"Marriage is more than four bare legs in a bed." - Hoshang N. Akhtar

Throughout the world, more and more gay and lesbian couples are formalising their relationships with a wedding or commitment ceremony. With or without the law, same-sex couples have been going ahead and holding public ceremonies of commitment attended by their loved ones, although the number of such ceremonies seems to be on the increase recently.

Since the late 1960s, many countries in the West have legalised or are in the process of legalising same-sex marriages. These countries would include Denmark, Norway and Sweden, with Finland, Slovenia, the Netherlands, and possibly Iceland and the Czech Republic expected to follow suit. In the United States, many gay activists are holding their breaths in collective anticipation of the outcome of a law case on same-sex marriage in Hawaii which may finally pave the ground for legal recognition.

While same-sex marriages are relatively rare in Asian countries, there are accounts of such weddings that are recorded and (surprisingly) even tolerated throughout history. In his book Passions of the Cut Sleeve: The Male Homosexual Tradition in China, author Brett Hinsch explored the tradition of gay marriage customs in olden China as recorded by Chinese writer Li Yu:

"In Fujian, the southern custom is the same as that for women. One tries to discern a youth for whom this is the first marriage. If he is a virgin, men are willing to pay a large bride-price. They do not skip the three cups of tea, or the sex wedding rituals - it is just like a proper marriage with a formal wedding."

Likewise, there are references in Chinese records to "Golden Orchid Associations" or lesbian marriages, which seem to have been not an uncommon phenomenon in the Guangzhou area. Just in all marriages, these associations are characterised by elaborate ceremonies and long term co-habitation of the parties involved, and married lesbian couples could even stand to inherit from their families.

In India, two policewomen - Lila Namdeo and Urmila Srivastava from the 23rd Battalion based near Phopal - got married to each other in December 1987. They even went through the customary wedding ceremony conducted by a Brahim in a Hindu temple. Their parents, pinnacles of familial understanding that they are, had given their consent and were present at the ceremony. However, the marriage caused an uproar in the largely conservative Indian society and as a result, both women were kept in solitary confinement for two days and lost their jobs. Recently, Jaya Verma and Tanuja Chauhan in the town of Ambikapur in the central state of Chattisgarh, also officiated their union with a full Hindu ceremony. Sadly, the local registrar refuses to recognize their union.

---

Yet even though Asian countries remain relatively untouched by modern gay and lesbian politics, same-sex marriages are increasingly being conceived and desired by couples who are sure they have found their partners for life. In view of the increasing popularity of same-sex marriages, it is crucial to examine and debunk the fervent (if misguided) arguments that had been put forth by homophobic detractors.

The most often heard argument concerns the definition of marriage as an institution between one man and one woman. This is easily the weakest argument for it begs the question of who defines marriage? The married or the "marriageable"? The heterosexual community or society at large? In the same breath, same-sex marriages (typically lumped with adultery and sodomy etc.) are also regarded as threatening the "sacred" institution of marriage. Actually, the converse is true. If gays or lesbians are allowed to marry, they would no longer be "pressurised" to marry members of the opposite sex to whom they feel little attraction (or strong repulsion) - thereby reducing the number of supposed "heterosexual" marriages that end up in the divorce courts.

The second most common argument against same-sex marriage is rooted in the ridiculous claim that marriage is for procreation and for ensuring the "continuation of the species". This hair-brained argument is of course refuted by the increasing number of heterosexual couples who have decided not to have babies as a lifestyle choice. With the world as it is today and all the attendant problems of overpopulation, it would seem that gay and lesbian couples are in fact doing the world a great service by not bringing more hungry mouths into an already overburdened world.

Then there is the nonsensical argument that same-sex couples just don't provide the most optimum environment in which to raise children properly. This is of course totally misguided since psychologists would have us know that what makes the difference in the development of a child is the love of the parents, not their sexual orientation.

The truth of the matter is this: homophobes and conservative societies as a whole just aren't comfortable with the idea of same-sex marriages. Gay and lesbian couples who decide "to get hitched" have been accused of everything from trying to flaunt their relationship to infringing on the "tradition" of marriage in an attempt to emulate "straight" couples. To hard-core cynics, same-sex weddings are only excuses for throwing a party and getting gifts - although I would dare say that no couple, gay or otherwise, would turn down the chance to acquire a treasure trove of wedding gifts.

In the final analysis, any society that devalues love devalues that upon which civilised society itself is based. Why should any form of that love for one another be discouraged? Same-sex marriages are often mocked and invalidated precisely because narrow-minded individuals often fail to look beyond their prejudices and see the ceremony for what it truly is: a meaningful and often spiritual commitment between two people.