Abstract
The study lays the groundwork for an innovative blueprint of comparative analysis by examining the Aravanis/Hijras, Warias and Baklas. The article employs these three clusters to illustrate the historical precedent for diverse gender roles and the collective colonial experiences of the dichotomous enforcement, which resulted in diverse consequences. The key insight of the article aids in exemplifying how the synthesis of post-colonial influence, faith-based impact and administrative directives sets apart third-gender identities, as perceived in modern-day Asia. The article scrutinises the anomalies faced by the third-gender communities in the post-colonial period: regardless of some legal amendments, these communities continue to experience structural oppression, legal equivocation and intolerance. The study foregrounds the unfailing resilience and resourcefulness of these identities, especially through their customs and cultural expression, which act as a source of anchor and assimilation. Rationally, the research focuses on revealing the disparity that turns tangible rights into abstract concepts and the systemic inequality of social alienation through comparing symbolic interpretations codified by law with the lack of true and purposeful social unification. This crucial outlook demonstrates the constraints of a legally-driven solution in overcoming entrenched post-colonial aftermath and ongoing preconceived notions. By acknowledging indigenous gender identities, this study argues for an extensive social safety net and collaborative research. It accentuates that for gender egalitarianism to be purposeful across domestic and foreign spheres, it must cultivate and transform, and should be stemming from these practices instead of displacing them.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.