Re: g_b Re: Bollywood and Gay Cinema
Wow, Sumeet I am a little puzzled with Sumeet myself. On one hand you seem to act rather self righteous in asking gay politicains to support the cause and on the other hand you want to hide behind your marriage as a bisexual. (which u claim to have realised after your marriage) Your mail on a gay man learning to have sex with a woman is as repulsive to me as it would be to ask a straight man to have sex with a man because he had no choice in the matter. You are asking someone to get into a trapping, and lead a lie. Your mails dont seem to demonstrate any coherent thought. Like someone aptly said, you are just waiting to widen your closet. Pallav On 3/7/06, Vikram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Sumeet, I am willing to take back my proscription of 'gayism' which I'll admit is a personal dislike for the term rather than something like gay culture or gay identity. But you still haven't responded to the salient part of my mail, which is that you said that an organisation like the Sena will never allow films with gay themes to be screened in Mumbai - so how can you account for all the films with gay themes currently in theatres in Mumbai? Again I'll admit I was probably wrong to take a leap to say that this pessimism was a cover for your own fears, but your recent mails on this list have left me rather confused about what your saying and what you want. For instance you seem to want gay politicians to support us and talk about their double face. But from your other mails you seem yourself to be into perpetuating some double faces of your own since you seem to be married and don't recommend people coming out. How then can you demand or expect it of other people when you can't do anything yourself? Frankly you seem to be just another one of these married and closeted gay men who pollute our growing gay community with their confusions and contradictions. They haven't had the balls to take control of their own lives, so they're not happy seeing others doing so either. And they recommend others make the same mistakes they did, so that their closet seems less lonely. Your mail about how gay men can make love to their wives is a particularly disgisting example of this, just one step removed really from the homophobic theories of the ex-gay movement which preaches that gay men can 'learn' how not to be gay by teaching themselves things like sleeping with the opposite sex the way you recommend. I'd certainly recommend Rahul and others looking for advice on leading a gay life don't look at your example for advice, Vikram --- In gay_bombay@yahoogroups.com, Sumeet Mehra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Hi Vikram! I think you better go through the mail again. I used word gayism that you felt not in dictionary then for your very kind knowledge, it was to highlight about gay culture. Where as we often use word hinduism for hindu culture. Again, why did you feel that I am afaraid of Sena. I have mentioned the double face of politics. Name a single politician who has come forward to support Gayism oh sorry Gay culture in India. I said about double face of Politicians. There would be Gays in all political parties but do they support us? Its only GB and HUMSAFAR in Mumbai who are fighting for Gay Rights. What I intended to say is that, if they don't accept GAY CULTURE then they are turning their face from truth. Hence they are wrong because they do not have acceptance of truth.So better next time when you comment please try to understand what one is intending to say. Do not stick to words but try to know one's view point. I will use word gayism again and again. According to me its appropriate. Could be not according to you as its not in dictionary. Well buddy language is meant for human beings but human beings are not meant for language. Again feelings have no language. If you can not understand the feelings behind the words used then its your problem. One more thing, I would like to thank all the other guys who did try to understand my view point. But I think now I have made my self clear.Bye! Regards to ALL.Vikram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:--- In gay_bombay@yahoogroups.com, Sumeet Mehra wrote: Hi Ketan!Its not about bollywood accepting gay cinema but the audience accepting it. And till there is ShivSena in maharashtra, i dont think they will allow such films to be screened. Infact i feel that people do not mind over gayism till its harmless, but Sena never will allow that. Infact everyone is aware about 14th feb. How they protest and how they treat lovers. They do not want to think beyound. They call it anti Indian Culture. According to me the culture and the society has to change with the demanding situations. We all know that India has changed its culture or else we all would be still wearing Dhoti and Kurtas instead of jeans and t-shirts. This is all double face of politics. So India accepting Gays is still a dream, to come true. But again here I dont feel that we need to beg for Gayism being accepted. Who are
Re: g_b Re: Bollywood and Gay Cinema
Hi Vikram! I think you better go through the mail again. I used word gayism that you felt not in dictionary then for your very kind knowledge, it was to highlight about gay culture. Where as we often use word hinduism for hindu culture. Again, why did you feel that I am afaraid of Sena. I have mentioned the double face of politics. Name a single politician who has come forward to support Gayism oh sorry Gay culture in India. I said about double face of Politicians. There would be Gays in all political parties but do they support us? Its only GB and HUMSAFAR in Mumbai who are fighting for Gay Rights. What I intended to say is that, if they don't accept GAY CULTURE then they are turning their face from truth. Hence they are wrong because they do not have acceptance of truth. So better next time when you comment please try to understand what one is intending to say. Do not stick to words but try to know one's view point. I will use word gayism again and again. According to me its appropriate. Could be not according to you as its not in dictionary. Well buddy language is meant for human beings but human beings are not meant for language. Again feelings have no language. If you can not understand the feelings behind the words used then its your problem. One more thing, I would like to thank all the other guys who did try to understand my view point. But I think now I have made my self clear. Bye! Regards to ALL. Vikram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In gay_bombay@yahoogroups.com, Sumeet Mehra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Ketan! Its not about bollywood accepting gay cinema but the audience accepting it. And till there is ShivSena in maharashtra, i dont think they will allow such films to be screened. Infact i feel that people do not mind over gayism till its harmless, but Sena never will allow that. Infact everyone is aware about 14th feb. How they protest and how they treat lovers. They do not want to think beyound. They call it anti Indian Culture. According to me the culture and the society has to change with the demanding situations. We all know that India has changed its culture or else we all would be still wearing Dhoti and Kurtas instead of jeans and t-shirts. This is all double face of politics. So India accepting Gays is still a dream, to come true. But again here I dont feel that we need to beg for Gayism being accepted. Who are they to grant us permission of what we want to do. We live in so called democratic country...bus sirf naam ke liye. When we are all aware why to bang heads on the rock and break our heads. If they cant accept truth, then they are wrong and not we. I don't know what annoys me more about this message - the use of 'gayism', a word that does not exist, or the assertion that nothing openly gay is possible in Bombay at the moment because of fear of the Sena. Sumeet for your information at the moment there are two films running in theatres in Bombay which have queer characters at their centre. Capote is about an openly gay and camp man, Saving Face is about a Chinese-American family where the daughter, the central character, is openly lesbian and her affair with another woman is very openly shown (and no, its not a porn film). There hasn't been a word from the Sena. My Brother Nikhil ran for six weeks in Bombay with no protests. Other films like the ones I've mentioned, Rules: Pyar Ka Superhit Formula and Page 3 have all had openly gay characters with no objections. There have been two queer film festivals in Bombay and both GB and Humsafar regularly show gay films at private events. Plays with gay themes have been presented in Mumbai like A Muggy Night In Mumbai and Chottiyasha Suttit (in Marathi, so the Sena couldn't pretend not to understand what was going on). At a larger level, GB has been in operation for seven years, having parties, film fests and other events. Humsafar has been in operation even longer and is quite high profile and in the news. We have had press conferences on queer issues and demonstrations, the last on August 16th. All this has happened with the knowledge of the Shiv Sena - so how is your statement that no presentation of 'gayism' is possible in Bombay justified? Yes, I'm aware that the Sena protested against Fire and Girlfriend, but the first was linked to the religious angle taken in the film and the second to the sleaziness the film was serving up (which queer people also objected to), and in both cases it was linked to a patriarchal attitude towards women. The protests were deplorable but looked at in the context of all the other stuff happening, they increasingly seem like aberrations rather than the norm. I am not, for a minute, arguing that the Sena has suddenly turned gay friendly. We are not likely to get any goodwill from them and yes, as gay stuff gets more high profile, we may well face problems. But it is just wrong to say t
Re: g_b Re: Bollywood and Gay Cinema
Salil, I completely agree with you here. Walnut Salil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Dear Vikram, While I appreciate the other information and points of view in your mail, is it really necessary to sit in judgement over Sumeet's mail and get annoyed with it publicly - does it not run counter to the central purpose of having a safe space ? I don't see what is annoying about Sumeet's message - he uses the slang gayism - one may rant all one wants - but it happens to be slang in the indian gay community - if you had instead educated him about why its not a good idea to use the suffix "ism", that would be constructive. As things stand, you end up sounding like a dowdy grammar teacher and sumeet will continue to say gayism :) Its also difficult to understand why one should be annoyed with Sumeet because he is scared of the Shiv Sena and overestimates its influence. I appreciate the hard facts you have thrown in about the Sena angle - but why get hysterical and suspect that his simple fear is a mask for a supposed mental struggle with exploring his sexuality, and worst of all, why allege that he "pretends" to be afraid - he may really be afraid, in which case getting annoyed is of frankly no use to anyone ! Cheers Salil Group Site: http://www.gaybombay.info == This message was posted to the gay_bombay Yahoo! Group. Responses to messages (by clicking "Reply") will also be posted on the eGroup and sent to all members. If you'd like to respond privately to the author of any message then please compose and send a new email message to the author's email address. Post:- gay_bombay@yahoogroups.com Subscribe:- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Digest Mode:- [EMAIL PROTECTED] No Mail Mode:- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Individual Mail Mode:- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Contact Us:- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives are at http://www.mail-archive.com/gay_bombay%40yahoogroups.com/maillist.html Classifieds for personal advertisements are back on www.gaybombay.info site. Please exercise restraint in the language of your personal advertisement. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gay_bombay/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: g_b Re: Bollywood and Gay Cinema
I completely agree with Salil's points mentioned below. Instead of getting personal it will be best if we use more lower toned language and not shut up other person (because I am sure that's not the intent of Vikram ). Everyone is not at the same comfort level accepting their sexuality. And their fears (about Sena and other issues) might be real. I guess the main purpose of this list is to create a safe platform for everyone (and not just selected few) While I appreciate all the good work Vikram and volunteers have done in Mumbai, we need to be appreciative of other's viewpoints as well. Changes can't happen overnight and even though we have made great progress in metro cities recently regarding LGBT awareness, I still believe we have long way to go. And that can only happen by education and awareness (of our own community and masses as well). By shutting down opinions of our own people we might not achieve the goal that we are trying to achieve. cheers, Sameer Salil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Dear Vikram, While I appreciate the other information and points of view in your mail, is it really necessary to sit in judgement over Sumeet's mail and get annoyed with it publicly - does it not run counter to the central purpose of having a safe space ? I don't see what is annoying about Sumeet's message - he uses the slang gayism - one may rant all one wants - but it happens to be slang in the indian gay community - if you had instead educated him about why its not a good idea to use the suffix "ism", that would be constructive. As things stand, you end up sounding like a dowdy grammar teacher and sumeet will continue to say gayism :) Its also difficult to understand why one should be annoyed with Sumeet because he is scared of the Shiv Sena and overestimates its influence. I appreciate the hard facts you have thrown in about the Sena angle - but why get hysterical and suspect that his simple fear is a mask for a supposed mental struggle with exploring his sexuality, and worst of all, why allege that he "pretends" to be afraid - he may really be afraid, in which case getting annoyed is of frankly no use to anyone ! Cheers Salil Vikram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In gay_bombay@yahoogroups.com, Sumeet Mehra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: i Ketan! Its not about bollywood accepting gay cinema but the audience accepting it. And till there is ShivSena in maharashtra, i dont think they will allow such films to be screened. Infact i feel that people do not mind over gayism till its harmless, but Sena never will allow that. Infact everyone is aware about 14th feb. How they protest and how they treat lovers. They do not want to think beyound. They call it anti Indian Culture. According to me the culture and the society has to change with the demanding situations. We all know that India has changed its culture or else we all would be still wearing Dhoti and Kurtas instead of jeans and t-shirts. This is all double face of politics. So India accepting Gays is still a dream, to come true. But again here I dont feel that we need to beg for Gayism being accepted. Who are they to grant us permission of what we want to do. We live in so called democratic country...bus sirf naam ke liye. When we are all aware why to bang heads on the rock and break our heads. If they cant accept truth, then they are wrong and not we. I don't know what annoys me more about this message - the use of 'gayism', a word that does not exist, or the assertion that nothing openly gay is possible in Bombay at the moment because of fear of the Sena. Sumeet for your information at the moment there are two films running in theatres in Bombay which have queer characters at their centre. Capote is about an openly gay and camp man, Saving Face is about a Chinese-American family where the daughter, the central character, is openly lesbian and her affair with another woman is very openly shown (and no, its not a porn film). There hasn't been a word from the Sena. My Brother Nikhil ran for six weeks in Bombay with no protests. Other films like the ones I've mentioned, Rules: Pyar Ka Superhit Formula and Page 3 have all had openly gay characters with no objections. There have been two queer film festivals in Bombay and both GB and Humsafar regularly show gay films at private events. Plays with gay themes have been presented in Mumbai like A Muggy Night In Mumbai and Chottiyasha Suttit (in Marathi, so the Sena couldn't pretend not to understand what was going on). At a larger level, GB has been in operation for seven years, having parties, film fests and other events. Humsafar has been in operation even longer and is quite high profile and in the news. We have had press conferences on queer issues and demonstrations, the last on August 16th. All this has happened with the knowledge of the Shiv Sena - so how is your statement that no presentation of 'gayism' is possible in Bomba
Re: g_b Re: Bollywood and Gay Cinema
For the first time, I agree that Vikram has been less than sober in his assessment of Sameer's mail. Vikram is usually extemely sober and reasoned and I was trying to get myself to agree to him but found it difficult. Abhay --- Salil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Dear Vikram, While I appreciate the other information and points of view in your mail, is it really necessary to sit in judgement over Sumeet's mail and get annoyed with it publicly - does it not run counter to the central purpose of having a safe space ? I don't see what is annoying about Sumeet's message - he uses the slang gayism - one may rant all one wants - but it happens to be slang in the indian gay community - if you had instead educated him about why its not a good idea to use the suffix "ism", that would be constructive. As things stand, you end up sounding like a dowdy grammar teacher and sumeet will continue to say gayism :) Its also difficult to understand why one should be annoyed with Sumeet because he is scared of the Shiv Sena and overestimates its influence. I appreciate the hard facts you have thrown in about the Sena angle - but why get hysterical and suspect that his simple fear is a mask for a supposed mental struggle with exploring his sexuality, and worst of all, why allege that he "pretends" to be afraid - he may really be afraid, in which case getting annoyed is of frankly no use to anyone ! Cheers Salil Vikram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In gay_bombay@yahoogroups.com, Sumeet Mehra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Ketan! Its not about bollywood accepting gay cinema but the audience accepting it. And till there is ShivSena in maharashtra, i dont think they will allow such films to be screened. Infact i feel that people do not mind over gayism till its harmless, but Sena never will allow that. Infact everyone is aware about 14th feb. How they protest and how they treat lovers. They do not want to think beyound. They call it anti Indian Culture. According to me the culture and the society has to change with the demanding situations. We all know that India has changed its culture or else we all would be still wearing Dhoti and Kurtas instead of jeans and t-shirts. This is all double face of politics. So India accepting Gays is still a dream, to come true. But again here I dont feel that we need to beg for Gayism being accepted. Who are they to grant us permission of what we want to do. We live in so called democratic country...bus sirf naam ke liye. When we are all aware why to bang heads on the rock and break our heads. If they cant accept truth, then they are wrong and not we. I don't know what annoys me more about this message - the use of 'gayism', a word that does not exist, or the assertion that nothing openly gay is possible in Bombay at the moment because of fear of the Sena. Sumeet for your information at the moment there are two films running in theatres in Bombay which have queer characters at their centre. Capote is about an openly gay and camp man, Saving Face is about a Chinese-American family where the daughter, the central character, is openly lesbian and her affair with another woman is very openly shown (and no, its not a porn film). There hasn't been a word from the Sena. My Brother Nikhil ran for six weeks in Bombay with no protests. Other films like the ones I've mentioned, Rules: Pyar Ka Superhit Formula and Page 3 have all had openly gay characters with no objections. There have been two queer film festivals in Bombay and both GB and Humsafar regularly show gay films at private events. Plays with gay themes have been presented in Mumbai like A Muggy Night In Mumbai and Chottiyasha Suttit (in Marathi, so the Sena couldn't pretend not to understand what was going on). At a larger level, GB has been in operation for seven years, having parties, film fests and other events. Humsafar has been in operation even longer and is quite high profile and in the news. We have had press conferences on queer issues and demonstrations, the last on August 16th. All this has happened with the knowledge of the Shiv Sena - so how is your statement that no presentation of 'gayism' is possible in Bombay justified? Yes, I'm aware that the Sena protested against Fire and Girlfriend, but the first was linked to the religious angle taken in the film and the second to the sleaziness the film was serving up (which queer people also objected to), and in both cases it was linked to a patriarchal attitude towards women. The protests were deplorable but looked at in the context of all the other stuff happening, they increasingly seem like aberrations rather than the norm. I am not, for a minute, arguing that the Sena has suddenly turned gay friendly. We are not likely to get any goodwill from them and yes, as gay stuff gets more high profile, we may well face problems. But it is just wrong to say that nothing is possible because of fear of the Sena. At some point one ha
Re: g_b Re: Bollywood and Gay Cinema
Dear Vikram, While I appreciate the other information and points of view in your mail, is it really necessary to sit in judgement over Sumeet's mail and get annoyed with it publicly - does it not run counter to the central purpose of having a safe space ?I don't see what is annoying about Sumeet's message - he uses the slang gayism - one may rant all one wants - but it happens to be slang in the indian gay community - if you had instead educated him about why its not a good idea to use the suffix "ism", that would be constructive. As things stand, you end up sounding like a dowdy grammar teacher and sumeet will continue to say gayism :)Its also difficult to understand why one should be annoyed with Sumeet because he is scared of the Shiv Sena and overestimates its influence. I appreciate the hard facts you have thrown in about the Sena angle - but why get hysterical and suspect that his simple fear is a mask for a supposed mental struggle with exploring his sexuality, and worst of all, why allege that he "pretends" to be afraid - he may really be afraid, in which case getting annoyed is of frankly no use to anyone !CheersSalil Vikram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In gay_bombay@yahoogroups.com, Sumeet Mehra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Ketan! > > Its not about bollywood accepting gay cinema but the audience accepting it. And till there is ShivSena in maharashtra, i dont think they will allow such films to be screened. Infact i feel that people do not mind over gayism till its harmless, but Sena never will allow that. > Infact everyone is aware about 14th feb. How they protest and how they treat lovers. They do not want to think beyound. They call it anti Indian Culture. According to me the culture and the society has to change with the demanding situations. We all know that India has changed its culture or else we all would be still wearing Dhoti and Kurtas instead of jeans and t-shirts. This is all double face of politics. So India accepting Gays is still a dream, to come true. But again here I dont feel that we need to beg for Gayism being accepted. Who are they to grant us permission of what we want to do. We live in so called democratic country...bus sirf naam ke liye. When we are all aware why to bang heads on the rock and break our heads. If they cant accept truth, then they are wrong and not we. > > I don't know what annoys me more about this message - the use of 'gayism', a word that does not exist, or the assertion that nothing openly gay is possible in Bombay at the moment because of fear of the Sena. Sumeet for your information at the moment there are two films running in theatres in Bombay which have queer characters at their centre. Capote is about an openly gay and camp man, Saving Face is about a Chinese-American family where the daughter, the central character, is openly lesbian and her affair with another woman is very openly shown (and no, its not a porn film). There hasn't been a word from the Sena. My Brother Nikhil ran for six weeks in Bombay with no protests. Other films like the ones I've mentioned, Rules: Pyar Ka Superhit Formula and Page 3 have all had openly gay characters with no objections. There have been two queer film festivals in Bombay and both GB and Humsafar regularly show gay films at private events. Plays with gay themes have been presented in Mumbai like A Muggy Night In Mumbai and Chottiyasha Suttit (in Marathi, so the Sena couldn't pretend not to understand what was going on). At a larger level, GB has been in operation for seven years, having parties, film fests and other events. Humsafar has been in operation even longer and is quite high profile and in the news. We have had press conferences on queer issues and demonstrations, the last on August 16th. All this has happened with the knowledge of the Shiv Sena - so how is your statement that no presentation of 'gayism' is possible in Bombay justified? Yes, I'm aware that the Sena protested against Fire and Girlfriend, but the first was linked to the religious angle taken in the film and the second to the sleaziness the film was serving up (which queer people also objected to), and in both cases it was linked to a patriarchal attitude towards women. The protests were deplorable but looked at in the context of all the other stuff happening, they increasingly seem like aberrations rather than the norm. I am not, for a minute, arguing that the Sena has suddenly turned gay friendly. We are not likely to get any goodwill from them and yes, as gay stuff gets more high profile, we may well face problems. But it is just wrong to say that nothing is possible because of fear of the Sena. At some point one has to ask if you are saying this more to justify your fears, rather than what the community is facing. Pretending that the Sena is such a big threat is a useful way for people like you to refrain from dealing with their sexu
Re: g_b Re: Bollywood and Gay Cinema
I agree in toto with Vikram. Fearing about Sena is just being too pessimistic. I'm eagerly waiting to see Broke Back Mountain. I don't think anything depicted in good taste will evoke such vehement protests. I saw a play last month at Rabindarnath Kala Mandir and though the play was not at all popularized as a gay play it had enough matter on gay sexuality! In fact I have very strong doubts that one of our staff, who's a Shaakha Pramukh is in fact gay! Best wishes, R Vikram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In gay_bombay@yahoogroups.com, Sumeet Mehra wrote: > > Hi Ketan! > > Its not about bollywood accepting gay cinema but the audience accepting it. And till there is ShivSena in maharashtra, i dont think they will allow such films to be screened. Infact i feel that people do not mind over gayism till its harmless, but Sena never will allow that. > Infact everyone is aware about 14th feb. How they protest and how they treat lovers. They do not want to think beyound. They call it anti Indian Culture. According to me the culture and the society has to change with the demanding situations. We all know that India has changed its culture or else we all would be still wearing Dhoti and Kurtas instead of jeans and t-shirts. This is all double face of politics. So India accepting Gays is still a dream, to come true. But again here I dont feel that we need to beg for Gayism being accepted. Who are they to grant us permission of what we want to do. We live in so called democratic country...bus sirf naam ke liye. When we are all aware why to bang heads on the rock and break our heads. If they cant accept truth, then they are wrong and not we. > > I don't know what annoys me more about this message - the use of 'gayism', a word that does not exist, or the assertion that nothing openly gay is possible in Bombay at the moment because of fear of the Sena. Sumeet for your information at the moment there are two films running in theatres in Bombay which have queer characters at their centre. Capote is about an openly gay and camp man, Saving Face is about a Chinese-American family where the daughter, the central character, is openly lesbian and her affair with another woman is very openly shown (and no, its not a porn film). There hasn't been a word from the Sena. My Brother Nikhil ran for six weeks in Bombay with no protests. Other films like the ones I've mentioned, Rules: Pyar Ka Superhit Formula and Page 3 have all had openly gay characters with no objections. There have been two queer film festivals in Bombay and both GB and Humsafar regularly show gay films at private events. Plays with gay themes have been presented in Mumbai like A Muggy Night In Mumbai and Chottiyasha Suttit (in Marathi, so the Sena couldn't pretend not to understand what was going on). At a larger level, GB has been in operation for seven years, having parties, film fests and other events. Humsafar has been in operation even longer and is quite high profile and in the news. We have had press conferences on queer issues and demonstrations, the last on August 16th. All this has happened with the knowledge of the Shiv Sena - so how is your statement that no presentation of 'gayism' is possible in Bombay justified? Yes, I'm aware that the Sena protested against Fire and Girlfriend, but the first was linked to the religious angle taken in the film and the second to the sleaziness the film was serving up (which queer people also objected to), and in both cases it was linked to a patriarchal attitude towards women. The protests were deplorable but looked at in the context of all the other stuff happening, they increasingly seem like aberrations rather than the norm. I am not, for a minute, arguing that the Sena has suddenly turned gay friendly. We are not likely to get any goodwill from them and yes, as gay stuff gets more high profile, we may well face problems. But it is just wrong to say that nothing is possible because of fear of the Sena. At some point one has to ask if you are saying this more to justify your fears, rather than what the community is facing. Pretending that the Sena is such a big threat is a useful way for people like you to refrain from dealing with their sexuality, rather than exploring it the way so many others in the city are doing. Even your parallel with Valentine's Day is faulty. Yes, many shops played it down this year because of Sena fears. But what was much more in the news was the Sena's confusion on this issue, between Raj Thackeray's and Saamna' endorsement of the event and Bal Thackeray's past statements. Many places and people went ahead with V-Day events including, as it happens, GB with its party at Karma. And the one event where the Sena did attack, at Nala Sopara, they have got so much flack they might think twice about doing it again. The kids who were attacked defiantly went ahead and had
