First Published in Debonair, Annual issue, 2000 The answer in many respects depends on what we mean by homosexuality. Do we limit ourselves only to sexual acts between members of the same sex and leave out romantic affection? Do we distinguish between those men who occasionally have sex with other men but otherwise live heterosexual lives, and those for whom their sexual preference forms the core of their identity? Do we consider same-sex intercourse that occurs in the course of a subterfuge, or as a result of frustration or desperation? And do we include liaisons involving those who consider themselves neither male nor female (for example, hijras)? Definitions are important because ‘homosexuality’ does not connote the same thing to all people. Besides, the meaning has changed over time. As has the meaning of heterosexuality. Until early 20th century, ‘heterosexuality’ was used to refer to ‘morbid sexual practices’ between men and women such as oral and anal intercourse, as opposed to ‘normal’ procreative sex. The term homosexuality – that is so casually used today and is almost an everyday vocabulary – came into being only in the late 19th century Europe when discussions on the varied expressions of sex and sexuality became acceptable in academic circles. The term was used to describe “morbid sexual passion between members of the same sex.” It was declared ‘unnatural’ by colonial laws, as unnatural as casual sex between men and women that was not aimed at conception. The term homosexuality and the laws prohibiting ‘unnatural’ sex were imposed across the world through imperial might. Though they exerted a powerful influence on subsequent attitudes, they were neither universal nor timeless. They were – it must be kept in mind – products of minds that were deeply influenced by the ’sex is sin’ stance of the Christian Bible. With typical colonial condescension, European definitions, laws, theories and attitudes totally disregarded how similar sexual activity was perceived in other cultures. There never has been across geography or history a standard expression of, or a common attitude towards sexual acts between members of the same sex. Love of a man for a boy was institutionalised in ancient Greece, amongst Samurais in Japan, in certain African as well as Polynesian tribes. Amongst some Native and South American tribes, erotic relationships between men was acceptable so long as one of the partners was ‘feminine’. For Arabs, so medieval travellers claim, ‘women were for home and hearth, while boys were for pleasure’. These cultures offer no synonym for same-sex intercourse. It was perhaps a practice that did not merit definition, categorization or even condemnation. So long as it did not threaten the dominant heterosexual social construct. To find out if homosexuality or same-sex intercourse existed in India, and in what form, we have to turn to three sources: images on temple walls, sacred narratives and ancient law books. What the walls show Construction of Hindu temples in stone began around the sixth century of the Common Era. Construction reached climax between the twelfth and the fourteenth century when the grand pagodas of eastern and southern India such as Puri and Tanjore came into being. On the walls and gateways of these magnificent structures we find a variety of images: gods, goddesses, demons, nymphs, sages, warriors, lovers, priests, monsters, dragons, plants and animals. Amongst scenes from epics and legends, one invariably finds erotic images including those that modern law deems unnatural and society considers obscene. Curiously enough, similar images also embellish prayer halls and cave temples of monastic orders such as Buddhism and Jainism built around the same time. The range of erotic sculptures is wide: from dignified couples exchanging romantic glances, to wild orgies involving warriors, sages and courtesans. Occasionally one finds images depicting bestiality coupled with friezes of animals in intercourse. All rules are broken: elephants are shown copulating with tigers, monkeys molest women while men mate with asses. And once in a while, hidden in niches as in Khajuraho, one does find images of either women erotically embracing other women or men displaying their genitals to each other, the former being more common (suggesting a tilt in favour of the male voyeur). These images cannot be simply dismissed as perverted fantasies of an artist or his patron considering the profound ritual importance given to these shrines. There have been many explanations offered for these images – ranging from the apologetic to the ridiculous. Some scholars hold a rather puritanical view that devotees are being exhorted to leave these sexual thoughts aside before entering the sanctum sanctorum. Others believe that hidden in these images is a sacred Tantric geometry; the aspirant can either be deluded by the sexuality of the images or enlightened by deciphering the geometrical patterns therein. One school of thought considers these images to representations of either occult rites or fertility ceremonies. Another suggests that these were products of degenerate minds obsessed with sex in a corrupt phase of Indian history. According to ancient treatises on architecture, a religious structure is incomplete unless its walls depicts something erotic, for sensual pleasures (kama) are as much an expression of life as are righteous conduct (dharma), economic endeavours (artha) and spiritual pursuits (moksha). Interpretations and judgements aside, these images tell us that the ‘idea’ of same-sex and what the colonial rulers termed ‘unnatural’ intercourse did exist in India. One can only speculate if the images represent the common or the exception. What the stories suggest In Indian epics and chronicles, there are occasional references to same-sex intercourse. For example, in the Valmiki Ramayana, Hanuman is said to have seen Rakshasa women kissing and embracing those women who have been kissed and embraced by Ravana. In the Padma Purana is the story of a king who dies before he can give his two queens the magic potion that will make them pregnant. Desperate to bear his child, the widows drink the potion, make love to each other (one behaving as a man, the other as a woman) and conceive a child. Unfortunately, as two women are involved in the rite of conception, the child is born without bones or brain (according to ancient belief, the mother gives the fetus flesh and blood, while the father gives the bone and brain). In these stories, the same-sex intercourse, born of frustration or desperation, is often a poor substitute of heterosexual sex. More common are stories of women turning into men and men turning into women. In the Mahabharata, Drupada raises his daughter Shikhandini as a man and even gets ‘him’ a wife. When the wife discovers the truth on the wedding night, all hell breaks loose; her father threatens to destroy Drupada’s kingdom. The timely intervention of a Yaksha saves the day: he lets Shikhandini use his manhood for a night and perform his husbandly duties. In the Skanda Purana, two Brahmins desperate for money disguise themselves as a newly married couple and try to dupe a pious queen in the hope of securing rich gifts. But such is the queen’s piety that the gods decide to prevent her from being made a fool; they turn the Brahmin dressed as a bride into a real woman. The two Brahmins thus end up marrying each other and all ends well. According to a folk narrative from Koovagam in Tamil Nadu, the Pandavas were told to sacrifice Arjuna’s son Aravan if they wished to win the war at Kurukshetra. Aravan refused to die a virgin. As no woman was willing to marry a man doomed to die in a day, Krishna’s help was sought. Krishna turned into a woman, married Aravan, spent a night with him and when he was finally beheaded, mourned for him like a widow. These stories allow women to have sex with women and men to have sex with men on heterosexual terms. One may interpret these tales as repressed homosexual fantasies of a culture. Perhaps the most popular stories revolving around gender metamorphoses are those related to Mohini, the female incarnation of Lord Vishnu. They are found in many Puranas. Vishnu becomes a woman to trick demons and tempt sages. When the gods and demons churn the elixir of immortality out of the ocean of milk, Mohini distracts the demons with her beauty and ensures that only the gods sip the divine drink. In another story, Mohini tricks a demon with the power to incinerate any creature by his mere touch to place his hand on his own head. Mohini is so beautiful that when Shiva looks upon her he sheds semen, out of which are born mighty heroes such as Hanuman (according to Shiva Purana) and Ayyappa (according to the Malayalee folk lore). One wonders why Vishnu himself transforms into a woman when he could have appointed a nymph or goddess to do the needful. However, devotees brush aside even the suggestion of a homosexual subtext; for them this sexual transformation is merely a necessary subterfuge to ensure cosmic stability. He who is enchanted by Mohini’s form remains trapped in the material world; he who realizes Mohini’s essence (Vishnu) attains liberation. In the Brahmavaivarta Purana, Mohini tells Brahma, “Any man who refuses to satisfy a willing woman in her fertile period is a eunuch.” This idea is explicit in the Mahabharata when Arjuna is deprived of his manhood after he spurns the sexual attentions of the nymph Urvashi. Consequently, the mighty archer is forced to live as a ‘eunuch dance teacher’ called Brihanalla in the court of King Virata for a year. All this suggests that in ancient India, men who were ‘unlike men’, unwilling or incapable to have intercourse with women, were deprived of their manhood and expected to live as women in the fringes of mainstream society. Perhaps this explains the existence of the hijra community in India. Like Brihanalla of Mahabharata, hijras have served in the female quarters of royal households for centuries. Hijras are organized communities comprising of males who express themselves socially as women. They are a mix of transsexuals (men who believe themselves to be women), transvestites (men who dress in women’s clothes), homosexual (men who are sexually and romantically attracted to men), hermaphrodites (men whose genitals are poorly defined due to genetic defect or hormonal imbalance) and eunuchs (castrated men). In one of the many folk stories associated with Bahucharaji (patron goddess of hijras worshipped in Gujarat), the goddess was once a princess who castrated her husband because he preferred going to the forest and ‘behaving as a woman’ instead of coming to her bridal bed. In another story, the man who attempted to molest Bahucharaji was cursed with impotency. He was forgiven only after he gave up his masculinity, dressed as a woman and worshipped the goddess. The idea of men who are not quite male or female was known in India for a long time. Such beings were known as kliba. In the Brahmana texts, written eight centuries before Christ we learn that when the gods separated the three worlds, there was sorrow. The gods cast the sorrow of the heaven into a whore (socially improper woman), the sorrow of the nether regions into the rogue (socially improper man) and the sorrow of earth into the kliba (biologically imperfect human). In later Hindu texts such as Manusmriti, the kliba was forbidden for participating in rituals; he was not allowed to possess property. Scholars believe the kliba was an umbrella term not unlike present-day words like namard and napunsak, which could mean anything from sexually dysfunctional male to impotent man to homosexual. One text describes fourteen different types of klibas, one of whom is a man who uses his mouth as a vagina (mukhabhaga). Hijras believe that they are neither male nor female, making them the descendents of the ancient kliba (though there is no definite proof in this regard). According to hijra folklore, when Rama went to the forest in exile, he asked the men and women of Ayodhya who had followed him to return to the city. Since he said nothing to those who were neither male nor female, these waited outside the city until he returned. Touched by their devotion, Rama declared that the non-man would be king in the Kali Yuga. What the scriptures reveal The Kali Yuga marks the final phase in the cosmic lifespan, the era before the flood of doom. Hindu scriptures state that in this age all forms of sexual irregularities will occur. Men will deposit semen in apertures not meant for them (Mouth? Anus?). According to Narada Purana: “The great sinner who discharges semen in non-vagins, in those who are destitute of vulva, and uteruses of animals shall fall into the hell ‘reto-bhojana’ (where one has to subsist on semen). He then falls into ‘vasakupa’ (a deep and narrow well of fat). There he stays for seven divine years. That man has semen for his diet. He becomes the despicable man in the world when reborn.” Clearly an acknowledgement, but not acceptance, of homosexual conduct. In the Kamasutra, there is a rather disdainful reference to male masseurs who indulge in oral sex (auparashtika). The author of this sex manual was not a fan of homosexual activities though he did refer to them in his book. Reference, but not approval, to homosexual conduct does occur in many Dharmashastras. These Hindu law books tell us what is considered by Brahmins to be acceptable and unacceptable social conduct. Since laws are not made on activities that don’t exist, a study of these scriptures does give an insight into behaviours in ancient India that merited a law. The Manusmriti scorns female homosexuals. It states, “If a girl does it (has sex) to another girl, she should be fined two hundred (pennies), be made to pay double (the girl’s) bride-price, and receive ten whip (lashes). But if a (mature) woman does it to a girl, her head should be shaved immediately or two of her fingers should be cut off, and she should be made to ride on a donkey.” There are no kind words for a male homosexual either: “Causing an injury to a priest, smelling wine or things that are not to be smelled, crookedness, and sexual union with a man are traditionally said to cause loss of caste.” And: “If a man has shed his semen in non-human females, in a man, in a menstruating woman, in something other than a vagina, or in water, he should carry out the ‘Painful Heating’ vow.” Further: “If a twice-born man unites sexually with a man or a woman in a cart pulled by a cow, or in water, or by day, he should bathe with his clothes on.” The ‘Painful Heating’ vow is traditionally said to consist of cow’s urine, cow dung, milk, yogurt, melted butter, water infused with sacrificial grass, and a fast of one night. Compared to the treatment of female homosexuals, the treatment of male homosexuals is relatively mild. Note that there are no threats of ‘eternal’ damnation, unlike the dogmas of Judeo-Christian-Islamic scriptures. There is nothing permanent in the Hindu world. There is always another life, another chance. An overview of temple imagery, sacred narratives and religious scriptures does suggest that homosexual activities – in some form – did exist in ancient India. Though not part of the mainstream, its existence was acknowledged but not approved. There was some degree of tolerance when the act expressed itself in heterosexual terms – when men ‘became women’ in their desire for other men, as the hijra legacy suggests. The question that remains now is: how does attitudes towards homosexuals in ancient India affect modern-day attitudes? Is our approval or disapproval of same-sex affection and intercourse dependent on ancient values? And while we ponder over the questions, we must remind ourselves that the ancient sources that censure homosexual conduct, also institutionalised the caste system and approved the subservience of women.

सहमत आहे. विशेषतः : "आज आम्हां बहुसंख्यांना आहेत ते अधिकार, कोणी वेगळ्या प्रकारे जन्माला आले म्हणून त्यांना देऊ नयेत याबद्दल फार आश्चर्य वाटलं आणि खेदही झाला. ... जसं काही समलैंगिक म्हणून जन्माला येणं हा गुन्हा आहे आणि तो कोणी स्वतःच्या मर्जीने केला आहे."

या वरून बरीच माहिती मिळावी. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals

मनोरुग्ण नव्हे कोणत्याही तर्‍हेचा रुग्ण कसा काय? काही हार्मोन्सच्या वेगळेपणामुळे निर्माण होणारी ती नैसर्गिक प्रकृती आहे. जर हे नैसर्गिक वेगळेपण ही विकृती/आजार मानायचे ठरवले तर टक्कल पडण्यापासून ते डावरे असण्यापर्यंत अनेक गोष्तींना आजार समजावा लागेल

कदाचित रुग्ण म्हटल्यामुळे आपणास संताप आला असेल पण सध्या असिडीटी किंवा सर्दीचा रुग्ण असतो त्या तर्हेने मी म्हटले.

कदाचित रुग्ण म्हटल्यामुळे आपणास संताप आला असेल पण सध्या असिडीटी किंवा सर्दीचा रुग्ण असतो त्या तर्हेने मी म्हटले. या लेखावरील आपले मत वाचावयास आवडेल The American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, and National Association of Social Workers stated in 2006: “ Currently, there is no scientific consensus about the specific factors that cause an individual to become heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual—including possible biological, psychological, or social effects of the parents' sexual orientation. However, the available evidence indicates that the vast majority of lesbian and gay adults were raised by heterosexual parents and the vast majority of children raised by lesbian and gay parents eventually grow up to be heterosexual. ” The Royal College of Psychiatrists stated in 2007: “ Despite almost a century of psychoanalytic and psychological speculation, there is no substantive evidence to support the suggestion that the nature of parenting or early childhood experiences play any role in the formation of a person's fundamental heterosexual or homosexual orientation. It would appear that sexual orientation is biological in nature, determined by a complex interplay of genetic factors and the early uterine environment. Sexual orientation is therefore not a choice. ” The American Academy of Pediatrics stated in Pediatrics in 2004: “ Sexual orientation probably is not determined by any one factor but by a combination of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences. In recent decades, biologically based theories have been favored by experts. Although there continues to be controversy and uncertainty as to the genesis of the variety of human sexual orientations, there is no scientific evidence that abnormal parenting, sexual abuse, or other adverse life events influence sexual orientation. Current knowledge suggests that sexual orientation is usually established during early childhood. ”

साहेब असंगत आचरण(DEVIATION) आणी विविधता(VARIATION) यात गल्लत होत आहे. माणूस डावरा असतो ते त्याचा उजवा मेंदू जास्त सशक्त असतो म्हणून तसेच दोन्ही मेंदू समान असणारे त्यामुळे दोन्ही हात सारख्याच क्षमतेने वापरणारे सुद्धा आहेत(AMBIDEXTROUS) यात अनैसर्गिक काय आहे? भिन्नलिंगी संभोगातून संतती निर्माण व्हावी हा निसर्गाचा संकेत आहे. समलिंगी संभोगातून काय निष्पन्न होणार?

man v/s wild हा कार्यक्रम आपण पहात असाल तर त्यातला श्री बेअर हा आळ्या सुद्धा खातो. मांसाहारी लोकाना देखील किळस येईल असे ते दिसते. तरीही मी पूर्ण शाकाहारी असूनही बेअरला अनकॉमन मानतो अननॅचरल नाही. या दुनियेत अनैसर्गिक काहीही नाही अगदी असेलच तर ..... तर ती मानवी संस्कृति आहे.

बाबा पाटील, सहमत. मारवा विकीपिडियावरच्या लिंक्स हा पुरावा ग्राह्य धरण्याजोगा नाही. अशीच एक चर्चा मागे दुसर्‍या संस्थळावर झाली होती आणि तिथे मी वर खरे डॉ यांनी मांडलेली मते मांडली होती. असो, मी मात्र आत्तापर्यंत जितके होमो पाहिलेत ते सगळे परिस्थितीवश , कुतुहुल म्हणून , गंमत म्हणून झालेले होते . अजून होमो स्त्री मी प्रत्यक्ष पाहिली नाही.

.या नंतरच्या प्राण्यांना उपचाराची खरच आवश्यकता असते.

मग यावर वैद्यकिय/मानसिक उप्चार आहेत का? कोणी तसे उपचार घेतले आहेत का? बरा झाल्याची उदाहरणे आहेत का?

मनिषा यांच्या प्रतिसादाखाली लिंक दिलेली आहे. बाकि समाज सहजासहजी बदलत नाही असं म्हणायचं असेल तर खरच वेगळा विषय आहे.

कलम ३ ७ ७ संपूर्णपणे कालबाह्य आहे हे मी सर्वात प्रथम म्हटलेच होते. आणि तो कायदा पूर्णपणे बदलाने हि काळाची गरज होती परंतु आपल्या कल्याणकारी विधायकानी मतांसाठी काहीही केले नाही कारण धर्म मार्तंड लोकांच्या विरोधात जाण्यापेक्षा कोर्टवर राळ उडविणे किती सोपे आहे हे आपण पहिलेच आहे. जर (अगदी काल परवा पर्यंत) २०१३ मध्ये निर्भया प्रकरणात कायद्यात बदल केला तेंव्हा सुद्धा विधायकानी हा कायदा बदललेला नाही. अगोदर सुद्धा १ ९ २ व्या कायदा आयोगाने ३ ७ ७ प्रकरण वगळावे असे सांगूनही सरकारने काहीही केले नाही त्याअर्थी सरकारला ते मान्य आहे असे सर्वोच्च न्यायालयाने म्हटले आहे. जर एखादा कायदा २० १ ३ साली विचार विनिमय होऊनही हे कलम कायम ठेवले आहे तर ते कालबाह्य कसे हे विचारत न्यायालयाने फक्त त्याची घटनात्मक वैधता ठरविली आणि हा निकाल दिला. आपले सर्व अति शहाणे(पुरोगामी) शहाणे( संसद सदस्य) आणि अर्धे शहाणे (जनता) यांनी न्यायालयाच्या विरुद्ध राळ उठविली. आपले अटर्नी जनरल वहानवटी यांनी सुद्धा न्यायालयाने पुरोगामी होण्यासाठी काही केले नाही म्हणून टाईम्स ऑफ इंडिया मध्ये वक्तव्य केले आहे. त्यांना लोकांसमोर हे विचावेसे वाटते कि आपल्या (मुसलमान) समाजाला दुखवू नये म्हणून तुम्हीसुद्धा राजकीय दृष्ट्या चतुर वक्तव्ये करता? असो मिळाला तर मी त्या निकालाचा दुवा देईनच पण त्या निकालात स्पष्टपणे असे म्हटलेले आहे जर संसद सदस्यांना ते कलम मान्य आहे आणि गेल्या तेरा वर्षात अनेक वेळा त्यावर विचार होऊन आणि त्याला संलग्न कायद्यात फेरफार होऊनसुद्धा त्यांनी हे कलम तसेच ठेवले तर (ते रद्दबातल ठरवणे) त्यांचे काम न्यायालयाने करणे कितपत बरोबर होईल? आम्ही फक्त त्त्या कल्माची घटनात्मक वैधता तपासून पाहिली. दिल्ली उच्च न्यायालयाने सुद्धा ते घटनात्मक वैध आहे असेच म्हटले आहे फक्त उच्च न्यायालयाने परस्पर संमतीने समलिंगी सम्भोग करणे हा गुन्हा नाही इतकेच म्हटले आहे. असो. "sitting on judgement of disputed or partial facts is not prudent ." "It is easy to blame someone than do something constructive."

डॉक पौगंडावस्थेत ९०% मुलामुलींच्या मनात कधी ना कधी समलैंगिक व्यक्तींबद्दल लैंगिक आकर्षण वाटते हे खरे आहे का?

>>हळुहळू आपली मुलेही सेक्श्युअली अवेअर होणार आहेत. अश्यावेळी जर होमो इज ऑल्सो अ नॉर्मल वे ऑफ लिविंग हे त्यांच्या कानीकपाळि सतत आदळलं गेलं तर चुकून होणारी पर्वर्जन्स, पौगंडावस्थेतील लैंगिक साहसे यांनाच ते नॉर्मल समजतील आणि आयुष्यातल्या एका मोठ्या सुखाला मुकतील अशी सार्थ भिती मला वाटते. सगळं मान्य. आमच्या कॉलेजात सेक्स एज्युकेशनवर दोन दिवसांचा सेमिनार झाला होता. (आता सेक्स एज्युकेशन म्हटल्यावर लगेच भुवया उंचावतील. सेक्स एज्युकेशन म्हणजे फक्त स्त्रीपुरुष संबंध नव्हे तर अगदी बायकांची मासिक पाळी म्हणजे काय, त्या दिवसात त्यांना किती त्रास होतो इथपासून ते मूल जन्माला देताना बाईला किती त्रास सोसावा लागतो इथवर सगळं व्याख्यात्याने सांगितलं. शेवटी हेही म्हणाला की तुम्हाला जन्म देताना तुमच्या आईनेही हा त्रास भोगलेला आहे, तेव्हा तिचा किती आदर राखायचा ते तुम्हीच ठरवा. घरात आई असेल, बहीण असेल महिन्यात ठराविक दिवशी ती चिडचीड करताना दिसली तर तिचा प्रॉब्लेम काय आहे ते समजून घ्या. ह्या गोष्टी त्या तुम्हाला सांगू शकत नसतील, समजून घेणं तुमचं काम आहे. हे इतक्यासाठी लिहावं लागलं की सेक्स एज्युकेशन म्हटलं की "लग्नानंतर पहिल्या रात्री आणि त्यानंतर काय करायचं हेच शिकवत असणार" किंवा "या गोष्टी शिकवायची गरज नसते " असा सूर काढणारे काही महाभाग आहेत.) तर आता मूळ मुद्दा, या व्याख्यात्यानेही आम्हाला समलिंगी संबंध हे नैसर्गिकच असतात त्यामुळे त्यात वावगं काहीच नाही असं सांगितलं होतं. त्यावरुन आमची झालेली धारणा अशी की हे शाकाहार-मांसाहाराइतकं सहज असावं. काही लोकांना प्राणी हे अन्न म्हणून खाणं पटत नाही ते शाकाहारी असतात आणि जे चवीनं खातात ते मांसाहारी. त्यामुळे उद्या कोणीही मला तो/ती समलिंगी असल्याचं सांगितलं तर थोडासा धक्का बसेल पण त्या व्यक्तीला मी लगेच बाजूला काढणार नाही. (निदान अजून तरी असं वाटतंय.) माझा मुद्दा हा होता की इथे काथ्याकूट करुन काय निष्पन्न!! मुळात या विषयातल्या जाणकारांतच इतके मतभेद असतील तर आमच्यासारख्या सामान्यांनी तो मुद्दा उगाच का चघळत बसावं. कोर्टाने निर्णय दिला म्हणून लगेच काही आभाळ कोसळलेलं नाहीये. ज्यांना या पद्धतीने आनंद घ्यायचा असतील ते घेतीलच. आपण इथे काथ्याकूट करत बसण्यात अर्थ काय !!

+१ याच आशयाचे लिहायचे होते पण कोणत्या शब्दात लिहावे समजत नव्हते. तुम्ही अगदी नेमक्या शब्दात सांगितले.

माफी हा शब्द फक्त मी वापरलेल्या शब्दांबद्दल होता,मताबाबात नाही. जे वापरले ते श्ब्द अतिशय जाणिवपुर्वक वापरले होते कारण मागच्या आठ दहा वर्षात जो काही वैद्यकिय व्यवसाय करत आहे तो आयुर्वेदाचा या मध्ये सेक्स मेडीसिन किंवा लैंगिक समस्यांवर उपचार करण्यास जे रुग्न येतात त्यात एकुन रुग्नांच्या सरासरी ४० टक्के प्रमाण असते.आनी त्यातल्या ६० टक्के रुग्नांना या खुळचट कल्पनांपाइ फक्त योग्य सल्ल्याची गरज असते. दुर्देवाने मागच्याच आठवड्यात असेच एक तरुण जोडपे आले होते लग्नाला सहाच महिने झालेले,त्यातला पुरुषाला हाच प्रॉब्लेम होता जवळ जवळ दोन तास त्याच्याशी सगळ्या गोष्टी समजाउन सांगत होतो.त्याच्यासाठी उपचार ही देता आले असते,पण मध्येच मुलाच्या आईने अत्यंत वाईटपद्धतीने त्या बिचार्‍य पोरीवरच आक्षेप घेतले,शेवट २३-२४ वर्षाची पोर लग्नाला सहा महिने होउन गेलेत अश्यापद्धतीने जर संसार असेल तर यातुन काय निश्पन्न होणार.ही एक केस नाही कित्येक संसार यातुन बर्बाद होताना डोळ्या समोर पाहिले आहेत.मेणबत्या पेटवुन बोंबा मारण फार सोप असत हो प्रत्यक्षात अश्या केसेस ज्यावेळेस हँडल कराव्या लागतात ना कळत आपले भारतीय संस्कार आणी स्वैराचार यातला फरक काय.