Blog: Homosexuality in the Island of Mauritius (Part B – Discussion)

In this latter part of the paper I aim to briefly discuss the findings of the survey previously published on Part A. Given the nature of the findings, the main theme is to discuss societal attitudes towards homosexuality in Mauritius. Societal attitudes towards homosexuality, as a highly complex topic, is marred with a multitude of factors, such as the country’s law and politics, religion, culture, demography, socio-economic structures, personal values and beliefs and the like. It is within the context of some of these factors that the discussion has taken place.

The Democratic Republic of Mauritius now fully recognises and respects the rights of the homosexuals within its constitutional law. As a free and politically stable and self-sufficient nation Mauritius has hardly experienced any untoward uprising by any minority groups whose rights have been duly recognised and respected post-independence according to United Nations human rights policy. However, this is not to say that the homosexuals, unlike in many other European, North or South American nations, have been free from societal oppression however covert this may have been amidst even in one’s own family environment at times. In fact, in the effort to legalise homosexuality Mauritius has experienced couple of minor protests through peaceful marches by homosexuals and their supporters in the capital of Mauritius as well as through the streets of neighbourhood town of Rose Hill in the early 70s, demanding the legalising of their rights through UN equality of human rights.

But how many homosexuals can be estimated in Mauritius? In the absence of survey or recordable data, in line with countries such as India, the Middle East nations and the larger part of the African continent, it is hard to say the number of homosexuals currently inhabiting Mauritius. But if compared with nations who have conducted proper survey the like of Europe and USA, to some extent Australia and elsewhere it would give an estimation of between 3-10% of homosexuals in a given nation. Such an estimation will therefore give a projection of at least 39,000 (3%) homosexuals, including male and female, currently in Mauritius with a population of about 1.3 million people.  Arguably, such a figure is quite significant when considering the rights of a minority group in any democratic society. However, looking upon the present circumstances and societal attitudes in Mauritius it is not altogether surprising that homosexuality is a subject of much taboo with total incarceration of this minority group who has no choice but to function as covertly as one possibly can. Such a covert behaviour appears to manifest in the form of small groups organising themselves with an aim to meet either in private clubs, hotels or at times at open sea resorts through phone calls and personal pre-arranged  appointments in an effort to avoid potential confrontation, consequential public stigmatisation and even physical attacks from time to time. Often the oppression has been felt so great that there are anecdotal evidence indicating that some homosexual youths have even left the island of Mauritius altogether whenever opportunity has arisen to countries where they could feel better accepted and recognised with understanding and compassion of their needs. In the process, some homosexuals have even expressed bitterness in describing Mauritius as a primitive dark hole of hell and, hence, felt lucky to have managed to escape its oppressive grip to lands of freedom. But often this is not without much pain in leaving behind one’s loved ones for good. Such can be the level of incarceration and covert oppression sometimes that often go unnoticed in the Mauritian society at large. But what it is that is so strong and inviting in homosexuality that one has to even resort to leaving one’s mother-land in search for that need? Perhaps one would put down the innate need for freedom itself, the need to feel free to express oneself and meet one’s own basic needs as human. Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs states that sex and sexual satisfaction, love, intimacy, self-esteem and acceptance are those needs of man that are similar to that of basic physical needs, such as the need for breathing, eating, sleeping and resting for survival. Without the fulfilment of these needs life does not only remain unfulfilled but even unsustainable. We, as humans, are always in search for self-actualisation and constantly striving to meet our basic needs. But what are those factors that deprive human from meeting those needs within the norm of a given society such as Mauritius?

As a cosmopolitan nation Mauritius demography consists of at least 65% of the population, by far the majority, coming from the Indian subcontinent where homosexuality (previously known as an act of sodomy during old British rule, hence legal incarceration) has hardly been talked about since antiquity whereas the rest, almost of equal proportion, made of Muslim, Christian, black African and other ethnicity with similar ideological background in respect to homosexuality. It is then obvious to understand the multitude of differing ingrained socio-cultural factors, shaped by differing religious denominations of these ethnic groups, impacting upon the belief pattern of the Mauritian society on human sexuality.

It is said that generally the relationship between religion and homosexuality goes back, perhaps, in antiquity and it constantly varies across time and place with myriads of views of homosexuality often between the same or different religions or sects; namely, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism and others. Often such a view takes the form of a religion either discouraging homosexual behaviour, forbidding it or, on the other hand, even encouraging it to take place. While doing so, many of these religions justify their statements by arguing that it is homosexual actions which are sinful rather than being homosexual itself. Often, it is also the case that homosexuality is condemned outright. If seen within this context, it might be supposed that the one act which can always be defined as the normal, natural thing is sexual intercourse intended for the reproduction purposes between a man and a woman following marriage. Any other than this may well, at some point in time or place, be regarded as sexual perversion. Hence, in this context, sexual intercourse between man and a woman for pleasurable act, without intent for reproduction, may arguably constitute a form of sexual perversion. As such, the meaning of ‘perversion’ is probably fluid, depending on the position of the person using it and his assumption about what constitute naturalness and normality as we would wish to imagine. From this point of view, it can be asserted that the meaning of perversion is, therefore, either personal or collective. However, there appears a moral duty to what men consider collectively as perversion which cannot be evaded altogether from belief within a close knit society such as Mauritius or any society to that matter.

Homosexuality has also often been perceived as an act of sin within the context of perversion as some indicated in the report. But sin as a concept is often used to mean an action that is prohibited or considered wrong. In colloquial term sin is, therefore, something immoral, selfish, shameful or even harmful. It is within this context that homosexuality may be viewed by some as sense of immorality, disregarding the expectation of the wider Mauritian population in what is viewed homosexuality as different from normal sexual expression. Such an expression may often lead to societal harm in terms of sexually related diseases such as AIDS and HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases according to the findings. On the other hand, the presence of a homosexual in a family environment brings forth great shame and often is the case that the individual is ostracised and even alienated from the family norm as something taboo to even talk about among one’s own loved ones in the Mauritian community.

On the other hand, even impotence or in the absence of involving in heterosexual activity, through whatever underlying reason(s), is generally misconceived as homosexuality in the Mauritian society, often given the name ‘Pillon’ (synonym ‘puff’). Hence, if a man has failed to involve in heterosexual activity, for whatever reason, the person is misconceived as homosexual. In this respect only heterosexually related sexual intercourse is considered as normal. In the absence of this relationship even a celibate person is often suspected of suffering from impotency and hence a homosexual in the island of Mauritius. Such an abnormality is claimed to have certain cure either through consumption of appropriate natural food or the need to undergo certain process of psychotherapy or counselling, according to the findings in this report. However, psychotherapy and counselling had once been viewed an option towards treatment of homosexuality even by developed nations in the past, specially when homosexuality was perceived a product of nurture than nature. On the other hand there has been much inconclusive studies and research evidence both for and against the physical causations of homosexuality, such as genetic determinism, hereditary or hormonal factors. Such inconclusive reports, however, continue to influence the opinion of the ordinary members of the society in Mauritius.

As such, homosexuality has often been viewed as a disease, medicalised by some as a physical ailment or even mental illness in Mauritius. For example, refined foods or certain unusual aphrodisiac even to the point of such things as eating dates or dead camel meat have been blamed by some for the causation of homosexuality and other abnormal sexual behaviour. The linkage between illness and homosexuality was not something unknown even in the most affluent and developed nations in the past. In fact the possibility of homosexuality as a mental illness has even been debated and recognised in the past as such in the American journal of psychiatry only to be removed from its archive later, once proven that homosexual behaviour does not fit into the norm of mental illness. But societal stigma of homosexuality as an illness appears to continue to date although this has long been rejected through stringent studies and research.  But then homosexuality did not remain immune from other type of stigmatisation within the context of illness and infection for too long when came the issue of HIV and AIDS in the world arena. Such a disease has been largely linked with irresponsible homosexual activity even in developed nations as one of the main causal factors, even though HIV/AIDS are widespread in other groups too, including heterosexuals, drug abusers and prostitutes to name a few. Hence many homosexuals as victims of AIDs/HIV in the world survey further exacerbated the situation alongside drug abusers and others labelled as immoral beings of society.

Alongside such stigmatisation many other sexually related promiscuity such as paedophilia, incest and bestiality came on the forefront and links were made as a characteristic predominant among the homosexuals. Although there is continuous media report of heterosexual parents and near relatives involving in incest activities more often than not such perversion, including paedophilia remain strongly linked as part of homosexuality. However, it cannot be denied, too, that often parents in developed nations are worried to expose their children to homosexual male adults in fear of falling victims of such things as paedophilia or incest. Such a belief pattern is widespread through international media.

As stated above, media propaganda is another cause with the misconceived idea that homosexuality is confined only to certain parts of the world whereas totally absent in other parts both by country and race. Findings showed that there was conflicting views among commentators themselves that nations such as the Africans, Indians and Chinese origins are immune from homosexuality whereas European countries, such as USA, European and South American countries have a high rate of homosexuals within their societies, including sexual perversion and other sexually related diseases and infections. Such belief pattern is erroneously placed that may well be reflecting the degree of ignorance as well as lack or absence of studies conducted in nations that are hardly showing the presence of homosexuality within their society. Report of related incidences and crimes, coupled with absence of recordable data, are indicative that level of homosexuality may well be equally distributed in number, yet unknown, throughout the world.

While Mauritius duly respects the rights of the homosexuals there is a still a long way to go for societal acceptance of this minority group with changed attitude in line with other developed nations. Much studies and data are required followed by societal education for better understanding and tolerance if the equality of right of the homosexuals is to be truly respected within the Mauritian society.