I'm in Delhi, so I thought I would revive Delhi diaries for a bit. However, this post is not about Delhi. This post is about my writers' block/inability to talk about myself in personal statements. I've been trying to work on personal statements for law school but I find myself absolutely unable to write them well. This is similar to the problem I encountered when writing personal statements/application essays for undergraduate admissions.
So I'm trying to address this problem by first being very clear on what I want to write about and then getting to the how of it. I know, for instance, that I want to talk about my intersecting identities as Indian and gay. I want to talk about how the two identities have sometimes led to identity struggles with one group or the other, resulting in my never "quite" fitting in, but still doing quite well. One issue, however, is that I tend to detach myself too much from my writing. I find it hard to show, instead of tell. So, for someone that doesn't know me, how do I manage the tasks of being both descriptive and reflective about my life, so as to convey a sense of who I am to adcomms who will likely be reading thousands of essays in a few short months? I think part of the trouble is that I tend to freeze/become more detached when I know my writing will be evaluated -- or rather, when I know that my writing will be used to judge ME.
Now, I know what not to do:
1. Don't be bland and boring.
2. Don't re-state things from your resume.
3. Don't tell; show.
However, I'm doing all the things I should NOT be doing because I'm so worried about what I am writing.
I was going over some old blogs and Facebook notes and I can tell I can write quite well when I'm not under pressure. For instance, right now, I feel like I am incapable of critically analyzing my life and what significance certain events/aspects of my life have, either for me or in a broader context.
I'm blogging this in an attempt to get my thoughts together, but even now, I'm just failing.
Some people have read over the crap that I've written so far, but while their comments are useful, it's nothing that I don't already know. The trouble really is that I know it but I just can't seem to write any better right now. I'm not a poor writer! I don't know what happens to me with these things.
Someone help me please!
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Monday, July 27, 2009
Lies. All of them.
I was trying to respond to a conversation I have having with someone on Twitter about this, but my facebook messaging was not working. This is about this article (the full version of the news clipping mentioned in the last post).
So, I am using this instead:
What I had been trying to say, and I am not sure if the meaning was lost in twitterverse or if you just misunderstood me, was this:
Amod Kanth is supposed to help advocate for children's rights. However, what he is doing here is using dubious assumptions and his personal prejudices to perpetuate homophobia, all the while pretending to be advocating for child rights. I am alarmed by this both on account of being passionate about LGBT rights and on account of being involved with child rights.
Here are a few select quotes that demonstrate that:
1. "In 1992, it is mentioned that WHO had removed homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses in its International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10); however, in the same classification gender identity disorders, trans-sexualism and disorders of sexual preferences, such as, fetishism, exhibitionism, voyeurism and pedophilia, have been listed in the broad categories (F-64 and F-65) of the Disorders of Adult Personality Behaviour. The conclusion appears contradictory since most of these disorders happen to be widely prevalent amongst lesbian women, gay men, bisexuals and transgender groups (LGTB), whose sexual orientation and public conduct stand legalized and endorsed through this Judgement."
He's making the claim that (let alone WHO and the psychiatric world's dated/biased stance on trans-sexuality) "disorders of sexual preferences" are not just widely prevalent amongst LGBT people, but that they are prevalent: implying that, if not a majority of, a very significant number of LGBT have these disorders. Does he have anything to back this up? Secondly, the judgment does absolutely nothing to "legalize and endorse" this judgment: it merely decriminalizes private consensual sex between adults (where does the public conduct even come into the picture)?
4. "It is also argued that amongst the ‘sexual minorities’, there are multiple issues- ranging from the substance and alcohol abuse resulting in serious psychiatric problems to potential for serious societal disruptions in India’s highly applauded family set-up having well defined positions and roles for husband and wife, grand parents, parents and children, their related fabric and norms, which will get distorted and ultimately disappear in case such practices are accepted.
Even if we don’t accept the strong religious feelings across the communities against legalizing homosexuality or recognize the scientific evidence of mental and physical aberrations in homosexual practices, it is evident that promoting these behaviors may aggravate problems like HIV AIDS, anal cancer and anxiety disorders, justifying the adage, “personal freedom ends when public peril begins”." Where do I even start on how epically distorted this is? Yes, I'd be willing to accept there might be higher rates of alcohol and substance abuse amongst LGBT populations, but does Mr. Kanth think about why that is? It is in response to the feelings of utter isolation and depression felt by members of the LGBT community, because "India's highly applauded family set-up" (this calls for a whole other post. Do not get me started on how this inherently patriarchal set-up is actually harmful to Indian society) does not accept them, and forcibly brushes their issues under the carpet. Decriminalizing consensual sex between adults will not exacerbate these problems. In fact, acceptance, at some level, at least from the legal code, might help reduce the instances of anxiety disorders, high risk sexual behavior, substance abuse etc. when at least the LGBT community does not feel like criminals in addition to feeling like outcasts. I accept, just as any rational person would, that until we have a reasonable alternative to the provisions of Section 377 of IPC, it cannot be delete. However, that does not in anyway justify Mr. Kanth's seriously flawed arguments in opposition of the reading down of that Section. His arguments seem to be based much less on fact, and much more so on his close-mindedness and bigotry. The entire article reads like one written by a man with a political agenda; whether that agenda is one of discrimination, or seeking funds, or winning friends, I don't know. Besides, why is Prayas or the DCPRC even wasting their time with this? Why are they wasting precious effort and energy opposing something on the shakiest of grounds? I know Prayas recognizes just as well as other child rights groups do, that there is a pressing need for much more comprehensive protections from sexual assault of children: sexual assault is not just through penetration: what about attempted penetration? Forced oral sex? Molestation? (Talking about male children here, I believe these provisions do exist for female children). If I'm not mistaken, there are also no provisions to account for sexual assault on boys by multiple people at a time. Why is DCPRC not concentrating more on fixing these? This is seriously appalling. And someone needs to set these people right now. |
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Equal Rights are not a Zero-Sum Game, Part 2
This new post is in response to this article in TOI.
I would appreciate if you could give suggestions on how to make this stronger.
Dear Mr. Kanth,
This is in response to the article “Child rights panel opposes any dilution of Section 377” published in Times of India (TOI), dated July 17 2009. TOI reports that Delhi Commission for Protection of Child Rights (DCPCR) is strongly opposed to “dilution” of the provision of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code.
I am student of International Politics and International Development at Georgetown University in Washington, DC and I am passionate about both child rights as well as LGBT Rights. I am presently interning with a child rights organization based in Delhi, and I absolutely understand how crucial the current provisions of Section 377 of IPC are in protecting children from sexual abuse, particularly in the absence of any other adequate provisions in our legal code. I recognize its deletion at this moment, without the necessary amendments to other relevant sections of the IPC would be disastrous. I also recognize that Section 377 has been used almost exclusively to cover sexual offences in India, and instances of actual criminal prosecution of homosexual couples have been negligible.
However, you are quoted as saying “The definition of consensual and non-consensual sex may get blurred in some cases… [some] adolescents [over 18]…[may] not have the adequate decision-making ability.” This statement demonstrates a double standard on your part – while I am willing to accept that certain adolescents may not possess “adequate decision-making abilities”, that would be as true of adolescents engaging in heterosexual activities as those engaging in homosexual activities. It appears hypocritical that the DCPCR is not asking for similar protections for female adolescents.
Additionally, as mentioned in the Delhi High Court verdict, while the provision of Section 377 criminalizing same-sex carnal relations between consenting adults may not have led to any recent prosecutions, it has been used against them in other ways. As stated in the verdict, affidavits, FIRs, judgments and orders have been placed on record that objectively document instances of “exploitation, violence, rape and torture suffered by LGBT persons.” I do not have concrete data to offer on this, but from experience, also know that LGBT youth are more likely to feel suicidal and depressed in a country where the law is against them. Thus, these aforementioned provisions of Section 377 clearly violate basic civic and fundamental rights of LGBT citizens of the country.
As someone working for human rights, you must realize that granting rights to a certain segment of society does not necessarily infringe upon the rights of others in the society. Equal rights do not work as a zero sum game. I am absolutely in agreement with you that the rights of children, and their mental, emotional, and physical health, need to be protected. However, granting LGBT people the right to their private consensual sexual lives need not undermine the rights of children in any way. If there are loopholes to be addressed, such as matters of dubious consent or maturity in age for an adolescent not being in sync with maturity of thoughts and decision-making, DCPCR should focus on closing them, rather than reverting to a blanket ban on sexual relations with consenting homosexual adults. I am certain there must be a better way to address them than holding double standards for heterosexual and homosexual relations.
Monday, July 6, 2009
Equal Rights are not a Zero-Sum Game
I wholly intended to write a blog post sooner about the decriminalization of homosexual acts in Delhi, but I just haven't had the time to sit down and jot my thoughts, in a way that is comprehensive enough to do justice to the complexity of the situation.
However, for now, I am posting a response I wrote to an article by former Indian Today editor Swapan Dasgupta that was published in "The Pioneer" yesterday:
Equal Rights are not a Zero-Sum Game
It is painful to note well-educated, prolific and intelligent people propagate misleading and ignorant beliefs. That is the first feeling I had when I read Mr. Swapan Dasgupta’s article “Aggressive Gay Evangelism.” In his article, published in Pioneer dated July 5, 2009, Mr. Dasgupta claims that the Delhi High Court judgment amending Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code may “open the floodgates” to his eponymous term “aggressive gay evangelism.”
He fears that the decriminalization of same-sex carnal relations will eventually, and invariably, lead to such frightening things as lowering the age of consent, accommodating gay marriage, and allowing the right of adoption to gay couples – all ideas that, presumably, go against the “natural order of society.” Why should these ideas be such frightening prospects to Mr. Dasgupta. It is not as if sexual and gender minorities fighting for further rights would personally be harmful to him in any way.
Mr. Dasgupta is concerned about “in-your-face-gayness” and militant gay activism, and believes all gay activism to be defined by this “perverseness.” This concern can be addressed with two brief points. The first is that some amount of what he terms “in-your-face-gayness” is required for increasing the visibility of an otherwise invisible minority. The second is simply that not much gay activism is militant or “in-your-face” at all – a lot of this activism is happening in the courtrooms, on editorial pages such as these, and in day-to-day lives of people living their lives honestly and openly.
He further has the audacity to claim that “the invocation of equality and the principles of non-discrimination” with regards to LGBT rights might be a “double-edged sword” as the assertiveness and desire for equality by the LGBT rights movement could very well “spin out of control.” Perhaps Mr. Dasgupta, and others that hold similar beliefs as him, need to understand that equal rights are not a zero-sum game. When a particular minority group gains equal rights, it does not necessarily come at the cost of those same rights that were already afforded to the majority or to other minority groups. For instance, the legalizing of gay marriages does not undermine the validity or sanctity of heterosexual marriages, and altering school curricula to remove heteronormative assumptions does not in any way indicate, as Mr. Dasgupta appears to believe, that “man-woman relations are not the natural order of society.”
Perhaps the reason some heterosexual (or male or upper-caste or rich) people question the needs and demands of minority groups fighting for equal rights is simply because they are worried not about losing their own rights, but about losing the privilege that their status as a part of the majority with exclusive rights had guaranteed them. To use a rather politically incorrect analogy, finding that their domestic help has happened upon an inheritance that makes him richer than they are would decidedly make most people uncomfortable, because it forces them to question what they took for granted about their personal superiority that came from being wealthier, and thus, more privileged. Mr. Dasgupta’s knee-jerk reaction to LGBT communities fighting from equality might stem from a similar concern – what happens to his heterosexual privilege when those homosexuals could have the same rights as he presently does, when their relationships are recognized as valid as his, when their human dignity is considered every bit as respectable as his own?
Decriminalization of homosexual behavior may indeed serve as the starting point for further LGBT activism in the country – indeed, moving towards full equality, as part of the same “gender-neutral, non-denominational, secular, uniform civil code”, in Mr. Dasgupta’s own words, desired by the makers of our Constitution. And since it’s not a zero-sum game that we are playing, perhaps this full equality for sexual and gender minorities would only strengthen the unity of the country.
And just for kicks, a closing quote from Tocqueville (that great scholar of democracy):
"If it be admitted that a man possessing absolute power may misuse that power by wronging his adversaries, why should not a majority be liable to the same reproach? Men do not change their characters by uniting with one another; nor does their patience in the presence of obstacles increase with their strength. For my own part, I cannot believe it; the power to do everything, which I should refuse to one of my equals, I will never grant to any number of them."
Alexis de Tocqueville, "Tyranny of the Majority," Chapter XV, Book 1, Democracy in America
Monday, June 23, 2008
Delhi and the Queer Scene
To be completely honest, I did not expect Delhi to have a queer scene at all, given how invisible non-heterosexual identities (or something along those lines – “identities” may be too western a take on it) are in this city.
However, recently I got an email telling me that Delhi’s first Pride Parade was happening on Sunday, June 29. That’s exciting. And even if it’s only a group of no more than a few dozen odd people, symbolically it is still huge. It may not even be a spot on the Capital Pride parade in DC that I feel so resentful about missing (why, oh why must it be in June?) so far as the flamboyance and extravagance is concerned, but to me, this is a hundred times more significant. For one, this is my city, my country, my people, and things here are just so wrong right now. Section 377 needs to go (or be modified at the very least!). The invisibility needs to go. The stigma, the social pressure to be married to someone of the opposite sex, all of that needs to go!
Then, a theatre group that a friend is involved with is putting up a production of the Laramie Project (just in case you don’t know what it’s about: it’s based on the aftermath of the murder of Matthew Shepard, a Wyoming student, who was killed by two homophobic assholes. Sorry, I was trying to give a reasonable description but that’s all I can come up with. You have to see it to understand). Now, Shepard’s story doesn’t necessarily resonate with Delhi folk because there isn’t very much obvious homophobia (because as I said before, homosexuality is mostly invisible), but I think it’s great that these folks are doing this reading.
Now, I can’t claim I am actually familiar with the queer scene in this city (ok, to be completely honest I am not familiar with any queer scene anywhere outside of my college – and that too, only to a limited extent) but these, and some others, seem to be encouraging developments. A week or so ago, the “Lifestyle” section of one of the major national dailies ran a page on whether Delhi residents could accept homosexual relationships (in light of the legalization of same-sex marriage in California, of course) and while the general consensus was one of disapproval, at least this is working towards removing the invisibility aspect. I hope. One can hope, right?
Though Delhi does not have any gay clubs per se, there are night clubs that have been running gay nights for years, I believe. Tuesday nights at Pegs and Pints are the most famous. A well-known night club in GK 1 also hosts queer nights on Fridays, but that is apparently a lot newer and lesser known right now.
But whatever little I have found out about the queer scene in Delhi through the internet and through other people seems to revolve around gay men. Well, this city itself revolves around men, but still, it bothers me. There has barely any mention whatsoever of lesbian or bisexual women in all the stuff I have looked at. Let’s see what the turn out at the Pride Parade is like – how many women are there, and how many of those women are actually queer and not just fag hags (though technically, I suppose I am a fag hag too, in a major way).
I guess I am just talking about the “scene” for upper middle class folk here, and the reality is much different for other people, that do not even use these labels to define/describe themselves. But then, that is something I am so unfamiliar with that it would be too presumptuous of me to try and say anything about. But whoever, the people are, I hope things change for the better soon. After all, if South Africa can go from homosexuality being illegal to same-sex marriages being legal in as little as twenty years, one can have some sort of hope for India. Then, maybe, when it comes to my (hypothetical) kids’ generation, not only would they not have to face pressure to marry someone of the opposite sex, they might be able to marry someone of the same-sex should they so desire.
However, recently I got an email telling me that Delhi’s first Pride Parade was happening on Sunday, June 29. That’s exciting. And even if it’s only a group of no more than a few dozen odd people, symbolically it is still huge. It may not even be a spot on the Capital Pride parade in DC that I feel so resentful about missing (why, oh why must it be in June?) so far as the flamboyance and extravagance is concerned, but to me, this is a hundred times more significant. For one, this is my city, my country, my people, and things here are just so wrong right now. Section 377 needs to go (or be modified at the very least!). The invisibility needs to go. The stigma, the social pressure to be married to someone of the opposite sex, all of that needs to go!
Then, a theatre group that a friend is involved with is putting up a production of the Laramie Project (just in case you don’t know what it’s about: it’s based on the aftermath of the murder of Matthew Shepard, a Wyoming student, who was killed by two homophobic assholes. Sorry, I was trying to give a reasonable description but that’s all I can come up with. You have to see it to understand). Now, Shepard’s story doesn’t necessarily resonate with Delhi folk because there isn’t very much obvious homophobia (because as I said before, homosexuality is mostly invisible), but I think it’s great that these folks are doing this reading.
Now, I can’t claim I am actually familiar with the queer scene in this city (ok, to be completely honest I am not familiar with any queer scene anywhere outside of my college – and that too, only to a limited extent) but these, and some others, seem to be encouraging developments. A week or so ago, the “Lifestyle” section of one of the major national dailies ran a page on whether Delhi residents could accept homosexual relationships (in light of the legalization of same-sex marriage in California, of course) and while the general consensus was one of disapproval, at least this is working towards removing the invisibility aspect. I hope. One can hope, right?
Though Delhi does not have any gay clubs per se, there are night clubs that have been running gay nights for years, I believe. Tuesday nights at Pegs and Pints are the most famous. A well-known night club in GK 1 also hosts queer nights on Fridays, but that is apparently a lot newer and lesser known right now.
But whatever little I have found out about the queer scene in Delhi through the internet and through other people seems to revolve around gay men. Well, this city itself revolves around men, but still, it bothers me. There has barely any mention whatsoever of lesbian or bisexual women in all the stuff I have looked at. Let’s see what the turn out at the Pride Parade is like – how many women are there, and how many of those women are actually queer and not just fag hags (though technically, I suppose I am a fag hag too, in a major way).
I guess I am just talking about the “scene” for upper middle class folk here, and the reality is much different for other people, that do not even use these labels to define/describe themselves. But then, that is something I am so unfamiliar with that it would be too presumptuous of me to try and say anything about. But whoever, the people are, I hope things change for the better soon. After all, if South Africa can go from homosexuality being illegal to same-sex marriages being legal in as little as twenty years, one can have some sort of hope for India. Then, maybe, when it comes to my (hypothetical) kids’ generation, not only would they not have to face pressure to marry someone of the opposite sex, they might be able to marry someone of the same-sex should they so desire.
Monday, June 16, 2008
Delhi and Racism
Delhi and racism don’t seem to be immediately connected. At least, I never really saw the connection until I encountered Diepiriye’s fascinating youtube videos (look them up, if you like). I can’t say I took his videos too seriously at first but they did lead me to observe things.
The first observation was not one I made in Delhi. It was a little incident that happened back at college. I was coming back to my dorm from the lounge I study in around 4 am, around finals time. The (African-American) guard at the entrance desk looked really tired, so I just decided to say hello and engage in conversation. After a while, he asked me if I were Sri Lankan. I replied, no, I am Indian. To which he said that he was surprised because Indians were usually not friendly at all. Now I don’t if that reflects on our race consciousness or on our class consciousness, but whatever it is, does not reflect well on our society.
The next was on the very first day after coming back to Delhi. My grandparents wanted to talk to me about America and they were eager to share their experiences from the early nineties as well. They asked me if I had encountered any racism and I said, no, not really (because they obviously expected me to encounter obvious racism?) Then talk somehow turned to crime in DC and how New York City is so unsafe and my grandmother said something about all the Negroes cause all the trouble there. That’s probably not a very different attitude than that of several Americans but it’s still disturbing to hear something of the sort coming from a family member I had always thought was very intelligent and open-minded. I think I must have made one of my usual justifications and got that out of the way somehow. Then, yesterday, again, my grandmother asked me if I had any black sahelis (Hindi equivalent of amigas/amies/friend(f)). Now, I don’t think I actually have any female friends of African origin but I do have male ones so I nodded anyway. Then she had the gall to ask me, “So what is their IQ like? Can they do well in their classes?” Oh my gosh! This was just unbelievable. Thankfully my grandfather quickly jumped in and asked her to not generalize in such a manner.
So, there end the actual observed events. Now for some commentary.
Indians have a definite post-colonial hang-up and that is something most Indians would admit, some readily, some with more shame. We, as a people (though really, I think I mean North Indians, rather than Indians in general), are obsessed with white skin (and as a corollary, fairness) and consider white skinned Caucasians superior to all others (don’t believe me? Come watch Indians fawning over any, and I mean any, fair-skinned person). This could be explained as a remnant of our colonial past, when Indians were made to feel strongly inferior to their British administrators, but I somehow doubt that theory. Anyhow, I am not a sociologist so I don’t have an explanation for our worship of white skin.
Not unrelatedly, Indians can be the most virulently racist of any other people towards people of African origin. A close friend’s father, who was a post-doctoral fellow at Duke University in the 90s, spoke of how his Indian colleagues refused to sit next to or even speak to African-Americans. It is easy to imagine how alienated and unwelcome any person of African origin (no matter what country s/he is a citizen of) would feel in this city.
A group that frequently encounters rampant racism in this city are the people from the North-East of the country. The fact that their racial and ethnic heritage differs from that of the North Indians (most of whom would not hesitate to tell you that they are Aryans) apparently makes them fair game for racial slurs of all sorts. Insults like “chinky” are liberally thrown around in every direction.
Another unfortunate aspect of this is that North Indian men (who are really not well known for their woman-respecting ways) tend to view white women and Northeastern women as “easy”. This, of course, means that these women have to suffer even more sexual harassment than your average Delhi girl (exceeding which, in itself, is a considerable feat).
Now, most Indians will not be willing to acknowledge that they are racist. They will however be willing to say stuff like my grandmother did and think that it is the gospel truth. Indians certainly have strong regionalist tendencies (Punjabi vs. Mallu vs. “Madrasi” vs. Marathi), and I think everybody that knows anything about India knows about casteism. To this delightful mix, I think we can safely add racism as well.
Naturally, different forms of exclusion and discrimination are not unique to North Indian society, but where we take everything several steps ahead is in our hypocrisy when it comes to facing the truth (seriously, go read the comments on Diepiriye’s videos). Oh well. I’ll write on Delhi-ites and their great powers of self-delusion later.
The first observation was not one I made in Delhi. It was a little incident that happened back at college. I was coming back to my dorm from the lounge I study in around 4 am, around finals time. The (African-American) guard at the entrance desk looked really tired, so I just decided to say hello and engage in conversation. After a while, he asked me if I were Sri Lankan. I replied, no, I am Indian. To which he said that he was surprised because Indians were usually not friendly at all. Now I don’t if that reflects on our race consciousness or on our class consciousness, but whatever it is, does not reflect well on our society.
The next was on the very first day after coming back to Delhi. My grandparents wanted to talk to me about America and they were eager to share their experiences from the early nineties as well. They asked me if I had encountered any racism and I said, no, not really (because they obviously expected me to encounter obvious racism?) Then talk somehow turned to crime in DC and how New York City is so unsafe and my grandmother said something about all the Negroes cause all the trouble there. That’s probably not a very different attitude than that of several Americans but it’s still disturbing to hear something of the sort coming from a family member I had always thought was very intelligent and open-minded. I think I must have made one of my usual justifications and got that out of the way somehow. Then, yesterday, again, my grandmother asked me if I had any black sahelis (Hindi equivalent of amigas/amies/friend(f)). Now, I don’t think I actually have any female friends of African origin but I do have male ones so I nodded anyway. Then she had the gall to ask me, “So what is their IQ like? Can they do well in their classes?” Oh my gosh! This was just unbelievable. Thankfully my grandfather quickly jumped in and asked her to not generalize in such a manner.
So, there end the actual observed events. Now for some commentary.
Indians have a definite post-colonial hang-up and that is something most Indians would admit, some readily, some with more shame. We, as a people (though really, I think I mean North Indians, rather than Indians in general), are obsessed with white skin (and as a corollary, fairness) and consider white skinned Caucasians superior to all others (don’t believe me? Come watch Indians fawning over any, and I mean any, fair-skinned person). This could be explained as a remnant of our colonial past, when Indians were made to feel strongly inferior to their British administrators, but I somehow doubt that theory. Anyhow, I am not a sociologist so I don’t have an explanation for our worship of white skin.
Not unrelatedly, Indians can be the most virulently racist of any other people towards people of African origin. A close friend’s father, who was a post-doctoral fellow at Duke University in the 90s, spoke of how his Indian colleagues refused to sit next to or even speak to African-Americans. It is easy to imagine how alienated and unwelcome any person of African origin (no matter what country s/he is a citizen of) would feel in this city.
A group that frequently encounters rampant racism in this city are the people from the North-East of the country. The fact that their racial and ethnic heritage differs from that of the North Indians (most of whom would not hesitate to tell you that they are Aryans) apparently makes them fair game for racial slurs of all sorts. Insults like “chinky” are liberally thrown around in every direction.
Another unfortunate aspect of this is that North Indian men (who are really not well known for their woman-respecting ways) tend to view white women and Northeastern women as “easy”. This, of course, means that these women have to suffer even more sexual harassment than your average Delhi girl (exceeding which, in itself, is a considerable feat).
Now, most Indians will not be willing to acknowledge that they are racist. They will however be willing to say stuff like my grandmother did and think that it is the gospel truth. Indians certainly have strong regionalist tendencies (Punjabi vs. Mallu vs. “Madrasi” vs. Marathi), and I think everybody that knows anything about India knows about casteism. To this delightful mix, I think we can safely add racism as well.
Naturally, different forms of exclusion and discrimination are not unique to North Indian society, but where we take everything several steps ahead is in our hypocrisy when it comes to facing the truth (seriously, go read the comments on Diepiriye’s videos). Oh well. I’ll write on Delhi-ites and their great powers of self-delusion later.
Saturday, June 14, 2008
Delhi... and WEDDINGS!!!
All right, so tonight, my mother dragged me to the wedding of her friend(acquaintance)'s daughter. I did not expect to know anyone there, and certainly did not want to go, but my mother wants met to "socialize" (why she won't let me do that with my own friends is beyond me!) so she forced me to tag along.
Anyhow, to my surprise, the mother of the groom (my mum knew the mother of the bride) turned out to be my ninth grade math teacher. Which meant that I "ran into" a lot of high school teachers and had to exchange the usual pleasantries (the "where are you going to college?", "what course are you studying?" "Do you like it there?"... just the usual). Thankfully, it was much better than I would've dared to imagine in my head. I suspect my mother already knew that the groom's mother had been my high school teacher, which might be really why she dragged me here (because she knew I was not likely to visit my high school and the teachers; but I just want to put that phase of life behind me. Anyhow).
So, Delhi weddings (I think most North Indian weddings, Punjabi ones in particular) are spectacles in their own right. This one was fairly regular by Delhi standards: the Punjabi food, the Rajasthani food, the "South Indian" food, the "Chinese" food, the chaat, the several different types of desserts and hors d'oeuvre (though no one here calls them that) , the over 500 guests, most of them only vaguely known to the hosts, the loud music. And did I mention the girls? Oh man, the girls were just so gorgeous. And there were so many of them, the pretty ones, that is. The bride looked spectacular as did her younger sister and a lot of her friends. Certainly reason enough to have stayed there much longer than I did, but I can't really use "I want to ogle at pretty girls" as an excuse to get my parents to stay longer, can I?
Now, one very interesting thing about Delhi weddings is how people dress. Winter weddings, which are much more common than summer weddings, are all right, because the weather is usually bearable (though sometimes it can be frigidly cold). However, summer weddings and the way people dress becomes a total disaster. Women will be decked out in heavily embroidered saris and salwar-kameezes and chaniya-cholis, with pounds of jewelry and more often than not, inches of make-up. How glitzy one's outfit is, is supposed to be some sort of status symbol. Such a shame. The men go to the other extreme. There were men at tonight's wedding dressed in sports coats, Hawaiian shirts and eve ratty jeans t-shirts! Seriously, faded jeans at a wedding that is not Harley-Davidson themed? That's definitely wrong! How difficult is it to be appropriately dressed even if ti is a million degrees Celsius out? The least they can do it wear a wrinkle-free linen or cotton dress shirt. And plenty of deodorant, for goodness' sake!
Anyhow, the wedding brought up the topic of my own wedding in the car. Because, of course, the daughter is now almost 19, and needs to be married in the next six or seven years. Now, I have already clearly told my parents that I will not have an arranged marriage, though they did not take me seriously. Besides, I am beginning to think an arranged marriage may be the best option for me (for my American friends, in case you want to understand this phenomenon of arranged matches in its entirety, ask me) since when it comes to a love match, I do not foresee the notion of my wanting to marry person I could only marry in six countries or two US states (at present) going down very well with my parents, if you get the gist of what I am saying.
Well, marriages are complicated things, but the wedding ceremonies are usually fun events. Too bad that I don't want a ceremony at all (though, really, there is no way around it -- my parents simply must have a grand celebration for their only daughter's wedding due to social obligations). Oh dear, Delhi's great middle class and its social dynamics. Sigh.
Anyhow, to my surprise, the mother of the groom (my mum knew the mother of the bride) turned out to be my ninth grade math teacher. Which meant that I "ran into" a lot of high school teachers and had to exchange the usual pleasantries (the "where are you going to college?", "what course are you studying?" "Do you like it there?"... just the usual). Thankfully, it was much better than I would've dared to imagine in my head. I suspect my mother already knew that the groom's mother had been my high school teacher, which might be really why she dragged me here (because she knew I was not likely to visit my high school and the teachers; but I just want to put that phase of life behind me. Anyhow).
So, Delhi weddings (I think most North Indian weddings, Punjabi ones in particular) are spectacles in their own right. This one was fairly regular by Delhi standards: the Punjabi food, the Rajasthani food, the "South Indian" food, the "Chinese" food, the chaat, the several different types of desserts and hors d'oeuvre (though no one here calls them that) , the over 500 guests, most of them only vaguely known to the hosts, the loud music. And did I mention the girls? Oh man, the girls were just so gorgeous. And there were so many of them, the pretty ones, that is. The bride looked spectacular as did her younger sister and a lot of her friends. Certainly reason enough to have stayed there much longer than I did, but I can't really use "I want to ogle at pretty girls" as an excuse to get my parents to stay longer, can I?
Now, one very interesting thing about Delhi weddings is how people dress. Winter weddings, which are much more common than summer weddings, are all right, because the weather is usually bearable (though sometimes it can be frigidly cold). However, summer weddings and the way people dress becomes a total disaster. Women will be decked out in heavily embroidered saris and salwar-kameezes and chaniya-cholis, with pounds of jewelry and more often than not, inches of make-up. How glitzy one's outfit is, is supposed to be some sort of status symbol. Such a shame. The men go to the other extreme. There were men at tonight's wedding dressed in sports coats, Hawaiian shirts and eve ratty jeans t-shirts! Seriously, faded jeans at a wedding that is not Harley-Davidson themed? That's definitely wrong! How difficult is it to be appropriately dressed even if ti is a million degrees Celsius out? The least they can do it wear a wrinkle-free linen or cotton dress shirt. And plenty of deodorant, for goodness' sake!
Anyhow, the wedding brought up the topic of my own wedding in the car. Because, of course, the daughter is now almost 19, and needs to be married in the next six or seven years. Now, I have already clearly told my parents that I will not have an arranged marriage, though they did not take me seriously. Besides, I am beginning to think an arranged marriage may be the best option for me (for my American friends, in case you want to understand this phenomenon of arranged matches in its entirety, ask me) since when it comes to a love match, I do not foresee the notion of my wanting to marry person I could only marry in six countries or two US states (at present) going down very well with my parents, if you get the gist of what I am saying.
Well, marriages are complicated things, but the wedding ceremonies are usually fun events. Too bad that I don't want a ceremony at all (though, really, there is no way around it -- my parents simply must have a grand celebration for their only daughter's wedding due to social obligations). Oh dear, Delhi's great middle class and its social dynamics. Sigh.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
