Faggots, homos, unnatural, weird and queer. These are the many name
s used to label people of an ‘unnatural’ sexual preference. But who is to say what is natural and what isn’t? History and science can prove otherwise. So why is the decision left in the hands of religious clerics and the State to decide whether or not to permit the union of two men or two women who consider themselves worthy of the each other’s companionship?
This debate has continued to nuanced levels. It is no more restricted to just the union of the couple but also the starting of a family, maintaining a steady job, living within one’s faith and most of all living within the legal terms of the State. With the family’s acceptance towards the individuals sexual preference being the most primary requirement, everything else is still at a far reach.
Is it natural?
There is always the much asked question on justifying the issue on scientific grounds. It is the question of ‘nurture v/s nature’. Research claims that the presence of an extra chromosome in the body or the secretion of a hormone from the hypothalamus gland situated at the back of the neck. Research also suggests that when the baby is in the mother’s womb, hormones could augment certain sex-typical characteristics. Psycho analysts like Sigmund Freud suggested that children who did not experience the ‘Electra’ or ‘Oedipus’ complex because of various reasons, could end up becoming homosexuals. He also believed that the continuous exposure to people of the same sex or the lack of exposure to the people of the opposite sex could give rise to the person having homosexual tendencies.
There is proof that homosexuality exists in the animal kingdom as well. Research has shown that three out of every ten rams display homosexual behaviour. It is only unfair that humans discriminate on the grounds of sexuality.
Discrimination at academic and corporate levels:
The Indian society was once considered to be one of the most liberal societies in history. Documents and architecture can prove the same. The coming in of the Moguls and then the British altered our ways of thinking. What was seen as a way of life soon became evil and was looked at in bad light. We started seeing things from the western perspective and somehow things haven’t changed since.
School students have also faced excessive bullying for being something ‘out of the ordinary’. On discovering the students sexual preferences, some even have to face suspension or worse; they become soft targets for teachers not well versed with handling such cases. Many have to face taunts that have the ability to scar them for life. Many professional counsellors are not equipped to handle such tense and delicate situations. It is the individual who ends up paying the price for what he is.
Many top companies are not open to homosexuals at the work place. They are being looked
at as sexual predators. Top companies have fired their employees since the employee in question was a homosexual. Some have even tried sending them to counsellors to convince them that they are not gay or worse, to ‘convert’ them into heterosexuals. The discrimination is not limited to the Indian society. Recently software giant Microsoft withdrew its support from the Washington State equality bill. The Bill stood for ensuring equality in employment, housing and insurance issues but failed to make it after Microsoft voted against it. Sources said that the multi-national did so following threat from Seattle based Evangelical pastor who threatened to nationally boycott Microsoft.
The road to discrimination:
There is a law in place that makes it illegal to be a homosexual. Our constitution is a ‘beautiful quilt’ made out of laws hand picked and borrowed from both written and unwritten constitutions around the world. The Indian Penal Code (IPC), under section 377 makes the practice of any kind of ‘unnatural’ sex illegal. The law clearly states that "carnal intercourse against the order of nature with man, woman or animal" is punishable by up to ten years in prison. Thus the law bans oral and anal sex amongst heterosexuals as well. ‘Obscene behaviour’ displayed by a homosexual couple can land them into deeper trouble than that displayed by a heterosexual couple. The recent case where a young gay couple was picked up and arrested by police officials in Lucknow when they were caught holding hands, angered activists throughout the country. Questions were raised to their treatment in custody. Many a times it has been reported that gay couples arrested by the police have often been sodomised by the law keepers themselves.
The afore mentioned law, has been adopted from the British. Their equivalent to our Session 377 IPC is their Section 28. The law had been abolished all over Britain in September 2003 except in Kent County. The amendment stated that a local authority "shall not intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality" or "promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship". The law was abolished amidst hue and cry from various orthodox Catholic groups and the respective churches. Kent County has been trying to repeal the law but with no avail. Parents feel that this law would keep teenagers and the youth from indulging in homosexual activities.
At teenage, people tend to experiment with their sexuality. Many do not know how to justify what they feel and what they are going through physically and mentally. Fear grips these youngsters as they do not know whether what they feel is alright or is completely wrong. It would only make sense to include homosexuality in sex education. It would be necessary to teach parents and their children that it is acceptable to be attracted to someone of the same sex.
This has always been viewed as a highly problematic area. AIDS, a global epidemic has been long viewed as a homosexual disease. But this does not hold true with a large number of heterosexuals contacting it through unsafe sex, use of syringes, exposure to drugs and blood transfusion. Anal sex has been treated as damaging and unnatural. This ‘breaking of the ice’ will help in creating a tolerant and liberal society.
The politics behind the law:
Everything circles around politics. It is a vicious circle; you never know what is ahead of the other. This has become a hot topic of debate in and around political circles. Politicians are using this tool very carefully and effectively to suit their needs.
The republicans of the United States of America are right wing conservatives. The party was against doing away with discriminatory laws against homosexuals and has managed to stay firm on not legalising gay weddings. In Britain, the government did away with the law allowing gats live together but not to get married. Issues of property and legal rights have come under focus as the couple cannot distribute their property or own any under joint names. The four main parties of Britain; the conservative party, the labour party, the green party and the liberal democrats; feel that they can bank on the votes of this minority group.
India has had a tradition of being an open society. The era of imperialism has made Indians rethink their stand on issues pertaining sex and sexuality. With Christian and Islamic organisations strongly opposing a repeal of Section 377 of the IPC, the Hindu organisations haven’t been left too far behind. The Hindu fundamentalists, Vishwa Hindu Parishad and the Shiv Sena, strongly oppose not only public display of affection but also the act of homosexuality. It is surprising that even though homosexuality finds itself a prominent, respectable place in its scriptures, it has somehow lost its essence through the years.
The movement in India:
Amidst bitter vehemence towards gay right activists, the latter have tried their best to be heard. Gays over Mumbai took to the streets, in December 2005, with pink balloons in their hands and body paint that read “I’m proud to be gay”. The march went off smoothly with no police intervention or violence.
The gay movement is struggling to get the government repeal the law that clearly segregates the homosexuals from the ‘others’. On the 19th of September 2006, International Human Rights groups and gay rights advocates in India wrote an open letter to the government to repeal its law criminalizing homosexuality, saying the law is affecting the fight against HIV/AIDS. Amongst its signatories were members of academia, writers, lawyers and artists and was spearheaded by author Vikram Seth. It also included names like former U.N. Under-Secretary General Nitin Desai, a former attorney general of the Hindu-nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party Soli Sorabjee, and author Arundhati Roy. The group said that section 377 (IPC) literally translates to making it illegal to distribute condoms to gay men and men in prison. The letter stated that the law has "been used to systematically persecute, blackmail, arrest and terrorize sexual minorities," and the law has "on several recent occasions been used by homophobic officials to suppress the legitimate work of HIV prevention groups, leaving gay and bisexual men in India even more defenceless against HIV infection". The repeal was ineffective like many such implorations being denied in the past.
In conclusion:
While many liberals feel the future lies in accepting gay marriages, the walk towards that end seems long and enduring. Although the fight has gained no momentum, it looks forward to gaining support and acceptance in the Indian society. A liberal society would only make for a tolerant one.
s used to label people of an ‘unnatural’ sexual preference. But who is to say what is natural and what isn’t? History and science can prove otherwise. So why is the decision left in the hands of religious clerics and the State to decide whether or not to permit the union of two men or two women who consider themselves worthy of the each other’s companionship?This debate has continued to nuanced levels. It is no more restricted to just the union of the couple but also the starting of a family, maintaining a steady job, living within one’s faith and most of all living within the legal terms of the State. With the family’s acceptance towards the individuals sexual preference being the most primary requirement, everything else is still at a far reach.
Is it natural?
There is always the much asked question on justifying the issue on scientific grounds. It is the question of ‘nurture v/s nature’. Research claims that the presence of an extra chromosome in the body or the secretion of a hormone from the hypothalamus gland situated at the back of the neck. Research also suggests that when the baby is in the mother’s womb, hormones could augment certain sex-typical characteristics. Psycho analysts like Sigmund Freud suggested that children who did not experience the ‘Electra’ or ‘Oedipus’ complex because of various reasons, could end up becoming homosexuals. He also believed that the continuous exposure to people of the same sex or the lack of exposure to the people of the opposite sex could give rise to the person having homosexual tendencies.
There is proof that homosexuality exists in the animal kingdom as well. Research has shown that three out of every ten rams display homosexual behaviour. It is only unfair that humans discriminate on the grounds of sexuality.
Discrimination at academic and corporate levels:
The Indian society was once considered to be one of the most liberal societies in history. Documents and architecture can prove the same. The coming in of the Moguls and then the British altered our ways of thinking. What was seen as a way of life soon became evil and was looked at in bad light. We started seeing things from the western perspective and somehow things haven’t changed since.
School students have also faced excessive bullying for being something ‘out of the ordinary’. On discovering the students sexual preferences, some even have to face suspension or worse; they become soft targets for teachers not well versed with handling such cases. Many have to face taunts that have the ability to scar them for life. Many professional counsellors are not equipped to handle such tense and delicate situations. It is the individual who ends up paying the price for what he is.
Many top companies are not open to homosexuals at the work place. They are being looked
at as sexual predators. Top companies have fired their employees since the employee in question was a homosexual. Some have even tried sending them to counsellors to convince them that they are not gay or worse, to ‘convert’ them into heterosexuals. The discrimination is not limited to the Indian society. Recently software giant Microsoft withdrew its support from the Washington State equality bill. The Bill stood for ensuring equality in employment, housing and insurance issues but failed to make it after Microsoft voted against it. Sources said that the multi-national did so following threat from Seattle based Evangelical pastor who threatened to nationally boycott Microsoft.The road to discrimination:
There is a law in place that makes it illegal to be a homosexual. Our constitution is a ‘beautiful quilt’ made out of laws hand picked and borrowed from both written and unwritten constitutions around the world. The Indian Penal Code (IPC), under section 377 makes the practice of any kind of ‘unnatural’ sex illegal. The law clearly states that "carnal intercourse against the order of nature with man, woman or animal" is punishable by up to ten years in prison. Thus the law bans oral and anal sex amongst heterosexuals as well. ‘Obscene behaviour’ displayed by a homosexual couple can land them into deeper trouble than that displayed by a heterosexual couple. The recent case where a young gay couple was picked up and arrested by police officials in Lucknow when they were caught holding hands, angered activists throughout the country. Questions were raised to their treatment in custody. Many a times it has been reported that gay couples arrested by the police have often been sodomised by the law keepers themselves.
The afore mentioned law, has been adopted from the British. Their equivalent to our Session 377 IPC is their Section 28. The law had been abolished all over Britain in September 2003 except in Kent County. The amendment stated that a local authority "shall not intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality" or "promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship". The law was abolished amidst hue and cry from various orthodox Catholic groups and the respective churches. Kent County has been trying to repeal the law but with no avail. Parents feel that this law would keep teenagers and the youth from indulging in homosexual activities.
At teenage, people tend to experiment with their sexuality. Many do not know how to justify what they feel and what they are going through physically and mentally. Fear grips these youngsters as they do not know whether what they feel is alright or is completely wrong. It would only make sense to include homosexuality in sex education. It would be necessary to teach parents and their children that it is acceptable to be attracted to someone of the same sex.
This has always been viewed as a highly problematic area. AIDS, a global epidemic has been long viewed as a homosexual disease. But this does not hold true with a large number of heterosexuals contacting it through unsafe sex, use of syringes, exposure to drugs and blood transfusion. Anal sex has been treated as damaging and unnatural. This ‘breaking of the ice’ will help in creating a tolerant and liberal society.
The politics behind the law:
Everything circles around politics. It is a vicious circle; you never know what is ahead of the other. This has become a hot topic of debate in and around political circles. Politicians are using this tool very carefully and effectively to suit their needs.
The republicans of the United States of America are right wing conservatives. The party was against doing away with discriminatory laws against homosexuals and has managed to stay firm on not legalising gay weddings. In Britain, the government did away with the law allowing gats live together but not to get married. Issues of property and legal rights have come under focus as the couple cannot distribute their property or own any under joint names. The four main parties of Britain; the conservative party, the labour party, the green party and the liberal democrats; feel that they can bank on the votes of this minority group.
India has had a tradition of being an open society. The era of imperialism has made Indians rethink their stand on issues pertaining sex and sexuality. With Christian and Islamic organisations strongly opposing a repeal of Section 377 of the IPC, the Hindu organisations haven’t been left too far behind. The Hindu fundamentalists, Vishwa Hindu Parishad and the Shiv Sena, strongly oppose not only public display of affection but also the act of homosexuality. It is surprising that even though homosexuality finds itself a prominent, respectable place in its scriptures, it has somehow lost its essence through the years.
The movement in India:
Amidst bitter vehemence towards gay right activists, the latter have tried their best to be heard. Gays over Mumbai took to the streets, in December 2005, with pink balloons in their hands and body paint that read “I’m proud to be gay”. The march went off smoothly with no police intervention or violence.
The gay movement is struggling to get the government repeal the law that clearly segregates the homosexuals from the ‘others’. On the 19th of September 2006, International Human Rights groups and gay rights advocates in India wrote an open letter to the government to repeal its law criminalizing homosexuality, saying the law is affecting the fight against HIV/AIDS. Amongst its signatories were members of academia, writers, lawyers and artists and was spearheaded by author Vikram Seth. It also included names like former U.N. Under-Secretary General Nitin Desai, a former attorney general of the Hindu-nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party Soli Sorabjee, and author Arundhati Roy. The group said that section 377 (IPC) literally translates to making it illegal to distribute condoms to gay men and men in prison. The letter stated that the law has "been used to systematically persecute, blackmail, arrest and terrorize sexual minorities," and the law has "on several recent occasions been used by homophobic officials to suppress the legitimate work of HIV prevention groups, leaving gay and bisexual men in India even more defenceless against HIV infection". The repeal was ineffective like many such implorations being denied in the past.
In conclusion:
While many liberals feel the future lies in accepting gay marriages, the walk towards that end seems long and enduring. Although the fight has gained no momentum, it looks forward to gaining support and acceptance in the Indian society. A liberal society would only make for a tolerant one.
No comments:
Post a Comment