Dhrithi Bangera Dharmendra (PhD Scholar)
Dr. Ishrat Munawer (Assistant Professor)
Dr. Aswathy Gopi (Assistant Professor)
Department of Psychology, SRM University-AP
Language plays a huge role in how we construct our identities and reflect our relationships with others. Different terms have been used while discussing the needs, health, and activism of the LGBTQIA+ community. Understanding what term to use and in what context helps in addressing these issues with better clarity. This article covers the three dominant terms used to address the community: LGBTQIA+, sexual and gender minorities, and queer.
The most widely known term in India and globally is LGBTQ+, an abbreviation that represents lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and all other people of diverse sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, and sex characteristics whose identities do not align with broader socio-cultural norms regarding sex, gender, and sexuality. The broader norms referred to here points to the view of sex/gender as existing in the binaries of male/female and the expectation that intimacies occur in this rigid assumed binary. This use of the abbreviation is presented in many forms, including the current widespread use of ‘LGBTQIA+’ aimed at being inclusive of intersex and asexual identities. Similarly, the abbreviation is presented differently in attempts to represent more identities (e.g., LGBTQQIAP+) or to address specific identities (e.g., LGB). It also reflects the queer movement of that specific socio-political timeline. For instance, the abbreviation commonly starting with “L” signifies the conscious efforts to uplift lesbians who were initially neglected during the gay rights movement and in recognition of the support that lesbians extended to gay men requiring HIV care. Similarly, in North America, there has been an increasing use of ‘2SLGBTQIA+’ to bring attention to Indigenous Two-Spirit people. These examples point to the fact that the letters in these abbreviations are deliberately placed in a particular order. While the abbreviations can be used differently depending on the context, the widespread use of ‘LGBTQ+’, with lesbian and gay identities being presented first, reflects the erasure and marginalization of underrepresented identities as well as bi-negativity and transphobia within the community.
While touching on the topic of in/visibility, erasure, and marginalization, it is important to address that while there has been an increase in the use of ‘2SLGBTQIA+’ in North America, there have been no such discourses on the topic of names observed in India, even in the limited spaces where the queer community is visible and LGBTQ+ discussions take place. Despite there being an increase in research studies and other media representations of the hijra communities in India, people who may be familiar with LGBTQ+ may not necessarily be familiar with hijras and other identities that are rooted in India’s pre-colonial histories. There also appears to be an unfamiliarity with the neo-identities that emerge in online spaces and are claimed by many non-heterosexuals and/or non-cisgender identifying people in India. The lack of spaces in India to have dialogues related to queer issues hinders Indian queer identities from becoming visible. This inevitably leads to continued ambiguity in the understanding of and empathizing with Indian queer people as well as prevents the community from building itself.
Sexual and gender minorities (SGM) is a term that is primarily used in research studies focusing on health and specifically on health inequalities faced by queer people. For instance, a review study by Arnold and Dhingra in 2020 revealed that the healthcare inequalities for SGM patients are connected to normative prejudices about the individuals from the community. Such disparities, linked to the lack of adequate training on queer health issues and the resultant distrust towards the healthcare system, have further adverse effects on their health. While the term “sexual and gender minorities” helps in highlighting the minority status of the community and therefore establishing how the health disparities experienced by them is due to their stigmatized minority position, it reduces their identities to solely being sexual and gender minorities and has restrictive focus on health, not allowing any space for discussions related to kinships, desires, and other experiences that are sanitized in mainstream discourses. ‘SGM’ further prevents intersex people from being accurately represented, due to which there have been attempts to shift to the acronym SOGIESC, which stands for sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, and sex characteristics. By characterizing the specific features of the community, ‘SOGIESC’ answers the question of “Who is included?”, removes the hierarchization and over- or under-representations of specific identities, and extends to all culture-specific identities previously not represented in mainstream queer politics. Despite its advantages, SOGIESC, like SGM, cannot be used for self-identification, limiting its use by queer people.
The term “queer” was historically used as a pejorative word directed at homosexuality. However, it is now reclaimed by the community as a means of resistance to the normative dichotomies of male/female and heterosexual/homosexual and is associated with pride instead of shame. Therefore, queer is a self-claimed identity which some people may identify with while others do not; it is not a word used to describe someone, which is how it was previously used as a derogatory term.
All discussions about “queerness”, including those on queer identity, have political connotations. Gamson, in 1995, wrote about how queerness reflects instability of identities and challenges socially produced binaries, building on a collective identity amidst the various distinct identities. His work also addresses how, while building a collective identity, there lies the question of who is included and represented in the “we”. Although queer stands for questioning normative impositions, transphobia and bi-negativity continue to persist within the community. Moreover, despite the potential for being largely inclusive, queer still continues to represent lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender identities over other identities that also challenge perspectives that make generalizing claims tying social behaviors and desires to binary ideas of the human body. However, ‘queer’ provides space for speaking about queer politics by emphasizing on “doing” queer without restricting it to an identity; it concerns itself with the act of transcending binaries and other normative and restrictive ways of living.
So, LGBTQIA+, sexual and gender minorities, or queer? It largely depends on the context. While many people outside the community have often associated these terms to describe anyone who does not visibly conform to their rigid binary ideas of sexual and gender identities, people with non-normative sexual and gender identities have also contributed to the erasure of invisibilised identities within the community by the ways in which they have represented the community. Sometimes, it is simply more beneficial to name a specific identity, such as when recalling the history and acknowledging the lack of inclusive representations of nonbinary gender identities. Therefore, a self-reflection preceding the usage of these terms is encouraged for everyone.
