Curtailed queer rights

Nepal: Nepal is ahead of many countries in LGBTQIA+ rights and policies. The Constitution of Nepal recognises gender and sexual minorities, which even developed countries like the US don’t explicitly mention. Moreover, the judiciary’s support for the rights of the queer community has increased in recent years.

 

photo: TKP

 While these achievements seem noteworthy at the outset, there is still a huge disparity between the laws and the reality queer people face every day. In Nepal, while much of the activism for the rights of the LGBTQIA+ community still focuses on something as basic as identity and legal recognition, issues like the sexual and reproductive health rights (SRHR) of these communities remain overlooked.

 

Although the Constitution of Nepal ensures fundamental rights, such as reproductive rights under the Safe Motherhood and Reproductive Health Act (2018) for gender and sexual minorities, these provisions haven’t effectively catered to the sexual and reproductive health of these communities.

 

The discrimination and stigma that gender and sexual minorities face daily manifests in their general inaccessibility of fundamental rights in Nepal. Programmes related to SRHR are usually associated with cisgender women and ignore LGBTQIA+ individuals. Queer folks are judged and ridiculed not just by their family members but also by the health staff at hospitals and health posts. This is problematic in a country where transgender people are forced to undergo surgery for medical verification to be legally recognised as “male” or “female”. Gender-affirming surgery requires medical professionals to follow certain clinical protocols; however, the existing law does not address gender reassignment.

 

In August, the Supreme Court made landmark progress in recognising LGBTQIA+ rights by ruling that Rukshana Kapali, a transgender woman, must be legally recognised as a woman on all documents without requiring medical verification; however, the law for legal recognition remains the same for all. So, these individuals have no option but to travel to India for surgeries, which can be expensive and unsafe. Moreover, transgender men, lesbians and bisexual individuals often struggle to access basic menstrual hygiene products and healthcare facilities related to safe motherhood and abortion. The path to having and parenting children is fraught with difficulties for queer individuals, as IVF and adoption facilities aren’t accessible. While surrogacy is legal for infertile married Nepali couples, it is prohibited for singles, transgender couples and foreign nationals.

 

Many people have the misconception that only cisgender women menstruate, but anyone with a uterus can experience it. These narratives arise through the limited awareness of our society and restrictive school curriculums. Such a perpetuation of false ideas further influences dominant ideas in popular platforms. Rarely do we see people from the LGBTQIA+ communities in the advertisements of sanitary pads or contraceptives. These communities often receive attention only during Pride Month (June), but progress in SRHR and other issues requires ongoing efforts, not just a month of focus.

 

The legal recognition of same-sex marriage between Surendra Pandey and Maya Gurung in 2023 made many hopeful about the future of Nepal’s LGBTQIA+ individuals. Conversations about the potential of Nepal’s LGBTQIA+ tourism (rainbow tourism) have emerged since. To ensure its sustainability, we must prioritise fundamentals such as SRHR for the queer communities to create a safe space for them. For our economy to benefit from their participation, it must ensure that their primary needs are met with dignity.

 

Our leaders cannot dismiss the issues of queer people by relying on the superficial claims of LGBTQIA+ policy advancements. Yes, there has been progress, but it is not enough. Lawmakers must understand that queer rights go beyond sexuality and identity and include all aspects of human rights, such as the right to sexual and reproductive health. Laws can only go so far if we do not change our deeply rooted beliefs and accept people for who they are while providing essential services.

 

Nepal has often earned global recognition for its progressive policies and inclusive stance on LGBTQIA+ rights. But do the global accolades Nepal has earned in terms of its progressiveness reflect the actual experiences of queer people here? The Post’s Aarati Ray sat down with Manisha Dhakal, executive director of the Blue Diamond Society and a leading advocate for LGBTQIA+ rights in South Asia for over 23 years.

 

Nepal is often hailed for its progressive stance on queer rights, both in South Asia and globally. With over two decades of queer rights advocacy, how accurate do you find this portrayal?

 

Many activists and commentators do describe Nepal as being progressive on queer rights. While this is partly true, especially when we consider the legal frameworks, the reality at the grassroots is quite different.

 

On the one hand, Nepal’s constitution recognises LGBTQIA+ identities. Articles 12 and 18 mandate that “gender identity” be acknowledged on citizenship certificates, while Article 42 promises affirmative action and participation in government for sexual and gender minorities.

 

Court decisions in Nepal, too, have been favourable for LGBTQIA+ rights, and unlike many former British colonies with Section 377-type laws that criminalise queer communities, Nepal has no such legal barriers.

 

So, indeed, there are opportunities for activism, and progress has been made, particularly in terms of legal recognition. But, again, the rights enshrined in the constitution and affirmed by the courts have not been realised at the grassroots level.

 

We are stuck with a limited focus, primarily on citizenship. The state claims that we’ve been given the right to identity and legal recognition, but even this is not fully realised.

 

For example, the process of obtaining citizenship based on self-identification remains difficult, with government officials still unclear on how to implement these provisions. The broader narrative of Nepal being progressive is built on a superficial understanding of the situation.

 

In August, Nepal’s Supreme Court ruled that Rukshana Kapali, a transgender woman, should be legally recognised as a woman on all documents without medical verification. How does this decision impact the future of LGBTQIA+ rights in Nepal?

 

Rukshana’s case is a prominent victory, highlighting the judiciary’s support for LGBTQIA+ rights, especially compared to those of the executive and legislative branches. This ruling lays a strong foundation for similar future cases and will undoubtedly help in future activism.

 

However, it’s important to note that the decision applies only to Kapali, meaning others will still need to go through the courts to have their gender identity legally recognised. How long must transgender individuals continue to endure lengthy court processes just to obtain citizenship?

 

Even outside the courts, the bureaucratic hurdles—from medical reassignment surgeries to invasive checkups and long delays from the CDO (District Administration Office) to the Ministry of Home Affairs—can take years, with no guarantee of getting preferred names on legal documents. In many cases, even after completing the process, the names are inaccurately changed, such as altering Ram to Rama instead of the preferred name, like Manisha.

 

We [Blue Diamond Society] get 15-20 complaints each year, primarily from transgender women, regarding difficulties in obtaining citizenship.

 

The Supreme Court’s recent decision on same-sex marriage in Nepal has attracted global attention and gotten a positive response. Are there any limits to the court’s decision?

 

After a long and arduous process, we secured temporary registration for same-sex marriages. On June 28, 2023, the Supreme Court, in the Pinky Gurung vs. Government of Nepal case, issued an interim order instructing the government to temporarily register same-sex marriages, including for those with “other” gender markers.

 

That said, the Civil Code adopted in 2017 still defines marriage as a union between a ‘man’ and a ‘woman’.

 

We, as a community, are pleased with the government’s temporary registration process. Yet it falls short of offering full marriage rights, including those related to property, adoption, and tax exemptions. While the court’s decision sets a supportive precedent, lack of clarity about the rights associated with the temporary certificate leaves many in limbo. So far, only around five couples have registered, and many in the community are hesitant to do so.

 

The question remains: Can this temporary registration truly grant us the same recognition as heterosexual marriages? While the decision has garnered global praise, the LGBTQIA+ community on the ground continues to feel cheated of true equality.

 

Our ultimate goal is to amend the Civil Code so that marriage is defined as a union between two individuals, rather than being restricted to one between male and female.

 

Why do many court decisions on queer rights in Nepal, like of same-sex marriages, remain in limbo? Is this due to the government and courts trying to appease both conservative and progressive groups, or is it just a performative gesture of inclusivity?

 

There are multiple factors at play. I think some responsibility also falls on activists. For example, when fighting for legal recognition since 2008, we should have advocated not only for the “third gender” or “other” but also for individuals who have transitioned from male to female or female to male.

 

What’s more, policymakers and bureaucrats still lack awareness about human rights principles related to minority groups like the LGBTQIA+ community. Even though Nepal has ratified international conventions on human rights, these commitments have not been prioritised by lawmakers, which leads to this state of limbo and half-hearted inclusivity.

 

As for the internal thought processes of bureaucrats and lawmakers, it’s hard to say. Many of them might still believe that the LGBTQIA+ community shouldn’t be granted full rights, so they engage in performative actions—appearing supportive on the surface to attract global attention but hesitating to fully advance our rights. This could explain why progress seems to stall midway.

 

Queer rights have received some legal recognition. But how are they reflected in terms of social and cultural acceptance in Nepal?

 

Legal changes and social acceptance need to go hand in hand. If we only focus on legal reforms without addressing societal attitudes, there will be no real change. We’ve seen this play out—there is legal recognition of gender identity, and temporary registration for same-sex marriage is available. Yet people struggle to fully realise these rights because of deep-rooted discrimination within families and society.

 

In Nepal, a socially and culturally driven society, where family, relatives, and festivals play a major role, social acceptance is often more important than legal acceptance.

 

 

 Deepak KC/TKP

When it comes to cultural acceptance, biases still persist. For example, it feels like we’re allowed to express ourselves openly only during the Pride Month in June. When we try to participate in other celebrations like Teej or Gaijatra, society often reacts negatively, asking why we need to “spoil” their festivals. This shows that social change is still lagging, despite the progress in legal rights.

 

You mentioned that the queer community is often given the surface level of legal recognition. How is the state of the exercise of fundamental rights for LGBTQIA+ people in Nepal?

 

Labelled as ‘gender and sexual minorities’, our broader struggles are ignored. When we raise concerns about poverty, food insecurity, or unemployment, the response we often get from government institutions and stakeholders is, “This isn’t our issue; it’s a gender problem.”

 

We are just as much a part of society as anyone else. Issues like climate change, housing, and poverty affect us too. We want to be included in solutions, whether it’s participating in climate programs or being involved in community initiatives. Unfortunately, lawmakers and stakeholders often overlook that we are just as human as heterosexuals, with needs that go beyond legal recognition on paper.

 

What are some aspects of the queer community that have not received enough attention in media narratives, and what tends to be unnecessarily highlighted?

 

As I’ve mentioned before, the narrative surrounding our community often focuses heavily on issues like citizenship, while overlooking other important aspects of our lives. What’s missing is the correct representation of our contributions in various fields. Many LGBTQIA+ individuals are doctors, and experts in different professions, yet their accomplishments are only rarely acknowledged or represented. Instead, the focus often falls on the unfortunate image of some members of the community begging on the streets, which goes viral on social media.

 

Another issue is the way we are predominantly associated with sex and sexuality. While these are important aspects of human identity, we are much more than that. We have other needs and rights that deserve attention. Unfortunately, the media tends to fixate on sexual aspects of the LGBTQIA+ community, reinforcing stereotypes. It’s time for the media to move beyond this narrow portrayal and include us in broader discussions that reflect the full scope of our lives.

 

How has the current narrative of progressiveness in Nepal impacted real change for the LGBTQIA+ community?

 

It’s time to move beyond this narrative of progressiveness. True progress should lead to further development, not be a barrier to it. Unfortunately, the current narrative seems to be stagnating.

 

For instance, when we raise issues with the government, the response often is, “We’ve already given you the right to citizenship. You’re getting citizenship now.” Even when I travel people sometimes ask, “You’ve got citizenship, right? Things are becoming progressive.” This narrative of progressiveness has become an excuse for the government to claim they’ve done enough and to avoid further action.

 

This surface-level progressiveness is used to showcase Nepal as forward-thinking internationally, but it hasn’t translated into real change for people at the grassroots. It also impedes activists’ efforts by providing the government with a shield against criticism. Until this narrative of progressiveness evolves into genuine, accountable action that goes beyond court decisions and performative gestures, it will continue to be a barrier to actual progress.

 

Saroj, a 24-year-old transgender man from Itahari, Sunsari, has lived a life defined by the rigid binaries of society. Born biologically female, Saroj, who the Post is identifying with a pseudonym for privacy, knew from an early age that he identified as male.

 

For Saroj, menstruation was a monthly reminder of his biological reality, one that society relentlessly framed as ‘exclusive to females’. Without access to gender-affirming surgery but living as his true self, Saroj endured the pain and stigma in silence.

 

At 21, his periods became increasingly painful, accompanied by heavy bleeding. However, the thought of seeking medical help appeared daunting to him. The fear of being judged—a man explaining menstrual symptoms to healthcare providers—kept him away from hospitals for months. When the pain became unbearable, he finally visited a local health post, only to face ridicule.

 

“From the registration desk to the gynecologist’s office, I felt like a spectacle. People stared, whispered, even laughed,” Saroj said. The gynecologist’s reaction compounded his humiliation. “She dismissed my symptoms with taunts, saying, ‘Are you not a girl? Why are you dressing like a boy?’ I left without proper care, ashamed and angry.”

 

Even outside medical settings, Saroj’s experience was riddled with judgment. Local shopkeepers, aware of his transition, often mocked him when he purchased menstrual products. “You call yourself a boy, but why do you get periods?” they said.

 

This often forced Saroj to travel miles to find stores where he wouldn’t be questioned.

 

At 22, when his symptoms worsened, his family insisted he visit the hospital, dressing him in female attire to avoid confrontation. While he finally received treatment, the experience left him feeling dehumanised. “I felt like I was wearing someone else’s skin. My family meant well, but why can’t doctors and healthcare workers show kindness? Aren’t they supposed to treat everyone equally?”

 

His experiences shine a light on the gaps in education, awareness, and empathy around sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) for not just transgender men but the whole of the LGBTQIA+ community.

 

Research proves this. According to a 2021 study, LGBTIQ individuals in Nepal face severe discrimination, social isolation, and human rights violations. These factors increased their vulnerability to HIV, compounded by stigma and family rejection for not adhering to traditional expectations like marriage and procreation.

 

Similarly, another 2020 study involving 340 MSM (men who have sex with men) and transgender women across eight districts in the Tarai region found alarming statistics: HIV prevalence was 5 percent among MSM and 13 percent among transgender women, while active syphilis affected 4 percent of MSM and 11 percent of transgender women.

 

Notably, 76 percent of transgender women engaged in sex work, and 51 percent reported discrimination in health care and various settings.

 

Despite Nepal’s constitution of 2015 guaranteeing fundamental rights for gender and sexual minorities—such as citizenship with gender identity (Article 12), equality (Article 18), social justice (Article 42), dignity (Article 16), freedom (Article 17), and reproductive health rights under the Safe Motherhood and Reproductive Health Act (2018)—these communities still face widespread stigma, discrimination, and inequality.

 

“They are often denied even the most basic rights promised by the law,” says Sarita KC, executive director of Mitini Nepal.

 

“Concepts like menstruation, safe motherhood, and abortion are typically associated with cisgender women, sidelining the diverse needs of individuals like transgender men, lesbian women, and bisexual individuals.”

 

KC adds that, while pregnancy can be relevant for queer individuals, they are unable to fully exercise their rights to services like IVF, surrogacy, and adoption, etc.

 

Surrogacy could be an option but was halted by the Nepal Supreme Court on August 25, 2015, and officially banned by a Cabinet decision on September 18, 2015, using the court’s ruling date as the cut-off. The Supreme Court’s final verdict, delivered on December 12, 2016, established that surrogacy is legal for infertile married Nepali couples, but illegal for single individuals, transgender couples, and foreign nationals.

 

According to KC, services like fertility counseling, egg freezing, sex education, and safer sex technologies remain unavailable, leaving queer individuals with little to no support. Hormone therapy for transgender individuals is also inaccessible.

 

Stigmatisation remains a major barrier preventing queer people from accessing healthcare, says KC. In November, the Post reported that many trans individuals experienced blatant discrimination at Janakpur Provincial Hospital.

 

Tabu Khan, one of the interviewees, recalled a ‘particularly humiliating’ visit six months ago for a syphilis injection. She described how the hospital staff treated her with extreme disrespect. “They asked about my condition in front of a crowd, made crude remarks about people like us, and humiliated me by forcing me to lift my sari for the injection in front of everyone,” Khan said.

 

“The limited access to SRHR for LGBTIQ people is not a minor issue,” says Laxmi Ghalan, chairperson of Mitini Nepal. “It hinders the full realisation of their human rights.”

 

Ghalan adds this includes violations of their rights to adequate living standards for health and well-being, equal treatment and non-discrimination, health and reproductive health, family life, dignity, privacy, and freedom of expression, association, and assembly.

 

“The community is also left out of policies, contrary to the principle underlying the Sustainable Development Goals, of ‘leaving no one behind’”, adds Ghalan.

 

KC further pointed out how transgender men are often denied uterine removal surgery, yet are required to undergo gender reaffirmation surgery for citizenship even if they face health or financial barriers. “We’ve seen cases where lesbians seeking uterus removal for health reasons are asked to bring their husbands....how unfair is that?”

 

Gender-affirming surgery surgery internationally requires medical professionals to follow certain clinical protocols. But in Nepal, the only relevant law, ‘The Human Body Organ Transplantation Act 1998,’ does not address gender reassignment. While some hospitals offer top surgery, bottom surgery is unavailable in Nepal.

 

With no clear legal framework for these procedures, sexual and gender minorities are forced to travel to India for expensive and risky surgeries, often facing physical, psychological, and legal challenges, KC said.

 

“We need to recognise that menstruation is not exclusive to women; anyone with a uterus can experience it. This should be incorporated into the educational curriculum,” said KC.

 

KC adds that the Nepal government should review, amend, and repeal existing health laws and policies that negatively impact the health and well-being of LGBT individuals. “It’s high time the government create a supportive legal and policy framework that prioritises the health needs of the LGBTIQ community, including HIV and STI prevention, treatment, and gender-affirmative care.”

 

A 2023 Mitini Nepal report, ‘Situational Analysis of SRHR Issues in LGBTIQ People’, involving several case studies of LGBTIQ people all over Nepal, recommends allocating health budgets to reduce out-of-pocket costs and providing subsidised insurance for sexual and gender minorities. Calls for legislation to recognise the family rights of same-sex couples and grant citizenship to children born to or adopted by LGBTIQs were another major point.

 

The report also called for “government-led research to gather data on LGBTIQ SRHR needs.”

 

“Despite my challenges with healthcare access, I don’t hold personal grudges against individual doctors,” Saroj said. “Their discriminatory attitudes may stem from a lack of awareness. I do hope healthcare workers make an effort to understand us, as hospitals are places of equal rights for all.”

 

Saroj added, “I hope the government initiates sensitisation and awareness programmes in hospitals to strengthen the capacity of healthcare providers to ensure confidentiality, empathy, and respect for us.”

 

The Supreme Court of Nepal has ruled that Rukshana Kapali, a transgender woman, should be legally recognized on all documents as a woman without having to submit to medical verification. The judgment is the latest in the court’s history of progressive rulings on sexual orientation and gender identity, which has earned Nepal a positive global reputation on LGBT rights.

 

Following a 2007 supreme court order, authorities have been issuing some documents listing gender as “other” or “third gender” for more than a decade on the basis of the person’s self-identification.  Despite the court order, the lack of a clear central policy has created problems. Trans people in Nepal today who want to change their gender markers to “female” or “male” are typically forced to undergo surgery, which requires traveling outside the country, and then in-country medical assessments, including invasive examinations of post-operative genitals. Even people who are attempting to obtain documents marked “other” are subjected to this humiliating and unnecessary medical scrutiny.

 

The Yogyakarta Principles – drafted and signed in 2006 by a group of experts, including a former Nepal parliament member and LGBT rights advocate Sunil Babu Pant – state that each person’s self-defined sexual orientation and gender identity is “integral to their personality” and is a basic aspect of identity, personal autonomy, dignity, and freedom. The principles are clear that gender recognition may involve, “if freely chosen, modification of bodily appearance or function by medical, surgical or other means.” These principles were the basis of the Supreme Court of Nepal’s 2007 order and are cited in Kapali’s new court victory as well.

 

Kapali, a trans woman law student, has sued the government of Nepal over 50 times since 2021 – pushing for rights-based legal recognition of gender identity. And while this recent judgment sets a precedent for trans rights, the order only applies to Kapali, meaning others will have to petition courts to be legally recognized according to their gender identity.

 

A better solution is a central policy. The government can and should make the system work for everyone by issuing a directive that allows people to self-identify their gender on official documents, without medical or other verification.

 

Nepal on Saturday hosted the first international LGBTIQ tourism conference. It wants a chunk of the multi-billion dollar pink market after the stunning success of a legally recognised same-sex marriage last November.

 

“Forget Nepal’s biased history. Now, we aim at building more just and equitable societies. Let the lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, intersex or queer (LGBTIQ) get equal economic opportunity,” said Sunil Babu Pant, the first openly gay former parliamentarian in Asia, addressing the conference in Kathmandu.

 

Just a few years back, police beating gay and transgender individuals in the streets used to be a common sight.

 

“After fighting legal battles for nearly two decades, the law and the society have accepted the LGBTIQ community. Now we are in the second phase—we need equal economic opportunities. For this we need to bring LGBTIQ tourists from the global market.”

 

The conference was announced following the successful marriage registration of Surendra Pandey and Maya Gurung, the first same-sex couple to get legally recognised in Nepal, on November 29, 2023, after a years-long legal wrangling.

 

This interim arrangement remains valid until the legal provisions are made.

 

Their legally recognised same-sex marriage is the first of its kind in South Asia and marks a milestone for LGBTIQ rights.

 

“It is a privilege to stand before you and reflect on a pivotal moment in my career, one that underscores the importance of justice, equality, and the pursuit of human rights,” said Supreme Court Justice Hari Prasad Phuyal, who in 2007 as a lawyer argued in favour of laws guaranteeing full rights of LGBTIQ people and in defining gender minorities as “natural persons” under the law. They had the right to marry, he argued.

 

Eventually, in December 2007, the court issued a historic verdict ensuring the rights of the community.

 

The verdict reads: “No one has the right to question how two adults perform sexual intercourse and whether this intercourse is natural or unnatural and that … the way the right to privacy is secured to two heterosexual individuals in sexual intercourse, it is equally secured to the people of third gender who have a different gender identity and sexual orientation.”

 

“In 2007, I found myself entrusted with a case… by Sunil Babu Pant that would leave an indelible mark on my journey. At the helm of Blue Diamond Society, Sunil brought forth a case that demanded not just representation, but a profound understanding of the struggle faced by the LGBTIQ community,” said Phuyal.

 

“Admittedly, my initial knowledge was limited on the issue, but through dedicated learning and unwavering commitment, I found the confidence to evoke it, and here we have it. The outcome, a resounding decision of the Supreme Court, stands as a backbone of hope and progress not only for Nepal but the world at large.

 

“We recognise that the civil and political rights are fundamental, but so are economic, social and cultural rights.”

 

He said that “rainbow tourism” not only promises economic growth but presents an opportunity to foster inclusion and empowerment in the LGBTIQ community. “By integrating them into the national economy, we not only create employment opportunities but also contribute to the overall prosperity of our nation.”

 

He stressed that the decision made by Nepal’s Supreme Court is a precedent for other countries, including the neighbours.

 

Diane Anderson-Minshall, CEO and chief storyteller of GO Magazine, in her presentation titled ‘LGBTI Tourism Global Overview and its Contribution to the Economy’, said that LGBTIQ or pink tourism are the segments of travellers that have a lot of wealth and purchasing power.

 

According to her, based on the Wealth and Travel Data Report of LGBT Capital 2023, the global annual spending power of LGBTIQ consumers is $4.7 trillion. Among them, the Americans have a spending capacity of $1.4 trillion, followed by the Chinese at $872 billion, Germans at $224 billion, Indians at $168 billion and the British at $164 billion.

 

China is an untapped market and that’s going to grow over the next several years. “And one of the things that we know from Chinese gay travellers is they are looking for places they feel safe, where they can hold hands and where they can have new experiences.”

 

And those are things they'll find in Nepal, said Anderson-Minshall. Germany and the UK are the LGBTIQ capitals.

 

 

Participants of Nepal’s first international LGBTIQ tourism conference held in Kathmandu on Saturday.  Post Photo

Nandini Lahe-Thapa, director of the Nepal Tourism Board, said, “For Nepal’s tourism industry, the LGBTIQ conference is a triumph as this is one of the most important market segments that we have yet to tap.”

 

To attract more tourists to spend more and stay longer, Nepal is following the principle of ‘tourism for all and the power for all seasons and all reasons’, said Lahe-Thapa. “And so we are very proud to partner with the first-ever Rainbow Tourism International Conferences.”

 

People choose to travel to places where they feel safe, respected and can be themselves.

 

“People might feel uncomfortable sharing their identity and choices if the place and the people are judgmental and unfriendly. Here we have an advantage as a destination,” said Lahe-Thapa.

 

Nepal Tourism Board and the travel trade fraternity plan to capitalise on the potential of the pink community worldwide and have started investing in creating a more friendly and enabled environment to foster such tourism. Last year, the board organised a trekking guide training for 25 individuals from the LGBTIQ community.

 

According to Pant, now there are several businesses owned by members of the LGBTIQ communities—with at least two dozen bars, restaurants, travel and tour operators and hotels in Kathmandu. “Businesses are opening up for the queer and that’s a good sign. We can promote Nepal as a same-sex marriage and honeymoon destination.”

 

Nepal’s diverse culture includes rich LGBTIQ-related traditions. Exploring the country’s festivals, temples, symbols, rituals and stories, such as the concept of Ajima and the recognition of six genders, offers a unique cultural experience.

 

Pant said that they have launched a ‘tantra heritage tour’ that provides an in-depth exploration of Nepal's culture and spiritual aspects, including those related to matriarchy and LGBTIQ communities.

 

The pink community worldwide opens up a new segment of valuable visitors for Nepal.

 

Veronique Lorenzo, the EU ambassador to Nepal, said, “For Nepal, this is the first of many happy journeys. I think this conference can play an important role in supporting Nepal’s economy and helping the LGBTIQ community with jobs and recognition. There's an array of benefits from this tourism segment.”

 

“Nepal is a success story. It's the second country in Asia to have have registered same-sex marriage. Of course, there's still a lot of progress to be made. The fight has to go on every day to bring the legislative and legal frameworks in line with the evolution of society.”

 

“It's not just about the pink money, it's also about promoting inclusiveness and being fair to travellers.”