The Diverse Strands of India’s Queer Movement: Organizational Forms and Strategies

India’s queer movement is not a single, unified force with one agenda or one voice. It is, instead, a collection of distinct communities – each with its own history, identity, and way of organizing. From urban LGBT collectives to Kothi networks, from sex worker unions to Hijra communities, the movement reflects the sheer diversity of those who fall outside India’s heteronormative mainstream. Understanding these different strands – their organizational forms, strategies, and challenges – is essential to understanding how sexual and gender minorities in India have fought, and continue to fight, for recognition and rights.

The urban foundation: LGBT and queer groups in metropolitan India 🔗

The most publicly visible strand of India’s queer movement took shape in its major cities. Since the 1990s, cities like Delhi, Mumbai, Bangalore, and Kolkata became centers for organized LGBT groups, many of which adopted frameworks and terminology influenced by global queer movements. These urban collectives created formal organizational structures – registered NGOs, drop-in centers, legal advocacy cells, and community helplines.

The Humsafar Trust, founded in Mumbai in 1994, is among the most prominent examples. It began as a small group welcoming gay men and lesbian women to Friday workshops, but grew into a large institutional body working on HIV/AIDS health services, counseling, legal advocacy, and community mobilization. It is now the convenor of INFOSEM (Integrated Network for Sexual Minorities), a national-level network representing 196 community-based organizations covering lesbian, gay, Kothi, MSM, bisexual, and transgender communities.

Other organizations took different forms. Orinam in Chennai, founded in 2003, operates as an all-volunteer, unregistered collective – deliberately non-hierarchical and community-driven. Sappho for Equality in Kolkata, established the same year, is the only registered organization in eastern India working specifically for the rights of sexually marginalized women and transmen, combining peer counseling, crisis support, and advocacy. Sangini, formed in Delhi in 1997, remains the oldest community support program for LBT individuals in the country. These varied structures – formal NGOs, informal collectives, support groups – reflect the diversity of needs and political commitments even within the urban LGBT organizing space.

A key strategic tool across this strand has been the Pride march. Pride marches in metropolitan cities became a powerful form of public visibility, building community solidarity while exerting cultural and legal pressure. The 2009 Delhi High Court ruling that partially read down Section 377 was, in part, the result of years of sustained legal and public advocacy by urban queer groups.

Class, language, and the limits of urban organizing 🔗

Urban LGBT organizing, however, came with its own exclusions. Early informal networks in cities like Mumbai and Bangalore held meetings predominantly in English, centered on middle-class concerns – navigating workplace disclosure, social pressure to marry, and family acceptance. As scholar Alok Gupta noted, this predominantly middle-class environment alienated working-class and lower-middle-class individuals from the initial organizing process. The question of who would distribute condoms at railway stations – spaces associated with cruising and sex work – became a telling indicator of class divides within the movement. Working-class Kothi individuals were mobilized for these outreach roles while English-speaking gay men kept their distance from such associations.

MSM and Kothi organizing: navigating identity and health 🔗

A distinct and significant strand of India’s queer movement emerged not from identity politics, but from public health interventions. As the HIV/AIDS epidemic grew through the 1990s, NGOs with government and international funding began working among gay men, Hijras, and Kothis – all grouped under the epidemiological category of MSM (Men who have Sex with Men) for the purpose of HIV prevention programs. This health-focused entry point created organizational spaces for communities that had previously had little formal representation.

Kothi communities occupy a specific social location. They are feminine-identified males, generally from working-class backgrounds, whose identities are rooted in regional subcultural traditions rather than the Western gay identity framework. The term “Kothi” gained extensive usage within NGOs and community networks by the late 1990s, becoming a politically empowering label through which communities could assert a distinct identity while also accessing health resources. Organizations like the Bharosa Trust in Lucknow, which worked specifically on HIV prevention among MSM communities, created platforms where Kothi individuals could collectively address police harassment, family violence, and economic precarity.

The Bharosa Trust also became central to a pivotal moment in India’s queer legal history. In 2002, four staff members of the Bharosa Trust were arrested in Lucknow on charges of promoting homosexuality under Section 377 – a case that became known as the “Lucknow Four.” The arrests drew national attention to the ways Section 377 was being used to harass queer individuals and organizations, and became a catalyst for forging coalitions across the movement. It directly led to the formation of PRISM (People for the Rights of Indian Sexual Minorities) and the broader coalition “Voices Against 377.”

The MSM/Kothi organizing strand demonstrates how health interventions can become gateways to broader rights-based movements. Many community members first encountered organizational spaces through HIV prevention programs, but gradually became involved in advocacy for legal recognition, protection from violence, and social acceptance. Critics, however, have pointed out a tension: by grouping diverse indigenous identities – Kothis, Hijras, Kinnars, Panthis, Jogtas, and others – under the fixed banner of “LGBT” for donor-driven programs, NGOs sometimes imposed Western identity frameworks onto communities with their own distinct self-understandings.

Sex workers as sexual minorities: organizing at the intersection 🔗

Another important strand within India’s broader queer movement involves sex workers who identify as sexual minorities – particularly male and transgender sex workers who face discrimination based on both their gender/sexual identity and their occupation. This strand maintains its own organizational logic and strategies, even as it intersects with queer rights advocacy.

The most prominent example is the Durbar Mahila Samanwaya Committee (DMSC), formed in 1995 in Kolkata’s Sonagachi red-light district. What began as a peer education initiative under an HIV intervention research project evolved into a large-scale workers’ collective. By 2012, DMSC had grown to 65,000 members across 48 branches in West Bengal, and explicitly included male and transgender sex workers alongside female sex workers. The organization runs 51 free clinics across the state, implements HIV intervention programs, and engages in legal advocacy for the decriminalization of sex work.

DMSC’s organizational approach is built on the “3 Rs” – Respect, Reliance, and Recognition – and emphasizes collective leadership by current and former sex workers. Its Sex Workers’ Freedom Festival has provided a platform for transgender sex workers to join broader rights campaigns, explicitly linking gender identity, labor rights, and anti-stigma advocacy. This model of centering those most affected by policy decisions – rather than positioning experts or NGO professionals as leaders – represents a distinct organizational philosophy within the broader movement.

The DMSC’s work also highlights how intersecting oppressions demand intersectional organizational strategies. A transgender sex worker faces discrimination rooted in gender identity, sexual orientation, and occupation simultaneously. Organizations working in this space have had to develop holistic approaches that address all these dimensions rather than reducing advocacy to a single-axis demand.

Hijra communities: tradition, structure, and modern advocacy 🔗

Among the most distinctive strands within India’s queer movement is the mobilization of Hijra communities. Hijras have existed in South Asian society for centuries, with identities rooted in ancient Hinduism and shaped through the Mughal period. Their traditional social organization is based on the guru-chela system – a hierarchical teacher-disciple relationship within residential communities called gharanas. These are not merely cultural arrangements; they constitute the primary kinship and support network for many Hijras who have been rejected by their families of origin.

Modern Hijra organizing has involved adapting these traditional structures to contemporary advocacy. By 1999, prominent Hijra leader Kamla Jaan had become the Mayor of Katni in Madhya Pradesh, and in 2000, Shabnam “Mausi” Bano became the first Hijra elected to a state legislative assembly. These electoral achievements were not only personal milestones but also demonstrations of community organizing capacity. Around the same period, Hijra leaders began establishing welfare organizations: the Dai Welfare Society (1999) and Astitva (2006), both founded in Mumbai, became institutional advocates for Hijra community welfare.

The strategies employed by Hijra organizations blend traditional forms of collective action with modern legal and media advocacy. Community meetings, elder consultations, and collective rituals remain central to organizing, while legal petitions and media campaigns address the wider public sphere. This approach contributed to the landmark NALSA judgment of 2014, in which India’s Supreme Court recognized transgender persons as a third gender, directing the government to extend educational and employment reservations. This ruling represented a significant victory for Hijra-led advocacy, even as its implementation has remained uneven.

Despite legal recognition, Hijra communities continue to face severe marginalization. Most Hijras lack access to formal education and employment, with many forced into sex work or begging for survival. Police and administrative systems still frequently fail to recognize “transgender” as a valid identity category in practice, creating barriers from hospital admission to identity documentation. The gap between legal rights on paper and lived reality on the ground remains one of the central challenges for Hijra organizing today.

Class, caste, and internal tensions within the movement 🔗

The diversity of India’s queer movement is also a source of internal tension. Research on activist spaces in Kolkata has documented how single-axis identity politics – focused on gender and sexual rights while ignoring class and caste hierarchies – has generated disillusionment among Kothi and Hijra communities, who often found themselves in exploitative labor dynamics within NGO structures dominated by upper-class leadership. When MANAS Bangla, a network of HIV prevention projects, lost state funding in 2012, hundreds of trans-Kothi-Hijra workers lost their livelihoods, and many felt that upper-class leadership offered only token protest in response. These tensions point to the need for any effective organizing to address not just sexual identity but also class, caste, and labor rights.

Coalition building and cross-movement solidarity 🔗

Despite these internal tensions, different strands of the queer movement have found common ground on key issues. The collective challenge to Section 377 brought together urban LGBT groups, MSM organizations, Hijra collectives, and allies from the women’s rights and health movements. Voices Against 377, formed in 2003, was a coalition that included organizations working across health, women’s rights, child rights, and human rights – reflecting a conscious effort to embed queer politics within a broader framework of social justice. Legal organizations like the Alternative Law Forum in Bangalore provided critical litigation and advocacy support, while groups like Nazariya brought a queer feminist lens to gender-based violence work.

Coalition-building has also required navigating the question of representation: who speaks for the movement, whose priorities get amplified, and which communities are rendered invisible in mainstream advocacy. State-level queer rights networks have tried to create platforms where different organizations can coordinate actions while maintaining their distinct approaches and identities. The movement continues to evolve – through digital organizing, social media activism, and new alliances – even as foundational questions about identity, class, and power remain unresolved.

What do you think? Given the significant class and caste divisions within India’s queer movement, how can organizations build genuine solidarity across communities with such different material realities and political priorities? And does framing diverse indigenous identities – Kothi, Hijra, Panthi – under the umbrella of “LGBT” strengthen or weaken the movement’s ability to represent each community’s specific needs?

References

1. https://ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in/soc14/chapter/lgbt-movement/
2. https://humsafar.org/about-us/
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humsafar_Trust
4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_culture_in_India
5. https://transreads.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/2024-10-12_670a4d2906f76_kumar-datta-2024-caste-concerns-in-transgender-communities-in-india-contesting-cohesiveness-broadening-horizons.pdf
6. https://globalizationandhealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1744-8603-3-8
7. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5d7cacb4969aad73e4847301/t/5d7dc652a871f8665677f4a1/1568523861783/Kothi.pdf
8. https://transreads.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/2021-07-23_60fa0fa4e18a7_j.1468-0424.2012.01712.x.pdf
9. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durbar_Mahila_Samanwaya_Committee
10. https://durbar.org/other-organisational-activities/
11. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijra_(South_Asia)
12. https://egyankosh.ac.in/bitstream/123456789/3059/3/MWG-001-B3-U2.pdf
13. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9555747/
14. https://www.vice.com/en/article/indias-transgender-hijra-community-searches-for-acceptance/
15. https://journals.openedition.org/samaj/5210