On Decriminalization and More

Celebrating Pride

Is it something in the air or something in the voice, that everything suddenly feels beautiful, as if it is of one’s own choice? The day seems special, charged with possibility, and perhaps even a little fear. It feels like a beginning, and why should it not? Today marks the day when many fully and legally gained the right to celebrate their autonomy and queerness.

On 6th September 2018, the Supreme Court of India revised and overruled its own judgment in the context of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, decriminalizing homosexuality. The Section stated, “Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.” This meant that any form of expression of sexuality understood to be “against the order of nature” was a criminal offense.

The 2018 verdict decriminalized consensual homosexuality as well as oral and anal sex, which were earlier treated as unnatural. While the Supreme Court made this judgment, it maintained that bestiality, sexual activity and intercourse with minors, and any form of non-consensual sexual activity remained criminal offenses. Only a few years prior, in 2013, in the case of Suresh Kumar Koushal v. Naz Foundation, the Supreme Court had refused to decriminalize homosexuality. The Delhi High Court had previously decriminalized homosexuality in the same case in 2009, but this was overturned by the Supreme Court in 2013. It was only in 2018, through the case of Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, that the shift occurred, recognizing homosexuality as a basic human right rather than a criminal offense. The Supreme Court of India took nearly a decade to formally acknowledge that love between consenting adults of the same sex is not a crime, but a fundamental part of human dignity.

Decriminalization is not merely a legal milestone; it is a profound act of social, political, and cultural significance. Legal recognition alone does not guarantee freedom from political and social violations or societal rejection. Political awareness and social acceptance of homosexuality remain as essential as legal recognition. Legal rights provide a framework, but society must also acknowledge and respect them for true liberation to take root.

Émile Durkheim, the renowned sociologist, argued that the collective conscience of society determines what is considered a crime and what is not. If something is labeled a crime, it is socially unacceptable. Some scholars suggest that colonial law did not create new morality, but rather formalized what society already considered immoral or socially unacceptable. Homosexuality had long been positioned as a moral transgression, even before colonial law codified it.

The decriminalization of homosexuality is not just about queer rights and the freedom to express oneself with pride; it is also a step toward decolonization, a rejection of a more than century-and-a-half-old arbitrary British law, which was based on moral and religious ideas described in a translation of the Bible. Even this translation framed homosexuality as a violation of natural order and equated it with sin. Religion shapes collective conscience, as Durkheim emphasized, and scholars of religion note that in many countries outside South Asia, over a century passed before homosexuality was recognized as a legal right.

The intersection of religion, law, and social morality has profoundly influenced perceptions of queerness, often labeling it as unnatural, immoral, or sinful. The historical criminalization of queer identities and behaviors demonstrates the deep entanglement of legal authority and social morality, and it reminds us that legal change must be accompanied by cultural and societal transformation to be meaningful.

Examining the historical roots of criminalization reveals how society interprets morality. The fact that homosexuality was criminalized for so long also demonstrates the enduring influence of religion as an instrument of social control, which Karl Marx famously described as the “opium of society.” Connecting Durkheim and Marx’s insights helps illuminate why societies have long regarded queerness as deviant, immoral, or threatening, even in contemporary times.

In the South Asian context, the discussion cannot ignore Brahmanical patriarchy. Scholars such as Uma Chakravarti argue that Brahmanical patriarchy transcends Hinduism, influencing the entire subcontinent. Even communities that do not follow Hinduism in belief or practice experience the social structures and norms established by caste logic. Brahmanical patriarchy prioritizes caste preservation, dictating norms around reproduction, sexual behavior, and family structure. It has shaped the social imagination, determining what is considered moral, natural, or acceptable.

The impact of Brahmanical patriarchy is profound: it marginalizes those who do not reproduce according to prescribed norms, including homosexuals, trans individuals, asexuals, and others who choose non-reproductive partnerships. Adoption and surrogacy, which challenge caste-based reproduction, are perceived as threats to social order.

The “ideal” family of father, mother, and children becomes more than a personal aspiration; it becomes a strategy to maintain caste purity and social control. These structures contribute to silencing and invalidating queerness, reinforcing exclusion in social, familial, and institutional contexts. Even after decriminalization, full freedom is incomplete. Legal recognition alone cannot dismantle entrenched societal norms that continue to constrain desire, expression, and autonomy.

Social acceptance, political visibility, and cultural celebration are necessary to complement legal progress. The refusal to recognize marriage equality in 2023 demonstrates how patriarchal structures still leverage family, reproduction, and tradition to reinforce exclusion. Colonial law criminalized queer desire in courts, while caste and patriarchy have sustained the same punishment within households and communities. To achieve true liberation, both dimensions must be confronted.

Celebrating decriminalization is vital, and the significance of such a celebration extends far beyond visibility. Pride, in its essence, is the assertion that queerness cannot be erased. It is a reclamation of dignity, autonomy, and identity. The anniversary of 6th September 2018 is not only a legal milestone but a symbolic reclaiming of space, freedom, and love.

Pride parades, cultural events, and educational programs amplify this freedom, insisting that society recognize queer identities as equal and integral. Celebrations of this kind honor courage, resilience, and the years of struggle that have brought about these victories. They mark progress while reminding society that visibility itself is a form of resistance and a statement against centuries of marginalization. Social silence can be as harsh as legal punishment. To remain partially chained is to accept symbolic freedom without practical liberation. Decriminalization is only the first step; acceptance, imagination, and cultural visibility are the victories that follow.

Each celebration is also a call to society to reflect: who benefits when queerness is silenced? What power structures are maintained when love is deemed dangerous? Liberation is incomplete if partial, and real progress must be inclusive, sustained, and collective. Pride is not only a parade but an insistence that all love, desire, and identity can exist openly without fear.

The journey from criminalization to full social recognition is ongoing, and every event, march, and educational initiative strengthens the roots of equality and challenges the lingering hierarchies imposed by colonial law and Brahmanical patriarchy.

Written by Anushka, 3rd year, Sociology Hons