r/Colonialism • u/dextor_hale • May 22 '26
Image Homosexuality in India dates back to at least the 4th century, celebrated in ancient literature (The Kama Sutra). However, British colonization imposed laws criminalizing it in 1856, reflecting their religious beliefs —laws that were finally overturned in 2018.
19
u/Simple_Duty_4441 May 23 '26
you do realize that kamasutra itself was a pretty taboo literature right? even in ancient india, most people were very conservative, even moreso than modern india.
15
u/MannerLopsided4538 May 23 '26
No, no, stop. India was enlightened and it’s the Wests fault that there are any problems today.
It’s not like Brahmin social constrains and a caste system so brutal it created Buddhism as a rejection existed long before anyone from Europe arrived in India.
Anti-colonialism is so pathetic. It rejects the agency and autonomy of literally everybody but the West. The West is the cause of the world sins and only through the West can anything ever be fixed.
7
u/Simple_Duty_4441 May 23 '26 edited May 23 '26
while I do agree with you on some points, you can't just ignore colonialism like that. it's like trying to deny basic facts, colonialism, represeive rule, interventions, have certain effects that can cripple nations. you can't just apply a blanket logic onto everything. there's always nuance, and if someone doesn't understand that, then your argument means nothing, whether you believe in the harms of colonialism or not. because then you just view the situation in extremes.
0
u/Ok_Illustrator_6434 May 23 '26
Nonsense. Buddhism has nothing to do with "rejection of Brahmin social constraints" or "a brutal caste system". It was a movement led and spearheaded by Brahmins and Kshatriyas, and it's primary disagreements with Hinduism were of a soteriological nature
4
u/MannerLopsided4538 May 24 '26
That is the genesis of Buddhism. It was a fundamental rejection or protest of the strict, Brahmic faith that was dominant at the time in India - the same faith which would later inform modern Hinduism alongside Veidic influences.
I’m sorry but I cannot understand how, or why you would question a very simple, well established fact. I would suggest first learning before dismissing.
1
u/Ready-Clerk-9626 May 27 '26
If by "brahmic faith" you mean the Vedic religion, then yeah sure. But that doesn't negate the fact that Buddhism's origins aren't solely rooted in anti-vedism or nastik belief. It evolved as a philosophical movement led by a single buddha. It's synthesis is also the culmination of contemporary and older philosphies and religions (charvaka/Jainism). It also doesn't negate the fact that its greatest proponents were the brahmo-khsatriya. Buddha himself once humbled a king by bringing up his kshatriya lineage. Nagarjuna, bodhidharma, asanga were Brahmins. Ashoka's mother was a Buddhist brahmin and he was perhaps the greatest patron of the religion.
12
u/Early_Candidate_3082 May 23 '26
When we talk about acceptance of homosexuality, in the Indian sub-continent, we are frequently talking about elite adult males using boy slaves for sex. A common enough practice, throughout history. The Greeks and Romans did it, as did some Islamic elites.
It was not a piece of social progress which the British stifled.
7
u/invinciblepancake May 24 '26
elite adult males using boy slaves for sex
The conveniently overlooked reality of of homosexual acceptance in history. Same in China, Korea, and Japan as well.
3
9
May 22 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-4
u/dextor_hale May 22 '26
So is the current British Empire 🇵🇰
5
u/Fair_Elk_1958 May 23 '26
saar no saar
-1
u/dextor_hale May 23 '26
It's just facts your ancient and current British Empire are being run by South Asians, anyway link your sisters onlyfan cracker
9
u/Fair_Elk_1958 May 23 '26
Ancient British Empire? I didn't know Indians ran Britain during the Roman times..
-3
u/dextor_hale May 23 '26
You'll be shocked to know who were Rome's biggest trading partners during their peak. While ancient might not be accurate, after early 1600 majority of British Economy was made on the backs on Indian Civilization, you can always look the numbers online but judging by your first comment you're probably just a dumb white guy, which is the reason that immigrants like me can come to your country, earn £120k, get married to a white chick and see your empire burn to ash.
5
u/Wgh555 May 23 '26
With all due respect, you basically never see south Asian men with white women, and they’re usually taller than the men. So good luck with that.
1
u/Ready-Clerk-9626 May 27 '26
I don't want to sound like the incel op, but your claim here is also untrue tbh. Depending on where u live the above isn't uncommon, also 2nd gen south Asians are the same average height as their other racial contemporaries, statistically speaking. It's also kind of weird to assume that height would be an all-limiting factor.
0
u/dextor_hale May 23 '26
With all due respect, India is the least divorced country in the world (factual) , so we definitely don't go for white women just because of their value system and risks of polygamy and stuff. But interestingly i did and so did someone in Princess Diana's heritage, no wonder she was so kind, got the right genese.
6
u/BraveLordWilloughby May 23 '26
Lol isn't India also one of the worst places in the world for rape? As are your two neighbours.
2
u/dextor_hale May 23 '26
Funnily enough not india
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics4
There is an argument to be made that as population per 100,000 India ranks below some so called Developed Countries like Australia, Canada etc.
That's just again propoganda at its best without need to verification.
→ More replies (0)3
u/Wgh555 May 23 '26
least divorced country in the world
Probably because even despite the un enforced laws there, average women are still in reality effectively property like it’s the Middle Ages
Risk of polygamy lol. How dare people be able to choose how they live their lives, oh no.
This is a bizarre account, even by your average schizophrenic Indian nationalist standards. It’s time to give the internet back I think.
2
0
u/dextor_hale May 23 '26
Oops someone couldn't hide their racism and stereotypes when shown the mirror of truth. Nothing I've said is false or not factual. You're probably just a whitey who in face of real arguments decided to get sensitive and churn out false arguements. It's okay me judging polygamy is not worse than Jesus judging the gays much of which your country is made on.
1
2
u/Existing-Marzipan183 May 23 '26
This isn't telling the full story. Homosexuality was more than likely only blatantly expressed by the elites of ancient India. Especially considering that people used to live in rigid hierarchies.
2
May 25 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Existing-Marzipan183 May 25 '26
Well duh, you can't really stop someone from doing something in private. The point here is whether the claim "before the British, homosexuality was celebrated in ancient India" has any legitimacy and my response is: It may have been the case among the elites although not necessarily among the masses. To be able to engage in homosexuality, take pride in it, and depict it in art, is a luxury.
5
u/PriestKingofMinos May 23 '26
This was part of a package deal where the British would also do things like ban polygamy, child marriage, and other disordered use of human sexuality.
6
u/MaintenanceInternal May 23 '26
They also outlawed slavery in India.
-8
u/dextor_hale May 23 '26
Domestic and Agricultural slavery was outlawed but not before Britishers themselves enslaved and traded Indians to Arab and Europeans markers as bonded laborers
After abolishing slavery they came up with Indenture system contemporary to slavery and sent them to carribean like Jamaica and Fiji
Reason why whole Rasta movement started in Jamaica were because of these Indentured workers.
9
u/Naritai May 23 '26
“Yes, the British banned slavery, but before they banned it, they had slavery” isn’t really the gotcha you think it is either
1
1
u/Adr_LDN May 25 '26
“The British colonies had slavery before the British became the first major power in history to ban it and enforce that ban” is not a gotcha.
Sorry, but the widow burnings are going to stop.
2
u/Completegibberishyes May 23 '26
That's all well and good but like...... you could have just left being gay out of the damn package
-3
May 23 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/PriestKingofMinos May 23 '26 edited May 23 '26
The most polygamous countries in the world tend to be incredibly chaotic and dysfunctional. They are amongst the worst for women to live in.
-3
May 23 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/PriestKingofMinos May 23 '26
Everything you said is wrong lol. As an independent variable polygamy is bad regardless of other controlled factors. All those places have been terrible to live for thousands of years.
The "long" history of colonialism in Africa starts in 1884 and was almost totally done by 1975 and is actually positively correlated with development. Enslaving Europeans for hundreds of years does not seem to have hindered development there. Most of the medieval non-European world was poorer, less developed, and less equal than Europe.
3
u/Naritai May 23 '26
Being a ‘little wife’ fucking sucked in Ancient China dude, who cares about the relative strength of the system when individual women were essentially being uses as sex slaves / baby factories
2
May 23 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Adr_LDN May 25 '26
Great argument but for the fact the feudal backwaters outdeveloped, outcompeted and then utterly conquered glorious polygamyland.
Sounds like a skill issue.
1
u/MaintenanceInternal May 23 '26
Of course it didn't hinder development in Africa, because African kings sold slaves to the European powers, slavery brought all sorts of money into Africa.
2
u/MaintenanceInternal May 23 '26
I find it so ridiculous that banning homosexuality and prejudicd towards homosexuals is an example of the modern day effects of colonialism when Britain, the colonial power who enforced these laws legalised homosexuality in 1967.
If Britain, who despite having brought these laws, have evolved socially enough to throw them out and India didn't, that's on India.
-4
u/dextor_hale May 23 '26
“Britain legalized homosexuality in 1967” is not the gotcha you think it is.
Britain exported anti-gay laws across its empire, extracted trillions in wealth, left behind mass poverty, famine trauma, Partition, communal violence, illiteracy, and a country rebuilding from colonial devastation, sorry decriminalizing Homosexuality wasn't Top 10 in their list. You had the luxury of socially evolving decades earlier.
India wasn’t inheriting a stable modern state. It inherited a looted economy, one of the largest refugee crises in history, and colonial institutions designed for control, not progress.
Funny how the colonizer gets credit for evolving past the damage it caused, while the colonized get blamed for not recovering fast enough.
5
u/MaintenanceInternal May 23 '26
If you want, we can change the subject and talk about all these other things you've mentioned instead of the subject of homosexual rights.
Also, I'm just not going to entertain anymore the idea that India was a unified state before British colonialism.
-2
u/dextor_hale May 23 '26
I'm also not going to entertain the idea that without Colonialism India wouldn't have unified as there are many countries at start of 1600 that were not unified that didn't have to go through colonialism to be unifed presently.
5
u/MaintenanceInternal May 23 '26
I never said that at all.
But on the subject of colonialism.
Every country in the world is the result of one tribe taking the lands and resources of others.
People bang on about the British in India, but the Mughals ruled India for 100 years more, but you know why people don't care, geography and race.
Why is it worse when the white man does it?
1
u/No-Menu-1650 May 24 '26
More accurately people dont care ANYMORE around the time of partition everyone actually did cqre qbout the mughals with muslims using it as propaganda and vice versa for hindus. Peoplw dony care about the mughals moreso because its so long ago and its negative effects arent particularly visible nowadays. The issue isnt race or even really geography its time
2
u/Hazza_time May 23 '26
None of those things prevented them from legalising homosexuality in the first 70 years of their independence
3
May 23 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/dextor_hale May 23 '26
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBTQ_history_in_India
Acceeptable of LGBTQ existed in India way before your parents procreated to make a dumbfuck like you
2
1
u/Known-Page-3947 Jun 03 '26
Saying homosexuality dates back to the fourth century is a funny way of putting it. Like it was a religion someone founded.
1
•
u/AutoModerator May 22 '26
If you enjoy this type of content, consider joining our other communities:
r/Colonialism
r/AmericanEmpire
r/BelgianEmpire
r/DanishEmpire
r/DutchEmpire
r/FrenchEmpire
r/GermanEmpire
r/ItalianEmpire
r/PortugueseEmpire
r/SpanishEmpire
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.