It was a few weeks since I was invited to and then reminded
every Tuesday about the meeting of a few blokes at the residence of a genial
fellow. But it was only yesterday evening that I could make it to their
meeting.
I left the informal meeting after about two and one half
hours with a few feelings. Firstly, since the chat was not supplemented or sautéed
with alcohol, the discussion was on a different plane, there was no impassioned
oration and arguments. But most of all, the individuals present there did not
have the cantankerous, menacing and totalitarian attitude. Disagreements were
argued off than shouted down or fumed at like monstrous grotsoque looking dragons
I have sometimes confronted. None of us present there had a termagant flip
side. What relief!
The meeting takes place every Tuesday evening and a subject
or topic is laid on the table. Though I did not see any spectacular debating
skills or opening of repository of knowledge, I felt some of them were quite competent
and were actually people from whom one could be enriched in terms of ideas,
insight and information.
Rights of LGBT! That was the subject for discussion. The
contention was not more about transgender than about homosexuals. It was a pity
that none of us were with a strong educational background in biology or
genetics. None of us would disagree that the rights of gays and LGBT is as inviolable
as that of any of us. However we just could not recall any definitive
scientific study that tells that a homosexual disposition is genetic nor could
we quote a definite study that it is epigenetic. Indeed it was not a
malediction from the heavens or a mental illness. But heck, nevertheless how could be a gay,
bisexual or transgender be seen as tantamount to a thief, rapist or murderer? We
were unanimous about one thing, that even if the SC throws out the
anachronistic Section 377, the antiquated persuasions that people harbour about
LGBT and homosexuality in particular will corrode minds like the egregious
caste bias that stays put in spite of the ambitious statements in the statute.
Mindset must change more than the law and for that we must heed to the
revelations and power of scientific knowledge that always opens new vistas, if
only we care to notice.
We did not notice that our discussion moved on to topics and
we ended up with the suicide of the research scholar at the Hyderabad University.
His misfortune need not be trumpeted to highlight the plight of dalits or the discrimination they face
in society and across which ever political ideology they run to for succour.
One need not even go excavating and hunting for information as to the lineage
of the poor chap. He may have been a dalit
or he may not have been one. He may have been a half dalit if there could be one such. But as one of the guys asserted,
his suicide was perhaps a genetic temperament, an aberration that he was inborn
with, only that the right moment and incidences accentuated it. The guy who
stated this spoke about the state of depressive disorder and he asked if we
could tell what it is to be plowed under by depression and then you are bludgeoned
by the effect of medication. He said that there was a time in his life when he
contemplated suicide every day. There were moments when he almost ended his
life. External environment also was unhelpful to his crawling out from the
plight.
I could not help remembering the young boy who I knew since
he was little, perhaps 6 years old. He, the 27 year old young fellow who
snuffed out his life the previous month, ending his untold agony (I suppose)
hanging by the neck. Was he depressed, was he unable to tell his receding
plight? Couldn’t the people near him notice? Or did he decide because of all
that he reached a cul de sac?