Dissecting the Gay Indian Male
Posted by Ergo on May 29, 2006
India is quite arguably a very androgynous – if not an outright feminine – culture; Indian men are very well-adjusted to displays of sensitivity, emotional depth, and homosocial intimacy.
It is not rare to see men walking around the city hand-in-hand or arms over their shoulders, displaying signs of very intimate affection towards each other. Once I saw a group of young men caressing each other’s hair, one of them combing the other’s lengthy locks with what seemed to me like so much love in his eyes, while the other men in the group carried on a lively and animated conversation amongst themselves.
Well, all of this means, it gets awfully hard for actual gay men to figure out who’s in who’s “camp.” It’s incredibly risky to assume someone’s gay or that someone has the “hots” for you just by their non-verbal behavior and overt displays of intimacy.
I suppose this type of a cultural acceptance of homosocial behavior leads to a psychological burial or repression of a gay man’s homosexual expression. This is because of the ambiguous sexual nature of the behavior he observes among the men around him. Since one can never be sure of the sexual intentions or persuasions of another man, it becomes incredibly risky to just assume the other’s sexual orientation and make an unsolicited or unwanted move–particularly given the paradoxical fact that while Indian men are notoriously homosocial, they are equally homophobic.
This ambiguity in sexual behavior leads Indian gay men to try and seek the fulfillment of their desire to be intimate with another man in such homosocial–but non-sexual–relationships (i.e., in safe homosocial intimacies with straight men); the result of this disguised approach to homoerotic intimacy thereby represses a full-blown expression of proper gay male sexuality with other gay men. Some gay men might even end up convincing themselves of the delusion that they are not really homosexual, that they merely have strong affections for other men just like other genuinely straight men do for each other.
All of that (and possibly other socio-psychological factors) then probably leads some Indian gay men to delude themselves into thinking that they are in fact bisexual or maybe even straight!–not as a matter of fact, but as an act of conditioned auto-suggestion upon their own minds–undoubtedly with terrible consequences for themselves and for those they share intimate relationships contact with, like their wives or romantic partners.
November 14, 2007 at 6:04 pm
The article really highlights the unpredictable predicament of indian males who enjou comparatively closer ties and emotional bonds between them even with out a sticky label like “gay” or “homosexual.” I think it is a unique social phenomenon in the Indian subcontinent and it adds to the much popular phrase, “a wonder that is India”
March 29, 2008 at 11:41 pm
I don’t think this apparent closeness between males is uniquely Indian. In the Arab Gulf men touch their noses and make a smacking sound with their lips when they greet each other. (I’m not calling it a kiss as the lips do not touch, although they come very close–call it a virtual kiss.) In many other Asian cultures men can be found walking hand in hand. Who is to say that holding hands or lips approaching lips is not masculine, but feminine? Women in the Gulf do not “kiss” like this, so to kiss in this way is very much a masculine expression, while the feminine expression involves cheek to cheek. I see the camaraderie among Indian men expressed in the ways you mention as a very masculine thing. Similar to in the west how the hearty handshake between men and a rough pat here or there is considered masculine. I feel the element of sexuality that might or might not accompany such actions is an important consideration, but I don’t feel it is a construct of masculinity or femininity. A parent can be very physically intimate with a child but this does not normally constitute any expression of sexuality.
I think the clues as to whether an individual is attracted to another of the same sex can still be recognized even if not based on distinct forms of physical intimacy. In fact, it is more the emotional than physical clues which one can look for. An unrelenting fixation on another, an emerging obsession, flirtatious and furtive looks, etc. Would not these be clear enough indications of another’s desires? I also believe that there is not only gay, bi and straight among the human family, but every degree in between. This is where the labels may not serve us well, whether we are referring to a Western context (in which the terms were coined) or that of any other culture. I guess my point is that there are numerous clues to pick up on to determine another’s interest in us or in others. A discussion of “masculine” and “feminine” behavior does not have much relevance. Indian men, are therefore not androgynous. They express intimacy among themselves in the culturally appropriate way for Indian man. In that sense holding hands is an expression of masculinity.