3 ms·
Something to note here is that it is not just gay sex that is legalised - the prohibition was on "carnal intercourse against the order of nature" which included
by vivan 8y ago
Something to note here is that it is not just gay sex that is legalised - the prohibition was on "carnal intercourse against the order of nature" which included straight anal sex as well as oral sex. Of course, these are less important as this was never enforced, but weird to think that these things were technically illegal.
- tomp 8y agoHow about things like bestiality and Pedophilia? (1) Were they "against the order of nature" in the first place, and (2) are only specific practices allowed (The ones you mention) or just everything? Edit: I'm not sure Wikipedia [1] agrees with you. The original law was: > Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal shall be punished with imprisonment for life So bestiality seems to have been prohibited initially. The judgement [2] says: > Section 377 of the Penal Code, in so far as it criminalises consensual sexual conduct between adults of the same sex, is unconstitutional So I'm not sure it decriminalizes anal and oral heterosexual sex as well. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_377_of_the_Indian_Penal_Code https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_377_of_the_Indian_Pena... [2] https://www.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2016/14961/14961_2016_Judgement_06-Sep-2018.pdf https://www.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2016/14961/14961_2016_Ju... page 442 (labelled 180)
- vivan 8y agoAccording to the BBC: >The court said other aspects of section 377 dealing with unnatural sex with animals and children would remain in force.
- windows_tips 8y agoWere they really though? Aren't there numerous artifacts from the region depicting such acts?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]