Live
- ‘Bachhala Malli’ trailer heightens anticipation
- Karnataka quota row: Backward Class forum chief warns Lingayat seer over 'tinkering with reservations'
- Tight security arrangements at Group-II examination centers District SP
- Alia Bhatt captures attention in white
- Varun Dhawan talks about ‘Baby John’
- ‘Moonwalk’ trailer promises a quirky heist, love, and loyalty
- Combat leaf spot disease
- Ahsaas Channaopens up about her complex character in ‘Mismatched 3’
- Radhika Apte welcomes first child, shares heartfelt post
- Jacqueline dazzles at Da-Bangg Reloaded concert
Tamil Nadu Introduces A Glossary To Address LGBTQ Individuals
Tamil Nadu Introduces A Glossary To Address LGBTQ Individuals
- The Tamil Nadu government has introduced a glossary of terms as suggested by the Madras High Court, as to how the persons from the third gender should be addressed or described.
- As a result, whenever the LGBTQIA+ community is discussed in any forum, it is required to only use the terms that have been listed in the gazette to describe them.
The Tamil Nadu government has introduced a glossary of terms as suggested by the Madras High Court, as to how the persons from the third gender should be addressed or described.
As per the information provided on Tuesday by the Additional Advocate-General (AAG) to Justice N Ananth Venkatesh, the glossary was published in the Tamil Nadu government gazette of the Social Welfare and Women Empowerment department on August 20 of this year.
The judge was informed that the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Rules draught had been received from the Director of Social Welfare and needed to be reviewed and in accordance with the Central Act, 2019. Before being distributed to the Chief Minister, it also needs to have the Law Department's clearance. The judge was therefore asked to provide six extra months for the rules to be completed and announced.
The Transgender Welfare Board secretary had been given orders to draught an exclusive policy for these people after consulting with relevant parties, including staff members of the State Planning Commission, the judge was also informed. To create the final policy, six more months were requested. The judge thought it was completely inappropriate to take another six months to complete the Transgender Policy and the rules that go with with it. It demonstrates that this problem is not given priority. The judge pondered the fact that this process has been ongoing for more than a year and that the reason for the requested six-month extension is unknown.
The government must keep in mind that members of the LGBTQIA+ community have been excluded from society's mainstream for far too long, and it is past time for the policy and guidelines to be implemented with the utmost seriousness. The policies and regulations must be finalised as soon as possible if the government is truly committed to helping members of the LGBTQIA+ community.
