A struggle against any form of margins is a feminist struggle, and it is incontrovertible that reading down §377 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) was an important feminist struggle. However, I argue here that §377 must be located as just one among various other struggles towards queer liberation in the history of India, and must be viewed as harmful without such a location. In this article, I lay out the hierarchies and exclusions within queer communities in the country along the lines of gender, caste, class, and religion. This is to show that the often opposing politics of these identities prevent us from constituting the ‘LGBT community’ as a singular subject of legal analysis, which the judgment of the Supreme Court in Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018) attempted to do but failed at. I argue that the judgment materially benefitted primarily gay men, while not applying to female sexuality (except symbolically), and having limited impact on the trans communities especially in the aftermath of National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India (2014). In a paradigm of limited funding and prioritised campaigning, acknowledging that funding and public discourse are among the primary ways in which many identities and lives have been made visible, I also point to possible focus areas that activist, legal and academic energies can be extended to going forward to benefit queer and trans women under the law. In keeping with the intersectional feminist understanding that if our freedoms are not interlinked, they are not freedoms at all, this paper highlights the urgent need to strengthen queer solidarities after the Navtej Singh Johar judgement.