There are many lines you can read again and again from the 2009 Delhi High Court judgment – commonly known as the Naz case – that decriminalized same-sex sexual relations in India. Let me give you one that has stayed with me since that day in the courtroom: " For every individual, whether homosexual or not, the sense of gender and sexual orientation of the person are so embedded … that the individual carries this aspect of his or her identity wherever he or she goes. While recognising the unique worth of each person, the Constitution does not presuppose that the holder of rights is an isolated, lonely, and abstract figure possessing a disembodied and socially disconnected self. It acknowledges that people live in their bodies, their communities, their cultures, their places and their times. " i Bodies, communities, cultures, places and times. In one sentence, the judges reminded us of what we talk about when we talk about sexuality. Not just sexual orientation or gender identity, read to be only about some people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender. Not just something called 'gay rights,' somehow separated from other intrinsic rights and freedoms. Not even just individual lives lived as if they could exist on islands of freedom. When they spoke of sexuality, the judges spoke of more than this. They spoke of sexuality as an intimacy both public and private, something we individually possessed but whose life was stitched into what we made together: families, communities, cities, nations.