Subscribe to Desicritics
It's Time To Stand Up And Stand Tall
Sanjukta Basu
Sometime back I was invited by Bangalore-based FM Radio Indigo, to talk about one of the blogging initiatives I was engaged in. Before the show started, I was chit-chatting with the RJ and casually mentioned the phrase, alternate sexuality. She immediately shook her head in serious negation conveying me that I shouldn't talk about it on the show. And I didn't because the context never came.
Nonetheless, I could never stop frowning about the shallowness of the matter. 'Normal' people under 'normal' circumstances cannot talk about Sex, more particularly if it is not heterosexuality. It's a sad state of affairs but there is little we can do. That is unless the society gets to see an upsurge of people calling themselves gay / lesbian / transgendered / transsexual or simply put NOT heterosexual.
Only if the number of people calling themselves queer is large enough and the faces known enough will the society realize it is not something so unnatural after all. And this responsibility lies with LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered) people themselves to come out of their closet and be confident of their sexuality. It's time to stand up and stand tall.
I see no reason why an educated person in a free society, who is independent financially and otherwise aware of his/her rights, should shy away or feel guilty of their sexuality. Trust me I have come across young people who are scared to come out. I think enough has been said and written about LGBT rights already and it's high time they start asserting their rights themselves. You can't seek respect from others unless you respect yourself and respecting yourself means being comfortable with your sexuality.
In this context it is worth mentioning the name Prince Manvendra Singh Gohil from whom young queer people in India should gain courage and confidence. Prince Manvendra set an excellent example by coming out with his homosexuality. Being part of the Royal family in Gujarat one can guess how difficult it must have been for him to come out. Although he initially tried to hide it for many years, he even got married like many Indian gay men do, today he admits he made a terrible mistake.
Things have not been easy for him, he was disowned by his parents and the royal name in 2006 when he came out, but now he is reunited with them and is loved and respected by all. Taking lessons from his own life he is now engaged in a lot of social activity for sexual minorities.
Prince Manvendra is also going to make the nation proud by being one of the three opening speakers at the forthcoming EuroPride 2008 in Stockholm.
Jonah Nylund, president of Stockholm Pride said, "We have chosen Manvendra Singh Gohil because he can give EuroPride visitors an image of the situation for LGBT people in other parts of the world." (Source:Pink News)
Responsibility also lies with the mainstream media today to provide more respectable visibility to queer people. Such achievement by Prince Manvendra must be reported as a national achievement thus giving confidence to the queer citizen of the country.
Last time another such person made queer activists in India proud was Zoltan Parag by participating in the Mr. Gay International contest. This news should have got enough coverage in the mainstream media but it is politically too weak to call a spade a spade. That said, I find it surprising that Parag is concerned that the media has exposed him too much.
"Indian media has exposed me so much that now when I call my friends back home, their parents do not let them talk to me," Parag said. (Source: Hindustan Times)
My question is, why should he be bothered about how is he looked upon by the "hetero-normative" parents of his friends? No one says it is going to be easy, but you'd have to face it and fight it now instead of being scared.
It's a popular rumour in Bollywood that Mr. Karan Johar is gay. His films also happen to have, very nicely, placed gay people into the mainstream without ridiculing them. Now if he himself is indeed gay I think he should just come out with it. I personally have a lot of respect for him and I really hope he is honest about his sexuality.
The taboos, illusions and ridicule about homosexuality will only end when famous and popular faces declare themselves as queers. There still has been some progress with gay men, but there isn't a single lesbian celebrity in the country. Rumour has it that Rekha might be a lesbian. If she is she should assert it.
Tehelka here has put in a list of cases where doctors try to cure homosexuality by shock therapy. Such disgusting ideas have to come to an end and, again, it wil only happen when more queer people speak out.
Some people are also scared to come out because of a common fear in India about homosexuality being illegal. As unconstitutional and unjust as this law is, one still needs to understand homosexuality per se is NOT illegal according to this law. An act of 'carnal intercourse against the order of nature' is illegal. By this definition anal intercourse even between a heterosexual man and woman would be illegal. The police of the country have, since it's inception only harassed gay couples and male sex workers using this law. But fear shouldn't come in the way of asserting human rights.
To sum up, I'd quote what senior lawyer Anand Grover, of the Lawyers Collective HIV/AIDS unit, said while addressing the issue of unsuspecting gay men / tourists being mugged and blackmailed:
"Blackmailers succeed simply because these gay men are too closeted to fight back. It’s this desire for secrecy and fear of being ousted that leaves gays open to grave security risks. The answer is to be more open as you can’t be arrested on the basis of your sexual orientation. Beyond that, there’s little refuge in law unless (IPC) Section 377 is amended."
It's Time To Stand Up And Stand Tall
RSS:
- Subscribe to RSS 2.0 feeds for:
- » Comments on this article
- » Culture
- » Culture: Sex
- » Desicritics.org articles by Sanjukta Basu
- » All Opinion articles
- » All Desicritics.org articles
Ritu
URL
June 27, 2008
11:38 AM
Sanjukta,
It is 'queer' that on one hand you are espousing the cause of alternate sexuality and on the other hand you continue to refer to them as 'queer' throughout your article. Is that the whole paradox of this community? That even people who support them tend to characterize them as 'queer'?
I agree with the core of your piece though. Famous people coming out definitely gives acceptability to the whole thing. But, sometimes it does get counter productive like say Bobby Darling. It gives the impression that alternate sexuality is the domain of weirdoes and whackos or as you call them 'queer'. What the world really needs to see is that the normal, unobtrusive guy next door could be gay and that is fine.
Anamika
June 27, 2008
12:06 PM
Sanjukta - good piece but I think the issue - at least for gay men - is very much a legal one. As long as the law is on the books, it will be used to harass gay men.
And yes, while its true its against anal intercourse and not specifically against gay men, the problem is the police isn't about to barge into bedrooms all over the country to check on men and women having anal intercourse.
The law plays a HUGE part in promoting a culture of fear amongst gay men, precisely because it gives the state a useful tool to harass them. Btw it doesn't mean they have to be caught in flagrante delicto, a confession to a gay relationship is enough for the police to begin proceedings. Its a sick law and needs to be gotten rid of as soon as possible.
If you remember Vikram Seth's comments on this issue, he pointed out that more gay people don't speak up because of the fear of the law. Unless you have loads of money and power to keep the law at bay (ie the prince - as aside, WHY is he being called prince when we got rid of hereditary titles a few decades ago!), you won't speak up.
Ritu - "queer" is a term that a lot of GBLT people use to define their own sexual and cultural identities. Its about reclaiming the word, just as the Black Power movement did with the word "black" back in the 1960s.
Ritu
URL
June 27, 2008
12:37 PM
Thanks for the enlightenment Anamika. I was not aware of that angle. It googled it and I found this
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/queer
Sanjukta: Please disregard the first part of my comment as an manifestation of my ignorance :)
Sakshi
URL
June 27, 2008
04:10 PM
Well Anamika has basically said everything that is there to be said with regards to the post. However I would like to add :
Every individual (gay or not) acts with regards to their own emotions. And not think of other people at large (in terms of benefiting). Everyone has a right to reveal as an when they want and are comfortable. And this doesn't necessarily mean they aren't comfortable with themselves or their sexuality.
Things are easier said than done, especially when in other's shoes.
commonsense
June 27, 2008
05:02 PM
Sakshi,
I agree with you. It may not be such a good idea to blame people who are not comfortable with "coming out". There are zillions of reasons why they chose not to do so, and it may have nothing to do with them trying to have their samosa and eat it too.
Sanjukta
URL
June 29, 2008
01:48 AM
@Anamika,
I don't know about this but does the LGBT Rights activist see Bobby Darling as a disgrace? If they do then that's very sad. Who said Bobby darling is whacko? And whoever decides what is whacko and what is not? I thought queer movement is all about being who you are, who you want to be and not conform to the constructs that society has set for you. The other day one gay friend said, "Zoltan isn't exactly my type of hero", pray, why would you not respect a fellow being for just what he is, why must you judge him as per your parameters. Queer people need to unite.
@Anamika, Sakshi,
I never denied the unconstitutionality or unjustness of Section 377. Just that people should still fight the fear and come out. It's like the freedom struggle you know, like do or die situation.. The way I see it, there are two kinds of queers, those who have come out and have joined the queer movement and are fighting for their and other's rights and those who have not.
Its "easier said than done" - I never said its going to be easy, but one has to set their priorities, rights or comfort?
@Commonsense, I am not blaming those who ain't coming out. All I am saying is that the movement need force, manpower. Coming out would help.
@Ritu, like Anamika mentioned 'queer' is used by a lot of LGBT rights activist, per my understanding queer is the most safe term to use, however there is no politically correct term for alternate sexuality, even 'alternate' is a wrong way to put it. Sexuality is like art, you can't really define it.
Chandra
June 29, 2008
04:03 AM
SB
Change will always take time. Most of our population is not even literate and a majority of the population cannot read more than a few sentences. So much so that advanced economies have only started moving forward in the 70s. Things will move slowly. Firstly, educated folks will have to accept LGBTs as a part of society. I am assuming that will take another 10 years. Next this group of people will have to be a majority or close to the majority of society. I suspect that will take another 25 years.
Personally, what people decide to do in their bedrooms or their lives is their business. There is no law that prevents a girl from loving a girl and a guy from loving a guy, none at all.
Anamika
June 29, 2008
11:04 AM
Sanjukta: I am a bit confused about your question. I have no idea what the GBLT community thinks of Bobby Darling or indeed who he is...I have some gay friends in India who are neither activists or nor in the closet but just prefer to get on with their lives.
Re: "conforming to social constructs" - we all do that regardless of our sexuality, ethnicity etc. Queer is a word that allows for a much wider range of sexualities that are not hetero-normative, and thus is a less value-ridden term to use.
RE: rights vs comfort: I tend to extremely wary of people who think everyone in the group - be that defined by race, gender, sexuality etc - "should" be out fighting for "rights."
Its upto an individual to decide how far they will get involved in a politica/social cause or movement. Each person has their particular circumstances and values. Just as I would not judge someone who was out fighting for "rights", I would also be wary of judging someone who preferred not to agitate or take up activism. Any other way is just another form of intolerance.
Add your comment