As the Indian LGBT community grows stronger and more vocal, it’ll soon become politically relevant too. Udayan suggests a non-traditional India-centric approach to the upcoming challenge.
It is often alleged that the Indian LGBT movement borrows too much from the movement in the west. Such attitudes often find voice in the community’s political affiliations. Most Indian LGBT people have assumed that center-right politics and politicians are essentially anti-gay, because that’s how politics in the west has been. However, such an assumption may not be correct in the Indian context after all.
There is ample evidence to suggest that center-left politicians in India have not been significantly pro-LGBT, and their center-right counterparts haven’t been that anti-LGBT as expected.
We have seen the Home Ministry of the Center-Left UPA government going to the Delhi High Court opposing the repeal of Section 377. Also, Congress leader Ghulam Nabi Azad created a furore by calling homosexuality a disease on at least two occasions. The Center-Right BJP on the other hand, was curiously silent on the whole issue. In fact, senior BJP leader Ram Jethmalani had been an active supporter of “Voices against 377” and had even eloquently argued in favour of gay rights in a book published by the Alternative Law Forum.
So what is the reason for this unexpected way in which the two main parties have reacted to the issue? The Congress derives a major portion of its vote share from the Muslim and Christian communities (which the BJP does not) and for these communities homosexuality is forbidden by faith, and therefore they have a strong opinion on this issue which the Congress can not ignore. When Section 377 was repealed, it was Muslim and Christian leaders who were most publicly critical of the judgement. Maulana Syed Jalaluddin Umari, president of Jamaat-e-Islami Hind; Father Dominic Emmanuel, spokesperson and Director Delhi Catholic Archdiocese, gave public statements condemning the High Court verdict. Hindu leaders were muted in their condemnation, Baba Ramdev being the only notable exception. So as opposed to the west, voters who have religious reasons to be anti-gay, vote for center-left parties in India.
The BJP has always preferred to project India as a modern libertarian nation- modelled like Israel – which although being in Asia, is sufficiently liberal and western in its outlook as opposed to Islamic countries in the region like Pakistan, Iran, etc. Any opposition to LGBT rights would give a battering to the image that BJP wants to portray of India. Plus, the BJP derives its vote base mainly from the urban upper and middle classes, who are the ones becoming most supportive of LGBT equality.
I do not suggest that these points are part of any official internal deliberations within either of the two political parties, but seek to present a non-traditional picture of our political spectrum vis-à-vis the issue of LGBT rights, and suggest that we should not base our political affiliations solely on the basis of experiences in the western world, but must take into account the unique political and socio-cultural aspects of the Indian sub-continent.
Very articulately put Udayan! Although this country deserves better than both the BJP and Congress,we surely can’t trust a party that has been screwing with our country since independence
Now, where shall I begin with the faults in the assumption and this article?
The author seems to have very conveniently overlooked the fact that there are hindu organisations too who part of the group of 16 who are opposing the delhi high court verdict. Also ignored is the fact that VHP leaders too had very much condemned (sitting on ths same dias as muslim and christian leaders, a rare feat) the ruling, calling it ” against the culture and family system in India. It will result in spread of number of diseases.”
Completely forgotten is the fact that it was the BJP govt which had opposed the case in Supreme Court while in power, whereas it was Law Minsiter Moily that had hinted at changing 377, and after the verdict, the Indian Govt (under congress) didn’t appeal against the case. BJp members are part of those in the group of 16
There are chirstian churches even in India with a more liberal view. Countries in the west, despite having christian population, have moved ahaead with equality. The impression in the mind of the author seems to be that islamic countries or people can never be progressive or accepting. I wish this piece had not been so biased
Sukhdeep,
Some factual errors. BJP Govt had never opposed the case in the SC/HC while in power, only the UPA did so after hearings started in 2008.
Yes, VHP is anti-gay, but VHP is not a political party and is separate from the BJP.
Western countries that recognize gay rights are not “Christian” countries, infact many of them like Netherlands, Denmark etc are not even Christian-majority any more- most of their citizens being atheist.
I do not think the article is biased because I do not endorse any particular view/political party here, I’m merely saying we need to keep our options open as a community instead of blindly supporting the left-wing parties and politicians.
Hi Udayan,
Thanks for this important and timely post. I feel that the Indian queer community spends very little time in determining what its political choices are, and we must definitely keep our political options open come election time.
Personally, I feel that lately the Congress has been trying to be as libertarian as the BJP, especially when it recently determined that the poor could survive on about 26 rupees a day. And sometimes, I feel that the BJP just apes the homophobia of the Congress, especially that one time in 2003 when it claimed in the Delhi High Court, that removing Section 377 would “open the floodgates to delinquent behaviour”. Such poetic language! Perhaps our poet-extraordinaire Vajpayee-ji coined that response to the court, himself. In comparison, Azad sounds like such an amateur when he performs his ignorance in public.
Anyway, the point I’m trying to make is that we should ideally be open to a Prime Ministerial candidate who is a much bigger celebrity than anyone in the BJP and Congress combined. I’d never settle for a toothless PM like the one we have now (even though he does betray some dashing libertarian principles), nor that old Italian amma, sitting by quietly in her zenana and surreptitiously stirring up the cauldron of socialist welfare all the time. Why does she need to constantly need to create problems for our business climate. Don’t the poor make at least 26 rupees a day?
Either way, my ideal candidate will be a hot bear daddy who has governed as chief minister and has political experience, who welcomes businesses with his manly open arms and gives them the country’s land at nominal costs without needing to worry about those pesky unions, looks hot both in short-sleeved white kurtas AND khaki trousers (just my little gayboy fantasy), ideally engages in showing homophobic minorities their place with some of his friendly Mafioso buddies (one or two throats slit can’t be that harmful), and most importantly can go on a five-star hunger fast that outdoes all other fasts in recent history. Do you think our country can ever produce such a leader?
but we lgbt people are not only lgbt, we are composite and complex people with many motivations and affliations.
we should not think that our world ends at the boundaries of lgbt – which is why we cannot think like a single minded machine, only thinking about the lgbt issues.
apart from the flawed historical and analytical remarks in your article, what is most dubious is that you have considered no other criateria of making political decisions for lgbt people other than their lgbt-ness.
we are gay, lesbian, transgender, bisexual, upper or lower caste, upper or middling or lower class, city peeps or rural people, communal or anti-communal (hopefully the latter), religious or secular, lovely or lovelorn (in turns both!)
consider this!
Despite the criticism, I’m actually glad that the article evoked such a strong response. It shows that we as a community are indeed politically conscious, which is a good thing.
Samaysamaykibaat,
Thanks for pointing out the biggest flaw in the article. Indeed we’re much more than LGBT. Price rise, stalled economic reforms and a skewed foreign/anti-terror policy affect ALL Indians- LGBT and straight; just that the center-Left UPA has given us very little reason to cheer on those fronts! Infact had LGBT rights been the only thing on my mind, I’d have supported the CPI-M which is the only political party that officially supported the Section 377 judgement of the Delhi HC.
Mario,
Slit throats are always harmful, unfortunately the BJP is not the only Indian political entity adept at that. The Sikh victims of Delhi and the Muslim victims of Bhagalpur are yet to get justice.
The point I’m making here is that there are gay conservatives like there are straight conservatives; and the conservative ideology of libertarianism, individual rights, free markets and stress on family values are very much in tune with what the LGBT community would want for itself.
The article seems to have too optimistic view of the right wing politicians. If I remember correctly neither congress nor BJP made any comments on the verdict of the Dehli High Court. When asked they would say ‘we have not read the judgment so we cannot comment’. On the contrary Prakash Karat of CPIM openly welcomed the verdict.He issued statements to this effect stating the position of the left parties. (kindly see- http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_gays-unite-w… And so far as Mr. Ram Jeethmalani is concerned his position does not reflect the BJP’S view. BJP is a political outfit that admires openly people like Hitler, Mussolini. One can read Savarkar on this point, their ideological mentor. Fascism thrives on hatred of the minorities. And BJP being a Fascist party is no different.One expects the author to do his research with a bit of care.
@samaysamaykibaat Politics in India is votebank politics. Politicians pander to Muslims as a consolidated votebank as does the BJP with its brain-washing sangh parivaar rhetoric. So if we dilute our political face by talking of ourselves as ‘complex’ beings, we dilute our political power as a integrated LGBT votebank.In India, we are politically subsisting on mere hand-outs like repeal of 377 when we can command if only we consolidated the ‘pink’ rupee and pink votebank.
@Udayan Your analysis though sharp goes quite off facts when you say that BJP does not want to ruffle its pro-Israeli image by keeping a studied silence on LGBT issues like repeal of Section 377. As a practising jew, I can tell you in the Torah of Moses and Abrahamic Covenant of Promises, homosexuality among men calls for death. So no Vajpayee, Advani or RSS Thinktank would if they had this basic knowledge, go for such a political strategy to appease Orthodox Jewish community. But i agree with the point that BJP is anti-minorities and with its credo of hatred, they cannot be expected to be pink-eared velvet-gloved politicalo option for LGBT. Also BJP is just the political offshoot of the larger Sangh Parivaar so their silence can be just the befuddling lull before the ‘rightist’ storm.