3 ms·

It is 'hostile' today also to a whole bunch of other freedoms. It isn't realistic to expect that India will automatically have the same values as the West, and

It is 'hostile' today also to a whole bunch of other freedoms. It isn't realistic to expect that India will automatically have the same values as the West, and while it is at that to also anticipate & go ahead of the West on that same yardstick, because only the West can define the values of the West. What India does need to do is to define its own response to the question of how society views LGBTQ. In some cases, in some sections of traditional society, it has developed an answer that is inclusive and friendly. In some other cases it is simply copying from the West, which is what the mainstream discourse is also heading towards. The latter imo is not authentic and will fail India in the long run.

howinteresting 4y ago
That isn't really responsive to my question? I don't care whether something is culturally "authentic" or not. I care about whether people can live the life they want to live or not.
- achrono 4y ago
  "whether people can live the life they want" is itself influenced by culture, i.e. it is one thing to say that LGBTQ+ should not be ostracized but another to come up with specific models of how to deliver on this value. What I'm trying to say is that there need not be just one way to deliver on this value -- there can be more than one valid approach to making LGBT folks have freedom & respect.
  - howinteresting 4y ago
    Yes and even if it is (which it isn't today), if someone prefers one model why should they be forced to move to a country with another?
    - achrono 4y ago
      For sure. The idea with the 'indigenous' approach would be that it does actually address the problem meaningfully rather than just being a lousy alternative. India has historically been pluralistic and a one-size-fits-all approach would actually be an unwelcome deviation. With regards to women, for example, even one of Manu's commentators (Medhatithi iirc) states that women used to follow one of two lifestyles: (1) being the traditional housewife, patriarchy & all or (2) having a career (academic) and being independent, implying that those 2 options were not available at the time the commentator lived. Indians today do have the freedom to look back at this past and rework & innovate -- rather than simply saying the West is the best.

howinteresting 4y ago

That isn't really responsive to my question? I don't care whether something is culturally "authentic" or not. I care about whether people can live the life they want to live or not.

achrono 4y ago
"whether people can live the life they want" is itself influenced by culture, i.e. it is one thing to say that LGBTQ+ should not be ostracized but another to come up with specific models of how to deliver on this value. What I'm trying to say is that there need not be just one way to deliver on this value -- there can be more than one valid approach to making LGBT folks have freedom & respect.
- howinteresting 4y ago
  Yes and even if it is (which it isn't today), if someone prefers one model why should they be forced to move to a country with another?
  - achrono 4y ago
    For sure. The idea with the 'indigenous' approach would be that it does actually address the problem meaningfully rather than just being a lousy alternative. India has historically been pluralistic and a one-size-fits-all approach would actually be an unwelcome deviation. With regards to women, for example, even one of Manu's commentators (Medhatithi iirc) states that women used to follow one of two lifestyles: (1) being the traditional housewife, patriarchy & all or (2) having a career (academic) and being independent, implying that those 2 options were not available at the time the commentator lived. Indians today do have the freedom to look back at this past and rework & innovate -- rather than simply saying the West is the best.