On Thursday, India's Supreme Court signaled it would hear an appeal to this month's Delhi High Court ruling that decriminalized same-sex sex. Striking down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (which concerns itself with "carnal intercourse against the order of nature"), Delhi gave gays the legal (and human?) right to be intimate with each other. Now, a threat to take that all away.

CONTINUED »

As India moves toward decriminalizing same-sex sex, with a Delhi court ruling this week striking down a 150-year-old British anti-sodomy law in the city, Queerty asked Pradeep Solanki to describe what the news means to him. He files from his home in Canada.

About ten years ago I was walking excitedly around downtown Mumbai, soaking in the sights and sounds of the land my family left more than 100 years ago. I passed by Churchgate Railway Station and the unmistakable aura of gay men cruising was palpable. I was approached very seductively by a square-jawed youth who wasted no time in getting to the point. He whispered all the things he would do to me if only I would follow him to his flat around the corner. My temperature raised, I followed him closely and he held my hand. In India it is a common sight to see two men (or two women) holding hands or walking arm on shoulder as a mark of deep friendship. We turned a corner and his demeanor turned violent. He snatched my wallet, insulted me in Hindi and finally threatened to call the police.

CONTINUED »

India may be the globe's largest democracy, but a 150-year-old rule on the books certainly appears to limit individual freedom: the one that makes same-sex sex a crime. Now, an effort to repeal it: "India is one of the few professed liberal democracies in the world that still has such a law. The others are mostly Islamic or authoritarian, and even China lifted its ban in 1997. Successive governments have long argued that Indian society is too conservative to accept repealing Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code — under which sex 'against nature' is punishable by up to ten years in prison. India’s leaders have come under increasing pressure in recent years from activists who say that the law, introduced in 1860, violates civil liberties and encourages the spread of HIV by forcing homosexuals underground. The new Government that took power in May after the Congress Party’s surprise election victory has indicated that it is ready to change the law, which is at present being challenged in the Delhi High Court, according to Indian media reports."

If "homosexuality is an offence under Shariat Law and haram [prohibited] in Islam," as Vice Chancellor Maulana Abdul Khalik Madrasi, of the Darululoom-Deoband school in India, proclaims, then isn't Shariat Law an offense to approximately 500 million persons around the globe? And, uh, Mother Nature?

CONTINUED »

"The past two decades have seen tremendous progress within the queer rights movement in India. The battle has been fought on several overlapping activist fronts, through organizations such as Sangama (Bangalore), which follows a human rights-based approach, and the Humsafar Trust (Mumbai), which focuses on health-based intervention.

CONTINUED »

The Delhi High Court is considering whether to make gay sex legal in India, the world's second most populous country. This morning, anti-gay rights advocates told the court that legalizing gay sex would increase the spread of HIV & AIDS. Advocate H P Sharma told the court:

"There is an increasing tendency of homosexuals in India to indulge in group sex. What is even more disturbing is that in the name of HIV/AIDS control, they try to get safe places for carrying out perverted sexual practices on a collective scale. Homosexuality will adversely affect the public health and in the name of thrill, enjoyment and fun the young shall walk into the trap of homosexual addiction. The tragic aspect of this is that alcohol, drugs and disease are the natural concomitants of homosexual activity."

The court rejected arguments made last week that gay sex causes bodily harm after gay rights advocates showed the bench World Health Organization documents refuting the claim. The opposition countered that no study had been conducted in India on the matter, but the court replied "Human beings are same everywhere." Gay sex is illegal under Section 377 under the Indian Penal Code and offenders can be sentenced to life imprisonment.

Indian Health Minister Anbumani Ramadoss says he and "like-minded" leaders plan on meeting with the Prime Minister to discuss the government's ongoing support of Section 377, a colonial era law prohibiting same-sex action. Ramadoss hopes to overturn the law, but other politicians insist it's for the good of the nation and have ignored Ramadoss' argument that Section 377 contributes to the spread of HIV/AIDS. [PTI]

Infighting continues over same-sex love over in India.

A High Court last week ruled that their colonial era prohibitions should remain, but some in the government, particularly the Health Minister, insist the law, called Section 377, does more harm than good. But government leaders aren't having it and told the Court yesterday to ignore Minister Anbumani Ramadoss pleas, which include highlighting the rate of HIV infection among shamed gays.

…The Government on Monday told the Delhi High Court not to consider Union Health Minister Anbumani Ramadoss’s views on legalising gay sex among consenting adults and said Section 377 of the IPC was “the will of Parliament and the people, how so wrong it may be”.

“Your Lordships can ignore the statements of the Minister…his statements cannot change the law,” said Additional Solicitor General PP Malhotra on Monday before a Bench of Chief Justice A P Shah and Justice S Muralidhar.

Such a stance astounds us – if a health official insists a population – and a nation – are in danger, we would be inclined to believe them.

It's been nearly 60 years since India became sovereign, yet the government yesterday decided to uphold a colonial era law prohibiting homosexuality. How queer!

Testifying before the High Court yesterday, gay activist Shyam Diwan implored India's leaders to remember their post-colonial democratic dream:

The Constitution gives fundamental right to equality and it prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex. But these rights of 25 lakh homosexuals in the country are being violated. Moral argument cannot triumph over the constitutional rights in a democratic society where fundamental rights prohibit any discrimination on the ground of sex.

The Ministry of Health has also been fighting against the law, called Section 377, and have asserted – quite rightly – that such legislation contributes to the spread of HIV/AIDS. The Home Ministry, meanwhile, fought for the law, highlighting a growing tension within the government.

Despite the facts and personal testimony, government leaders said yesterday they were "obviously" not going to overturn 377. It seems they would rather live under rhetorical British rule. Said Additional Solicitor General PP Malhotra: "Obviously, we will take a stand against the scrapping of Section 377 IPC that classifies sex between two men as a criminal offense. We object to their plea." Isn't it funny that Malhotra referred to men in his response?

Indian activists are gearing up for a battle this week as their government prepares arguments for and against Section 377, a colonial era law banning same-sex love.

The Indian government has agreed to hear their pleas after eight years of struggle. And, if all goes according to plan, lawmakers will revoke the legislation.

Health Minister Anbumani Ramadoss twice last month called for 377's removal, saying such a law only brings shame and self-loathing, which can lead to unsafe sexual practices and, of course, the spread of HIV.

"The removal of legal and social sanctions against homosexuality has positive ramifications that go beyond concerns of public health and which strengthen the foundations of a democratic polity." – Journalist Jug Suraiya (pictured) on Indian health minister Anbumani Ramadoss' push against Section 377, the part of the nation's penal code prohibiting same-sex relationships. [Times of India]

Indian Health Minister Anbumani Ramadoss again reiterated his opposition to the nation's ban on gay sex. Said the politico: "Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which criminalizes men who have sex with men, must go. I want to do away with it to curb the spread of HIV/AIDS… We need to accept it as a problem as the provision is preventing our work to control, curb and reverse the AIDS situation." [Thaindian]

Indian health minister Anbumani Ramadoss today came out against his nation's ban on gay sex, telling officials at an AIDS conference, "Section 377 of the [penal code], which criminalizes men who have sex with men, must go." [Hindustan Times]

American artist Miles Patrick's Indian adventure took a wrong turn last month.

The fifty-five year old, who moved to tourist town Mahabalipuram, known for its famous temples, back in 1998. Things went swimmingly for many years until Patrick reportedly started "seducing" local fishermen, a move that garnered him a five-year jail sentence:

Magistrate of Tirukazhukundram court pronounced the sentence on July 27 after finding Miles Patrick, a resident of New York, guilty of inducing young fishermen into homosexuality by showing pornographic films and giving narcotics.

The court sentenced Srinivasan, a local associate of Patrick, to three-year rigorous imprisonment for aiding and abetting him in his acts.

The two were arrested by the Mahablipuram police last year on a complaint from 25-year old local fisherman Desamuthu.

Though India's urban citizens have become more accepting in recent years, same-sex loving remains illegal thanks to the colonial era law, Section 377.

India's gays made quite a statement this weekend. Though homos have previously put on pride parades in Calcutta, the festivities stretched across the nation in the biggest gay outing in India's history this weekend:

Waving rainbow flags and chanting "Gay India does exist," nearly 1,000 gay activists and their supporters marched in coordinated parades in three Indian cities Sunday, demonstrating their growing confidence and hope for change on a subcontinent where homosexuality is illegal.

Activists in New Delhi, Bangalore and Kolkata called the parades the largest display of gay pride in India's modern history. They said the public rallies would have been impossible just a decade ago in this largely conservative nation, where marriage is seen as an important societal duty.

Most of the marchers came out to oppose Section 377, the colonial era law prohibiting gay activities. While most political leaders oppose opening the laws for the lavender set, none actively protested this weekend's happenings, saying they didn't want to give the gays too much attention. Ain't that grand?

Homo hopes are up in India, where a court is reconsidering Section 377, a Colonial era penal code criminalizing same-sex loving. Activists are hoping the court will "read down" the law, which would remove gay speak from 377. [Times of India]

HIV outreach workers are venturing into new territory in India: they're specifically searching for gay people. Here's The Times of India's awkward explanation:

Guess what hundreds of social workers in the field of HIV, AIDS awareness in the city are working on these days? They are actually learning some of the basic knowledge about how to identify gays.

Rumor has it that activists are keeping their eyes peeled for feathers, boas and other signs of fabulosity. One activist described the quest as "learning the trick of the trade".

CONTINUED »

A woman named Rose will be making Indian history later this month when she becomes the nation's first transgender television host:

For the first time in the history of Indian television, a transgender will anchor a talk show on a Tamil channel, Star Vijay, titled Ippadikku Rose (Yours Rose), glamourising a gender condemned to begging and sex work.

A 28-year-old transgender, Rose, hailing from Chennai, will come on air about issues hitherto considered ‘hush hush’ like homosexuality, alternative sexuality, child abuse, sex abuse and generally things labeled as taboo.

CONTINUED »

While some people would ensure their birthday party revolves around their existence, Indian Prince Manvendra Singh Gohil used his 42nd to celebrate India's often over-looked gay communities:

A leading figure in India's small LGBT civil rights movement and a vocal supporter of people living with HIV, Prince Manvendra invited gays and PWAs from all over India to celebrate his birthday at a party that featured gay musicians and artists.

It is the 10th birthday that the prince has celebrated this way, brightening the faces of hundreds of people who regularly suffer from discrimination.

Homosexuality is illegal in India, punishable by imprisonment and people living with HIV/AIDS are frequently shunned by their families.

For the prince the occasion allows people to interact and be visible. The two day party was extensively covered by the Indian media which usually treats gays with derision.

Manvendra's family originally scorned him for coming out, but tensions have been eased in recent years. Despite their acceptance, the Indian government upholds – but rarely enforces – the colonial era Section 377.

Gay Indians no longer live in fear. Well, not as much.

Despite the nation's tenacious colonial ban on homosexuality, Section 377, more gays and lesbians are living their lives in the open.

Last week's gay pride march, which once stopped traffic – and soccer games – went off without a hitch. Yes, some troublesome bikers tried to stir the shit, but coppers shooed them away. Times certainly have changed.

Outside the pride context, gay social groups have started popping up in urban areas, such as Delhi. Every Sunday, about 10-15 men show up to exchange advice, chit chat and, most importantly, be seen.

CONTINUED »

Being gay in India ain't easy. As we've seen, the former British colony refuses to shed Section 377, the anachronistic law banning homosexuality. Well, the issue came up this weekend over at India's NDTV, where journo Revati Laul offers readers a little look at India's lavender set. And it's lots of confusing…

Among Laul's subjects, you'll find a transexual by the name of Sylvie. According to Laul, "[Sylvie] was once gay and then decided to undergo a sex change and completely transform into a woman". So, does that make Sylvie hetero? We don't mean to be insensitive, but we can't keep trans sexuality straight.

CONTINUED »

India's Ministry of External Affairs has found itself in a diplomatic quagmire after finding out two high-ranking Canadian diplomats live with their legal spouses. The unnamed politicos – a man and a woman – both married their partners while still living in Canada. Unfortunately, the Indian government still abides by the colonial era law, Section 377, which forbids homosexuality.

Upon hearing of the queer couples, the Ministry of External Affairs told the Canadian government it cannot honor their marriages, nor will they allow diplomatic immunity…

CONTINUED »

Five students at India's Christian St Joseph's College of Communications have been expelled after producing a short film with gay themes. The fearsome five made the film for an inter-college film festival, but school officials found the exploration of gay woe to be indecent. One teacher notes, "We teach modern technology and so we are generally open to new ideas. But this film was outrageously indecent."

The students defended their actions on grounds of artistic expression, including the partial nudity. "The film was targeted at the festival crowd. At festivals, only creativity matters and issues of morality are swept aside." Apparently not.

The move comes just weeks after three Indian states banned sex education. The legacy of Section 377 lives on…

Five expelled for gay film [New India Press]