‘Modesty’ has no place in Laws against Molestation
‘Modesty’ has no place in Laws against Molestation
- Sayan Basak
The
ubiquity of sexual abuse in the modern society is well felt. There have been
several reports coming out over the past few months in reference to sexual
abuse in colleges, in workplaces and so on. However, this is not a new
phenomenon – sexual abuse did not start yesterday. Rather, it has become
intermingled with the structure of society for a long time.
The
causes and reasons might be debated over for decades to come. However, my main
point of contention is the idea of modesty itself, which the Indian Penal Code
ascribes to several molestation laws.
[1]According to Section 509 of the Indian Penal
Code (IPC), “Whoever, intending to insult the modesty of any woman,
utters any word, makes any sound or gesture, or exhibits any object, intending
that such word or sound shall be heard, or that such gesture or object shall be
seen, by such woman, or intrudes upon the privacy of such woman, shall be
punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or
with fine, or with both.”
According
to Section 354 of the IPC, “Whoever assaults or uses criminal force to
any woman, intending to outrage or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby
outrage her modesty, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description
for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.”
However,
the idea of modesty is not defined by the Indian penal code at all, which
brings up the issue of who gets to decide what is ‘modest’ and how does consent
figure into it. Section 354 noticeably puts the onus on the assaulter, which
must not be the case. The ideals of modesty simply should not be dictated by
the people who seek to outrage it.
In
fact, taking a feminist stance, one might question whether ‘modesty’ should
figure more prominently in this discussion or is the fundamental idea of ‘consent’
far more important. This led to me actually going through a tour of what
modesty means.
[2]Wikipedia defines modesty as, “Modesty,
coming from the Latin root modestus which means “keeping within measure”, and
demureness is a mode of dress and deportment which intends to avoid encouraging
of sexual attraction in others.”
In
Indian society, the idea of modesty has a shifting form. The fashion of the
time dictates the idea of what is ‘modest’ for any individual.
This
is an interesting quagmire. For example, under the eyes of society, any instance
of nudity can point towards sexuality and thus be branded as outraging
modesty.
Who
gets to decide what provokes the modesty of a woman? Should it not be the woman
herself? Instead, it seems like the limits upon modesty are decided and shaped
by patriarchal ideals.
These
questions are important because, in certain spaces, certain groups of women may
be seen as ‘non-victims’, as people who cannot be ‘molested’, for whatever
reasons. [3] For instance, a
leader of the ABVP said in 2016 that girls from Jadavpur University
cannot be molested as they have no shame. In this context, political
ideology shapes their ideas of ‘modesty’ and puts students at the risk of
sexual violence.
I
might, for example, send naked pictures over Tinder expressively for the
purpose of having a sexual encounter. However, in the social context, one might
argue that I have already shed all vestiges of my ‘modesty’ by doing so and
hence can no longer be molested which is simply not true. My body and my
consent should be able to decide whether someone is being abusive, not an
abstract idea of ‘modesty’.
In
an amorous setting, I often indulge in kissing men and women, both with
consent. Similarly, in some settings, given my knowledge of a person, I do not
indulge in the same. Different people have different sexual boundaries.
[4] Coming back to
the question of who shapes this idea of ‘modesty’, one may point towards
religion, politics, and society – powerful beings when compared to the idea of
a single person. Also, since it is immensely impractical for a person to move
around with documents stating their idea of modesty towards each person they
encounter, the idea of consent becomes more central yet.
We
need to take into notice the structures that surround our laws and understand
that such laws, at the end of the day, are tone deaf.[5] This relativity
in terms of outrage must be taken into account whence we start understanding
and questioning sexual violence and its survivors.
There
can be many instances of sexual violence, some not as obvious as the others.
What needs to be taken into account is that sexual violence always ignores
boundaries defined by the survivor. It shows little or no respect for the
selfhood of the person beyond their bodies. An unsolicited dick picture
may look harmless to some but without consent, it is sexual violence. It is
precarious and scary, and we need to become better.
------------------------------------------------
By-
Sayan Basak
4th Year, Department of Polymer Science
and Technology,
University of Calcutta
------------------------------------------------
References-
[1] https://indiankanoon.org/doc/68146/
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modesty
[3] https://www.deccanchronicle.com/
[4]http://psych.cf.ac.uk/home2/snowden/2009_Assessment%20of%20Deviance%20(Thornton&Laws)_Gray&Snowden.pdf
[5] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jul/23/why-india-bad-for-women
[6] http://medind.nic.in/jal/t12/i2/jalt12i2p170.pdf
[7] https://www.un.org/press/en/2015/sc11862.doc.htm
[8]
https://eprints.qut.edu.au/107784/2/Lina_Acca_Mathew_Thesis.pdf
