The actual scientific report mentioned by the article heavily implies that the person is probably of Finnic or Sami origin and that such mixed gender role burials are not as unheard on among those people.
This is supported by their jewelry being of prominent local origin and style and nothing in the burial being supportive of a real nordic origin beyond minute cultural syncretism.
I’d also mention that the conditions of the burial are not actually consistent with a high status norse religious burial, due to lack of accompanying sacrifices like animals or slaves. This is at best some kind of middle class burial they scrapped together.
Secondarily, they were not buried with a sword, the sword was buried later between their grave and then covered up (Which seems emblematic of trying to seal the grave tbh, as if people thought it might rise as a draugr – Supportive of them having a bad reputation or as a safety precaution for a deliberate humiliation of the burial conditions.) and then buried with an unhilted sword on their person (meaning unknown with speculation it may have been deliberate as an insult due to their condition).
If we assume that this is a Norse XXY Burial with good reputation, it seems likely to me that this person was probably one of those sorts who displayed severe anatomical resemblances to women and that they were presumed and raised to be such. Its possible that this was kept as a family secret until death, leading to a post-mortem awareness of the condition and subsequent steps taken to “seal” the grave afterwards.
There is literally no chance that a “Non-Binary” individual would have been openly accepted in the Norse world. There is a term for this, its Nith, and constitutes the highest of religious crimes.
Secondarily, There is not such thing as a Germanic Shaman. Let me repeat, There is not such thing as a Germanic Shaman. The Germanic people did not practice Animistic beliefs and shamanism was not a religious custom. This is a form of denigratory primitivism by assuming that “primitive and pagan” cultures all behave the same way and hold roughly the same beliefs.
>Define what is the objectionable positions in LGBTQI ideology. Blog post or tweet series, please.
My remark on this is that the very premise of queer activism and the question of LGBT liberation in India has completely imported and copied the trends of the Western world:Some of them are (I am summarizing them under the label of queer and gender ideology activism,as opposed to people who only believe homosexuality should be decriminalized):
1. A trend towards rebellion against the mainstream of society rather than wishing for any acceptance(this is signalled by political valences that tend to be anti-national). This tendency is glorified in Anglo academia by the American theorist Jasbir Puar(one of the fountainheads of such theories),who made her career lambasting gay men who remain satisified with the rest of the society after marriage or partnership rights have been granted to them. According to them: >Queer is … whatever is at odds with the normal, the legitimate, the dominant. In the view of this type influenced by this fount:It is not enough to have a particular sexuality to be in the movement and want to live a sane life with a loyal,single faithful man,but one must ever militate against the normative religion and traditions of the society to have cred in the ‘movement’. This example can be found in this article which takes a sympathetic view to having sex in public in parades,demanding that maximum freakishness and ‘nanga naach’ type of displays are good by the very virtue of them being an oppressed class and dragging in the topic of socio-economic backgrounds to get a figleaf of legitimacy for their theorizing. It is this view of celebrating all that should is intended to hurt and shock and rub in the faces of mainstream Hindu society that that group could include the case of Hadiya under the Queer ideology.
2. A trend of activism that has arisen in trans circles(related to the above),who have gained power in the Western LGBT movements and pushes out anyone else who speak against them as a transphobe,and as pathologizing transgenderism or related identities. While the various identities that don’t fit into male/female identity would be fitting into the broad ‘third gender’ category in traditional Indian views with their own communities,this particular strain of activism that has taken over insists that anyone can be anything they insist to be if they feel like it,violating all the conventions of it just out of pure narcissism. They take over the cases of effeminate boys,etc who do face genuine problems and bullying at school and use that to give a solution that is worse than the problem(this ideology). In the Western idiom,the only logically consistent position that does not do harm to trans people is one that is called transmedicalism,which notes that people who do not have dysphoria do not deserve to be called trans(which is dismissed by current crop of trans activists that say that dysphoria. They also have taken to unnecessary advocacy towards children,who are better served by supportive therapy which would include a wait and watch approach towards their condition(and these trend of activists have made even the topic of eventual desistance of initially dysphoric children taboo) and have slandered every other person who has been contrary to them as being transphobes. This transgenderism is a cult that listens to no reason and simply looks like it wants to recruit as many people into it,and they proceed to get super offended when people are not into them,to even academically complaining that normal people do not like them. Their cultic influence has gone to the extent of transwashing LGBT activism in the US.
Most ordinary gay men do not know about the above sort of views of the activists and in my experience,it takes quite a bit to wrap their head around the sort of views these people hold:They may or may not attend pride because for them it is a venue to meet other gay people and hang out. Unfortunately what happens as a consequence is brainwashing in the above set of ideologues because they for the first time find a set of people who are more accepting of their proclivities towards sex and relationships than the normal mainstream society and they get stuck there in those circles.
As to the views of this author on the views on the activisms and theories:
1. These Queer ideology theories are thinly veiled homophobia and slave morality at its core:These people are essentially slandering ordinary gay men and women and people who are effeminate etc that the more freakish and perverse one becomes,the better it is. (My quote on Queer Theory from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy by their own theorists sums it up perfectly well). 2. People who are effeminate,etc in school should be taught to stand up to those who bully them and should be supported by parents and should go through a ‘wait and watch’ approach,rather than be transed by ideologues who seem to want only a cult of them(by puberty blockers,etc). Traditional gendernoncofirming communities like kinnars,hijdas,etc should be protected as well. This post was not meant to attack them. As for the various ones in trans ideologies in the West,the unfashionable ‘transmedicalism’ or ‘trutrans’ is the only logically consistent and correct one. 3. Children should not be sexualized. 4. Consent alone should not be the sole morality of sex. It is necessary but not a sufficient condition of sex between two people. As this section from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy notes,going from an article by Seriol Morgan Dark Desires,some sexual acts which would fall under the purview of consent would be still immoral.
So cases like Armin Meiwes would not pass muster merely because his victim contested.
4. Gay people,Lesbian,genuinely trans people,hijras,etc should be left alone with each other and not harassed merely due to their sexuality or whom they interact with as romantic partners/sexual partners/companions. At the current stage,I do not have further views as such.
While the author of this article appreciates the good work done by Srishti in Madurai and Gopi Shankar Madurai,there are a number of points in their(or their organization’s article) which he feels is not accurate,and which he feels the need to set right.
The author shall refrain from commenting about some of the sculptural evidence that the blog author there has noted,due to his not having seen them/not having examined them by an expert in iconography,notably
Neutrois theme in Kala Samhara deity. The deity, typically with a male like body, and represented with lack of any sexual organ typically represents a MTN (Male to Neutrois) person.
The Sanishwara deity which is the well known Transgendered deity can be seen in the temple
The author does not discount the possibility of erotic carvings in temples which depict homosexual acts.
Mīnākṣī being three breasted is not a sign of gender variance. It is one of those sort of tales in which a being loses his/her unique features when they meet a special person(example is Shishupala who was born with three eyes and four arms). Similarly She lost Her third breast when She met Śiva(whom She would marry).
Also Ardhanārīśvara is not really a gynandromorph condition….it is more of an ‘consciousness as impartial observer'(Puruṣa)-‘everything as the power inherent in that consciousness'(Prakṛti) represented in one mūrti. Gynandromorphs don’t exist in humans.
Harihara as a deity does not fit in the Procrustean bed of gender ideology in any way. The deity merely represents the concept that ‘śivāya viṣṇurupāya śivarūpāya viṣṇave'(Śiva is a form of Viṣṇu and Viṣṇu is a form of Śiva) along with injunctions that they must never be thought of in any manner except as equal and always both very respectful of each other.
Sri Pitchandavar=A Tamil name of Bhīkṣaṭana Rudra. As far as I know,there is nothing in His iconography that indicates any third gendered status. The main feature of His form is supreme attractiveness,and which is used in certain tantric rites of vaśikaraṇa(causing attraction of a girl to a boy or vice versa).
Bhagavān Vīrabhadra=The author would be very interested in knowing about any upāsana krama of this deity that involves being third gendered,and until one can provide that reliably,one fails to note what is third-gender about Vīrabhadra. He is a guru figure(cited from the Raurava Āgama) and greater than a hundred rudras(Mṛgendra Āgama). He is the personified wrath of Rudra,who taught the Gods through his violent actions through the greatness and centrality and glory of Rudra. In this author’s limited experience He was worshipped by mostly wandering Jangama ascetics and Lingadhari brahmins in Andhra. All that is required to approach Him is initiation in His mantras,which,to the best knowledge of the author do not have any bearing on the sex of the person who is being initiated.
Also,Arjuna ended up in that condition of Brihannala due to a curse by the apsara Uruvashi(which was reduced by Indra to just the duration of one year),which implied that that condition in the times that story was told would be less than a normative/ideal/good one.
People who weren’t straight or non-trans,etc were generally kept at a distance in society,though not explicitly harmed:The author is right in this one aspect,definitely.
People who are Gender and Sexual Minorities should make their case using well supported evidence,not evidence that is flimsy(at best) on closer examination to earn the good will of Hindus who know and internalize the understanding of śāstra,and can hope for the best for their dignity in the larger society.