Uncategorized

Applying natural jurisprudence of duck’s penis to section 377

Almost once every year Indian social media rises to the cause of LGBT (with a Q added now). It always leads to familiar monotonous responses from various factions. Babas decide that it is anti-natural and liberals declare that it is natural. Both propose what they imagine to be gospel truth and fight without reaching any meaningful conclusion till the wave passes.

Poor nature gets it from both sides but has no real voice to speak, so I am tempted to make her speak from one of her own products, i.e. duck penis, as the bone of contention that Hon. Supreme Court is chewing on is section 377 of IPC that refers to same-sex coitus.

Every LGBTQ debate, if you wait long enough, ends up at the same issue, i.e homosexuality is natural and hence should be accepted. If you are arguing with an educated liberal, he/she will be armed with google-searched wisdom that “homosexuality” is “common in nature” and it is found in hundreds or thousands of creatures depending on the web-site he/she has visited.

Unfortunately, when they are asked to cite examples, they can produce everything but a “same-sex coitus” that is the true test of homosexuality. If “homosexuality” is that common (as they now suggest that 5 to 10% of humans have “homosexuality”) why don’t we have hundreds of photos of male cheetahs or bonobos copulating?

While awaiting a liberal backlash for my medieval backward stupid opinion, I would go out on the limb and say that homosexuality, IF IT MEANS full coitus between same-sex is rare, if not non-existent phenomenon in nature. If it exists, it surely is not enough to be recognised as a behaviour.

If we look closely at most examples cited by websites used by liberals, even if we accept them as “sexual engagement” between same-sex animals, none are really about a full penetration based copulation that section 377 is dealing with.

While you may not find copulating male bonobos, it is easy to find something even more startling and that is images of a duck’s penis. Though the image attached here is of an extreme case, finding corkscrew shaped penis is common in nature, and that is for a reason. Copulation is not a recreational activity for nature. It is The most serious act leading to The objective of Life on Earth. Copulation is precursor to procreation and nature has worked hard to make it work perfectly.

As in most large creatures, copulation is executed by insertion of penis into vagina, both these parts have evolved extensively to make coitus a fool-proof act. The absurd shape of duck’s penis that we see here is reciprocated by equally convoluted vagina evolved in female ducks to ensure that one species of male duck impregnates females of the same species.

 

 

As nature has invested heavily in copulation to work, it has also worked hard to ensure that it is not wasted by an engagement between same-sex animals. So, there is also a clear lack of viable coitus in same sexes.

From humans to ducks, it is impossible to execute the same-sex coitus with biological perfection of responding organs. If we look at human coitus, the sexual act is not a mare penetration, but also a complex body-event.

Human penis is not the only active body part in coitus, as female vagina also prepares and responds to the act equally vigorously. So, a true coitus between male-female is incomparable to a same-sex coitus in terms of its biology.

If you are a liberal, by now you are already seething with anger and will be ready to shout about freedom of choice and honouring it to be a constitutional or human duty. So, I want you to relax and take a deep breath and answer this simple question.

Why are we looking for a natural validation for a human act?

Is homosexuality the first and only “unnatural” act we indulge in? Have we seen an octopus cycling? Have we seen a polar bear smoking? Have we see two dolphins arguing?

The answer is a vehement NO. We humans indulge in “unnatural” acts all the time. It is this that makes us special. It is, may be, a trait that defines us.

The entire idea of looking for justification of homosexuality in nature is barking the wrong tree, and it is, in fact what allows others to reject homosexuality.

The real need of the hour is to stop justifying homosexual behaviour through the medium of nature. It is just another unique idea humans have discovered and are trying it out. If it is suitable, it will be assimilated over the time. But, force-fitting it by claiming that it is natural is surely not the way to assimilate with human society.

If we visit section 377, it states “Whoever voluntarily has carnal inter­course against the order of nature….”, the real operative word is not “nature” but “voluntarily”. The de-criminalisation is required because if a private act that is not harming others is executed voluntarily, it should be out of state’s scope of controlling.

While looking at section 377, we also need to accept that such acts are often not voluntary, and hence can be crimes of extremely horrible nature. So we need an act to look at the act as a crime in such circumstances.

I am happy to admit that I have managed surviving till now with minimum effort as all my intellect has be used to avoid doing anything meaningful. As I needed to while all the free time I generated in course of being lazy, science has been my favorite muse that I have enjoyed company of. As an effort to kill time (in a way, to get even with it) one fine day I decided to write a science column, more for my personal amusement than to attract readers. After getting educated about the attention span of modern readers from my editor, it became more like a challenge to tackle esoteric subjects in 600 words that I have managed to remain interested in for more than a year now. I do not want to add my worldly profile here as these are ideas that need to be considered only on the merits they carry and not as an opinion of a certain human being.

0 comments on “Applying natural jurisprudence of duck’s penis to section 377

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: