Debunking the Myth That Hijra People Do Not Have "Real" Families

Introduction

The myth that hijra people do not have "real" families and cannot create meaningful family structures persists across South Asian societies, including Bangladesh, where this third-gender community has existed for centuries. This belief, rooted in narrow, heteronormative definitions of family that privilege biological kinship, marriage, and binary gender roles, fundamentally misrepresents the complex kinship systems that hijra communities have developed to survive, thrive, and care for one another. This paper argues that hijra communities not only form families but have created sophisticated, structured kinship networks that fulfill the essential functions of family: providing emotional support, economic cooperation, caregiving, identity formation, and intergenerational continuity.

Drawing on peer-reviewed literature from anthropology, sociology, gender studies, and architecture, this paper will demonstrate that the hijra family system—centered on the guru-chela (teacher-disciple) relationship—represents a legitimate, functioning family structure that challenges and expands dominant understandings of what constitutes a family. The paper will first contextualize how dominant definitions of family in Bangladesh have constructed the myth of hijra "family-less-ness," then systematically debunk this myth through scholarly evidence examining hijra kinship structures, household organization, care practices, and resilience strategies. Finally, it will offer reflections on how this understanding informs professional practice with diverse families and communities.

Context of the Myth: How Dominant Definitions of Family Exclude Hijra Kinship

The myth that hijra people lack families stems directly from how "family" is traditionally defined in Bangladesh and across South Asia. Dominant definitions privilege the nuclear or extended family model based on heterosexual marriage, biological reproduction, and patrilineal descent (Chowdhury, 1995; Shah et al., 2024). In Bangladeshi society, the family is conceptualized as "the cohabitation of a minimum of two individuals of differing genders, ensuring their provision of sustenance, housing, security and legitimate sexual relations" (Shah et al., 2024, p. 2). This definition positions the heteronormative, reproductive couple as the foundational unit of family life.

The consequences of this narrow definition are profound. Families with hijra children often experience shame and social ostracism, leading to the rejection and expulsion of hijra individuals from their natal families (Khan et al., 2009; Al-Mamun et al., 2022). As one hijra participant in Shah et al.'s (2024) study explained: "I fled my home because of my family's physical and emotional torture" (p. 11). This forced separation from biological families is then misinterpreted as evidence that hijra people cannot form families at all, rather than recognizing it as a response to familial rejection rooted in rigid gender norms.

The colonial legacy further shaped this exclusion. British colonial authorities criminalized hijra identities through the Criminal Tribes Act of 1871, categorizing hijras as "criminal tribes" and reinforcing perceptions of hijra communities as deviant and outside normative social structures (Podder & Shahidullah, 2024; Goel, 2025). This colonial construction continues to influence contemporary perceptions, contributing to the myth that hijra communities are inherently disorganized or incapable of forming legitimate social bonds.

Even when the Bangladeshi government legally recognized hijras as "third gender" in 2013, this recognition did not automatically translate into social acceptance of hijra family structures (Al-Mamun et al., 2022). The persistence of the myth reflects what Yuval-Davis (2011, cited in Nandi, 2025) terms the "politics of belonging"—the power of dominant groups to legitimate certain identities and relationships while delegitimizing others. In this case, the narrow definition of family serves to maintain social and political order by excluding those who do not conform to heteronormative, reproductive models of kinship.

Literature-Based Argument: Hijra Communities as Family Systems

The Guru-Chela Relationship as Fictive Kinship

The foundation of hijra family structure lies in the guru-chela (teacher-disciple) relationship, which scholars have extensively documented as a legitimate form of fictive kinship (Nanda, 1999; Reddy, 2006; Shah et al., 2024; Podder & Shahidullah, 2024). This relationship is not merely transactional but embodies the core functions of family: care, protection, socialization, and intergenerational continuity.

The guru (or guruma, meaning "mother") serves as the head of the hijra family, assuming the role of parent and protector. As Shah et al. (2024) describe, "the guru assumes the role of a nurturing maternal figure... The relationship between the guruma and chela is often seen as a maternal bond in the community, where it is acknowledged as dudh bety (milk daughter)" (p. 13). This maternal framing is not metaphorical but represents how hijras understand their kinship bonds. One guru interviewed by Podder and Shahidullah (2024) stated: "In our house, no one calls me hijra; they call me 'MOTHER'! Not a 'father'!" (p. 12).

The chela's obligations mirror those expected in biological families: loyalty, obedience, and care for the guru in old age. In return, the guru provides shelter, food, security, and training for livelihood (Shah et al., 2024; Hossain & Nanda, 2020). As one participant explained: "My guruma takes care of myself and other chelas as family members. However, all of us must work to bear the expenses of the family" (Shah et al., 2024, p. 10). This mutual responsibility reflects the economic cooperation fundamental to family units across cultures.

The guru-chela relationship also creates extended kinship networks that span generations and geographic locations. Nanda (1999) documented how hijra kinship includes grandmothers (the guru's guru), aunts (the guru's sisters), and sisterhood among peers. These networks provide social support, economic cooperation, and cultural continuity that parallel extended family systems in mainstream society (Tanupriya, 2024).

Hijra Households as Domestic Spaces of Belonging

Recent architectural and ethnographic research has revealed how hijra homes are deliberately organized to function as family spaces, contradicting the myth that hijra communities lack stable domestic structures (Podder & Shahidullah, 2024; Podder & Shahidullah, 2024). These studies demonstrate that hijra homes are not merely shelters but complex domestic environments designed to facilitate family relationships, economic cooperation, and identity formation.

The spatial organization of hijra homes reflects hierarchical family structures. The guru's room serves as the functional and symbolic center of the home, and circulation patterns ensure that all household members pass through or near this space (Podder & Shahidullah, 2024). This design embodies the guru's role as the family head and protector. As the researchers explain, "Such a sequence establishes a spatial guardianship, where Guru-maa acts as a shield and symbolic centre who secures the daughters from external mockery, stigma, and trauma" (Podder & Shahidullah, 2024, p. 10).

Hijra homes also demonstrate flexibility and adaptability that support family functions. Multiple bedrooms accommodate collective living, and shared spaces are designed for training, performance, and social gathering (Podder & Shahidullah, 2024). This spatial flexibility reflects the hijra family's economic strategies, as members collectively engage in income-generating activities such as badhai (ritual blessings at births and weddings) and cultural performances.

Importantly, hijra homes often accommodate multi-religious practices, with separate spaces for Islamic prayer and Hindu worship within the same household (Podder & Shahidullah, 2024). This religious inclusivity reflects the hijra family's commitment to creating belonging for members from diverse backgrounds—a function central to family life but rarely recognized in mainstream definitions.

Economic Cooperation as Family Labor

The myth that hijra people cannot form families often rests on assumptions about economic instability and reliance on stigmatized occupations. However, research demonstrates that hijra families develop sophisticated economic strategies that mirror family-based economic cooperation across cultures (Hossain, 2021; Al-Mamun et al., 2022; Shah et al., 2024).

In hijra families, economic cooperation is organized hierarchically. Chelas contribute their earnings to the household, and the guru manages collective resources to provide for all members (Shah et al., 2024; Hossain & Nanda, 2020). As one participant explained: "We earn roughly 5000 to 6000 taka, but we have to pay guruma 2000-2500 taka and malkin 800-1000 taka. Guruma receives our money under the logic of providing shelter and safety" (Shah et al., 2024, p. 16). This arrangement reflects the family-based economic pooling common in many cultures, where household members contribute to collective resources in exchange for care and security.

The training of chelas in income-generating activities represents a form of family-based skill transmission similar to apprenticeship in traditional family businesses. As one guru described: "As in school, one could get skilled and cross the classes, I also had some phases to grow and skill development with communication, care, and love" (Podder & Shahidullah, 2024, p. 17). This intergenerational transmission of skills and knowledge mirrors the socialization function of families across cultures.

Research also documents how hijra families adapt their economic strategies to changing circumstances. During the COVID-19 pandemic, hijra families provided mutual support to cope with economic disruption, demonstrating the resilience of their family networks (Al-Mamun et al., 2022; Ahmed & Sifat, 2021). One study found that despite severe income loss, hijra households maintained collective support systems, with members sharing resources and caring for vulnerable members (Al-Mamun et al., 2022).

Rituals, Practices, and Cultural Continuity

Hijra families maintain distinct cultural traditions that create continuity across generations—a function central to family life. These traditions include rituals of initiation, cultural performances, and the transmission of secret languages like Hijra Farsi (Shah et al., 2024; Hossain, 2021; Goel, 2025).

The ritual of nirvan (castration) represents a significant rite of passage within some hijra traditions, analogous to initiation rituals in other cultures that mark membership and identity (Goel, 2025; Nanda, 1999). While controversial and associated with health risks, this practice within hijra communities reflects how families create meaning and identity through ritual. As Goel (2025) argues, "For hijra individuals, castration is a final and irreversible rite of passage into the hijra community for evolution into a virtuous self" (p. 7). This ritual, and the kinship obligations it creates, demonstrates how hijra families establish enduring bonds that transcend biological connections.

The performance of badhai—ritual blessings at births and weddings—represents both economic activity and cultural practice that reinforces hijra family identity (Hossain, 2023; Podder & Shahidullah, 2024). These performances are learned within hijra families and transmitted across generations, preserving cultural traditions while providing economic sustenance.

Hijra families also create kinship bonds through shared language. The secret language of Hijra Farsi, learned from gurus, creates a sense of belonging and distinguishes community members from outsiders (Shah et al., 2024). This linguistic practice parallels how families and ethnic groups maintain identity through language transmission.

Resilience, Resistance, and Family of Choice

Hijra families demonstrate remarkable resilience in the face of social exclusion, violence, and discrimination. Research documents how hijra communities develop family structures specifically as survival strategies in hostile environments (Alamgir et al., 2025; Nandi, 2025; Podder & Shahidullah, 2024).

The concept of "families of choice" is central to understanding hijra kinship. As Alamgir et al. (2025) document in their study of khwaja sara and hijra communities in Pakistan: "The guru-cheela houses, or Dera, become families of choice that provide Khawaja Sara and Hijra with an opportunity to live relatively freely" (p. 9). These chosen families provide what biological families often fail to offer: acceptance, safety, and the freedom to express gender identity.

Historical research reveals how hijra refugees during the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War created families of choice when biological families and state structures failed them. Nandi (2025) documents how hijra refugees who fled to Kolkata "chose to remain in West Bengal rather than returning to Bangladesh, a homeland that they felt estranged from due to the violence they experienced... and instead established a localized microcosm of belonging in Kolkata" (p. 8). These refugees created family networks through shared experience and mutual support, demonstrating that family bonds can be forged through choice rather than biology.

The resilience of hijra families is also evident in their collective resistance to discrimination and violence. During communal riots in Delhi, hijra communities intervened to stop violence, using their collective identity to assert power (Goel, 2025). In Kolkata, hijra refugees participated in sex worker movements, using their family networks to organize for rights and recognition (Nandi, 2025). These actions demonstrate how hijra family structures enable collective action and political mobilization—functions often associated with family and kinship in other contexts.

Refuting the Myth: Hijra Families as Legitimate Kin Structures

The evidence from peer-reviewed literature systematically refutes the myth that hijra people cannot form real families. Hijra families fulfill the essential functions of family across cultures:

Care and Protection: Hijra families provide shelter, food, security, and emotional support to members who have often been rejected by their biological families (Shah et al., 2024; Al-Mamun et al., 2022).

Economic Cooperation: Hijra households pool resources, share earnings, and support members through economic hardship (Hossain, 2021; Podder & Shahidullah, 2024).

Socialization and Identity Formation: Gurus teach chelas cultural practices, skills, and community norms, shaping their identity as hijras (Tanupriya, 2024; Goel, 2025).

Intergenerational Continuity: Hijra families transmit cultural traditions, languages, and practices across generations, maintaining community continuity (Nanda, 1999; Hossain, 2021).

Belonging and Attachment: Hijra homes create spaces of belonging where members develop deep emotional bonds and attachments (Podder & Shahidullah, 2024; Nandi, 2025).

Ritual and Meaning-Making: Hijra families maintain rituals that create meaning, mark life transitions, and establish community identity (Goel, 2025; Hossain, 2023).

The myth that hijra people lack families is thus exposed as rooted in a narrow, culturally specific definition of family that privileges biological kinship and heteronormative marriage. When family is understood functionally—as networks of care, economic cooperation, and belonging—hijra communities clearly possess sophisticated, meaningful family structures.

Critical Reflection

My understanding of family has been fundamentally transformed by engaging with this literature. Before this course, I held an implicit definition of family that, while perhaps broader than the heteronormative nuclear model, still privileged biological kinship and marriage. The research on hijra communities challenged me to recognize that family is not defined by biology or legal recognition but by the quality of relationships, the nature of care, and the creation of belonging.

Several concepts from this course directly shaped my analysis. The concept of social construction helped me understand how the myth of hijra "family-less-ness" is produced and maintained through dominant definitions that exclude alternative kinship systems. The idea that family is socially constructed—not natural or inevitable—made it possible to recognize hijra kinship as legitimate family structure rather than deviation from a norm.

The concept of intersectionality deepened my analysis of how gender, sexuality, caste, class, and colonial history intersect to shape hijra experiences. The exclusion of hijra families is not solely about gender identity but reflects intersecting systems of oppression: colonial criminalization, economic marginalization, and cultural stigma. Understanding these intersections helps explain why hijra families are both necessary and unrecognized.

The concept of families of choice, discussed in relation to LGBTQ communities in Western contexts, provided a framework for understanding hijra kinship. However, the literature revealed important differences: hijra families of choice are not simply alternatives to biological families but often become primary families that provide what biological families cannot. This challenged my assumption that biological families are somehow "more real" than chosen families.

The course's emphasis on decentering Western perspectives was crucial. Early in my research, I found myself unconsciously comparing hijra families to Western family models. The literature challenged this by showing how hijra families reflect South Asian cultural contexts, including hierarchical relationships, collective economic strategies, and the integration of spiritual practices into family life.

Perhaps most significantly, this research challenged my understanding of what makes a family "real." The emotional bonds, mutual obligations, and intergenerational continuity documented in hijra families are as real as any I have witnessed in biological families. The trauma of separation from natal families, the joy of finding belonging in chosen families, and the deep commitments between guru and chela all point to family as a lived experience rather than a legal or biological category.

Implications for Practice

My learning about hijra families has profound implications for professional practice with diverse families and communities. These implications extend beyond work with hijra individuals to inform practice with all families whose structures differ from dominant norms.

Professionals must examine their own assumptions about what constitutes a "real" family. The myth that hijra people cannot form families persists in part because professionals—social workers, educators, healthcare providers, policymakers—often operate with implicit definitions of family that privilege biological kinship and heteronormative marriage. Reflecting on these assumptions is essential to avoid imposing narrow definitions on diverse families.

Assessment and intervention should be family-centered in the broadest sense. When working with hijra individuals, professionals should recognize guru-chela relationships as family relationships. Asking about "family" without specifying biological family may inadvertently exclude these relationships. Instead, professionals can ask: "Who are the important people in your life?" or "Who do you turn to for support?" to capture the full range of family relationships.

Inclusive practice requires recognizing diverse kinship systems as legitimate. Professionals can advocate for policies and practices that recognize diverse family forms, including chosen families, fictive kinship, and non-biological care relationships. In healthcare settings, this might mean allowing gurus to make medical decisions for chelas or recognizing hijra family members as next of kin. In social services, it means designing programs that support hijra family structures rather than assuming nuclear family models.

Understanding family as function rather than form is essential. The literature on hijra families demonstrates that what matters for family well-being is whether relationships provide care, support, belonging, and continuity—not whether they fit a particular structural model. Professionals can assess families based on these functions rather than imposing structural criteria that exclude diverse family forms.

Cultural competence must extend to understanding alternative kinship systems. Working effectively with hijra families requires knowledge of guru-chela relationships, hijra household structures, and the cultural practices that shape hijra family life. This knowledge enables professionals to avoid misunderstandings and provide culturally responsive support.

Advocacy for structural change is necessary. The challenges hijra families face—including discrimination, violence, economic marginalization, and lack of legal recognition—reflect structural inequalities that individual intervention cannot fully address. Professionals can advocate for policies that recognize hijra families, protect their rights, and provide resources to support their well-being.

Critical reflection should be ongoing. My learning about hijra families has taught me that family diversity is far greater than I initially understood. Continuing to question assumptions, seek out diverse perspectives, and remain open to learning is essential for effective practice.

Conclusion

The myth that hijra people do not have real families reflects a narrow, culturally specific definition of family that fails to recognize the sophisticated kinship systems hijra communities have developed over centuries. Drawing on peer-reviewed literature from anthropology, sociology, gender studies, and architecture, this paper has demonstrated that hijra families—centered on guru-chela relationships—fulfill the essential functions of family: care, economic cooperation, socialization, intergenerational continuity, belonging, and meaning-making.

Hijra homes are not merely shelters but carefully organized domestic spaces designed to facilitate family relationships and economic cooperation. Hijra kinship networks extend across generations and geographic locations, providing social support and cultural continuity. Hijra families demonstrate remarkable resilience, creating families of choice when biological families fail, and organizing collectively to resist discrimination and violence.

The evidence challenges professionals to expand their understanding of family beyond biological kinship and heteronormative marriage. When we understand family functionally—as networks of care, belonging, and mutual obligation—hijra communities clearly possess real families. Recognizing this has profound implications for professional practice, requiring us to examine our assumptions, assess family relationships broadly, and advocate for policies that recognize and support diverse family forms.

Ultimately, debunking the myth about hijra families is not merely an academic exercise but a matter of justice. The denial of family status to hijra communities has real consequences: it contributes to social exclusion, legitimizes discrimination, and denies hijra families the recognition and support they deserve. By recognizing hijra families as legitimate, we take an important step toward affirming the humanity and dignity of hijra people and all whose families fall outside dominant norms.

References

Ahmed, F., & Sifat, R. I. (2021). Experiences of Hijra (transgender) communities during the COVID-19 pandemic in Bangladesh. F1000Research, 10, 601.

Alamgir, A., Brown, S., Gray, E., & Kelly, P. (2025). Exploring resistance, resilience, and refusal amongst Khawaja Sara and Hijra communities in postcolonial Pakistan. *LGBTQ+ Family: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 21*(2), 116-130.

Al-Mamun, M., Hossain, M. J., Alam, M., Parvez, M. S., Dhar, B. K., & Islam, M. R. (2022). Discrimination and social exclusion of third-gender population (Hijra) in Bangladesh: A brief review. Heliyon, 8(10), e10840.

Chowdhury, A. (1995). Families in Bangladesh. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 26(1), 27-41.

Goel, I. (2025). Rituals of harm: Castration and genealogies of sacred wound cultures in the Hijra communities of India. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 1-9.

Hossain, A. (2021). Beyond emasculation: Pleasure and power in the making of Hijra in Bangladesh. Cambridge University Press.

Hossain, A. (2023). Badhai as dis/ability: Meaning, context, and community in Bangladesh. In A. Hossain, C. Pamment, & J. Roy (Eds.), Badhai: Hijra-Khwaja Sira-Trans performance across borders in South Asia (pp. 41-68). Methuen/Drama.

Hossain, A., & Nanda, S. (2020). Globalization and change of Hijra in South Asia. In J. M. Ryan (Ed.), Trans lives in a globalizing world: Rights, identities, and politics (pp. 34-49). Routledge.

Khan, S. I., Hussain, M. I., Parveen, S., Bhuiyan, M. I., Gourab, G., Sarker, G. F., & Sikder, J. (2009). Living on the extreme margin: Social exclusion of the transgender population (Hijra) in Bangladesh. Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition, 27(4), 441-451.

Nanda, S. (1999). Neither man nor woman: The Hijras of India. Wadsworth Publishing Company.

Nandi, S. (2025). "We were together and we had our own family in each other": Refusing repatriation and forging gendered belonging as Hijra refugees in Kolkata. Migration Studies, 1-17.

Podder, A. K., & Shahidullah, F. B. (2024). Counter home: Unravelling the socio-spatial dynamics of Hijra dwellings of Khulna, Bangladesh. eTropic: Electronic Journal of Studies in the Tropics, 23(2), 237-269.

Reddy, G. (2006). With respect to sex: Negotiating Hijra identity in South India. Yoda Press.

Shah, M. F., Shahidullah, K., Sultana, F., & Shah, M. R. (2024). Adaptation or exploitation? An analysis of the family structure of the Hijra community in Bangladesh. European Journal of Educational & Cultural Studies, 11(3), 67-89.

Tanupriya. (2024). Redefined families and subsystems: Reading kinship and hierarchical structures in select Hijra autobiographies. Rupaktha International Open Conference on Recent Advances in Interdisciplinary Humanities, 12(5), 1-5.