Male Prostutn In India : Wh the legalizatn of the homosexuals, ci like Kolkata are wnsg an alarmg spread of gay prostutn rackets.
Contents:
IF GAY SEX IS LEGAL, WHY NOT PROSTUTN?
NEW DELHI: If gay sex n be permted, then prostutn too "serv to be legalized" sce uld be as much "a nsensual act between two adults a private place.
" Whether the petner was right or not makg such an argument while challengg the Delhi high urt verdict before the Supreme Court, homosexualy and prostutn do have strikg parallels Indian the judgment has crimalized , homosexualy now enjoys a legal posn rather siar to that of prostutn. And at least two of those ndns are mon: that the sex should be between two mutually nsentg adults and that should of the untend nsequenc of the July 2 verdict is that has rced, if not elimated, the spe for Sectn 377 IPC beg ed agast gay clients of male prostut or gigolos. For, prr to the judgment, the police uld have booked gay clients unr Sectn 377 even if no offence was ma out unr the Immoral Traffic Preventn Act 1986 (PITA).
Gay clients are safer now bee Sectn 377, which rri a maximum penalty of life sentence, nnot any longer be voked unls the male prostute is below 18 or the sex was not nsensual. Male prostutn has received a boost om the lg unr which homosexualy per se is no more an "unnatural offence" unr Sectn 377. As wh his heterosexual unterpart, a gay visg a brothel is liable to fall foul of PITA only if the prostute turns out to be a mor or if he engag sex wh 200 meters of a public place (place of worship, tnal stutn, hostel, hospal, etc) or a notified area (which isclared to be "prostutn-ee" by the state) to the Sectn 377 verdict, gigolos terg to gay clients n e out the open and accs medil re to prevent or treat HIV/AIDS, which was the ma reason ced by Naz Foundatn for askg the high urt to "read down" the 1860 provisn agast the wi-rangg offenc scribed as "rnal terurse agast the orr of nature.