The
recent US
nation-wide legalization of same-sex marriage in June 2015 is undoubtedly a
laudable step in the struggle for full equality for its LGBT+ citizens. How far
does this move serve the LGBT+ masses of America ?
It would be impossible to succinctly expand on the types of marriage that have
existed throughout human history, but an integral element (especially for the
working classes), has been its role in ensuring economic security. So what
about the economic security the working class LGBT+ in America, for whom in
many states can be fired (and legally so) for being LGBT+? The prioritisation
of same-sex marriage over livelihood security does not serve the most
disadvantaged LGBT+, who cannot afford to migrate to a state where they are
protected from workplace discrimination. What then, can India ’s
growing LGBT+ movement do better?
It
is the bleak reality that the vast majority of gay women and men in the world
still marry opposite-sex partners. Legalisation of same-sex marriage maybe a
dream so distant for most LGBT+ people, who desperately require societal change
before any change in law – such as not facing the risk of alienation or
‘shaming the family’ for coming out, or to not risk losing their job simply for
falling in love with the ‘wrong’ sex. This is the reality of modern India ,
and many men and women in America
today. It is then the failure of same-sex marriage advocates to consider the
real life context and diversity of those LGBT+ citizens it purports to serve,
that India ’s
LGBT+ movement could learn from. While these societal barriers in the US
may be primarily religiously driven, India
clearly has much more to contend with.
An
example of how not to do it is Celina Jaitley’s American-style gay-liberation.
As part of the UN’s ‘Free and Equal’ campaign, her video features a male,
fair-skinned, seemingly-wealthy same-sex Indian couple who are quickly accepted
by their family at their wedding – it gets a plus point for using Hindi rather
than English, but the portrayal is of the least marginalised of LGBT+ in India.
Would a female same-sex couple with a darker complexion, one perhaps from a
Scheduled Caste and the other a Muslim, have shaken up India
too much? Heterosexual India
needs to be enlightened as to the reality of LGBT+ India around them, rather than
confining LGBT+ people to a Bollywood prototype. I digress to accept that films
like Dostana, with its underlying message of gay-acceptance, may provide a
starting point for LGBT+ sensitisation, but we must ask the question: in a
highly diverse, class and caste-structured society like India, can these
efforts translate into meaningful change for all LGBT+ people?
Using
cinema to promote LGBT+ acceptance through male, same-sex love marriages among
economically advantaged Indians serves to confine issues to the world of cinema
alone, especially in a society where heterosexuals are also expected to
self-sacrifice in deciding their marriage partner. Self-sacrifice is a
wonderful value that many western countries can borrow from India ,
but without the excesses that produce relationships for the sake of reputation
and economics. It is then the duty of the LGBT+ movement to target the real
barriers that produce the oppression and stigmatisation of LGBT+ in India ;
marriage, love and happiness are inadequate solutions for a far more complex
context. It is only when the barriers are both identified and targeted can India
really achieve an LGBT+ movement that rivals the USA ,
rather than imitating it. This will serve to create a strong, effective
movement with a lasting change. It is the wider social biases that are carried
through into the LGBT+ movement that serve to detriment, fragment and serve a
small minority of LGBT+ in India .
The
first step is to celebrate the diversity of India ’s
LGBT+, like the auto-walas, office-professionals, dark and light skinned,
Sikhs, Muslims, Hindus and Atheists, Scheduled Castes and Tribes, Rich and
Poor. The second step is not to simplify the cultural barriers as only being
unique to LGBT+ people – there is a necessity to recognise both the narrative
of the immorality/culture/sin and shame connected to homosexuality but also the
connection with the restrictions placed on how non-LGBT+ people are expected to
live. Repetitive American Bollywood-esque platitudes like Celina Jaitley’s, no
matter how positive her intentions are, neglect the diversity and opportunity
that India’s LGBT+ citizens have to set a precedent for engagement and inclusively,
and to develop a movement that is truly transformative.
As a
non-Indian, I admittedly uncomfortable. I hasten to pontificate and lecture on
how liberation should look to those who need it – and beyond the call to
recognise diversity (a foundational value of all well-meaning social
movements), it is up to every single LGBT+ person in India
to decide what needs to take place. To phrase it quite simply: India
can do much, much better.
