o m en from loci o f pow er a n d p res­
tige; th e n a rro w e d ra n g e o f leg itim acy c o n c e rn in g th in g s in tim a te
a n d erotic; a n d th e c o n strictio n o f p lu ralistic g e n d e r sensibilities as
a w hole. A nother, m ore g en e ral a rg u m e n t is th a t it is only in lig h t o f
th is h isto rical exegesis th a t g en d er p lu ralism a n d its stru c tu rin g can
be un d ersto o d .
AMONG THE INTERESTING FEATURES OF MUSLIM SOUTHEAST ASIA
in cu ltu ral-p o litical te rm s are th e deeply e n tre n c h e d tra d itio n s o f
p lu ralism w ith resp ect to g en d er a n d sexuality. Perhaps m o st im por­
ta n t to u n d erscore in this regard is th a t d uring th e first h a lf o f th e early
m o d ern p erio d (and for m an y cen tu ries p rio r to it), k in sh ip system s
th ro u g h o u t M uslim S outheast Asia te n d e d to em phasize bilateralism
(tracing k in ties to relatives th ro u g h b o th th e fa th e r an d th e m other)
ra th e r th a n one o f a n o th e r v aria n t o f u n ilin eal (for exam ple, p atrilin ­
eal) d escen t a n d in h e rita n c e , th u s valorizing re la tio n s th ro u g h m en
an d w o m en alike; and th a t religious traditions w ere “profoundly dualistic, w ith m ale an d fem ale elem ents b o th needing to be p re sen t to give
pow er and effect. Female gods o f th e underw orld, o f th e e a rth o r crops
(especially rice), and o f th e m oon balanced th e m ale gods o f th e u p p er
world, th e sky, iro n (that w h ich ploughs th e earth, cuts th e rice-stalk),
an d th e s u n ” (Reid 1993: 161-162). W om en p re d o m in a te d in m any
rituals associated w ith agriculture, b irth , death, an d healing, perhaps
because th e ir reproductive capacities w ere seen as giving th e m regen­
erative an d spiritual pow ers th a t m e n could n o t m atch (Reid 1988:146;
Lieberm an 2003:118).
W o m en ’s re p ro d u ctiv e capacities a n d th e pow ers o f re g e n e ra ­
tio n associated w ith th e m also raised th e specter o f dan g er (through
p o llu tio n , fo r exam ple) to m e n a n d v ario u sly d efin e d m o ra l an d
n a tu ra l co m m u n ities, a n d w ere th u s seen as re q u irin g th a t som e o f
6 62
social research
th e activ ities o f w o m en o f ch ild -b earin g age be carefully reg u lated .
N o tw ith stan d in g th is re g u la tio n , th e am bivalences associated w ith
it, o r th e fact th a t m e n w ere g en erally accorded m ore prestig e th a n
w om en, th is w as a p erio d in M uslim S outheast Asia’s h isto iy th a t was
ch aracterized by w o m e n ’s active involvem en t in th e realm s o f trade,
diplom acy, an d statec raft, b y a good deal o f fem ale a u to n o m y a n d
social co n tro l, a n d by relatively eg a litaria n re la tio n s b etw e en m ales
a n d fem ales. View ed from a d iffe ren t angle, it was a p erio d in w hich,
to p a ra p h ra se B arbara A ndaya (2006: 227), w o m en w ere no ticeab ly
“less socially in fe rio r” to m e n th a n was typically th e case e ith e r in th e
W est o r in areas th a t n e ig h b o re d S o u th east Asia, such as East Asia,
S outh Asia, an d M elanesia.
This p erio d in M uslim S o u th east A sia’s h isto ry w as ch a ra c te r­
ized by co n sid erab le flu id ity a n d p e rm e a b ility in g e n d e r roles, an d
by re la tiv e to le ra n c e a n d in d u lg e n c e w ith re sp e c t to m an y th in g s
sex u al, a t le a s t fo r th e c o m m o n e r m a jo rity . S ix te e n th -c e n tu ry
P o rtuguese observers re p o rte d th a t Malays w ere “fo n d o f m usic an d
given to love,” th e b ro a d e r th e m e s b e in g t h a t “p re -m a rita l sexual
re la tio n s w ere re g ard e d indulgently, a n d [that] virginity a t m arriage
w as n o t ex p e cted o f e ith e r p a r ty ” (Reid 1988: 153). O th e r o bserv­
ers e m p h asiz ed sim ilar p a tte r n s w h e n w ritin g ab o u t Javanese an d
o th e r M uslim g ro u p s (as w e ll as non-M uslim Filipinos, Thais, a n d
Burmese).
M any o f th e s e p a tte rn s w e re g ro u n d e d in th e A u stro n e sia n
an d H indu-B uddhist (especially Tantric a n d Saivite) sensibilities th a t
in fo rm ed early S outheast A sian Islam , w h ich to o k ro o t in th e region
b eg in n in g aro u n d th e th irte e n th century, m ostly as a m ystically (Sufi)
o rie n te d v a ria n t o f S unni Islam . Inscribed in m o n u m e n ta l a rch itec­
tu re a n d in d ig en o u s tex ts o f various kinds, th ese sensibilities w ere
keyed to cosm ological em phases (variably inflected by A ustronesian,
H indu-B uddhist, a n d Islam ic m otifs) o n b o th th e re c o n c ilia tio n o f
co n tra stin g o r opposed forces to a tta in h arm o n y a n d lib eratio n , and
th e u se o f th e h u m a n body to achieve th ese ends. It m erits n o te in this
co n n e ctio n th a t Islam , p artic u la rly in its m ystical/Sufi form s, is o ften
G ender Pluralism : M uslim S outheast Asia since Early M odern Times
663
describ ed as a “sex-positive” religion. This is p a rtly because Islam ic
d o ctrin e views law ful sexual acts b o th as “good, healthy, a n d p raise­
w o rth y ” an d as “a divinely approved fo rm o f p le a su re ” th a t serves as
“a fo retaste o f th e delights o f p arad ise” (Ali 2006: 60,154; Kugle 2003).
A n o th er re le v an t issue is th a t Islam ic doctrine encourages husbands
an d wives alike to take seriously th e ir spouses’ desires for sexual satis­
faction, in clu d in g orgasm . O f m ore im m e d ia te concern, how ever, is
th e b o u n d ed n a tu re o f th is “sex-positivity”; fo r exam ple, th a t th o se
believed g u ilty o f incest o r a d u ltery in M uslim S outheast Asia in early
m o d ern tim es m ig h t be im m ersed in vats o f m o lte n m etal o r subject
to o th e r g ru eso m e p u n ish m en t. These la tte r p u n ish m e n ts m ake clear
th a t w e are n o t dealing w ith sex/gender system s ch aracterized by an
eth o s o f “a n y th in g goes” a n d th a t th e p lu ralism th a t suffused m any
re alm s o f g e n d e r a n d sex u ality w as d o m ain specific a n d o th erw ise
b o u n d ed (th o u g h n o n eth ele ss far m o re expansive th a n w h a t w e see
today).
In lig h t o f th e re lig io u s a n d cosm ological p a tte rn s o u tlin e d
earlier, it should n o t be surprising to find th a t d u rin g th e first h a lf o f th e
early m o d ern period, m an y com m unities o f S outheast Asian M uslims
accorded en o rm ous prestig e to m ale-bodied individuals w ho dressed
in fem ale attire, especially b u t n o t only w hile th e y p erfo rm ed rituals
associated w ith royal regalia, b irths, a n d agriculture. Such individuals,
along w ith fem ale-bodied ritualists, w ho som etim es engaged in tra n s­
g en dered behavior as well, served as sacred m ediators betw een m ales
and fem ales, an d betw een th e spheres o f hu m an s an d th e dom ains of
spirits and n atu re (Blackwood 2005).
C onsider th e bissu. This te rm d en o tes ritu a l specialists am o n g
th e Bugis o f Sulaw esi w ho, like m an y o th e r In d onesians, have long
id en tified w ith a highly syncretic v a ria n t o f Islam influenced b o th by
H indu-B uddhist beliefs a n d practices, a n d by th e A ustronesian ritu a l
cu lts th a t p re d a te d Indie a n d Islam ic in flu en c es in th e region. The
m ale-bodied bissu, w ho w ere described by o u tsid er observers as early
as 1544, assu m ed fem ale a ttire and o th e r acco u trem en ts o f fe m in in ­
ity, safeg u ard ed th e sacred sym bols o f ru lin g fam ilies, a n d engaged
664
social research
in sexual an d m arital relatio n s th a t w ere sim u ltan eo u sly h om osexual
an d h etero g en d er. In o th e r w ords, a bissu typically m a rrie d an d h ad
sexual relatio n s w ith a p erso n having m ale g enitals w ho was gendered
m ale, u n lik e th e bissu w ho, d esp ite b ein g p h en o ty p ica lly m ale, was
p erfo rm ativ ely fem inized. T he h e te ro g e n d e r n a tu re o f th e re la tio n ­
ship is n o tew o rth y in asm u ch as it points us to th e m o re encom pass­
in g b u t larg ely im p lic it h e te ro g e n d e r m a trix th a t has lo n g existed
a m o n g Bugis a n d o th e r S o u th e a st A sian M uslim s. This cosm ologically g ro u n d e d te m p la te re n d e re d h e te ro g e n d e r sam e-sex re la tio n ­
ships leg itim ate (even im b u ed w ith sanctity) in certain contexts, ju s t
as it d efin ed h o m o g e n d e r re la tio n s as co m p letely b ey o n d th e pale.
The h e te ro g e n d e r m a trix w as o f far g re a te r c u ltu ra l salience th a n
any analo g o u s m a trix d efin e d in re la tio n to h etero sex u ality , p a rtly
because g en d er has long encom passed an d in fo rm ed sex a n d sexuality
ra th e r th a n vice versa.
It is in s tru c tiv e th a t p ra c tic e s in v o lv in g tra n s g e n d e ris m a n d
sam e-sex re la tio n s also o c c u rre d a m o n g m ale- a n d fem a le-b o d ied
Bugis w h o w ere not ritu a l specialists, a n d th a t th e se p ractices seem
to h av e b ee n acco rd ed as m u c h h o n o r as m o re co n v e n tio n a l, m ajorita ria n a rra n g e m e n ts so lo n g as th e y w ere h ete ro g e n d e r. T hese facts,
alo n g w ith w o m e n ’s read y access to th e h ig h e s t offices in th e land,
su g g est t h a t g e n d e r p lu ra lis m su ffu se d a v a rie ty o f a n a ly tic a lly
d is tin c t d o m ain s, a n d w as b y n o m ean s lim ite d to th e sex u al and/
o r g e n d e r licen se th a t o b ta in e d a m o n g tra n sg e n d e re d ritu a l special­
ists a n d th e ir n o rm a tiv e ly g e n d e re d p a rtn e rs . P u t d iffe ren tly , th e
tra n s g e n d e ris m a n d sam e-sex re la tio n s u n d e r c o n sid e ra tio n did n o t
re p re s e n t q u a ra n tin e d ex c ep tio n s to th e re la tiv e ly p lu ra listic h e g e ­
m o n y b e a rin g o n sex a n d g e n d e r t h a t p re v a ile d th ro u g h o u t Bugis
society.
U nfortunately, for m an y societies in M uslim S outheast Asia we
have little in fo rm atio n on th e subjectivities, desires, o r p leasures o f
th e in d iv id u als w ho oversaw th e ritu a ls a t issue o r w ere o th erw ise
involved in th e m as p artic ip a n ts o r observers. It is n o n eth eless signifi­
c a n t th a t th e m o st kn o w led g eab le scholars o f th is e ra o f S o u th east
G ender Pluralism : M uslim S outheast Asia since Early M odern Tim es
665
A sia’s h istory, such as B arbara A ndaya (1994: 105), have sp o k en o f
“th e re sp ect accorded b ise x u a lism ” b o th a t th e ae sth e tic level an d
beyond. One re aso n fo r th is p a tte r n o f re sp e c t m ay be th a t bisex u ­
alism , lik e tra n sv e stism , c o m b in ed e le m e n ts fro m a n d sim u lta n e ­
ously tran sc en d ed th e m ale-fem ale d u ality th a t h elp ed stru ctu re and
an im ate th e u n iverse in its entirety. A n o th er m ay be th a t, in com bin­
in g elem e n ts o f m ale a n d fem ale, in stitu tio n a liz e d bisex u alism and
tran sv e stism sym bolized w holeness, purity, a n d g e n d e r to tality, and
th u s th e u n fra c tu re d u n iv e rse p o site d to e x ist b efo re th e ad v e n t
o f h u m a n ity a n d difference. No sm all m a tte r is th a t in m an y local
cosm ologies, im p o rta n t sp irits a n d deities w ere d ep icted as an d ro g ­
ynous o r as ex istin g in m ale-fem ale pairs. R itual specialists ex h ib it­
in g androgyny w ere th u s ideally situ ated b o th to co m m u n icate w ith
th ese spirits a n d deities, a n d to personify th em . M ore generally, ju st
as th e local cosm ologies in q u estio n u n d erg ird ed state ritu als o f vari­
ous k in d s—a n d vice v ersa— so to o did m an y o f th e se ritu a ls reso ­
n a te deeply w ith locally salien t m ythologies as w ell as dom estic and
social stru ctu ra l arran g e m e n ts (including b ilateral kinship; relatively
h ig h rates o f divorce, rem arriag e, an d in fo rm al adoption; system s of
k in sh ip term in o lo g y involving b irth -o rd e r n am es, teknonym y, an d
classificatoiy term s o f referen ce an d address) th a t encouraged concep­
tu a l an d m o ral relativism .
The fact th a t th is was th e case an d th a t th is situ atio n o b tain ed
w ell in to th e tw e n tie th ce n tu ry serves as an im p o rta n t re m in d e r th a t
w h e n th in k in g ab o u t states w e n eed to range beyond c o n sid eratio n o f
th e u tilita ria n roles th e y play in co n tro llin g bodies or, alternatively,
p ro te c tin g th em . States do o f course endeavor to control, co n strain ,
a n d p ro te c t bodies, som etim es by “m ak in g d iffe ren t kinds o f biopo­
litical in v estm en ts in d iffe ren t subject p o p u latio n s” (Ong 1999: 217),
ju s t as th e y typically levy taxes, w age w ar, u n d e rw rite m o n u m e n ta l
a rc h ite c tu re , a n d do th e o th e r k in d s o f th in g s fo r w h ich th e y are
(in)fam ous. But w e also n ee d to b e a r in m in d th a t state stru ctu res are
co m m only g ro u n d ed in sanctified cosm ologies, an d th a t som e o f these
leg itim izin g c h arters v alorize g en d ered a n d sexual a rran g e m e n ts th a t
666
social research
are n o t reducible to cu ltu ra l logics based on u tilitarian ism . This was
th e case w ith th e Bugis state an d m an y o th ers in th e reg io n —M uslim,
B uddhist, an d H indu alike (see, for exam ple, G eertz 1980; Day 2002;
Gibson 2005).
I WANT TO PROCEED TO A DISCUSSION OF DYNAMICS SINCE THE
second h a lf o f th e early m o d ern period, roughly th e sev en teen th and
e ig h tee n th centuries. This period w itnessed dram atic transform ations
in m an y realm s o f society a n d culture. These tran sfo rm atio n s cam e
ab out due to dialectically related processes involving th e intensification
o f com m erce, state building, an d territo rial consolidation conducive to
political system s th a t w ere “m ore absolutist, centralized, an d b u reau ­
cratic” (Lieberm an 2003: 16). Integrally re la te d to th ese processes in
areas th a t h ad becom e M uslim o r w ould soon do so, was th e h eig h t­
en ed cen trality , in courtly realm s an d beyond, o f S unni Islam . This
“m ale oriented, legalistic, a n d hierarchical w orld religion,” as Andaya
(1994: 106) describes it, m akes no scrip tu ral provision for th e public
ritu a l c e n trality o f w o m en o r th e tran sg e n d ere d . Due to th e spread
an d en h an ced ap peal o f canonical orthodoxies, th e previously sacro­
sanct roles o f w o m en an d tra n sg e n d e re d individuals in public ritu al
w ere subject to processes o f questioning and, ultim ately, to declines in
prestige an d legitim acy. So, too, was m uch—b u t n o t all—o f th e sexual
license an d gen d er diversity th a t h ad long characterized th e region, as
w ell as bodily practices such as tattooing, ear-boring, an d th e w earing
o f long h a ir by m en.
These tren ds w e n t h a n d in h an d w ith a n u m b er o f o th er dynam ­
ics th a t proved d e trim e n ta l to w o m en an d p lu ralism alike: th e rela­
tive exclusion o f w o m en fro m political office; a n increase in poverty;
an d th e dem ise o f craft specializations th a t h elp ed w o m en m ain tain
th e ir econom ic an d social autonom y. M any o f th ese tren d s continued
in su b sequent centuries due to th e pronounced, albeit regionally vari­
able, im p act o f D utch an d B ritish colonial rule, W estern (especially
Protestant) m issionary activity, an d increasingly m uscular states. These
states typically prom oted one o r an o th er form o f capitalism and w ere
G ender Pluralism : Muslim S outheast Asia since Early M odern Times
667
u n d erg ird ed by ideologies o f h ig h m odernity, w h ich Jam es Scott (1998:4)
has ch aracterized in term s o f “a self-confidence ab o u t scientific and
tech n ical progress, th e ex p an sio n o f p ro d u ctio n , . . . th e m astery o f
n a tu re ” an d “th e ra tio n a l design o f social o rd er co m m en su rate w ith
th e scientific u n d e rsta n d in g o f n a tu ra l laws.” T here is little space in
such schem es o f in stitu tio n al and cu ltu ral rationalization for th e valo­
riz a tio n o f locally d istin c tiv e ritu a l o r esoteric know ledge d eem ed
necessary for th e rep ro d u ctio n o f kingship or th e cosm os as a whole.
Perhaps m ore to th e point, architects o f rationalization, along w ith the
sociocultural forces th a t spaw n th em , are notoriously u nfriendly to all
p h en o m en a deem ed to be am biguous or lim inal w ith respect to gender,
sexuality, an d m o st ev ery th in g else, unless th e y have folkloric, to u r­
istic, or o th er m ark e t value. The sam e m ay be said o f Islam and o th er
w orld religions, or at least w idespread in terp re tatio n s o f them . In m any
contexts, p o litical an d religious elites cast as g uardians o f th ese reli­
gions are deeply suspicious o f ethical pluralism an d th e value diversity
th a t it logically entails.
P olitical a n d o th e r d ev e lo p m e n ts o u tlin e d h e re stim u la te d th e
g ro w th o f re lig io u s n a tio n a lism s a n d e d u c a tio n a l re fo rm , w h ic h also
c o n stric te d th e relig io u s a n d ritu a l spaces accorded w o m en a n d th e
tra n s g e n d e re d . T hey also w o rk e d a g a in st th e c o n tin u e d re p ro d u c ­
tio n o f a good m an y ritu a l com plexes t h a t involved tra n sg e n d e rism
a n d sam e-sex re la tio n s, ju s t as th e y d isco u rag ed sh am an ic p ractices
a n d sy n cretic ritu a l co m plexes as a w hole. T he m o re g e n e ra l p o in t
is tw o fo ld . F irst, th e s tro n g h is to ric a l b o n d s th ro u g h o u t M uslim
S o u th e a st Asia b e tw e e n p o litic a lly c o n n e c te d ritu a l sp ec ia lists on
th e o n e h a n d , a n d tra n s g e n d e ris m o n th e o th e r, a lm o st g u a r a n ­
te e d th a t ra d ic ally ch a n g ed cu ltu ra l-p o litical c o n te x ts w o u ld re s u lt
in o v e rd e te rm in e d a tta c k s o n tra n s g e n d e re d ritu a l p ra c titio n e rs .
A nd second, th e s e attac k s w e n t a lo n g w ay to w a rd sev erin g th e ties
lin k in g tra n s g e n d e re d ritu a lis ts w ith relig io u s o rth o d o x y a n d state
p o w e r alike.
H istorical dynam ics b ea rin g on a n Indonesian society m en tio n ed
e a rlie r m e rit co n sid eratio n here. In th e Bugis case, th e a d o p tio n by
66 8
social research
1611 o f v arious fe a tu re s o f Islam by local ru le rs a n d th e ir charges
posed serious d ilem m as for tra n sg e n d e re d ritu a l specialists, th e bissu.
This is p a rtly b ecau se th e m o stly m ale-bodied bissu h a d sam e-sex
spouses. A n o th er p ro b lem w as th e ir claim o f d escent from th e gods,
h en ce th e statu s o f divinity—a m ajo r heresy in Islam . Thus, beg in n in g
in th e early se v e n te e n th century, w e see p eriodic efforts by Islam ic
ru lers co m m itted to lite ral in te rp re ta tio n s o f syariah to d iscredit bissu
and expel th e m fro m th e ir ju risd ictio n s (or sim ply p u t th e m to death).
Such m oves w ere p a rt a n d p a rc e l o f m o re en co m p assin g strateg ies
o f c u ltu ra l clea n sin g a im e d a t e ra d ic a tin g g am b lin g , slavery, th e
co n su m p tio n o f p alm w ine a n d opium , a n d o th e r evidence o f “pagan
tim es.”
The im p o sitio n o f D utch colonial ru le in Sulawesi in th e early
tw e n tie th ce n tu ry re su lte d in ad d itio n al challenges to bissu, as did
In d o n esia’s in d ependence in 1949. A lthough th e tw o sets o f develop­
m en ts w ere o f course quite different, th ey b o th co n trib u ted to th e elim ­
in atio n o f long-sovereign kingdom s, th ereb y “d epriving] bissu o f th e ir
royal p atro n s an d th e ir prin cip al raison d ’ê tre ”—guarding royal rega­
lia an d en h an cin g th e sacred potency o f local rulers (L. Andaya 2000:
44). A n o th er factor re le v an t to th e decline o f bissu is th a t th e sacred
texts (such as th e epic La Galigo), w h ich served as th e bases o f th e ir
legitim acy and sanctity, have becom e som ew hat irrelev an t due to th e
sp read th ro u g h o u t Indonesia o f m odern-day science, education, and
tran sn atio n al m edia, coupled w ith th e increased im portance o f Islamic
in stitu tio n s and pan-Islam ic discourses. It did n o t help th e bissu th a t by
th e m id -tw entieth century, m an y Bugis regarded th e m as re m n a n ts o f
feudalism , a view th a t sheds lig h t on w hy bissu w ere to rtu re d and killed
by som e gro u p s o f re fo rm ers d u rin g th e S outh Sulaw esi R ebellion
(1950-1965).
This is n o t to suggest th a t bissu, tran sg en d erin g , a n d sam e-sex
sexuality have disappeared fro m Sulawesi: for th ey have not. The postSuharto jReformasi era, w hich began in 1998, has even w itnessed a “bissu
ren aissan ce” o f sorts (Davies 2007:98). This era has also seen phenotypic
m ales w ho are n o t bissu b u t are involved in tran sg en d ered practices and/
G ender Pluralism : M uslim S outheast Asia since Early M odern Times
6 69
or same-sex relations endeavoring to legitim ize th e ir subject positions
and id entities by invoking th e legacy o f bissu or tak in g on som e o f the
ritu al roles long associated w ith th em . Sim ilar options ap p ear largely
unavailable to fem ale-bodied Bugis involved in tran sg e n d erism an d /
o r sam e-sex relations. No less significant is th a t fem ale-bodied Bugis
w ho transgress gender n orm s (that is, calalai) are o u tn u m b ered by th e ir
m ale-bodied co u n terp arts (calabai) by som e tw en ty to one, presum ably
because th ey are accorded less legitim acy and in cu r far m ore stigm a in
locally salient h ierarchies o f value.
A non-M uslim ex am p le m erits b rie f m e n tio n h e re in a sm u c h as
it help s illu m in a te h is to ric a l processes th a t have o ccu rred th ro u g h ­
o u t S o u th e ast Asia, a m o n g M uslim s a n d non-M uslim s alike. I re fer
to th e N gaju D ayak o f B orneo, w h o h av e b e e n su b je c t to W e ste rn
(m ostly G erm an a n d Swiss P ro testan t) m issio n a ry in flu en c es since
th e 1830s as w ell as th e effects o f (m id -n in etee n th -cen tu ry a n d subse­
q u en t) Islam ic rev iv alism , D u tch co lo n ialism , a n d th e tra n s m ig ra ­
tio n policies o f th e Java-centric In d o n e sia n state. One re su lt h as b een
large-scale a b a n d o n m e n t o f a n im istic p ra c tic e s a n d co n v e rsio n to
C h ristianity. E xtensive ra tio n a liz a tio n processes, b o th in s titu tio n a l
a n d c u ltu ra l, h av e b e e n p u rs u e d by th e N gaju D ayak in th e sam e
g e n e ra l w ays as th e y h av e b e e n e m b ra c e d by Bugis, M alays, a n d
o th e r M uslim s in th e reg io n . M any o f th e m o re flam b o y a n t featu res
o f N gaju ritu a l th a t o c c u rre d in c o n n e c tio n w ith fe rtility cults an d
p erio d s o f ritu a l license h av e b e e n e lim in a te d o r d ra m a tic ally to n e d
do w n . E q u ally te llin g , fe m a le ritu a l sp e c ia lists k n o w n as balian ,
w ho, in fo rm e r tim es, engaged in “ritu a l p ro s titu tio n ,” have all b u t
d isap p eared , a n d v ery few o f th e ir m ale c o u n te rp a rts are involved in
tra n s g e n d e r practices.
In d o n e sia n cases su c h as th e s e are re v ealin g , p a rtly b ecau se
th e y are q u ite d ra m a tic . B ut th e y c a n also co n v ey th e e rro n e o u s
im p ressio n th a t h isto ric a l processes involving th e d im in ish e d leg iti­
m acy a n d a tte n d a n t stig m a tiz a tio n o f tra n sg e n d e rism , a n d th e tra n s ­
fo rm a tio n o f g e n d e r p lu ra lis m g en e rally , w e re all e n c o m p a ssin g ,
u n ifo rm , o r m o n o lith ic. This was d efin itely not th e case. N or should
670
social research
w e assu m e th a t th e d e v e lo p m e n t o f sa n c tio n s d isc o u ra g in g tra n s ­
g en d e red p ractices a n d sam e-sex re la tio n s w ere always o f th e fo rm al
legal o r ex p licitly religious variety. Far m o re co m m o n w ere diffuse
a n d in fo rm a l s a n c tio n s —g o ssip , o s tra c ism , e tc .— a lb e it p r im a r ­
ily w h e n p riv a te ac tiv ities w e re m ad e p u b lic o r w h e n in d iv id u a ls
in v o lv ed in tra n s g e n d e rin g o r sam e-sex sex u a lity fa ile d to h o n o r
b asic e x p e c ta tio n s a sso c ia te d w ith m a rry in g p ro p e rly a n d u p h o ld ­
in g o th e r c o m m u n ity n o rm s. P u t d iffe ren tly , a n e th o s o f “D o n ’t
ask, d o n ’t te ll” p e rv a d e d m a n y M uslim S o u th e a s t A sian c u ltu re s
o f g en d er, sexuality, a n d ju ris p ru d e n c e u n til fairly recently, ow ing
p a rtly to cu ltu ra l p rem ises k eyed to th e idea th a t
“talk ab o u t illicit sex m ig h t be as socially destabilizing as
its p erp e tra tio n .” This is n o t a sim ple m a tte r o f prudery;
th e p ractice o f avoiding p o ten tially in c rim in a tin g ques­
tions, an d n o t sharing in fo rm atio n ab o u t indiscretions, is
w oven in to th e fabric o f Islam ic legal th o u g h t as w ell as
em bedded in M uslim social norm s (Ali 2006: 73).
These generalizations are im p o rta n t to b ea r in m in d in lig h t o f
assum ptions am ong som e scholars th a t Islam ic law, inform ed by Quranic
or o th er tex tu al injunctions against same-sex sexuality (or at least anal
p en etration; liwat) an d an alleged em phasis on retributive as opposed to
restorative justice, was w idely applied in Islam ic areas o f Southeast Asia
e ith e r during early m odern tim es o r in subsequent centuries. W ith a few
exceptions, such as seventeenth-centuiy Aceh (n o rth ern Sumatra) and
Sulawesi (noted earlier), this was n o t th e case. It is instructive too th a t
even in present-day Malaysia, w hich has seen high-profile scandals and
political crises associated w ith th e sacking, im p riso n m en t, an d bogus
adjudication o f charges alleging sodom y on th e p a rt o f fo rm er D eputy
Prim e M inister (and cu rren t opposition leader) A nwar Ibrahim , th e laws
typically invoked to p u n ish sam e-sex sexuality have n o th in g to do w ith
Islam. The relevant legislation, w hich dates from th e colonial era, is o f
th oro u g h ly British origin an d design. This is one reason w hy th e w ord­
G ender Pluralism : M uslim S o utheast Asia since Early M odern Times
671
ing an d n u m b erin g o f Section 377 o f M alaysia’s N ational Penal Code,
w hich severely crim inalizes sodom y and o th er sexual acts “against the
ord er o f n atu re ,” is m ore or less identical to its counterparts in th e penal
codes o f o th er form er British colonies (for exam ple, Singapore, Pakistan,
Burma, and, u n til recently, India).
DESPITE THE OVERALL TREND OF THE LONG-TERM HISTORICAL
p ro cesses o u tlin e d h e re , a good d ea l o f g e n d e r p lu ra lis m e x isted
th ro u g h o u t M uslim S o u th e ast Asia w ell in to th e tw e n tie th ce n tu ry
(see, for ex am p le, O ng a n d P eletz 1995; P eletz 1996; O etom o 1996;
J o h n so n 1997; B o ellsto rff2005). A m ong th e Bugis, Javanese, a n d o th e r
M uslim g ro u p s in Indonesia, M alaysia, a n d th e so u th e rn P hilippines,
fo r in sta n c e , m o st ca te g o ries o f w o m e n a n d fe m in in ity c o n tin u e d
to b e v alo rized in p o sitiv e w ays, w o m e n te n d e d to en jo y co n sid e r­
able au to n o m y a n d social c o n tro l (th o u g h th is v arie d by social class),
a n d in d iv id u als en g ag ed in tra n sg e n d e rism a n d sam e-sex re la tio n s
c o n tin u e d to b e involved (and estee m ed fo r th e ir role) in ritu a l activ­
ities asso ciated w ith s p irit cults, w eddings, a n d b ea u tific atio n . M ore
broadly, ev en th o u g h som e o f th e re le v a n t an th ro p o lo g ica l accounts
b ea rin g o n tra n sg e n d e rism a n d sam e-sex re la tio n s suggest a c e rta in
d ism issiveness, am b iv alen ce, and, arguably, a e u p h e m iz e d violence
o f exclusion, th e y also d o c u m e n t subjectivities a n d c u ltu ra l a ttitu d e s
t h a t w ere (and rem ain ) in m a n y re sp ects re la tiv e ly p ositive, a lb eit
less so th a n in e a rlie r tim e s. R efe rrin g to p re d o m in a n tly M uslim
S u m atran s a n d to S o u th east A sians g en e rally in th e 1960s, fo r exam ­
ple, th e a n th ro p o lo g is t M. A. Jasp a n (1969: 22-23) could still re la te
t h a t “h o m o sex u als a n d tra n sv e stite s a re tre a te d w ith k in d n ess a n d ...
to le r a n c e ;. . . are seldom c o n sid ered a m en ace to society, b la m e d for
b e in g w h a t th e y are, o r m ad e to feel th a t th e y m u s t be k e p t in sepa­
ra te places fro m o th e r p eo p le, o stracised o r co n fin e d to in s titu tio n s .”
(S ignificantly, Jasp a n m ak es no m e n tio n o f th e sam e-sex p ra ctices
asso c ia te d w ith sadati p e rfo rm a n c e s th a t S nouck H u rg ro n je [1906]
d o c u m e n te d a m o n g A c eh n ese in th e 1890s, p re su m a b ly b ec au se
th e y w ere n o lo n g er as com m on, public, o r visible.)
672
social research
D eeply re s o n a n t w ith th e se fin d in g s are c o n te m p o ra n e o u s
re p o rts fro m th e M alaysian state o f K elantan, w h ich b o rd ers so u th ­
e rn T h ailand a n d has long b e e n re g ard ed by Malays a n d o th ers as a
b a s tio n o f tra d itio n a l M alay c u ltu re . T he a n th ro p o lo g is t D ouglas
Raybeck re p o rted th a t in th e late 1960s Malays “regard[ed] hom osexu­
ality as peculiar, different, a n d even som ew hat h um o ro u s, b u t t h e y . . .
[did] not view it as a n illness o r as a serious s in ” (1986: 65; e m p h a ­
sis added). Raybeck also e n c o u n te re d several “specialized h o m osex­
u al v illages” in o r aro u n d th e state capital, Kota Baru, one o f w h ich
ad jo in ed th e palace o f th e sultan. These villages w ere com posed exclu­
sively o f m ale couples en g ag ed in sam e-sex erotics w h o se p rim a ry
bread w in n ers m ade th e ir living as tran sv e stite p erfo rm ers o f a Thaio rig in d ram atic g en re k n o w n as mak yong. Mak yong p erfo rm ers w ere
e ste e m e d for th e ir a rtistic skills a n d could o u t-ea rn th e h e tero n o rm ativ e m ajo rity in h a b itin g n eig h b o rin g se ttlem en ts w ho com prised
m o st o f th e ir audience.
The specialized villages in w h ich m an y K elantanese mak yong
artists resided in th e 1960s w ere n o t o u tcast com m u n ities to w h ich
g e n d e r tran sg resso rs k n o w n to be involved in sam e-sex intim acies
w ere banished. Nor is th e re evidence to suggest anyone harassing these
enclaves o r o th erw ise b o th e rin g th e ir m em bers. These com m unities
w ere w ell kn o w n to o th er villages, to local as w ell as regional and statelevel religious an d secular au th o rities, including o f course th e sultan
o f Kelantan, w ho was th e ir royal patron, an d to Malay (and Malaysian)
society at large. Indeed, th e su rro u n d in g Malay com m unities and p olit­
ical-religious elites such as th e sultan did n o t sim ply k now about these
u n iq u e villages; th ey actively supported th e m an d especially in th e case
o f th e su ltan clearly helped constitute them .
Even th o u g h th e se villages are a th in g o f th e p a st a n d in tw e n ti­
e th -c e n tu ry M alaysia w ere larg e ly co nfined to K elantan (so fa r as w e
know ), th e p lu ralism su ggested by th e ir ex isten ce is bro ad ly consis­
te n t w ith e th n o g ra p h ic fin d in g s fro m o th e r re g io n s in th e M alay
P en in su la d u rin g th e sam e g e n e ra l period. D uring m y field w o rk in
th e sta te o f N egeri S em b ilan in th e 1970s a n d 1980s, fo r exam ple,
G ender Pluralism : M uslim S outheast Asia since Early M odern Times
673
n o rm a tiv e ly o rie n te d M alays still e x h ib ite d c o n sid erab le to le ra n c e
a n d re sp ect fo r m ale-bodied individuals involved in tran sg e n d erin g ,
a ssu m in g th e y m e rite d to le ra n c e a n d re s p e c t o n o th e r g ro u n d s as
w ell. But th is is n o t to suggest a tra n sg e n d e r le t alo n e gay o r lesbian
p a ra d ise , p a rtic u la rly sin ce, in sh a rp c o n tra s t to th e ir Bugis c o u n ­
te rp a rts , villagers fo u n d it a lto g e th e r in co n ceiv ab le th a t p h en o ty p ic
fem ales m ig h t be involved in tra n sg e n d e rism o r sam e-sex re la tio n s
(Peletz 1996, 2009).
This b ein g th e case, o n e could lo o k at th e p ro v e rb ial glass as
e ith e r h a lf e m p ty or h a lf full. I b eg in by co n sid erin g th e half-em pty
persp ectiv e, b riefly e n u m e ra tin g fo u r bro ad ly en co m p assin g sets o f
dy nam ics th a t ero d ed g e n d e r p lu ra lism over th e longue durée. First,
forces o f p o litical ce n tralizatio n , som e o f w h ich involved th e ex p an ­
sion an d con so lidation o f state pow er a t th e expense o f local polities.
Second, th e d ev e lo p m e n t o f n a tio n a lis t a n d m o d e rn is t discourses
e m p h a siz in g ra tio n a liz e d re lig io n , science, technology, econom ic
p ro g ress, sec u la r e d u c atio n , a n d m ass literacy. T hird, processes o f
u rb a n iz atio n , b u re au cratiz atio n , a n d in d u strializ atio n , coupled w ith
th e rise o f c a p ita list m a rk e t econom ies. T hese dynam ics e n ta ile d
w idely ram ify in g in s titu tio n a l a n d cu ltu ra l ra tio n a liz a tio n th a t n o t
o n ly u n d e rc u t th e m o ra l bases o f a g ra ria n c o m m u n itie s a n d th e
p lu ralism -frie n d ly cosm ologies in w h ic h th e y w e re em b ed d ed , b u t
also u n d e rm in e d “m odes o f c o m p re h e n d in g th e body in re la tio n to
th e cosm os,” as L aqueur (1990:154) p u t it for broadly analogous devel­
o p m en ts in th e W est. T hey sim u ltan e o u sly c o n trib u te d to in creased
social d iffe re n tia tio n a n d stra tific a tio n , alo n g w ith n ew fo rm s o f
surveillance, discipline, a n d co n tro l g eared tow ard pro d u cin g h eig h t­
en ed n o rm ativ ity in all areas o f social life.
A fo u rth dynam ic, w h ic h I discuss in a b it m o re d etail, involved
th e co lo n ial-e ra (and p o stc o lo n ia l) e n c o u n te r b e tw e e n S o u th e a st
A sian Islam a n d E u ro p e a n C h ristia n ity , esp e cially P ro te s ta n tis m ,
a n d th e w ays t h a t e n g a g e m e n t c o n trib u te d to th e specific d ire c ­
tio n a litie s in w h ic h S o u th e a s t A sian M uslim s ra tio n a liz e d th e ir
d isco u rses, p ra ctices, a n d su b jectiv itie s. As p o litic a l a n d relig io u s
674
social research
elites in M uslim S o u th e a st Asia n e g o tia te d th e c u ltu ra l a n d p o liti­
cal in tru sio n s o f m o stly P ro te s ta n t W estern ers, th e y typically did so
in ways t h a t in v o lv ed a d o p tin g th e ir stro n g ly b in ary /d ich o to m o u s
n o tio n s o f g e n d e r a n d se x u a lity a n d e m b ra c in g th e re p re s sio n o f
o v ert sex u a lity alo n g w ith V icto rian sex u al n o rm s o n th e w h o le —
as also h a p p e n e d in A rabic- a n d P e rsia n -sp e a k in g re g io n s o f th e
M iddle E ast an d elsew h ere in th e M uslim w o rld (El-Rouayheb 2005;
N ajm ab ad i 2005). B roadly c o m p a ra b le sh ifts o cc u rre d in Sri Lanka
a n d T h eravada B uddhist c o n te x ts o f m a in la n d S o u th east Asia, lead ­
in g so m e sch o lars (e.g., G o m b rich a n d O bey esek ere 1988) to coin
th e te rm “P ro te s ta n t B u d d h ism .” I fin d th e la tte r n o tio n p ro b le m ­
atic a n d am also u n c o m fo rta b le w ith ex p ressio n s such as “P ro te sta n t
Islam ” a n d “M uslim P u rita n s.” T h at said, concepts such as th ese h elp
re m in d us th a t th e d o c trin e s a n d p ra ctices asso c ia te d w ith w o rld
re lig io n s are b e s t u n d e r s to o d in re la tio n to h is to ric a lly specific
lo cal c o n te x ts a n d th e in te rp re tiv e c o m m u n itie s a sso c ia te d w ith
th em .
O f m o re im m e d ia te re le v a n c e h e re , th e s e co n c ep ts e n c o u r­
age re co g n itio n o f th e fact th a t th e n o rm ativ e b ite o f co n tem p o rary
Islam w ith re sp ect to g e n d e r a n d sexuality owes a t least as m u ch to
th e circu m stan ces o f M uslim s’ e n c o u n te r w ith th e W est, th e “stru c­
tu re o f th e c o n ju n c tu re ” in S ahlins’ (1985) term inology, as to Islam ic
d o c trin e s b e in g “m a le o rie n te d , leg alistic, a n d h ie ra rc h ic a l” (B.
A ndaya 1994: 106). This is all th e m ore ev id en t w h e n one considers
th e discursive origins, foils, a n d prevalence o f th e ex trem ely conser­
vative (“p u rita n ic a l”) Salafi-W ahabi sen sib ilities p ro m o te d by Saudi
le a d e rsh ip th a t have in fo rm e d Taliban- a n d Al Q aeda-style Islam as
w ell as th e M uslim p a ra m ilita ry groups th a t sp ran g u p th ro u g h o u t
In d o n e sia d u rin g th e early years o f th e post-Suharto/Re/orm asi era.
T hese sam e sen sib ilities are p a rtly re sp o n sib le for th e re c e n t in tro ­
d u ctio n th ro u g h o u t In d o n esia (p articu larly in Aceh, W est Java, a n d
S outh Sulawesi) o f syarah-inflected regional bylaws—ostensibly aim ed
a t cu rb in g alcohol co n su m p tio n , gam bling, p ro stitu tio n , a n d co rru p ­
tio n —w h ich te n d to be used by religious police an d vigilante groups
G ender Pluralism : M uslim S outheast Asia since Early M odern Tim es
675
to discipline an d p u n ish w o m en for styles o f dress an d co m p o rtm en t
th a t are d eem ed seductive, “p o rn o g rap h ic,” or otherw ise in ap p ro p ri­
ate according to asc en d an t views o f classical Islam (W ieringa 2007).
It should be clear in any ev e n t th a t w e are dealing w ith dynam ic, not
static or “fix ed ” religious trad itio n s, w hose e n ta ilm e n ts w ith regard
to g en d er an d sexuality are h ig h ly variable b o th historically a n d crossculturally, and, perh ap s m o re to th e point, th a t th e “sam e” religious
tra d itio n s (and “A sian v a lu e s ”) th a t h e lp give rise to an expansive
g e n d e r p lu ra lism in som e h isto rical a n d e th n o g ra p h ic settin g s m ay
provide th e basis for its co n strictio n in others.
M ore g en erally, b ec au se o f th e b ro a d ly en c o m p a ssin g sets of
dynam ics o u tlin e d h ere, m an y ritu als associated w ith dual-gendered
o r fem ale sp irits an d deities have fallen by th e wayside. In addition,
tra n s g e n d e rin g , like fe m in in ity , has b e e n strip p e d o f m an y o f its
positive associations w ith re lig io n a n d th e sacred. Its long-standing
ce n trality in state cults, royal palaces, a n d th e re p ro d u ctio n o f local
p o lities exists p rim a rily in sc a tte re d m em o ries a n d d u sty archives.
And, as regards its co n te m p o ra ry loci, it ten d s to be m o st visible in
sec u la r v en u e s o f fa sh io n a n d e n te r ta in m e n t, in th e in cre asin g ly
scru tin ize d a n d discip lin ed p riv ate d om ain, a n d o n th e n o to rio u sly
u n g o v ern ab le In te rn e t. W h e n view ed fro m a long-term perspective,
w e see th a t m o st v ariants o f tran sg e n d erin g an d all types o f sam e-sex
relatio n s have b een subject to processes o f secularization, stigm atiza­
tio n , an d m ed ica liza tio n , a n d th a t som e o f th e m —m o st n o ta b ly in
co n tem p o raiy M alaysia—have b een heavily crim inalized as w ell. We
also see th a t m any tran sg e n d ere d individuals have b ee n red efin ed as
c o n ta m in a tin g ra th e r th a n sacred m e d ia to rs w ho, to p a ra p h ra se a
p o in t m ade by Stallybrass a n d W hite (1986: 110) in a n o th e r context,
are perversely if n o t treaso n o u sly m u d d lin g an d e n m irin g th e increas­
ingly dich o to m o us term s o f sex/gender system s long c h aracterized by
pluralism .
If, on th e o th e r han d , w e view th e proverbial glass m en tio n ed
earlier as h a lf full, we need to ask a different question: W hy is gender
pluralism still relatively ro b u st in m any M uslim Southeast Asian societ­
676
social research
ies, despite th e forces long arrayed against it? A partial answ er is th a t
m any M uslim S outheast A sian system s o f m yth, ritual, an d cosm ology
co n tin u e to be cu lturally salient, encouraging im aginative play condu­
cive to th e creatio n o f im p licit cu ltu ra l m odels th a t ascribe value to
different ways o f being in th e w orld. Also germ ane, particularly since
p lu ralistic sen tim en ts an d dispositions beg in a t hom e, is a nexus o f
dom estic and social stru ctu ral dynam ics identified by Beatty (2002) for
late tw e n tie th -c e n tu ry Java, w h ich are re le v an t th ro u g h o u t M uslim
S o u th east Asia. These include: h ig h rates o f divorce a n d rem arriage;
w idespread fosterage an d adoption; and system s o f k in sh ip term in o l­
ogy involving classificatory term s o f reference and address, birth-order
n am es, a n d tek n o n y m y —all o f w h ich valorize th e c o n c ep tu al an d
o th er shifts involved in changing places an d view ing things from differ­
en t perspectives. Owing partly to th e ir synergy, these dynam ics engen­
der relationality, tem p o ral flux, an d reversal, an d otherw ise encourage
conceptual and m oral relativism .
A n o th er relevant factor has to do w ith agency an d resistance on
th e p a rt o f those targ eted by forces hostile to p luralism o r th e political
regim es th a t so ught to g u aran tee it. T hroughout history, th e Bugis bissu
actively resisted efforts to u n d e rc u t th e ir prestig e a n d succeeded in
convincing m any people o f th e righteousness o f th e ir cause. So, too, did
th e ir co u n terp arts in C hristian an d B uddhist areas o f S outheast Asia,
such as th e n o rth e rn Philippines an d Burma, respectively. In Burma, for
instance, tran sg en d ered fem ale ritualists assum ed a p ro m in en t role in
m ilitary charges against th e B ritish in w h a t cam e to be know n as th e
First Anglo-Burm ese W ar (1824-1826). It seem s quite likely th a t such
resistance en h an ced th e rep u tatio n s o f ritu al practitioners an d all th a t
th ey signified in cosm ogenic term s, even w h e n b o th th e ritu alists in
q u estion and th e ir supporters experienced resounding m ilitary defeat
by im p erial (or o th e r hostile) forces.
BY WAY OF A CONCLUSION, I EMPHASIZE THREE SETS OF ISSUES
b e a rin g o n th e p ro life r a tio n o f sex u al a n d g e n d e r d iv e rsity t h a t
h as o c c u rre d in M uslim S o u th e a s t A sia in th e la s t few d ecades,
G ender Pluralism : Muslim S outheast Asia since Early M odern Times
677
larg e ly as a co n se q u e n c e o f g lo b a liz in g forces t h a t have see n th e
tra n s n a tio n a l c irc u la tio n o f discourses em p h asiz in g gay a n d lesbian
su b jectiv ities a n d sexual rig h ts as h u m a n rig h ts. T he first involves
a lo o sen in g o f th e h e g e m o n ic “d eep s tru c tu re ” th a t lo n g in fo rm ed
su b jectiv itie s as w ell as th e d ire c tio n a lity a n d th e e m b o d im e n t o f
“p o te n tia lly ] e ro tic e n te r p ris e s ” (B utler 1993: 110). I u se th e te rm
“lo o sen in g ” p a rtly b ecau se w e are n o t dealin g w ith th e s h a tte rin g o f
a h eg e m o n y in a G ram scian sense, n o r w ith a n ep istem ic ru p tu re or
succession a la M ichel F oucault o r D ennis A ltm an. T he evidence for
th is “lo o sen in g ,” w h ich com es fro m Indonesia, M alaysia, a n d o th e r
p a rts o f M uslim S o u th east Asia, in clu d es th e em erg en ce in th e p ast
few decades o f (at least) tw o n ew classes o f individuals. O ne consists
o f fem ale-id en tified w o m e n w ho are ero tically involved w ith o th e r
w o m en (for ex am ple, lines a m o n g th e Bugis). W h a t is n ew a n d d istin c ­
tiv e ab o u t th e s e w o m en is th a t th e ir subject-positions a n d subjectivi­
ties are d e fin e d n o t o n ly b y th e ir fem ale gen d er, b u t also by th e ir
sex u al o rie n ta tio n as lesb ian s o r w o m e n w ho have sex w ith w om en.
The o th e r g ro u p in clu d es m ascu lin e-id en tified gay m e n w h o p u rsu e
e ro tic re la tio n s w ith o th e r m en . T hese m e n a re also d istin c tiv e in
t h a t th e ir su b ject-p o sitio n s a n d su b jectiv itie s are likew ise d efin e d
b o th by th e ir g e n d e r a n d by th e ir sexual o rie n ta tio n . Because g e n d e r
id e n titie s in S o u th e a st Asia have alw ays su b su m ed a n d effectively
d efin ed sex u al o rie n ta tio n s, scholars like D ennis A ltm an (2001) see
in th e se d ev elo p m en ts evidence o f th e ways th a t “A sian h o m o sex u ­
a litie s ” are b e in g W e ste rn ized o r o th erw ise re c o n fig u re d by tra n s n a ­
tio n al, g lo b alizin g dev elo p m en ts.
In m y view, how ever, th e shifts at issue are n o t as d ram atic as
th e y ap p ear a t first glance (see also B oellstorff 2005). I say th is partly
because fem inine-identified lesbians te n d to form erotic relationships
exclusively w ith m asculine-identified lesbians, ju s t as m asculine gay
m e n are ero tically in clin ed to w ard fe m in ized gays. These re la tio n ­
ships are still h e te ro g e n d e r as far as th e p artic ip a n ts an d o th ers are
co n cern ed . As such, th e y fit co m fo rtab ly w ith in th e h e te ro g e n d e r
m atrix th a t has long b een hegem onic th ro u g h o u t th e region. If, o n the
6 78
social research
o th er han d , th e n ew subject-positions involved relationships th a t w ere
sim ultaneously hom osexual and hom ogender, th ey m ig h t pose serious
challenges to th e prevailing hegem ony. Notice, th o u g h , th a t it w ould
n o t be th e sexual p a tte rn in g —th e hom osexuality—o f th ese re la tio n ­
ships th a t w ould raise th e specter o f subversion vis-à-vis local taxono­
m ies an d h ierarchies an d th e values and in tere sts th e y serve. Rather,
th e th re a t o f subversion w ould com e from th e w ay th ey are gendered —
th e fact th a t th ey are hom ogender.
A second, re la te d set o f issues h as to do w ith th e c o n c e p t o f
h etero n o rm ativ ity . W hile I re fe rre d to th is co n c ep t e a rlie r (for ex am ­
ple, a t th e o u tse t o f m y essay, w h e n I suggested t h a t th e decline o f
g e n d e r p lu ra lism since ea rly m o d e rn tim e s h as e n ta ile d th e rise o f
c e rta in kin d s o f h e te ro n o rm a tiv itie s), it is to o e th n o c e n tric to be o f
m u c h u se to m e. T he p re fix “h e te ro -” in h e te ro n o rm a tiv ity re fers
u n c r itic a lly to h e te ro se x u a lity , th u s p ro b le m a tic a lly p riv ile g in g
sex u al d iffe ren c e o v er g e n d e r d ifferen ce. A k ey essay in th e 2002
Handbook of Lesbian and Gay Studies, fo r exam ple, defines h e te ro n o rm a ­
tiv ity “as th e view th a t in stitu tio n a liz e d heterosexuality co n stitu te s
th e sta n d a rd fo r le g itim a te a n d ex p ected social an d sexual re la tio n s,”
in su rin g “th a t th e o rg a n iz a tio n o f heterosexuality in ev e ry th in g fro m
g e n d e r to w eddings to m a rita l statu s is h e ld u p as b o th a m o d el an d
as ‘n o rm a l’” (In g ra h a m 2002: 76; em p h asis added). M any w ho use
th is te rm collapse o r ig n o re th e h e te ro se x u a l/h e te ro g e n d e r d istin c­
tio n a lto g e th e r, a ssu m in g in th e p ro cess t h a t o ste n sib ly b e d ro c k
sexual(ized) d ifference is in v aria b ly the d efin in g fe a tu re o f p erso n al
id en tity , th e d iffe ren c e th a t m a tte rs m o st. This is u n fo rtu n a te an d
iro n ic in so fa r as it e n ta ils th e su p p re ssio n o f c u ltu ra lly m e a n in g ­
ful d ifferences even a t th e h a n d s o f th o se w h o have h e lp e d develop
lan g u ag e in te n d e d to lay b a re a n d critiq u e various k in d s o f n o rm a l­
izin g discourses a n d in stitu tio n s. N ote in any case th a t as co m m o n ly
d efin e d h e te ro n o rm a tiv ity is n o t a p p ro p ria te as a gloss fo r th e h e g e ­
m o n ies b e a rin g o n b odily p ra c tic e s a n d social re la tio n s in M uslim
S o u th e a st A sia in e a rly m o d e rn tim e s o r su b seq u e n tly , u n le ss th e
p re fix “h e te ro -” is ta k e n to re fe r to g e n d e r r a th e r th a n sexuality.
G ender Pluralism : M uslim S outheast Asia since Early M odern Times
679
T he te r m h e te r o n o rm a tiv ity also o b scu res a n d im p o v e ris h e s o u r
u n d e rs ta n d in g o f sig n ific a n t d y n am ics in M uslim S o u th e a st Asia
in re c e n t years, one n ex u s o f w h ich involves th e lo o sen in g th o u g h
c o n tin u e d p rev alen ce a n d p a rtia l sex u a liz atio n o f th e h e te ro g e n d e r
m atrix .
The th ird an d final se t o f issues I w a n t to co m m en t o n has to
do w ith th e n o tio n o f grad u ated pluralism . As m en tio n ed earlier, this
te rm draws a tte n tio n to th e differential d istrib u tio n th ro u g h o u t soci­
eties an d p o lities o f c e rta in kinds o f se n tim e n ts, dispositions, and
in stitu tio n a liz e d a rra n g e m e n t conducive to o r in h ib itin g p luralism ,
m any o f w h ich are keyed to system s o f stratified repro d u ctio n defined
as en co m p assin g system s o f pow er re la tio n s th a t encourage ce rtain
gro u p s’ n u rtu ra n ce an d repro d u ctio n w hile discouraging or precluding
th o se o f others. I developed th e concept o f graduated pluralism partly
because it m akes little sense on em pirical or o th er grounds to speak of
plu ralism —o r o f tolerance, legitim acy, justice, sovereignty, coercion,
o r pow er—in th e abstract. Regimes o f pluralism , like regim es o f justice,
sovereignty, pow er, etc., are in te rn a lly d iffe re n tia te d a n d d o m ain
specific. C oncepts like g rad u ated p lu ralism encourage recognition of
th is fact, h elp in g us to ap p reciate as w ell th a t p lu ralistic sen tim en ts
an d dispositions w ith respect to gen d er and/or sexual diversity m ay or
m ay n o t h elp co n stitute pluralistic sentim ents an d dispositions bearing
on diversity defined in relatio n to race, ethnicity, and/or religion—and
vice versa. In M uslim S outheast Asia, p luralism w ith regard to gender
an d sexuality has long b een ra th e r robust, and typically far m ore expan­
sive th a n its co u n terp arts in th e W est, b u t it has always b een relative.
Various kinds o f “close m a tin g ” (construed as incest) and extram arital
relations (adulteiy), for instance, have always b een beyond th e pale, as
have sam e-sex relations involving hom ogender as distinct from h etero ­
gender relations. We have also seen th a t m ale-bodied persons, how ever
gendered, seem always to have b een allow ed m ore bodily “play” th a n
th e ir fem ale-bodied counterparts.
The logic u n d erly in g m an y o f th e se d istin ctio n s (for exam ple,
h e tero g en d er versus hom ogender) is im bricated in various discursive
680
social research
m odes in clu d in g Islam ically in flected m ythologies a n d cosm ologies,
th o u g h I have n o t b ee n able to address th e se m a tte rs in an y d etail
here. The p o in t is n o n eth eless w o rth em phasizing in asm u ch as it helps
distin g u ish th e concept o f g rad u ated pluralism from o th ers to w hich
it bears a loose fam ily resem blance, such as Aihwa O ng’s m ore statecen tric (1999) n o tio n o f g ra d u a te d sovereignty. The la tte r concept,
w h ich was also developed largely in relatio n to S outheast Asian m a te ­
rial, refers to processes in w h ich “th e state m akes d iffe ren t kinds o f
biopolitical investm ents [both] in different subject p o p u latio n s” (“priv­
ileging o ne g en d er over th e o th er,” for exam ple) “an d in certain kinds
o f h u m a n skills, ta le n ts, a n d e th n ic itie s,” along w ith its w illingness
in som e cases, even as it “m a in ta in s co n tro l over its territo ry , . . . to
le t c o rp o rate en titie s set th e te rm s for c o n stitu tin g a n d re g u la tin g
som e d o m ain s” (Ong 1999: 217). Ong deploys th e concept o f graduated
so v ereig n ty p rim arily to d esig n ate post-F ordist dynam ics th a t have
arisen w ith n eo lib eral globalization, com m o nly associated w ith th e
post-1970s era, suggesting th a t hyper-rational states an d tran sn a tio n a l
corporations driven by wills to p ow er and p ro fit an d o th e r largely u tili­
ta ria n agendas are invariably th e key players in m oving these dynam ­
ics forw ard. As discussed in g re a te r detail elsew here (Peletz 2009), th e
n o tio n o f g rad u ated p lu ralism accords m ore significance to th e cosm o­
logical u n d erp in n in g s o f state apparatuses an d th e conceptual schem a
in fo rm in g th e subjectivities a n d practice o f agents o f g overnm entality
an d th e ir proxies a n d charges, a n d th e ways th ese cosm ologies an d
co n cep tu al schem a are dialectically related to m yth, ritu al, an d v ari­
ous d o m estic a n d social stru c tu ra l arran g e m e n ts. It re m a in s only to
add th a t th e tw o concepts (like th e lite ratu re s to w hich th e y are keyed)
are by no m eans m u tu ally exclusive; th a t b rin g in g th e m m ore directly
in to conversation w ith one a n o th e r w ill fu rth e r illu m in ate th e m yriad
ways in w h ich states a n d bodies are im plicated in dynam ics o f power,
p restige, legitim acy, a n d difference; an d th a t w e have m u ch to learn
fro m exegeses o f g e n d e r p lu ra lism a n d its stru c tu rin g in d iffe ren t
w orld areas th a t take seriously b o th regional specificity an d historical
dynam ics o f th e longue durée.
G ender Pluralism : M uslim S outheast Asia since Early M odern Times
681
NOTES
1. This essay presents a synoptic overview and rew orking o f argum ents
developed in Peletz (2009), w hich provides a book-length trea tm e n t of
gender pluralism in M uslim and non-M uslim areas o f Southeast Asia
since th e beg inning o f th e early m o d ern period. Space lim itations
preclude citation o f m any relevant references along w ith discussions
o f methodology. Suffice it to say th a t th e larger w ork upon w hich this
essay is based draws on indigenous (mostly Malay) m anuscripts, and
on th e w ritings o f C hinese and o th e r explorers, European colonial
officials an d m issionaries, as w ell as th e research o f archeologists,
historians, and anthropologists. I also build on th e archival study and
eth n o g rap h ic fieldw ork I conducted in Malaysia during tw o exten­
sive periods o f research (1978-1980,1987-1988) and shorter visits in
subsequent years (2001, 2002, 2008, and 2010).
2. Im p o rtan t exceptions include El-Rouayheb (2005) and N ajm abadi
(2005).
3. For m y purposes, th e te rm “gen d er” designates th e cultural catego­
ries, sym bols, m eanings, practices, an d in stitu tio n alized arran g e­
m ents b earin g o n at least five sets o f phenom ena: (1) fem ales and
fem ininity; (2) m ales and m asculinity; (3) androgynes, w ho are partly
m ale and partly fem ale in appearance, as w ell as intersexed individu­
als, w ho to one o r an o th e r degree m ay have b o th m ale an d female
sexual organs or characteristics; (4) th e transgendered, w ho engage
in practices th a t transcend or transgress norm ative boundaries and
are th u s by definition “transgressively g en d ered ”; and (5) n eutered
o r unsex ed /u ngendered individuals, like som e eunuchs. “Sex,” by
contrast, refers to physical activities associated w ith desire, repro­
duction, and th e like, including b u t n o t lim ited to sexual intercourse
o f a heterosexual nature; to physical bodies th a t are distinguished
by having genitals th a t are construed as “fem ale,” “m ale,” b o th (as
w ith some intersexuals), o r n eith er (as in th e case o f some eunuchs);
and to bodily processes associated w ith anatom ical and physiologi­
cal m aturation, such as m en stru atio n and ejaculation. The partially
overlapping te rm “sexuality” bears m ore specifically o n th e realm
6 82
social research
o f erotic desire, passion, and pleasure. “G ender pluralism ,” fo r its
p art, den o tes p lu ralistic sensibilities a n d dispositions reg ard in g
bodily practices (ad o rn m en t, attire, m annerism s) a n d em bodied
desires, as w ell as social roles, sexual relationships, and overall ways
o f being th a t bear on or are otherw ise linked w ith local conceptions
o f fem ininity, m asculinity, androgyny, and so on. Sexual pluralism ,
prem ised m inim ally on a concept o f relatively “benign sexual varia­
tio n ” (Rubin 1984: 283), is included u n d er th e m ore encom passing
rubric o f gender pluralism . This is in keeping w ith analytic conven­
tions subsum ing sex into th e category o f gender (but n o t conflating
o r eliding th e differences betw een them ) th a t are adopted by m any
scholars in th e field. It is also consistent w ith th e em pirical reali­
ties o f M uslim Southeast Asia, insofar as gender difference has long
encom passed sexual difference—associated w ith anatom y, physiol­
ogy, sexual activity, and th e like—ra th e r th a n vice versa.
4. I use th e term “Muslim Southeast Asia” to refer to areas o f Southeast
Asia now know n as Indonesia, Malaysia, and th e southern Philippines,
an d to designate th e ir M uslim in h ab itan ts in particular, especially
Bugis, Javanese, Acehnese, Malays, Tausug, and Sama.
REFERENCES
Ali, Kecia. Sexual Ethics and Islam: Feminist Reflections on Quran, Hadith, and
Jurisprudence. Oxford: Oneworld, 2006.
Altman, Dennis. Global Sex. Chicago: University o f Chicago Press, 2001.
Andaya, Barbara. “The Changing Religious Role o f W om en in Pre-Modem
Southeast Asia.” South East Asia Research 2(1994): 99-116.
Andaya, Leonard. “The Bissu: Study o f a Third G ender in Indonesia.” Other
Pasts: Women, Gender, and History in Early Modem Southeast Asia. Ed.
Barbara Andaya. H onolulu: C enter for S outheast Asian Studies,
University o f Hawaii, 2000:27-46
Beatty, Andrew. “C hanging Places: Relatives an d R elativism in Java.”
Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 8 (2002): 469-491.
Blackwood, Evelyn. “Gender Transgression in Colonial and Post-Colonial
Indonesia.” Journal ofAsian Studies 64 (2005): 849-880.
G ender Pluralism : M uslim S outheast Asia since Early M odern Tim es
683
BoellstorfF, Tom. The Gay Archipelago: Sexuality and Nation in Indonesia.
Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005.
Butler, Judith. Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of “Sex.” New York:
Routledge, 1993.
Cohen, Shellee. ‘“Like a M other to T hem ’: Stratified R eproduction and
W est In d ian C hildcare W orkers an d Em ployers in New York.”
Conceiving the New World Order. Eds. Faye G insburg and Rayna Rapp.
Berkeley: University o f California Press, 1995: 78-102.
Davies, Sharyn Graham . Challenging Gender Norms: Five Genders Among the
Bugis in Indonesia. Belm ont, Calif.: W adsworth, 2007.
Day, Tony. Fluid Iron: State Formation in Southeast Asia. Honolulu: University
o f Hawaii Press, 2002.
El-Rouayheb, Khaled. Before Homosexuality in the Arab-Islamic World, 15001800. Chicago: University o f Chicago Press, 2005.
Foucault, Michel. The History of Sexuality. Vol. 1: An Introduction. New York:
Vintage, 1978.
G eertz, Clifford. Negara: The Theatre State in Nineteenth-Century Bali.
Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1980.
Gibson, Thom as. And the Sun Pursued the Moon: Symbolic Knowledge and
Traditional Authority among the Makassar. H onolulu: U niversity o f
Hawaii Press, 2005.
Gom brich, Richard, and G ananath Obeyesekere. Buddhism Transformed:
Religious Change in Sri Lanka. Princeton: Princeton University Press,
1988.
Ingraham , Chrys. “H eterosexuality: It’s Just Not N atural!” Handbook of
Lesbian and Gay Studies. Eds. Diane Richardson and Steven Seideman.
London: Sage, 2002: 73-82.
Jaspan, M. A. Traditional Medical Theory in Southeast Asia. Hull: University of
Hull, 1969.
Johnson, Mark. Beauty and Power: Transgendering and Cultural Transformation
in the Southern Philippines. London: Berg, 1997.
Kugle, Scott. “Sexuality, Diversity, and Ethics in th e Agenda o f Progressive
M uslim s.” Progressive Muslims: On Justice, Gender, and Pluralism. Ed.
Omid Safi. Oxford: Oneworld, 2003:190-234.
684
social research
Laqueur, Thomas. Making Gender: Body and Gender from the Greeks to Freud.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1990.
L ieberm an, Victor. Strange Parallels: Southeast Asia in Global Context, c.
800-1830. Vol. 1: Integration on the Mainland. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2003.
N ajm abadi, Afsaneh. Women with Moustaches, Men without Beards: Gender
and Sexual Anxieties of Iranian Modernity. Berkeley: U niversity o f
California Press, 2005.
Oetomo, Dede. “G ender and Sexual O rientation in Indonesia.” Fantasizing
the Feminine in Indonesia. Ed. Laurie Sears. Durham : Duke University
Press, 1996: 259-269.
Ong, Aihwa. Flexible Citizenship: The Cultural Logics of Transnationality.
D urham : Duke University Press, 1999.
Ong, Aihwa, an d M ichael G. Peletz, eds. Bewitching Women, Pious Men:
Gender and Body Politics in Southeast Asia. Berkeley: U niversity o f
California Press, 1995.
Peletz, M ichael G. Reason and Passion: Representations of Gender in a Malay
Society. Berkeley: University o f California Press, 1996.
---------. Islamic Modern: Religious Courts and Cultural Politics in Malaysia.
Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2002.
---------. Gender Pluralism: Southeast Asia since Early Modem Times. New York:
Routledge, 2009.
Raybeck, Douglas. “The E lastic Rule: C onform ity a n d D eviance in
Kelantan Village Life.” Cultural Identity in Northern Peninsular Malaysia.
Ed. S h aro n C arstens. M onographs in In te rn a tio n a l Studies,
Southeast Asia Series, No. 63. Athens: Ohio U niversity Press, 1986:
55-74.
Reid, Anthony. Southeast Asia in the Age of Commerce, 1450-1680. Vol. I: The
Land Below the Winds. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1988.
---------. SoutheastAsiain the Age of Commerce, 1450-1680. Vol. II: Expansion and
Crisis. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993.
Rubin, Gayle. “T hinking Sex: Notes for a Radical Theory o f th e Politics o f
Sexuality.” Pleasure and Danger: Exploring Female Sexuality. Ed. Carole
Vance. New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1984: 267-319.
G ender Pluralism : M uslim S outheast Asia since Early M odern Tim es
685
Sahlins, M arshall. Islands of History. Chicago: University o f Chicago Press,
1985.
Scott, Jam es C. Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human
Condition Have Failed. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1998.
Snouck H urgronje, C hristiaan. The Achehnese. 2 vols. Trans. A. W. S.
O’Sullivan. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1906.
Stallybrass, Peter, and Allon W hite. The Politics and Poetics of Transgression.
Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1986.
W ierginga, Saskia. “W om en Resisting Creeping Islamic Fundam entalism
in Indonesia.” Paper delivered at EUROSEAS Conference, Naples,
Septem ber 12-14, 2007.
686
social research