Legal Extramarital Affairs

National Commission for Women has now revealed a disturbing trend in the Indian society. The Government had proposed the amendment of IPC 497 relating to adultery demanding the law to be gender-neutral. Till now, this law, which was enacted in 19^th century, was considering only men as the culprit and women as the victim in adultery. Now that the modern lifestyle has changed dramatically and women are not reluctant to experiment after marriage, the law is supposed to be amended with the changing culture and lifestyle of the society to be effective and serve its purpose. Extramarital affair has virtually become fashionable.

Government demanded equal punishment for the crime of adultery for both the husband and the wife. The society, too, has the same opinion that if the woman is having an extramarital affair, she should not be let off scot-free just because the law was composed in the 19^th century. Any person with reasonable understanding will agree that when the husband is punished of adultery, the woman cannot be allowed to protect herself by a law that is outdated and ineffective in the present times. And therefore, it is prudent and socially acceptable that the law must be amended to suit the present conditions to remain effective and efficient in justice delivery.

However, National Commission for Women turned down the proposal. NCW is aware that their reputation is degraded in the society and any justification given by them will only increase ill-feeling toward them. NCW gave the justification, anyway. NCW believes that women are victims in adultery, and that making the law gender-neutral is not suitable knowing the status of women in the society. This implies that NCW is confident that if adultery law is made gender-neutral, a staggering numbers of women will be punished of adultery. Women want the adultery to be legal for them. This isn’t fair for fairer sex, right? Besides, the legal brain of NCW is run by a large group of young female lawyers hired as research associates and legal advocates, who are modern, promiscuous, and anti-male and anti-family, will never want theirs and other modern women’s extramarital affairs to be illegal. These young female lawyers closely monitor all legal provisions and try to find ways and means to amend the law to the sole advantage of young promiscuous women and regularly update NCW as recommendation to the Government. Domestic Violence Law is the product of these female lawyers.

NCW has recommended against this proposal, which is even more incredible. NCW wants maintenance to be given to women who are engaged in live-in relationships. It is easy to understand why they want to promote live-in. They want women to live with as many sexual partners as possible, have many live-in male partners who will be slogging to pay her money to have sex with them. No, NCW does not agree that this will promote prostitution in the name of marriage. Besides, NCW has also been initiating pro-abortion drive for women to have many sexual partners and extort money using IPC 498A and DV laws. The male live-in partner will be paying maintenance to his female live-in partner to have sex with her. NCW does not feel comfortable calling this female live-in partner a prostitute.

In short, National Commission for Women definitely understands the society better than the common man. NCW knows that now extramarital affairs of women have become so common, that it is a bad idea to amend the laws and make their adultery a punishable crime. Restricting women to have sex with many sexual partners after marriage is wrong, according to NCW. It is the so-called ‘rights’ of women to have as many sexual partners as she likes.

Now it is understood why NCW has rejected this amendment. How will a woman live having just one single sexual partner after marriage? Will she not become a victim of sexual boredom? It is her ‘rights’ to indulge in promiscuous lifestyle and nobody should restrict this “Indian Woman” or “Bharatiya Naari”. NCW is here to protect the ‘rights’ of women to have multiple sexual partners. Yes, it is their ‘rights’

4:29 AM - Thursday, December 28, 2006