DISCUSS?

August 15, 2008 at 9:34 pm 13 comments

QUEER AZADI

Sent in by Tariq Wani

Some people believe that if such a thing becomes a reality then the whole discourse of nature will be at stake. It’s not that these people do not acknowledge the fact that people who are by nature made to be like that. If two people with the same tendencies are getting involved into a relationship which they feel like getting into. I don’t think that should come under the purview of Un-natural offence Therefore a kind of freedom is very much needed and should be made possible. But if it is made legally an open concept, then the threat that it poses towards the larger society which is mainly a bi-sexual society; needs a guarantee?

The sexual variation and biological make up is something one must accept to live with and so should the society do. If a discussion could further on this it would be great. Because I sometimes feel very tempted to know what exactly the problem is? And what mechanism do these people have in mind that not only guaranteed but makes sure that it would not lead into vulgarism furthering the complexities of an already complex society?

If a discussion can further on the question so posed, will be deemed as a great breakthrough in overcoming some of my deeply rooted conservative but logical set of values!!

Advertisements

Entry filed under: discussion. Tags: , , , , .

Break the Silence Fat, Feminist and Free @TISS on Aug 23

13 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Varun (HRM)  |  August 16, 2008 at 1:34 am

    Very mature post, Tariq bhai….

    I would request Ammel, Sangeetha or Aditi to arrange some kind of forum on one of the weekdays when we all can sit down in the Conference Hall and discuss this issue..

    I feel a person to person discussion shall go a long way in healing wounds rather than an online discussion…

    Cheers…

    Reply
  • 2. Shilpa Phadke  |  August 16, 2008 at 3:51 am

    Without wanting to suggest a textual response to what is a call for dialogue, I would still like to bring to your attention an interesting volume of very lucid writing ‘Beacause I Have a Voice’ edited by Arvind Narrain and Gautam Bhan, published by Yoda Press. This book engages many questions of alternate sexuality both at a political and personal level.

    Reply
  • 3. Tariq Wani  |  August 16, 2008 at 10:06 pm

    After having gone through the thread posted by me, i myself found some serious flaws in it for which i am sorry!!

    Please read the term “Bi-sexual” as “Hetero-sexual” and then u may want to reflect once again with your comments!!

    The reason i wanted this discussion to take place is to understand the issue a little deeper.

    I am here to learn and get answers to my never ending questions…and hope you people must have understood the question..despite all the ambiguities i carry in my writings above!!

    Reply
  • 4. Tariq Wani  |  August 16, 2008 at 10:26 pm

    I would like to re frame the question once again for clarity!!

    Q1:- What guarantee do these people offer to the larger part of the Society, that removal of “Article 377” will not pave way to further complications into an already complicated society?

    Please post your comments in accord to the question…thanks!

    Reply
  • 5. Varun (HRM)  |  August 17, 2008 at 1:54 am

    Hmm..as for every issue, there are pros and cons for this too..

    Pros :
    We are enforcing equal rights to all.
    Crime against homosexuals shall be lowered.
    Looking ahead, they could solemnise their relationships
    Society shall gradually respect them and accept them.

    Cons :
    Why do we assume that homosexuals shall further complicate the society ? Dont we (straight) people also complicate the society ?
    I really dont see complication of society as a serious issue compared to equal rights to gays.
    I do get your point that this may lead to unrestrained sexual relations with different genders and some miscreants could use it to their advantage for sodomy and forced gay sex etc. But thats an issue the whole society faces and not only the homosexual community…

    I feel more work and research needs to be done so as to re-frame the article 377….

    Reply
  • 6. Tariq Wani  |  August 17, 2008 at 2:05 pm

    I strongly accede to the last line..when u said that there needs to be more research done so as to re-frame the article…..So that some concretization takes place keeping the “Balance” part of the diverse society very much intact.

    I seem to have a different conception when it comes to looking at the whole issue purely as a ‘Social Construct”..What I mean by this is:- One must not go for a naive take in advocating for the Issue..rather we must take into consideration the scientific realities also into consideration…because at the current juncture of the Nations discourse towards development…this issue shall not be a mandate, when we already have hundereds of issues which needs more pondering and action..and once we are at par with other nations on those fronts…I think this issue will automatically get resolved!! But untill then keep educating people and once they are educated they can readily decide what is good for them and what is not!!…..Only “Education” can pave new myriads of success..In the absence of which everything will lead to a disaster!! So lets not be hypocrites by holding onto the Pro part of the issue only rather involve in prognosis and preperation of mitigational measures and inventions to counter the Implications which may otherwise come to the fore!!

    Reply
  • 7. Tariq Wani  |  August 17, 2008 at 2:33 pm

    “This is a tendency, an orientation that has always existed, I don’t know why. I do not intend to combat it, to force them into therapy. But at the same time, I don’t think it’s appropriate that they should promote their sexual orientation.” Particularly at this juncture when the Nation in facing great challenges in its discourse to Development and Sustenance!!

    Reply
  • 8. Tariq Wani  |  August 17, 2008 at 2:37 pm

    “This is a tendency, an orientation that has always existed, I don’t know why. I do not intend to combat it, to force them into therapy. But at the same time, I don’t think it’s appropriate that they should promote their sexual orientation.” Particularly at this juncture when the “Nation” is facing greater challenges in its discourse to Development and Sustenance!!

    Reply
  • 9. Ankur  |  August 17, 2008 at 3:34 pm

    dear tariq i request u to read sm more articles n buks on homophobia n transphobia fr a more clear understanding of d issue..
    n ya d impotant thing is 2 realize ‘homosexuality’ n ‘bisexuality’ are as much normal n natural as ‘heterosexuality’… nad there is no threat to heterosexual popullation.. bt ya we r definately demanding to throw off this ‘hetero-normative’ mindset….
    nywaz we can discuss abt it in person or on net…
    sm buks: ‘Beyond sex and gender’ by WC Harrison and JH Williams
    ‘GENDER’, ‘QUEER THEORY’ by palgrave publication

    Reply
  • 10. Preeti jha  |  September 3, 2008 at 4:49 pm

    I just want to ask that how cam law decide that with whom the most personal feelings should be shared? Homosexuality cannot create any complicatons in the society.Rather,it is a vice versa process where society is creating complications.The law is just not recognizing the sexual orientation of certain groups but does that mean that it is not happening.Won’t things be much easier when we will be able to accept both homosexual and hetrosexual people similarly?

    Reply
  • 11. Subuhi  |  September 16, 2008 at 3:44 pm

    Dear Tariq,

    You say, “this issue (i.e. the legalisation of homosexualtiy) shall not be a mandate, when we already have hundreds of issues which needs more pondering and action”.

    You seem to be establishing a hierarchy of needs here. Therefore, to view the needs to Dalits as more important than those of homosexuals would be one example of this kind of reasoning. It is inherently problematic.

    I’m not so sure that things will necessarily work themselves out in terms of gay rights when “we are on par with other nations”. (What might this even mean?) Even California, where gay marriage is legal, is fighting to keep the conservatives from filing an appeal against the law and winning.

    Some questions: What do you see as the pressing issues that need to be addressed before we legalise homosexuality? When might India “be on par” with other nations and why is this important?

    Subuhi

    Reply
  • 12. Revati  |  April 30, 2009 at 3:32 pm

    Identity politics and strategic decisions made to either embrace homosexuality as an integral part of one’s identity or rather make it a side issue, to expand and widen the circle of support should not necessarily contend to broadening an issue, that already applies to a vast majority (homosexual or straight, even to escape these binaries and accept sexuality as fluid and a continuum or scale, i.e. no one is entirely gay nor straight). So, in my humble opinion, Gay rights are human rights, there should only be one massive march of all interested in Human Rights. Language is an institutionalized structure rooted in power relations. Do not let language confuse or hinder you from expressing the justice that runs through your veins, the justice that permeates goosebumps all over your body, and most of all the justice that harmonizes equality! PEACE, ONE LOVE, LIVE AND LET LIVE

    Reply
  • 13. Revati  |  April 30, 2009 at 3:44 pm

    P.S.

    Nature is also socially constructed. The natural, as connected to scientific discovery, exploitation, and highly patriarchal, sexist degradations towards women (look at the 1800s and the type of biological interpollations women underwent–less intelligent, etc.) do not escape or privilege the transcribers, those scientists, those people, and then in effect, the people, people like you and me, who either consciously or unconsciously (sheeple, going with the crowd) re-assign value or belief to these definitions. And who in the hell set things up this way, anyway?

    So, remember, nature is also colonized, there is no such thing as a pristine natural state, once nature enters into a language we understand, it comes with the baggage we created surrounding it.

    Tying this up to sexuality, there is no biologically determined natural state, free of bias and alternative agendas. Whatever science has found on the grounds of research to better understand homosexuality, one must also examine the reasons, the sources of funding, and the socially specific moment, contextualized by time, place, history, and so fourth, to understand the entirety of the problematic assertions being made.

    As an alternative, trust your heart, let it speak, and believe in love.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Categories

Feeds

Contact us

Have anything to say on the themes under discussion? Or do we want to bring a new issue under consideration? Mail us at tisstalks@gmail.com and we'll put up your thoughts, your ideas and your experiences up here for discussion.

%d bloggers like this: