A PRIDE OF GAYS
A PRIDE OF GAYS Some of the most kind, productive, successful people I have known are gay. I am privileged to know them and to have the gift of their friendship. To this wonderful blessing, I owe gratitude to my daughter Adithi who changed my inflexible and unfair views on them when she was just 15, in one of the several arguments we constantly have on various issues, and the " violent agreements" we come to as my son-in-law is discovering. When prejudice is born of ignorance it can be damaging to self and society. Self because all of us are on a growth path and need to find it within ourselves to view all aspects of life with harmony and love. Society because we can collectively coerce, harm and cause incredible pain and justify it as the truth, be immune to guilt because of our numbers. My first gay friend was Brian, a handsome suave Australian with whom I shared a class teachership of a grade 5 class way back in 2000. Brian was an excellent teacher, a sensitive person involved in a corrosive relationship with a much younger man, who eventually used him for material ends. I have shared with Brian teaching strategies, his reminiscence of childhood, admonished him for his gullibility, laughed and shopped, taken him home to my rather uncomfortable husband, partied into late nights with friends and listened to his fears and dreams. I have loved Brian as I love all my friends, without judgement and with a deep sense of gratitude for the gift of friendship. I have since known friends of my daughter who are gay. Again lovely human beings, intelligent, hard working, playful and wonderfully caring. It is no secret therefore that my feelings for their cause are biased in a personal sense of outrage at their unfair plight. To my mind a lot of people who are highly prejudiced are those who have never known a gay person. Like my early stages of prejudice they are embroiled in half truths or untruths given to them by threatened clergy, moral custodians who have very selective vision and pursue soft targets from amongst the large areas of social reform available to them or people who are insecure and who fear a takeover of their comfort zones by having to deal with difference. First of all gays and lesbians are born that way. They are not products of deprivation of social mingling of opposite sexes. They are not confused people who could swing either way. Their confusion, if at all, emerges from the reactions to their gender preference from the society they live in and its violent disapproval of their desires. Gayness is totally a part of their genes in a sexual preference they cannot help. To a gay touching a girl sexually would be as abhorrent as it would be for a straight man to touch another man sexually. So you first need to empathise with the human beings, instead of writing them off as deviant or trying to punish or “cure” them. Can you cure someone who is born with dark skin, or slit eyes, or with female genitalia? NO. But you can cure yourself of thinking of people as lower than you because of their caste, creed, colour, sect, nationality and sexual preference. Imagine having a criminal law against all those who were left handed or blind. Imagine having a criminal law against anyone worshipping the rain as a new religion. We would find these either cruel or ridiculous. And yet we have lived with a 150 year old archaic law criminalizing gays without batting an eyelid because it has a sexual orientation and we are so uncomfortable with sex.
The criminalzation of gays was an offense on the part of our society. We stand guilty. We stand in shame for that atrocity. Like the purging of Jews by the Nazi regime for which we as humanity bear the cross of guilt and shame and anger, we must take responsibility for not advocating the cause of our gay brethren sooner and asking for their rights. Same sex mating has been found in several species of the animal kingdom signaling to us that it is not 'unnatural' but a scientific part of recorded natural history. We have a natural aversion or curiosity to homosexuality because it does not produce fruit in a child. It therefore becomes subservient to heterosexuality. We are also the majority and therefore anything that is different from the norm we try to obliterate as it threatens our dominance. And yet, nature is responsible for these mutations and variations. There must be a larger purpose in this, like the control of burgeoning populations where Mother Nature gently steps in and neutralizes the numbers through such changes in gender preference, who knows? If, in the future, we were to find a reason such as this, we would perhaps canonize those who have made our survival possible and treat them with gratitude and honour. Such is the changeability of our self serving attitudes and values. The AIDS panic hugely damaged the reputation of gays where rabid religions leaders called them the scourge of mankind and talked of nemesis of God against this Evil. Closeting personal emotions are clearly harmful as any bottling goes. So it is with the frustration of gays who are not allowed even the mildest of ex-pressions of affection that we heterosexuals take so much for granted.
Extreme social repression has extreme reactionary consequences. The confusion ensuing from violent social disapproval can create fear and confusion and as sexual orientation is at the heart of the matter, where all other parameters are common, this aspect gets highlighted and becomes the core of the gay man and movement. Hence the fullness of wholesomeness of the human being is lost because of this skewed focus. Gays themselves are known to lose this focus, concentrating exclusively on their sexuality to define themselves as individuals. Then there is religion. The custodians of religion are unanimous in their anger and fear for traditions and the shaking of the foundations of societies. They expect a huge corruption of morals because gays have been sanctioned a few basic rights. Their argument about the natural order presumes that man is not part of Nature? If he is homosexual then does that not indicate that Nature has the capacity for homosexuality? If deers are not, then neither do they marry. This intermingling of these parameters as arguments of the natural order is just an excuse for religious bigotry. People marry for several reasons, love, children, money, companionship, sex, status and who will judge any one of these is more valid than the other? Marriage is a social institution created by society for the protection of women and children. It is also an institution that protects wealth and property and therefore a business transaction of sorts. Because it involves the emotional ties between a man and a woman it also enshrines love and care. It protects property and rights of individuals and families. It offers support in old age. Are we saying all of these parameters need to be met in order to justify marriage? If that were so why have we seen the following changes in this sacred institution, other than the sanction of gay marriages? We have constantly reinvented the institution and moulded it. · Legalization of divorce · Criminalization of marital rape (and recognition that the concept even exists) · Legalization of contraception · Legalization of interracial marriage · Recognition of women's right to own property in a marriage · Elimination of dowries · Elimination of parents' right to choose or reject their children's mates · Elimination of childhood marriages and betrothals · Elimination of polygamy · Existence of large numbers of unmarried people · Women not taking the last names of their husbands · Changing emphasis from money and property to love and personal fulfillment Marriage has evolved significantly. In fact live in and co habitation is now recognized in many countries to be given the status of regular marriages and property rights. Hence why are we making such a fuss over gay marriages? Until we have no divorces in straight marriages can we deny gays the right to marry in the name of righteous sanctity? The court ruling brought great jubilation to the gay community who hit the streets to rejoice. Gay parades in many countries are regularly held as part of the assertion of who they are. It is necessary for them because they have for long lived with fear and guilt and shame that the hetro society has heaped on them. In Indian society where physical hugging of males and females are viewed with prudery and shock, I understand why the PDA (public display of affection) has hurt some sensibilities. All we need to do is fan the flames of our personal prejudice and social hatred to create strife and trouble. I am really happy no one did that. |
What makes us think gay couples can”t live happier lives than hetros or that they make bad parents? How narrow is that? Don”t hetros divorce even after being married for 50 years in their old age? Don”t they beat up and abuse kids? So how are they better qualified?
What as a society are we protecting? Do we think young children will become gay if they are not born that way? Our society is changing all the time. What you consider normal now as couples holding hands would have been a scandal in the age of your grandpa. Similarly we will find that several behaviours that we consider shocking could well be the norm in a couple of generations. So let us not exaggerate the moral component too much. History must teach us to be more tolerant, empathetic and to tone down our rabid reactions to people and situations. So let us make amends and at least allow them an hour of celebration. dont grudge them that.
And stop the 'we' and 'them', they are human, they are people like you and me. Once upon a time the blacks, the jews and the shudras, why even women have been put to this discrimination pain. Let us not repeat bad history.
Well, I had to take a long time to make up my mind. Dunno if its made up.
What made it more difficult was the fact that I was unable to feel as, perhaps, a gay would. The whole issue is created out of desire for sex. Love is sexless. Men do love men - As I love my V - but that, obviously, has nothing to do with sex. Also, in general a man spends more time with men than women. But when it comes to sex, the equation changes. So it reduces to the question of libido and one’s sexual preferences. Two men or women living together is normal. If they need to indulge in sex, so be it. To me that is a very low form of love which is fuelled by physical desire. Many opposites sex relationships are so anyway. So to brand gay relationship as criminal or illegal is nonsense. The Court decision is welcome on that account.
test
While it is perfectly fine and sensible to decriminalize gay relationship, I wouldn’t equate the relationship with marriage. Why should they marry? . Marriage is not just an arrangement between two people, it extends far beyond them. Its not an arrangement for convenient sex. Procreation, rearing up of the young ones, social security and transfer of property and other legal rights also come into its ambit. In a traditional marriage, the couple involved have different emotional and physical needs and hence the structure has evolved accordingly. Marriage is a platform which seeks to fulfill these needs. In case of gay relationships, it is not so. The couple involved have similar, NOT different, emotional and physical needs. They may have to evolve a different platform to satisfy their needs. Perhaps, they may term their relationship as something else, a live-in relationship perhaps, but I see no point in them asking for the same status and comfort as that of traditional marriage.
Well, I had to take a long time to make up my mind. Dunno if its made up.
What made it more difficult was the fact that I was unable to feel as, perhaps, a gay would. The whole issue is created out of desire for sex. Love is sexless. Men do love men - As I love my V - but that, obviously, has nothing to do with sex. Also, in general a man spends more time with men than women. But when it comes to sex, the equation changes. So it reduces to the question of libido and one’s sexual preferences. Two men or women living together is normal. If they need to indulge in sex, so be it. To me that is a very low form of love which is fuelled by physical desire. Many opposites sex relationships are so anyway. So to brand gay relationship as criminal or illegal is nonsense. The Court decision is welcome on that account.
Well, I had to take a long time to make up my mind. Dunno if its made up.
What made it more difficult was the fact that I was unable to feel as, perhaps, a gay would. The whole issue is created out of desire for sex. Love is sexless. Men do love men - As I love my V - but that, obviously, has nothing to do with sex. Also, in general a man spends more time with men than women. But when it comes to sex, the equation changes. So it reduces to the question of libido and one’s sexual preferences. Two men or women living together is normal. If they need to indulge in sex, so be it. To me that is a very low form of love which is fuelled by physical desire. Many opposites sex relationships are so anyway. So to brand gay relationship as criminal or illegal is nonsense. The Court decision is welcome on that account.
I remember watching the film Philadelphia and being overwhelmed by the depiction of the tenderness in the depiction of the relationship between Tom Hanks and Antonio Banderas. If two people can love like that who are we to stand in judgement?
I remember many years back, one of my British clients came visiting to our Noida office and she coolly asked me “Are most Indian men gay?” I was shocked at that question. She went on with her reasoning.”I see so many men walking on the streets with arms around each others shoulders.” Hehehehe… same sex kandhe-pe haath rakhna is normal in India and opposite sex doing the same is PDA. Lolz. So there. I think it is more to do local customs/cultures too.
Wonderful post LLji. And I agree with you 100%. Those who say that being gay is unnatural and go on quoting examples from the animal world… why do they keep shut when someone says that animals regularly change their partners and don’t stick to one mate? If all holy cows are so holy, the same logic should apply na? I wonder what baba Ramdev/Mullas/Panditjis have to say to that? It is all a matter personal preference and is akin to punishing the left-handed, as u say. BTW, I am not too sure if ALL gays/lesobos are born/genetic. If that is true, how come prisons have such high rates of gay instances? Wahan par shayad majboori hoti hogi.. hai na? Or am I missing something there?
oops! Never mind LLji. lolz.
I know whenever your write on any issue, Lissomeji, you accord it a deserving importance and try to cover all the angles and I simply adore your blogs and mostly agree with your views. But I am concerned at the undue importance beinng accorded to gay issue by the media, while ignoring India’’s basic problems. And, by the way, though your all contentions seem to be alright, I doubt whether all gays are born this way. During early teens, homosexuality is very common. As the teens grow up, they overcome this phase. However, some do not grow out of this phase and remain struck with homosexuality just in the way some persons refuse to come out of the adolescent problems throughout their life and never attain maturity in real sense. I think one important cause of gay relations is segreation of sexes and can be seen more prominently in places where mingling of oposite sexes is not permitted.
Scraping of section 377 is alright (it should have been done much earlier), gay relations are alright (consensual sexual relations, irrespective of gender preferences, should never be labeled as criminal act) and your write-up is alright. What is wrong is the scenes of jubilation over the court ruling, vast media coverage, giving too much importance to a simple thing. On the day, the court rouling was reported as the main news in TOI, there was a very small news item which indicated that about 60% of the Indians live on less than Rs.20/- per day and this is not important news in the eyes of our reporters. What pains me really is the distortion of our priorities. We forget that we are one of the poorest nations, more than 60% of our people do not get proper nutrition, do not get basic amenities like safe drinking water, electricity, education and, above all, corruption is on the peak. Yet our intellectuals accord undue importance to gay relations, ban of smoking, ban on plastic..
Shall come back and comment shortly. I did read it. Great as usual.
BTW, unable to post comments on your GB.
Agree entirely LL. I wish I could write as persuasively as you have done!
Your article is both enlightening and empathetic and elevates the self-worth of people who have chosen a different path in matrimony and relationships. Society has been the problem for Gay folks as it still meters mild acceptance to wild damnation in different countries. Every individual should have his right to gain identity and showing respect to them is surely the best way to help them to be productive to the community around them. Once again a well-researched article on a topic viewed with anathema ….PGR
again as usual a great and a timely post …provoking the readers to go in depth about their own perceptions of gay community. why can”t our society judge an individual without any other associated factors of caste, religion,socioeconomic conditions and sexual preferences..?? people hate as if it is a contractable behaviour..
// THIS WAS SNIPPED OFF MY SECOND COMMENT// As you said Lissome, the gay community often takes the extreme measure of defining themselves with their sexuality.. but their sexuality and the coming out but their sexuality and the coming out is such a definitive event in some of their lives, that the mistake becomes an easy one to make. Raj currently lives with an older partner in the US. he finds it difficult to come back to India and talk to his family clearly about this. So many of his life decisions continue to be defined by finding a safe space to be himself.
I also like your thoughts on understanding this is a sliver of time in history.. in a few years we will have redefined our norms of what is acceptable vis a vis the gay community and our moral stance will be completely different…thus let them be.. don”t hurt or harm .. just keep an open mind.. and your homosexual friends will convince you , just by being, of their legitimacy and normalcy.
Unsafe places are his families, some of his friends, India as a society and country..Laksh in the background says we need the education of society in acceptance and tolerance… we are harsh and judgmental in our drawing rooms and in accepting those with any differences..As you said, many of us do not know anyone who is gay, thus we carry many ill-informed misperceptions about them..my parents and brother accepted Raj after the initial hiccups… but we need to stop depicting the gay character in derogatory manners in our movies.. mainstream movies are certainly increasing visibility thanks to Karan johar and Kal ho na ho or dostana…but the genuinely sensitive portrayals like Onir’’s My brother Nikhil find only a niche audience.. I think popular culture must give space, respect and step away from gay stereotypes or depict them with laughter alone…
a bunch of factors kept him from recognizing his own sexuality… the stigma of society and the impending disapproval of his parents and family; the lack of availability and accessibility of places to meet other gay men.. I found out much later that he was actually meeting other lesbian and gay friends in his spiritual travels.. it was in pockets like McLeodganj, Pushkar or ashrams in Tibet that he found like-minded people ( often travellers from the West) who were looking for answers as well as were open, happy and accepting of their own sexuality as well as of others. In his phone calls, he started referring to men who he was dating and dropped the collegian chants of ” that lady is soooooooo hot/sexy” that he had been hiding behind. He even started calling himself a bisexual. A year or so later, at last he could admit he was gay. As you said Lissome, the gay community often takes the extreme measure of defining themselves with their sexuality.. but their sexuality and the coming ou
Hi Lissome, you are as topical, thought-provoking and response-provoking as usual.. I think you make many pertinent points about the status of the gay community.. whn I met my friend Raj, he was 21 and unnerved with his sexuality.. he came from a small town.. his parents were rich, conservative marwaris and he was looking desperately for a life path to open up.. he looked for answers in our psychology course and then by turning to tibetan psychology, meditations like vipassana and immersing himself in a strange mix of ritualistic, spiritual, shamanic experiences.. and then he finally met an older man who helped him recognize his sexuality.. Raj was and is gay.. I had known it from the moment we met and most smirked and spoke about it behind his back… but he was extremely uncomfortable in his skin.
i liked the post and your open mindedness
hahahaha Amit. Kitne faide hai dekho toh. lol
Ofcourse Rajiv, did we have an altercation? I dont even remember. That is because I am always arguing a point not the man/ woman. So feel free but dont expect any concessions in the rigour of the argument process. Know that it is the thought and not the person.
Am I still a friend to air my views?
Rajiv
Lisse is always too serious, and ao to neutraluse the impact here is a “Sachha Kissa” 4 of us- me, my partner Vijay, his son Nitin nd my daughter Anuja- were buying tickets to The ARCH OF sT. LOUIS. There was a family ticket, obviously cheaper than the individual ones. We rushed him into giving us the family ticket as we glibly said, ours is a family- brother and sister and same sex parents
A thought-provoking post.
I agree with you lissome….they are one of us and if they have anything uncommon thats not by their choice. I am with you……and I felt very happy for them.