Erasing the Lines
Reading this made me realize how deep-seated the belief is, especially in India, that homosexuality is an “undesirable, unhealthy, unnatural and abnormal behaviour increasing without control” to quote the words of the author of the above article. An article in which he rails against the open letter written by many eminent writers, artists, human rights activists and others calling for the decriminalization of homosexuality in India by overturning Article 377 of the Indian constitution. What I find even more disquieting is that the writer is apparently a qualified paramedical professional. Here we have a person connected to the medical field who argues that homosexuality should not be decriminalized because, and I quote here,
“…it is an altogether socially, ethically and medically unacceptable idea to treat them as normal. There are no homosexuals among any species of animals. Such practice is fundamentally against nature. With all our sympathy, we have to treat them as abnormal.”
In closing, he wants this to be “a wake-up call for the guardians of traditional morality and ethics”. I utterly disagree with this oft-argued but blinkered view of homosexuality, especially from a scientific point of view. To counter the major argument that it is unnatural here is a link to a seminal book available on Amazon.
The author painstakingly collected documented evidence on animal behavior in which scientists, due to their personal prejudices, completely ignored or overlooked obvious and widespread homosexual behavior among as many as 450 species of animals. An excerpt:
“Astounding as it sounds, a number of scientists have actually argued that when a female Bonobo wraps her legs around another female … while emitting screams of enjoyment, this is actually “greeting” behavior, or “appeasement” behavior … almost anything, it seems, besides pleasurable sexual behavior.”
That book and the studies it cites should completely debunk the ”its unnatural” argument. Apart from that, police and the so-called ‘moral guardians of culture’ in India have used the law to harass homosexuals. So if not anything, it is a basic denial of human rights to selectively target human beings solely on the basis of their (different) sexual preference. Just as we have a right to freedom of speech there should be a right to sexual preference as well. For the latter is admittedly a more personal and private choice than the former. Therefore, it is justified to demand that the unjust and inhumane Article 377 be overturned.