•
Write the author
The structures and organising strategies of the various groups that exist today are
several and often separate. Many groups are funded and provide services such as
information and counselling on sexual health and HIV prevention, general counselling,
legal aid, helplines, etc. to specific sections such as gay men, hijras, kothis, men who
have sex with men, commercial sex workers and so on. These groups are scattered all over
the country, from small towns to the metros and provide much needed infrastructural
support for people who are otherwise marginalised by the medical and other state
institutions. A handful of groups work autonomously and are non funded collectives. Many
groups have also worked consistently on documentation and today there are quite a few
reports and magazines.
The movement for the rights of peoples of marginalised genders and sexualities is not
monolithic and there are many voices and articulations, often in conflict and dialogue
with each other and other movements. Some groups are trying to evolve a queer politics in
alliance with various other peoples struggles and movements. One such instance was the
coming together of almost fifteen LGBT groups from different parts of the country in
January 2002, to begin the process of forming a political understanding on all issues and
to reaffirm that they would not work with organisations supporting right wing religious
fundamentalism in any form. Some of these same groups were actively part of the work done
by citizen's and other groups for justice and peace after the carnage in Gujarat the same
year.
The support of the progressive movements to these groups has, however, not been
unequivocal. Sexuality is generally considered an 'unimportant' and secondary issue. It is
also seen as an issue of only a handful of people who are labelled pervert, abnormal,
western, un-Indian by the mainstream within the political movements as well as in society.
The importance of issues of sexuality in shaping of all social relations and hence all
aspects of human interaction has not been recognised by most movements.
The state is not an arbiter of what 'Indianness or Indian society' can be or should
be. By citing disapproval by society as a valid reason for the criminalisation of
homosexuals, the state is doing several things simultaneously. It is restrictively
defining Indian, making all those who do not fit the definition, criminal, and further
justifying the multiple ways in which the very basic rights of a section of its own
citizens are violated.
In complete contrast to these vibrant discussions is the Indian State, which, on September
9, 2003, responded to the petition filed in the Delhi High Court by Naz Foundation (India)
Trust in 2001 by saying that Indian society was intolerant and did not approve of
homosexuality. Further quoting the 42nd report of the Law Commission it claimed that
Society's disapproval was 'strong enough to justify it being treated as a criminal
offence'. This was an official statement from the Union government in response to a
petition demanding a very basic right - that private consensual sexual acts between adults
be decriminalized.
The irony of the situation begs articulation and demands serious action from all those who
work towards a more egalitarian and a just world. The government of a country which has
been the most celebrated for its democracy, feels justified in treating a large number of
its citizens as criminal, based on the alleged 'disapproval' of the 'Indian society'. The
democratic state is the upholder of the fundamental rights of all its citizens and not
just those belonging to a majority, howsoever it may be defined - in terms of religion,
caste, community, sex and also sexuality.
The state is also not an arbiter of what 'Indianness or Indian society' can be or should
be. By citing disapproval by society as a valid reason for the criminalisation of
homosexuals, the state is doing several things simultaneously. It is restrictively
defining Indian, making all those who do not fit the definition, criminal, and further
justifying the multiple ways in which the very basic rights of a large section of its own
citizens are violated. This is not the first time in the recent past that we have had to
see this version of the Indian democratic State.
We have seen it in the past and as groups and individuals believing in the human rights of
all people, we have stood up against the State and demanded accountability. This is yet
another time when we need to do it together. It is also important that we not only talk of
the lives of LGBT people in the rights context vis-à-vis the State alone, but also work
towards changing the ways in which society at large looks at issues of gender and
sexuality. And for this we need to begin with expanding our mindscapes to include the
multiple colours of plurality all around us, to recognise, respect, and reaffirm the
diverse ways in which gender and sexuality are lived. We also need to see the
intersections of oppressions and the importance of sharing struggles as well as
strategies.
Shalini Mahajan
•
Vol #2, Issue #4, Combat Law
•
Human Rights
•
Printer friendly version
Redefining oppressions, articulating rights
Shalini Mahajan
on marginalised sexualities and genders in India.
Combat Law, Volume 2, Issue 4 -
In recent years, the lesbian, bisexual, gay, transgender and hijra peoples and communities
in India have effectively and consistently raised their concerns in larger social, legal
and political contexts. There is a vibrant and political movement fighting for the rights
of these communities and peoples. The issues raised by the groups are multiple: creating
public visibility for the identities and issues, building community and safe spaces for
people to be able to reach out to each other, providing support networks, fighting for
legal recognition and rights, providing safe health care services, articulating and
questioning the politics that makes all sexuality other than hetero-normative suspect,
building alliances nationally and well as internationally with other movements, connecting
the politics of gender and sexuality with other politics, and working with multiple
strategies towards a society where all genders and sexualities would be respected and
treated equally.
Within these groups, while many claim to work for all marginalised genders and
sexualities, specific and much needed work on the minorities within these groups, such as
lesbian and bisexual women and transgender persons, is limited. Most of the organising and
articulation of issues of women has come from within lesbian and bisexual women's groups.
In terms of service provision, these groups have provided helplines and safe spaces for
women to meet each other. Most of these groups have been working in urban centres and are
often in alliance with women's groups and feminist organisations on many issues. Some
groups of transgendered persons and hijras have also begun articulating their concerns in
the last few years.
It is only in the past few years that a few groups within the women's movements and the
human rights movement, have begun to contribute to the articulations of LGBT groups. When
the workers of Bharosa Trust in Lucknow, an NGO working on sexual health, were locked up
by the police under section 377 amongst others in July 2001, many voluntary autonomous
groups, funded NGOs, women's groups, lawyers and human rights groups and civil society
groups joined in the countrywide protests against the state. LGBT groups, women's groups,
child rights groups and human rights groups, also came together in response to the changes
in the rape laws that were recommended by the 172nd report of the Law Commission of India.
All the groups sat together through intensive consultations to formulate and propose
sexual assault laws that would be sensitive to each of the sectors and oppose those that
would further endanger the rights of any group.
Combat Law, Volume 2, Issue 4
October-November 2003
•
Vol #2, Issue #4, Combat Law
•
Human Rights
•
Feedback :
Tell us what you think of this page.
