The latest glossary (henceforth official glossary) is a marked improvement over the previous version drafted by the government. It largely adopts the community-preferred glossary  developed by Queer Chennai Chronicles, Orinam and The News Minute, building on the work done by QCC-TNM media reference guide and Orinam’s terminology, and included by  Justice Anand Venkatesh in one of the interim orders of the Sushma (2021) case.

A key difference is in the official glossary’s replacement of ‘Thirunar’, an umbrella term for transgender persons, with ‘maruviya paalinar/ maariya paalinar’. We invite reader comments and feedback on other changes: please reach us at orinam.net@gmail.com.

People’s Union for Civil Liberties; Coalition for Sex Workers, Sexual and Sexuality Minorities’ Rights; Payana; ASQ; Swabhava Trust; LesBit; Jeeva; Karnataka Transgender Samiti; Karnataka Sexual Minorities Forum; Sarathya; Swatantra; Ondede; Sangama; QAMI and QCI condemn the irresponsible, sensational and salacious reportage by media houses on the issue of LGBTQIA+ rights.

On Wednesday, July 5, Bangalore Mirror published on its front page a news item titled “All hell breaks loose as two women wed in Koramangala”. The news item proceeded to give a one-sided account of the women’s relationship. It published salacious details about how their relationship started and went on to falsely claim that the women had gotten married. Further, the news item mentioned two quotes from lawyers saying that they were in an “unnatural union” and would be “punished”, and only one from a lawyer, who was misidentified, saying that same-sex relationships per se are not criminalized under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code 1860.

At the same time, Public TV, a Kannada news channel, also obtained the contact details of one of the women, and called her to appear on their show. When she refused, stating that she wished to keep her life private, the reporter from Public TV told her to “wait and see”. Subsequently, Public TV uploaded perfunctorily blurred pictures of the women on their Facebook and Twitter feed, with captions insinuating that they were in an incestuous relationship. Public TV continues to harass one of the two women by constantly calling her and demanding that she appear on this show.

In case anyone is doubtful about the repercussions of such irresponsible reportage – one of the women was fired from her employment with immediate effect, within a few hours of the Public TV report.

As civil society organisations that work on the rights of LGBTIA+ individuals, we are horrified at the absolute lack of concern that media organisations demonstrate for the lives of people that they are reporting. We know that this is an incident that involves tremendous amounts of domestic violence and abuse. We are also aware that these women are living in constant fear for their lives. They have endured domestic violence, police harassment, and threats to their lives, and had achieved a semblance of peace for themselves. However, the actions of media houses have shattered this hard-earned respite, and now they are again forced to be on the run.

This is not the first time that media houses in Karnataka have chosen to report in this manner. TV9s reporting on Operation Anandi had devastating impact on the lives of the transgender women involved, some of whom continue to languish in jail. Media houses refuse to acknowledge actual human lives in their reportage, and absolve all responsibility for consequences. Every time a media house publishes a report like this; LGBTQIA+ persons are pushed further into the closet, and are made more vulnerable to violence.

Moreover, we understand that the police themselves have leaked much information to the media. It is disconcerting that in spite of closing all formal proceedings, the police continue to interfere in the lives of these women, and are harassing them using the media.

As a group of civil society organisations concerned for media reportage and its impact on the rights of LGBTQIA+ persons, we are calling for a press conference tomorrow, July 6, 2017, at 1 pm, Bangalore Press Club.

Organisations: People’s Union for Civil Liberties; Coalition for Sex Workers, Sexual and Sexuality Minorities’ Rights; Payana; ASQ; Swabhava Trust; LesBit; Jeeva; Karnataka Transgender Samiti; Karnataka Sexual Minorities Forum; Sarathya; Swatantra; Ondede; Sangama; QAMI and QCI

Timeline of media coverage (credits Rōmal Lāisram)

Bangalore Mirror published this on July 5: http://bangaloremirror.indiatimes.com/bangalore/cover-story/all-hell-breaks-loose-as-two-women-wed-in-koramangala/articleshow/59448986.cms

Public TV goes live with the story a few hours later, claiming an incestuous relationship and highly sensationalises the story: http://publictv.in/father-files-complaint-against-homosexual-techie-sisters-in-bengaluru/

News9/Deccan Herald and TheNewsMinute call up activists for directions on how to respond to the story:

News9 responds positively like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5LVfgU6pCQ

TheNewsMinute responds satirically: http://www.thenewsminute.com/article/completely-out-their-depth-bengaluru-cops-counsel-lesbian-couple-instead-helping-them-64710

Deccan Herald decides to avoid the story altogether.

Public TV airs a special (link not yet up, but this smaller package will show you enough how terrible the reportage is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnGBVsHu3p0 | It was also their ‘breaking news’ in the) 10:30pm bulletin)

The findings of her study are available here. The abstract of her study is presented below, from genderdiversityandschools.in/research-design/

“I present the results of a first of its kind qualitative study to understand the experiences of queer students during their K-12 education in India. “Queer” signifies various counter-heteronormative identities apart only from lesbian, bisexual, gay and transgender (Narrain and Bhan, 2005; Menon, 2008). Using semi-structured interviews with self- identified queer persons of <=25 years of age, focus group discussions and expert interviews, I develop a coding scheme based in grounded theory and guided by Olweus’ (1993) definition of bullying.

I find that: 1. Gender non-conforming students are labelled as gay, lesbian or transgender and are bullied verbally, physically, sexually and relationally by students, teachers and administrators, regardless of their actual sexual orientation. 2. Perhaps, due to the androcentricism and invisibility of female sexuality, gender non-conforming PAGFB are subjected to less bullying than gender non-conforming PAGMB, up to a certain point. 3. Schools are sex negative with little or no sexuality education, and no policies prohibiting bullying. Complaints are either trivialized or bullied students are blamed for bringing this upon themselves by being gender non-conforming. Bullied participants report isolation, depression, fall in grades and educational aspiration, suicidal ideation and increased absenteeism but many also excel academically and in co-curriculars. Some love school as it is the only place that they can be themselves. Participants and experts suggest that comprehensive sexuality education and inculcating equal respect through effective school and state based policies may create more inclusive school climates.”

I attempt a model “Anti-Discrimination and Sexual Rights” policy based on my findings, legal decisions and suggestions from participants and experts.

Click here, or on the image below to go to the website:

Editors’ note: This post has been added to Orinam’s compilation of resources for educational institutions in India, at https://new2.orinam.net/resources-for/educational-institutions/