Anjali Gopalan: Getting same-sex marriage legalised our next goal 

A. I see this as just a part of the battle being won. All that’s happened now is decriminalisation, which means consenting adults of the same sex are not within the purview of Section 377.

What this actually means is that the law is still on the statute books, which means that the law hasn’t been removed, which is a good thing. Because rape laws are not gender neutral. So, we need Section 377 for male-on-male rapes. We also need it for cases involving sexual abuse of animals.

But even after the judgment, we can’t rest assured since the rights of the community have been fully guaranteed. Even though the courts did say that everyone does have rights in this country, yet we do not have a situation where people from this community can take for granted the rights everyone else takes for granted, including the right to get married. People of the heterosexual community don’t even think of marriage as a right. So, that is what we see as the next phase of battle in the movement. We must start looking to ensure rights of the people. Everybody in this country has the same rights. That’s the way I look at it.

A. The way I look at it, everyone, irrespective of their sexual preferences, should have the right to get married. Everyone should have civil rights. It doesn’t matter if you are straight or not.

A. Look, people are going to say what they have to say. But the important point is that courts have decriminalised homosexuality and spoken out in favour of rights. So, just because someone says that somebody can’t have equal rights doesn’t matter much now. The fight has to continue. If a homosexual couple asks for their rights tomorrow, I don’t see no reason now why that right should be denied to them.

What’s problematic here is trying to understand if the courts can guarantee the right to marriage, or if the right must be granted through Parliament. Because we have multiple marriage laws, with every religion having laws of its own. So, obviously, changing marriage laws is not going to be easy. That doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t happen.

A. I would just say that it takes time for societal attitudes to change. We can’t expect change to happen overnight. Just because a certain law has been modified doesn’t mean that attitudes would change overnight. What’s important is that a law has come into place and the need for a strong law to protect the rights of sexual minorities.

Yes, religious groups have the right to say and believe in what they want. But that doesn’t mean that you could deny a whole set of people what is rightfully theirs. Let the religious leaders take their stand. It doesn’t matter. It is a question of constitutional morality. The Constitution is guaranteeing these rights. It doesn’t matter what the religious groups are saying. I believe that as was the case with Sati, people and religious groups would start seeing through the mindless opposition to homosexuality.

If you ask me, I have seen a tremendous change in societal attitudes over the last 20 years as far as homosexuality is concerned. The way it is portrayed in media, in movies and looked at in general has undergone a great deal of change.

Just look at the judges who delivered the ruling. There was a huge difference between the way judges reacted this time around and 2013, when Section 377 was reinstated in the statute books after being scrapped. But other things have happened as well, like the transgender judgment has come in and you also have the privacy judgment that has come in. I think that courts, sometimes, are a reflection of change in societal attitudes too.

A. There are a couple of things we must remember about this judgment. Firstly, it was not about gay sex. This whole discourse around gay sex being decriminalised makes it sound as if homosexuality is just about sex. It is not.

Just like heterosexuality is not just about sex, the same way there is more to homosexuality than just sex. It is about loving and caring, wanting to be someone, wanting to build a life with someone. Does it mean that people would have only one sexual partner? No, just like it often is the case with heterosexual individuals.

Secondly, I see many media outlets reporting that Section 377 has been scrapped. It hasn’t been scrapped. It is very much on the books. We need it on the statute books. People like me don’t want Section 377 to be scrapped (in its entirety). Because our rape laws are not gender neutral. So, for male-on-male rape, we need Section 377. For sexual abuse of animals, we need Section 377. We have a huge problem of sexual abuse against animals. We don’t talk about it much as a culture, but it does exist. So, we need Section 377. We can’t just get rid of the law. Thank god, the court saw this.

A. Listen, the fact remains that the government wasn’t. They just said that they would follow what the court said, which I feel was better than the government sticking with the 2013 judgment. So, in many ways, I am glad that the government didn’t take a stand (laughs). But I also feel that it is the duty of courts to guarantee rights.

A. A fantastic thing to have happened for me is to see how a strong community has been built over the years. When we had started out, there was just one other organisation, Humsafar Trust (Mumbai-based NGO), working in the same realm. There was absolutely no community voice.

Just look at it today. There is a 180-degree community change. I believe a significant credit goes to the 2009 Delhi High Court verdict, which was a brilliant judgment. It just opened the doors, because I remember at the time a number of people had come out and spoken about being gay.

A. I think of Professor Siras (the gay AMU professor who committed suicide because of his sexuality) all the time. When the whole incident happened, I went there to spend time with him as I was really horrified at what he was being made to go through.

Ever since this judgment came out, I have been thinking that there would be so may others like him. Just because the judgment has come out doesn’t mean that attitudes are going to change overnight. People are still going to be discriminated against. People are still going to be afraid. It doesn’t mean that there is going to be acceptance.

There has to be acceptance from families, which is the most important thing. But I am sure that there are a lot of others like Professor Siras who have lost along the way. There have been people who have been forced into marriages that they didn’t want to be in. It is not a nice situation to be in. But, this judgment is a big step forward.