For the last couple of years she's been working on this book, and I'd heard about it from several sources including friends of mine whom she interviewed, Geeta who's on the khush-list and Ashwini Sukhthankar, who edited Penguin's anthology of Indian lesbian writing. Her reason for interviewing them seemed to be because she was drawing connections between being lesbian or gay and being abused as a child. 

Not surprisingly, I had a lot of apprehensions about the book. CSA activists have not friendly towards the gay community in India, tending to blindly equate all gays with pedophiles. A friend told me the other day about a seminar in Delhi where a CSA activist started off by making the distinction, but as she got increasingly caught up in her talk kept forgetting it and saying 'homosexual' for 'pedophile' until a Delhi based gay activist had to get up and protest. 

Also, attempts from the gay community to have Section 377 amended to prevent it being used against consensual sex between adult men, have faced resistance from CSA activists. In such a context Virani's attempting to draw causalities between CSA and being gay or lesbian seemed just the latest in a dismaying trend. 

I have to say though that my apprehensions have proven to be unfounded. Bitter Chocolate is a passionate, crusading book, based on a great deal of research and lucidly written. Its certainly going to have a big impact on CSA awareness in India. 

But most important from our point of view is that for all her indignation and fury, Virani (with one big exception) doesn't become unfair or prejudiced the way so many other CSA activists are. She is personally certainly not homophobic and avoids falling into the homosexuality = pedophilia trap. She chronicles many cases of same sex CSA, both lesbian and gay, but she is always at pains to emphasize that all gays and lesbians aren't pedophiles. 

Yes, she does make the argument that children who have been abused often do become gay or lesbian, but she doesn't make it a necessary causality. And the basic point is, I guess, a fair one - the figures do seem to show that there are connections in several cases, although perhaps one could dispute about the reasons why. The point is she's not dogmatic about it. 

I'm not saying I agree with all she says, and some of her attitudes are a bit odd. And she does say something really bad about bisexuals, falling into that trap many seem to when they want to show acceptance with gays and lesbians - denigrating bisexuals in the assumption that that's what we'd feel or because they feel uncomfortable with the perceived lack of responsibility. 

Despite the Great Bisexual Debate on the Khush list, I think there are few gay or lesbian activists who would support her in what she says here, although its in a context of condemning homophobia: 

"Comments Ashwini Sukhthankar who has edited a book on lesbian writing. 'I think everyone is - or should be - aware that children are not appropriate objects of sexual desire for adults, be they heterosexual or homosexual.' She adds, 'Most child abusers are, however, heterosexual men - even those that sexually abuse young boys.' 

She overlooks that reprehensible group - the bisexual men and women - who with their sexually uncommitted behavior also negate the serious work done by committed homosexual and lesbians for their cause. Nevertheless, the lady makes a valid point; homophobes to note."

I can imagine Ramki hitting the roof on that one, and justifiably. Of course, she's talking of bisexuality in an Indian context where its the person is very rarely open about it to the people he or she is involved with, but talking of "reprehensible" and "sexually uncommitted behavior" does seem to indicate a phobia that goes deeper than just disapproval about dishonesty. 

And yet, along with all this goes an excellent discussion about the legal issues involving CSA and how what's needed is a redefinition of rape under Articles 375 and 377. When this is done she says 377 will become redundant and should be scrapped. Its great hearing this coming from a CSA activist, and is perhaps the most practical way for us to make 377 (the parts that criminalize types of homosexual activity) redundant. 

The argument is on the lines that rape at the moment simply is defined as forced and unwilling penetration of the vagina by the penis. Sodomy is left to 377, but oral contact, or touching the genitals, or penetration by some other object, all of which are common in CSA, is covered nowhere. 

The definition of rape in Articles 375 and 376 hence needs to be widened and made gender neutral. This has to be accompanied by the decriminalization of sexual acts between consenting adults should be removed since that simply weakens the whole issue of rape and victimizes people like us. 

Once that happens it may even help reduce CSA (this isn't Virani's point, but something I've told has been observed in countries like Canada after the laws criminalizing homosexuality were removed. If anyone has the actual data on this, or knows where I could get it, I'd be grateful if you could let me know). 

Educating the community on CSA issues could help reduce same sex CS abusers. And in the long run more openness will encourage people in the closet who might have taken out their feelings on children to seek consenting adult companions. 

Arguments like this legal one are what's really good about the book, and makes up, in my opinion, for most of its flaws. The queer community in India can learn a lot about CSA issues from this book, and Virani's attitude offers a way where queer and CSA activists can finally come together. So for those reasons, its a must read book, and I'm really happy to have my apprehensions about it proven wrong.

-- Compiled by Vikram
Uploaded on 08-Feb-2002