On 9th November, 2020 a virtual discussion was held amongst members of the LGBTIA+ community and representatives of various organizations from different states in India on the nature and intensity of structural interventions by police, media, and family members in queer and/or trans relationships. A number of instances were recounted and discussed, where the common underlying theme emerging was that the persons involved were adult, consenting individuals, and thus legally free to be in a relationship with the person they wished to be with. The police and family members however, reinforcing each other’s powers of control, sought to intervene in such relationships and tried to “return” the individuals “home”. Both these terms hold very different, and often negative, meaning for members of the LGBTIA+ community as compared to their cisgender and/or heterosexual counterparts. The persistent emphasis on ideas of family and home as being nurturing, caring, and loving is destroyed when such narratives emerge from lived experiences of individuals. Structural interventions are a common phenomenon in queer/trans relationships, and continue to rob individuals of their rights that they possess as consenting adults.

Kerala cops take 22-yr-old away from lesbian partner in Chennai, lawyers questions move https://t.co/LQPcErLYHW

— TheNewsMinute (@thenewsminute) October 25, 2020

An excerpt from the above piece: “It is a prevalent pattern where the personal freedom and liberty … is disregarded. The police also know that it is not in consonance with the law, but they still do it. There are so many such cases, especially with LGBTQ+ community and interfaith consensual relationships, where the police take the side of the parents..”

While some participants shared their personal experience, others, as members of organizations, recounted instances that they oversaw and managed, which involved the police and families . Maya from Vikalp shared how there is a tendency among both the police and family to accuse queer/trans persons of having either suffered from some personal tragedy (death, accident, etc.) or as having a mental illness which makes them to do “such things”; i.e. being trans, being queer, or being in a non-cisgender or heterosexual relationship.

In light of this, Prem, a trans man, and Rukaya, his partner, from Vikalp shared their experience* with family, the police, and shelter homes. They recalled how they had to run away from home thrice, and when the police’s efforts to track them failed, news of the two was printed in the paper, where their relationship was attributed to being a result of the death of Prem’s mother. It was held that suffering such a loss was the only reason that the two sought each other and henceforth became attached. Rukaya shared how the family and police asked that the “two girls come back home”, thus dismissing Prem’s identity. With time, the case escalated and they both began to feel scared and unsafe under the rising pressure. The police then threatened to take away Rukaya’s uncle if they did not return to their families. Confronted with this dangerous and violent threat, they returned. Here they were given what the police called a “choice” – either to return to their families, or stay at a shelter home. They protested, saying that they were consenting adults and wanted to live on their own. Forced into making a decision, yet determined to not return to their natal homes, they decided to stay at the shelter home. They were told they’d be temporarily situated there for 2 days, but ended up being forced to stay there for 15 days. The shelter home also turned out to be a source of abuse and violence. They were forced to wear feminine clothes, and discomfort with this led to them having to spend the entirety of 2 weeks there in the same clothes they came in. They were both subjected to rigorous “counseling”, under the garb of which efforts were made to instigate them both against each other. Here, they felt, that the shelter home and their families were involved. They were repeatedly told that from there, they could only go home; nowhere else. Eventually, the family threatened to file a court case if they did not return, saying “saath mei toh nahi rahoge” (you definitely will not live together).

They recounted a horrendous instance when a police officer, in front of the family, openly said, “Yeh sab baar baar karne se acha hai ki mai paise de deta hun; aap zehar kha ke mar jao – na humara jhanjhat, na family ka” (instead of doing all this repeatedly, it would be better if I gave you some money myself. Buy yourself some poison with it, consume it and die. Both we and your family will be rid of the problem then).

They recounted that their meeting with a Deputy Superintendent of Police (DYSP) was also to no avail. She immediately refused to help and said that she could not do anything, and that they approach a good lawyer for legal advice. On doing the same, the lawyer had them post a letter to the police, saying that every decision they were taking with regard to their relationship was out of their own free will, and that they did not want any action taken against them. If this was done, they may try to die by suicide.

Maya continued the conversation forward by highlighting the strong linkages that exist between institutional setups – between the police, the family, shelter homes, and the media. Rukaya had to later return to her natal home where she was physically abused and locked up. It becomes important to address the notion of family – there is a need to question the idea that blood-relations hold utmost importance, and they are the primary providers of safety and security. It clearly is not so for trans and queer persons. She further linked this with the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act which seeks to rehabilitate trans persons in shelter homes. She says, “What can we hope for if we are subjected to this despite being adults?”

*This incident took place at a time when NALSA judgement by the Supreme Court had already been passed. Despite these guidelines being in place, systemic violence continued to, and still does, exist.