Tolerating Sexuality

Leave pornography aside - India is becoming a Puritanical/Talibanist farce. In late 2003 in the southern city of Chennai the police arrested more than a hundred couples who were seeing each other in the ccity`s Anna Nagar park. No one did anything obscene - the park is barren for the most part and no privacy is available for anyone to indulge in anything intimate. All of the couples were adults. They were taken to police stations, fingerprinted like criminals and photographed. Some Tamil newspapers even carried pictures of these couples in what was a clear warning to them and their parents that they would be arrested if they were seen at the park again.

In May 2005, in Hyderabad, the police barged into a private birthday party at the residence of a Muslim family claiming that an obscene performance was taking place there. Members of the press who were at the party later said that nothing obscene had taken place. Indeed, it would have been difficult if not impossible to hold an ``obscene`` performance when several hundred guests, mostly whole families were present at a birthday party.

And Tamilnadu again - the Vice Chancellor of the state`s prestigious Anna University recently introduced a dress code for students, something that is ridiculous considering that there is nothing obscene that has ever been seen by me in my many visits to colleges in the state for more than 20 years. What was worse was that a boy was suspended by a Jain college for wearing a ``dark coloured shirt.`` For all the talk about freedom that India`s politicians bandy about, they are hard at work turning the country into a muttawa type tyranny. Indians need to wake up to this madness and get rid of the moral dictators who rule there.

Having the right to be sexual with who I want, when I want is as political as it is personal and as such I consider my sexuality as important as my politics. I take considerable political pleasure in the fact that I enjoy sex with men and that I am able to have sex for my own pleasure or any other reason whenever I want.

South Asian would be a lot more reasonable if there were no virgins.

very sad
That even sex has to be commercialized and packaged as art for some perverts.
Since when did banning porngraphy become a denial of sex as a basic human right.

cheers
raza

Very sad.

Sex is a basic human right. Why do countries in the East deny it?

if ur not being shoved in one`s face logic is used....then tomm someone could use the same argument for cocaine........and other drugs....would you agree with that ? so it would be ok to put cocaine and other drugs on your local shelves.....no one would be forcing you to buy them would they ?
as for the other point you mentioned....i was saying that like the institution of marriage has been destroyed by the sexual revolution and liberation....the same thing could be done to non adults through pornography.........that is corrupt their immature minds.......
it was an analogy.....u r a bit slow to get things rnt u ?
try a bit more next time
cheers
raza

razzz #30

This is getting mighty irritating - this periodic recycling of your bounty of illogic.
Furthermore, your arguments keep changing (if you wish, I could delineate the
changes for you), and lately you`ve indulged in garden variety condescension.
Frightfully boring, if I may say so.

Just because you think something has questionable artistic merit or is obscene,
does not make it ban-worthy. Other adults should have access to what they
consider entertainment, as long as it doesn`t involve active exploitation. The
situation, however, changes when it violates your private space. Thus,
committing sexual acts on the streets is illegal (indecent exposure can be a
source of public hazard), but having a video on a store-shelf isn`t.

Where exactly is imposition coming in ? Nobody`s forcing you to watch these
videos. There is a difference between having access to something, and it being
shoved in my face. In principle, I could argue that a Hindu religious procession
with loud music or a Muharram procession invades my private life much more
than a porn video does.

Pornography has a marginal role, at best, in shaping social values. At some
point you mentioned marriages falling apart - I assure you that this particular
``civilizational crisis`` was not brought about by porn videos.

the issue becomes a public domain when it appears in a video shelve in your near store and not just an issue among two consenting adults...........then it becomes an externality being imposed by THOSE two consenting adults on the society......very easy thing to comprehend......put some effort into comprehending it................u might get it.!!!!!!!!!

razzz #28

I had made my feelings abundantly clear in my first post - let
me cut and paste it here.

``What I think about prostitution or pornography matters little here.
The question is whether the person involved in it thinks it violates
his/her self esteem. If not, then my/your opinion shouldn`t matter -
it`s strictly between consenting adults.``

why should i be answering your QUESTIONS....i think we interact on this site to discuss issues which are presented in various articles.......not debate on where did someone all important said something......why dont u for once...tell me whats YOUR point of view on this issue.....? rather then ask me questions about silly things.

razzz #26

Let me ask you this one more time. Since you have accused me of trying
to promote pornography as a ``creative exercise``, would you please point out
where I`ve done so ?

Could you also please tell me which part of your ``argument`` am I failing to
comprehend - to support your claim that I have a comprehension problem.

i really think chowk should have some option which allows one to see whether a particular member has a mental handicap cz you seem to have one really big comprehnsion problem. Anyway i have said what i wanted to, why dont you tell me why pornography should be legalized.....apart from questioning things you havent made one argument so far as to why should pornography be legalized.....care to bless us with ur infinite wisdom...for once instead of countless meaning less questions.
raza

razzz #24

This debate is getting more interesting with every post of yours.

I guess I didn`t comprehend the deep impact of pornography on society and the
pornographers devious social agenda - you`ve being unnaturally insightful here.
I`m sure people in this profession would be delighted to hear that they`ve
successfully demolished the institution of marriage single-handedly; it is a major
achievement.

A couple of questions -

1) Please find a post of mine (there are only 4 in this thread) where I claim that pornography is high art or an especially creative enterprise (since you claim that
I`ve done so) ?

2) If pornography is degrading to its participants because it is done for money
alone (and not pleasure, I assume), would it be less degrading if there is no exchange
of money or an exchange of money and pleasure ?

By the way, you say ``i just wanted to add another argument to make my point`` -
which argument would that be ?

i still stick to my viewpoint about pornography being degrading to the participants because its done for MONEY ALONE....i just wanted to add another argument to make my point....because how can ppl with perverse values be convinced that pornography is not an ART !!!!.....just tell me where the creativity lies in pornography..??......i mean creativity for normal people...not ppl with perverse values...whom u seem to sympathize with a lot....share anything do ya ?........and you expect parents in a society where pornography is acceptable as an art form to monitor their kids ? ...u must be kidding.......the fact is that making pornography legal like this....would only corrode the fabric of society even more.......the institution of marriage has already been destroyed....with countles single mothers raising children themselves and ending up as pros because of that and now.....u want to do away with whatever is left of the society as well..........

raza

razzz #21,

You surely have an interesting way of debating - moving the goalposts whenever
it is inconvenient. Your initial objection was about porn being degrading to the
participants, particularly when there is exchange of money. After a couple of
iterations, porn has become offensive because the target audience might include
children.

I do not see a huge effort to make pornography lucrative to children in the
public domain - yes, child porn exists, but it is illegal because of issues of
exploitation. Monitoring children is something their parents should do ; not
the government, because once they are in, govts are reluctant to step out.
It should be a truism by now that freedom of expression is particularly relevant
for expression that you don`t approve of.

I do not think that the existence of pornography or prostitution has defined
the evolution of society in any serious manner. They do provide easy targets
for self-righteous people, though.

``Butch, Butch Bush!
By MAUREEN DOWD

WASHINGTON

Let`s get it straight. The president and the pope aren`t riding the new gay wave.

``I believe a marriage is between a man and a woman,`` said President Bush last week. ``And I think we ought to codify that one way or the other. And we`ve got lawyers looking at the best way to do that.`` Trying to add a tolerant note to an intolerant policy, he allowed that he was ``mindful that we`re all sinners.``

Last time I checked, we had separation of church and state, so I don`t know why the president is talking about sin...... (NYT)

---

well Maureen -- the Butch Bush is ``talking about (his) sin`` -- because the Bitch (sorry for the typo) Bush IS -- a born-again SINNER -- not the gays -- despite his (how inclusive!!) --``WE``... gays are not part of the ``We``...

the Gays have committed NO SIN -- the President of the United States has committed a Sinster SIN...

anybody who in 2003 attacks a sovereign country unprovked -- occupies and brutalizes its people -- uproots their daily life -- bringing upon them so much death and destruction and misery -- especially to a people that did no harm to his country and his people...

a president who humiliates, degrades and debases on a daily basis -- a proud ancient far away land and its people -- tramples with his Texas boots upon their dignity, their human rights, their culture on public TV -- every hour...every day --

a country and a people that this SINNER son of a bush knows nothing about -- can`t even spell correctly

a president -- who is getting the precious sons, daughters, husbands, and sisters of American families KILLED everyday -- in a godforsaken desert -- FOR NOTHING --

without remorse without guilt -- does not even utter a word of sympathy or express sorrow to the families...

is a SINNER -- who will burn in the Hell of ignonimity -- till eternity --

NOT the GAYS -- they`re headed straight for the heavens..

on a positive note nonetheless -- good to hear a Liar and a Sinner US President -- being truthful once about himself -- for a change..

the problem is not the freedom of two persons doing something between themselves which is under debate over here, the problem is that they film it and put it on a public place where it is accessible to non adults and is thus able to corrupt the mind of the immature and disorient them. No one is stopping them from doing it in the privacy of their private life. They can make as many home videos as they want but when they put it on a public forum for a commercial purpose it becomes a little debatable. For example you could extend this theory to cocaine or hash too. That is if an individual wants to use it why does the government put a ban on its sale. Its because the individual is not always capable of making the right choices for himself. So the government has to step in. And i dont need a respone by plats18 cz i know its beyond your capability. Putting a wager does not make your point. The principle of free markets and freedom does not always go hand in hand with public welfare because as individuals we extend some externalities on the society we live in and in order to contribute to the society in a better UNSELFISH way which you dont seem capable of one has to observe some rules.

#19 by plats8 on August 2, 2003 10:21am PT

well it could have been 3 or 5 or 6. but I suppose that really is not much of a point of debate. After all the quran asks for reasoning in arrival of belif and not to subject each and every injuction to this test. I think most are satisfied with the 4 number without any need to question its logic.

ali87 #18

Ah ha... but each of these 4 men can have 3 other wives - so unless they all decide to get pregnant at the same time, everyone should be happy. And why stop at 4, by the way ?

razzz #16

I think parthaab adequately addresses your queries, if you had any in the midst of
all that self-righteous rage. There is this new concept out - freedom of choice. You
are free to not watch anything that offends your sensibilities. I, for example, find
the born-again version of Hindu religiosity very disturbing - shall we extend this
argument there as well ?

Are you willing to put in a little wager to back up your statement that pornography entertains mostly non-adults ? As for your rest of your rambling that anyone defending
the right of pornography to exist, has to participate in it - surely you don`t expect
a response to that.

#12 by plats8 on July 31, 2003 7:20pm PT

sure ever figured out what would happen if 4 men are frustrated because their wifey is pregrant? LOL not a agrument just pointing how the argument can go for Polyandry.

I agree handdogs doesnt constitue argument. Im not in a mood for length agurment I suspect you know what my position is..

Ultimately, any subject is debatable. You could go on forever debating whether you really are mad or not, for eg. But how do you decide whether you need any intervention?
I guess it should be when a third party is affected. What two people do for pleasure may never find the approval of a third person, whether he is nude on the beach, on a fashion show, simply masturbating, doing pornography, or reading Human Digest.
It should sensibly be left to the individuals choice, and respect that choice whateevr.
I find it abhorent that he could be imprisoned because he `hurt` the values of a thid person. Somehow!

i fail to understand whats so artistic about pornography..its done for the perverse pleasure of some people and provide sexual entertainment to people who are mostly underage and are NOT adults...........there is no art whatsoever involved in pornography......we have to remember that we live in a world which has some norms and criterions which we should adhere to......no one is stopping one from doing anything in the privacy of their home but doing it as art for the public is ridiculing art......and downgrading it. If anyone is so keen on performing this art why does nt that person himself come forward and make one on his/herself. Then he/she`ll realize what kind of exploitation does it involve. as for day labourers ....a lot of jobs in this world involve exploitation but pornography is one we can do without ...........the society is not losing out on anything because of its being banned.

razzz #14

You need to tighten up the logic a bit. What I think about prostitution or pornography matters little here. The question is whether the person invloved in it thinks it violates his/her self esteem. If not, then my/your opinion shouldn`t matter - it`s strictly
between consenting adults.

You didn`t address my question, though. Should we ban pornography because it is
low art ? Perhaps it should be allowed as long as there is no exchange of money
taking place (since you seem to have a problem with that).

The issue you raised first was exploitation - do you honestly think that day-labourers
do not get exploited, just because you label their job respectable ?

yes but atleast those sweating it out in the sun do it as a respectable profession. Do you not consider prostitution and pornography as a violation of one`s self respect and esteem specially when its being done for the money ?

``If at all sex should remain illegal, we should consider punishing these `consented` crimes, such as prostitution, pornography and homosexuality...``(Prathasarathy)

first homosexuality is not synonymous with prostitution and pronography -- and none of the three should be a crime -- --

consensual sex between adults with different preferences -- is no crime -- whether free or for a fee

prostittution`` -- yes it`s a definite health hazard -- must be a carefully monitered and strictly regulated business as public health hazard -- but no Crime?

as Ghalib may have said -- about the sex trade:

``Han Voh Nahin Khuda Parasat Naheen
Jaao Voh Baiwafa Sahi

Jisko Ho Din-o-Dil Aziz
Uski Gali Mein Jaye Kyon?

as adults you should be free to choose-- if you don`t want to die of AIDS -- don`t go there...

ali87 #10

Surely you`re willing to extend your argument to polyandry as well.
Also, labelling people as ``handogs`` hardly counts as counter-argument
of any sort.

razzz #11

I agree with you that the article stands on very weak legs by trying to flash
the Kamasutra card. But what if one wants to do a porno film because
he/she wishes to ? Should pornography be criminalised for its questionable
artistic merit ?

About doing it for the money, the men/women doing construction work in
mid-summer Delhi heat aren`t doing it for the thrill - I`m certain of that.

The arguments made in this article are pretty ridicolous. Just because india is the land of kamasutra and mystical traditions dznt make it necessary that one should practice those again. India is also the land of Sati and wife burning.....why dont you start practicing that again. Plus whats so artistic about pornography......showing one`s basic instincts isnt basically an art form. There always has to be a limit where the line should be drawn. and if anything is happening out there you dont necessarily have to exploit it further. What you are neglecting over here is that people do porn for the money`s sake out of financial needs not as an art. If you are such an art fan why dont you make one on yourself. Why exploit the miseries of one prostitute and make a porn movie starring her.

#1 by parthaab on July 31, 2003 0:19am PT

so is robbery!!

Now ask the enlightned west why cant a man marry another woman if his first wife is willing?
What happens? does heaven come crashing down? Does nothing happens when swapping and orgies takeplace betweetn married couples?
I sure am impressed the modernity and logic and freedom preached by the west and its handdogs.

#2

the union of two ppl, be it man and woman, man and man, or woman and woman, in a marraige is a lot more than just sex, its considered sacred (at least man and woman union) and encompasses almost every aspect of that couples life, not just sex...

anyone seen the movie Umrao jaan? where the big nawabs go to the court house to see highly refined and articulate courtesans perform, it is prostitution but as an art form and a career... in our society it was ok for the nawabs to go there (in fact encouraged) but what of the comman man?

there are similar kinds of set up in Lahore, but no way near refined or articulate of the Umrao Jaan era and style, politicians and `Madams` meet, no one says anything to them, it is the same with the vaderas and choudaries... why in some instances is it accepted by society and in others it is not?

#2 by oraja: How is a prostitute different from a wife? They are both giving out sexual favors in return for something material, cold cash in one case, a shelter, food, and clothes in the other.

---

The husband and wife bond is something on a higher plane and should not be considered that base. They make a commitment to live with each other for the rest of their live`s, share their secret`s, their joys and worries. I am talking about healthy relationships, not necessarily love marriages, simple relationships in which both of them cooperate and help each other. I agree that many people have your point of view, but it does not apply to every couple.

In the Lucknow culture, ``tawaif`` was far more than a mere prostitute.

She embodied the refiniest part of the culture - ettiquette, music & dance.

I wonder if any remnants of that culture remain in India!

How is a prostitute different from a wife? They are both giving out sexual favors in return for something material, cold cash in one case, a shelter, food, and clothes in the other.

Religion and Sex are intertwined in Carnal Embrace till eternity --

unless we teach Religion to be Tolerant -- Tolerance for Sex and Sexual preferences is like chasing chastity in a brothel house.....

[A homosexual lesbian girl, kills herself...]

What stupidity. She was already out of the gene pool by choice.

I agree. Prostitution should be legal. Amsterdam is a good example to follow.

Prostitution is the oldest profession in the world.

It has integrated into society so intricately that every human language has a word for it!

It caters to a basic instinct of humans, like any other basal instinct - hunger, thirst or food and shelter.

Different peoples treat it differently. Some people even consider it an art form!

Some nations `tolerate` it enough to legitimise it and its relative, pornography. Some nations and religions consider it on par with murder or other such crimes.

Some mothers willingly allow their daughters to enter prostitution. Some daughters take to prostitution by their own free will. Others consider it a grave sin.

A cause of VDs, like AIDS, for some, casual sex for others.

Performed between two broad minded, consenting adults, the objections always arise from third parties - for whom the motivations are varied, but not always above suspicion of jealousy.

What is is devious crime for some, is an art form for others!

Should prostitution be considered a crime?