Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli went viral last week for not knowing things. Asked about how his government would support the LGBTQIA+ community, Oli admitted, “I do not know much about this issue.” This can be considered unusual for a politician who has offered his takes on everything from the domains of Hindu religious epics to linguistics.

“What did he say, something till Q?” Oli said during the National Youth Conclave on August 24. “Yes, LGBTQ. Every individual, whoever they are, should have their rights established. But marriage between the same gender is something I do not understand. What does that mean? I don’t know.” The crowd received Oli’s remarks with loud cheers. The footage of the remarks went viral across social media platforms.

Oli’s admission of ignorance comes at a time when Nepal has earned a reputation globally for being favourable for the LGBTQIA+ community. It is perhaps one of the few subjects that has put Nepal on the global map recently.

“Nepal leads inaugural Rainbow Tourism Conference, pledges safe destination for all,” reports the Hindustan Times. “Why Nepal could be the next big LGBTQ travel destination,” CNN wonders. ILGA Asia celebrates, “Nepal: Marriage Registration for Same-Sex Couples after seminal court ruling.” The BBC: “Nepal registers first same-sex marriage, celebrated as a win for LGBT rights.”

Oli’s admission, made in front of a large audience, makes the international praise ring hollow, say Nepal’s gender activists, casting doubt on how genuinely inclusive the country’s environment is for its queer community.

The comment has also ignited disappointment and disillusionment among those who had hoped the government would be a strong ally in their fight for rights.

“If the policymakers and high-ranking officials like the prime minister do not know the issues, they need to collaborate, they need to invite us to build their capacity in this regard,” says Manisha Dhakal, the executive director of the Blue Diamond Society (BDS), Nepal’s pioneering queer rights group.

Meanwhile, Laxmi Ghalan, founding president of Mitini Nepal, another queer rights organisation, describes Oli’s response as “unexpected” and indicative of a superficial understanding of the LGBTQIA+ movement in Nepal.

“We believe that the prime minister’s response might weaken our community’s movement and extend the battle for the rights we are seeking,” Ghalan says. “In any civilised society, the issues of minorities are always given priority. However, when the prime minister makes a casual remark like ‘I don’t know much about this,’ even after the constitution has acknowledged this community, it raises concerns that our struggle might continue for a longer time.”

Even with constitutional recognition, true equality remains elusive if those in power are uninformed or indifferent, says Pinky Gurung, president of the BDS.

“From his response, it seems like he has accepted gender issues,” Gurung says. “But by saying he doesn’t understand the issue of same-sex marriage, he has diplomatically shown positive ignorance. I don’t think he has the liberty to say that he doesn’t understand or have much knowledge on an issue because he is not an ordinary citizen. He is the country’s prime minister!”

Gurung adds that such rhetoric might perpetuate ignorance and prejudice among the broader population, and trickle down to the daily lives of queer individuals.

For instance, Anamika Chhetri, 31, and her 22-year-old sibling, both trans women, have been victims of such rhetoric. Chhetri’s sibling had gender reassignment surgery three years ago, while Chhetri is currently on hormone therapy.

In June, National Assembly member Ranju Jha made controversial remarks about hormone therapy and gender reassignment surgery. “With hormone therapy and gender reassignment surgery—men becoming women and women becoming men…,” Jha said. “I don’t know if I should call it a right or what. We cannot recognise women who have undergone these processes as ‘women.’”

The Yogyakarta Principles, developed in 2006 and endorsed by experts like former Nepal parliament member Sunil Babu Pant, affirm that each person’s self-declared sexual orientation and gender identity are fundamental to their identity, autonomy, dignity, and freedom.

These principles emphasise that legal recognition of gender should not depend on medical procedures. However, if someone chooses medical assistance for their transition, those services should be accessible.

The siblings, who came out in 2022, initially struggled for parental acceptance. With the help of their nurse sister, they managed to persuade their parents. However, Jha’s comments shattered this hard-earned acceptance, leading their parents to view them as “abnormal” again, Chhetri says.

Since Jha’s remarks, Chhetri and her siblings have not been able to visit their parents, and the supportive environment they had found was lost, Chhetri adds.

After Jha’s comments, Chhetri experienced mental and emotional distress, feeling that her life, which was finally improving, had been derailed once more by a remark made by a parliamentarian.

“The PM’s comments have thrown me back into the same turmoil,” Chhetri says. “When powerful figures like the prime minister or parliamentarians make such remarks, it deeply affects us. We constantly struggle to prove our normalcy and existence, and such incidents undermine all our efforts, reducing us to the subject of jokes and memes.”

Meanwhile, Alisha, a bisexual woman from Kathmandu, says that the prime minister’s remarks showed that he was irresponsible to his duties. “The PM’s later remarks about ‘establishing justice’ seemed like an attempt to salvage his earlier statement,” says Alisha, who the Post is identifying with a pseudonym for privacy reasons. “But how can we trust him to ensure justice when he admits, ‘I am not aware of this issue,’ and adds, ‘I don’t need to know everything’?”

No matter what PM said in the end, Alisha adds, only the earlier sentence regarding his disregarding of the LGBTQIA+ community has been circulating in social media and is being used against them.

The impact of the video has indeed been deep.

Rishi (name changed for privacy), a 28-year-old gay man from Lalitpur, is also bearing the brunt of the prime minister’s remarks, he says.

Since Oli’s controversial remark went viral, Rishi has been bombarded with memes, the video clip, and taunting messages from his relatives and even an old class bully.

Rishi has not left his home for the past five days, struggling with the emotional toll it has taken on him, he says. “The hope I had after hearing about the news of registration of the first same-sex marriage towards the end of 2023 has turned into hopelessness,” Rishi says. “When the prime minister says, ‘I don’t know,’ what can I expect from the government?”

The negative impact of political rhetoric on LGBTQIA+ communities is not confined to Nepal. In the United States, research following the 2016 presidential election highlighted how anti-queer rhetoric during the campaign led to an increase in reported hate crimes against LGBTQIA+ individuals.

The ‘Southern Poverty Law Center’ (SPLC) documented a significant rise in hate incidents following the election, many of which were directly linked to the rhetoric used by political figures.

In countries where politicians have made openly homophobic or transphobic statements, such as Russia or Uganda, there has been a corresponding increase in violence and discrimination against LGBTQIA+ individuals.

Studies have shown that these remarks not only fuel societal prejudice but also embolden law enforcement and judicial systems to act against queer communities.

The fear and anxiety generated by such remarks can lead to psychological distress, as evidenced by the mental health struggles reported by LGBTQIA+ individuals like Rishi and Chhetri in the aftermath of the politically charged rhetoric.

As Gurung points out, Oli’s remarks give the impression that LGBTQIA+ issues are not a priority for the government. “When the prime minister doesn’t know about our struggles, it gives the impression to the general public that when even the government is not willing to learn about LGBTQ+ issues, why would the general public care?” Gurung says.

In response to the viral statement, the Prime Minister’s press secretary, Ram Sharan Bajagain, said that “the prime minister responding with ‘I am not aware much about the issue’ is the admission that there is always more to learn for everyone.” “He will engage in the necessary discourse to understand what he’s currently unfamiliar with,” Bajagain said.