Grow Up
The
Telegraph, April 11, 2005
Calcutta, India
Letters to Editor
Sir—With gay and lesbian rights groups leading the
campaign against Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, this Victorian
provision has come to be understood as a law which makes homosexuality an
offence (“SC notice on homosexuals”, April 2). Even media reports suggest
the same. Section 377 does not criminalize homosexuality per se, but any form
of sex that is not peno-vaginal. Which means even heterosexuals engaging in
consensual anal or oral sex can be booked. Thus the campaign against this law
must be one which challenges all attempts by the state to regulate consensual
sexual behaviour between adults and not one that looks at it as an entirely
gay-rights issue. Or, one that looks at its inadequacies in addressing the
issue of child sexual abuse.
Fears about opening “the floodgates of delinquent
behaviour” and AIDS are completely unfounded. Decriminalizing all consensual
sexual activities between adults, including same-sex behaviour, will allow the
sexual minorities better access to information and services to enjoy a
fulfilling and safe sexual life. It is nothing but moral panic that has
allowed Section 377 to remain, while the similar provision in the British laws
was done away with in 1965.
Yours faithfully,
Oishik Sircar, Calcutta
Sir—While I agree in the main with its advocacy of the repeal of Section
377, the editorial, “What is nature?” (April 4), gives the impression that
criminalizing sodomy and other sexual acts “against the order of nature”
is equivalent to criminalizing homosexuality. But sodomy performed between a
man and a woman is also a punishable offense under Section 377. Moreover,
legalizing homosexuality involves not only decriminalizing all types of sexual
acts between two consenting adults, but also giving homosexuals the right to
marry each other, and the marriage the same legal status as a heterosexual
one.
It is true that men having sex with men are a high-risk
group for HIV infection and that the government of India has done little to
acknowledge this. But it is somewhat unfair to state that India’s national
campaign against HIV/AIDS is “strangely reticent” about it. In recent
years, the National AIDS Control Organization has been supportive of AIDS
prevention programmes of some homosexual groups like Humsafar in Mumbai and
Saathi in Calcutta. Only 3 per cent of the over 5.1 million estimated
HIV-positive population in India is reported to belong to the community of men
having sex with men.
Yours faithfully,
Moni Nag, New York
Sir—The Supreme Court seems to be favourably inclined to
repealing Section 377 of IPC. But there is no talk about a same-sex marriage
law. Doing the one without the other will do more harm than good. Society
needs to first decide whether sex between two persons of the same gender is
moral or immoral. If it is moral, same-sex marriages should be allowed. If
not, Section 377 too must continue. The law, as it is now, is at least
consistent.
What would legalizing homosexuality mean without the
permission to marry? With whom should homosexuals have sex then? And
wouldn’t society then be condoning immorality—since it would be going
against the accepted association of marriage with sex?
Theoretically speaking, it is not even necessary to
repeal Section 377 to allow same-sex marriages. Heterosexual couples can and
do indulge in both anal and oral sex—both of which are illegal according to
the law—while a large percentage of male homosexuals do not like anal sex.
Yours faithfully,
Jayant Kumar, New Delhi
Sir—It is high time homosexuality is legalized. After
all, how can one have a society that is liberal in religion, economics, art
and culture but prudish in its ideas of homosexuality and lesbianism? What is
said to be “against nature” has been in practice since time immemorial.
Also homosexuals, if not integrated into society, could become the vehicle for
the spread of sexually-transmitted diseases and HIV. After all, it is better
to open the can than to let the contents stink. What the law must do is guard
against brutality, and protect the underage and the unwilling.
Yours faithfully,
Pijush Banerjee, Calcutta
[Home] [Editorials] [India]
