At the rate we are going, we might become a reference point to relentless persecution of those suspected of sodomy ( there is a police reminder floating about asking bloggers not to unduly influence the ongoing investigations, so I am not going to mention names, eh) and flog them in public.
In a hotel lounge in Amsterdam- “Van Narrow stop pissing on de Bonk for his homosexuality. Someone might call you Malaysian.”
While everyone is getting more and more normalised to homosexuality, Malaysia has hang ups still with those coming out of closets.
The conventional understanding of sodomy is anal sex, however the broader reading or interpretation covers all things not associated with what is naturally necessary for procreation. Which makes direct intercourse the only natural act. The philosophical quandary would be if you were assuming the missionary position ( as kosher as it gets, and if you apply a white sheet between the subjects then you are in orthodox jewish acceptability) and you then choose to caress the ear lobe of your partner, are you then participating in unnatural sex?
It would make a fair bit of us worry to think that fellatio and cunnilingus is punishable by the law.
But by large sodomy refers to as mentioned anal sex, and is focussed on nailing homosexuals, or more aptly stop homosexuals from nailing each other.
So let’s stick to sodomy as anal intercourse only.
Plus, not all sodomisers are gay. No, no, I am not making some smart remark about elderly gentlemen picking tran-sexuals in Chow Kit on Saturday nights.
Heterosexuals are sodomisers too.
And I am informed, by adherents on both sides of the divide ( homos and heteros) that it is the bomb (mind the pun).
As my 42 year old former colleague put it to me, “it put the spark back into my 15 year old marriage.” Apparently, she put it crudely friction in a relationship is actually a good thing.
Would she now have to bolt her house up and stock up cctvs before she actually has her fun?
The police and state have no place in regulating people’s sexual mores. As long as there is consent, no widespread harm and involves adults, then people should get along with their lives without the police, state or religious authorities butting in.
The famous Lawrence vs. Texas case which overturned centuries of using the law to repress sexual conduct in the US in 2003, was an accident of sorts, since policemen breaking in to help the occupants inadvertendly found the occupants in sexual congress. They were arrested.
Pertinently the supreme court decided homosexuality and privacy are more important than cultural-religious interpretation of acceptability.
Drawing back to Malaysia, you have to ask, how long are we going to be stuck in the past?
There are obviously thousands or probably more sodomising couples in the country, and leaving the political angle of the current situation out of it, is it possible Malaysia is ready to repeal its sodomy laws?
And please don’t talk about religious texts, because if that is the basis, then sodomy will never be acceptable.
You have to ask the question on are the laws consistent with the cultural mores of your present population, and if it is not, then you have to either enforce the law despite public protestation – which would lead to public condemnation, or change the laws to meet your increasingly urbane population.
Otherwise, there is every chance people will adopt ‘Malaysia’ as a word to connote many things backward or intolerant.