So I have successfully defended my dissertation.

It feels a little wierd. This is the rite of passage to get a Ph.D., to have the prefix Dr. attached to your name — just basically a presentation of your work and handle questions on it. Why is it that I do not feel any difference between my states before and after the exam. I did not grow or learn during the defense.

Or maybe, its the many-year-long organic growth process that leads to the defense. But then why have the defense? Why not just have the dissertation peer-reviewed and thats it?

In any case, it does feel relieved to have completed.

And now to further things. Physics Education Research. I am excited about that, about learning a whole new topic and new research methods. 

Two days away .. Monday 10.00 a.m.

This is what six years of work boils down to. This is what it looks like.

What does it feel like?
Strange.

And then I will be moving out into the world. Leaving behind that which I knew, leaving behind that which I thought would be and onto a new beginning. Who knows for how long? Life has not really been good at following the path that I set out for it — and I guess I am thankful for that, in general (Otherwise, I might have ended up as a one-dimensional bookworm with my research as the only thing in life, intensely religious, ignorant of the world, definitely boring and maybe stupid). All I have done is tried to be cognizant of the twists in life’s path and take decisions accordingly stepping carefully while keeping track of the final destination. This time I am exercising less caution. Part-time work, uncertainties, against peer pressure … but I think I have a greater view of the final destination now.

When I was about to graduate from High School, a very dear teacher of mine had said to me, "Ayush, I am sure that you will be successful. Do not seek it. Look for happiness in life." I like to believe that it is something I have tried to pursue and it has led me into strange paths at times (like dungeons …. oops ..).

That which I know is reality, the rest is fantasy.

Google has agreed to restrict information for Chinese citizens. One of my roommates argued that they will just get a smaller set of information, not incorrect information. But in this age of extreme connectivity, with a zillion sources putting forth their news and views, is not a subset of information inherently misleading? If reality (especially about situations and incidents that are taking place away from the eyes) is created be information, then a lack of that information would create a warped reality.

Let me take another example: Say Google was instructed to cut-off most results for things like Abu-Ghraib, or prisoner-abuse. And Google complied. [Google of course is an example, the point is the effect of restriction of information]. Let us also take a person who relies on Google as a primary source of information (Don’t many of us do that? ) When faced by sudden information on the above topics, say on a foreign trip, would not this person feel that this is all fabricated lies to defame his country? For prisoner abuse would be outside his reality, and the sudden information might challenge his otherwise self-consistent picture of a just and clean war of good vs. evil.

Another example. There was little spotlight on the severe human rights violations in East Timor carried out by the Indonesian military. It took the masaccre of hundreds of innocent lives in a single attack to finally create some amout of stir. I recently came to learn about it from Democracy Now archives. Preventing that information from reaching the world is what enabled Indonesia to continue the atrocities.

Information is power. And the power should be with the people. Democracy, of course. When the people are prevented from access to that power, it is then that war, torture and atrocities continue. Lack of information prevents public outrage and political pressure. So I ask the following questions:
Was it socially respponsible of NYT to restrict information about the wire-taps?
Was it socially responsible of The Post to restrict information about the secret renditions and prisons?

Indeed, news agencies and media outlets are creating reality today. With great power should come great responsibility. Unfortuanately, petty profits and political gain have as usual transcended social responsibility.

The other day I was talking to Didi and she said, "Ayush, tor English ‘ta eto accented keno hoye gechche?" [Why have you picked up an accent?]. She wanted her old Ayush, not this Americanized version. The seemingly innocent question, posed even in a loving way, sparked an identity war in my head.

Moving away from the places where we grew up, taking in the wide experiences as we come in contact with other cultures, other peoples is it possible for us to retain the same old character? Is it even healthy to hold onto that past and refuse to grow organically, to adapt, to change in response to the new experiences?

So who am I?
Am I the Ayush who grew up in Calcutta in a small locality, who was too afraid to leave Ma for even a little while?
Am I the Ayush who was steeped in religion and eastern mysticism?
Am I the Ayush who went to Kharagpur and questioned all that he held sacred?
Am I the Ayush who then wept for hours on the flight to USA as he felt torn away from all that was dear?
Was that the same Ayush who now calls home once a week for 10 minutes?
Am I the Ayush who wept the whole night when he drank a tiny amount of alcohol when tricked by friends, or the one who danced drunk on 17th Street?
Am I the Ayush who hated this inscrutable America or am I the one who now has an American boyfriend and who sometimes also finds the Indian culture inscrutable?
Am I the ayush who does not believe in bowing down before a stone idol to seek good fortune and blessings or the one who was a Hanuman-devotee?
Am I the Delhi-born Ayush who had been told multiple times by his marwari friends that he speaks English with a Bangla accent, or the one who used to speak Bangla from a Hindi perspective, or the one who now was accused of having an American accent?
Am I from Delhi, from Calcutta or from Maryland?

Maybe I am all of them. As new colors are added on new hues emerge. They do
not kill the older shades but add to them, and in the words of Shyam Selvadurai the identity gets hyphenated. We who are of the diaspora, develop a unique culture that is neither fully ‘here’ nor ‘there’. Grey can be darker or lighter but it is neither black, nor white. Who is to say what color the shade is? And I feel it is healthy that way. I do not hold sacred, infallible or unchanging the traditions and lifestyle of my stay in India. I could stop my time, and stay with that identity which I brought out of the lands of my origin but that would mean (to me, at least) a stagnation, almost a death.

So I think the colors of different experiences, the childhood in Lake Gardens, the years at South Point, the experiences of Kharagur, the last few momentous years in USA are all mixed in me…. I refuse to be defined by any one of them or to be bound by any single one! But if you look closely, you will find a strand of Kolkata, a streak of Kharagpur, the imprints of India and an evolving Ayush who is merging all that was past with all that is present.

Just read a great post about social Symbols
in India. I think we can see it everywhere, be it India or USA. The
Spirit of an action/emotion is first bound in a Symbol — almost as an
honor, as a proclaimation. The Symbol serves the beautiful purpose of
reminding us of the Spirit that was first embodied in it. initially,
the Symbol is one that is self-imposed, and granted authority by free
will. But over ages the Spirit is often forgotten while the hollow
Symbol remains, no longer serving as a reminder of the lost Spirit.
Often, the Symbol, in trying to preserve its own glory, even perverts
the Spirit and becomes a gesture of oppression and submission as it
begins to be socially imposed rather than being a personal expression. While the Spirit of an emotion/action evolves
with different individuals and changing times, the Symbols get set in
stone (sometimes literally) and unable to change, they rot. The dominance of select social identities (e.g. male, white, heterosexual, higher caste) adds an extra factor by gradually eroding the
Symbols into equations of power. So it is with the Symbols like mangalsutra, the
sindoor, the Karwa-Chauth, the sati, the dowry, the joint family, and
the heterosexual marriage among countless others.

The University of Maryland, College Park, student newspaper did a  story on  ‘out’ , foreign, students/staff on campus to catch a glimpse of the myriad issues they face.

Queering AND Browning the campus..huh?
The overall response was pretty positive. The only negativity I heard of was that one staff member in the department was overheard saying what is the need of such issues to be on the front page …. I guess the question is the answer in itself.
But without further ado, let me engage in shameless self-promotion by posting the article:

Comfort away from home

Campus an easier place to be gay for foreign students

Coming out of the closet in the United States meant more to
sixth-year graduate student Ayush Gupta than facing the social backlash
and stigmas that threaten many young gay Americans. He feared that if
his superiors opposed homosexuality, he could lose funding for his
graduate research position and have to return to his native India, and
the subsequent task of explaining to his parents that he is gay.

Talking to his parents would not be easy, as some Indian families
exert pressure on their sons and daughters to marry early and start
families, Gupta said. Though his parents were accepting of his
sexuality, Gupta said others haven’t had such a painless experience.

“It does become an act of courage to actually go in and talk,” Gupta said.

Some international students at the university find that moving to
College Park makes it easier to be openly gay. Freed from what they
consider cultural and social restraints at home, moving overseas to
attend school in this area exposes them to openly gay people and allows
them to think about their sexuality miles away from family pressure.

“It was much easier coming out in this country,” Gupta said. “I
could actually mull over a lot of things without the presence of my
family.”

A person’s family, surroundings and societal attitudes toward gays
can play a significant role in how comfortable they are with coming
out, said Luke Jensen, director of the campus’ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual
and Transgender Equity Office.

“There’s this tension between sexual identity and national identity
that can really complicate the experience a person has,” Jensen said.

Different cultures have varying attitudes toward sexuality and
homosexuality that can potentially complicate a person’s coming out
experience, Jensen said. Some formerly colonized nations, including
some in Africa and South Asia, believe that homosexuality is an
unhealthy phenomenon inherited from their Western colonizers. Other
nations, such as some Latin cultures, have firm beliefs in patriarchy
where men cannot be perceived as feminine.

In India, there is technically a word that means gay but it is not
widely used, said Naresh Cuntor, a Ph.D. electrical engineering student
from Bangalore, India. The lack of terminology made it harder to talk
to his mother, he said.

“‘I don’t like girls’ is pretty much all you can say, and you really
can’t elaborate too much because it’s your mother,” he said. “It was
awkward.”

Although Cuntor realized he was gay at around age 13, he couldn’t
put a word to his feelings until he watched a gay-themed movie about
two years later.

Gupta said he had not even heard the word ‘gay’ until he got to
college. In Calcutta, India, where he grew up, there were not many
openly gay people and he was not exposed to gay culture.

For Gupta, coming to the campus for graduate studies was liberating.

“It gives you courage you to see other people who are open,” Gupta said.

However, even having the proper terms does not make embracing
homosexuality completely easy. Shiva Sivagami, coordinator of Office of
Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Equity, who is from India, said
when she immigrated to the United States in the 1980s, it was hard to
identify with the lesbian label.

“The labels, to me, that was very white,” Sivagami said. “None of it
reflected my experience. When I first heard the word ‘lesbian,’ the
only lesbians I knew were white women.”

“The labels are a big part of the problem,” she went on. “The labels
signify lifestyle; for a lot of people it may be a stereotyped notion
of life.”

She said that because the public LGBT community is predominately white, it can be difficult for people of color to find a niche.

“They wanted me to leave my race at the door and just be gay,”
Sivagami said. Conversely, “[The South Asian community] wanted me to
leave my sexual orientation at the door and just be Asian.”

However, increased exposure to homosexuality usually helps students,
including Gupta, Cuntor and fourth year graduate civil engineering
student Roger Chen.

Chen said he was rarely exposed to homosexuality while growing up
with his parents, who immigrated from Taiwan in the late 1960s.
Although Chen has not told his parents he is gay, he has tried to drop
hints and get them acclimated to the idea by talking about cousins who
are gay and watching Will & Grace with them.

“Will & Grace is easiest way to do it,” he said. “It would definitely help if we had some gay Asian figures out there.”

Fifth-year graduate computer science student Ruggero Morselli said
coming to campus made coming out more reassuring because he hadn’t met
an openly gay person in his native Modeno, a city in northern Italy.

“I think what actually made the difference for me when [I] moved
here on campus, there were many more openly gay students and
homosexuality seems largely accepted,” he said. “That’s why I decided
to come out of the closet. Maybe if I ended up working a job in Kansas,
that environment would not have helped,” Morselli said.

Jensen said varying prejudices among religious and ethnic
communities within the United States affect how people experience their
sexual orientation.

“It’s very important that when you talk about these global or
international terms that you not assume that coming to the U.S. is the
solution to everyone’s problems. You don’t want to suggest that
homophobia happens [only] there,” said English professor Marilee
Lindemann, director of the LGBT studies program.

Although homosexuality isn’t widely accepted in India, male bonding
is often more acceptable, Gupta said. Many people don’t blink an eye if
two men hold hands or hug.

If fifth-year engineering graduate student Ayan Roy-Chowdhury, who
is also from Calcutta, India, were to go back to India now, he might be
able to hold his partner’s hand, but not in a way “that would convey
that you are more than just friends.”

Some people in India hold the notion that homosexuality was imported
from their Western European colonizers, Gupta said. But in ancient
India, homosexuality was often accepted. There is a similar situation
in some African cultures, Jensen said.

Gupta said he is optimistic that attitudes in his country — as in
many nations all over the world — are changing for the better. While
the campus has a relatively gay-friendly atmosphere as compared with
some schools in the region, some improvements can still be made, Jensen
said. Sivagami said she is working to make LGBT groups address the
issues of minorities, including international students.

Gupta suggested that academic departments post visible gay-friendly
signs available from LGBT organizations so students won’t fear their
academic surroundings are homophobic.

“Having a supportive environment is not enough if that support is invisible,” Gupta said.

Recently there was a workshop on “Social Justice from Classroom to Community”.
One of the guest speakers was Omecongo (www.omecongo.com)
In the questions round, I asked “How can we bring activism to our daily lives?”
His reply was awesome, and something that I have felt for long.
He asked us to be aware of social justice issues by informing ourselves using a variety of
sources, books, news, articles, web-sources etc. And he said that we should confront
issues within our minute circles. Even within our small circle of friends/family we might hear
words of hate/bigotry/discrimination every once in a while. We need to confront those
and bring greater understanding to those close to us … that itself is activism.

The need for speaking up and speaking out is huge.
Here is a recent article on Washington Blade on LGBT activism by Peter Rosenstein :

Activist isn’t a
new ‘A’ word
Gay Americans enjoying their quiet lives should not forget they owe that quiet to a generation of loud activists.
Friday, December 02, 2005

I HAVE ALWAYS thought of myself as a concerned citizen, rather than a gay activist.
But I seemed to become one last year when a column I wrote for the Blade was used
in TV ads to smear a Democrat running for U.S. Senate last year in Oklahoma.

The rampant anti-gay sentiment used by the Republican in that race to distort my words
in an effort to hurt the candidate I had complimented was a useful reminder to me how
much we still need our activists.

I always cringe when I hear gay people claim they don’t understand the need for activism.

We need our activists now more than ever before. We need them to remind both those
who hate us, those who claim to love us, and even those who are us, that we cannot safely
go about pretending that we are just like everyone else, with all the same civil and human
rights.

It will be these activists about which some complain so much who will get us to that happy
day when GLBT people really can go about living our lives in quiet and ordinary ways.

I APPLAUD THE work of gay and lesbian activists for bringing to the attention of the world
the intolerance that we must still face. We cannot just turn the other cheek and pretend
the insults, large and small, don’t affect us.

Prejudice cannot simply be swept under the carpet, or back into the closet. To argue that
out and vocal GLBT activists are the problem, not the solution, is like wishing
African Americans could hide their skin color so we wouldn’t have to deal with the
reality of racism.

The world isn’t always a friendly place, and it’s the activists that hold our feet to the
fire and remind us of this every day. Let us never forget that the only reason that some
GLBT Americans can now go about living their lives quietly is because of the drag queens
at Stonewall and those courageous gays who marched in the early Gay Pride parades while
so many others, including me, stood and hid behind trees as we watched the parade go by.

I WAS 34 BEFORE I came out even though I grew up in Manhattan where gays were, of course,
rampant. I knew there was homophobia because I heard my parents’ friends talk about fags while
playing bridge every Wednesday.

Those friends were shocked years later when my mother explained to them that those nice gentlemen
from next door who for 10 years joined their bridge game were “fags” of the type they always complained
about.

Only two years ago, I worked with a principal who was threatened by some parents for allowing a
gay-straight alliance in his school. How can we allow parents to send their gay children to “ex-gay”
camps yet still feel that we need not be vocal in challenging such bigotry?

Those who would denigrate our activists lack an understanding of history. Without activists, so many
more gays would be beaten and bludgeoned, both physically and mentally, by the bullies next door.

As I found out from my experience as an accidental activist in Oklahoma, some of those bullies are
today in control of the Republican Party. These activists from the religious right don’t shy from
pushing their worldview, and neither should we. Our own activists must counter these attacks by
standing up and speaking out.

I learned from my parents about the dangers of staying quiet and fitting in. They came to the United
States to escape the Nazis. They taught me that assimilating into the American way of life does not
mean giving up our identity. Instead, we must remain vigilant, and become an activist when necessary
to fight for our civil and human rights, and the rights of others.

I am facilitating this dialogue course in Education and Public Policy Department and as a part of it we were exploring what sexual orientation means to each of us. So I pose three questions to you:

1. What does sexual orientation mean to you?
                Is it defined by which biological sex we are attracted to physically?
                Is it defined by which gender we are attracted to ?
                Is it defined only on the basis of physical attraction or on the basis of mental attraction              also (i.e. if we can at all separate the two, without playing games with ourselves,                          games which might be derived of social conditioning)?

2. What role does your sexual orientation play in your life, in the choices you make?

3. Would you date someone who is bisexual?

and yes, I will post my response too, just not yet, for fear of setting a pattern of reply.

On one of the discussions forums there was a long discussion on ‘is there a need to come out?’. It was very interesting to read the different views. What I had not expected was a lot of people actually arguing that its not really necessary to come out, either explicitly or implicitly.

Some of the arguments were
1. It might hurt my parents. Do they really deserve that pain?
2. My gay life is very separate from my ‘normal’ life. So unless there is too much marriage pressure or something like that, what is the need to come out
3. It might alienate friends/family. Why complicate life?
4. My straight friends do not state that they are straight. Why should I need to talk/tell about my sexual orientation?

In my personal opinion, each person who comes out to someone else, is doing his bit for the gay civil-rights movement.

Yes, coming out might cause hurt to people who care for you. But what is the cause of that hurt. It is not due to the son/daughter who comes out. Rather is the the social training in which even the parents are entrenched; a training that makes us think that heterosexuality is "normal" and all alternate expressions are deviant. It is the social rules and even laws that regard homosexuality as a sin, punishable by law (in some countries). It is the lack of everyday visibility of gays and gay relationships that leads parents to believe that their gay kid will never be happy or coupled. So let us not blame coming out or the gay child for their hurt.

Would it not be worse, to lead a lie in your parents eyes? Would they not be hurt more if they learn very late in life, that they never really knew who their son/daughter was, and their child never felt the closeness or confidence to confide in them?

As for gay life being separate from "normal" life I don’t have much to say, save that (as far as I am concerned) I think of life as a whole, and not segregated into gay and straight compartments. Plus coming out is not something that is a last defense of a homosexual cornered into marriage! It is the sharing of something that is important to you. It is the explicit declaration that the person no longer wants to hide behind the implicit assumption of heterosexuality.

Of course, straight people do not have to announce their heterosexuality openly and in so many words. and yet, they can do so without fear of repercussion. When a guy boasts about how many girls he has slept with, is he not declaring his heterosexuality ? If the situation is really so neutral, why is it that a gay couple has to often think twice before holding hands at a public place  while for a straight couple public display of affection is considered natural?

In a society where straight is the norm, and anything away from the norm is looked down upon, silence is the privilege of those who conform to the norm, for others it is the oppression. This silence is not one that says "it is not an issue"; rather the silence shouts out, "If you are different, do not show it; stay invisible, blend in, even if it means crushing your true self"

One could argue that with the media coverage of gay issues, and with shows like "Will and Grace" where is the invisibility? But really is a token Will and Grace show (a show in which the lead gay role is hardly ever shown to exhibit his gay side, except in campy behavior)enough for visibility? And the media coverage is largely due to either side of the political divide in this country trying to gain political mileage by either bashing or backing the gay rights. Its not all bleak though, and things are changing but there is still a long way to go.

There are organizations like HRC, NGLTF and such fighting for gay rights and legislation protecting against hate crimes and discrimination, but all the laws we could make might still not change the public opinion, which is finally the measure of social change.

It is in bringing about this social change that coming out can really make a difference. Many people have lost their lives just for being who they are. It is when a friend or member of family or someone close comes out that we can put a face to the gay community. It no longer remains this alien deviant thing they talk about in the news. For many of my friends I was the first person who told them he was gay. I was their first contact to the gay community. And it did a lot in placing the gay issues on a human and personal footing for them.

Make no mistake. It is not easy. my mother wept for months after I came out. It took her 1.5 years to completely accept my sexuality without subconsciously associating it with deviant behavior. But a few days ago I got a copy of a letter from her: she had written the letter to the editor of a Hindi weekly newspaper which had published an article with gross misinformation about homosexuality and the gay community. Her letter demonstrated a very good understanding of issues facing the gay community and she pointwise countered the misconceptions and misgivings expressed in the article. Such is the transforming effect of coming out. It almost forces people who love you to jump to the forefront of social understanding of sexuality and broaden their outlook. It is this social change I am talking about. And this does not happen in Congress. It happens in small living rooms.

Coming out could spark a dialogue among people who care for you. Some of your friends may confront their friends who make homophobic comments, thus increasing the sphere of social awareness. And finally awareness and education is what leads to change in general attitude in society.

Silence is a privilege of the majority. For the minority silence is equivalent to denying your true identity and blending in. This silence is deafening.

After a long time, I read an article which is delightfully complex and touches on the myriad of issues which shape the attitudes of Indians towards homosexuality.

The article makes an interesting declaration/acceptance of Indians’ discomfort with their heterosexuality. It goes on to explore the link between sexism and homophobia. We are so entrenched in gender roles that often we actually start believing them as being essential to our existence. A simple example: even educated people would often think that the husband should earn more than the wife. When I came out as gay, the problem I faced from some friends was not about my sexuality but more about my gender expression, that I could be as gay as I want but I should walk in a certain way or not have the limp wrist :).

Another important point , also raised in the article, is that the gay rights movement in India has to stop hiding under the banner of AIDS! For though AIDS is one of the issues of serious concerns to the gay population, the make the two synonymous could lead to misconception in the minds of many that homosexuality and AIDS are inherently related. We need to fight for civil rights, and we need to do so by the right means, by the right names, and with the right alliances.

Recently BBC had another article which talked of social reform in India and had a section on homosexuality and Article 377 (the section of the Indian Penal Code which criminalizes homosexual acts and could even lead to 10 years in prison!) . Some critics of the article said that India has much larger issues: poverty, population, education and such like. Why bring up homosexuality — that is not high on the list of social reform. Indeed if homosexuality is so insignificant, then why does the government waste its precious time trying to weigh down on the courts with its "moralistic stands" on the issue? Should not the government then spend every minute on the eradicating poverty?  Read also my friend’s views on this topic.

Indeed as one person commented on BBC, Article 377 should be repealed, not because homosexuality is becoming a trend, not because there are other nations in the world which are legalizing homosexuality, but because tolerance towards sexual minorities is an ancient  Indian tradition.