Never thought I’d say this, but our esteemed health minister has finally made a good suggestion. Hallelujah! And since I’ve been quick to pounce on his follies, it’s only fair I tip my hat when he proposes something that actually makes sense.
Dr. Ramadoss, like many of us, believes that Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code must go. (Section 377 makes sex between two men a criminal offence.) Of course, the scrapping of this section falls outside the purview of his ministry, but for whatever it’s worth, his support is important. Here’s to more judicious ideas from our enlightened rulers, rather than the ones we’ve been used to seeing!
August 18, 2008 at 4:54 pm
QI:
Unqualified, his stance looks liberal but the link you provide suggests he says this move is worth considering, “..stating that India was witnessing the “stabilisation of the HIV epidemic””. He also does not just talk about Section 377 but also mentions the illegality of commercial sex workers in the same statement. Fascinating insight on how the health ministry frames issues.
There are many an assumption in that one statement. Even discounting for the fact that he only speaks for the portfolio he holds, is he suggesting that HIV was the one reason to have not opposed 377 earlier? Wasn’t it a day or so ago that the gay community in India wanted the British to apologise (never mind the law, as if we are so law-abiding in India that Section 377 made us prejudiced against gays overnight, ignoring the centuries-old tradition of acceptance of alternative sexuality!)?
It is not the law, it is our weird societal perspective on sexuality in general, and our queasiness with alternative sexuality in particular, that makes LGBT the pariahs they are.
Good post though. Thanks for bringing it to light.
August 18, 2008 at 8:22 pm
About time! Seriously that law was death sentence for homosexuals in India. Lets hope other of his kind agree with him too and let this pass through the parliament (I guess they need to do that right?)
August 18, 2008 at 9:34 pm
I don’t believe that Ramadoss is advocating the repeal of article 377 out of respect for individual liberty. It’s good news nevertheless!
Shefaly, you are right that ultimately it is the Indian atitude to sex and privacy that needs to change. I believe some of this change is already taking place, the rest will happen with time. Section 377, however, is an insidious law. Not only does it go against basic individual rights, it also makes abuses like this possible. Anything that hastens its repeal, I welcome!
August 18, 2008 at 10:31 pm
No harm is saying what you want, as long as its not in your purview
But, you are right.. support matters!!
August 19, 2008 at 10:24 am
@Shefaly – strangely enough, his speech-writer wrote a decent enough speech; here is a better excerpt: “Structural discrimination against those who are vulnerable to HIV such as sex workers and men having sex with men must be removed if our prevention, care and treatment programmes are to succeed. Section 377 of the IPC, which criminalises men who have sex with men, must go. The key to overcoming the HIV epidemic is to take HIV services to those on the margins of society and we can only do that in an enabling environment.”
So he was actually talking sense…..but even if he’s stumbled onto the right answer for all the wrong (in the context of liberty and freedom of choice) reasons (as you have pointed out), I’m happy……at this point of time, it’s too much to expect anything else from Our Great Leaders.
@Che – the Delhi High Court is hearing a PIL challenging the validity of the law….the home ministry – whose jurisdiction it actually is – opposes it, citing its fear of ‘delinquent behaviour’ and the argument that “homosexuality is unnatural.”
Any proposed amendment by the government will have to be passed by parliament.
@Abhishek – you’re right, he’s doing this for different reasons, but I think we agree it’s welcome. And yes, the Indian attitude to sex and privacy has to change.
@Aparna – hmmmm. Interesting thought….
August 19, 2008 at 11:05 am
@ QI
That is a much better excerpt but also a line of reasoning that will go down like a lead balloon with India’s Great Leaders [capitalisation yours!
] and hence the Parliamentary passage of the bill is likely to be less delightful than we may like.
On an aside, to me, the need to do things bite-size is the most amusing thing about politics. Lumping gay men with sex-workers? Watch how this one goes…
It is only now that many in India know the name of this section of the IPC but our prissy attitudes to alternative sexuality, heck even how married people can and cannot behave, predate the act and the awareness of the act by a wide margin. No?
The corresponding law in Britain was repealed some 40 years ago. I doubt many, except gay men, had even heard of the law in India then.
I believe if our nosy attitude changed, there would be no meaning in this law anyway. But then how will Indians live – we want to know everything from people’s names, jobs, salaries, marital status, number of kids, if zero why and because of whose ‘problem,’ (we do not get ‘choice’), brands of possessions we have, whom we talk to, which religion we are and so on… That is a tall order for mass attitude bypass, my friend. That context will keep the prejudice and the heavy handedness of the police alive long after 377 may be repealed… :-/
August 19, 2008 at 11:27 am
Otherday this is what I wrote in another blog, for once, a silly minister, who once thought of putting no smoking laws at homes wherein you would have to seek permission from your help to smoke, is talking sense. Or is he trying to be politically correct after all the flak he has constantly received over Venugopal and going after smoking stars. Unless some real action happens, I would not be very optimistic.
August 19, 2008 at 12:48 pm
I agree with Shefaly about ‘our culture’.. I am past my mid-twenties, single.. & No matter where I meet people.. they ask me, “Are you married?”.. and I say, “Nice to meet you”!
Why are we so nosy? Why can’t we just let the other do what they want, how they want it..
On the other hand, having worked with gay communities, I’m sure they are a happy lot that someone in some kinda political system, for a hundred reasons they cant understand right now is supporting them! Support, i guess is the key word here..
August 19, 2008 at 3:19 pm
@Shefaly – as far as a change in attitudes go, you are the asking the Indians to drop such fascinating and warm-feeling and friendly aspect of our culture? Haan? As I never tire of reminding my fellow citizens, we are like this only!
Obscure Fact – 377 actually criminalises penetrative intercourse against the ‘order of nature’ – which also means that some heterosexual couples come under its purview.
Wonder if they have a law that criminalises everything but the missionary position?
@Poonam – I share your scepticism about talk being translated into action, but as a statement, it is an important one and that needs to be recognised.
@Aparna – so why you are being single? How much your salary is monthly? You are living in own house, na? Oh, you are paying rent? Why, baba? And how much per month?
At the risk of sounding repetitive, we are like this only.
August 19, 2008 at 3:28 pm
You get a kick out of this, don’t you? “We are like this only” is the biggest fall-back we have had for ages!!
August 20, 2008 at 11:32 am
another sort of minorityism… now even sexual minorities are being made a votebank.
wake up, folks.
August 20, 2008 at 12:14 pm
its amazing some people can suddently see light of the day after being super silly! will we see arjun singh talking about how pointless reservation is someday?!
but yeah, least these kinda speeches give some hope.
tho its crazy that someone sex life should be under legal purview. as long as you are not a serial rapist of some kind, its none of anyone elses business!
nahi?!
cheers!
abha
August 21, 2008 at 10:12 am
@aparna – ‘we are like this only’ is my blog’s raison d’etre!
@wanderlust – while I have absolutely no regard or respect for the man, it is my view that the votebank – such that it may be – was the last thing on his mind in this case.
@Abha – it is an unfortunate fact that the government tells us how we can or cannot have sex, what we can read, what we can watch, whether or not we can drink or smoke, ….they just don’t seem to be doing the things they should. You might want to check out a post I wrote called “The Government as Moral Guardian”….it’s the first link on this post.
September 7, 2008 at 8:14 pm
This is a very interesting discussion for a citizen of the U.S. (me) to read because we’re having the same debates here. On my blog I wrote a post called “Gay Marriage? I Can’t Afford To Fill Up My Car” in which I expounded on the comedian Bill Maher’s great line that with all that’s going wrong in the world, do we really need to be worried about 2 men kissing?
I hope that your government rids itself of these types of prejudicial decrees. And I hope mine does, too.
September 8, 2008 at 6:08 pm
@Supercynic – thanks for the comment. I think this one will take time. The home ministry, under under whose jurisdiction this falls, is opposing the modification. We’ve got to keep hoping!