They're gunning for Gere (no spam)

[fable]

NEW DELHI — A court issued arrest warrants for Hollywood actor Richard Gere and Bollywood star Shilpa Shetty on Thursday, saying their kiss at a public function "transgressed all limits of vulgarity," media reports said. Judge Dinesh Gupta issued the warrants in the northwestern city of Jaipur after a local citizen filed a complaint charging that the public display of affection offended local sensibilities, the Press Trust of India news agency reported.

Gupta earlier viewed television footage of the event, which he called "highly sexually erotic," saying the pair violated India's strict public obscenity laws. Gere and Shetty "transgressed all limits of vulgarity and have the tendency to corrupt the society," PTI quoted the judge as saying.

Such cases against celebrities _ often filed by publicity seekers _ are common in conservative India. They add.

You can read the rest here.

But didn't we just have this case on SYM...? Oh, that was a Swiss citizen who defaced posters of the Thai king while resident in Thailand. He was sentenced to 10 years, I think, but only served long enough to require a sincere change of laundry before being booted back home. Yet in some ways, aren't the two cases not dissimilar? Gere has fallen afoul of public obscenity laws that would be considered overly restrictive by most people, always excepting Southern Baptist Albama preachers. Who's to blame, here? The person who oversteps the law, and should certainly have known in advance? The society that supports such laws? The legal community itself, that does nothing to argue against the laws?

[Claudius]

Laws are not absolute they are relative. What I mean is they are in a context. I think one should try and fit in with the society they are in. I don't think there is anything wrong with the nude human body, but that doesn't mean I am going to exhibit my body for shock value either.

In effect my inner law is to have a concern for my neighbors wellbeing. If my neighbors freak out over kissing and fondling then its foolish to do that.

The law Gere broke is neither right or wrong. But if it is enforced then he could suffer from his oversight. If he were in the jungle would he expect tigers to not hunt? Then in India expect conservative sexual taboo.

Its also of relevance the consequence on the people of India for holding the views that they do. Especially if they do not examine them. I would hope Indians could be open minded but also that Gere could consider the feelings of Indians. I hope both sides learn from this and I don't agree that jail is the best way to do this.

[galraen]

It seems bizarre for the country that gave the world the Kama Sutra, and presumably the lawmakers/enforcers have never visited any of their temples. However, Gere's actions were even more bizarre, he looked like he was drunk on the video I saw, but why charge Shetty? What was she supposed to do knee him in the vitals? The idiot was all over her and didn't give her any choice in the matter.

[fable]

It seems bizarre for the country that gave the world the Kama Sutra, and presumably the lawmakers/enforcers have never visited any of their temples.

India never gave the world, or anybody else, the Kama Sutra. It was probably written in the 4th century ACE, in Pataliputra, then part of the Mauryan empire. India also has palace complexes decorated with erotic murals of great artistic value. This doesn't mean India is responsible for them.

But back to subject. Is this a law that should be respected, or should it be decried in the West? And should Gere and Shetty be held responsible for such a wanton display of physical lust?

[Lady Dragonfly]

At least he did not do it in a temple, good for him. Otherwise it would be added to the other famous articles of bizarre Gere folklore. Gerbils annoyingly come to mind...

Quote:

Who's to blame, here? The person who oversteps the law, and should certainly have known in advance? The society that supports such laws? The legal community itself, that does nothing to argue against the laws?

A polite guest should respect the laws of a house he visits. If he would like to be invited again, of course. 3 months is not 10 years, but I seriously doubt Gere will be doing his time at all, despite all warrants. He will pay a fine, probably. Shilpa was dragged to court for "vulgar pictures" last summer as well, so she is a "habitual offender".

The India obscenity law is vague and apparently custom cut. And loves targeting celebrities.

...the Indian law, as Supreme Court lawyer Alpana Poddar says, "does not have any clear cut definition on this.

It depends on the factual circumstances of each case." Adds lawyer and former MP RK Anand, "Obscenity is a wide word. It changes with time. What was considered obscene 20 years ago, is not considered so now."
....
Adds Reema, "The legal system should take up bigger and better social issues like protecting women's rights, rather than targeting celebs... She does concede that "actresses have to be decently dressed as they influence the public, but it doesn't give anybody the right to act as the moral police."

Amidst all this, what about those whom these upholders of public morality are seeking to protect -- the people? Poddar insists it's all a waste of time and money.

[mr_sir]

I don't see how the country or laws can be at blame. It is their culture and there are many cultures that have strict codes of practice/religious beliefs regarding intimacy in public. If he is visiting their country then he should respect their views and laws on something like that. Just like the guy in Thailand, he really should have known better and has nobody to blame but himself if he can not respect the customs of a country which he is visiting as a guest.

[Gilliatt]

I believe these people (the Swiss man in Thailand and Gere) had the right to disagree with the laws they broke. But I also think that when you don't agree with a law, the proper thing to do is try to discuss about it, not to break it. I don't believe the second option does any good, I'd rather say it diminishes one's credibility.

[Dottie]

I think there is cause for criticism both towards the behaviour of the individuals and the laws of the nations.

Imo, there is no need to offend people in a country you are visiting, unless it's for some reason a moral imperative. Neither obscenity laws nor the laws regarding the Thai king is immoral on a level that demands action, especially not one that isn't even a protest, just dumb provocation.

However, I also don't see a need for laws that have no practical use other than to protect moralistic values. I definitely think you can say that such laws are generally bad without being guilty of some kind of cultural racism.

[galraen]

Gere was definitely guilty of boorish, apparently drunken behaviour, and Shetty would have been well within her rights to have sued him for assault. If he'd done that in most 'Western' countries he would also have been liable to charges of sexual harassment, and if it was in the workplace probably instant dismissal. But what I can't figure out is why the victim of his boorish behaviour is being persecuted.

[QuenGalad]

@Galraen, she is being prosecuted because that's the tradition. In the countries that have strict "moral-protecting" laws, it is a good, long tradition to prosecute harassed women, and make them harlots in the eyes of others because they were harassed. Take any exceedingly-muslim society - they're all doing just that. There was this case recently, can't remember the country, of a female journalist who was beaten almost to death by her husband, and called her collegues to hospital so they could make a material about her, showing her brown-purple face and bleeding eyes... And what? The religious and oh-so-moral society didn't give a damn about the sadistic husband. Oh, he was not immoral, no. Instead, they cried obscenity because a wisp of her black hair was visible from under a hospital bonnet...

I'm absolutely against any "moral-protecting" laws, because they can, and will be, twisted in any way that enables their use against anyone. The "moral" laws are mostly those that have least in common with morality. Hypocrisy, falseness, an untruthful way to opress the seemingly weaker fellow man, or a political rival, and a way to keep all the horrible immoral acts out of public view... Putting them behind the closed doors of the houses, "where they belong".

[Chanak]

I concur with the bad taste that such laws leave in the mouth. Considering how they generally serve as tools of oppression in societies where the more severe forms are found, they certainly do far more harm than good. In fact, I daresay that such laws do no good at all, save to placate the sensibilities of a highly religious minority.

With that said, Richard Gere acted irresponsibly anyway. I wonder if this was a staged act designed to draw attention to the morality statutes in India, or simply Mr. Gere acting like a buffoon. I suspect it was the latter. While he may have violated some of India's laws by his actions, he otherwise violated the notion that he possesses a scrap of self-control and taste. What he did was pretty tacky.