India Health Minister calls homosexuality a disease - Condem this

[hope4love]

New Delhi, Jul 4 (Press Trust of India) Health Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad today described homosexuality as a "disease" and regretted that despite being "unnatural", it now afflicts a substantial number of people in India.

"The disease of ''Men having Sex with Men'' (MSM), which was found more in the developed world, has now unfortunately come to our country and there is a substantial number of such people in India", Azad said speaking at a convention on HIV/AIDS at Vigyan Bhawan here.

The minister said, "Even though it (homosexuality among men) is unnatural, it exists in our country and is now fast spreading, making it tough for its detection".

"With relationships changing, men are having sex with men now. Though it is easy to find women sex workers and educate them on sex, it is a challenge to find MSMs"

Azad''s comments, which come in the wake of growing demand to tackle HIV/AIDS, is likely to raise many an eyebrow and generate a heated debate. Activists in the country favouring homosexuality have faught a long battle against the stigma and discrimination associated with homosexuality.

Azad also called for making sex education more open in the country, to help control the HIV epidemic. "We are lagging behind in sex education as compared to the West and not talking about sex has fuelled the epidemic."

He also called for increased efforts to promote sex education, especially among high risk groups, besides promoting condoms, treating sexually transmitted diseases and launching information and communication programmes amongst transgenders and sex workers to help control the disease.

The AIDs convention, organised by a forum of parliamentarians, was also attended by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Congress president Sonia Gandhi and some union ministers and chief ministers, besides members of parliament and legislative assemblies, Zila Parishad chairpersons and mayors, apart from professionals working in the area.
                                                        ****

[komnaes]

Sorry to hear that H4L, it seems it's one step forward two steps back in India.

It's sad that old British colonial homophobia continues to poison your country despite being rid of in the UK and many of its former colonies for years. Is it an online petition we can sign? In here we  launched one a while ago when a church supported antigay hate group was found to have received government money to organized "trainings" for social workers.

Shaun

[mecch]

He's a 60 year old + politician, not a doctor. 
Pity for India.
But I guess you could find many countries with 60 year old ruling men who might be A OK with openly agreeing that homosexuality is a disease.

[spacebarsux]

This is awful news.

[LM]

Yeah, that's the legacy the Western powers left in their colonies in Asia and Africa. Terrible...

[spacebarsux]

Lol, this bit is truly classic from the article below. "According to NACO (National Aids Control Organisation), there are more than 400,000 men who have sex with men in India".

I wonder when they carried out this particular head-count. Cos they forgot to count me and every single gay man I know in India.

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/homosexuality-no-disease-india-must-include-msm-unaids-116934

[emeraldize]

Seems he's back-pedalling a tad....

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Remarks-on-homosexuality-taken-out-of-context-clarifies-Azad/articleshow/9114625.cms

updated to add:  the comments from readers, posted under the article, are notable. Here are a few:

harry (Nagaland)
Yes , Gay is a disease. Its entered into India by foreign countries deliberately and intelligence agencies played a big role. Guys look at these people they are HIV and lives in groups and deliberately targets the masses to become gay. Fuck these gays out of here.. I want to kick their butts, Disgusting whenever I sees such diseases people. Make a law and kill this disease.

Parth Sarathi (Noida, India)
2 hrs ago
AIDS or no AIDS....homosexuality is disgusting.....

And…

Shridhar (Bangalore)
Gay sex natural or unnatural is a debatable subject. What is natural today may become unnatural after few more years. The simple equation is whatever done by majority is natural. But there could be some scientific reason behind rise in gay people in the society. One of them is Soy Products. If you feed more soy products to young children then their Estrogen hormone gets increased and may turn to become gay. If you need more info Google on Soy & estrogen hormone

[mecch]

harry (Nagaland)
Yes , Gay is a disease. Its entered into India by foreign countries deliberately and intelligence agencies played a big role. Guys look at these people they are HIV and lives in groups and deliberately targets the masses to become gay.

If I had time I would think about these mind fucking comments, but I don't.  I can't even get into the grammar "they are HIV" --- and I can't fathom the logic how "HIV guys" make the masses gay.   

[spacebarsux]

The attitudes these comments reflect is not surprsing in the least.

In a country where 25% of the population is still illiterate and can't even read the word "homosexuality", expecting everyone else to comprehend it is being a bit too optimistic, in my opinion. Ignorance, superstitions and primitive beliefs are exceedingly common-especially in smaller towns and rural areas.

Having said that, there is social progress being made (albeit at a very slow pace). Oftentimes, when there is a step in the right direction, some politician or religious loon (mostly to gain votes and popularity from ignorant fools), takes it upon himself to "defend Indian cultural values being corrupted by the evil west" or some such drivel.

As far Homosexuality and Indian Culture is concerned, I think this Health Minister ought to read the Kamasutra (a product of Indian soil) that has entire chapters dedicated to gay sex.

I agree with Shaun. It is indeed one step forward and two steps back, as is usual with most things in India.

[WillyWump]

How does can one be a Health minister of India and make statements like this (referring to homosexuality)..

"It has now unfortunately come to our country"..."it exists in our country and is now fast spreading".

Homosexuality isn't "imported" into a country, and it doesnt "spread". It just is. It's always been there. I didn't read any further than these statments because clearly he is an idiot.

-W

[spacebarsux]

How does can one be a Health minister of India and make statements like this (referring to homosexuality)..

"It has now unfortunately come to our country"..."it exists in our country and is now fast spreading".

Homosexuality isn't "imported" into a country, and it doesnt "spread". It just is. It's always been there. I didn't read any further than these statments because clearly he is an idiot.

-W

For those who can't tell by his name, I just wanna add that he is Muslim.

[LM]

Homosexuality wasn't seen as a negative thing in India until the British came and made it a crime. So it's funny that an Indian would call it something that came from the West. What really came from the West was homophobia. And they managed to spread it well across the world.

[komnaes]

Homosexuality wasn't seen as a negative thing in India until the British came and made it a crime..

And someone should send Ghulam Nabi Azad a copy of Kama Sutra..  

[spacebarsux]

LM- I don't think its fair to blame colonialists who left in 1947 for the prejudices that exist in Indian society today. We've had more than 6 decades to sort out our house in order. 

[LM]

LM- I don't think its fair to blame colonialists who left in 1947 for the prejudices that exist in Indian society today. We've had more than 6 decades to sort out our house in order. 

Don't take lightly the harmful effects of colonialism. 60 years are nothing. 10 years of destruction may need another 50, 100 to fix it. And in terms of mentality, it takes much longer. But that doesn't make the Indian Health minister less of a prick.

[spacebarsux]

Don't take lightly the harmful effects of colonialism. 60 years are nothing. 10 years of destruction may need another 50, 100 to fix it. And in terms of mentality, it takes much longer. But that doesn't make the Indian Health minister less of a prick.

I am not downplaying the harmful effects of colonialism.

We (in India) like to partly blame the Brits for Partition of the country, stealing our wealth etc among other things; however attributing blame for homophobic attitudes that exist in India in 2011 is not only disingenuous but downright absurd.

Also you are not right in saying that the Brits brought homophobia to Indian shores. The Indian-Subcontinent (incudes modern day Pakistan and B'desh) was invaded and ruled by Muslim for nearly 600 years before the European colonialists arrived. I doubt the Muslim rulers would have taken kindly to homosexuality. Except "Babar" of course, it is common knowledge that he was an avid homosexual.

Although Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code of 1860 (the law that talks about unnatural sex) was enacted by the Brits. Our parliament had more than 60 years to repeal that piece of legislation but chose not to do so. It took a few brave judges of the Delhi High Court to 'read down' that antiquated law. And now we have nutjobs who are incharge of the health Ministry who want to set the pace back by 10 years.

Ultimately, the responsibility lies at home and nowhere else.

[hope4love]

India gay rights activists voiced shock and outrage over public comments by the health minister that homosexuality was a "disease" brought to the country by foreigners. There was a lot of debate on the National Televisions and all News papers. India Gay rights activists are organising a movement called “Quack-Quack” movement, which simply mean all our ministers are Quacks who have no knowledge of Homosexuality and they do not deserve to be Minister and need to be studying in school. There was one more minister few months back Dr.Farooq Abuddla Minister of renewable energy in a public speech blamed the current trend of Indian couples preference for Male child had brought the number of females to the number of males as very low which would compel men to be more homosexuals. There is a movement happening now in India and there is a lot of support from Human rights groups from within and outside India, media and intellectuals demanding an apology and resignation of the minister.

[sevillano]

For those who can't tell by his name, I just wanna add that he is Muslim.

hm.. do I need to comment this? hm.. I DIDNT expect this from YOU, even if i know you dont like BD´s etc ... about being shallow and supersticious!

[spacebarsux]

hm.. do I need to comment this? hm.. I DIDNT expect this from YOU, even if i know you dont like BD´s etc ... about being shallow and supersticious!

I said the Health Minister is Muslim as that might explain the cultural context in which he made the grossly homophobic comment. Islam and homosexuality are incompatible, as far as I am aware.

[LM]

I am not downplaying the harmful effects of colonialism.

We (in India) like to partly blame the Brits for Partition of the country, stealing our wealth etc among other things; however attributing blame for homophobic attitudes that exist in India in 2011 is not only disingenuous but downright absurd.

Also you are not right in saying that the Brits brought homophobia to Indian shores. The Indian-Subcontinent (incudes modern day Pakistan and B'desh) was invaded and ruled by Muslim for nearly 600 years before the European colonialists arrived. I doubt the Muslim rulers would have taken kindly to homosexuality. Except "Babar" of course, it is common knowledge that he was an avid homosexual.

Although Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code of 1860 (the law that talks about unnatural sex) was enacted by the Brits. Our parliament had more than 60 years to repeal that piece of legislation but chose not to do so. It took a few brave judges of the Delhi High Court to 'read down' that antiquated law. And now we have nutjobs who are incharge of the health Ministry who want to set the pace back by 10 years.

Ultimately, the responsibility lies at home and nowhere else.

Well, just wanted to highlight the root of it all. Colonialism does more damage to a people's mentality than all the riches they extract. Look at Latin America, Africa...

And in a country, like you said, where many people are illiterate, a change of mentality takes much longer. But I'm far from saying that it takes responsibility away.

[spacebarsux]

Well, just wanted to highlight the root of it all. Colonialism does more damage to a people's mentality than all the riches they extract. Look at Latin America, Africa...

And in a country, like you said, where many people are illiterate, a change of mentality takes much longer. But I'm far from saying that it takes responsibility away.

I hear ya but don't entirely agree with what you seem to imply. Speaking of India (and no other country) I can assure you that the homophobic attitudes that persist in this part of the world are in no way some sort of British colonial hang-over lingering in people's psyche.

India is just too big and too diverse, with many religions and beliefs, and a simplistic 'blame it on the Brits' argument is just plain wrong, in this case.

As far as the Brits having some sort of lasting impact on the mentality of the average Indian is a different matter which is a bit offtopic. But since you brought it up, most Indians old and young, are most grateful for their biggest gift to us:- their language. The older generations blame them for dividing the country but the youngsters couldn't care less really.

[LM]

Once again, I'm not saying it's the sole cause, but one of the roots. Laws, particularly, help to form people's opinion about something.

[spacebarsux]

Once again, I'm not saying it's the sole cause, but one of the roots. Laws, particularly, help to form people's opinion about something.

Laws do not shape public opinion. It is the converse. A society's culture, norms and the public opion of the majority dicate the laws of the land. Explains why gay marriage is legal in Holland, whereas gay sex can attract death penalty in Saudi Arabia.

The law enacted in the 1800's by the Brits in India, that deemed gay sex as unnatural (btw, if you are interested the said law deems anal sex in all forms gay or straight as unnatural) was a reflection of Victorian prudish attitudes prevalent among the ruling classes of Britain, who happened to also rule India, at the time.

The fact that the Brits enacted this law is a 'technicality' and nothing else. It is not the root cause of any homophobic sentiments among people in India either before the arrival or after the departure of the ruling clolonialists.

In the 19th century, homosexuality in India, as in most parts of the world , was considered a deviation from the norm. Prior to the arrival of the Brits, the islamic rule of the India over several centuries probably played a significant role in changing social attitudes on sexual minorities.

In the 1960's and afterwards when laws relating to homosexuality started to change in Europe (including in the UK) and the USA nothing happened in India. Why? Cos the law that existed on this issue was a fair representation of what law-makers thought reflected the general views of the majority. It  is this mentality which still exists among many law-makers today, and thier views are based on thier own self-serving interpreations of what constitutes "Indian culture" and the pivotal role of "Family"- a term they love throwing around.

Blame the colonialists for draining wealth from India, ruthless policies exacerbating poverty in those days etc, but assigning any blame on the Brits in respect of social attitudes regarding homosexuality either while we were ruled by them or after they left is an argument that just doesnt fly.

We're gonna have to agree to disagree on this issue my friend.

[LM]

Ok, if you believe in the idealist dream that laws are a reflection of society, think what you wish, especially while so certain about it, but you are trampling over much of social science.

[spacebarsux]

Ok, if you believe in the idealist dream that laws are a reflection of society, think what you wish, especially while so certain about it, but you are trampling over much of social science.

Law is enacted by Parliament.
Parliament is made up of members of Parliament who are elected by the people.
People elect leaders to represent them and their concerns/views/policies etc.
Oftentimes, in a democracy when a law is morally reprehensible or at variance with the views of the majority- it causes public debate- which in turn leads to laws being amended to reflect the views of the majority.

In this sense, yes the law does reflect views of the majority in any given society. Having said that there will always be dissenting views!

Why does  the Netherlands allow Gay marriage? Why does Saudi Arabia punish gay men for having sex? why is a man raping his wife not considered rape in some countires while it is in others? It comes down to reflection of what the majority views of the society in that country deems as acceptable or not.

This is how it works in most non- theocratic modern democratic countries I believe. Unless I live in a different planet.

PS- Aren't we moving off topic?

[Ann]

Actually, a society's laws often DO influence how the society perceives that particular thing being legislated against.

Take the hiv transmission laws, for example. Because hiv positive people have been prosecuted and incarcerated for the mere NO RISK act of spitting on another person, many believe that saliva is infectious, and therefore spitting, kissing, sharing eating utensils, getting blowjobs etc etc etc are ways of transmitting hiv.

We've been asked this numerous times in the Am I Infected forum. To paraphrase; "If saliva can't transmit hiv, why are positive people in jail for spitting on someone? They wouldn't jail people if it wasn't possible."

Many laws do very much influence how society views some things and I believe laws against homosexuality do influence many in a negative way. Just like with hiv transmission laws.

[spacebarsux]

Actually, a society's laws often DO influence how the society perceives that particular thing being legislated against.

Take the hiv transmission laws, for example. Because hiv positive people have been prosecuted and incarcerated for the mere NO RISK act of spitting on another person, many believe that saliva is infectious, and therefore spitting, kissing, sharing eating utensils, getting blowjobs etc etc etc are ways of transmitting hiv.

We've been asked this numerous times in the Am I Infected forum. To paraphrase; "If saliva can't transmit hiv, why are positive people in jail for spitting on someone? They wouldn't jail people if it wasn't possible."

Many laws do very much influence how society views some things and I believe laws against homosexuality do influence many in a negative way. Just like with hiv transmission laws.

Ann, those laws are in place cos the mis-informed, undeucated members of Parliament enact those laws. Those MP's are feeding populist views of the majority. So you see, it is like a viscious circle. Is it not?

Laws don;t drop out of thin air. They are made by people. Those people have to cater to populist views of the majority to keep being re-elected.

[LM]

Exactly what Ann said. In pure theory, that's how democracy works: laws represent the will of society. In practice, it's nothing of the sort. The best example is the case of death penalty laws. Most societies are in favor of death penalty for heinous crimes; yet, most countries do not apply this kind of penalty.

Still using as an example HIV-related laws, where I live, the law says you don't have to disclose it to anyone if you don't want to. As a consequence, most people I've met here believe you should really disclose it only after you are getting more romantically involved with a person. On the other hand, I see that are many Americans here, and over there, many states require you to disclose before engaging in any sexual contact. As a consequence, I see many people here, defending disclosure ASAP for moral reasons, not just legal ones. So you see, what's legal or not influences people's opinion. And when a law changes, people progressively change their opinion about the subject, following the law change.

And well, if it is off-topic and you, spacebarsux, with to continue discussing it, you can PM me. I don't want to be accused again of hijacking a thread.

[Ann]

Ann, those laws are in place cos the mis-informed, undeucated members of Parliament enact those laws. Those MP's are feeding populist views of the majority. So you see, it is like a viscious circle. Is it not?

Laws don;t drop out of thin air. They are made by people. Those people have to cater to populist views of the majority to keep being re-elected.

Many of the people who believe the hiv transmission laws are valid weren't even born when they were enacted. These laws ARE influencing how these people think.

[I_care]

I agree, this is disgusting and wrong. However: Are all PWA's homosexuals? Is this post about HIV/Aids activism or "off topic"?  A post of mine, in this forum, ("activism"), was moved to OFF TOPIC because I talked about an upcoming Occupy Wall Street direct action against the Health Insurance/ Health care industry....apparently that is considered off topic because it is not HIV/Aids specific enough. Mods?