"Gay rights" is a sensitive topic and I wanted to write on this from a long time. But I was a little confused. Frankly I didn't know whether I completely support the scrapping of Article 377 or not. I admit that I supported the scrapping of the act because I was among those so-called "Modern People" who consider supporting anything that goes against the existing system. That system could be religion, politics or sexuality for that matter. A 22 year old, well educated and awakened citizen is expected to support everything that makes the society more free and open. Otherwise you are just an orthodox fundamentalist!
However, I wasn't sure about one thing-is homosexuality a mental disorder? Is it just a "state-of-mind" and can be treated? The reasons for such confusion were the opposing articles I had read and the counter arguments of the debates I had been a part of. I still wouldn't have known the answers to these questions but an article in TOI today has helped me make my final opinion on this issue.
Santosh Desai writes in his article titled "Fear of unnatural lurks in all of us" that-"Cultural institutions seek to modify natural intent in ways that are deemed beneficial to the majority of the human race. To argue for heterosexuality on grounds of naturalness is therefore strange, for culture almost by definition seeks to control what is natural. Culture routinely uses the body in ways not intended by nature. If we were meant to wear ear-rings, we should have been born with pierced earlobes, for instance. And certainly, nature did not mean for us to wear clothes; that is an act of culture alone. All technology, in any case, works single-mindedly towards improving the natural. We do not accept that humans were meant to travel only as fast as their legs can take them simply because that is the nature of our physical equipment, so why should we argue in this case?"
I agree with this gentleman. Those who oppose homosexuality are actually scared of it. They are the ones who are scared of everything that threatens to challenge the age-old practices of the society. They are simply terrified by CHANGE. They oppose the Women Reservation Bill, they attack the girls going to the pub, they oppose Valentines Day, they order the girls not to wear jeans and any western clothes and they question reality TV shows in which the anchor asks embarrassing questions from personal lives of the contestants. They are the self proclaimed flag bearers of the Indian Culture and can create chaos in the name to save it! "They" are not restricted to a particular region, religion or political party. "They" are omnipresent and are in power. If they oppose homosexuality as unnatural then why not oppose artificial insemination, artificial sperms, contraceptives, fertility clinics, cloning etc? Are they natural?
I see a lot of benefits in identifying gays as a part of the society. It will make them come out of the closet. It will end the years of pain, anguish and embarrassment they have faced due to the orthodox laws. Our constitution owes an apology to eunuchs already for making them miserable and not recognizing them as normal citizens with equal rights. It should not do the same with the homosexuals. The legal battle of homosexuals is out in open and in full public view. This will help the eunuchs too to wage a battle for their rights. This is an area where homosexuals have advantage over other less privileged people like the eunuchs. Gays have the support of some famous personalities and some famous people are gays too! It helps in getting attention a movement needs to reach the bedrooms of the common man. In the hindsight, a very big advantage of legalizing homosexual relations would be increased number of adoptions. Hundreds of orphans in India need a place which they can call "HOME". Since gays cannot reproduce, they need to adopt. If homosexuality becomes legal then adoption by gay couples will become easier and a lot of orphan babies may get parents, of a little different kind, but I guess they would settle for it!
Gays may win the battle legally but they have a war to win ahead. That is social acceptance. Our society has not accepted disorder of any kind easily and happily, be it mental, physical or sexual. Sex is a taboo topic in most household anyways. There are people who still consider mentally challenged or handicapped people as cursed and outcastes. How many of us use the phrase "Special Children" in place of the R-word? Very few, isn't it!
It's time to make a change-a change in society and a change in our constitution.
For some of us, it's time to be "Gay and Proud of It"!
10 comments:
gud one man....very enlightning....enjoyed readin the entire blog.....keep these kind of article blogs comin....waitin for ur next one.....
You seem to imply that anybody uncomfortable with gays are automatically labelled as crazed and deluded individuals with a homophobic streak. Not true.
Also your comparison of homosexuality( a social/psychological phenomenon) with modern day technologies seems obtruse to say the least. I'm sure that sperm donors, surrogate mothers,biotechnologists and geneticists who are pioneers of "change against nature", do feel uncomfortable with the gay concept.
And while people are going beserk about voicing gay opinions, I feel the rest of us should be able to voice our "discomfort" so to speak, about gays in an equal light without being branded as close minded or,God forbid, antediluvian. And as ever, the world is ever eager to jump the bandwagon and go with whatever rings clear at the end of the day. Pro-gay seems to be the in thing right now and anyone who politely states otherwise are akin to the little girl who is the only one who can see the emperor for what he is: naked.
I want your opinion on this.
@anonymous (btw ur busted..;)..but lets keep that under wraps..!!)
i don't label the people who oppose homosexuality as crazy or antediluvian. i just want people to have an open mind and think it logically. what happens inside the bedroom must be by the consent of the individuals involved and there shouldn't be a law governing someone's bedroom life. i consider that an intrusion of privacy. however, consent is important to stop the sexual violence of any kind.
however, if still people can't accept it, it's ok. but they don't have the rights to stop people from being homosexuals and accuse them of corrupting the culture.
is beating people for their sexual orientation indian culture? is it not cultural corruption? u may have heard that girls were tested whether they are virgins or not in a government hospital in MP recently if they wanted to avail some kind of help in their marriages from government! is this acceptable? is this natural? is this indian culture? is this not a mental disorder of the people involved? why single out homosexuals then?
i m not against people who are against homosexuality. they are free to express their opinions, but they can't impose it. i m against any kind of forceful execution of an "antediluvian" practice in the name of Indian culture. the people are not "antediluvian" but they there tactics surely are...
regarding the sperm donors, surrogate mothers,biotechnologists and geneticists who are pioneers of "change against nature",how do u know that they are uncomfortable about gay "concept" (please dont refer it as a concept..its not hit n trial thing..it's someone's way of life..respect it..!)? i believe if they can be part of such radical techniques and advancements then they definitely will support homos too...my point was only that none of these is objectionable, though its is no-way natural, then why homosexuality is targeted?
i want your opinion in reply to my opinion..
Well its pure human instinct to fight back when people think that their reality is inexplicably threatened. Because heterosexuality is evolutionarily hard-wired into the human psyche, the very concept of its opposition can be seen with some degree of caution or in most cases hatred.This is why it is being targetted.
"Gay bashing" and "queer bashing" goes on in all countries including the United States and isn't solely an Indian issue.
As for your comment of it being someone's way of life, I strongly disagree. The whole "bedroom life" or "what goes on in my bedroom is none of your business " excuse is outright nonsense. Even if homosexuality could be excused this kind of attitude can lead to more deviant behaviour of an inexcusable kind.
Not everyone is a flag bearer of homosexuality. While there are a few outright haters and the indifferent, I believe that most of the general public are prevented from expressing their distate for them for fear of moral,social and political backlash.And I reiterate for your benefit, despite the media hype and hooplah,there are many people who cannot except gay people. Period.
If someone states " I despise/can't tolerate/am disgusted by gays", he instantly gets ostracized by the general public, although they themselves may be closet gay haters too afraid to take a stand themselves.
In any case, I never bother asking people what they feel about gay people cause they never give a straight(no pun intended) answer.
well...very nice views and certainly a liberated mentality.It has been scientifically established that homosexuality isn't a disorder and medical history unravels the existence of the third sex since the dynastic era.and the point you made about adoption is absolutely admirable.I would just like to address one deficiency in this ruling..that is it by no means restricts individuals who are attracted to the perspective of homosexuality only on a psychological level.What i feel that a clause of undergoing counseling under a certified sexologist before entering into a legal wedlock should be added.As for the rest of the things,gays were and are a part of our culture and deserve the dignity which they have been denied for ages.
@subhankar
i agree with ur clause...nice thought..:)
@anonymous.Your views seem to reflect your utter distaste for the very concept of homosexuality.Let me (just imagine)take you out of this world into outer space and ask you to describe the world you live in.no doubt you would say "it's amazing".You know what influences your judgement..."harmony in diversity"..."coexistence of antagonists".We have come this far coz we all are different...Can u think of a happy life amongst a bunch of robots all programmed to think in the same manner...well all this talk just to clarify one point.All human beings do not view sexuality the way you do.I am pretty sure the homosexuals possess the same dislike and reprobation towards us as you,my friend have shown towards them.But as it is you know,history is a work of the strong,the majority and that is us.But does that make us the rulers of their destiny.Don't love them(even its difficult for me),but the least we can do is let them live,not shun them.I think that is exactly what the Delhi HC has done.It has, as per its responsibility as the guardian of the fundamental rights of the citizens restored the right to equality(sexual preference is an imp aspect)of a group that has been remonstrated by a selfish society led by some narrow minded,self proclaimed patrons.
i'm impressed by this post and the views of both prateek and subhankar... articles like these are anyday better than pointless rambling meta-philosophical altruisms i normally get to read in blogs these days!
Let me quote Freud here.. "Homosexuality is assuredly no advantage, but it is nothing to be ashamed of, no vice, no degradation; it cannot be classified as an illness; we consider it to be a variation of the sexual function, produced by a certain arrest of sexual development."
As for the anonymous, it was kind of decisive of you to say that 'anyone who politely states otherwise are akin to the little girl who is the only one who can see the emperor for what he is: naked.' While that does show clearly that you dont support the issue, it also seems to imply t that you seem to think that the rest of us are plainly following the herd.
Great article though.. and i look forward to read more like this.
Brilliant write up bro... honestly i read few lines again and again, you nailed your thoughts and voices perfectly !
Though i don't agree with all your points, there are few points you made me to think.
I am not a fundamentalist, i fear for myself and i fear for my future and non homosexuals future.
I feel uncomfortable with those guys, just because of them SOCIETY will name Guy-Guy friendship(without sexual contact) as GAY.. socity is a Total crap, we cant hide its mouth...
Everyone has his/her right to do what he like to..
i am not against gay people and i am not supporting to hurt them and am none to do so but i am against that controversial topic. "If we love them 100% is that mandatory to bed with them ?"
Post a Comment