IN THE NAME OF PRIDE: CONVERSATIONS WITH QUEER ACTIVISTS

Event Description
2015 marks 8 years of Bangalore Pride. The stories of queer activism in the city, of
course, significantly predate Pride. As we proceed in an increasingly polarized
national context where re-criminalization is only a fragment of the issues facing us, it
is worthwhile to look back at prior activist struggles in the city. How do stories from
the past echo in today's context, how do we learn from our shared histories?
CSMR presents a conversation with 3 activists: Akkai Padmashali, Arvind Narrain
and Sumathi Murthy who have been involved in the landscape of queer activism in
the city. Gowthaman Ranganathan and Danish Sheikh will moderate a discussion with
them as they reflect on their experiences of intervention in different spaces, and what
our future strategies might gain in learning from these stories.

Transcript of Proceedings

Sumathi: I am a musician, a lesbian, part of a collective called LesBit.

Arvind: I was an ALF member for many years, but still closely associate with issues
they deal with.
Akkai: I am a sex activist. I work for sexual minorities. I head an organization called
Ondede the word means convergence in Kannada.
Danish: Today, 377 is an ubiquitous term that has acquired a fair amount of public
visibility. To see the number is to associate it with a certain struggle. This was not
quite the case a while ago, when it was merely a dead letter in the statute book. What
were your initial engagements with this question?
Sumathi: I had no organizations to share it with when I realized what I was. My
partner committed suicide, but I had no one to speak to. Ten years later, PUCL and
Sabrang organized a coming out programme. Chatura Patil, Famila, Owais Khan etc.
spoke. It was then that I realized that people like me do exist! I found my language,
my heart, my space. I was part of the Narmada Solidarity forum, where many queer
activists came together to organize different kinds of issues. At that time, we knew
Section 377 exists, but to address it, there was a little fear. One of the initial cases we
saw was that people would definitely bring up [Section] 377. Theyd use it to threaten
us parents, teachers and police would all do it, but would never file a case. In that
context, we were handling such cases. Two adults want to live together, thats it! We
cant question it. This was in 1999-2001, but it [377] has resurfaced.
Arvind: It is a Section in the IPC. When does it become larger? Only law students
know. An analogy may be made with the Manusmriti when does it become a source
of oppression? Dr. Ambedkar made the connection the provisions in the Manusmriti
end up targeting caste relationships, and those who were untouchables. Similarly, [a
parallel may be drawn with] the IPC why is 377 of any consequence? In law school,
377 was just a provision. Teachers were reluctant to even talk about Section 376. But
at the time, people were keenly interested in what 377 meant. This interest was aided
by the community a number of gay magazines spoke out, saying that 377 was
responsible for targeting the LGBT community. Sanghamitra, a magazine for

members of the queer community, wrote an article on the impact of 377. The issue
became much bigger when Naz Foundation filed a case. The law made it a public
issue. It is now much more likely to reach different corners of the country. In 2001,
when Naz filed a case, there was not much publicity for it, but it built up! An essay in
Outlook noted that 377 is a metaphor for what is wrong with our sexual universe. It
got lots of media publicity. 2009 was a good judgment, for it garnered huge publicity.
More people became aware of LGBT people after 2013, even more people are
aware. Large parts of the country are now aware because of the negative decision.
This terrible judgment has served to reignite efforts towards decriminalization.
Akkai: Today, I am very open about gender identity etc. Post 2013 judgment,
especially. I was born as male, but my orientation is female. My parents said I cant
[be a woman]. I tried to commit suicide twice. But my brother was the first to accept
me as I am. I was born like this, I want to be like this. I am from a working class, nonHindi [speaking] background. In 1999-2000, [while practising] sex work, I saw so
many friends with a similar orientation. Through Kavipriya, I came to know of a huge
movement in Karnataka. Vividha, an autonomous group, brought together all
activists. I saw hundreds of people with different identities. Why is society rejecting
us?, I thought. In 2002, the Vividha Habba took place. In 2006, Chandinis murder
took place. People were on the streets demanding rights for trans people. We wanted
to be recognized as women. In 2004, a woman was raped and her vagina burned
because of her profession. She was a trans woman, a dalit, practised sex work, and
was vulnerable. No one talked about it. Even the police raped her. There was no
political will, no judicial will, no media will. It was then that I decided I want to come
out and talk about my issues. I told the media I want to challenge my society. Sex
work involves enormous violence. In 2008, at the first Bangalore pride march, I was
very shocked when people started talking about the conflict within them. I saw
thousands of people on street saying, My body, my right. And thats how
movement began. In 2009, Justices Shah and Muralidharan delivered judgments on
the basis of constitutional morality. It spoke not just about sex, but also human
dignity. The 2013 judgment, however, disrespected constitutional morality. I am not
happy with the 2014 judgment of NALSA [v. Union of India]. When a law is
conflicting with life and personal dignity, how must one combat that?

Danish: One of the criticisms about the Supreme Court judgment in 2013 was that it
failed to appreciate the massive amount of evidence of the harassment that the
community faced as a result of 377. We can quibble about the Constitution and its
interpretation, but ultimately facts are facts. PUCL had a fact finding report, in the
making of which Arvind was involved. How did the report come about? How can we
imagine future endeavours?
Arvind: It is not easy to talk about sex and sexuality in the Indian context. The only
language to do this is the language of human rights. The Constitution does not
discriminate between human beings and those of the LGBTI community. That is what
the PUCL Report emphasised upon. This Report came about when 3-4 men were
picked up in Cubbon Park and harassed. So, PUCL in 2001 did a fact-finding report to
investigate the arbitrary actions against members of the community. The Police were
arbitrarily detaining these men from Cubbon Park. PUCL said that human rights were
for all people. Criminal law does not discriminate between a homosexual and a
heterosexual. The rules with regard to arrest, detention are the same for everyone.
PUCL concluded that the reason why certain kind of people are subject to this
oppression is because the legal framework oppresses certain members of a particular
community. The question is of law and not of the Constitution; the Constitution does
not discriminate between anyone. Quite radically, PUCL saw the issues concerning
different sexual orientations as a matter of human rights. They emphasised that sexual
orientation is a part of being human. They brought out the human rights link. That this
right to express sexuality was an inviolable right. This is how the PUCL Report came
about and this is why it is important.
In our society, how do you speak about sex without receiving sneers? The Delhi High
Court Judge said that this is how we speak about the issues surrounding sex; we speak
about it with a sneer. We need to respect LGBT issues giving it the due importance it
deserves. This is why we need to speak in the human rights language. The PUCL
Report was instrumental in this aspect.
But then again, when we talk about dignity and so on, there is always the question of
who we are including and excluding by using these terms?
Sumathi: PUCL actually interviewed people from a lot of communities. I was sitting
in the office with Famila- the same office where these interviews were conducted.

Some police raided this office and actually put up a sign saying Hijras shouldnt be
allowed to enter the office. This was because of a Congress MLA. We protested
outside the office, we had an online campaign as well. We had feminist groups, Dalit
groups all taking part in this campaign. It was so effective that this issue was sorted
out in just two days. What really stuck with me is what Famila said as we were
travelling back. She said Will there be a time when there is no 377 in our lives?.
Danish: One way in dealing with the legal situation is through the marshalling of
evidence, of bringing together objective arguments. And yet, how much can reason
serve us when we are dealing with unreasonable laws? While dealing with an
irrational set of policies, how crucial are artistic registers such as music and theatre?
Sumathi and Akkai in particular, bring in music into their work - what do you think of
the link between art and activism?
Sumathi: To me, they both are the same; they both come out of the heart. I bring in
issues of sex, sexuality into my music. The raga I wrote becomes a Dalit woman, I
include erotic aspects, and the raga becomes transgender who has a relationship with
a Prince. The idea was to break the Brahminical dominance in music.
Akkai: These aspects cannot be bifurcated. They are all interlinked. I am a singer, I
show my love and affection, arrogance, aggression through songs. During the last
Pride March, we had a cultural evening where I sang. It is baseless to delink religion
and sexuality. God is also sexuality. If you are saying that Jesus had no sexual
relationships, isnt that being asexual? Even Lord Krishna had a lot of partners.
Anyone who is born into this world, has sexuality. Activism is not only about protest,
dharnas, it is something beyond that.
Gowthaman: When Sumathy mentioned the campaign against the police, she spoke
about various feminist, Dalit groups getting together. Generally, otherwise as well,
intersectionality is a very used word. I was wondering if you all could provide some
clarity with regard to this word in the context of the queer movement; perhaps
reflecting on personal experiences.
Sumathy: In 2002, after the Gujarat communal attack, we held a protest in front of
the Corporation for over two weeks. Trans people (some working otherwise as sex
workers) would participate during the day and then return to their work later.
Different groups had taken up different responsibilities with respect to managing the

protest pandal. Hijras, showing great solidarity, helped remove it and bring it back in
the mornings, which is significant because they they normally wouldnt otherwise be
working at this time. Intersectionality is very important; Pride without other
movements is not Pride.
Arvind: Intersectionality is an academic word, but what does it really mean? Order
of nature had a certain meaning in the British Raj, but what does it mean in the
Indian context?
Unnatural in the Indian context includes Hindu men loving Muslim women or Dalit
men loving Brahmin women as well. The idea of unnatural is much broader in the
Indian context. Youre targeting, in a more abstract sense, the right to love. Therefore,
when defending the right to love, you need to look at a broader range of groups. Who
are you as a person, at the end of the day? There is a huge sense of learning that is
gained just by interacting with other groups and being open to different kinds of
experiences. Its important to broaden your sense of who you are and to understand
the world in a wider sense. Openness to the experience of other people is
intersectionality.
Akkai: Intersectionality must be taken into consideration across groups, between
religious leaders, caste/class minorities, etc. We, as a community, are responsible for
educating ourselves on gender, class and politics. Learning has no full stop; its
common.
Sumathi: In fact, this would have been the best time for people participating in Pride
to protest what is happening across the country (i.e. Dalit and religious
marginalisation, and violence and atrocities against the Dalit community and religious
minorities). As people, we all have multiple sides and are, therefore, responsible for
responding in such situations because of that. What Pride is it otherwise?
Gowthaman: This could be a forum to think of Famila and share some of our
memories about her and her work; what are the things we want to collectively reflect
on now, looking forward? What does Pride mean to you?
Arvind: Famila died when she was twenty four and Sumathi, amongst others, was
very close to Famila. So the challenge for us is how do we remember her? I believe
its a fair question to ask, a lot of us werent there when she was alive. She was a

remarkable activist and she is one of those people from whom I learnt a lot. She
introduced herself as a bisexual hijra sex worker. She disrupted so many
assumptions from the usage of this one sentence. Her presence was powerful but to
me really the impulse that I derived from her is the spirit of activism. How do you
respond to it, how do you take it forward? Each year is different, each year she is
remembered in a different light. How do these identities come together? Pablo Neruda
wrote a poem which reminds me of Famila If I should die, survive me with a force so
pure that you awaken a fury from the pale chill world, in all directions raise your
indelible eyes, day in, day out, sound your mouths guitar. We need to think about
the future and how can we replicate that spirit of activism which Famila exuded. One
of her distinct qualities was that she managed to get into a personal world and
political world.
Akkai: She was on face, energetic and dynamic. Once senior hijras were fighting
against her, because of her trans sex worker bi sexual comment. She faced a lot of
backlash ( for example people putt tea in vagina) only because she was a bi sexual.
Famila had a relationship with a man, woman and a transgender. But today, after my
castration and my sex change surgery and having a relationship with a trans-man, the
hijra community fought with me as well for being in a relation with a man and tried
paying me 2 lakh rupees. After two weeks, they withdrew their demands. The whole
issue about trans-feminism dates long back, but even though we are in 2015, the
issues still have not changed. People need to accept diversity because we face
rejection both inside and outside the society.
Sumathi: There are so many instances with which I remember Famila so fondly.
Three to four months before her death on July 17th, I met her. She was completely
involved in sex work and she was frustrated as she had no space. She asked me if both
of us could go out and we did. She came up with the idea (she was in love with 3
people at that time, two cis-gendered males and a trans man) that love is the only
way to fight all these issues. She was very serious about the trans-man whom she
was in love with and decided to get married to him. She always had a way of taking a
personal situation and changing it into a political situation, to upturn the society. She
wanted to get her marriage with the trans man registered under Special Marriage Act.
She asked a couple of us if it was possible and since there was no provision against it,
we advised her that it was. Famila was very enthusiastic about it. Her idea was to

make peace with the hijra community, but unfortunately she passed away before she
could get married.
Danish: Hearing about Famila makes one think about another fragment of verse: My
candle burns at both ends; It will not last the night; But ah! my foes and oh! my
friend; It gives a lovely light. One of the things that we've learnt from all of you is
how to react to times of adversity. Ultimately, moments of loss and struggle
outnumber the victories. Most of our activism after Supreme Court judgement has
been a reaction to it. To sum up two questions for all of us, is what was your biggest
moment of disappointment and biggest moment of joy?
Arvind: I think in a larger way, when things go badly, I dont always feel bad. I wish
to look at the Supreme Court judgment as an opportunity. After the Supreme Court
judgment there has been even more awareness about this issue and I dont see
anything so disappointing that theres no hope. The Dalit movement, Human Rights
movement or Womens movement wouldnt have gone anywhere if they took every
moment of loss as a hindrance to their way forward. We got a favourable judgment
after a period of 50 years of struggle. If you had asked me in 1998, 2004 or 2008, I
wouldnt have agreed that criminalisation wouldnt go in my lifetime.
But for 4 years, the law wasnt there; we have lived without the law as well for a
minority of our lives. Keeping a long term objective in mind, we should keep
working. I remembering talking to a senior advocate of the Bombay High Court who
was working on the report of killings of members of marginalised committees. Others
had told him to quit working on it since it was a waste of time. However, he said that
he wanted to build an archive of targeted killing led by shiv sena in 1993. A lawyer in
Kashmir, Pervez said that cynicism is a sin.
Akkai: No implementation after Nirbhaya case. Wheres the will to implement? If
law is against human beings, why do you need law? Why did India take a trans-homophobic stance at the UNGA? Why did India take a neutral stand on the AntiDiscrimination Bill? Our responsibility is to take on different sectors. Despite my
interaction with representatives from all over the world, why isnt the sexual
minorities situation improving? There needs to be effort to improve.
Sumathy: When I saw the 2009 judgment, tears rolled down my eyes at the
judgment. Were not criminals anymore. I remember running on the road,

screaming! Then I stopped and wondered - what next? Look at the Dalit Atrocities
Act; is a very good law, but atrocities havent stopped. It is the same with rape
women sex workers are also not included; trans-men and women not included. Are
we even thinking of making space for them? The Domestic Violence Act DV
hasnt stopped. The institution of marriage is not destroyed yet. We have to struggle
on.