aforementioned definition 2.(a) of the I T (P) A, the whole of patriarchal India is just one big brothel. However, accordingto the implications of sub-section 6. (1) (b) of the same I T(P) A, it is only in these patriarchal homes that we conductour legally approved, non-criminal, inter-spousal, maritalsexual activities. Hence, 2. (a) and 6. (1) (b) of the I T (P) Aare mutually inconsistent.
The entirety of the I T (P) Act is guided by the spirit of itssub-section 6. (1) (b), which in its turn reflects some pre-second-world-war Anglo-American belief, according to whichall non-spousal, non-marital, interpersonal sexual activitiesare crime. This belief, turned into a legal dogma, criminalizesnot only all forms of services provided in the sex sector of our economy, but also all non-commercial, interpersonalsexual activities outside marriage. This spirit of borrowedAnglo-American legal-sexual Puritanism is completely atodds with the realities of our sexual life, including those of our sex sector.
In compliance with this spirit, section 3 of the I T (P) Actdeclares that all residences and work sites of our sexworkers are sites of criminal activities. This helps ourhooligans and gangsters in cahoots with our police to keepour sex workers under conditions of perpetual homelessnessand corresponding insecurity. Further, according to section 4of this Act the children and parents of the sex workersresiding with them and eating food provided by them arealso criminals, as they live on the earnings of sex workers.
The I T (P) Act conflates all non-marital sexual activity withsex work and, further, all sex work – with trafficking inhuman beings. This double conflation effectively criminalizesall non-marital sexual activity, including sex work on onehand and, turns a blind eye to the vast sea of humantrafficking in the entire unwaged, contractual, low wage,