"Maybe it's a fear of rejection," he grinned. "It's one thing to be turned down by women, but to find that even the 'fags' don't want you – ouch!"
Interestingly, many men carry their bias against homosexuality into their interactions with women. Even as to be labeled a "queer" or a "faggot" or a "queen" is deeply offensive to the male psyche, so they imagine it must be for women to be alluded to as "dykes", "lesbos", etc. The all-threatening figure of the feminist, for example, should just be declared as another synonym for lesbian, so often do men invoke the image.
In recent days, even as America debates the right of gay people to marry (and at least one Church is rocked by the issue of gay clergy), India is slowly waking up to the debate. More and more people are stepping up to talk about the issue, approaching it in ways unique to India. There are some who persist in seeing this as a “foreign” issue, but the voices we hear have a distinct Indian edge to them.
"How do you feel about that?" I asked A.
"Yuck," he said scornfully.
"What do you mean?"
"Why are we talking about this?" he said, exasperated.
"I don't know, because you're my friend and your attitude bothers me?"
"Well, you're not going to change my opinion, so you should just give up," he said with an air of finality.
That might well be true. It's a hard lesson to learn, but the fact is, one has very little control over the opinions and actions of others. It's something I struggle to remember everyday when I see people whose views on life or society I find abhorrent – everybody is not the same all the time. My friend has certain facets to his personality that repel me, but others that attract me. Our friendship is a constant, at times unconscious, balancing act.
Interestingly, however, ever since I made such a thorough pest of myself on the subject, I heard fewer derogatory remarks from him. Has he changed his mind? I don't think so. Is he more comfortable around gay people? Not so much. I might have succeeded in getting him to shut up around me, but that's about the best I have accomplished. Is that enough?
Article comments
1 - ken
"Interestingly, however, ever since I made such a thorough pest of myself on the subject, I heard fewer derogatory remarks from him. Has he changed his mind? I don't think so. Is he more comfortable around gay people? Not so much. I might have succeeded in getting him to shut up around me, but that's about the best I have accomplished. Is that enough?"
Enough? I would say no, but it is a start and a good one. I think your efforts are admirable. The ideal would be to have him be more tolerant of others, granted that may not be likely. However, getting him to not make derogatory comments (around anyone) would be good though. I suggest that whenever you hear him make a derogatory comment you engage him in a discussion about it. When he asks "why are we talking about this?" you can simply say that he brought it up, so you assumed he wanted to talk about it.
2 - Natural Manhood
You must understand that in South Asia (well, actually also in the West, but to a lesser extent), the sniggers and humiliation is reserved for the effeminate, third sex guy... it is wrong to say it is because of men's sexual attraction for men.
Because, such men or chakka are not even considered men.
I remember a TV laughter programme, where under India's ongoing heterosexualization, they were making fun of the song, "Aadmi hoon aadmi se pyaar karta hoon". The person doing the mimicry seemed queeny, and was swaying his hands and limp wristing for special effects, and I thought to myself, if you're indeed a 'Man' as per Indian culture (as per western culture he is indeed a man, but a queer man), then why can't you walk properly, why are you walking like a Hijra.
The fact of the matter is that you have to differentiate between masculine men who like men (who are considered straight in India) and feminine men who like men (who are the actual queers and the target of all the ridicule), and not lump them together under the western concept of 'sexual orientation' which doesn't recognize gender differences between men, for its 'homosexual' category. That, when it doesn't want queer heterosexuals as part of the 'straight' category, even when straight is defined as 'heterosexual'.
Double standards.