|
::
Out Of the Closet And Into the Courtroom? Some Reflections on
Sexuality Rights in Malaysia by AR
First, we had days
of local and foreign press coverage of Mahathir railing against
homosexuality in connection with Anwar's alleged acts of sodomy.
Then, in late October, we got news that a group calling itself
the People's Anti-Homosexual Volunteer Movement, (PASRAH) has
been formed, with the intention of "[helping]
the Government wipe out homosexuality'" (The Star, 22 Oct 1998.)
This was followed by press reports of the Malaysian AIDS Council
and SUARAM condemning PASRAH and its objectives, and urging
people not to support them.
Never before in Malaysia has homosexuality received so much
press coverage, been so much in the public eye, as in the last
few months. Thus, despite the best efforts of parents and teachers
everywhere to shelter young people from knowledge of "unnatural
sexual activities," it is likely that any one old enough to
read the papers will have some idea of what sodomy or 'liwat'
entails - and some idea, therefore, that straight or heterosexual
sex is not the only mode of sexual expression.
So, in a way, homosexuality has been outed; and "the love that
dare not speak its name" has come out of the closet. What are
the implications of this for issues to do with sexuality, or
sexuality rights, in this country? (I use the term 'sexuality
rights' rather than 'gay rights' because the events in question
have ramifications for other people besides gay people, such
as transsexuals, bisexuals or any one who engages in prohibited
sexual acts such as sodomy and fellatio.)
Will awareness beget acceptance, will the step out of the closet
be a step towards liberation and equality? Or will it lead straight
into the courtroom, and towards more persecution of those whose
sexual practices differ from the "norm"? And why should we be
concerned about this now, when there are so many pressing issues
facing us - the economic debacle, political and social unrest
etc, etc?
Well, if, like me, you believe that someone's sexual orientation,
or their choice of sexual practices, as long as they occur between
consenting adults, should not be grounds for discrimination
and persecution, there are several reasons why the recent events
which have led to all the publicity around homosexuality demands
our attention, and demands it now.
One reason is that Mahathir's onslaught against homosexuals,
while making homosexuality more visible, has also reinforced
notions of it being "unnatural" and "disgusting." As such, it
may lead, and perhaps already has lead, to gay people facing
even more hostility and persecution, not only because homosexuality
has become more visible and therefore more open to condemnation,
but also because people may act on the belief that homophobic
measures are sanctioned by the Prime Minister.
The formation of PASRAH is an example of what can happen as
a result of such a belief. The fact that the group was formed
in the midst of the current struggle for power between Mahathir
and Anwar rather than last year, or a few years ago, I feel,
is no coincidence. Clearly the intention of forming the group
was to get political mileage from the situation and brownie
points from Mahathir - but at the expense of homosexuals.
Gay people have therefore become a scapegoat in the fight for
political ascendancy between Mahathir and Anwar. In fact, when
the charges of corruption etc. against Anwar did not seem to
sway his supporters, it was likely that the vilification of
homosexuality, and the accentuating of Anwar's alleged homosexual
tendencies became one of Mahathir's key strategies. Thus at
one point after Anwar's arrest, the case against him presented
by Mahathir to the press was telescoped so as to focus on the
allegations of sodomy. The other charges were sidelined for
days on end, while accounts of Anwar's alleged acts of sodomy
were splashed all over the front pages of national newspapers.
The reason for this is clear - by emphasising Anwar's supposed
homosexuality, people would be forced into a situation where
supporting Anwar appeared to be tantamount to condoning homosexuality.
Nepotism could be forgiven by staunch Anwar supporters, corruption
could be overlooked - after all, many public figures had been
forgiven similar transgressions - but homosexuality?
Unfortunately, gay people have already experienced
some of the effects of being caught in the cross-fire between
Mahathir and Anwar. With regard to PASRAH, though its formation
may have been politically motivated, the homophobia inherent
in forming the group and its objectives is real. So too is the
increased fear of persecution and homophobic attacks experienced
by the gay community as a result of PASRAH's avowed intention
of wiping out homosexuals and targeting gay-friendly places,
and the general climate of heightened homophobia.
Another reason for concern lies in the legal aspects of the
case, specifically those to do with the use of Section 377B
of the Penal Code in relation to Anwar's alleged acts of sodomy.
Section 377B, which is one of the laws listed in the "Unnatural
Offences" section of the Code, states that "whosoever voluntarily
commits carnal intercourse against the order of nature shall
be punished with imprisonment of a term which may extend to
twenty years, and shall also be liable to whipping." 'Carnal
intercourse against the order of nature' is defined in Section
377A thus: "Any person who has sexual connection with another
person by the introduction of the penis into the anus or mouth
of the other person is said to commit carnal intercourse against
the order of nature."
Section 377B has not often been used, and its use has largely
been restricted to cases involving non-consensual sex - e.g.
sodomy within the context of a rape. Its use in the Anwar case
is therefore significant, in that it represents perhaps the
first time, or at any rate, one of the few times, that this
law has been invoked in a case involving consensual sex.
Given the increased awareness in the country of the supposed
evils of 'unnatural' or 'deviant' sexual behaviour, this raises
the possibility that Section 377B will be used more often in
future in cases involving consenting adults (though of course,
gathering evidence will not be easy). And if Anwar is found
guilty of the charges of sodomy, and a harsh sentence is meted
out, then others charged with the same "offence" in future can
expect to be treated as harshly.
I should probably add here that although the Penal Code
is popularly misconceived as targeting homosexuality, it does
not actually prohibit homosexuality as such, but targets specific
acts such as sodomy or fellatio. People who think that only
gays stand to lose if there is an increased use of Section 377B
in cases of consensual sex in future had therefore better think
again - any one who engages in sodomy or fellatio, whether straight,
gay or bisexual, can be penalised.
It is not only gay people, therefore, who should be concerned
about how issues of sexuality intersect with the current political
situation, though this is not to say that had gay people been
exclusively targeted, everyone else would have been justified
in turning a blind eye. When Anwar appears in court to answer
the charges against him, there will be two trials going on -
the 'real' trial dealing with facts and hard evidence, with
Anwar's future hanging in the balance; and another, a shadow
trial, which will in some way affect the lives of everyone whose
patterns of desire runs along different tracks than those laid
down by the State.
Yet another worrying factor, and one which has been particularly
disturbing to me, has been the general failure of groups and
organisations working for social justice to challenge the various
homophobic statements reported in the press recently. The condemnation
of PASRAH by the Malaysian AIDS Council and SUARAM was a positive
step, but much more could and should have been done, especially
in the beginning, when Mahathir started his attacks against
homosexuality.
The only voice raised in defence of gay people then was that
of a gay rights group from the Philippines, who wrote to the
press here to register their concern at Mahathir's denigration
of homosexuals. It is, I think, a matter of shame for Malaysians,
especially those who pride themselves on being progressive,
that we remained silent on the issue, thus worsening the problem
by appearing to condone the incitement to hatred of gays.
One reason this happened, I think, is that groups and NGOs concerned
with social justice have still to take on issues of sexuality
rights, and to accept them as part of human rights (although
the Malaysian Charter of Human Rights does include sexuality-based
discrimination as a violation of human rights). Even among those
NGOs who have been at the forefront of the fight for civil liberties,
few if any, have raised these issues among their members and
decided on an official stance against homophobia and heterosexism.
Thus when it came to the crunch, no one was in a position to
comment on the homophobic statements in the press.
The implications of the events and issues discussed above for
sexuality rights in Malaysia are therefore not heartening. This,
however, does not mean that there is no room for hope and intervention.
Sexuality rights in Malaysia today occupy the marginal position
women's rights did a few years ago; and the fact that there
is now much more consciousness about women's rights presents
us with some grounds for optimism.
In the same way that women's activists had to fight hard to
get trade unions, labour organisations, human rights groups
etc to take on issues such as sexual harassment, gender-related
discrimination and violence against women, people concerned
with sexuality issues must lobby for their inclusion in agendas
for social justice. We must act now to try and stem the wave
of homophobia and intolerance which seems to be sweeping across
our country. Only then can we ensure a future in which we will
not have to choose between the closet and the courtroom.
:: Definitions
Homophobia (noun): hatred or fear of homosexuals; homophobic
(adjective)
Heterosexism (noun): the dismissal or ignorance of sexual orientations
other than heterosexuality, and/or the assumption that heterosexuality
is superior to any other sexual orientation; heterosexist (adjective)
The term "heterosexism" was coined as a result of the recent
interrogations into social constructions of sexual identity
conducted by (Western based) gay scholars and activists. Borrowing
some of the insights and methodologies of feminists who had
argued that our notions of what it is to be 'masculine' or 'feminine'
are not inherent or natural, but socially endorsed or constructed,
gay theorists challenged assumptions that heterosexuality is
any more 'normal' or 'natural' than any other sexual orientation.
In a seminal essay entitled "Compulsory Heterosexuality and
Lesbian Existence" (1980), the lesbian poet and critic Adrienne
Rich examined the ways in which in which heterosexuality has
been privileged, and made to seem 'normal' or 'natural' in society.
In contrast, other forms of sexual expression or identity have
been degraded and repressed. This, she argued, was directly
related to the need of those in power to maintain patriarchal
systems and ideologies, which are based on institutions such
as marriage, the nuclear family and the heterosexual couple.
Since then, other theorists and activists (see, for example,
The Straight Mind and Other Essays (1992) by French lesbian-feminist
Monique Wittig) have built on Rich's analysis to conduct their
own interrogations into the social constructions of sexuality
and the privileging of heterosexuality.
The fact that their work is located in Western traditions of
thought, and therefore may not accurately reflect situations
and issues in Asian countries is something we need to be aware
of, although this should not invalidate the importance of such
work. Perhaps it is time for Asian, and Malaysian, thinkers
and activists to enact their own challenges and responses to
the heterosexism in our own cultures and social institutions.
::
Homosexuality
is a Crime Worse Than Murder
::
Lesbian sentenced for kissing foster daughter
::
Baker v. State | Vermont Victory!
|