Starting from the recurrent usage of the term ‘transgender’ as a noun throughout the document, the new draft manual published by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) for ‘gender inclusive’ training is riddled with problems, activists have alleged. The draft, titled ‘Integrating Transgender Concerns in Schooling Processes’, is intended to train school faculties to make classrooms more inclusive for gender nonconforming children. It has been published nearly a year after the older manual ‘Inclusion of Transgender Children in School Education: Concerns and Roadmap’ was taken down from the NCERT website, claiming that the material was not reviewed and finalised.
TNM spoke to some LGBTQIA+ rights activists and other concerned queer-identifying individuals, who highlighted the issues with the new draft.
One of the primary problems with the NCERT’s new manual, as pointed out by the Gender Euphoria space of Chennai’s Orinam collective, is that it wrongfully conflates transgender persons with people with intersex variations, implying that schools should focus on the latter. “The foreword by the NCERT Director even introduces the term ‘transgender person by birth’. These are two different concepts,” members of the group said.
“The word they are looking for is ‘intersex’. There is no such thing as a ‘trans person by birth’. They have confused the two terms,” said Radzz (they/them), a queer person working in the education sector. They further pointed out that the manual has only recognised one intersex variation, which is persons born with ambiguous genitalia. “There are, in fact, many intersex conditions that may or may not be realised at birth. It is important to understand the differences,” they said.
“The manual also does not recognise or understand the difference between biological sex, gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation. These terms have been used interchangeably,” Radzz said. “It is necessary to acknowledge that it is gender nonconformity specifically, and not just their identity, that puts trans persons at a higher risk. Of course, biological sex, ambiguous genitalia etc play a role. We can’t isolate any one factor. But visibility puts people at more risk,” they added.
Another issue highlighted by Radzz, as well as the Gender Euphoria group, is the possibility that the manual’s focus on ‘transgender persons by birth’ (supposedly referring to intersex persons) might serve to dehumanise students and strip them of their privacy. “The school authorities are going to want to know which students have ambiguous genitalia and which don’t; this can pave the way for medical tests that are dehumanising and unethical,” they said.
Vignesh Dhananjayan (he/she/they), a trans non-binary medical student, said the manual has entirely overlooked the concepts of gender dysphoria and gender incongruence. “I don't think there is even a single mention of what gender incongruence is. A module focused on transgender children without the use of the term gender dysphoria or gender incongruence even once just seems incomplete. For a teacher to even understand trans persons, it is highly essential that they know what gender incongruence is,” he said.
The Gender Euphoria space also underlined how, apart from one success story featuring Vihaan Peethambar and a mention in the glossary and definitions, the manual features no discussions on transmasculine persons and the unique challenges they face. It also ignores the existence of a spectrum of identities — gender and sexual — and doesn’t acknowledge the fluidity of these concepts, Radzz said. “Certain identities have also been mistakenly clubbed together,” Vignesh added.
Citing another example of how the document confuses gender identity and expression with sexuality, Gender Euphoria pointed out that Narthaki Nataraj’s biographical profile in the manual says she was “denied admission at a law college because of her sexuality”, while it was actually because of her gender identity.
The Gender Euphoria space also pointed out that the NCERT manual has not complied with the final version of the Transgender Rules, published in the Gazette of India on September 29, 2020. The draft manual instead cites the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, saying a revised certificate to change gender in documents shall be provided to “any transgender person who changes their gender into female or male after undergoing surgery.”
“It appears the authors of this module are unaware that the final version of the Transgender Rules have replaced the surgery requirement with a Letter of Medical Intervention,” the Gender Euphoria space said. The Letter of Medical Intervention has been defined as a “gender affirming medical intervention undertaken by an individual to facilitate the transition to their self-identified gender, including but not limited to counselling, hormonal therapy, and surgical intervention, if any.”
“Besides the fact that it contradicts the Transgender Rules, the manual also risks confusing children, teachers, and parents alike by mentioning surgery,” said Tarun (he/him), an LGBTQIA+ affirmative counsellor.
In response to the question “What can [the teacher] do if they identify a student facing gender-related challenges?”, one of the pointers the manual mentions is to “discuss with the parents”. However, this can be highly problematic as it does not take into account the child’s right to privacy and consent, said Tarun. “Natal families are often the first to turn to violence. If a child does not want to come out to their parents, it is the child's choice,” he said.
Radzz further stressed on the dangers of the manual suggesting a separate toilet for transgender and gender nonconforming children. “That will disclose the identity of the students who want to remain in the closet. There is a difference between separate restrooms and gender neutral restrooms,” they said.
Vignesh is also not in support of separate restrooms, unless the students have specifically asked for it. “Such a measure will single out at least some students. Besides, it is unnecessary to force a child to use a separate restroom. The ideal move is to integrate a child with the gender they feel congruent with, which means they should be allowed to use the restrooms designated for that gender. This is what will lead to normalisation and sensitisation,” they added. Tarun also pointed out that this suggestion was completely against Madras High Court judge Justice Anand Venkatesh’s order, which had called for gender neutral restrooms in all educational institutions.
Moreover, the manual is reinforcing stereotypes about trans persons rather than breaking them, Vignesh alleged. For instance, the manual contains a section that gives suggestions to teachers for role-play, which proposes the following scenarios:
> “Suppose you are going to your workspace and you come across a group of transgender persons at the traffic light. How would you react? Some participants could become Transgender and others as commuters while enacting the situation (sic).”
> “You are attending a wedding wherein a group of transgender persons visit the venue to bless the couple. How would you respond in this situation?”
“Those who wrote the manual seem to think that we can only interact with a trans person when they are begging at a traffic signal or when they come to our houses to give blessings. They can’t seem to imagine a trans person as a doctor or a non-binary person as your service provider or just anybody other than a beggar. This reinforces a stereotype, which is very concerning given that teachers will be using this module to sensitise students,” he said.
Radzz also called attention to the manual’s “ice-breaking session”, which asks people to share their experiences encountering “the transgenders” at public places “like streets, traffic light junctions, and marketplaces”. “Imagine you are in a class with transgender students, and in the ice-breaker session, you are talking about trans people begging at traffic signals. Are you going to tell a fellow trans child that’s where you met a transgender person?” they asked.
> The manual quotes the National Educational Policy (NEP) in recommending that “alternative and innovative education centres will be put in place in cooperation with civil society to ensure bringing back children who have dropped out of school due to various circumstances into mainstream education.” This essentially recommends that transgender children be isolated from mainstream education, and effectively ghettoised. Such a move also runs the risk of teachers and administrators embarking on a search for who is “truly” transgender, which can result in physical examinations and other practices. Such isolationist approaches also run contrary to the Transgender Act.
> The definition of homophobia in the glossary section of the manual is wrong. The glossary defines homophobia as “negative attitude or feelings towards homosexuality or people who identify as gender queer.” Radzz pointed out that negative feelings towards gender queer persons is not homophobia, but transphobia. “Interchanging these terms is very problematic because people already don’t know the difference between gay and transgender,” they said.
> When discussing the history of the transgender community, the new manual has omitted the part about the influence of Islamic cultures, which was mentioned in the older manual. “Trans people's cultural expression is a mixture of Hindu and Islamic cultures that were agglomerated together to form the Jamaat, chosen families and guru-chela systems,” said Vignesh.
> The language used throughout the manual is insensitive. After stating that a “boy identifying as a girl” should be accepted, the manual addresses the child using ‘he/him’ pronouns. The manual, in its foreword, states that the students in the schools have to be accepted for “what they are”, as opposed to “who they are”. This dehumanises trans people.
“Students of secondary stage, who are also adolescent may be given an opportunity to learn that the words “gay,” “lesbian,” and “transgender” are adjectives that should be used with respect to describe people in their community, not words used in a negative way to hurt, insult, and degrade,” the manual states under the section ‘Practising a Gender Inclusive Curriculum’. But then contrary to its own advice, it repeatedly and inappropriately uses ‘transgender’ as a noun. “Why even make these statements if they will not even be followed in your own text?” an activist asked.
Stating that the older version of the manual was sensitive, inclusive, and had a basic understanding of the spectrum of identities, some LGBTQIA+ persons pointed out that the current manual highlighted the gaps in the knowledge of those who wrote it. “The people preparing such a document should have a basic understanding of queer identities. This is highly insensitive and triggering,” they added.
You mean my community members were pushed into begging and doing sex work because of marginalisation by the mainstream community, for which they were targetted by the colonial criminal tribes act? pic.twitter.com/mgKo6WQhfo
— Vignesh️⚧️️ (@Vignesh50880630) January 17, 2023