Over the years, your support has made Women’s Web the leading resource for women in India. Now, it is our turn to ask, how can we make this even more useful for you? Please take our short 5 minute questionnaire – your feedback is important to us!
Much noise has been created over the legalization of homosexuality by the Delhi High Court without understanding that Article 377 was a British creation
In recent months, much noise has been created over the legalization of homosexuality by the Delhi High Court. The Court, in July 2009, had struck down section 377 of the Indian Penal Code which criminalizes ‘carnal intercourse against the order of nature’ and prescribes a punishment of up to ten years imprisonment for such acts.
Chief Justice Mr. AP Shah had said, “We declare that Section 377 IPC, insofar it criminalizes consensual sexual acts of adults in private, is violative of Articles 21, 14 and 15 of the Constitution.”
This section of the Indian Penal Code, like the Code itself, was a creation of the British, and came into force in 1860. Interestingly, England decriminalized homosexuality way back in 1967 by passing the Sexual Offences Act. In an earlier (1957) debate on the issue even the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Geoffrey Fisher, spoke in support of decriminalizing homosexuality, saying that “There is a sacred realm of privacy… into which the law, generally speaking, must not intrude. This is a principle of the utmost importance for the preservation of human freedom, self-respect, and responsibility.” The 1967 Act was a giant leap for England, because till 1861 the punishment for homosexuality was death in that country.
More recently, the Government of India tied itself in knots when an appeal against the order of the Delhi High Court was being heard in the Supreme Court. The Additional Solicitor General of India, Mr. PP Malhotra said in the Supreme Court, “Gay sex is highly immoral and against social order and there is high chance of spreading of diseases (like AIDS) through such acts.” The Court, while discussing the issue, wanted to know the meaning of ‘order of nature’ from the Government. It asked, “Who is the expert to define the term ‘order of nature’, more so in relation to carnal intercourse? Meaning of words has never been constant. Test-tube babies, surrogate mothers – are they in the order of nature?”
I too have a few questions:
1. Is contraception against the order of nature? 2. Is consensual intercourse between a man and woman involving oral sex or anal sex against the order of nature? 3. Is talking dirty during sex against the order of nature?
I actually want to write to the Ministry of Law and Justice under the Right to Information Act seeking answers to these questions, but I know the reply I will get: “Your prayer under the RTI Act is denied as you have sought opinions and not information as defined in the said Act.”
An afterthought: Section 377 IPC also says, “Penetration is sufficient to constitute the carnal intercourse necessary to the offence described in this section.” Does that mean lesbianism was never a crime under this section?
Pic credit: Vereda Estreita (This picture of a campaigner at Europride 2011, Rome was used under a Creative Commons license)
I am a former bureaucrat, and have worked a lot on gender issues, disaster management and good governance. I am also the proud father of two lovely daughters. read more...
Women's Web is an open platform that publishes a diversity of views, individual posts do not necessarily represent the platform's views and opinions at all times.
Stay updated with our Weekly Newsletter or Daily Summary - or both!
Calling a vaginal birth a 'normal' or 'natural' birth was probably appropriate years ago when Caesarian births were rare, in an emergency.
When I recently read a post on Facebook written by a woman who had a vaginal birth casually refer to her delivery as a natural one, it rankled.
For too long, we have internalized calling vaginal deliveries ‘normal’ or ‘natural’ deliveries as if any other way of childbirth is abnormal. What about only a vaginal birth is natural? Conversely, what about a Caesarian Section is not normal?
When we check on the health of the mother and baby post delivery, why do we enquire intrusively, what kind of delivery they had? “Was it a ‘normal’ delivery?” we ask.
Many women have lost their lives to this darkness. It's high time we raise awareness, and make maternal mental health screening a part of the routine check ups.
Trigger Warning: This deals with severe postpartum depression, and may be triggering for survivors.
Motherhood is considered a beautiful blessing. Being able to create a new life is indeed beautiful and divine. We have seen in movies, advertisements, stories, everywhere… where motherhood is glorified and a mother is considered an epitome of tolerance and sacrifice.
But no one talks about the downside of it. No one talks about the emotional changes a woman experiences while giving birth and after it.