Anderson Cooper and Section 377 of the IPC

June 10, 2006
Grumpy Old Indian Man

"You're not going to believe, actually, what I'm about to do. I'm not exactly good with heights, so I'm not even sure I believe it. This is what they call the man cage."

--Anderson Cooper, Anderson Cooper 360, May 31

So now they are calling it a man cage. What to do until we repeal this Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)? There's not much to say except that Democracies both sub-continental and Norteamericano need to get with the program. The Supreme Court is really shocking on this. I mean South Africa has an advanced level of constitutional recognition of sexual minority rights and that's where it all began. Burn a pass card why don't you already, na? And even young Anderson did a whole TV segment on hijras. Yesterday is too late in a country where all the major dieties are transgendered. It makes me grumpy that we hold on to this portion of Victorian morals having sacrificed so much to rid ourselves of its other imperial structures.

Particularly embarassing for the old Bande Mataram when you think what a kinky winky Gandhiji was — and how interestingly and thoroughly that form of personal sexuality was woven into his notion of political practice. Ahhh well... I'm all for Universal Human Rights now — even for Vanderbilts on Cable.

cooper fence

Grumpy Old Indian Man because there's so much to complain about.
eXTReMe Tracker
Keep reading for comments on this article and add some feedback of your own!

Comments! Feedback! Speak and be heard!

Comment on this article or leave feedback for the author

June 10, 2006
04:58 AM

"377. Unnatural offences
Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal, shall be punished with 152[imprisonment for life], or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Explanation- Penetration is sufficient to constitute the carnal intercourse necessary to the offence described in this section."

A special Gift for Dog/Cat lovers of DC readers!!!!

June 10, 2006
05:05 AM

Exactly .... Clearly Anderson, or anyone else should be able to have a 360 Degree CNN unnatural offence anytime he likes in India ... unnatural offences are the dhal-bat of daily life on the Good Ship Bharat Ma --- you cant get through five minutes in a day or a bus ride in Bombay without unnatural offences occuring left right and center.

June 10, 2006
05:05 AM

"Penetration" word very carefully replace the meanning of "intercourse".

This the real clever mind of a LAW Maker!!!!
Who says our LAW maker are fool?

June 10, 2006
05:12 AM

Whether they are fools or not they are intrusive moralists ...

They should apply the Noneya Principle ... as in it is noneya businesss what adults are getting up to in the privacy of their homely estates.

Thusly everyone wins

June 10, 2006
05:28 AM

"they are intrusive moralists ..." really???
Little relook:-

"Penetration" who is capable? - Human Men and Male Animale.

But who will get the Punishment?

"Unnatural offences"- Who can't do that?
A Women and Women animale as per law as the "Penetration" are not there .. so not only Human, women animale also allowed for doing the "Unnatural offences".

On the other hand, animale are not allowed to complin , hence who gets the Whole sale free lincence?

Poor Dogs...!!!

"intrusive moralists" - Any answer?

June 10, 2006
06:02 AM

Indian Legal system is in 17th century.

Heard of Section 497 of IPC.

1 an adultery can be committed only by a man and not by woman.

2 the person committing adultery must also know or should have reason to believe that woman with whom he had intercourse is the wife of another man, and
3. the sexual intercourse should not amount to the offence of rape.
The complainant husband can only vindicate himself if he can establish the above, otherwise his complaint would fail. What is most significant in the penal offence of adultery is that invariably the husband takes his vengeance against the third person, i.e. the adulterer : though in some jurisdictions he may also be able to reap it against the wife. But in most cases the main target of his vengeance is the adulterer.

The criminal action is filed not against the wife but against the adulterer. The wife is not guilty of offence, not even as an abettor.

June 10, 2006
08:10 AM

Rape is defined as consuensual sex and if no marriage happend afer that and the girl wants to force marriage

Preeti jain and madhur bhandarkar. kinod fo case .

Mark Pritchard
June 12, 2006
01:55 PM

I don't understand what the hell Anderson Cooper and the report you cited -- the transcript of the entire program is at http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0605/31/acd.01.html -- has to do with human rights or laws against homosexuality.

The "man cage" Cooper was referring to was simply a metal basket which allows a crane operator to lower a person from a crane.

So what the hell are you talking about?

June 12, 2006
02:46 PM

try a ggogle round the internet on the quote ... and you'll be up to speed ... technology can be help even the most literal minded of readers. Its a wonderful thing.

Add your comment

(Or ping: http://desicritics.org/tb/2075)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.

Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!