killing denouement

[zor se bol]

That’s right, decriminalised – in a landmark ruling that amends the 148 year old colonial-vestige Section 377 law. One that’s still extant in an unchanged form in other places formally colonised bt the British like Singapore – wonder how much it’ll open up debate elsewhere? In India it seems that some conservatives are shuffling, and centrist polititians are being predictably vague, probably waiting to see which opinion will garner the most votes. Interesting to see that the CPM (Communist Party Marxist) have come out strongly in favour though. All’s well then it would seem, with much happiness and relief in the streets for a ruling that’s been a really long time coming.

“The inclusiveness that Indian society traditionally displayed, literally in every aspect of life, is manifest in recognizing a role in society for everyone – Delhi High Court”

Throw in some constitution love and Nehru quoting and you’re good to go. All until you look at the text of the amended code, that is. I need to read the actual ruling (or scan- it’s some 105 pages) but this bit from the times of india report jumped out at me. Note that Section 377 as it stands still criminalises non-consensual sex and sex with minors (ie statuatory rape) – but then look at how it’s defined!

A bench comprising Chief Justice A P Shah and Justice S Muralidhar clarified that the provisions of Section 377, enacted in 1860 to deal with an unspecified range of “unnatural offences”, would hereafter be restricted to non-consensual penile “non-vaginal sex” (rape by a homosexual) and “penile non-vaginal sex involving minors” (pedophilia).

Clearly ‘women’ can/do not rape (and I do dislike using such gender essentialising terms here)? And worse still rape and paedophilia are defined as being non-vaginal? WHAT. I understand this is a lifted quote and I’d hope that the actual ruling, and subsequent (hopefully) parliamentary law rewriting doesn’t actually say this. I’d geuss that the judge in question might have just been clarifying that gay sex is still illegal if non-consensual and/or with a minor (under 18), both of which come under the same Section 377. It’s still icky that ‘gay rape’, whether statuatory or otherwise is still defined/imagined as “penile” and “non vaginal” though. In the meantime, wow, a case of phallic fail “phail?” (and recent discovery of failblog, years later).

These last two pictures are from Mumbai, where I should be tonight for a few days before heading to Kashmir and Delhi till the end of the month