In the West and in India political turmoil is brewing and boiling faster every day. Perhaps the only reason we are not seeing violence in the streets yet is because the older generation is still in charge, the Indian version of the American Baby Boomers if you will. It might not be all that far away when both younger Leftists and the younger less understanding elements of the Right, even though they are both minorities, will turn to violence to accomplish their goals... revolutions are always started and led by small minorities. The social and verbal violence is already here, we don't need for things to get physically violent for us to understand that LGBTQs are already caught in the crossfire of the confrontation... but why?
Being LGBTQ in the West and being LGBTQ in India are two very different things, but there are similarities. What is the main difference between being LGBTQ in the West and being LGBTQ in India? The West for more than 1,000 years has been built upon the edifice of Christianity. As hopefully most Hindus know, despite the stupid coverup and silence by hypocritical Indian Leftists, the Bible is most definitely anti-LGBTQ. The Old Testament in the law book of Leviticus makes it clear that homosexuality is an abomination and that homosexuals should be killed:
"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination." Leviticus 18: 22"If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them." Leviticus 20:13
In the New Testament, Apostle Paul makes it a requirement to refrain from "sexual immorality" to become a Christian, and homosexuality is admonished throughout the New Testament:
"Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood." - Acts 15:20“That is why God abandoned them to their shameful desires. Even the women turned against the natural way to have sex and instead indulged in sex with each other. And the men, instead of having normal sexual relations with women, burned with lust for each other. Men did shameful things with other men, and as a result of this sin, they suffered within themselves the penalty they deserved.” Romans 1:26-27“Don’t you realize that those who do wrong will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Don’t fool yourselves. Those who indulge in sexual sin, or who worship idols, or commit adultery, or are male prostitutes, or practice homosexuality, or are thieves, or greedy people, or drunkards, or are abusive, or cheat people—none of these will inherit the Kingdom of God. Some of you were once like that. But you were cleansed; you were made holy; you were made right with God by calling on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.” - 1 Corinthians 6:9-11
“We know that the law is good when used correctly. For the law was not intended for people who do what is right. It is for people who are lawless and rebellious, who are ungodly and sinful, who consider nothing sacred and defile what is holy, who kill their father or mother or commit other murders. The law is for people who are sexually immoral, or who practice homosexuality, or are slave traders, liars, promise breakers, or who do anything else that contradicts the wholesome teaching that comes from the glorious Good News entrusted to me by our blessed God.” - 1 Timothy 1:8-11
Homosexuality is also strongly admonished in the Muslim Quran, and in the Hadiths homosexuals are called to be killed and driven out of their houses. For the quotes below "people of Lot" means the people of Sodom and Ghammora (homosexuals).
"And (We sent) Lot when he said to his people: What! do you commit an indecency which any one in the world has not done before you? Most surely you come to males in lust besides females; nay you are an extravagant people. And the answer of his people was no other than that they said: Turn them out of your town, surely they are a people who seek to purify (themselves). So We delivered him and his followers, except his wife; she was of those who remained behind. And We rained upon them a rain; consider then what was the end of the guilty." - Sura 7:80–84
"Narrated by Abdullah ibn Abbas: The Prophet said: If you find anyone doing as Lot's people did, kill the one who does it, and the one to whom it is done." — Sunan Abu Dawood, 38:4447, Al-Tirmidhi, 17:1456, Ibn Maajah, 20:2561
"Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas: If a man who is not married is seized committing sodomy he will be stoned to death." — Sunan Abu Dawood, 38:4448
It was narrated that Ibn 'Abbaas said: "The Prophet said: "... cursed is the one who does the action of the people of Lot." — Musnad Ahmad:1878
"Ahmad narrated from Ibn 'Abbas that the Prophet of Allah said: "May Allah curse the one who does the action of the people of Lot, may Allah curse the one who does the action of the people of Lot," three times." — Musnad Ahmad: 2915
"Narrated by Abdullah ibn Abbas: The Prophet cursed effeminate men; those men who are in the similitude (assume the manners of women) and those women who assume the manners of men, and he said, "Turn them out of your houses." The Prophet turned out such-and-such man, and 'Umar turned out such-and-such woman." — Sahih al-Bukhari, 7:72:774
It is this backdrop in which the West as we know it developed. Hatred for homosexuality was and still is ingrained in the culture of the West, in many places until recently it was classified as a crime. Why are Western homosexuals so uppity about being visible and gaining all rights and privileges held by the heterosexuals? Because in the West homosexuals were and still are socially harassed.
From birth, if he is effeminite, the homosexual male (or masculine female) is cursed to be misunderstood, less loved, chastised, and even despised by relatives and associates. People who hate homosexuals try to claim that homosexuals are never socially harassed by any significant portion of the population and the only reason there is any animosity toward them is because they "throw it in people's faces". First of all, many of these people consider ANY visible homosexuality as throwing it in people's faces, while they allow and maintain visible heterosexuality. Secondly, while heterosexuals are allowed to bring up spouses, lovers, children, weddings, anniversaries and any heterosexual engagement at any point in time in a conversation... because these things can naturally arise during any discussion... yet those who hate LGBTQs take any mention of them being gay in the same reasonable circumstance as throwing your homosexuality in their face.
The level of stupidity and hypocrisy the Western (and modern Indian) homosexual has to go through is endless. Homosexual children often go to great lengths to hide their homosexuality as best as they can, but for those who are naturally effeminate and male, this is virtually impossible. While they would never bring up homosexuality so as to avoid the topic, everywhere s/he goes the young LGBTQ is accused of being homosexual and taunted, even though s/he denies it. These same people who will endlessly mock and bring up homosexuality in front of the attempting to hide LGBTQ, these same people will accuse gays of bringing up homosexuality all the time and throwing it in people face.
The truth of the matter is that the homosexual or LGBTQ is bombarded with speech and gesture about just how homosexual they are, even if they deny it and never bring it up themselves. What happens is that when the LGBTQ grows older and accepts himself/herself, then they say.. "yeah, I am gay!" What others use to say in jest now the LGBTQ says in accepting defense. Homosexuals are not "proud" they are homosexuals, they are proud that they have accepted themselves despite social pressures. Everyone else has made such a big deal about just how gay we are for our whole lives... so yeah, now we are going to make a bid deal about it, and we are going to let you know that we don't care what others think. Yes, we are a minority and yes we are socially repressed often, and like all minorities, we are more vocal to compensate for the injury and pain and to ward off further attacks. The taunted child LGBQT grows up to be the fiercest advocate for the protection of gay children in schools and for programs to foster their acceptance.
The truth of the matter is that the homosexual or LGBTQ is bombarded with speech and gesture about just how homosexual they are, even if they deny it and never bring it up themselves. What happens is that when the LGBTQ grows older and accepts himself/herself, then they say.. "yeah, I am gay!" What others use to say in jest now the LGBTQ says in accepting defense. Homosexuals are not "proud" they are homosexuals, they are proud that they have accepted themselves despite social pressures. Everyone else has made such a big deal about just how gay we are for our whole lives... so yeah, now we are going to make a bid deal about it, and we are going to let you know that we don't care what others think. Yes, we are a minority and yes we are socially repressed often, and like all minorities, we are more vocal to compensate for the injury and pain and to ward off further attacks. The taunted child LGBQT grows up to be the fiercest advocate for the protection of gay children in schools and for programs to foster their acceptance.
I would like to say the push for gay marriage is only because heterosexuals get financial, insurance, and hospital visit rights under the system, not to mention the social recognition of their relationship. LQBTQs want to be on one another's insurances, they want hospital visit right, and they want to file joint taxes. They want society to acknowledge their commitment to one another just as much as they acknowledge those of heterosexuals. The issue arises when LQBTQs overcompensate and demand to have access to religious ceremonies from religions that reject them. LGBTQs should have no interest in getting married in a Church or a Mosque or having a Christian bake them a cake, homosexuals are foolishly attempting to reform an unreformable movement. However, this overcompensation only exists because of their previous persecution... LGBTQs are complexed.
But the homosexual needs allies, s/he is a small minority and without allies they would succumb to the weigh of hatred and torture which could easily retake society, especially a society which was built upon Abrahamism. Well guess what, there are plenty of groups and individuals who make sure to make it known to everyone that homosexuals are not welcome amongst them. I am not saying all heterosexuals in the American or Indian right act like this, but there are enough of them to color the community in a certain shade. While things have changed in the mainstream right of America, until recently and even still, homosexuals were generally not viewed with pleasure within the traditionally Christain conservative movement. Now it is almost 100% true (but not totally true) that LGBTQs are certainly not welcome in far-right movements in America, particularly those that cater to Whites, even Pagan far-right movements. These people often use harsh and humiliating language against homosexuals and some even call for them to be killed or injured. These same people will then tell the homosexual that homophobia does not exist and that we just have a persecution complex; anti-homosexual are usually very unscrupulous people who also have no problem tormenting women, children, and racial minorities in this same way, a denial of their reality and experience, and so they turn everyone into an enemy.
First the homosexual is pushed out of sectors of society... but then the Left comes in and not only accepts them but wants to make them part of the machinery of destroying the system which wounded them. The LQBTQ generally gains a wide distaste for broad society because we must admit, anti-homosexuality is not a small problem, it is huge, perhaps not most but many many many people harbor deep hatreds for homosexuals which they have integrated into society and which they are trying to resurge. The LGBTQ was hounded out by half of society and had no other refuge but the Left, and so they become endeared to the cause and LQBTQs make up some of the most fanatical Leftists. It was generally Leftists heterosexuals who accepted them, there are plenty of right-wing heterosexuals who are accepting, it is just the homophobic streaks in the community cloud the waters.
The solutions for dealing with the LGBTQ question is the West is going to be much different than solving a similar but different problem for LGBTQs in Hinduism and India. What is the difference between anti-homosexuality in India, especially within some (not all) of Hindutva, and what has happened in the West? The most important aspect is that ancient Hindu society was not built upon a vicious hatred for homosexuals. Vedic literature makes it clear that LGBTQs were not generally harassed in ancient India and even enjoyed protections from being mocked in public. Hindu medical texts acknowledge that certain persons, though born one sex, display even physical attributes of the other sex, and these are given special designations of different degrees of "3rd sex" which is acknowledge to have been determined in the womb and even by astrology. Here is a list of some of what the Vedic literature says about LQBTQs, but I would like to add that the Kama Sutra does mention that some people did not accept homosexuality personally or socially, it was one thing to have an opinion, it was another to force it upon others (there were also some anti-LGBTQ laws in certain smritis, but that was regional and not systemic):
Vedic Sources On Homosexuality & Gender
List retrieved from the Gay & Lesbian Vaishnava Association
https://www.galva108.org/
https://www.galva108.org/
1) Three categories of sex or gender are mentioned throughout the Vedic canon—virile males, fertile females, and an impotent third sex having both male and female qualities. (Srimad Bhagavatam 8.3.24, Manusmriti 3.49, Sushruta Samhita 3.3.4)2) Vedic texts contain important lists defining third-gender men (napumsa, kliba, shandha, panda, etc.). These lists cite many different types of men considered impotent with women and include homosexuals, transgenders, the intersexed, and so on. Simplistic English translations such as eunuch, neuter, hermaphrodite, etc. are inaccurate and in most cases incorrect. (Narada-smriti 12.12-13, Sushruta Samhita 3.2.36-43, Caraka Samhita 4.2.17-21, Kamatantra, Smriti-ratnavali, Sabda-kalpa-druma, etc.)3) The primary definition of third-gender people is that they are not sexually procreative and do not beget offspring, being either physically impotent or devoid of any desire for the opposite sex. (Naradasmriti 12.8-19)4) People who are impotent with the opposite sex by nature and birth are known as tritiya-prakriti— people of the third nature or sex. They have both male and female qualities and are described as homosexual, transgender and intersexed. (Kama Sutra 2.9, Sushruta Samhita 3.2.36-43, Caraka Samhita 4.2.17-21)5) All three sexes (male, female and third sex) are biologically determined at the time of conception. (Sushruta Samhita 3.3.4, Manusmriti 3.49)6) Vedic medical texts (the Ayur Shastra) specifically mention how third-sex conditions (homosexuality, transgender identity and intersex) are caused at the time of conception. (Sushruta Samhita 3.2.38, Sushruta Samhita 3.2.42-43, Caraka Samhita 4.4.31, respectively)7) The sex of the fetus—whether male, female or third sex—becomes fully manifest during the second month of pregnancy and cannot be changed after that. (Caraka Samhita 4.4.10, 4.8.19)8) Vedic astrological texts (the Jyotir Shastra) analyze the sex of any child, whether male, female or third sex, through the adhana or conception chart. Various planetary configurations indicate the conception of third-gender offspring. (Brihat Jataka 4.13, Jaimini Sutram 4.3.12, Saravali 8.18-20)9) The Jyotir Shastra furthermore mentions hundreds of signs in the janma or birth chart indicating thirdgender characteristics such as male and female homosexuality, transgender identity, bisexuality, impotence, sterility and so on. (Bhrigu Sutram 3.54-65, 7.35; Brihat Parasara Hora Sastra 80.5051, Jaimini Sutram 4.3.84, Brihat Jataka 17.3, Garga Hora 465, Jataka Parijata 16.18, respectively)10) Living entities take birth as male, female and third sex for many different reasons that include desire (kama), past deeds (karma), divine ordinance (daiva) and so on. In any case, Krsna directs material nature and sanctions the birth of all living entities. (Caraka Samhita 4.2, Bhagavad Gita 9.10, 18.61)11) The Narada-smriti specifically states that homosexuals (mukhebhaga, sevyaka, etc.) are incurable and unfit for marriage to the opposite sex. Bisexuals (paksha) are possibly fit for opposite-sex marriage if confirmed as potent with women through testing. (Narada-smriti 12.11-19)12) Vedic texts reiterate that women should not be married to third-gender men and that wives should leave such husbands. The same is true for men married to third-gender women. The Artha Shasta nullifies such marriages, returns the dowry and imposes fines whenever a spouse is thus deceived. (Baudhayana Dharmasutra 2.3.17, 27, Artha Shastra 3.15.12-15)13) The Kama Shastra acknowledges third-gender marriages wherein same-sex couples with “great attachment and complete faith in one another” get married together. (Kama Sutra 2.9.36)14) Vedic teachings recommend minimizing and moderating the four basic necessities of life (eating, sleeping, mating and defending). Forbidding these entirely, however, is deemed unrealistic and inhumane. Regarding mating, even people outside the varnasrama system are entitled to marry and establish households. (Bhagavad Gita 6.16, Jaiva Dharma, p. 172, Kama Sutra 7.2.59)15) Vaishnavas should not get married with the desire to beget children or worship their ancestors. Rather, a marriage is considered successful only when it is God-centered and one’s spouse is viewed as a servant of Krsna. This is true despite whatever mundane priests or relatives may say. (Jaiva Dharma, p. 164)16) Vedic law promotes virtue and sense control but also allows for various regulated expressions of vice such as intoxication, meat-eating, prostitution and gambling, especially among the general public. Total prohibition of vice in society is not the Vedic system. (Srimad Bhagavatam 1.11.19, Manusmriti 5.56, Artha Shastra 2.25, 26, 27; 3.20)17) No Vedic law specifically penalizes third-gender men or women (napumsa, kliba, etc.) for their characteristic behavior (homosexuality, crossdressing, etc.). The Narada-smriti states that third-gender citizens are not to be fined. (Narada-smriti 15.15)18) No Vedic law prescribes castration for third-gender men. Rather, it is mentioned only as a punishment for heterosexual adultery and rape. (Manusmriti 8.374, Narada-smriti 12.72-74. Gautama Dharmasutra 12.2)19) Homosexual behavior among ordinary, twice-born males (pums) is considered a minor offense atoned for by taking a ritual bath or paying relatively small fines. (Manusmriti 11.175, Artha Shastra 4.13.40)20) Vedic law punishes homosexual behavior among females only when it involves the violation of young unmarried girls (traditionally aged 8 through 12). Such offenses are fined variously and can include corporal punishment. (Manusmriti 8.369-370, Artha Shastra 4.12.20-21)21) Vedic law books regard heterosexual crimes such as rape, adultery and the propagation of unwanted progeny as the foremost threat to human society (not homosexuality). (Manusmriti 8.364, 352-387, Bhagavad Gita 1.40-41)22) Parents must provide basic necessities (food, clothing, etc.) to their third-gender offspring according to their means. The king should provide for third-gender citizens without family. (Manusmriti 9.202, Artha Shastra 3.5.32, Vasistha Dharmasutra 19.35-36)23) It is an offense to vilify or publicly mock people of the third sex. This is punishable by various small fines. (Artha Shastra 3.18.4-5, Manusmriti 28.274, Narada-smriti 15.19)24) Third-gender men are foremost determined by testing them with women. (Artha Shastra 3.18.6; Mahabharata, Virata Parva)25) The Kama Shastra specifically mentions homosexual men, lesbians and transgenders as a third nature or sex (tritiya-prakriti). It describes their various homosexual practices, masculine and feminine types, crossdressing, and traditional occupations as barbers, masseurs, house servants, florists, prostitutes, etc. (Kama Sutra 2.8, 2.9)26) In the Artha Shastra, third-gender men and women are described working for the king variously as bedroom servants, armed guards, harem supervisors, spies, assassins and so on. (Artha Shastra 1.21.1, 1.20.21, 1.12.21)27) The Jyotir Shastra associates third-gender men and women with the planets Mercury, Saturn and Ketu; with expertise in the arts and sciences; with asceticism, and with the worship of Lord Vishnu and Lord Brahma. (Brihat Samhita 16.18-19,Brihat Jataka 2.5-6)28) The third gender exists throughout the natural and supernatural worlds. Third-gender animals (snakes, elephants, etc.), humans (such as Brihannala) and demigods (such as Sri Ardhanarisvara) are mentioned here and there throughout the Vedic canon. (Sushruta Samhita 5.4.18, 25; Brihat Samhita 67.9-10; Mahabharata; Brihat Samhita 58.43, Prasna Marga15.214)29) No Vedic texts specifically associate the third sex with Kali Yuga. Rather, texts on omen reading (the Nimitta Shastra) associate creatures of unusual birth and the third sex with prosperity, the special power to bless or curse, and variously as good or bad omens. (Brihat Samhita 46.95, Prasna Marga 3.17, Srila Prabhupada tape #67-002)30) In the Mahabharata, Arjuna’s appearance as a male-to-female transgender (Brihannala) serves as an important example of the acceptance of third-gender people in Vedic society. Brihannala’s traditional role as a skilled teacher of the fine arts and her acceptance by Maharaja Virata are exemplary. (Mahabharata, Virata Parva)31) Everyone should work for Krsna or God according to their respective nature (svakarma or svadharma), even if performed imperfectly. To follow another’s path or to artificially suppress one’s nature is considered dangerous and ill advised. (Bhagavad Gita 3.33, 35; 18.45-48)32) Some law codes in the Dharma Shastra place restrictions on third-gender men and other types of people including women, sudras, artisans, dark-skinned races, etc. Vaishnavas, however, easily reject such mundane codes (naimittika-dharma) when deemed unnecessary or unfavorable in the worship of Krsna. (Jaiva Dharma, p. 54; Bhagavad Gita 18.66)33) Bodily designations such as gender (male, female or third sex), race, nationality, and so on play no role in determining whether a person is divine or demonic. That is determined by individual qualities and personal behavior alone. (Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 16)34) Truthfulness, honesty, revealing one’s mind in confidence, compassion, inclusiveness and so on are all important Vaishnava qualities that should be practically applied in cases of third-gender people and issues. (Bhagavad Gita 10.4-5, 16.1-3, Bhagavata Purana 1.17.25, Sri Upadesamrta 4, Krsna book Ch. 24)35) A spiritually advanced person views everyone equally as part and parcel of Krsna. He never hates anyone. Rather, he is friendly and kind to all creatures. Conversely, mundane religionists discriminate against and exclude others based on bodily differences. (Sri Isopanisad 6, Bhagavata Purana 3.29.2627, Sri Tattva-sutram 35, Bhagavad Gita 5.18, 11.55, 12.13-14)36) Krsna Himself never hates nor envies anyone. He is equal to all but especially inclined to His devotees. (Bhagavad Gita 9.29, 12.20)37) Anyone can attain the supreme destination regardless of birth or body type. Vaishnava- or sanatana dharma is very liberal and all living entities have a right to practice it. Anyone can serve Krsna in their natural capacity and chant the holy names whether fit or unfit, strictly following the regulations of bhaktiyoga or not strictly following. (Bhagavad Gita 9.32, 12.9-12, Caitanya-caritamrta 1.9.29, Jaiva Dharma, p. 172)38) The material world is a reflection of the spiritual world. Every material manifestation (including the third gender) has its pure, original counterpart in spiritual existence. (Bhagavad Gita 15.1, Caitanyacaritamrta 1.4.29, 65; 1.14.62)
If ancient India was accepting of LGBTQs, then where did Indian anti-LGBTQ sentiments come from in the modern era? Now there must be extensive history about how the Islamic invasion brought homophobia to India, but because it would take extensive research to show this in as much detail as would satisfy our enemies, for now I will focus on how the Christain British brought anti-LGBTQ sentiments to India. We all know how within recent years, India overturned the colonial-era Section 377 which outlawed homosexuality in India. While Indian Leftists tried to pin this on Hindutva, homosexuality did not become illegal in India until the arrival of the British, it was a British invention.
For hundreds of years both Islam and Christianity ruled India and touted Abrahamic monotheism as the superior religion over Hinduism, and many Hindus fell into having an inferiority complex. The culture became much more conservative, it became more obsessed with women covering themselves up, the bare-breasted statues found in Hindu temples were retrofitted with new mythology... they were put there to remind us of what we should not be doing... kind of silly. Indians started trying to act more Victorian than Victorians, and many of them still do. Even though the Indian LGBTQ may now today experience harassment, his/her society was not built upon this and can much more easily be remedied.
Even though Britain gave up the Indian colony in 1947, the colonial era still infects Indian society in many ways. Yes, Hindus were always free to have opinions against homosexualities, and communities could choose to accept it or not, but anti-LGBTQ sentiments were not a megalith. The Britsh era homophobia however organized homophobia, institutionalized it, polemicized it, universalized it, and otherwise propagated it in Indian society until many Indias and Hindus felt homophobia to represent a superior colonial trait of the oppressors. It is because of this reason that we have seen the springing up of militant, crass, harsh, and mocking anti-homosexuality in some areas of the right-wing in India today. No this does not infect all of Hindutva and there is plenty of Hindutwatis who understand the LGBTQ issue, but there are too many voices screaming out the ugliest versions of homophobia of the general LGBTQ community to feel comfortable or safe within the movement.
Another problem has been the imitation of the rise of the White right-wing movement in the United States. The White right-wing movement is much more uniform in its disdain for homosexuals and much more bellicose and violent in its language. So many in the younger Hindutva crowd have seen the White right-wing as an inspiration and follow their lead. They are also taking on other negative traits from the modern White right-wing like confronting feminism in a dark and threatening manner with that "get back to the kitchen" attitude... they are making sure that women feel threatened like they are not going to like their life under the new Hindutva auspices... they are doing the same to LGBTQs... "you are not going to like it when we are in charge". This is a counter-productive trait in the White right-wing movement that only gains them many enemies within their own ranks. Even if not all or most of younger Hindutva is like this, there is enough for concern.
I am not an Indian homosexual, and I cannot understand the situation fully, but there is commonality in the struggle of all LGBTQs, India is unique, but not so different that other people can't understand or give advice. Homophobia is a recent and foreign invention in India, though it is certainly still truly felt by LGBTQs living there. The problem is that the LGBTQ community has not thought this through thoroughly, though they cannot be blamed as they are desperate. LGBTQs went running to the Left because that is the place where they found the most acceptance. But what is the Left?
The Left claims to accept everyone, that they are here to help minorities escape any feelings if discontent they may have. This post is not about the structure of Leftism, but for those who can see it, Leftism creates a structure where no one person or group of people would ever have the power to replace or overthrow the Leftist government. Leftists governments can be just as corrupt and even racist and homophobic as any other government. But when there is a level of free enterprise (I believe in the ancient Hindu guild system and not capitalism) and groups are allowed to organize their community in ways they see fit, then certain communities and individuals can rise in power high enough to fight off governmental tyranny which always happens in centralized Leftism, because the government has too much power and oversight. They use protecting minorities as an excuse, even homophobic minorities like Islam and Christianity.
The problem arises when LGBTQs notice that those people and groups, if unregulated, who could challenge the government, are anti-LGBTQ. What are LGBTQs to do if they see the factions which is fighting Leftism to be too saturated with homophobia for the LGBTQs taste? The solution to this problem is to make the general society, as well as those right-wing elements which oppose Leftism, to be less anti-LGBTQ. How would this be done? The solution is many-fold but all solutions ask the LGBTQs to take all of the initiatives and to be the mature people in the situation.
First, the LGBTQs need to be mature enough to see that any and all anti-LGBTQ sentiments which are organized in modern Indian society come from Abrahamic influence. I know that is not an excuse for individual people's behavior, but that is where it stems from, not from Hindu society proper. What the Left does is it turns you against the general society, the general idea which created the society. In the USA this is easier since the society was built upon Christianity, even I say the USA must change in a fundamental way, the struggle for LGBTQs here is just a little different. But Indian Hindu LGBTQs don't need to change Hindu society fundamentally, they just need to weed out those elements which have crept in from the outside, to extricate the poison. If this becomes your attitude you will automatically notice you have become at odds with the Left, because they want to change the society on a basic level, they want to uproot what had once been good for homosexuals only because it has been corrupted, they are not interested repairing it but totally replacing it with a system that if it becomes entrenched, there is very little hope of removing it when it does inevitably become corrupt from too much central power and incursion.
How do Indian Hindu LGBTQs change the tempo of Hindutva so as to remove those elements which make the general LBGTQ community feel threatened and as though they have no other refuge than the Left? At the moment, it is likely the majority of LGBTQs will stay with the Left, but as I have stated before revolutions are often led by minorities. Minorities need to speak louder and work harder to be noticed. The fact of the matter is there are plenty and not few homosexuals in India who have seen through the fog of Abrahamism and have noticed that Hinduism proper is not a threat to him or her. They have also seen that if Leftists had their way, perhaps when they came to power, there would be little ability to thwart them when they became corrupt. The Left makes less power for the individual and more power for those who are administrating the collective, a collective which they don't mind if it is fundamentally, at its base ideology, anti-homosexual (Muslim/Christian).
It needs to start with those minority LGBTQs who understand and see the issue. Their first mission must be to become the most visible and active critics of the Left, but what should they criticize? The Left's hypocrisy! Both the Left in the West and in India are extremely two-faced and hypocritical. They speak of gay rights on one hand, yet they expect gays to be accepting of Islam and in India, Christianity. Islam and Christianity slowly affect society. They are generally an anti-homosexual doctrine and homophobia is central enough that this would be preached in many Mosques and Churches throughout India. The Left NEVER attacks Muslim homophobia and in India, they never hold Christians accountable for this in any way. The Left includes Christianity and Islam without qualifiers, they are never asked to curb their own homophobia... no, it is the minority homosexual who is asked to silently accept this hypocrisy, the Left still treats its minorities like minorities, there are more Muslims and Christians, so they are catered to.
It needs to start with those minority LGBTQs who understand and see the issue. Their first mission must be to become the most visible and active critics of the Left, but what should they criticize? The Left's hypocrisy! Both the Left in the West and in India are extremely two-faced and hypocritical. They speak of gay rights on one hand, yet they expect gays to be accepting of Islam and in India, Christianity. Islam and Christianity slowly affect society. They are generally an anti-homosexual doctrine and homophobia is central enough that this would be preached in many Mosques and Churches throughout India. The Left NEVER attacks Muslim homophobia and in India, they never hold Christians accountable for this in any way. The Left includes Christianity and Islam without qualifiers, they are never asked to curb their own homophobia... no, it is the minority homosexual who is asked to silently accept this hypocrisy, the Left still treats its minorities like minorities, there are more Muslims and Christians, so they are catered to.
The first campaign needs to be a general LGBTQ led right-wing front against the generally anti-homosexual nature of Islam and Christianity. Each and every instance of anti-homosexual sentiments in the Christian and Muslim world, particularly those groups within India, must be recorded and highlighted. Homosexuals in India need to set up watch groups to report on the spreading of homophobia out of Mosques and Churches, as well as highlight their generally homophobic doctrines. The minority of right-wing LGBTQs in India must become a bane on the Church and the Mosque, we must become their worse enemies. First, we need to get Hindutva seeing that, and first, we need to get them to recognize we can actually be useful to their cause. We must eventually find Hindutva elements that are willing to silently and even openly support us in this campaign to eradicate Abrahamism from India. We must also get the Abrahamics seeing LGBTQs as enemies, this will help break up the Left' LQBTQ-Muslims alliance... get the Muslims and Christians feeling attacked by LGBTQs and they will fight back with subtle homophobia, breaking the bond.
The second part is a little more difficult and that is to convince those elements of Hindutva who are anti-homosexuals to understand that original Hinduism was much more lenient and less obviously averse to LGBTQs. We need to get them to recognize that certain levels of homophobia actually go against the principles of ancient Hinduism and that by engaging in blanket anti-homosexuality they are actually making India less Hindu and more Muslims/Christian. Hindutva does not need to become PRO-LGBTQ, it just can't be ANTI-LGBTQ, and I don't think that this would be too terribly hard to accomplish once Hindutva sees some LGBTQs as allies. Notice, if the right-wing minority LGBTQs are loud enough and put a dent into Leftist LGBTQ rhetoric, we could be easily recognized as we would stand out. The more viciously anti-Abrahamic the LGBTQs appear, the more they will be accepted in Hindutva and seen as a weapon against the enemy, and the more attention they will get form everyone. But what is most important is to recognize that many many people in Hindutva hold no anti-LGBTQ sentiments, and they can never be painted with a broad brush.
The third step would be to criticize the Left for their blatant hypocrisy. Their silence on the persecution of LGBTQs in Muslim lands and their denunciation in the Churches. Liberal Christian and Muslim movements must be exposed for what they are, smokescreens for their more radical brethren. How dare Christians and Muslims try to hide the obvious anti-LGBTQ sentiments of their religion... no matter how much talk these people give Abrahamic homophobia will always rise to the top, those who preach liberal Christianity are trying to dupe homosexuals into accepting what is no good for them. This is what the Left tolerates. The Left is not stupid, they know the Islamic and Christian doctrine leads to homophobia, but they will never criticize it, because they need numbers, they have sold LGBTQs out. And what exactly is supposed to happen to LGBTQs in India when Muslims and Christians have more power? Wasn't it a Hindu majority nation which repealed Section 377? If India was a Muslim or Christain nation Section 377 would never have been repealed and probably would have only been made worse, like what we see in Pakistan or Bangladesh. How silent is the Left about those murders of LGBTQ activists in Bangladesh? Pindrop silent! This is what we must use against the Left.
Now it would be irresponsible to end this post without addressing some hard issues that both LGBTQs and Hindtuva must accept and that is there is going to be tension, even among those who are not anti-LGBTQ, against the institutions of gay marriage and adoption. As I have stated, LGBTQs want the same benefits heterosexuals get in terms of inheritance, insurance, taxes, hospital visits and social recognition of their relationships. I have noticed many Indian heterosexuals think of marriage as an institution for raising children, and they have never thought of the peripheral benefits they receive. I am a legally married homosexual living in the United States and I am very appreciative of the services I am provided because of that legal recognition, if it were not for my marriage I would have no health care. Some of the issue arises when religion gets involved rather than just practical terms as some Hindus believe only heterosexual marriage is sacred and meant for the rearing of children and so does not apply to homosexuals... however, not all definitions of marriage need to be religious. Also, there are many things which never existed in Hinduism yet which arrived at different times, different practices, different beliefs different gods. I have heard it argued that Hinduism has no tradition of gay marriage... but there are many traditions which have been incorporated into Hindu society so why not gay marriage? We should not force priests or temples who are against gay marriage to enact ceremonies, but there really should be no conflict in gays getting married in accepting cults of Hinduism. This is something that will need to be further discussed within the community and I think hostility toward the idea will decrease when LGBTQs are recognized as a valuable contribution to the community. Either way, I think it is safe to say that many right-wing LGBTQs, even though they support Hindutva, will still want the benefits of marriage, but this is a debate which can be fought out civilly amongst Hindus themselves and should not impede the plan to pit LGBTQs against Abrahamism first and then by extension Leftism.
The plan is not too hard to understand. First we must find those Indian Hindu LGBTQs who understand the true nature of Hindu society and understand that it has been corrupted by Abrahamism. Then we need to turn those same LGTBQs against the Church and the Mosque in India, causing friction. Then, when the Left's hypocrisy on the issue is exposed by their silence or even aid to the Abrahamics, the Left can also be attacked. But LGBTQs must take the first step, we must be the first ones to realize what is going on and what to do. We are the ones who will have to tolerate some abuse and misunderstanding and even opposition, we are going to have to be the mature ones in this. If we do not take the stance now, LGBTQs will forever be affiliated with the Left, and if things ever got violent, it could spell disaster for us.
The second part is a little more difficult and that is to convince those elements of Hindutva who are anti-homosexuals to understand that original Hinduism was much more lenient and less obviously averse to LGBTQs. We need to get them to recognize that certain levels of homophobia actually go against the principles of ancient Hinduism and that by engaging in blanket anti-homosexuality they are actually making India less Hindu and more Muslims/Christian. Hindutva does not need to become PRO-LGBTQ, it just can't be ANTI-LGBTQ, and I don't think that this would be too terribly hard to accomplish once Hindutva sees some LGBTQs as allies. Notice, if the right-wing minority LGBTQs are loud enough and put a dent into Leftist LGBTQ rhetoric, we could be easily recognized as we would stand out. The more viciously anti-Abrahamic the LGBTQs appear, the more they will be accepted in Hindutva and seen as a weapon against the enemy, and the more attention they will get form everyone. But what is most important is to recognize that many many people in Hindutva hold no anti-LGBTQ sentiments, and they can never be painted with a broad brush.
The third step would be to criticize the Left for their blatant hypocrisy. Their silence on the persecution of LGBTQs in Muslim lands and their denunciation in the Churches. Liberal Christian and Muslim movements must be exposed for what they are, smokescreens for their more radical brethren. How dare Christians and Muslims try to hide the obvious anti-LGBTQ sentiments of their religion... no matter how much talk these people give Abrahamic homophobia will always rise to the top, those who preach liberal Christianity are trying to dupe homosexuals into accepting what is no good for them. This is what the Left tolerates. The Left is not stupid, they know the Islamic and Christian doctrine leads to homophobia, but they will never criticize it, because they need numbers, they have sold LGBTQs out. And what exactly is supposed to happen to LGBTQs in India when Muslims and Christians have more power? Wasn't it a Hindu majority nation which repealed Section 377? If India was a Muslim or Christain nation Section 377 would never have been repealed and probably would have only been made worse, like what we see in Pakistan or Bangladesh. How silent is the Left about those murders of LGBTQ activists in Bangladesh? Pindrop silent! This is what we must use against the Left.
Now it would be irresponsible to end this post without addressing some hard issues that both LGBTQs and Hindtuva must accept and that is there is going to be tension, even among those who are not anti-LGBTQ, against the institutions of gay marriage and adoption. As I have stated, LGBTQs want the same benefits heterosexuals get in terms of inheritance, insurance, taxes, hospital visits and social recognition of their relationships. I have noticed many Indian heterosexuals think of marriage as an institution for raising children, and they have never thought of the peripheral benefits they receive. I am a legally married homosexual living in the United States and I am very appreciative of the services I am provided because of that legal recognition, if it were not for my marriage I would have no health care. Some of the issue arises when religion gets involved rather than just practical terms as some Hindus believe only heterosexual marriage is sacred and meant for the rearing of children and so does not apply to homosexuals... however, not all definitions of marriage need to be religious. Also, there are many things which never existed in Hinduism yet which arrived at different times, different practices, different beliefs different gods. I have heard it argued that Hinduism has no tradition of gay marriage... but there are many traditions which have been incorporated into Hindu society so why not gay marriage? We should not force priests or temples who are against gay marriage to enact ceremonies, but there really should be no conflict in gays getting married in accepting cults of Hinduism. This is something that will need to be further discussed within the community and I think hostility toward the idea will decrease when LGBTQs are recognized as a valuable contribution to the community. Either way, I think it is safe to say that many right-wing LGBTQs, even though they support Hindutva, will still want the benefits of marriage, but this is a debate which can be fought out civilly amongst Hindus themselves and should not impede the plan to pit LGBTQs against Abrahamism first and then by extension Leftism.
The plan is not too hard to understand. First we must find those Indian Hindu LGBTQs who understand the true nature of Hindu society and understand that it has been corrupted by Abrahamism. Then we need to turn those same LGTBQs against the Church and the Mosque in India, causing friction. Then, when the Left's hypocrisy on the issue is exposed by their silence or even aid to the Abrahamics, the Left can also be attacked. But LGBTQs must take the first step, we must be the first ones to realize what is going on and what to do. We are the ones who will have to tolerate some abuse and misunderstanding and even opposition, we are going to have to be the mature ones in this. If we do not take the stance now, LGBTQs will forever be affiliated with the Left, and if things ever got violent, it could spell disaster for us.
