Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
censored

Book About Gandhi’s Bodybuilder Lust Is Too Hot For This Indian State

The new book on Mahatma Gandhi claiming the Indian sage enjoyed a romance with a muscled male bodybuilder is too hot for one Indian state. Great Soul: Mahatma Gandhi and His Struggle, from Pulitzer-Prize winner Joseph Lelyveld, has been banned from sale by the western state Gujarat’s assembly, all because it claims Mahatma traded love letter (and fluids?) with a toned German fellow named Hermann Kallenbach. Not that the book has even been released there yet. But Lelyveld says the Indian lawmakers, who must’ve read about the book in the British tabloids, have it all wrong: “The book does not say that Gandhi was bisexual or homosexual. It says that he was celibate and deeply attached to Kallenbach. This is not news.” So my mental image of Hermann rubbing baby oil all over The Mahatma’s head are pure fiction?

By:           Max Simon
On:           Mar 30, 2011
Tagged: , , , , ,
  • 50 Comments
    • justiceontherocks
      justiceontherocks

      Banning a book – perfect way to make it a best-seller.

      Mar 30, 2011 at 12:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • joe K
      joe K

      I am SO tired of everyone in history being labled as gay.

      Mar 30, 2011 at 12:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TheRealAdam
      TheRealAdam

      @joe K: I’m not, since the vast majority of people aren’t gay. So, it’s extremely important that a possible homosexual or bisexual sexual orientation is not overlooked when discussing personal lives.

      If anything, the reaction to this book just demonstrates how sheer homophobia plays a role in concealing possible truth. You should not be “tired” of it, you should be jumping for joy that these kinds of stories are revealed.

      Mar 30, 2011 at 1:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Gopal Balakrishna
      Gopal Balakrishna

      Dear Sir or Madam,

      Can you at Queerty KINDLY PLEASE leave Mahatma Gandhi alone? It is absolutely disgraceful to sully the name of this man, who was arguably one of the most influential men of the 20th century. Please stop making every historical figure bloody gay to suit your personal agendas.

      Gandhi was NOT gay. He was happily married (to a woman), and celibate when he was away from her. Hermann Kallenbach was just a friend of Gandhi’s, whom he cared for (solely as a friend).

      Westerners, kindly please stop pushing your homosexuality upon us Indians. We do not like homosexuality. India was one of the wealthiest societies in the world until the white men plundered our country’s riches & infected us with homosexuality, just like you spread small pox to the Native Americans living in United States.

      Thank you, Sir.

      Mar 30, 2011 at 1:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • David Ehrenstein
      David Ehrenstein

      @Gopal Balakrishna: Kindly take a long walk off a short pier. Revealing the fact that Ghandi was gay does not “sully the name of this man” to “suit” our “personal agenda.” Closeting him, as you demand, does that.

      Mar 30, 2011 at 1:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • T9r7u2t0h1
      T9r7u2t0h1

      Dear Gopal

      Your attempt to force your beliefs on us is malicious and a discredit to everything Gandhi stood for.

      Your assertion: “It is absolutely disgraceful to sully the name of this man, who was arguably one of the most influential men of the 20th century.” insinuates that being gay is wrong – an assumption that sullies the name, and lives of millions of human beings.

      You are a bigot, and that is not a good thing.

      “Gandhi was NOT gay. He was happily married (to a woman), and celibate when he was away from her. Hermann Kallenbach was just a friend of Gandhi’s, whom he cared for (solely as a friend).”

      Unless you spent every minute with Gandhi, you do not know, you are jumping to a conclusion without examining the evidence – typical of bigots. People used to do that to Indians, perhaps they should again, to remind you what bigotry feels like.

      Indian got its hatred of homosexuality from the British, and every day that you keep it, you remain a mental prisoner of British occupation.

      Homosexuality is not an infection, but prejudice is, and you are infected. Indian will never truly be free from British control as long as it apes British prejudices.

      Please don’t stay in touch.

      Mar 30, 2011 at 1:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The sane Francis
      The sane Francis

      No-one should be “tired” of the facts. This is no different than what we’ve seen with Hoover among many other historical figures. And even today, we see in many avenues, how many CONTINUE to deny our existences, shun our existences, and attempt to closet and shame us into hiding. This is ALL homophobia, pure and simple, whitewashing of homosexuality, because people can’t handle the fact that their icons are gay, as that “tarnishes” them somehow, and because people would rather pretend homosexuality doesn’t exist than accept it for what it is and dealing with their insecurities of the subject. The facts need to be presented that, yes, gay people have been around forever, and we have had an impact on the world throughout history.

      Homosexuality has been around FOREVER Gopal, that includes India. Homosexuality is not a western concept, it’s a natural being concept. As has been put, homophobia in India is largely a British concept. What you like or don’t like is irrelevant, and being anti-gay is irrational and illogical. It’s YOU who has the problem, and YOUR bigotry is clouding your mind of reality. Homosexuality is not the issue here. You wanting not to discuss the full details of Gandhi’s life because of your homophobia most certainly is.

      Mar 30, 2011 at 2:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • rachel
      rachel

      @T9r7u2t0h1:
      thank you for saying everything i would have liked to say but much clearer and more thoughtful theni could have done. <3

      Mar 30, 2011 at 2:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Codswallop
      Codswallop

      I’m tired of the canard, “You people think everybody is gay!” It usually comes up in conversations about actors but it applies elsewhere as well.

      And it’s bullshit.

      What IS true is that the homosexual relationships and desires of historical figures have been deliberately erased from history. It’s like the scene in “Maurice” (the movie) where the tutor tells his students to omit “the unspeakable acts of the Greeks.” It’s a dolled-up history that ignores inconvenient truths. And some of it will remain speculation because we’re unlikely to ever know for sure, but usually there are reasons for it.

      Take US Presidents for example. How many have there widely been gay speculation about? Two. Out of 44. James Buchanan is widely accepted to have been homosexual. Then there’s Abraham Lincoln. Was he gay? Nobody knows for sure and probably ever will. But speculation about Lincoln’s sexuality didn’t happen in a vacuum, there’s cause for it. It’s complicated by the floridly romantic terms of affection between men at that time, but Lincoln wrote what to modern eyes seems to be love letters to another man. And they shared a bed. Often. So it’s not some “way out of left field” random thing. It’s debatable but not outrageous.

      About Gandhi, who knows? A relationship can be homosexual in nature without anyone ever sticking Tab A into Slot B. There’s a well-known anecdote about Gandhi meeting a gay couple.

      “Two gay Englishmen came to Gandhi in the 1930s and asked him what he thought of their relationship. The Mahatma asked some questions and for a short time fell silent. Then he said, “The greatest gift God gives us is another person to love.”Placing the hands of each man in the other’s, he quietly and with a smile asked, “Who are we to question God’s choice?”’

      So to Gopal Balakrishna I would say that no matter the Indian attitude toward homosexuality is today, Gandhi’s thoughts didn’t agree. You may not like it but it’s a disservice to Gandhi himself to ignore it. And maybe his affection for the German bodybuilder was romantic even if it was never consummated. We’ll likely never know but so what if it was?

      Historical figures aren’t just who we want them to be. We owe it to them to be honest about the totality of who they were as complicated people, not to make them plaster saints and rob them of their humanity.

      Mar 30, 2011 at 3:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • divkid
      divkid

      @T9r7u2t0h1: buddy your on fire today! i love it when you swing those big guns into action against our *real* enemies (sadly not often enough.)
      nevertheless, very impressive. very.

      Mar 30, 2011 at 3:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      Not one bit surprised he loved another man. Not at all.

      Mar 30, 2011 at 4:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Gopal Balakrishna: You don’t speak for all Indian people. Well you do but you don’t know what the hell you are talking about.

      Mar 30, 2011 at 4:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jeffree
      Jeffree

      @T9R7U: Brilliant rebuttal to Gopal. The part on colonialism and its effects on Indian culture were spot on.

      @TheSaneFrancis:, & @Codswallop: Well done, also. This whitewashing of history runs contrary to the best practices in historiography: we need to look at history not just through our own lenses but through the cultural biases/ethos of the time in question.

      To add to the thread, I’d say that we can’t forget that Gandhi may have fit also into the B and/or Q category of our modent viewpoint : Whether or not Gandhi was “gay” doesn’t matter as much as that he had a deep & abiding relationship with a man, despite being married. Even if they never actually “did the act” the letters point to a mutual attraction: brain, heart, body.

      Gandhi’s choice to be celibate may have applied to obstaining from relations with anyone, male or female.

      Mar 30, 2011 at 5:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Oprah
      Oprah

      Well, i am NOT surprised the photo on the cover could be a certifiable homosexual. *eyes roll*

      Mar 30, 2011 at 9:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Oprah
      Oprah

      By the look of his face,a very demure effeminate timid guru,i say he certainly looks gay to me.

      Mar 30, 2011 at 9:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Eric
      Eric

      @Gopal Balakrishna: Well then you must have really told us American’s as you type on the internet invented by america on an american site. Maybe you and your people can stop burning them selves in the streets long enough to see the all men are created equal and women aren’t slaves to passed on to the biggest wallet. No one infected anyone with homosexuality it’s been in nature for thousands of years. If you don’t like gays or lesbians that’s your problem but it’s’ not something that is passed on. It’s something that is felt. Just like you have sluts in the straight world you will have sluts in the gay world and the lesbian world and the animal world.

      Mar 30, 2011 at 10:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Shannon1981
      Shannon1981

      Nobody here said Ghandi was gay, Gopal. But his relationship with that man was well documented. Nobody is accusing him of cheating his wife either. But, if his relationship with this man was well documented enough to warrant speculation, and obviously it was, there is zero reason not to discuss it. He didn’t hide it, and was obviously not ashamed, so why are you?

      Mar 30, 2011 at 10:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • rohan
      rohan

      @ gopal
      what do i say to you, i am an Indian and gay… and i completely understand when you say ” we do not like homosexuality”-because i happen to be on the wrong side of that dislike everyday of my life.
      What i am about to say now may/ may not be clear to your low IQ head- history is usually recreated from speculations. Aristotle said “it is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.” Though,from what you wrote, i understand you can’t be expected to appreciate the fact. By the way,it must be news to you,marriage to a person of opposite sex does not preclude his/her homosexuality.
      @other non Indian guys in the comment section- i guess we all understand happening to be gay is not a racial thing, just like bigotry or stupidity aren’t.For example,Gopal is an idiot, but that does not mean Indians=idiots.so @T9r7u2toh1,”people used to do that to Indians, perhaps they should again”- comments like this don’t help.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 12:08 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Gopal Balakrishna
      Gopal Balakrishna

      @rohan: Yaar, it is nice to hear back from a fellow Desi.

      I am not a Christian (I am a Hindu), but I follow my Christian brothers who say, “Love the sinner, not the sin.” I am very sorry if you have experienced intolerance in your life. I may not agree with homosexuality, but if you are otherwise a good person, then I love you as a person & fellow human being. We all have our sins & transgressions — nobody is perfect. I have so many sins myself.

      Maybe this is a calling for you to rise above your sexuality. Our sexual orientation is only ONE part of us. Maybe being a homosexual is a calling for you to be celibate or become a sanyasi, and dedicate your life to the Lord.

      Male with female intercourse and intimacy has a purpose of producing children and fostering good relations between the two parents. On the other hand, male homosexuality has no real purpose — it is just lustful and sinful. It is full of “tamas” (impurity, unclean).

      Mar 31, 2011 at 12:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Gopal Balakrishna
      Gopal Balakrishna

      I should add that am a former male homosexual myself. I was so unhappy and frustrated being gay, that I contacted my pujaree at the local temple and asked for help. Through prayer and counseling, I reformed myself. It has been difficult, and once in a while, I temporarily relapse into my former homosexual ways. But now, I am mostly straight.

      I recently had an arranged marriage to a lovely woman, and we spend our time volunteering at our local temple and doing work for charities. I love my wife for being an extraordinary woman — I don’t need to have sex with her to appreciate that.

      I think that Western culture emphasizes that, especially if you are a man, that once you are a homosexual, you will always be a homosexual. But if you really want to break free, change is possible!

      Mar 31, 2011 at 1:13 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Gopal Balakrishna: You are a very dumb human being. Being homosexual is not only about what you do between your legs IDIOT!!! And if you stop having sex, that doesn’t make you mostly heterosexual FOOL!!! If anything you said was even remotely true, then there would be many times more heterosexual people trying to change themselves to homosexual but that’s not happening nor is it ever talked about or promoted because you are just an idiot who is gullible and taken advantage of by people even more cynical and sinister than you and your childish guilt and shame. Honey, fuck off. Your bullshit is not valid. It is self hate.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 1:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Gopal Balakrishna: You need to learn how to accept your sexual orientation you twisted queen.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 1:41 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Gopal Balakrishna: The west this and the west that. AUM. They they they. Come out of your closet and travel more.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 1:43 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Gopal Balakrishna: So let’s get this straight(no pun intended). You love your wife and you don’t want to fuck her but you are mostly heterosexual? Well all over the world, that is known as dyfunctional and cuckoo and not living your life because your basically an idiot. So shut it up and keep it to yourself because i don’t care that you may perhaps maybe, maybe not, come to your senses when you’re fucking 95 years old. You have not knowledge of anything regarding sexual orientation. You are in deep denial and you are an asshole. No pity here. Go to your church where delusional thinking ranks supreme.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 1:49 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • rohan
      rohan

      @Gopal
      I really had no intension of getting into the “justification of homosexuality” brawl with you. But since you’ve addressed me directly, i guess i need to talk a bit.
      I happen to disagree with your classifying sexual orientation into Tama guna.(That by the way means both hetero and homosexual orientation is tamas). Tama guna represents darkness and inactivity-and yes a lustful life may be called a Tama dominated life. Rajas however represents passion and activity,and i happen to classify the purpose of any orientation, that is love- into that- and to some extent love can be classified into swatta as well.(however, i think we are not experts in this,but the point is not being lustful)You might say that purpose of sexuality is producing children- i happen to disagree- children are born due to the act of intercourse,but the purpose of intercourse is usually the manifestation of love.that is the urge we were born with,and yes,the urge is not similar for everyone.
      As long as i live a productive life(not reproductive, haha!),love the person i love with all my honesty,and do no harm to anyone else,i dont see my life being especially lustful, or filled with tamas and sin, as it is according to you.I am not a religious person, but i am deeply spiritual-and my orientation is in no way conflicting with my ideologies.
      Why do you guys like to make a simple matter so complicated? Not everyone is the same- what might be right for you can be completely dishonest and demoralizing for me, and vice versa.Read Tagore(you advised me, so i can advice you).
      anyhow, your comments show that you dont understand others points of views,so saying all of this is a bit of a waste, …just one thing- stop judging me, because frankly, you are not credible enough to do that.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 1:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Gopal Balakrishna: You act like a black person who does not feel good about being black because of an oppressive society and decides it makes sense to find a group of nazi racist white supremacist skin heads to validate your feelings. That is EXACTLY what you are doing. You do not like yourself for the true innate feelings you have for your own gender and you got audacity to think that is valid and possible to just discard them away as if they should not exist by calling that whole process “changing”. Your feelings may be real but WHAT you are feeling and HOW you think you are dealing with it is NOT valid. It isn’t. If i need a heart transplant i want the best cardiac surgeon. If you want to feel bad about who you are then you find people who hate who you are. This site is mostly gay people who accept themselves for who they are and you will not be allowed to come here and defecate on me all the while calling it spiritual progress. TAWISTED. You are fucked up because you do not admit you are gay not because you are gay.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 2:00 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @rohan: His comments only show that he thinks (like so many in this world not just India) that gay men secretly desire to be female. He is fucked up in the head and buying all the ugly bullshit being dished out by the haters. He has no experience to speak about what a well rounded gay person is about because is he a self hating homosexual in denial. With a wife. Please. I’m laughing and tearing. It’s so fucking pathetic. And if he wants to have children, he doesn’t have to lie to their mother about his identity. He misses the chance of this one lifetime to be human by hiding and trying to change. Sick. That is what is sick. He is sick alright. Sick in the head for not accepting who he is as an adult man.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 2:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Gopal Balakrishna: Don’t you even try to attempt to say that who you are and what you feel sexually are two different things meant to be separated and distinct from one another. Straight people don’t do that. You evern separate those two things with your wife which only proves you’re GAY.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 2:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • T9r7u2t0h1
      T9r7u2t0h1

      Gopal Balakrishna

      “I am not a Christian (I am a Hindu), but I follow my Christian brothers who say, “Love the sinner, not the sin.””

      But that is not Christian theology, so you are being led astray.

      Christ taught “love your neighbor as you love yourself”, which is very different.

      “I am very sorry if you have experienced intolerance in your life. I may not agree with homosexuality,”

      Here’s the problem – the intolerance that GLBTQ people experience is because people like you think you have a right to disagree with our innate sexual orientation. Guess that means that Pakistani’s have the right to disagree with your indian-ness, eh?

      “but if you are otherwise a good person, then I love you as a person & fellow human being. We all have our sins & transgressions — nobody is perfect. I have so many sins myself.”

      No, you do not love us – you declare that our intimate relationships are intrinsically wrong. That is hate. And since you have so many sins, why the hell are you even thinking about whether other people’s relationships are wrong? Fix your damn life before you worry about ours.

      “Maybe this is a calling for you to rise above your sexuality.”

      You first. Maybe this is a calling for you to rise about petty hate and ego, since prejudice, including yours, is all about ego. You need to feel better than someone, and so tear us down to inflate your own ego. Rather than expecting us to deny our sexuality, why don’t you reign in your enormous ego instead?

      “Our sexual orientation is only ONE part of us. Maybe being a homosexual is a calling for you to be celibate or become a sanyasi, and dedicate your life to the Lord.”

      Hmmm. Maybe being Indian is a calling for you to be celibate too.

      “Male with female intercourse and intimacy has a purpose of producing children and fostering good relations between the two parents. ”

      Here’s the irony. See, while homosexuality occurs in thousands of species of life, it is extremely rare among class of lifeforms – parasites. Parasites exists only to reproduce, and you’ve reduced human sexuality to the same level as that of parasites like tape worms.

      “On the other hand, male homosexuality has no real purpose — it is just lustful and sinful. It is full of “tamas” (impurity, unclean).”

      That is your opinion, and a vile and hateful one at that. Do you have a real purpose, other than spreading hate and contempt? You’ve defined your sexuality as the equivalent of that of tapeworms, which are pretty universally considered impure and unclean.

      “I should add that am a former male homosexual myself.”

      Is that like a former Indian? The reality, Gopal, is that your nationality is more fluid than sexual orientation. There is no concrete evidence that anyone has ever changed from homosexual to heterosexual. There are lots of liars though.

      “I was so unhappy and frustrated being gay, that I contacted my pujaree at the local temple and asked for help. Through prayer and counseling, I reformed myself. It has been difficult, and once in a while, I temporarily relapse into my former homosexual ways. But now, I am mostly straight.”

      No, you are a closeted and repressed homosexual engaging in unnatural sexual acts with someone you are not really attracted to, in order to please other people.

      If you were doing what is Godly and pure, it would not be difficult.

      “I recently had an arranged marriage to a lovely woman, and we spend our time volunteering at our local temple and doing work for charities. I love my wife for being an extraordinary woman — I don’t need to have sex with her to appreciate that.”

      Gay men often have female friends they work with, love for being extraordinary human beings, and do not have sex with them. Generally, it is straight men who have to be intimate with a woman to truly appreciate her.

      “I think that Western culture emphasizes that, especially if you are a man, that once you are a homosexual, you will always be a homosexual. But if you really want to break free, change is possible!”

      So you are saying that Eastern culture is delusional and unscientific. Why then are we relying on Indians to staff our high tech call centers?

      Or is it possible that you are just spouting the same old, world-wide lies of homophobes because homophobia is a delusion, a rejection of reality in favor of one’s ego.

      Really, don’t stay in touch.

      Rohan

      “so @T9r7u2toh1,”people used to do that to Indians, perhaps they should again”- comments like this don’t help.”

      Actually, it does. Too bad you didn’t have the integrity to quote me completely, choosing to be deceitful instead.

      Because what you left out “to remind you what bigotry feels like.” makes all the difference. Racism is as irrational as homophobia, and one way of pointing it out is to remind someone of their experience of racism. All prejudices are the same illness, whether based on race, or sexual orienation, religion, gender, or any other trait. All are about inflating one’s own ego by tearing other people down.

      So, if the racial prejudice against Indians was/is wrong, then homophobia is wrong too. But if homophobia is ok, then so is racism, including that directed at Indians.

      Of course, although Gopal articulated anti-west racist perspective, you only complained about what you perceived, falsely, as anti-Indian racism. Seems you have some racist issues to work on.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 2:25 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Gopal Balakrishna: And don’t be clouding anything over with the word “love” because gay people love just as much and just as deep as straight people.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 2:25 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jeffree
      Jeffree

      @Rohan: Thank you for posting your reply to Gopal. It seems you’ve been a success in melding your spirituality and yr sexuality.

      @Gopal: Your arrangement with your wife may work well for you, but you are wrong to believe it’s moral to deny her a fully committed relationship. Is she just a prop to support your ego? Why is she not entitled to have a satisfactory sex life?

      Mar 31, 2011 at 2:30 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Oprah
      Oprah

      “Male with female intercourse and intimacy has a purpose of producing children and fostering good relations between the two parents. On the other hand, male homosexuality has no real purpose — it is just lustful and sinful. It is full of “tamas” (impurity, unclean).”

      Gopal–excuse me –I think Homosexuality DOES IN FACT have a purpose. Population control. If only you Indians, in India learnt this miracle fact, you wont have a poulation of 1.19 billion. Food for thought. :)

      Mar 31, 2011 at 2:51 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Gopal Balakrishna: You are a gay man married to a straight woman and trying desperately not to have sexual desire for or sex with other men. That is not heterosexual Gopal. That is the definition of a pained homosexual with some real emotional issues not being processed correctly. You are not processing correctly because you refuse to accept you are gay. Oy freagin vey. This just doesn’t seem to end. People like you coming out of the woodwork not able to accept your natural state of being. ANNOYING.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 2:53 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Oprah
      Oprah

      Jefree

      ‘@Gopal: Your arrangement with your wife may work well for you, but you are wrong to believe it’s moral to deny her a fully committed relationship. Is she just a prop to support your ego? Why is she not entitled to have a satisfactory sex life?’

      Who says,their sex life is not satisfactory–maybe gopal is bisexual-equal opportunist?

      HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

      Mar 31, 2011 at 2:53 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      Gopal: And this is how you handle most of that nonsense. When someone approaches you with negativity about your homosexuality, you tell them not to get so damn personal with you. You tell them to mind their own damn business and 99% of the haters disappear. Keep in mind everything i said to you was actually positive.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 2:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Oprah: no Gopal flat out says he is heterosexual as a result of changing from a former homosexual. He spoke of nothing bisexual. Sex acts in and of themselves does not determine orientation.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 2:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sidewalk
      sidewalk

      @Gopal Balakrishna: I have pointed out, regarding a different article here on Queerty, that this word ‘bodybuilder’ is an internet headline grabber that keeps getting repeated. And if it’s on the internet, if it’s repeated, it must be true, right?

      The next time you hear the phrase “gay community,” think of the comments that were posted here in response to what you wrote. There is no gay “community” – there is a community of Gaga fans, a a community of pride parade goers, a community of hateful queens with keyboards, a community of bears, etc etc etc.

      But there is no single unified “gay community.” It is a fiction.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 3:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • rohan
      rohan

      @T9r7u2t0h1
      lets stop drawing daggers at each other.” People used to do that to Indians, perhaps they should again,to remind what bigotry feels like “.And now that i have just proven my integrity to you,reminding one of bigotry by subjecting anyone to bigotry isn’t an idea you endorse, surely. everyone is equal-irrespective of gender, religion,orientation and color-and thinking one is better than the other based on these or anything else apart from character is a bit stupid.you obviously know that and so do i-there’s not much difference of opinion:).

      Mar 31, 2011 at 4:21 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TheRealAdam
      TheRealAdam

      @sidewalk: There may not be a gay “community” in a unified sense, but we can all agree that there is no such thing as an ex-gay. The fact that everyone can come together around that fact is a testament to the reality that we do share an unchangeable identity, and that counts for something, especially when faced with a tragic character like Gopal.

      Do not try to portray him as a victim. He decided to post on a gay blog that homosexuality is wrong, and that it is somehow wrong to even insinuate that a character such as Gandhi could have homosexual inclinations. I certainly hope he (and you) DO think of the comments that were posted here, because the kind of homophobic “fiction” that Gopal supports in his own life will certainly not be tolerated by the informed.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 4:21 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • craig
      craig

      @David Ehrenstein: The book doesn’t “reveal the fact that Ghandi was gay”. The author himself has said the media has gotten that wrong about the not yet released book. The biographer did not find Ghandi to be bisexual or gay. This is another non-story the media tried to manufacture into something gossip worthy.

      Gopal was offensive and foolish, but so is automatically and ignorantly pushing our modern and western assumptions and labels onto someone as removed in time and culture as Ghandi.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 5:16 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • craig
      craig

      …..and yes, I realize I just somehow managed to repeat some very funky spelling for the name “Gandhi” after quoting David E’s typo.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 5:27 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tallskin
      Tallskin

      Gophal wrote: ”

      I should add that am a former male homosexual myself. I was so unhappy and frustrated being gay, that I contacted my pujaree at the local temple and asked for help. Through prayer and counseling, I reformed myself. It has been difficult, and once in a while, I temporarily relapse into my former homosexual ways. But now, I am mostly straight.

      I recently had an arranged marriage to a lovely woman, and we spend our time volunteering at our local temple and doing work for charities. I love my wife for being an extraordinary woman — I don’t need to have sex with her to appreciate that.

      I think that Western culture emphasizes that, especially if you are a man, that once you are a homosexual, you will always be a homosexual. But if you really want to break free, change is possible!”

      Is this a fucking joke??? It certainly reads like one!

      Mar 31, 2011 at 6:56 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason

      Gopal,

      You can never change the sexual feelings that come automatically to you. In other words, your sexual orientation is automatic and beyond your control.

      However, I agree that you can change your behavior in order to accommodate a belief. This is easier to do if you are oriented more to one gender than the other. The more you are oriented to one gender, the more easy it is to confine your sexual behavior to that gender.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 8:07 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • David Ehrenstein
      David Ehrenstein

      @Gopal Balakrishna: You’re STILL gay, Gopal! And you will be until the day you die!

      LIVE WITH IT!!!!

      Mar 31, 2011 at 9:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • David Ehrenstein
      David Ehrenstein

      @ewe: Yes, Ewe, he’s desperately trying not to have sexual desires for other men — which is why he’s posting coments on a gay site. I trust we can find Gopal on “Manhunt” as well.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 9:31 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • David Ehrenstein
      David Ehrenstein

      @craig: I haven’t read the book, but repoarts relating to the book noting his passion for Hermann Kallenbach speak for themselevs.

      I don’t know why anyone would find it so difficult to belkieve that he was gay. Gayness isn’t some obscure “malady.” It’s perfectly ordinary and has existed in all cultures, all species and all circumstances since the dawn of time.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 9:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JusticeontheRocks
      JusticeontheRocks

      @T9r7u2t0h1: Spot on perfect.

      We can only hope young Gopal will someday find the courage to be proud of himself for who he really is.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 9:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The sane Francis
      The sane Francis

      Of course you’re gay, Gopal. Um, if you didn’t know, the trend is that those who are anti-gay or actively seek to try to repress and closet all homosexuals or somehow entice all gay people to be straight, generally are sexually repressed gays themselves. So yeah, I think many of us assumed that, that’s why you’re here. You’re desperate for validation and you can’t handle the fact Gandhi, at the very least, was gay friendly. You can’t handle that fact because it hits close to you, so instead you want to deny and hide reality to suit your own needs and not have to deal with your own insecurities and discomfort with your sexuality and gay sexuality in general. It says a lot about you that you fully admit to having gay sex and fully admit to still be attracted to men, but you say you’re straight? No hun, sorry. Ex-gay is not straight. Ex-gay=gay in denial. Living as straight does not make you straight. So, Gopal, what it is time for you and your other bigoted Indian friends to do is actually start getting real, stop trying to justify your own self-loathing and insecurities of homosexuality by closeting all forms and discussion of it in your society, and stop trying to deny the knowledge of all to know of Gandhi the man, and other historical icons for ridiculously self-centered reasons.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 9:55 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JoeyB
      JoeyB

      haha, so Gandhi was a big ol’ queen cavorting around Delhi in diapers!

      Mar 31, 2011 at 11:03 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @David Ehrenstein: Thank you David. Ditto. I could not have said it any better in such a succinct manner.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 6:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • QUEERTY DAILY

     




    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.