Gay Bombay: Globalization, Love and (Be)longing in Contemporary India (38 page)

As I have mentioned earlier, I have used pseudonyms to disguise my interviewee names and or email or newsgroup identities or chat handles.

I have also used gender appropriate pronouns while describing the respondents, based on their declared gender orientation. Wherever I have used online or offline conversation or interview excerpts, I have either cut and pasted them verbatim from my saved records, or reproduced them within quotation marks. I have not edited the excerpts for minor grammatical or spelling errors; I want their original flavour to be retained and reflected within this book. (For more detailed interviewee profiles, kindly refer to the Appendix).

BEING GAY IN INDIA

Becoming gay or, rather, becoming aware of being gay is an organic process. More men in India are seeing themselves and their lives reflected in this idea and the individual testimonies often give a hint of the evolution within people’s lives of that consciousness. ( Jeremy Seabrook, 1999)1

Many people whom I interviewed considered their homosexuality

to be normal, natural and just another personal choice. It was something that was intrinsic, ‘as much a way of life as brushing your teeth in the morning or breathing’ (Bhuvan). Others were grappling with self-acceptance
.

220
Gay

Bombay

MOHNISH:
I AM GAY THOUGH I WOULDN’T LIKE PEOPLE TO CALL ME

GAY, HOMO, QUEER, ANYTHING; IT IS STILL CONSIDERED

ABNORMAL. I DON’T WEAR THE LABEL WITH PRIDE.

ORMUS: TO SOME EXTENT, ASKING ME WHAT MY PERSONAL VIEWS

ON HOMOSEXUALITY ARE IS EQUIVALENT TO ASKING A

JEWISH MAN IN A 1940S GERMAN CONCENTRATION CAMP

ABOUT HIS VIEWS ON JUDAISM. DESPITE THE COMPLETE

ACCEPTANCE OF ONE’S OWN NORMALITY, THE MANY WHIPS

OF THE NAZI COMMANDANT CANNOT BUT CARRY THEIR

OWN STING. NEVERTHELESS, THE MOMENTS WHEN I WISH

I WEREN’T GAY ARE GROWING FEWER AND FEWER. THE

PATH THAT I MUST FOLLOW, THOUGH ONE THAT WILL VERY

FORESEEABLY BE STRUNG WITH OBSTACLES, IS ONE WHOSE

ABILITY TO INTIMIDATE ME GROWS LESSER EVERY DAY.

For some respondents, being gay denoted a political stance or signified a social identity. A few considered it to be just a desire, or equated it with the sexual act—‘Just sex, over and out. I know what I want. Seven inches and above’ (Harbhajan). For others, it extended beyond their sexual urge
into what Adam (2000) describes as the
‘potential for emotional involvement and relationships’.2 Thus, Asim, Mike, Yudhisthir and Mohnish portrayed being gay as being comfortable with one’s own self, a state of mind, a spirit of being, a way of life, something that was both emotional as well as physical, as opposed to
homosexuality,
which was something just physical. Some respondents did not see the point in differentiating between the terminology of
homosexual
and
gay
(Nihar—

‘Gay, queer, homosexual, potato,
batata
; it is all the same’; Rahim—‘It is just men doing other men’), but for others,
homosexual
was a significant boundary that had to be crossed on the way to being considered
gay
.

Jasjit differentiated between sexuality as a practice and as a lifestyle when he defined homosexuality as ‘an innate personal trait that may or may not be translated into a conscious lifestyle decision’.

Most respondents noted that being gay in India carried its own unique set of connotations and experiences, mainly because of the cultural, social and religious structures, and family pressures that insist on conformity to traditional patriarchal, heteronormative values. Still, almost all were confident that India was becoming more open to the idea of homosexuality, although they qualified that this change was confined largely to urban areas and came accompanied by many riders.

Straight Expectations
221

JASJIT:

OPEN
IS A DECEPTIVE WORD IN MY OPINION—THE

PARADIGMS OF SOCIAL ACCEPTANCE IT CONNOTES ARE

ESSENTIALLY ROOTED IN WESTERN THINKING AND BASED

ON INDIVIDUALISM AND RATIONALITY. PEOPLE IN INDIA HAVE

VIEWED IT DIFFERENTLY…

VIDWAN: TO A LARGE EXTENT, THE INDIAN WAY OF LOOKING AT QUEER-

NESS IS VERY DIFFERENT FROM THE WAY THE WEST SEES IT.

THERE SEEMS TO BE A LOT MORE ACCEPTANCE OR AT LEAST

TOLERANCE OF QUEERNESS IN INDIA AS LONG AS IT DOES

NOT COME IN THE WAY OF HETEROSEXUAL PROCREATIVE

ACTIVITY. THE RECENT VISIBILITY GIVEN TO AN OVERTLY

POLITICIZED SEXUAL IDENTITY IS WHAT IS EXTREMELY UN-

NERVING FOR MANY WHO SEE THEIR PRESENT POSITIONS

IN SOCIETY, COMPROMISED BY A QUESTIONING OF GENDER

AND SEXUALITY. AND YET, THERE IS CHANGE, MUCH OF IT

POSITIVE—A LOT OF IT, COMING FROM THE ENGLISH MEDIA.

IN URBAN HIP CULTURES, HOMOSEXUALITY IS FINE AND SO IS

HAVING GAY FRIENDS, BUT SOME OF THE OLDER ATTITUDES

PERSIST, SOMETIMES UNKNOWINGLY.

Many respondents echoed Vidwan’s assertion that gay men in India could easily compromise with straight society by existing ‘within the confines of a heterosexual framework’ (Pratham). However, for others, this ‘silent acceptance’ (Rahim) was a mirage, ‘an existence in invisibility’, (Senthil) that would be shattered with increased visibility, which in turn would almost certainly lead to ‘more pronounced homophobia’ (Nihar).

JASJIT: BEING

GAY AND INDIAN WOULD, IN A TRADITIONAL CULTURAL

SENSE, MEAN HAVING SEX WITH A MEMBER OF SAME SEX

MORE AS A
HOBBY
OR
PASSION
(
SHAUK
IN HINDI), RATHER THAN

TO TURN IT AN IDENTITY ISSUE, WHICH IS A POST-MODERN

VIEW OF HOMOSEXUALITY, SO FAR AS INDIA IS CONCERNED.

THUS, MANY INDIAN GAYS WOULD HAPPILY GET MARRIED AND

HAVE FAMILIES. FAMILIAL GENDER BIAS AND THE GENERAL

LACK OF INDIVIDUALISTIC THOUGHT, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT

COMES TO WOMEN, HELP SUPPORT SUCH A SITUATION. ALSO,

THE GENERAL MASS OF GAY INDIANS ARE QUITE UNAWARE OF

THE HISTORICITY OF THEIR SEXUAL PREDILECTION AND SO IS

THE SOCIETY AT LARGE—SO THE MAIN HOMOPHOBIC AGENDA

FOR INDIANS CAN BE THAT BEING GAY IS ESSENTIALLY A

WESTERN (LESS CHAUVINIST) OR ISLAMIC (MORE CHAUVINIST)

222
Gay

Bombay

PHENOMENON AND IT NEVER EXISTED IN INDIA! THERE MOST

CERTAINLY IS A UNIQUE GAY CULTURE. INDIVIDUAL TRAITS,

WHICH IN TURN ARE CONVERTED INTO SOCIAL TRAITS THAT

FOSTER AND CHERISH IT, ARE NARCISSISM, CHAUVINISM,

ESCAPISM AND INDIVIDUALISM. OF COURSE THERE CAN BE

MANY MORE, OFTEN HAVING THEIR OWN DIALECTIC (THESIS-

ANTITHESIS-SYNTHESIS), RHETORIC AND POLITIC DYNAMICS.

RAHIM: A LOT OF GAY MEN ARE FINDING COMFORT IN THAT SPACE,

WHICH SAYS—DO EVERYTHING, BUT BE QUIET! IF YOU ARE

GAY, REMAIN GAY. IT’S OKAY. JUST DON’T WALK ON THE ROAD

WAVING A FLAG. I HAVE A FRIEND, A GAY COUPLE, WHO HAVE

BEEN LIVING FOR TEN YEARS IN A BUILDING SOCIETY. EVERYONE

IN THE SOCIETY AND THEIR WORKPLACE KNOWS THAT THEY

ARE A COUPLE BUT IT IS NOT TALKED ABOUT. IT GIVES THEM A

GREAT SENSE OF COMFORT THAT WE ARE NOT A HOMOPHOBIC

SOCIETY. THESE GUYS HAVE FOUND COMFORT IN A SOCIETY

THAT IS WILLING TO OVERLOOK THEIR RELATIONSHIP AS LONG

AS IT IS NOT ACKNOWLEDGED. WE ARE NOT A HOMOPHOBIC

SOCIETY AS LONG AS EVERYTHING IS QUIET. THE MOMENT

I GET UP AND SAY I WANT AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT THAT I

AM GAY AND AT PAR AS ANYONE ELSE IN SOCIETY, IS WHEN

THE PROBLEM COMES UP.

However, it would be a mistake to assume that this
contract of silence
(Ashok Row Kavi, 1999)3 existing in India is similar to the situation that prevailed in the West in the early and mid 20th century, where typically the gay son would leave home as soon as he could, ‘both to move to a larger city and to keep his secret from kin’ (Sanders, 2004).4 In India, leaving home is an option that is rarely exercised, but even if this happens (as with Bhuvan, Yudhisthir and some of my other interviewees), the shadow of family continues to loom large in influencing the lives and decisions of gay men.

JASJIT:

A PERSON’S EXISTENTIAL NOTIONS ARE STILL ROOTED INTO

THE FAMILY AS OPPOSED TO THE INDIVIDUAL. SO THE FAM-

ILY’S ROLE, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO IDENTITY-BASED

ISSUES LIKE
COMING OUT
FOR EXAMPLE, CAN BE CRUCIAL.

RANDHIR: THE MANIFESTATION OF THIS IN THE LIVES OF SAME-SEX

ATTRACTED PERSONS IS MOST PROFOUNDLY FELT IN THE

AREA OF (HETEROSEXUAL) MARRIAGE, WHERE THE PERSON

Straight Expectations
223

OFTEN CANNOT RESIST THE FAMILY PRESSURE AND DOES

CONCEDE TO GETTING MARRIED, THUS LIVING A DUAL LIFE

AFTER THAT!

The mythologist Devdutt Pattanaik (2002) attributes the unique marriage pressure on Indian gay men to the overwhelming influence of the ‘Hindu way of life’ in India.5

For the sake of social stability, scriptures demand unquestioning obedience to sacred duties (
Dharma
) that are determined by one’s inherited caste (
Varna
) and one’s stage in life (
Ashrama
). One’s duty, or rather a biological obligation, common to all castes, is to produce children, so as to facilitate the rebirth of ancestors and keep the cycle of life rotating…. The Hindu way of life also acknowledges that the humans need to earn a living (
Artha
) and enjoy life (
Kama
). However, the right to worldly goods and worldly pleasures comes only
after
worldly duties are performed. Thus, marriage is transformed into a key to worldly life. Unless married, the Hindu man has no right to own property or to perform religious rituals. He has no right to indulge his senses. The unmarried man is given two choices—remain a chaste student (
Brahmachari
) or turn into a celibate hermit (
Sanyasi
)…

All hell breaks loose in a Hindu household not so much when a son or daughter displays homosexual tendencies, but when those tendencies come in the way of heterosexual marriage… Non-heterosexuality is ignored or tolerated as long as it does not upset the heterosexual world order.6

Indications of this tremendous pressure to conform to social norms were made visible to me in the case of the three married men who were a part of my survey. They all stated that they had got married as they felt that there was no other alternative. From among the others, I was struck that although only 21 years old, Iravan was already feeling the burden of this pressure when he insisted during our conversation that he had no choice but to get married. ‘I am an only child and I have to do the best for my parents. I know that I am going to get married. [But] I do not know if I will be able to overcome my sexual attraction to men’.

This pressure, as Vidvan pointed out, is even more intense when the gay person is effeminate and thus visibly marked different—

BECAUSE SEXUALITY IS NEVER VERY OVERT, BUT GENDER OFTEN TENDS

TO BE SO, EFFEMINATE MEN AND BUTCH WOMEN OFTEN FACE GREATER

224
Gay

Bombay

HURDLES THAN OTHERS IN QUEER CIRCLES. ALSO, MANY ARE OFTEN

WILLING TO COMPROMISE FOR THIS AC-CEPTANCE, LIKE GETTING

MARRIED OUT OF FAMILY PRESSURE, WHILE THE FAMILY REMAINS SILENT

OVER MANY CONTINUING RELATIONSHIPS.

Rebellion against this pressure can sometimes mean banishment (Queen Rekha revealed that her decision to come out as
kothi
led to her estrange-ment from her family), but in most cases, the child is not thrown out, but pressurized to change his ways in order to maintain the family i
zzat
(honour).

On the issue of coming out, my understanding is that although all respondents had shared information about their homosexuality with their friends to some extent or another, most equated
coming out
with coming out to their families. Here, the first obstacle as Ormus lamented, was that ‘in India, there does not exist a respectable vocabulary for homosexuality. If I were to come out to my aunts and uncles, I have no idea what words I would ever use’. Students Gul, Nihar and Om shared with me their deep desire to come out, but only after they graduated and achieved financial independence from their families, as they were apprehensive about their reactions. For Ormus, Divakar, Taksa and Husain, fear of confrontation with their families led to their eliminating all traces of their homosexuality within the family presence. Even in situations like Mohnish’s where he acknowledged that his family might be understanding (‘they are broadminded, liberal, discuss homosexuality often’), there was still a fear that ‘their condition would be quite miserable…

if they found out that their own son was gay’.

On the other hand, for openly out respondents like Kabir, Cholan, Rahim, Karim, Harbhajan and Mike, the family helped serve as a vital source of support.

MIKE:

I’VE BEEN RAISED IN A PSYCHIATRIST’S HOUSE. SO THERE

HAVE NEVER REALLY BEEN ANY ISSUES OR TABOOS. SOME OF

MY PARENTS’ CLOSEST FRIENDS ARE GAY, SO IT WAS MUCH

EASIER FOR ME TO ACCEPT MYSELF AND TO REALIZE THAT

I’M NOT A GENETIC DEFECT OR SOMETHING.

CHOLAN: MY FATHER’S FIRST REACTION WAS, ‘LETS CHALLENGE THE

LAW.’ HIS SECOND REACTION WAS, ‘I WANT TO READ SOME

BOOKS ON THIS TO UNDERSTAND IT BETTER.’ HIS THIRD

REACTION WAS, ‘YOU KNOW I’VE BOUGHT A SMALL FLAT IN

Straight Expectations
225

BOMBAY, IT’S NOT READY BUT WHEN IT IS, I THINK YOU NEED

YOUR OWN SPACE AND I THINK YOU SHOULD HAVE IT.’ HIS

FOURTH REACTION WAS, ‘I WANT TO MEET OTHER PARENTS.’

I DON’T KNOW ANY OF MY FRIENDS WHO’VE HAD SUCH A

COOL EXPERIENCES WITH THEIR PARENTS. SIX YEARS AGO,

THEY ASKED ME, ‘CHOLAN YOU ARE OF MARRIAGEABLE AGE, IF

OUR FRIENDS ASK US, WHAT DO YOU WANT US TO SAY?’ I TOLD

THEM TO SAY WHATEVER THEY THOUGHT WAS APPROPRIATE.

THEY SAID, ‘WE WANT TO TELL THEM THAT YOU’RE GAY.’