Drag Queens - Political Bellwethers of Pakistan?

Originally published on Desicritics on Feb. 29th 2008

Almost twenty years ago while traveling through Swat Valley, I stopped in a bazaar and two women approached me, tall women with heavy make up. They stood in front of me and asked where I was from in broken English. I replied in Urdu which set them off with high squeals and sexy wiggles. A crowd gathered. There is always a crowd when there is a tamasha. What a show this was, an American dressed in shalwar kameez, wearing a Pashtun hat, speaking Urdu, driving a Japanese car, talking to two six feet tall ‘women’ who were flirting like crazy and reaching out to feel blonde hair.

“Do you take female hormones,” I asked. It was a fair question because they had asked me if I thought they were beautiful as they puffed out their bosoms. I nodded and rolled my eyes. Wah! The crowd laughed.

“Yes. Yes. I do, but my friend Sheila here does not. She has not been a nar, male since he was castrated as a child. She is a eunuch.” I looked at Sheila and my gaze embarrassed her; she turned away shyly, but then returned my gaze and lifted her eyebrows in a question mark. The crowd of children echoed the word eunuch, hirja.

“Do you sing and perform?” I asked.

“Yes. Yes almost every night. We have even performed in the famous Nishtar Hall in Peshawar when we were younger. We were very famous!”

In the Northwest Frontier Province where I spent my childhood, I had seen many, many men dressed as women, in drag as we say in the States. But not really in drag. My parents always looked away and did not answer our questions about tall women in drag. Cross dressing implied ‘functional’ men dressed as women. I was informed later by my father that most of the men who dressed like women, were eunuchs, and if not, were effeminate, and often homosexual. He was comfortable about this reminding me of the ‘eunuch of Ethiopia’ who was forced to carry Jesus’ cross.

Already my readers are squirming. Drag, eunuch, homosexual, effeminate, cross dressing… these are only mentioned in whispers by the men in parties or away from the family. Such are not discussed within family, within ear-shot of wives and children, particularly the word homosexual; that term had a special taboo, it was unthinkable. But in Pakistan, since its inception in 1947 and in the NWFP where I grew up, many men had a penchant for young boys, and beautiful men as they had throughout history. Check your history books about the Emperors of ancient India, who their favorite entertainers were. Oh, heaven forbid another term, pedophilia in India!

“In a society that strictly segregates women and men, these transgender musicians perform for male audiences—at weddings and other social occasions, swinging their hips in suggestive gyrations.” Dancers Cheer Islamist Defeat in Pakistan Vote, by Yaroslav Trofimov, The Wall Street Journal, Feb. 26. 2008.

This article suggests that the new election results in the NWFP of Pakistan are harbingers of change for cross-dressers and entertainers who had in recent years been prohibited, that a new era of more liberal thought and attitude toward dancers will now become a reality because the people in Swat have voted against Islamic militants who banned music, bombed and burned stores that sold video tapes, prohibited suggestive signs advertising with sexual overtones, and worst of all prohibiting the sale of those suggestive very evil Indian Bollywood movies and videos in which young women dance with faces exposed and hips and breasts moving suggestively.

The Wall Street Journal article suggests that there may be a return to ‘normalcy’ so that the featured entertainer, Adel, will be able once again to perform in Peshawar’s Nishtar Hall; a great step forward toward normalization of social activity.

Does the irony of all this leap out at you as it does for me? Normalization of social activity? So what is normal? Concealing women within society to the point that the normal urge for heterosexual interaction must be satisfied with men acting as women singing in falsetto voices and wiggling their hips and breasts to satisfy the prurient needs of a sexually repressed society? Even more, the ‘dancers cheer’ is a bellwether of political-social change. What an irony.

A bellwether is any entity in a given arena that serves to create or influence trends or to presage future happenings. The term is derived from the Middle English bellewether and refers to the practice of placing a bell around the neck of a castrated ram (a wether) in order that this animal might lead its flock of sheep.

Now the bells are around the ankles of Pakistani eunuch ‘cross dressers’; castrated rams that lead the flock of sheep toward political change. What a beautiful image. But in the same newspaper the headline shouts, PAKISTAN LULL IS SHATTERED, and reports that insurgents are receiving renewed attention in the assassination of Lt. General Mushtaq Baig, an eye surgeon who headed the Army Medical Corps. Insurgents; such a convenient term for cowards who hide behind religious convention and dogma to exert control, even to the extent of assassination and heaven forbid, the closing down of YouTube and repression of cross-dressing dancers.

Dancing bellwethers! Long may they gyrate and presage future happenings, leading out the sheep in the repressed frontier along the Afghanistan border.

Mother Teresa's Prayer

Originally published on Desicritics on Feb. 4, 2008

Puja, worship, invocation, prayer, namaz, dua, salvat, bhajan, meditation, praise, astute; the words are not synonymous. Each person involved in such acts brings with him or her personal understanding, personal cultural experience and personal interpretation of the reason for such acts. Each mind and heart experiences worship differently through the interactions stemming from experience and existence, dare I use the word, existentially. Each worshipper has a cognitive set, emotional baggage, cultural learning. Even the artifacts which surround the one performing namaz are totally different. How utterly different is the Badshahi Mosque from the Indian temple mandira, such as the Gopuram of South India! The motive for the prayers may vary as well. Some pray for a special blessing, some for forgiveness, some for physical health, and some even for wealth. A few pray to praise, repeating over and over how wonderful and powerful God is; are they hoping He will hear their praises and recognize their obeisance for… Others mutilate, flagellate themselves hoping that will show their devotion and thus garner something from Allah.

For one, with eyes open staring at a lingam, the statue, the bringing of flowers, the pouring of oil, the bowing and chanting may represent hope, a wish that a power greater than self will look with favor and grant the supplicant’s mundane yet heartfelt desire; to bear a child, to overcome an illness, to feed a family. To another who kneels in the cathedral with eyes closed to shut out earthly and physical surroundings, prayer may be a means to commune with God almighty on a one-to-one basis, to request forgiveness for sins, to give thanks to a personal God who attends, listens to; such a one prays for answers, gives praise, extols, and murmurs in the ear of the Almighty, hallelujah. Among hundreds gathered together in Lahore to perform namaz, to prostate themselves and intone holy words is to carry out the meaning of islam, subjugation of self before the one god, Allah and commune with other faithful and extol the attributes of the Almighty, the Merciful. Others in Ludhiana may sit together and sing, hum, play drums and musical instruments and make a joyful noise to khuda and feel the fervor of worship in bhajan, become invigorated with the eternal rhythms.

Mother Teresa’s personal letters published after her death reveal yet another meaning of prayer and worship. She expressed joy in 1931 when she took her first vows as a nun and wrote to a friend, “If you could know how happy I am, as Jesus’ little bride.” Those words evoke strong physical meaning, as does the act of prostration on the floor, arms and legs akimbo in the act of complete spiritual surrender to the bridegroom, Jesus, or walking into the church wearing bridal clothing. Some nuns wear a wedding ring.

Teresa perceives a dialogue with the almighty.

JESUS) Wilt thou refuse to do this for me?...You have become my Spouse for my love—you have come to India for Me. The thirst you had for souls brought you so far—Are you afraid to take one more step for Your Spouse—for me—for souls? Is your generosity grown cold? Am I second to you?

Teresa) Jesus, my own Jesus—I am only Thine—I am so stupid—I do not know what to say but do with me whatever you wish…” Time, September 3, 2007, page 39As a teacher in Calcutta with the Loreto Sisters on the way to Darjeeling she reported that Christ again spoke personally to her to work with people in the slums of the Calcutta with the poor, the sick the dying. “Come be my light.”

She embarks on her mission after 1948 but soon thereafter she experiences abandonment. “Lord, God, who am I that You should forsake me? The Child of your love—and now become as the most hated one—the one—You have thrown away as unwanted—unloved. I call, I cling I want—and there is no One to answer—no One on whom I can cling--.”

Teresa’s faith takes on a desperation stemming from unbelief, disbelief, emptiness because her prayers rebounded back to her. She felt totally cut off from God. She doubted the existence of her Lord. Yet she continued to do her work, continued to serve the needy, continued to hold her rosary and move the beads through her fingers.

Now, in retrospect the armchair religious analysts make their interpretations, those who find divine purpose in the fact ‘that Teresa’s spiritual spigot went dry’; that she may have experienced abandonment by God by imposing it on herself; that she may have had a huge amount of cognitive dissonance, or that through all her struggles with faith that she “reveals herself as holier than anyone knew.”

She fought against pride in her entire life of service, fought against her own unbelief and perception of darkness and emptiness when she tried to pray, when she sought One to cling to. But she did her work; her ‘prayer’ was her service, her giving, not vast sums to build a cathedral or support a religious cause, but in her poverty, her penury she gives what she has, herself, to the service of the untouchables. Her salvat, her mukt was her consistent fight against self pride. She perceived an absence of God, yet found salvation in service and dedicating herself to her work to the end through giving.

Teresa had asked that her private letters and notes be kept secret after her death. They were not, nor were her requests carried out, the church over-ruled. Why? “Her Agony” in the Religion section of Time, written by David van Biema got lots of attention. It put her picture on the cover of this world class magazine to be read by tens of millions. It exposed her belief or lack of it, her secrets. Why? Her secret letters became tabloid stuff. (Who wants to read about quiet belief, joy, and peace?) What sells is trauma, agony, voyeuristic peeking into another’s struggle, and agony with faith. What could have been the church’s motivation to release her secret letters? They must answer.

Teresa’s life itself was a dua, a prayer, a dedication to her fellow men, to alleviate the suffering around her, to extend a helping, healing hand to those who suffered. She had no money to give to charity, she gave herself. Whatever her inner spiritual, philosophical struggle was, it was hers and should have remained hers, as words spoken by a ‘sinner’ in the confessional should remain hidden. Though she received Nobel accolades for peace on earth, her greatest achievement resides in the lives of those she touched; it is a prayer through giving. We are not known for what we receive, what we get, what we obtain. We are really only what we have given. It is not her agony that should be celebrated or remembered, rather her gifts to humanity, her love for others. She was a little light burning in a tiny clay dish.

An Oath of Vengeance: Blood Demands Blood

Originally published on Desicritics on Jan 31, 2008

“Life for a life, eye for an eye, nose for a nose, ear for an ear, tooth for a tooth, and wounds equal for equal. But whoso forgoeth it (in the way of charity) it shall be expiation for him.” Koran, Surah 5, vs.45

To live under the first part of this declaration, to believe it and to enact it in one’s life places the individual in a position which leaves little room for forgiveness, little consideration for peaceful negotiation and instills the need to keep score. Certainly the idea of “turning the other cheek” as taught by Jesus can not be considered. However, Jesus was a Jew and the teachings of the Old Testament were almost identical to those taught in Surah 5. The idea of an eye for and eye persists yet today in the minds of those who negotiate settlements never solved by Arafat, never solved by present day Israeli leaders. The life for a life belief, and I say belief, not philosophy, makes for self justification and the drawing of hard lines in the sand.

On an individual scale, those who live and breathe this belief, carry their jambiya sheathed, ready for use against any who violate or step across that line. I remember traveling in Yemen Arab Republic and talking to men who carried their curved dagger at the waist, would never consider walking the street without it, they would feel undressed. So, I asked, when have you used your dagger? Why? Different men responded in different ways. One told me that if the dagger was drawn from the sheath to pay another back in kind, one who blasphemed, it must draw blood. Another said that if another’s dagger drew blood, then he would make an oath of vengeance and the aggressor would surely have his blood drawn.

I lived in Northern Nigeria for twelve years. Almost daily I heard the Hausa words, ‘make an oath’, yi rantsuwa. Men, thus protected by the aura of such belief go about relaxed in their passive aggressive stance, knowing that others around them think the same way. I also lived in Pakistan for a number of years and listened to iman se, saugand which was spoken so frequently that it lost its sting.

I was amazed when George Bush used the words crusade when speaking of the actions which would be taken against the Islamic terrorists after 911. Those too were similar words, ‘eye for an eye’ words. Those words drew a line in the sand. George said America would never rest until we got him, Bin Laden that is. They got Saddam but the misplaced vengeance continues in Iraq. The bad press Bush got about using the word crusade changed his language but not his actions. His immediate response was a telling one.

Not long ago Bin Laden said, “Stop spilling our blood so we can stop spilling your blood.” Diane Christian said in her article, Blood Spilling, “Osama bin Laden released a taped message offering to stop his jihad against European nations if they will stop ‘onslaughts against Muslims and interference in their affairs as part of the big American conspiracy against the Islamic world.’ It’s a noteworthy vengeance text, with a new peace-making twist. Bin Laden first claims his war is not terrorism but righteous revenge for brutality against his people and sacred places. He rejects the label of terrorist and returns it: By describing us and our actions as terrorism, you are necessarily describing yourself and your action…Our actions are reactions to your actions that destroy and kill our people in Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine.”

One religious cause against another; Israel and Palestine, or the United States against fundamental radical Islamists wherever they are, in Pakistan, Iraq or Palestine. But how is the common man on the street in Baluchistan or Kabul going to view the common man on the street in Chicago or Dallas? Will all Americans be thought of as aggressors against Islam? How is the average American getting on the sub-way in New York or the next plane to Seattle going to differentiate between those who are Muslim believers, peaceful believers who do not carry oaths of vengeance as part of their costume? Truly we are in a disturbing era in world history. War is being waged against unseen ‘enemies’, particularly those considered to be the ‘most dangerous kind’, those who carry their jambiya sheathed but ready to draw blood, or carrying hidden bombs strapped to their waists; and they can not be recognized on a Bombay railway station.

Our family first left India in 1944, boarding a freighter in Bombay and making our way south all the way to Australia and then on to Los Angeles. During the War! By 1947 we had settled into an American home but each of us carried our ‘Indian’ selves with us. As a school child I learned quickly not to constantly provide answers about India, not to talk about India too much; even though the teachers’ smiles were patient with these new strangers. Now I carry with me my ‘desi’ self, carry it quietly and have for many decades. Does one ever lose the sense of what home meant? The point I am making is that each individual carries with him, her or his social-ethnic and emotional costume. But then Partition came!

Our Indian homes had been in Taxila, Ludhiana and Sialkot. Partition came and as a child, I heard with disbelief the reports of horror and carnage at the new international border, brothers killing brothers and making solemn oaths of vengeance against those who slaughtered their loved ones. But how could the Indian child differentiate between the man getting on the Bombay train or the Lahore PIA flight to Quetta? There were a million wounds, much blood and memories which span generations. Even using the word Partition makes the listeners’ faces in Lahore or Lucknow, harden.

The reaction over the years that followed 911 or 1947 are similar; hardening of the categories, solidifying the rationale for the barriers, giving credence to the arms build up and the need for nuclear weapons, justification for preemptive actions, except now the jambiya that are carried are no longer personal but national and the oaths are based on strange alliances and threats. “Leaders perform their bizarre public ballets making friendship over hatred and common terrorist enemy, ignoring their serious disagreements over the Iraq invasion.” (See Diane Christian’s new book, Blood Sacrifice, available from Amazon.com, Feb. 2008).

Righteous violence and vengeance is the mask that is worn, like the phantom of the opera, it both hides and reveals the wearer; it makes the identity of the wearer grotesque. Look at the faces of shop keepers in Murree, Pakistan, when the Kashmir problem is mentioned. Mouths turn down and harden, eyes become fierce as India’s guilt is considered. The Vale of Kashmir considered to be a ‘heaven on earth’ has become the basis for hatred, revenge and oaths of vengeance keep flying back and forth.

I do not mean to preach, but why have the lessons of peaceful living been forgotten? Why are the noble ideals of ‘turn the other cheek’ forgotten; why is the teaching of serenity, peace and enlightenment of Siddhartha Gautama forgotten? Where is the belief of acceptance of all religions of Hinduism, promotion of non violence, the welcoming of all faiths, where has it gone? Where are these noble ideas and ideals? I think they are with us. But there is a second part to the verse. “But whoso forgoeth it (in the way of charity) it shall be expiation for him.” Vs.45b.

Is there charity? Is there hope? Vivekananda: May he who is the Brahman of the Hindu, the Ahura Mazda of Zoroastrians, the Buddha of the Buddhists, the Jehovah of Jew, the Father in Heaven of Christians give strength to you to carry out your noble ideas. J.H. Barrows, In the World’s Parliament of Religions, (Ed.), Vol. II. Chicago, 1893, p.98