Seat Belt Safety Video: Good For Trans People?

A few weeks ago, I wrote about a ruling from India's Supreme Court that says, in essence, that transgenders are a third gender.  This, I believe, is both good and bad:  On one hand, people do not have to be bound to the gender binary that prevails in most cultures.  On the other, such a law can make further stigmatization--particularly of the hijra--possible.


In that context, it's especially interesting to see hijra in a new video urging drivers to use their seatbelts. In it, transgender actors mimic airline flight attendants giving an in-flight safety demonstration. 


Most likely, the actors were chosen because in traditional South Asian cultures, hijra were believed to possess special powers and, for that reason, were asked to bless births and marriages and are, to this day, sometimes found blessing motorists in return for cash.


On the other hand, that is one of the reasons why hijra have been stigmatized:  People fear those very same powers.  However, it must be said that the most virulent prejudice against them has come as India has become more Westernized.


And, another reason why the video might not be such a boon to gender-variant people is that it casts trans people in one of the most stereotypically female--or, more precisely, feminine--roles: that of a stewardess.  Then again, some might regard that as a validation of us as women.


In any event, here's the video:

A Third Gender In India

Quite possibly the most revolutionary piece of legislation regarding gender identity and expression was passed two years ago in Argentina.  In essence, it says that any Argentinian aged 18 or older can live as whichever gender he or she chooses. It also authorized doctors, surgeons and other medical professionals to provide the necessary care for those who chose not to live in the gender to which they were assigned at birth.  And, for those who couldn't afford those treatments and therapies, the government would foot the bill.

Now something arguably as radical--or, perhaps even more so--has happened in India.  A couple of days ago, that country's Supreme Court ruled that transgenders are a third gender.  So, for starters, all official forms must allow for trans people to indicate their gender as such, just as males and females check off the boxes that correspond with their sex.  It also allows transgenders to receive government benefits and partake of the social programs to which the rest of the country's citizens are entitled.

On one hand, I am pleased with this development.  Although I identify as female, and would continue to do so even if I were offered the option now available in India, I do not believe that people should be bound to the gender binary if they feel it's inappropriate for the way they identify and express themselves.  

On the other hand, given India's history with transgender people, this development could be troublesome.  I am thinking specifically of the hijra, who are both venerated and stigmatized in the subcontinent's cultures.  

Traditionally, hijras lived outside of the gender norms of Indian society and were believed to have special spiritual (and paranormal) abilities cisgenders don't have.  So, they were often called upon to officiate at weddings, funerals and other ceremonies and to cast, or cast away, spells.  But, even with such a status--which, for the most part, they've lost as India has become more influenced by the West--they were still very poor and begged or even engaged in sex work.   To this day, people give them money simply because they don't want to take the chance that a spurned hijra will send some dark enerty their way.

Given such a history, I have to wonder whether India's new ruling might actually further stigmatize the hijra, as well as other trans people.  I can't help but to think about a trans woman who was a hijra in India and was seeking asylum here.  From what she told me, even though some people still believe hijras have special powers, they can be killed with little or no penalty to those who kill them.  And, according to this trans woman (who will remain nameless, for obvious reasons), many men in her native country "accept" trans people insofar as they can use us sexually, or simply as lurid curiosities.

I guess time will tell what how the Indian Supreme Court's ruling will affect the lives of trans people. 

India's Response To The Death Of A Woman Who Was Gang-Raped

In much of the world--including, at times, my hometown of New York--rape is still treated as "just" a sexual offense rather than the violent crime it is.

What that means is that sentences are relatively light.  For example, in India, rapists faced seven to ten years in prison.  Granted, I wouldn't want to spend that much time incarcerated.  However, compared to other violent offenses, rape wasn't punished harshly.

That may change.  Unfortunately, it took the death of a 23-year-old woman who was brutally gang-raped for this change to come about.

Because of a "gag" order, the victim and her family cannot be identified.  However, Indian media has reported that she was a physiotherapy student who was attacked by six men on a bus.  She died in Singapore hospital, where she was sent for treatment, nearly two weeks after the attack.

In response to this awful crime, President Pranab Mukherjee assented to new laws proposed by cabinet ministers.  According to the new ordinances, the sentences for gang rape or rapes committed by police officers or other persons in authority will be doubled and can be extended to life without parole.   The law also includes a new set of offenses, including voyerism and stalking.  

There has even been discussion of the death penalty for the young woman's attackers.  Although Indian law provides for capital punishment, officials say that it is used "only in the rarest of rare cases". Three months ago, the last surviving gunman of the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks was hanged.  It was the first state execution in eight years.

While the new laws, if passed (even without a provision for the death penalty), will punish some rapists more severely than perpetrators of similar crimes have been penalized in the past, women's rights advocates still don't think it goes far enough.  They say that, while the provisions for longer sentences are welcome, the law still doesn't have the teeth to fight sex crimes against women.  Others criticized the government for not holding a public debate or hearing on the law.

According to a defense lawyer, the court will start hearing evidence from witnesses next Tuesday and that verdicts will be handed down "very soon" on five of the perpetrators.  The sixth is being tried in a juvenile court.