Gay Men and Mischievous Boys

huh? whats with sattar and tahmed?

anyhoo...indian working to reduce homophobia in the west recognized with an award

http://us.rediff.com/news/2005/may/10mitaward.htm

tahmed,

So you can’t find your post and think I am faking … hmmm. May be you need to try harder. However, it is too late for denial as you’ve already accused me again of trying to pick up women (re #123). Get your story straight, dumb ass. You can’t think straight since your head remains stuck in your rear … which has been your problem all along.

Falsely accusing one of ... trying to pick up women by spreading rumors about them … is sick. Attempt at denial makes it worse.

This suggests that you have morals of a two-bit pimp raised by crack whores. One can only wonder about you. Despite claims of civility, you remain a perverted madarch*d and a lowlife haramee … and I would say this to your face … you stupid fuck …

I am done with this board and I am done kicking your ass. So get lost now. Send me an e-mail if you need to get something off your chest. And then, go screw yourself some more … you sick pervert …

#135 by amrita
parvati sounds great.

i dont know about amma much, but in indian politics other example is that of savarkar himself. so general attitude is more in lines of dont-ask-dont-tell .. their is zero (bible-based) religious zealotary against homos like you see in the US.. thats what is different.

The PIL notwithstanding, i still am unconvinced about the importance of gay rights in india, even for gays. Based on my experiece, they are mostly happy to carry on and are much more concerned about regular (missing) law and order issues.

Re: # 134 by Amrita

selective memory:
This is from your post: ``Most of our intellectuals do nothing but parrot the latest fashionable theories from the West (which is why none of them is respected or even known in the West, unlike our software engineers, who are admired, feared and hated).``
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Clearly the post is condemning `intellectuals do nothing but parrot the latest fashionable theories from the West`. What is the alternative (which is implicitly being advocated)? Knowing our own traditions so that we can make an informed criticism. I admit I was unclear. In any case, it is not possible to quote the entire context of an argument in every point on a discussion board, since we typically do not exercise as much care as when writing an essay.

do they react to Amma as a homosexual ... or to Amma as Amma?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I think they have both reactions, and the reaction to Amma as a homosexual does not prevent them from voting for Amma as Amma (there was an interview with an AIDMK supporter where the supporter said something like `Who cares who is lying next to her as long as...` I tried to find the interview but could not). This is why jang doubted the existance of homophobia in India. Why is the West unable to show such broad mindedness?

Bhabha is the kind of person the West loves to take notice of.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
We travel in different circles; I personally think that Bhabha is about as relevant to today`s society as medieval scholastics. In any case I doubt his influence, and to test my theory, I typed in `Rushdie Bhabha` into Google. A quick scan of the results show that there appears to be no comment by Rushdie on Bhabha, while there are plenty of comments by Bhabha on Rushdie. So apparently Rushdie hasn`t taken much notice of Bhabha. You get the same results if you type in `Martel Bhabha`.

Changing the laws is an immediate step.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I forgot to point out last time that India is a democracy and in a democracy, nobody has much of a chance of ramming through a law that is not acceptable to most of society.

sattar: I decided to check for myself exactly what you had written, given your refusal to cut and paste the offending items. So, I checked all posts addressed to you by me (about 5-6, all of them in response to something you add written to me, and most of them telling you politely that I had no interest in exchanging posts with you) over the past 7 months. I could not find anything that you had quoted me on.

So, clearly, your ``anger`` has been a fake, and your newly-learnt preppy english abuses are also a fake. You are indeed a pathetic individual.

Re: # 121

jang - yes thats bhagwati :)). My apologies to the prof. but at least i didnt call him Parvati.

Homosexuality isnt the shining beacon it is in the States in India but here its merely brushed under the carpet rather than being a non issue. Its snowballing into the public arena right now thanks to the PIL that challenges the unnatural sex act law. I believe the SC wants to know why modern Indians are toeing the Victorian line - I dont know if thats a direct quote or a paraphrase.

As for violence against gays - you`d be surprised. There were statistics on it on one site that I found. Lemme see if I can find it again.

And whats with you and Amma anyway? :) Anyhow, I thnk the avg Amma supporter would cut your tongue out if you said something like about their Puratchi Thalaivi and her opponents wouldnt dare to say it coz Amma would zing em with her lines and play the victim card. So, nah - I dont think it means anything that Amma rules TN.

Re: # 132 - selective memory:
This is from your post: ``Most of our intellectuals do nothing but parrot the latest fashionable theories from the West (which is why none of them is respected or even known in the West, unlike our software engineers, who are admired, feared and hated).`` You then pointed out 4 fields where you thought Indians did well and said you thought that was it. Changing your mind to a more defensible position at the tail end of the debate doesnt change anything.

As for Jayalalithaa - do you wanna talk Amma??? Is Amma the homosexual on the street? When you walk out of your house and talk to those 10 people, do they react to Amma as a homosexual [btw, I`d talk plenty low and plenty mild on that issue if i were you - unlike the ordinary homosexual in India, Amma has some plenty big powers and she wont take kindly (hmm, I wonder why she wont take kindly??) to speculations on her sexuality] or to Amma as Amma? Dont be ridiculous and do let it go if you dont have anything to say.

Postcolonial discourse is one part of Bhabha`s repertoire. As for who cares - intelligent people who like to know whats up. Bhabha`s ideas dont stop at lit. A lot of people who talk about the West and ``Our Culture`` and Identity and Pride, etc would benefit a great deal from reading someone like Bhabha. It might interest you to know that almost anyone and everyone who`s ever taken a lit course in English, in the States esp, is familiar with Bhabha.
And what is more, with ref to your quote above, Bhabha is the kind of person the West loves to take notice of.

Changing the laws is an immediate step. The process doesnt stop there. If the process ended there then no one would ever have to teach their kids that murder is wrong. You would just have a law against it and have ambivalent feelings about it morally. Social change without the judiciary to back it up is no solution whatsoever.

In India it is a crime for a person to have sex with a person of his choice unless he does it in the approved manner and with the approved gender. Oral and anal sex is illegal as are penetrative sex toys. However, oral or anal rape or rape using something other than genitalia is not rape. These laws need to be changed and need to be changed now. social approval is something you work at and campaign for. Its a long term goal. its not something you present a thesis upon and hey, presto - its done.

Re: # 115 by rahul_capri

Why do you think Indians are homophobic?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I don`t know if Indians are homophobic.

I don`t know if ``homophobia`` in India means the same thing as ``homophobia`` in the West or for that matter the US; after all ``norms of heterosexual behaviour`` vary widely in the two countries.

I also don`t believe that studies done in the West can blindly be applied to India, which is a very different culture (see my post on Asian women, where it is pointed out that the strong family values actually support these women working outside the house, whereas in the West it would frequently be assumed that strong family values are in conflict with women working outside the house).

118 by Amrita
Sunlight - assuming homophobia exists?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I was going to let this go, but thanks to jang for pointing out that Jayalalitha is actually CM of Tamil Nadu. Were you aware about this?

Understanding the root cause is a very noble exercise. And it is entirely irrelevant in changing the laws.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Do you want to change the laws or solve the problem? Laws are not much use in solving social problems. If you simply make laws, a couple of years later you will be making angry speeches about how the laws are not enforced.

Remember that when Gandhi returned from South Africa, he was advised by Gokhale to spend a couple of years travelling around the country and understanding the problems before getting into politics. Are our intellectuals prepared to work this hard? Or do they simply try to apply the latest intellectual fashions from the West to India (a much easier task).

In fact, he and Gayatri Spivak are about the two people no postcolonial discourse can be without.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
What impact has postcolonial discourse had on the world (other than among a small self-selected clique of intellectuals)? Absolutely none, as far as I can see, nor is it likely to have any impact.

As for people knowing Indian traditions - and your point is?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I have not been discussing Indians who have had an impact on the world. I have had only one point:
(1) To have an impact anywhere, it is necessary for an Indian to know Indian traditions. We cannot blindly try to apply the latest fads and fashions from the West to India

sattar: Please re-read my post #129 in response, since you still remain unwilling to back your claims by cutting and pasting what it is you wrote.

As for your abusive language, I will not lower myself to your level. As I said, any coward can start abusing and using vulgar language. However, say these words to me face to face sometime, and I will provide you with the proper response.

tahmed,

It is you who needs to show … not me … you stupid prick. But you’ll need to get your head out of your rear to understand this. You made the claim, not me …

If I wrote what you suggested … I’d show it to you. I have nothing … zip … nadda … and neither do you. So take your cyber jihad some place else … and fuck off.

[And I would not hesitate to call you these names on your face either … you miserable behanch*d ... are you now satisfied?]

sattar2 #128 ``As I said, nothing I wrote supports your claim.``

Then why are you unwilling to show what you wrote?

You can keep using vulgar words, and keep calling me names (easy to do on the internet) and you can keep trying to be cleverer than you are (lots of fool do that on the internet too). But nothing can change the fact that you have, despite a number of exchanges below, steadfastly refused to do the simple thing of cutting and pasting the exchange in question based on which you are making this show of anger.

tahmed,

As I said, nothing I wrote supports your claim. So there’s nothing for me to point out. But if you had valid reasons, you would`ve pointed them out. And you haven’t. It is fair to conclude that you have a sick imagination, and are a self-righteous prick.

How did the idea of ``picking up women … in cyberspace … by spreading rumors about them`` … occur to you … I’d much rather not guess. I recall people tried to talk sense to you … but to no avail …

But don’t despair … as there may still be hope for you. Continue to see your proctologist. Use of his long electrical probes may be your only chance. Report back when you feel better.

(Murmuring to self … pata naheeN, yeh lafangay-madarch*d kahaN sey uth key a’jaatay haiN …nah sharam ... nah haiyya ...)

further to #125: and it is you (not me) who keep popping up on different threads venting your anger at me for something I said. So it is for you to substantiate your anger by posting what you have taken offense to. Not me.

sattar: I have given you a fair chance in #124. You have not done the simple thing I suggested there, and instead continue to make a show of your anger. So, I can only conclude that my original premise was right: you are demonstrating the meaning of the phrase ``oolta chor kotwaal ko dantay``.

And kindly refrain from use of vulgar language.

tahmed,

Think about it: “picking up women … on chowk … by spreading rumors about them”. It has three parts. Each part reveals something sick about you. Fabricating such claims requires a very sick mind.

Nothing in my posts suggested what you claimed. It is you who needs to explain his sick conclusion … not the other way around. Your failure to do so suggests you are a pretentious moralist and a self righteous fuck. Either substantiate your claim … or accept your mistake.