Homosexuality: Passage Analysis
Passage 4
To fully unpack this passage, it is important to understand the events that lead to the confrontation between Shivan and his grandmother about the truth of his relationship with Mili. Earlier that day, Shivan and Mili quickly plan a quick getaway to Mount Lavinia Hotel, without knowing that they are being followed by one of Chandralal’s goons. So, when Shivan returns to his grandmother’s house that evening, an unexpected confrontation follows. Shivan, as the narrator, realizes that his grandmother now knows the truth of his relationship with Mili, and unfortunately, it is a truth that she is not willing to accept. The passage begins with the grandmother blaming Mili for taking advantage of her “obedient, innocent” “Puthey”. We, …show more content…
This is a good representation of what the Sri Lankan culture would expect from a grandmother because homosexuality is something that is completely illegal, unacceptable and unnatural. As I was researching the Buddhist beliefs on homosexuality, I found that there are a lot of disagreements amongst the different schools of Buddhism. While some are very specific about what is licit sexual intercourse and what isn’t, an article from the Huffington Post outlined that Buddhism, as a religion, is more accepting of homosexuality than other religions. To paraphrase the article, Buddha’s teachings don’t proscribe same-sex relationships, any more than they promote them. (Shaheen, 2009). A popular quote by a Buddhist monk stated that the restriction of sexual intercourse is meant for Buddhist monks, and that for the most part, the “lines between licit and illicit sex have nothing to do with sexual tastes and preferences”. (Shaheen, 2009). So, if anything, the grandmother should have been more accepting of Shivan’s “nature” than the rest of Sri Lanka. This is strike two against the grandmother and her …show more content…
First of all, miscegenation – interbreeding and interracial mixing, was a European taboo throughout history. A relatively recent example would be Nazi Germany’s forbidding of marriage between a German and a member of a non-Aryan race. (Posner, 2010). This was (and still is) a universal taboo. Secondly, even in 2017, not all of Europe has yet legalized same-sex marriages. In the late 1970’s to the mid 1980’s, around the time of Shivan’s stay in Sri Lanka, no country in Europe had legalized same-sex marriages. Therefore, it is wrong for the grandmother to be accusing Europe of promoting this “vile” relationship, because up until then, most of Europe would have agreed with her
To fully unpack this passage, it is important to understand the events that lead to the confrontation between Shivan and his grandmother about the truth of his relationship with Mili. Earlier that day, Shivan and Mili quickly plan a quick getaway to Mount Lavinia Hotel, without knowing that they are being followed by one of Chandralal’s goons. So, when Shivan returns to his grandmother’s house that evening, an unexpected confrontation follows. Shivan, as the narrator, realizes that his grandmother now knows the truth of his relationship with Mili, and unfortunately, it is a truth that she is not willing to accept. The passage begins with the grandmother blaming Mili for taking advantage of her “obedient, innocent” “Puthey”. We, …show more content…
This is a good representation of what the Sri Lankan culture would expect from a grandmother because homosexuality is something that is completely illegal, unacceptable and unnatural. As I was researching the Buddhist beliefs on homosexuality, I found that there are a lot of disagreements amongst the different schools of Buddhism. While some are very specific about what is licit sexual intercourse and what isn’t, an article from the Huffington Post outlined that Buddhism, as a religion, is more accepting of homosexuality than other religions. To paraphrase the article, Buddha’s teachings don’t proscribe same-sex relationships, any more than they promote them. (Shaheen, 2009). A popular quote by a Buddhist monk stated that the restriction of sexual intercourse is meant for Buddhist monks, and that for the most part, the “lines between licit and illicit sex have nothing to do with sexual tastes and preferences”. (Shaheen, 2009). So, if anything, the grandmother should have been more accepting of Shivan’s “nature” than the rest of Sri Lanka. This is strike two against the grandmother and her …show more content…
First of all, miscegenation – interbreeding and interracial mixing, was a European taboo throughout history. A relatively recent example would be Nazi Germany’s forbidding of marriage between a German and a member of a non-Aryan race. (Posner, 2010). This was (and still is) a universal taboo. Secondly, even in 2017, not all of Europe has yet legalized same-sex marriages. In the late 1970’s to the mid 1980’s, around the time of Shivan’s stay in Sri Lanka, no country in Europe had legalized same-sex marriages. Therefore, it is wrong for the grandmother to be accusing Europe of promoting this “vile” relationship, because up until then, most of Europe would have agreed with her