Friday, July 03, 2009

A sexy post

Sextion 377. Finally most of what it applied to has been de-criminalised. Hoorah. Yay. While the faggots are publicly celebrating, you as a straight, heterosexual normal man or woman should also be standing relieved. Because while the shirtlifters might have made it their mission in life, it equally applies to you too, and for all you know you have been up to many criminal acts that went against the order of nature. Here’s how:

Section 377 of the IPC. Unnatural offences: Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

But since the term ‘carnal intercourse’ is such an ambiguous term with regards to what it constitutes, there’s also an explanation in Note 1.

Explanation (to Section 377 of the IPC) – Penetration is sufficient to constitute the carnal intercourse necessary to the offence described in this Section.

The key phrase of course is ‘against the order of nature’ which we would usually apply to the homosexuals because it is, right? Think again. If you’ve ever been done the favour of a fellatio, well there you go! Thou haveth committed a criminal offense. Also a seriously supposedly facetious character like the Bekku could also on a technicality claim that using a condom is against the ‘order of nature’; when was the last time you saw a dog in a helmet? Speaking of doggys, there is the issue of ‘let’s add some variety’. So if you’ve ever been retrocopulating or in other words doin’ it doggy style, you’ve been committing an offense my frisky experimenting straight friend. So any form of intercourse other than a straightforward missionary position between a man and a woman would be considered ‘against the order of nature’, digital penetration included, and is punishable.

So that’s why even a heterosexual, normal person should support the (no one’s saying parade alongside the faggots) de-criminalization of Section 377, irrespective of whether you condone homosexuality or not, regardless of your personal prejudices against gays (and maybe even lesbians!).

The religious heads (no pun intended) are of course against it, because homosexuality is unacceptable to Christianity and Islam., and it being turned into law. They shouldn’t actually be worried these blinkered bishops and myopic mullahs. So what if its de-criminalised homosexuality, doesn’t mean you have to condone it or encourage it or not socially stigmatise the faggots and ostracise the shirtlifters. But let's not make them legal criminals. Plus, no one’s giving any legal rights to same-sex couples or making same-sex marriages legal, not just yet. They’re just not gonna be punished or harassed for having an alternate sexual preference and being deviant that’s all. And the government will wait and watch. Plus this judgment as of now only applies to Delhi. Rejoice all thee doggy stylin’ straight boys in Delhi. The rest of you make sure you don’t do it in public (and for the purposes of decency and conduct even in Delhi). So from here on, the momentum should take things forward so when it comes to debate into making it a law, make sure you support it. Because de-criminalising something is not the same as making it legal.

No comments: