January 17, 2025 • 41 mins
How do societal expectations shape who we are? In this powerful episode of Love Matters, Leeza Mangaldas and Writer and Curator, Aroh Akunth explore gender, identity, and breaking free from labels. Learn how to embrace your authentic self while navigating societal pressures. Listen now on your favourite podcast platform!
Leeza Mangaldas’ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/leezamangaldas/?hl=en
Aroh Akunth’s Social handles:
Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/arohakunth/?hl=en
Credits:
Produced by:
Patricia Szilagyi (DW)
Khyati Rajvanshi (IE)
Charulata Biswas (IE)
Researcher and Editor
Sana Rizvi (DW)
Camera (DW):
Christian Dransfeld
Ralph Meiling
Marek Neumann-Schönwetter
Sound (DW):
Tabea Senne
Video Editor:
Meetesh Dixit (IE)
Audio Editor
Suresh Pawar (IE)
Project Manager:
Patricia Szilagyi (DW)
Executive Producer:
Melanie von Marschalck (DW Life & Style)
Anant Nath Sharma (IE)
Love Matters with Leeza Mangaldas is a cooperation between The Indian Express and DW, Germany’s international broadcaster.
Learn more about DW:
https://www.dw.com
Get in touch: lovematters@dw.com
Leeza Mangaldas’ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/leezamangaldas/?hl=en
Aroh Akunth’s Social handles:
Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/arohakunth/?hl=en
Credits:
Produced by:
Patricia Szilagyi (DW)
Khyati Rajvanshi (IE)
Charulata Biswas (IE)
Researcher and Editor
Sana Rizvi (DW)
Camera (DW):
Christian Dransfeld
Ralph Meiling
Marek Neumann-Schönwetter
Sound (DW):
Tabea Senne
Video Editor:
Meetesh Dixit (IE)
Audio Editor
Suresh Pawar (IE)
Project Manager:
Patricia Szilagyi (DW)
Executive Producer:
Melanie von Marschalck (DW Life & Style)
Anant Nath Sharma (IE)
Love Matters with Leeza Mangaldas is a cooperation between The Indian Express and DW, Germany’s international broadcaster.
Learn more about DW:
https://www.dw.com
Get in touch: lovematters@dw.com
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:05):
Who are you outside of who you've been told you
should be from birth? We're bombarded with messages about who
we are and how we are to behave based on gender,
long before we have the ability to think about these
questions for ourselves. I'm Lisa Mangeldas and this is Love Matters,
and today we're going to be talking about gender and
identity with Aarro akund our very special guest whose work
(00:30):
has been focused on addressing and unpacking these topics. So Aarro,
thanks so much for joining us. I want to introduce
you briefly, but I'd also love for you to introduce yourself.
So Arro is a transfeminine writer, researcher, artist, one of
the most articulate people I've ever had the privilege of
speaking to. Some so excited to talk today. Our is
(00:51):
also the founder of the Valid Queer Project and the
Art Archives. But Aro, since we're talking about identity today,
I really think.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
You are to take I'll ask how you see r
I definitely see myself beyond identity right And I mean,
first of all, thanks for having me and being so
generous in talking about my work. But I definitely see
not only myself. I hope everybody sees themselves beyond identity, right.
(01:22):
The history of identity in the legacy that, for example,
some of us would talk about identity comes from Combahi
River collective coining identity politics, right, And.
Speaker 3 (01:35):
They were mostly like.
Speaker 2 (01:37):
Black queer women talking about their experiences and trying to
say that we don't talk about lived experiences enough and
so on. That's where it is coming from. And I think, unfortunately,
this is a common mistake with identity that we tend
to get focused on the label the taxonomy, right. And
(02:00):
I think that is a problem because nobody has ever
talked about identity or shouldn't without connecting it to the world,
the lived world one comes from, or that rich experience.
So I think for people who might be interesting in
knowing me, it should be enough that they can put
(02:22):
a name to my face and know that I'm living.
I think that's a good thing. That's a good way
to know people. Actually, we mostly know people, you know,
when they're living, so that we share spaces with them
and memories with them, you know. And I mean you
also mentioned me as a writer, so I think, you know,
that's kind of like a posthumous honor that writers get
(02:42):
that we are even ready when we are not there,
and you don't have to necessarily share spaces with us.
Speaker 3 (02:49):
But that's how I think is a good way to
know and interact with me.
Speaker 1 (02:53):
I love that. I think that labels, while perhaps for
some can be a sort of helpful in explaining and
understanding oneself, they can also constrain and confine just as
they define. Right. I think about the identity markers that
I've been attached to or was taught that I should
(03:14):
be attached to, such as women, heterosexual, and I think
to some extent, that's the most elaborate form of drag.
You know, life itself is a performance, right, Like what
is gender or what is gender?
Speaker 3 (03:28):
I wouldn't know.
Speaker 2 (03:29):
I mean like, we know that enough people have said
that it's cooped up. We know that it is so
potent that it defines our life choices, the way we move,
the way we see ourselves. But I'm not sure if
that is a true or complete way of living or
that should be. And the thing is, unfortunately that gender
(03:53):
doesn't come alone, right, Like in the very beginning you
said that gender is the thing that is assigned to
your birth. But it's not just gender, it's also your
cast it's also your race. It's also a lot of
times your socio economic background. And those are really hard things,
and they interact with each other and they can decide
(04:14):
your whole life trajectory. And we can always say that, oh,
if you work hard enough, or you know whatever, the
reasons one gives to actually obfuscate power, right, Rather than
realizing that most of the people are going to be
like that that's going to dictate their whole life and
so on, we tend to hyper focus on exceptions, you know,
(04:35):
to the rule, but not the exceptions which make us
renegotiate our resumptions, exceptions which allow us to reinforce power.
Speaker 3 (04:43):
Right.
Speaker 2 (04:43):
But this kind of assigning you social identities from your
birth puts you at conflict with yourself from the get go.
And I think a lot of thinkers are now trying
to wrestle with this, like what this means?
Speaker 1 (05:00):
Are there any identity markers that bring you a sense
of meaning or joy? Like I see you're wearing a
sarry for example, when Violin does indian Ness for example,
is that something you do like to stay defined by.
I'm just I've been thinking about this for myself.
Speaker 2 (05:19):
I'm just yeah, the reason I am so exhilarated by
this is because I really hope people don't look at
me and think Indian, because Sadi is not just Indian,
right like it's also about glad Ishie. It's also Sri Lankan.
I really hope they don't assign me to a nationality
when they see me wearing a sari. And as for
(05:43):
the joy in claiming certain identities, if one is using
their identity to let people in and organize around it,
and in some ways, you know, identity can also be
oppositional practice, Like it brings me immense joy to foreclose
(06:04):
that my ancestors were unto tables and that I, by
the rigid systems of caste am considered an untouchable in
the South Asian context um, and it allows me to
build allyship and bridges with other people who have been
subjected to this kind of in humanity. My transness allows me,
(06:28):
gives me all the logics and the right to experiment
with myself and my body, gives me autonomy and empowerment,
which is unprecedented without this language, at least in my journey.
And I think those are important things. And as for
(06:51):
the Sadi and how I.
Speaker 3 (06:52):
Get this sardi.
Speaker 2 (06:53):
It's a friend sari, you know, like I feel it's
a friend's mother's. Sorry to be precise, Um, when my
grandmother dresses me and her sari and sends me out
of the door, she knows the violence I would be
subjected to, But her dressing me up in her sary
and providing me that sari is support enough, because we
(07:13):
are never really alone, if you think.
Speaker 3 (07:15):
About it, right, We walk with the love that we
have been given.
Speaker 2 (07:20):
And similarly, this friend's mother passed away and they provided
their saris to their friends who might be trans who
might not have those sais, who might not get it
like you know, for example, I know many people who
are not lucky enough to have grandmothers.
Speaker 3 (07:34):
Who passed down the sais to them and so on.
Speaker 2 (07:37):
And it's just a way of my expression. But it's
not specific to me. Right Like in our part of
the world, people have always worn saris and it didn't
matter what they had between their legs two for them
to have the right.
Speaker 3 (07:52):
To wear it. It was never a question historically speaking.
Speaker 2 (07:57):
So I think there is definitely joy, more respect, a
better aspiration for living that can be attached to identities. Yeah,
but I'm not sure if identities unto themselves are a solution.
Speaker 1 (08:13):
How do you think family plays into identity. When we
talked before this conversation, we talked of how family citizenship,
like these things that we need can also be very stifling. Yeah,
but what sort of relationship has your family played in
shaping how you think of identity?
Speaker 3 (08:35):
What need is stifling? This is quite established.
Speaker 2 (08:39):
Like anybody who can have an honest conversation with themselves
will tell you that when you need something, you feel vulnerable, and.
Speaker 3 (08:48):
That's not a very nice position to be in.
Speaker 2 (08:50):
It can make you insecure, It can make you fearful,
It can make you act in a way.
Speaker 3 (08:56):
Which is not the best I think.
Speaker 2 (08:58):
Then one needs to question is that, yes, you need it,
and you might need it to survive at times, you
might also be able to survive without it. There are many,
very many people who are able to survive without it
and outside it. But maybe it's not a very central
idea around which you should live your life, because it's
both give and take, and like, as long as you
(09:20):
know that there's a given take, you'd be in a
better position to, you know, reconcile yourself with that truth
and complexity. But if you don't even know that it's
actually a given. Take, it's not just I have a
need and the need is being met. When the need
is being met, it is costing you something. And yeah,
I hope people think more about the cost.
Speaker 1 (09:43):
I think often when it comes to expressing one's gender
and sexuality, particularly in the South Asian context, family can
present a massive obstacle, you know, in terms of how
what is sort of the respectable and honorable way to
be as for your family versus perhaps who you see
(10:06):
yourself as or wish to be. Is that something that
you had to navigate or I mean, as an unmarried
thirty four year old woman who talks about sex on
the internet, I feel like, even though it's quite basic,
like really not so radical, I feel like I have
to navigate some of that. And I'd love to hear
what your journey has been like in that.
Speaker 2 (10:26):
Regard, right, I think two paths too, Like I wouldn't
like to answer your question in two parts. First thing is, yes,
sometimes the focus on us and what we are doing
we should.
Speaker 3 (10:39):
We all know this as artists and creators, because.
Speaker 2 (10:42):
People can't trace our original sources, because people can't trace
the archives of people who have lived like us and
done things like us.
Speaker 3 (10:50):
We just become what we become right in the public eye.
Speaker 2 (10:55):
But for example, I have known very many women pre
independent woman, working woman, single woman, talking about sex, because
that is the generation of my grandmother's and I have
been raised by them, and I'm very proud to be
raised by these grandmothers, many of them choosing to live
with friends, many of them choosing to live with their
(11:15):
female lovers. And just because their archives are not available
popularly doesn't mean they don't exist. And just because archives
are similarly people like me might not be accessible. They
might only know aruwakunt and that's what shows up, doesn't
mean that that's the only reality. So I think that's
one thing definitely to be careful of. And like I
(11:35):
feel like, yeah, given the context we are in, it's
very difficult to be radical because the demand for radicalness
and what is needed for things to actually change is
that much high in an unequal, brutal kind of system.
Speaker 3 (11:54):
You would have to remind me what the first part
of your question was.
Speaker 1 (11:58):
I think I was trying to get at whether a
family was ever an obstacle in navigating or expressing identity
for you.
Speaker 2 (12:05):
I think that's where I think we become a bit exceptionalist,
because family is an obstacle all across the world. And
I could tell you how respect is also tied to
cast and respect is a lot of times for children
of migrants related to assimilating well.
Speaker 3 (12:20):
And so on. Right, it's tied to race.
Speaker 2 (12:24):
It's not just about generine sexuality, as has been the
conversation from the get go. And the families do create obstacle,
as I said, like they come with violence. So I
think that's more or less answered. But I do want
to talk about it in a different way, in the
(12:45):
way that as societies, are we empowering our families to
accept their children, what are we providing for these very
many families. Most of the families in the world live
quite poor, ma just make it by still, And this
is just the reality. Everything from their health care to
(13:09):
their education, everything that one needs to survive is up
for question. There's very very few people, even in West,
even in developed countries, so as to say who don't
struggle with these things. If this is the society we
have built, If this is the societies we have built,
then it's but natural that on that family as a
(13:33):
microcosm of society, there will be violence.
Speaker 3 (13:36):
So I think that violence doesn't surprise me.
Speaker 2 (13:39):
I don't have more expectation of my family than I
have of this state or government and so on. But
that said, it is very hard because often in interpersonal relationships,
and especially in family, which is mostly like a group dynamic.
Even though I have lived in a family where it
was just me and my single mother and now it's
(14:00):
again me and my widowed grandmother, so I've lived in
families of two also, but generally it's a group dynamic,
and there it can be a lot of trauma and
you know, feeling of loss of power and being subjected
to violence for other people who hold the most close to.
Speaker 3 (14:19):
And live with.
Speaker 2 (14:22):
And so I would reframe the thing that there are
challenges and families can be obstacle, but to even be
a family has a lot of obstacles, and we should
not lose sight of that.
Speaker 1 (14:35):
That's true. Gosh, You've made me think of so many
things that I want to bring things back to gender
since that's the focus of the episode today. You know,
I think a lot of people who are not as
immersed in discourse around gender and rights and identity politics
and things, the terminology is alienating, and so instead of
(15:00):
inviting people in the conversations end up facing some resistance
because it's just like the language only is like too
much for them to consent. I mean, I think it's
unfortunate people have to do the labor after being on
the receiving end of the lack of that understanding already.
But here we are, So can we perhaps explain that
(15:22):
people who might be less familiar. You know, when I
asked you what is gender? I think a lot of
people assume that gender is determined by what's between your legs, right,
There's this conflation of biological sex with gender, and I
think it might be helpful for some to understand why
(15:45):
that isn't accurate. And also perhaps we can talk about
the socially constructed element of how we see gender. You know,
so omnipresent that it seems like it's natural, but it isn't.
Speaker 2 (16:01):
Yeah, yeah, I mean it's definitely not natural. Everything that
we say is natural. See, natural is one way to
support a kind of like science fiction. So whatever anybody
thinks that they say is natural, they need to think
like one hundred times about whether it is. For example,
you said biological sex, right, they're not talking about biological
(16:22):
sex when they even say that they're talking about biological
sex because they're talking about male and female, which are
again like constructed kind of sex identifications, which means that
there are of course, you know, like you are called
male and female based on xxxy chromosomes. Now chromosomes can
have variations, and there's so many intersex activists and.
Speaker 3 (16:43):
Lives and.
Speaker 2 (16:45):
Literature by and for intersex people which talks about this.
So they're talking about like a sex binary kind of
which is not scientific, it's science fiction.
Speaker 1 (16:54):
Yeah, I think language truly is inadequate, and it's almost
like we're playing badminton, right trying to trying to talk
about gender in a way that doesn't rely on jargon.
Like there's all this jargon around identity and activism that
actually can can sometimes limit the expansiveness that that is
(17:21):
actually contained within the possibility of identity. Right Like as
soon as let's say you you know in your introduction
or when you google you online and the things the
terms associated with with anybody, right, the internet reduces. So
it's like transfeminine, non binary right now, most people are
going to hold on to those two terms and be like, oh,
(17:43):
what does that mean? You know, what does it mean
to be both transfeminine and non binary? As if now
that those two words are attached to your identity, you
must somehow justify you know, or that that's it then,
or that you can either be one or the other.
Where even though man and women are very reductive, that's
the gender binary such at In fact, all labels to
(18:05):
some extent are trying to contain something that's infinite in
some sort of small package.
Speaker 2 (18:11):
Right, But I think labels are not trying to do that,
and labels shouldn't do that.
Speaker 3 (18:15):
But individuals are that, and individuals should have that kind
of self respecting relationship with themselves.
Speaker 2 (18:21):
I think I now have gathered some of your earlier question,
which was that this idea that men or women operate
in any way is not consistent in any society. In
any society, there are many many what we call ethnic
gender minorities in South Asia which grow in their specific
linguistic social context. We have the Nupi man Bees, we
(18:45):
have the Tiru Nangas, so we have the Hydra Kothi's,
we have the Quaja Sarahs and so on. And yet
I think for a person like me who's passed off
as trans women.
Speaker 3 (18:56):
And non minority whatever. I am aware of that.
Speaker 2 (18:59):
Tradition and as of now, I'm living outside that tradition, right,
And that is also means something because there are certain
kind of supports through which I'm able to live a
life like this.
Speaker 3 (19:16):
I don't I.
Speaker 2 (19:17):
Want to be a bit of a turncoat and say
I don't have problem with the conversations we are having.
Speaker 3 (19:21):
I think they're great conversations, and I think activists.
Speaker 2 (19:24):
Are amazing, and I think all these people who know
this dragon are also very important and essential to how
the world works. I think they're on the right side
of history and the right side of what needs to
be done.
Speaker 3 (19:38):
So I wouldn't.
Speaker 2 (19:39):
Blame the jargon on those who are trying to tip
the structure towards fairness. Absolutely, But in my observation, there
are limitations to language in the way that language cannot
change human apathy and indifference. It has never happened in
(20:01):
any context. It's not happened in the context of war, genocide, hunger,
poverty not happened. You can't talk to your way out
of oppression. Unfortunately, that is what the history tells us.
And the other thing is because you know, I also
take classes, I teach university students and so on. And
(20:27):
also the communities I live in, I do work there
also because it's reparative and it needs to be done.
Intention is very important. Commitment is very important because it's
through commitment through which you realize your self esteem. Even
people who grow up having nice self esteems, having everything
struggle after a point to maintain it. Because that's the fact.
(20:48):
We need to bide time. You know, we all are
in touch with our mortality, and we must do work
and work that we're proud of. Work we see ourselves
in work that makes us feel nice to build our
self esteem, and in the classroom, outside the classroom, on
the road, whatever we call kindness, compassion. You know, it's
(21:09):
the intention that matters, and committing to that intention that matters.
And I think, yes, it's true that language can alienate,
but that cannot be the reason for somebody to not
have intentions or to not thought about those intentions. That
cannot be the reason for them to be committed. Because
(21:30):
I would any day work with a committed labor unionist
who doesn't know the heed she there of trance, but
is doing good work because that work.
Speaker 3 (21:42):
Needs to be done.
Speaker 2 (21:42):
I would any day work with somebody who's bringing down
the rents from the real estate market any day. You know,
we don't all have to know everything about everything. That's
never been there's never been a demand, you know, the
demand has always been to reorganize and reorient.
Speaker 3 (22:05):
I love that.
Speaker 1 (22:06):
I think so often on social media and these like
fish bowls, you know where unfortunately often there's sort of
sometimes discussions between people on the same team, like we're
on the same team. We don't have to outwook each other,
you know, we're on the same team. And I think
sometimes we can do with that reminder, like if you
don't quite know your way around a very anglicized vocabulary
(22:30):
of various terms to do with gender and justice, it
doesn't necessarily belie a lack of intention, especially in our
part of the world, where language is also something that's
not everybody doesn't have access to the same anglicized vocabulary,
and it would be wonderful also if we could learn
our own, as you were saying, there's a history in
(22:51):
our part of the world also, instead of only borrowing
from the language of Western feminism. Right, but let's also
talk a little bit about sexuality and gender in our relationships,
and how sort of our lived experiences perhaps end up
either s throwing up challenges or even new discoveries around
(23:15):
our own perception of an experience of gender. You know,
Like I just I'm curious whether in navigating romantic relationships,
for example, do you have to explain yourself. I find
myself having to explain myself to so much more than
I wish I had to. You know, I think when
(23:36):
you this idea of conformity, right, and the idea of
anybody who's not easy to put into a box as
a misfit or someone you have to sort of like
put in an extra effort to understand what they want.
Like let's say I don't want marriage in kids. Now,
this seems like why do I have to explain why
that's the thing?
Speaker 3 (23:55):
Right?
Speaker 1 (23:56):
But as a woman who's thirty four, I am constantly
having to explain this to the man I am interested
in dating, or to my family or whatever.
Speaker 3 (24:03):
You know.
Speaker 1 (24:05):
So I think there's elements of my gender that or
the expectations around it, that factor into how the world
thinks I should operate in my private life. What has
that been like for you?
Speaker 3 (24:18):
Okay?
Speaker 2 (24:18):
I think this is where my response might get into
the territory of annoying, because but this is also not
knowing me, you know, like this is how just I think,
and I am in my every day and me and
my therapist constantly try to think about why, but we
haven't found an answer yet. But basically, I'm going to
answer this in a social way, right. The thing is
(24:43):
we have to explain because we are placing a demand
right in very of what you're saying. A woman who
doesn't want you, for example, reproduce, there's a unfortunately, a
non conformance, and it's the cost of non conferments that unfortunately,
not only women and queer people have to pay.
Speaker 3 (24:59):
Everybody has to pay, right like men who have shrill.
Speaker 2 (25:02):
Voices, men who have long hair in the South Asian context,
men who are not probably very muscular and very you know,
like able bodied, and so on, men who are just
outrightly not considered good looking by beauty standards and so on. Right,
all of them are having to pay those costs in
their own ways. And before this you talked a bit
(25:24):
about like social media and what terms appear on internet
for me and so on, And I think that's an
interesting intersection of where like language and media together come together,
then it's just not language, you know.
Speaker 3 (25:36):
I think many of.
Speaker 2 (25:38):
These perceptions that we are talking about are true and
not true at the same time. But the thing is
that so many queer people who live in India, who
are my communities and so on, and I have lived
majority of my life in.
Speaker 3 (25:50):
India and so on, didn't grow up thinking trance.
Speaker 2 (25:53):
We grew up being called chukha heija, you know, like kothi,
like these were the slurs we knew, and so it
would be a bit bizarre and also not real for
us to say suddenly trans you know, because we know
the names we have been called by. We know that
identities also pass off as slurs, right And I think
(26:15):
the other thing is that on social media, if you
see two people squabbling somehow, it becomes about sea wokes
to this sea cancel culture does this. But this is
social media is also a reflection of a reality. It's
not that before social media people were not doing this.
It's not that people who don't use social media don't
do this. We often do this. We are often at
(26:37):
odds with the people who want the same thing. And
that is fine, because we just said that you are
only doing this because you have that expectation and demand. Right,
it's a cost of non conformity. It's not a bad
cost to pay. It only becomes a cost because you
(26:59):
have confirmity.
Speaker 3 (27:00):
Place. Cruising is amazing. Have you engaged with cruising at all? Lisa, No,
I have not.
Speaker 2 (27:06):
So cruising is this whole thing in queer culture where
you just go and have sex with random people you
don't know. You don't have to ask their names, you
don't have to ask their gender, you don't have to
ask whether they like to do. And it happens everywhere.
It happens in Berlin, it happens in Delhi, it happens
in Bombay, it happens in Goa. Of course, the scenery
changes and go ats the beaches.
Speaker 3 (27:27):
In Berlin and Deli and Bombait.
Speaker 2 (27:29):
It's the parks sometimes some cinema halls and so on.
And I think that's such an exciting place, right because generally,
if you go to say, for example, imagine a sex
club or like a high end orgy or whatever, you
have to get an invite, you have to pay an
entry fee, you need to have the right partner, the
right dress.
Speaker 3 (27:49):
But nobody's asking this of you. At a public urinal, you.
Speaker 2 (27:52):
Know, everybody can come there, everybody can do their business.
Some people are just going to use the washroom and leave,
but it's fine if somebody these having some fun in
the stall, right, And that's where it is. That is
the very human need to make these connections. And I
think that's also a moving space, right, I've already said
(28:14):
it's a moving space in the way of the affordability
of it. And who goes to these spaces?
Speaker 3 (28:20):
Right?
Speaker 2 (28:20):
All kinds of people go to these spaces. Sex workers
go to these spaces. Queer people go to these spaces.
Queer people of all ages, races, backgrounds go to these places.
Speaker 3 (28:30):
Heterosexuals go to these places. Bisexuals go to these places.
Speaker 2 (28:33):
Right, And that's where I think the most interesting things happen.
Like I know so many cisterterosexual women who have been
who say that they have been raised by queer culture,
which means that in these spaces, in a dive bar
or in a cruising park, they learned a thing or
two about sex, you know, like for example, I don't
(28:55):
know scissoring, which is more associated with lesbian I have
enjoyed it with my cism.
Speaker 3 (28:59):
And partner also, and that's possible.
Speaker 2 (29:01):
You know, that's the place of possibility, and there is
a certain kind of fluidity of gender there because it's
act specific. It's about that sexual that particular way of
interacting with that sex, which is then can also be
a way of enjoying for many, can all be can
also be a way of pleasure for many, of achieving pleasure.
Speaker 3 (29:26):
And I think that's how I would want to answer
this question.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
That just throw yourself into the social throw yourself into
everyday life, you know, like why would you want to
hide behind a screen or an app or like, you know,
having those Like I also feel like sometimes this kind
of like consent discourse gets so many things so wrong,
Like for example, there was this condem packaging with both
(29:49):
partners who'ld open only when they both press from both ends,
you Like, I definitely wouldn't want my condom to be
so protected or like having this kind of like fully
signatures and so on, and like both ends, I definitely
wouldn't want my condom to be so protected or like
having this kind of like fully signatures and so on,
(30:12):
and like, you know, yeah, almost like a pillion now, Yeah,
I mean I feel like it's good to discuss those
things and have a safe word and have a safe
gesture if you can't use your mouth right, or like
figuring out what safety means.
Speaker 3 (30:27):
That's very important.
Speaker 2 (30:28):
But I think that everything can have excesses, and I
think these are some of the excesses which I definitely
don't want in my bedroom as a person who's very
vehemently pro consent and so on.
Speaker 3 (30:40):
Yeah, I love that.
Speaker 1 (30:41):
Thank you for sharing all of that.
Speaker 3 (30:44):
You know.
Speaker 1 (30:44):
I think that the term when we when we talk
about gender non conforming, we suggest that people who don't
identify as such are conforming, right, which indicates within itself
the artifice of that conformity. Right. It's a funny as
versus them type of situation where cist gender and heterosexual
(31:04):
people tend to see queer people as the other. But actually,
by being on board with the term gender nonconforming, you
admit that you are simply conforming, which is itself a performance, right.
And yet even people who you know have decided whatever
that they would at least outwardly like to be seen
(31:25):
a certain way, et cetera, et cetera. To the line,
do try and look for outlets like what you've said earlier,
whether it's the exclusive orgy for only rich people, or
whether it's a you know, a club that has address
code and et cetera, et cetera. But what that points
do in a way is that the respectability politics of
what is your marriage and sex between a man and
(31:46):
a woman in missionary to have a child and like,
that is not how the vast majority of people actually
want to experience their private lives, right, And yet we pretend,
we must pretend in respectable society that the majority you know,
are man and woman and in straight relationships and only
want to have a family and want to be monogamous,
and like, there's so much pretending.
Speaker 2 (32:08):
Yeah, but I think that the regimes of respectability politics,
and this is a good thing, have never been absolute.
Speaker 3 (32:16):
Everybody has known. Everybody who does.
Speaker 2 (32:18):
Even practice respectability politics knows that they're a hypocrite.
Speaker 3 (32:22):
You know, there's a been called out though.
Speaker 2 (32:26):
I mean yes, because they know that they're using a
discourse of power and whenever.
Speaker 3 (32:31):
You question power, no power likes to be questioned.
Speaker 2 (32:34):
But when you use respectability politics logics, you can only
use it them in certain spaces.
Speaker 3 (32:38):
You can't actually govern it.
Speaker 2 (32:40):
As of now, with the technologies that we have and
how we are organized as societies to actually enforce them
in a totalitarian way.
Speaker 3 (32:48):
It's very very difficult task.
Speaker 2 (32:51):
And in that sense, these so called people who are confirming,
we might say that they're performing, but actually they're not performing.
They're performing terribly, you know once I mean I also
used to dance once upon it, and I hate uncoordinated performances.
Like that's something where I'm a confirmist, right, Like I
hate and coordinate performances. I think like all these cetero
sexuals are like a really badly organized flash mob. You know,
(33:12):
one hand is going there, one hand is going there,
like nobody knows what is happening. And so all these
people who call themselves confirming are not confirming.
Speaker 3 (33:19):
For example, live in.
Speaker 2 (33:20):
Relation people heterosexuals and live in relationships have problems accessing
housing as married couples in many parts.
Speaker 3 (33:28):
Of the world.
Speaker 2 (33:32):
Women who appear as this heterosexual woman who appear as
a bit butch do often get comments about it, and
so on.
Speaker 3 (33:40):
A lot of them.
Speaker 2 (33:41):
Want threesomes, a lot of them wants want co colding,
and so on, like these are not something which the
queers did and queers made happen. And I think this
is where we now democratize the queer theory for your audience,
that queer is not just identity, right, like the queer
theories coming from this idea that if you were given
these ten things to follow, even if you're saying you're
(34:01):
a ceterosexual, you just won't be able to.
Speaker 3 (34:05):
So it's a myth.
Speaker 2 (34:06):
And I think it would be incorrect to say that
most people are living like this. It would be more
correct to say that more people don't talk about the
conditions that they are living in.
Speaker 3 (34:21):
You know, they just don't talk about this condition. So
then it's very.
Speaker 2 (34:25):
Difficult to confirm to these ten things that you have
been given as a cetero sexual right. And I think
it's interesting that you also mixed respectability with this kind
of like sis cetero sexual identifying, because it's not just them, right,
it's also the homosexual. So it's also many other identities
which try to do this kind of respectability politics. For example,
(34:49):
three seventy seven is read down. It becomes the big
moment right for queer rights in India. But the reasoning
for it being read down is a right to privacy
judgment which comes before that. Now the thing is what
is privacy and who can afford privacy? Definitely, all these
people who cruise cannot afford privacy. Definitely, transsex workers can't
(35:12):
afford privacy. And there also there's the thing that at
the same time, in three seventy seven is read down,
begging is criminalized. In that point in history, trans families
are being criminalized, you know, chosen family and so on.
So as long as you are not in the purview
of law, there are so many more liberties to be.
Speaker 3 (35:34):
Lived which you can't if.
Speaker 2 (35:39):
Very kind of regressive politics makes you their subject, which
I think, unfortunately has now happened for transfer people, you know,
across the world. But historically this has happened for women's rights, right,
This has also happened for rights.
Speaker 3 (35:53):
Of workers and so on.
Speaker 2 (35:55):
Once you are the subject of regressive politics, it's very
difficult to come out of it. And I think that's
where the respectability politics derives its power.
Speaker 3 (36:06):
You know, think of it this way. If there is
no state in law to.
Speaker 2 (36:08):
Back it, it's going to be a funny opinion. Nobody's
gonna follow it, nobody's gonna enforce it. But in India
we don't only have legal and state mechanisms, but we
have community mechanisms and paralegal entities or not even legal entities,
for example, the krpentats and in the urban cases, in
the urban cities it's the resident's welfare association and whatnot,
(36:33):
which you know, govern our lives. This is supposed to
be self governance, but it's a misleading term to say
the least.
Speaker 1 (36:42):
I mean, I think in so many ways, all of
the structures, right, the big structures of society that the
structural principles family, government, religion, work, you know, capitalism, technology,
all of these things kind of seek to control and
surveil and sort of confine, right, And so I think
(37:04):
that it would be wonderful if, as we sort of
wrap up this conversation, if we could perhaps draw from
lived experiences as well as perhaps lessons from you know,
whatever one might have been through or studied so far.
For anyone who's grappling with these types of questions around
their own identity or not able to bridge that dissonance
(37:27):
between who they're expected to be and who they know
themselves to be because of circumstance or family or whatever
it is, like, you know, how can we perhaps attempt
to be true to ourselves, you know, while still remaining safe.
Speaker 2 (37:48):
I definitely can't tell this two people, and I definitely
don't have the answer for that. I think that's a
very good question. But I think there's also this tendency
in our societies. Very recently, somebody was asking me, can
you give me a self help book on how.
Speaker 3 (38:01):
To build community? I said, first of all, I.
Speaker 2 (38:04):
Don't know what books are being produced and who's producing them,
and like what their interests are, But there's no book
possibly that is going to tell you how to build
a community. You just have to build community. And I
think my role could be even though many very many
people a lot of times reflect this to me that
you know, whatever, something helped, like having a conversation with
(38:28):
me helped. But I don't take the onus of those
seeking themselves and make it my own.
Speaker 3 (38:36):
It can't be.
Speaker 2 (38:37):
I can only be a person they can be in
conversation with and sort their thoughts out.
Speaker 3 (38:42):
Maybe hearing me makes them feel better and so on.
Speaker 2 (38:44):
Right, But people who are doing this work, whether for
gender or not, they're any way doing it, and I
hope they continue to do it because that's what you
need to live. And I hope a lot of your
listeners are those kinds of people.
Speaker 3 (38:59):
That's what I for. And uh, yeah, I don't.
Speaker 2 (39:03):
Think this question is something so easily answered or definitely
should be answered by somebody other than yourself.
Speaker 1 (39:12):
Yeah, no, not by me for sure, not no other
than like other than oneself one self. That no one
can do. You mean that it is not something you
can prescribe. Yeah, one person cannot really tell another person
how to be.
Speaker 3 (39:25):
Yeah, freedom is not formulaic.
Speaker 1 (39:27):
That's true. Freedom is not formulaic. I suppose one can
perhaps share what one's own experience has been without it
being prescriptive.
Speaker 3 (39:39):
Right, I was quite lucky.
Speaker 2 (39:42):
I had a lucky start. I never felt that I'm
without love in my life. I never felt that life
is not worth living. And when we say never, right,
it's a it's a poetic emphasis. You know, your brain
obviously goes everywhere, you think, obviously everything. But this is
(40:04):
when I say never, I mean, this is the result
I arrived at. And I think that was the reason,
was that a lot of my birth families and chosen
families and communities I do believe genuinely care about human beings,
you know, be it them calling themselves you know, left
(40:28):
socialists arguing for education, healthcare reparations, be it themselves, calling
themselves somebody who wants to see a world without caste
or without racial stratification, or without gendered lives. It's the
lofty idea to live your life around, but I don't
know any other idea one would want to live their
(40:49):
life around as well.
Speaker 1 (40:51):
Oh, thanks so much for joining us. It's been such
a pleasure talking to you, and you've left me with
so much to think about. Freedom is not formulaic. Thank you,
Thank you so so much. This has been such a pleasure.
I am really grateful that you joined us on Love Matters.
Thank you, and thank you so much for tuning in.
(41:11):
I hope you enjoyed this episode. Love Matters is produced
by b W, Jeremy's International Broadcaster and The Indian Express,
and if you have any feedback or a question for us,
you can write to us at Lovematters at BW dot com.
Speaker 3 (41:25):
We'd love it if you.
Speaker 1 (41:26):
Share this podcast, rate and review it wherever you're listening.
As always, I believe Love Matters
Who are you outside of who you've been told you
should be from birth? We're bombarded with messages about who
we are and how we are to behave based on gender,
long before we have the ability to think about these
questions for ourselves. I'm Lisa Mangeldas and this is Love Matters,
and today we're going to be talking about gender and
identity with Aarro akund our very special guest whose work
(00:30):
has been focused on addressing and unpacking these topics. So Aarro,
thanks so much for joining us. I want to introduce
you briefly, but I'd also love for you to introduce yourself.
So Arro is a transfeminine writer, researcher, artist, one of
the most articulate people I've ever had the privilege of
speaking to. Some so excited to talk today. Our is
(00:51):
also the founder of the Valid Queer Project and the
Art Archives. But Aro, since we're talking about identity today,
I really think.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
You are to take I'll ask how you see r
I definitely see myself beyond identity right And I mean,
first of all, thanks for having me and being so
generous in talking about my work. But I definitely see
not only myself. I hope everybody sees themselves beyond identity, right.
(01:22):
The history of identity in the legacy that, for example,
some of us would talk about identity comes from Combahi
River collective coining identity politics, right, And.
Speaker 3 (01:35):
They were mostly like.
Speaker 2 (01:37):
Black queer women talking about their experiences and trying to
say that we don't talk about lived experiences enough and
so on. That's where it is coming from. And I think, unfortunately,
this is a common mistake with identity that we tend
to get focused on the label the taxonomy, right. And
(02:00):
I think that is a problem because nobody has ever
talked about identity or shouldn't without connecting it to the world,
the lived world one comes from, or that rich experience.
So I think for people who might be interesting in
knowing me, it should be enough that they can put
(02:22):
a name to my face and know that I'm living.
I think that's a good thing. That's a good way
to know people. Actually, we mostly know people, you know,
when they're living, so that we share spaces with them
and memories with them, you know. And I mean you
also mentioned me as a writer, so I think, you know,
that's kind of like a posthumous honor that writers get
(02:42):
that we are even ready when we are not there,
and you don't have to necessarily share spaces with us.
Speaker 3 (02:49):
But that's how I think is a good way to
know and interact with me.
Speaker 1 (02:53):
I love that. I think that labels, while perhaps for
some can be a sort of helpful in explaining and
understanding oneself, they can also constrain and confine just as
they define. Right. I think about the identity markers that
I've been attached to or was taught that I should
(03:14):
be attached to, such as women, heterosexual, and I think
to some extent, that's the most elaborate form of drag.
You know, life itself is a performance, right, Like what
is gender or what is gender?
Speaker 3 (03:28):
I wouldn't know.
Speaker 2 (03:29):
I mean like, we know that enough people have said
that it's cooped up. We know that it is so
potent that it defines our life choices, the way we move,
the way we see ourselves. But I'm not sure if
that is a true or complete way of living or
that should be. And the thing is, unfortunately that gender
(03:53):
doesn't come alone, right, Like in the very beginning you
said that gender is the thing that is assigned to
your birth. But it's not just gender, it's also your
cast it's also your race. It's also a lot of
times your socio economic background. And those are really hard things,
and they interact with each other and they can decide
(04:14):
your whole life trajectory. And we can always say that, oh,
if you work hard enough, or you know whatever, the
reasons one gives to actually obfuscate power, right, Rather than
realizing that most of the people are going to be
like that that's going to dictate their whole life and
so on, we tend to hyper focus on exceptions, you know,
(04:35):
to the rule, but not the exceptions which make us
renegotiate our resumptions, exceptions which allow us to reinforce power.
Speaker 3 (04:43):
Right.
Speaker 2 (04:43):
But this kind of assigning you social identities from your
birth puts you at conflict with yourself from the get go.
And I think a lot of thinkers are now trying
to wrestle with this, like what this means?
Speaker 1 (05:00):
Are there any identity markers that bring you a sense
of meaning or joy? Like I see you're wearing a
sarry for example, when Violin does indian Ness for example,
is that something you do like to stay defined by.
I'm just I've been thinking about this for myself.
Speaker 2 (05:19):
I'm just yeah, the reason I am so exhilarated by
this is because I really hope people don't look at
me and think Indian, because Sadi is not just Indian,
right like it's also about glad Ishie. It's also Sri Lankan.
I really hope they don't assign me to a nationality
when they see me wearing a sari. And as for
(05:43):
the joy in claiming certain identities, if one is using
their identity to let people in and organize around it,
and in some ways, you know, identity can also be
oppositional practice, Like it brings me immense joy to foreclose
(06:04):
that my ancestors were unto tables and that I, by
the rigid systems of caste am considered an untouchable in
the South Asian context um, and it allows me to
build allyship and bridges with other people who have been
subjected to this kind of in humanity. My transness allows me,
(06:28):
gives me all the logics and the right to experiment
with myself and my body, gives me autonomy and empowerment,
which is unprecedented without this language, at least in my journey.
And I think those are important things. And as for
(06:51):
the Sadi and how I.
Speaker 3 (06:52):
Get this sardi.
Speaker 2 (06:53):
It's a friend sari, you know, like I feel it's
a friend's mother's. Sorry to be precise, Um, when my
grandmother dresses me and her sari and sends me out
of the door, she knows the violence I would be
subjected to, But her dressing me up in her sary
and providing me that sari is support enough, because we
(07:13):
are never really alone, if you think.
Speaker 3 (07:15):
About it, right, We walk with the love that we
have been given.
Speaker 2 (07:20):
And similarly, this friend's mother passed away and they provided
their saris to their friends who might be trans who
might not have those sais, who might not get it
like you know, for example, I know many people who
are not lucky enough to have grandmothers.
Speaker 3 (07:34):
Who passed down the sais to them and so on.
Speaker 2 (07:37):
And it's just a way of my expression. But it's
not specific to me. Right Like in our part of
the world, people have always worn saris and it didn't
matter what they had between their legs two for them
to have the right.
Speaker 3 (07:52):
To wear it. It was never a question historically speaking.
Speaker 2 (07:57):
So I think there is definitely joy, more respect, a
better aspiration for living that can be attached to identities. Yeah,
but I'm not sure if identities unto themselves are a solution.
Speaker 1 (08:13):
How do you think family plays into identity. When we
talked before this conversation, we talked of how family citizenship,
like these things that we need can also be very stifling. Yeah,
but what sort of relationship has your family played in
shaping how you think of identity?
Speaker 3 (08:35):
What need is stifling? This is quite established.
Speaker 2 (08:39):
Like anybody who can have an honest conversation with themselves
will tell you that when you need something, you feel vulnerable, and.
Speaker 3 (08:48):
That's not a very nice position to be in.
Speaker 2 (08:50):
It can make you insecure, It can make you fearful,
It can make you act in a way.
Speaker 3 (08:56):
Which is not the best I think.
Speaker 2 (08:58):
Then one needs to question is that, yes, you need it,
and you might need it to survive at times, you
might also be able to survive without it. There are many,
very many people who are able to survive without it
and outside it. But maybe it's not a very central
idea around which you should live your life, because it's
both give and take, and like, as long as you
(09:20):
know that there's a given take, you'd be in a
better position to, you know, reconcile yourself with that truth
and complexity. But if you don't even know that it's
actually a given. Take, it's not just I have a
need and the need is being met. When the need
is being met, it is costing you something. And yeah,
I hope people think more about the cost.
Speaker 1 (09:43):
I think often when it comes to expressing one's gender
and sexuality, particularly in the South Asian context, family can
present a massive obstacle, you know, in terms of how
what is sort of the respectable and honorable way to
be as for your family versus perhaps who you see
(10:06):
yourself as or wish to be. Is that something that
you had to navigate or I mean, as an unmarried
thirty four year old woman who talks about sex on
the internet, I feel like, even though it's quite basic,
like really not so radical, I feel like I have
to navigate some of that. And I'd love to hear
what your journey has been like in that.
Speaker 2 (10:26):
Regard, right, I think two paths too, Like I wouldn't
like to answer your question in two parts. First thing is, yes,
sometimes the focus on us and what we are doing
we should.
Speaker 3 (10:39):
We all know this as artists and creators, because.
Speaker 2 (10:42):
People can't trace our original sources, because people can't trace
the archives of people who have lived like us and
done things like us.
Speaker 3 (10:50):
We just become what we become right in the public eye.
Speaker 2 (10:55):
But for example, I have known very many women pre
independent woman, working woman, single woman, talking about sex, because
that is the generation of my grandmother's and I have
been raised by them, and I'm very proud to be
raised by these grandmothers, many of them choosing to live
with friends, many of them choosing to live with their
(11:15):
female lovers. And just because their archives are not available
popularly doesn't mean they don't exist. And just because archives
are similarly people like me might not be accessible. They
might only know aruwakunt and that's what shows up, doesn't
mean that that's the only reality. So I think that's
one thing definitely to be careful of. And like I
(11:35):
feel like, yeah, given the context we are in, it's
very difficult to be radical because the demand for radicalness
and what is needed for things to actually change is
that much high in an unequal, brutal kind of system.
Speaker 3 (11:54):
You would have to remind me what the first part
of your question was.
Speaker 1 (11:58):
I think I was trying to get at whether a
family was ever an obstacle in navigating or expressing identity
for you.
Speaker 2 (12:05):
I think that's where I think we become a bit exceptionalist,
because family is an obstacle all across the world. And
I could tell you how respect is also tied to
cast and respect is a lot of times for children
of migrants related to assimilating well.
Speaker 3 (12:20):
And so on. Right, it's tied to race.
Speaker 2 (12:24):
It's not just about generine sexuality, as has been the
conversation from the get go. And the families do create obstacle,
as I said, like they come with violence. So I
think that's more or less answered. But I do want
to talk about it in a different way, in the
(12:45):
way that as societies, are we empowering our families to
accept their children, what are we providing for these very
many families. Most of the families in the world live
quite poor, ma just make it by still, And this
is just the reality. Everything from their health care to
(13:09):
their education, everything that one needs to survive is up
for question. There's very very few people, even in West,
even in developed countries, so as to say who don't
struggle with these things. If this is the society we
have built, If this is the societies we have built,
then it's but natural that on that family as a
(13:33):
microcosm of society, there will be violence.
Speaker 3 (13:36):
So I think that violence doesn't surprise me.
Speaker 2 (13:39):
I don't have more expectation of my family than I
have of this state or government and so on. But
that said, it is very hard because often in interpersonal relationships,
and especially in family, which is mostly like a group dynamic.
Even though I have lived in a family where it
was just me and my single mother and now it's
(14:00):
again me and my widowed grandmother, so I've lived in
families of two also, but generally it's a group dynamic,
and there it can be a lot of trauma and
you know, feeling of loss of power and being subjected
to violence for other people who hold the most close to.
Speaker 3 (14:19):
And live with.
Speaker 2 (14:22):
And so I would reframe the thing that there are
challenges and families can be obstacle, but to even be
a family has a lot of obstacles, and we should
not lose sight of that.
Speaker 1 (14:35):
That's true. Gosh, You've made me think of so many
things that I want to bring things back to gender
since that's the focus of the episode today. You know,
I think a lot of people who are not as
immersed in discourse around gender and rights and identity politics
and things, the terminology is alienating, and so instead of
(15:00):
inviting people in the conversations end up facing some resistance
because it's just like the language only is like too
much for them to consent. I mean, I think it's
unfortunate people have to do the labor after being on
the receiving end of the lack of that understanding already.
But here we are, So can we perhaps explain that
(15:22):
people who might be less familiar. You know, when I
asked you what is gender? I think a lot of
people assume that gender is determined by what's between your legs, right,
There's this conflation of biological sex with gender, and I
think it might be helpful for some to understand why
(15:45):
that isn't accurate. And also perhaps we can talk about
the socially constructed element of how we see gender. You know,
so omnipresent that it seems like it's natural, but it isn't.
Speaker 2 (16:01):
Yeah, yeah, I mean it's definitely not natural. Everything that
we say is natural. See, natural is one way to
support a kind of like science fiction. So whatever anybody
thinks that they say is natural, they need to think
like one hundred times about whether it is. For example,
you said biological sex, right, they're not talking about biological
(16:22):
sex when they even say that they're talking about biological
sex because they're talking about male and female, which are
again like constructed kind of sex identifications, which means that
there are of course, you know, like you are called
male and female based on xxxy chromosomes. Now chromosomes can
have variations, and there's so many intersex activists and.
Speaker 3 (16:43):
Lives and.
Speaker 2 (16:45):
Literature by and for intersex people which talks about this.
So they're talking about like a sex binary kind of
which is not scientific, it's science fiction.
Speaker 1 (16:54):
Yeah, I think language truly is inadequate, and it's almost
like we're playing badminton, right trying to trying to talk
about gender in a way that doesn't rely on jargon.
Like there's all this jargon around identity and activism that
actually can can sometimes limit the expansiveness that that is
(17:21):
actually contained within the possibility of identity. Right Like as
soon as let's say you you know in your introduction
or when you google you online and the things the
terms associated with with anybody, right, the internet reduces. So
it's like transfeminine, non binary right now, most people are
going to hold on to those two terms and be like, oh,
(17:43):
what does that mean? You know, what does it mean
to be both transfeminine and non binary? As if now
that those two words are attached to your identity, you
must somehow justify you know, or that that's it then,
or that you can either be one or the other.
Where even though man and women are very reductive, that's
the gender binary such at In fact, all labels to
(18:05):
some extent are trying to contain something that's infinite in
some sort of small package.
Speaker 2 (18:11):
Right, But I think labels are not trying to do that,
and labels shouldn't do that.
Speaker 3 (18:15):
But individuals are that, and individuals should have that kind
of self respecting relationship with themselves.
Speaker 2 (18:21):
I think I now have gathered some of your earlier question,
which was that this idea that men or women operate
in any way is not consistent in any society. In
any society, there are many many what we call ethnic
gender minorities in South Asia which grow in their specific
linguistic social context. We have the Nupi man Bees, we
(18:45):
have the Tiru Nangas, so we have the Hydra Kothi's,
we have the Quaja Sarahs and so on. And yet
I think for a person like me who's passed off
as trans women.
Speaker 3 (18:56):
And non minority whatever. I am aware of that.
Speaker 2 (18:59):
Tradition and as of now, I'm living outside that tradition, right,
And that is also means something because there are certain
kind of supports through which I'm able to live a
life like this.
Speaker 3 (19:16):
I don't I.
Speaker 2 (19:17):
Want to be a bit of a turncoat and say
I don't have problem with the conversations we are having.
Speaker 3 (19:21):
I think they're great conversations, and I think activists.
Speaker 2 (19:24):
Are amazing, and I think all these people who know
this dragon are also very important and essential to how
the world works. I think they're on the right side
of history and the right side of what needs to
be done.
Speaker 3 (19:38):
So I wouldn't.
Speaker 2 (19:39):
Blame the jargon on those who are trying to tip
the structure towards fairness. Absolutely, But in my observation, there
are limitations to language in the way that language cannot
change human apathy and indifference. It has never happened in
(20:01):
any context. It's not happened in the context of war, genocide, hunger,
poverty not happened. You can't talk to your way out
of oppression. Unfortunately, that is what the history tells us.
And the other thing is because you know, I also
take classes, I teach university students and so on. And
(20:27):
also the communities I live in, I do work there
also because it's reparative and it needs to be done.
Intention is very important. Commitment is very important because it's
through commitment through which you realize your self esteem. Even
people who grow up having nice self esteems, having everything
struggle after a point to maintain it. Because that's the fact.
(20:48):
We need to bide time. You know, we all are
in touch with our mortality, and we must do work
and work that we're proud of. Work we see ourselves
in work that makes us feel nice to build our
self esteem, and in the classroom, outside the classroom, on
the road, whatever we call kindness, compassion. You know, it's
(21:09):
the intention that matters, and committing to that intention that matters.
And I think, yes, it's true that language can alienate,
but that cannot be the reason for somebody to not
have intentions or to not thought about those intentions. That
cannot be the reason for them to be committed. Because
(21:30):
I would any day work with a committed labor unionist
who doesn't know the heed she there of trance, but
is doing good work because that work.
Speaker 3 (21:42):
Needs to be done.
Speaker 2 (21:42):
I would any day work with somebody who's bringing down
the rents from the real estate market any day. You know,
we don't all have to know everything about everything. That's
never been there's never been a demand, you know, the
demand has always been to reorganize and reorient.
Speaker 3 (22:05):
I love that.
Speaker 1 (22:06):
I think so often on social media and these like
fish bowls, you know where unfortunately often there's sort of
sometimes discussions between people on the same team, like we're
on the same team. We don't have to outwook each other,
you know, we're on the same team. And I think
sometimes we can do with that reminder, like if you
don't quite know your way around a very anglicized vocabulary
(22:30):
of various terms to do with gender and justice, it
doesn't necessarily belie a lack of intention, especially in our
part of the world, where language is also something that's
not everybody doesn't have access to the same anglicized vocabulary,
and it would be wonderful also if we could learn
our own, as you were saying, there's a history in
(22:51):
our part of the world also, instead of only borrowing
from the language of Western feminism. Right, but let's also
talk a little bit about sexuality and gender in our relationships,
and how sort of our lived experiences perhaps end up
either s throwing up challenges or even new discoveries around
(23:15):
our own perception of an experience of gender. You know,
Like I just I'm curious whether in navigating romantic relationships,
for example, do you have to explain yourself. I find
myself having to explain myself to so much more than
I wish I had to. You know, I think when
(23:36):
you this idea of conformity, right, and the idea of
anybody who's not easy to put into a box as
a misfit or someone you have to sort of like
put in an extra effort to understand what they want.
Like let's say I don't want marriage in kids. Now,
this seems like why do I have to explain why
that's the thing?
Speaker 3 (23:55):
Right?
Speaker 1 (23:56):
But as a woman who's thirty four, I am constantly
having to explain this to the man I am interested
in dating, or to my family or whatever.
Speaker 3 (24:03):
You know.
Speaker 1 (24:05):
So I think there's elements of my gender that or
the expectations around it, that factor into how the world
thinks I should operate in my private life. What has
that been like for you?
Speaker 3 (24:18):
Okay?
Speaker 2 (24:18):
I think this is where my response might get into
the territory of annoying, because but this is also not
knowing me, you know, like this is how just I think,
and I am in my every day and me and
my therapist constantly try to think about why, but we
haven't found an answer yet. But basically, I'm going to
answer this in a social way, right. The thing is
(24:43):
we have to explain because we are placing a demand
right in very of what you're saying. A woman who
doesn't want you, for example, reproduce, there's a unfortunately, a
non conformance, and it's the cost of non conferments that unfortunately,
not only women and queer people have to pay.
Speaker 3 (24:59):
Everybody has to pay, right like men who have shrill.
Speaker 2 (25:02):
Voices, men who have long hair in the South Asian context,
men who are not probably very muscular and very you know,
like able bodied, and so on, men who are just
outrightly not considered good looking by beauty standards and so on. Right,
all of them are having to pay those costs in
their own ways. And before this you talked a bit
(25:24):
about like social media and what terms appear on internet
for me and so on, And I think that's an
interesting intersection of where like language and media together come together,
then it's just not language, you know.
Speaker 3 (25:36):
I think many of.
Speaker 2 (25:38):
These perceptions that we are talking about are true and
not true at the same time. But the thing is
that so many queer people who live in India, who
are my communities and so on, and I have lived
majority of my life in.
Speaker 3 (25:50):
India and so on, didn't grow up thinking trance.
Speaker 2 (25:53):
We grew up being called chukha heija, you know, like kothi,
like these were the slurs we knew, and so it
would be a bit bizarre and also not real for
us to say suddenly trans you know, because we know
the names we have been called by. We know that
identities also pass off as slurs, right And I think
(26:15):
the other thing is that on social media, if you
see two people squabbling somehow, it becomes about sea wokes
to this sea cancel culture does this. But this is
social media is also a reflection of a reality. It's
not that before social media people were not doing this.
It's not that people who don't use social media don't
do this. We often do this. We are often at
(26:37):
odds with the people who want the same thing. And
that is fine, because we just said that you are
only doing this because you have that expectation and demand. Right,
it's a cost of non conformity. It's not a bad
cost to pay. It only becomes a cost because you
(26:59):
have confirmity.
Speaker 3 (27:00):
Place. Cruising is amazing. Have you engaged with cruising at all? Lisa, No,
I have not.
Speaker 2 (27:06):
So cruising is this whole thing in queer culture where
you just go and have sex with random people you
don't know. You don't have to ask their names, you
don't have to ask their gender, you don't have to
ask whether they like to do. And it happens everywhere.
It happens in Berlin, it happens in Delhi, it happens
in Bombay, it happens in Goa. Of course, the scenery
changes and go ats the beaches.
Speaker 3 (27:27):
In Berlin and Deli and Bombait.
Speaker 2 (27:29):
It's the parks sometimes some cinema halls and so on.
And I think that's such an exciting place, right because generally,
if you go to say, for example, imagine a sex
club or like a high end orgy or whatever, you
have to get an invite, you have to pay an
entry fee, you need to have the right partner, the
right dress.
Speaker 3 (27:49):
But nobody's asking this of you. At a public urinal, you.
Speaker 2 (27:52):
Know, everybody can come there, everybody can do their business.
Some people are just going to use the washroom and leave,
but it's fine if somebody these having some fun in
the stall, right, And that's where it is. That is
the very human need to make these connections. And I
think that's also a moving space, right, I've already said
(28:14):
it's a moving space in the way of the affordability
of it. And who goes to these spaces?
Speaker 3 (28:20):
Right?
Speaker 2 (28:20):
All kinds of people go to these spaces. Sex workers
go to these spaces. Queer people go to these spaces.
Queer people of all ages, races, backgrounds go to these places.
Speaker 3 (28:30):
Heterosexuals go to these places. Bisexuals go to these places.
Speaker 2 (28:33):
Right, And that's where I think the most interesting things happen.
Like I know so many cisterterosexual women who have been
who say that they have been raised by queer culture,
which means that in these spaces, in a dive bar
or in a cruising park, they learned a thing or
two about sex, you know, like for example, I don't
(28:55):
know scissoring, which is more associated with lesbian I have
enjoyed it with my cism.
Speaker 3 (28:59):
And partner also, and that's possible.
Speaker 2 (29:01):
You know, that's the place of possibility, and there is
a certain kind of fluidity of gender there because it's
act specific. It's about that sexual that particular way of
interacting with that sex, which is then can also be
a way of enjoying for many, can all be can
also be a way of pleasure for many, of achieving pleasure.
Speaker 3 (29:26):
And I think that's how I would want to answer
this question.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
That just throw yourself into the social throw yourself into
everyday life, you know, like why would you want to
hide behind a screen or an app or like, you know,
having those Like I also feel like sometimes this kind
of like consent discourse gets so many things so wrong,
Like for example, there was this condem packaging with both
(29:49):
partners who'ld open only when they both press from both ends,
you Like, I definitely wouldn't want my condom to be
so protected or like having this kind of like fully
signatures and so on, and like both ends, I definitely
wouldn't want my condom to be so protected or like
having this kind of like fully signatures and so on,
(30:12):
and like, you know, yeah, almost like a pillion now, Yeah,
I mean I feel like it's good to discuss those
things and have a safe word and have a safe
gesture if you can't use your mouth right, or like
figuring out what safety means.
Speaker 3 (30:27):
That's very important.
Speaker 2 (30:28):
But I think that everything can have excesses, and I
think these are some of the excesses which I definitely
don't want in my bedroom as a person who's very
vehemently pro consent and so on.
Speaker 3 (30:40):
Yeah, I love that.
Speaker 1 (30:41):
Thank you for sharing all of that.
Speaker 3 (30:44):
You know.
Speaker 1 (30:44):
I think that the term when we when we talk
about gender non conforming, we suggest that people who don't
identify as such are conforming, right, which indicates within itself
the artifice of that conformity. Right. It's a funny as
versus them type of situation where cist gender and heterosexual
(31:04):
people tend to see queer people as the other. But actually,
by being on board with the term gender nonconforming, you
admit that you are simply conforming, which is itself a performance, right.
And yet even people who you know have decided whatever
that they would at least outwardly like to be seen
(31:25):
a certain way, et cetera, et cetera. To the line,
do try and look for outlets like what you've said earlier,
whether it's the exclusive orgy for only rich people, or
whether it's a you know, a club that has address
code and et cetera, et cetera. But what that points
do in a way is that the respectability politics of
what is your marriage and sex between a man and
(31:46):
a woman in missionary to have a child and like,
that is not how the vast majority of people actually
want to experience their private lives, right, And yet we pretend,
we must pretend in respectable society that the majority you know,
are man and woman and in straight relationships and only
want to have a family and want to be monogamous,
and like, there's so much pretending.
Speaker 2 (32:08):
Yeah, but I think that the regimes of respectability politics,
and this is a good thing, have never been absolute.
Speaker 3 (32:16):
Everybody has known. Everybody who does.
Speaker 2 (32:18):
Even practice respectability politics knows that they're a hypocrite.
Speaker 3 (32:22):
You know, there's a been called out though.
Speaker 2 (32:26):
I mean yes, because they know that they're using a
discourse of power and whenever.
Speaker 3 (32:31):
You question power, no power likes to be questioned.
Speaker 2 (32:34):
But when you use respectability politics logics, you can only
use it them in certain spaces.
Speaker 3 (32:38):
You can't actually govern it.
Speaker 2 (32:40):
As of now, with the technologies that we have and
how we are organized as societies to actually enforce them
in a totalitarian way.
Speaker 3 (32:48):
It's very very difficult task.
Speaker 2 (32:51):
And in that sense, these so called people who are confirming,
we might say that they're performing, but actually they're not performing.
They're performing terribly, you know once I mean I also
used to dance once upon it, and I hate uncoordinated performances.
Like that's something where I'm a confirmist, right, Like I
hate and coordinate performances. I think like all these cetero
sexuals are like a really badly organized flash mob. You know,
(33:12):
one hand is going there, one hand is going there,
like nobody knows what is happening. And so all these
people who call themselves confirming are not confirming.
Speaker 3 (33:19):
For example, live in.
Speaker 2 (33:20):
Relation people heterosexuals and live in relationships have problems accessing
housing as married couples in many parts.
Speaker 3 (33:28):
Of the world.
Speaker 2 (33:32):
Women who appear as this heterosexual woman who appear as
a bit butch do often get comments about it, and
so on.
Speaker 3 (33:40):
A lot of them.
Speaker 2 (33:41):
Want threesomes, a lot of them wants want co colding,
and so on, like these are not something which the
queers did and queers made happen. And I think this
is where we now democratize the queer theory for your audience,
that queer is not just identity, right, like the queer
theories coming from this idea that if you were given
these ten things to follow, even if you're saying you're
(34:01):
a ceterosexual, you just won't be able to.
Speaker 3 (34:05):
So it's a myth.
Speaker 2 (34:06):
And I think it would be incorrect to say that
most people are living like this. It would be more
correct to say that more people don't talk about the
conditions that they are living in.
Speaker 3 (34:21):
You know, they just don't talk about this condition. So
then it's very.
Speaker 2 (34:25):
Difficult to confirm to these ten things that you have
been given as a cetero sexual right. And I think
it's interesting that you also mixed respectability with this kind
of like sis cetero sexual identifying, because it's not just them, right,
it's also the homosexual. So it's also many other identities
which try to do this kind of respectability politics. For example,
(34:49):
three seventy seven is read down. It becomes the big
moment right for queer rights in India. But the reasoning
for it being read down is a right to privacy
judgment which comes before that. Now the thing is what
is privacy and who can afford privacy? Definitely, all these
people who cruise cannot afford privacy. Definitely, transsex workers can't
(35:12):
afford privacy. And there also there's the thing that at
the same time, in three seventy seven is read down,
begging is criminalized. In that point in history, trans families
are being criminalized, you know, chosen family and so on.
So as long as you are not in the purview
of law, there are so many more liberties to be.
Speaker 3 (35:34):
Lived which you can't if.
Speaker 2 (35:39):
Very kind of regressive politics makes you their subject, which
I think, unfortunately has now happened for transfer people, you know,
across the world. But historically this has happened for women's rights, right,
This has also happened for rights.
Speaker 3 (35:53):
Of workers and so on.
Speaker 2 (35:55):
Once you are the subject of regressive politics, it's very
difficult to come out of it. And I think that's
where the respectability politics derives its power.
Speaker 3 (36:06):
You know, think of it this way. If there is
no state in law to.
Speaker 2 (36:08):
Back it, it's going to be a funny opinion. Nobody's
gonna follow it, nobody's gonna enforce it. But in India
we don't only have legal and state mechanisms, but we
have community mechanisms and paralegal entities or not even legal entities,
for example, the krpentats and in the urban cases, in
the urban cities it's the resident's welfare association and whatnot,
(36:33):
which you know, govern our lives. This is supposed to
be self governance, but it's a misleading term to say
the least.
Speaker 1 (36:42):
I mean, I think in so many ways, all of
the structures, right, the big structures of society that the
structural principles family, government, religion, work, you know, capitalism, technology,
all of these things kind of seek to control and
surveil and sort of confine, right, And so I think
(37:04):
that it would be wonderful if, as we sort of
wrap up this conversation, if we could perhaps draw from
lived experiences as well as perhaps lessons from you know,
whatever one might have been through or studied so far.
For anyone who's grappling with these types of questions around
their own identity or not able to bridge that dissonance
(37:27):
between who they're expected to be and who they know
themselves to be because of circumstance or family or whatever
it is, like, you know, how can we perhaps attempt
to be true to ourselves, you know, while still remaining safe.
Speaker 2 (37:48):
I definitely can't tell this two people, and I definitely
don't have the answer for that. I think that's a
very good question. But I think there's also this tendency
in our societies. Very recently, somebody was asking me, can
you give me a self help book on how.
Speaker 3 (38:01):
To build community? I said, first of all, I.
Speaker 2 (38:04):
Don't know what books are being produced and who's producing them,
and like what their interests are, But there's no book
possibly that is going to tell you how to build
a community. You just have to build community. And I
think my role could be even though many very many
people a lot of times reflect this to me that
you know, whatever, something helped, like having a conversation with
(38:28):
me helped. But I don't take the onus of those
seeking themselves and make it my own.
Speaker 3 (38:36):
It can't be.
Speaker 2 (38:37):
I can only be a person they can be in
conversation with and sort their thoughts out.
Speaker 3 (38:42):
Maybe hearing me makes them feel better and so on.
Speaker 2 (38:44):
Right, But people who are doing this work, whether for
gender or not, they're any way doing it, and I
hope they continue to do it because that's what you
need to live. And I hope a lot of your
listeners are those kinds of people.
Speaker 3 (38:59):
That's what I for. And uh, yeah, I don't.
Speaker 2 (39:03):
Think this question is something so easily answered or definitely
should be answered by somebody other than yourself.
Speaker 1 (39:12):
Yeah, no, not by me for sure, not no other
than like other than oneself one self. That no one
can do. You mean that it is not something you
can prescribe. Yeah, one person cannot really tell another person
how to be.
Speaker 3 (39:25):
Yeah, freedom is not formulaic.
Speaker 1 (39:27):
That's true. Freedom is not formulaic. I suppose one can
perhaps share what one's own experience has been without it
being prescriptive.
Speaker 3 (39:39):
Right, I was quite lucky.
Speaker 2 (39:42):
I had a lucky start. I never felt that I'm
without love in my life. I never felt that life
is not worth living. And when we say never, right,
it's a it's a poetic emphasis. You know, your brain
obviously goes everywhere, you think, obviously everything. But this is
(40:04):
when I say never, I mean, this is the result
I arrived at. And I think that was the reason,
was that a lot of my birth families and chosen
families and communities I do believe genuinely care about human beings,
you know, be it them calling themselves you know, left
(40:28):
socialists arguing for education, healthcare reparations, be it themselves, calling
themselves somebody who wants to see a world without caste
or without racial stratification, or without gendered lives. It's the
lofty idea to live your life around, but I don't
know any other idea one would want to live their
(40:49):
life around as well.
Speaker 1 (40:51):
Oh, thanks so much for joining us. It's been such
a pleasure talking to you, and you've left me with
so much to think about. Freedom is not formulaic. Thank you,
Thank you so so much. This has been such a pleasure.
I am really grateful that you joined us on Love Matters.
Thank you, and thank you so much for tuning in.
(41:11):
I hope you enjoyed this episode. Love Matters is produced
by b W, Jeremy's International Broadcaster and The Indian Express,
and if you have any feedback or a question for us,
you can write to us at Lovematters at BW dot com.
Speaker 3 (41:25):
We'd love it if you.
Speaker 1 (41:26):
Share this podcast, rate and review it wherever you're listening.
As always, I believe Love Matters
Popular Podcasts
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com