Muslim Fire, Hindu Ire

No patakhas for Muslims?

Leading Islamic seminary Darul Uloom Deoband has issued a fatwa against manufacturing and sale of firecrackers, saying that it is against the Sharia law.

Manufacturing and selling of firecrackers is against the Sharia law, and firing crackers is a gross misuse of money, the fatwa said. It also said that that men who misuse money are the ‘brothers of devil’. The Islamic seminary issued fatwa on a query from a man involved in the business of manufacturing firecrackers. The news holds significance given that a large number of Muslims are involved in the manufacturing and sale of firecrackers across the country.

I just cannot understand this. Why would a person who is already involved in the business want to consult the seminary?

If firing crackers amounts to misuse of money, then so is placing flowers over tombstones at dargahs.

If those who indulge in this are ‘brothers of the devil’, are women permitted to play with phuljhadis?

Is there any evidence of the devil misusing funds? Did he not inherit hell, or should he be pulled up for spending a fortune on adding all those satanic thingies in there?

I do not see how there can be any mention of firecrackers in the Sharia. Did some of the Prophet’s opponents light up anaars on the desert sands?

If the Darul Uloom is so concerned, it should seek justice for children who work in these factories and are exposed to risks of extreme levels of pollution. Get over this fatwa obsession and do something that matters.

- - -

Gays threaten Hinduism?

An artist holding an exhibition in the capital on the theme of homosexuality was on Thursday attacked and abused by an unidentified assailant, who also damaged one of the paintings on display. Balbir Krishan said the attacker entered the solo exhibition space at Lalit Kala Akademi with his face covered by a handkerchief. He pushed and kicked Krishan, a double amputee who has lost both his legs, while hurling insults all the while.

He has been receiving threatening calls saying: “Tuney Hindu dharam ko bigarne ka theka laga rakha hai (You are determined to ruin Hinduism).”

Someone should take these guys on a yatra where temple sculptures clearly show all kinds of sexual activities, including homosexuality. Will they dare to deface those? Will they dare insult the deities?

I am not suggesting that art should be irresponsible. In this case, he was only exhibiting works, giving expression to his thoughts and personal experiences. He was not indulging in criminal activities like paedophilia, for which a few good godmen have been caught. Why do these assaulters not land up in those ashrams and use their fists. Well, to beat up those holy folks...

No dharam can be spoilt. It is not perishable food.

Why Modi Refused Spandex Tights

Only crowns will do

My friend from Rajkot, Karsanbhai - "call me Kairi (Kerry), like ole IIM importex peepul are doing" - runs a shoppe selling sale phone eelektrone and all. He is also homosexyual. And very angry.

He wanted his chief minister Narendra Modi to wear spandex tights. "I thot sadbhavna is good occasun to show davelupmeint of gas (gays) kominitee, so I toll SRK, maane Saan Rupes Kapdawala (he is producsun of mix masala meridge), we will olso go and do harmoney. We are leeving sample of davelupmeint, and sucksex of bhavna's sambhavna and sadbhavna. We thot and thot wot to geev. SRK said we will take rainbow flag. I said to him no baba rainbow has not goat saffron. Then we thot peacock feather, fur stall (stole), even letest Perees Heelturn beig to sow glaubalisasun and Perees is olso gas ikaun, na?

But SRK is little scare type. He is poor thing coat between his gasness and his Mussalmanness. He is saying if Narendrabhai says no to purse, then hole world will feel insult just like that maulana is saying Modi is insulting Islam only because he did not wear skull cape. I like SRK and all Muslims basically. But why is cape called skull only becoz it is on skull? Then why cowboy hat is not on top of cowboy?

Muslims are very touching, no, no, not like that. I am saying they are getting hurt for little little thing. Now Islam is big religion, even Dharmendra became Mussalman and Obama is also small part Muslim. How cape will insult Islam? Why they are shouting Allah-hu=Akbar when man who was ruling when 2002 heppened? This is not insult to ordinary Mussalman? I am saying it is non-issue. RSS olso saying same thing. I am not RSS. They are saying dawn pees Muslims, we have to stand for Hindu. I am standing for Hindu, but I can pees Muslims oslo. Bakwas is going on and on, and fasting is over but no one is telling our story. Hole time how to hurt Muslim or pees Muslim. I am with Muslim and loving it, like Mac bhai saying.

SRK swallowed anger, ate ten khakhras and said with brein vhew, "Why not give him spendex tights?" My bhejo went all round. It was gud idea. Simball of gasness and olso harmoney and closeness. So we took nice orange peir, XL for some lajja. We pecked it in khadi beig to sow Gandhian vel-you. Modi's chamchas wonted us to stay out. Place was full of skull capes and bhagwa dhotis. Too much attrecsun, I am telling you. SRK looked hurt, this time not like Muslim type, but gas type. He is too much attach. I must detach. What if Hindu rashtra comes? I toll him note to whurry. I was only looking.

Finally some bhakt from SIT took us inside. Narendrabhai looked weak but had hello round his hade. Later I found it was light bulb. We have packet. He thot it was kurta or something. His food tester opened. I was wondering how food tester is doing this. Bhakt said food tester tests everything becoz test buds are more powerful. Thet is why Modibhai is so orally gud, haan?

But he sow the spendex tight and said, "I do not wear Spandex tights," and ask SRK to give him his shawl. That shawl had all calligraphy is Arbi, but Modi thot it was design from Amdavad febrix. You know Mallikaben Sarabhai hes museum, I think. Why she is bringing bribery case from so long back now in open? I am liking her. She is all for gas. Leebral types hev to be or thier ghoos will become cook!

I brot this topic up becoz all are toking about skull cape and this will be fourgoaten staury. For informasun, SRK and I am heppy that Narendrabhai did not take spandex tight but he is in posessun of gas bag.

PS: The above is a fiction. Should anyone find it believable, do let me know what other categories can be peesed....I mean, appeased.

- - -

The language is Gujarati-accented English. I am afraid, I cannot make it intelligible for those who are not acquainted with it. Please ber with me!

Gaga's Gays and Spidey's Black

I never did think about Spiderman’s colour, except for his blue and red costume. So, what does a new half-black replacement mean? Is he termed the “Ultimate” only because he is a hybrid? Miles Morales sounds like one more of those gestures.

Axel Alonso, Marvel Editor in Chief, said:

“When the opportunity arose to create a new Spider-Man, we knew it had to be a character that represents the diversity—in background and experience—of the twenty-first century. Miles is a character who not only follows in the tradition of relatable characters like Peter Parker, but also shows why he’s a new, unique kind of Spider-Man—and worthy of that name.”

Spiderman is supposed to crawl up walls, save people, and lead a double existence. His bane and boon. With the racial angle, he will be politicised. White people, as much as blacks or any other races, can have diverse backgrounds within their fold. Besides, experiences are pretty much unique to individuals. It has been a decade since the 21st century kicked in, so why the sudden need to diversify?

His “half-black, half-Hispanic” origins come across as tokenism. It is true that no business enterprise would risk something only to offer sops, but there is a huge market of African Americans and the others, primarily immigrants, who would be interested for reasons other than mere uniqueness. It could be political correctness, or curiosity, or to see the ‘difference’.

Spiderman is an entrenched hero. They are not following the trend; they have moved Miles into a new category. He will wear the mask, but pajamas. The true test here is not scaling walls, but who he will save and what his heroism will come to denote. I am afraid the possibility of him catering to a niche market is stronger than any universal appeal. Not because he is black, but because he has been planned as that. Truly strong characters evolve. Miles Morales has already been trapped.

- - -

I love Lady Gaga for pushing the envelope and parodying pop culture, but her recent comment is worse than tokenism. She was releasing her line of baby wear and said she’d like to have kids.

"Some day, a long way from now. But I wouldn't love them unless they were gay.”

What is she trying to prove? That she supports alternative sexuality? That she does and has expressed it publicly. With this statement, she has confirmed that love is conditional and she will probably inject some hormones that will ensure the children turn out the way she wants.

A gay infant will not show signs of sexual orientation, nor will s/he when they grow up to be toddlers. Perhaps not until their teens, maybe even later. What will she do until then? Hold back her love? If they turn out to be heterosexual, will she turn them away or inculcate gay values and gay behaviour – if there are any such standard forms – to ensure that they are influenced enough? Or maybe they will just go along to be what mommy wants them to be?

I doubt if the gay community would concur with her views. She makes it seem like they need ‘special’ care.

Gays and Maoists

Courtney and Sarah

When the two American gay women got married in Kathmandu, they probably were not aware that they were fighting Maoists.

Psychologist Courtney Mitchell and lawyer Sarah Welton exchanged vows as a Brahmin priest presided over the ceremony at the Dakshinkali temple.

Of course, westerners love these exotic traditions and part of the reason for the Nepal choice is that their marriage is not recognised in their native Colorado.

So, is Nepal more progressive? There is a more pragmatic reason. A while ago there was a report making it clear:

Nepal Tourism Board (NTB) officials hope that LGBT arrivals will give a boost to the number of visitors to the country as the government mulls new ways to bring in a million foreign tourists every year by 2011.

“Some international companies want to work in tandem with the government and attract LGBTs,” said an NTB official. “The beginning is encouraging.”

The sudden spurt in this niche market was due to the decade-long Maoist insurgency that affected tourism. The 10 per cent that constitutes sexual minorities need a space where they can roam free and not be judged. If a country offers itself openly as such a place, then there are bound to be takers. In fact, in this “first Asian public lesbian wedding”, Nepal’s only gay legislator, Sunil Babu Pant, did not waste any time and kick-started wedding packages for same sex partners with his Pink Mountain Travels and Tours.

The Maoist position on such alliances is not known and one should hope that a targeted group is not being created to deflect the danger elsewhere.

Tharoor and Abdullah

"Amul babies are fit, strong and focussed. (They) symbolize white revolution, which brought milk to the masses.

- Shashi Tharoor

This comment is being considered humorous because unlike our other Congress netas he has not made a fuss over Kerala chief minister V S Achutanandan's statement about Rahul Gandhi being an Amul baby. A few points:

*Rahul asked the voters if they wanted a 90-year-old man at the end of the tenure. That was offensive to a senior leader.

*The Amul baby is an advertising symbol and has nothing to do with the masses. What is the baby 'focused' on anyway?

*The white revolution was the result of the cooperative movement in Anand, Gujarat. Those masses did not think of utterly butterly stuff. I guess they really did not want to butter up anyone, and did not even know if their bread would be buttered, forget on which side.

We miss straightforward old-fashioned sycophancy.

Incidentally, Narendra Modi has inadvertently got the thumbs up for a fit and strong
revolution in his backyard. He did not start it, we know, but Amul is a Gujarat story.

- - -

"The day is not far when there will be no girls to marry and we will all become gays."

- Farooq Abdullah on the declining female population

Is the primary role of women to be male-centric? Unless the minister lives in some la-la-land, girls do grow up to do other things. This remark is especially absurd because procreation has pushed the woman into a situation where, although she is the conceiver, she cannot decide whether she can give birth and if she does then she has no choice but to fall in line with the desire for a male offspring, even watching and participating in the ritual of killing the girl child.

Next we come to the minister's comment about gays. Homosexuality is not the consequence of lack of females. Using his logic one may say that since there are more men, women will become promiscuous and we will be headed towards a matrilineal society.

The skewed sex ratio should be seen from the female perspective and not about what will happen to the poor men.

For starters, they can grow up. Or is the Amul baby idea catching on?

Vote for the black gay woman?

Inside every American there is a president waiting to come out. So it would seem from former Prez Jimmy Carter’s recent statements. I find this open-for-all attitude rather patronising in a subtle way. It also assumes that the top post validates a section of society that the candidate represents. This is not quite true, for even within those segments there are hierarchies. Besides, the person who holds the position is supposed to represent all of the country and not just where s/he came from, so to speak. It might be added that no person is just one aspect and, therefore, cannot be reduced to a cause or a race or a sexual orientation.

So, is the US ready for a gay president? And why would that be so important? He said in a recent interview:

“I think the entire population of America has come tremendous strides forward in dealing with the issue of gays. And I would say that the answer is yes. I don’t know about the next election, but I think in the near future…The country is getting acclimated to a President who might be female, who might obviously, now be black and who might be, as well, a gay person.”

This is just so simplistic, especially his “obviously”. How would a black female gay person be different in the White House? The very fact that this is emphasised reveals a lack of real change. A woman in a powerful position is seen as masculine in so many ways; in many countries, including the UK, she is called the only man in the cabinet. She has to play tougher and get a macho act together. I can well imagine a gay person’s sexuality will be up for scrutiny and will therefore begin to sound almost asexual. I can bet you won’t have an Oval office blue dress/tie situation. As for blacks, we have seen how white it can be, not to speak of how forgetful of origins.

Has it altered how the blacks in certain parts of the country are viewed? I will leave the world aside for now, and it might well be worse in many other parts. People need laws, but more important than that is they need to go out and mix around. A totem is just that. S/he does not change the way things are at the grassroots. I don’t think peanut farmers really benefited from Mr. Carter’s presidency.

Rather unthinkingly, he likened the issue of homosexuality to the race issue 50 years ago. There is an important difference – one is a choice, however natural it may for the person, the other is inherited, ingrained and leaves one with being branded for ancestry, colour, culture, subjugation and all it stands for. There are occasions when both are socially ostracised, but racism of this kind has lent itself to putting people way behind in education, in work, in social settings.

Gays and blacks are ostracised and there are protest avenues for both, but I have not seen the equivalent of ‘gay pride’ marches for blacks in the US.

The issue, however, is not what category the president is from, but how the individual understands the needs of all kinds of people to the extent is humanly possible with all frailties intact but prejudices leashed!

All White

I still remember the beggar girl craning her neck as the couple walked down the road, foreign tourists with straw hats, fair with golden hair. There was a girl with them. A girl as dark as the urchin. A girl who looked like an add-on, who did not seem to belong. Both girls were turning to look at each other, their eyes widening. One had her hand clutching at her adoptive mother’s dress; the other’s had been outstretched a while ago hoping for coins to drop in it.

This was at least ten years ago and the eyes of those kids still haunt me. It can be a story of hope for one, but it isn’t always.

It is not surprising that whites choose to adopt non-black children. This is the reality of choice, not the celebrity market that flaunts different colours.

The data was collected over a period of five years from a website by an adoption agency by a team from the California Institute of Technology, the London School of Economics and New York University.

It showed that non-Blacks were seven times more likely to be chosen over Black kids. It is easy to term this racism, but think about ordinary middle-class homes in the suburbs. If the kids look different they would be ostracised. There is likely to be a bias, but the bias is driven by a need to protect the status quo as well as the social dynamics within which such families operate. Would black parents opt for white kids? The question is not even addressed and is all the more revealing.

The elite can go scouting for babies in Africa, Korea, Vietnam, India because they live a different life. Besides, at one level it would appear that they are doing a good deed and get imbued with such legitimacy that is politically correct. Ever wondered why they do not adopt black kids in their country?

Middle class couples who have to furnish all sorts of papers to show they are capable of looking after the child will not have it so easy. Therefore, they want someone like them.

The study also revealed that girls were preferred to boys even by gays and lesbians. I think that despite the need to bond, there is always the feeling that the child is not genetically the same. The inheritance of name and perpetuity seems to rest on the male and perhaps the parents are a bit reluctant to let an outsider have that privilege.

Gay men might just be more comfortable bringing up a girl to avoid any questions about impropriety and lesbians would quite likely think along feministic lines as also avoidance of the male principle in their scheme.

One could judge the biases harshly but individuals in general choose what is non-threatening and they think mirrors them.

Is this pride?

At the Sunday gay parade in Mumbai:

Shobha Doshi, a housewife in her 50s, stood out among the colourful wigs with a banner that read “Proud Mother of a Gay Son’’.

Proud of what? His preference for boys over girls? I would understand “Supportive Mother”. There is nothing to be proud about any kind of sexual choices except between the two people (or, ahem, more) involved in the act and the prowess they manage to display. Although that too is a bit déclassé for it stands in opposition to system failure…that is failure to perform, which can be truly traumatic.

Let us rethink this pride business. It is about achievement and talent and has nothing to do with being gay or heterosexual.

Imagine if Kasturba Gandhi had taken part in a parade to say she is a “Proud Wife of a Celibate”. Going by how these ‘movements’ are being propagated, why not?

The Paranoia of the New Gay Family Saga

Maverick: Paranoia of the New Gay Family Saga
by Farzana Versey
Covert, Aug 1-15

A gay friend once called me homophobic. I had mentioned in passing that he was trying to be “too gay”.

“What is too gay?”

Being gay is essentially about a sexual identity, and although sexuality is an important part of human existence it is not something that has to be flaunted. Does it mean I do not accept it?

Alternative sexuality has changed the way we look at families. With decriminalisation, there may be an element of becoming legitimate either by giving relationships a stamp of social approval or retaining the sanctity of gayness. Many ‘pure’ gays have always had a problem with bisexuals; they believe that it is a compromise and seek to co-opt them.

There is every likelihood for a demand to legalise same-sex marriage, which the pure gays again have a problem with and rightly so. They do not wish to mimic heterosexual behaviour and marriage is a most conservative option.

The very idea of homosexuality gains currency due to it being outside the realm of any stratification.

The legal ramifications of consensus are often vague; the likelihood of brainwashing or bribing is not unusual. Last year in Surat, an 18-year-old killed a 35-year-old man for coercing him into a relationship. The boy was arrested for murder. This was not consensual, both were adults and there was a crime committed that could be termed self-defence or revenge.

How often do we hear gays speak up against paedophilia, rape, promiscuity in their community? How many have been arrested, imprisoned and punished for homosexuality? How many gay icons – a part of the celebrity brigade that has joined these carnivals – come out in the streets to oppose police action against innocent young heterosexual couples who dare to marry above their caste or outside their religion?

Don’t prominent gay couples realise that it is only their fame that protects them? A fashion designer in Goa married his French partner and the Indian media went gaga over it. Would the high society types who were blessing them have the same standards if their maid or driver turned out to be gay?

India’s criminal law against homosexuality has looked the other way when well-heeled Indian and foreign gay partners ‘bought’ mothers. Anand in Gujarat is often referred to as the ‘surrogacy capital of the world’. An Israeli gay couple took their baby home last year. These two guys took their time choosing the mother, even sending a psychology questionnaire. Did the woman know that she was helping two men and not a woman?

The gay issue is riddled with patriarchal notions and its proponents tend to ignore the complexities of other factors, promoting instead the luminaries in their midst.

Recently, at Sao Paulo’s gay pride parade the chief guest was an Indian, the ‘Pink Prince’ Manvendra Singh Gohil of the erstwhile Rajpipla royal state. It was double whammy exotica. No one in India had heard about him until he appeared on the Oprah Winfrey show. His father had threatened to disinherit him, but now the king has restored all his titles. He is being idolised only for his position and he plays along by dressing the part of a royal heir in a democracy. On what grounds, then, is he is seen as the “global face of the Indian gay movement”? In an interview he had once said, “Gays are talented, creative, imagine a world without us.”

There is no reason why all gays have to be creative and talented. This reveals a disgustingly posh isolationist attitude.

A few years ago, I had met a top-notch model who happens to be gay. A glossy magazine wanted him on the cover and he refused only because he did not want to exhibit his homosexuality, which was certainly not his claim to fame.

Of late, unfortunately, he seems to have copped out. The man who did not want to flash his sexual choice is now doing just that. He is invited to the best shindigs in town. And he plays to the gallery. Crimson lipstick. Outlandish stoles. Wigs. Feathers. Baubles. In one newspaper photograph, his face looked like a mask.

Isn’t it strange that his true self is revealed only by appearing as a camouflage?

* * *

Additional information not in the column for those not aware about the legal aspect:

India’s attempts at decriminalising homosexuality have been seen as path-breaking. Section Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code states: “Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 10 years and shall also be liable for a term which may extend to 10 years and shall also be liable to fine.”

The new 105-page judgement that wnast to change this has woken up to the fact that, “it is the recognition of equality which will foster dignity of every individual”.

However, Section 377 will continue for non-consensual and non-vaginal sex.

When did men acquire vaginas?

It must be remembered that heterosexuals too indulge in forms of carnal expression that may be deemed unnatural legally.

Gay fathers, Indian mother

Israeli gay couple, Yonatan and Omer Gher, hired a surrogate mother to deliver their child here. Their first-born was conceived with a Mumbai-based surrogate mother. Great. I mean it. Now, let us get to the questions. Here is a part of the report:

India, with its availability of surrogates, easy paperwork and lower costs has earned a reputation for its surrogacy programme, with Anand in Gujarat often being referred to as the ‘surrogacy capital of the world’.

Is this why India needs Narendra Modi, as some half-baked columnists are whooping with joy about? Just this one clinic where the Israeli couple went to has been responsible for 40 such surrogate births since 2005. There is nothing to feel proud of. It is because we are a country of cheap labour, and motherhood has been reduced to just that.

Surrogacy is available only in the US and India, and naturally they chose India because of the cost factor. And to think that so many Indians who don’t have much money and crave children cannot afford this option because of not just money but also bureaucracy.

Another aspect that disturbs me is they have called their first-born, Evyatar. It means “more fathers’’ in Hebrew. Imagine a child growing up with this identification. Does it have to be so obvious? And what about the mother’s role?

Oh, they are planning another baby with her because they want “real siblings”. It’s all about them and theirs. The woman can take the cash and go, and am sure it is a small portion of what the clinic charged.

If this is our selling point, then we must start making people cough up more for it. Motherhood is not some commodity available at discount over the counter. Indians go on and on about Shakti and Durga and Lakshmi.

Here’s our chance to respect the wealth of woman power.