The Politics of Sexuality in Modern India: an analysis of marginality By Devika Narayan

Introduction If Foucault had one point to convey about sexuality it was its inseparability with relations of power. Far from being purely a private matter designated to the bedroom, the defining of acceptable and normative sexuality (as opposed to deviant sexuality) is a continuous political process. Sexuality and its expression is stringently regulated by an infinite set rules and one could convincingly argue that the transgression of these norms provoke the most severe (and often violent) retaliation. The objective of this paper is to demonstrate how the politics of sexuality is fused with the politics of community, family, nationhood, gender and social class. The broad argument about sexuality and Indian modernity is constructed through the specific focus on alternative or marginal sexualities. The central purpose is to properly situate socially, historically and politically, the emergence of gay and lesbian Identities in contemporary India and the intense anxieties this has generated. activism. The Making of Heteronormative Sexuality Of all the reasons cited for the revulsion against homosexuality in contemporary India the two that are most common state that it is unnatural and un-indian. A closer consideration of these two ideas reveals a great deal about the history and politics of Indian modernity. Identities rooted in alternative sexualities like that of the Hijras and Kothis maybe severely stigmatized but they are rarely accused of being un-indian or foreign. This indicates that it is not the act of homosexuality per se that is rejected for being un-Indian but something else. What is this notion of Indiannesss and which is selectively threatened by gay/lesbian identities? These debates really bring to light the linkages between ideas of nationhood (itself a modern idea!) and the regulation of sexuality. There are two ways of responding to this argument. One could either reject the notion of an authentic and pristine Indian culture or through a historical Another component this paper examines the internal dilemmas, conflicts and arguments within queer rights

exposition which unequivocally demonstrates that homosexuality has a long and varied history in the subcontinent which stretched back to the ancient times, thereby the claim that homosexuality itself is a western import rejected. The historical approach to the study of sexual politics in India analyses historical texts, mythology, stories, folktales, traditional forms of theatre and dance to elicit the multiple spaces in which forms of non-normative desire has existed for centuries. There is plenty of literature which describes the diversity of precolonial and pr-modern sexual expression, norms, practices and identities which inhabited a multiplicity of social spaces. Scholars have examined old traditional translations for gay, asexual, bisexual, transgender and lesbian activity and ancient texts like the kamasutra and Arthashastra which present a range of sexual activity are also used to illustrate this long history. Vanita and Kidwai author one of the most systematic compilations of this history and come to the conclusion that if not accommodate, pr-colonial India was relatively tolerant to a much wider range of sexualities. Homosexuality, even when disapproved of, was not actively persecuted (As cited in Shahani, 2008, p. 49) and they point to a crucial period of transition when a minor strand of pre colonial homophobia becomes that dominant voice in colonial and post colonial mainstream discourse. Far from homosexuality being a modern phenomenon it is the vehemence with which it is denounced that arises out modernist ideals. Legitimate sexuality has always been defined in narrow terms and yet modernity institutionalised it in a fresh a way, with a new rigidity. Colonialism represents the single most significant historical break from the past as it introduced the seductive and irreversible forces of modernity which transformed Indias course to the future. It brought with it a new understanding of sexuality and morality which arose out of a particular conception of nature and the natural, a rigid sex/gender binary, Victorian morality, the Christianity and the church, and numerous other factors. The most explicit manifestation of this new conception of sexuality is the criminalization of sexual acts against the order of naturei. The combination of the puritanical morality of Victorian England and the Christian church anything other than heterosexual procreative sexuality was deemed as a sign of barbarism and evil. Again we see how the elevation of a certain conception of civilization reconfigured normative sexuality in a powerful way. Existing sexual spaces and identities are quelled and criminalised and traditional art forms are censored so as not to offend the refined sensibilities of high culture. This is not to suggest that pre-colonial India was a harmonious and

free place where sexuality unregimented rather that colonization and later nationalism led to the unquestioning naturalization of hetero-normativity as the only legitimate mode of sexuality. Nivedita Menon argues that it is impossible to engage with what is called sexuality in contemporary India without recognising its passage through the complexity of the practices that were homogenised under the sign of Modernity. The polyvalence of gender identities and sexual desire prevalent even up to the 19th century in India sutured in a variety of ways, through legal and social interventions that disciplined a range of non-normative sexualities and family arrangements. (Menon, 2007 .p11) Menon also sees patriarchal family as the single most crucial institution which sustains and reproduces the constructed normality of heterosexuality. This is also enmeshed with the reproduction of caste, community and nation, as legitimate sexuality demands the condition not only of heterosexuality but also that it must find expression only within inter-caste, inter-class, inter-religious and therefore inter-community marriages. Compulsory hetero-normative of the kind aggressively endorsed in India also plays a critical role in the maintenance of unequal structures of power. This sort of overarching analysis which seeks to lay bare the interconnectivity of systems of power refrains from focusing on sexuality as an independent social realm and shows instead how it is embedded in a multiplicity of power relations. These scholars do not merely argue for the social, political and legal acceptance or legitimacy of sexual minorities but would attempt to challenge and destabilize the hegemonic structure of the heteronormative paradigm itself. the normative. It would be short sighted to focus singularly on the colonial rulers when discussing the process by which heterosexuality was rigidly normalised. From the colonial period new conceptions of sexuality, morality, nationhood and modernity were inherited and then were sustained and amplified in the post-independence phase. The politics of sexuality continues to be extremely explosive and of great consequence in contemporary India. Sexuality and Identity politics Any discussion on homosexual activity in India today is immediately equated with the gay/lesbian identity and is followed by protests against urban and In other words it is not simply about the inclusion of the marginalised but is rather about rejecting the very foundation of

western elitist constructions of sexuality.

A lot of confusion arises when

homosexuality and gay are used interchangeably as if they are synonymous. For the sake of clarity it must be reiterated that homosexuality simply refers to sexual activity between members of the same sex. Just like procreative sex this was not invented by the west and has unquestionably and has been around from the beginning of human history. However, sexuality does not purely exist in societies as a function of biology and the form it takes is socially constructed. For this reason, there is tremendous cultural variation in the social embodiment of sexuality. Gay and lesbian discourse represent only one particular set of social identities rooted in a notion homosexuality. This conflation of behaviour as truth of identity (Srivastava, 2006, p. 348) allows for a certain kind of blindness to the historical multiplicity of not only distinct sexual identities but also variations in homosexual sexual practices/expressions which are not encompassed by a separate social identity. This issue of labelling came to the fore in the context of public health and the Aids epidemic when NGOs realised that they could not solely use gay as a category and the more neutral and pragmatic term MSM (men who have sex with men) was created. As Shivananda Khan points out, In South Asia the socio-cultural frameworks are supremely gendered. And are often sexual relationships are framed by gender roles, power relationships, poverty, caste, class, tradition and custom, hierarchies of one sort or other.... are we truly saying that we should reduce this diversity into the singular construction of a gay identity, a term that does not readily translate into the multiplicity of languages...? 2008, p.50) The Indian example is especially fascinating because of the diversity of social groups based on a multiple dimensions of difference. As the previous section illustrated, there the historical fact of colonization, modernity and then nationalism led to a homogenization of sexual expression and norms and homosexuality along with other forms of deviant behaviour was pushed to the underbelly of culture. With the removal of legitimate spaces for alternative sexual identity and practice and the rise of gay rights activism and it has allowed the branding of homosexuality as an alien, upper-class fad. At the same time, however marginalised older communities like those of the hijras and kotis continue to exist. The whole question of alternative sexual identities based on sexualities in India is extremely complex and layered. This is true for many reasons including the two briefly discussed above, i.e. the complexity of systems (as cited in Shahani,

of stratification and difference as well as the long history of non-normative sexual identities which continue to co-exist with more modern identities. This coexistence of old and new sexualities throws a number of interesting issues. As Gayatri Reddy puts it, the present seems to be one of those times in India when apparently different systems cohabit in a single field. The simultaneous presence of these different sexual classificatory grids in India and their varying emphases on modernity illustrate the fluid construction of sexual subjectivity in this region. (Reddy, 2006, p. 221) Reddys well known study of the hijra community in Hyderabad provides a detailed account of a subculture which at one level upholds significantly different conceptions of sex and gender from that of the larger society while at the same time reinforcing mainstream binaries and ideas of marriage, respectability, honour, and so on. However, she strongly argues against reducing the hijra identity to the single dimension of sexuality and offers a far more holistic and nuanced representation of the community. Reddy attempts to uncover the interrelations between other axis of difference including religion, kinship and class and believes that essentialising the community to merely constituting a third sex is problematic. The sole focus on sexuality suggests the existence of as an independent sexual arena, when in fact sexual relations are profoundly embedded in a host of identity networks. Nevertheless for the purpose of this essay there is a need to examine how the hirja and Koti community provides us an example of alternative cartographies of sex/gender (p.44) which can tentatively represent a traditional or pre-modern framework of non-normative sexuality. For instance, the gender/sex categories which are recognised by the communities include koti (receptive, effeminate men), panti (penetrative, masculine men), naran (all women), hijra and AC/DC (men who alternate roles). (Reddy, 2006, p.44) This is only a simplistic statement of sexual categories which does not speak at all of the unique kinship arrangements, notions of respectability, internal hierarchies and so on, all which together contribute to a non-normative identity at least partially shaped by alternative modes of gender/sexuality. Juxtaposed with this are the flourishing gay and lesbian spaces which are influenced by larger global narratives which projects homosexuality as an all encompassing social identity which is associated with a distinct culture and lifestyle as separate from the heterosexual realm. One of the most significant

post-colonial

developments

in

India

is

the

conception

of

sexuality

as

personhood (Khanna, p. 166) Khanna argues that talking of homophobia in a context where there is no real notion of the homosexual as a type of person is meaningless. To quote, The point here is that the idioms in which same-sex desire and identities based on non-heteronormative desires are spoken of, are varied. (ibid, p.163) Moreover, same-sex desire inhabits various sites where it is not positioned in opposition to heteronormivity and these diverse idioms of homosexual behaviour cannot all be understood through the same lens. One of the reasons why there is a widespread backlash against the increasingly visible gay community is because it consciously situates itself antagonistically against heteronormativity. When non-normative sexuality instead of silently inhabiting unacknowledged spaces, forcefully constructs itself in terms of personhood and identity, it becomes a grave threat to prevailing notions of morality, gender norms but most of all the institutions of family and marriage. To understand what Reddy refers to as gay sexual archetypes as examples of modern subjectivities in India it is important to discern the linkages with larges processes of economic liberalization and the growth of the middle class which enables access to global gay culture and Identity. This relationship between global gay culture which is largely shaped by the west and emerging local identities is far from a straightforward one and the theoretical frameworks that various fields offer including cultural studies and media studies often prove useful for a stronger analysis. Identities are not mechanically adopted or embraced but are modified, constructed and negotiated with. Many of the issues and points of contestation are most apparent in the sphere of resistance and activism, as the need to publically define the identity along with a larger set of political objectives cannot be escaped. This process is bound to be conflict ridden because of the sheer complexity and heterogeneity of a group where all members do not even identify with a clear community. What of the individuals who do not recognise a vocabulary which encompasses same-sex desire? Or as Bhan and Narrain ask, how do we speak of the women couples who committed suicide rather than be parted, but never used the word lesbian? ...the realm of same-sex desire and love in our country extends far beyond those that embrace a certain identity. (Bhan and Narrain, 2007, p. 6) Bhan and Narrain are part of a group of activists who do not speak of gay-rights but queer rights and conceive of the movement in the broadest and most

inclusive manner possible. Rather than subscribing to gay versus heterosexual binary it is a hetronormative versus everything else sort of theorization. As outlined earlier, in India the conditions placed on sexual activity to be recognised as legitimate, move far beyond the domain of sexuality and are defined also in terms of caste, religion, class, marital status and so on. Queer activism recognises the interconnectivity of identities and social domains and that fact that one does not have to be gay or lesbian to experience the hegemonic oppression of heteronormivity. The concept of heteronormivity replaces heterosexuality because queer activism does not reduce the issue to one simply of sexual orientation. There is a conscious attempt unpack normative notions of gender roles, femininity, masculinity, nationhood, caste, culture and most significantly, the point is to object to all hierarchies and power structures, not just the ones we happen to be on the wrong end of. (ibid, p. 4)This all-inclusive understanding of power structures allows for the creation of a common social and political platform and does not see identity as something enclosed and selfcontained. Identity politics of the conventional kind is perceived as being divisive and ultimately reinforces difference; queer activism on the other hand encourages the forging of bonds between other marginalised communities and movements. This is not projected as a superficial political coalition but as a Queer activism consciously sincere attempt to transcend the boundaries of exclusive identities all of which share the experience of being on the margins. four identities. This perspective is has not been immune to criticism. In a country this where identity is so central, especially in the face of a baffling diversity of social groups the idea of an inclusive queer politics may appear futile. Member of various groups (like the hijra or gay community) could argue that their experiences are far most dissimilar than shared. Furthermore, this also raises a general question about social movements: is it politically more effective to articulate a allencompassing agenda or a more sharply focused one? These are issues or major dispute for intellectuals and activists. For instance Parmesh Shahani relegates queer theory to the status of an academic fashion with no real consequences outside of these restricted circles. He goes on to quote Barry Adam who writes, Queer theory has a problem of accounting for why gay and lesbian cultural forms have been flourishing as never before and more and more people appear willing to participate in and embrace the distinguishing markers of sexual rejects the LGBT label which is reduces the complexity of queer reality to merely

difference. ( Shahani, 2008, p.47)

However, it would be too convenient to

dismiss queer theory as it asks some uncomfortable questions and truly challenges power arrangements in society in a radical way. As ambitious is its agenda, it remains one that that must be contended with. How does one both recognise the distinctiveness of identity while at the same time acknowledge capacity to transcend its frontiers? One of the most striking axes of difference between non-normative sexual groups is that of social class. In India where economic locations of groups are so polarised, the power of this dimension of difference to shape the experience of reality of the group cannot be undermined. The idiom of sexuality is often rooted in the material condition of your community. In other words, class divides the large umbrella of queer identities and communities like no other force. This in itself is not particularly remarkable; in fact it is not surprising that queer spaces mirror the stark polarities that define larger society. Hijra and kothi communities are not merely culturally different from the gay community but also fall into vastly different class category. How oppression of the upper-middle class urban gay man comparable to the experiences of work class kothis? Can one represent this difference of experience only in terms of the degree of marginality or is there a more fundamental disconnect between these two categories? These class differences inevitably become points of conflict between groups under the larger rubric of queer activism. Alok Gupta in his paper on class divisions in the movement quotes a gay man who is unable to understand why lower class kothis refuse to include themselves in the larger gay community. He asks, A kothi is just a passive gay man who is also very effeminate. Why do you need a spate I identity for that? (Bhan and Narrain, 2007, p.128) This comment is very revealing of variations in perceptions about the significance of class difference and it is usually the privileged who claim that class is irrelevant. In his interviews with individuals from middle class and lower class back grounds Gupta find that class shift from being an issue to being the issue. All in all, there are vastly divergent views on the problem of class and what to do about it. What cannot be denied is the role class plays in the mediating the experience of alternative sexuality. To conclude, as India rushes through this period of immense change,

traditional discourses of sexuality are shaken. This process of reconfiguration opens up new spaces, allows for new forms of resistance, and enables the development of new identities while also reinforcing the

older moulds of community and class. This paper has attempted to capture
the complexity of the dynamics of alternative sexuality and the uniqueness of the Indian example.

Bibliography:
Bose, B. and Bhattacharyya, S. (eds.) The Phobic and the Erotic: The Politics of Sexualities in Contemporary India (Oxford: Seagull Books, 2007). Bhan, G. and Narrain, A. Because I have a Voice: Queer Politics in India (New Delhi: Yoda Press, 2007). Gupta, A. Englishpur ki Kothi: Class Dynamics in the Queer Movement in India in Bhan, G. and Narrain, A. Because I have a Voice: Queer Politics in India, (New Delhi: Yoda Press, 2007). Khanna, A. Us Sexuality Types: A Critical Engagement with the Postcoloniality of Sexuality in Bose, B. and Bhattacharyya, S. (eds.) The Phobic and the Erotic: The Politics of Sexualities in Contemporary India (Oxford: Seagull Books, 2007). Menon, N. (ed.) Sexualities: Issues in Contemporary Feminism (New Delhi: Women Unlimited, 2007). Reddy, G. With Respect to Sex: Negotiating Hijra Identity in South India (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005). Shahani, P. Gay Bombay: Globalization, Love and (Be)longing in

Contemporary India (New Delhi: Sage Publications, 2008). Srivastava, S. Sexual Sites, Seminal Attitudes: Sexualities, Masculinities and Culture in South Asia (New Delhi: Sage Publications, 2004). Srivastava, S. Passionate Modernity: Sexuality, Class and Consumption in India (New Delhi: Routledge, 2006).

On the 2nd of July 2009 the Delhi high court decriminalised sexual activity between two consenting adults of the same-sex. The watershed judgement stated. If there is one constitutional tenet that can be said to be underlying theme of the Indian Constitution, it is that of 'inclusiveness'. Where society can display inclusiveness and understanding, such persons can be assured of a life of dignity and non-discrimination. This was the 'spirit behind the Resolution' of which Nehru spoke so passionately. In our view, Indian Constitutional law does not permit the statutory criminal law to be held captive by the popular misconceptions of who the LGBTs are.
i