Not a Post Feminist World

I just came across a link on Quizlaw.com in which the author points out that we aren't really living in a post-feminist world.

"I’m used to seeing ugly misogyny in the gossip world, but aside from the usual right-wing nutjobs, I’m not as accustomed to seeing it as much in politics. However, New York Magazine ran a fascinating piece over the weekend on Hillary Clinton and the way her candidacy has brought the sexist douchebags out of the woodwork..."

Following the link which spoke about the gossip world, I reached an article which speculates about whether Ellen Page is gay -- the evidence: she apparently hasn't shaved her armpits in some film. (And, incidentally, if you're like me and have no idea who Ellen Page is, wikipedia has an article about her.)

It reminded me of an amazing post I read a few days ago about the politics of body hair by Anji in which she says:

"The hair on our heads must be our ‘crowning glory’; the rest of our bodies must be as bald as a newborn. Much of this can be attributed to the fetishisation of youth. Like glossy hair, bright eyes and unlined skin, hairlessness gives the body the appearance and feel of a young girl’s, or what I once saw described on the website of a hair removal product as a ‘prepubescent appeal’. It is curious that in a society where paedophilia is so reviled and such a huge problem, it is thought of as harmless and ordinary that men live out their paraphilic fantasies by requiring that the women they are exposed to look as young as possible.

... A woman, taught throughout her life that beauty through youth is her ultimate goal and that upon ageing her beauty dies, may feel compelled to remove every trace of adulthood within her control - and hair removal is so easy, so readily available, and she is so socialised to believe it is normal, that she reaches for the razor."

Anji's post doesn't really talk about being perceived as homosexual because of not removing body hair but I think it is interesting that to be considered a heterosexual woman one has to look a certain way. In fact to be considered a woman at all, one has to conform to various norms.

One woman discovered that the hard way: Khadijah Farmer was thrown out of a ladies' restroom Caliente Cab Company after New York's gay pride parade last June because the bouncer thought that she was a man and refused to look at her identification.

Anji's post: shutupsitdown.wordpress.com/2008/04/07/the-politics-of-body-hair/

Recognition to Transsexuals

I just came across a piece in today’s Times of India which says that the Government of Tamil Nadu’s Civil Supplies Department has decided to allow transsexuals to identify themselves using the letter ‘T‘ while applying for ration cards. I couldn’t find a link to the article on their website although I did find an article which deals with the response to the government’s action. [1]
While looking for the link, I discovered that in 2004, the Madras High Court had directed the Government of Tamil Nadu to inform it ‘about the action being taken on a circular from the Election Commission about issuance of identity cards to ‘aravanis’ (eunuchs)’. [2]
I don’t know much about about the rights (or lack thereof) of sexual minorities but I was nonetheless very surprised to see this news come out of Tamil Nadu since I’ve always thought of it as a particularly conservative state. However, when I thought about it, I realised that that opinion is based on what little I’ve seen of people from the state, and every single person I know is from just one caste.
(The reason I know their caste is because, amazingly enough, they’ve all told me their caste within days of my first meeting them. They’re all educated and they’re all phenomenally proud of their caste. So much for social integration!)

Links:

[1] timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Response_to_TN_govt_scheme_overwhelming/articleshow/2870041.cms[2] timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/540464.cms

Hinduism and Homosexuality

I just came across a post [1] by a lady imagining what her life might have been like had she been gay. She also speaks of a friend whom she calls Stella saying:

“Stella, at least, had to have really believed that was who she was meant to be.She still believes in God, the last I heard. She just has a lot of questions. It’s just too bad that there aren’t very many churches where they’d let her in long enough to ask them.”

It made me wonder what Hinduism says about homosexuality –- I’ve never heard anything at all being quoted against it from any Hindu scripture. However, a quick search reveals:

• There is a lone verse in the Manusmriti that reads: “A twice-born man [from an upper caste] who commits an unnatural offence with a male, or has intercourse with a female in a cart drawn by oxen, in water, or in the day-time, shall bathe, dressed in his clothes.” [2]
• The Arthashastra too apparently imposes a minor fine on a man who has ayoni [non-vaginal] sex (4.13.236). [3]
• The medical text, Sushruta Samhita mentions two different types of homsexual men: kumbhika and asekya.
• And the Naradsmriti apparently says that a homosexual man is unfit for marriage to a woman. [4] Well, obviously!
• Although the Kama Sutra states that homosexual sex is to be engaged in and enjoyed for its own sake as one of the arts. [5]

In addition to this, Hindu religious art and mythology have several depictions of and references to homosexuality right from in the temples of Khajuraho to the tale of Bhagiratha Maharaja, an Indian king born of two women.
That being said, most Hindus I know are deeply homophobic; it’s not a subject I can claim to have any knowledge worth speaking of on but I suspect that that’s one of the effects having had the British make homosexuality a criminal offence during the Raj and never having had the law changed (even though the Brits changed a similar law in their own country in 1967 [6]).
The law in question, Section 377 of the IPC says:Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
After all, Hinduism in itself doesn’t seem to deeply disapprove of homosexuality: the religion may not be particularly enthusiastic about it but it doesn’t unequivocally prohibit it either. And this is not the only instance where British laws have left a legacy in India of misgivings such as these in what are essentially personal matters …think of the restitution of conjugal rights, a concept alien to India which was introduced by the British and which has caused much hardship over the years.
Links:

[1] http://shushnow.wordpress.com/2008/03/01/what-if-i-were-gay/
[2] http://www.slate.com/id/2102443/
[3] http://www.galva108.org/hinduism.html
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_Hinduism
[5] http://www.religionfacts.com/homosexuality/hinduism.htm
[6] http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?msid=187403

Hinduism and Homosexuality

I just came across a post [1] by a lady imagining what her life might have been like had she been gay. She also speaks of a friend whom she calls Stella saying:

“Stella, at least, had to have really believed that was who she was meant to be.She still believes in God, the last I heard. She just has a lot of questions. It’s just too bad that there aren’t very many churches where they’d let her in long enough to ask them.”

It made me wonder what Hinduism says about homosexuality –- I’ve never heard anything at all being quoted against it from any Hindu scripture. However, a quick search reveals:

• There is a lone verse in the Manusmriti that reads: “A twice-born man [from an upper caste] who commits an unnatural offence with a male, or has intercourse with a female in a cart drawn by oxen, in water, or in the day-time, shall bathe, dressed in his clothes.” [2]
• The Arthashastra too apparently imposes a minor fine on a man who has ayoni [non-vaginal] sex (4.13.236). [3]
• The medical text, Sushruta Samhita mentions two different types of homsexual men: kumbhika and asekya.
• And the Naradsmriti apparently says that a homosexual man is unfit for marriage to a woman. [4] Well, obviously!
• Although the Kama Sutra states that homosexual sex is to be engaged in and enjoyed for its own sake as one of the arts. [5]

In addition to this, Hindu religious art and mythology have several depictions of and references to homosexuality right from in the temples of Khajuraho to the tale of Bhagiratha Maharaja, an Indian king born of two women.
That being said, most Hindus I know are deeply homophobic; it’s not a subject I can claim to have any knowledge worth speaking of on but I suspect that that’s one of the effects having had the British make homosexuality a criminal offence during the Raj and never having had the law changed (even though the Brits changed a similar law in their own country in 1967 [6]).
The law in question, Section 377 of the IPC says:Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
After all, Hinduism in itself doesn’t seem to deeply disapprove of homosexuality: the religion may not be particularly enthusiastic about it but it doesn’t unequivocally prohibit it either. And this is not the only instance where British laws have left a legacy in India of misgivings such as these in what are essentially personal matters …think of the restitution of conjugal rights, a concept alien to India which was introduced by the British and which has caused much hardship over the years.
Links:

[1] http://shushnow.wordpress.com/2008/03/01/what-if-i-were-gay/
[2] http://www.slate.com/id/2102443/
[3] http://www.galva108.org/hinduism.html
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_Hinduism
[5] http://www.religionfacts.com/homosexuality/hinduism.htm
[6] http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?msid=187403

Art and Lies: A Piece for Three Voices and a Bawd

“There is no such thing as autobiography, there is only art and lies.”

I’ve never written a book review in my life and I don’t intend to begin now although I suspect that it is precisely what I’m going to wind up doing. Sometime ago, I read a book which I loved. It’s called Art and Lies: A Piece for Three Voices and a Bawd by Jeanette Winterson.Prose and poetry merge, and words are used to sculpt images (as opposed to being used to frame sentences). There isn’t anything academic in it but doesn’t lack depth.
Art and Lies certainly isn’t everyone’s cup of tea though: it’s the kind of work which either leaves you stunned by the beauty of its language or makes you want to throw rotten tomatoes at the author who, after all, often does nothing more than simply state the mundane and the obvious albeit beautifully.In many ways, the book reminded me of the film Closer — although it lacks the crudity of the film — and in particular, one line from it:“It’s a lie. It’s a bunch of sad strangers photographed beautifully, and all the glittering assholes who appreciate art say it’s beautiful ’cause that’s what they want to see. But the people in the photos are sad, and alone, but the pictures make the world seem beautiful. So the exhibition’s reassuring, which makes it a lie, and everyone loves a big fat lie.”Even so, I think that it’s one of those books which you’re better for having read.Art and Lies appears to me to be some form of meditation on the manner in which one should live. Although the book itself traverses the centuries with ease, it is set in a London of the near future which the three main characters are fleeing from. They are Handel, Picasso and Sappho. They seem to represent Music, Art and Poetry although Handel is, in the book, a former priest turned surgeon and Picasso is a female painter who is abused by her brother. Only Sappho resembles the poet of antiquity. And the stories of these characters are often interrupted by Doll Sneerpiece, an 18th century bawd.There is much which is said in the book and one is left with the feeling that there is even more which is left unsaid. The truth hurts. The truth never hurt anyone. Le silence éternel de ces espaces infinis m’effraie. Two sides of the same coin.