The Itinerant: Homophobia’s silent victims

In some parts of the world the 17 of May was commemorated as ‘International day against Homophobia’. I would not have known of this day had it not been for a post of Facebook that read: “Since my childhood until my teens..There were those who offended me, beat me, humiliated me (some returned here to find me on facebook) because I was not boyish enough. Today is a special day in 100 countries in the world. I have no regrets, just hope that you today will be as happy as I am.”

Reading this post a couple of facts became obvious. First, challenging homophobia does not demand that we love homosexuals. It does not require that we agree to what is termed as ‘the gay agenda”. It only requires, even as we continue to disagree with the demands of the gay rights movements, that we restrain for any acts of violence against people who we assume to be homosexual.

Indeed, the logic of ceasing homophobic violence is made obvious by the contents of the Facebook post shared above. Much homophobic violence is often justified on the basis of the homosexual’s alleged sexual predations on heterosexual men. Homophobic violence is justified on the basis of these heterosexual men feeling violated by the homosexual man’s sexual attention. And yet, what kind of sexual attention or predation is a pre-teen, admittedly non-macho boy capable of? Anyone familiar with life in schools will recognise that the violence against boys who are not man-enough is a quotidian fact. Unfortunately, this violence is meted out to these kinds of gentle boys not merely by macho schoolboy bullies, but by practically everyone around. They are mocked and humiliated by other boys, by girls, by adults in positions of guardianship, namely teachers, relatives and often enough parents as well. The tragedy of this all, is that most of the time, a number of these boys do not turn out to be homosexual, but actively heterosexual men. What they do carry, however, are painful memories of their childhood and adolescence.

It appears then homophobic violence is a much broader form of violence than merely beating up homosexual men for making a pass at a heterosexual. It encompasses violence that is visited on innocents merely because they do not meet societal norms of what a man, or indeed, a woman should look like. Homophobic violence is not visited merely on men, but on women, and girls as well. It would encompass the treatment meted out to women who prefer the sexual company of other women, or women who do not act feminine enough, or girls who are referred to as tom-boys.

Looking at the issue from this perspective, it becomes clear that homophobic violence is not merely the desire to punish people with same sex desire, but to discipline people into behaving in a manner that is deemed socially acceptable. Boys must behave in a particular manner, and girls in a different manner. Do not do so, and you will face humiliation and violent repercussions. This violence then gets carried over into adult relations, where if a woman does not behave in the way she ought to, society around her condones her disciplining. This disciplining as we well know, often extends to rape. Rape is not about sexual desire, it is about power, and often about the power to discipline.

The challenge to homophobic violence is does not simply benefit homosexuals, it makes space for a world with less sexual and other violence. Think about that the next time you give in to homophobia.

(First published in The Goan on 25 May 2013)

On the death of a student: Punishment, discipline and school

On the 20^th of July 2010, Roshni Rego, hurrying across the railway crossing at Comba in Margao, was hit by an oncoming train, dragged by the engine, and subsequently died from this encounter. Roshni was a student in Grade XII and the horrific manner of her death has quite naturally shocked the State.

In the aftermath, there have been a number of voices raised in protest. Given the feeling of a lack of misgovernance in the State, the Chief Minister Digambar Kamat, and his political establishment has emerged as one of the top favourites in the list of those responsible for this tragedy. There are however, other claimants for this role. There is the fact that the subway that should have been used by the rickshaw that normally dropped Roshni to school was flooded by rainwater. A case of bad and negligent design. There is the fact that the rickshaw driver ought to have dropped his load of school children directly at the school, and not left them to their own devices. There is the fact that the railway crossing across which Roshni ran was not manned and ought to have been.

A question that appears to have not been asked is; why was Roshni running across the railway tracks in the first place? Why not wait, peaceably, for the train to pass, and then casually walk to school? The answer, as per some of the newspaper reports, indicate that Roshni was in a hurry to get to school on time. A case of an unusually diligent and conscientious student? I think not.

I am unaware of the disciplinary practices that are favoured at the Damodar Science Higher Secondary School, and the practices of this particular school are not the target of this column. Rather, it is the disciplinary practices of schools across the State in particular, and India in general that I would like to focus on. I recollect the days when I was a student of a school in Panjim town. The school had a peculiar practice for those students who arrived at school once the morning assembly was over. They were made to kneel down for a period of time. And if these late comings were repeated, they were then sent to detention, after school.

This particular practice never made sense to me. Let us ignore the fact that one is humiliating a child for a fact that may be beyond his or her control. As children, we are dropped to school, by our parents, by hired drivers, or we come to school by public transport. Most of these situations are beyond the control of the student. In which case, why punish the child? Perhaps a word with the parents, where we try to understand the reason for this delay?

The method of punishment that this particular school, that I use as example, adopted was particularly amusing and indicative of what exactly was going on. Granted that the student was late. But if punctuality to ensure that one does not miss the precious drops of wisdom that are being dispensed in the classroom is the point, why hold the child back longer? The point perhaps is that disciplinary practices in school are not about gaining knowledge, but about training students for life once they leave school. Just as a dog is trained with some harsh treatment as a puppy, we train children for life in general while at school. It becomes necessary then, to run schools as if they were military camps, where we churn out robots for the market.

The suicide of a student in Calcutta, after she was caned by her teacher, had segments of the country up in arms about corporal punishment in schools. I would argue that we need to go a step further and add a ban on humiliation to that list. We would also need to rethink our policies on students who arrive late to school. While there is a point to be made that students should be encouraged to arrive in time to school, surely there is no point in punishing students for things they have no control over? Especially when they are reliant on adults; especially when a parent racing through traffic to reach their child to school on time is courting disaster?

Tragedies are always a time when one reflects on the past that brought us to the present condition. While offering a prayer for the soul of Roshni, perhaps we could also ensure a dialogue that prevents schools from being the reasons for the death of innocents?

(First published in the Gomantak Times, 28 July 2010)