OK so there is really not going to be a delicate way for me to talk about this. I am sorry if I offend anyone, but when I read the article this AM on the front page of the Times of India about the Indian Supreme Court defining the long-used term of a woman’s ‘modesty’ I think I about hit the roof.
There is apparently some long-standing penal charge on the books of “outraging a woman’s modesty” which was never really defined. So the SC came out with a definition of this modesty, which is ” the essence of a woman’s sex”
My issue is this. Under the penal code, any act which falls short of actual penetration of the above named ‘essence’ (which is indirectly referring to the female sexual organ) is simply an outrage of modesty. You have to have penetration of this particular part for there to be a charge of rape.
I have never heard of something so entirely draconian and upsetting in my life.I can think of at least 5 other ways in which a woman can be violated which should qualify as rape, but apparently… not.
Now, I am happy that there is a serious charge for harassment. But this same charge simply is not enough to cover all forms of violation. And that definition! WHAT? The essence of my modesty is my sex? Oh so if you offend any other part of my body, my modesty should by all accounts still be intact?
Women, how does this make you feel? Do you feel at all protected by this clause?
Men, do you feel this charge is serious enough to deter anyone from crimes against women?
| Categories - bangalore | |||
| |||
I think this is absolutely preposterous. The best way to make these old farts understand is to put the women in their lives in some of these situations and see how they feel about defining the law so narrowly. It’s disgusting. I wonder how this law defines rape for men - if some perverted guy grabbed another man’s nads, what happens then?