The Regulation, Reclamation, and Resistance of Queer Kinship in Contemporary India.

IF 2 3区 社会学 Q1 LAW Feminist Legal Studies Pub Date : 2022-01-01 Epub Date: 2022-08-23 DOI:10.1007/s10691-022-09489-3
Katyayani Sinha
{"title":"The Regulation, Reclamation, and Resistance of Queer Kinship in Contemporary India.","authors":"Katyayani Sinha","doi":"10.1007/s10691-022-09489-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Since 2014, two legislative actions, the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights)Act 2019, and the Draft Trafficking in Persons (Prevention, Care and Rehabilitation) Bill 2021, have been pivotal in re-inscribing the Indian state's colonial policing of queer kinship networks. By criminalising relationalities outside the heteropatriarchal conjugal home, the sexual subaltern is exposed to the state's mechanisms of rescue and rehabilitation. These developments have occurred alongside the constitutional recognition of privacy in <i>K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India</i> (2017) 10 SCC 1 and the decriminalisation of the anti-sodomy law in <i>Navtej Johar v. Union of India</i> 2018 (10) SCALE 386 which have been celebrated as victories of self-determination and dignity for queer kinship. These judicial pronouncements, although symbolically pertinent, fail to materially protect queer kinship, and with the contemporary advocacy around queer marriage, the need for legal and cultural recognition has obfuscated the substantive needs of pre-existing queer alliances. Queer communities continue to organise for their own emancipation and despite their vulnerability, queer visibility offers a public counter-narrative of resistance and survival against the brutalities of society and the state.</p>","PeriodicalId":45822,"journal":{"name":"Feminist Legal Studies","volume":"30 3","pages":"281-307"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9396582/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Feminist Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10691-022-09489-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/8/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Since 2014, two legislative actions, the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights)Act 2019, and the Draft Trafficking in Persons (Prevention, Care and Rehabilitation) Bill 2021, have been pivotal in re-inscribing the Indian state's colonial policing of queer kinship networks. By criminalising relationalities outside the heteropatriarchal conjugal home, the sexual subaltern is exposed to the state's mechanisms of rescue and rehabilitation. These developments have occurred alongside the constitutional recognition of privacy in K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) 10 SCC 1 and the decriminalisation of the anti-sodomy law in Navtej Johar v. Union of India 2018 (10) SCALE 386 which have been celebrated as victories of self-determination and dignity for queer kinship. These judicial pronouncements, although symbolically pertinent, fail to materially protect queer kinship, and with the contemporary advocacy around queer marriage, the need for legal and cultural recognition has obfuscated the substantive needs of pre-existing queer alliances. Queer communities continue to organise for their own emancipation and despite their vulnerability, queer visibility offers a public counter-narrative of resistance and survival against the brutalities of society and the state.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
当代印度酷儿亲属关系的规制、开垦与反抗。
自2014年以来,两项立法行动,即《2019年跨性别者(权利保护)法案》和《2021年人口贩运(预防、护理和康复)法案草案》,在重新确立印度国家对酷儿亲属网络的殖民监管方面发挥了关键作用。通过将父权制夫妻家庭之外的关系定为犯罪,性次等者暴露在国家的救助和康复机制之下。这些发展伴随着K.S. Puttaswamy诉印度联邦(2017)10 SCC 1中宪法承认隐私以及Navtej Johar诉印度联邦2018 (10)SCALE 386中反鸡奸法的非刑事化而发生,这些都被庆祝为酷儿亲属关系自决和尊严的胜利。这些司法声明虽然具有象征意义,但却未能从物质上保护酷儿的亲属关系,而且随着当代对酷儿婚姻的倡导,对法律和文化认可的需求混淆了已有的酷儿联盟的实质性需求。酷儿群体继续为自己的解放而组织起来,尽管他们很脆弱,酷儿的可见度提供了一种对抗社会和国家暴行的抵抗和生存的公共反叙事。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Feminist Legal Studies is committed to an internationalist perspective and to the promotion and advancement of feminist scholarship in all areas of law. It aims to publish critical, interdisciplinary, theoretically engaged feminist scholarship relating to law (broadly conceived) and has a particular interest in work that extends feminist debates and analysis by reference to critical and theoretical approaches and perspectives, including postcolonial, transnational and poststructuralist work.  Although the focus of the journal is law, the editorial board encourages the submission of papers from people working outside the academy, as well as academics other than lawyers as well as interdisciplinary work addressing the concerns not only of lawyers but others, women and men, interested in feminist work. The editorial board is a collective drawn from feminists working at leading law schools across the UK. A full list of the editorial board can found on the Journal’s website: http://www.springer.com/law/international/journal/10691?detailsPage=editorialBoardAlongside traditional articles and book reviews Feminist Legal Studies is committed to publishing material that challenges conventional forms of academic writing/knowledge and encourages creative approaches to scholarship, analysis and debate. Such material is normally published in our “Creative Content” section (see Instructions for Authors for more details). The board also welcomes proposals for themed issues of the journal.
期刊最新文献
Labour Law’s (Mis)Management of Menopausal Workers Those Lucky Enough to Transcend Gender: Travis Alabanza, Radical Transfeminism, and the Law Gender-Based Violence and Carceral Feminism in Australia: Towards Decarceral Approaches Separate But Equal: Is Segregated Schooling (Still) Good for Girls? The Art of Waiting Humbly: Women Judges Reflect on Vertical Gender Segregation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1