Sunday, 29 December 2013

My Review of Supreme Court's View

Indeed, I didn’t blog for a long time now. Actually, nowadays I need to write so much for my profession that writing for pleasure or for expressing my ideas looks like another tiring job to me.

Anyway, I couldn’t suppress myself, thankfully and incidentally the office gave me a week off as well, on something which is hitting Indian badly nowadays. If you are an India, or if you are someone who follows international news, you must have heard that the supreme court of India has recently banned homosexual relationships. As you would have expected, and probably supported as well, the waves of protests which are hitting streets are hysteric.

Before I go into the details, lets see what our leaders are saying. For the first time, except for when we fight against Pakistan, they are equivocally protesting against verdict and condemning the supreme court. There is indeed a competition which I noticed amusedly, who can go the farthest to prove that they are with the homosexuals. If someone is saying, the supreme court is wrong and this verdict pushed us back by 400 years, another is quipping with, I wouldn’t have been ashamed if my own son or daughter was a homosexual.

Not that I am uninterested in politicians. In fact, I believe they can show us the truth. Its easy, just believe the exact opposite of what they say, and you were never nearer to the truth. But, keeping them away for a while (they eat too much newsprint anyway), lets see what the intellectual class is saying. In this class we find our poets, writers, freethinkers(I don’t really know what this term means), progressive reformers and others.

Our first self declared homosexual of India, Prince Something (I don’t remember his exact name) said in a press meet, (in English so that he can be understood by the elite thinking class, Hindi is a language spoken by illiterates I guess) “It's all about which hole you enter”, sarcasm dripping out of every word. I thought about it for a long time, with my vivid sexual imagination running pretty wild, but still failed to comprehend fully what he meant. Perhaps he wanted to say “it's all about whose hole you enter”. This one makes sense in the context, else whether I sex normally with my wife or try the back-door for fun is entirely our choice and I don’t see this supreme court ruling saying anything about that.

Some poet, who declared himself as a homosexual way back in 1984, said today, did we fail to make the bigger part of the society to understand? No mate, going by the support, which you are receiving from almost every quarter of society, at least the powerful and the influential ones, makes me think like you have done good enough for your cause. Except for one quarter, which I proudly call the last defence standing, you have conquered almost every sect.

People call this sect, which I belong to, as regressive, blind, fundamentalist (which I am and I would love to explain why but not now), medieval or the popular term now, Taliban. I wondered about the meaning of progress. Given my English is as good as that of a Bushman of the desert, I went to online Harper Collins dictionary. They said
1. Movement, as toward a goal; advance.
2. Development or growth: students who show progress.
3. Steady improvement, as of a society or civilization: a believer in human progress. See Synonyms at development.
Sadly, I was disappointed with what the dictionary said. I thought of something like, Progress: a trait, displayed by individual, race or nation, in aping whatever the USA and the Europe is doing. It isn’t, poor me, poor homosexuals. So, the examples they gave, how USA and Europe accepted it, and how we should as well, to help our civilisation to progress, doesn’t hold much water as progress is not defined by our ability to copy the white skin.

I am just a poor blogger, hardly with any academic qualification, keep artistic education apart. The amount of newsprint and TV-hours they are getting, I can't dream of it, nor do I desire. I can't go on making the thing so complex. Nor I can be so glib. All I know, Bible said “wide and tempting is the gate/path which lures you to hell” (Christian readers, please supply me the exact verse, I am poor in memorising.) Quran and Hadith also predicted how sweet talkers the Satan and his agents are. Anyway, lets not get into those Taliban talks of Bible and Koran, outdated books with a faulty concept called God. Let's go back to science.

My parents insisted that I should study the science. I had no particular interest except in History and the answers are so tediously long that I chose the lazier science instead. So, I am somewhat comfortable here or at least I can pretend more convincingly here. Anyway, lets proceed.

Homosexuals are saying, law shouldn’t decide who we love. Slogans are coming like “let us make our own choice”. Yes very true. I say, lets be even more progressive. Let's remove the concept of incest. It is a backdated concept anyway. If you want to make love to your mother as a son, or to your father as a daughter (or even the other combination) law shouldn’t decide or interfere. After all, you are in love and scientifically, two biological bodies are performing a basic physiological act. So lets proceed with incest as well, I say. Next on our agenda should be animal sex, where if as a woman you want your dog to fornicate with you or you want to put your thing in a hole of a mare, the law shouldn’t interfere with “which hole you are entering”.

But wait, what is this I am reading? Times Now, the leading newspaper, in its Bengali version, Ei Somoy, runs a column where an actress, probably because she doesn’t have many films to do anyway, replies to the psychological problems of we, the common man. Forgetting for once what qualification does she have to take up that role or how we Indians love to say, even the excretion of celebrities smell so nice, lets hear her answer to a question. This one came after the ruling to supreme court.

The question was something like, a man asked, recently, with my wife's permission, I engaged in a sexual intercourse with a female cousin of mine. Now we think we should continue this relationship (the threesome, he meant I am certain) on a permanent basis, please advise. The answer was pretty sarcastic. She, the actress, said “wow mate, you have done great. Just enjoy till you can because as soon as the law catches you, it will end. You better run to Mars and continue there.” etc. etc.

I can bet my last underwear, ask that actress what she thinks of the supreme court ruling and she will shrug in as American a way as she can and answer in stammering Bengali, with a heavy and consciously inculcated American accent, with stress evident on her face to speak the language her parents speak and the Lingua Franca of the land she lives in, that she thinks that is horribly unjust. Why then, I ask you madam, you hide your disgust in sarcasm when someone decides to enter the hole of his female cousin, with his wife being the third party?

You call me Taliban, you call me fundamentalist, you call me medieval regressive and blinded by religion inhuman creature, justify your own damned double standard first. 

Thank you supreme court of India, thank you Australian government and thank you those few countries like Iran who, even at the risk of being tagged as "oppressor of humanity" are keeping the healthy society intact.