Chapter VI

HUMAN RIGHTS PERSPECTIVE AND

HOMOSEXUALITY

The Tenth of December every year is the International Day of

Human Rights. Father of our Nation Mahatma Gandhi observed “It has

always been a mystery to me how men can feel themselves honoured by

humiliation of their fellow beings”. He further said “there is a higher

court of justice and that is the court of consciousness. It supersedes all

other courts”.

The central idea of various international human rights documents is

that there is something about each and every human being, simply as a

human being. The universal declaration of Human Right (article 2) says

“Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this

declaration, without distinction of any kind such as race, colour, sex,

language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin,

property, birth or other status.”

In view of the above the present study tried to know how gays and

lesbians are treated by the heterosexuals in Indian Society and whether

the homosexuals are aware of their rights and fight for these rights.
 184

Table 6.1 : Attitudinal change towards gay culture

No. of respondents Percentage

No 87 79.09

Yes 5 4.55

Can't say 18 16.36

Total 110 100.00

Graph 6.1 : Attitudinal change towards Gay culture

Attitudinal change towards Gay culture

87

90
80
70
No. of respondents

60
50
40
18
30
20 5
10
0
No Yes Can't say

The above data points out that 16% respondents did not want to say

anything whereas a fraction of them, i.e. 5% believed that people have

started changing their attitude towards gay culture. A large number of

them, i.e. 88% were of the opinion that people have not changed their

attitude towards them. This shows that in a traditional society like India,

people have not yet welcomed gay culture.

 185

Graph 6.2 : Special rights for the homosexuals in India

Special Rights for the Homosexuals in India

(n=110)

10% Yes No

90%

The concept of human rights is an old and ancient concept of

‘Natural Rights’ based on natural law. The expression ‘Human Rights’ is

of recent origin emerging from international conventions and charters.

The expression ‘Human Rights’ is to be found in the Charters of United

Nations adopted at San Francisco on 25 June, 1945. The Preamble to this

Charter declared that United Nations shall have for its object, inter alia,

“to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights.” Article 1 states that the

purposes of United Nations shall be, among others, “to achieve

international co-operation ..... in promoting and encouraging respect for

human rights and for fundamental freedom for all without distinction as

to race, sex, language, or religion.....”

 186

In view of this, the above data shows that 90% respondents were in

favour of special political rights for them whereas 10% were not in favour
of such rights for them. This shows that gays and Lesbians are aware of

the rights given to this community all over the world and want these

rights for themselves in India too.

Table 6.2 : Legal rights to homosexuals to rear children

No. of respondents Percentage

Strongly agree 85 77.27

Do not agree 5 4.55

Neutral 20 18.18

Total 110 100.00

Graph 6.3 : Legal rights to homosexuals to rear children

Legal rights to homosexuals to rear children

85
90
80
70
No. of respondents

60
50
40
20
30
20 5
10
0
Strongly agree Do not agree Neutral
 187

When probed further about rights given to them, the above graph

shows that 77% respondents were strongly in favour of legal rights given
to them to rear children, whereas 4% did not agree and 18% of them were

neutral. Universal declaration of Human Rights, 1948 came to be adopted

on 10 December, 1948 in the form of resolution passed by the United

Nations General Assembly. It consists of 30 articles. Articles 2 to 21

include ‘rights to live’ liberty and security of the person, freedom from

slavery, freedom from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

There is also the fact-finding report about Bangalore City,

organized by the Peoples Union for Civil Liberties, Karnataka Branch, in

2001. The report, 'Human Rights Violations Against Sexual Minorities in

India; explores every dimension of the issue. It underlines our worst fears

of the extent of discriminations and humiliation experiences by gays,

lesbians and transvestites at the hands of the law and the police. But their

experiences of violence extend into society - in the family, by the medical

establishment, at work places, in household spaces, in public spaces and

in popular culture. Those from low-income/non-English-speaking

backgrounds and transvestites face the worst, kinds of discrimination and

humiliation, according to the report.

It can be concluded that there are no legal rights for LGBT

community in India.
 188

Graph 6.4 : Legal hurdles for homosexuals in India

Legal hurdles for homosexuals in India

(n=110)

Yes No
15, 13.64%

95, 86.36%

Whether, it is blackmail or physical violence, verbal abuse or

police harassment, forced heterosexual marriage or denial of homosexual
marriage, gay people, live like second class citizens, unable to obtain fair
treatment because of their sexuality. The question of the human rights of
gay men and women is not about whether or not people approve of
homosexuality or the concept of gay identities. Rather, it is a question of
equality under the law and under human rights conventions, like the
international convention on civil and Political Rights, to which India is a
signatory. The above data shows 86% respondents argued that there are
many legal hurdles for the homosexuals in India whereas 14% believed
that there are no such hurdles and that they can be given rights if the
Government wants.

Homosexuality is widespread in India but it is unusual to see two

men in close embrace or two women with arms around each other in
 189

public places. However, there is lack of credible data or well researched

statistics available on the number of homosexual men and women in the
country. If we go by the generally accepted formula which places ten
percent of sexually active adult, in any given society, as practicing
homosexuals, there must be over 80 million homosexual men and women
in the country. But then in the Indian context, there is a large percentage
of adults who would engage in heterosexual and homosexual
relationships. Unwritten family codes force most to hide their
homosexual identity. A majority of homosexual men and women are
content to lead a double life. Many of them dutifully get married, as is
demanded by family due to social pressure, and act out their parts as
husband or wife - dropping their mask only when they are among people
of their own sexual preference. They are expected to project a veneer of
being 'normal' - what happens outside the public eye is ignored.

Homosexuality challenges widely held assumptions about

masculinity and femininity about the way men and women relate to each
other. Not surprisingly, its existence is either vigorously denied or
subjected to abuse and ridicule. The fact that many gay men and lesbians
feel obliged to conceal their sexual orientation makes it difficult for them
to assert their civil, political, cultural rights, as individuals and as
members of a sexual minority. Neither the government nor civil rights
groups even acknowledge that homosexuality exists, let alone address gay
peoples' experiences of discrimination.
 190

Graph 6.5 : Support to gay activism

Support to gay activism

(n=110)

Yes No
15, 14%

95, 86%

Our data shows that 86% respondents were in favour of supporting

gay activism whereas a small percentage of 14% were not in such a
favour. This points out that there is lot of awareness amongst gays and
lesbians for their rights.

Across all cultures and societies, the primary function of marriage

has been procreation and then, raising the children who have been born
from wedlock, thus ensuring continuity of society and that the society
would have a proper social structure. The case is not different in India
and the Indian society. The traditional Indian society gives a lot of
importance to the institution of marriage, and to the subsequent
procreation of children. This can be seen from the elaborate rituals
involved in a marriage ceremony or the naming of a newborn child.
 191

Marriage between a man and a woman involves union and

expression of mutual love. Heterosexual intercourse continues the cycle
of humanity on this earth. This expression of mutual love by a man and a
women perform biological functions to create a new life. With time a
familial unit of mother and father, daughters and sons, grandsons and
grand-daughters, uncles, aunts, cousins, is built up. Celebrations,
ceremonies, observance of wedding anniversaries, establishment of
family traditions etc are observed. Moral and ethical values are formed
and redefined and practiced-all built around the love, protection, safety
and desirability of the family unit. These values will be incorporated into
the cultural values of the contemporary society in which these families
live.

The Indian society is steeped in tradition and this reflects on the

legal system as regards inter-personal relationships. Intimacy of any sort
in not approved of unless it is legitimized in the form of marriage.

Gay marriage is a very important issue that is likely to be debated

for years to come. It is probably the last and most critical concern in
regards to the fair treatment of homosexuals within society. People will
have to decide how to engage people of the third sex who cannot strictly
follow celibacy. Many questions are there; like should they be
encouraged to form committed same sex partnerships and marriage;
should they be encouraged to attempt heterosexual marriage; or should
they just be abandoned and allow to become promiscuous? What will be
the best for the Individual, and what will be best for society as a whole ?
 192

Graph 6.6 : Legitimization of Gay Marriages in India

Legitimization of Gay Marriages in India

(n=110)
Strongly agree
5, 5% Neutral
10, 9%
Do not know

95, 86%

When probed, the respondents in large numbers (95), i.e., 86%

were strongly in favour of legitimization of gay marriages in India. 5%

were neutral and the remaining 9% reserved their comments on this issue.

Looking at the data it can be said that in this 21st century, this community

is demanding its legal rights.

 193

Graph 6.7 : Delhi High Court Judgement - Awareness

Delhi High Court Judgement (2009) - Awareness

(n=110)

Yes No
12, 11%

98, 89%

2nd July 2009 is a significant date for anybody who follows social
movements and its interface with the legal system in India. The Delhi
High Court passed a judgment on the popularly known Naz Foundation
petition decriminalizing homosexuality in India. It declared that in so far
as IPC Sec 377 criminalizes consensual sexual acts of adults in private, is
violative of Articles 21, 14 and 15 of the Constitution. (Para 130 Page
105 of judgment) Certain observations may be made.

v The judgment uses the public health rhetoric, arguing that because
HIV/AIDS is reaching the proportions of an epidemic in India,
therefore it is logical to decriminalize homosexuality. This will
allow MSMs (men having sex with men) to come out of their
closet without the threat of being harassed or arrested and test HIV.
This is important because many MSM have heterosexual
relationships also and thus the danger of public health disorder.
 194

This is the reason why the Health Ministry in India has been one of
the Chief proponents of decriminalization together with the fact
that NACO (National AIDS Control Organization) is one of the
petitioners to the case.

v The decision to decriminalize is supported because it is argued in

the case that criminalization of homosexuality violates Art 14
(equality for all), 15(non-discrimination on the basis of sex and to
read sexual orientation as a component of sex) and 21 (right to life
and liberty, and including right to privacy within it) of Indian
Constitution. Thus it is significant that a number of fundamental
rights are being discussed and formally guaranteed to the
homosexual community with the acknowledgement that till before
these were violated.

v The Judgment makes a reference to many International Human

Right documents. Art 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights and Art 17 of the International covenant on civil and
Political Rights both of which ensure right to privacy. India is a
signatory to both these documents indicating that there is a
contradiction between ratifying internationally right to privacy and
continuing within the domestic legislative space a criminal
provision that goes against the letter and spirit of the privacy. It
also makes a reference to the Yogyakarta Principles of 2007, which
discusses states’ responsibility towards protection and respect of all
persons regardless of sexual orientation and gender identity. Our
data points out that 89% respondents were aware of this judgement
whereas 11% had no idea.
 195

Table 6.3 : Reasons for non-legalization of Homosexuality

No. of respondents Percentage

Unnatural 85 77.27

Immoral 15 13.64

Anti-religious 10 9.09

Total 110 100

Graph 6.8 : Reasons for non-legalization of Homosexuality

Reasons for non-legalization of Homosexuality

(n=110)

15, 14% Unnatural Immoral Anti-religious

10, 9%

85, 77%

The data shows that 77% homosexuals were of the opinion that

people believe that such relations are unnatural, 14% said it was immoral

in the eyes of people and according to 10% respondents it was anti-

religious according to people in society. It is believed that same sex

marriage cannot lead to procreation and it is against the existing social

order, it has been resisted.

 196

In the sexual union of men and men and women and women, there

is no such biological function available. There is no life in such a union,

but only sexual pleasure. The cycle of continuing humanity doesn't exist.

There is no baby, there is no larger family with moral and ethical values

being formed, redefined, refined and practiced. There is nothing to

contribute to the cultural values of the contemporary society in which

these people live. Of course at times irresponsible acts are committed in

heterosexual marriages. But people have been doing so for years and may
no doubt continue to do so still attempting to redefine "marriage" as

including two homosexual males or two lesbians is like taking away life

from the very institution of marriage itself.

Therefore, it is quite understandable as to why there is a huge

opposition to same sex marriage. The traditional concept that marriage is

always between a man, a women, not between two men or two women

has been firmly ingrained in the minds of most of the people. And in most

societies where people have not been quite sensitized or educated to the

issues concerning homosexuality, people are quite unable to digest the

fact that two people belonging to the same-sex can get married.
 197

Table 6.4 : Reasons to legitimize homosexuality

Reasons No. of respondents Percentage

Equality before law 35 31.82

State cannot interfere with sexual

preferences of its citizens 35 31.82

Liberty of Personal choices 105 14.00

Human rights perspective 25 22.73

Total 110 100.00

Graph 6.9 : Reasons to legitimize homosexuality

Reasons to legitimize homosexuality

(n=110)
Equality before law
State cannot interfere with sexual preferences of its citizens
Liberty of Personal choices
Human rights perspective
25, 23%
35, 31%

15, 14%
35, 32%
 198

Coming to the reasons for legitimization of homosexuality, it was

found that 32% respondents were of the opinion that it should be

legalized because all are equal before law, and that the State cannot

interfere with the sexual preferences of its citizens. 14% believed that

there should be liberty of personal choices and 23% respondents pointed

towards the Human Rights Perspective. It can be concluded that the

homosexuals in India are demanding legal status.

Section 377 of IPC violates Fundamental Rights guarantee under

Part III of the constitution :

Article 14 of the constitution provides us equality before law. The

intention of this Article is that every person is equal in the eye of the law.

Then why homosexuals are not treated equally with heterosexuals? This

Article provides us equal protection of law and says that the basis of the

classification must have a rational or reasonable nexus with the object

sought to be achieved by the legislation. However, in criminalizing

homosexuality in sec 377, the classification between natural sex and

unnatural sex is that those sexual activities that are performed for

procreation are natural and those that are not performed for procreation

are unnatural. Now the Individuals have become more independent and

rational. For them, procreation is not the main aim of sexual activities.

Moreover, homosexual activity can never be termed as unnatural. Modem

understandings of psychiatry and psychology, no longer view

 199

homosexuality as a disease or a disorder. Thus, the very objective of the

section is facile, unscientific and based upon prejudice alone. Therefore,

section 377, which criminalizes homosexuality relying on the

unreasonable classification based on the procreation, is an absolute

violation of this Article.

Article 15 says that there shall be no discrimination based on sex.

The intention of this Article is that no person shall be subject to any

disability, liability, restriction or condition on the ground of sex or

gender. Moreover, Sec 377 criminalizes the sexual relationship between

two persons of same sex i.e. homosexuals. Thus, this provision of IPC

discriminates against the homosexuals because of their sexuality and

therefore constitutes discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Article 21 of our Constitution prohibits the state from interfering

with the private personal activities and personal liberty of the individual.

The term personal liberty is a compendious term to include within itself

all the varieties of rights that goes to make up the 'personal liberties' of a

person. The central idea behind the concept of personal liberty and

privacy is that the quest of happiness of the individual must be fulfilled.

Homosexual conduct is a very personal conduct and they do it for the

sake of happiness. This Article also says that a state cannot deprive any

person from his personal liberty and privacy according to the procedure

established by law. Therefore, someone can say that sec 377 can restrict
 200

homosexuals from their personal liberty and privacy. The procedure in

Article 21 must be right, just and fair and not arbitrary, fanciful or
oppressive, otherwise, it would be no procedure at all and the requirement

of Article 21 Would not be satisfied. This provision of IPC is an arbitrary,

unfair and unreasonable provision because it criminalizes homosexuals

because of their infertility or unproductiveness that gives a very narrow

sense of classification between homosexuals and heterosexuals. Thus, by

criminalising homosexuality in sec. 377, it restricts them to enjoy their

right to personal liberty and privacy given in Article 21 and this

procedure is arbitrary, unfair and unreasonable, therefore it is not a

procedure at all.

The Meaning and content of Fundamental Rights guaranteed in the

constitution are of sufficient amplitude to encompass all the facets of

gender equality including same-sex relationship. Moreover, sec. 377

criminalizes same sex relationship. Thus, this provision is not consistent

with the Fundamental Rights and according to Article 13 of our

constitution, which says that those laws which are inconsistent with

Fundamental Rights, must be void. Sec. 377 of IPC is therefore void. Not

the whole section is void; one part of this section is void and after

applying the doctrine of severability this provision of IPC must be

amended.
 201

Table 6.5 : Divorce or separation of homosexual partners

No. of respondents Percentage

Yes 46 41.82
No 44 40.00
Cannot comment as law does not 20 18.18
recognise this relationship
Total 110 100.00

Graph 6.10 : Divorce or separation of homosexual partners

Divorce or separation of homosexual partners

(n=110)
Yes No Cannot comment as law does not recognise this
18% relationship

42%

40%

The present study tried to find out about the cases of divorce or
separation of homosexual partners. 18% respondents were of the view

that since the law in India does not recognise this union, therefore there

are few cases found. 2% had an idea of few such cases whereas 40% had

no idea. From amongst our total respondents, 11% were divorced. They

married their partners in front of God, but later on divorced them.

 202

Table 6.6 : Homosexual Wills for inheritance of their assets

No. of respondents Percentage

Yes 58 52.73
No 22 20.00
Same as heterosexuals 30 27.27
Total 110 100

Table 6.11 : Homosexual Wills for inheritance of their assets

Homosexual Wills for inheritance of their assets

(n=110)

Yes No Same as heterosexuals

30, 27%

58, 53%
22, 20%

Marriage has various implications as far as rights and duties of an

individuals are in question. It not only gives to people the right to co-
habit but also gives them right to property, inheritance, maintenance,
adoption, pension, insurance, employee benefits etc.

When asked about the above, it was found that 53% respondents

make Will for inheritance of their assets, whereas 27% follow the

heterosexuals in this matter and 20% do not believe in this.

 203

Table 6.7 Inheritance of the assets by Homosexuals

No. of respondents Percentage

Blood Relations 10 9.00
Sexual Partners 36 33.00
Homosexual organisations 50 45.00
Charity 14 13.00
Total 110 100.00

Graph 6.12 : Inheritance of the assets by Homosexuals

Inheritance of the assets by Homosexuals

50
50
36
40
No. of respondents

30

20 14
10
10

0
Blood Relations Sexuals Homosexual Charity
Partners organisations

45% homosexuals further pointed out they would like to donate

their assets to the Homosexuals organisations, 13% would do charity,

33% would write WILL in the name of their sexual partners and only a

very small percentage, i.e. 9% would like to WILL in the name of blood

relations. This shows that due to neglect by their own kith and kin, they

were not found close to them.

 204

Table 6.8 Arbitration bodies to resolve mutual disputes between

homosexuals

No. of respondents Percentage

Yes 10 9.09

No 87 79.09

In nascent stage only 13 11.82

Total 110 100.00

Graph 6.13: Arbitration bodies to resolve mutual disputes between

homosexuals

Arbitration bodies to resolve mutual disputes between

homosexuals (n=110)

Yes No In nascent stage only

10, 9%
13, 12%

87, 79%

Talking about the arbitration bodies like Gram Panchayats to

resolve mutual disputes between them and help them in court settlements,

79% respondents refused, 9% had an idea and 12% argued that there are

such bodies but in a very nascent stage.

 205

Table 6.9 : Rape cases within homosexual community

No. of respondents Percentage

Yes 20 18.18

No 54 49.09

Not to my knowledge 36 32.73

Total 110 100.00

Graph 6.14 : Rape cases within homosexual community

Rape cases within homosexual community

(n=110)
Yes No Not to my knowledge
18%
33%

49%

The above data point out that 49% respondents knew about the

rape cases amongst their community, 33% had no knowledge about it

whereas 18% firmly believed that there are no such cases amongst them.
 206

Graph 6.15 : Status of having a partner

Status of having a partner

(n=110)
Yes No Strictly confidential
20, 18%

8, 7%

82, 75%

The concept of privacy is so broad that no comprehensive and all

encompassing definition of the term can be given. In the case National

Coalition for Gay and Lesbian V. Ministry of Justice, the South

African Court held that, privacy recognizes that we all have a right to

sphere of private intimacy and autonomy which allow us to establish and

nurture human relationships without reference from the outside

community. Even at the international level, the right to privacy has been

recognized in the favour of lesbians and gays.

It was found that in 75% cases it was strictly confidential about

letting the researcher know about their partners. 18% had partners and

only a fraction of respondents, i.e. 7% had no partners.

 207

Table 6.10 : Fidelity between partners

No. of respondents Percentage

Yes 22 20.00

No 20 18.18

Strictly confidential 68 61.82

Total 110 100

Graph 6.16 : Fidelity between partners

Fidelity between partners

(n=110)
Yes No Strictly confidential
22, 20%

20, 18%
68, 62%

To know about their views on their belief in fidelity between

partners, all respondents were probed. 62% believed in fidelity between
partners, whereas 18% did not believe in this and 20% did not comment
treating it as their confidential matter. Interestingly, it was also found that
the older respondents (above 51 years) cared for one another and relied
mostly on their partners, whereas those belonging to the category of
younger age group, were not found to be committed towards their
partner/friend.
 208

Table 6.11: Reservation of seats in elected bodies for the homosexuals

No. of adolescents Percentage

Yes 88 80.00

Not necessary 22 20.00

Total 110 100.00

Graph 6.17: Reservation of seats in elected bodies for the

homosexuals

Reservation of Seats in Elected Bodies for the Homosexuals

(n=110)
20% Yes Not necessary

80%

80% of the homosexuals were in favour of their reservation in

elected bodies akin to women in India, whereas according to 20% it was

not necessary to have reservation.

 209

Table 6.12 : Child Adoption

No. of adolescents Percentage

One of us 85 77.27

Child is not adopted legally 25 22.73

Total 110 100

Graph 6.18 : Child Adoption

Child Adoption
(n=110)

One of us Child is not adopted legally

23%

77%

In their opinion when homosexuals adopt children; when asked

about the legal father and mother, 77% were of the opinion that one of

them would become mother.

 210

Table 6.13 : Legal Status

No. of Respondents Percentage

Yes 85 77.27

No answer 25 22.73

Total 110 100

Graph 6.19 : Legal Status

Legal Status
(n=110)
Yes No answer
25, 23%

85, 77%

In India, the homosexuals are not given any legal status. 77%
respondents believed that the adopted child may become the claimant of

their property whereas the rest did not give their views on the subject.

In New Delhi, police arrested 18 men in 1992 from a park on the

suspicion that they were homosexuals. After protest by the intervention of

human rights groups, they were released from police custody.

 211

Another case was reported in a small village in Gujarat State two

decades ago, where Ms. Tarulate underwent a female to male sex change
operation and changed her name to Mr. Tarun Kumar. He later married

Ms. Lila in 1989. But Lila's father filed a petition in the High Court

stating, that it is case of a lesbian, relationship so the marriage must be

null and void - the petition called for criminal action under section 377.

What is more aggravating is that in Lucknow city, the local police

force has been bizarrely upbeat in attempt to enforce section 377. In

2001, police invaded two officers of the local AIDS prevention

organizations to arrest their staff for promoting homosexuality. In January

2006, police arrested four men accusing them of operating an online "gay

racket" and engaging in unnatural sex.

New Campaign for Lesbian Rights in India

Directly following lesbian, feminist and leftist protest against the

December 1998 attacks in India on Deepa Mehta's feature film 'Fire'

which portrayed two sisters-in-law who fell in love and left the family

into which they had been married, a number of otherwise lesbian groups

scattered throughout India organized themselves into a coalition called

"Campaign for Lesbian Rights". Many women living in the USA must be

familiar with Deepa Mehta's 'Fire' which was showed in U.S. cinemas in

1998 and won several international awards.

 212

The campaign for lesbian rights is a very wide coalition, including

besides lesbian groups, feminist and leftists individuals and groups. The
campaign moved with a new urgency when lesbian partners of five years.

Mamta and Monalisa of Cuttack, Orissa, subject to family harassment,

recently attempted suicide and only one survived. This was the latest in a
long list of suicides which has been reported in the Indian press since the

1980's.

The campaign has already held a series of actions, and has many

more plans to take place over the coming year. On January 9, the

campaign called a public meeting at the Delhi Women's Center, Saheli,

for a discussion entitled, "Free lesbianism and other issues". About forty

people attended.

On January 24, a day which since 1993 has been to commemorate

deceased gay activist Siddhartha Gautam with a gay and lesbian film

festival in Delhi, Four women from the campaign conducted a panel in

the context of the festival on myths and realities about lesbians, legal

issues and the gay and lesbian movement.

On February 1, campaign members began to distribute leaflets in

public places on myths and realities about lesbians and gays. They

described this action as "the first in a planned series" of leafleting

ventures.
 213

The same leaflets were distributed again in Delhi University, and it

was reported that the response was generally positive when the film 'Fire'
reopened in cinemas in Delhi on February 26. Campaign members were

there again with leaflets.

In the meantime, on January 4, four members of AIDS Bhedbahav

Virodhi Andolan (ABVP) a group which is part of the campaign, went

to Orissa where Mamta and Monalisa lived, to investigate the situation

and prepared a report to distribute. Later in February, campaign members

prepared a memorandum to present to the Parliamentary Secretariat

Subcommittee on women to repeal an Antisodomy Law (IPC 377) which

has been on the books since the British colonizers first put it there in the

nineteenth century. Attempts to repeal this law have been made since

1991, but have never had such support behind them. The current support,

and the campaigns' current momentum, bode well for the future of lesbian

in India.
 214

Graph 6.20 : Support of NGOs

Support of NGOs
(n=110)
Always Sometimes Never
5, 5% 20, 18%

85, 77%

Our data shows that 77% respondents agreed that their NGOs help
them in fighting for their rights sometimes, 5% were refused such help

and 18% were always rendered help by their NGOs.

Attitude of People Towards Homosexuality - Largely Silenced and

Marginalized

One of the objectives of the present study was to know about what

people think about homosexuality in our society. For this, a purposive

sample of 50 respondents was selected amongst whom all were graduates.

25 respondents were upto the age group of 30 yrs whereas the rest were

above 30 years of age.

 215

When asked about their support for same sex marriage in India,

those who were between the age group of 20-30 years 18 were in favour
of such marriages whereas from amongst those belonging to higher age

group, only 12 were positive. It can be said that if younger people are

more accepting to gays than older ones, it seems that we can expect more
positive attitude towards homosexuals over the period of time.

When asked whether homosexuals relations is considered a sin in

their opinion, the younger people did not believe in this whereas the

elderly respondents staunchly believed it as a sin. It can be said older

people become less tolerant as they age. They are more homophobic

because they were born and raised at a time when gay rights were non-

existent. According to them they did not fit into a tidy category. Those

who were above 60 years of age believed that GOD THE ALIMIGHTY

shall punish them one day.

Attitudes towards Homosexuality

Total Sample : 50

Moral attitudes Agree Unsure Disagree

“What consenting adults do together is 45 2 3
their own business”
“A person’s sexual orientation is his 38 3 9
own business”
“People have a right to be homosexual 7 2 41
if they choose to be”
 216

“Homosexuals are just people like 5 2 43

everyone else”
“Homosexuals have a sense of morals” 5 5 40
“Homosexuality is a natural sexual 12 28 10
variation in humans”
Attitude to Rights / Human Rights Agree Unsure Disagree
“Do you think that homosexuals 28 3 19
should have the right to any kind of
job they want, provided they are
qualified of course”?
“Do you feel that the Human Rights 26 5 19
Act (1977) should be widened to
include protection for people on the
basis of their sexual orientation”?
Do you feel there is any need to 12 10 28
change the law regarding homosexual
acts in the Crimes Act”?

It can be said that gays and lesbians in India could still be

described as little more than shadows, largely silenced and marginalised.

Lot of educated people are cool about it but are still very transphobic, the

data shows that it is not acceptable by Indian society because Indian

society is predominantly homophobic.

Celebrities who came out of the closet in Recent Times

The famous people who are gays and Lesbians are now coming

forward and face media. “Proud to be Gay” says Apple CEO. In has not

been a secret in the tech world or in the gay-lesbians community, but

Apple CEO, TIM Cook made his homosexuality public very recently. He
 217

said he is proud to be a gay and counted it “among the greatest gifts God

has given me”. He further says “Being gay has given me a deeper
understanding of what it means to be in the minority.... it has made me

more empathetic.... which has led to a richer life.... and to rise above

adversity and bigotry”. Cook becomes one of the high profile public
figures to come out at a time when the United States is increasingly

starting to recognise the rights of Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender

(LGBT) community. While India is still struggling to come out of the

colonial closet, sexual activity between consenting adults in the US is not

considered illegal in many of its states since 2003. Several public figures

in India are rumored to be gay, but subject is considered taboo. In a recent

case in India, the wife exposed his gay husband by the help of hidden

cameras in the bedroom.

Cook has been an intensely private man. “Throughout my

professional life, I’ve tried to maintain a basic level of privacy. I don’t

seek to draw attention to myself he wrote. “While I have never denied my

sexuality, I haven’t publicly acknowledged it either, until now. He was

coming out because he was reminded of Dr. Martin Luther King’s words

about what one is doing for others. Cook doesn’t consider himself as an

activist but he realizes how he has been benefitted from the sacrifice for

others. “So if hearing that CEO of Apple is gay can help someone

struggling to come to terms with who he or she is..... Then it’s worth the

trade-off with my own privacy” writes, Tim Cook.

 218

Yet, in another case, CNN anchor Anderson Cooper on July 2,

2012 said “The fact is, I’m gay, always have been, always will be, and I
couldn’t be any more happy, comfortable with myself and proud.” Actor

Ellen Page came out as gay at an LGBT conference in February, 2014 “I

am here today because I am gay... I am tired of hiding and I am tired of

lying my omission.”

Actor Wentworth Miller announced he was gay and turned down

an offer in 2013 to travel to Russia because of Russia’s treatment of gay

men and women.

Popstar Ricky Martin came out in March, 2010 blog post on his

website “I am proud to say that I am a fortunate homosexual man. I am

very blessed to be who I am”.

Actor Jim Parsons (Big Ban Theory’s Sheldon Cooper) came out

in May, 2012 in a New York Times profile that said “Mr. Parsons is gay

and in a 10 year relationship....”

rrr