Comparison of the Views on Homosexuality and Same Sex Marriage

Western Views

Although marriage is a cultural universal, how cultures conceive of marriage vary depending on many factors such as the customs, sex roles, gender roles, human right interpretation, religion, procreation and perpetuation of lineage. Traditionally, marriage according to Henry Tichler (2004) 'is the socially recognized, legitimized, and supported union of individuals of opposite sexes' (1) It takes place in a public and usually formal manner; (2) it includes sexual intercourse as an explicit element of the relationship; (3) it provides the essential for legitimizing offspring; that is, it provides new-borns with socially accepted statuses.

The 21st century has witnessed a flurry of conceptions of ‘marriage’ that calls for gender neutral language rather than gender specification. This has made all, sociologists and anthropologists revise their definition of the term marriage to include same-sex unions. Same-sex marriage refers to the union of two people of the same sex who live together as a family. It is more or less marriage between people of the same sex, consummated either as a secular civil ceremony or in a religious setting.

Same sex relationships were tolerated and even celebrated in many early western societies, like ancient Rome, Greece and Europe. The practice of same-sex marriage has been there right from ancient times in the western world. Historian John Boswell records that the first performance of same-sex marriage between child emperor Elagabus to Hierocles, his chariot driver, as the husband. He is also said to have married Zoticus, an athlete in a lavish public ceremony in Rome. Nero, the first Roman Emperor, is recorded to have engaged in same-sex marriage with two other males on different occasions. These were done in a public ceremony with all the solemnities of matrimony. Medieval times accord the same-sex marriage between Perodias and Munho Vandilas in the Galician municipality of Rairiz de Veig, Spain.

Many arguments for same-sex marriage invoke liberal principles of justice such as equal treatment, equal opportunity, and neutrality. Same-sex relationships are relevantly similar to heterosexual relationships recognized as marriages, yet the state denies gays and lesbians access to the benefits of marriage, hence treating them unequally. In addition, some philosophers have argued that excluding gays and lesbians from marriage is central to gay and lesbian oppression, making them ‘second-class citizens’ and underlying social discrimination against them. Some arguments against same-sex marriage also said to affect child’s upbringing. But parenting is a basic civil right and social science literature shows that children are neither typically nor catastrophically harmed by same-sex parenting. The most common objection usually raised against same-sex marriage is that it is unnatural because majority of people do not engage in it and it doesn’t serve the purpose it was created for i.e. procreation. The religious argument is that homosexuality is immoral because it has been condemned in the Bible. “You must not have sexual intercourse with man as you would with woman; it is abomination” (Leviticus 18:22).

For the western minded persons who engage in same-sex relationship, which may culminate into marriage, it is his/her fundamental right to marry whoever he/she wants, and does not matter whether or not such a person is of the same gender. It is important to note that this conception is basically a libertarian view in which case what one does with his/her body, but that does not constitute harm to the society, is his/her own right. This view shows that same-sex marriage for the westerner is not basically for procreation, but it is aimed at satisfying what gives them pleasure, especially as covered by what they claim as fundamental and inalienable rights. It is important to note that the US is the model which many developed and underdeveloped nations look up. Thus, as soon as Obama and the US succumbed to other western pressures, many other countries in Europe, Latin America, Oceania and North America created laws that recognized gay marriage.

Thus in the western world, homosexual-based marriage is popular, and is driven and motivated by the human right fad through which same-sex couples feel they have ‘inalienable right’ over their bodies and regarding who to marry. Hence for them, same-sex marriage is sexually and emotionally inclined and not for the purpose of procreation, religious.

Comparison

Politically and socially conservative factions in India claim that homosexuality or alternative gender identities are an influence of Western ideas. This idea is based on the false assumption that being a homosexual or alternative-gender individual is a lifestyle choice. In fact, gender identity is an inborn trait. In India, since the country is deeply rooted in religion, culture and tradition, marriages are considered sacred practices and mainly for procreation which is considered a duty. But since same-sex marriages do not fulfil that purpose they were not accepted and looked down upon. However in western cultures, people see marriage as an opportunity to be bound with someone you love and want to share life with. This concept of Marriage allows freedom of choice and does not focus much on the religious, cultural and social aspects of marriage. And hence, same sex marriage is more accepted in the West than in India.

However the belief that the whole concept of equality marriage/homosexuality came from the West is false because the histories of both cultures show equal examples of homosexuality. Equality marriage has been legalised in 20 western countries starting from USA. It is not still legal in India but the concept of homosexuality is gradually getting more acceptance from the people. The legalisation of homosexuality by taking down article 377 was a big step towards the same. However, we still see that there is some existing stigma left regarding the acceptance of not only equality marriage but homosexuality in general, in both cultures (western and Indian),with Indian culture leading.

Comparison

We see a massive difference between the mindset of Westerners and Indians when it comes to the topic of sexual relationships amongst the same sex. The idea of erastes and eromenos is something the Indian culture has never even come across. While both the sides have shown severe rigidity in acceptance of sexual intercourse between the same sex and termed this ‘unnatural’, their reasons for denying have different bases altogether.

Indians refuse to accept homosexuals having sex because of religious scriptures and texts. The various punishments stated in holy books indicate that such acts are ethically and morally wrong, as the Gods themselves have stated the consequences of these actions. On the other hand, the denial in the western countries was influenced by thought processes of various philosophers and were based on various theories that have practical reasons attached to it. One major difference is the amount of time taken by Western countries and India to accept and understand that homosexuality and the physical relations between them is completely normal and natural is spread across the gap of a very wide timeline.

Sexual intercourse between adults and teenagers of a close age of the same sex has been legalized, pursuant to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Lawrence v. Texas since June 26, 2003. When we look at the Indian scenario, 2013 decision was reconsidered and it was decided that gay sex will remain an offense, because Section 377 wasn’t scrapped off. Finally, as recently as 6th September 2018, the Supreme Court of India finally legalized consensual gay sex. This timeline indicates a difference of fifteen years between the western and the Indian world for the countries to accept homosexuality.

As time passes, the mindset is progressing. However, it is still very evident and clear that homosexual people’s sexual desires and wishes are much more openly embraced in the western countries and most of 4th the times, still looked down upon by the Indians.

Conclusion

The Indian and Western views when compared are more or less similar; the only difference is how they look at it. True, the West is more accepting than Indians but that does not eliminate the hate homosexuals receive. Decriminalization of Article 377 was a stepping stone to a greater acceptance in future. Now people are hoping for allowance of same-sex marriage too, and the struggle has a long way to go! The concept of homosexuality has existed in the past and will exist in the future. We have to think rationally and accept them as humans.