One of the things that is dictated by nature is that people grow and evolve - physiologically and socially. As we grow physiologically then we become aware of the choices that society places before us. In today's society, exercising your choice of a life partner has become very acceptable. I would now like to raise a question - will the society also be liberal if I want to make a choice about the 'gender' of my life partner? Probably not.
Lets ponder on this. Love takes many shapes and forms. Some people say that love is one of the purest form of emotion. But I am going to narrow down my vision for the sake of this article to the 'girl-guy' type of love. The society accepts and cherishes this kind of love. This kind of love (or should I say love relationships) would culminate in extending the existance of the home sapiens on this earth. This truth is as old as Adam and Eve.
The definations of 'girl-guy' love has evolved over time to incude 'girl-girl' love and 'guy-guy' love. If you want historical evidence of the existance of such love then let me wisper the names of Alexander, the great and Hitler. Two very famous men...but did your viewpoint about them change when I told you that they were gays. Probably yes...you would have definately got a little 'start' if you were not aware of this fact already.
We are all aware of Kamasutra and the temples and paintings like Ajanta and Ellora. These things give us Indian historical evidence that 'girl-girl' and 'guy-guy' relationship had existed and was accepted in ancient times too.
On a more contemporary note, Karan Johar is fabled to be a gay too. It was amusing to the reaction of some people when he comes on the screen - their voices drop to a wisper and attitude is snikering when they mention this rumor to their friends. Vikram Seth, a writer, is heterosexual - he enjoyed a 10 year relationship with another guy. Deepa Mehta's film 'Fire' drew people into drawing room discussions on these facts. Fire is a very toned down version. The movie, Philadelphia deals with this topic to its fullest extent.
Why can not we accept gayism or lesbianism? Why do we attatch social stigma to this kind of love - its another form of human emotion after all? Are we aware of the fact that our non-acceptance of these people make them prone to diseases like AIDS?
In India, the situation is worse. There is a law againstat people who will depict such behaviour, IPC 377. In his interview, Vikram Seth said that he did not want to come back to India to be jailed. Statistics say that there are more gays and lesbians in the Indian society than are recorded. We are a very tolerant society. We tolerate rape, extra-marital affairs, even shoot-outs. But we have difficulty in coming to terms with the broadining or should I say already broadened horizons of love.
Live and let live? Can we join our hands together to help fight Vikram Seth in his crusade to modify the attitude of people and also modify the IPC 377? Can we stand up and stand together?
PS: Guys and Gays have a rhyming quality to it. Girls and Lesbians, Gays and Lesbians hardly have the same thing. I choose it simply because I wanted it to be catchy. If any of you have any objections about the title, please mention it wth your comments on the article.
A discussion on current social concerns, books, movies, authors, people I admire...
Panorama
Welcome to Panorama. This blog contains jottings on varied topics of interest - ranging from social issues, books, movies, child rights, women rights, human rights. You are welcome to post your comments on any of the articles published here.
Blog Archive
Rights of a Child
A Book I am Reading.....
My Favorite Books
- Fasting and Feasting by Anita Desai
- Five Point Someone by Chetan Bhagat
- Indomitable Spirit by APJ Abdul Kalam
- Interpreter of Maladies by Jhumpa Lahiri
- The Fish Philosophy
- You Can Win by Shiv Khera
List of Favorite Blogs
NEWS Links
Let's Join Hands
And build a bridge for a better tomorrow
5 comments:
Ofcourse the law should be modified!Period.
However as far as social acceptance is concerned, firstly, i really feel that society and its norms change with time. History might depict homosexuality was accepted but mid-era(might be the mughal empire), changed that notion. Just like in western countries, homosexuality was a social crime a decade back however now its readily accepted. Change certainly will happen in India too with time.
Secondly, people who decide to break the norms laid by conventional society should be ready to accept the opposition as well. Someone said "No Pain No Gain". So be ready for pain if you decide to be among the initiators to break the conventional rules to be happy.
At the outset I would like to say that first and foremost the distinction has been made purely on the basis of sexual preferences. Its like saying Hindus and Muslims instead of Indians. I consider myself an Indian first and then a Hindu. Similarly, irrespective of our sexual preferences we are human beings first and then anything else.
So I an objection to identifying them and treating them only on the basis of their sexual preferences. And to jail them or discriminate against them violates the human rights. One has to consider the fact that only criminals are punished or jailed. By definition a criminal is someone who proves to be a threat to society. I have done a lot of soul searching to come up with the justification of implementing article 377 and I could really find none. How do we presume that the sexual preferences of an individual is a threat to the society? They they are no threat to the society then why consider them criminals at all fit enough to be jailed.
Unfortunately, the mindset of most Indians would go against my mindset .... but then I have been known support views which directly contradicts or is at cross purposes with the popular beliefs and mind sets and I like it that way ......
At the outset I would like to say that first and foremost the distinction has been made purely on the basis of sexual preferences. Its like saying Hindus and Muslims instead of Indians. I consider myself an Indian first and then a Hindu. Similarly, irrespective of our sexual preferences we are human beings first and then anything else.
So I an objection to identifying them and treating them only on the basis of their sexual preferences. And to jail them or discriminate against them violates the human rights. One has to consider the fact that only criminals are punished or jailed. By definition a criminal is someone who proves to be a threat to society. I have done a lot of soul searching to come up with the justification of implementing article 377 and I could really find none. How do we presume that the sexual preferences of an individual is a threat to the society? They they are no threat to the society then why consider them criminals at all fit enough to be jailed.
Unfortunately, the mindset of most Indians would go against my mindset .... but then I have been known support views which directly contradicts or is at cross purposes with the popular beliefs and mind sets and I like it that way ......
IPC 377. Unnatural offences
Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal, shall be punished with 152[imprisonment for life], or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Explanation- Penetration is sufficient to constitute the carnal intercourse necessary to the offence described in this section.
This is the Orignal Version of IPC -377
Post a Comment