Jump to content

Homosexuality in India: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
undid vandalism and reverted spelling back to Indian English
m Reverted edits by Russianvodka (talk) to last version by 103.242.189.192
Line 2: Line 2:
{{Use dmy dates|date=July 2011}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=July 2011}}
{{LGBT rights}}
{{LGBT rights}}
'''Homosexuality''' is mostly a taboo subject in [[India]]n civil society and for the [[government of India|government]]. [[Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code]] makes sex with persons of the same gender punishable by law. On 2 July 2009, in ''[[Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi]]'', the [[Delhi High Court]] held that provision to be unconstitutional with respect to sex between consenting adults, but the [[Supreme Court of India]] overturned that ruling on 11 December 2013, stating that the court was instead deferring to Indian legislators to provide the sought-after clarity.<ref name="SHYAMANTHA">{{cite news|last=Shyamantha|first=Asokan|title=India's Supreme Court turns the clock back with gay sex ban|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/11/us-india-rights-gay-idUSBRE9BA05620131211|accessdate=11 December 2013|newspaper=[[Reuters]]|date=11 December 2013}}</ref> On 2 February 2016, however, the Supreme Court agreed to reconsider its judgment, stating it would refer petitions to abolish Section 377 to a five-member constitutional bench, which would conduct a comprehensive hearing of the issue.<ref name="refers">{{cite news|last=Rajagopal|first=Krishnadas|title=Supreme Court refers plea against Section 377 to five-judge Bench |url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/supreme-court-refers-plea-against-section-377-to-5judge-bench/article8183860.ece?homepage=true|accessdate=2 January 2016|newspaper=[[The Hindu]]|date=2 January 2016}}</ref>
'''Homosexuality''' is mostly a taboo subject in [[India]]n civil society and for the [[government of India|government]]. [[Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code]] makes sex with persons of the same gender punishable by law. On 2 July 2009, in ''[[Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi]]'', the [[Delhi High Court]] held that provision to be unconstitutional with respect to sex between consenting adults, but the [[Supreme Court of India]] overturned that ruling on 11 December 2013, stating that the court was instead deferring to Indian legislators to provide the sought-after clarity.<ref name="SHYAMANTHA">{{cite news|last=Shyamantha|first=Asokan|title=India's Supreme Court turns the clock back with gay sex ban|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/11/us-india-rights-gay-idUSBRE9BA05620131211|accessdate=11 December 2013|newspaper=[[Reuters]]|date=11 December 2013}}</ref> On 2 February 2016, however, the Supreme Court agreed to reconsider its judgment, stating it would refer petitions to abolish Section 377 to a five-member constitutional bench, which would conduct a comprehensive hearing of the issue.<ref name="refers">{{cite news|last=Rajagopal|first=Krishnadas|title=Supreme Court refers plea against Section 377 to five-judge Bench |url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/supreme-court-refers-plea-against-section-377-to-5judge-bench/article8183860.ece?homepage=true|accessdate=2 January 2016|newspaper=[[The Hindu]]|date=2 January 2016}}</ref>


There are no official demographics for the LGBT population in India, but the government of India submitted figures to the [[Supreme court|Supreme Court]] in 2012, according to which, there were about 2.5 million gay people recorded in India. These figures are only based on those individuals who have self declared to the Ministry of Health. There may be much higher statistics for individuals who have concealed their identity, since a number of homosexual Indians are living in the closet due to fear of discrimination.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-17363200|title=India has 2.5m gays, government tells supreme court|work=BBC News|accessdate=15 May 2016}}</ref>
There are no official demographics for the LGBT population in India, but the government of India submitted figures to the [[Supreme court|Supreme Court]] in 2012, according to which, there were about 2.5 million gay people recorded in India. These figures are only based on those individuals who have self declared to the Ministry of Health. There may be much higher statistics for individuals who have concealed their identity, since a number of homosexual Indians are living in the closet due to fear of discrimination.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-17363200|title=India has 2.5m gays, government tells supreme court|work=BBC News|accessdate=15 May 2016}}</ref>
Line 15: Line 15:
==Legal status==
==Legal status==
{{See also|LGBT rights in India}}
{{See also|LGBT rights in India}}
On August 24, 2017, India's Supreme Court gave the country's LGBT community the freedom to safely express their sexual orientation. Therefore, an individual's sexual orientation is protected under the country's Right to Privacy law.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/sc-verdict-says-sexual-orientation-part-of-privacy-lgbt-community-celebrates/story-wk3PFmNK0G2tCpBK4GyjZK.html |title=SC verdict says sexual orientation part of privacy, LGBT community celebrates |work=[[Hindustan Times]] |author=Dhrubo Jyoti |date=August 24, 2017}}</ref> However, the Supreme Court did not directly overturn any laws criminalizing same-sex relationships.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/india-declares-freedom-of-sexual-orientation-a-fundamental-right_us_599f574ee4b05710aa5b4194 |title=India Declares Freedom Of Sexual Orientation A Fundamental Right |work=[[The Huffington Post]] |author=Doha Madani |date=August 24, 2017}}</ref>
[[Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code]] (IPC), dating back to 1861, makes sexual activities "against the order of nature" punishable by law and carries a life sentence and a fine.<ref name=1861_law>{{cite news|title=India’s Supreme Court Restores an 1861 Law Banning Gay Sex|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/12/world/asia/court-restores-indias-ban-on-gay-sex.html|accessdate=4 April 2014|newspaper=[[The New York Times]]|date=11 December 2013|first=Gardiner|last=Harris}}</ref> The law replaced the variety of punishments for [[Zina]] (unlawful intercourse<ref>{{cite book|last1=Kugle|first1=Scott A|title=Sufis and Saints' Bodies: Mysticism, Corporeality, and Sacred Power in Islam|date=1 Sep 2011|publisher=Univ of North Carolina Press|location=Chapter 4 - Note 62-63|isbn=9780807872772|page=309|url=https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=HJ1vpC_SeLcC&pg=PA309&lpg=PA309&dq=Fatawa+Alamgiri+zina&source=bl&ots=RQTWqJ0qX-&sig=DfjTY8HWjZKklyBk2GZccm9Y0Cc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj0-OTX5rPWAhWF0RoKHdg2C30Q6AEIbTAV#v=onepage&q=Fatawa%20Alamgiri%20zina&f=false|accessdate=20 September 2017}}</ref>) mandated in the Mughal empire's [[Fatawa-e-Alamgiri]], these ranged from 50 lashes for a slave, 100 for a free infidel, to death by stoning for a Muslim.<ref>[https://archive.org/stream/digestmoohummud00bailgoog#page/n57/mode/2up A digest of the Moohummudan law] pp. 1-3 with footnotes, Neil Baillie, Smith Elder, London</ref> Similarly the [[Goa Inquisition]] once prosecuted the capital crime of [[sodomy]] in [[Portuguese India]]<ref>{{cite news|title='Xavier was aware of the brutality of the Inquisition'|url=http://www.deccanherald.com/content/66330/xavier-aware-brutality-inquisition.html|accessdate=18 September 2017|work=Deccan Herald|publisher=Deccan Herald|date=27 April 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last1=Sharma|first1=Jai|title=The Portuguese Inquisition in Goa: A brief history|url=http://indiafacts.org/the-portuguese-inquisition-in-goa-a-brief-history/|website=Indiafacts.org|accessdate=18 September 2017}}</ref>, but not lesbian acts<ref>{{cite book|last1=Soyer|first1=Francois|title=Ambiguous Gender in Early Modern Spain and Portugal: Inquisitors, Doctors and the Transgression of Gender Norms|date=2012|isbn=9789004225299|page=45|url=https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=LxqzbYdSeuYC&pg=PA45&lpg=PA45&dq=portuguese+inquisition+sodomy+goa&source=bl&ots=OCKQuo8dLA&sig=DRHNAQOwy2sN5DIEeorovpHhXOI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjNsL_c5q_WAhUQPVAKHXvQDxMQ6AEISTAJ#v=onepage&q=portuguese%20inquisition%20sodomy%20goa&f=false|accessdate=18 September 2017}}</ref>. Although not carried out by the Government, vigilante executions and beatings do occur commonly and the police turn a blind eye to it.<ref name="killing"/><ref name="killing1"/><ref name="killing2">[http://foreignpolicy.com/2011/07/29/lesbian-newlyweds-flee-honor-killing-threats-in-india/ Lesbian newlyweds flee honor killing threats in India]</ref>

[[Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code]] (IPC), dating back to 1861, makes sexual activities "against the order of nature" punishable by law and carries a life sentence.<ref name=1861_law>{{cite news|title=India’s Supreme Court Restores an 1861 Law Banning Gay Sex|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/12/world/asia/court-restores-indias-ban-on-gay-sex.html|accessdate=4 April 2014|newspaper=[[The New York Times]]|date=11 December 2013|first=Gardiner|last=Harris}}</ref> The law replaced the variety of punishments for [[Zina]] (unlawful intercourse<ref>{{cite book|last1=Kugle|first1=Scott A|title=Sufis and Saints' Bodies: Mysticism, Corporeality, and Sacred Power in Islam|date=1 Sep 2011|publisher=Univ of North Carolina Press|location=Chapter 4 - Note 62-63|isbn=9780807872772|page=309|url=https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=HJ1vpC_SeLcC&pg=PA309&lpg=PA309&dq=Fatawa+Alamgiri+zina&source=bl&ots=RQTWqJ0qX-&sig=DfjTY8HWjZKklyBk2GZccm9Y0Cc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj0-OTX5rPWAhWF0RoKHdg2C30Q6AEIbTAV#v=onepage&q=Fatawa%20Alamgiri%20zina&f=false|accessdate=20 September 2017}}</ref>) mandated in the Mughal empire's [[Fatawa-e-Alamgiri]], these ranged from 50 lashes for a slave, 100 for a free infidel, to death by stoning for a Muslim.<ref>[https://archive.org/stream/digestmoohummud00bailgoog#page/n57/mode/2up A digest of the Moohummudan law] pp. 1-3 with footnotes, Neil Baillie, Smith Elder, London</ref> Similarly the [[Goa Inquisition]] once prosecuted the capital crime of [[sodomy]] in [[Portuguese India]]<ref>{{cite news|title='Xavier was aware of the brutality of the Inquisition'|url=http://www.deccanherald.com/content/66330/xavier-aware-brutality-inquisition.html|accessdate=18 September 2017|work=Deccan Herald|publisher=Deccan Herald|date=27 April 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last1=Sharma|first1=Jai|title=The Portuguese Inquisition in Goa: A brief history|url=http://indiafacts.org/the-portuguese-inquisition-in-goa-a-brief-history/|website=Indiafacts.org|accessdate=18 September 2017}}</ref>, but not lesbian acts<ref>{{cite book|last1=Soyer|first1=Francois|title=Ambiguous Gender in Early Modern Spain and Portugal: Inquisitors, Doctors and the Transgression of Gender Norms|date=2012|isbn=9789004225299|page=45|url=https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=LxqzbYdSeuYC&pg=PA45&lpg=PA45&dq=portuguese+inquisition+sodomy+goa&source=bl&ots=OCKQuo8dLA&sig=DRHNAQOwy2sN5DIEeorovpHhXOI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjNsL_c5q_WAhUQPVAKHXvQDxMQ6AEISTAJ#v=onepage&q=portuguese%20inquisition%20sodomy%20goa&f=false|accessdate=18 September 2017}}</ref>.


===Support for decriminalisation===
===Support for decriminalisation===
[[File:Bangalore Gay Pride Parade (15).jpg|right|thumb|Gay Pride March in Bangalore (2013)]]
[[File:Bangalore Gay Pride Parade (15).jpg|right|thumb|Gay Pride March in Bangalore (2013)]]

Several organisations, including the [[Naz Foundation (India) Trust]],<ref name=Anachronistic_law/> the [[National AIDS Control Organisation]],<ref name=Anachronistic_law>{{cite news|title=Anachronistic law|url=http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-opinion/anachronistic-law/article1348979.ece|accessdate=3 April 2014|newspaper=[[The Hindu]]|date=1 October 2008|location=Chennai, India}}</ref> [[Law Commission of India]],<ref name=NGO_2004>{{cite web|title=UN 2004 - NGO statement: LGBT rights in India|url=http://ilga.org/ilga/en/article/64|publisher=[[International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association]]|accessdate=3 April 2014|location=[[Geneva]]|date=27 April 2004}}</ref> [[Ministry of Health and Family Welfare|Union Health Ministry]],<ref name="ramdoss_gay_rights">{{cite news|author=Kounteya Sinha |url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2008-10-01/india/27901688_1_unaids-msms-ramadoss|archivedate=9 October 2008|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20081009042809/http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Gay_rights_should_be_respected_prostitution_legalised_NHRC_chief/articleshow/3565933.cms |title=Ramadoss to take up gay rights issue with PM |newspaper=[[The Times of India]]|date=1 October 2008 |accessdate=20 January 2011}}</ref> [[National Human Rights Commission of India]]<ref name=NHRC>{{Cite news|url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Gay_rights_should_be_respected_prostitution_legalised_NHRC_chief/articleshow/3565933.cms |title=Gay rights should be respected, prostitution legalised: NHRC chief |date=6 October 2008 |newspaper=[[The Times of India]] |accessdate=12 February 2009 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20081009042809/http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Gay_rights_should_be_respected_prostitution_legalised_NHRC_chief/articleshow/3565933.cms |archivedate=9 October 2008 }}</ref> and the [[Planning Commission (India)|Planning Commission]] of India<ref name=sex_work>{{cite news|url=http://www.indiatogether.org/2005/dec/hlt-legalise.htm|title=The silence around sex work|newspaper=India Together|accessdate=3 April 2014|date=13 December 2005|author=[[Syeda Saiyidain Hameed|Syeda Hameed]] }}</ref> have expressed support for decriminalising [[homosexuality]] in India.


In September 2006, Nobel Laureate [[Amartya Sen]], acclaimed writer [[Vikram Seth]] and other prominent Indians publicly demanded the repeal of section 377 of the IPC.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/india/story/0,,1874833,00.html|title='India's Literary Elite Call for Anti-Gay Law to be Scrapped' | newspaper= [[The Guardian]]|location=London | first=Randeep | last=Ramesh | date=18 September 2006 | accessdate=4 May 2010}}</ref> The open letter demanded that "In the name of humanity and of our Constitution, this cruel and discriminatory law should be struck down." On 30 June 2008, Indian [[Minister of Labour and Employment (India)|Labour Minister]] [[Oscar Fernandes]] backed calls for decriminalisation of consensual gay sex, and [[Prime Minister]] Manmohan Singh called for greater tolerance towards homosexuals.<ref>{{cite news| url=http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/News_By_Industry/Reverse_swing_It_may_be_an_open_affair_for_gays_lesbians/articleshow/3186187.cms | newspaper=[[The Economic Times]] | title=Reverse swing: It may be an open affair for gays, lesbians | date=2 July 2008|accessdate=3 April 2014}}</ref> On 23 July 2008, [[Bombay High Court]] Judge [[Justice Bilal Nazki|Bilal Nazki]] said that India's unnatural sex law should be reviewed.<ref>{{Cite news| url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Unnatural-sex_law_needs_relook_Mumbai_HC/rssarticleshow/3276516.cms | title=Unnatural-sex law needs relook: Bombay HC| accessdate=12 February 2009 | date=25 July 2008 | newspaper=[[The Times of India]] | author=Shibu Thomas}}</ref> The [[Law Commission of India]] had historically favoured the retention of this section in its 42nd and 156th report, but in its 172nd report, delivered in 2000, it recommended its repeal.<ref name=NGO_2004/><ref name=rape_laws>{{cite web|title=Review of Rape Laws|url=http://www.lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/rapelaws.htm|publisher=[[Law Commission of India]]|accessdate=4 April 2014|date=March 2000}}</ref>
In September 2006, Nobel Laureate [[Amartya Sen]], acclaimed writer [[Vikram Seth]] and other prominent Indians publicly demanded the repeal of section 377 of the IPC.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/india/story/0,,1874833,00.html|title='India's Literary Elite Call for Anti-Gay Law to be Scrapped' | newspaper= [[The Guardian]]|location=London | first=Randeep | last=Ramesh | date=18 September 2006 | accessdate=4 May 2010}}</ref> The open letter demanded that "In the name of humanity and of our Constitution, this cruel and discriminatory law should be struck down." On 30 June 2008, Indian [[Minister of Labour and Employment (India)|Labour Minister]] [[Oscar Fernandes]] backed calls for decriminalisation of consensual gay sex, and [[Prime Minister]] Manmohan Singh called for greater tolerance towards homosexuals.<ref>{{cite news| url=http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/News_By_Industry/Reverse_swing_It_may_be_an_open_affair_for_gays_lesbians/articleshow/3186187.cms | newspaper=[[The Economic Times]] | title=Reverse swing: It may be an open affair for gays, lesbians | date=2 July 2008|accessdate=3 April 2014}}</ref> On 23 July 2008, [[Bombay High Court]] Judge [[Justice Bilal Nazki|Bilal Nazki]] said that India's unnatural sex law should be reviewed.<ref>{{Cite news| url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Unnatural-sex_law_needs_relook_Mumbai_HC/rssarticleshow/3276516.cms | title=Unnatural-sex law needs relook: Bombay HC| accessdate=12 February 2009 | date=25 July 2008 | newspaper=[[The Times of India]] | author=Shibu Thomas}}</ref> The [[Law Commission of India]] had historically favoured the retention of this section in its 42nd and 156th report, but in its 172nd report, delivered in 2000, it recommended its repeal.<ref name=NGO_2004/><ref name=rape_laws>{{cite web|title=Review of Rape Laws|url=http://www.lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/rapelaws.htm|publisher=[[Law Commission of India]]|accessdate=4 April 2014|date=March 2000}}</ref>
Line 32: Line 36:
[[Bharatiya Janata Party]] senior leader [[Arun Jaitley]] stated in February 2014 that he supported decriminalisation of homosexuality. On 13 January 2015, BJP spokesperson [[Shaina NC]], appearing on ''[[NDTV]]'', stated, "We [[BJP]] are for decriminalising homosexuality. That is the progressive way forward."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.livemint.com/Leisure/XCOl7cJw5t3DgnQZsFYIFO/BJP-supports-decriminalization-of-homosexuality-Shaina-NC.html|title=BJP supports decriminalization of homosexuality: Shaina NC|author=Dhamini Ratnam|work=Livemint|accessdate=15 May 2016}}</ref>
[[Bharatiya Janata Party]] senior leader [[Arun Jaitley]] stated in February 2014 that he supported decriminalisation of homosexuality. On 13 January 2015, BJP spokesperson [[Shaina NC]], appearing on ''[[NDTV]]'', stated, "We [[BJP]] are for decriminalising homosexuality. That is the progressive way forward."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.livemint.com/Leisure/XCOl7cJw5t3DgnQZsFYIFO/BJP-supports-decriminalization-of-homosexuality-Shaina-NC.html|title=BJP supports decriminalization of homosexuality: Shaina NC|author=Dhamini Ratnam|work=Livemint|accessdate=15 May 2016}}</ref>


[[Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh]] spokesperson Ram Madhav in an interview with national daily Business Standard said in May 2014: "But I can say this — that while glorification of certain forms of social behaviour is not something we endorse, the penalizing and criminalization aspects need to be looked into. Whether to call homosexuality a crime and treat it as one in this day and age is questionable"<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/rss-eases-stance-on-decriminalisation-of-gay-sex/article1-1223632.aspx|title=RSS eases stance on decriminalization of gay sex|work=Hindustan Times|accessdate=15 May 2016}}</ref> which is interpreted as Sangh's support to decriminalization of homosexuality.
[[Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh]] spokesperson Ram Madhav in an interview with national daily Business Standard said in May 2014: "But I can say this — that while glorification of certain forms of social behaviour is not something we endorse, the and aspects need to be looked into. Whether to call homosexuality a crime and treat it as one in this day and age is questionable"<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/rss-eases-stance-on-decriminalisation-of-gay-sex/article1-1223632.aspx|title=RSS eases stance on of gay sex|work=Hindustan Times|accessdate=15 May 2016}}</ref> which is interpreted as Sangh's support to of homosexuality.


On March 6, 2016 Srishti Madurai's new website was launched by Dalit activist and Ambedkarite Ma. Venkatesan from BJP in the presence of Central Minister [[Pon Radhakrishnan]], Vanathi Srinivasan, [[Aravindan Neelakandan]], [[Joe D'Cruz]] and scores of [[Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh]] volunteers at Chennai.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.firstpost.com/living/rss-flip-flop-on-homosexuality-indicates-gay-men-in-india-remain-in-exile-writes-ashok-row-kavi-2685296.html|title=RSS flip-flop on homosexuality indicates gay men in India remain in exile, writes Ashok Row Kavi|author=Firstpost|date=19 March 2016|work=Firstpost|accessdate=15 May 2016}}</ref>
On March 6, 2016 Srishti Madurai's new website was launched by Dalit activist and Ambedkarite Ma. Venkatesan from BJP in the presence of Central Minister [[Pon Radhakrishnan]], Vanathi Srinivasan, [[Aravindan Neelakandan]], [[Joe D'Cruz]] and scores of [[Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh]] volunteers at Chennai.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.firstpost.com/living/rss-flip-flop-on-homosexuality-indicates-gay-men-in-india-remain-in-exile-writes-ashok-row-kavi-2685296.html|title=RSS flip-flop on homosexuality indicates gay men in India remain in exile, writes Ashok Row Kavi|author=Firstpost|date=19 March 2016|work=Firstpost|accessdate=15 May 2016}}</ref>
Line 40: Line 44:


On 2 July 2009, in the case of ''[[Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi|Naz Foundation v National Capital Territory of Delhi]]'', the High Court of Delhi struck down much of S. 377 of the IPC as being unconstitutional. The Court held that to the extent S. 377 criminalised consensual non-vaginal sexual acts between adults, it violated an individual's fundamental rights to equality before the law, freedom from discrimination and to life and personal liberty under Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the [[Constitution of India]]. The High Court did not strike down Section 377 completely. It held the section to be valid in case of non-consensual non-vaginal intercourse or to intercourse with minors, and it expressed the hope that Parliament would legislatively address the issue.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/jul/21/india-gay-rights-law|title=A New Law for India's Sexual Minorities|newspaper=[[The Guardian]] |location= London|date=21 July 2009|author=Yuvraj Joshi|accessdate=12 December 2010}}</ref>
On 2 July 2009, in the case of ''[[Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi|Naz Foundation v National Capital Territory of Delhi]]'', the High Court of Delhi struck down much of S. 377 of the IPC as being unconstitutional. The Court held that to the extent S. 377 criminalised consensual non-vaginal sexual acts between adults, it violated an individual's fundamental rights to equality before the law, freedom from discrimination and to life and personal liberty under Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the [[Constitution of India]]. The High Court did not strike down Section 377 completely. It held the section to be valid in case of non-consensual non-vaginal intercourse or to intercourse with minors, and it expressed the hope that Parliament would legislatively address the issue.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/jul/21/india-gay-rights-law|title=A New Law for India's Sexual Minorities|newspaper=[[The Guardian]] |location= London|date=21 July 2009|author=Yuvraj Joshi|accessdate=12 December 2010}}</ref>

On 11 December 2013, on responding an appeal filed by an [[astrologer]] Suresh Kumar Koushal and others,<ref name="earth motion">{{cite news|title=It is like reversing the motion of the earth|url=http://www.thehindu.com/features/metroplus/society/it-is-like-reversing-the-motion-of-the-earth/article5483306.ece|accessdate=4 April 2014|newspaper=[[The Hindu]]|date=21 December 2013|location=Chennai, India}}</ref> the [[Supreme Court of India]] upheld the constitutionality of Section 377 of the IPC, and stated that the Court was instead deferring to Indian legislators to provide the sought-after clarity.<ref name="SHYAMANTHA"/> In its judgment the Supreme Court stated
On 11 December 2013, on responding an appeal filed by an [[astrologer]] Suresh Kumar Koushal and others,<ref name="earth motion">{{cite news|title=It is like reversing the motion of the earth|url=http://www.thehindu.com/features/metroplus/society/it-is-like-reversing-the-motion-of-the-earth/article5483306.ece|accessdate=4 April 2014|newspaper=[[The Hindu]]|date=21 December 2013|location=Chennai, India}}</ref> the [[Supreme Court of India]] upheld the constitutionality of Section 377 of the IPC, and stated that the Court was instead deferring to Indian legislators to provide the sought-after clarity.<ref name="SHYAMANTHA"/> In its judgment the Supreme Court stated


Line 56: Line 60:


On 24 August 2016 a draft law for the ban of commercial surrogacy was cleared by the Union Cabinet and announced by [[Sushma Swaraj]], the [[Minister of External Affairs|Minister of External Affairs (India)]]. The draft bill denied homosexuals from having surrogate children with Swaraj stating - ''We do not recognise live-in and homosexual relationships….this is against our ethos''.<ref>{{cite news|title=India proposes commercial surrogacy ban; live-ins, homosexuals worst hit|url=http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/india-proposes-ban-on-commercial-surrogacy-homosexuals-live-ins-worst-hit/story-Vb1fKz0XSJPdCT7GbympkO.html|accessdate=26 August 2016|work=[[hindustantimes]]|date=24 August 2016}}</ref>
On 24 August 2016 a draft law for the ban of commercial surrogacy was cleared by the Union Cabinet and announced by [[Sushma Swaraj]], the [[Minister of External Affairs|Minister of External Affairs (India)]]. The draft bill denied homosexuals from having surrogate children with Swaraj stating - ''We do not recognise live-in and homosexual relationships….this is against our ethos''.<ref>{{cite news|title=India proposes commercial surrogacy ban; live-ins, homosexuals worst hit|url=http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/india-proposes-ban-on-commercial-surrogacy-homosexuals-live-ins-worst-hit/story-Vb1fKz0XSJPdCT7GbympkO.html|accessdate=26 August 2016|work=[[hindustantimes]]|date=24 August 2016}}</ref>

On 24 August 2017, the Supreme Court upheld that the right to individual privacy is an "intrinsic" and fundamental right under the constitution.<ref>{{cite web|title=India’s Supreme Court Upholds Right to Privacy|url=https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/08/24/indias-supreme-court-upholds-right-privacy|website=Human Rights Watch|accessdate=19 November 2017|language=en|date=24 August 2017}}</ref> In its 547-page decision on privacy rights, the nine-judge bench also held that "sexual orientation is an essential attribute of privacy." The judgement noted, "Discrimination against an individual on the basis of sexual orientation is deeply offensive to the dignity and self-worth of the individual. Equality demands that the sexual orientation of each individual in society must be protected on an even platform. The right to privacy and the protection of sexual orientation lie at the core of the fundamental rights guaranteed by Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution."<ref>{{cite web|title=India’s Supreme Court Has Ruled That Sexual Orientation Is A Fundamental Privacy Right|url=https://www.themarysue.com/india-supreme-court-lgbt-privacy/|website=www.themarysue.com|accessdate=19 November 2017|language=en}}</ref>


==Religious opposition==
==Religious opposition==
Line 164: Line 170:
{{Asia in topic|Homosexuality in}}
{{Asia in topic|Homosexuality in}}
{{Asia topic|LGBT rights in}}
{{Asia topic|LGBT rights in}}
[[Category:Religious controversies]]
[[Category:Controversies in India]]


{{DEFAULTSORT:India}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:India}}

Revision as of 09:15, 10 December 2017

Homosexuality is mostly a taboo subject in Indian civil society and for the government. Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code makes sex with persons of the same gender punishable by law. On 2 July 2009, in Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi, the Delhi High Court held that provision to be unconstitutional with respect to sex between consenting adults, but the Supreme Court of India overturned that ruling on 11 December 2013, stating that the court was instead deferring to Indian legislators to provide the sought-after clarity.[1] On 2 February 2016, however, the Supreme Court agreed to reconsider its judgment, stating it would refer petitions to abolish Section 377 to a five-member constitutional bench, which would conduct a comprehensive hearing of the issue.[2]

There are no official demographics for the LGBT population in India, but the government of India submitted figures to the Supreme Court in 2012, according to which, there were about 2.5 million gay people recorded in India. These figures are only based on those individuals who have self declared to the Ministry of Health. There may be much higher statistics for individuals who have concealed their identity, since a number of homosexual Indians are living in the closet due to fear of discrimination.[3]

Homophobia is prevalent in India.[4][5] Public discussion of homosexuality in India has been inhibited by the fact that sexuality in any form is rarely discussed openly. In recent years, however, attitudes towards homosexuality have shifted slightly. In particular, there have been more depictions and discussions of homosexuality in the Indian news media[5][6] and in Bollywood.[7] Several organisations have expressed support for decriminalising homosexuality in India, and pushed for tolerance and social equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people. India is among countries with a social element of a third gender. But mental, physical, emotional and economic violence against LGBT community in India prevails.[8] Lacking support from family, society or police, many gay rape victims don't report the crimes.[9]

Religion has played a role in shaping Indian customs and traditions. While injunctions on homosexuality's morality are not explicitly mentioned in the religious texts central to Hinduism, the largest religion in India, Hinduism has taken various positions, ranging from homosexual characters and themes in its texts to being neutral or antagonistic towards it. Rigveda, one of the four canonical sacred texts of Hinduism says Vikriti Evam Prakriti (Sanskrit: [विकृतिः एवम्‌ प्रकृतिः] Error: {{Lang}}: text has italic markup (help), meaning what seems unnatural is also natural),[10] which some scholars believe recognises homosexual/transsexual dimensions of human life, like all forms of universal diversities.[11] Historical literary evidence indicates that homosexuality has been prevalent across the Indian subcontinent throughout history, and that homosexuals were not necessarily considered inferior in any way until about 18th century.[12]

History

On August 24, 2017, India's Supreme Court gave the country's LGBT community the freedom to safely express their sexual orientation. Therefore, an individual's sexual orientation is protected under the country's Right to Privacy law.[13] However, the Supreme Court did not directly overturn any laws criminalizing same-sex relationships.[14]

Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), dating back to 1861, makes sexual activities "against the order of nature" punishable by law and carries a life sentence.[15] The law replaced the variety of punishments for Zina (unlawful intercourse[16]) mandated in the Mughal empire's Fatawa-e-Alamgiri, these ranged from 50 lashes for a slave, 100 for a free infidel, to death by stoning for a Muslim.[17] Similarly the Goa Inquisition once prosecuted the capital crime of sodomy in Portuguese India[18][19], but not lesbian acts[20].

Support for decriminalisation

Gay Pride March in Bangalore (2013)

Several organisations, including the Naz Foundation (India) Trust,[21] the National AIDS Control Organisation,[21] Law Commission of India,[22] Union Health Ministry,[23] National Human Rights Commission of India[24] and the Planning Commission of India[25] have expressed support for decriminalising homosexuality in India.

In September 2006, Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen, acclaimed writer Vikram Seth and other prominent Indians publicly demanded the repeal of section 377 of the IPC.[26] The open letter demanded that "In the name of humanity and of our Constitution, this cruel and discriminatory law should be struck down." On 30 June 2008, Indian Labour Minister Oscar Fernandes backed calls for decriminalisation of consensual gay sex, and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh called for greater tolerance towards homosexuals.[27] On 23 July 2008, Bombay High Court Judge Bilal Nazki said that India's unnatural sex law should be reviewed.[28] The Law Commission of India had historically favoured the retention of this section in its 42nd and 156th report, but in its 172nd report, delivered in 2000, it recommended its repeal.[22][29]

On 9 August 2008, then health minister, Anbumani Ramadoss began his campaign for changing Section 377 of the Indian penal code, which makes homosexuality an unnatural act and thus illegal. At the International AIDS Conference in Mexico City, he said, "Section 377 of IPC, which criminalises men who have sex with men, must go."[30] His ministerial portfolio had put him at odds with the Indian Home Minister Shivraj Patil and several other ministers in seeking to scrap Section 377.[31][32] In late 2008, he changed his argument saying he does not want the scrapping of Section 377 but a mere modification of the law treating homosexuality as a criminal offence punishable up to life imprisonment. He said he wants Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to resolve the matter, while he wanted to avoid discord with the home ministry, who said the altered law would then result in an increase in criminal incidences of sodomy or offences involving sexual abuse of children, particularly boys. In doing so he alleged that the law even penalises health workers who treat homosexuals, while making this a cognizable and non-bailable offence.[31]

Various Hindu organisations, based in India and abroad have supported decriminalisation of homosexual behaviours. In 2009, the Hindu Council UK became one of the first major religious organisations to support LGBT rights when they issued a statement "Hinduism does not condemn homosexuality".[33] Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, a prominent Hindu spiritual leader, has condemned sec 377 in a series of tweets, maintaining that "Hinduism has never considered homosexuality a crime" and "to brand a person a criminal based on sexual preference would be absurd."[34]

The United Nations has urged India to decriminalise homosexuality by saying it would help the fight against HIV/AIDS by allowing intervention programmes, much like the successful ones in China and Brazil. Jeffrey O'Malley, director of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) on HIV/AIDS, has stated countries which protect men who have sex with men (MSM) have double the rate of coverage of HIV prevention services as much as 60%.[35] According to him, inappropriate criminalisation hinders universal access to essential HIV, health and social services.[36] Later talking to The Hindu in November 2008, he added concerns that the then in power United Progressive Alliance government was in a difficult position in regards to amending Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code because of the then upcoming elections, as such changes could be misrepresented. He further emphasised the need to change the laws, sensitise the police and judiciary. According to him, after removal of discriminatory laws, marginalised groups would have better access to treatment and prevention facilities like condoms. He warned of the urgency and stated that India had succeeded in checking the spread of AIDS through commercial sex workers but transmission through gay sex, and injectable-drug users was still an area of concern in the country.[37]

On July 2014, A book on LGBTQIA & Genderqueer rights published by Srishti Madurai was released by Vanathi Srinivasan, the general secretary of the BJP in Tamil Nadu. The move has been considered encouraging by members of the LGBTQIA community.[38][39][40]

Bharatiya Janata Party senior leader Arun Jaitley stated in February 2014 that he supported decriminalisation of homosexuality. On 13 January 2015, BJP spokesperson Shaina NC, appearing on NDTV, stated, "We BJP are for decriminalising homosexuality. That is the progressive way forward."[41]

Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh spokesperson Ram Madhav in an interview with national daily Business Standard said in May 2014: "But I can say this — that while glorification of certain forms of social behaviour is not something we endorse, the penalising and criminalisation aspects need to be looked into. Whether to call homosexuality a crime and treat it as one in this day and age is questionable"[42] which is interpreted as Sangh's support to decriminalisation of homosexuality.

On March 6, 2016 Srishti Madurai's new website was launched by Dalit activist and Ambedkarite Ma. Venkatesan from BJP in the presence of Central Minister Pon Radhakrishnan, Vanathi Srinivasan, Aravindan Neelakandan, Joe D'Cruz and scores of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh volunteers at Chennai.[43]

Court proceedings

In December 2002, Naz Foundation filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) to challenge IPC Section 377 in the Delhi High Court.[44] On 4 July 2008, the Delhi High Court noted that there was "nothing unusual" in holding a gay rally, something which is common outside India.[45]

On 2 July 2009, in the case of Naz Foundation v National Capital Territory of Delhi, the High Court of Delhi struck down much of S. 377 of the IPC as being unconstitutional. The Court held that to the extent S. 377 criminalised consensual non-vaginal sexual acts between adults, it violated an individual's fundamental rights to equality before the law, freedom from discrimination and to life and personal liberty under Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The High Court did not strike down Section 377 completely. It held the section to be valid in case of non-consensual non-vaginal intercourse or to intercourse with minors, and it expressed the hope that Parliament would legislatively address the issue.[46]

On 11 December 2013, on responding an appeal filed by an astrologer Suresh Kumar Koushal and others,[47] the Supreme Court of India upheld the constitutionality of Section 377 of the IPC, and stated that the Court was instead deferring to Indian legislators to provide the sought-after clarity.[1] In its judgment the Supreme Court stated

We declare that Section 377 IPC, insofar it criminalises consensual sexual acts of adults in private, is violative of Articles 21, 14 and 15 of the Constitution. The provisions of Section 377 IPC will continue to govern non-consensual penile non-vaginal sex and penile nonvaginal sex involving minors... Secondly, we clarify that our judgment will not result in the re-opening of criminal cases involving Section 377 IPC that have already attained finality.[48][49]

On 28 January 2014, Supreme Court dismissed the review petition filed by Central Government, Naz Foundation and several others, against its December 11 verdict on Section 377 of IPC.[50]

In January 2015, National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) said that according to data collected, 778 cases were filed under Section 377 of IPC and 587 arrests were made in 2014 until October after the Supreme Court verdict. Some states are yet to submit their full data.[51]

On 18 December 2015 Shashi Tharoor, a member of the Indian National Congress, introduced a Private Members Bill for the decriminalisation of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code in the Lok Sabha, but the motion was rejected by house by a vote of 71-24 with one abstention.[52]

On 12 March 2016 Tharoor once again introduced a Private Members Bill for the decriminilsation of Section 377. However, the motion for introduction was yet again defeated by a division of 58-14 with one abstention.[53]

On 2 February 2016, the Supreme Court agreed to reconsider its 2013 judgment; it said it would refer petitions to abolish Section 377 to a five-member constitutional bench, which would conduct a comprehensive hearing of the issue.[2]

On 24 August 2016 a draft law for the ban of commercial surrogacy was cleared by the Union Cabinet and announced by Sushma Swaraj, the Minister of External Affairs (India). The draft bill denied homosexuals from having surrogate children with Swaraj stating - We do not recognise live-in and homosexual relationships….this is against our ethos.[54]

On 24 August 2017, the Supreme Court upheld that the right to individual privacy is an "intrinsic" and fundamental right under the constitution.[55] In its 547-page decision on privacy rights, the nine-judge bench also held that "sexual orientation is an essential attribute of privacy." The judgement noted, "Discrimination against an individual on the basis of sexual orientation is deeply offensive to the dignity and self-worth of the individual. Equality demands that the sexual orientation of each individual in society must be protected on an even platform. The right to privacy and the protection of sexual orientation lie at the core of the fundamental rights guaranteed by Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution."[56]

Religious opposition

The 11 December 2013 judgement of the Supreme Court, upholding Section 377, was met with support from religious leaders.[57] The main petitioner in the plea was an astrologer, Suresh Kumar Koushal, and other petitioners were religious organizations like All India Muslim Personal Law Board, Trust God Missionaries, Krantikari Manuwadi Morcha, Apostolic Churches Alliance, and Utkal Christian Council.[47][58] The Daily News and Analysis called it "the univocal unity of religious leaders in expressing their homophobic attitude. Usually divisive and almost always seen tearing down each other's religious beliefs, leaders across sections came forward in decrying homosexuality and expressing their solidarity with the judgment." The article added that Baba Ramdev India's well-known yoga guru, after advising that journalists interviewing him not to turn homosexual, stated he could cure homosexuality through yoga and called it a bad addiction.[57]

The Vishwa Hindu Parishad's vice-president Om Prakash Singhal said, "This is a right decision, we welcome it. Homosexuality is against Indian culture, against nature and against science. We are regressing, going back to when we were almost like animals. The SC had protected our culture." Singhal further dismissed HIV/AIDS concerns within the LGBT community saying, "It is understood that when you try to suppress one anomaly, there will be a break-out of a few more."[57] This, however, is in stark disagreement with many Hindu teachings because Hinduism does not view homosexuality as a religious sin.[59]

Maulana Madni, of an Islamic organization, Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind, has echoed similar homophobia in stating that "Homosexuality is a crime according to scriptures and is unnatural. People cannot consider themselves to be exclusive of a society... In a society, a family is made up of a man and a woman, not a woman and a woman, or a man and a man. If these same sex couples adopt children, the child will grow up with a skewed version of a family. Society will disintegrate. If we are to look at countries in the West who have allowed same-sex marriages, you will find the mental tensions they suffer from."

Rabbi Ezekiel Isaac Malekar, honorary secretary of the Judah Hyam Synagogue, in upholding the judgement, was also quoted as saying "In Judaism, our scriptures do not permit homosexuality." Reverend Paul Swarup of the Cathedral Church of the Redemption in Delhi in stating his views on what he believes to be the unnaturalness of homosexuality, stated "Spiritually, human sexual relations are identified as those shared by a man and a woman. The Supreme Court's view is an endorsement of our scriptures."[57]

Coming-outs and pride parades

In 2005, Prince Manvendra Singh Gohil, who hails from Rajpipla in the Gujarat, publicly came out as gay. He was quickly anointed by the Indian and the world media as the first openly gay royal. He was disinherited as an immediate reaction by the royal family, though they eventually reconciled. He appeared on the American talk show The Oprah Winfrey Show on October 24, 2007,[60] and on BBC Three's Undercover Princes.[61] In 2008, Zoltan Parag, a competitor at the Mr. Gay International contest said that he was apprehensive about returning to India. He said, "Indian media has exposed me so much that now when I call my friends back home, their parents do not let them talk to me".[62]

On 29 June 2008, five Indian cities (Delhi, Bangalore, Kolkata, Indore and Pondicherry) celebrated gay pride parades. About 2,000 people turned out in these nationwide parades. Mumbai held its pride march on 16 August 2008, with Bollywood actress Celina Jaitley flagged off the festivities.[63] On 4 July 2008, the Delhi High Court, while hearing the case to decriminalise homosexuality, opined that there was nothing unusual in holding a gay rally, something which is common outside India.[64]

Days after the 2 July 2009 Delhi High Court verdict legalising homosexuality, Pink Pages, India's first online LGBT magazine was released.[65] On 16 April 2009, India's first gay magazine Bombay Dost originally launched in 1990,[65] was re-launched by Celina Jaitley in Mumbai.[66]

On 27 June 2009, Bhubaneswar, the capital city of Odisha, saw its first gay pride parade.[67] A day later, Union Law Minister Veerappa Moily announced that the Union Home Minister has convened a meeting with the Union Law Ministers, Union Health Ministers and Home Ministers of all states to evolve a consensus on decriminalising homosexuality in India.[68] On 28 June 2009, Delhi and Bangalore held their second gay pride parades, and Chennai, generally considered to be a very conservative city, held its first.[69][70]

Mumbai has one of its own pride events, like Kashish Mumbai Queer Film Festival which was first held in 2010 from 22 to 25 April[71] and in the next year 2011 from 25 to 29 May.[72] It was the first queer film festival in India and is held in a mainstream multiplex theater which screens LGBT films from all over the world.[72][73] It has been recognised by Interpride as a pride event in India.[74]

Asia's first Genderqueer Pride Parade at Madurai with Anjali Gopalan and Gopi Shankar Madurai[75]

Madurai celebrated city's first LGBTQ Rainbow festival on 29 July 2012, Anjali Gopalan inaugurated Alan Turing Rainbow festival and flagged off the Asia's first Gender queer pride parade as a part of Turing Rainbow festival organised by Srishti Madurai, a literary and resource circle for alternative gender and sexualities. It was established by Gopi Shankar a student of The American College in Madurai to eradicate social discrimination faced by the LGBT and Genderqueer community. The objective of the organisation in to highlight 20 different types of Genders.[76][77]

On 1 May 2011, Kolkata Rainbow Pride Festival (KRPF) was formed to take the initiative of organising Pride Walk in Kolkata. Since then the initiative of Queer Pride Parade in Kolkata is being taken by KRPF. The 11th Kolkata Rainbow Pride Walk, held on 15 July 2012, was attended by more than 1500 people.[78] Kolkata hosted South Asia's first pride walk in 1999.

Chandigarh held its first LGBT pride parade on 15 March 2013 and it has been held annually ever since.[79]

The first LGBT pride parade in Gujarat state was held at Surat on 6 October 2013.[80]

Rajasthan witnessed its first pride event on 1 March 2015, when a pride walk was held in Jaipur.[81]

Awadh witnessed the first Awadh Pride parade in 2017.

In 2013, India was represented by Nolan Lewis, a model, at the Mr Gay World 2013 contest. He had trouble finding sponsors. Previously, India had been represented at the Mr Gay World by Zoltan Parag Bhaindarkar in 2008. He did not return to India and reportedly sought asylum in the United States.[82]

Sushant Divgikar, the winner of Mr Gay India 2014, was a contestant on the Bigg Boss reality show.[83] On 26 July 2014, at Kochi the 5th All-Kerala Queer Pride Parade was held.[84] It was organised by Queerala (a support group for the LGBT community) and Sahayathrika (a rights organisation for lesbian and bisexual women in Kerala).[85]

In June 2016, a platform named Amour Queer Dating is launched in India, to help queer/LGBTIQ people find long term companions.[86][87][88]

Recognition of same-sex couples

In February 2017, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare unveiled resource material relating to health issues to be used as a part of a nationwide adolescent peer-education plan called Saathiya. Among other subjects, the material discusses homosexuality. The material states, "Yes, adolescents frequently fall in love. They can feel attraction for a friend or any individual of the same or opposite sex. It is normal to have special feelings for someone. It is important for adolescents to understand that such relationships are based on mutual consent, trust, transparency and respect. It is alright to talk about such feelings to the person for whom you have them but always in a respectful manner."[89][90]

See also

Organisations:

Religious views:

Media:

Related:

Notes

  1. ^ a b Shyamantha, Asokan (11 December 2013). "India's Supreme Court turns the clock back with gay sex ban". Reuters. Retrieved 11 December 2013.
  2. ^ a b Rajagopal, Krishnadas (2 January 2016). "Supreme Court refers plea against Section 377 to five-judge Bench". The Hindu. Retrieved 2 January 2016.
  3. ^ "India has 2.5m gays, government tells supreme court". BBC News. Retrieved 15 May 2016.
  4. ^ Bedi, Rahul (5 July 2011). "Homophobia persists in India despite court reforms". The Telegraph (UK). London. Retrieved 3 April 2014.
  5. ^ a b "Fear and loathing in gay India". BBC News. 17 May 2005. Retrieved 3 April 2014.
  6. ^ "Why should homosexuality be a crime?". The Times of India. 18 April 2003. Retrieved 3 April 2014.
  7. ^ Gopinath, Gayatri (2000). "Queering Bollywood: Alternative sexualities in popular Indian cinema". Journal of Homosexuality. 39 (3–4): 283–297. doi:10.1300/J082v39n03_13. PMID 11133137.
  8. ^ "Violence against LGBT groups still prevails in India". DNA India. 24 November 2013. Retrieved 4 April 2014.
  9. ^ Priya M Menon (16 February 2013). "Lacking support, male rape victims stay silent". The Times of India. Retrieved 4 April 2014. I did not know how the police would treat a gay man.
  10. ^ Stephen Hunt; Andrew K. T. Yip (1 December 2012). The Ashgate Research Companion to Contemporary Religion and Sexuality. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. p. 368. ISBN 978-1-4094-7225-4. Retrieved 4 January 2014.
  11. ^ Ashok Row Kavi. "Expose the Hindu Taliban!". Rediff.com. Retrieved 4 January 2014.
  12. ^ Ruth Vanita; Saleem Kidwai (18 October 2008). "Indian Traditions Of Love". Tehelka. Retrieved 4 April 2014.
  13. ^ Dhrubo Jyoti (24 August 2017). "SC verdict says sexual orientation part of privacy, LGBT community celebrates". Hindustan Times.
  14. ^ Doha Madani (24 August 2017). "India Declares Freedom Of Sexual Orientation A Fundamental Right". The Huffington Post.
  15. ^ Harris, Gardiner (11 December 2013). "India's Supreme Court Restores an 1861 Law Banning Gay Sex". The New York Times. Retrieved 4 April 2014.
  16. ^ Kugle, Scott A (1 September 2011). Sufis and Saints' Bodies: Mysticism, Corporeality, and Sacred Power in Islam. Chapter 4 - Note 62-63: Univ of North Carolina Press. p. 309. ISBN 9780807872772. Retrieved 20 September 2017.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location (link)
  17. ^ A digest of the Moohummudan law pp. 1-3 with footnotes, Neil Baillie, Smith Elder, London
  18. ^ "'Xavier was aware of the brutality of the Inquisition'". Deccan Herald. Deccan Herald. 27 April 2010. Retrieved 18 September 2017.
  19. ^ Sharma, Jai. "The Portuguese Inquisition in Goa: A brief history". Indiafacts.org. Retrieved 18 September 2017.
  20. ^ Soyer, Francois (2012). Ambiguous Gender in Early Modern Spain and Portugal: Inquisitors, Doctors and the Transgression of Gender Norms. p. 45. ISBN 9789004225299. Retrieved 18 September 2017.
  21. ^ a b "Anachronistic law". The Hindu. Chennai, India. 1 October 2008. Retrieved 3 April 2014.
  22. ^ a b "UN 2004 - NGO statement: LGBT rights in India". Geneva: International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association. 27 April 2004. Retrieved 3 April 2014.
  23. ^ Kounteya Sinha (1 October 2008). "Ramadoss to take up gay rights issue with PM". The Times of India. Archived from the original on 9 October 2008. Retrieved 20 January 2011.
  24. ^ "Gay rights should be respected, prostitution legalised: NHRC chief". The Times of India. 6 October 2008. Archived from the original on 9 October 2008. Retrieved 12 February 2009. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  25. ^ Syeda Hameed (13 December 2005). "The silence around sex work". India Together. Retrieved 3 April 2014.
  26. ^ Ramesh, Randeep (18 September 2006). "'India's Literary Elite Call for Anti-Gay Law to be Scrapped'". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 4 May 2010.
  27. ^ "Reverse swing: It may be an open affair for gays, lesbians". The Economic Times. 2 July 2008. Retrieved 3 April 2014.
  28. ^ Shibu Thomas (25 July 2008). "Unnatural-sex law needs relook: Bombay HC". The Times of India. Retrieved 12 February 2009.
  29. ^ "Review of Rape Laws". Law Commission of India. March 2000. Retrieved 4 April 2014.
  30. ^ Kounteya Sinha (9 August 2008). "Legalise homosexuality: Ramadoss". The Times of India. Retrieved 20 January 2011.
  31. ^ a b Kounteya Sinha (1 October 2008). "Ramadoss to take up gay rights issue with PM". The Times of India. Retrieved 20 January 2011.
  32. ^ "Gay laws: Patil's stand finds support in Cabinet". The Indian Express. 17 April 2008. Retrieved 4 April 2014.
  33. ^ "'Hinduism does not condemn homosexuality'". 3 July 2009. Retrieved 15 May 2016.
  34. ^ "Homosexuality not a crime in Hinduism, says Sri Sri Ravi Shankar". Firstpost. Retrieved 15 May 2016.
  35. ^ "LGBT Africans demand action on AIDS pandemic ahead of international conference". Pink News. 5 December 2008. Retrieved 4 April 2014.
  36. ^ "Landmark Delhi High Court decision recognises inappropriate criminalisation as a barrier to health, human rights and dignity". UNAIDS. 7 July 2009. Retrieved 4 April 2014.
  37. ^ "India going through social change: UN official". The Hindu. Chennai, India. 9 November 2008.
  38. ^ "BJP leader launches LGBT rights book in TN". Mumbai Mirror. Retrieved 15 May 2016.
  39. ^ "It's a great honour to be awarded for book on gender variants: Gopi Shankar". The Times of India. Retrieved 15 May 2016.
  40. ^ "Meet the BJP leader who released a book on LGBT rights". The News Minute. Retrieved 15 May 2016.
  41. ^ Dhamini Ratnam. "BJP supports decriminalization of homosexuality: Shaina NC". Livemint. Retrieved 15 May 2016.
  42. ^ "RSS eases stance on decriminalisation of gay sex". Hindustan Times. Retrieved 15 May 2016.
  43. ^ Firstpost (19 March 2016). "RSS flip-flop on homosexuality indicates gay men in India remain in exile, writes Ashok Row Kavi". Firstpost. Retrieved 15 May 2016.
  44. ^ "Advocacy: Section 377". Naz Foundation (India) Trust. Archived from the original on 30 June 2012. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  45. ^ "High Court dismisses case against gay rally". Hindustan Times. 4 July 2008. Retrieved 20 January 2011.
  46. ^ Yuvraj Joshi (21 July 2009). "A New Law for India's Sexual Minorities". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 12 December 2010.
  47. ^ a b "It is like reversing the motion of the earth". The Hindu. Chennai, India. 21 December 2013. Retrieved 4 April 2014.
  48. ^ "Live: Govt to legislate against criminalising homosexuality?". First Post (India). 3 April 2014. Retrieved 11 December 2013.
  49. ^ Suresh Kumar Koushal and others v. Naz Foundation and others (Supreme Court of India 2013), Text.
  50. ^ "SC Dismisses Homosexuality Review Plea". The New Indian Express. 28 January 2014. Retrieved 4 April 2014.
  51. ^ "600 homosexuals arrested in 2014". Deccan Herald. 10 January 2015. Retrieved 8 January 2015.
  52. ^ "Shashi Tharoor's bill to decriminalise homosexuality defeated in Lok Sabha". The Indian Express. 18 December 2015. Retrieved 26 August 2016.
  53. ^ "Lok Sabha votes against Shashi Tharoor's bill to decriminalise homosexuality. Again". The Indian Express. 12 March 2016. Retrieved 26 August 2016.
  54. ^ "India proposes commercial surrogacy ban; live-ins, homosexuals worst hit". hindustantimes. 24 August 2016. Retrieved 26 August 2016.
  55. ^ "India's Supreme Court Upholds Right to Privacy". Human Rights Watch. 24 August 2017. Retrieved 19 November 2017.
  56. ^ "India's Supreme Court Has Ruled That Sexual Orientation Is A Fundamental Privacy Right". www.themarysue.com. Retrieved 19 November 2017.
  57. ^ a b c d "Rare unity: Religious leaders come out in support of Section 377". DNA India. 12 December 2013. Retrieved 4 April 2014.
  58. ^ "Supreme Court upholds Section 377 criminalising homosexual sex". Live Mint. 11 December 2013. Retrieved 5 April 2014.
  59. ^ Gay Histories and Cultures, Routledge, p. 438, George Haggerly
  60. ^ "India's gay prince appears on Oprah show". Rediff. 27 October 2007. Retrieved 4 April 2014.
  61. ^ "Undercover Princes". BBC Three. 27 April 2011. Retrieved 4 April 2014.
  62. ^ "I'm scared to return to India". Hindustan Times. 1 February 2008. Retrieved 5 April 2014.
  63. ^ "Mumbai's gay pride comes to fore". DNA India. 17 August 2008. Retrieved 5 April 2014.
  64. ^ "High Court dismisses case against gay rally". Hindustan Times. 4 July 2008. Retrieved 20 January 2011.
  65. ^ a b "Rainbow Chronicles". The Indian Express. 31 August 2009. Retrieved 5 April 2014.
  66. ^ "Celina Jaitley at re-launch of pro-gay mag Bombay Dost". Bollywood Reloaded. 19 April 2009. Retrieved 20 January 2011.
  67. ^ "Maiden rainbow pride walk". The Telegraph (India). Bhubaneswar. 28 June 2009. Retrieved 20 January 2011.
  68. ^ "Centre won't rush Sec 377 repeal, says Moily". Rediff. 28 June 2009. Retrieved 5 April 2014.
  69. ^ "City prepares for gay pride march". The Times of India. 11 June 2009. Retrieved 5 April 2014.
  70. ^ "Gay activists rejoice over Centre's plan, hold parades". The Times of India. 29 June 2009. Retrieved 27 October 2016.
  71. ^ "Queer celebration at film festival in Mumbai". DNA India. 22 April 2010. Retrieved 6 April 2014.
  72. ^ a b "LGBT film festival kick starts second edition in Mumbai". DNA India. 26 May 2011. Retrieved 6 April 2014.
  73. ^ "Queer films from Pakistan, Iran head for Kashish". DNA India. 15 May 2013. Retrieved 6 April 2014.
  74. ^ "InterPride 2013 Annual Report" (PDF). InterPride. Retrieved 6 April 2014.
  75. ^ "One Who Fights For an Other". The New Indian Express.
  76. ^ Karthikeyan, D. (30 July 2012). "Madurai comes out of the closet". The Hindu. Madurai. Retrieved 6 April 2014.
  77. ^ "Worldwide gay rights as a social movement picks up". Retrieved 15 May 2016.
  78. ^ Mohua Das (16 July 2012). "Pride parade breaks record". The Telegraph (India). Kolkata. Retrieved 6 April 2014.
  79. ^ "LGBTs come out of closet, to march for pride, identity tomorrow". Retrieved 15 May 2016.
  80. ^ "First gay parade held in India's Gujarat state". The Telegraph (UK). London. 7 October 2013. Retrieved 5 April 2014.
  81. ^ "Pride walk: LGBT group demands social, economic rights". hindustantimes. 15 May 2016.
  82. ^ "Proud to be Out". Tehelka. 17 August 2013. Retrieved 29 September 2014.
  83. ^ "Bigg Boss contestant Sushant Divgikar hopes to sensitise TV viewers to LGBT cause". The Times of India. 23 September 2014. Retrieved 8 January 2015.
  84. ^ "Queer Pride march in Kochi". The Hindu. 27 July 2014. Retrieved 8 January 2015.
  85. ^ "Fifth Kerala LGBT parade pride held". DNA India. 27 July 2014. Retrieved 8 January 2015.
  86. ^ http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-now-a-dating-platform-for-lgbt-community-2236832
  87. ^ http://amourqueerdating.blogspot.in/
  88. ^ https://gayrightsindia.wordpress.com/2016/07/21/amour-a-brand-new-dating-platform-for-queer-indians/
  89. ^ "Same-sex attraction is OK, boys can cry, girl's no means no". The Indian Express. 21 February 2017. Retrieved 21 February 2017.
  90. ^ "Homosexual attraction is OK; 'NO' means no: Health Ministry rises above Indian stereotypes". The Financial Express. 21 February 2017. Retrieved 21 February 2017.

References

Further reading

Books

  • Merchant, Hoshang (1999). Yaraana: Gay Writing from India. New Delhi: Penguin. ISBN 0-14-027839-7. (First edition)
  • Thadani, Giti (1996). Sakhiyani: Lesbian Desire in Ancient and Modern India. London: Cassell. ISBN 0-304-33451-0.
  • Vanita, Ruth (2005). Love's Rite: Same-Sex Marriage in India and the West. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 1-4039-7038-6.
  • Joseph, Sherry (2005). Social Work Practice and Men Who Have Sex With Men. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications. ISBN 0-7619-3352-2.
  • Nanda, Serena (1998). Neither Man Nor Woman: The Hijras of India. USA: Wadsworth Publishing. ISBN 0-534-50903-7. (Second edition)
  • Shahani, Parmesh (2008). GayBombay: Globalization Love and Belonging in Contemporary India. USA, India: SAGE.

Articles