India court legalises gay sex in landmark ruling • Hacker News Board

Re: India court legalises gay sex in landmark ruling

#61

Post by krapp » Thu, Sep 06, 2018, 10:22 AM UTC

M_Bakhtiari wrote: post #43

majewsky wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to elaborate?

It's naive to think western liberal cultural change is a one-way street. This is the kind of thing that comes in waves. Just look at the radical transformation of the pre-colonial Kingdom of Buganda into present-day Uganda with its sodomy laws and internet meme pastors, perhaps ironically catalysed by the west, a west that has since flipped the complete opposite direction. It's only a matter of time before the tables…

The modern definition of "LGBT" is, for the most part, a cultural construct. Behavior we in the west would consider "homosexual" today, including the act of sex between persons of the same gender, was considered perfectly normal between "heterosexual" people in certain contexts and pre-Christian cultures. It wasn't that long ago that men kissing one another on the lips was a common practice of platonic affection.

If you look beyond the rather limited filter of "western liberal cultural change" you'll see that, while yes politics and societies shift over time, acceptance of same-sex relationships has been the norm in many cultures more often than your comment might suggest.

Re: India court legalises gay sex in landmark ruling

#62

Post by labster » Thu, Sep 06, 2018, 10:23 AM UTC

wallace_f wrote: post #42

vinni2 wrote: post #35

As a gay Indian this is a great news! but it is one thing to decriminalize it legally and complete different thing for societal acceptance and leading a normal life as gay person in India. For an average gay person in India this doesn’t change much. There is still a long way to go. This law was never a problem for me but my family and relative and neighbors are. But it is a good progress.

The world is so weird. I never understood the motive behind tyrannizing other people. How is that winning at anything other than being an asshole? Why don't people just leave other people alone? Is it so much different to tyrannize a woman for being feminine, or just being attractive? Most of us are instinctively disgusted by that--or at least claim to be?

Isn't the original purpose of society to control access to sex?

Re: India court legalises gay sex in landmark ruling

#63

Post by puranjay » Thu, Sep 06, 2018, 10:24 AM UTC

simias wrote: post #34

Dawny33 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait. Gay sex is legalized, but not marriage. That's so un-Indian-like

How so? That's generally how these things have progressed in most countries I'm aware of. First you make the simple fact of being homosexual not be illegal. Same-sex marriage often comes much later.

I think OP is joking about the taboo against sex and focus on marriage in Indian society.

Re: India court legalises gay sex in landmark ruling

#64

Post by labster » Thu, Sep 06, 2018, 10:28 AM UTC

vijaybritto wrote: post #51

Irony is that a British news outlet is posting about it when they were the ones who introduced that law in India before 157 years!! Anyway, a great step in the right direction!

I'm pretty sure that this is not an example of irony. There's no unexpected or ambiguous element in the British covering news in India, as they have had an interest in the subcontinent since 1600.

Re: India court legalises gay sex in landmark ruling

#65

Post by cknight » Thu, Sep 06, 2018, 10:29 AM UTC

jacobush wrote: post #59

shkkmo wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, "decriminalize" means "reduce or eliminate the penalties/enforcement for a criminal act (but it is still against the law)" while "legalize" means "make a criminal act no longer criminal (it is no longer against the law)". Oddly enough, this means that "criminalize" is not the opposite of "decriminalize" but of "legalize".

Wouldn't that depend entirely if the law was only in criminal law? If so, decriminalize would remove all of the illegality?

Criminal law is not a neat container. A crime is simply anything which is defined as being a criminal act within a given piece of legislation.

You can "decriminalise" something either by eliminating the entire piece of legislation, or by amending it to remove the criminal act within it. In the case of the latter, that leaves open the option of replacing it with other words that might indicate civil penalties. If that happens, that is still decriminalisation, and would be distinct from legalisation.

Re: India court legalises gay sex in landmark ruling

#66

Post by codegeek » Thu, Sep 06, 2018, 10:36 AM UTC

wallace_f wrote: post #42

vinni2 wrote: post #35

As a gay Indian this is a great news! but it is one thing to decriminalize it legally and complete different thing for societal acceptance and leading a normal life as gay person in India. For an average gay person in India this doesn’t change much. There is still a long way to go. This law was never a problem for me but my family and relative and neighbors are. But it is a good progress.

The world is so weird. I never understood the motive behind tyrannizing other people. How is that winning at anything other than being an asshole? Why don't people just leave other people alone? Is it so much different to tyrannize a woman for being feminine, or just being attractive? Most of us are instinctively disgusted by that--or at least claim to be?

It is human nature. Whenever we have moments of weakness, we tend to blame the "others" because it is easy to do so and makes you feel stronger than you actually are. Same goes with bullies. They are really weak inside and all it takes is one strong person to stand up to them.

Re: India court legalises gay sex in landmark ruling

#67

Post by gdfasfklshg4 » Thu, Sep 06, 2018, 10:40 AM UTC

8draco8 wrote: post #21

M_Bakhtiari wrote: post #19

I don't think this will last, not even in the west.

What? So you think that gay sex should be illegal?

"It won't last" is clearly an opinion about whether or not it will last. NOT a value judgement about whether the person wants it to last.

For example "We all die eventually" means "all humans die eventually" NOT "I want all humans dead".

Or in this case the GP is saying that they think that gay sex will be illegal again NOT that they want gay sex to be illegal again.

As someone that personally wants gay sex to be legal myself this is an important consideration. We are fortunate (in the West at least) to live in a fairly liberal society. We have to remember that freedoms have waxed and waned in human history and we should guard against steps which would lead to important freedoms being limited.

I get that this is a very emotive topic but it is important not to jump to conclusions - in fact it is part of the rules of this site to assume good faith.

Re: India court legalises gay sex in landmark ruling

#68

Post by gdfasfklshg4 » Thu, Sep 06, 2018, 10:44 AM UTC

nextstep wrote: post #53

M_Bakhtiari wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's naive to think western liberal cultural change is a one-way street. This is the kind of thing that comes in waves. Just look at the radical transformation of the pre-colonial Kingdom of Buganda into present-day Uganda with its sodomy laws and internet meme pastors, perhaps ironically catalysed by the west, a west that has since flipped the complete opposite direction. It's only a matter of time before the tables…

I think you are wrong. There are minor setbacks and reactions to liberalization of society, but ultimately the trend over the past many hundreds of years has been generally toward a more equitable and accepting society almost everywhere in the world. Also, LGBT is definitely not a small minority interest and the more accepting society becomes, the more people realize that these issues are incredibly mainstream.

I think you should study history related to gay rights over the last few centuries. Whilst we are currently in a better situation in many western countries the course of change has been anything but a smooth set of improvements.

Re: India court legalises gay sex in landmark ruling

#69

Post by i_am_nomad » Thu, Sep 06, 2018, 10:48 AM UTC

moh_maya wrote: post #57

i_am_nomad wrote: post #41

This is great, though it also illustrates how much farther India (and other countries) have to go in legal protection of LGBT people. Also, a bit off-topic here, but it also reveals how stupid and hypocritical California's policy is, forbidding travel of state employees to US states that don't grant certain protections to transgender people. You can't go to Oklahoma because they don't have self-selection for bathroom…

Umm, the Indian Supreme Court legally recognized the "third gender"; quoting from the article [1]: "When the Indian Supreme Court acknowledged that gender is a non-binary form of identity that goes beyond male and female, the victory came as a nice surprise to many." [2]: "India's Supreme Court has recognised transgender people as a third gender, in a landmark ruling that may offer gay people a glimmer of hope. It is…

Excuse me, I wasn't addressing whether or not India protected the rights of transgender people. I was pointing out that until yesterday, gay sex in India was actually _illegal_, yet there was no ban on traveling there for California state employees. Which seems horribly hypocritical and basically an exercise in virtue signaling.

Re: India court legalises gay sex in landmark ruling

#70

Post by vivan » Thu, Sep 06, 2018, 10:50 AM UTC

tomp wrote: post #32

vivan wrote: post #22

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.

How 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…

According to the BBC:

>The court said other aspects of section 377 dealing with unnatural sex with animals and children would remain in force.