On Transgender Day of Remembrance (TDOR), Nov 20, 2018, we at Orinam honour the memory of Anannya Krishnan.

Anannya, a transgender woman, reached out to us in 2016 and joined one of our online groups, Gender Euphoria. Over the months, she grew more and more confident with disclosing and living in her true gender. She also emerged as a source of support to other young transgender people.

A pharmacologist by training,  she managed to land a corporate job  as a Drug Safety Associate: a job at which she was able to be out in the workplace.

She signed on to Sampoorna’s Open Letter of Sept 23, 2017 to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on the Transgender Persons Bill,  gave a public talk (TEDxNapierBridgeWomen, Nov 5, 2017,  and also spoke at a British Council panel discussion on Diversity and Inclusion on Dec 9, 2017, representing Orinam.

Her struggles to find a place to live, and the strife within her family, proved too much to handle, and she took her life on Dec 30, 2017.

On this day, TDOR 2018, Orinam and Diversity Dialogues dedicate our guide Transgender-Affirming Guidelines for Indian Workplaces to the memory of Anannya.

Anannya’s TEDxNapierBridgeWomen talk may be viewed below.

Note:
Some resources including suicide helplines are at https://new2.orinam.net/crisis-support

FMCG giant Procter and Gamble has teamed up with creative agency Publicis Singapore  to produce an evocative ad for Vicks Vaporub that simultaneously reinforces and queers this imagery. Directed by Neeraj Ghaywan for production house SeeOn, Mumbai, the ad features a girl child raised by her adoptive mother who happens to be a trans woman. The ad hashtags #TouchOfCare to celebrate mother-daughter pair Gauri Sawant and Gayatri, and gently raise questions about discrimination and denial of rights of transgender people in India.

Despite the progressive Supreme Court NALSA judgment of 2014, civil rights for transgender people remain a pipe dream beyond the mostly-tokenistic moves of introducing a third gender category in application forms for education and employment, and the occasional welfare scheme.

Trans people still struggle to get basic identity documents based on self-identification. Rights to legally adopt and raise families – instances such as Gauri (Maharashtra) and Maya (Odisha) notwithstanding – remain mostly thwarted by the dysfunctional implementation of NALSA, criminalization via Section 377, and lack of clarity around adoption by parents who do not identify within the gender binary.

In such a scenario, one hopes ads like this one will give viewers some pause for thought, some reflection on the abject injustice meted out to transgender people, and some recognition that loving families don’t necessarily have to be linked by ties of blood.

And some realization why Gayatri wants to become a lawyer when she grows up.

Notes:
(i) The post is not to be interpreted as an endorsement of the product being sold.
(ii) Orinam would like to know if P&G’s support of transgender people goes beyond advertisements, and is reflected in their India operations being inclusive of LGBTIQ+ persons in their diversity and inclusion policies. If readers have any knowledge of this, please let us know.

Related reading/viewing:

Gupta, Roohi. 2016. Why Transgenders are the New Favorites of the Ad World?
Advertising Age India.
http://www.adageindia.in/marketing/cmo-strategy/why-trangenders-are-the-new-favourites-of-the-ad-world/articleshow/52511377.cms

Sawant, Gauri. 2012. video (Hindi). in Project Bolo. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-A_rDOVdxWw

Sawant, Gauri. 2011. video (English). in Subramaniam, Kalki. 2011. Indian transgender rights activists talk about love and relationships. Orinam blog.
https://new2.orinam.net/indian-transgender-rights-activists-talk-about-love-and-relationships/

Sawant, Gauri. 2009. videos. Resisting Stigma and Homophobia: Gauri Sawant’s Deposition, Pune Panchayat (Marathi), Delhi Panchayat (Hindi). Pad.ma archives
https://pad.ma/grid/title/gauri_sawant

]]> https://new2.orinam.net/vicks-ad-march-2017/feed/ 1 https://new2.orinam.net/justice-for-tara-resist-police-brutality/ https://new2.orinam.net/justice-for-tara-resist-police-brutality/#respond Tue, 15 Nov 2016 17:24:16 +0000 https://new2.orinam.net/?p=12816 Tara, a 28 year old trans-woman in Chennai, was found with 90% burn injuries near the Pondy Bazaar police station. On the morning of November 9, she succumbed to her injuries and died at Kilpauk Medical College hospital. According to the, police, it was a case of self-immolation but the matter is still under investigation.

Gender rights activist and members of the LGBTQ community came together under the banner of Delhi Queer Pride banner, for a protest vigil for Tara, which took place at Jantar Mantar on November 14.

Dhrubojyoti, journalist and activist based in Delhi, addressed the protestors in New Delhi saying that Transgender persons just like other oppressed groups like Dalits or Adivasis or homeless persons, have been bearing the brunt of police violence. “LGBTQ persons, like me, with the privilege to move around in cars, who are not homeless, who do not beg or engage in sex work as a means of sustenance are the ones who are tolerated by society if not accepted entirely.” It is working class trans persons like Tara who are oppressed by the hetero-patriarchal structures of society with aggressions amounting to physical and sexual violence and even death.

Tara, like lot of other trans-women, was a sex worker. Does that dilute her right to live with dignity? The police harassment meted out against her was under the garb of her being a sex worker. Before she died, she faced torture at the police station where she was told by the police “to go out and die as nobody will mourn your death”.

Whether Tara was killed or forced to kill herself, we are still to find out.

But why is it that we need a death to evoke empathy and agitate? Oppressed groups have been constantly brutalised by the state and society, but it is only when someone dies, that our blood boils. Women get raped and molested almost every day in India, but we needed a Nirbhaya, to take to the streets and demand accountability from the state. Agitated at the apathy of state and society towards oppressed groups, Bittu Karthik, scientist and activist, said, “Tara and a lot of trans-women and sex workers have been harassed and abused. But nobody takes these incidents of aggression seriously. Tara was killed by the same oppressive forces. Maybe we need a death, a murder.”

“Recently in Hyderabad”, said Karthik, “There was a spate of attacks on transgender sex workers by a group of men to extort money. Even after a number of FIRs and constant pleadings with the police, there was no action taken. It was only when one of the trans-women was killed by this group, that people started protesting and police arrested the men. It is just how public sympathy and attention works. We strive to provide retrospective justice to the ones who died under oppression by forces that we did not combat.”

It is important for us to understand the relationship of marginalised communities and police violence. The widespread impunity with the police to harass, curtail and control certain identities is the reason for Tara’s death. Even after the landmark judgment in NALSA v Union of India, oppression and violence towards trans* individuals continue.

Members from Pinjra Tod, a feminist movement against patriarchal domination of public spaces, expressed their rage towards Tara’s death saying that our patriarchal societies permit only certain kind of bodies – the male, able-bodied, upper class- to enjoy public spaces  like the streets at night. The ‘other’ bodies- women, trans persons – are subjected to suppression and violence as a measure to control those bodies and limit them to a certain periphery. “Dignity of women is attached to their choices of clothing and the time of the night they take to the streets. We are told that it is only bad women who go out at night and then they are subjected to violence, which they presumably asked for. Tara’s death is an example of this narrative.”

Birsa Ambedkar Phule Students’ Association of JNU expressed their solidarity and rage towards the incident and condemned police violence towards trans-persons saying, “It is a reflection of the patriarchal, brahminical society that oppresses every disadvantaged group to maintain this status quo. We must resist such acts.”

Shambhavi, member of Dhanak – a student led LGBTQ collective in JNU, expressed her rage towards such ‘dispensable’ identities by citing instances of micro aggressions on campus where students deal with discrimination on a daily basis. She also cited the case of Najeeb and the apathy of the institution towards the case.

While we express our agitation and resistance towards these acts of violence, we must also resist and challenge the institutions that perpetuate these forms of violence. In a hyper-masculine, patriarchal society that is bifurcated on the lines of class, caste and gender, these acts of violence are mere expressions of a much larger problem. Vqueeram, activist and professor, articulated the pain and anger of Hijra and Thirunangai individuals by addressing the structural injustices on these identities every single day so much so that it becomes a matter of life and death. “When people say Hijras are in-betweens, I think they are- in between life and death.”

“The narrative is such that is acceptable that certain lives are dispensable,” said Dhrubojyoti.   “Let us not find novelty in violence and choose to fight only when someone has died. Is it that we are angry only because Tara was burnt alive? Are the acts of violence against marginalised groups every single day not moving enough for us to stand in solidarity?”

Republished from TheWire.in with consent of the author.

Extension of deadline from Jan 4 to Jan 14, 2016: The Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment (MSJE), Government of India, has sought comments on the Rights of Transgender Persons Bill, 2015. The full text of the bill is available here. Comments/suggestions, if any, may please be sent latest by 14th January, 2016, to Smt Ghazala Meenai, Joint Secretary (SD), Room No. 616, ‘A’ Wing, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi-110001 (E-mail: commentstgbill-dosje@gov.in)

Despite all its praises and misgivings, one of the ways a judgment like this which lays such heavy emphasis on State responsibility to include trans* persons into ‘mainstream society’ becomes ‘landmark’ is how it gets translated into easily accessible policies and opportunities. One of the recent judgments (July, 2015) deliberating on trans* person’s inclusion has been Sumita Kumari v. State of West Bengal from the Calcutta High Court. One might dismiss this three page long judgment as being ordinary, but the ways in which state actors and administration interpret the rights set under NALSA, this judgment becomes a striking point in showcasing how the imagined rights get reflected upon the lower judiciary.

The petitioner in the Sumita case is a “member of the transgender community” and had complained for not being considered for a government job which was exclusively reserved for women. Considering whether the denial of that post to the petitioner would amount to discrimination or not, the court ruled in negative saying that a trans* person, just like men are not eligible for the post reserved for women only and that, “it would have been discriminatory if two out of the three genders of the human species were considered eligible to apply for engagement in respect of the posts-in-question to the exclusion of the transgender community members”.

Talking about sex based discrimination laws in India and how they get constructed by the judiciary in different ways, Ratna Kapur and Brenda Cossman point out (p.56) that the formal approach to equality often neglects any analysis of substantive inequality between men and women, i.e.. They say that, merely looking at whether men and women are similarly situated or not, several factors determining the disadvantages faced by women get side-lined. Analyzing series of cases based on sex based discrimination Gautam Bhatia notes that the point of enquiry solely being based on the grounds of discrimination on ‘sex only’ by the courts should also have been around the rubric of the meaning of discrimination. How could one then see a trans* individual’s right only in terms of them being similarly situated as men and/or women?

While understanding the discrimination against trans* persons, it becomes very important to realize how the already existing objective categories do get used. In the absence of any legislation which addresses remedy to violence faced by members of trans* persons in any capacity, the way in which individuals negotiate the ambiguity of law to help themselves is quite telling. Vyjayanti Vasanta Mogli, a human rights activist working with Telangana Hijra Intersex Transgender Samiti (THITS) talks about how the organization is trying to tackle the cases of sexual and non-sexual violence and assault against hijra women by filing criminal complaints using sections from the Indian Penal Code (IPC) which are generally used by cis-gendered women. Use of Sections such as 354 (‘Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty’), 354A (‘Sexual harassment and punishment for sexual harassment), 509 (‘Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman’) of the IPC clearly represent how trans* women try to legally frame their sufferings.

Gowthaman Ranganathan, a human rights lawyer working with Alternative Law Forum says that legally, in the light of the fact that NALSA gives the right to a person to self-identify their gender regardless of undergoing Sex Reassignment Surgery, trans* women could very well avail of such laws and there shouldn’t be an onus on them whatsoever, to prove their gender identity before the police if and when they choose to file a criminal complaint. At the same time, however, Gowthaman cautions that these gaps in the law become very difficult to read and apply where Female to Male (FTM) trans* persons seek criminal recourse. If one were to apply the same logic, then they would inevitably have to rely on Sections such as 377 which include completely different ingredients as opposed to a criminal assault.

The debate of using the already existing law is of course much bigger. The use or non-use of laws meant only for women by trans* individuals has been opposed by many in the women’s group. For instance many members of the women’s group opposed the gender neutrality of sexual assault laws in the Parliamentary Standing Committee Report and the 2013 Criminal Law (Amendment) Ordinance. Similarly Ashley Tellis points out how the demand for gender neutrality to a large extent neglects the fact that violence becomes a continuing site through which women have known sexuality. Akkai Padmashali, a human rights activist in Bangalore and Founding Member of Ondede, says how preposterous judgments like Sumita are and such decisions are completely in contempt of NALSA. She points out how many trans* individuals have successfully claimed their rights as women and men and in fact they want to claim such rights as women or men. The gender binary, therefore, despite being repeatedly challenged by activists and lawyers does not become completely diminished or obsolete. Ranjita Sinha working with the Association of Transgender/Hijra in Bengal on the other hand emphasizes the need to articulate trans* rights outside the paradigm of the binary. She says when the sensitivity of dealing with violence against women itself is severely lacking, then framing trans* women’s right within that domain poses multiple problems.

Is this issue just about strategizing sufferings within the law then? Although a lot of individual States within India are addressing the demands of several groups through their individual Transgender Boards, the ambiguity of the law with regard to addressing sexual violence against trans* individuals shows how difficult it gets for people to claim their rights. Despite NALSA, cases such as Sumita show the lack of understanding of multiple disadvantages and discrimination faced by a class of people. The denial of a trans* person to a woman’s post, therefore, becomes a way in which every experience get legally fitted into the third category as devised by the law. Despite coming off as a glorious judgment in which an individual would be given agency over their genders, in just a sentence or two that agency gets silenced.

Orinam thanks the SAIS Center for Transatlantic Relations at Johns Hopkins University for permission to republish this post from the Equality Blog.

Bangalore, Nov 26, 2014: Over the past two days, approximately 167 members of the transgender community have been taken away by the police and kept at the Beggars’ colony. These detentions have been entirely arbitrary, and we are apprehending more detentions in the coming days. We are greatly concerned by this mass detention and violations of human rights.

Most detenues were not on the streets begging or doing any act that is prohibited under the Karnataka Prohibition of Beggary Act, 1975. Most of them were going about their daily chores when they were arbitrarily picked up by police officers and taken away to the Beggar’s colony in Hoysalas. The police even walked into the homes of the hijras and dragged them out. It is to be noted that even those hijras who went to the police station because they were called by other arrested hijras were also arrested. Clearly the objective of the police was not merely to pick up those who were begging, but in effect all persons who answered to the description of being hijra.

The reason for this mass detention is unknown to us but there is information suggesting that this is retaliation for the misbehaviour of one of the members of the community. Even if this were true, collective punishment inflicted on the entire hijra community for the wrongdoing of just one person is not appropriate. It is unconscionable that the entire transgender women community should be punished for the alleged wrongs of some members of the community

The detainees were not released even on an undertaking given by organizations working on sexuality rights. This is tantamount to arbitrary detention as the majority of those arrested have not committed any offence under the Beggary Act. This is violative of the fundamental freedom of movement which all citizens enjoy under Article 19 of the Constitution. This state action has taken on the character of a purge of hijras from the city of Bangalore violating guaranteed constitutional rights.

The Supreme Court of India in the judgment of National Legal Services Authority v Union of India has upheld the rights of the transgender community. The apex court has held that, “We, therefore, conclude that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity includes any discrimination, exclusion, restriction or preference, which has the effect of nullifying or transposing equality by the law or the equal protection of laws guaranteed under our Constitution, and hence we are inclined to give various directions to safeguard the constitutional rights of the members of the TG community. Hijras, Eunuchs, apart from binary gender, be treated as ‘third gender’ for the purpose of safeguarding their rights under Part III of our Constitution and the laws made by the Parliament and the State Legislature.”

In furtherance of the said judgment, the Karnataka State Government has formulated a policy for Transgenders in Karnataka. The Preamble to the policy states that “steps to create public awareness should be taken so that TGs feel that they are also part of the society, regain their respect and are not to be treated as untouchables. The solution to their problems requires concerted efforts to mainstream them and adoption of an inclusive approach in all spheres of life.” The policy then goes on to provide for a range of measures to create an enabling environment for the transgender community, amongst which include protection from harassment and abuse at multiple levels. The arbitrary mass detention of members of the transgender community is in violation of the Supreme Court’s judgment and the policy by the Karnataka State Government.

Therefore, we demand the State Government immediately fulfill the following demands:

1. Direct the release of the members of transgender community immediately;

2. Direct that there be no further detention of members of the transgender community;

3. Initiate departmental inquiry into this arbitrary detention by police officers under whose direction the purge of hijras from the city was carried out.

4. Compensation for the wrongful arrest and consequent mental trauma suffered by those arrested.

Please attend the protest today, the 26th of November, at Town Hall, from 4 pm, against the illegality of police action against transgenders.

Supported by : Karnataka Sexual Minorities Forum, Alternative Law Forum, People’s Union for Civil Liberties,Karnataka Janshakthi

Coverage by the Bangalore Mirror is here.

I have always been afraid of needles, stitches, surgery and knives. Even as a kid. My clumsy flat-foot+awkward height made me fall quite often, needing stitches at least once in three months. Never have I had them. Just can’t. I’d ask the doctor to just put a bandaid or something, and I’d go home clutching wads of cotton to help stem the blood.

So. Surgery = big fear.

Secondly, unlike a lot of other transwomen, I do not have a particularly hateful relationship with my penis. I’ve been ashamed of it, yes. I’ve considered alternate realities where I was me, without the penis. I’ve fantasized a lot of having a vagina and being able to “receive sex”, as one transwoman I spoke to put it.

TMI maybe, but my penis is really really small. I’ve never had a bulge, despite the tightest trousers I’ve worn. I know some people hate that term, but as the porn-industry puts it, I think of my penis as a large clit.

Thirdly, right now my orientation is pretty queer. In that, as a woman, I like and am attracted to other women (cis, trans, gender-fluid or sexually fluid – all equally). And therefore, I’m not particularly sure that I would need a vagina to please my eventual partner (obviously a big assumption.) Also, while I admit I have zero experience in this matter, receiving anal stimulation/anal sex is about as erotic and fulfilling to me as receiving vaginal sex.

Plus, sex toys = amazing.

This year has been brilliant for me. I’ve come out to a lot of my friends, have managed to overcome some serious depression, and have found some amount of peace. This has helped me learn, explore and define my gender and politics a lot. I think I am gender fluid. I am transgender. I would like a female body (as that would give me greater personal happiness) but this does not require me to undergo any sexual reassignment/gender-affirming surgery.

In the back of all this is also one teen-early adulthood desire to be a trans-porn actress. Right.

Given all this, I think surgery may not be what I most desire. Hormones, absolutely. Every day I have to shave, every day I am perceived as a man is hurtful. Every day I look at myself and see a man in the mirror is debilitating.

I cannot wait to be seen as a woman.

However, I do think there is value in surgery for aesthetic reasons. For one, there are a bunch of scars on my face which I don’t like at all. I would like to lose them. There are also varicose veins and badly healed burns on my leg – the veins probably a result of Klinefelter’s syndrome, the burns because of a road accident – that I’d rather not have at all. So cosmetic surgery = yay.

I don’t think I want breast implants. For one – I already have a bit of boobage. Secondly, delicious estradiol/ estrogen is going to give me sufficient growth, I think. But, if I – at a future point – decide I need larger breasts, I have no compunctions getting implants.

I think my, um, balls are ugly. They perhaps give me the most pain, and are quite hard to tuck away. So for that, and that reason alone, will I consider having surgery. It’s more a question of aesthetics and comfort than sex/gender confirmation.

I think I wouldn’t mind having both a “penis/clit” and a vagina.

Does this make me less of a woman? Does this make my experiences as a trans person less authentic?

I don’t give a f*ck.

Color of Trans: seven episodes of trans experience

7 pm Sept 27-28, 2014 (Saturday and Sunday)
Spaces, 1 Elliots Beach Road, Besant Nagar

Panmai is the upcoming theatre group founded by Living Smile Vidya, Angel Glady and Gee Imaan Semmalar.

‘Color of Trans’, Panmai’s debut production, is devised by Living Smile Vidya (author of ‘I am Vidya’ and Charles Wallace Fellow of the London International School of Peforming Arts), Vinothini Vaidyanathan (Actor, Theatre Maker) and Angel Glad (Cine-actor, performer with Tuida Theatre Group, South Korea).

The text of the application made by the Government of India, downloadable here, appears less alarming than the IE headline. The application, which seems to have been filed at the instance of the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, seeks clarification on the NALSA judgement of April 15, 2014.

1. In our reading, some of the points raised in the application that are not a cause for concern, or a step in the right direction, are as follows:

• The  application points out that the term ‘eunuch’ is not an equivalent of ‘transgender’ or a variant of the latter and hence it has to be left out. => This is true, and many in the transgender community have pointed out that we consider the term derogatory.
• “…They will include trans-men and trans-women (whether or not they have undergone sex re-assignment surgery or hormonal treatment or laser therapy etc)… and a number of socio-cultural identities, such as kinnars, hijras, aravanis, jogtas, etc.” => This is a welcome point, and bears repeating because some groups, media and government departments around the country have narrowly interpreted the NALSA judgement (particularly Justice Sikri’s section) as being purely concerned with hijras, kinnars and others of transfeminine gender experience.

2. We are ambivalent on the following point:

• TG should not include cisgender lesbian, gay and bisexual people => SC has, in one place (page 93, pt. 107) in the NALSA petition, mentioned that occasionally T is used to refer to LGBT spectrum and GoI wants to ensure NALSA ruling does not apply to LGB. The ruling actually made it clear they were proceeding with the narrow (minus LGB) definition, while acknowledging that sexual orientation a separate issue from gender identity and that some trans people may be LGB. This is thus a non-issue. We fail to understand why GoI seeks a clarification on this matter, unless it seeks to emphasise to its more conservative supporters that it remains opposed to reconsideration of Section 377, an issue that discussion of same-sex orientations among cisgender people may bring up.

3. Two issues that may be a matter of concern:

• The statement that six months (as stipulated by the Supreme Court) is not enough to implement all the changes mandated by the Supreme Court, and the recommendations made by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment need to be rolled out in a phased manner => We hope this does not lead to indefinite delays or any backtracking on the promises of the NALSA judgment.
• The application’s point that the categorisation of transgender people as OBC is a determination that would have to be made by the National Commission for Backward Classes => this could, again, result in indefinite delays until such time as the National Commission considers the issue.

4. While we appreciate the effort the application makes to clarify terminology by eschewing the term ‘eunuch’ we note that the definitions of male-to-female and female-to-male transgender people have been interchanged in the application.

5. Finally we urge the government and Supreme Court to expedite action towards justice, equality and full citizenship for transgender people. If the recent developments in the Ajmer, Rajasthan, case of policy brutality and sexual assault of a hijra are any indication, we remain far from this goal.

Update Sept 12:

An MSJE official has explained that the application was initiated in response to

– representations from community members who had expressed concern that most states preparing to establish transgender welfare boards were interpreting the NALSA judgement to include only hijras, and not considering other trans people

– confusion resulting from a line in the NALSA ruling about ‘transgender’ occasionally used as an umbrella term that includes lesbian, gay and bi people. This has, apparently, led to concerns that cisgender LGB people would use this definition to claim OBC status for themselves.

– concerns raised that SC/ST transpeople may be forced to identify as OBC

– procedural issues regarding who makes the determination of OBC

– the need to let the SC know that the term ‘eunuch’ is neither acceptable nor accurate as a synonym for TG. The NALSA judgement uses ‘eunuch’, ‘third-gender’ and ‘transgender’ synonymously in some portions of the text. Many members of the diverse trans* communities have objected to use of the term eunuch.

Background Reading:

• NALSA judgement
• Government of India application
• Recommendations of the Experts Committee, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment
• Read more on the NALSA ruling including summaries and analyses from legal and community perspectives here.

Thirunangai (transwoman) Sudha has been conferred an honorary doctorate, a lifetime achievement award, by the International Tamil University, USA, making her the first in the history of India’s trans* community to receive such an honour. She has been given this recognition for her consistent work towards development of the thirunangai community since 1993, and for expressing her views relating to the community’s rights and issues in all possible media. Sharing her feelings on this honour, Dr. Sudha said “I take this as the recognition given for the entire thirunangai community. My sincere thanks to Sahodaran, a CBO based in Chennai, and TAI-VHS, Chennai, for providing me the opportunities to work for my community.”

திருநங்கை சுதா அவர்களுக்கு அமெரிக்க உலக தமிழ் பல்கலைகழகம் முனைவர் பட்டம் வழங்கி சிறப்பு செய்து உள்ளது. இந்திய வரலாற்றிலேயே ஒரு திருநங்கை கௌரவ முனைவர் பட்டம் பெறுவது இதுவே முதல் முறை ஆகும். குறிப்பாக 1993-லிருந்து இன்று வரை திருநங்கைகளின் மேம்பாட்டிற்காக விடா முயற்சியுடன் தொடர்ந்து பணி செய்ததற்காகவும் திருநங்கைளின் உரிமைகள் மற்றும் பிரச்சனைகள் குறித்து தன்னுடைய கருத்துகளை பல ஊடகங்களில் தொடர்ந்து முன்வைத்ததற்காகவும் இந்த பட்டம் வழங்க பட்டுள்ளது. இது குறித்து Dr. சுதா அவர்கள் கூறுகையில், “இது எங்கள் ஒட்டுமொத்த திருநங்கை சமூகத்திற்கு கிடைத்த அங்கீகாரமாகவே நினைக்கிறன். எங்கள் சமூக மக்கள் மத்தியில் தொடர்ந்து பணி செய்ய வாய்ப்பு அளித்த சகோதரன் சமூக அமைப்பிற்கும் TAI_VHSக்கும் நன்றி தெரிவித்து கொள்கிறேன்.”

Watch Sudha in the primetime Sun News segment Vivaadha Neram on June 11, 2013. Even though Vivaadha Neram has featured thirunangais and gay men in previous episodes, this was the first time such a major Tamil-language channel (viewership in lakhs) had positive coverage of such a diverse spectrum of LGTB concerns, and featured transmen, gay and bi men and a transwoman together on a single show. Sudha played a key role in getting this TV panel discussion organised as part of ChennaiPride month 2013, and in ensuring visibility of transmen, gay and bisexual men in this programme.

மாற்றுப் பாலினத்தவருக்கான சட்ட,சமூக உரிமைகள் என்ன?

http://youtu.be/mAN8GDTzqb4