Okay, this post is triggered by discussions I have occasionally been involved in with different groups. The most recent case was a few days ago during a coffee break at work, and as randomly as coffee conversations go, someone began talking about homosexuality. Shockingly, the consensus seemed to be that homosexuality is a deviation from normal human behaviour. That it should be accepted upto a certain limit, but never encouraged. What this limit is, no one seemed to have an answer to. There were several questions raised – some of them I have faced earlier – which I found baffling.
So, in my humble capacity, here are a few counterpoints to frequent arguments. I am in no way an expert opinion in these matters, but do try to see what I am saying here.
Argument 1: Homosexuality is not natural.
What would one define as natural? There seems to be no objective answer. If, as some discussions tend to veer towards, one means it is a trait found only in humans and therefore ‘unnatural’, you can do a quick search on the internet. You’ll find good evidence of the trait being common in the animal kingdom as well. Read this and this.
Argument 2: God did not make humans this way.
For the sake of argument, I’ll suspend my skepticism in the existence of a supernatural power. How does one know how God wanted to make humans? Maybe some of the mystics would be able to answer this. I mean those mystics who themselves are not embroiled in some kind of scandal – I know that cuts the eligible pool down to a pretty small one, but hey, we’ve gotta have some benchmark here.
Again for the sake of argument, we do find such mystics. Let’s further assume God did not make humans this way. As a corrective measure, let’s revert all our behaviour to the way God made us then. Let’s walk around naked, not by choice but because God made us without any fabric covering our tushy. Let’s shun cars, airplanes and any other vehicle, yes even the bicycle. Let’s instead walk, run and swim. Na, not to become athletes, but because God gave us legs. Natural, aint it? Let’s also eat our food raw, because you know fire.. Manmade. We could write a series of books on doing natural stuff, but you get the picture.
Argument 3: The human race will become extinct if homosexuality continues to thrive?
Uh, seriously? Firstly, the proportion of queer population in the human race is not so high as to cause its extermination. And second, our race may in all likelihood be wiped out due to some other outrageous event. Like an asteroid colliding with the earth. Or a nuclear disaster. Or global warming. Or the games political leaders play. Lay people call them war. Let’s divert our attention to solving these problems please. Okay okay, the asteroid thing we can leave to the experts.
Argument 4: It’s a disease and needs to be cured.
Why is it a disease? Several queer people I know live happy, fun-filled, inspiring lives, just like anyone else. Do you think happiness is a disease?
Argument 5: We can’t let people do whatever they want to do. It’s against our culture. Our world would be in chaos without such social norms.
Actually, we can let people do what they want to do. As long their actions don’t cause harm to others, people have every right to do what they wish. Freedom of choice is a real thing, not some magical idea from a fantasy novel. Against culture? If our culture is so rigid as to not allow individuals to live freely and with passion, what good does it serve?
Let’s leave all these arguments aside, and just consider a simple principle. If you don’t like it, don’t do it, but don’t impede others either. I think Honey Singh’s music is trash. Someone else may think it changed his life. That’s how it is. I love reading the advertisements in the Times of India. You read The Economist. So be it. Diversity. It’s what keeps the world interesting.
Grains of thought 