Speaker 1: Hi, it's West Kasova. We're taking a break this week,
Speaker 1: so here's one of our favorite episodes you might have
Speaker 1: missed and an update since this show aired. In the spring,
Speaker 1: India Supreme Court held hearings on same sex marriage. A
Speaker 1: verdict is expected in the fall. From Bloomberg News and iHeartRadio,
Speaker 1: it's the Big Take. I'm West Kosova. Today India's march
Speaker 1: toward marriage equality. This month, India Supreme Court will hear
Speaker 1: arguments in a closely watched case on whether to allow
Speaker 1: same sex couples to marry. The court's already affirmed are
Speaker 1: right to privacy for all, which abolished a colonial era
Speaker 1: law that made gay sex a crime, and it expanded
Speaker 1: social welfare benefits for what it called atypical families. To
Speaker 1: those arguing in favor, marriage equality is the logical and
Speaker 1: inevitable next step.
Speaker 2: I want to get married. I want to get married
Speaker 2: for the reason that many people in this country and
Speaker 2: everywhere they believe that one day they'll meet somebody who
Speaker 2: they really love and you know, they'll be able to
Speaker 2: get married. I want to be able to do that.
Speaker 1: That's Aditi Anan. She and her partner are among several
Speaker 1: same sex couples who petition the court for the right
Speaker 1: to marry. If the judges rule in their favor, the
Speaker 1: effects will be far reaching, and not only within India itself.
Speaker 1: India's size and its political and economic influence in Asia
Speaker 1: means the ruling will be felt well beyond its borders.
Speaker 1: My colleagues Munisa Nakbie and Kai Schultz are following this
Speaker 1: case and they are here with me now from New Delhi. Munisa,
Speaker 1: can you give us an overview of the case that's
Speaker 1: now before the court.
Speaker 3: So we's the case that is before the court is
Speaker 3: several couples who are asking the court. Shortly after India legalized,
Speaker 3: or rather decriminalized homosexuality, they're asking to have access to
Speaker 3: marriage equality. So these couples are saying, we are no
Speaker 3: longer now criminals in the eyes of the law, and
Speaker 3: it's time for the law and the country to go
Speaker 3: one step further and allow us those rights and privileges
Speaker 3: that come with marriage. These include things like adoption, being
Speaker 3: able to be each other's next of kin, have each
Speaker 3: other on their insurance, and all of those things that
Speaker 3: come with marriage, the good and the bad.
Speaker 1: And how did this all come to be?
Speaker 3: It's sort of built up from the decades on fight
Speaker 3: to first decriminalize homosexuality in India, which came to pass
Speaker 3: only in twenty eighteen. You know, for more than one
Speaker 3: hundred and fifty years before that, it was a crime
Speaker 3: to openly declare that you were a in this country,
Speaker 3: and even though prosecutions were read was a huge tool
Speaker 3: of harassment for the gay community. It created fear and
Speaker 3: a sort of impunity for police to come and harass
Speaker 3: you should they choose to so. Once that sort of
Speaker 3: had come about and that was a huge moment for
Speaker 3: the NGBTQ community in India. Once that had been achieved,
Speaker 3: it seemed the next obvious thing. What a surprise everybody
Speaker 3: is the speed at which this has come. In many
Speaker 3: countries where marriage equality has come, or the fight for
Speaker 3: marriage equality has come, it's been a much slower process.
Speaker 3: In India. It's been just a couple of years between
Speaker 3: decriminalization and fighting to get the rise to marriage equality.
Speaker 1: Kai Menisa described how quickly this all happened. How was
Speaker 1: it able to change so fast?
Speaker 4: The speed has been remarkable for I think everybody that
Speaker 4: we've spoken to, and people have put forward a few
Speaker 4: theories for why they think the evolution has been so accelerated.
Speaker 4: India is a fairly English country. It has a large diaspora,
Speaker 4: it has a large English speaking population. It's very much
Speaker 4: a country where people follow international media. So there was
Speaker 4: an awareness, I think of rights movements in other parts
Speaker 4: of the world, including the US, that's helped to kind
Speaker 4: of create this consciousness around these issues. Secondly, India is
Speaker 4: led by a fairly progressive Supreme Court. The bench as
Speaker 4: it currently stands is pretty progressive on social issues. So
Speaker 4: in recent years, they've allowed women to enter sex segregated temples.
Speaker 4: They've extended legal recognition to transgender people who can identify
Speaker 4: as so called third genders. That's how it's characterized in India,
Speaker 4: and so that's provided some of the context I think
Speaker 4: for the speed.
Speaker 3: What happened between the criminalization and fighting for marriage equality
Speaker 3: has been quite a seismic shift in how Indian culture
Speaker 3: has viewed LGBTQ people. Twenty years ago, a firm that
Speaker 3: had a lesbian characters, you know, inflamed such passions that
Speaker 3: movie theaters were set on fire and you know, the
Speaker 3: movie had to be pulled out off screens. Now we're
Speaker 3: seeing advertisements for two women buying a home together, buying
Speaker 3: wedding jewelry together, which is very iconic to Indian culture,
Speaker 3: and cinema is making nuanced, you know, not the caricatured
Speaker 3: sort of homosexual characters of the movies of the nineties,
Speaker 3: which was almost sort of like the buffoonish character. Bollywood
Speaker 3: is making films with very sort of sensitive portrayals of
Speaker 3: gay characters. So all of that has also changed in
Speaker 3: the interim between decriminalization and pushing for marriage equality. Some
Speaker 3: of the people we spoke to have said this that
Speaker 3: seeing all of these things change, being able to see
Speaker 3: for the first time representations of themselves on screen and
Speaker 3: around them in popular culture, which was brand new, also
Speaker 3: allowed them to sort of feel that the time had
Speaker 3: come to push for more. So to give an idea of,
Speaker 3: you know, what this journey has been like for LGBTQ
Speaker 3: people in India. We spoke to this couple, Aditi and Susan,
Speaker 3: and it's sort of their story really is the story
Speaker 3: of what it has meant in India for so many
Speaker 3: people to grapple with their own gayness, find themselves sort
Speaker 3: of legally full citizens finally, and then find themselves in
Speaker 3: this sort of amazing place where they can reach for
Speaker 3: marriage equality, which seemed even a decade ago to them
Speaker 3: completely out of reach. And in Aditi and Susan's story
Speaker 3: we find reflections of all of that. So they talk
Speaker 3: about how as young women, coming out even to themselves
Speaker 3: was hard.
Speaker 1: And here is Aditi Anan speaking about this to Bloomberg Quicktech.
Speaker 2: Susan and I moved in within a few months of
Speaker 2: I think a few weeks of meeting each other, and
Speaker 2: you know, once we actually started dating. Susan quit her job,
Speaker 2: she moved out of a house, moved into my apartment
Speaker 2: in Bombay, and we got a dog. So I would
Speaker 2: say we started seeing each other in October and by
Speaker 2: March of next year we were already living together. Our
Speaker 2: friend and family were extremely supportive, extremely supportive, though it
Speaker 2: was fell in nerve racking and a difficult, difficult thing
Speaker 2: to come out because of our own fears and all
Speaker 2: the things that we had been dealing with all our lives.
Speaker 2: But it was remarkable once we actually came out to
Speaker 2: our families on both sides, Susan to her mom that
Speaker 2: night and then me to my parents the next day,
Speaker 2: it was remarkable how supportive they've been throughout Extraordinarily, my grandmother,
Speaker 2: who is in her nineties, is not just a supporter.
Speaker 2: I mean, it's completely organic, her relationship with Susan, her
Speaker 2: relationship with our son. So it's been a really, really
Speaker 2: wonderful and I know, sometimes a very rare experience to
Speaker 2: have this kind of support, and we've been very lucky
Speaker 2: to have it.
Speaker 4: So much of the context behind these journeys comes from
Speaker 4: a place of pain for people. India is a country
Speaker 4: where you can still very easily be harassed for being gay.
Speaker 4: You have a few legal protections in the workforce. In
Speaker 4: many instances, sexual assault is common. Many of these challenges
Speaker 4: that come from living openly in countries across the world
Speaker 4: are common in India, and so the fear there persists,
Speaker 4: and I think that that's something that many people feel
Speaker 4: marriage equality will help to abate, is the idea that
Speaker 4: they're different or separate or other from other Indians in society.
Speaker 1: Let's hear from Susan Dia. She's a Deity's partner and
Speaker 1: she also spoke to Bloomberg Quick.
Speaker 5: Take at the time a couple of years ago when
Speaker 5: we decided to have children, is when we thought that
Speaker 5: marriage would be a logical next step for us, and
Speaker 5: in doing that, in having and raising a child, now
Speaker 5: we realize more so the lack of a lot of
Speaker 5: things that we don't have today. Legal rights over each other,
Speaker 5: the ability to you know, have a bank account, to
Speaker 5: own assets together, to be a legal parent to a child.
Speaker 5: These are all things that one either takes for granted
Speaker 5: or doesn't think about till you're faced with it.
Speaker 1: Kai, Is it possible to measure how the Indian people
Speaker 1: feel about this? Is same sex marriage popular? Do people
Speaker 1: want it?
Speaker 4: It's hard to say precisely. We've spoken to lawyers who
Speaker 4: have said that with decriminalization it was a fairly easy
Speaker 4: pill for people to swallow. They could understand and get
Speaker 4: on board pretty quickly with the idea that people didn't
Speaker 4: want to be considered a criminal in front of the law.
Speaker 4: And I think it was also framed as a very
Speaker 4: private act. Marriage is a much more public institution. It
Speaker 4: holds such an important space in the Indian consciousness, and
Speaker 4: so there was some concern that the speed was so
Speaker 4: quick that perhaps it was almost too quick. What we
Speaker 4: found though, is that public polling varies pretty widely, so
Speaker 4: in the months after decriminalization, this would have been. In
Speaker 4: twenty eighteen twenty nineteen polls found that anywhere from about
Speaker 4: a quarter to more than two thirds of Indians supported
Speaker 4: same sex marriage, And so it doesn't give a full
Speaker 4: picture of support on the ground. But what we do
Speaker 4: know so far as there have been no public protests
Speaker 4: that have taken on any sort of grandeur or size
Speaker 4: or importance in the media or in bigger and urban centers,
Speaker 4: and so so far there hasn't been that pushback that
Speaker 4: some people are fearing there might.
Speaker 1: Be, munisa because India has such a large population and
Speaker 1: it's so influential in Asia and around the rest of
Speaker 1: the world. If same sex marriage becomes law. You write
Speaker 1: in the story that this will have far reaching effects
Speaker 1: beyond India itself. How is that?
Speaker 3: I mean, For one thing, one hopes that it sets
Speaker 3: a legal precedent for other countries to follow, for the
Speaker 3: more conservative cultures to follow it. It creates a blueprint.
Speaker 3: But also because in the region, even wealthier sort of
Speaker 3: seemingly more advanced economies so like Singapore and Japan, for example,
Speaker 3: haven't provided this right to their citizens. Presumably once India
Speaker 3: or if India rather were to make marriage equality or
Speaker 3: possibility it would definitely sort of draw talent to India,
Speaker 3: people who would feel safer working here, living here, being
Speaker 3: able to get their partners on visas, and not having
Speaker 3: to sort of jump through hoops pretending that they were
Speaker 3: moving in, you know, or living with a friend. So
Speaker 3: all of those things would make India sort of a
Speaker 3: stand out in the region where this access to equality
Speaker 3: of basic equality hasn't been made possible so far.
Speaker 4: And to add to Muniza's point, the scale of the
Speaker 4: judgment is enormous. India is, by some estimates already the
Speaker 4: world's most populous nation, and so to legalize same sex
Speaker 4: marriage would extend benefits to more than one point four
Speaker 4: billion people. To get a sense of the scale of this,
Speaker 4: it would more than double the number of people globally
Speaker 4: with marriage equality rights. As hosts of the G twenty
Speaker 4: this year as well, India's government, which is led by
Speaker 4: Prime Minister Nearendromodi, could use this ruling as evidence that
Speaker 4: the country isn't as regressive on minority rights, for instance.
Speaker 4: That's a criticism that's often made by Western governments, and
Speaker 4: so there's a political mileage that could be gained from
Speaker 4: this ruling as well, that goes beyond the leverage that
Speaker 4: the ruling could provide in terms of attracting talent from
Speaker 4: other parts of Asia or other parts of the world.
Speaker 1: Our conversation continues after the break, Munizer. We've talked about
Speaker 1: the significance of this case before India's Supreme Court and
Speaker 1: what it could mean both inside the country and around
Speaker 1: the world. Really, let's focus now on what's happening outside
Speaker 1: the court. What are various political groups within the country
Speaker 1: saying about this issue.
Speaker 3: To begin with, we'll hear what the government actually thinks
Speaker 3: in a few days their affidavit to the court. The
Speaker 3: you know, the Law Ministry stating the government's position will
Speaker 3: be made available because the government has to take its
Speaker 3: stand before the Supreme Court, so we know more specifically
Speaker 3: what the government has to say. The interesting thing is
Speaker 3: there hasn't been very much said at all, and that
Speaker 3: can be extrapolated as a positive thing. I think the
Speaker 3: positive has been that there hasn't been any backlash. Really,
Speaker 3: I suspect some of it as the government is beating
Speaker 3: and watching. It's a crucial election here, so if it
Speaker 3: feels like this might not be socially acceptable, who knows
Speaker 3: large Actually, what will be interesting to see is the
Speaker 3: two elements where this ruling could go. One is how
Speaker 3: it affects Hindu marriage. Marriages in India guided by personal
Speaker 3: religious laws, So the Hindus have the Hindu Marriage Act,
Speaker 3: the Muslims have Muslim personal law, and then there is
Speaker 3: the civil code under which interfaith marriages happened.
Speaker 4: We know that the ruling BJP has previously opposed broadening
Speaker 4: the Hindu Marriage Act, which applies to most of the population.
Speaker 4: Officials have argued that including same sex couples would legitimize
Speaker 4: what they've called a particular human conduct and that it
Speaker 4: would run against Indian values. Lawyers generally expect there to
Speaker 4: be some opposition within the government, but that's not necessarily
Speaker 4: being framed as a bad thing. And to sidestep some
Speaker 4: of these issues, most of the petitions appearing before the
Speaker 4: Supreme Court fall under a different marriage Act, which is
Speaker 4: used for secular and interreligious unions. Lawyers hope that this
Speaker 4: route will avoid some of the land mines that are
Speaker 4: associated with amending laws specifically bound with religion, and they're
Speaker 4: building their case around the idea that marriage equality is
Speaker 4: ultimately about fundamental rights under India's constitution, that it's not
Speaker 4: necessarily a moral issue.
Speaker 1: Munisa. More than a century ago, you right, that India
Speaker 1: was much more tolerant than it has been, and that
Speaker 1: that is really a legacy of colonialism, that it is
Speaker 1: something that the British brought with them. Can you describe
Speaker 1: how that happened and how it played out.
Speaker 3: Hindu mythology is very, very open when it comes to sexuality.
Speaker 3: There are you know, gods that changed gender, men become women,
Speaker 3: men have babies. It's all very fluid. Even for the
Speaker 3: many one hundred years of Mughal Muslim rule in India,
Speaker 3: erotic homo erotic poetry, same sex, so love, none of
Speaker 3: it was criminalized. And then you know, so in eighteen
Speaker 3: sixty one when the British took over rule of India,
Speaker 3: that is when the law was codified and draft to
Speaker 3: make homosexuality a crime. Academics and experts who've been looking
Speaker 3: at this will say that, you know, while modern India,
Speaker 3: India today will often people who oppose gay marriage, for example,
Speaker 3: will critique gay marriage as a Western import, but what
Speaker 3: really is a Western import is the criminalization of homosexuality,
Speaker 3: and that ancient and even medieval Indian culture was very
Speaker 3: open and accepting, if not sort of warmly embracing it.
Speaker 4: Kay.
Speaker 1: The Supreme Court is said to hear this case later
Speaker 1: this month. What do you expect? Are there signs of
Speaker 1: which way the court may ultimately come down?
Speaker 4: The Supreme Court is a fairly progressive institution in India
Speaker 4: and it's led by a largely progressive Chief Justice. Last year,
Speaker 4: the Court offered a hint at how the case might go,
Speaker 4: ruling that same sex couples and other what they've called
Speaker 4: non traditional families are entitled to social welfare benefits. And
Speaker 4: so I think there's an optimism in the legal community
Speaker 4: that the ruling could be apot one. What we're waiting
Speaker 4: on is to understand better the government's position in all
Speaker 4: of this. But ultimately, the Supreme Court is an independent institution.
Speaker 4: The Chief Justice has the power to choose the bench,
Speaker 4: and lawyers are optimistic that unless there are widespread protests
Speaker 4: against the marriage equality case, that a ruling could come
Speaker 4: as early as this summer this fall.
Speaker 1: Muniza Knakbe Kai Schultz, thanks so much for speaking with
Speaker 1: me today.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Thank you Wes.
Speaker 1: When we come back a broader look at same sex marriage,
Speaker 1: where is it allowed and where is it still outlud
Speaker 1: India isn't alone in considering same sex marriage. In recent years,
Speaker 1: several nations have legalized it, but there are many places
Speaker 1: where same sex relationships are still against the law. For
Speaker 1: a global picture of where things stand, ger chat and
Speaker 1: Sandu joins me from jin Eva, Switzerland. They're the director
Speaker 1: of programs at ILGA World, which advocates for the rights
Speaker 1: of LGBTI people. Great Chatton, could you give us a
Speaker 1: little tour of the world. Same sex marriage has been
Speaker 1: expanding in many places, but not in all. Can you
Speaker 1: tell us where it's legal and where it's not.
Speaker 6: We currently have thirty three UN member states with full
Speaker 6: marriage equality, thirty four with other forms of what we
Speaker 6: call civil partnerships. The latest countries that have introduced marriage
Speaker 6: equality in twenty twenty one was Chile, twenty twenty two,
Speaker 6: it was Switzerland, Slovenia and Cuba, and this year so
Speaker 6: far it's Andorra and I believe there are other discussions
Speaker 6: happening in Japan as well.
Speaker 1: Are there regions of the world where you're seeing movement
Speaker 1: forward and other places where either there is no movement
Speaker 1: or there's active moves against marriage equality.
Speaker 6: If we look at the question just purely from a
Speaker 6: marriage perspective, marriage equality perspective, Yes, there are certain moves
Speaker 6: towards that. A lot of the discussions or narratives around
Speaker 6: decriminalization of same sex intimacy, or the fear around decriminalization
Speaker 6: is that it would lead to marriage equality and the
Speaker 6: call for marriage equality. We are hearing from governments in
Speaker 6: parts of West Africa where there's no not even a
Speaker 6: ban on same sex intimacy, they have no laws. They
Speaker 6: are thinking of introducing those bands on same sex intimacy
Speaker 6: to ensure that there is no marriage equality. So it's
Speaker 6: going the opposite way. This is in parts of Africa
Speaker 6: and Asia. We also see even in the USA with
Speaker 6: versus Wade, the whole of the argument around same sex
Speaker 6: marriage was pinned on the decision around roadways Wade. So
Speaker 6: what you see is that it's not so much the
Speaker 6: attack on same sex marriage or marriage equality. You see
Speaker 6: that it's a chipping away at these well fought rights
Speaker 6: that have been gained so far that eventually lead to
Speaker 6: marriage equality. On one side you have a block and
Speaker 6: the other side you have a move which could then
Speaker 6: send marriage equality backwards as well. And it's not one
Speaker 6: region is leading, it's different patterns. I think it's always
Speaker 6: best to avoid looking at the world in a homogeneous
Speaker 6: way or in different regions in a homogeneous way. And
Speaker 6: in fact, one of the most disturbing patterns is actually
Speaker 6: coming from North America and Western Europe, a where you
Speaker 6: see these growing anti trans anti gender rhetorics which could
Speaker 6: definitely play into the same sex marriage equality rights as well.
Speaker 1: You mentioned Cuba as being a country that has advanced
Speaker 1: marriage equality last year. Is there a pattern at all
Speaker 1: between democracies and non democracies when it comes to enacting
Speaker 1: these laws.
Speaker 6: Indeed, I think that's something very interesting that there is
Speaker 6: data that is correlated to this, and that we find
Speaker 6: that where there's our higher account or higher evaluation of democracies,
Speaker 6: there is more freedoms afforded towards LGBTIQ plus people. Indeed,
Speaker 6: in the case of Cuba, that is the anomaly in
Speaker 6: that sort of discussion. You know, we are seeing right now,
Speaker 6: in particular, at a time when we are seeing growing
Speaker 6: anti gender, anti rights rhetorics there are linked to anti
Speaker 6: democratic movements, anti bodily autonomy rhetoric. They all do go
Speaker 6: to a hand in hand with a growing threat on democracy.
Speaker 6: A contrary to what I was saying earlier, there are
Speaker 6: patterns of merging. There is you know, there is the
Speaker 6: domino effect. Yes, we see one country and then the
Speaker 6: others following. However, that does not mean every single country
Speaker 6: will follow because there's still many parts of the world,
Speaker 6: especially in Asia and in Africa, punitive laws against same
Speaker 6: sex into So whilst you will see this happening, it
Speaker 6: won't guarantee that every single country will then follow suit.
Speaker 6: There has to be certain enabling factors and enabling conditions.
Speaker 1: So in authoritarian states you see less tolerance for both
Speaker 1: same sexual relationships and marriage equality.
Speaker 6: Indeed, that's a growing pattern that we have seen, yes,
Speaker 6: and I think there's data around that, especially from our
Speaker 6: partners and members from the Global Council of Equality that
Speaker 6: have done great work around this, who have tied work
Speaker 6: on democracy and LGBTIQPUS rights, and in fact there has
Speaker 6: been other research that has been done, including not just
Speaker 6: on democracy, but on economic growth as well. We see
Speaker 6: that when there's a percentage increase in rights or more
Speaker 6: rights being afforded, in particular to marginalized populations, especially those
Speaker 6: who identify as LGBTIQ PUS. We see a percentage growth
Speaker 6: in GDP as well. This is some great research that's
Speaker 6: come out from the US and from the Netherlands and.
Speaker 1: Seeing all the change that's happening all around the world.
Speaker 1: When you look ahead, what do you see for the
Speaker 1: future of marriage equality.
Speaker 6: We are moving towards marriage equality, but I would like
Speaker 6: to preface this. In twenty nineteen ILGA World we produce
Speaker 6: what it's called the State Sponsored Homophobia Report. In our report,
Speaker 6: marriage equality was seen as the gold standard as the
Speaker 6: go to you know, we've reached it. However, in twenty nineteen,
Speaker 6: our team decided against that and said no, this should
Speaker 6: not be the gold standard because it sends a very
Speaker 6: one sided view. So what we said that the gold
Speaker 6: standard should be is constitutional rights. So once lgbtiquplus rights
Speaker 6: are enshrined in the constitution, we have better chances of
Speaker 6: ensuring equality for all the journey towards that could be
Speaker 6: one route to that is marriage equality. Indeed, we saw
Speaker 6: last year and the Netherlands have included or introduced now
Speaker 6: in their constitution lgbtiqplus protections. So I think some of
Speaker 6: this narrative around marriage equality is very, very import but
Speaker 6: also need We cannot just focus on that alone. It
Speaker 6: cannot be our end goal. Our end goal is constitutional
Speaker 6: protections and ensure because once we're in the constitution there
Speaker 6: are constitutional laws are harder to change, whereas marriage quality laws.
Speaker 6: They could change from the next five ten years, and
Speaker 6: we indeed are going to see a positive direction. But
Speaker 6: it shouldn't be the endpoint for us.
Speaker 1: John and Sandu, thanks so much for speaking with me,
Speaker 1: Thank you for inviting me, Thanks for listening to us
Speaker 1: here at The Big Take. It's a daily podcast from
Speaker 1: Bloomberg and iHeartRadio. For more shows from iHeart Radio, visit
Speaker 1: the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen, and
Speaker 1: we'd love to hear from you. Email us questions or
Speaker 1: comments to Big Take at Bloomberg dot net. The supervising
Speaker 1: producer of The Big Take is Vicky Vergalina. Our senior
Speaker 1: producer is Catherine Viink. Frederica Romanello is our producer. Our
Speaker 1: associate producer is Zen Raphael. I'm Seely is our engineer.
Speaker 1: Our original music was composed by Leo Sidron i'm wes Kasova.
Speaker 1: We'll be back on Monday with another Big Take. Have
Speaker 1: a great weekend.