The insult that reveals something about us
A woman opens her Facebook page and finds young men mocking her. They call her “Hijra” or “Khusra”, laugh and disappear. They imagine they have found a particularly humiliating insult.
In an Urdu reflection attributed to Dr Tahira Kazmi, she explains that the insult itself does not hurt her. What troubles her is the contempt directed at people whose bodies or identities do not fit society’s expectations. She asks whether particular anatomy is necessary to prove that someone is a servant of Allah.
That question deserves attention. The young men were relying on a shared prejudice: that the identity of a Hijra is inherently shameful. An insult only works when the speaker expects others to share its meaning. In Pakistan, Khwaja Sira is often used as a more respectful term, yet respect in language does not always translate into safety or employment.
A community with a history
South Asia’s Hijra communities long predate contemporary debates about gender identity. During the Mughal period, eunuchs held different positions in court life, including trusted administrative roles. British colonial rule later introduced surveillance and criminal regulation. The Criminal Tribes Act of 1871 contained provisions targeting people classified as eunuchs.
Traditional guru-chela networks offered some people belonging and support when families rejected them, although those networks also had unequal power relationships. The community should neither be romanticised nor treated as a single uniform identity.
Hijra, transgender and intersex are not interchangeable descriptions. Some experiences overlap, but gender identity and variations in sex characteristics are distinct concepts. Reducing them all to anatomy repeats the very error Kazmi challenges. Kazmi has also written about gender diversity in her own work: her earlier Urdu essay provides useful context, although it is not verified as the source of the reflection discussed here.
When families reject their own children
Public exclusion often begins inside the household. A child who does not conform to expected gender behaviour may face ridicule, pressure or abuse. Some families remain supportive. Others reject their children, leaving them without secure housing or a route through education.
Economic vulnerability then becomes self-reinforcing. People excluded from schools and ordinary employment may rely on informal work. Society subsequently uses their circumstances as another excuse for contempt. Pakistan’s National Commission for Human Rights has documented the weakness of practical rights protection.
The urgent question is not merely how to classify a person’s identity. It is what happens when that person has nowhere safe to sleep or cannot obtain a job.
Religion and the duty not to humiliate
Kazmi’s moral argument rests on the conviction that the person being mocked is also God’s creation. Quran 17:70 speaks of the dignity granted to the children of Adam. Quran 49:11 warns against ridicule and offensive names.
These verses do not resolve every contemporary legal or theological disagreement about gender. Islamic jurisprudence addresses sex characteristics, inheritance and social obligations, and scholars differ on some applications. Yet disagreement about legal categories cannot justify humiliation or assault.
A person can hold a conservative religious position while recognising another person’s right to protection from violence. A theological discussion is not a licence to turn someone’s existence into a joke.
Rights on paper and rights in practice
Pakistan passed the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act in 2018, prohibiting discrimination and addressing identification, employment and access to services. In May 2023, the Federal Shariat Court ruled against several provisions relating to gender identity and inheritance. The decision was appealed.
An Islamabad High Court election judgment in January 2024 explained that the Shariat Court ruling remained suspended during the appeal under Article 203D. A May 2026 report said the appeal was still unresolved. Its exact procedural status in October 2026 has not been independently confirmed for this article.
Legal recognition matters, but an identity card cannot force a landlord to rent a room or an employer to assess an applicant fairly. Implementation determines whether the promise of equal protection becomes real.
The institutional cost of prejudice
Transgender Pakistanis have reported harassment, threats and serious violence. Their experiences raise questions for police stations, hospitals and employers. Will officers register a complaint without ridicule? Will a hospital treat a patient without humiliating them? Will a qualified applicant receive an interview?
The state does not need to resolve every argument about gender before protecting a citizen from assault. Its basic duties already exist. Where institutions treat victims as less deserving, private prejudice gains official weight.
Why the insult survives
Kazmi makes a provocative comparison: society can tolerate grave moral failures while treating physical difference as unacceptable. It is rhetoric, not a statistical claim that Pakistanis approve of serious crimes. Her point is that visible difference can attract faster judgment than harmful behaviour.
A person’s clothing or manner of speaking may provoke hostility before anyone knows how they treat other people. Someone with status, meanwhile, may continue to command deference despite misconduct. Economic insecurity magnifies the imbalance. Those without stable income or family protection have fewer ways to resist abuse.
We should not require a transgender person to become famous or exceptionally accomplished before granting ordinary respect. The person who completes a degree deserves fair treatment. So does the older Khwaja Sira who never had a chance to attend school.
The question that remains
I return to the young men on Kazmi’s Facebook page. Their laughter lasted seconds. The social meaning behind it has endured for generations.
It reaches households where children fear rejection and workplaces where applicants are judged before they speak. It becomes dangerous when violent people assume that their victims will receive little sympathy.
Kazmi asks religious readers to imagine answering to the Creator for humiliating His creation. The state faces a more immediate test: whether its institutions protect citizens whose identities are unpopular.
People may debate legislation and disagree about theology. Neither dispute gives anyone permission to degrade another person. The young men may forget their joke. Those whose identity they used as an insult live with the prejudice long after the laughter ends.
Author’s acknowledgement: This independent essay was inspired by an Urdu reflection attributed to Dr Tahira Kazmi. Her question about human dignity supplied its central argument. The historical, legal and institutional analysis is independently developed. The original URL of the quoted reflection could not be verified.