Recognition of queer rights under far-right authoritarianism in India.

Gender equality is usually one of the first casualties when far-right populisms capture socio-political spaces (Mudde, 2019). Evoking nostalgia for a simplistic and pristine past where gender binaries and patriarchies were intact, is after all common strategy across far-right populisms. Once in power, such regimes seek to reshape societies to suit this vision (Korolczuk, 2020). In rare cases, however, recognition of gender rights appears to continue in far-right imageries, though in an ambivalent mode. India is one such instance where recognition of gender rights especially of LGBTQI+ people, rather than being reversed, has been repurposed to strengthen a plutocratic-sectarian policy agenda (Bhattacharya, 2019). The presence of gender-fluid and assertive divine characters in myths and histories from which the movement draws its emotional sustenance makes it easier for the Hindu far right to embrace gender fluidity and non-conformity. These progressive markers are then used to claim cultural supremacy vis-à-vis communities, like the religious minorities, it seeks to target and exclude (Upadhyaya, 2020). An option unthinkable in similar far-right populist regimes in Europe and other parts of Asia (Korolczuk, 2020). This recognition is however ambivalent. Features of gender rights that suit the socio-political agenda (Hindu nationalist trans identity) are made visible; others that are incompatible with its vision of ethnic purity (eg. Muslim/secular trans identity) are made invisible. The boundaries of LGBTQI+ rights and recognition are never settled and kept intentionally ambivalent. To illustrate this ambivalence, this paper will rely on two in-depth case-studies of far right’s responses to LGBTQI+ portrayals in popular culture. The first is to the portrayal of a transgender protagonist in a Bollywood film Laxmii (Thakur, 2020). The second case is to the use of same-sex relationships in product advertisements – expressions of ‘homocapitalism’ (Rao, 2020) that has recently merged with far-right populism in India. In spite of being created by filmmakers and targeting consumers from social classes and castes that constitute its supporters, these portrayals triggered swift and shrill condemnations and vigilantism by groups affiliated with the regime on account of its alleged transgressive nature. These reactions indicate the unsettled meanings of recognition for gender within far-right imaginaries, i.e., its ambivalence, which require practices of continuous reinterpretations. The research question that this paper seeks to address is this: What are the practices of far-right populists in India that maintain the ambivalence in the recognition of LGBTQI+ rights? Three that can be potentially identified are - (1) Hegemonic discourses kept ambiguous making even self-censorship difficult, (2) Arbitrary applications of legal tools like state censorship to suit political expediency, (3) Harassments by foot-soldiers and cyber trolls based on loosely defined criteria of transgression. This paper integrates theories of recognition (Fraser), populism and ‘homocapitalism’ to create a theoretical framework to understand how gender is being mobilised in contemporary far-right authoritarian regimes.