17 November 2017
Racism and Sexuality Discrimination
The feedback from members of the Australian Tamil community, through SBS Radio, confirmed that majority Australian Tamils are not yet comfortable with Same-Sex marriage partnerships. But they are not actively opposed to it either. Often it is about having to change their attitudes – as to who is right and who is wrong in family & community. One who is right takes higher position with the person who is marked wrong – often through cultural understanding. In terms of parenting too – it is more difficult to parent children where the children adopt a different culture and therefore become ‘Equals’ and not juniors in the same system. Racial discrimination problems are also based on this kind of mind-structure.
When I responded through SBS Tamil Radio, I highlighted that to me it was about victory for minority group in marriage culture. Majority Tamils who responded took the voting outcome at the surface level and whilst they accepted the verdict of majority – they themselves seemed uncomfortable with it. I feel that my identity with this minority group happened due to me being demoted to minority status despite performing at equal or higher level as the parallel member from majority group. This includes reasons of race with wider society and gender as well as ‘divorce and remarriage’ status within the Tamil community. To the extent I absorbed the discrimination pain where it was confidential and fought against such discrimination where it was public – I would comfortably integrate with other minorities as Equals. Those who ‘found fault’ with me outside their net contribution to common belief in our relationship and/or outside current merit basis – are likely to have voted ‘no’ to Same Sex marriage. They would fear that such relationships would demote them within the conservative society. But the deeper we Hindus go we would find the approval through Lord Vishnu taking the form of a damsel (Mohini) and Lord Shiva falling in love with Mohini. The son born from their union is Hari Hara Puthiran known also as Swami Aiyappan. This confirms that like the immaculate conception of Jesus by Mother Mary –union between same sex also would produce highly spiritual / creative children. It has to be naturally pure to have positive value. In one interpretation – the union happened due to arrogance within sages living in man-woman relationships. In other words, when majority abuse their powers for lower purposes which cause internal divisions – divinity is born within the minority group that the majority would naturally oppose.
Like Buddhists in Sri Lanka who fear losing power over minority religious groups – Australian Tamils who have formed their own Community structures on certain common values particular to a generation, would fear losing their children to the mainstream. This was confirmed by the ‘No’ vote coming from Sydney’s Western suburbs where majority Tamil migrants live. They ought to then appreciate why Sinhalese Buddhist leaders in Sri Lanka are also saying ‘No’ to Devolution of Power through a Federal system. Desire and Fear are inseparable as per the laws of nature. The English parallel that comes to mind is ‘no pain no gain’.
Those of us who genuinely support minority groups here in Australia or in our countries of origin, for Equal rights, would identify with the true minorities in our environments. Those who voted ‘no’ therefore are confirming that they identify with majority power and hence would say no to Equality within one structure. Tamil militants led by LTTE (commonly known as Tamil Tigers) wanted separation because they wanted to be majority power/seniors. Tamil Politicians on the other hand seek to be Equals. That was what the Same Sex marriage vote in essence was all about, at the deepest common level.
The ‘Yes’ vote is misunderstood as majority wanting to leave the man-woman traditional path. Likewise Federal structure of governance in Sri Lanka. It is highly unlikely that a Tamil of Northern Sri Lanka would choose to marry an Upcountry Tamil of average achievements due to the latter being known as Indian Tamil. Within the Tamil community – they are usually considered to be the most junior. This is confirmed through the recent news report headed ‘India to take up with Lanka removal of Tamil Leader’s Name’ by India Today which refers to the Hon Savumiamoorthy Thondaman who is presented as follows by Wikipedia:
[Savumiamoorthy Thondaman (August 30, 1913 – October 30, 1999) also spelled Saumyamurthy Thondaman was a Sri Lankan politician who represented the Indian Tamils of Sri Lanka of which he was a member. At the time of his death, he was both the oldest and the senior-most member of the Sri Lankan Cabinet where he had served continuously for 21 years from 1978, under four Sri Lankan Presidents and the leader of the political party Ceylon Workers' Congress. He was succeeded by his grandson Arumugam Thondaman.]
Most who feel uncomfortable about ‘same sex marriage’ view it at technical level. I discussed this problem of technicality – recently, using my experience within NSW Commercial Services Division – where I joined as a clerk and left as Financial Consultant. The position of Financial Controller was created due to my performance. During the interview – the white Australian senior from Central Office asked me a technical question about Accounting standards. I did not know the exact wording but was comfortable with its relevant application in the then current environment. To my mind, the senior from Central was showing off through a technical question and it was his way of taking revenge for the times I pointed to errors of principles in the Accounting Policy directions prepared by Central office. To my mind, that was racism as well – due to denial of Equal status to a Sri Lankan Professional until known otherwise on current merit basis.
This morning, with the above experience active in my mind, the following section of the Island report headed ‘Namal, Sujeewa get tongue tied during verbal duel’ caught my attention:
[State Minister Senasinghe: Everybody knows your track record. How did you get through the law exams? Could you tell me at least what the first section of the Civil Procedure Code Ordinance is about? I challenge you to tell the House if possible and prove you know it. What is the first section of the Civil Procedure Code Ordinance about.?]
I have used various sections of the Sri Lankan Civil Procedure Code to develop my thought structures during recent proceedings in Sri Lankan Courts. But I had no idea what the first section said. I looked it up and it says :
[This Ordinance may be cited as the Civil Procedure Code] !!!
Whether it is the technicality of Civil Procedure Code, Buddhism foremost provision in the Sri Lankan Constitution or Same Sex marriage law – using it purely at technical level confirms desire for status and therefore fear of loss of such status. The essence of Civil Procedure Code is upheld in parliament within the order in which Parliament operates. Mr Namal Rajapaksa did not need to be familiar with what the book said. Likewise, Mr Namal’s father Mr Mahinda Rajapaksa using Buddhism foremost after praying at Hindu temples is use of technicality to override experience based wisdom. This is confirmation of fear accumulated through years of enjoyment of unearned status. That is how Lord Buddha would show the connection if we ask Lord Buddha within us. I believe that when non-Buddhists ask with faith – Lord Buddha would respond more quickly. I know this through my experience at the Ministry of Health where I was demoted on secular basis for approval to counsel the civilians in war-camps in 2009. I prayed to Lord Buddha through the big statue in the room – and obtained the approval. Had I retaliated – I would not have spoken to Lord Buddha and I would have been limited to group power of the Tamil community. The power of Truth is universal and once developed that power travels with us wherever we go and beyond this life.