Why the docs need a lesson in homosexuality

Ashok Row Kavi, in a recent newspaper interview ahead of a mammoth conference on sexuality in Mumbai, criticised medical professionals in India on their absolute lack of knowledge about human sexuality, especially homosexuality. No wonder really. A gay friend of mine, studying medicine at the Osmania university in Hyderabad says that textbooks and course materials in Indian universities are completely bare of any discussion whatsoever on homosexuality. Only in gynaecology is the subject mentioned. And if the student is referring to an Indian author, he'll be told in a fleeting sentence that homosexuality is a sickness that can be cured.

This lack of education in Indian medical institutes, which indeed is in sharp contrast to their western counterparts has caused a situation to develop, wherein harassed gay people, who are forced to see these professionals, instead of getting any real relief, are thrown into the abyss of what is called "aversion therapy", now completely discredited in the west.

In August this year, The American Psychological Association declared that mental health professionals should not tell gay clients they can become straight through therapy or other treatments. In a resolution adopted on a 125-to-4 vote by the APA’s governing council, and in a comprehensive report based on two years of research, the 150,000-member association put itself firmly on record in opposition of so-called “reparative therapy” which seeks to change sexual orientation. No solid evidence exists that such change is likely, says the report, and some research suggests that efforts to produce change could be harmful, inducing depression and suicidal tendencies. The APA had criticized reparative therapy in the past, but a six-member task force added weight to this position by examining 83 studies on sexual orientation change conducted since 1960.

Most prominent among them was the Masters and Johnson research. In April 2009, Thomas Maier reported in Scientific American that Virginia Johnson had serious reservations about the program, and that the results of the study were fabricated by William Masters. The same story goes for every other such aversion therapy 'researches'. Mainstream medical bodies have consistently rejected them because of several fundamental flaws in them- These include the fact that the results are not published in peer-reviewed journals, but tend to be released to the mass media and the Internet, that random samples of subjects are not used and results are reliant upon the subjects' own self-reported outcomes or on evaluations by therapists which may be subject to social desirability bias, that the evidence is gathered over short periods of time and there is little follow-up data to determine whether the therapy was effective over the long-term, that the evidence does not demonstrate a change in sexual orientation but merely a reduction in same-sex behavior, that the interpreters of the evidence do not take into consideration that subjects may be bisexual and have simply been convinced to restrict their sexual activity to the opposite sex, that conversion therapists falsely assume that homosexuality is a mental disorder, and that their research focuses almost exclusively on gay men and rarely includes lesbians.

Row Kavi specifically pointed out Dr. Rajan Bhonsle, Head of Department of sexual medicine at KEM hospital. "Sexologist Dr Rajan Bhonsle, for instance, is homophobic. He claims homosexuality is a "choice" when it is a sexual orientation. Bhonsle wrongly equates same sex with anal sex. A large number of gay men I know do NOT have anal sex. Bhonsle induces many homosexuals to go in for aversion therapy. His writings and lectures come in the way of creating a more tolerant and healthy society.", Kavi says. Dr. Bhonsle in his defence claimed that, "Only if an individual, who approaches me, has the right reasons, and a willingness to develop orientation towards the opposite sex, do I help him. I have hundreds of patients who have developed heterosexual orientation following therapy and are now happily married."

I have two things to say to that. Firstly, even if a gay person comes to a doctor wanting to 'change' his sexual orientation, he should be advised not to do so, just as medicos in the west now do. These psychiatrists should be instructed not to exploit the fears and gullibility of those struggling with their homosexuality, and instead should be helped so that they can come to terms with it. As for the claim of turning gays straight, it's nothing new. Dr. Bhonsle's claims hold no more water than those several 'researches' in the west that have been sysytematically discredited by mainstream medical organizations. Such claims of "therapy" would be quite a joke had they not been so tragically damaging to the spirit and happiness of gay people and their families. So, as medical professionals from all over India converge in Mumbai for the conference, let's hope it'll set some wrongs straight.

Bruno dear, it's not your fault!

So what’s the fuss all about? What’s so outrageous about Bruno that even the liberal Times of India supports a ban on it? 82 minutes long, but devoid of a single second of boredom, Bruno is definitely the most offensive of all movies ever made. Unparalleled in its dark humor, this film is surely not for everybody to see.

The film chronicles the life of a flamboyant Austrian fashion journalist who moves to the United States to gain stardom. What follows is a hilarious and shocking journey to fame. But does it deserve the kind of condemnation it received? The mainstream media has dubbed it pornographic, while the gay media has castigated it for reinforcing stereotypes about gay people.

Bruno reveals a facet of gay life that straight people, indeed most gay people themselves, are uncomfortable acknowledging, let alone discussing. The graphic visuals of kinky sex are meant to shock the audience, not turn them on. Calling the film pornographic is therefore the easiest way out for those in the audience who are just not comfortable watching it on screen. The sex scenes, or scenes showing male genitalia are the exact anti-thesis of what real pornography is. Jug Suraiya, in his Times article argues that what is not erotica is pornography. Someone please tell him that the world is not all black and white.

As for the argument that Bruno reinforces gay stereotypes, one must keep in mind that the film has been intentioned as a mockumentary rather than a documentary. It tries to tell the audience that what they are seeing on the screen is the epitome of the stereotyped gay, and not all gay people are like that. Ofcourse many people have not understood the point, and from this stems the criticism.

Mercifully, there have been several commentators, both gay and straight, who’ve seen the breathtaking hilarity of this film, most notably Out magazine, whose endorsement of the film in the form of a brilliantly written mock interview is a welcome breath of fresh air!

A call for equality

The English media has delivered a flurry of celebratory editorials ever since the Delhi High Court’s historic judgment decriminalizing homosexuality. But for reasons more than one, what stood out from the rest was Milind Deora’s article in today’s Times of India. And if you still haven’t read it, I suggest you skip the rest of this post, and read that first. Really!

For starters, Milind Deora is the first Member of Parliament in this country who has had the courage to speak out so lucidly and so forcefully for gay rights. While his own Congress party has been too shy to publicly endorse the judgment, this MP from South Bombay has shown the sort of moral uprightness that somehow seems to be missing in his fellow politicians of today- speaking out freely for what you believe in.

But that’s not all. His article is special for many more reasons. Firstly, he moves beyond the traditional “us versus them” paradigms. Quoting Cesaire he says, "...the work of man is only just beginning...and no race holds the monopoly of beauty, intelligence and strength and there is place for all at the rendezvous of victory.'' By saying that he not only includes LGBT people within the gambit of those who deserve absolute equality in modern India, but also calls upon straight Indians to be a part of the struggle. “Ask yourself if you can step out of your comfort zone to advocate for the rights of all, regardless of gender, caste, sexuality, ability, or religion, to pursue your freedom and happiness. After all, our convictions mean the most when they include those beyond ourselves.” And that’s an important message. Both for straight and gay Indians. It’s great that straight people support gay rights, but what about our own responsibilities towards other minorities. How many times have we heard our gay friends abusing the Muslim on the street, or ramble about what a disgrace the transgenders are on our community. Indeed, how many of us really care about our own gay and lesbian brothers and sisters in small towns and villages, or those battling with HIV, as long as we’re happy with our partners and our parties.

And that brings us to the second point. He speaks about the “poor and less privileged sections of the gay community in both urban and rural India who have neither the financial nor political clout to counter the persecution, blackmail and incarceration they are constantly subjected to.” Let’s accept it, despite being gay, life’s rosy for those of us with an English education, internet access and cash rich jobs. But we’re a small part of the Indian gay community. And it’s time we reached out to the other lot.

And thirdly, he gives us hope. He says that there will always be a “blinkered few” who will oppose our movement for equality, but goes on to say that “this is where rational argument and nuanced analysis can and should take centre stage in mainstream Indian politics… Self-appointed custodians of Indian culture and the extreme right will always harbor archaic prejudices about anyone not like them but they never did merit serious attention in a free-thinking democracy like ours.” And as rightly pointed out by Milind, the greatest beacon of hope is India’s youth- “If my campaign experience across the socio-economic divide has taught me anything, it is that young India is not just a barometer of social change but a determining factor in shaping it. Indians of my generation are not afraid to speak the truth to power.” And so let us not cry ourselves hoarse over the lunatic fringe of Baba Ramdev and others like him. They’re entitled to their views in a democracy, and what we must ensure is that we reach out with our love to the society at large. That’s our democratic right.

A Thumbs Up to Justice

So the word’s finally out- the Government has decided its stand on the historic July verdict of the Delhi High Court- that it will not oppose the decriminalization of homosexuality. This is what a senior law ministry official said to the media- “There is nothing wrong, legally, with the judgment. It is a well-reasoned judgment. There is no purpose in opposing it.”

The fact that the High Court had only amended Section 377 (as was demanded by the Naz Foundation), and not struck it down completely, has made it impossible for the Government to oppose the judgement without invoking the sort of primitive arguments that the previous Home ministry under Shivraj Patil had done.

However, there has been no dearth of petitioners knocking the doors of the Supreme Court- eight in all. Quite a motley group one has to admit- ranging from astrologers to yoga gurus and a conglomerate of churches and even a political party called the Panthers Party from Jammu. All of them with their nasty and predictable arguments, on which I wouldn’t waste either my time or yours. But there’s one that deserves a mention- not just for its anecdotal value, but also to point out just how ignorant a homophobic society can be, where our community itself is next to invisible.

Astrologer S K Kaushal suggests that since jawans live away from their families, they could be tempted to gratify themselves using their colleagues. If this happens, "the whole defense system of the nation will collapse''. I’m sure this venerable astrologer is hardly aware of the fact that one of the best defense forces of the world- the Israeli army was the first in the world to allow openly gay men and women to serve in their ranks. In any case, if gays can do such a wonderful job at “collapsing a whole defense system”, why not suggest the government to hire them for use against unfriendly neighboring armies?

Jokes apart, I’m pretty sure with the Government’s bold and principled stand, India’s gay community can be hopeful for a better future. Now that a favorable Supreme Court ruling seems all the more likely, we should prepare for battles ahead. The next step obviously is anti-discrimination laws. The Delhi High Court has mentioned in its ruling-

"We hold that sexual orientation is a ground analogous to sex and that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is not permitted by Article 15." (Pg85 point 104)

However, the law still does not explicitly mention sexual orientation as a prohibitive ground for discrimination. That needs to be changed. Also, protection from hate-speeches and hate-crimes. And therefore it’s time to be more pro-active. Time to come out of our silent closets. Time to move beyond networks to a community.