Last Updated on December 8, 2025 by Chicago Policy Review Staff
Across continents and institutions, the premise of queer equality is being tested anew. From legislative chambers to military ranks to public squares across the globe, LGBTQ+ people are confronting an unsettling pattern: rights once thought secure are again under siege. What connects these struggles is not only the backlash itself, but the systems — legal, cultural, and institutional — that allow regression to masquerade as debate.
This series, Rights in Retreat, explores that global tension through three distinct but resonant lenses. One lens examines how colonial legal inheritances continue to shape the criminalization and regulation of queer identity in parts of South Asia. Another considers the ways military institutions negotiate inclusion, often framing questions of equality as threats to discipline or readiness. A third interrogates the shifting political landscape in the United States, where the conversation about good policy has increasingly become a battleground for defining gender, identity, and belonging.
Together, these stories trace the shifting boundaries of belonging, how law, power, and national identity determine who is recognized as fully human. As global democracy wavers and rights recede, these conversations ask a single urgent question: What does the retreat of queer rights reveal about the health of democracy itself?
Sri Lankan activist and civil rights attorney Kaushy S. Arachchi (MPP ‘26) has spent her career navigating the colonial legacies that still criminalize queer identity. As part of the Rights in Retreat series, she speaks with Elliot Certain, Policy Chair of OUTPolitik, about global backlash, the persistence of outdated laws, and how true solidarity must center dignity and local leadership.
Elliot: Hi Kaushy. To start, could you introduce yourself?
Kaushy: Kaushy S. Arachchi! I’m originally from Sri Lanka. I began my career as a litigation lawyer focused on civil rights and later moved to non-profit work. I spent several years at EQUAL GROUND, which was the first LGBTQ+ rights organization in Sri Lanka. I started as the Projects and Legal Officer and eventually worked my way up to Deputy Executive Director.
At EQUAL GROUND , I worked on information campaigns, public speaking, and managing landmark legal cases. Now that I’m in Illinois, I’m expanding into other areas of minority rights and the criminal legal system.
Elliot: Around the world, including here in the United States, we’re seeing legislative and cultural backlashes against LGBTQ+ rights. From your perspective, what’s driving this regression?
Kaushy: Honestly, the current backlash against LGBTQ+ people isn’t anything new. The arguments haven’t changed in decades. They come back in new packaging, but it’s the same ideas: that LGBTQ+ people spread HIV, that we’re corrupting children, that society is somehow ‘at risk’ if queer people have equal rights.
Even in the U.S., we recently came close to seeing a challenge to same sex marriage equality, something that many people previously saw as settled. None of this is new. What’s happening is that old arguments are resurfacing in slightly different forms, and they gain traction when people let their guard down.
Elliot: What does the phrase “Rights in Retreat” mean to you, either personally or professionally?
Kaushy: To me, a ‘retreat’ isn’t a sudden collapse. It’s the slow backsliding that happens after a big victory. Countries like the United States, Australia, and Canada made huge strides with marriage equality and partnership rights, but a win doesn’t mean the movement is over. Rights are cyclical, not linear. If you look at the feminist movement or the pro-choice movement in the US, Roe v. Wade was a massive victory. But people took their eyes off the ball, and that allowed opposition to grow and mobilize. That’s why rights recede. It’s not that the progress was wrong, just that it’s never a final destination.
Elliot: Do you see the current backlash as temporary, or part of a deeper ideological shift backwards?
Kaushy: In the moment, [regression] feels deep and permanent. But a step backwards doesn’t mean you can’t take two steps forward a little later. Yes, we’re seeing ideological shifts, especially around trans rights. But I’m hopeful that we’re not going down in the trenches too far. Social change has never been a straight line.
Elliot: Sri Lanka’s penal code still reflects colonial era laws. How have imported legal systems shaped present day discrimination?
Kaushy: Before British colonization, Sri Lanka had more freedom around sexual identity. There weren’t marriage laws in the formal sense. People lived together, polyamory existed openly in certain cities, there was flexibility. British colonizers introduced anti-LGBTQ+ laws across South Asia: India, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Singapore. In Sri Lanka, a particular difficulty arises with Section 365 that criminalizes same sex relations between men. In 1995, Parliament expanded it to ‘all persons’, making Sri Lanka one of the few countries that explicitly penalizes lesbian relationships. Then, there’s section 365A, which defines “gross indecency.” It’s incredibly vague and is often used against trans people or anyone who doesn’t conform to gender norms. Even holding hands in public can be interpreted as indecent.
The strange part is that these laws are archaic and rarely enforced. But because we have parliamentary supremacy and no judicial activism, the courts have repeatedly said “Our hands are tied, only Parliament can repeal this.” To make things even more complicated, our Constitution also includes Article 16, which allows pre-constitutional laws, like these colonial laws, to remain in force. That’s why change is so difficult.
Elliot: What are some of the biggest legal and cultural barriers to dismantling these frameworks?
Kaushy: Legally, Article 16 is a huge barrier. When I was at EQUAL GROUND , someone challenged a proposed repeal of Sections 365 and 365A as unconstitutional. The Supreme Court once again upheld the values of human dignity and gave the green light on decriminalisation of consensual same sex relations. Unfortunately, this repeal never came through. Culturally, religion plays a major role. Buddhism doesn’t directly condemn same-sex relationships, and there’s often more gender and sexual freedom in Buddhist communities. Hinduism, too, has deities with dual identities and long histories of gender fluidity, so there’s room for acceptance.
But the Catholic Church and parts of the Muslim community hold more conservative views, and those perspectives influence the political landscape. So the cultural obstacles are layered: history, religion, colonial influence, and social norms all intersect.
Elliot: Are there strategies from the Global South that advocates in the US could learn from as America faces its own regression?
Kaushy: Absolutely. One misconception is that the Global South is always “catching up” to the West. But in some ways, South Asia has moved much faster. Sri Lanka has a national health policy for trans people that dates back to around 2016. There’s no surgery requirement to change your gender marker on official documents. Our registrar of births allows amendments to gender markers. It’s not perfect, but the infrastructure exists. Across South Asia, we also have the Yogyakarta Principles, which outline rights related to gender identity and expression. Nepal and Pakistan recognize a third gender.
What the U.S. can learn is humility—and the importance of seeing trans people as human beings first. In Sri Lanka, despite our legal challenges, there’s often a cultural openness that drives progress.
Elliot: Western governments often use human rights rhetoric to pressure other nations on LGBTQ+ issues. How can such advocacy avoid being paternalistic or neocolonial?
Kaushy: By grounding everything in human dignity. It’s a dignified act to come out as trans or gay, but being queer isn’t a choice. At the end of the day, we’re human beings, and we all deserve dignity.
When governments engage in conversations about LGBTQ+ rights, they need to find common ground that respects everyone involved. It can’t be the West lecturing the Global South. It has to be a partnership rooted in the shared understanding that human dignity is universal.
Elliot: What forms of solidarity from Western activists have been most meaningful for Sri Lankan advocates?
Kaushy: The most important thing is: don’t speak for us. Local activists in Sri Lanka work intentionally to frame this movement as homegrown. One of the biggest accusations we face is that LGBTQ+ rights are Western imports, so Western voices dominating the narrative only harms us.
Support works best when it’s collaborative. In 2022, the Human Dignity Trust in the UK supported us with legal expertise. They helped us navigate risks, provided counsel, and stood with us every step of the way—without ever taking over. That partnership helped produce a strong judgment in one of our key cases, resulting in a CEDAW landmark decision on the Criminalisation of Same Sex Conduct Between Women. So the role of Western supporters is to bolster local activists, not replace them. Lift from the bottom; don’t speak from the top.
Elliot: You’ve been very visible in your advocacy. How do you navigate the risks and responsibilities that come with that?
Kaushy: Before joining EQUAL GROUND, I knew the risks of advocating for LGBTIQ rights in Sri Lanka, specially as a lawyer working in a changing political climate. One way was to show that my advocacy comes from a professional responsibility and my passion for commitment to minority rights and not because of assumptions that could arise regarding my identity.
There were risks, for instance, a national newspaper published a list of names including mine to discredit our attempts of advocacy. At times, I had to be vague about explaining to some people my work, knowing it would have attracted criticism.
Yet, over time, I have chosen to wear my advocacy as a badge of pride, it’s part of who I am.
Elliot: If you could rewrite one element of your country’s approach to equality tomorrow, what would it be?
Kaushy: First, I’d repeal Article 16 of the Constitution. It doesn’t just shield anti-LGBTQ+ laws. It also protects laws that enable child marriage. That’s how extreme it is. I would get rid of that.
I’d also reform Section 12, the equality clause, to explicitly include sexual orientation and gender identity. And I’d add a comprehensive right to life. In Sri Lanka, the right to life has been interpreted to include things like clean air and drinking water. It could also mean the right to live freely as a trans person, to access gender-affirming care without humiliation, to exist without fear.
Elliot: What gives you hope about the next generation of South Asian queer activists?
Kaushy: Young people today are unapologetic. They’re open, accepting, and unbothered by labels or expectations. Even during economic crises, Sri Lankan activists continued hosting Pride events, getting bigger and bolder each year. Parents bring their queer children to pride events. That’s something I could never have imagined when I started. My former boss at EQUAL GROUND started the organization over two decades ago under threats so severe she sometimes had to go underground. Activists today still face risks, but the landscape has changed. They’re creative, resilient, and fearless. That gives me hope.
Elliot: Last question: how can students and advocates in places like Chicago stand in meaningful solidarity with your work?
Kaushy: Learn first. Many people don’t understand what criminalization actually means—they assume it’s simply “illegal to be gay,” but the legal landscape is more complicated.
Get to know the organizations in Sri Lanka that need support. When Pride season comes around, donations go a long way. Pro bono partnerships also matter. For example, Northwestern’s law clinic helped us prepare documents and evidence to submit shadow reports to UN Bodies. They spent weeks editing and shaping those materials. That kind of support is invaluable.
And finally, create spaces for dialogue like you’re doing now. These conversations help us see that the Global South and the U.S. are facing many of the same challenges, and we can draw strength from each other.
Elliot: Is there anything you’d like to emphasize before we wrap up?
Kaushy: Legal victories are important, but they’re not the end of a movement. Change happens in many places. Culture, community, economics, everyday life. And at the heart of it all is human dignity. That’s the value that runs through every human rights framework. We’re all human. We all deserve dignity.
Interview edited for brevity and approved by Kaushy Arachchi.