A big gay post

The Culture Ministry's recent call for television shows to tone down their gay characters continues to receive press and criticism.

The always entertaining Farang Affairs (temporary link) column in The Nation made a few good points:

We see the Culture Ministry has adopted rule No 3 from the charter of the Philosophy Department at the University of Woolloomooloo:

“No poofters”

Well, no poofters on TV, anyway.

The Culture Ministry will send a letter to television stations asking them to cut down on images portraying homosexual behaviour, a senior ministry official said.

Dr Kla Somtrakul, deputy permanent secretary for Culture, said some television programmes clearly showed homosexual behaviour and, if unchecked, some could cross the line to obscenity.

With the greatest respect to Dr Kla – he’s lost the plot.

Last time we looked, portrayals of homosexuality on Thai TV consisted mainly of male comedians dressed as women pretending to be men dressed as women who elicit howls of laughter from the studio audience every time they adjust their fake breasts.

It is not even homosexual stereotyping. It’s farce. Anyone with two brain cells left to rub together knows that.

Ironically, those most grateful for the clampdown will be the gay community, relieved that these stupid characters perceived by Dr Kla and his Culture Ministry to be typical homosexuals will vanish – at least to a degree – from TV screens.

Where’s my brain gone?

Ah ha! We have located the missing half of Dr Kla’s brain. Dr Taveesilpa Wisanuyothin, spokesman for the Mental Health Department, is using it.

“Watching homosexual behaviour on television could help arouse people with homosexual tendencies to act on their urges,” the doctor said.

Oh no . . . I have suddenly have the urge to tie two half-coconut shells on my chest, wrap a sarong around them, smudge makeup on my face and shove a creamy piece of cake in somebody’s face.

I must be gay.

Sounds like Dr Taveesilpa should be a patient at he Mental Health Department, not a spokesman.

One of the most pleasing traits of Thai culture is tolerance. So why is a ministry charged with maintaining the positive aspects of Thai culture doing its best to strangle this gracious social prerogative, burn its corpse and bury it where nobody can find it?

A pox on you Culture Ministry!

A Nation editorial further hammered on the point:

The Culture Ministry’s controversial idea of playing down the depiction of homosexuality on TV reflects the government’s backward thinking and broad misconception of the issue of gender. What’s worrying to the authorities seems to be the massive popularity of soap operas, game shows and comedic acts on TV in which homosexuals, mostly katoeys, play stand-out rolls, to the extent that some culture gurus fear these portrayals will have unpleasant effects on audiences, especially our more sensitive youth, who make easy prey for the influence of the mass media.
The fact is that gay men, katoeys and lesbians are a statistically measurable segment of our society, though a segment that is not often reflected accurately or realistically in our entertainment. Whatever their role on TV, homosexual characters tend to be indispensable as the objects of ridicule and humiliation. This is obviously not a realistic depiction of the gay community and most definitely not the kind of image this community wants to project to the rest of the world. These stereotypes are quite misleading. There is a large difference between gay men and kathoeys, though TV viewers associate the two in their minds. Katoeys, or at least an exaggerated version of them, are a daily part of most people’s entertainment. Soap operas featuring brash, outspoken transvestite characters tend to have higher ratings, much to the detriment of the country’s gay community.

The story of gay men and lesbians is a much different one. Gay men and lesbians generally do not have as much media exposure. It’s no exaggeration to say that homosexuals are relatively invisible in the Thai mass media. Some newspapers even prefer to run photos of Western homosexuals on their front pages when the news is about gay men or lesbians in Thailand. Indeed it seems hard for some Thais to understand the difference between sex, gender and sexuality.

Thais often associate homosexuality with sex, making it difficult to come to terms with the possibility of a gay identity. As a result, gay men and lesbians are not part of our entertainment. Being gay, like having sex, is seen as a private affair, and thus not fit for public consideration.

Whether the popular perception of homosexuality fostered by the media has anything to do with Thai youngsters wanting to eventually become homosexual is another issue: homosexuality is a fact, not a choice. It is a question of nature, not nurture. The authorities need to understand that their half-baked scheme cannot stop homosexuality. Being gay is a gender issue. Like race, gender is beyond a person’s control. Even Buddhism acknowledges that homosexuality exists and is not a form of sexual misconduct. Ill-informed officials would do well to learn from Theravada Buddhism, which states that all relationships are personal matters and develop by mutual consent. As long as a relationship extols the virtues of happiness and well-being without destroying and harming living beings, then it is a positive ethical action. Rape, sexual harassment and child molestation are unacceptable.

It’s ironic that the Culture Ministry’s desire to rein in homosexual activity is taking place at the same time the Tourism Authority advertises transvestite shows in its brochures. Perhaps it’s time for the authorities to be more open-minded and treat gender the way it should be treated, as something natural.

Here's more from the Bangkok Post, which finds that that Culture Ministry's push to eradicate gay characters from television is ironic, as homosexuality has long been a part of Thai culture.

"Homosexuals and transgendered persons are not new to traditional Thai culture," said Peter Jackson, gay activist and researcher of Thai history from the Australian National University, during a recent seminar on trans-genderism at the Princess Sirindhorn Anthropology Centre.

These individuals, he said, have coexisted, and have been assimilated and mentioned, in Thai society for centuries. Thailand's linguistic, mural painting and literary heritages have not shied away from their existence.

According to Jackson, the word katoey, a Thai term for transgendered persons, has its roots in the Khmer word that means "those who are different". There is also a term in the northern dialect that refers to trans-gendered individuals as those who have elements of both male and female.

"Clearly from these linguistic examples, we can infer that pre-modern Thais saw these individuals merely as 'different'. They did not have a stark distinction or description of straight, homosexuality or transgender like we do today," Jackson said.

He added that for ancient Thais, homosexuality was seen as a behaviour, not an identity. But people today see homosexuality as a fixed identity.

Erotic scenes depicting same-sex relationships can be found on mural paintings. "Ancient Thais talked openly about sex. There are erotic pictures of people engaging in sexual activities, representing a part of daily life in their time. Some of these include erotic scenes of same-sex relationships," said Jackson.

Literature, too, recorded stories that suggest homoeroticism and same-sex relationships. Cross-dressing was apparent.

"There are many heroes in Thai literature who felt attracted to women in the guise of men," said Teodsak Romjampa, a history graduate student.

If homosexuality and transgenderism have been part of Thai life for centuries, why is there a sense of discomfort today? According to Jackson, the changed perspective is a reaction toward Western colonialism and the concept of modernity. European imperialists viewed pre-modern Thais as semi-barbarians because of three main aspects in their culture: that Thai men had many wives, that Thai people were barely clothed, and that Thai men and women looked similar, sharing similar costumes and hair-dos.

"In order to escape colonialism, the Thai state recreated a Thai culture and civilisation based on the Western concept of what civilisation was," Jackson said.

From the time of King Rama V to Gen Field-Marshal Plaek Pibulsongkram, the Thai state went through a series of nationalistic policies, which modified, fortified and recreated "civilised" Thai citizens. Thais started to cover up their bodies. Monogamy was exalted. State propaganda demanded that husbands kiss their wives before leaving home for work.

Remarkably, Dr Jackson pointed out, it was at this point that Thai men and women started to see clear divisions between themselves. In order to accentuate their sexualities, men and women sported completely different costumes, hairstyles and dialects. Jackson also noted that after the time of King Rama IV (when Siam opened itself to Western powers), mural paintings never again depicted erotic scenes.

As a result, modern Thai society has maintained two sexualities, men and women, while marginalising "the others". Male and female homosexuals, and transgendered persons, are thus ignored, denied and discriminated against _ a subtle form of violence in society, he said.

Along this line of thought, sex, the "third" sex and eroticism have all become taboo.

"To me, the Thai state is a vigorous guardian of Victorian values. Modern Thai society allows people to do whatever they want, but it has to be done in the private space. Homosexuality exists, but must be kept behind closed doors. They shouldn't be in the mass media or express themselves in public," said Jackson.

He observed that an increasing number of people are resisting the state's monolithic structure that tries to uphold the dual sexual division.
"Members of the new generation now accept that there are varieties of sexual identities," said Teodsak.

Even in the government itself, there seems to be a new breed of thought.

"It's dangerous to set cultural policies without having adequate knowledge about it," observed a participant who came from the Ministry of Culture. "It creates mistrust among the public against the state."