Homosexuality : Ab Normal?
(My contribution towards Blogathon India 2008. To know more, head here.)
What are the challenges that society faces in accepting the concept of alternate sexuality? How can we address them?
First off, it’s the homosexual who’s facing the real challenge.
Society lays down norms and expects the community to follow them. The term norm-al is thus a heavily loaded one.
Heterosexuality isn’t normal, it’s normative. Homosexuality isn’t abnormal, it’s a challenge to the normative.
Second, the term alternate presumes:
a) an existent (more valid) way of being
b) the presence of choice
And frankly, I am not comfortable with either of the two.
The very fact that we refer to homosexuality as alternate shows we’ve still got a long way to go. We might have made this a topic of our blogathon, and Bollywood might have brought in more effeminate men (mostly for serious comic relief), but it’s still ‘alternate’ to the normative in our perceptions. That viewpoint needs to be sent to the bin.
What we need is to understand that Homosexuality, like heterosexuality, is not a choice. In fact, it’s probably genetic (link). And, can you ever choose who you fall in love with?
So let’s just do everyone a favour (including ourselves) and get our thoughts and words in order.
Hindustan Times carried two very interesting pieces on homosexuality finding more acceptance on campus on April 22, but all the guys and girls quoted, had their names changed on request. And if hypocrisy is the first word that comes to your mind, then you’re a long way off boss. Those kids can’t be blamed for want of trying. All felt that outing themselves to accepting friends made them feel ‘normal’. But not many have told their parents. And the very fact that they don’t want their names published points to an unaccepting society.
Not many can stay on the fringe and revel in their imposed abnormalities. Indeed, it shouldn’t even be expected of them.
So if we’re talking about society and the challenge posed before it, here’s what it is.
Normative needs to include all forms of sexualities. Difference shouldn’t be accompanied with prejudice. Religions and laws that call homosexuality an "abomination" and a crime need serious rethinking and overhauling. And science and medicine – hotspots of hegemonic ideologies that are so easily overlooked – need to be subjected to as much of a critical combing as the others. (The DSM manual of psychiatry actually refers to homosexuality as a sexual deviation!)
And finally society has to learn to live and let be.
That’s the challenge - does society have the strength to face it?



We all have a right to express our views. In many instances; it will be against ours and in some; with us. To hear them out is 'decency' but to let them get to you is 'weakness'. 





Trackbacks & Pingbacks
Trackback Address
[…] the entire post at: http://sakshijuneja.com/blog/2008/04/22/homosexuality-ab-normal/ previous:It’s a jolly Bollywood…. by Santhi […]
Pingback by Blogathon India : Homosexuality: Ab Normal? by Saakshi O. Juneja — April 22, 2008 @ 9:10 am
[…] 23, 2008 This post started as a comment to Sakshi’s post for the ongoing blogathon (which I heard about, thanks to Sakshi) on the subject of homosexuality. […]
Pingback by Homosexuality: a meta (or non) normative take « A Fine Imbalance — April 23, 2008 @ 1:49 pm
[…] Sakshi Juneja’s post and a reply to it from Asuph and a response to that from Sakshi […]
Pingback by “Out”ing the truth…./ Blogathon Day 5 : Gender « Writing on the Mirror — April 24, 2008 @ 11:43 am
Comments
21 comments | Leave your comment
Apr 22nd, 2008 at 9:38 am | #
great post! totally agree with everything you’ve said.
Apr 22nd, 2008 at 10:28 am | #
Society already knows such people exist,…..probably education can make a difference! Movies like this will a big difference
Apr 22nd, 2008 at 10:41 am | #
Nice read. I hope more and more people come out in the open to express themselves freely and society comes out of state od denial.
Apr 22nd, 2008 at 2:29 pm | #
Ms. Sakshi
R U looking for our permission to dive to the depths of your fantasy ? Your rambling round about post appears to expose a latent desire to “twist your tongue”. I think we prefer that you go about your nefarious activity under the umbrella of “don’t ask, don’t tell” (we don’t want to know for sure). Here we were thinking that your big nose probably gets stuck in many issues beyond your comprehension, but now it appears your tongue has been sticking out too.
We understand, sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you feel like a fruit. Sometimes you just want to have Boston Cream Donut. You are a turkey and sometimes you need to gobble. But please leave us out of this.
Apr 23rd, 2008 at 5:40 am | #
Dear Kathi Roll,
To me you come across as nothing but a “Homophobe”, maybe you have issues with your own sexuality or lead a deprived adulthood or are simply PMSing. Whatever may be the reasons, be assured my sympathies are with you.
Even though personally I can’t stand *fuckers as yourself however I also believe in “Live and Let Live”.
Good Luck and wish you the very Best.
Sakshi
Apr 23rd, 2008 at 1:09 pm | #
Dear Ms Sakshi
You should be more tolerant towards *fuckers like me who like to do it with their own *dicks rather than their tongue. How insensitive of you to lash out at someone who has a traditional sense in *fucking, and thinks that it should be between a Man and his Lady Love.
No wonder a man hater like you is not married. The clock is ticking babes and saliva will not get you pregnant or start a family.
Apr 23rd, 2008 at 2:06 pm | #
Hello Dyke
Perhaps the instructions did not come with your oven but you need some male yeast to raise the dough. Saliva is good for a spit and shine but not for the dough in the oven.
Apr 23rd, 2008 at 4:27 pm | #
it’s ironical that this “traditional taste” sample never learned tradition in other aspects of life! sad commentary on our cultural(?) keepers. and irony of irony is now these guys (?) are demanding tolerance. we’ve got a whole kitchen here - oven, kathi kabaab, chilli.
sakshi, i like the way u treat this all as professional hazzard and move on.
cheers,
asuph
Apr 23rd, 2008 at 4:36 pm | #
One homo in defense on another
homolesboApr 23rd, 2008 at 5:16 pm | #
Kathi Roll,
This post is meant mostly for you. For people for whom heterosexuality is normative.
Asuph: this is why I’d disagree with your assumption that normative is social ‘value’ (in its positive connotation). Clearly people like Kathi Roll value heterosexuality and see what such valuing leads to: not just downright filth, but also the worst sort of bigotry and chauvinism. I particularly relished his reference to biological clocks and spit not leading to pregnancy! (Seriously KR, are you for REAL?)
KR, you’re the textbook example of what discrimination non-normative sexualities face, and this is how it’s done: the criticism is crass, corporeal, and aimed to humiliate. Oddly enough, (and this is where you’re stupidity ceases to amaze me), you actually think your words carry any import in this space. Even if your comeback comment is a internecine attempt to label me a ‘dyke’, you must understand, it doesn’t matter. Because you don’t matter.
And oh yeah, I’m totally with Asuph on this one: you’re handling the fool really well Sakshi. Keep it up.
Apr 23rd, 2008 at 8:58 pm | #
Nothing more funny than fags and dyke in
heathysteriaApr 24th, 2008 at 4:35 am | #
Moallif:
> Asuph: this is why I’d disagree with your assumption that normative is social ‘value’ (in its positive connotation). Clearly people like Kathi Roll value heterosexuality and see what such valuing leads to: not just downright filth, but also the worst sort of bigotry and chauvinism.
It’s not my “assumption” that normative is a social value. It’s the definition of normative. And since we’re talking about what is socially normative, it cannot be anything but what is of “value” to the society (as perceived by the society as a whole, if there is such a thing?). So I’d like to know what exactly you disagree with. The definition?
Normative is used generally in the sense of something that society will pitch as an ideal, prescriptive or prohibitive rules that preserve/lead towards the ideal. So it doesn’t matter what Kathi Roll values (that’s a red-herring of an argument, sorry). S/he might value using gutter language in the name of homophobia, for instance. That doesn’t become part of the normative. (Will s/he get endorsement for that sort of behavior from the generally respected elders/leaders in the society for instance? I doubt). Heterosexuality is not normative because Kathi Roll values it, but because, as I hinted in my post, a monogamous heterosexual relationship between married couple is typically valued by the society as a whole. However you dislike the way Kathi Roll puts it, there is a plain common sense truth in it. Society selfishly values its continuation: the reason why motherhood is such a “normative” big deal. Not unwed mothers, mind you — because that’s not seen as a stable environment for nurturing of kid(s). And that is why extra-marital sex, oral sex (between heterosexuals even), anal sex (ditto), pre-marital sex (ditto), incest (ditto) is not in normative. It’s not wishful thinking that will get them there, either.
By the argument that’s made in this post, and which you say you agree with completely, all these above forms of sex should be in the normative? Right?
regards,
asuph.
Apr 24th, 2008 at 7:20 am | #
Ok Asuph. Here’s what I believe. There seems to be a semantic disagreement between us, and since this is hardly the space to argue that, I’ll be concise.
Normative: a social construction meant to keep our patriarchal class based social order in place.
Ideal/ Value: The discourse of ethics, once again, socially constructed (in that it isn’t divinely ordained, or ‘natural’, as it is touted to be), variable (as you yourself point out), but ultimately a matter of discursive praxis.
The Normative isn’t the ideal. Calling it that is confusing two discourses (albeit interlinked) for one and the same. Further, if our aim is to analyse social structures, uncritically valuing the normative for being an ideal will hardly end discrimination.
And finally: there’s a difference between forms of sex, and sexual orientation. How can you group them together??
As for the orientations becoming part of the normative, yes, i believe they should. Because, that’s how it is: everything becomes part of the normative. But our efforts to always critique the normative shouldn’t end.
Apr 24th, 2008 at 3:55 pm | #
Normative: a social construction meant to keep our patriarchal class based social order in place.
What is the source of this definition? Will as society which have moved beyond patriarchal/class based order cease to have a normative?
If everything becomes part of the normative, does everything include hate, bigotry, misogyny, homophobia?
I think the process of defining a word to suite one’s whim is not a good starting point for any reasonable debate.
regards,
asuph.
Apr 24th, 2008 at 10:26 pm | #
Shoving one’s cucumber into another male’s boom box cannot be normal. Likewise shoving one’s tongue like Sakshi here into a girlfriend’s crotch cannot be normal.
But to each its own. I now understand what Sakshi means. She likes girls, well she likes girls. It is her business not ours.
Apr 25th, 2008 at 3:52 pm | #
I cannot believe people like KR exist for real! Why is it so important for us to associate everything with gender? Is the feeling of love so simple that it can be overshadowed by genitalia? Well I guess for people who compare love making with baking, it does matter after all. But just a little question pops-up what if you did not want to make the dough? What if all you wanted was some love and companionship for a change?
Apr 25th, 2008 at 7:03 pm | #
Having found your site by sheer chance i would like to say on the Homosexuality issue what is normal ? how do you know that homosexuality isnt real and heterosexuality the deviation , our education leads us to believe these things , but there are many things we learn in life that simply just dont add up , as a christian who has read the bible , the bible is full of inconsistencies , people should be allowed to be who or what they are wihout having to live in fear , people who use labels such as queer or puff or lezza show their total ignorance and contempt for the very people they claim to have “pity” for , Gay men and women dont want pity they just want to be allowed to live theri life in peace and harmony with others , what about the wrongdoings of adulterers/adultresses or those who have sex with children , or those members of society who have sex with their own family members including their parents , these are far worse evils than the supposed evil dirty homosexuals out there , live your life , be free , respect others and they in turn will respect you , dont use labels
Apr 29th, 2008 at 1:42 pm | #
You mean AlternatIVE Lifestyle, sugar.
Leave a comment
Comment Guidelines:
You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Off-topic or inappropriate comments will be edited or deleted.
Email addresses will never be published.